You are here: SriPedia - SriRangaSri - Archives - Apr 2003

SriRangaSri List Archive: Message 00015 Apr 2003

 
Apr 2003 Indexes ( Date | Thread | Author )
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]


 
Srimate SrivanSatakopa Sri Vedanta Desika Yatindra Mahadesikaya nama:



The Scapegoat



Of all the avataras, the Krishnavatara is the one where the Lord afforded full 
play to His penchant for "leelA". He indulged in all sorts of fun and games 
possible, setting a precedent for current day players. More, the little Lord 
made mischief His principal occupation. Lying, thievery of milk, butter and 
curds, pranks of every imaginable type played upon unsuspecting Gopis and 
others-the misdeeds of KannapirAn are indeed beyond enumeration. His mother 
Yasoda despaired of ever making the brat conform to socially acceptable 
standards of behaviour and resorted to novel modes of punishment like tying Him 
to the grindstone, to enforce good conduct. It is one thing to be abused by 
one's detractors, but quite another to earn the opprobrium of one's own clan. 
It is understandable for asurAs like Ravana, Sisupala ,Hiranyakasipu and 
Hiranyaksha to shower abuse on the Lord, as it is their nature (svabhAvam). 
However, to be berated by loving Gopis and by one's own mother calls for 
misdeeds of a very high order, which were the principal occupation of Sri 
Krishna. Hearken to the Gopis roundly cursing the brat (upon discovering the 
empty and broken pot which originally contained fresh butter, churned with much 
labour from a cauldron of curds)-"VEyinanna tOl madavAr veNnai uNdAn ivan endru 
Esa nindra EmperumAn evvuL kidandAnE". Azhwars have never been known to speak 
anything but in superlatives of the Lord. If they themselves speak of Sri 
Krishna as a black-hearted knave ("puram pOl uLLum kariyAn") and as a lawless 
lout ("dharumam ariyA kurumban"), one can imagine the extent to which the Lord 
has been guilty of infamous conduct in this avatara.



A thief who gains notoriety for his habitual stealing gets blamed not only for 
his own crimes but also for all the unsolved ones happening in the locality. 
This is natural, for once he establishes a pattern of misdeeds, people tend to 
look no farther for the culprit when there is another theft or burglary, as it 
is both convenient and reasonable to blame it on the known offender rather than 
search laboriously for a fresh criminal. Likewise, Sri Krishna too gets 
unjustly castigated for some mischief perpetrated long before He was born. Sri 
Krishna's misdemeanours are so frequent and varied, that people take it for 
granted that He is behind all pranks, tricks and petty thefts of dairy products 
happening in NandagOkulam. Sri Yasoda is afraid of precisely such a situation 
and cautions the little Lord in this regard-

"PallAyiravar piLLaigaL ivvooril teemaigaL seivAr

ellAm un mEl andri pOgAdu empirAn ingE vArAi"



Sri Yasoda's fears of unjust accusation attaching to her ward are proved true, 
when Sri Krishna gets blamed for something, which occurred thousands of years 
before He arrived on this earth. And, surprisingly, the person who fires this 
salvo is none but Sri Nammazhwar. Here is the beautiful pasuram-



"MAnEy nokki madavALai mArvil vaitthAi MadhavA!

koonE chidaya uNdai vill niratthil teritthAi GovindA!

VAnOr sOdi MaNivaNNA! MadhusoodA! nee aruLAi un

TEnE malarum tiruppAdam sErumAru vinayEnE"



The line we are concerned with is the second one in the aforesaid pasuram-

"koonE chidaya uNdai vill niratthil teritthAi". This refers to the Lord's act 
of using a sling or catapult for propelling a missile aimed at the hunchback of 
Mantara, which causes her considerable pain. This was not done purposefully, 
but Mantara came across the line of fire and got hurt accidentally.



As everybody knows, this episode could have happened only during the 
Ramavatara, Mantara being the maidservant of KaikEyi. There is not even a 
remote connection between Mantara and Krishnavatara. And while recounting this 
misdeed, it would have been proper on the Azhwar's part to append the name of 
Rama- "koonE chidaya uNdai vill niratthil teritthAi Rama", or if alliteration 
and metre were to be preserved, Azhwar could have plumped for "koonE chidaya 
uNdai vill niratthil teritthAi KOdandA!". Without doing what is normally 
expected of him, Azhwar addresses Govindan (another beautiful sobriquet of Sri 
Krishna) while mentioning this misdeed, making it appear as if it is Yasoda's 
brat who is responsible. As if He hasn't suffered enough ignominy, why lay the 
blame for this act of His long-gone predecessor on Sri Krishna?



It would appear as though the Azhwar is unable to bring the haloed name of Sri 
Rama into the context, because it is impossible for him to associate the 
Chakkravartthi Tirumagan with any infamous act, even an accidental occurrence. 
And the moment Azhwar comes across any misdemeanour, he is automatically 
reminded of the lawless brat Krishna and attributes the catapult episode too to 
the much-maligned Yasodai iLam singam, more as a spontaneous reaction than due 
to any premeditated plan to lay the blame at the cowherd's doorstep, rather 
than at that of the Ayodhya palace.



The Eedu MuppatthArAyirappadi has an interesting story to narrate here, with 
the remark, "teembu sEruvadu KrishnanukkE AgayAlE pOm pazhi ellAm amaNan 
talaiyOdE ennumA pOle avan talayil Erittu solludal". The vyAkhyAtA says that 
all mischief is usually attributed to Sri Krishna, just as the Digambar (nude) 
monk was made to bear the blame for somebody's death. For those who are 
curious, here is the story:-



A Brahmin built a compound wall at the rear of his house to keep out midnight 
marauders. The very day the wall was built, even before it could dry and firm 
up, a thief tried to enter the compound. The wall, still wet and infirm, 
collapsed, killing the burglar in the process. The thief's wife, who came to 
know of this, went to the King's court, holding the Brahmin responsible for her 
husband's death and seeking punishment for the offender and compensation for 
herself.

This king was a rank idiot and quite a stranger to concepts like justice, 
fairplay etc. When the strange case came up for hearing, the King ordered the 
Brahmin to be executed for the offence of causing the burglar's death. Alarmed, 
the Brahmin told the king that it was really the fault of the mason for having 
left the newly constructed wall wet, without ensuring its safety. "Off with the 
mason's head!" cried the foolish king, whose habit it was to rush to 
conclusions without any thought. The mason, when brought to the King's court, 
blamed his assistant for having poured too much water during construction, 
which led to the wall remaining wet and unset. Sentenced to death immediately, 
the mason's helper in turn blamed the potter for having made the pot too big, 
as a result of which the helper had unwittingly poured more water than 
necessary. When the King condemned the potter to capital punishment, he in turn 
blamed a young woman who had kept walking this way and that, distracting his 
attention and resulting in the pot becoming oversized. In the game of Pass the 
Buck, the lady held the washerman (to whom she had entrusted clothes for 
cleaning and who failed to deliver on time, making her visit his shop twice or 
thrice) responsible. When the washerman was bound hand and foot and brought to 
the court for receiving sentence, he in turn told the King that a nude monk had 
been sitting unmoved on the washing stone, impeding the washing process. The 
monk was then brought before the King, who held the former squarely responsible 
for the burglar's death. As the monk was observing a vow of lifelong silence, 
he didn't reply to the ridiculous charge and was ultimately executed on the 
orders of the idiotic ruler.



This is a story narrated to indicate that blame often attaches to the most 
innocent of bystanders, who has had absolutely nothing to do with the crime, as 
did the guilt, for hitting Mantara's hump with a catapulted missile, to Sri 
Krishna, though the Prince of Ayodhya was the real, albeit unwitting 
perpetrator of the act. Though Sri Valmiki doesn't narrate the incident, Kamban 
does- he makes Sri Rama recount the occurrence and the disastrous effect it had 
on His coronation which was effectively stopped by a vengeful Mantara, who took 
the hit from the catapult literally to heart and worked through a gullible 
Kaikeyi to banish Sri Rama to fourteen long years of exile-



" siriyar endru igazhndu nOvu seivana seyyal mattru in

neri igandu yAn Or teemai izhaittalAl uNarcchi neeNdu

kuriyadAm mEniyAya kooniyAl kuvavu tOLAi!

Veriyana eidi noidin ventuyar kadalin veezhndEn"



There are any number of such gems strewn over the vast mine of Divya Prabanda 
commentaries, which can be had for the asking and await discovery by the 
connoisseur of Bhagavat anubhavam.



Srimate Sri LakshmINrsimha divya paduka sevaka SrivanSatakopa Sri Narayana 
Yatindra Mahadesikaya nama:

Dasan, sadagopan







[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index ] [Thread Index ] [Author Index ]
Home Page
http://www.ibiblio.org/sripedia
srirangasri-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
To subscribe to the list