You are here: SriPedia - SriRangaSri - Archives - Dec 2004

SriRangaSri List Archive: Message 00097 Dec 2004

 
Dec 2004 Indexes ( Date | Thread | Author )
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]



Dear Bhagavatas:
Enough has been said on the subject. 
I am constrained to request Bhagavatas to stop further postings on this subject.
Thanks.
Moderator
=====================================================================================================================================From:
      jasn sn [jayasartn@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent:   Tuesday, November 30, 2004 12:47 PM
Subject:        RE: Bow's story -11.
SRIMATHE RAMANUJAYA NAMAHA.
Respected Sri Vasudevan swami, I wish to add the following points to 
your mail on the title conferred by Sita, "Sthreeyam 
purushavigraham", on the basis of vyakhyanam given in Sri 
A.V.Narasimhachar's translation in Tamil. As I said in my earlier 
post I am not in a position to pinpoint who has given this, the 
translator or Sri Govindarajar.

But before going into the details, let me state my position as I have 
understood.
(1) This is not the 'title' given by Sita. This seems to be what king 
Janaka is likely to think of Rama. Sita merely expresses her worries 
over this. By virtue of her being the better half of Rama, she also 
has to bear the brunt of the criticisms and/or commendations poured 
on Rama. So in her role as pathivradha (is one who shares the 
husband's happiness and sorrow) she is cautioning him of the anartham 
that can be caused if Rama leaves for the forest without her. That is 
why she says these words with "prANayascha (affection) abhimAnAscha 
(with pride) paricikShepa raghavam" in the verse preceding the one 
under discussion. It runs thus:

"saa tam uttama samvignaa siitaa vipula vakSasam |
praNayaac ca abhimaanaac ca paricikSepa raaghavam ||" 2-30-2
(meaning)
Distressed and highly agitated, the said Seetha reproached Rama 
having a broad chest, from affection and pride in the following 
words:-

MGV: I only used that word `title' ? in inverted commas ? just to 
give an added pep.  Actually the `sargam' is just flowing in 
vaalmeeki without any such words. In the commentary by sri 
poundareekapuram aaNdavan swamy, whose points I used, also does not 
mention this as `title'. Swamy uses the title `kOpaththOdu 
parihaasam' for this chapter in his book `raama piraanaik karpOm' 
where in he offers the commentary for this slOkam.

JASN: (2) One of the interesting features of Valmiki Ramayana is that 
the Kavi seems to indicate beforehand what is likely to happen later. 
There is lot of scope to interpret and invent tattwArtham in the 
verses, particularly in the seemingly controversial ones. The kavi 
seems to insert them at appropriate places making us wonder whether 
he had in his mind more than one idea for a given word or phrase when 
he put them down into writing. Such tattwartham that had occurred to 
this adiyaL are given in brackets and the rest as found in the 
transliteration are furnished below.

The 3 verses that have a lot of bearing on Sita's purported 
accusation are 2-30-2, 3 & 4. I find an additional verse in the 
translation (not found in www.valmikiramayana.net), which 
says, "Rama, you seem to possess soundharyam only, seeing which 
others derive happiness and not pourusham." Saying this she continues 
with conferring the so-called 'title'

MGV: saa tham uththama samvignaa seethaa vipula vakshasam |
praNayaach cha abhimaanaach cha parichikshEpa raaghavam || 2-30-2

Meaning: Distressed and highly agitated, the said Seetha reproached 
raama having a broad chest, from affection and pride in the following 
words:-

kim thvaa amanyatha vaidhEha: pithaa mE mithilaa adhipaH |
raama jaamaatharam praapya sthriyam purusha vigraham || 2-30-3

meaning: What my father, the king of Mithila belonging to the country 
of VidhEha, think of himself having got as so-in-law you, a woman 
having the form of a man?

anrutham batha lOkO~yam ajnaanaath yadhi vakshyathi |
thEjO na asthi param raamE thapathi iva dhivaakarE || 2-30-4

meaning: It is a pity if these people of Ayodhya through ignorance 
tell the falsehood that excellent valour is lacking in Rama as in a 
blazing sun.

Just rearrange slightly the same words as in meaning given above. 
Then it can read "It is a pity, the falsehood, that, if these people 
of ayOdhyaa tell through their ignorance, that in raama, as in the 
blazing sun, excellent valour is lacking.
 
This means he is having that excellent valour as the sun.  

In sanskrit placing words anywhere is permitted, then interpretation 
to suit the context can also be done. Of course, in the present case 
seethaa is a little sarcastic and hence the meaning given first is 
taken. But what she says is that my husband is a valourous man, but 
now he refuses to take me along with him to the forest, I am unable 
understand him why he does so?  

On the additional verse or point of JASN on, "Rama, you seem to 
possess soundharyam only, seeing which others derive happiness and 
not pourusham". 

>From this verse itself the above interpretation can be given. For 
this word `thEjas' in amara kosam reads  
thEja: prabhaavE dheepthou cha bale sukrE~pyathasthrishu 3-3-845

also monier Williams page 454 glow glare, splendour, brilliance, 
bright appearance of the human body, beauty, fiery energy, ardour, 
vital power 

thEjas also means `balam', as we all know, balam is a more familiar 
word meaning power, strength, might, vigour, force, validity, etc. 

meaning: It is a pity if these people of Ayodhya through ignorance 
tell the falsehood that excellent balam ? strength or force is 
lacking in Rama as in a blazing sun.

But that word `raamE' ? in raama ? ramayathi ithi raama - the beauty 
personified - param raamE ?excellent in soundhrayam.

So the interpretation can be `oh raamaa, it is a pity, falsehood that 
people of ayOdhyaa, by ignorance, say you do not have the manly 
strength pourusham ? [being a lean figure], but has only beauty - 
soundharyam.

pourusham means `a weight that can be carried by man' besides the 
main meaning of `manly', being a derivative of purusha: meaning man. 
[re Monier Williams page 651]

So it can also be said as seethaa sarcastically claiming `hey raama 
you lack the  capacity of carrying me to the forest [means taking me 
along], and you are beauty personified only for other people to 
enjoy". 

JASN: (Adiyal's view:- since the extra verse doubting rama's 
pourusham does not fall within the length of a separate verse, I 
presume those words are indeed to explain the name "Rama", by which 
Sita calls him in the verse. The translator might have taken the 
liberty to express like this based on the vyakhyaanam he has 
furnished for why Sita called him Rama and not by any other name.)

The source for this is traced to balakhandam where sage Vasishta 
suggested the names for the 4 sons born to Dasharatha. The sage seems 
to have been attracted by the outer appearance of Rama, the baby, and 
suggested the name Rama as the very appearance gave immense happiness 
to the one who happens to see the baby. Sita means to imply that 'the 
meaning ends with that only' and not about the inner beauty, which 
actually did the sage anoint to Shatrugna. By not taking Sita to the 
forest, does Rama mean to show that he possesses only outward beauty 
and not inward beauty? Sita seems to remind this to Rama by calling 
him by this name.

MGV: the point given here by JASN is adequately explained above. 

What then is inner beauty? To analyse this, let us see the next 
verse. 

"kim tvaa amanyata vaidehaH pitaa me mithilaa adhipaH|
raama jaamaataram praapya striyam puruSa vigraham ||" 2-30-3
(meaning): "What my father, the king of Mithila belonging to the 
country of Videha, think of himself having got as son-in-law you, a 
woman having the form of a man?"

For better understanding, I take the liberty to compartmentalize the 
vyakhyanam into groups as the original vyakhyanam looks complicated.

1. By mentioning about her father in two ways, videhaH' and 'mithila 
adhipaH', Sita lays stress on Janaka un-mincingly. Is it not enough 
to say my pita? Why that extra identification? One reason is as given 
by Sri Vasudevan swami, on the basis of Janaka being identified for 
his karma-yoga marga as moksha saadhanam and the related ones that he 
had furnished in his mail on how Sita had to support Rama in his 
actions, in her capacity as saha-dharma chaariNi.

2. Another notion given is that Janaka would have rather wished to 
see her go to forest and suffer and even die in not being able to 
withstand the vagaries of forest-life than to come back to him 
(father) on Rama's departure to the forest. He would be crest-fallen 
in that case, that his daughter had not died on leaving the husband. 
He would think of himself as sthree in purusha vigraham (a gender-
mix) in having begotten such a daughter who failed to show up the 
fine values of a pathivratha. The terms 'amanyata' and prapya' are 
about thinking of himself (Janaka) as 'sthree in purusha vigraham'. 
This is one way of looking at this.

MGV: Another story [ayOdhyaa - sargam 29] is also there that some 
astrologers and a lady thapasvee foretold seethaa that she has to 
spend some years in forest and also has to live separately. Since it 
is not connected with bow I do not want to include same. So father 
janaka would simply accept that proposal and not resist for he is a 
karma yogi as well a gnaani.

On other points given by JASN I have no more to offer for they are `a 
class interpretation'.

Dhaasan

 Vasudevan m.g









------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
$4.98 domain names from Yahoo!. Register anything.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/Q7_YsB/neXJAA/yQLSAA/VkWolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 

 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SriRangaSri/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    SriRangaSri-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 




[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