Ramayana - Another Great Epic

Mukkur lakhsmi Narasimacharya writes about this in 'kurai ondrum illai' as follows.

"When lakshmi came out of the occean asuras and devas were stunned by her beauty.All wanted to marry her.But lakshmi gave a condition."I will marry the person who doesnt desire me"

Devas and Asuras couldnt even pretend that they did not desire her.Lakshmi took a garland and moved ahead.She went to vaikunta where the balck thirumeni was laying.She saw him,he saw her.She saw nothing in his face.She only saw mercy and vatsalya.

"Dont you desire me?" she asked.

"Who are you?" asked vishnu.

Immediatly she garlanded vishnu.Since he was girupamoorthy he accepted her immediatly.

--------------------------------------------

we always see this repeated.In every avathar it is lakshmi who falls in love.Vishnu doesnt fall in love so easily.He never proposes.He only accepts proposals.

In krishnavathar ,Rukmani falls into love on krishna without even seeing him.Her father arranges her marriage with another king and Rukmani writes the first 'love letter' in recorded history to krishna.What was written in that love letter?

"Hey krishna,in yagnas havis will be given to devas.Wont it be ludicrous if a fox comes and snatches away the havis given to Lord vishnu?Similiar will be the case if I marry somebody else.

I am the havis given to you the purusha simman.How can a fox take away what belongs to a lion?take me"

After this love letter krishna comes and takes away Rukmani.

Radha's case is even worse.She first hears the name krishna.She immediatly falls in love with that name.Then she sees a beautiful youngman who grazes cows.She falls in love with him too.Now she is confused.She is in love with two persons.But to complicate things more she hears a venuganam and falls in love with the person who played thye flute.

She cries to a friend of her saying that she is in love with 3 people at the same time.Her friend consoles her by saying all three are the same.Radha is relieved.

Surrender:

The lines which I love in valmiki Ramayana are as follows.It was said by Rama to sugreeva.When veebeshna came to surrender to Rama,sugreeva suggested not to accept him.Now this is against the nature of lord Ram.He never lets down the people who surrender to him.He said as follows

"aanaya enam hari shreSTha dattam asya abhayam mayaa ||6-18-33
vibhiiSaNo vaa sugriiva yadi vaa raavaNaH svayam"

"He who surrenders to me saying "Rama I surrender to you, save me"- it becomes my duty to save him.This is my promise.I cannot take back this promise."

"raamasya vacanam shrutvaa sugriivaH plavaga iishvaraH ||6-18-34
pratyabhaaSata kaakutstham sauhaardena abhicoditaH"

"hey sugreeva,He surrendered to me.I dont see whether he is Ravana or veebeshna.It can be anybody,I dont care.Bring him to me"

-----------------------------------------------

How does kamban treat this incident?

Rama says

"Uadandavarku uthavan ayin,ullathu ondru iyan ayin,
adandavarku arulan ayin,aran enna am?Anmai enn am?"

He who doesnt help people who dont have anything,he who lets down people who surrender him-what sort of dharma he follows?Can he be even called as a male?


"ennai saran endru vazkindranai thurandha naal,Irandha naal"

"The day I let down the person who surrendered to me,it is the day of my death"

"Athalal 'abayam' endra poluthe abaya dhanam eethale kadapadu enbathu:iyambineer enpal vaitha kadhalon;Ini veru enna enna kadavathu en?kathiron maindha kothu ilathavanai neeye en vayin konarthi endran"

He who surrendered to me,it is my duty to save him.I cannot think otherwise,I have no option.Bring him to me"

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is always repeated by lord vishnu.He never lets down people who surrender to him,let it be any avathar,any situation,any condition..

He never forgot this under any situation.He never said that he was vishnu avathar anywhere.But when jatayu died,when rama was in full grief-he even forgot that grief and gave jatayu moksham,something which can be only done by parabhramman.His vratha made him to reveal his parabhramman nature then.Something which he never does in any other condition.He reveals his parabhramman nature once again when veebeshna came to surrender to him.

How did he give moksha to jatayu?valmiki says

yaa gatiH yaj~na shiilaanaam aahita agneH ca yaa gatiH |
a para aavartinaam yaa ca yaa ca bhuumi pradaayinaam ||
mayaa tvam samanuj~naato gacCha lokaan anuttamaan |
gR^idhra raaja mahaa sattva sa.nskR^itaH ca mayaa vraja

"hey, greatly king jatayu, through me you depart to the unexcelled moksha... you depart to those worlds that are destined for the noblest of jnanis..."

He did not say that he gave moksha even to his father dasaratha.But he gave it to a bird.

In mahabharatha when satyagi was about to be killed by purichravas he asks arjuna to cut purichravas' hand from behind.Arjuna hesistates since that isnt yuddha dharma.Krishna tells to him that satyagi has surrendered to him and is his devotee.He can never let satyagi down and if arjuna doesnt kill puruchravas,he will take sword and save satyagi breaking his vradha of not fighting in mahabharatha war.Arjuna then severs arm of purichravas.

He never has let down people who surrendered to him.

This is what veebeshna says after he sees Ravana's body.Veebshna loved Ravana a lot.Seeing Ravana's body he cries and in grief calls seetha as a poison.Ofcourse even if amritha consumed in wrong way becomes a poison.

After all Ravana loved a goddess.We all love mother seetha.But Ravana's love was immoral form of love.He also made the mistake of loving seetha and hating Rama.God never accepts such love.

I have read about a saint who prayed only to lord shiva.He never worshipped mother uma.So he went to a temple and saw parvathi and parashiva together as idols.He wanted to go around paramashiva but not around parvathi.So he took the form of an insect and went into the gap between the two idols.But parvathi and paramashiva idols crushed him inbetween and he realized his mistake.He sung many songs on parvathi and then only he was released.

It is a mistake to love a god and hate his/her spouse.Dhaksha made this mistake.He loved his daughter parvathi but hated his son in law shiva.In the end he was destroyed by his daughter itself.

Surabathman was a staunch devotee of lord Shiva.But he hated shiva's son subramanya.So shiva did not accept his devotion.

Loving a devotee and hating god is also bad.Hiranya did that.He loved his son prahalad but hated god vishnu.He got punished.But even more worse is loving god and hating his devotee.God will atleast tolerate the reverse.He let hiranya free for a long time.But if somebody loves god,but hates the devotee of god,god will never tolerate it.Dhurvasa did that to ambareesha.He was chased by vishnu chakra and only when he apologized to ambareesha,he was spared.

Similiarly Ravana loves seetha,but hated Rama.He paid the price for it.Seetha herself became a posion for Ravana.kambar narrates this as

"sanaki enum peru nanju unnai kannal nokkave pokkiyathe uyir.."

Meaning "When janaki the great poison looked at you,you lost your life"

----------------------------------------------

The rakshasa wives of ravana came to see his dead body.They were jealous on seetha already.They were jealous since their husband was madly in love with seetha.Seeing his body they cried "Did you not forget seetha even now?"

"Aram tholaivura manathu adaindha seethayai
marandhilayo innum?Emakku un vailmalar thirandhilai,vizithilai
arulum seikilai,irandhanayo...?"

You took seetha against dharma.Did you forget her atleast now?You never spoke with us,showed love on us..did you die,oh king.."

----------------------------------------------------

mandothari comes to see the dead body of ravana.She says

"Kal irukkum malar koondhal sanakiyai manachirayil karandha kathal ul irukkum ena karuthi undal pugundhu thadavinavo oru vali"

"Did Rama's arrows enter your heart since it thought that your heart too had immense love on seetha?"

I like the analysis you are doing, viggop! To add another angle, only a person who is capable of handling the poison should be dealing with it. When according to the story, the Halahala came out of the Ocean, only Shiva was in a position to tackle it.

Also, look at Vibheeshana's way of looking at the event!

He didn't say "Ramamnin ambu thaakiyathaal ponathey uyir". That is obviously the literal reason for Ravana's death. But he directly attributes the fall to the adharmic act of Ravana.

One man's meat is another man's poison, it is said. Adding a very slight twist, to look at another man's wife immorally has been shown to be poison here.

Hi badri
All the above posts of mine are copy and paste.Not at all my original!!!

I try to elaborate the ages of Raman - Sita during their Marriage.

In Kamba Ramayana the age is fixed normal by Kamban fittable for marriage.

In Valmiki Ramayana the scene is different denoting the culture of 'Palya vivakam'.

Raman's age was 12.

"Thoshath Tharakthi yampathi
Chinthaya Mana Darmathma
Sopathyaya sabanthda vaha"

When Rama was twelve Dasaradan thought about his marriage.

In Vanavasa Sita told Hanuman that she lived with Rama 12 years and destiny led her forest life in her 18th age.

"Ashtathasa Varushani mama Jenmani kanyathe"

Before 'Aknippiravasa' Sita asked Rama "You married me in my 'Palya' age and still you are suspecting me ?"

"Nabramaani KirathapMaani
Palye Palena Peedithag"

'Palya vivakam' mentioned in 'Manusmirthi' and according to that Raman's marriage carried out.

This is the Therma in Inthu religion of yesteryears. Rama married Sita is karma.

I strongly believe that the epic go around Karma,Therma and Atharma.

f.s.gandhi

I thought that rama was aged 12 and sita was aged 8 during their marriage.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by viggop

I thought that rama was aged 12 and sita was aged 8 during their marriage.

---

Annalum nokinan, avalum nokinal... at the age of 12 and 8....

Very difficult to believe.... What kind of maturity our ancestors had at the age 12 and 8.... !!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by r_kk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by viggop

I thought that rama was aged 12 and sita was aged 8 during their marriage.

---

Annalum nokinan, avalum nokinal... at the age of 12 and 8....

Very difficult to believe.... What kind of maturity our ancestors had at the age 12 and 8.... !!!

---

haha!! good one, r_kk!!

I have always found it difficult to accept too! And then they blame the youth of today??? Who start only as late as 15-16!~!!! :wink:


Well, I suppose a poet must have his poetic license!!! :wink:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by viggop

I thought that rama was aged 12 and sita was aged 8 during their marriage.

---

NO NO NO, i don't think so, BUT in those days and even now in rural parts of India and Africa Child marriages do take place, BUT that was regarding as ENGAGEMENTS ONLY, nothing ELSE I know this DISGUSTING but this has been going on for decades, it is bad time this ILLICIT MUNDANE weddings are STOPPED

pls DO NOT DEVIATE from the topic, thanks