About Seetha Mata

[Guest guest]

Respected Sirs,

I am not an active member of these most interesting sessions due to my lack

of knowledge about the subject, but I can admit that Iam a very

enthusiastic reader.

I have some geniune doubts about Sri Ramayan, which Iam sure I will be

blessed enough to get cleared through these discussions.

 

If Sri Rama was clear about Sita mata's purity, why the Agni Pariksha ? was

it for the Dharma as a King ? It could be told that as Sri Rama the Bhagwan

is sure about the outcome of agnipariksha. Then, why the most painfull act

of parityaga afterwards ? Now, if parityaga was the only solution, why the

ordeal of Agni pariksha ? Does it indicate a lack of surity of Agni as the

ever purifier ?

 

Now if I am looking through Mata's angle all the episodes are painful.

Because of no mistake of hers, she had to leave the Bhagwan, How painfull

it would be, with the demons ! Then, to be TESTED for purity ! Above all,

finally to be forsaken by the God Himself !

 

At this point, the obvious thing which comes to mind is " Is Seetha Matha

who is none other than the Universal Mother always at the mercy of the Lord

? "

( In that case, it becomes the DUTY of the Pathi to protect His Patni under

ALL circumstances, which I, wrongly , somehow, feel Sri Rama was unable to

do , when She was taken away by the Rakshasa.)

Now, where is the Karunyam of the Lord towards Her ?

Now in another plane, does it mean that the Divine Mother, the principle

which creates sustains and destroys, always under the control of the

ParaBrahman ?

 

I beg to look at the above questions as come from a very naive mind, and

request all learned members of this Group to kindly clarify my doubts .

 

Krishnan S H

[Guest guest]

>If Sri Rama was clear about Sita mata's purity, why the Agni Pariksha ? was

>it for the Dharma as a King ? It could be told that as Sri Rama the Bhagwan

>is sure about the outcome of agnipariksha. Then, why the most painfull act

>of parityaga afterwards ? Now, if parityaga was the only solution, why the

>ordeal of Agni pariksha ? Does it indicate a lack of surity of Agni as the

>ever purifier ?

>

>Now if I am looking through Mata's angle all the episodes are painful.

>Because of no mistake of hers, she had to leave the Bhagwan, How painfull

>it would be, with the demons ! Then, to be TESTED for purity ! Above all,

>finally to be forsaken by the God Himself !

>

>At this point, the obvious thing which comes to mind is " Is Seetha Matha

>who is none other than the Universal Mother always at the mercy of the Lord

>? "

>( In that case, it becomes the DUTY of the Pathi to protect His Patni under

>ALL circumstances, which I, wrongly , somehow, feel Sri Rama was unable to

>do , when She was taken away by the Rakshasa.)

>Now, where is the Karunyam of the Lord towards Her ?

>Now in another plane, does it mean that the Divine Mother, the principle

>which creates sustains and destroys, always under the control of the

>ParaBrahman ?

>

>I beg to look at the above questions as come from a very naive mind, and

>request all learned members of this Group to kindly clarify my doubts .

 

 

Hare Krishna.

 

I am not sure I can state what is the orthodox Shrii Vaishnava position on

this (nor am I sure there necessarily is a single, Shrii Vaishnava view).

However, I can give you the Gaudiiya Vaishnava view.

 

There is an interesting verse from the Kuurma Puraana on this subject. It is

quoted in Shrii Chaitanya Charitamrita and reads as follows:

 

siitayaaraadhito vahnish chaayaasiitaam ajiijanat |

taa.m jahaara dashagriivaH siitaa vahnipura.m gataa ||

pariikShaasamaye vahni.m chaayaasiitaa vivesha saa |

vahniH siitaa.m samaaniiya tatpurastaad aniinayat ||

 

siitayaa - by mother Siitaa; araadhitaH - being called for; vahniH - the

fire-god; chaayaa-siitaam - the illusory form of mother Siitaa; ajiijanat -

created; taam - her; jahaara - kidnaped; dasha-griivaH - the ten-faced

RaavaNa; siitaa - mother Siitaa; vahni-puram - the the abode of the

fire-god; gataa - departed; pariikShaa-samaye - at the time of testing;

vahnim - the fire; chaayaa-siitaa - the illusory form of Siitaa; vivesha -

entered; saa - she; vahniH - the fire-god; siitaam - the original mother

Siitaa; samaaniiya - bringing back; tat-purustaat - in His presence;

aniinayat - brought back.

 

When he was petitioned by mother Siitaa, the fire-god, Agni, brought forth

an illusory form of Siitaa, and RaavaNa, who had ten heads, kidnapped the

false Siitaa. The original Siitaa then went to the abode of the fire-god.

When Lord Raamachandra tested the body of Siitaa, it was the false illusory

Siitaa that entered the fire. At that time the fire-god brought the original

Siitaa from his abode and delivered her to Lord Raamachandra (kuurma

puraaNa).

 

Gaudiiya Vaishnavas regard all Lakshmii-tattva as the personified

hladini-shakti (spiritual pleasure potency) of Lord Vishnu. Thus, She is

also purely spiritual just as He is. Because she has a spiritual form, she

cannot be touched or harmed by anyone who is conditioned by maayaa.

 

Therefore, the pastime in which Raavana kidnapped Siitaa so that the Lord

could later go and slay him took place without Raavana actually touching

Her. According to the viewpoint of the Gaudiiya Vaishnavas, Siitaa was was

given shelter by Agni-deva when Raavana came for Her, and a "Maayaa-Siitaa"

was put in Her place, who was kidnapped by Raavana. When Lord Raama rescued

this "Maayaa-Siitaa" from Raavana's clutches, the internal reason for His

requiring the Agni-Pariksha was so that she could return to Agni-deva and

the real Siitaa could return. Obviously, Lord Raamachandra could not take

the Maayaa-Siitaa back with Him since He knew who she was.

 

Sri Mohan Sagar also pointed out that the sthala-puraana describing how

Thiruvenkatamudayaan came to Earth mentions this "Maayaa-Siitaa." I'm not

certain if it is considered authoritative by most Shrii Vaishnava

aachaaryas, but it does seem consistent with the Kuurma Puraana verse.

 

adiyen Krishna Susarla

[Guest guest]

I am far from qualified to discern the official SriVaishnava position on

Sri Kurma purAnam (let alone anything else), and I certainly would not

question the Gaudiya position regarding Maya-Sita. However, I was taught

that SriVaishnavas recognize Adi kavi Valmiki's Ramayanam to be the sole

accurate source for learning about the vaibhavam of RamAvatharan.

Consequently, I would doubt that SriVaishnavas would easily accept the

Maya-Sita concept, although the idea does provide us with some comfort, and

despite the fact that it has become part of the popular story surrounding

the sthala purAnam of how and why Sriman Narayana came to bhulOkam as

thiruvenkatamudAyAn.

 

As one aspiring to be a prapanna and a Rama bhaktha, I try to spend as

little time as possible thinking about or questioning these extremely

painful moments of His Avatharan. To me, He is always with Piratti at His

sannidhi at Bhadrachalam, and that is all that matters. However, if I were

to attempt to use my very limited knowledge to speculate my perspective on

the subject of the agni-pariksha incident would be based on two sources.

One is Smt. Vasudha Narayanan's outstanding article on the SriVaishava view

of Srimad Ramayanam in which it is suggested that thAyAr as Sita Piratti in

the Ramayanam is not only fulfilling her unique role as purushakAram, but

is also serving as the paradigm for the mumuksu, giving the example of how

a prapanna should conduct her(him)self even under the most frightening of

circumstances. I believe that Swamy PeriavAccan Pillai has expanded on

this concept in one his works (I would appreciate someone's help with the

name of this work). The other source would be verses 7 & 8 of Sri Vachana

Bhushanam of Swamy Pillai Lokacharya: (transliteration and translation by

Dr. Robert Lester, Professor of Religious Studies at the University of

Colorado; typographical errors are my own)

 

-----verse 7----

 

PurusakAramAmpotu krupaiyum pAratantryamum ananyArhatvamum venum.

 

The qualities essential to the purusakAram are Mercy, Dependence on the

Lord, and not being subservient to anyone other than the Lord.

 

-----verse8----

 

PirAtti murpatappirintatu tanNNutaiya krupaiyai veliyitukaikAka. Natuvir

piritatu pAratantryattai veliyitukaikAka. Anantaram pirintatu

anayArhatvattai veliyitukaikAka.

 

Piratti's first separation revealed Her mercy. Her dependence on the Lord

is revealed in her middle separation. The final separation revealed her

not being subservient to any other.

 

In commenting on verse 8, Dr. Lester, who learned this work form Sri

Agnihotram Ramanuja Tatacharya and Professor A. Thiruvengadathan, states

that the three separations in the above text refer to the three times that

Piratti is separated from Her Lord, the first when Ravanar kidnaps Her, the

second at the agni-pariksha, and the third when she is exiled from Ayodhya.

Her complete dependence on and subservience to the Lord, one of the chief

qualities of the purushakAram as suggested by verse 7, is seen from Her

unquestioning and faithful undertaking of His Command to take the

agni-pariksha.

 

Consequently, I would gather that the agni-pariksha incident is a

demonstration and proof without doubt of Her position as purusakAram and an

example to all other mumuksus of how one should follow the Lord's commands

without question.

 

The above is an attempt at a scholarly approach to the subject. However,

I believe that one can only truly begin to understand just how much the

Divine Couple really love each and every one of us by meditating on how

much pain they must have felt. The ones who are described as inseparable

as the fragrance and the flower, as the sun and the light, were separated

for so many months for the sake of the ignorant souls of this world, only

to have to undergo such a horrible test to set an example to these same

unworthy souls. Our simple faith in Them is virtually meaningless when

compared to the level of The Divine Couple's Love for us.

 

adiyEn rAmAnuja dAsan,

 

Mohan Raghavan