Sita Mata

[Guest guest]

Dear Sahridayas,

Sri Sudarshan's beautiful rendition of juxtaposing Ayodhyavasi's reactions

with those of the Vanaras' was as illuminating as Sri Krishnan's doubts of

moral dilemma of whether Sri Rama remissed in showing karunyam to Sita Piratti

during Agnipravesa. It is said that for Bhakti and jnana to flourish as the

twin-path to enlightement, "Faith and doubt are both needed - not as

antagonists, but working side by side - to take us around the unknown

curve." Doubt here does not mean cynicism, just the ability to ask

questions..but questions at the right time is imp. Perhaps, it is the timing

that makes the world of a difference between when to be guided by faith and

when by doubt..perhaps because Sri Rama himself briefly forgot this when his

faith in Sita took a backseat and doubt dominated him during agnipravesa that

the ayodhyavasi nara-naris did likewise...yatha raja thathaa prajaa! The

vaanaraas on the otherhand were guided by Hanuman, himself the epitome of

Faith! And, besides, Valmiki's Uttarakanda can hardly be considered "morbid",

if we llok upon it as itihasa, which is what tha Adikavi intended it to be,

rather than a sacred text to develop Bhakti..

Please take my comments as my poor attempts at expressing, born not of of any

scholarship but of jigyaasaa.

Adiyen dasi

Radhika

[Guest guest]

RSrin wrote:

> The vaanaraas on the otherhand were guided by Hanuman, himself the epitome of

> Faith! And, besides, Valmiki's Uttarakanda can hardly be considered "morbid",

> if we llok upon it as itihasa, which is what tha Adikavi intended it to be,

> rather than a sacred text to develop Bhakti..

 

A question on this. In the SriVaishnava understanding, is the uttara

khAndam

considered to be itihAsam, and as valid as the original Srimad

Ramayanam? I have

always understood that this work was written much later than the

original 6

khAndams.

 

dAsan,

 

Mohan