Vali Vadham 64

[Guest guest]

Conviction beyond compare

 

Home page line: In both the above occasions, one can see Sri Rama thinking it

over and over again before coming to the final decision….

 

Even at such a crisis, is it not surprising that the greatest archer of all

times, one who was in possession of all kinds of divine weapons, one who had

mastered the Dhanur Veda, was thinking only in terms of his arrows and not his

divine weapons? His strong grounding in principles was the reason. He could

not even think of resorting to the use of the mightiest of divine weapons, the

Brahmastra, the only weapon that could stop, nay, slay Ravana. It is the kind

of mental training that Sri Rama has subjected himself to, that it did not occur

to him at that time that he should deal with this situation in a special way,

when the normal course fails.

 

It was Matali, the charioteer of Indra, on whose chariot Sri Rama was seated,

who reminded Rama thus. "How do you (merely) do as Ravana does (by acting on

the defensive) as though you did not know (how to dispose of him), O gallant

prince? With a view to his destruction discharge you on him the mystic missile

presided over by Brahma (the grandfather of the universe, which was created by

the ten Prajapatis or lords of creation, who were all his mind-born sons), my

lord. The hour of doom, which was foretold by the gods, has now arrived."

(Valmiki Ramayana, Yuddha Kanda, Canto 108, Sloka 1-2)

 

Kamban however shows this as Rama's own decision to resort to the use of

Brahmastra, not suggested by Matali. 'naaraNan thiru undhiyil naanmugan baara

vempadai vaangi' He took the divine astra created by Brahma (one who was born

from the divine lotus that bloomed through the navel of Lord Vishnu) 'ip

paadhagan maaridai eyvan endru eNNi valithanan' and strung it to his bow,

thinking, 'I will shoot this through the chest of this scoundrel.'

 

Be it the suggestion of Matali, or his own decision as shown by Kamban, both the

Poets make one thing very clear. It took a long time for Rama to come to this

decision. He was avoiding this move for as long as it was possible for him to

do so. 'Do not play the defence. Be on the offensive' is the advice given by

Matali.

 

This third instance very clearly, and without the least scope for any doubt that

(1) Rama was very particular in adopting the right ways to achieve the right

ends. The adage 'Ends justify means' had nothing to do with him. (2) He was

unsparing and uncompromising in following his own judgement and did not budge

even when the great sage Viswamitra - who was at that time the very embodiment

of his parents - wanted him to kill Tataka. He did so only after sufficient

reasons, justifications and precedents were given to him. (3) He did not resort

to the use of the supreme powers of destruction over which he had ready access,

even when a crisis was in the making.

 

In both the above occasions, one can see Sri Rama thinking it over and over

again before coming to the final decision. This therefore gives credence to the

argument of the great commentator Govindaraja, who says that Rama hesitated for

a while before killing Vali and that is why he did not kill him in the first

encounter with Sugriva. But it has also to be remembered that once Sri Rama

decides to do a particular thing, he was clear in his mind about the course of

action and did it without any guilt feelings about what he did. That is why he

is able to say, "No agony is felt by me or remorse for what I have done," to

Vali.

 

So far for Vali and his killing. We shall now move over to Sugriva, Tara and

Angada.