Dasaratha's Dilemma

[Guest guest]

Srimate SrivanSatakopa Sri Vedanta Desika Yatindra

Mahadesikaya nama:

 

Dasaratha’s Dilemma

 

It is no exaggeration if we call Srimad Ramayana a Guide Book

for universal good conduct. It is so full of the right type of advice,

that anyone who reads it could never go wrong. And the beauty is that

the characters of Valmiki adhere so completely to what they preach,

that the usual dichotomy between precept and practice is conspicuous

in the epic by its absence.

 

One of the traits given much importance in the epic is Truthfulness or

Honesty. We find characters praising each other for being invariable

adherents to Truth. This quality is so basic to the work as to form

the bedrock on which the entire magnificent epic is founded. Though

Sri Rama might have had innumerable auspicious attributes

(“BahavO Nripa! KalyANa guNA: putrasya santi tE”),

Truthfulness leads the pack, with everyone adulating Raghava for His

scrupulous honesty in word, thought and deed.

 

In the very first Sarga, we thus find Sri Rama described by Sri Narada as

“Dharmagya: Satyasandhascha prajAnAm cha hitE rata:”

 

How does Sri Rama conquer all the worlds—by His prowess with the

bow and arrow or His undisputed valour? Neither, says Sri Valmiki,

telling us that it is through His unvarying Honesty that Sri Rama

triumphs over all world—“SatyEna lOkAn jayati, deenAn

dAnEna Raghava:”. And again, when Dasaratha lists the glorious

good qualities in his eldest son, it is Truthfulness that comes to

his mind first—

“Satyam dAnam tapa: tyAgE mitratA soucham Arjavam

VidyA cha Guru sushrooshA dhruvANi EtAni RAghavE”

 

Not only is Sri Raghunandana personally honest, He encourages and

facilitates the trait in others too.

 

Take for instance His conduct, when told on the eve of His coronation

as the Prince of Ayodhya, that He was to leave the country instantly

and reside in the jungle for fourteen long years. Receiving these

instructions from His stepmother, Sri Raghava could very well have

refuted them, as He had already been promised the post of Crown

Prince. Had He done so, He would have been well within His rights and

assured of popular support too. None would have found fault with Him,

had He chosen to go through with the Coronation, as scheduled.

 

However, Sri Raghava meekly submitted to the machinations of KaikEyI,

because He wanted His father the Emperor, to retain his name and fame

as an adherent to Truth. Just for the sake of retaining the crown of

Ayodhya, Sri Rama wouldn’t let His father incur the infamy of

not keeping his word, lest the scrupulously built IkshvAku edifice of

Honesty crumble due to a single act or omission, however painful it

was to the persons concerned. We thus see how dear was the concept of

Honesty to the heart of Sri Raghunandana.

 

We now come to Dasaratha’s side of the picture.

 

It was indeed true that he had promised two boons to Kaikeyi, at the

time of the SambarAsura vadham. And, as the famed Emperor of the

IkshvAku dynasty, it was his sacred duty to deliver on his promises,

when called upon to do so. However, it is worth our while to research

the options open to the Chakravartthi and the real concepts of Honesty

or Truthfulness.

 

When Kaikeyi delivered the twin blows of seeking Sri Rama’s

expulsion from Ayodhya and the Coronation of Bharata as the Crown

Prince, Dasaratha knew very well that acceding to his Empress’

request might plunge the entire nation into anarchy. The People of

Ayodhya had already indicated their choice of Rama as their ruler, in

no uncertain terms, even hinting to Dasaratha that the earlier he

vacated the throne, the better. What would the reaction of these

masses be, when told that Rama was being asked to live in the jungle,

instead of reigning over Ayodhya? Would there not be an uprising,

leading to consequences too disastrous for contemplation? Should

Dasaratha plunge the entire nation into possible mutiny and

rebellion, merely to satisfy the wishes of an avaricious and

obviously misled wife? Where did his duty lie, as an Emperor

responsible for the welfare of millions of citizens who looked to him

verily as their father? Was adherence to honesty worth it, in the face

of such calamitous possibilities affecting the entire nation? ShastrAs

tell us that on several occasions, speaking of untruth is

justified—for instance, when one’s life is in danger, to

save oneself, one might speak untruth, without the attendant stigma

attaching to oneself. When sticking to his word and acceding to

Kaikeyi’s requests would entail the possible loss of millions

of lives of people who might decide to commit suicide rather than

live in a state without their beloved Raghava, was it not adequate

justification for resiling from his promise to Kaikeyi?

 

And what about his promise to Rama? He had categorically told his

glorious eldest son that He would be the Prince of Ayodhya on the

morrow (“ata: tvAm Yuva rAjAnam abishEksyami Putraka!”).

In implementation of the Royal Decree, all requisite arrangements for

the Coronation had been made. There was no doubt that the extremely

obedient Rama would consent to the fourteen-year sentence without a

word of protest—however, would it be fair on his

(Dasaratha’s) part to go back on his word to Rama, in order to

keep his promise to Kaikeyi? Merely because Rama was compliant and

uncomplaining, could he, as a father, possibly impose on the

blemishless boy a terrible punishment apropos of nothing, in the

process of honouring his word to Kaikeyi, who had proved to be

anything but a devoted mistress?

 

And honouring the promise to Kaikeyi would also result in breaking the

word given to the denizens of Ayodhya, that Sri Rama would soon be

their monarch? Did he not enthusiastically agree to their proposal

for making Rama the Crown Prince?

“ahOsmi parama preeta: prabhAvascha atulO mama

yanmE jyEshttam priyam putram YouvarAjyasttham icchatha”

 

On the other hand, what would befall him, if he were to tell Kaikeyi

to go to hell along with her boons and just refuse to honour his

earlier promises, given in a moment of weakness?

Dasaratha realised that the stigma of untruth would definitely attach

to him indelibly, bringing him ineradicable infamy and opprobrium, as

an Emperor, a scion of the famed Ikshvaku dynasty, who couldn’t

keep his word, whatever be the extenuating circumstances. Among his

worst critics would be his own son, his darling Sri Rama, who would

never countenance dishonesty in anyone, leave alone His own father.

And this single untruth would be enough to mar the glory and goodwill

earned over thousands of years of sincere reign over Ayodhya. Whenever

anyone spoke of him subsequently, they would say, “Dasaratha!

Oh! That Liar?”, referring disparagingly to his having been

unable to keep his word to his own Empress. Books of history would

casually gloss over his innumerable years of painstaking honesty, to

label him a common liar.

 

With all these cruel thoughts buffeting him from every side, what does

Dasaratha decide? Sri Valmiki gives us a graphic account of the

devastating dilemma Dasaratha finds himself in, bound on all sides by

bonds of honesty and righteousness—

 

“Sa Satya vachanAt RajA dharma pAsEna samyata:”.

 

By the time Dasaratha recovers from his long faint, he finds Rama

come to take leave of him, all ready for departure for the forest.

Dasaratha realises then that the decision had been taken out of his

feeble hands, with Sri Rama having made up his mind to accept jungle

life, in preference to a life of palatial comfort at Ayodhya. Still,

he tells Rama to overthrow him (Dasaratha) and assume the reigns of

Ayodhya, which Rama respectfully declines.

 

It would be instructive to note the arguments advanced by Sri Rama for

choosing a life of hardship and privation, over one of over lordship

of Ayodhya.

1. Rama says that He would not be the reason for the

Chakkravarthy’s words turning to untruth—

“na mE kAryam tvayA anrutam”. Of all people, let Me (who

have espoused Honesty and Truthfulness as my life’s mission)

not be the provocation for your acquiring the stigma of

truthlessness, says Sri Rama. The Lord prefers to see His father

stick to the narrow but difficult path of Satyam, irrespective of

consequences, rather than tread the easy and comfortable trail of

untruth—“TvAm aham Satyam icchAmi na anrutam

Purusharshabha!”

 

2. To Rama, it is a question of personal honesty too, for, having

promised to Kaikeyi that He would unprotestingly go to the forests and

renounce His claim to the throne of Ayodhya for fourteen years, if He

were to listen to Dasaratha now and refrain from leaving Ayodhya, it

would be a breach of the promise made to the stepmother. Even in His

dreams, Rama wouldn’t contemplate going back on His word, as He

Himself reiterates—

“anrutam na ukta poorvam mE, na cha vakshyE kadAchana”

 

“RAMO dvi: na abhibhAshatE”.

 

Hence Raghunandana tells Dasaratha that as promised, He must

immediately leave for the forests—

 

“artthitO hyasmi KaikEyyA vanam gaccha iti Raghava!

MayA cha uktam vrajAmi iti, tat Satyam anupAlayE”

 

Thus, looked at from any angle, it was the desire to accord Honesty

the lofty pedestal that it was used to in the reign of IkshvAkus,

that prompted Sri Rama to accept immediately and uncomplainingly the

deadliest of instructions from His own stepmother whom He had been

regarding with greater love than for His own mother. Neither would

Rama utter untruth and go back on His own hallowed words, nor would

He permit such conduct in those near and dear to Him, even if it

would result in His shouldering indescribable suffering.

 

Even to save Himself from the cruel jaws of death, Sri Raghava would

never utter an untruth, says Sri Mythily to Hanuman, putting Sri

Rama’s philosophy in a nutshell—

 

“dadyAt na pratigrihNeeyAt Satyam brooyAt na cha anrutam

api jeevita hEto: hi Rama: Satya parAkrama:”

 

 

 

Amidst all this, somewhat funnily, we find Sri Rama adducing His

father’s instructions as the reason for His jungle sojourn

(“Pitu: vachana nirdEsAt, KaikeyyA: priya kAraNAt”),

though Dasaratha never tells Him in so many words to leave Ayodhya:

in fact, the embattled Emperor tries his best to dissuade Rama from

going to the jungle. The reason is that Sri Rama accords high

credibility to His stepmother’s words, as if they were His

father’s own—

“Mannavan paNi endrAgil num paNi maruppEnO?”.

 

 

Despite such overwhelming obsession with Honesty, would you be

surprised to hear that Sri Raghunandana prompted someone to tell a

deliberate untruth? Before you rise up in arms to castigate me for

casting aspersions on the “VigrahavAn Dharma:”, let me

narrate what happens when Sri Rama ascends the chariot which is to

take Him to the forests. Sri Rama’s eyes fill with tears at the

sight of His mothers, the doting denizens of Ayodhya and above all,

His aged father the Emperor, all assembled with heavy hearts and

tear-filled eyes to watch Him embark on His jungle sojourn. As the

horses are given the command to go, the chariot starts its unpleasant

task of rolling off with its distinguished occupants. Unable to bear

this parting from the dearest of his sons (“RamO rati kara:

pitu:”), Sri Dasarata shouts to Sumantra the charioteer, to

stop, so that he could have a last word, a last embrace, a last

glimpse at the glorious features of Sri Rama. However, the Lord tells

Sumantra to hasten and drive the chariot off fast. Sumantra is torn

between the conflicting orders he receives from Father and Son—

“Tishtta iti RAjA chukrOsa, yAhi yAhi iti Raghava:

Sumantrasya babhoovAtmA chakrayOriva cha antarA”

 

At this juncture, Sri Rama tells Sumantra, “Do drive off fast.

If the Chakravartthy asks you later why you didn’t stop, you

could tell him that you didn’t hear his words in all the crying

and breast-beating that was going on—

“na asrousham iti RajAnam upAlabdhOpi vakshyasi”.

 

Can you believe your eyes and ears-- Sri Rama, the paragon of virtue,

the embodiment of Satyam and Dharmam, telling the charioteer to utter

a blatant lie!

 

It is here that we must remember that the concepts of Satyam (Honesty)

and Dharmam (Righteousness) are not absolute, but vary according to

time, place, occasion and persons. As Sri Rama Himself is to point

out during the Vali vadham episode, the nuances of Dharma are indeed

difficult to discern for ordinary mortals like

us—“Sookshma: parama durgyEya: satAm dharma:”.

 

Sri Rama provides enough justification for His asking Sumantra to

ride off oblivious to Dasaratha’s entreaties and to tell the

Emperor later that his cries were drowned in the general tumult. To

the surprised Sumantra, who is astounded at the request from Rama, of

all people, to utter an untruth, Sri Rama says that there is no point

in prolonging grief both to oneself and others. Even if Sumantra were

to stop as requested by the Emperor, it would only elongate the

suffering both the father and son would feel in the parting, each

moment of lingering feeding the already unbearable grief—

 

“chiram du:khasya pApishttam iti Rama: tam abraveet”.

 

It is hence that Sri Rama instructs Sumantra to hasten and to offer

excuses to the Emperor for not listening to him. And in doing so, Sri

Rama is adhering to the Shastraic dictum to speak the Truth, but only

if it is Sweet. If such Truth is harmful to the listener, then it is

better left unsaid—“Satyam brooyAt Priyam brooyAt, na

brooyAt Satyam apriyam”. Would it serve any purpose for

Sumantra to tell Dasaratha, upon inquiry, the truth that it was at

the behest of Sri Rama that the chariot was driven off, despite the

Emperor calling for it to stop? This would have only heightened

Dasaratha’s already overwhelming grief. This would therefore

have been an example of “Satyam apriyam” and it was to

avoid this that Sri Rama advises Sumantra to offer an excuse, though

not really the truth.

 

Thus, the nuances of Truth and correct conduct are to be learnt not

through our own concepts of good and bad or from the pages of

unresponsive books, but from the behaviour of acknowledged paragons

of virtue—“MahA janA: yEna gata: sa panthA:”.

 

Srimate Sri LakshmINrisimha divya paduka sevaka SrivanSatakopa Sri

Narayana Yatindra Mahadesikaya nama:

dasan, sadagopan