Ordeal by Fire--2

[Guest guest]

Srimate SrivanSatakopa Sri Vedanta Desika

Yatindra Mahadesikaya nama:

 

Ordeal by Fire-2

 

It is a measure of Sri Mythily’s purity and blemishlessness,

that the entire clan of Celestials, (including BrahmA the creator,

RudrA the destroyer, Indra the chief of dEvAs, KubErA the custodian

of all wealth, Yamadharmaraja who keeps meticulous count of our good

and bad deeds, Varuna the deity of waters, et al) turn up the moment

Sita enters the fire, to swear by all that they hold holy, that Sri

Janaki is absolutely free of any blemish and pure as driven snow. In

fact, they chide Rama for not preventing His beloved from the agni

parIkshA and tell Him He ought not to behave like an ordinary mortal

husband in suspecting his wife.

 

As if this chorus of conduct certificates is not enough, the venerated

Agni BhagavAn too emerges with Sri Sita, (who is totally unaffected by

Her fiery bath) to add His two-cents’ worth. We are told that

even the flowers She wore around Her neck did not wilt despite their

contact with fire. Agni says to Sri Rama in a stentorian voice and

for all to hear, that Sri Mythily is the purest of pure, untainted by

stigma of any sort, had not committed any transgression by thought,

word, deed or sight. Every waking minute She had only Her husband in

mind and had thoughts for nothing else.

 

Apparently satisfied with all this vouchsafing for Sri Janaki’s

character by the most eminent of beings, Sri Raghava accepts Her with

due honour. He also provides a detailed justification for His having

countenanced Sita’s ordeal by fire, acknowledging that He had

never had any but the highest of opinions about His Consort. He

proclaims for all world to hear that Sri Mythily is the embodiment of

purity, whom even the vilest of influences cannot hope to stain. He

clarifies that Sita could never have thoughts for anyone else, for

She is verily an inseparable part of Him, as are the heat and light

of the Sun—“ananyA hi mayA Sita bhAskarENa prabhA

yathA”. So saying, Sri Rama reveals His unvarying love for His

Consort and His unshakeable faith in Her virtue. And the divine

couple are reunited, with the passing cloud of apparent suspicion

lifting to reveal the shining sun of love.

 

Though we are eminently unqualified to sit in judgement over divine

actions, yet a few doubts plague us over the conduct of Sri Rama in

this instance.

 

Since we hear so much throughout the Epic about the professed love of

Raghava for His princess, how was it possible for Him to suddenly

develop a doubt about Her character?

 

What was the need for Sri Rama to reveal His misgivings about Sri

Sita’s chastity in public, that too in before a vast gathering

of monkeys and rAkshasAs?

 

 

Even granting Rama’s right to suspect a woman who had been in

the custody of a rAkshasa like Ravana, what was the need for Him to

tell Sita to go and live with any person of Her choice? Was it not

too much of an insult to heap on an unblemished woman?

Having accused Sri Sita in public about Her conduct, would it not have

been appropriate for the Prince of Ayodhya to have been satisfied with

Her eminently reasonable explanations and impassioned assurances and

not let Her go to the extent of proving Her innocence by entering the

fire?

 

How was it possible for Sri Rama, even granting His anger and

suspicion, to permit His beloved Sita to adopt the extreme step of

ordeal by fire?

 

 

When there are any number of people standing around ready to do Her

bidding, why should Sri Sita ask Lakshmana, of all people, to make a

fire?

 

Did it need the combined character certificates of all the celestials

for Raghava to believe in Sita and to accept Her back into His fold?

 

These and similar misgivings are cleared, once we peruse the words of

Sri Rama following the unscathed emergence of Sri Sita from the fire,

as also the words of commentators like Sri Govindaraja, who have a

knack of reading and revealing the true purport of Sri

Valmiki’s words. And we are able to find the following answers

too through a perusal of the aforesaid passages.

 

There is absolutely no doubt about the boundless love Sri Raghava had

for His Queen. This is demonstrated in ample measure throughout the

Epic. However, for Chakravartthi Tirumagan to have unquestioningly

accepted Sri Mythily, (who had, all said and done, spent a year in

the custody of the vilest of rAkshasAs with a huge harem) would have

attracted adverse comment from the undiscerning. Gossip-mongers would

have said, “Look at Rama, who is so head over heels in love with

His wife, that He has accepted Her without question, knowing full well

that she was abducted and was in the custody of the notorious kAmuka

Ravana”.

Hence, it was indeed necessary for Sri Rama to appear to enquire into His lady’s chastity.

 

The suspicions about Sri Sita’s conduct could indeed have been

voiced and clarifications obtained in private, or before a select

audience of trusted acolytes. However, the general public would still

be unaware of the proceedings and might continue to think Sri

Raghava’s conduct unbecoming of a scion of the Ikshvaku

dynasty. Since Sita’s innocence was proved beyond doubt for

everyone to see, even the breath of scandal was avoided in the

matter.

 

Commentators clarify that the actual purport of Sri Raghava’s

words about Sita being free to live with Lakshmana, Bharata, et al,

is that once abandoned by her husband, a woman could seek the support

and roof of her husband’s relatives and friends. It was with

this in mind, (that Sita could find support from any of the worthies

mentioned), that Sri Rama’s words were uttered and not with any

other untoward purport, says Sri Govindaraja (“atra LakshmanAdou

mana: karaNam nAma anAthAyA: rakshakatvEna tat tat grihE vartanam.

BhartrA parityaktAyA: striyA bandhu grihE vAsa vidhAnAt”).

If Sri Rama were to appear to be apparently satisfied by Sita’s

own words of assurance and sworn protests of innocence, it would not

have been adequate for the assembled public, who would have thought,

“What sort of justice is this, if the accused person is

exonerated based solely on her own protestations of innocence?”

Hence some solid proof was needed, if the proletariat was to be

convinced as to where the rights of the matter lay. The agni parIkshA

was therefore necessary. Sri Rama makes this clear, saying that this

was essential for convincing the three worlds—

“PratyayArttham tu lOkAnAm trayANAm satya samshraya:

upEkshE VaidEhIm pravisantIm hutAsanam”

 

Despite His harsh words, Sri Rama was absolutely convinced about Sri

Sita’s impeccable character. He knew too that none of the five

elements was capable of causing Her harm, since all were under the

joint command of Himself and His Consort (“bheeshAsmAt VAta:

pavatE, bheeshOdEti Soorya:, bheeshmAt agnischa indrascha, Mrityu:

dhAvati panchama iti”—the Taittiriyopanishad). Since no

injury could be caused by Fire to Sita who was the embodiment of

purity, and since it would prove Her to be blemishless beyond doubt,

Sri Rama didn’t feel any qualms about permitting Her to enter

the fire.

 

Sri Sita is ever conscious of the insults She meted out to Lakshmana,

when he refused to leave the parNashAlA, in response to

MArIcha’s cry for rescue, uttered in Rama’s voice. Sri

Mythily accuses Lakshmana of having improper intentions towards Her,

when He tries to convince Her that his brother needs no assistance

from anyone and is quite capable of defending Himself. It was to

atone for this inexcusable conduct towards a BhagavatA, that Sri

Mythily requests him specifically to make a fire for Her to enter and

prove Her innocence.

 

 

The Prince of Ayodhya knew His Consort like the palm of His own hand

and needed no certificates from anyone, however eminent, as to Her

character and conduct. Yet, since justice had not only to be done but

also seem to be done, Sri Raghava accepted Sri Sita with these

certifications, as they came from entities, which the public held in

high reverence. As such, it was for public consumption, rather than

for His own requirement, that Sri Rama waited for these celestials to

pronounce Sita innocent, before accepting Her.

 

The episode might have been painful to all concerned while it lasted,

but both Sri Rama and Sri Sita emerge from it with their fame

enhanced manifold. Just as gold glitters more after passing through

fire, Sita too has Her sterling qualities reaffirmed beyond doubt,

after the ordeal by fire. And it proves too that Sri Raghunandana

applied the same strict standards of ethics and righteousness in His

own case, as He did in others’, attesting to His impartiality

and passion for justice and fair play. Detractors might still be

found, criticising the Prince of Ayodhya for what He said and did on

the occasion, but for us, as students of Srimad Ramayanam, He would

always be the shining paragon of virtue, the epitome of all merit and

the compulsively righteous monarch, who could never do wrong. If some

people think the worse of the Magnificent Monarch on this count, it

shows only their ignorance, for, being the embodiment of Dharma

(certified as such by even His enemies—“RamO vigrahavAn

dharma:”), Sri Rama was incapable of wrongdoing. If some of His

actions appear to us to be incorrect, it is because we apply our own

defective human standards in judging divine conduct, which we have no

business to do.

 

For, if Rama did it, it must be correct.

 

Srimate Srivan Satakopa Sri LakshmInrisimha divya paduka sevaka

SrivanSatakopa Sri Narayana Yatindra Mahadesikaya nama:

dasan, sadagopan