FW: The Crow's crime

[Guest guest]

dear srivaishnava perunthagaiyeer,

 

Smt.Jayasree saranathan has sent this long mail to me and sri sadagopan swamy as a personal mail. since it is of interest to all, i am sharing this with you all without Jayasree madam's express permission to do so. hope she will not mind that.

 

dhasan

 

vasudevan m.g.

 

PS: Sadagopan swamy, hope you are on my side in sharing madam's article with all.

 

 

Jayasree Saranathan [jayasree.saranathan ]

Thursday, September 28, 2006 5:36 PM

M.G.Vasudevan; sadagopaniyengar (AT) vsnl (DOT) net

The Crow's crime

 

 

SRIMATHE RAMANUJAYA NAMAHA

 

Namaskaaram.

 

The write-ups by yourselves on Crow, the crime and Raman's reasons

have come at a right time when Navaaha parayanam of Sundhara khandam

for this navarathri dealt with these on this 6th day today.

 

The Ramaanubhavam on this day make me write this mail from 2

perspectives. Hope these make some relevance.

 

(1) The issues around Crow written by Sri SSC in his article and the

related ones by Sri MGV.

(2) Why Rama used the Brahmaasthram to kill a crow.

 

 

About (1) there are more issues than what meet the eyes in the choice

of crow- body by Jayanthan.

(a) Why should he choose this body first of all?

(b) What were his intentions?

© Can someone like the son of Indran even dream of doing this

apachram to Piratti?

For (b) & ©, I concur with Sri MGV's friend that some curse might

have been there.

 

And there are other factors too.

 

The clue lies in kaakasura vrudhantham itself.

Before taking leave of Rama, Jayanthan in crow's body pays pranams to

Raman and Dhasharathan.

 

'sa raamaaya namskruthva raajye Dhasharathaaya cha' (38-38)

 

Where was Dhasharatha in this scene is a question.

 

The possible answer is that since the crow stands for a conduit for

paying off pithru ruNam (pithru kadan), Jayanthan could have thought

it safe to appear as a crow, expecting Rama to see his pithrus in crow

and refrain from harming him.

 

Or since he has brought disgrace to the entire species of crows which

receive the pindam for pithrus, he invoked dhasharatha and sought his

blessings (or pardon by prostrating before him)

 

Another factor is about the very name of crow in Sanskrit.

It is kaaka:

The crow's only language is kaa kaa.

Kaa means 'who is she' in Sanskrit.

The crow seems to be only species which always says 'who is she?' 'who is she?'

Is this she?

Is that she?

Or

Is this Sita she?

 

The crow seems to have tried to ascertain who this purushakaari is.

It seems to have come down from Indra lokam to show to this world and

humanity of all times who this purushakaari is.

 

When it tried to test this Sita, Sita did not harm it at the first instance..

So 'this she' is one with immense patience.

 

At the second occasion too, she didn't harm the crow for what it had

done to her.

So no doubt about her extreme patience with aparaadhis.

 

But Rama intervened.

 

Again only in her presence, could he get a lease of life.

So it is known without doubt that this is she, the purushakaari.

That is why the crows always sing 'who is she"

'Who is she, who is merciful to even the worst offender?'

 

Not only that, the crow also seems to remind us who he is who

pardons even the worst offender. 'kaha?' 'kaha?'

 

 

Therefore it is kaaka:

 

Not only the Indian crow but also the crow in a foreign land goes

about spreading the message 'kaa' 'kaa' 'who is she?'

 

I think the crow is an apt character to bring out the highest quality

of the divine couple.

 

Jayanthan's impersonation seems to be with such far-reaching intentions!!

 

Yet another factor is about the safety (or so) in crow's garb.

This can be understood only through pancha pakshi shastra.

 

This is one among the 4 main parts of the samhitha skandam of

Jyothisha shastra. This is about 'aaroodam' in astrology, which had

been popularly in vogue in Ithihasic times. Like swapna shastra,

nimittha shastra (sagunam etc), pancha pakshi was fo0\llowed by all

in those days.

 

As per this, 5 birds have been identified as depicting or showing

certain characteristics based on which a person can decide about doing

or not doing an activity.

 

Crow is one among them.

Not only that, the crow has a primary position among them, in that it

rules for a long time at a stretch. i.e., for 2 naazhigai, than any

other pancha lakshi and its jurisdiction is top of all others', namely

it stands for 'ruling' (arasu) and its duration is a favourable one

too. Even in nimitthna shastra, the sight of a crow to one's left is

considered auspicious.

 

The crow of pancha pakshi shastra is not to be confused with crow as

vahanam for Sanishwaran. The implication and relevance differs in

different places.

 

But crow as one among the pancha pakshi is powerful in accomplishing things..

 

Since people would not harm the pancha pakshi but instead look them up

for favorable results, Jayanthan would have felt it safe to look like

a crow. Other wise why should a crow which usually is a scared one

feeding on left overs and dead ones, wish to taste a live person's

flesh?

 

The analysis on lines of pancha pakshi throws some interesting

information which are relevant in the second perspective I mentioned

earlier ( Why Rama used the Brahmaasthram to kill acrow?)

 

As per this shastra. The choice of crow, fell doom on Jayanthan.

It is a practice in astrology to look for other factors to ascertain

the veracity of a prediction or an observation.

 

In this context, Jayanthan's name stands for another pancha pakshi

namely cock, which is an enemy to crow as per this shastra. So it must

spell doom for a person of cock to don a crow, which Jayanthan did.

 

Also it became possible for him to irritate Sita (of pancha pakshi,

the owl) for owl and crow are enemies. But Rama's pancha pakshi is

vulture which had an over powering effect on the crow.

 

As per this shastra, the kaakasura episode could have happened on a

Thursday, or else Jayanthan could not have escaped like this.

 

If one wonders whether it could be true that Rama and Sita would have

taken lightly on the crow initially on consideration of pancha pakshi,

my reply is "strongly possible"

 

Because at many places in Ramayana, the daily or hourly nimittham had

been considered for favorable or unfavourable events.

 

Even the fixing of muhurtha for Rama's coronation was done (rushed) by

Dhasharatha on maasam, tarabalam and thidhi balam, while the natal

horoscope of Rama did not support coronation at that time.

 

Dhasaratha tells rama about the bad dream (nimittha shastram) he had

and the prediction by astrologers of the nearing of his anthimama

denoted by aspect of his birth star by sun (in mesha) and Rahu and

Mars. Calculating from Rama's birth chart we find that Rahu must have

been at Thula at that time with Mars, for mars at 4th bhava from

Rama's chnadra rasi stands for what happened then. This means Rama had

Sun at 10th and Rahu and Mars at 4th and when sun in the 10th in

gochara has planets in 4th, they form vedai spelling doom on whatever

good the 10th sun was capable of doing.

By this, I mean to tell that birth horoscope was hardly given

importance in fixing coronation for Rama.

 

Dhasharatha expresses fears about some trouble from Bharatha and

combining it with prediction of his maraka, rushes to fix the

coronation on the day's strength, which however could not be

proceeded. Even before the onset of the favorable day, the damage had

occurred.

 

Again at Yuddha kandam we find Rama depending on Tarabalam while

setting out for journey to lanka.

 

My contention is that importance was given to day's or hora's position

as signified by hora shastra, nimittha sashtra (there are many

instances in Ramayana alone) and pancha pakshi shastra.

 

So Crow's body is a safe one.

 

Now about the astram.

 

In this context, 3 instances need to be seen to understand the inner

taathparyam.

 

Rama plucked the darbai from his asanam and invoked the Brahmastram in

it to punish kaakasuran

 

Though he was seated on darbaasanam, he summoned Lakshmana to get his

astras to punish samudra rajan. He did not use the darbai of his

asanam.

 

Though he was possessed of Bramasthram among other weapons, he had to

be reminded of that by his sarathy, Maadali to punish Ravana, the

greatest offender of all.

 

The first was a Devan, the 2nd a Thanavan and the 3rd a Rakshasan.

The first and the 3rd were punished, while the 2nd says why Rama can

not punish him. This is brought out by Hanuman too in today's (6th

day) parayanam.

 

"Rama is one who knows when to show anger" ('sthana krodha: -34-31)

"Rama is one who knows about when and where and how to punish his

enemies" ('dEsha kaala vibhakanjya:' 35-21)

 

He knows Raja neethi and follows the 4 neethis (one among them is

Danda neethi) as per the situation. (Raja vidhya vineedhas cha -35-

13)

 

So there is some meaning behind every act of Rama in his danda neethi.

 

What his guiding principles are, is known by what the Samudra rajan

says when he appears before Raman.

 

He tells Rama that he can not just make the waters stop or recede.

 

Because it is not out of desire for prosperity or riches,

nor for desiring something to which he is not entitled,

nor for fear of having incurred some paapam,

is he being made or asked to make the waters behave in the way in

which they can not behave.

 

This implies that he has not done anything objectionable or wrong as

to attract the wrath of Rama to shoot him with brahmasthram. In the

absence such mukhandram, Rama could not punish him. All that he did

was to threaten him and that was enough for Samdra rajan to come in

the open and give some suggestions to Rama. Brahmasthram was needed to

make him come out as he was a thanavan of exalted nature.

 

>From the above, it is known that desire of something for which one is

not entitled is a cause for Rama's Brahmastra. Kaakasurana nd Ravana

fit in this mukhaandram.

 

Kakasura is a deva (I concur with Sri MGV's Views on this) and the

astra chases him till he seeks rakshanam. Pl refer Govinda rajeeyam on

rakshnam in explaining why Rama left Ravana the first time and why

rama appeared only after the vanaras were beaten by Ravana and sought

refuge in Rama.

 

Sri Govindarajar says that rakshakam is done only in aarthi,

suffering. The vanaras after being badly affected by Ravana rushed to

rama for protection,. Rama became the protector.

 

Rakshakam is also done when one is helpless. That was when Kaakasuran

fell at his feet and Ravana was about to swoon and his weapons

slipped from his hands. When Ravana was helpless, Rama's danda neethi

and Raja vidhya is such that he would not kill / punish him. This is

also one part of the explanation for Rama killing Vali. He didn't kill

him when he was helpless. Had Vali been deprived of weapons

(niraayudhapaani), Rama would not have killed him as he did.

 

Coming to our thread, on sighting Ravana for the first time in the war

field, Rama declares that having sighted him, he not let him go

unpunished. Since Rama had seen him, Ravana can not escape even if he

takes shelter in Indran, yaman, suryan, Brahma devan, agni or

shankaran or in any of the 10 directions.

 

This happened with Kaakasuran who was right in front of Raman.

Rama could not punish Ravana ( pl recall the many write-ups we wrote

in the past on why Sita had to suffer) immediately because he was not

in his presence. The difference in the scenes is there.

 

He used brhamastra on a devan (jayanthan) and thanavan (samudra rajan)

but not on Ravanan. He was wondering why the kind of astras he used on

other rakshasas like maareecha, kara dhooshana, viraadha, Kabhandan

etc was not working on Ravana. It was only after Maadhali prayed to

him why he was not using that ultimate astra, and that the time had

come for slaying Ravana, did he draw it.

 

The reason for this is in Ramayana itself, that is waiting for the

time. Just during that occasion the ashubha sagunam were described.

Things happen at the appointed time.

 

For a Rakshasa like Ravana, Rama had thought that other astras were

enough. Such leniency, he did not take on the other two. But Ravana's

other side of the character is such that he had accumulated so much

strength, that there was the need for systematically disarming him by

wrong doings of sorts, of which abduction of Sita was the foremost

(recall the write-ups on whether sita was not powerful). Remember the

gloating by Brahma deva when Rama lifted Sita by her hair while she

was crying over the slain Jatayu. "Kaaryam mudinthadu" said Brahma

deva. A strong reason for Ravana vadam by Rama was done.

 

Ravana was not an easy target for, his other side of character and

deeds saved him.

 

Kaakasura was also not an easy target for he can not be killed. But he

was one such person who can quickly correct himself. He did that and

escaped.

 

And Rama is one who gives along rope, gives many chances. He gave so

to Ravana, for, he is after all a rakshasan, not a devan or thanavan.

Had he been a deva or so, he would not have offended Rama nor have

gone thus far.

 

Any corrections to the above observations are welcome.

 

Pardon me for a long mail.

 

Regards,

 

Jayasree saranathan

 

 

DISCLAIMER:

This Message and its contents is intended solely for the addressee and is proprietary.Information in this mail is for L&T Business Usage only. Any Use to other than the addressee is misuse and infringement to Proprietorship of L&T ECC.If you are not the addressee please return the mail to the sender.L&T ECC DIVISION