lakshmana 24

[Guest guest]

Post 24

 

 

 

Dear Sri vaishnava perunthagaiyeer,

 

 

 

In the previous 23 posts, we saw 'lakshmaNa' donning 10 roles. The 10th role

as a great warrior is continuing. Just for recollection

 

- For the first time, in the great warrior role, the boy lakshmaNa had

his part in cutting ears and tip of nose of thaatakaa, similar to that of

soorpanakaa in the fourth time - as an adult.

- Next time, as deputy warrior in the maareecha ambush and subhaahu

killing, our hero did not have any role except as 'onlooker'.

- Third time, in viraadha vadham, we saw lakshmaNa first cutting the

arm of viraadhan as warrior and then a role change effected - from warrior

to scavenger.

 

 

 

In the next khara dhooshaNa vadham, or the mini war prior to lanka war, we

saw in previous post lakshmaNa, as per direction of raama, took seethaa and

went into a cave covered with trees.

 

· Why lakshmaNa was sent away with seethaa by raama?

 

· Will lakshmaNa not render a helping hand in that mini war with

khara and his army of 14000?

 

 

 

The answer to these questions is in raama's reaction saying 'it is a good

idea [to have sent them off] ' - after lakshmaNa left with seethaa – see

slokam

 

 

 

thasmin pravishTE thu guhaam lakshmaNE saha seethayaa |

 

hantha niryuktham ithi ukthvaa raama: kavacham aavi*s*ath || 3-24-16

 

* *

 

meaning: On Lakshmana's entering into cave along with Seethaa, Raama said to

himself, "thank goodness, it is a good-idea!". Thus saying raama donned his

shield.

 

 

 

*Point:* Perhaps immediate reaction by any curious reader will be to ask.

Why this kind of reaction - in getting rid of seethaa and lakshmaNa from

that place. Added together are the 2 questions above awaiting an answer. For

all 3 questions, the beautiful answer is given below, and is in the

valmikiramayan web site [my sincere thanks to the authors]. Since it is so

attractive and clear in thinking, I want to share that with you all. [it is

not a 'quote – unquote' - I edited to suit my style of presenting]

 

* *

 

This episode of sending away Seethaa and Lakshmana has got three reasons in

the complex 'She-He-Me' roles of these three personalities.

 

1. first the 'she' factor:

 

a. Seethaa is to be sent away from that prospective battlefield,

because Seethaa is not trained for warfare like Raama's third mother

KaikEyi. [MGV adds – She cannot defend herself, for she is not trained. So

she has to be protected by either of the two – raama or lakshmaNa. As such

the concentration of one of the two will not be on war but on seethaa. And

the other will be anxious about her safety even while fighting the war.

Hence it is safer if one handles the war with full concentration and other

takes care of seethaa].

 

 

 

b. Whenever Seethaa is present nearby, we see no killings or slayings

in Sreemadh Raamayanam. Because she, as Goddess Lakshmi, condones any sinner

and accords salvation. [MGV adds - as in kaakaasura episode – after a round

of chase by brahmaasthram the crow was given asylum – even though it is a

physical assault on her own self – re momukshuppadi on this particular point

– since she was nearby kaakkai was given asylum but raavaNan – since she was

not available - punished for a lesser offence].

 

 

 

c. Therefore, in all probability – seethaa will, not only be a

hindrance to war, but also there may be her blessing to every demon with a

free passage to mOksham, on which Raama becomes a helpless onlooker.

 

 

 

2. Next the 'he' factor: LakshmaNa is intolerant of any assault on his

brother raama or manni - sister-in-law seethaa, and collides head-on with

the aggressors. This may lead LakshmaNa up to Lanka also to confront even

RaavaNa. That being the aggressive nature of 'snaky' LakshmaNa, Raama bids

him to go away before any happening, or any further dialogue. [MGV adds – so

it is not to sideline lakshmaNa or belittle his contribution but realizing

the nature of lakshmaNa, raama took this decision to keep him away]

 

 

 

3. Third the 'me' factor: Raama is the first one to promise the sages

and saints of the forest to eradicate the demons himself. On this Seethaa

nags him not to wage a causeless war [and has a quote story from past – of a

rishi possessing sword]. Therefore, if Raama is going to hide in any cave

camouflaged by trees along with Seethaa, and LakshmaNa goes on warring, the

very character of Raama is at stake. Thus, as promised to sages and saints,

Raama alone wanted to trigger off the elimination process of demons. That is

why Raama breathes fresh air saying "good idea and good riddance".

 

 

 

4. Now comes the next question - Why these reasons are to be detailed in our

article on 'lakshmaNa'? If not answered – some critical reader may say

lakshmaNa, the hero of our series, was simply sidelined by raama. So it is

not simply sending off of lakshmaNa but a 'strategic decision' displayed by

raama.

 

 

 

Further proceedings in raamaayaNam on khara vadham:

 

this runs like this - After that raama took a ferocious look – vaalmeeki

describes this 'look' of raama as that of rudhran who came to destroy that

yagnam of dhaksha – his father in law. See slokam -

 

roopam aprathimam thasya raamasya aaklishTa karmaNa: |

 

babhoova roopam krudhdhasya rudhrasya iva mahaathmana: || 3-24-26

 

 

 

The war started and raama was shedding blood and that covered the entire

body. Then raama killed the sainyam – army, along with their living and

non-living vehicles – like horses, elephants, and destroyed the chariots

etc. When faced with defeat like this, the balance army went to dhooshaNa,

their deputy commander. At his behest the army returned to attack raama –

but raama destroyed the balance army and then cut both arms of dhooshana.

That fellow fell down dead.

 

 

 

Then raama killed the left outs also and remained persons were khara,

thrisira, and raama only - in that 14000 + 1. Among the two, when khara

wanted to take on the fight, Thrisira came forward and asked his permission..

He hit raama in the forehead with arrows. Then raama killed him.

 

 

 

Afterwards khara started fighting and that was a tough fight. Khara even

removed the armour of raama and made it fall down on ground. During this

fight Raama was using that vaishNava dhanu: given by sage agasthya. [here is

the first and major use of the bow and see what vaalmeeki says – vaishNava

dhanu: - not 'kOdhandam']. Then khara sent his gadhaa – mace – and raama

destroyed that. Then raama hit khara with indhra's asthram, and that asthram

killed khara. The sages on ground praised raama, along with dhEvaas standing

in the sky praising raama. At that stage lakshmaNa returned from cave along

with seethaa. On seeing her victorius husband she embraced raama with all

love and happiness.

 

 

 

That slokam is a famous one and we use that slokam very regularly --

 

tham dhrushtvaa *s*athru hanthaaram maharsheeNaam sukha aavaham |

 

babhoova hrushtaa vaidhEhee bharthaaram parishasvajE || 3- 30 – 30

 

 

 

She repeated that rare scene, [the open embrace by seethaa in front of all],

because of her joy in seeing the victorius husband. [Here that beautiful

'haridhasulu' krithi in raga yamunaa kalyaaNi of thyaagaraja comes to mind –

re MGV's article].

 

 

 

*Point:* That way lakshmaNa's role in the khara dhooshana vadham turned out

to be a low-key affair, doing only the protection - rather than a serious

fighter. Of course as stated a protector has to be an alert warrior, and is

needed very much – for without that warring capability he can't be a

protector.

 

 

 

Another point is – we could have skipped this desciption of the fight of

raama – since lakshmaNa is kept away – but that slokam of embracing of

seethaa is so familiar and important – that forces me not to miss that.

 

 

 

*NEXT:* Now we move on to next topic - maareecha vadham. Let us see what

role did lakshmaNa play in that? Is it again a low key like khara vadham or

some major contribution? Yes. For lakshmaNa is directed to be a protector to

seethaa again by raama. Before raama did so, lakshmaNa's premonition – that

maareecha is the deer is one of the best suggestions or advices a minister

can give to the king. This description we will see in that role – of a

minister.

 

 

 

*Prelude* to maareecha vadham: It goes like this – This destruction of

khara, dhooshaNa, and their army of 14000 single handedly by raama, was

conveyed to raavaNa by akampana, a secret agent. Akampana described about

seethaa and her beauty to raavaNa [he is the first to talk on seethaa to

raavaNa, later only soorpanakaa]. He also suggested to raavaNa to steal

seethaa, stating a reason also - 'by stealing seethaa, raama will die

naturally' [because of that separation from seethaa and he made it clear -

otherwise raama can't be defeated].

 

 

 

A point for us who are studying on lakshmaNa - that akampana while talking

about lakshmaNa to raavaNa describe him as '*s*a*s*i nibha aanana:' – moon

faced. Earlier we have seen raama only being described 'somavath priya

dharsana:' and 'chandra nibha aanana: - but here, somebody describes

lakshmaNa like that, for a change]

 

 

 

RaavaNa took his flight – his flying chariot from lanka to maareecha

aasramam, - far away from dhandaka - the very next morning on akampana's

information. [you may ask is it so – yes. Vaalmeeki states specifically

'next morning'] Maareecha advised raavaNa to drop that idea of lifting

seethaa. RaavaNa obeyed that advice this time.

 

 

 

Later when soorpanakha came and instigated raavaNa on similar lines, then

only raavaNa really plunged into carrying out abduction of seethaa, and

sought help from maareecha again. Second time also maareecha gave a lot of

advice and finally when raavaNa threatened to kill maareecha, he conceded to

help thinking that it is better to die at the hands of raama than raavaNa.

 

 

 

One small difference in the two points made to raavaNa by these two

 

· akampana said raama would die on his own on separation of seethaa,

 

· whereas soorpankaa wanted raavaNa to do the abduction of seethaa

and then killing of raama is easy, for, due to separation of seethaa he

would be weak then.

 

 

 

Dear readers, once again you may ask 'why so much description? - in the

prelude to maareecha vadham'. Many a times when you listen to a raamaayaNam

series, afer khara dhooshaNa vadham, as per soorpanakaa's suggestion raavaNa

will seek help, then maareecha maan will come into the story etc - and not

these subtle points - like akampana's advice and the difference between the

two advices etc.

 

 

 

akampana's role is clear – as a secret agent – he is clear in reporting –

raama will be die naturally due to separation - this means – his

observations as a spy are very clear and clean reporting. Whereas in

soorpanakaa – her intention is to take revenge – so raama is to be hit twice

– once by snatching away seethaa, second in killing raama.

 

 

 

Similarly maareecha when draws raama out from the proximity of seethaa as a

golden deer, he is meeting raama for the third time.

 

· First time he was beaten is during thaatakaa vadham.

 

· Second maareecha himself naarates how he was beaten by raama, when

he wanted to take revenge for the hit he received from raama during the

early days of forest life of raama.

 

· Third time is meeting is that golden deer and this time he is

killed.

 

 

 

So raama has really spared him twice knowingly, so that he will help in

abduction of seethaa and all that – for there is that major task to be

accomplished – that avathaara kaaryam – of killing raavaNa.

 

 

 

Since the length of post applies a brake we will continue in next.

 

Dhasan

 

 

--

Vasudevan MG