ABOUT MANTHARA

February 19, 2008

Friends,

I would like to know whether MANTHARA mentioned in SHYAMALA DANDAKAM

written by Adi Shankara is a synonym of Goddess Saraswathi

" .........sathkalAmanthirE MANTHTHARE.... " In that case , whether

MANTHTHARA mentioned in the Great Epic RAMAYANA is the incarnation of

Goddess Saraswathi who paved wayby coxing Queen KAIKEYI to ask the two

boons given by him to her in a different occassion, for Lord Rama's

VanavAsa and killing of the great RAkshasa King Ravana.

If any one can give me an answer, I shall be grateful.

Regards,

P.R.RADHAKRISHNAN

February 19, 2008

!! Sri Rama Jayam !!

Dear Radhakrishnan ji,

You have put a very nice question for the benefit of all. Per my very limited knowledge let me answer you in the context you have asked.

Devi/Shakti manifests in many aspects - Brahman, Isvari, Parama, Maya, Vidya, and Avidya; the terminal five elements proceed from Brahman; important to understand that all elements are of equal importance. Parama is consciousness; Maya is the material cause of the universe; Vidya is spiritual knowledge (as Bhagavad GITA also tells); Avidya is spiritual ignorance.

Per Shaktas/Vaishnavas/Shaivas, a very common understanding says that MAYA is composed consists of three gunas (bonds); Sattva, Rajas, and Tamas.

Avidyam is maya with dominance of Rajas and Tamas, while dominance of Sattva in maya is Vidya.

Based on this understanding it would not be incorrect to assume that Manthara who is personified AVIDYA (form of Devi Saraswati) enters Ayodhya & tricks the mind of Kaikeyi against Rama. Whether Manthara belongs to kaikey land or not is not very important for us here or anywhere else.

Hence, Sri Adi Shankara has shown a great spiritual confidence, caution & courage when he is addressing Sri Saraswati as Manthara....which is absolutely correct.

Salutations to that great acharya.

Hare Krishna

Hare Rama

guruvayur [guruvayur ] On Behalf Of P.R.RADHAKRISHNANTuesday, February 19, 2008 2:36 PMguruvayur Subject: [Guruvayur/Guruvayoor] ABOUT MANTHARA

Friends,I would like to know whether MANTHARA mentioned in SHYAMALA DANDAKAMwritten by Adi Shankara is a synonym of Goddess Saraswathi ".........sathkalAmanthirE MANTHTHARE...." In that case , whetherMANTHTHARA mentioned in the Great Epic RAMAYANA is the incarnation ofGoddess Saraswathi who paved wayby coxing Queen KAIKEYI to ask the twoboons given by him to her in a different occassion, for Lord Rama'sVanavAsa and killing of the great RAkshasa King Ravana.If any one can give me an answer, I shall be grateful.Regards,P.R.RADHAKRISHNAN

February 20, 2008

Dear members, This question of Manthara being the incarnation of sarasvathi and the mening of the word of Manthara has already been explained in the group earlier by me.It is better if we do not get the same questions again anad again.I reproduce from my webpage on Questions and answers where i have recorded the same Question Manthara who was no one else than Goddess Saraswathi's incarnation, Saraswathi is also called as Manthara, ( See Shyamalaa Dandakam ), the killing of Ravana could not have happened. The poets who wrote Ramayana have added many stories to the

real one and that is the main reason as to why our History is distorted. These are all NIMITHTHAAS. Manthra has been depicted as a bad character in Ramayana. The fact is that it is the will of God which prevailed. No matter who wrote what. Answer Of course it is the will of God without nothing could have happened and Manthara could be a goddess in disguise but Ramayana became known to the world through Valmiki only and he was supposed to be told the story by Narada through the command of Brahma.We have no authority or proof other than this to say that it

was imagined by Valmiki who pictured Manthara as bad.The story as told could not be dismissed because 1.The name Manthara alone is not enough to prove that she was the incarnation of Sarasvati as any one can be named after any Goddess. 2.Even if she is, Valmiki could not have said so nor Narada as it would have been divine secret and cannot

be divulged . 3. Once a person had taken the role of a bad character whoever he or she might be they had to act it out and the script writer of the drama will have to portray them only as the character and not as who they really were. 4. Both Valmiki and Kamban explicitly state that it was all the plot of the devas and the will of God and there is no doubt about it at all. 5. Rama Himself inspite of being the incarnation had to appear true to His character and so did Ravana who was in reality only the faithful attendent of the Lord in his poorva janma. 6.Ravana could also be defended by some quoting some other source to say that he wanted to die in the hands of the Lord and that is why he abducted Sita etc.but these are only various threads to the main story, which was written by Valmiki the adhikavi, who did not do so out of his imagination but by the instruction of Brahma and Narada. 7. Finally when the subject matter of these posts have been specified as the Ramayana of Valmiki and Kamban, one has to expound only on what exactly they have said even though it could be mentioned that there is a view that Manthara was an incarnation of Sarasvati, though Sarasvati need not have taken the incarnation as a hunchback when she could have easily manifest on the tongue of Manthara to make her say what she said, probably that was what happened. Please log in to http://www.geocities.com/sarojram18 and read the

page titled Questions and answers wherre you will find all the questions asked in the various groups and my answers to them. saroja Ramanujam Dr. Saroja Ramanujam, M.A., Ph.D, Siromani in sanskrit. www.freewebs.com/asrama3

Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Search.