Guest guest Posted April 2, 2009 Report Share Posted April 2, 2009 Happy Sri Rama navami Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 2, 2009 Report Share Posted April 2, 2009 You took me thru Srimad Valmiki Ramayanam.I dont know how to thank You?Sri Rama Jaya Rama Seetha Rama!"setlur.shanu" <setlur.shanuguruvayur ; Krishna Files <krishnafilesThursday, April 2, 2009 5:57:10 AMSubject: [Guruvayur] Ramayanam Happy Sri Rama navami Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 3, 2009 Report Share Posted April 3, 2009 Hello everyone, Ramayanam ppt was so soothing and i felt an inner pleasure,god bless all luv, Glitter Graphics--- On Thu, 2/4/09, Viswanathan K <kvichu2000 wrote: Viswanathan K <kvichu2000Re: [Guruvayur] Ramayanamguruvayur Date: Thursday, 2 April, 2009, 9:43 PM You took me thru Srimad Valmiki Ramayanam.I dont know how to thank You?Sri Rama Jaya Rama Seetha Rama! "setlur.shanu@ gmail.com" <setlur.shanu@ gmail.com>guruvayur@grou ps.com; Krishna Files <krishnafiles@ ymail.com>Thursday, April 2, 2009 5:57:10 AM[Guruvayur] Ramayanam Happy Sri Rama navami Add more friends to your messenger and enjoy! Invite them now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 3, 2009 Report Share Posted April 3, 2009 Good job Shanthiji !Thank you for giving us an opportunity to go through ramayanam on this auspicious day.May Lord Rama bless you and all in this world !!with love,rekha--- On Thu, 4/2/09, setlur.shanu <setlur.shanu wrote:setlur.shanu <setlur.shanu[Guruvayur] Ramayanamguruvayur , "Krishna Files" <krishnafilesThursday, April 2, 2009, 8:57 PM Happy Sri Rama navami Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 3, 2009 Report Share Posted April 3, 2009 It is an excellent work, thanks a lot for sending it. May Guruvayoorappan bless you. Jai Sree Krishna--- On Thu, 4/2/09, Viswanathan K <kvichu2000 wrote: Viswanathan K <kvichu2000Re: [Guruvayur] Ramayanamguruvayur Date: Thursday, April 2, 2009, 5:13 PM You took me thru Srimad Valmiki Ramayanam.I dont know how to thank You?Sri Rama Jaya Rama Seetha Rama! "setlur.shanu@ gmail.com" <setlur.shanu@ gmail.com>guruvayur@grou ps.com; Krishna Files <krishnafiles@ ymail.com>Thursday, April 2, 2009 5:57:10 AM[Guruvayur] Ramayanam Happy Sri Rama navami Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 24, 2009 Report Share Posted July 24, 2009 The will of God makes one behave the way they do but how they do uit is all that matters.Even though it was the divne will thatRama should go to forest becaseu of the boons Kaikeyi den manded,her act was not withour selfishness and illwill. Firstly she never cared when Dasarath said that he would not live without Rama.Secondly she was angry when Dasaratha wanted to send the things that would create comfort for rama in the forest. Thirdly she wished to see Seetha earing bark garments and she referred to Seeth as the daughter of Janaka. This was the result of Manthara poisoning her mind that if Rama becomes the king Janka would attack her father.. Normally if some one does any harm to us it is our fate but that does not absolve the doer of harm and he has to suffer the result of his action becasue is iinduced by raga dhvesha.Kaikeyi was puished enough whern Bharatha denounced her and that was her prayaschittha.saroja Ramanujam . Dr. SarojaRamanujam , M.A., Ph.D, sanskritsiromanireply to sarojram18 and to get the previous posts--- On Fri, 7/24/09, Jayasree Menon <euroanuster wrote:Jayasree Menon <euroanuster[Guruvayur] Ramayanamguruvayur Date: Friday, July 24, 2009, 12:34 PM Hare Rama Hare Rama.... Rama Rama Hare Hare ....!! Hare Krishna Hare Krishna..... Krishna krishna Hare Hare .........!! I have a small doubt which arose while i was reading Ramayanam this morning. It may be a foolish one. Still I thought i should check with the expert gurudevs from the group. It is said in Ramayanam that " Than Than Nirantharam Cheyyunna Karmangal... ..than than anubhavichoodukenne varoo" means, one has to bear the fruit of all his/her karmas. At this juncture, my question is that Kaikeyi demanded two "varams" from Dasaradhan exactly just before the day of "Pattabhishekham" of Sri Rama and this caused a lot of sorrowful situation not only in the minds of all in Rama's House but in the minds of all in the Kingdom itself. While it is a fact that Kaikeyi is one of the mothers who loved Rama the most, when compared to the other two mothers, it was simply because of Goddess Saraswathy's desire, Manthara prompted Keykeyi to demand this and it was all the "Daiva Kaaryartham" happened. We also know that everything happens only if God wishes and not even a leaf moves unless HE decides. Here I recall my first sentence, Karma and its fruit.... Will Kaikeyi be punished for her roll in this action or not? If yes, why she should be punished when it was God's desire. If no, why she should not be punished when she has wounded the minds of lots of people including the king, Dasaratha? Best regardsJayasree MenonBangalore+9900149461my blog link: http://www.pythruka m.blogspot. com/------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- ----- A well-thought out plan, execution excellence, market timing, personal leadership are drivers of the growth trajectory. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 27, 2009 Report Share Posted July 27, 2009 Dear Sarojaji, Sasthrji, and Jayasreeji,Can we say that " vinaashakale Viparitha Budhi " is true in this case? Sometimes, if the time is not good, we take wrong decisions and later feel bad about it and try to do praayaschittham. Kaikeyi loved Lord Rama as much as he did Bharatha or even more. Then why did she listen to Manthara's words? We need Bhagavaan's blessings not to have this Viparitha Buddhi and Kaikeyi was unfortunate in not realizing how transient the pleasures she would have experienced by making Bharatha as Yuvaraja. This Viparitha Buddhi is even true with Sita Devi. How in the world, Sita Devi who is Prakruthi Devi Herself, who is patience personified, lost her temper with Lakshmana and sent him away to save the Saviour of all(!) and ended up in Ashoka Vana! As Melpatthoor puts it: Soyam Marthyaavathaara............. This marthyaavathaara is to instruct us that too much attachment to anything will bring sorrow. There is no doubt that Lord Rama was Atmaaraaman ans was detached. In his acting out of Ramayana story He showed us that His extreme attachment to Sita caused Him endless sorrow and His excessive attachment to Dharma resulted in abandoning his pregnant Dharma Pathni and abandoning His most dear and devoted brother Lakshmana who sacrificed his whole life for Him. Can we take as Ramayana advising us not be like Kaikeyi and telling us to be vigilant about wrong advises that come from wrong people? Otherwise we also will be put to the same situation as Kaikeyi. Bharatha said such harsh words to her and even considered himself the most unfortunate because he was born in her womb. So she got the worst punishment one can get as a mother. I am so fascinated by each and every line of Raamaayana and feel that we can learn something good from every incident and character. Like Jayasreeji, I pondered a lot about Kaikeyi and I come to the conclusion that nobody is basically mean or vicious and circumstances or past karmaas or vaasanaas or a combination of all, of all the people involved makes thing happen. Dasharatha had the curse to die of Puthra dukham. So Rama has to be away. Then Rama's intention of Avathaar is Raavana - Kumbhakarna Vadham who were actually Bhagavaan's own dwaarapaalakaas whom He needed to get back to Vaikundham. So he cannot stay in Ayodhya and do Raajya paripaalanam. No individual or incident is independent and we are going through the field of individual and collective karma. May be Bhagavan wants to show us how deep the entanglement of this world and encourage us to pray and free ourselves from this. I may be completely wrong. I was just thinking out loud. Thank you Jayasreeji, it gives a lot of food for thought.Regards an dprayers SavitriOn Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 1:52 AM, Dr.B.G.Y Sastry <drbgysastry wrote: Dear Madam, Bhakti is eternal. First and foremost, let me say pranams to you, for reading Ramayana in the mornings. It is named as Ramayana and not as Rama Katha. The ayana denotes time. In a year there are two ayanas. One is Uttarayana and the other is Dakshinayana. One is followed by the other and there is no end. That never-ending is Ramayana. Those who read regularly and those who talk with such readers are all blessed. So I am blessed to reply. The answer is in your question itself. “We also know that everything happens only if God wishes and not even a leaf moves unless HE decides.” Before probing further, let us go through a small story. Once upon a time, a case was brought to a king’s durbar regarding a death due to snake poisoning. The question arose “Who is responsible for the Sin?” It goes as: One day a milk maid was carrying the milk pot in an open basket on her head and coming to the town for sale. On the way, one bird killed a snake and was carrying it. While the dead snake was being carried in the sky, the poison from the snake mouth fell into the milk pot. Being unaware of the incident, the milk maid sold the milk and the resident of the house died after consuming it. A complaint was lodged on the milk maid. She said that she does not know any thing. Subsequently they came to know about the snake. The bird said that the snake is its meal. The snake was dead. Then who is responsible? The complaint could not be solved. Finally the king has to carry the sin, since he could not give any verdict! So, the Dharma Sutra is so difficult to analyze. The action of mother kaikeyi can be pardoned, provided it is in the purview of Lord Krishna’s preaching in Bhagavad-Gita, as under: karmaNyE vaadhikaarastE maa phalEshu kadaacana, maa karmaphalahEturbhuuh maa tE samgOsmyakarmaNi. (sloka 47 of chapter 2) Meaning: Your right is to work only and never to the fruit there of. Do not be the fruit of action; nor let your attachment be to inaction. So if the action is without expecting anything, the result is to God. Here her action is selfish and not for the “daiva kaaryam” as is clear from the statement of Rama himself. When Bharatha approached Rama in the forest and pleaded for his coming over to Ayodhya to enthrone and rule, Rama did not agree and in regard to Kaikeyi, he requested Bharata as under: kaamaad vaa tataa lObhaad vaa maatraa tubhyam idam kRitam, na tan manasi kartavyam vartitavyam ca maatRivat. maataram raksha kaikEyiim maa rOsam kuru taam prati. (Chapter 112 of Ayodhyakanda) Meaning: “My dear brother! Your mother acted thus, for your sake, out of her affection or ambition. It should not be carried out in your mind. You ought to obey her as your mother. O Bharata! Protect your mother, Kaikeyi. Do not get angry with her”. So Kaikeyi might have got the punishment for her selfish deportment. Accepting the fact that I am not at all an expert Gurudev, I am giving the opinion as an ordinary devotee, with the fear that Lord Rama may get angry, since he did not allow his own brothers to talk ill of Kaikeyi. As such I do prayascittam by reciting: aapadaa mapahartaaram daataaram sarvasampadaam, lOkaabhiraamam shriiraamam bhuuyO bhuuyO namaa myaham. I bow again and again to Sreerama who removes (all) obstacles and grants all wealth and pleases all. My humble prayers to Lord Rama to pardon me for my venture. With love and regards, Sastry --- On Fri, 7/24/09, Jayasree Menon <euroanuster wrote: Jayasree Menon <euroanuster[Guruvayur] Ramayanam guruvayur Date: Friday, July 24, 2009, 7:04 AM Hare Rama Hare Rama.... Rama Rama Hare Hare ....!! Hare Krishna Hare Krishna..... Krishna krishna Hare Hare .........!! I have a small doubt which arose while i was reading Ramayanam this morning. It may be a foolish one. Still I thought i should check with the expert gurudevs from the group. It is said in Ramayanam that " Than Than Nirantharam Cheyyunna Karmangal... ..than than anubhavichoodukenne varoo " means, one has to bear the fruit of all his/her karmas. At this juncture, my question is that Kaikeyi demanded two " varams " from Dasaradhan exactly just before the day of " Pattabhishekham " of Sri Rama and this caused a lot of sorrowful situation not only in the minds of all in Rama's House but in the minds of all in the Kingdom itself. While it is a fact that Kaikeyi is one of the mothers who loved Rama the most, when compared to the other two mothers, it was simply because of Goddess Saraswathy's desire, Manthara prompted Keykeyi to demand this and it was all the " Daiva Kaaryartham " happened. We also know that everything happens only if God wishes and not even a leaf moves unless HE decides. Here I recall my first sentence, Karma and its fruit.... Will Kaikeyi be punished for her roll in this action or not? If yes, why she should be punished when it was God's desire. If no, why she should not be punished when she has wounded the minds of lots of people including the king, Dasaratha? Best regardsJayasree MenonBangalore+9900149461my blog link: http://www.pythruka m.blogspot. com/ ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -----A well-thought out plan, execution excellence, market timing, personal leadership are drivers of the growth trajectory. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 27, 2009 Report Share Posted July 27, 2009 Hare Rama Hare Rama... Rama Rama Hare Hare..! Hare Krishna .. Hare Krishna... Krishna Krishna Hare Hare ...!! My dear Gurudevs (Sarojaji, Sasthriji and Savithriji) I feel I am really blessed by Lord through you gurus for getting the right clarifications. However if it was not the past karma or bad time Keikeyi would have not done it. Even if Rama had to go to Forest, it need not have to be 14 years. It could have happened in Thretha Yuga too, similar to that had been happening ..like Narada narrates atrocities on earth and Krishna immediately acts upon....without taking so much difficulties of 14 years in forest and later leave her on the basis of the prayas' comments etc...is it not? It was all probably the feit of each atma (except that of Lord Rama who was totally detached). I am extremely thankful to all of you, especially Dr Sasthriji and Savithriji for the long and detailed explanations. Om Namo Bhagavathe Vasudevaya ! 2009/7/27 Savitri Puram <savitriopuram Dear Sarojaji, Sasthrji, and Jayasreeji, Can we say that " vinaashakale Viparitha Budhi " is true in this case? Sometimes, if the time is not good, we take wrong decisions and later feel bad about it and try to do praayaschittham. Kaikeyi loved Lord Rama as much as he did Bharatha or even more. Then why did she listen to Manthara's words? We need Bhagavaan's blessings not to have this Viparitha Buddhi and Kaikeyi was unfortunate in not realizing how transient the pleasures she would have experienced by making Bharatha as Yuvaraja. This Viparitha Buddhi is even true with Sita Devi. How in the world, Sita Devi who is Prakruthi Devi Herself, who is patience personified, lost her temper with Lakshmana and sent him away to save the Saviour of all(!) and ended up in Ashoka Vana! As Melpatthoor puts it: Soyam Marthyaavathaara............. This marthyaavathaara is to instruct us that too much attachment to anything will bring sorrow. There is no doubt that Lord Rama was Atmaaraaman ans was detached. In his acting out of Ramayana story He showed us that His extreme attachment to Sita caused Him endless sorrow and His excessive attachment to Dharma resulted in abandoning his pregnant Dharma Pathni and abandoning His most dear and devoted brother Lakshmana who sacrificed his whole life for Him. Can we take as Ramayana advising us not be like Kaikeyi and telling us to be vigilant about wrong advises that come from wrong people? Otherwise we also will be put to the same situation as Kaikeyi. Bharatha said such harsh words to her and even considered himself the most unfortunate because he was born in her womb. So she got the worst punishment one can get as a mother. I am so fascinated by each and every line of Raamaayana and feel that we can learn something good from every incident and character. Like Jayasreeji, I pondered a lot about Kaikeyi and I come to the conclusion that nobody is basically mean or vicious and circumstances or past karmaas or vaasanaas or a combination of all, of all the people involved makes thing happen. Dasharatha had the curse to die of Puthra dukham. So Rama has to be away. Then Rama's intention of Avathaar is Raavana - Kumbhakarna Vadham who were actually Bhagavaan's own dwaarapaalakaas whom He needed to get back to Vaikundham. So he cannot stay in Ayodhya and do Raajya paripaalanam. No individual or incident is independent and we are going through the field of individual and collective karma. May be Bhagavan wants to show us how deep the entanglement of this world and encourage us to pray and free ourselves from this. I may be completely wrong. I was just thinking out loud. Thank you Jayasreeji, it gives a lot of food for thought. Regards an dprayers Savitri On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 1:52 AM, Dr.B.G.Y Sastry <drbgysastry wrote: Dear Madam, Bhakti is eternal. First and foremost, let me say pranams to you, for reading Ramayana in the mornings. It is named as Ramayana and not as Rama Katha. The ayana denotes time. In a year there are two ayanas. One is Uttarayana and the other is Dakshinayana. One is followed by the other and there is no end. That never-ending is Ramayana. Those who read regularly and those who talk with such readers are all blessed. So I am blessed to reply. The answer is in your question itself. “We also know that everything happens only if God wishes and not even a leaf moves unless HE decides.” Before probing further, let us go through a small story. Once upon a time, a case was brought to a king’s durbar regarding a death due to snake poisoning. The question arose “Who is responsible for the Sin?” It goes as: One day a milk maid was carrying the milk pot in an open basket on her head and coming to the town for sale. On the way, one bird killed a snake and was carrying it. While the dead snake was being carried in the sky, the poison from the snake mouth fell into the milk pot. Being unaware of the incident, the milk maid sold the milk and the resident of the house died after consuming it. A complaint was lodged on the milk maid. She said that she does not know any thing. Subsequently they came to know about the snake. The bird said that the snake is its meal. The snake was dead. Then who is responsible? The complaint could not be solved. Finally the king has to carry the sin, since he could not give any verdict! So, the Dharma Sutra is so difficult to analyze. The action of mother kaikeyi can be pardoned, provided it is in the purview of Lord Krishna’s preaching in Bhagavad-Gita, as under: karmaNyE vaadhikaarastE maa phalEshu kadaacana, maa karmaphalahEturbhuuh maa tE samgOsmyakarmaNi. (sloka 47 of chapter 2) Meaning: Your right is to work only and never to the fruit there of. Do not be the fruit of action; nor let your attachment be to inaction. So if the action is without expecting anything, the result is to God. Here her action is selfish and not for the “daiva kaaryam” as is clear from the statement of Rama himself. When Bharatha approached Rama in the forest and pleaded for his coming over to Ayodhya to enthrone and rule, Rama did not agree and in regard to Kaikeyi, he requested Bharata as under: kaamaad vaa tataa lObhaad vaa maatraa tubhyam idam kRitam, na tan manasi kartavyam vartitavyam ca maatRivat. maataram raksha kaikEyiim maa rOsam kuru taam prati. (Chapter 112 of Ayodhyakanda) Meaning: “My dear brother! Your mother acted thus, for your sake, out of her affection or ambition. It should not be carried out in your mind. You ought to obey her as your mother. O Bharata! Protect your mother, Kaikeyi. Do not get angry with her”. So Kaikeyi might have got the punishment for her selfish deportment. Accepting the fact that I am not at all an expert Gurudev, I am giving the opinion as an ordinary devotee, with the fear that Lord Rama may get angry, since he did not allow his own brothers to talk ill of Kaikeyi. As such I do prayascittam by reciting: aapadaa mapahartaaram daataaram sarvasampadaam, lOkaabhiraamam shriiraamam bhuuyO bhuuyO namaa myaham. I bow again and again to Sreerama who removes (all) obstacles and grants all wealth and pleases all. My humble prayers to Lord Rama to pardon me for my venture. With love and regards, Sastry --- On Fri, 7/24/09, Jayasree Menon <euroanuster wrote: Jayasree Menon <euroanuster[Guruvayur] Ramayanamguruvayur Friday, July 24, 2009, 7:04 AM Hare Rama Hare Rama.... Rama Rama Hare Hare ....!! Hare Krishna Hare Krishna..... Krishna krishna Hare Hare .........!! I have a small doubt which arose while i was reading Ramayanam this morning. It may be a foolish one. Still I thought i should check with the expert gurudevs from the group. It is said in Ramayanam that " Than Than Nirantharam Cheyyunna Karmangal... ..than than anubhavichoodukenne varoo " means, one has to bear the fruit of all his/her karmas. At this juncture, my question is that Kaikeyi demanded two " varams " from Dasaradhan exactly just before the day of " Pattabhishekham " of Sri Rama and this caused a lot of sorrowful situation not only in the minds of all in Rama's House but in the minds of all in the Kingdom itself. While it is a fact that Kaikeyi is one of the mothers who loved Rama the most, when compared to the other two mothers, it was simply because of Goddess Saraswathy's desire, Manthara prompted Keykeyi to demand this and it was all the " Daiva Kaaryartham " happened. We also know that everything happens only if God wishes and not even a leaf moves unless HE decides. Here I recall my first sentence, Karma and its fruit.... Will Kaikeyi be punished for her roll in this action or not? If yes, why she should be punished when it was God's desire. If no, why she should not be punished when she has wounded the minds of lots of people including the king, Dasaratha? Best regardsJayasree MenonBangalore+9900149461my blog link: http://www.pythruka m.blogspot. com/ ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -----A well-thought out plan, execution excellence, market timing, personal leadership are drivers of the growth trajectory. -- Best regardsJayasree MenonBangalore+9900149461my blog link: http://www.pythrukam.blogspot.com/-- A well-thought out plan, execution excellence, market timing, personal leadership are drivers of the growth trajectory. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 27, 2009 Report Share Posted July 27, 2009 Ofcourse the puranas and ithihasa are written to teach us how to live in the world and how to be devoted to the Lord an dgive up attachment. It mat be true that the acts of Kaikeyi and othetrs were due to karma. But the action of Rama and Seetha were not sio becaseu they did not have any karma being the incarnation s of the Lord Himself and His consort.rama was simply acting his role as aseparated husband and Seetha similarly actewd as she did to help finish the avathra karya.Unless Seetha spoke thus to Lakshmana he would not have budged fromn there and Ravana could not have carried Seetha.She herself says to ravana that she could have burnt him to ashes if she wished. Ravana could not have carried gher off without her will. It was vinaasakaala for Rcvana and Seetha assumed a vipreetha budDhi.Ranma himseld need not have gone after Maricha whom he could have killed frm where he was. Similarly he could have killed Ravna also while being in Ayodhya as he was master of asthras which were equivalent to the modetrn atom bomb. Only the heroes of yore never used them for the mighty destruction it might have caused. Ran mayana was basically to display saranagatha rakshana and that is why Rama went ot the forest to give refuge to the rshis who surrendered and fir the sake of sbari and Guha etc. That was the kaarunya of the Lord. i will explain all this when I write about Ramavathara in my postring on Dasabathara and Bhagavatgita. of which I have just finished varaha and Narasimha. Similarly the sorrow of rama and his banishing Seetha later were not due to attachment. In grieving over Seetha he was simply acting his role as a human husband as otherwise it would have amounted to revealing his divinity which he had to conceal according to the boions of Ravana that he will not be killed by anyone except human beings and monkeys. Ranma banishing Seetha was not the attachment but adherence to dharma. The samanya dharma against visesha dharma. the samanya dharma requires that the husband should always prote4ct his wife and should not cause her soerrow. But the c\visesgha dharam is that as theking he should be above censure in order to set an example to his subjects even to the extent of sacrificing his own happiness.. sarioja ramanujam saroja Ramanujam . Dr. SarojaRamanujam , M.A., Ph.D, sanskritsiromanireply to sarojram18 and to get the previous posts--- On Mon, 7/27/09, Savitri Puram <savitriopuram wrote:Savitri Puram <savitriopuramRe: [Guruvayur] Ramayanamguruvayur Date: Monday, July 27, 2009, 8:04 PM Dear Sarojaji, Sasthrji, and Jayasreeji,Can we say that "vinaashakale Viparitha Budhi" is true in this case? Sometimes, if the time is not good, we take wrong decisions and later feel bad about it and try to do praayaschittham. Kaikeyi loved Lord Rama as much as he did Bharatha or even more. Then why did she listen to Manthara's words? We need Bhagavaan's blessings not to have this Viparitha Buddhi and Kaikeyi was unfortunate in not realizing how transient the pleasures she would have experienced by making Bharatha as Yuvaraja. This Viparitha Buddhi is even true with Sita Devi. How in the world, Sita Devi who is Prakruthi Devi Herself, who is patience personified, lost her temper with Lakshmana and sent him away to save the Saviour of all(!) and ended up in Ashoka Vana! As Melpatthoor puts it: Soyam Marthyaavathaara. ......... ... This marthyaavathaara is to instruct us that too much attachment to anything will bring sorrow. There is no doubt that Lord Rama was Atmaaraaman ans was detached. In his acting out of Ramayana story He showed us that His extreme attachment to Sita caused Him endless sorrow and His excessive attachment to Dharma resulted in abandoning his pregnant Dharma Pathni and abandoning His most dear and devoted brother Lakshmana who sacrificed his whole life for Him. Can we take as Ramayana advising us not be like Kaikeyi and telling us to be vigilant about wrong advises that come from wrong people? Otherwise we also will be put to the same situation as Kaikeyi. Bharatha said such harsh words to her and even considered himself the most unfortunate because he was born in her womb. So she got the worst punishment one can get as a mother. I am so fascinated by each and every line of Raamaayana and feel that we can learn something good from every incident and character. Like Jayasreeji, I pondered a lot about Kaikeyi and I come to the conclusion that nobody is basically mean or vicious and circumstances or past karmaas or vaasanaas or a combination of all, of all the people involved makes thing happen. Dasharatha had the curse to die of Puthra dukham. So Rama has to be away. Then Rama's intention of Avathaar is Raavana - Kumbhakarna Vadham who were actually Bhagavaan's own dwaarapaalakaas whom He needed to get back to Vaikundham. So he cannot stay in Ayodhya and do Raajya paripaalanam. No individual or incident is independent and we are going through the field of individual and collective karma. May be Bhagavan wants to show us how deep the entanglement of this world and encourage us to pray and free ourselves from this. I may be completely wrong. I was just thinking out loud. Thank you Jayasreeji, it gives a lot of food for thought.Regards an dprayers SavitriOn Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 1:52 AM, Dr.B.G.Y Sastry <drbgysastry@ > wrote: Dear Madam, Bhakti is eternal. First and foremost, let me say pranams to you, for reading Ramayana in the mornings. It is named as Ramayana and not as Rama Katha. The ayana denotes time. In a year there are two ayanas. One is Uttarayana and the other is Dakshinayana. One is followed by the other and there is no end. That never-ending is Ramayana. Those who read regularly and those who talk with such readers are all blessed. So I am blessed to reply. The answer is in your question itself. “We also know that everything happens only if God wishes and not even a leaf moves unless HE decides.†Before probing further, let us go through a small story. Once upon a time, a case was brought to a king’s durbar regarding a death due to snake poisoning. The question arose “Who is responsible for the Sin?†It goes as: One day a milk maid was carrying the milk pot in an open basket on her head and coming to the town for sale. On the way, one bird killed a snake and was carrying it. While the dead snake was being carried in the sky, the poison from the snake mouth fell into the milk pot. Being unaware of the incident, the milk maid sold the milk and the resident of the house died after consuming it. A complaint was lodged on the milk maid. She said that she does not know any thing. Subsequently they came to know about the snake. The bird said that the snake is its meal. The snake was dead. Then who is responsible? The complaint could not be solved. Finally the king has to carry the sin, since he could not give any verdict! So, the Dharma Sutra is so difficult to analyze. The action of mother kaikeyi can be pardoned, provided it is in the purview of Lord Krishna’s preaching in Bhagavad-Gita, as under: karmaNyE vaadhikaarastE maa phalEshu kadaacana, maa karmaphalahEturbhuu h maa tE samgOsmyakarmaNi. (sloka 47 of chapter 2) Meaning: Your right is to work only and never to the fruit there of. Do not be the fruit of action; nor let your attachment be to inaction. So if the action is without expecting anything, the result is to God. Here her action is selfish and not for the “daiva kaaryam†as is clear from the statement of Rama himself. When Bharatha approached Rama in the forest and pleaded for his coming over to Ayodhya to enthrone and rule, Rama did not agree and in regard to Kaikeyi, he requested Bharata as under: kaamaad vaa tataa lObhaad vaa maatraa tubhyam idam kRitam, na tan manasi kartavyam vartitavyam ca maatRivat. maataram raksha kaikEyiim maa rOsam kuru taam prati. (Chapter 112 of Ayodhyakanda) Meaning: “My dear brother! Your mother acted thus, for your sake, out of her affection or ambition. It should not be carried out in your mind. You ought to obey her as your mother. O Bharata! Protect your mother, Kaikeyi. Do not get angry with herâ€. So Kaikeyi might have got the punishment for her selfish deportment. Accepting the fact that I am not at all an expert Gurudev, I am giving the opinion as an ordinary devotee, with the fear that Lord Rama may get angry, since he did not allow his own brothers to talk ill of Kaikeyi. As such I do prayascittam by reciting: aapadaa mapahartaaram daataaram sarvasampadaam, lOkaabhiraamam shriiraamam bhuuyO bhuuyO namaa myaham. I bow again and again to Sreerama who removes (all) obstacles and grants all wealth and pleases all. My humble prayers to Lord Rama to pardon me for my venture. With love and regards, Sastry --- On Fri, 7/24/09, Jayasree Menon <euroanuster@ gmail.com> wrote: Jayasree Menon <euroanuster@ gmail.com>[Guruvayur] Ramayanam guruvayur@grou ps.comFriday, July 24, 2009, 7:04 AM Hare Rama Hare Rama.... Rama Rama Hare Hare ....!! Hare Krishna Hare Krishna..... Krishna krishna Hare Hare .........!! I have a small doubt which arose while i was reading Ramayanam this morning. It may be a foolish one. Still I thought i should check with the expert gurudevs from the group. It is said in Ramayanam that " Than Than Nirantharam Cheyyunna Karmangal... ..than than anubhavichoodukenne varoo" means, one has to bear the fruit of all his/her karmas. At this juncture, my question is that Kaikeyi demanded two "varams" from Dasaradhan exactly just before the day of "Pattabhishekham" of Sri Rama and this caused a lot of sorrowful situation not only in the minds of all in Rama's House but in the minds of all in the Kingdom itself. While it is a fact that Kaikeyi is one of the mothers who loved Rama the most, when compared to the other two mothers, it was simply because of Goddess Saraswathy's desire, Manthara prompted Keykeyi to demand this and it was all the "Daiva Kaaryartham" happened. We also know that everything happens only if God wishes and not even a leaf moves unless HE decides. Here I recall my first sentence, Karma and its fruit.... Will Kaikeyi be punished for her roll in this action or not? If yes, why she should be punished when it was God's desire. If no, why she should not be punished when she has wounded the minds of lots of people including the king, Dasaratha? Best regardsJayasree MenonBangalore+9900149461my blog link: http://www.pythruka m.blogspot. com/ ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -----A well-thought out plan, execution excellence, market timing, personal leadership are drivers of the growth trajectory. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 28, 2009 Report Share Posted July 28, 2009 Dear all, In case of the snake-poisoning we are unable to find out the reason. Hence we call it "fate" or " mujjanma karma phalam" and that gives us a solace.Otherwise we will go mad thinking about "karya and karana". But it happens with reason only and we may not know, that is all. In mahabharatha and other puranas, for each thing though the persons handling it may not know, Vyasa vouches for a reason behind it. That is the glory of Hinduism and our puranas ! with Pranams! GK Dr.B.G.Y Sastry <drbgysastryguruvayur Sent: Monday, July 27, 2009 12:22:37 PMRe: [Guruvayur] Ramayanam Dear Madam, Bhakti is eternal. First and foremost, let me say pranams to you, for reading Ramayana in the mornings. It is named as Ramayana and not as Rama Katha. The ayana denotes time. In a year there are two ayanas. One is Uttarayana and the other is Dakshinayana. One is followed by the other and there is no end. That never-ending is Ramayana. Those who read regularly and those who talk with such readers are all blessed. So I am blessed to reply. The answer is in your question itself. “We also know that everything happens only if God wishes and not even a leaf moves unless HE decides.†Before probing further, let us go through a small story. Once upon a time, a case was brought to a king’s durbar regarding a death due to snake poisoning. The question arose “Who is responsible for the Sin?†It goes as: One day a milk maid was carrying the milk pot in an open basket on her head and coming to the town for sale. On the way, one bird killed a snake and was carrying it. While the dead snake was being carried in the sky, the poison from the snake mouth fell into the milk pot. Being unaware of the incident, the milk maid sold the milk and the resident of the house died after consuming it. A complaint was lodged on the milk maid. She said that she does not know any thing. Subsequently they came to know about the snake. The bird said that the snake is its meal. The snake was dead. Then who is responsible? The complaint could not be solved. Finally the king has to carry the sin, since he could not give any verdict! So, the Dharma Sutra is so difficult to analyze. The action of mother kaikeyi can be pardoned, provided it is in the purview of Lord Krishna’s preaching in Bhagavad-Gita, as under: karmaNyE vaadhikaarastE maa phalEshu kadaacana, maa karmaphalahEturbhuu h maa tE samgOsmyakarmaNi. (sloka 47 of chapter 2) Meaning: Your right is to work only and never to the fruit there of. Do not be the fruit of action; nor let your attachment be to inaction. So if the action is without expecting anything, the result is to God. Here her action is selfish and not for the “daiva kaaryam†as is clear from the statement of Rama himself. When Bharatha approached Rama in the forest and pleaded for his coming over to Ayodhya to enthrone and rule, Rama did not agree and in regard to Kaikeyi, he requested Bharata as under: kaamaad vaa tataa lObhaad vaa maatraa tubhyam idam kRitam, na tan manasi kartavyam vartitavyam ca maatRivat. maataram raksha kaikEyiim maa rOsam kuru taam prati. (Chapter 112 of Ayodhyakanda) Meaning: “My dear brother! Your mother acted thus, for your sake, out of her affection or ambition. It should not be carried out in your mind. You ought to obey her as your mother. O Bharata! Protect your mother, Kaikeyi. Do not get angry with herâ€. So Kaikeyi might have got the punishment for her selfish deportment. Accepting the fact that I am not at all an expert Gurudev, I am giving the opinion as an ordinary devotee, with the fear that Lord Rama may get angry, since he did not allow his own brothers to talk ill of Kaikeyi. As such I do prayascittam by reciting: aapadaa mapahartaaram daataaram sarvasampadaam, lOkaabhiraamam shriiraamam bhuuyO bhuuyO namaa myaham. I bow again and again to Sreerama who removes (all) obstacles and grants all wealth and pleases all. My humble prayers to Lord Rama to pardon me for my venture. With love and regards, Sastry --- On Fri, 7/24/09, Jayasree Menon <euroanuster@ gmail.com> wrote: Jayasree Menon <euroanuster@ gmail.com>[Guruvayur] Ramayanamguruvayur@grou ps.comFriday, July 24, 2009, 7:04 AM Hare Rama Hare Rama.... Rama Rama Hare Hare ....!! Hare Krishna Hare Krishna..... Krishna krishna Hare Hare .........!! I have a small doubt which arose while i was reading Ramayanam this morning. It may be a foolish one. Still I thought i should check with the expert gurudevs from the group. It is said in Ramayanam that " Than Than Nirantharam Cheyyunna Karmangal... ..than than anubhavichoodukenne varoo" means, one has to bear the fruit of all his/her karmas. At this juncture, my question is that Kaikeyi demanded two "varams" from Dasaradhan exactly just before the day of "Pattabhishekham" of Sri Rama and this caused a lot of sorrowful situation not only in the minds of all in Rama's House but in the minds of all in the Kingdom itself. While it is a fact that Kaikeyi is one of the mothers who loved Rama the most, when compared to the other two mothers, it was simply because of Goddess Saraswathy's desire, Manthara prompted Keykeyi to demand this and it was all the "Daiva Kaaryartham" happened. We also know that everything happens only if God wishes and not even a leaf moves unless HE decides. Here I recall my first sentence, Karma and its fruit.... Will Kaikeyi be punished for her roll in this action or not? If yes, why she should be punished when it was God's desire. If no, why she should not be punished when she has wounded the minds of lots of people including the king, Dasaratha? Best regardsJayasree MenonBangalore+9900149461my blog link: http://www.pythruka m.blogspot. com/------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -----A well-thought out plan, execution excellence, market timing, personal leadership are drivers of the growth trajectory. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 28, 2009 Report Share Posted July 28, 2009 Hari-Om It is King dasaradha who is responsible. He maarried three women because of his selfishness. If he had only one wife this would not have happened. He should not agree to all the wishes of all his wives blindly and withhout analysing the reasons for any and all such requests. A king should not yield to unjustified demands whatever the circumstances may be. If he does he is not fit to be a king. jai shree krishna ! guruvayur , gopalakrishnan kesavanbhattathiri <gkekm7 wrote: > > Dear all, > > In case of the snake-poisoning we are unable to find out the reason. Hence we call it " fate " or " mujjanma karma phalam "  and that gives us a solace.Otherwise we will go mad thinking about " karya and karana " . > > But it happens with reason only and we may not know, that is all. In mahabharatha and other puranas, for each thing though the persons handling it may not know, Vyasa vouches for a reason behind it. That is the glory of Hinduism and our puranas ! > > with Pranams! > GK > > > > > ________________________________ > Dr.B.G.Y Sastry <drbgysastry > guruvayur > Monday, July 27, 2009 12:22:37 PM > Re: [Guruvayur] Ramayanam > >  > > > Dear Madam, >  > Bhakti is eternal. >  > First and foremost, let me say pranams to you, for reading Ramayana in the mornings. > It is named as Ramayana and not as Rama Katha. The ayana denotes time. In a year there are two ayanas. One is Uttarayana and the other is Dakshinayana. One is followed by the other and there is no end. That never-ending is Ramayana. Those who read regularly and those who talk with such readers are all blessed. So I am blessed to reply. >  > The answer is in your question itself. >  > “We also know that everything happens only if God wishes and not even a leaf moves unless HE decides.†>  > Before probing further, let us go through a small story. >  > Once upon a time, a case was brought to a king’s durbar regarding a death due to snake poisoning. The question arose “Who is responsible for the Sin?†It goes as: >  > One day a milk maid was carrying the milk pot in an open basket on her head and coming to the town for sale. On the way, one bird killed a snake and was carrying it. While the dead snake was being carried in the sky, the poison from the snake mouth fell into the milk pot. Being unaware of the incident, the milk maid sold the milk and the resident of the house died after consuming it. A complaint was lodged on the milk maid. She said that she does not know any thing. Subsequently they came to know about the snake. The bird said that the snake is its meal. The snake was dead. Then who is responsible? The complaint could not be solved. > Finally the king has to carry the sin, since he could not give any verdict! >  > So, the Dharma Sutra is so difficult to analyze. >  > The action of mother kaikeyi can be pardoned, provided it is in the purview of Lord Krishna’s preaching in Bhagavad-Gita, as under: >  > karmaNyE vaadhikaarastE maa phalEshu kadaacana, > maa karmaphalahEturbhuu h maa tE samgOsmyakarmaNi. > (sloka 47 of chapter 2) >  > Meaning: Your right is to work only and never to the fruit there of. Do not be the fruit of action; nor let your attachment be to inaction. So if the action is without expecting anything, the result is to God. >  > Here her action is selfish and not for the “daiva kaaryam†as is clear from the statement of Rama himself. >  > When Bharatha approached Rama in the forest and pleaded for his coming over to Ayodhya to enthrone and rule, Rama did not agree and in regard to Kaikeyi, he requested Bharata as under: >  > kaamaad vaa tataa lObhaad vaa maatraa tubhyam idam kRitam, > na tan manasi kartavyam vartitavyam ca maatRivat. > maataram raksha kaikEyiim maa rOsam kuru taam prati. > (Chapter 112 of Ayodhyakanda) >  > Meaning: “My dear brother! Your mother acted thus, for your sake, out of her affection or ambition. It should not be carried out in your mind. You ought to obey her as your mother. O Bharata! Protect your mother, Kaikeyi. Do not get angry with herâ€. >  > So Kaikeyi might have got the punishment for her selfish deportment. >  > Accepting the fact that I am not at all an expert Gurudev, I am giving the opinion as an ordinary devotee, with the fear that Lord Rama may get angry, since he did not allow his own brothers to talk ill of Kaikeyi. As such I do prayascittam by reciting: >  > aapadaa mapahartaaram daataaram sarvasampadaam, > lOkaabhiraamam shriiraamam bhuuyO bhuuyO namaa myaham. >  > I bow again and again to Sreerama who removes (all) obstacles and grants all wealth and pleases all. >  > My humble prayers to Lord Rama to pardon me for my venture. >  > With love and regards, >  > Sastry  > --- On Fri, 7/24/09, Jayasree Menon <euroanuster@ gmail.com> wrote: > > > >Jayasree Menon <euroanuster@ gmail.com> > >[Guruvayur] Ramayanam > >guruvayur@grou ps.com > >Friday, July 24, 2009, 7:04 AM > > > > > > > >Hare Rama Hare Rama.... Rama Rama Hare Hare ....!! Hare Krishna Hare Krishna..... Krishna krishna Hare Hare .........!! > > > >I have a small doubt which arose while i was reading Ramayanam this morning. It may be a foolish one. Still I thought i should check with the expert gurudevs from the group. > > > >It is said in Ramayanam  that " Than Than Nirantharam Cheyyunna Karmangal... ..than than anubhavichoodukenne varoo " means, one has to bear the fruit of all his/her karmas. > > > >At this juncture, my question is that Kaikeyi demanded two " varams " from Dasaradhan exactly just before the day of " Pattabhishekham " of Sri Rama and this caused a lot of sorrowful situation not only in the minds of all in Rama's House but in the minds of all in the Kingdom itself. While it is a fact that Kaikeyi is one of the mothers who loved Rama the most, when compared to the other two mothers, it was simply because of Goddess Saraswathy's desire,  Manthara prompted Keykeyi to demand this and it was all the " Daiva Kaaryartham " happened. We also know that everything happens only if God wishes and not even a leaf moves unless HE decides. > > > >Here I recall my first sentence, Karma and its fruit.... Will Kaikeyi be punished for her roll in this action or not? If yes, why she should be punished when it was God's desire. If no, why she should not be punished when she has wounded the minds of lots of people including the king, Dasaratha? > > > > > >Best regards > > > >Jayasree Menon > >Bangalore > >+9900149461 > >my blog link: http://www.pythruka m.blogspot. com/ > >------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- ----- > >A well-thought out plan, execution excellence, market timing, personal leadership are drivers of the growth  trajectory. > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 28, 2009 Report Share Posted July 28, 2009 Well said.I agree with you.The duty of the King shuld be to rule and not to succumb to pressures like the present day politicians but use his wisdom and Dasaratha has certainly failed.So too Rama whatever be his designation whether Avatar of Vishnu or not He shuld not hv agreed to the saying of some washerman abt Sita and cowardly sent Sita to exile.Here Rama did not folow the Dharma that shuld also be meted out to Sita.He also never followed dharma when he killed Vali by hiding just becoz he gave words to sugreeva to protect him and becoz of valis boon of getting half the power of his attackers.He shuld hv talked to vali in a nice way before embarking upon his fight.So in many instances Rama did not follow dharma and his dharma was partial and can't be appreciated whether He was an avatar or not. This is not to invite controversies again I stress as we don't hv any idea of the story written by Valmiki and the circumstances and Ramayana too in certain cases to be taken just as some novels written by famous authors so too Valmiki was a great author and we are just accepting whatever he has written.We can't simply buckle under the theory his avatar purpose would hv failed if he acted otherwise.When he could not tolerate the wordings of the washerman he had the audacity to send his pregnant wife to forest which against all principles of dharma he was supposed to possess and one shuld use his own decision without dfscrimination without being unduly carried by avatar concept.Of course this may invite criticism but fact shuld be accepted logically.I don't write this just for inviting controveries but only bringing the facts. Hare Krishna.--- On Tue, 28/7/09, anair1101 <anair1101 wrote: anair1101 <anair1101[Guruvayur] Re: Ramayanamguruvayur Date: Tuesday, 28 July, 2009, 10:25 PM Hari-OmIt is King dasaradha who is responsible. He maarried three women because of his selfishness. If he had only one wife this would not have happened. He should not agree to all the wishes of all his wives blindly and withhout analysing the reasons for any and all such requests. A king should not yield to unjustified demands whatever the circumstances may be. If he does he is not fit to be a king.jai shree krishna !guruvayur@grou ps.com, gopalakrishnan kesavanbhattathiri <gkekm7 wrote:>> Dear all,> > In case of the snake-poisoning we are unable to find out the reason. Hence we call it "fate" or " mujjanma karma phalam" and that gives us a solace.Otherwise we will go mad thinking about "karya and karana".> > But it happens with reason only and we may not know, that is all. In mahabharatha and other puranas, for each thing though the persons handling it may not know, Vyasa vouches for a reason behind it. That is the glory of Hinduism and our puranas !> > with Pranams!> GK> > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __> Dr.B.G.Y Sastry <drbgysastry@ ...>> guruvayur@grou ps.com> Monday, July 27, 2009 12:22:37 PM> Re: [Guruvayur] Ramayanam> > > > > Dear Madam, > > Bhakti is eternal. > > First and foremost, let me say pranams to you, for reading Ramayana in the mornings. > It is named as Ramayana and not as Rama Katha. The ayana denotes time. In a year there are two ayanas. One is Uttarayana and the other is Dakshinayana. One is followed by the other and there is no end. That never-ending is Ramayana. Those who read regularly and those who talk with such readers are all blessed. So I am blessed to reply. > > The answer is in your question itself. > > “We also know that everything happens only if God wishes and not even a leaf moves unless HE decides.†> > Before probing further, let us go through a small story. > > Once upon a time, a case was brought to a king’s durbar regarding a death due to snake poisoning. The question arose “Who is responsible for the Sin?†It goes as: > > One day a milk maid was carrying the milk pot in an open basket on her head and coming to the town for sale. On the way, one bird killed a snake and was carrying it. While the dead snake was being carried in the sky, the poison from the snake mouth fell into the milk pot. Being unaware of the incident, the milk maid sold the milk and the resident of the house died after consuming it. A complaint was lodged on the milk maid. She said that she does not know any thing. Subsequently they came to know about the snake. The bird said that the snake is its meal. The snake was dead. Then who is responsible? The complaint could not be solved. > Finally the king has to carry the sin, since he could not give any verdict! > > So, the Dharma Sutra is so difficult to analyze. > > The action of mother kaikeyi can be pardoned, provided it is in the purview of Lord Krishna’s preaching in Bhagavad-Gita, as under: > > karmaNyE vaadhikaarastE maa phalEshu kadaacana, > maa karmaphalahEturbhuu h maa tE samgOsmyakarmaNi. > (sloka 47 of chapter 2) > > Meaning: Your right is to work only and never to the fruit there of. Do not be the fruit of action; nor let your attachment be to inaction. So if the action is without expecting anything, the result is to God. > > Here her action is selfish and not for the “daiva kaaryam†as is clear from the statement of Rama himself. > > When Bharatha approached Rama in the forest and pleaded for his coming over to Ayodhya to enthrone and rule, Rama did not agree and in regard to Kaikeyi, he requested Bharata as under: > > kaamaad vaa tataa lObhaad vaa maatraa tubhyam idam kRitam, > na tan manasi kartavyam vartitavyam ca maatRivat. > maataram raksha kaikEyiim maa rOsam kuru taam prati. > (Chapter 112 of Ayodhyakanda) > > Meaning: “My dear brother! Your mother acted thus, for your sake, out of her affection or ambition. It should not be carried out in your mind. You ought to obey her as your mother. O Bharata! Protect your mother, Kaikeyi. Do not get angry with herâ€. > > So Kaikeyi might have got the punishment for her selfish deportment. > > Accepting the fact that I am not at all an expert Gurudev, I am giving the opinion as an ordinary devotee, with the fear that Lord Rama may get angry, since he did not allow his own brothers to talk ill of Kaikeyi. As such I do prayascittam by reciting: > > aapadaa mapahartaaram daataaram sarvasampadaam, > lOkaabhiraamam shriiraamam bhuuyO bhuuyO namaa myaham. > > I bow again and again to Sreerama who removes (all) obstacles and grants all wealth and pleases all. > > My humble prayers to Lord Rama to pardon me for my venture. > > With love and regards, > > Sastry > --- On Fri, 7/24/09, Jayasree Menon <euroanuster@ gmail.com> wrote:> > > >Jayasree Menon <euroanuster@ gmail.com>> >[Guruvayur] Ramayanam> >guruvayur@grou ps.com> >Friday, July 24, 2009, 7:04 AM> >> >> > > >Hare Rama Hare Rama.... Rama Rama Hare Hare ....!! Hare Krishna Hare Krishna..... Krishna krishna Hare Hare .........!!> >> >I have a small doubt which arose while i was reading Ramayanam this morning. It may be a foolish one. Still I thought i should check with the expert gurudevs from the group.> >> >It is said in Ramayanam that " Than Than Nirantharam Cheyyunna Karmangal... ..than than anubhavichoodukenne varoo" means, one has to bear the fruit of all his/her karmas.> >> >At this juncture, my question is that Kaikeyi demanded two "varams" from Dasaradhan exactly just before the day of "Pattabhishekham" of Sri Rama and this caused a lot of sorrowful situation not only in the minds of all in Rama's House but in the minds of all in the Kingdom itself. While it is a fact that Kaikeyi is one of the mothers who loved Rama the most, when compared to the other two mothers, it was simply because of Goddess Saraswathy's desire, Manthara prompted Keykeyi to demand this and it was all the "Daiva Kaaryartham" happened. We also know that everything happens only if God wishes and not even a leaf moves unless HE decides. > >> >Here I recall my first sentence, Karma and its fruit.... Will Kaikeyi be punished for her roll in this action or not? If yes, why she should be punished when it was God's desire. If no, why she should not be punished when she has wounded the minds of lots of people including the king, Dasaratha? > >> >> >Best regards> >> >Jayasree Menon> >Bangalore> >+9900149461> >my blog link: http://www.pythruka m.blogspot. com/> >----------- - --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -----> >A well-thought out plan, execution excellence, market timing, personal leadership are drivers of the growth trajectory.> >> >> See the Web's breaking stories, chosen by people like you. Check out Buzz. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 29, 2009 Report Share Posted July 29, 2009 Dear all,Radhe Krishna!Inscrutable are the ways of the Lord. There are two incidents in Ramayanam which are criticised by those who have studied the epic in the proper perspective. One is the killing of Baali, hiding behind a bush, and that too when he was in the process of fighting with Sugriva, and the other, banishing of his dearest one, Sita, and that too, when she was pregnant with two of His sons, on the verge of delivery. I suggest all of you read the commentary of dasakam 35 of Narayaneeyam in my website www.narayaneeyam.com where we have used a number of pages on these topics. As it will be a matter of repetition, I do not reproduce the pages here. RegardsKVG.On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 1:31 AM, GANAPATHY RAMAN <agraman62 wrote: Well said.I agree with you.The duty of the King shuld be to rule and not to succumb to pressures like the present day politicians but use his wisdom and Dasaratha has certainly failed.So too Rama whatever be his designation whether Avatar of Vishnu or not He shuld not hv agreed to the saying of some washerman abt Sita and cowardly sent Sita to exile.Here Rama did not folow the Dharma that shuld also be meted out to Sita.He also never followed dharma when he killed Vali by hiding just becoz he gave words to sugreeva to protect him and becoz of valis boon of getting half the power of his attackers.He shuld hv talked to vali in a nice way before embarking upon his fight.So in many instances Rama did not follow dharma and his dharma was partial and can't be appreciated whether He was an avatar or not. This is not to invite controversies again I stress as we don't hv any idea of the story written by Valmiki and the circumstances and Ramayana too in certain cases to be taken just as some novels written by famous authors so too Valmiki was a great author and we are just accepting whatever he has written.We can't simply buckle under the theory his avatar purpose would hv failed if he acted otherwise.When he could not tolerate the wordings of the washerman he had the audacity to send his pregnant wife to forest which against all principles of dharma he was supposed to possess and one shuld use his own decision without dfscrimination without being unduly carried by avatar concept.Of course this may invite criticism but fact shuld be accepted logically.I don't write this just for inviting controveries but only bringing the facts. Hare Krishna.--- On Tue, 28/7/09, anair1101 <anair1101 wrote: anair1101 <anair1101[Guruvayur] Re: Ramayanamguruvayur Tuesday, 28 July, 2009, 10:25 PM Hari-OmIt is King dasaradha who is responsible. He maarried three women because of his selfishness. If he had only one wife this would not have happened. He should not agree to all the wishes of all his wives blindly and withhout analysing the reasons for any and all such requests. A king should not yield to unjustified demands whatever the circumstances may be. If he does he is not fit to be a king.jai shree krishna !guruvayur@grou ps.com, gopalakrishnan kesavanbhattathiri <gkekm7 wrote: >> Dear all,> > In case of the snake-poisoning we are unable to find out the reason. Hence we call it " fate " or " mujjanma karma phalam " and that gives us a solace.Otherwise we will go mad thinking about " karya and karana " .> > But it happens with reason only and we may not know, that is all. In mahabharatha and other puranas, for each thing though the persons handling it may not know, Vyasa vouches for a reason behind it. That is the glory of Hinduism and our puranas ! > > with Pranams!> GK> > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __> Dr.B.G.Y Sastry <drbgysastry@ ...>> guruvayur@grou ps.com > Monday, July 27, 2009 12:22:37 PM> Re: [Guruvayur] Ramayanam> > > > > Dear Madam, > > Bhakti is eternal. > > First and foremost, let me say pranams to you, for reading Ramayana in the mornings. > It is named as Ramayana and not as Rama Katha. The ayana denotes time. In a year there are two ayanas. One is Uttarayana and the other is Dakshinayana. One is followed by the other and there is no end. That never-ending is Ramayana. Those who read regularly and those who talk with such readers are all blessed. So I am blessed to reply. > > The answer is in your question itself. > > “We also know that everything happens only if God wishes and not even a leaf moves unless HE decides.” > > Before probing further, let us go through a small story. > > Once upon a time, a case was brought to a king’s durbar regarding a death due to snake poisoning. The question arose “Who is responsible for the Sin?” It goes as: > > One day a milk maid was carrying the milk pot in an open basket on her head and coming to the town for sale. On the way, one bird killed a snake and was carrying it. While the dead snake was being carried in the sky, the poison from the snake mouth fell into the milk pot. Being unaware of the incident, the milk maid sold the milk and the resident of the house died after consuming it. A complaint was lodged on the milk maid. She said that she does not know any thing. Subsequently they came to know about the snake. The bird said that the snake is its meal. The snake was dead. Then who is responsible? The complaint could not be solved. > Finally the king has to carry the sin, since he could not give any verdict! > > So, the Dharma Sutra is so difficult to analyze. > > The action of mother kaikeyi can be pardoned, provided it is in the purview of Lord Krishna’s preaching in Bhagavad-Gita, as under: > > karmaNyE vaadhikaarastE maa phalEshu kadaacana, > maa karmaphalahEturbhuu h maa tE samgOsmyakarmaNi. > (sloka 47 of chapter 2) > > Meaning: Your right is to work only and never to the fruit there of. Do not be the fruit of action; nor let your attachment be to inaction. So if the action is without expecting anything, the result is to God. > > Here her action is selfish and not for the “daiva kaaryam” as is clear from the statement of Rama himself. > > When Bharatha approached Rama in the forest and pleaded for his coming over to Ayodhya to enthrone and rule, Rama did not agree and in regard to Kaikeyi, he requested Bharata as under: > > kaamaad vaa tataa lObhaad vaa maatraa tubhyam idam kRitam, > na tan manasi kartavyam vartitavyam ca maatRivat. > maataram raksha kaikEyiim maa rOsam kuru taam prati. > (Chapter 112 of Ayodhyakanda) > > Meaning: “My dear brother! Your mother acted thus, for your sake, out of her affection or ambition. It should not be carried out in your mind. You ought to obey her as your mother. O Bharata! Protect your mother, Kaikeyi. Do not get angry with her”. > > So Kaikeyi might have got the punishment for her selfish deportment. > > Accepting the fact that I am not at all an expert Gurudev, I am giving the opinion as an ordinary devotee, with the fear that Lord Rama may get angry, since he did not allow his own brothers to talk ill of Kaikeyi. As such I do prayascittam by reciting: > > aapadaa mapahartaaram daataaram sarvasampadaam, > lOkaabhiraamam shriiraamam bhuuyO bhuuyO namaa myaham. > > I bow again and again to Sreerama who removes (all) obstacles and grants all wealth and pleases all. > > My humble prayers to Lord Rama to pardon me for my venture. > > With love and regards, > > Sastry > --- On Fri, 7/24/09, Jayasree Menon <euroanuster@ gmail.com> wrote:> > > >Jayasree Menon <euroanuster@ gmail.com> > >[Guruvayur] Ramayanam> >guruvayur@grou ps.com> >Friday, July 24, 2009, 7:04 AM> >> >> > > >Hare Rama Hare Rama.... Rama Rama Hare Hare ....!! Hare Krishna Hare Krishna..... Krishna krishna Hare Hare .........!!> >> >I have a small doubt which arose while i was reading Ramayanam this morning. It may be a foolish one. Still I thought i should check with the expert gurudevs from the group. > >> >It is said in Ramayanam that " Than Than Nirantharam Cheyyunna Karmangal... ..than than anubhavichoodukenne varoo " means, one has to bear the fruit of all his/her karmas.> >> >At this juncture, my question is that Kaikeyi demanded two " varams " from Dasaradhan exactly just before the day of " Pattabhishekham " of Sri Rama and this caused a lot of sorrowful situation not only in the minds of all in Rama's House but in the minds of all in the Kingdom itself. While it is a fact that Kaikeyi is one of the mothers who loved Rama the most, when compared to the other two mothers, it was simply because of Goddess Saraswathy's desire, Manthara prompted Keykeyi to demand this and it was all the " Daiva Kaaryartham " happened. We also know that everything happens only if God wishes and not even a leaf moves unless HE decides. > >> >Here I recall my first sentence, Karma and its fruit.... Will Kaikeyi be punished for her roll in this action or not? If yes, why she should be punished when it was God's desire. If no, why she should not be punished when she has wounded the minds of lots of people including the king, Dasaratha? > >> > > >Best regards> >> >Jayasree Menon> >Bangalore> >+9900149461> >my blog link: http://www.pythruka m.blogspot. com/ > >----------- - --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -----> >A well-thought out plan, execution excellence, market timing, personal leadership are drivers of the growth trajectory. > >> >> See the Web's breaking stories, chosen by people like you. Check out Buzz. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 6, 2009 Report Share Posted August 6, 2009 Gurudev, It is available on the site, guruvayoor.com.Raghava Menon--- On Thu, 6/8/09, gangadharan <gangancnair wrote:gangadharan <gangancnair[Guruvayur] ramayanamguruvayur Date: Thursday, 6 August, 2009, 2:10 AM hi om namo narayana i want to learn ramayanam ,any body is having ramayanam audio in mp3 format pls send to me thanks gangan c nair recommends that you upgrade to the new and safer Internet Explorer 8. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.