desire 15

[Guest guest]

Dear sri vaishNava

perunthagaiyeer,

 

First of all I offer my due

apologies for delay in continuing this topic.

 

We saw in the previous post, how

sugreeva neglected his duty and indulged in kaamam with his 'got back' wife and

'newly obtained' wife thaaraa [formerly his brother's wife]. We also saw how even though 'action' on

collecting the vaanara sainyam – army of monkeys - is taken, the communication

of same to concerned viz. raama, had not reached. And hence it became the cause

of raama's fury [that was communicated to sugreeva thru lakshmaNa].

 

The communication in modern management is stated as so important. And a

small gap or a small failure in that 'timeliness' of that communication leads

to loss of profits or loss of business etc. That is what is stated in corporate

circles. And on that 'communication' lot of teaching or training takes place in

the corporate circles. Perhaps these corporate managers may or may not have

gone through such aspects of communication or 'timeliness' subtleties in

sreemadh raamaayaNam. But, see that is what is stressed in that sugreevaa's

kaamam episode - thru thaaraa, that intelligent wife of vaali earlier and now

sugreeva. She says to angry lakshmaNa action is already taken but communication

was not done and that lead to anger of raama and you oh lakshmaNa – once that

wor is given lakshmana's anger is gone. [for more detailed description see envoy's

role in roles of lakshmaNa ebook in sundarasimham.org website]

 

Now let us take a U turn to see some more on that 'kaamam'

–

on one side

one's 'kaamam' being rewarded and

–

on other side

same 'kaamam' being punished.

 

Take the case of two pairs --

sugreeva and

vaali - one pair raavaNa and

vibheeshaNa – another pair.

Both pairs are brothers and one brother in each pair is punished and

one brother is rewarded for same act of 'kaamam'.

 

Thulasi dhasa in his 'raama charitha maanas' points out --

both pairs had done same crime of vaali and raavaNa – of taking other person's

wife

–

vaali taken ruma –sugreeva's wife – got killed – thus punished

by raama

–

raavaNa taken seethaa – raama's wife – got killed – thus

punished by raama

–

sugreeva taken thaara – vaali's wife – got awards by raama

–

vibheeshaNa taken mandodhari – raavaNa's wife – rewarded by

raama

 

Sugreeva and vibheeshaNa were awarded and rewarded with

praises and prizes in raama's pattaabhishEkam – all by raama himself.

 

Same 'kaamam' is the thread in all 4 cases. Let us see thulasidhasa's verses -- 4 choupaayees coming after doha 28 in baala

kaandam – [choupayee is 4 line verses and dhohaas are two liners]

 

athi baDi mOri DiTaayee khOree,

suni agha narakahum naaka sakOree |

samujnhi sahama mOhi apaDara apanEn

sO sudhhi raama keenhi nahi sapanEn | | 1.

 

suni avalOki suchitha chakha chahee,

bhagathi mOri mathi svaami saraahee |

kahatha nasaai hOyi hiyam neekee

reejnhatha raama jaani jana jee kee

| | 2.

 

rahathi na prabhu chitha chooka kiE kee,

karatha surathi saya baara hiE kee |

jEhin agha badhhEu byaadha jimi baalee,

phiri sukanTa sOi keenhi kuchaalee | | 3.

 

 

sOi karathoothi bibheeshana kEree,

sapanehun so na raama hiyan hEree |

thE bharathahi bhEnTana sanamaanE,

raajasabhaam raghu beera bakhaanE | | 4.

 

 

Meaning:

[as given in gita press website - raama charit maanas English version book]

My

presumption and error are indeed very great and, hearing the tale of my sins,

even hell has turned up its nose at them. I shudder to think of it due to my

assumed fears; while Sri Raama took no notice of them even in a dream. (1)

 

The

Lord, on the other hand, applauded my devotion and spirit on hearing of,

perceiving and scanning them with the mind's eye. If there is anything good in

one's heart, it is marred by the telling; for Sri Raama is pleased to note what

is there in the devotee's mind. The Lord never cherishes in His mind the lapse,

if any, on part of a devotee; while He remembers the latter's spirit a hundred

times. (2)

For

instance, the very crime of which He had killed Vaali (the monkey-king of

Kishkindhaa) even as a huntsman, was repeated in the misdemeanour

perpetrated by Sugreeva* (3)

VibheeshaNa

too was guilty of the same offence; but Sri Raama took no cognizance of it

even in a dream. The Hero of Raghu's clan, on the other hand, honoured them

both at His meeting with Bharatha (on His return from Lankaa) and commended

them in open court. (4)

 

Dear bhakthaas, see how the poet

here places the verses – that too in baala kaNdam and not in yudhdha kaaNdam or

uththara kaaNdam which you can normally expect – because this incidence of

praising of the two happens in raama's crowning or while returning and meeting

bharatha as stated herein.

 

Infact, for raavaNa, he took seethaa – that is all – he has not really

touched her after that abduction scene. But with other three – that is a

different story. And that is what we are analyzing and studying. Now the

question arise – why a difference in treatment for same offense if it can be

called so.

 

The reason can be given by

bhagavathaas or await next post.

 

Dhasan

Vasudevan m.g.

-- Vasudevan MG