raama's food habits 12

[Guest guest]

Post 12

 

Dear srivaishNava perunthagaiyeer,

 

 

We saw king dhasaratha doing lot of dhaanams

- donations – by giving food and land and cows and got raama, saakshaath sreeman naaraayaNan, as his son. Dhaanam given by dhasaratha has lead to a greater profits or gains or 'laabham' to him.

 

On the other hand 'suthapaa and prsni', next 'kaasyapa and adhithi', later 'vasudhEva and dhEvaki' did lot of fasting – called payOvratham – and got saakshaath sreeman naaraayaNan as their son, not once but three times – [remember my earlier series] – called prsnigarbha, vaamana and sree krishNa.

 

Here son raama abstained from food and did 'thavam'. That thavam gave greater labhaams to raama – the power to kill raavaNa besides getting back his wife seethaa – just recall that varam to raavaNa - of being only killed by a person who lives for 14 years on roots and fruits [a vegetarian living] and living in forest – covered earlier – in another article.

 

Perhaps thus dhaanam and thavam gets linked.

 

When sage visvaamithra came and asked raama to be sent with him for his yaaga samrakshaNam – saving the yaagams he was doing, in spite of the sage saying

'na cha puthra gatham snEham' [1-19-3]

– meaning - let not that affection of son affect you,

dhasaratha first refused saying he is a 'boy' – 'baala:', and not having information on 'bala-abalam' of the enemy - knowledge of having

balam – strength, or

abalam – weakness of enemy.

 

 

See slokam below - 1-19-7.

 

baalaH + hi = boy, indeed;

 

a + krutha + vidhyaH + cha = not done [un-drilled,] in education [of warfare] also;

na + cha + vEththi + bala + abalam = not, also, knows, strengths, weaknesses;

na + cha + asthra + bala + samyukthaH = not, also, arsenal, equipage;

na + cha + yuddha + visaaradhaH = not, also, warfare, expert.

 

Meaning: dhasaratha replies to sage visvaamithra, "Raama is a 'boy', indeed! Un-drilled in his education [of warfare] also knows not the strengths and weaknesses [of the enemy] and has not fully equipped of arsenal also...and not an expert in warfare too...[1-19-7]

 

 

What visvaamithra gave raama and lakshmaNa when king sent them finally is 'bala' and 'athibala' – 2 powerful manthrams to get rid of all these --

 

 

 

pasi - hunger

 

thookkam –sleepiness,

 

tiredness, and

 

to add 'balam - strength'.

So here the focus is 'bala and athibala' the manthrams.

 

Thus this post is spun around those 'laaba, baala, bala, a-bala and athibala' as part of raama's food habits.

 

 

Why this refusal becomes important in the 'food habits' series is - the very purpose of doing a yaagam – the laabham out of a yaagam gets mentioned.

 

Sage vasishta convinces dhasaratha to send raama alongwith visvaamithra – while doing that he says in following slokam -1-21-8.

prathi

sruthya + karishyaami = on promising, I will do;

uktham + vaakyam = saying so, those words;

a + kurvaan + asya = non-performance, of that;

Oh! Raaghava – [addressed to dhasaratha];

ishTapoortha + vadham + bhooyaath = Vedic ritual's, doom, it becomes;

thasmaath + raamam + visarjaya = hence, Raama, be left of [with sage visvaamithra].

 

 

Meaning: vasishTa to dhasaratha - On promising that 'I will do so...' and on saying and non-performance of that, becomes the doom to the "ishTapoortha rituals" and hence leave hold of Raama, [send alongwith visvaamithra] [1-21-8]

 

 

Comment [of govindaraajar - in website on this slokam]: ishTapoortha rituals are the aspects of Vedic rituals, like digging wells, and lakes etc., and other social facilities, comprising in ashvamedha, raajasooya, pounDareeka rituals, that are oriented around societal benefits, called abhydhaya yajna-s.

 

Point: 1. what 'yaagam' or 'niyamam' or 'vratham' visvaamithra talks about, as being disturbed, is known thru this 'vasishTa's reaction to dhasaratha'.

 

2. Also note the very purpose of the yaagams – including aswamEdham – is the social purpose of providing facilities – 'laabham' to people in general.

 

 

3. 12 years after getting raama as his laabham, [or 16?] dhasaratha does that refusal to visvaamithra. Just think for a moment of requesting for doing or completing a 'yaaga' – if same situation of refusal on sending the person - happened 14 [or 18] years earlier – dhasaratha would not have got raama.

 

when dhasaratha went and asked for sage rishya sringa to come and do the yagnam – and king romapaadha refused to send his son in law – [just for argument sake] – could

dhasaratha have got raama? Saying yes did the great laabham – gain - to him.

 

4. If that is so - What about us – that great raamaayaNam, the raama kathaa – his food habits – our food for thought - all would not be there – no real laabham for us.

 

Let us continue in next post,

 

 

Dhasan

 

 

 

Vasudevan m.g.-- Vasudevan MG