More on Vedavathi

[Guest guest]

Dear Bhaktas,

 

I am following up with this tread with input from Sriman Muralidhar Rangaswamy and Sriman Suresh Bindinganavale.

 

Sriman Muralidhar Rangaswamy's observations:

==================================

Adiyen is curious to know if the reference to Vedavati comes from Valmiki Ramayanam or if it is a latter day addition. Also adiyen is not sure about Sita Piratti granting Moksham to Trijatai. Another contradiction that arises is that if it was Vedavati that was imprisoned by Ravana, there is no way she could grant Moksham to anyone, because, this elevated boon can be conferred only by Perumal and Thayar. Another serious implication comes about in the context of VibhishaNa SharaNagati. If it was Vedavati that was imprisoned by Ravana, there is no way she could have provided purushakaram, since this is exclusively the privy of Thayar. Swami Desikan discusses the subject of Vibhishana SharaNagati quite extensively and eloquently in the grantham Abhaya pradhAna sAram. In it Our Paramacharyan observes that Vibhishana secured Thayar's purushakarathvam and consent through Tirjatai. This is due to the fact that Trijatai kept Sita Piratti informed of the day-to-day happenings in the Sabha of Ravana. One day Trijatai reports that Vibhishana, in utter disgust with the wrongdoings of Ravana, has decided to forsake Lanka and seek refuge at the Lotus Feet of Lord Rama. Sita Piratti confers her blessings (Purushakaram) through her words to Trijatai "Everything will go well for VibhishaNa". In light of these observations, adiyen seriously questions the imprisonment of Vedavati in the Ashoka Vanam.

 

Sriman Suresh Bindinganavale's Observations

=================================

"If veda-vathi was the person who replaced sita and underwent sufferings in Lanka given by Ravana and his evil followers and continued to play the role of sita upto to the point when she was replaced by the "Real Sita" restored by Agni during Agni pravesa",then how can the statement that "Sita is a model of a devoted wife or pathivratha carry any value? because it was veda vathi who as a proxy to sita bore all the sufferings".

Also to answer the above question if we do not accept veda vathi's presence in the Ramayana and maintain that it was none other than sita who was kidnapped by Ravana and later on rescued by Rama himself and it was the same sita who entered the fire to prove her purity,"then the entire story of Srinivasa and padmavathi will be questioned".In otherwords if we accept vedavathi's story as correct then "Greatness of Sita is questioned" else if we do not accept the presence of a character as vedavathi in Ramayana "then the entire story of Srinivasa and padmavathi will be questioned".I had this paradoxial question and i got this somewhat reasonable answer when i consulted an well knownlearned scholar.The answer was as follows :-In the Ramayana of Valmiki the original and authoritative work,there is no mention of veda vathi and therefore it is sita devi and sita devi alone who was kidnapped by Ravana and later on rescued by Rama himself and it was the same sita who entered the fireto prove her purity.So there can be no doubt with respect to sita's greatness or her identity.Also,the Story of Srinivasa and padmavathi is a sthala purana(padma purana) which is not authoritative from the final analysis as it is in contradiction with the accepted authoritative work of Sage valmiki considered as a veda.The above analysis may then question the history of Lord Srinivasa,but it is still accepted by the vedas,acharyas and alwars that Lord Srinivasa is a swayamvyakta perumal in tirumala for the sake of blessing his devotees of Kali age whatever might be the sthala puranas.

I was also told that in matters of conflicts between vedas and puranas,one has to take the vedic statement as true and reject the puranic statement contradicting it as there can be more than one purana contradicting the veda and other puranas themselves.So far i have accepted the above answer as i feel it answers my question.If any of the members of this group have any different answer,it is welcomed.Also if Sri Malolan is satisfied by the above answer then it also answers his query.===========================In light of both inputs, I have to extend a small clarification in this matter. I would appreciate answers from elder/knowledgeable members in this forum.

 

1.) If the inclusion of vedavathi in Valmiki Ramayanam is not true, then is the validity of the padma purAna to be questioned?

2.) If the validity of the padma purAna cannot be questioned, then is the inclusion of vedavathi as a charecter in padma purAnam be justified?

3.) If the padma-purAnam is not valid in light of apparent contradiction with Srimad Valmiki Ramayanam, then should the sthAla puranam of thirumala be questioned?

 

Please consider these humble questions.

 

Adiyen Ramanuja dasan,

 

Malolan Cadambi

[Guest guest]

SrI:

SrImatE rAmAnujAya namaH

namO nArAyaNa!

Dear SrI Malolan,

Sorry for this very belated reply; Meant to write on this

much earlier.

In light of both

inputs, I have to extend a small clarification in this matter. I would

appreciate answers from elder/knowledgeable members in this forum.1.) If

the inclusion of vedavathi in Valmiki Ramayanam is not true, then is the

validity of the padma purAna to be questioned?2.) If the validity of the

padma purAna cannot be questioned, then is the inclusion of vedavathi as

a charecter in padma purAnam be justified?3.) If the padma-purAnam is not

valid in light of apparent contradiction with Srimad Valmiki Ramayanam,

then should the sthAla puranam of thirumala be questioned?Please consider

these humble questions.

There were many RAmAvatArams in the past, as the cycles of

yugas keep repeating. In one such avatAram,

the mayA-sItA episode has taken place {Ref PAdma

PurANa

or any such pramANa}. That was taken as the precursor

for

the thirumalai leelai. PerumAL made the avatAram

at thirumalai

afterwards at His own pace and wish {not the immediete

next

kalpam after that mAyA-sItA episode etc}. All these

pramANas

are valid and its a case of "kalpa bhEdam".

A telling materialistic analogy by SrI KaruNAkaran SwAmi

would be very handy here :

The following are the two statements at different

places,

in a book on Cricket :

India beat West-Indies in the World Cup.

West-Indies beat India in the World-Cup.

Conclusion : This is not a contraction; Both of these

do not refer to the same match ; It is perhaps

on the results in two different World-Cups {kalpam

in our case}, as we know that World-Cup keeps

appearing periodically.

Please read the following article which was

on the same issue of mAyA sItA :

http://dileepan.busi.utc.edu//dec98/0017.asp

<<Password: badran >>

aDiyEn rAmAnuja dAsan,

anantapadmanAbhan.