Of Inlaws and Outlaws

[Guest guest]

Srimate SrivanSatakopa Sri Vedanta Desika Yatindra Mahadesikaya nama:

 

 

 

 

 

Of In-laws and Outlaws

 

 

 

 

 

Which would you say is the most maligned relationship between

human beings? We hear of estrangement between fathers and sons, mothers and

daughters, between husband and wife and brothers and sisters. However, these

relationships, by themselves, do not suggest a potential for misunderstanding.

Among the myriad associations people form during their sojourn on this planet,

there is one single relationship which, ab initio, has immense potential for

misunderstanding and bad blood. This is the one between the mother-in-law and

daughter-in-law. Though the ideal tenor of the relationship between the

newly-wed bride and her mother-in-law should be one of daughter and mother, each

lavishing upon the other love and affection as behooves the relationship, what

actually prevails, in many a case, is a diametrically opposite emotion. Whatever

be the psychological or other reason behind the phenomenon, it has become a norm

for mother-in-law and daughter-in-law not to get on with each other. In its mild

form, this takes the form of a misunderstanding, which, if it festers long

enough without resolution, graduates into disharmony and discord, ultimately

leading to a parting of ways between the two women, in the form of " Thani

Kuditthanam " . Without taking sides and without going into the merits of the

matter, we find that as a matter of routine, the two women fail to hit it off

together, often preferring to hit at each other. Neither does the mother-in-law

realize that she herself had once been a daughter-in-law, nor does the latter

consider the sure prospect of herself becoming a mother-in-law in course of

time. (Of course, there are any number of families where the newly-married girl

and the boy's mother move as daughter and mother, each caring very much for the

other-but unfortunately, such families are in a minority.) Would it not

therefore be appropriate to term those who do not adhere to the norms of such

relationships as " Outlaws " , rather than In-laws?

 

 

 

In comparison, the role of a Father-in-law appears much more benign, with none

casting generalized aspersions on him. If a joint family splits after marriage,

with the newly-wed couple deciding to set up home separately, you can be sure

that it would have nothing to do with the Father-in-law. I remember having come

across a mantra in the Atharva Vedam for ensuring cordial relations between the

women in the household, but none appears to be either necessary or stipulated in

the case of the Father-in-law. To tell you the truth, my own father-in-law was

an excellent person (well-known for his long spell of kainkaryam for the

Tirukkoshtiyur Teppotsavam) with whom I enjoyed the best of relationships, till

he passed away a couple of years ago. We hardly ever hear of the Father-in-law

being the cause of discord in the family, much less for its break-up. All that

he ever reminds us of is a father-figure, lavishing genuine love and affection

on the bride and trying to make her life comfortable in the new environs and at

times trying to compensate for his wife's rudeness (whether or not justified) by

being extra nice to the newcomer.

 

 

 

Lest this be mistaken as a discourse on social and familial mores, for which I

am least qualified, let me get down to brass tacks, which is to highlight the

roles of some Fathers-in-law, portrayed in the scripture.

 

 

 

While discussing any familial subject, it is Srimad Ramayanam that comes to our

mind first, as it portrays ideal relationships-- that between father and son,

between brothers, among friends, between a wedded couple, etc. Each of these

relationships is portrayed in the Epic with a finesse and subtlety that makes it

a model for all to follow for all times. It is hence no surprise that the role

of a Father-in-law too comes in for due comment at appropriate junctures.

 

 

 

Let us first consider the conduct of the Emperor of Kekaya, the father of

Kaikayee and the Father-in-law of Dasarata Chakravartthy. The moment he receives

notice of Sri Rama's proposed union with Sri Sita, Dasaratha is so

head-over-heels with joy, that he doesn't even consider notifying and inviting

his close relatives for the wedding: perhaps the short notice had something to

do with it. However, the fact remains that Dasaratha did not invite his

Father-in-law for the wedding. It would have been bad enough had the wedding

been only for Rama, but the fact that Bharata too was to be married makes the

omission rather unpardonable, as the latter was a dear grandson of the Kekaya

raja. Consider what an insult this would be deemed as, in the context of current

practices, where even close relatives expect a personal invitation and are not

satisfied with a mailed one! One can very well imagine the Kekaya monarch's fury

at not being invited for his own grandson's wedding. However, there was no such

fury or fireworks. In fact, the first Yudhajit (Bharata's maternal uncle) comes

to know of the wedding is at Ayodhya, where he reaches after Dasaratha and party

have left for Videha, the venue of the marriage. And when Yudhajit meets

Dasaratha at Mithila, all he conveys to the latter is his happiness over the

event and his father (Kekaya Raja's) warm regards and good wishes. Contrasted

with his daughter's later behaviour, the Emperor of Kekaya, as Dasaratha's

father-in-law, appears to have exhibited great statesmanship and genuine

affection, in ignoring his lack of invitation for his own grandson's marriage.

 

 

 

And as far as Janaka Maharaja was concerned, he appears to have had the unique

distinction of being the father-in-law to the Lord Himself. Added to this was

the privilege of having four of his daughters married off to four illustrious

sons from the Ikshvaaku dynasty simultaneously. Just as He chose His father with

considerable care in the Ramavatara, the Lord appears to have devoted equal care

in the choice of His father-in-law, for Janaka was no ordinary monarch. He was a

Brahma Gnaani, having attained the ultimate wisdom through the extremely

difficult path of Karma Yogam ( " Karmena eva hi samsiddhim aastitaa

Janakaadaya: " -the Bhagavat Gita). His detachment from worldly things and

attachment to the Paramatma was such that he remained totally unmoved by the

news that his palace was on fire. Such is the greatness of this monarch that he

is mentioned frequently and with appreciation in the Shruti. He is reputed to

have performed innumerable sacrifices and having given away fortunes by way of

Dakshina- " Janako ha Vaideho bahu dakshinena yagyeneje " says the Brihadaaranyaka

Upanishad. The Raja's penchant for performing Yagas and Yagyas incidentally

yielded him the ultimate fruit-while tilling the Yagya bhoomi once, he found Sri

Sita, the Universal Mother, whom he brought up lovingly as his daughter. He was

an extremely fair and just emperor, known for his scrupulous adherence to the

right path- " Sa esha raajaa Janaka: sarvam dharmena pasyati " (Mahabharatam). Not

only was he personally upright and a paragon of virtue, he was also able to

inspire his subjects too to toe the narrow but straight path of Dharma, with

everyone adhering to his or her duty scrupulously- " anugrihnan prajaa: sarvaa:

sva dharma nirataa: sadaa " . The Emperor's strict and impartial enforcement of

the rule of law was such that he would not spare his own son, had the latter

erred-

 

 

 

" Sa esha Janako raajaa durvrittam api chet sutam

 

Dandyam dande nikshipati tathaa na glaati dhaarmikam "

 

 

 

He is rightly praised as the embodiment of Dharma, as one whose wisdom was

boundless and whose spiritual attainments were impressive- " Janako Maithilo

raajaa mahaatmaa sarva tattva vit " . It is hence no wonder that his glory had

spread in all the three worlds- " Tattvagya: Janako raajaa lokesmin iti geeyate " .

It is little surprise for us to learn that this emperor was a treasure house of

wisdom, for, whenever he encountered mahatmas and maharshis, he made it a point

to humbly seek from them the supreme knowledge. We thus come across several

mentions of him having fallen at the feet of Yaagyavalkya, Paraasara, Vasishtta,

et al, in his unending quest for the ultimate wisdom-so much so that he is

praised as one who knows to ask the right questions- " Prasna vidaam vara: " . One

of his pronouncements stands as a guiding beacon to those aspiring for

Liberation-the emperor, though reputed for his adherence to Karma, tells us that

there is no liberation without divine wisdom, which, in turn, can be acquired

only through an Acharya-

 

 

 

" Na vinaa gnaana vigyaanam mokshasya adhigamo bhavet

 

na vinaa Guru sambandham gnaanasya adhigama: smrita: "

 

 

 

Janaka appears to have developed, through his impeccable karma anushttaanam, an

enviable equanimity and poise, hard to attain for even the most evolved souls.

Having brought up Sita with immeasurable love and affection, we do not find him

overly sorrowed at the parting after Her wedding. The Maharaja accepts it as an

inevitable fact of life, having reconciled himself to the same. Compare this

with the attitude of Dasaratha, who is desolate and devastated when Sri Rama

leaves for the forest and ultimately dies due to putra shokam. We should not

conclude from their respective attitudes that Dasaratha's love for Rama was

deeper or more profound than that of Janaka for Sita. It was just a question of

bearing even unbearable separation with composure, which Janaka had developed

and Dasaratha had not. Though one doesn't want to compare, Janaka towers head

and shoulders above Dasaratha in all departments of life-it would therefore

appear that Piraatti's choice of a father was much better than the Lord's. It

is no wonder that of all the appellations he coins for Sri Sita, Valmiki

delights most in calling Her " Janakaatmajaa " .

 

 

 

Another distinguished father-in-law Emperuman chose with much care and

consideration, is Sri Vishnuchitta, later known as Periazhwar. Having instilled

in his divine daughter the delights of Krishnaanubhavam, Sri Vishnuchitta found

Her unwilling to accept mundane mortals for a husband- " Maanidavarkku endru aagil

vaazhakillen kandaai Manmathane! " . And the moment Vatapatrasaayee told him that

He preferred the garlands worn first by Andal, Sri Vishnuchitta knew for sure

that he was destined to become father-in-law to the Lord. And when the call came

from Sri Ranganatha for delivering Andal in bridal suit for the divine wedding

at Srirangam, Azhwar complied, albeit with reluctance. Though he was elated at

the exalted match, nevertheless he was saddened at the prospect of losing the

dear child whom he had found amidst bushes of Tulasi and brought up lavishing

boundless love and affection. We thus find him lamenting, " Oru magal tannai

pettren, Tirumagal pol valartthen, Tirumaal kondu ponaan " . While ordinary human

fathers are indeed saddened while giving their daughters off in marriage, they

have at least the consolation that they could visit her or she them from time to

time, providing for occasions for joyous reunion. However, in the case of

Periazhwar, the parting with Andal was permanent, She having joined the other

Mahishis of the Lord at Sri Vaikunttam, not to be seen again in flesh and blood,

as long as Azhwar inhabited the earth. We are therefore able to empathize with

Periazhwar-if even ordinary girls are capable of inspiring pangs of parting in

their fathers, consider how much a spiritually precocious and eminently lovable

lass like Andal must have caused in Sri Vishnuchitta! Azhwar's sorrow was not

only that he had lost a daughter, but also at the separation from an eminent

Bhaagavatai, for whom " unnum soru, parugum neer, tinnum vettrilai " were all

Kannan. He had lost not only a lovable daughter, but also a devotee par

excellence with whom he could share the delights of Krishna anubhavam, with whom

he could rhapsodize about Emperuman and His leelaas, with whom he could explore

the unfathomed depths of the Lord's auspicious attributes. It is all very well

for the father to be told that he has been able to get the best of grooms for

his daughter, one employed in the West and minting money-the pangs of separation

remain just the same. Similarly, even though it was to the Lord that Sri

Periazhwar gave his daughter in marriage; he was none the less sad at the

parting with Kodai. His words, " Tirumaal taan kondu ponaan " drip with poignancy,

portraying fully the feelings of a doting father and of an eminent Bhaagavata.

It is this which makes Azhwar the object of worship for not only mortals, but

also for celestials- " Svasuram amara vandyam " . In a lighter vein, we might say

that the celestials knew what was good for them. Many a person has come to grief

because he has ignored the in-laws in a family. The in-laws often represent the

" Purushakaaram " essential for obtaining favours from the head of the family. By

wisely opting to adulate Azhwar, the Devas ensured that due protocol was

observed and that they were well spoken of in the Lord's court.

 

 

 

As we have seen above, fathers-in-law are normally nice persons, with whom one

generally has no quarrel. Would it therefore surprise you to learn that the Lord

did pick up a quarrel with His father-in-law, and in fact threatened all sorts

of mayhem? I am not joking-it did happen. Sri Mahalakshmi is known as " Samudra

Raaja Tanayaa " , as She emerged out of the Milky Ocean, when Devas and Asuras

churned the same in search of Amritam. She is thus the daughter of the ocean and

the Samudra Raaja Her father. It is this very same Samudra Raajaa to whom Sri

Raghava performed Saranagati on the shores of Tiruppullaani, praying for the

deep waters to part, so that the Vaanara Sena could march to Lanka in its

mission for the rescue of Sri Janaki. And when the deity of the waters did not

respond to His entreaties, Sri Raghunandana was naturally angry and told

Lakshmana to bring His bow, so that He could dry up the ocean with a single

arrow, making it possible for the army to march on the ocean bed across to

Lanka- " Sosayishyaami Saagaram-padbhyaam yaantu plavangamaa: " . It is only then

that Samudra Raja realized the perils of ignoring a son-in-law, that too one of

matchless might like Sri Raghava, and appeared before Daasarathi, conveying his

consent for the bridging of the ocean.

 

 

 

It is not often that a son-in-law is compared with his father-in-law. However,

in Sri Rama's case, it is interesting to note that when Narada searches for a

simile to describe the Lord's inscrutability, unfathomability of mind, etc., he

hits upon Samudram as the apt example- " Samudra iva gaambhheerye, dhairye

Himavaan iva " .

 

 

 

It is practically impossible to speak about the Lord's fathers-in-law during the

Krishanaavataaram, for He had no less than 16007 Mahishis ( " Shodasa aasan

sahasraani sthreenaam anyaani Chakrina: " says the Sri Vishnu Puranam). It would

perhaps require a separate volume (in fact several of them) to write about such

a huge number of fathers-in-law. However, in this avatara, the principal Consort

was Sri Rugmini and by implication, the pride of place among the Lord's

fathers-in-law should have been that of Bhishmaka, the father of Sri Rugmini.

However, due to sheer stupidity, contrariness and misplaced hate, this Bhishmaka

Raja ruling over Kundinapuram, was totally against giving his daughter in

marriage to Sri Krishna and wanted, instead, to marry Her off to Sisupaala (of

all people) who was the sworn enemy of Sri Krishna. And the marriage was

accordingly fixed and invitations sent out. In the guise of attending the

marriage, the resourceful Krishna managed to abduct Rugmini and marry Her,

before Sisupala could tie the knot. The enraged Bhishmaka, along with his son

Rugmi, chased Sri Krishna and His entourage, only to be roundly vanquished in

battle. Bhishmaka is thus perhaps the only one of the Lord's fathers-in-law

without the distinction and glory that would willy-nilly attach to one who has

given his daughter in marriage to none other than the Paramatma.

 

 

 

Jaambavaan, the ancient and distinguished king of bears, was another

father-in-law of Sri Krishna, albeit by accident. Sri Krishna entered

Jaambavaan's cave in search of Syamantaka Mani (a stone of much magical

prowess), which He was wrongly accused of stealing from one Satraajit. (It would

appear that the Lord has had to battle with such charges of stealing right from

childhood in Krishnaavataaram, the Gopis having begun the tirade with

accusations of stealing butter and other dairy products- " Vennai undaan ivan

endru esa nindra Emperumaan " ). When He found the precious stone in the bear's

cave, being tossed about in play by a bear cub, Sri Krishna appropriated it for

returning the same to the rightful owner Satraajit. However, Jaambavaan, who

returned to the cave just as Krishna was leaving, mistook Him again as having to

come to steal the Syamantaka Mani and battled with Krishna for 28 long days,

before he realized that it was none other than Sri Rama Himself, in a different

form, that he was battling with. Jambavan, as a gesture of peace and

reconciliation, offered his daughter Jaambaavati to Sri Krishna in marriage,

thus becoming the Lord's father-in-law.

 

 

 

The same episode of the Syamantaka Mani was the cause of Sri Krishna adding

another person to His bulging bevy of fathers-in-law. Satraajit, who had

unfairly accused Krishna of having stolen the Syamantaka Mani, was put to shame

when Krishna recovered the stone from the bear cub and restored it to Satraajit.

The latter was consumed by remorse and repentance and racked his brains for ways

of atoning for the sin of flinging false accusations at the Emperor of Dwaaraka.

After much thought, Satraajit decided that the only suitable recompense he could

offer Sri Krishna was to give his daughter in marriage. And thus came about the

wedding of Sri Satyabhaama with Sri Krishna. It is thus a coincidence that both

the principal fathers-in-law of the Lord in Krishnaavataaram, were not at all

disposed well towards Krishna, at least initially.

 

 

 

Another of the Lord's numerous fathers-in-law is Raja Nagnajit of Kosala Desam.

Like Janaka Maharaja, Nagnajit too imposed tough conditions for marrying off his

daughter Naagnajiti and told Sri Krishna to prove His prowess first by taming

seven untamable, wild and virile bulls. It would appear that this Naagnajiti is

none other than Sri Nappinnai, as the episode of bull-taming for winning

Nappinnai's hand is chronicled by several Azhwars.

 

 

 

There have been several Rishis too, who have been privileged to be father-in-law

to the Lord. First and foremost among them is Sage Bhrigu, the son of Varuna

Bhagawan ( " Bhrigur vai Vaaruni: " ). Sri Mahalakshmi, in one of Her avataras, was

born as his daughter and was known as Bhaargavi and ultimately married Sri

Mahavishnu. Sage Mrigandu was another such Rishi, as whose daughter Bhoomi

Piraatti was born. Stthala puraanam has it that when the Lord sought the hand of

the seven year-old Bhoomaa Devi from Mrigandu, the latter told Him that the

tender girl did not even know how much salt was to be added to various food

items and would as such make a poor spouse. The Lord said, " No problems. I would

love to have even salt-less prasaadam from Her hands " and thus came about the

tirunaamam " Uppiliappan " . Whether He is " Oppiliappan " or " Uppiliappan " , the Lord

tastes sweet and delightful to devotees.

 

 

 

A perusal of the local lore at other Divya Desams would reveal the fact that the

Lord has had a wide variety of fathers-in-law in His arcchhaavataaram, ranging

from monarchs and maharshis, to ordinary mundane mortals. In fact, even till

date, at every wedding, it is the Lord who is seen, welcomed and propitiated, in

the form of the son-in-law, for the Groom is considered as the personification

of Sri Mahavishnu. This being the case, the Lord's fathers-in-law are really

countless.

 

 

 

Considering all this, wouldn't you say that of all the in-laws, the

father-in-law is the best? The fact that there are no widespread mentions in the

scripture of the Lord's mothers-in-law, for instance, would seem to support this

conclusion.

 

 

 

Srimate Sri Lakshminrisimha divya paduka sevaka Srivan Satakopa Sri Narayana

Yatindra Mahadesikaya nama:

 

dasan, sadagopan