Dasaratha's Dilemma

[Guest guest]

Srimate SrivanSatakopa Sri Vedanta Desika Yatindra Mahadesikaya nama:

 

 

 

Dasaratha's Dilemma

 

 

It is no exaggeration if we call Srimad Ramayana a Guide Book

 

for universal good conduct. It is so full of the right type of advice, that

anyone who reads it could never go wrong. And the beauty is that the characters

of Valmiki adhere so completely to what they preach, that the usual dichotomy

between precept and practice is conspicuous in the epic by its absence.

 

 

 

One of the traits given much importance in the epic is Truthfulness or Honesty.

We find characters praising each other for being invariable adherents to Truth.

This quality is so basic to the work as to form the bedrock on which the entire

magnificent epic is founded. Though Sri Rama might have had innumerable

auspicious attributes ( " BahavO Nripa! KalyANa guNA: putrasya santi tE " ),

Truthfulness leads the pack, with everyone adulating Raghava for His scrupulous

honesty in word, thought and deed.

 

 

 

In the very first Sarga, we thus find Sri Rama described by Sri Narada as

 

" Dharmagya: Satyasandhascha prajAnAm cha hitE rata: "

 

 

 

How does Sri Rama conquer all the worlds-by His prowess with the bow and arrow

or His undisputed valour? Neither, says Sri Valmiki, telling us that it is

through His unvarying Honesty that Sri Rama triumphs over all world- " SatyEna

lOkAn jayati, deenAn dAnEna Raghava: " . And again, when Dasaratha lists the

glorious good qualities in his eldest son, it is Truthfulness that comes to his

mind first-

 

" Satyam dAnam tapa: tyAgE mitratA soucham Arjavam

 

VidyA cha Guru sushrooshA dhruvANi EtAni RAghavE "

 

 

 

Not only is Sri Raghunandana personally honest, He encourages and facilitates

the trait in others too.

 

 

 

Take for instance His conduct, when told on the eve of His coronation as the

Prince of Ayodhya, that He was to leave the country instantly and reside in the

jungle for fourteen long years. Receiving these instructions from His

stepmother, Sri Raghava could very well have refuted them, as He had already

been promised the post of Crown Prince. Had He done so, He would have been well

within His rights and assured of popular support too. None would have found

fault with Him, had He chosen to go through with the Coronation, as scheduled.

 

 

 

However, Sri Raghava meekly submitted to the machinations of KaikEyI, because He

wanted His father the Emperor, to retain his name and fame as an adherent to

Truth. Just for the sake of retaining the crown of Ayodhya, Sri Rama wouldn't

let His father incur the infamy of not keeping his word, lest the scrupulously

built IkshvAku edifice of Honesty crumble due to a single act or omission,

however painful it was to the persons concerned. We thus see how dear was the

concept of Honesty to the heart of Sri Raghunandana.

 

 

 

We now come to Dasaratha's side of the picture.

 

 

 

It was indeed true that he had promised two boons to Kaikeyi, at the time of

the SambarAsura vadham. And, as the famed Emperor of the IkshvAku dynasty, it

was his sacred duty to deliver on his promises, when called upon to do so.

However, it is worth our while to research the options open to the Chakravartthi

and the real concepts of Honesty or Truthfulness.

 

 

 

When Kaikeyi delivered the twin blows of seeking Sri Rama's expulsion from

Ayodhya and the Coronation of Bharata as the Crown Prince, Dasaratha knew very

well that acceding to his Empress' request might plunge the entire nation into

anarchy. The People of Ayodhya had already indicated their choice of Rama as

their ruler, in no uncertain terms, even hinting to Dasaratha that the earlier

he vacated the throne, the better. What would the reaction of these masses be,

when told that Rama was being asked to live in the jungle, instead of reigning

over Ayodhya? Would there not be an uprising, leading to consequences too

disastrous for contemplation? Should Dasaratha plunge the entire nation into

possible mutiny and rebellion, merely to satisfy the wishes of an avaricious and

obviously misled wife? Where did his duty lie, as an Emperor responsible for the

welfare of millions of citizens who looked to him verily as their father? Was

adherence to honesty worth it, in the face of such calamitous possibilities

affecting the entire nation? ShastrAs tell us that on several occasions,

speaking of untruth is justified-for instance, when one's life is in danger, to

save oneself, one might speak untruth, without the attendant stigma attaching to

oneself. When sticking to his word and acceding to Kaikeyi's requests would

entail the possible loss of millions of lives of people who might decide to

commit suicide rather than live in a state without their beloved Raghava, was it

not adequate justification for resiling from his promise to Kaikeyi?

 

 

 

And what about his promise to Rama? He had categorically told his glorious

eldest son that He would be the Prince of Ayodhya on the morrow ( " ata: tvAm Yuva

rAjAnam abishEksyami Putraka! " ). In implementation of the Royal Decree, all

requisite arrangements for the Coronation had been made. There was no doubt that

the extremely obedient Rama would consent to the fourteen-year sentence without

a word of protest-however, would it be fair on his (Dasaratha's) part to go back

on his word to Rama, in order to keep his promise to Kaikeyi? Merely because

Rama was compliant and uncomplaining, could he, as a father, possibly impose on

the blemishless boy a terrible punishment apropos of nothing, in the process of

honouring his word to Kaikeyi, who had proved to be anything but a devoted

mistress?

 

 

 

And honouring the promise to Kaikeyi would also result in breaking the word

given to the denizens of Ayodhya, that Sri Rama would soon be their monarch? Did

he not enthusiastically agree to their proposal for making Rama the Crown

Prince?

 

" ahOsmi parama preeta: prabhAvascha atulO mama

 

yanmE jyEshttam priyam putram YouvarAjyasttham icchatha "

 

 

 

On the other hand, what would befall him, if he were to tell Kaikeyi to go to

hell along with her boons and just refuse to honour his earlier promises, given

in a moment of weakness?

 

Dasaratha realised that the stigma of untruth would definitely attach to him

indelibly, bringing him ineradicable infamy and opprobrium, as an Emperor, a

scion of the famed Ikshvaku dynasty, who couldn't keep his word, whatever be the

extenuating circumstances. Among his worst critics would be his own son, his

darling Sri Rama, who would never countenance dishonesty in anyone, leave alone

His own father. And this single untruth would be enough to mar the glory and

goodwill earned over thousands of years of sincere reign over Ayodhya. Whenever

anyone spoke of him subsequently, they would say, " Dasaratha! Oh! That Liar? " ,

referring disparagingly to his having been unable to keep his word to his own

Empress. Books of history would casually gloss over his innumerable years of

painstaking honesty, to label him a common liar.

 

 

 

With all these cruel thoughts buffeting him from every side, what does Dasaratha

decide? Sri Valmiki gives us a graphic account of the devastating dilemma

Dasaratha finds himself in, bound on all sides by bonds of honesty and

righteousness-

 

 

 

" Sa Satya vachanAt RajA dharma pAsEna samyata: " .

 

 

 

By the time Dasaratha recovers from his long faint, he finds Rama come to take

leave of him, all ready for departure for the forest. Dasaratha realises then

that the decision had been taken out of his feeble hands, with Sri Rama having

made up his mind to accept jungle life, in preference to a life of palatial

comfort at Ayodhya. Still, he tells Rama to overthrow him (Dasaratha) and assume

the reigns of Ayodhya, which Rama respectfully declines.

 

 

 

It would be instructive to note the arguments advanced by Sri Rama for choosing

a life of hardship and privation, over one of over lordship of Ayodhya.

 

1. Rama says that He would not be the reason for the Chakkravarthy's words

turning to untruth-

 

" na mE kAryam tvayA anrutam " . Of all people, let Me (who have espoused Honesty

and Truthfulness as my life's mission) not be the provocation for your acquiring

the stigma of truthlessness, says Sri Rama. The Lord prefers to see His father

stick to the narrow but difficult path of Satyam, irrespective of consequences,

rather than tread the easy and comfortable trail of untruth- " TvAm aham Satyam

icchAmi na anrutam Purusharshabha! "

 

 

 

2. To Rama, it is a question of personal honesty too, for, having promised

to Kaikeyi that He would unprotestingly go to the forests and renounce His claim

to the throne of Ayodhya for fourteen years, if He were to listen to Dasaratha

now and refrain from leaving Ayodhya, it would be a breach of the promise made

to the stepmother. Even in His dreams, Rama wouldn't contemplate going back on

His word, as He Himself reiterates-

 

" anrutam na ukta poorvam mE, na cha vakshyE kadAchana "

 

 

 

" RAMO dvi: na abhibhAshatE " .

 

 

 

Hence Raghunandana tells Dasaratha that as promised, He must immediately leave

for the forests-

 

 

 

" artthitO hyasmi KaikEyyA vanam gaccha iti Raghava!

 

MayA cha uktam vrajAmi iti, tat Satyam anupAlayE "

 

 

 

Thus, looked at from any angle, it was the desire to accord Honesty the lofty

pedestal that it was used to in the reign of IkshvAkus, that prompted Sri Rama

to accept immediately and uncomplainingly the deadliest of instructions from His

own stepmother whom He had been regarding with greater love than for His own

mother. Neither would Rama utter untruth and go back on His own hallowed words,

nor would He permit such conduct in those near and dear to Him, even if it would

result in His shouldering indescribable suffering.

 

 

 

Even to save Himself from the cruel jaws of death, Sri Raghava would never utter

an untruth, says Sri Mythily to Hanuman, putting Sri Rama's philosophy in a

nutshell-

 

 

 

" dadyAt na pratigrihNeeyAt Satyam brooyAt na cha anrutam

 

api jeevita hEto: hi Rama: Satya parAkrama: "

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Amidst all this, somewhat funnily, we find Sri Rama adducing His father's

instructions as the reason for His jungle sojourn ( " Pitu: vachana nirdEsAt,

KaikeyyA: priya kAraNAt " ), though Dasaratha never tells Him in so many words to

leave Ayodhya: in fact, the embattled Emperor tries his best to dissuade Rama

from going to the jungle. The reason is that Sri Rama accords high

credibility to His stepmother's words, as if they were His father's own-

 

" Mannavan paNi endrAgil num paNi maruppEnO? " .

 

 

 

 

 

Despite such overwhelming obsession with Honesty, would you be surprised to hear

that Sri Raghunandana prompted someone to tell a deliberate untruth? Before you

rise up in arms to castigate me for casting aspersions on the " VigrahavAn

Dharma: " , let me narrate what happens when Sri Rama ascends the chariot which is

to take Him to the forests. Sri Rama's eyes fill with tears at the sight of His

mothers, the doting denizens of Ayodhya and above all, His aged father the

Emperor, all assembled with heavy hearts and tear-filled eyes to watch Him

embark on His jungle sojourn. As the horses are given the command to go, the

chariot starts its unpleasant task of rolling off with its distinguished

occupants. Unable to bear this parting from the dearest of his sons ( " RamO rati

kara: pitu: " ), Sri Dasarata shouts to Sumantra the charioteer, to stop, so that

he could have a last word, a last embrace, a last glimpse at the glorious

features of Sri Rama. However, the Lord tells Sumantra to hasten and drive the

chariot off fast. Sumantra is torn between the conflicting orders he receives

from Father and Son-

 

" Tishtta iti RAjA chukrOsa, yAhi yAhi iti Raghava:

 

Sumantrasya babhoovAtmA chakrayOriva cha antarA "

 

 

 

At this juncture, Sri Rama tells Sumantra, " Do drive off fast. If the

Chakravartthy asks you later why you didn't stop, you could tell him that you

didn't hear his words in all the crying and breast-beating that was going on-

 

" na asrousham iti RajAnam upAlabdhOpi vakshyasi " .

 

 

 

Can you believe your eyes and ears-- Sri Rama, the paragon of virtue, the

embodiment of Satyam and Dharmam, telling the charioteer to utter a blatant lie!

 

 

 

It is here that we must remember that the concepts of Satyam (Honesty) and

Dharmam (Righteousness) are not absolute, but vary according to time, place,

occasion and persons. As Sri Rama Himself is to point out during the Vali vadham

episode, the nuances of Dharma are indeed difficult to discern for ordinary

mortals like us- " Sookshma: parama durgyEya: satAm dharma: " .

 

 

 

Sri Rama provides enough justification for His asking Sumantra to ride off

oblivious to Dasaratha's entreaties and to tell the Emperor later that his cries

were drowned in the general tumult. To the surprised Sumantra, who is astounded

at the request from Rama, of all people, to utter an untruth, Sri Rama says that

there is no point in prolonging grief both to oneself and others. Even if

Sumantra were to stop as requested by the Emperor, it would only elongate the

suffering both the father and son would feel in the parting, each moment of

lingering feeding the already unbearable grief-

 

 

 

" chiram du:khasya pApishttam iti Rama: tam abraveet " .

 

 

 

It is hence that Sri Rama instructs Sumantra to hasten and to offer excuses to

the Emperor for not listening to him. And in doing so, Sri Rama is adhering to

the Shastraic dictum to speak the Truth, but only if it is Sweet. If such Truth

is harmful to the listener, then it is better left unsaid- " Satyam brooyAt Priyam

brooyAt, na brooyAt Satyam apriyam " . Would it serve any purpose for Sumantra to

tell Dasaratha, upon inquiry, the truth that it was at the behest of Sri Rama

that the chariot was driven off, despite the Emperor calling for it to stop?

This would have only heightened Dasaratha's already overwhelming grief. This

would therefore have been an example of " Satyam apriyam " and it was to avoid

this that Sri Rama advises Sumantra to offer an excuse, though not really the

truth.

 

 

 

Thus, the nuances of Truth and correct conduct are to be learnt not through our

own concepts of good and bad or from the pages of unresponsive books, but from

the behaviour of acknowledged paragons of virtue- " MahA janA: yEna gata: sa

panthA: " .

 

 

 

Srimate Sri LakshmINrisimha divya paduka sevaka SrivanSatakopa Sri Narayana

Yatindra Mahadesikaya nama:

 

dasan, sadagopan