Ordeal by Fire--2

[Guest guest]

Srimate SrivanSatakopa Sri Vedanta Desika Yatindra Mahadesikaya nama:

 

 

 

Ordeal by Fire-2

 

 

It is a measure of Sri Mythily's purity and blemishlessness, that the entire

clan of Celestials, (including BrahmA the creator, RudrA the destroyer, Indra

the chief of dEvAs, KubErA the custodian of all wealth, Yamadharmaraja who keeps

meticulous count of our good and bad deeds, Varuna the deity of waters, et al)

turn up the moment Sita enters the fire, to swear by all that they hold holy,

that Sri Janaki is absolutely free of any blemish and pure as driven snow. In

fact, they chide Rama for not preventing His beloved from the agni parIkshA and

tell Him He ought not to behave like an ordinary mortal husband in suspecting

his wife.

 

 

 

As if this chorus of conduct certificates is not enough, the venerated Agni

BhagavAn too emerges with Sri Sita, (who is totally unaffected by Her fiery

bath) to add His two-cents' worth. We are told that even the flowers She wore

around Her neck did not wilt despite their contact with fire. Agni says to Sri

Rama in a stentorian voice and for all to hear, that Sri Mythily is the purest

of pure, untainted by stigma of any sort, had not committed any transgression by

thought, word, deed or sight. Every waking minute She had only Her husband in

mind and had thoughts for nothing else.

 

 

 

Apparently satisfied with all this vouchsafing for Sri Janaki's character by the

most eminent of beings, Sri Raghava accepts Her with due honour. He also

provides a detailed justification for His having countenanced Sita's ordeal by

fire, acknowledging that He had never had any but the highest of opinions about

His Consort. He proclaims for all world to hear that Sri Mythily is the

embodiment of purity, whom even the vilest of influences cannot hope to stain.

He clarifies that Sita could never have thoughts for anyone else, for She is

verily an inseparable part of Him, as are the heat and light of the Sun- " ananyA

hi mayA Sita bhAskarENa prabhA yathA " . So saying, Sri Rama reveals His unvarying

love for His Consort and His unshakeable faith in Her virtue. And the divine

couple are reunited, with the passing cloud of apparent suspicion lifting to

reveal the shining sun of love.

 

 

 

Though we are eminently unqualified to sit in judgement over divine actions, yet

a few doubts plague us over the conduct of Sri Rama in this instance.

 

 

 

1.. Since we hear so much throughout the Epic about the professed love of

Raghava for His princess, how was it possible for Him to suddenly develop a

doubt about Her character?

 

 

1.. What was the need for Sri Rama to reveal His misgivings about Sri Sita's

chastity in public, that too in before a vast gathering of monkeys and

rAkshasAs?

 

 

 

 

1.. Even granting Rama's right to suspect a woman who had been in the custody

of a rAkshasa like Ravana, what was the need for Him to tell Sita to go and live

with any person of Her choice? Was it not too much of an insult to heap on an

unblemished woman?

2.. Having accused Sri Sita in public about Her conduct, would it not have

been appropriate for the Prince of Ayodhya to have been satisfied with Her

eminently reasonable explanations and impassioned assurances and not let Her go

to the extent of proving Her innocence by entering the fire?

 

 

1.. How was it possible for Sri Rama, even granting His anger and suspicion,

to permit His beloved Sita to adopt the extreme step of ordeal by fire?

 

 

 

 

1.. When there are any number of people standing around ready to do Her

bidding, why should Sri Sita ask Lakshmana, of all people, to make a fire?

 

 

1.. Did it need the combined character certificates of all the celestials for

Raghava to believe in Sita and to accept Her back into His fold?

 

 

These and similar misgivings are cleared, once we peruse the words of Sri Rama

following the unscathed emergence of Sri Sita from the fire, as also the words

of commentators like Sri Govindaraja, who have a knack of reading and revealing

the true purport of Sri Valmiki's words. And we are able to find the following

answers too through a perusal of the aforesaid passages.

 

 

 

1.. There is absolutely no doubt about the boundless love Sri Raghava had

for His Queen. This is demonstrated in ample measure throughout the Epic.

However, for Chakravartthi Tirumagan to have unquestioningly accepted Sri

Mythily, (who had, all said and done, spent a year in the custody of the vilest

of rAkshasAs with a huge harem) would have attracted adverse comment from the

undiscerning. Gossip-mongers would have said, " Look at Rama, who is so head over

heels in love with His wife, that He has accepted Her without question, knowing

full well that she was abducted and was in the custody of the notorious kAmuka

Ravana " .

Hence, it was indeed necessary for Sri Rama to appear to enquire into His lady's

chastity.

 

 

 

1.. The suspicions about Sri Sita's conduct could indeed have been voiced

and clarifications obtained in private, or before a select audience of trusted

acolytes. However, the general public would still be unaware of the proceedings

and might continue to think Sri Raghava's conduct unbecoming of a scion of the

Ikshvaku dynasty. Since Sita's innocence was proved beyond doubt for everyone to

see, even the breath of scandal was avoided in the matter.

 

 

1.. Commentators clarify that the actual purport of Sri Raghava's words

about Sita being free to live with Lakshmana, Bharata, et al, is that once

abandoned by her husband, a woman could seek the support and roof of her

husband's relatives and friends. It was with this in mind, (that Sita could find

support from any of the worthies mentioned), that Sri Rama's words were uttered

and not with any other untoward purport, says Sri Govindaraja ( " atra

LakshmanAdou mana: karaNam nAma anAthAyA: rakshakatvEna tat tat grihE vartanam.

BhartrA parityaktAyA: striyA bandhu grihE vAsa vidhAnAt " ).

2.. If Sri Rama were to appear to be apparently satisfied by Sita's own

words of assurance and sworn protests of innocence, it would not have been

adequate for the assembled public, who would have thought, " What sort of justice

is this, if the accused person is exonerated based solely on her own

protestations of innocence? " Hence some solid proof was needed, if the

proletariat was to be convinced as to where the rights of the matter lay. The

agni parIkshA was therefore necessary. Sri Rama makes this clear, saying that

this was essential for convincing the three worlds-

" PratyayArttham tu lOkAnAm trayANAm satya samshraya:

 

upEkshE VaidEhIm pravisantIm hutAsanam "

 

 

 

1.. Despite His harsh words, Sri Rama was absolutely convinced about Sri

Sita's impeccable character. He knew too that none of the five elements was

capable of causing Her harm, since all were under the joint command of Himself

and His Consort ( " bheeshAsmAt VAta: pavatE, bheeshOdEti Soorya:, bheeshmAt

agnischa indrascha, Mrityu: dhAvati panchama iti " -the Taittiriyopanishad). Since

no injury could be caused by Fire to Sita who was the embodiment of purity, and

since it would prove Her to be blemishless beyond doubt, Sri Rama didn't feel

any qualms about permitting Her to enter the fire.

 

 

1.. Sri Sita is ever conscious of the insults She meted out to Lakshmana,

when he refused to leave the parNashAlA, in response to MArIcha's cry for

rescue, uttered in Rama's voice. Sri Mythily accuses Lakshmana of having

improper intentions towards Her, when He tries to convince Her that his brother

needs no assistance from anyone and is quite capable of defending Himself. It

was to atone for this inexcusable conduct towards a BhagavatA, that Sri Mythily

requests him specifically to make a fire for Her to enter and prove Her

innocence.

 

 

 

 

1.. The Prince of Ayodhya knew His Consort like the palm of His own hand and

needed no certificates from anyone, however eminent, as to Her character and

conduct. Yet, since justice had not only to be done but also seem to be done,

Sri Raghava accepted Sri Sita with these certifications, as they came from

entities, which the public held in high reverence. As such, it was for public

consumption, rather than for His own requirement, that Sri Rama waited for these

celestials to pronounce Sita innocent, before accepting Her.

 

 

The episode might have been painful to all concerned while it lasted, but both

Sri Rama and Sri Sita emerge from it with their fame enhanced manifold. Just as

gold glitters more after passing through fire, Sita too has Her sterling

qualities reaffirmed beyond doubt, after the ordeal by fire. And it proves too

that Sri Raghunandana applied the same strict standards of ethics and

righteousness in His own case, as He did in others', attesting to His

impartiality and passion for justice and fair play. Detractors might still be

found, criticising the Prince of Ayodhya for what He said and did on the

occasion, but for us, as students of Srimad Ramayanam, He would always be the

shining paragon of virtue, the epitome of all merit and the compulsively

righteous monarch, who could never do wrong. If some people think the worse of

the Magnificent Monarch on this count, it shows only their ignorance, for, being

the embodiment of Dharma (certified as such by even His enemies- " RamO vigrahavAn

dharma: " ), Sri Rama was incapable of wrongdoing. If some of His actions appear

to us to be incorrect, it is because we apply our own defective human standards

in judging divine conduct, which we have no business to do.

 

 

 

For, if Rama did it, it must be correct.

 

 

 

Srimate Srivan Satakopa Sri LakshmInrisimha divya paduka sevaka SrivanSatakopa

Sri Narayana Yatindra Mahadesikaya nama:

 

dasan, sadagopan