15 Dec 2017
Questions on the Ramayana from Smt. Devi w/o Dr. Nikhil
1) Why is it necessary to understate the sacrifice of Lord Rama, in order to prove the greatness of Lakshmana?
[Question by Devi: You have repeatedly stated that the apparent injustice done to Sita was nothing but the punishment for her verbal abuse of Lakshmana, who was one of the highest devotees and an embodiment of purity and sacrifice. You have mentioned of Lakshmana’s sacrifice, when he left his wife and the luxuries of the palace and followed Lord Rama into the forest as His servant and guard. Lakshmana’s sacrifice becomes greater when we see during the 14 years of exile, Lord Rama was enjoying with his wife in the hut while Lakshmana stayed on guard outside. By this You wish to show the greatness of Lakshmana. This is excellent and true. However in the process, You are hiding the greatness and incomparable sacrifice of Lord Rama Himself.
I feel that it cannot be said that Lord Rama was enjoying in the hut with his wife because in the 14 years of exile, no child was born to them. Knowing the highly sensitive and soft nature of Lord Rama, it seems unlikely that He would enjoy with his wife, when his beloved brother had sacrificed his own wife for His sake. Later on we see that, in order to give justice to Lakshmana, who had been verbally abused by Sita, Lord Rama left her in the forest and lived His entire life alone without getting married again. He had lived with Sita for an extremely short period of time during which Lava and Kusha, the twins were conceived. It is said that Lord Rama lived for a very long time after that. During that entire period, Lakshmana and the other two brothers lived with their wives and children. Thus, while Lakshmana sacrificed his wife for only 14 years, Lord Rama sacrificed His wife for His entire life. So isn't the sacrifice of Lord Rama infinitely greater than Lakshmana? Lord Rama’s tendency to show His devotee to be greater than Himself, only proves His own divinity. Since the sacrifice of Lord Rama has remained hidden, most people misunderstand Him.]
Swami Replied: Rama was leading family life in the hut and whether children were born or not born is in no way concerned with the main point that while Rama was with family life, Lakshmana watched outside the hut without family life. This point makes the test more severe so that omniscient Rama wanted to examine mind of Lakshmana whether Lakshmana even thought about this in any fraction of time during 14 years. Rama, being God, might have used miraculous power to control the birth of children. In those times, even sages had such control power by the grace of God. Actually, Lakshmana need not go to forest. Only Rama had to go to forest. Sita accompanied Rama being His wife and there is no sacrifice in this. There is real sacrifice in the case of Lakshmana following Rama to the forest for their protection. Lakshmana avoided his wife since she will be hindrance in protection. Hence, sacrifice of Lakshmana is more predominant than that of Rama. Moreover, Lakshmana was a devotee and is tested in the sacrifice. Rama is God and there is no need of any test of sacrifice in the case of Rama. The setter of question paper need not answer the questions set by him on the answer sheet along with other candidates in the examination hall!
Coming to the point that Rama also punished Himself for the sin of Sita since He also lived for a long time without Sita, following analysis is to be observed. In the constitution of God, nobody will be punished unnecessarily without any sin (Avashyamanubhoktavyam krutam karma…). When the issue is suffering for its sin, parents also suffer seeing the issue. People think that the parents are suffering unnecessarily due to the sin done by issue! It is not correct. The parents are also punished simultaneously for their past sins, which are not inferred by the spectators. People infer the sins of issues seeing the suffering of issues. Similarly, the people should infer the sins of parents also seeing their suffering. The implementation of fruits of deeds is done in such a perfect way of coincidence that two birds will be shot by one bullet! In the case of Rama also, sin shall be inferred as in the case of Sita. Rama was going after the golden deer since Sita desired for it. Then, Lakshmana advised Rama not to go after golden deer since demons are capable of doing such miracles and already demons (Khara and Dushana) have become enemies to Rama. Due to blind fascination towards Sita, Rama didn’t listen the advice given by Lakshmana and this led entirely to further tragedy! You need not doubt that Rama was having blind fascination! It is not so. If Rama heard the advice of Lakshmana, destruction of Ravana will not happen. But, every human being having blind fascination to life partner can’t support himself showing such divine reason. Rama came to act as an ideal for humanity (Aadarsha Maanusha Avataara). Hence, humanity shall take the point limited to that scene only. Fascination to the life partner shall not continue blindly in all the times. Even if a boy of little age (Lakshmana was younger to Rama) tells something, you must hear and analyze it (baalaadati subhaashitam…). In fact, not only Rama suffered due to this mistake (of Rama), Sita also suffered a lot! Had Rama heeded to the advice of Lakshmana, even Sita might have not scolded Lakshmana in such way for which she suffered a lot. This sin of Rama joined with the sin of Sita (by the direction given by destiny or administration of deity of justice) and hence, both suffered. Such coincidence is done for simplicity of divine administration. We should not mistake Rama and Sita in these scenes since both were only divine actors in these human roles of drama, which is meant for preaching the humanity. Some time back, Shri Anil asked that why Sita was not punished in the upper world and was punished on this earth only. I answered him telling that since it is an intensive sin, punishment is given here in this life itself. Another reason added to the above is that if Sita is punished in this world itself, everybody will see the punishment of the sin here itself. If Sita is punished in the upper world, nobody sees the punishment and will not fear for such sin here. For the same reason, Rama punished Himself also here itself. We should worry more about the ideals conveyed to the humanity than worrying about those divine actors in human roles.
It is very difficult to develop faith in human incarnation itself since the external medium shows common properties as those of other human beings. This itself is pouring ghee in jealousy-fire. Added to this, negative behavior expressed by human incarnation (like Rama enjoying with Sita in the hut while younger Lakshmana alone is moving around the hut like a watchman day and night for 14 years) acts like wind blown towards the jealousy-fire! Again, Lakshmana is the Adishesha, the divine actor acting in the human role of a devotee (recognizing his contemporary human incarnation) for the sake of direction in spiritual effort of all spiritual aspirants. Similarly, Hanuman was also tested very severely by Rama and we should recognize that Hanuman, incarnation of Lord Shiva, also is a divine actor acting for the same purpose. From the Ramayana, we can get guidance not only in Pravrutti, but also, in Nivrutti. Nivrutti is actually existing from the beginning to the end and Pravrutti is only an intermediate station in the line of Nivrutti. One may stop at Pravrutti, but, he can do so only when he fixes Nivrutti as the ultimate goal and travels in the line of Nivrutti only (Pravrutti has no separate line and separate beginning). In fact, the fruit of Nivrutti is beyond words in which God takes up your total responsibility and your failure is impossible (Nivruttistu mahaaphalaa).
2) Why did Lord Rama punish Himself for the mistake of Sita?
[Question by Devi: By verbally abusing Lakshmana, Sita had sinned and hence she deserved punishment. However, Lord Rama had not sinned in any manner. When Sita was punished, Lord Rama also had to suffer due to her separation. So why did He punish her in such a manner that He had too had to unnecessarily suffer lifelong?]
Swami Replied: The answer for this question is already covered in the above answer.
★ ★ ★ ★ ★