Srivaishnava Network

Srimate SrivanSatakopa Sri Vedanta Desika Yatindra Mahadesikaya nama:

We saw how Sri Rama gave in to His beloved wife, in their argument about whether or not Sri Mythily should accompany Him to the forest.

To demonstrate that married life is a matter of give and take, a matter of appreciating the other’s viewpoint and a matter of being reasonable rather than adamant, we shall see another occasion when the Divine Couple had an argument, where Sri Janaki ultimately gave in to Sri Raghava’s reasoned arguments. The second debate that the two had, dispels the popular misconception, especially in the western world, about women in ancient India being servile and ignorant, mere ornamental objects meant for pleasure, from whom nothing intellectual could be expected.

To digress a little, all the women portrayed in Srimad Ramayanam are extremely intelligent, capable of highly advanced thought processes and well versed in their respective spheres. Many of them were adept at statecraft, some at war: and we find some aware of the subtlest aspects of Dharma. Even if you take the least educated among them, Manthara, the arguments she advances, in favour of Sri Bharata’s coronation and Sri Rama’s exile to the jungle, are quite well reasoned-out and persuasive. That she is able to bring Kaikeyi (who loves Rama more than even Kousalya) around to a diametrically opposite viewpoint, is no small tribute to the hunchback’s thought-processes and oratorical accomplishments. If this is the attainment of one of the lowest of Ayodhya’s female citizens, then one is not at all surprised at those of Kaikeyi (who helped Dasaratha win a war against the dreaded SambarAsura) or of Kousalya, whose parting words to Sri Rama on the eve of His departure for the jungle constitute a distillation of righteousness, or even those of Sri Sumitra, whose homilies to Sri Lakshmana

(“RAmam Dasaratham viddhi, mAm viddhi JanakAtmajAm
AyOdhyAm atavIm vidddhi gaccha tAta yathA sukham”)

ring still in our ears as the best advice to one bent on service to the Divine Couple. In no way inferior are TArA and MandOdarI, who render sterling counsel to their respective husbands, who, had they listened to the same, would have prospered, instead of meeting a gory death at the hands of Rama. Even a woman of apparently lowly origins like Sri Shabari, belonging to the hunter class, is hailed to be well-versed in the finer points of Dharma-”ShramaNIm dharma nipuNAm”– acquired through sincere service to her Acharyas.

Thus, it is not at all surprising to find Sri Janaki raising arguments based on a fine perception of what was right in a particular situation.

The Rishis of DandakAraNyam appeal to Sri Rama for relief from the constant torment of rAkshasAs, who not only create all sorts of hurdles to the performance of sacrifices, but also inflict often fatal injuries on the innocent sages. These Rishis assemble at the Sharabhanga Ashramam and display to Sri Raghava the innumerable injuries sustained on account of the onslaught.

“Ehi pasya shareerANi munInAm bhAvitAtmanAm
hatAnAm rAkshasai: ghOrai: bahoonAm bahudhA vanE”

Each tapasvI’s body sports more scars than would that of a warrior. The Rishis perform Sharanagati to Sri Rama (“tatastvAm sharaNArttham cha sharaNyam samupastthitA:”), seeking permanent protection against the onslaught of the unholy.

Moved beyond measure by the sufferings of the helpless Rishis, Sri Rama immediately vows to destroy the rAkshasAs, considering this a heaven-sent opportunity to be of assistance to the holy men. He assures the Rishis of protection and exhorts them to shed their fear on this count. This done, He leaves for the Sharabhanga Ashramam.

It is after leaving this Ashramam, that Sri Sita voices Her doubts about Sri Rama’s assurance to the Maharshis, about ridding them of  rAkshasAs.

Sri Valmiki tells us that Sri Mythily began Her submission to Her husband, in an extremely sweet and soulful tone-”hridyayA snigdhayA vAchA bhartAram idam abraveet”. This is a lesson for modern women-if you want to be heard, however reasonable be your words, your presentation has to be friendly, avoiding all rancour and recrimination. Sri Sita’s words, though She is about to question the correctness of Sri Rama’s conduct, are couched in the sweetest possible tone and tenor.

Beginning Her argument, Sri Mythily lays a sound scriptural base for Her averments, by pointing out that there are three great sins prompted by one’s mind-

1) Lying, 2) coveting another’s wife and 3) violence towards others, without due reason.

We have to hand it to Sri Janaki for being persuasive-She commences Her argument by praising Her husband, telling Him that the first two of the aforesaid three sins had never happened and would never occur in His case, given His glorious guNAs. She lavishes further praise on Him by listing His magnificent traits-

“Tvayi Satyam cha Dharmam cha tvayi sarvam pratishttitham”

“Tat cha sarvam MahAbhAga! sakyam bOddhum jitEndriyai:
Tava vasyEndriyatvam cha jAnAmi Subhadarsana!”

Having prepared the ground, Sri Janaki now comes to the nub of the matter and tells Raghava that His vow to destroy the rAkshasAs of DankAraNyam, to protect the Rishis, is wrong, because the rAkshasAs had not done Him any harm directly.

She reminds Rama that they had come to the forest for a life of penance and non-violence and the proposed killing of rAkshasAs would be totally against their avowed objective. She tells Him that nothing could be farther from their quest of peace and tranquility, than to use weapons for tormenting people, be they asurAs or others. She launches into a powerful condemnation of Arms and their destructive nature and recounts how an extremely docile and peaceful Rishi was transformed into a bloodthirsty killer, merely through association with a sword gifted to him by Indra for self-protection.

“Having come to the jungle for observing penance and austerity, having taken to apparels of tree-bark and deer-skin signifying the life of a mendicant, let us not revert to the behaviour of a King, whose ways are violent. Aren’t weapons like the cruel bow and arrow totally in contradiction with a mission of peace? Having come to the forest, let us behave like tapasvIs and not like kshaktriyAs intent on bloodshed! Moreover, our avoiding any confrontation and living a peaceful life is what would be pleasing to your parents too.” says Sri Janaki. Lest this persuasive tone be mistaken for lack of emphasis, She adds firmly that She would never agree to anyone being tormented without reason-”aparAdham vinA hantum lOkAn Veera! na kAmayE”.

Just as She began, Sri Sita winds up Her harangue with more praise for Rama. “I do not presume to advise you, for I am incapable of that. I just draw your attention to certain matters, prompted by my endless love and respect for you. You are the repository of all wisdom and valour. Please do consider my humble submission and take appropriate action, based on discussion with Lakshmana too”. Sri Valmiki’s words here are worth their weight in gold-

“snEhAt cha bahumAnAt cha smArayE tvAm na sikshayE”

It is to be noted that Sri Sita never compels Her husband to adopt the alternative She suggests, but puts the ball entirely in His court-however, the whole exercise is with the aid of powerful and irrefutable arguments, accompanied by parables and illustrations, with subtle hints about the absolute unsuitability of the proposed course of action.

How does Rama react to this? Does He take offence at His wife’s words, apparently presuming to tell Him, of all people, of what was right and wrong? Was He not Dharma personified (“RAmO vigrahavAn dharma:”), in no need of lectures, especially from a slip of a woman, much inferior to Him in age and experience? Notwithstanding the sugarcoated language, what Sita had done was to question His wisdom.  How does a hot-blooded Kshatriya take this? Does He reject His wife’s arguments outright, treating them with contempt and condescension?

Because of the strong bond of love and affection binding them, Sri Rama takes the words of Sita in the proper perspective, realising Her well-meaning sentiments. He doesn’t agree with His wife, but voices His disagreement in the most reasonable and inoffensive terms. He advances eminently sensible and logical arguments in support of His actions and tries to convince Sita of their correctness, rather than force His views upon Her. He doesn’t tell Her, “It is correct because I say so, and what I say goes!”, but talks to Her with all the persuasiveness at His command.

Sri Rama points out to Mythily how the Rishis of DandakAranyam specifically, and all others who seek refuge, are to be protected, even if it entails the loss of one’s life. He tells Her that the Rishis had performed Sharanagati to Him (“MAm SeetE svayam Agamya sharaNyA: sharaNam gatA:”), seeking protection of life and limb and the unhindered pursuit of their holy endeavours, treating Him as their sole refuge-”gatim mrigyamANAnAm bhavAn na: paramA gati:”. They had chosen Him as their sole Saviour-”Raksha na: tvam saha bhrAtrA tvam nAthA hi vayam vanE”. As a Kshatriya, residing whether in the palace or in the forest, it behoved Him to rush to the rescue of the distressed, for which sole purpose He was carrying His bow and arrow. Sri Raghava tells Sita that His keeping His word is paramount to Him, even if it involved theloss of His own life, Lakshmana or even Sita Herself. A promise, once made, should be kept at all cost, especially if it is to Brahmins, says Sri Rama-

“apyaham jeevitam jahyAm tvAm vA SeetE sa LakshmanAm
na tu pratigyAm samshrutya brAhmaNEbhyO visEshata:”

While making it clear to His wife that He had to abide by His word to the Rishis at any cost and hence could not accept Her views, Sri Raghava softens the disagreement by telling Her that it was indeed correct of Her to spell out Her views, because they were prompted by love and good intention. He also appeals to Her to see things from His viewpoint, and praises Her as being dearer to Him than His own life-

“Saha dharma chAriNI mE tvam prANEbhyOpi garIyasI”

Several unique aspects emerge from an analysis of the two arguments the Divine Couple had.

1.      Not a single harsh word was uttered throughout the lengthy exchange. The entire debate was totally free of rancour or recrimination.

2.      Both the beginning and the conclusion of the arguments were marked by absolute cordiality, with each praising the other for their views.

3.      Each person stated His or Her position clearly and firmly, without ambiguity, but in an extremely reasonable manner, devoid of acrimony.

4.      There was absolutely no going off at a tangent nor any resort to irrelevant matters or invective.

5.      While most arguments leave a bitter taste in the mouth of the participants for days thereafter, the aforesaid arguments did nothing of the sort.

6.      While disagreements tend to eat away at the fundamentals of the relationships, the aforesaid arguments resulted in the bonds of love and affection between the couple emerging stronger.

7.      There was a readiness on the part of both to appreciate and accept the other’s viewpoint, once they were convinced of its correctness.

8.      Ego played absolutely no part in the arguments, with neither being dogmatic or obdurate.

Besides being paragons of virtue and models of correct conduct in everything else, the Prince of Ayodhya and the Princess of Mithila also showed us the way in conducting our domestic affairs in a congenial fashion. They showed us that it was possible for couples to have disagreements without their taking on the hue of discord and diatribe.

They showed us too that wife or husband, each must respect the other’s viewpoint and not ride roughshod over the other’s opinions. Looking to these instances and others, which showcase the extremely strong bonds of love binding the Divine Couple, we feel that it is high time every discordant couple was told to read the Ramayana, which would do them immeasurably grater good than an army of Marriage Counsellors.

Srimate Sri LakshmINrisimha divya paduka sevaka SrivanSatakopa Sri Narayana Yatindra Mahadesikaya nama:

dasan, sadagopan

Srimate SrivanSatakopa Sri Vedanta Desika Yatindra Mahadesikaya nama:

All of us are aware of how debilitating domestic arguments are. Though they may begin quite innocuously, they have an uncontrollable tendency to become serious affairs, with both parties to the disagreement feeling hurt. And often, either of the participants in the argument goes off at a tangent, straying from the core subject to extraneous matters. Usually, what begins as a reasoned effort to convince the other person of his or her error, ends up as a free-for-all slanging match, with tones and tempers raised to unseemly levels. And for hours or days thereafter, the matter leaves a bitter taste in the participants’ mouth, turning people estranged and bitter.

If the matrimony is healthy and the partners flexible, the bitter argument is usually followed by a reconciliation and things return to normalcy. If we were to take a survey of separations and divorces, we would probably find that all of them began with an argument, developed into disharmony, graduated into discord, resulted in mutual incompatibility and intolerance and ultimately ended in a parting of ways between partners, who had sworn to stay together till “death do us part”.

An argument results, when a couple have a difference in outlook concerning a particular matter. As two reasonable adults, a husband or wife should appreciate reason when they see it in the other’s argument and concede gracefully. The problem arises only when one or both of them stick(s) to their stand adamantly, without appreciating the logic of the matter.

And when one of the parties to the argument fails to find reasonable things to say, he or she usually resorts to extraneous matters, insults, abuse, invective and so on. The Sanskrit saying, “SEsham kOpEna poorayEt” highlights the fact that people get angry, when they have no reasonable answer to others’ arguments. And when anger enters the mind, reason deserts it, with predictable consequences.

As in everything else, Srimad Ramayanam has lessons for us in how to have domestic arguments, reasonable ones, and how to appreciate the spouse’s point of view. Like any other marriage, that of the Divine Couple too had its share of arguments-however, what sets these arguments apart is that they were eminently devoid of rancour, discord and acrimony, with both Sri Rama and Sri Sita conceding readily, when they were convinced of the logic of the other’s arguments. And these exchanges left the Couple with considerably enhanced love and affection for each other and the marriage itself emerged considerably enriched, the bonds of matrimony made stronger than before.

The first of these arguments that Sri Janaki has with Her beloved, is over the issue of accompanying Him to the jungle, while He undertook the 14-year vanavAsam imposed by the scheming Kaikeyi. The exchange between the Divine Couple on this occasion highlights for all to see, the unbounded love and affection they had for each other. While Sri Rama doesn’t want the delicate Princess of Mithila to be exposed to the rigours and dangers of a jungle sojourn, Sri Mythily, on the other hand, is equally convinced that Her place is by at the side of Her beloved, wherever be His residence.

When Sri Rama reveals to her the momentous news about His impending journey to the jungle and asks Her to stay behind, Sita Devi is instantly angry at being left behind. This anger, says Sri Valmiki, flowed not out of any ego, pride or sense of self-importance, but purely out of the immeasurable love She had for Rama-”PraNayAt Eva samkruddhA”. She is flabbergasted at the idea of being left behind to spend 14 interminable years without the enchanting company of Her Sri Rama and this found expression in Her words of anger. She tells the Prince that She would indeed accompany Him, walking ahead and removing the thorns and stones in the way, which could hurt Her Lord’s delicate soles-”agaratastE gamishyAmi mridgatI kusha kantakAn”. She tells Rama that She is prepared to endure the inhospitable environs of the jungle, to live on fruits and roots, to travel barefoot on the thorny jungle paths. The immortal words of this young Princess, barely out of Her teens, would bring tears to the eyes of even the most stone-hearted of men and women. She tells Rama that if He is with Her , She wouldn’t mind a vanavAsam of even a thousand years, leave alone a mere fourteen. And why wouldn’t She forsake Her husband’s side? Because the Pati is everything to a married woman and is never to be forsaken under any circumstance. She might have any number of close relationships, with Her father, mother, son or Her friends, but of all these the overriding alliance is that with Her husband, who is Her sole refuge-

“na pitA na Atmaja: na AtmA na mAtA na sakhIjana:
iha prEtya cha nAreeNAm Pati: EkO gati: sadA”

To achieve Her objective of accompanying Sri Rama, She displays all womanly wile by pointing out to Raghava the innumerable days of happiness they could have amidst the romantic and picturesque locale of the jungle.

No husband could resist such words of reason, mixed with the potent potion of love. However, Sri Rama does, prompted by a fear of what the dark and dangerous jungle could hold for a delicate damsel like His beloved. He hence embarks upon a detailed description of the terrors of the jungle, in all of 26 slOkAs spanning a whole chapter, all of them ending with the refrain, “tata: dukhataram vanam”. The Prince is totally determined not to expose the young Mythili to the hard, cruel and dangerous life of the forest.

She reasons, She begs, She beseeches, She sheds copious tears, She threatens to commit suicide by consuming poison, entering the fire or waters-When all this doesn’t work, Sri Sita, out of sheer desperation and the fear of being left behind, hurls at Her husband a biting barb which no man worth his salt can tolerate. She sneers at Sri Rama and wonders whether Her father had married Her off to a woman in man’s garb, incapable of protecting his wife from man or beast-

“kim tvA manyata VaidEha: pita mE MithilAdhipa:
RAma jAmAtaram prApya striyam purusha vigraham”

Which man would put up with such insults? Sri Raghava does, because He knows full well that they are born not out of a desire to abuse, but constitute a last-ditch effort to make Her husband take Her along on the arduous journey to the jungle.

Thus Sita tries all the four strategies listed in the Shastras for achievment of one’s goals-SAmam, BhEdam, DAnam and Dandam, the last comprising Her stinging words casting aspersions on Rama’s bravery.

Though He had made up His mind initially to leave Sita behind, Sri RAma, the ideal husband that He was, doesn’t hesitate to change His mind and agree to take Her along, in the face of Her impassioned plea therefor. He doesn’t stick to His stand adamantly and tell Her to just obey, or else! He doesn’t claim a right, as the husband, to lay down what was to be done, irrespective of whether it was right or wrong.

This volte-face in Sri Raghava’s attitude was possible because He looked not merely at Sri Janaki’s words, but at the immeasurable love and affection, which prompted them. He listens not only to Her words calling Him effeminate, but hears too to the tone of anguish and agony that the lady is feeling over being left behind for not one or two, but fourteen long years. He gathers up Sita in a close embrace and tells Her He considers Her dearer to Him than even the heavens-”na idAneem tvatritE SeetE! SvargOpi mama rOchatE”. He gives in at last and tells Her to make preparations for them to leave for the forests together.

Now, whom would you say won the argument?

To the superficial reader, it would appear that, as is the case in almost all our domestic arguments, the Lady of the House was victorious on this occasion too, Sita managing to get Her way despite Rama’s reservations.

However, to the serious student of Srimad Ramayana, it would be evident that it was the strong bond of matrimony and the inalienable love and affection that characterised it, which emerged victor. There was no winner and no loser in this particular argument-both the Prince of Ayodhya and the Princess of Mithila emerged appreciably stronger from the episode, as a husband and wife who had infinite concern for the other’s welfare. They cared little for proving themselves to be right, through empty and endless debate with each other. Sri Rama was concerned at exposing His young Princess to the dangers and discomfort of the jungle, while Sita was intent on being with Her husband, through thick and thin, offering moral and other support through the impending sojourn in the inhospitable forests.

Marriage counsellors would have to search for other jobs, if everyone started perusing the Ramayana. The divine couple’s flawless conduct, their undisguised affection for each other, their readiness to appreciate each other’s viewpoint and to readily change their own opinion to accommodate the other’s, their moving concern for each other’s welfare, much more than each caring for his or her own-all these set out the argument they had as an exemplary one. Their way of resolving discord sets for us a shining example to emulate for all time.

If this is an argument where Sri Rama gave in to Sri Mythily, there was another where Sri Sita conceded to Her husband. Let us see more about this later.

Srimate Sri LakshmINrisimha divya paduka sevaka
SrivanSatakopa Sri Narayana Yatindra Mahadesikaya nama:

dasan, sadagopan

Srimate SrivanSatakopa Sri Vedanta Desika Yatindra Mahadesikaya nama:

The other day I went to a bank for opening an account. Decades back, this used to be a simple affair. Now, however, the Bank officials demanded some positive identification, confirming me to be myself. They were generous enough to give me a wide choice-I could produce a Passport, a Driving Licence, a Voters’ Identification Card or similar document, certifying that I was indeed a bona fide citizen of the country and that I looked like the photograph affixed on these documents. Additionally, an existing customer of the Bank had to vouch for me and my credentials.

When I went to book a new telephone line, the same was the case and I was told to produce proof positive that I was indeed whom I claimed to be. The irony is that for securing any of these documents (especially a Passport or a Driving Licence), you have to furnish positive identification, only upon which the identifying document would be issued. Thus, wherever you go in this wide world, you are asked to identify yourself to the satisfaction of the powers that be, before gaining admittance. The formalities in this regard become more rigorous when you cross international borders and enter another country. The current terrorist and other threats being what they are, the presumption on the part of security agencies appears to be that you are a criminal and impersonator, unless you can prove yourselves to be otherwise. There is thus paranoia, about identifications and credentials, pervading the whole world today. Security-conscious householders have started demanding ID cards from plumbers and electricians, knowing little that these could be forged with laughable ease.

When such documents considered sacrosanct like the Passport and the Driving Licence are being forged routinely, what to say about minor ID cards? While manning the Bank’s Foreign Remittance desk a few years back, I remember having confiscated no less than 16 forged passports, during a particular month.

Thus, establishing one’s identity is no joke these days and the need therefor has also multiplied manifold, with all types of economic and other offences being rampant.

If such is the case in the age of the Chip and of instant communication, imagine how difficult it must have been to establish the identity of a person, in days of yore! Take the period of the Ramayana for instance. How would people have identified strangers, who claimed to bear messages from those near and dear? For instance, if one were imprisoned by force and leading a miserable existence ruing one’s stars, if some one were to drop down from the tree top and claim to be the messenger of one’s beloved spouse, would one be naïve enough to believe the stranger, especially given the hostile environs? Though the heart would readily welcome the stranger bearing news of impending rescue, the head would definitely want to confirm the stranger’s identity, before proceeding further in the matter.

Which is what Sri Mythily did, when Sri Hanuman presented himself to Her in the AsOka vanikA. Surrounded by merciless rAkshasIs constantly terrorising Her, with periodical visits from the cruel Ravana exhorting Her to marry him and with the demoniac Emperor’s acolytes doing all within their powers to persuade Her in this regard, Sri Janaki could hardly be faulted for not accepting Maruti at his face value, initially. In fact, She was inclined to consider Hanuman as Ravana come in yet another form to prevail upon Her. The closer Hanuman came to Her, the stronger became Her suspicions about the strange monkey being Ravana come in disguise-

“yathA yathA sameepam sa HanumAn upasarpati
tathA tathA Ravanam sA tam SeetA parisankatE”

She is convinced about this being yet another machination of the cruel Ravana-”RoopAntaram upAgamya sa EvAyam hi Ravana:”

Despite Sri Maruti’s protestations that he was indeed a messenger of Sri Rama (“aham RAmasya sandEsAt DEvi! doota: tavAgata:”), Sri Vaidehi was hard put to believe him, circumstances being what they were.

How could Sri Mythily satisfy Herself about the credentials of the self-proclaimed messenger and benefactor? She couldn’t very well demand that he produce his ID card issued by SugrIva, confirming him to be a principal member of the VAnara sEnA, nor had he a Passport or other papers establishing his identity. For Sri Janaki, if it was a question of establishing the stranger to be friend or foe, for Sri Hanuman it was a matter of proving his credentials as a genuine messenger from Sri Raghava, bearing good tidings of impending rescue. His entire mission would become infructuous if he was unable to convince the Princess of Mithila of his bona fides and elicit Her cooperation.

It is here that one has to hand it to Sri Hauman. It is not for nothing that he is hailed as the wisest of all-”buddhimatAm varishtham”. Sri Maruti hits upon the idea of recounting to Sri Sita the entire story of Sri Rama, from birth to that moment, in a bid to prove himself to be the genuine article. This proves effective, as Sri Sita’s heart is gladdened to hear the RAma KathA and seeds of hope germinate in Her sorrowful heart.

However, having witnessed Ravana’s cruelty and ingenuity at close quarters, having been taken in once by his disguise as a sanyAsi, Sri Sita finds it hard to believe that Hanuman could be genuine and fears reoccupy Her heart that it is indeed Ravana come to torment Her in another form. She begins to berate Hanuman, convinced that he is indeed the rAkshasa, cursing him for deceiving Her once more with disguises-

“utpAdayasi mE bhooya: santApam tat na shObhanam
svam parityajya roopam ya: parivrAjaka roopa dhrik”

She demands of Hanuman-”If you are really who you claim to be, tell me in detail about Sri Rama’s auspicious qualities-”guNAn Ramasya kathaya priyasya mama VAnara!”. She challenges him further to recount in considerable detail the incomparable physical features of the Prince of Ayodhya. “How do Rama and Lakshmana look, how big are their shoulders and biceps and what are their distinguishing features? If you really know Rama well, tell me what His thighs look like! And tell me too how Sri Rama sent you, a monkey, as His messenger, instead of a human being! How is it that you met Him and became intimate enough for Him to trust you with this delicate mission?”

We discern in Sri Mythili’s searching questions Her sharp intellect and thorough-going nature, endeavouring to establish beyond reasonable doubt the identity of the stranger and to rule out the possibility of his being a foe in a friend’s garb.

Being genuine, Sri Maruti has absolutely no trouble in launching into a mouth-wateringly detailed description of Sri Rama’s enchanting physical features and enthralling auspicious attributes. It gives him another excuse for recounting the glories of Sri Rama, which are never far from his tongue.

It is only after listening to Sri Maruti’s pleasing narration that conviction dawns in Sri Janaki’s heart about the messenger being genuine. Now, having prepared the ground, Sri Hanuman hands over to Sri Mythily the ultimate identification-Sri Rama’s signet ring, with His name embossed thereon. It is this “anguleeyakam” or ring, which puts the final seal on Sri Sita’s conviction and encourages Her to repose full trust in Maruti.

One might ask why Sri Hanuman did not show Her Rama’s ring in the first instance, without engaging in the lengthy harangue. The fact is that Sri Sita wouldn’t have believed him, had he done so without laying the ground with Rama KathaA, which so gladdened Sri Mythili’s heart as to make it receptive.

Having seen Sri Valmiki’s depiction of Sri Maruti establishing his identity to Sri Sita’s satisfaction, let us see how Sri Periazhwar describes the scene.

Unlike the Mythily of Valmiki, Azhwar’s Sita needs much more convincing. She demands and obtains from Maruti several other items of proof as to his identity, by making him recount occasions of Her intimacy with Sri Raghava, which would naturally be unknown to a third-party, unless Sri Rama considered him close enough for such confidences.

Listen, for instance, to Sri Hanuman trying to prove his identity, by narrating an episode of romantic intimacy. Once during their happy days at Ayodhya, the divine couple were engaged in playing Chaturangam (Chess). Having won the game, Sri Sita tied up Her dear Prince with strands of fragrant jasmine, as a token of Her victory. As none else could have known this unless confided in by Chakkravartthi Tirumagan, this romantic titbit generates confidence in Sri Janaki’s heart. Here is Azhwar’s beautiful pasuram-

“alliam poo malar kOdAi! adi paNindEn viNNappam
sollugEn kEttaruLAi tuNai malar kaN mada mAnE!
elliam pOdu inidu iruttal irundadOr ida vagayil
Malligai mAlai koNdu angu Arttadum Or adayALam”

Apart from the avowed purpose of establishing Sri Hanuman’s identity, this pasuram also provides us with an intimate insight into Sri Rama’s nature, proving to us that He was not the serious, sober and straight-laced prude He is often made out to be, and did enjoy His moment of fun, frolic and romance. It tells us further that even the omnipotent Parabrahmam could indeed be tied up securely-all that it takes is a rope of love and devotion, as Sri Yasoda too could prove in a later avatara.

Continuing with Hanuman’s efforts to generate confidence in Sita Devi’s heart, we find Sri Periazhwar recounting yet another episode of intimacy from the life of the divine couple.

When Sri Rama is asleep with His head on the lap of His Princess in the shade of a tree at Chitrakootam, the dirty-minded KAkAsurA nips at Her breast. Though Sri Sita keeps quiet out of mercy for the misguided bird, the flow of blood from Her chest falling upon the sleeping Sri Rama enrages Him beyond measure. He plucks a near-by blade of grass and throws it after the flying crow with an appropriate incantation. The makeshift arrow pursues the hapless crow with a vengeance and does not rest till the bird, having knocked at all doors and failed to find refuge, falls at the feet of the Lord in exhaustion and surrender. Though the delinquent bird deserves the maximum punishment, the Lord just takes out one of its eyes, to remind it of the unsavoury episode, but lets it live.

This episode is another recounted by Sri Hanuman to convince Sri Sita of his bonafides, says Sri Periazhwar-

“Chittira kootatthu iruppa siru kAkkai mulai teeNda
attiramE koNdu eriya anaitthu ulagum tirindOdi
“VittakanE! IrAmAvO! nin abhayam” endru azhaippa
attiramE adan kaNNai aruttadum Or adayALam”

Sri Maruti adduces several other items of proof of his bona fides, to establish that he is indeed a RAmadootA, before Sri Mythily develops confidence in him.

We now come to an intriguing question-how could Azhwar be aware of an incidence, which occurred during the intimate moments enjoyed by the Lord and His Consort, of which Sri Valmiki was unaware?

The question assumes greater importance, when we consider that Sri Valmiki was blessed with the boon of knowing everything that happened between Sri Rama and His Princess, whether in public or in private. BrahmA’s words to Valmiki are very clear that the Maharshi would see in his mind’s eye everything exactly as it happened, with nothing remaining secret or hidden-

“Rahasyam cha prakAsam cha yat vrittam tasya dheemata:
RAmasya saha SoumitrE: rAkshasAnAm cha saravasa:
VaidEhyAscha yat vrittam prakAsam yadi vA raha:
Yat chApi aviditam sarvam viditam tE bhavishyati”.

Despite being blessed with such facility of knowledge, how did the episode (of Sri Janaki tying up the Lord with ropes of fragrant jasmine) escape Valmiki’s attention? And by the same token, how did Sri Periazhwar alone become privy to it?

Two reasons could be attributed to Valmiki’s apparent omission.

First and foremost, while Sri Valmiki had only the blessings of BrahmA, Azhwar was favoured with boons from a much higher deity, the highest of all, the Supreme Lord. Sri Vishnuchitta was afforded unblemished wisdom (“mayarvara madi nalam”) by sAkshAt Sriman Narayana, making the range and reach of Azhwar’s wisdom much more comprehensive and intensive than that of the Maharshi. It is axiomatic that a person can give to another only what he has. Accordingly, BrahmA bestowed on Valmiki the maximum wisdom that he (BrahmA) could. On the other hand, the Lord, with His boundless wisdom (“ellayil gnAnatthan”) could confer on Azhwar knowledge of a much higher order than that obtained by Valmiki.

It is thus that Sri Periazhwar was able to discern and recount episodes, which were beyond Valmiki’s ken.

Secondly, we must remember as an influential member of the Lord’s family, Sri Vishnuchitta was much more privy to such episodes than an outsider like Valmiki could ever be. Being the Lord’s own Father-in-Law (“Svasuram. RanganAthasya sAkshAt”), having given his daughter GodA in marriage to sAkshAt Sriman Narayana, Azhwar could definitely boast of  ”inside information” about happenings in the Lord’s house-hold, than could the Maharshi, who had no such connection.

This is not to detract in any way from the greatness of Sri Valmiki, who is verily a “Munisimham” and whose immortal words would continue to enchant and enthral this world for millennia to come, but just to demonstrate how the Divya Prabandam supplements and complements the Shruti, Smritis and the ItihAsAs, in showcasing the innumerable facets of the Lord’s glory.

Srimate Sri LakshmINrsimha divya paduka sevaka Srivan Satakopa Sri Narayana Yatindra Mahadesikaya nama:

dasan, sadagopan