Why is Bhagwaan Shri Ram called Maryaada Purushottam?
Dear All: Thank you for a very engaging and educative discussion on the earlier post on Marayada Purushottam, Sita Mata, Agni Pariksha and Vaali Vadh. I have been unusually busy for the past few days and have barely had a chance to read all the comments properly. I will try and respond to them in due course.
This post was prompted specifically by Patriot’s question at comment #8 to the earlier post. In that comment, Patriot wrote:
I have not said Ram is all good or all bad – in fact, it is the title Maryada Purushottam that I am cavilling against.
And, as I mentioned before, the only really stellar thing that Ram did was to ensure that he kept his father’s words to Kaikeyi, despite his father urging him to seize the kingdom.
Name any other really outstanding deed from Ram.
I believe many of you have already responded – in your own way – to the question…so please bear with me if some of the points I make are repetitive and/or paraphrase earlier comments.
The first point is regarding the word “outstandingâ€. I don’t have to tell you that the term is subjective, therefore open to different interpretations and to a great extent depends on context…In a limited sense, therefore, Shri Ramchandra’s “greatness” can be a matter of perception – depending on whom you ask. Having said that, when a large group of people hold a particular figure as venerable, it is very likely that such a belief stems from at least a few acts of extraordinary significance and not just one single deed.
Second, as you read this post and the earlier discussion, please bear in mind that Shri Ramchandra is an “avatar†in human form and therefore has human traits – some of which we may find “ungodlyâ€.
Coming back to the question:
Why is Bhagwaan Shri Ramchandra called Maryaada Purushottam?
If you read the Ramayana in some detail and try to understand the historical context around the narrative, a few things stand out. Specifically:
1] The remarkable geographical spread of the narrative which indicates that if Shri Ramchandra was indeed a historical figure, his kingdom must have been one of the largest (if not the largest) of those times. In particular, he managed to bridge the north and south of the country – reflected in his travels during the “Vanavaas” – which should count as a tremendous achievement (I am deliberately not mentioning the Ashvamedha Yagya he performed after his return to Ayodhya)
2] The respect with which he treats the tribes and “other†people – i.e. non-citizens of Ayodhya – mark him out as a man far ahead of his time – keen on forging alliances and bringing people together rather than subjugating them.
3] The numerous stories of his fights with Asuras & Rakshas and how he emerges victorious in each of them are very likely indicative of his ability as a brilliant warrior and a superb war strategist.
4] There are clear references in the epic to his breaking of numerous social taboos…To cite two specific examples, a] his sharing meals with the Shabaras and b] his freeing Devi Ahilya of her curse. Through his deeds and actions, he exemplified the belief that all men are equal…He of course, shares this “greatness of thought†with other saints and venerated men including Jesus Christ , Gautam Buddha and Prophet Muhammad.
5] His reign – “Ram-Rajya†in popular culture – has become a synonym for a peaceful, harmonious, secure and prosperous state – almost an ideal that every government should strive for.
6] His deeds as a son, as a brother, as a husband (leaving aside the matter of Agni-Pariksha which I will deal with separately) and as a King, exemplified model behaviour and conduct and that is why he is called Maryada Purushottam.
“Maryada†meaning (by extension of the original meaning of a limit or boundary) the intrinsic moral law, ethics, customs or rules and “Purushottam†being – the best amongst men (Note that he is not called the “best amongst Godsâ€). Also note that “Uttam†may not mean “best†either (that would be “Sarvashreshtha“). Its meaning is closer to exemplar – or worth emulating.
Finally, try and interpret all this in the proper socio-historical context (leaving aside the deification, if you can) and then consider his various deeds and actions.
Shri Ramchandra is often cited as an epitome of “Dharmic†behaviour. But (as one of the commentators has also noted) “Dharma†(i.e. being morally and ethically correct) is contextual and is not disconnected from the socio-political context of the time of these events.
So to view these acts and events from a purely modern, individualistic (or even feminist) perspective may be an interesting intellectual exercise but such an interpretation is likely to lead to erroneous conclusions (and possibly cause offence)
Note that the word “Dharma†itself cannot be appropriately translated in English. There is no single word/phrase in English that can fully capture the various nuances and connotations of the term. As noted by commentators, “…there is no one corresponding English term that fully renders both the denotative and the connotative meanings of the term with maximal sufficiency“.
Coming to the matter of Agni-Pariksha.
While it is debatable whether the event actually happened – or it was an embellishment to the original story by later writers (subsequently lodged in popular imagination through Goswami Tulsidas’s Ramcharitmanas) – the episode highlights (to me) the dilemma faced by Shri Ramchandra when his duties (loosely “Dharmaâ€) as a King conflicted with his “Dharma†as a husband.
For a ruler, ancient Hindu society expected that “Raj-Dharma†should come ahead of everything else…Seen from this perspective, it becomes easier to understand why Sita Mata herself asked Shri Ramchandra to send her away (as mentioned in some versions) and why Shri Ramchandra had to do this.
The references mention that Sita Mata herself asked him to do this since she realised and understood the dilemma he was in. As an aside, some sacred stories mention a curse of Rishi Agastya that condemned Bhagwaan Shri Vishnu to living for a long time without his soulmate…this curse was ultimately borne by Shri Ramchandra (one of the ten “avtaars†of Vishnu) – and the sequence of events starting from Sita Mata’s agni-pariksha and subsequent departure from Ayodhya were a result of this curse.
Here is another very interesting story that illustrates the dilemma Shri Ramchandra faced when his different duties (“Dharmaâ€) came in conflict.
Please read this with an open and sensitive mind:
Bhagwan Ram was seated on his royal throne. DevRishi Narad, Rishi Vishwamitra, Guru Vashishta and many other sages were also present in the court four counseling him. They were all contemplating on some religious issue. Right then DevRishi Narad said, “hey scholars, please let me know who is more powerful. “The God himself or His Nameâ€. After a long debate the questions remained unanswered. Then DevRishi Narad himself declared that “His Name†is higher than the person name and went to the extent of proving the fact before the dispersal of the royal court. Then Narad Ji called Shri Hanuman Ji and said, “when everyone was about to leave the courtâ€, “You will bid greeting to every Sage but not Vishwamitra because he is a kingâ€. Then turn to Rishi and said “He does not deserve the same respect and honor as others present hereâ€.
Hanuman Ji agreed and obeyed Maha Rishi Narad. RajRishi Vishwamitra was very upset by seeing this rudeness of Hanuman Ji. As he was trying to compose himself DevRishi appeared before him and said, “Did you notice the arrogance of Hanuman? He know that you have done mare favor for his lord Shri Ram by giving him the knowledge. It was because of you he could marry Devi Sita, still Hanuman ignored you
and paid obeisance to all other saints and sages. He has insulted you intentionallyâ€. Provoked by DevRishi Narad, Rishi Vishwamitra became very angry. He went to King Rama and said , “your devotee Hanuman has insulted me publically, so he should get the death penalty before sunset tomorrow for his arrogance. Rishi Vishwamitra was Shri Ram’s Guru and Ram could not disobey his Guru at any cost, so he had to punish Hanuman Ji for his disrespect shown to the Guru.Shri Ram was dumb-founded for a moment because Hanuman was his most beloved devotee. The news of the death penalty of Hanuman by Shri Ram became the talk of the town and it spread like a wild fire. Hanuman Ji was very sad too. He repented for his misdeed and went to DevRishi Narad and request him to protect him from Rishi Vishwamitra’s wrath and from the arrows of Shri Ram. I did that because of your suggestion (he said). DevRishi Narad replied very calmly. “Don’t worry Hanumanâ€. Don’t be dismayed only do what you has been advise to do. Get up early in the morning and take a bath in the Saryu River. Then stand on the banks of the river and start chanting Shri Ram Jai Ram Jai Jai Ram. I will guarantee you, that nothing will happen to you. The next day Hanuman Ji did as DevRishi Narad told him. People from all over the kingdom gathered there to see the harvest test of Hanuman’s Devotion and Shri Ram’s strict values and rules (Maryada Purushottam). Then Shri Ram Ji came and stood at a distance from Hanuman’s Ji and started looking at him with kindness, but he is called Maryada Purushottam so against his will he started shooting arrows at Hanuman who was fully engrossed in chanting his name Jai Ram Shri Ram Jai Jai Ram.
None of his arrows could touch Hanuman Ji. Shri Ram was exhausted but Hanuman Ji was only looking at his Lord with total surrender, love and devotion. Shri Ram used the most powerful weapons he had never used before but nothing could not harm Hanuman Ji. Then Shri Ram aimed his Brahmastra on him. Hanuman Ji kept chanting Shri Ram Mantra and did not move at all. The crowd of on-lookers was under a spell. They were calling out loudly victory to Shri Ram Bhakta Hanuman repeatedly. When DevRishi Narad notice the culminating Brahmastra he went to Rishi Vishwamitra and requested him to stop the unique battle. He said oh great sage, Hanuman Ji was very ignorant about your grace but does that make a difference in your greatness in anyway?. However this was a little drama that I directed to show the significance of “Ram Naamâ€. Do you agree now that Naam is more powerful than Shri Ram Himself. Vishwamitra was convinced and ordered Shri Ram to stop. Hanuman Ji came and prostrated himself on the feet of Shri Ram. He expressed his gratitude and apologized from Maharishi Vishwamitra. RajRishi not only forgave him but blessed him too, that his devotion towards Ram will be the loftiest example in time to come. “So the Greatness of Ram Naam was establishedâ€.    [ Source ]
Patriot: I hope this has helped answer your question…I wanted to write more but am seriously short of time…This took over three days to draft and put in a final shape (I am still not fluent in these things) but I feel very satisfied having attempted this.
Comments, thoughts welcome as always (You don’t have to agree with me!)…although I may not be able to respond quickly (I’m travelling for the next two weeks).
As Kaffir noted in an earlier comment, there is a strong tradition of Vaad-Vivaad and Shastraarth in Hindu belief system but I should add (as pointed out to me by a wise person) that there are two important presumptions implicit in this tradition: a] there is agreement on the basic “dharma” and b] there is willingness to concede a point as the intention is not to “win” but to know the truth.
Thank you all.
Related Posts:
“Who is this Ram?†– Will Thiru Karunanidhi look at this evidence?
The search for a historical “Ramaâ€
On Marayada Purushottam, Sita Mata, Agni Pariksha and Vaali Vadh
In my view, it is made absolutely clear in the very first sarga of the Ramayanam as to why Rama is Maryada Purushottam. Valmiki asks Maharshi Narada if he can find one person alive at that time who possessed 16 properties.
http://www.valmikiramayan.net/bala/sarga1/bala_1_frame.htm
The sixteen properties are (i am copy-pasting from the source mentioned above for quick ref)
1) kaH nu asmin sa.mpratam loke guNavaan kaH ca viiryavaan |
dharmaj~naH ca kR^itaj~naH ca satya vaakyo dhR^iDha vrataH || 1-1-2
meaning: Who really is that person in this present world, who is principled and also a potential one, a conscientious one, a redeemer, and also a truth-teller and self-determined in his deed
2) caaritreNa ca ko yuk{}taH sa.rva bhUteSu ko hitaH |
vidvaan kaH kaH samarthaH ca kaH ca eka priya darshanaH
meaning: Who is he conduct-wise blent with good-conduct… who in respect of all beings is benign… who is adept and also the ablest one… also uniquely good to look to
3) aatmavaan ko jita krodho dyutimaan kaH anasuuyakaH |
kasya bibhyati devaaH ca jaata roSasya sa.myuge || 1-1-4
meaning: Who is that courageous one, who controlled his ire, who is brilliant, non-jealous and even whom do the gods fear, when provoked to war
4) etat icChaami aham shrotum param kautuuhalam hi me |
maharSe tvam samartho.asi j~naatum evam vidham naram || 1-1-5
menaing: All this I wish to listen from you, oh! Great Sage, as you are a mastermind to know this kind of man, and indeed my inquisitiveness is immense…” Thus Valmiki enquired with Narada
These sixteen properties could be summarized as
1) principled
2) potential
3) a conscientious one
4) a redeemer
5) a truth-teller (satya vakya paripalakudu)
6) self-determined in his deed
7) blent with good-conduct
8) respect of all beings is benign
9) adept
10) ablest one
11) uniquely good looking
12) courageous
13) controls his ire
14) brilliant
15) non-jealous
16) even whom do the gods fear, when provoked to war
in telugu, we refer to Rama affectionately as “padaharu gunala ramudu” meaning “Rama of sixteen properties”.
In no other person you would find these sixteen properties together. For example, if a person is satyavan, he need to dharmavat.
Valmiki posed the question to see if any man, who is his contemporary, possesses all the properties at the same time!!! He didnt some historical figure. No. He asked for a contemporary example.
In my view, every child should be taught about these 16 properties by their parents (ignore the religion here)!!! These properties make a man who lives in harmony with the world.
Now people like “patriot” ask how do your prove that Rama possessed all these properties? Well Rama is not a chemical substance so one can conduct some litmus tests or acid tests to put “Tested, OK” stamp!!! My answer is simple. Read the Ramayana!!! Today there are so many translations available on internet. You dont even need to understand Samskrt!!! There are umpteen number of instances where valmiki describes Rama and without mentioning the properties proves that Rama did possess all these properties!!! Please do go through the Ramayana before you really start questioning Rama’s character!!!
I totally disagree with your point No.4. You cannot compare Lord Rama with others. Rama never asked others to follow him. He set an example of his life. It is upto others to follow his path or reject it. There was or rather I would say there never is any compulsion. He never said anything against believers of any particular God or anything like that. Please, if you want to make any comparison, do it with proper examples of similarities. Here there are more dissimilarities than similarities. How can you compare the incomparable.
Rama is considered in the same boat as one who claimed to be the only son of god and condemned everyone who didn’t believe in him to going to eternal hell and another who married a nine year old child. Please. Let us stop needing to earn a place for Indian religious figures by comparing them to those of other religions who are vastly inferior. We need to get over our inferiority complex and tell it like it is. These is nothing in Christianity or Islam that matches the profundity of the Vedantic philosophy and their religious figures have never inspired that kind of passionate creative love that exists within all the Indian classical arts.
I admire the interplay of agreements and disagreements. In any case you are epitomizing an important aspect of Indian Philosophy.
Ideal man(Aadarsh Purush)- Lord Rama. Very true!
Control over five vices; anger, greed, dishonesty, lie and desire will lead to an ideal life.
If followed in present time; police and judge will catch flies on their desk instead of cases and culprits.
I agree completely with Harapriya.
I too agree! @K Haripriya,
Very bold and fearless statement.
Jai Hind!
Vivek, KSV, Harpriya, Kartikey, Indian and Nam: Thanks for your comemnts/links…I have had a very long day today and it is past midnight…so will respond tomorrow…
Thanks.
@ Vivek: Thanks…I must look up that link..
***
@ KSV and Harpriya: I think you both mis-understood me…Where is the comparison? I wrote:
“He of course, shares this “greatness of thought†with other saints and venerated men…”
That said, I agree with your points that there is a lot of difference in the behavior and actions of Shri Ramchandra, Jesus Christ and Prophet Mohammed…
I don’t think one can really compare…
As for the differences between Christianity, Islam and Hinduism, welll…to “steal” KSV’s phrase: “How can you compare the incomparable?”
***
Thanks for the “five desires” comment Indian.
***
Happy “Ram Navami” to all of you. Jai Shri Ram.
Rama as Maryada Purushottam is a belief that lot of people hold in this country.
However, it is not the stated policy of our state.
Nobody is forcibly made to accept such a thought.
It is not the stated policy of ancient indian scriptures as well, some of which even pre-dates Rama.
Even a staunch practioner of ancient indian culture is not required to accept Rama as Maryada Purushottam.
In fact ancient indian culture does not lay down any pre-conditions that you have to accept this God or this Avatar as your guide.
What ancient indian scriptures do is offer guidance to a person who is interested in spiritual progress.
People can choose a particular avatar as a guide, to internalise qualities attributed to that particular avatar.
The ancient indian spiritual philosophy offers different paths, depending on the temperament of the person, for spiritual progress.
You have Bhakti marga, path of devotion. Jnana marga, path of spiritual knowledge, Yoga, physical processes that aid in spiritual progress, and so on, each wide enough to accommodate diverse practitioners and their individual inclinations.
This being so, a question such as why Rama is called Maryada Purushottam arises on two occasions-
1. When the questioner wants to genuinely understand Rama and his qualities.
2. When the questioner has convinced himself of a different conclusion and is of the view that those who hold such views are ignorant, superstitious, irrational and not modern and so the question to establish that view.
In the former case the questioner can satisfy his doubts by studying the Ramayana and arriving at a conclusion one way or other, or he can approach a learned person, preferably a realised person and seek his /her help.
In the second case, there is only one solution.
The questioner should allow, as befitting a secular democracy such as ours, those who hold differing personal views to continue holding those differing views so long as those views are in no way preventing the questioner himself from living his life the way he feels.
Rama himself never declared that he is the best among men.
He did not ask anyone to call him such.
So it is entirely upto each individual to consider him in whatever form he wants to.
Boyle, who directed Slumdog may hold similar views to that of the central character of the movie, that Rama is the root cause of many killings, probably that is why he directed such a movie. So would many self styled secularists and marxists.
But neither view, of those who consider him Maryada Purushottam nor of those who consider him the cause of many deaths has any effect on what Rama was, or as he was envisaged by Valmiki.
Both views have relevance only to those who holds the view.
Those who see him as Maryada Purushottam imbibes those qualities as they cherish them.
Those who see him otherwise imbibes those particular qualities as they think about them.
In the story of Hanuman and Ram naam, while the name and its pronounciation itself has a lot of powers, it was also the devotion with which Hanuman called Ram’s name that really protected him.
Hanuman saw certain particular qualities in Rama that he internalised through devotion and those qualities invoked by Hanuman shielded him.
This is the reason why Rama is called Maryada Purushottam.
More than anything else, it offers, to many people, a direction to model their lives on. That is the essence of Rama and the Ram naam.
That is also the essence of the scriptures, such as Vedas.
To view them as historical narratives or as mythological stories or as some others consider, ravings of some person under the influence of intoxicating drink called ‘soma’ is meaningless.
They are, like everything about ancient indian culture, Guides on the path to spiritual development.
They can not be dissected from the standpoint of so-called rationalism or scientific enquiry.
To understand them one has to travel the path they guide him on.
In ancient india rationalism and scientific temper was also a path to spiritual progress. That is why ancient indians had developed superior science and diverse philosophies alike.
Unlike this indian viewpoint of unity, the westerner seeks to dissect everything that he comes across.
His scientific temper is therefore divorced from spiritual path. His rationalism is devoid of spiritual goals.
That is why a person looking at ancient indian culture from western stand point will never comprehend what it is all about.
That is why many of our countrymen who are brought up on a western education system, a leftover of the british education system, is unable to understand or respect ancient indian culture.
—
Would be better if so called rationalists and atheists allow others of this country the freedom given in our constitution of holding personal views which need not conform to these peoples’.
While ancient indian culture gives that freedom to each individual and accepted people of diverse faith such as Jews and Zorashtrians into India, it is the modern day practitioners of secularism and rationality, those who reject the ancient indian culture, that are seen to display intolerance and fanaticism.
Incognito: You hit the nail on the head, the head of the so called secular fundamentalist fanatics and pseudo-athiests (their atheism is limited to hindus and hinduism only). These are the most intolerant of the lot. Any other creed pales into insignificance compared to these fanatic seculars atheists who shouts like men possessed when they hear the word hindu.
Very well said! Incognito
‘Happy Ram Navami’ to everyone
Three Hundred Ramayana Article- Case Vice Chancellor Delhi University summoned by Dera Bassi Court.
Buzz up! ShareThisMar 8 2009 | Views 179 | Comments (1)
Many Ramayanas – Three Hundred Ramayanas; Five Examples and Three Thoughts on Translation†by A.K. Ramanujan.
In Three Hundred Ramayana, Legal Case against V.C. Delhi University has been summoned to face trial for the alleged commission of an offense punishable under Section 153_A, 295_A. and 298 of IPC, for 22.4.2009. This is an order against the complaint filed by Anil Bali in Dera Bassi Court on 13.6.2008, in the SUB DIVISIONAL JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, DERA BASSI.
The Case was filed through Advocates Sh. Mukesh Gandhi, Sh. Anmol Singh and Miss Indu Bali.
The complainant was aggrieved and his conscience is hurt after going through the malicious, fictitious, mutilated comments added by altering the original contents of the religious book. It contains abusive and libelous language used for Divine Hindu deities. It contains false stories quoted under one pretext or oral and other without any authenticity. That it is a matter of concern that popular beliefs and prevailing traditions of Hindu Culture are projected in distorted manner. An attempt is made to create differences in communities.
I am giving below the points which are objectionable in the above Article. All those who respect the sentiments of others are requested to come forward to associate and help in all possible ways in this case with possitive feelings.
The Case has been filed through Advocates Sh. Mukesh Gandhi, Sh. Anmol Singh and Miss Indu Bali.
I am a concerned citizen and religious person with respect for all religions and have read Indian and many other original literatures analytically and scientifically from my childhood. I have interest in research papers, comparative research works with criticism and articles on religious subjects by scholars. I came across a compiled Book “Culture in India: Ancient†being taught in B.A. (Hons.) 2nd year course by the University of Delhi containing objectionable article “Three Hundred Ramayanas: Five Examples and Three Thoughts on Translation†by A.K. Ramanujan. On further enquiry he found this is a part of controversial book MANY RAMAYANA-the diversity of narration traditions in South Asia (pp 22-49) which is published at Berkeley, University of California Press, USA and is available on Web-Site and have got a copy from there also.
I am deeply aggrieved and my conscience is hurt after going through the malicious, fictitious, mutilated contents added by altering the original contents of the religious books in the said article “Three Hundred Ramayanas: Five Examples and Three Thoughts on Translationâ€. The University of Delhi has mislead the public that this article is taken from “The Collected Essays of A.K. Ramanujan†published by Oxford University Press, New Delhi. Where as the approval for this article is given from MANY RAMAYANA-the diversity of a narration traditions in South Asia(N. Delhi pp 22-49).
1) That this article contains abusive and libelous language used for Divine Hindu Deities by addressing Shri Hanuman as ‘Henchman’, ‘Tiny Monkey’ (page 22), Rishi Vishwamitra as ‘Man of Fire’ and ‘Hot-Headed Man’ (page 23, 25), ‘Unfaithful’ for Sita (page 44), termed Ramayana Stories as ‘Gasp’ (page 24) and said Rama with ‘Jealous Rage’ etc. This articles is very offending and the language used is disrespectful.
2) I felt humiliated and perturbed to read filthy comments made by quoting Santal Tribes in the article. I have checked various details in the literature of Santals and have found nothing of this kind with them. If at all this is found in any of their literature, it will be highly objectionable and will attract the penal action. The article is completely unauthentic, malice and furts the feelings of other persons. It is said in the article that; “The Santal, a tribe known for their extensive oral traditions, even conceive Sita as UNFAITHFUL- to the sock and horror of ANY HINDU bred on Valmiki and Kampan, she is seduced by both Ravana and by Laxamanaâ€. The Santals have no such feelings and I have not found anywhere in their litrature. When we contacted them they were rather surprised to hear such type of feelings being mentioned on their behalf.
Visit anilbali49.sulekha.com
for further details
Indu: What is the update on this?
Devotees of Bhagwan Sri Ram need not be worried, bothered or disturbed at all by any adverse comments made by those who are of low intellect. Sri Ram’s name is much more powerful than all the conspiracies and efforts put together against Hindu sensitivity. Jai Sri Ram!
I think the entire debate is trying to make a mixture of multiple perspectives from which one looks at Ramayana and Ram as a person. We must seprate these perspectives analyse separately
Ram as a historical personality
There is no definite timeline which is provided by any historian or archeologist, but multiple estimates put this event at 1500 BC and that make it an event 3500 years old. Now let us look at this personality in the background of the society 3500 years old and then we can imagine how much ahead this person was from his time to think about a unified country, think about a society based on values of duties, responsibilities and sacrifice. As a king, the person thought about the subjects and the views of subjects and even decided to quit his wife becuase views of his citizens ( I am not debating about right or wrong). As a king he decided to have single conjugal partner in spite of the fact that the society did support multiple marriage. His own father married three times. His views on pan Indian alliance to expand and all inclusive expansion without destroying anyone was a role model of the time. That is why he set the kingdom of dharma and defined what a raj dharma was supposed to be. Now the Agni Pariksha was something which was the rule of the day and Ram as a humab being even being far ahead of his time in his thinking could not resist this.
Ram as a religious leader
Ram never propounded any religion nor he ever asked people to follow him. Even Hanuman, Sugreev and Bibhishan were his friend, ally and follower, but no one went ahead bringing people under his thought and belief system.
Ram as a God
Ram as a God had descended on the Earth to perform certain duties and they were pre-destined. Sita had her part and role to play and she had to play that role. Ram was bound by the destiny to send Sita to vanvas. Agni Pariksha was the ritual of the time and as a human incarnation of God he had to follow the traditions.
India does not pray Ram becuase he was right on many occassion and wrong some times. It has become a matter of faith. Ram is an issue of faith. We as Hindus do not follow our religion as the semite religions do – follow the acts without any question. We keep our faith and follow the acts based on our intelligence and consciousness; but, the underlying faith on the super consciousness in the form for example Ram; does not fade. We do not interpret our religion based on what Ram did, when, why and where the act were done. We rather take the essense of the act and apply the underlying principles in our lives. Respect to our parents is something a matter of principle. That does not mean that One leaves the house the moment father asks him or her. A Hindu, under the religion has the right to debate and logically discuss it with the father and take a decision which respects the sentiments and preserves the emotions which binds the family.
Something which is a matter of faith can not be debated at the activity level. Ram even asked Lakshman to go and get knowledge from Ravana – that never means he praised Ravana. All through my childhood this episode has been cited by my elders to tell me that one should shun ego to acquire knowledge and one shoudl acquire knowledge from where ever and whoever one can.
Let us understand Ramayana as our faith and apply its principles with our rational mind.
Came across this beautiful story on Bhagwaan Shri RamChandra, courtesy Sh Joshi: The Wanderer Prince
Concluding part of an article by Swarna Rajagopalan in a recent edition of “Pragati”:
What would a “Ramarajya†administration deliver? A good quality of life, where people live in good health, enjoy a good livelihood and dignity, appears to be the first element of good governance by Ramarajya standards. Good governance would appear to assure habits of production and consumption that do not interfere with nature and its cycles. In a well-governed state, citizens travel, observe, discuss and then endorse or reject their government; at any rate, informed citizenship is an element of good governance, Ramarajya style. The administration is accountable and responsive. Peace, we infer, prevails within and without. But most important, good governance is predicated on the personal integrity and conscience of the ruler; Ramarajya depends on “maryada purushottamaâ€, the model human being. For the rest of us, this mythical political ideal offers a mirror and a yardstick to our times.
From my facebook profile, a thought-provoking discussion:
***
Shashi Joshi: Am traveling, but try this post to get another vital angle which people miss http://blog.practicalsanskrit.com/2012/03/greatness-of-rama-ideal-man.html
…
Vinay Thakur: very good article but again one sided justification to prove whatever Ram did was right and justified as per that situation….I believe these scriptures are not to show you black and white picture of like (where one is all good side and other is all bad) but to give complete picture of life and decide ourselves what we want to do….
Shashi Joshi: Vinay, why does it seem one sided? Why is self flogging a prerequisite to being heard? Why do we assume that we know better than the learned valmiki who was not writing to win a booker prize or a harry potter empire? When he did not choose to malign rama s name why are we hell bent on proving logically that something must be wrong in the story? No one cast such blames and fault before the british started telling us what we were!
Vinay Thakur: I didnt say that I know better than Valmiki and also never criticized Ram (who am I to criticize him)…the problem is whenever one tries to put his/her point of view regarding some incident in story (I am not even questioning the character of Ram here) or say that here things should have been done little differently or there is some other perspective of this action…people get angry/emotional and say whatever is written is 100% right, either take it all or leave it, almost all religions and holy books ore victim of this…I believe our generation is the most advanced generation lived on this planet till now (evolution) thats why we analyze things little differently than previous generations…all books are written with certain aim or intention no exceptions in this…there is nothing wrong in story..its just people dont want to learn all lessons…simple..as I said its not black and white…some are only pointing towards white, some are only towards black…I am happy to look at grey also and it doesnt bother me…for me Ramayan is important whether Ram is maryada purush or not doesnt matter…
http://selfrealization-vinay.blogspot.com/ your comments are welcome
Shashi Joshi: vinay, i was NOT addressing you personally, but this trait is seen among many ‘educated’ people. we think that analysis is a new discovery of modern humans. and yes, i agree that you will also find many who blindly uphold everything indian. so, either we take words at face value, or the faith in a person’s intentions. i am not that famous that you would take my words for granted, but vAlmIki ji surely is 🙂
why would a society care to remember such a long epic, and pray and worship rAma, if there was such a major blemish on him? his treatment of all other women seems to be unblemished, right? the only doubt is regarding the agni-parIkShA episode.
my point, before people (any person) confidently cast a strong doubt on the episode’s real meaning and start treating rAma as a mere mortal, ordinary as any other, they should think twice, how much they themselves ever stood up for anything, even if it meant losing your job, your empire, your wife, your everything.
the debate can be endless, as to what is right and what is wrong. on every side of an issue, you will find people who have vested interest. so how can you decide?
the upaniShads give a way out here as well, only if you believe in them. if you believe in a Harvard prof more than the upaniShad, then of course no need to say or listen anything.
The upaniShad says – when you are in doubt of what is satya and what is dharma, then in that place, those who are elderly, wise and respected, those who are engaged (in activity) and disengaged (not attached), who speak sweet and with no self interest, those people, what they say is truth and what they do is dharma. (shikShA valli)
Here dharma should be understood as values. what values should one have? is it okay to eat cows (in US) but not okay to eat dogs? which value is right? how do you decide? is it okay for mothers to not breastfeed their babies in the initial ages. should blacks vote? should women vote? why did the values change over time?
who decides what is the right value to have? the one that is engaged, disengaged, wise, respected, sweet spoken with no agenda (self interest) – that is whom you should listen and emulate.
anyway, these are minor things. no one can change anyone else’s viewpoint.
i was just sharing an other viewpoint since shantanu seemed interested in the topic.
http://www.facebook.com/practicalsanskrit
***
Thanks a lot Shahsi for your elaborate comment. I like to learn new things and whenever I ask question normally its to get some information, clear doubts or to know other persons point of view on that issue. I also agree that debate can be endless but if one can share useful information via those debates then it can be really useful thats what I try to take from debates. I like to read Shantanu’s blog and comments, discussions on them for the same reason.
You have mentioned quite a few points in your comment. Analysis is not by any means discovery of modern human beings, we humans are doing it since we started our journey on this planet. Debated, analysis, research is going on for ages its not recent phenomena. We divided for our convenience science and religion for me they are one and same.
There is difference between worshiping, praying Ram and understanding him and following him, you must be lucky to be born in educated surroundings where you may not have seen how society which worships Ram, does ‘akhand Ramayan path’ every six months, treat women like animals. I saw these things with my own eyes and that made me wonder, do these people really worship Ram? do they even understand him? The point here is there is difference between worshiping the character and following its teachings. And believe me the people about whom I am talking are not villainous characters they are my elders, I love them respect them and learned so many good things from them. This taught me that there is nothing totally sacred or totally good or totally bad in this world.
If I believe Harvard professor if he is saying something sensible then how come I get disqualified to read Upanishad or any other scripture. I want to take good things from both. I believe everyone (including all books) in this world have ability to teach us something, provided we want to learn. I learned many things from my kids.
I learned a lot from elderly, wise and respected but with due respect I also want to mention that many times I found their views somewhat biased and one sided. Noe you may say that means I really never met any wise person, but believe me I tried my best, went wherever I can (within my limits) to listen these people, read their books (thanks to internet now most of the things are available online). Please read the book Bhagvad Gita as it is, which was recently in news as one court in Russia was considering it to ban it, this translation of Gita is very one sided and it preaches many good things but at the same time says many harsh things about non-believers.
Morality is personal perspective, if its allowed by law one can eat whatever meat is available in food market, for me its not different whether its cow, chicken, sheep or anything else. In US generally law takes precedence over personal morality (drinking is allowed after 21, whether drinking or smoking is moral or not its personal decision). I will write on my blog about Ashtavakta Gita very interesting text I came across recently, amazing piece of literature, comparable to Vedas or Bhagvad Gita but largely ignored.
Thanks for your insightful comments, they are very helpful to me. We many not be able to change anybody’s views but definitely can broaden them and I think if we can do that its enough. Thanks Shantanu to initiating many thoughtful discussions like this.
A brief excerpt from In defence of Sri Ram by Vijayendra Mohanty,
…Ram or Radha’s presence in modern Indian debates in modern India is not a sign of the fact that they are losing importance. It is quite the opposite. That odd mentions of Ram and Radha can stir passions up thousands of years after their stories were first told only indicates that they remain relevant as ideals even in these times. Whether people believe in what these cultural icons stood for doesn’t matter. Whether people believe these are worthy icons doesn’t matter either. Respect and understanding cannot be forced, they have to be arrived at through personal effort.
…
Sri Ram always finds himself in the unenviable position of having to represent this expansive and diverse set of traditions. Anyone with a strong and slightly offensive view about Hindu traditions starts off by making Sri Ram his target and calling him names ranging from ‘misogynist’ to ‘casteist’ to ‘cowardly’ to ‘war-monger’.
..
Take for example, the matter of Ram being a bad husband. Never mind his love for Sita that Valmiki wrote entire chapters about. Never mind the very human tears he shed when his wife was taken from him. Never mind the epic war he fought to bring her back. Those intent upon proving he was a bad husband have what they need in Sita’s exile from Ayodhya.
But here’s a funny twist. If Ram had disregarded the washerman’s comment and allowed Sita to remain in Ayodhya, you can be sure that an enthusiastic army of modern Indian ‘scholars’ and ‘historians’ would be labelling him a casteist king right now — one who had no respect for the opinions of a washerman because he belonged to a so-called lower caste. But come to think of it, Ram never gets any credit for being a king who, at the suggestion of even a washerman, decided to exile his beloved queen. We could use leaders like that today — people of power with that much respect for public opinion. But we don’t, and nobody seems to care that there is an example to be followed in Ram’s actions here.
I think it was mythologist Devdutt Patnaik who pointed out some time ago that the entire life of Ram may be seen as a manifestation of the idea of duty. When Ram obeyed his father’s wishes and went into exile, he was doing his duty as a son. When he fought for Sita, he was doing his duty as a husband. And when he exiled his wife from his kingdom, he was doing his duty as a king. At every key point of his life, all Ram was doing was what he ought to have done at that particular point of time in accordance with the highest principles of his dharma.
…
One thing I have always liked about the story of Ram (in its original Valmiki version) is that while elaborate tributes are paid to him for being an avatar of Vishnu, his humanity is still emphasised. In all of Hindu itihas (some call it mythology), even the highest of gods do not escape the tests that come with being human. There is something about the all-too-human frailty of Hindu gods that makes them so much more respectable and worthy of emulation.
From The Perfect Husband:
..
As the pandit wrapped up, the guests got into their stride. It was time for the baithak. The famous poet, who was the groom’s uncle, had composed a poem for the occasion. After the metaphorical candle had been passed around a few times, he took centre stage. The poem was on marriage. On the perfect marriage. He spoke of Ram and Sita. Of their marriage that began young. Of their devotion to each other. Of their commitment to their joint cause – the maryaada. Of the sacrifices and suffering in the cause of what was right and just. And their unshakeable loyalty to the glory of Ram.
…A subtle huddle ensued, pen and mind were applied. The words flowed.
They composed a poem right there. And then recited it – it was the story of Shiva and Shakti.
Of how Shiva was the desired one, of how Shakti in her various forms sought her salvation. Her purpose and her path were through Shiva. And of how he was incomplete without her. Of their perfect understanding. Of empowerment. Of how stories strengthened their bond. Of how the only time things got messed up for them was when families intervened. Of how the perfect wife and perfect husband were a team. Regardless of appearances and extreme moments. Of investing in continuity.
As the poems were exchanged through the night, a seven year old stayed awake.
Some more thoughts on this, courtesy Rajarshi:
When Rama took the criticism of the washerman seriously, he was setting a stellar example of how a true leader must conduct his public life.
How many genuine leaders of men can do that today? As a king, it was Rama’s Rajdharma to work on the criticism of even a simple citizen.
For those who live a public life must not only be incorruptible internally but also seen to be incorruptible. Rama did just that.
Rama did the most impossible act of balancing his various dharmas in life, of a son, of a husband, of a mighty king, of a slayer of demons.
Any lesser man would have buckled under the pressure of so many conflicting dharmas. N#ot Rama. That is why he is the MaryadaPurushottama.
And finally, below, some nuggets oft forgotten in discussions(again, courtesy Rajarshi):
+ Not once in the course of debate, as Jabali kept berating Rama’s views, did Rama the mighty pick up his sword and behead Jabali.
+ When Ravana lay dying Rama asked Lakshman to go and learn certain esoteric vidyas from Ravana which only Ravana had the knowledge of.
+ Lakshmana refused so Rama went and spoke to the dying Ravana. Can an egoistic man seek knowledge even from an enemy? No. But Rama, yes.
Shantanu, 3 points.
1. Do portions of your #4 smack of good intentions rather than being data-driven statements?
>>Through his deeds and actions, he exemplified the belief that all men are equal…He of course, shares this “greatness of thought†with other saints and venerated men including Jesus Christ , Gautam Buddha and Prophet Muhammad.
Here’s a CNN article on religious history that contradicts your claim on “equality of men” with respect to two of the three examples you quote in comparison. This article is not a mere opinion piece, but a claim based on facts uncovered by scholarly research.
http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2012/03/29/how-religion-has-been-used-to-promote-slavery/
[excerpts]
Which revered religious figure – Moses, Jesus, or the Prophet Mohammad – spoke out boldly and unambiguously against slavery?
Answer: None of them.
One of these men owned slaves, another created laws to regulate – but not ban – slavery. The third’s chief spokesman even ordered slaves to obey their masters, religious scholars say….
2. Alternatives to Ram:
Intellectuals can dissect Rama v/s Sita under a microscope until kingdom come, but given just the above historical FACT alone, i’d much rather be a free person and go with a Rama rather than the alternatives. Actually, I’d happy with the Buddha too, but Rama’s Kshatra spirit to resist tyranny is more appealing compared to self-immolating into Shunya.
Touche! Thanks for pointing out…
Also read: Sexism in the Ramayana
Interesting and somewhat relevant excerpt from Lord Ram imam of Muslims too, BJP tells EC, May 10, 2014, by Arshad Afzal Khan:
FAIZABAD: The famous couplet by the great Urdu poet Allama Iqbal, “Hai Ram ke wajood pe Hindustan ko naaz, ahle nazar samajhte hain unko Imam-e-Hind (India is proud of Ram’s being and people of wisdom consider him the leader of India)”, have put the Faizabad district administration in a fix.
In its reply to a show-cause notice on using Lord Ram’s picture as background on the stage from where Narendra Modi addressed a rally in Faizabad, the BJP has stated that the deity is not related to any religion or caste but a historical and cultural figure. It said Ram, Sita and Lakshman were mentioned in the original Indian constitution.
…
The party also said …In many Muslim countries, including Indonesia and Malaysia, Ram Leelas are performed with much fervour, the reply further said.
The BJP has tried to establish that Lord Ram, if he is considered a Hindu God, should also be considered imam of India’s Muslims.