Self development through Ramayana

While doing the parayanam of Ramayana, my mind went into deep thoughts on the context behind a statement that Lakshmana made.
Lakshmanan was so angry at dasharata, he says भ्राता भर्ता च बन्धुः च पिता च मम राघवः, ie  rama is my brother and lord, and he is my bandhu, and he is my father. I understand the repetition of 'च' as an effort to insist on the additional qualities. He could not have been so dedicated to his brother Rama if Rama was just a brother, a bhrata. Lakshmana did not surrender to his elder brother alone but to his all encompassing lord , ie bharta. Here Lakshmana is expanding the scope of an elder brother beyond being a good brother. When an elder brother shows the characteristics of a brother, a leader, a father and a valuable relative, it is easier for a brother like Lakshmana to perform saranagathi to his elder brother.

In many instances, we come across people who say you cannot be a Rama in this world because you don't have brothers like Lakshmana or wife like Sita. Similarly, we also see people saying we cannot be like Sita because husbands are not like Rama.

What we may understand from Ramayana itself is, no one can make his brother a Rama or Lakshmana by virtue of them being Rama or Lakshmana. Both of them should make themselves Rama and Lakshmana through self introspection and progress on dharmic development. Because even in case of Rama, Lakshmana's saranagati is unmatched. Bharatashatrugnas could not match Lakshmanas devotion even though they were also highly devoted to Rama. Ramalakshmanas alone is considered a benchmark for perfect brotherhood and not, for example, ramashatrugnas. Similarly, though many women were dharmapatnis, they did not necessarily get husbands with the virtues of Rama. Mandothari got Ravana as husband though she was perfect on her own. Hence, this applies to all relations like, a wife and a husband, a father and a child and so on.

Ramayana also shows that individual development is possible without dependency on the other half of the pair. From Lakshmana's perspective, he developed himself as the foremost devotee of Rama, though Rama was equally a good brother to all his younger brothers. From Rama's perspective, he demonstrated the qualities of a good elder brother to all his younger brothers irrespective of the maturity of their saranagathi towards him.

In essence, Ramayana shows that a good elder brother will guide others on righteous path, will practice righteousness and be a role model for his younger brothers, will show the dharmic path for development of his brothers. If one does this, he can be a Rama. A good younger brother will listen and act as per the righteous ways as guided by his elder brother, will be eager to follow the path of dharma, will follow the dharmic ways of his elder brother. If one does this, he can be a Lakshmana.

By applying the same dharmic svadharma principle to a pati patni relationship, we can understand that one needs be a good husband guiding the family in dharmic way respecting his wife and satisfying her wishes, even if he doesn't have a perfect dharmapatni like Sita. Udaiyavar Sri Ramanuja was like that, King Dasharatha was like that. Dasharata did everything he could to his wife Kaikayi as long as it was in line with dharma. When he had to satisfy her adharmic selfish wish, he continued to explain her many sessions with various dharmic reasoning until he died. He never ceased to be a bad husband who did not try to guide a wife in righteous path or who could not satisfy her wishes. Similarly, one needs to be a dharmapatni who is eager for leading a dharmic family life, who is devoted to the husband and supportive of his dharmic commitments, with control on selfish indulgence, even if the husband is not a purushottaman like Rama. When husband goes in adharmic ways, one needs to still be devoted to him while explaining the dharmic path. Like Dasaratha, Mandothari also explains her husband about his adharmic ways until he dies. In a similar but slightly deviated context, Kumudavalli, who was the wife of Tirumangai Azhwar, was a dharmapatni who succeeded in changing a laukika to a vaishnava husband.

Ramayana, being a great source of dharmic guidance for this world, helps us understand that there is absolutely no excuse to say that I will not try to be like Rama as I do not have a Lakshmana-like brother, or I will not be a Lakshmana because my brother is not like Rama, or I will not try to be like Sita because I do not have a husband like Rama, or I will not try to be Rama because my wife is not like Sita. Let individuals self introspect and self develop righteousness, as demonstrated by the great characters of Ramayana.

Bhishma and Sisupala's tactics

Whenever you recite or hear bhishma stuti when it reaches हरिरिव हन्तुमिमं गतोत्तरीय: gurunathal starts flashing in the mind so brightly and his vyakyanam is played inside the mind like a recorded message. simple translation would be that krishna's uttariyam fell down when he rushed towards bhishma. Since every small action of hari has a purpose, this has its reasons too, as wonderfully put by none-other-than and who-else-can. 1. to show Bhishma how he looked when in fury, ignoring his uttariyam 2. leaving uttariyam behind so that horses know he is still there as sarathi 3. to give bhishma a darshan of his neela mega shyamala shariram 4. so that sri lakshmi thayar who resides in his vakshasthalam can bestow kataksham on Bhishma and so on. Bhisma eagerness to get attacked by krishna reminds me of the sishyal's eagerness to get 'kuttu' and 'adi' from gurunathal. No wonder raavana sisupalaadi villains were so persistent even though they knew their end. Sri Hariji says when sisupalan's mother srutakirthi asked krishna a varam she asked him not to kill sisupalan not just until he scolded 100 times but until he scolded 100 times at a stretch :-). The represents one of Bhagavan's guna called 'kshama' which is an embodiment of bhumadevi or bhumi piratti, as Swami Desikan says 'मुकुन्द चरणौ शरणं क्षमे त्वं' in Bhu Stuti. Sisupalan made sure he did this just to ensure he gets the darshan of chakrapani before his end. As gurunathal says while usually everyone pray to get darshan of chakrapani rupam, Sisupalan scolded for it and Bhishma fought for it.

Kapilopadesham

समो दमो भगस्चेति यत् संगात् यति संक्षयं - How true! Little later Bhagavan Kapila talks about maya into whose clutches fall even brahma rudrati devathas. Though it may look like he is personifying Maya on affection to women and men, by this above sloka he has already established that maya can be in the form of acquaintances, friends and family, even parents, husband, wife and children. It is amazing how he puts this view without offending any of these relations. This is clear by the way he lovingly explains this gnana to his own mother. I'm told that gnanandagiri swami used to quote from a prakarana grantham called drk drishya vevekam which says 'only the one that sees is real'; this will be quite evident when sri kapila completes his upadesham. I recommend everyone to read this wonderful script, introspect and be guided towards attaining wisdom and vairagyam.

Swadharma Nishta

Sri jayadeva emphasizes the evolution indirectly प्रलय पयोदि जले..केशवा धृत मीन शरीर, where post-pralaya evolution starts from living beings in water followed by reptiles and other so on reaching till human. By any evolutionary theories, the natual question is what is after human? Lord Shiva answers this elegantly as 'स्वधर्म निष्ट शथ जन्मभिः पुमान विरिन्चतां एति तत: परंहि मां', ie swadharma-nishta is the next highest form after being a human. A barbaric human tribe changes to a civilized community over a period of time, similarly the civilization gets matured and efficient as time passes. Swadharma nishtai is performing individual duty and dharma righteously, which is the highest form of efficiency for a civilization. For vedic civilization this has been the varnas and ashramas as refined over 1000s of years by our sashtras. Hence a civilization that is more individualistic without social structure is actually going backwards in evolution. Nevertheless, Lord Shiva says continuing swadharma nishtai for 100 births leads the evolution to Brahma lokha and then shivapraapti. The most touching and important part of this is when he says what happens after 'पदं यथाहं विभुदः कलायते'. What I found interesting here is, Lord Shiva says everyone including Brahma and I attain Vaikunta moksha by getting freedom from the materialistic guna of our realms. Realizing that the next question will be what will happen to the jeevaatmas who are not interested in materialistic guna, he immediately says 'अव्याकृथं भागवतोथ वैष्णवं', ie who devotes himself to bhagavan with druda chitha will automatically attain paramapadam along with brahma and I, skipping brahma and shivapadam.

Articulations on Vedic Period

As per Winternitz the Vedas belonged to a period stretching from 2500 B.C. to 7000 B.C., but most scholars today would certainly put the origin at a date later than 2500 B.C.

In a document of about 1300 B.C., the Mitannian king Mattiuaza is found invoking the gods Mitra, Varuna, and Indra of the Hindu pantheon; so the roots of the Vedas certainly stretch at least to the middle of the second millennium B.C.

Wheeler's Aryan invasion theory says India was invaded at 1700BC-1000BC and that was the vedic period. But this theory is known to have blatant and innumerable holes, though most english media and scholars continue to refer this in their work. For ex, Archeologists like Shaffer declare that there is no archeological evidence of such invasion as propogated by historians.("The Indo-Aryan Invasions: Cultural Myth and Archeological Reality,")

The entire theory of Max Mullar who dated vedic period as 1700BC is based on his assumption that human race could not have existed before 4000BC.

Satellite studies of saraswati mentioned in RigVeda indicate this river as completely dried up during 1750bc which puts a lower bound of 1750BC on vedic period.

Harappa (2500-1750 BC) civilisation used brahmi sripts and veda was their primary religion. For ex, the symbols of Harappa; One Horn bull (Eka Srunga Lord siva) and Harappa seal with an image of a medidating person on a lotus petal, represent vedic foundation. So it puts a lower bound of 2500 BC for vedic period.

As per some research groups that reasearch on musical notes, they put vedic period during 2500BC-2000BC.

Indus Valley Civilisation is dated around 3000BC, during which time Vedas and sanskrit were the primary base of living style. - From KEM, US.

As per the mathemetical knowledge displayed in Vedas, it could be understood even by a child that Vedas which defines not only decimals but even infinity, represents a highly uncomparable knowledge which cannot be acquired so easily. So the dates of 3000BC when vedic rituals were practised becomes a lower bound on the vedic period.

The astronomical evidences that were researched by Tilak and Jacobi note that the references made in one of the mandalas of Rig Veda put this around a period of 4000BC. This is available in orion. However, Tilak's observation is also at a high level and is only a counter-proof for shortening the vedic period and not a proof of exact vedic period. (Refer to Dr.Richard Thomson's Vedic Cosmography and Astronomy, really a brilliant research work).

As per silver institute reseaches, silver was found during 4000BC. There are no references of silver in Vedas, which indicates that Vedic period was much before the silver age.

No historians or scholars could see beyond 5000BC due to a short vision and hence the actual vedic period could not be understood by them.

Even with all these articulations, all the studies are only trying to understand the time of compilation of Vedas but NOT the origin of vedas. Vedas always existed and 'Vedoakilo Dharma Moolam'.

RadheKrishna`

Vedic Period - Its beyond any calculation by Western 'scholars'

--Based on Sri Krishna Premi Swamigal's "Veda Vignanam".

There are lot of articulations on Vedic Period by different people. However, none of those theories are proved till date. Since not proved till date, they are just staying as a mere thoughts and opinions. In other words, it is just an assumption that Veda might have appeared before certain number of years. Noone is able to substantiate the time period yet. Some western scholars opin that Vedic period could be during 2000 BC. It is noted that it has been just 7000 years since the inception of world, as per Christianity. It could be due to a short vision or narrow attitude to encapsulate all world cultures within that time period. Only the scientists who conclude based on facts can tell the true facts without discrimination. There are many ideas from different archeological experts around the world. Scientists who studied the changes in the temperature, reflectivity of materials and elements, say that the age of the world is around 24 Lakhs. Scientists whose work are based on the depth of the earth and rate of increase of salt in ocean, suggest that the earth's age is 10 Crore years. Radiology Scientists find that it has been 15,07,00,000 years since the formation of earth, by using radio carbon techniques.

We are following Manvantharas and Punyakalas as per our vedic calender. The current Manvanthara is Vaivasvatha. So far 1,95,58,85,500 years have passed in this Manvanthara and there are 2,16,00,00,000 years remaining. This is just the calculations for Vaivasvatha Manvanthara, not the entire formation of earth. Svayambuvam, svarosisham, uttamam, tamasam, raivatham and chakshusham are the manvantaras that have passed before the current one. Puranas say 71 chaturyugas make a Manvantara. As per them, during Swayambuva manvantara, Sri Varahamurthi recovered the earth from its celestial avalanche. So the Indian astrological experts have calculated that period as Swetha Varaha Kalpa.

With all these points, it is wrong to restrict entire earth withing a period of 7000 years.

The archeological scientists mention that earth slips from its axis at north pole once in 10000 years which cause a massive snowfall and ice formation. This is referred to as Himapadam in Veda. In his book 'Orayan', Bala Gangadara Thilak mentions that , since there are many references for such Himapadas in Veda, Veda could have been appeared before the first such Himapada. Similarly, many scholars like Babu Avinash Chandradas MA in his 'Rikvedhika India', Narayanabavan Rao in his 'Arya varthan thil aryasi janma Bhumi', Umesha Chandra Vidyaratna in his 'Men were Adi Janmabhumi', have estimated the vedic period in many ways. Bala Gangadara Thilak researched the time frame of Vedic period by studying the pace of Aswini Stars and opposed the theories of westerners.

RadheKrishna