Sai message for the day

[Guest guest]

Do you feel that during the time of the Ramayana, there were no

feuds? Sending Rama to the forest and crowning Bharata - are not

these plain and simple politics? Is there justice in the way Rama

killed Vali? Is not abducting Sita heinous? How then can the

Tretayuga be called flawless? Kindly forgive me for putting this

question out of my ignorance and for crossing my limits out of my

presumption. Favour us with your views on these matters.

 

Upholding dharma and satya, and demonstrating to the world a new

ideal was the purpose of the incarnation of Rama. All the events in

the Ramayana illustrate this truth. Consider the very first episode

of Rama's arrival in the forest accompanied by Sita and Lakshmana.

Remember that Bharata's objective in visiting Rama in the hermitage,

along with the citizens of Ayodhya, eminent sages and the four arms

of the militia is to welcome him back to Ayodhya. In this concourse

was Jabali. In the conversation with Rama, he said, " O Rama! Unable

to bear the prospect of separation from you, Dasaratha passed away.

Now you are no longer bound by the words of your father who had sent

you to the forest as Kaikeyi desired. Lord! You yourself should rule

Ayodhya. " Ignoring these words, Rama turned to Bharata and

remarked, " Bharata! By admitting Jabali and such others into the

court, our father's reputation was tarnished. You should not allow

him access. For me nothing is greater than honouring the word of

one's father. King Dasaratha, Dasaratha the husband of Kaikeyi, and

my father Dasaratha are not different from one another. You may think

that our father's death was brought about by separation from me. That

is not correct. The aged parents of Sravanakumar died lamenting the

death of their son felled by an arrow let loose by our father. The

curse of that aged couple led to his demise. My duty is my foremost

concern. " Jabali intervened with the words, " O Ramachandra! Your

dedication to Truth and Righteousness are well known all over the

world. I spoke these words only in an attempt to bring you back to

Ayodhya " . Thus, in the matter of Truth and Righteousness, Rama's

resolve is adamantine. Rama put these ideals into practice as a stern

discipline, and proclaimed them to mankind.

 

You referred to Rama's killing Vali. As he lay dying, Vali questioned

Rama, " O Rama! You shot an arrow at me from behind a tree? Is this

fair? " Rama replied, " You are a monkey and I am a King. The chase is

part of the nature of kings. They may hunt animals in the forest and

kill them. Therefore, how can I be faulted for directing an arrow

from behind a tree? " Vali questioned again, " Rama! You sought the

assistance of Sugriva, my younger brother. So, you decided on killing

me. Is this just? Had you approached me, I myself would have rendered

you all assistance, would not I? Compared with my strength, Ravana's

is no equal. Then, Sugriva's strength does not count. " Rama

replied, " O Vali! I understand Sugriva's distress. Like me who am

separated from Sita, Sugriva too is anguished by separation from his

wife.

 

The root cause of my friendship with Sugriva is the similarity of our

condition. It is said, fighting, matchmaking and friendship should be

between equals. " Then Vali observed, " O Rama! You may well be king of

Ayodhya, but this is a forest. Are we who roam freely to be punished

right here? " Rama gave a fitting reply, " My younger brother, Bharata,

the ruler of Ayodhya, resides in Nandigrama, and holds sway in my

name. All this area is our territory, and mine is the responsibility

for opposing and punishing unrighteousness and protecting

righteousness. Therefore, you deserve to be punished. "

 

Noticing that all his questions were fully answered, Vali finally

objected, " Sri Rama! We live here according to the moral code of the

monkeys. Your human moral code does not apply to us. Is killing me a

righteous act? " Silencing Vali forever, Rama gave an apt and

straightforward reply, " O Vali! Even while claiming to be a vanara

(monkey), you spoke of righteousness. So long as you are ignorant of

righteousness, your behaviour need not be questioned. But you have

chosen to speak of righteousness, haven't you? Don't you know that

the wife of a younger brother is equal to one's own daughter? Is not

your action unrighteous? When you know what righteousness is, how can

you fail to know what unrighteousness is? Therefore, you deserve to

be punished. " In this manner, it is Rama who had made known to the

world both the practice of righteousness and the importance of

teaching it.

 

What remains then is your question about the abduction of Sita. Even

this is proof of God's compassion. Cursed to be born a demon, Ravana

abducted Sita in the mode of a devotee turned enemy, vairabhakti,

thereby begging Rama to kill him with His own hands and ensuring

Ravana's return to Vaikuntha into the presence of Vishnu. That he

should die at the hands of Rama was his sole yearning. Such a noble

love of God also is righteous. You should have an understanding

capable of properly grasping the subtleties of dharma and

appreciating their inner meaning.