Analysing Wisdom

" इक्ष्वाकुवंशप्रभवो रामो नाम जनैः श्रुतः |
   नियतात्मा महावीर्यो द्युतिमान् धृतिमान् वशी || "

Shri Narad Muni Ji said this to Shri Valmiki Ji. In these lines, he is giving a description of Shri Rama, and this verse is one of the verses in the Valmiki Ramayana.

In India, the majority of people know about The Ramayana. We pray to Shri Rama, Sita Maiyan, Shri Lakshman, and Shri Hanuman, as gods who are the main characters of The Ramayana. 

Here Narad Muni said,
"One emerged from the Ikshvaku dynasty, known to people as Rama by name. He is with a controlled self, highly valorous, resplendent, steadfast and a controller of (vice and vile... or) his own senses."

The first line of Shri Rama describes him as the one who is born in The Ikshvaku Dynasty, very courageous, a controller of his senses, attractive, handsome, and strong. 

Shri Rama, for whom, one can get short of words, is our main protagonist. From being the best son, brother, prince, warrior, husband, and then a KING, Shri Rama followed all his duties perfectly, and that's why he is regarded as Purshotam ( Purush -men, Uttam- best, which means best among all the men).
The Ramayana tells us about the journey of Shri Rama. Set in Treta Yug, his journey from being born as Suryavanshi (Surya Clan), as a student, then being a prince of Ayodhya, then being the husband of Sita, and then obeying his father's and his mother Kayki's wish to go for 14 years of exile (Vanvasa), along with his wife and brother Lakshman, and letting the throne to his another brother, Bharat. As he went for Vanvasa, he moved throughout the jungle, met different people, and did his duties during his exile.

In this due course, he met Suprankha, who appealed him to marry her, but instead of that, being truthful and loyal to his wife, he denied it.

Resulting in which, Suprankha got angry as she thought that Sita Maiyan was behind this denial. She attacked her. 

In response to this, Lakshman saved Shri Sita and cut the nose of Suprankha. 

Suprankha was actually the sister of Ravana, the antagonist of Ramayana.

Ravana is a scholar, intelligent, has knowledge of Astra-Shastra (both Academic and Warfare), and is very strong. Aggressive and lustful for Sita as Suprakha describes her; Ravana made a plan to kidnap Sita Maiyan and take his revenge on Ram. 

Ravana was successful in doing so. 

Shri Rama got devastated and decided to initiate his search for his wife Sita, along with his brother Lakshman.

In this search, he met Shri Hanuman, Sugreev, and his Vanara Sena. 

Along with Hanuman and Vanara Sena, Shri Rama found Sita, who was kept in Lanka, the territories of Ravana.

Shri Rama crossed the sea by making a bridge of stones that floated on the sea by writing his name on those stones, along with his brother, Shri Hanuman and Vanara Sena. After reaching Lanka, a war broke out between Shri Rama and Ravana. This led to massive bloodshed and led the death of Ravana's son Meghnaath and brother Kumbhkarna and this was not enough Vibhishana another brother of Ravana left him as Ravana was unrighteous and joined Shri Rama's army.

Ravana now came onto the battlefield, which led to a big fight between Shri Rama and Ravana. 

But Shri Rama in the end killed the villainous Ravana. 

After Shri Rama killed Ravana, he finally met his wife and his exile of 14 years also ended. He returned to Ayodhya and took the throne of Ayodhya as it was awaited.

This description of Ramayana I gave here, is not just very short, but also needs more essence and dimensions in order to derive several meanings of Ramayana. 

Ramayana provides insights into how you can live different roles in different phases of your life. 

Shri Rama provides us with ways to live a life. What he did in Ramayana is worshipped, and we learn several things from him. 

No one can absorb everything from Shri Rama, because he is so big. Not in physical terms, but in terms of spirituality, personality, and behavioral aspects.

In fact, we cannot take everything from Shri Rama in this life. Shri Rama influences us and can influence other people also. 

Questions like "how to live with my brother?", "how to be a better person?", "how to live better?" Shri Rama and Ramayana answer it all. 

BUT

Still, certain questions are asked, which can certainly be said that questions the morality of Shri Rama.

One such question is this.

After Shri Rama returns to Ayodhya and takes the throne of Ayodhya, the Uttar Kaand of Shri Valmiki Ramayana begins. 

People started questioning Sita Mata's character and argued that she lived in Lanka, for 1 year with Ravana and due to that they doubted her purity. 

As an individual and as we live in this modern period, we can say how vague and baseless these arguments are. But, still if such kind of doubts arises in society for anyone, it spreads in society like a virus. It is highly contagious and no one is left unaffected. The same happened in that period also. Shri Ram got the news about such arguments being discussed, and he was kept in doubt by his courtesans also. 

To resolve this issue which was spread throughout his territory, he asked Lakshman, to leave her in the jungle again. She was pregnant when she was again sent for exile.  

Further, everyone knows what is the story, sorrowfully Lakshman left Sita Maiyaan in the jungle, where she lived in Shri Valmiki's ji abode. 

She gave birth to two boys, Luv and Kush.

From here we can pose the question that we are here to search for

Was Shri Rama right when he sent Sita Maiyan to exile again?

He did so after getting influenced by his people. Was he right to do so??

Currently, anyone, especially the younger generations would have answered this question quickly and just said, NO!!!!, in response to this question.

Keeping the ideas of this modern era, where freedom to all is not just praised but practiced, rights for any person, whether the person is male or female, this region or another, are respected, and we always thrive to do so, anyone would have answered the same.

And currently, we can see as feminism draws its way out in this modern world, where we are opening our brains out and expanding our acceptability to different things, we are getting more open regarding rights that humans perform, and not just that, to what extent these rights prevail, who can practice these rights, and what are its limits, we all are coming up with this notions and thus, we all are getting towards new understanding.

This answer is something that I came up with when someone asked me this question the first time. 

 But, are we really going to take this, this easily, or do we think this is this easy!!!!

Actually, it is not.

Understanding one's sense and motives behind his/her particular decision are highly complex. So much complex that we had led to form certain subjects like Economics, Psychology, Sociology, etc to understand the same. 

And here, we are talking about Shri Rama. 

To make things more clear, we have to TIME TRAVEL and move to Dwapur-Yug from Treta-Yug.

Dwapur-Yug, the Yug of Shri Krishna (another incarnation of Shri Vishnu Bhagwaan Ji) the Yug in which the battle of Mahabharat happened. Mahabharat. One refers it as the largest battle fought in the history of this world.

The war from which we got The Bhagavad Gita. 

Here we are going to dig in the Mahabharat. 

To discuss the previous question we have to ask another question. 

WHY DID MAHABHARAT HAPPEN?

There are multiple reasons which lead to Mahabharat. Kauravs being the villains, the antagonist of the 

the whole story, the way Draupadi was treated by the Kauravas, the game between Pandavas and Kauravas, Shakuni igniting the flame between the brothers, etc., etc. 

BUT

One reason is that most of us do notices, but sometimes, other reasons dominate our search for the cause and we ignore this reason 

That is 

DHRITARASHTRA IGNORED WHAT HIS SON DID EVERY SINGLE TIME.

Dhritarashtra was the blind king of Hastinapur when Mahabharata happened. 

One can say that Dhritarashtra was not just physically blind, but philosophically also. One can say that Dhritarashtra was blind from his brain. He ignored what his sons did. 

The way they treated their own cousins-the Pandavas, the way they were always jealous of them, the way they always tried to somehow kill them, the way they were always disgusted by them, the way they cheated on them in the game of "Chausar", the way they treated Draupadi, and in this, the main role was played by his two elder sons, Duryodhan and Dushasan. 

The cause of Mahabharata as declared by Draupadi, when she was brought to the court after the game, where she was disrespected, harmed, and harassed by Dushasan and Duryodhan, was that the

SILENCE HERE IN THIS COURT, THE SILENCE WHICH STILL PREVAILS WHEN ALL CAN WITNESS SUCH BAD AND DISGUSTING ACTIVITIES DONE BY THE PRINCE OF HASTINAPUR TO THE QUEEN, WILL BRING DESTRUCTION TO THIS CLAN.

Mahabharata is a very big part of our history that retells how a clan, a kingdom, or a family can be destroyed. 

We know that elders play a role in managing the family. With more experience and maturity, they are able to control the situation. This is not applicable every time, but yes, they do have some influence.

And in this Bhishma and Dhritrashatra played that role which was so crucial, but yet, they weren't able to practice that.

As the elders of the Kuru Clan, which was ruling the Hastinapur, they could have controlled the situation, but despite that, what resided there was SILENCE. 

Pitama Bhishma disregarded the activities done by Duryodhana. Dhritrashtra was also against that, but what he was into is known as Putra-moh (Exaggerative love for his son).  

If we slightly take a leap back in the story, we would find out, that Dhitrashtra and his wife Gandhari weren't able to bear a child. After meeting scholars and several hardships, they were able to have a child, but they never got one. From a technique, where babies are conceived outside the mother's womb, which is expressed in the story, Dhritrashtra, got 100 sons. 

Dhritrashtra struggled in order to bear a child. Result of which, when he was finally able to bear his first, he was so attached to him, that he never scolded him, never corrected him, never taught him to be not jealous of his own brothers, never taught him certain basic habits, which we usually teach our children, to share, to love.

And this was not enough, 

Duryodhan was under the guidance of his uncle Shakuni, who was somewhere the one who started the hate and always misguided his nephew. 

And

Dhritrashtra never looked upon this. 

Dhritrashtra was always criticizing himself for being blind. And he blamed himself to be not competent. He never understood that he had to be king first instead of being patient. He was never able to overcome this deficiency. He could have changed his son, but he remained blind.

HE REMAINED WHAT HE WAS LIKE, HE NEVER ARGUED, NEVER SPOKE AGAINST DURYODHAN, HE JUST KEPT HIS EYES CLOSED. 

He was always like this, if we study the character of Dhritrashtra, he wasn't offered the crown of Hastinapur the first time. Instead, it was given to Pandu, his brother, and father of Pandavas. At this, Dhristrashtra was disheartened. He blamed himself for being blind. He wanted the power but never thought that how he deserves that power. How he can work upon that, how he can be a good king for his people, and how can he derive trust from his people on him, from the people of the kingdom. He never considered this, 

Same as his son Duryodhan,

Who was always having one target for him. To acquire the throne of Hastinapur, and always thought of his cousins as his enemies.

Both just wanted just one thing, POWER.

You must have listened to this, "Power Corrupts the person."

Both father and son moved towards the very same thing, 

If we see Duryodhan as a villain, we do not see Dhitrashtra as a villain with the same magnitude, because, Duryodhan indeed did most villainous acts in the epic, but the motives behind all those were the envy for his cousins, his hatred for them, and lust for power, which are very similar to those of Dhritarashtra.

Dhritrashtra and his wrong decisions caused havoc in his kingdom, where brothers fought with each other, where they killed each other, so much bloodshed, no emotions, no family values, only blood, and the war, in which at last, no one was able to be left alive, except the 5 Pandavas. 

Because they were right, they were for the Dharma.

"There is another topic that discusses whether Pandavas were totally correct. We will take upon this discussion, further in this series of "ANALYSING THE CORE".

Here we can see between both the kings, Shri Rama and Dhritarashtra. We can see how they encountered a similar problems, and how they faced them. 

Both faced a dilemma regarding their family member, Shri Rama faced this with his wife Sita, and Dhritarashtra with his son, Duryodhan.  

But what they did is different, what they defined them as what they are.

Today where we consider Dhritarashtra as a shallow, weak, blind king. At the same time, we say that Shri Rama is god, he is Purshotam. 

Dhritarashtra who always supported his son, who was blind to whatever his son did, as he loved him so much, made Dhritarashtra selfish. 

DHRITARASHTRA WAS SELFISH AS HE NEVER SAW WHAT WAS BETTER FOR THE SOCIETY, FOR THE FAMILY, AND FOR THE KINGDOM. HE DID WHAT HE WANTED, HE DID WHAT HIS SON WANTED 

AND 

WE SHOULD NOTE THAT HIS SON WAS AN ADHARMI. 

HE DID BAD.

Due to this, he supported Adharma. If he would have stopped Duryodhan, he would have talked to him, and things could have been different. 

Understanding what Duryodhana was like is part of another topic, which we will be discussing in the upcoming episodes of ANALYSING THE CORE.

If we consider what Shri Rama did, that was actually not being selfish. The decision he made, led to a stop to the discussions and uproar among the people which could have happened if such a decision was not taken. What Shri Rama did, can be stated as a sacrifice. 

In today's time, talking about this is important, because it not just shows how a king manages his nation, but also shows how parenting is done. Such questions always pertain in our society, how a king should be, how a leader should be, how I as a parent should behave, shall I scold my child or shall I behave softly with him, etc., etc., etc?

That's why our history speaks to us. History is that's why very important. These questions are not new. These situations pertain to every era. And that's why Humans in each era tried to find answers to these questions. 

Shri Rama being the Purshotam is not just for saying. It means a lot. 

The thing here is that yes, Shri Rama sent Mata Sita into the jungles, which is something that can't be let go as vague. But this can be a sacrifice made by Shri Rama. A sacrifice that led to a decrease in chaos, and made the society of that period understand what such comments and judgments meant, which they made for Mata Sita. 

We should understand that as Shri Rama, Lord Vishnu took an incarnation as a human, and in his every incarnation, we have seen how he faces what that particular species, in which he incarnated suffers. As a human, he faced those human sufferings, but as he is god, he knows how life is lived in a peaceful manner. I am not stating this without any reason. If we read Bhagavad- Gita, we would be able to understand, that how Shri Krishna guided Arjun in the Mahabharata. 

Shri Rama faced these human hardships, and what he did is something a human is not capable to do so. And that's where we see how Shri Rama is Purshotam. As he was born Human, he suffered from exactly those things, where we as humans suffer, but his outlook, his attitude towards such issues, and his solutions to them were different. 

We can say that as a king, Raja Rama took a decision, which was in favor of his people. 

Here Dhritrashtra was a shallow, weak king. His weak and blind outlook toward managing his home, his family, and being a king of a nation, this kind of, somewhere irresponsible behavior brought turmoil to the nation. Such kind of response to situations led to war, and that too between brothers. In this family fight, soldiers died, and people died. Dhritarashtra's bad judgment and his solutions just led to all this. 

SHRI RAMA CONTROLLED THIS, AND AS WE THINK, HE PREVENTED A KIND OF DISPUTE IN HIS RULE

BUT

Whether this is going to justify his action as a husband. 

If one starts listening to society, what will one do? We should note that Shri Rama was not an ordinary being, he was king. But again, can we say what he did with Sita Mata wasn't wrong.

Also, one can think, that Dhritrashtra was wrong, but what is wrong for a father to love his son. To take care of him, what is wrong with these ideas. 

Here comes another complex idea and the conclusion of our comparison, which is explained by none other than Shri Krishna in his Bhagavad Gita,

WHAT IS DHARMA AND HOW TO FOLLOW IT?

Shri Krishna made us understand that there are several Dharma or one can say duties, and responsibilities, to be handled by an individual (it has other meanings also). 

One is not just a husband, he is a son, a brother, an employee or a businessman, a friend, a native, and a human. All these are not just roles assigned to him, these are responsibilities that he follows. 

And we know that these responsibilities will collide with each other. These things are not likely to be followed by each other always. 

The riddle we ask that whether you will choose your friend or your love, looks funny and unrealistic when they are asked. But human history has faced such dilemmas.

In order to come up with a solution.

We have to manage and prioritize what we do and take care of.

That's how we can take smart decisions, be wise!!

Of course, we can not justify the act of sending Sita Maiyan away, for exile. But we can see from the lens of a king how he takes decisions, and how a wise king manages and carry out a nation.

(We will discuss more about the Dharma in the episode of Analysing Dharma)

We should learn from this, as we wish that we don't contact with such problems, but learning the way decisions are taken, makes us wiser. More understandable and more bearable.

Whether these stories are Mythology or History (which I believe are part of our History) we are given a chance to learn. That's a form of learning, to learn from our past experiences. Our educational system and learning manner are being developed and designed according to this format, that's why we have books, text, and different things from which we can learn. 

It's not necessary to learn everything from experiences. We can't just wait for an apple to fall on us and think about it, the gravity, derive it, and redo it all. It's not the right way, it's an exhaustive way. 

We have text to understand what Sir Isaac Newton did.

That's why such comparisons give a good insight into things.

I believe that Shri Ram teaches multiple times more than what we think he can, or what I have written. 

and we should continue learning.

Taking decisions wisely is a task and thus we should note our priorities and responsibilities and thus act according to them.

That's how we can lead a better life.

And that's how we continue ANALYSING WISDOM!