Ramcharit Charcha CCLXXV

II Shree Guruvey Namah II

Jai Shri Ram,

II Sri Ram Jai Ram Jai Jai Ram II
II Sri Ram Jai Ram Jai Jai Ram II
II Sri Ram Jai Ram Jai Jai Ram II

We covered up to Doha 282 of Balkand in Ramcharit Manas of Tulsidas in the last post and learned that
Ram tried to explain the reason behind Lakshman’s behavior to Muni Parasuram that it was invited because of Muni’s own appearance as a weapon wielding hero and that he would have shown all respeted in line with his family tradition to follow dictate of a Muni. Ram told there can’t be any comparison between him and Muni for he was inferior to Muni who is a Brahmin of many qualities and he is just a Kshatriya who is guided by Brahmins. His name is just Ram (without an attribute, deeper meaning being that God is attributeless) while Muni is known as Parasuram (qualified as holder of Parasu, a weapon, a Jeeva prefers to be qualified). The deeper meaning didn’t reflect on Parasuram and he said to Ram that he was crooked like his brother.

Parasuram than further told Ram, “you take me to be just a Brahmin while I am a different type of Vipra; my bow is sacrificial alter and arrows are oblation, my anger is the blazing fire in which the fourfold army is poured as Samidha (stuff poured in to sacrificial fire) and the sacrificial animals are none other than the great kings whom I cut to pieces while performing ritual of sacrifice. I have performed this kind of Yagnas of war innumerable times with sound of cries as Japa.

“Unaware of my real glory, you have in fact thrown poor light on me by caling me just a Vipra out of your own lack of understanding.

“Your arrogance is hightened after breaking of the bow as if it has touched the level of pride of one who has won over the entire world.”

Ram replied to Muni with absolute calm, “O Muni, you have very thoughtfully revealed the fact your anger is too much in comparison to small fault on my part (Ram found a point that didn’t fit in Muni’s arguments i e since Muni considered the breaking of bow as something of little importance than why was he so angry).

” If the precarious bow got dismantled just by touch how then it could form a reason for my arrogance and pride.

“Besides, if I have to show disrespect towards anybody by calling him a Vipra than you should factually consider, O Lord of Bhrigus, which other great warrior is there for us to bow down to out of fear.”

(Parasuram’s ancester Bhrigu Rishi once wanted to check whether Shri Hari is prone to be angry and hit him on chest with his foot,but Lord Hari inquired about whether it had hurt Rishi’s foot without a trace of complaint about what Rishi had done; the foot made a permanent mark of his chest which Lord Hari has been pleased to carry ever after signifying that God revers Brahmins above all. Here Ram wanted to make the same point that God accepts only Vipras as worthy of respect and none other and what has happened there is that all the mighty kings could not perform what He did so naturally there is no sense to shame them by calling
them Vipra, they have already lost reputations.
So calling somebody Vipra can’t be a on account of showing disrespect.)

We have now covered up to Doha 283 of Balkand.

Bhavani Shankar Ki Jai!
Prabhu shri Ram Ki Jai!
Sant Samaj Ko Pranam!
Goswami Tulsidas Ki Jai!


Krishna Khandelwal


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s