గురు బ్రహ్మ గురుర్ విష్ణుః గురుర్ దేవో మహేశ్వరః
గురు స్సాక్షాత్ పరబ్రహ్మ తస్మై శ్రీ గురవే నమః
శుక్లాం బరధరం విష్ణుం శశివర్ణం చతుర్భుజం
ప్రసన్న వదనం ధ్యాయేత్ సర్వ విఘ్నోప శాంతయే
శ్రుతి స్మృతి పురాణానాం ఆలయం కరుణాలయం
నమామి భగవత్ పాదం శంకరం లోక శంకరం
ఓం నమః శివాయ
Handling a situation as a leader and the methodologies adopted are very evident from the way Sri Raama and Raavana conduct the sabhas (Meetings).
When
Raavana comes to know that Sri Rama along with Lakshmana, Sugreeva and millions
of his army are on the other side of the ocean surrounding Lanka, he panics a
bit and conducts a large meeting (Sabha) with all the key people of his
kingdom. He informs that all of them need to discuss and arrive at a conclusion
as to how the situation has to be handled. He starts off by saying that he
wants to know their opinion, but sets the following objectives.
·
Sita will not be returned to Sri Rama.
·
Sri Rama and Lakshmana should be killed.
So any
sane person in that Sabha would promptly leave because the conclusion has
already been made and what opinion can be expressed except for preparing for
war.
Ravana
mentions the following as a justification of his conclusion/objectives.
Sita asked me 1 year
time before she could accept me.
This was
a blatant lie, but tries to show off in front of everyone how Sita was fond of
him too, which was the reason why he did not want to let go off sita –
Justification for his objective 1.
But that
being a Raakshasa Sabha, everyone wants to prove their loyalty towards the king
to ensure that they don’t rub on the wrong side of their king. One of his
ministers Prahastha says, “Why don’t u force her right away without waiting for
1 year?” Ofcourse
his words and sentences and words are not this simple and short.
Raavana gets
impressed with that suggestion and then comes forward with a truth that he has
a curse from Brahma that is he forces any unintending woman, then he would die
immediately. This is because of such act that he had committed in the past. The
way he narrates the story, it looks like a mere attempt to show off how he
forced himself onto one apsarasa, who complained to Brahma abt Raavanas act and
Brahma inturn cursed Raavana.
Like Prahasta,
different other people suggested different ways and methods of destroying Sri
Rama and his army single handedly. Everyone spoke about his power and strength to
assure Raavana on the victory in the war and that Sri Rama would be destroyed. So all statements were made only in support of the
objectives set out by Raavana and nothing else.
Kumbha Karna and
Vibheeshana (Raavanas brothers) were the only two sane people who expressed
their opinions. Ofcourse Vibheeshana said that Sita should be returned, whereas
Kumbha Karna said that he would destroy Sri Rama and co single handedly. But he
made his point that Raavana was not wise in consulting with his people after
perpetrating the crime of abducting Sita. He should have done that before
committing that act.
After
Raavana abuses Vibheeshana, Vibheeshana leaves Lanka and reaches Sri Rama on
the other shore and seeks refuge. Though Sri Rama and his entire army is on the
sands without any kingdom or meeting halls, Sri Rama too conducts the sabha to
discuss on what to do abt Vibheeshanas request.
He said,
“All of you are intelligent and know abt Raaja neethi (law), I would like to
take your opinion on the current situation.”
Different
people offer their suggestions. I am
presenting their opinions in a nutshell without details.
·
Sugreeva said that Vibheesahana should be killed, he being
the brother of the opponent.
·
Another minister said that they should spend some time
with Vibheeshana by talking to him and understanding his plan, based on which
appropriate action could be taken.
·
Another one recommended the deployment of detectives to
understand the motive behind Vibheeshanas move and take the action accordingly.
·
Sri Rama asked Hanuma to express his opinion. Hanuma made
a very elaborate case as to why all the earlier suggestions were incorrect. He
justified that Vibheeshana should be accepted for which he provided valid and solid
arguments. (Will
probably write another post involving the detailed conversation of other
ministers’ opinions and Hanumas justification, which is very interesting.)
Sri Rama then spells
out his decision that he would provide refuge to Vibheeshana. His decision was not based on his personal opinion but
based on a well learned Rushi’s statement.
He went on to say,
“Kandu Maharshi, son of Kanwa maharshi narrated a story.
‘There used to be a
dove couple. Once a hunter shot down the
female dove in front of the male dove and fried that in a fire and ate it. The
male dove’s sorrow knew no bounds. The same hunter after some days revisited
the jungle and tried the whole day to kill something. It started raining in the
evening and quickly darkness sets in. The hunter took shelter under the same
tree where the male dove resided. The hunter started shivering of cold and became
weak because of hunger. Seeing his state the male dove felt that the hunter has
sought refuge by taking shelter under its tree and wanted to do justice. It lit
a fire so that the hunter can feel the warmth. Then it kills itself by falling
in that fire, thus offering itself to the hunter and the hunter ate it and
satisfied his hunger.’
So when a bird could
do such a sacrifice, how can I not give refuge to Vibheeshana, irrespective of
his motives and objectives, after he has sought refuge. I will pardon and give
refuge to Raavana also if he seeks that.
Such is the
difference between Sri Rama and Raavana.
Even
in our lives, we come across people
·
Who force their opinions on to us without
understanding our perspective.
·
Who state their opinions without any
justifications/reasoning.
·
If you show a problem with them, they would justify
how that’s either not a problem or how they have already taken care of it.
·
If you suggest something, they would say that they
are already aware of it.
సర్వే
జనాః సుఖినో భవంతు
PS: There could be typos and other mistakes in telugu and
english, kindly pardon me with big hearts.
