[Advaita-l] On the forms of Guru

[Anbu sivam2]

A story on Rama told by Bhagavan Ramana Maharshi.  I am sure it is published
somewhere but I am writing from memory.

Once Paarvathi and ParamEswaraaL were surveying the world as
vrushbhaaroodar.  Suddenly Paarvathi saw below on the earth Raama was crying
saying: "SeethE, SeethE, where are you?  Where have you gone?" and so on.
So Paarvathi said to ParamEswara:  "Swaamy!  You told me that Rama is a
perfect man.  What kind of perfect man is he to cry on the disappearance of
his wife?"  To this Siva said: "I still say he is the perfect man.  If you
want you can go and test him."  Immediately Parvathi descended on earth and
appeared before Rama in the form of Seetha.  But to her surprise Rama turned
180 degrees and continued with his crying.  So Paarvathi appeared before him
again but Rama seem to ignore and turned a 90 degrees and started crying
"SeethE, SeethE".   Parvathi appearing as Seetha before Rama and Rama
turning away from her continued like this for sometime.  Then suddenly Rama
exclaimed at Paarvathi saying: "Paarvathi!  Why are you here in the guise of
Seetha?  Where is Shiva?  Please go back to Him before he starts looking for
you."  And then he turned away from Paarvathi and continued his lamentation
on Seetha!

Then Paarvathi was convinced that Rama was a perfect man who plays his role
efficiently.


On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 3:06 AM, V Subrahmanian <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com>wrote:

> On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 1:26 PM, Bhaskar YR <bhaskar.yr at in.abb.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > Taking shruti,  smruti & purANa  characters & their so called activities
> > literally would do more harm to the stature of those noble character than
> > proving the individual BMI to jnAni :-))
> >
> > Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
> > bhaskar
> >
> > Namaste.
>
> Understanding the Shruti vaakya: 'Brahmaveda Brahmaiva bhavati' wrongly
> literally will result in a lopsided comprehension of the Tattva.
>
> Here is an instance of how Shuka Maharshi, in the Srimad BhAgavatam, looked
> at Sri Rama as a Jnani yet as a human:
>
> रक्षोऽधमेन वृकवद् विपिनेऽसमक्षं वैदेहराजदुहितर्यपयापितायाम् ।
> भ्रात्रा वने कृपणवद् प्रियया वियुक्तः स्त्रीसंगिनां गतिमिति प्रथयंश्चचार ॥
> 9.10.11 ||
>
> //  When Sri Ramachandra entered the forest and Lakshmana was also absent,
> the worst of the Rākṣasas, Ravana, kidnapped Sītādevī, the daughter of the
> King of Videha, just as a tiger seizes unprotected sheep when the shepherd
> is absent. Then Lord Ramachanra wandered in the forest with His brother
> Lakshmana as if very much distressed due to separation from His wife. Thus
> He showed by His personal example the condition of a person attached to
> women. //
>
> If Shuka Muni had seen Rama as only Para Brahman, he would not have
> described Him in the above terms.  He would have said something like:
> अशबदमस्पर्शमरूपमव्ययम्....or यत्र त्वस्य सर्वमात्मैवाभूत् तत्केन कं
> पश्येत्.....or in saguNa form: यतो वा इमानि भूतानि जायन्ते...जन्माद्यस्य
> यतः
> etc.   No.  Shuka did not do that.  Doing that would be useless for a
> seeker.  He saw Rama as a MaryAdaa Purushottama, giving a lot of lessons to
> fellow humans.  He saw Rama as a man with emotions, reactions and concern.
> All this is possible only if the human aspect is not rejected but
> purposefully retained, studied and analysed.  Look at these words of Shuka:
> कृपणवद्...स्त्रीसंगिनां गतिमिति....By this Shuka did not end up 'doing more
> harm to the noble stature of Sri Rama' as you have alleged.  Your
> allegation
> stands re-directed at Shuka Muni and Veda Vyasa.  You seem to be teaching
> them how to view a Jnani.
>
> Om Tat Sat
> _______________________________________________
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
>
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>