Originally posted by: ShivangBuch
Very strange concept for me Janaki but interesting definitely. I would say that it doesn't make sense to me even if we take Karma into consideration (Lola will have lot more to say about this in her reserved post and you might also then like to share something about that discussion you had before in Ramayan forum) Keikei mata had already suffered the fruit of her action by going through the pain of repent herself through those years in the same birth. She herself was neglected and hated during those years by her own son because of this (And Bharat also was acting king - raja se dand paa kar praani nishpaap ho jata hai - though he actually left Keikei and/or Manthra to be punished only by Ram the real king and he himself didn't intentionally do it. This addition in bracket may not be necessary though). She not only got punishment but also the realization about the action-punishment relationship. Paschaataap was done (whether or not punished by the king but that's the point I want to make). So I find no logic of taking another birth for bearing the fruit of that action. I also find similar problem in believing the story of the hunter in the end of Dwapar to be the rebirth of Vaali. Oh wow, this is a very interesting and new interpretation of the story, Shiv, never thought of it like that.😲 You know, I agree 100% with you....even before knowing that Devaki and Vasdev were the incarnations of Aditi and Kashyap as it says in the Bhagawatham, I also found it hard to believe that Kaikeyi could have been reborn as Devaki, but not for the same reson you described...see, Kaikeyi exiled Ram to the forest for 14 years, yes, but she did nothing so atrocious and evil to deserve the death of six babies in her next life. People may say she separated Ram and Kaushalya, but at that time Ram was a grown man and able to fend for himself. He was not physically dependent on his mother...and usually Royal Princes at that time went off to fight in many battles and wars on behalf of their father, didn't they? Even had Ram been a normal human being and not God, he may have left home many times to fight in battles, would that not be separation from his mother as well? So it was not like Ramji was a small innocent baby for Kaushalya to feel a keen sense of separation from. Not that she did not feel the pain of separation, I am in no way lessening Kaushalya's pain, but it would have been different had Ramji been a child and Kaikeyi banished him, right? So even if Kaikeyi was reborn to suffer her Karma (which itself does not make sense since she already suffered it in her present avatar itself, like you said), the degree of her suffering would not have been to the heights of Devaki. She did not do something so terrible that she'd see six of her children die before her eyes, think she had a miscarriage when Balram was transferred from her womb to Rohini's, and then suffer so many years of separation from both Balram and Krishna later on. God is never unjust in his handing out of Karma, and it would def have been unjust had Kaikeyi suffered that much as Devaki, because her crime during the Ram Avatar was not that terrible. So yes, I too agree that she could not have been reborn as Devaki, because if Ram gave moksha to the rakshas he fought against, why would he not give moksha to his own three mothers?
Moreover, if we still believe the story, then what similar wrong Kaushalya mata did after 14 years throughout the life that she had to be reborn as Yashoda to live the life of separation after Kansvadh? So the story lacks consistency of same logic here with this loophole. And Kaushalya mata could stay in Chitrakoot with Ram for the 14 years after meeting him there since Dashrathji was no more but she didn't stay there by her choice then due to her love, and care for Bharat and concern about him and possibly the wish of Ramji. So again, Keikei in a sense can't be held directly responsible for separation but for exile only. Very true point👏, also, she asked Ram to return during the Bharat Milaap part, remember? So basically, she herself retracted her boons, so in a way she cannot be blamed for exile either...Vidhi had only used her as an instrument to bring Ravan closer to his death, and she suffered for any wrongs she did. It would not have been fair for her to be reborn for a Karma she already suffered. However, one can always argue here also that Nand-Yashoda could also go to Dwarika to stay and to live with or closer to Krishna leaving Vraj after retiring from their duties as King-Queen of Vraj. True...that is one point I do not understand....why didn't Nand and Yashoda go to Dwaraka?😕 Krishna would have given them the same elevated standing he gave Devaki and Vasudev...I was always confused by this.
And also one more funny question. What could be the logic of Keikei behind asking for exile for EXACTLY 14 years? Not 10. Not 15. Not 20. What could be the Vaidik or Shaastriya or political or legal or practical significance of such odd number multiple of 7? 😃 There should be some reason though unwritten in Ramayan epic itself. The number can't be that random. Even if it was Yogmaya's or Saraswati ma's inspiration, then also there should be some mythological answer of number 14 somewhere connected to some previous births before Treta then. We may not continue the discussion of the Ramayan issues posted by me here but just thought to post here only at the place which is responsible for such question coming in mind (The question in logical link was generated in mind as principles of Karma in the story are so precise and particular in their mathematical calculation of human years for giving karmphal). Similar question can also be asked about Duryodhan asking for condition of 12 years exile and not more and a number not multiple of 5 or 10 (possibly in those days, like today, 5 or 10 may not be common easy multipliers in use due to numerology significance). Should the answer of the question be purely taken as one word - numerology? 14 number lucky for Keikei/Bharat (Fulfilling her desire initially and purifying her spiritually later and giving glory to her sons and welfare to the world) or unlucky for Ram (Sitaharan happened only in the last year)? Hmm, that is a good question, but I think everyone else answered this pretty well. 14 seems to have significance in our scriptures. There are 14 worlds, 14 years of exile for Ram, 14th year Sita got kidnapped, and if I remember correctly, after the Pandavas' 13 year exile, Kurukshetra war happened on the 14th year, right? Don't know the reason for this...will ask my father as he's an astrologer.😳
I am yet to read the last edited post by you Janu but now I am eager for your entry on Dwait-Adwait convo and my most favourite scene of Garg-Akrur-Blind poet as Lola had rightly pointed out that that scene has the potential to create from it at least 10 different topics of discussion in our 'to do' list for the future someday one by one. I'm getting there, I'm getting there😆, once my midterms are over and Spring Break begins for me, I'll try to write my entries sooner....but you know, this way I can prolong the RS-directed chunk of SK.😉
Posting for the first time but continuously in this thread as you know. This time I naturally and logically was driven to post my view due to so many new questions arising in mind and also Ramayan-Krishna connection always is so inspiring, isn't it?.😊 I'm so glad you posted, was waiting for your reply.😃 I agree, any Ramayan-Krishna question is always sooo interesting, as Ram and Krishna were Vishnu's longest avatars and the ones which had most story in them, so it's always interesting to find connections. I do hope you will continue to post here.😳
Great going Aishu, Vedo and Janu.
All in all, I don't hold much substance for this theory since it has too many holes and inconsistencies. I'd rather just think of Aditi and Kashyapa reincarnating themselves three times, all in different avatars, to have the lord as their son.
And if I concentrate on one to two significant scenes at a time, I'd be inspired to write more.
Members Lounge
963