Kaikeyi..the mother no one revered?

[renuka]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

Mathru Devo Bhava....the well known saying but always wondered why Kaikeyi was never given this honour?

Pandavas married Draupadi even though it was Kunti who had not realized that the "prize" they had brought home was a woman.

Adi Shankara promised His mother He would do her final rites even though He knew He would be bending the rules as a Sanyasi for this.

So why didnt Bharata obey his mothers commands?

Isnt mother words supposed to be carried out?

Kaikeyi was still within Dharma if we look it at a different angle cos Dasaratha did give her two boons and so she rightfully exercised her rights to it.

Why is Bharata extolled as the obedient brother and not thought of as a defiant son?

 

[Raghy]

Sowbagyavathy Dear Renuka, Greetings.

Raman was very fond of Kaikeyi. He loved as much as he loved Kosala. She loved him too. Bharatan was very fond of Raman too.

By exercising one boon, Kaikeyi could have asked Dasarathan to crown Bharata. She could have very easily used the second boon to make sure Raman work in support of Barathan.

But she chose to ask Raman's exile for 14 years. After 12 years of exile, one is considered dead and the last rites could be conducted. There was no need for that. That second boon made her unpopular even with Barathan.

Not all the mothers are Devo Bhava; not all the fathers are Devo Bhava. That phrase is an illusion.

Cheers!

 

[suraju06]

Dear Renuka,

For her son to live happily the mother had to be greedy and scheming. For a husband to live happily the wife has to be greedy and scheming. If the plans fail she has to bear the brunt of criticism also. Is it a mistake for a mother/wife to be greedy about her son's/husband's prosperity and welfare? So it is still matru Devo bhava for all the trouble a mother takes for her son/daughter. Without women, albeit scheming, strong willed, greedy and doting there would be no thrill living in this world. Life would have been too dull and drab. I will vote for women in any situation. I am one who believe that my daughter when she came into this world made me a father instantly which is a unique feat for a new born. Long live woman hood. Matru Devo bhava.

 

[zebra16]

Mathru Devo Bhava....the well known saying but always wondered why Kaikeyi was never given this honour?

Pandavas married Draupadi even though it was Kunti who had not realized that the "prize" they had brought home was a woman.

Adi Shankara promised His mother He would do her final rites even though He knew He would be bending the rules as a Sanyasi for this.

So why didnt Bharata obey his mothers commands?

Isnt mother words supposed to be carried out?

Kaikeyi was still within Dharma if we look it at a different angle cos Dasaratha did give her two boons and so she rightfully exercised her rights to it.

Why is Bharata extolled as the obedient brother and not thought of as a defiant son?

Although what I say may not appeal to many, dont you think you will get a better answer if you look for (i) pratibhAsika satyam; (ii) parmArthika satyam; and (iii) vyavahArika satyam in the episode?

 

[renuka]

Although what I say may not appeal to many, dont you think you will get a better answer if you look for (i) pratibhAsika satyam; (ii) parmArthika satyam; and (iii) vyavahArika satyam in the episode?

Dear sir,

Absolute reality/empirical reality/subjective reality..so how should we coin it in this case?

 

[Raghy]

Dear Sri. Raju, Greetings.

I refer to your message in post #3. I respect your happiness towards your daughter who brought you Fatherhood at the time of her birth. It could have been a boy too. Just a different mixture of harmones!

In general all mothers seek prosperity and welfare for their children. But there are exceptions too. hat's why I said 'Mathru devo bhava; pithrudevo bhava' can't be taken for granted.

Cheers!

 

[C RAVI]

Dear Renuka,

For her son to live happily the mother had to be greedy and scheming. For a husband to live happily the wife has to be greedy and scheming. If the plans fail she has to bear the brunt of criticism also. Is it a mistake for a mother/wife to be greedy about her son's/husband's prosperity and welfare? So it is still matru Devo bhava for all the trouble a mother takes for her son/daughter. Without women, albeit scheming, strong willed, greedy and doting there would be no thrill living in this world. Life would have been too dull and drab. I will vote for women in any situation. I am one who believe that my daughter when she came into this world made me a father instantly which is a unique feat for a new born. Long live woman hood. Matru Devo bhava.

Very well said Shri Raju..

Thats why there is a saying in Tamizh, that - A mother who is a Devil is still a mother with same values and respect for the person who was given birth by the Devil mother. It is OK to bear any repercussions of a mother's actions or at least to protect oneself from the negative impacts. BUT, its not justifiable if a person insults, hits or talk ill of his/her mother. Talking ill of a mother or one's wife with sense of hatred, disrespect and abuses and or doing nasty things against them can never give any true solace and peace to a person.

Greedy mother and or Greedy wife can Ruin a Man for ever and make him present no where. At the same time, a right MAN is a MAN who honestly takes responsibility of his actions and don't blame his mother or wife despite their successful attempts to make himself greedy to do/earn more by any ways and means and making himself ruin his image.

 

[zebra16]

Dear sir,

Absolute reality/empirical reality/subjective reality..so how should we coin it in this case?

Hey, I thought you being the expert would be filling in the gaps. I am a zero. But just to keep you interested, my ramblings are set forth below:


In absolute state, there is nothing other than Brahman, neither the kingdom nor the forest; therefore neither the king nor the wanderer of the forests. So the episode comes under the category of mithyA.

The case is not pratibhAsikA, as the narration is neither of dream state nor arising of wrong cognition. So the issue is vyavarikA

So what does the story tell us of the vyavahArikA? In the mAyA covered world, when prakruthi undergoes various transformations all the while the Brhman is covered by avidyA and unable to see the reality, things and entities are divided and grouped as me, him, my son, her son, promise, fulfilment of promise etc.

How much we are constrained by time (11 years, 14 years etc.) and place (kingdom, forest etc.) and the human thinking is always constrained by the time-space concept. It would be a herculean task to realise the brahman who/which is beyond these constraints.

I think as per Valmiki Ramayan Rama's reign lasted for 11000 years. So how poorly kaikey's period of 14 years compares against this gigantic period of 11000 years.

 

[renuka]

Hey, I thought you being the expert would be filling in the gaps. I am a zero. But just to keep you interested, my ramblings are set forth below:


In absolute state, there is nothing other than Brahman, neither the kingdom nor the forest; therefore neither the king nor the wanderer of the forests. So the episode comes under the category of mithyA.

The case is not pratibhAsikA, as the narration is neither of dream state nor arising of wrong cognition. So the issue is vyavarikA

So what does the story tell us of the vyavahArikA? In the mAyA covered world, when prakruthi undergoes various transformations all the while the Brhman is covered by avidyA and unable to see the reality, things and entities are divided and grouped as me, him, my son, her son, promise, fulfilment of promise etc.

How much we are constrained by time (11 years, 14 years etc.) and place (kingdom, forest etc.) and the human thinking is always constrained by the time-space concept. It would be a herculean task to realise the brahman who/which is beyond these constraints.

I think as per Valmiki Ramayan Rama's reign lasted for 11000 years. So how poorly kaikey's period of 14 years compares against this gigantic period of 11000 years.

Dear sir,

I am no expert still learning.Thank you so much for your explanation.
Makes a lot of sense to me.

regards
renu

 

[talwan]

Renukaji,
It was Manthra(kooni) who brainwased Kaikeyi to ask for the boons thereby Bharata becomes King and Ram goes to forest.In kambaramayanam there is this episode of Manthara ,Kaikeyiarguements are well explained.Initially Kaikeyi scolds Manthara for the suggestion.But as the arguement goes on it is Manthara who prevails over AND MAKES kaikeyi ask for the boons.

Alwan

 

[Iyyarooraan]

Everybody has to take credit or discredit for their actions. Rama also had been wrong on occasions. Kaikeyi was wrong. That wrong stretched out to Ravana samharam. Kunti was wrong (by allowing her son to float as an orphan). Somehow every body as human being commit wrongs. Krishna fooled everybody till the last for the good of the world. To err is human. Maybe that is the reason we must seek moksha from birth. Does it not sound a little selfish when you do not finish your work in this world!

 

[vembu]

whenever kaikeyi's name crops up, i remember the quote of kamba ramayanam

[FONT=TSCu_Inaimathi, TSC-Sri, TSCComic, TSCTimes, InaimathiTSC, TSC_Thunaivan, MylaiTSC, MylaiFixTsc, Sri-Tsc, MadhuramTSC, AparanarTSC, ThunaivanTSC, TneriTSC, Tamil_Avarangal31TSC, TSCAparnar, TSCAndal, TSCAvarangal, TSC_Avarangal, TSC_AvarangalFxd]²Â ÅÃí¸û þÃñÊý ´ýȢɡø ±ý
Á¸ý «ÃÍ ¬ûÅÐ º£¨¾ §¸ûÅý ´ýÈ¡ø
§À¡ö ÅÉõ ¬ûÅÐ ±ÉôÒ¸ýÚ ¿¢ýÈ¡û
¾£Â¨Å ¨Å¢Ûõ º¢Èó¾ ¾£Â¡û - [/FONT]

[FONT=TSCu_Inaimathi, TSC-Sri, TSCComic, TSCTimes, InaimathiTSC, TSC_Thunaivan, MylaiTSC, MylaiFixTsc, Sri-Tsc, MadhuramTSC, AparanarTSC, ThunaivanTSC, TneriTSC, Tamil_Avarangal31TSC, TSCAparnar, TSCAndal, TSCAvarangal, TSC_Avarangal, TSC_AvarangalFxd](¦¸¡ÊÂÉ «¨Éò¾¢Öõ ¦¸¡ÊÂ¡Ç¡É ¨¸§¸Â[/FONT])

Kambar calls her as best of evils and evil personified.

 

[renuka]

whenever kaikeyi's name crops up, i remember the quote of kamba ramayanam

[FONT=TSCu_Inaimathi]²Â ÅÃí¸û þÃñÊý ´ýȢɡø ±ý
Á¸ý «ÃÍ ¬ûÅÐ º£¨¾ §¸ûÅý ´ýÈ¡ø
§À¡ö ÅÉõ ¬ûÅÐ ±ÉôÒ¸ýÚ ¿¢ýÈ¡û
¾£Â¨Å ¨Å¢Ûõ º¢Èó¾ ¾£Â¡û - [/FONT]

[FONT=TSCu_Inaimathi](¦¸¡ÊÂÉ «¨Éò¾¢Öõ ¦¸¡ÊÂ¡Ç¡É ¨¸§¸Â[/FONT])

Kambar calls her as best of evils and evil personified.

I had read before some version of the Ramayana that each queen had their own desire for their son to be King.

Kausalya knew Rama should be King cos he is the 1st born male.

Sumitra all the while knew her son would never be King cos she knew that Rama was the 1st born male of Kausalya and Dasartha loved Kaikeyi the most and Dasaratha would do anything for Kaikeyi.

The version I read even mentioned that Sumitra was not too keen even to drink the Payasam thats why she left it by the window and it got carried away by an eagle and she had to share what Kausalya and Kaikeyi gave her.

So each one had their own desire..its so happen that Kaikeyi was brave enough to make it known.

Kaikeyi took the greatest discredit ever in the Ramayana without which Lord Rama would have never been able to liberate His devotee Jaya(Ravana) to hasten Ravana's journey back to Vaikuntha only to meet him again in his final birth as Sishupal.

 

[vembu]

Smt renuka madam,

yes. there are umpteen versions of ramayana and folk tales also. kaikeyi was initially happy to know about Lord Rama's coronation but was influenced by kooni to ask for the two varams. but, as you correctly said, kaikeyi was responsible for liberation(nice usage) of Ravana.

 

[sudeshwer]

it is interesting discussion about motherhood. kaikayi took us very far. deva bhava becomes a myth. you read in the news that father is sentenced for rapping his daughter; father kills his daughter since she elopes with someone; mother sends daughters for prostitution. where are we!! as someone mentioned, there is nothing wrong if son or daughter dont obey father or mother if the commands are not justifiable and correct. 11000 yrs rule of Ram doesnot justify kaikeyi's demands for sending Ramn to forest for 14 yrs. it is a question of process. anyway I enjoy the thread

 

[B V RAAGHAVAN]

Namaskarams,

As far as ramayana is considered, Only Mantara was aware of Rama's birth secrets. She was aware that if Rama entered into the Kingdom the main purpose of his avatara would be defeated so Rama should be away from this daily chores to concentrate on his Avatara purpose, i.e. Ravana Samhara. She convinced Kaikeyi to send Rama to forest for 14 years. Also, the curse Dasaratha had from the parents of Sravan helped Rama to proceed towards his main goal. So Kaikeyi was an embodiment of "Thyaga". She was a brave lady to forego her motherly love and affection towards Rama to see that the main purpose of his avataram be accompalished.

I hope my humble opinion will be accepted by the eminent personalities of this august forum.

Lovingly
Adiyen

 

[sudeshwer]

Lord Rama was an Avatara purush. HE took birth for a specific purpose; so, all actions, deeds, approaches etc were done to fullfull that purpose. Mantara, Kaikeyi, Dasaratha, Bharatha, why even Lord Rama had a purpose i.e. to put an end to the evil. They all have done their job very well. We the human being enjoyed, prayed, still praying