You are here: Sri Vaishnava Home Page : Bhakti List : Archives : October 1998

Vibhishana Saranagati -- a query

From: Mani Varadarajan (
Date: Fri Oct 09 1998 - 19:15:16 PDT

A Rama-bhakta not on this list asks this very interesting


Dear Bhaagavataas,

Have had a nagging doubt after listening to VeLukkudi's lectures. The
topic is Vibhiishana sharanaagati from Srimad RaamaayaNam ( what else
could you expect from me? ). According to repeated statements from the
upanyaasakar - SriRaama did NOT "protect" when he was away from
Seetha-devi. Even Maariicha was killed a distance away from her and so
were the Raakshasaas in Janasthaana etc. Vaali claims that the Lord is
bereft of his KaaruNyam since he is separated from Piraatti and hence
he was needlessly killed.

The upanyaasakar says there are some who challenge that Sugriva was
accepted by the Lord as his friend - in the absence of Sita - but
refutes it by saying that Sugriva offered the AabharaNas of the Mother
to the Lord first and hence he followed the tradition of reaching the
Lord thru the mediation of the Mother. He states that with Hanumaan
too it is only after Hanumaan had the darshan of the Mother in Ashoka
vana that he calls himself - Daasoham Raamasya - as opposed to
announcing himself as dhootoham Raamasya. I verified this in the
recent reading of the Sundara-Kaandam. This is true - I was amazed to
see this.

But the problem I have is that those two are perhaps explanations I
could come up with if I did a little detailed reading of the Srimad
RaamaayaNam. Not something only the elders needed to point out. In my
view the knotty problem is VibhiishaNa sharanaagati - which VeLukkuDi
does NOT address and for which I for one cannot find any intercession
from the Mother for SriRaama to accept him ignoring Sugriva, Angada
and Jaambavaan's advice to have him killed. Hanumaan is the only one
who speaks in favor of accepting VibhiishaNa.

So the question is did Piraatti act as a purushakaara in Vibhiishana
sharanaagati? If so where and how?