Ramáyana Book III: The Forest: Ancilliaries

1.1  

“of Daṇḍaka”: The king of that name whose country [Ck, Ct, “Maharashtra”] had become a wilderness in consequence of Indra’s curse” (Cm, Cg, Ck, Ct; see note on 2.16.51).

“a circle of ashrams” āśramamaṇḍalam: Cm, Cg, Ck, Ct, Cr understand “circle” in the sense of “mass” (“so called because many dwellings [? read vasti] are placed together in one area in close proximity,” Ck). This is to be distinguished from āśramapada, which signifies the site of a particular ashram.

1.2  

“bark garments” -cīra, The clothes would have been set out to dry in the sun after the ascetics’ ritual bath (Cg). On the “bark garments” themselves that are traditionally worn by ascetics, see Emeneau 1962 (suggesting cloth woven of bast fiber).

“brahmanical splendor” brāhmyā lakṣmyā: Either the splendor that derives from asceticism (Cm), or from the study of the vedas and the performance of its precepts (Cg), or from “the study of the wisdom of brahma” (Ck, Cs).

1.4  

“kuśa grass” kuśaiḥ: An essential component in a variety of vedic sacrifices.

1.5  

“offerings and oblations” balihoma-: I agree with Cg, Cr in taking this as a dvandva; Cm, Ck, Ct understand it as a tatpuruṣa, “the oblating of offerings.”

1.8  

“who knew the meaning of brahma” brahmavidbhiḥ: Perhaps here brahma in the sense of “holy power.”

Note the dignity lent to the verse by the repetition of brahma-. For an informative discussion of the semantic field of the word, the complexity of which is reflected in the different glosses of our commentators here and on verse 2 above, see Biardeau 1972, pp. 24-35.

1.9  

“he unstrung his great bow” vijyaṃ kṛtvā mahad dhanuḥ: Once again Rāma does not entirely lay aside his weapon, as is customary on entering an ashram. See the note on 2.48.8, and below, 6.18ff. and note. Curiously, most of the NR here reads “stringing his bow” (though Ck should not be included among them, as the crit. ed. has it; he reads vijyam).

1.10  

“divine knowledge” divyajñāna-: “They knew the secret of Rāma’s avatāra, namely, that he was Viṣṇu descended in order to kill Rāvaṇa; that Sītā was Lakṣmī, and Lakṣmaṇa a portion [of Viṣṇu],” Cg; “‘They had knowledge of the past, present, and future: that Rāma was an avatāra of … the primeval guru brahma, who had descended in order to purify his own śakti; that it was he now coming, and that he would slay Rāvaṇa,” Ck.

1.11  

“like the rising moon” somam ivodyantam: “Because like the moon he removes darkness, or like the new moon is particularly worshipful; or again, because appearing in the wilderness he is like the moon surrounded by clouds,” Cg; “They looked upon him as King Moon — note the scriptural statement, ‘The moon is king of as brahmans’ [TaiS 1.8.10 (d), TaiBr 1.7.4.2]; this would go to explain the request for protection they will soon make [verses 17-20, below],” Ck (so Ct, Cs, who adds, “Thus they were as happy as if they had seen their own king”).

1.12  

“handsome physique” rūpasaṃhananam: The compound is odd, being apparently redundant, and it gives the commentators trouble (is it here to be taken as a dvandva?). I agree with Ct, though the reading of Cm (rūpaṃ sam-) is attractive. The epic formula is in fact siṃhasaṃhanana-, “with the physique of a lion” (“handsome and well built” according to AmaK 3.1.12; see 6.21.30 with Cg there, MBh 1.68.4 and repeatedly in that epic), whereas rūpasaṃhanana- occurs nowhere else in epic Sanskrit.

“his lovely attire” suveṣatām: It is curious that the sages should admire Rāma’s clothing (so Cr, who alone glosses the word reasonably), since he is supposed to be dressed just as they are (see 2.10.28, 16.28, 33.7). There is a related problem in 44.36 below; see the note there. Were suveṣ- instead to connote “simple clothing,” the sages’ astonishment would then be occasioned by the incongruity between Rāma’s princely bearing and weapons and his hermit’s clothes (as in 2.10cd-11ab, 16.11, 18.11 below).

1.13  

“forest hermits” vanacāriṇaḥ: Cm wants to interpret this literally, “wanderers of the forest”: “The birds, beasts, and so on are meant. And this is the significance of the passage: Blessed Rāma, Sītā, and Lakṣmaṇa are beyond the ken even of Brahmā and the other gods. But like the current of the Ganges, which flows over the halt and the lame alike, he had manifested himself before these forest creatures; and they, fearful of losing this blissful vision … will not even blink their eyes.”

1.14  

“their leaf huts” parṇaśālāyām: Literally, “their leaf hut.” The singular implies that each seer invites Rāma into his own hut (Cg, Ck, Ct).

1.16  

“they offered … flowers” puṣpaṃ … nivedayitvā: Apparently for Rāma to eat; see verse 21 below and 2.101.26 note.

“with hands cupped in reverence” prāñjalayaḥ: These brahmans, as Ck, Ct, and Cs observe, may bow before this kshatriya because they know his true nature; otherwise such deference would be improper (compare the note on 2.40.25).

1.17  

This verse offers a general description of a king, without specific reference to Rāma. There is no need to read, or understand, “you are” with Cm, Ck (Ct), who accordingly refer the sages’ knowledge of Rāma as god and king (which they say is implied by “worthy of reverence and esteem,” respectively) back to verse 10.

“his people” janasyāsya: Less likely, “this people,” that is, the ascetics (Cg).

1.18  

“(A king is) a fourth part Indra himself” indrasyaiva caturbhāgaḥ: See the Introduction, Chapter 4d, for a discussion of the divinity of kings in traditional India. Cg takes the genitive indrasya as implying (upalakṣaṇa) the other world protectors, citing the statement, “A king is fashioned out of eight measures of the world protectors” (compare ManuSm 7.4, LiṅgaP pūrvārdha 35.5, and SūktiRa 39.18); thus also Cm. See further below, 38.12 and note.

1.19  

“your realm” bhavadviṣaya-. “Even though the Daṇḍaka forest is not part of Rāma’s realm, it can generally be considered such, since he is a universal emperor,” Ck (but see the note on 2.43.11); “the deeper meaning, however, is that because he is an avatāra of Viṣṇu, all regions are his,” Ct (so too Ck).

1.20  

In the first half of the verse there is a causal sequence: violence or punishment depends on anger, which in turn is rooted in (unfulfilled) sensual desire (so Cg).

“we are as your children” garbhabhūtāḥ: So Cg. The subjects of a king are considered his prajāḥ, “offspring” or “children” (see Pollock 1986, pp. 21-24). The use of the word garbha-, “embryo,” however, is unusual enough to lead Cm, Ck, Ct to remark that the king should protect his subjects “as a mother protects the unborn child in her womb.”

1.22  

“lord Rāma” rāmam … īśvaram: The first time in the epic the word is applied thus, as a bald epithet, to Rāma.

2.1–9  

According to Cg, this sarga is meant to demonstrate the abilities Rāma possesses that qualify him as a place of secure refuge, in anticipation of the sages’ request that he destroy Khara (sarga 5).

2.2–3  

The commentators take the qualifications (at least 2cd-3ab) as intimating the presence of the demon Virādha, though they give no convincing explanation of why the crickets are chirping. Evidently this is supposed to be an ominous portent, as in 1.23.12 (the dark forest of Tāṭakā).

2.9cd–10ab  

“strode off” apakramya: The demon’s threats make his “retreating” here seem out of place, but it is difficult to assign the verb any other meaning. Much of the NR reads instead parikramya, “strode about.”

2.10cd–11ab  

“short-lived creatures” kṣīṇajīvitau: A word that, like gatāyuḥ (46.14, 53.21; 5.22.21) and parimitāyuḥ (47.13), appears to carry an ironic overtone. Like Khara and Rāvaṇa later on, Virādha makes the fatal if understandable mistake of judging Rāma to be a “mere” mortal. See the Introduction, Chapter 4.

“share a wife between you” sabhāryau: According to Cg, some commentators suggest that the word for wife here may be used merely in the sense of “woman” (that is, “who have come in the company of a woman,” so Cm, Ck), or that the dual may be more syntactically than semantically conditioned (although only is married, the adjective is made to agree with the dual subject). Cg himself argues that Virādha means to insult the two men with the reproach that they hold one wife in common, and this seems to me to be correct (Cs adds that Virādha is suggesting that she should thus be his wife, too). On the fundamental tensions in Rāma’s way of life in the forest, see also the note on 16.11.

2.11cd–12ab  

“impersonating sages” munidūṣakau: Or is it “desecrators [of the ways] of sages”? Compare dharmadūṣakaḥ in 37.7 below.

2.18  

“farsighted” dīrghadarśinī: See the note on 2.69.2 for the semantic range of this word.

“middle” madhyamā: This despite the fact that Kaikeyī is usually considered the youngest of Daśaratha’s three wives (though not by Ct here). Cg, “Kaikeyī is the youngest of the three chief queens, but the middlemost in age of the 350 other wives of the king” (Cm is similar; see the note on 2.19.22). The NE recension reads “youngest mother.”

2.21  

“the equal of Vāsava” vāsavopamaḥ: “Unlike the seers [sarga 1], Lakṣmaṇa does not possess knowledge of the true essence of brahma [that is, Rāma], who is the helper of all creatures, and to whom Vāsava could never be compared. Rāma himself has hidden this knowledge from his brother,” Ck (other commentators also attempt to reestablish what they believe to be the proper subordination of Indra, glossing the compound, “to whom Vāsava might be compared” [Cg, Cr]).

2.23  

“The rage I felt toward Bharata” krodho bharate yo babhūva: Lakṣmaṇa could not appease his anger at Bharata because the latter had come to Rāma seeking refuge (Cg), or because he did not show any desire for the kingship (Ck). Cg enlarges: “An objection might be raised: Bharata and Kaikeyī had Rāma exiled without thinking, and they did beg his forgiveness and ask him to return. Why then do Rāma and Lakṣmaṇa keep calling to mind their usurpation of the kingship? … Because in times of trouble [even good] people forget what may and may not be spoken, and it is to intimate this notion that these statements are made here.” As Venkatanathacharya suggests (1965, p. 14 note), the past tense of the verb may be significant: Lakṣmaṇa’s anger was in fact placated after Bharata’s arrival in Citrakūṭa (Ayodhyākāṇḍa 93ff.), though presumably a residue remained.

3.5  

“Virādha”: That is, “Insatiable,” Cg remarking on the propriety of the name (anvarthanāma).

3.6  

“no weapon of this world could ever kill me” śastreṇāvadhyatā loke: No doubt we are to keep this provision in mind when we come to verse 15 below.

3.8  

In most of the NR here (and elsewhere in the sarga) it is, interestingly, Lakṣmaṇa who confronts the demon, as in sargas 65-66.

3.11  

“taut-strung” jyāguṇavatā: The commentators are not helpful on this apparently tautologous item (“a cord in the form of a bowstring,” Cg, Ck, Ct, Cr; “a twanging string,” Cm, which is a guess). The compound is unattested elsewhere.

3.12  

“dripping with blood” śoṇitādigdhāḥ: Perhaps overly clever Cg, “only ‘partly [-ā-]’ so, because the arrows emerged from his body before the blood could spurt,” and Ck, “‘not at all’ [-a-], because they flew so fast.” I agree with Crā, Cm, Ct, Cr.

3.13  

“like Death with jaws agape” vyāttānana ivāntakaḥ: According to Cg, with tongue protruding, which establishes a more elaborate comparison with Virādha and his pike, though see the use of the figure elsewhere, such as 30.6 below.

In his comment on an interpolated verse before verse 13 (41*), Ck notes that Rāma’s arrows had little effect on the demon because of his boon (so Ct). This is explicitly stated in a following interpolation (43*): “He preserved his life by reason of his possession of the boon granted him” (line 5).

3.15  

The NR reads instead that Rāma “implants” an arrow in Virādha’s heart (45*).

Cg observes, “In the subjugation of both Virādha and Kabandha [below, 66.6], Lakṣmaṇa [breaks or] cuts off the left arm, Rāma the right. What necessitates this restriction? Because Lakṣmaṇa always takes up his position at Rāma’s right side, and so [each] demon, in seizing Rāma with its right arm, seizes Lakṣmaṇa with its left.”

Ck (so Ct) are demonstrably wrong to suggest that “the demon has still not lost his life, so the boon has not been contradicted.” Virādha is clearly dying (see verse 23); compare also above, note 13.

3.16  

The SR (46*) prolongs the attack on Virādha, after which “he still did not die” (46*.4), whereupon Rāma decides to bury him, stepping on his neck to hold him down while Lakṣmaṇa digs. Virādha then speaks, saying he had not known his assailant was Rāma (an interpolation no doubt motivated by the same anxiety as that felt by Ck; see verse 15 note).

3.17  

“worthy son of Kausalyā” kausalyāsuprajāḥ: For the crit. ed.’s kausalyā suprajāḥ I read the phrase as a tatpuruṣa compound, in agreement with Cg, Ck, Ct, Cr (see the note on 2.14.11).

3.18  

“Tumburu”: According to Cg on 2.85.15, a singing instructor of the apsarases.

“Vaiśravaṇa”: Another name for Kubera, king of gandharvas and yakṣas.

Are we being given two different stories explaining the identity of the monster, one in verses 5-6 (he is a rākṣasa who through asceticism won the grace of Brahmā), and another in verses 18ff. (he is a gandharva who was cursed)? Text-critically considered, both stories appear authentic, however incompatible. The gemination (if it is that) is oddly similar to what appears to be present in the Kabandha episode (see sarga 67 and note on verse 1).

3.20cd–21ab  

“Rambhā”: According to the commentator Rāmacandra on RāmāCam p. 162, she was the daughter-in-law of Vaiśravaṇa.

3.24  

“Such is the immemorial custom with respect to dead rākṣasas” rakṣasāṃ gatasattvānām eṣa dharmaḥ sanātanaḥ: “The Yavanas [literally, “Ionians” (that is, Greeks), though the reference here is doubtless to Muslims], who are the rākṣasas of the Kali age, thus still follow this custom,” Ck, Ct. According to Kālidāsa, RaghuVa 12.30, they bury Virādha lest the stench (of his burning corpse) pollute the groves of austerities.

3.25  

“ready to enter heaven” svargasaṃprāptaḥ: The compound must have an inchoative aspect, as Cm, Cg, Ct perceive, for the demon could not actually reach heaven before the burial had taken place (for the verbal aspect, see the note on 2.3.5).

3.26  

“at the top of his voice” muktakaṇṭham: The commentators all understand “having his throat freed,” that is, from Rāma’s foot (see the interpolation noted on verse 16 above), though the adverbial use of the compound is not infrequent.

3.27  

“like the sun and moon in heaven” divi sthitau candradivākarāv iva: Cg attempts to explain the simile: The forest is comparable to heaven because it is both vast and dark; Rāma to the moon because he has his wife with him (corresponding to the constellation Rohiṇī; see the note on 2.106.3); and Lakṣmaṇa to the sun in being without his wife, and lacking full autonomy (though why the sun lacks autonomy is unclear). Cm and Ct offer similar fanciful explanations. For the figure compare 2.93.40.

4.5–6  

Many of these characteristics are standard traits of divine beings.

4.12–13  

Most of the SR adds that the young men are cloaked in red (66*). On the troop of Indra’s companions, normally considered to be the Maruts or stormgods — young, handsome men ornamented with gold, who are the same age, accompany Indra at the battle against the demon Vṛtra, and sing the victorious god’s praises — see the convenient summary in Gonda 1960-64, vol. 1, pp. 61-62.

4.14  

“tigers among men” puruṣavyāghrāḥ: Much of the NW and SR reads the vocative singular (referring to Lakṣmaṇa), and indeed it seems rather odd to apply this particular epithet to gods, an instance apparently without parallel in the Rām (but note the v.l.’s in the SR and NR on verse 12 above).

4.18–19  

“conduct me to my residence” niṣṭhāṃ nayata: Crā, Cm, Cg (all S manuscripts read the third person here) have nayatu “Let him achieve (his end before he addresses me).” Cg cites AmaK (3.3.41) as authority for niṣṭhā- in the sense of “end,” “goal,” and indeed it is the common one (though the phrase niṣṭhāṃ nī seems to be attested only here in Sanskrit literature). But as Ck (who with Ct and Cr reads as per the crit. ed.) comments, “What Indra wants to do is avoid seeing Rāma at this time, and that is all he should say … .” Why should Indra wish to avoid any meeting with Rāma? Cg: “Were Indra to speak with him he would thereby reveal Rāma’s divine nature … and [on verse 19] Rāma must do his great deed — the slaying of Rāvaṇa and so on — in the guise of a man” (so basically Ck; Cr, “The verse [19] suggests that Indra is afraid Rāvaṇa might be angry were he to speak with Rāma”; Ct, “It is inappropriate for one in such narrow straits [as Rāma] to behold such magnificence [as Indra’s]”).

This episode is further explicated in 29.30ff. below, but one must wonder whether that later “interpretation” is the one intended by the monumental poet here. For Indra does not meet with Rāma after the death of Khara, but only after the death of Rāvaṇa (Yuddhakāṇḍa 105ff.).

Cg’s comment touches on an essential theme of the poem; see the Introduction, Chapter 4.

4.21  

“with his companions” saparicchadaḥ: So Cg, Ck, Ct, Cr (see verse 22); Cs, perhaps to avoid any inconsistency with verse 15, glosses, “with his accoutrements, bows, arrows, etc.”

4.24  

“wishes to conduct me” māṃ … ninīṣati: “That is, under orders from Brahmā,” Cg, Ck (Ct, “Or, it may have been Brahmā himself in the guise of Indra”).

4.25  

“the world of Brahmā” brahmalokam: The highest of the several heavens of classical cosmology, the others including the world of the fathers, that of the seers, and that of the gods (cf. also note 35 below). (Cg here cites BhagGī 8.16, which says that though the highest of heavens, even the world of Brahmā is perishable.)

“honored guest” priyātithim: “This signifies that in comparison even with the world of Brahmā the sight of Rāma is more efficacious in providing imperishable happiness,” Cs; Cm glosses the compound as a bahuvrīhi, “‘to whom guests,’ that is, devotees, ‘are dear.’”

4.26  

“please accept the worlds that are now mine” pratigṛhṇīṣva māmakān: Venkatanathacharya suggests that because Rāma has been banished from his own kingdom, the sage offers him an even grander residence, and he refers to Sutīkṣṇa’s words and Rāma’s reply in 6.10-13 below (1965, p. 36 notes). Cg, however, argues that the surface meaning here may relate to the hospitality shown to a guest (expressed by transferring one’s puṇya, or merit, to him), but more deeply the verse concerns what is called the “delivering up” of all deeds to the Blessed One, that is, unattached action (so also Cm; Ct cites a verse of similar import from the KūrmaP [see 1.3.16 in the crit. ed.], and remarks, “It is clear from the Gītā and other works that acts of righteousness delivered up to the Blessed One give infinite rewards, insofar as they issue in liberation”).

4.28  

“1 hope to win … for myself” aham evāhariṣyāmi: Rāma refuses because a kshatriya may not accept gifts (Cm; see for instance the note on 2.81.15). Moreover, as the MBh informs us, the kshatriya is able, by the proper execution of his own code of conduct, to win himself “infinite worlds” (see 12.64.19, 72.30).

4.30  

“Make your way” abhigaccha: Some S manuscripts add that the direction is upstream, along the Mandākinī (76*).

4.31  

“as I abandon my body” yāvaj jahāmi gātrāṇi: Cm justifies Śarabhaṅga’s self-immolation (suicide being generally prohibited) by the following citation: “An old man who can no longer perform the rites of purification, and for whom medical treatment is no longer indicated, may destroy himself by [throwing himself from] a cliff, by fire, fasting, or drowning” (AtriSm 218; see also Kane 1962-1975, vol. 2, part 2, p. 926). Cg and Ck are no doubt closer to the truth when (on verse 32) they describe this as the brahmamedha, a self-sacrifice for attaining divine existence (they adduce as proof-text an unidentified upaniṣad).

4.35  

“the world of Brahmā” brahmalokam: The path to the world of Brahmā — through the flame of the cremation fire, and thence, ultimately, to the world of the gods, the sun, lightning, and finally brahmaloka — is described in the most ancient upaniṣads (BṛĀraU 6.3.15, ChāndoU 4.15.5-6), which Cg cites here.

Ck comments, “According to śruti, ‘By works the world of the ancestors …’ [compare BṛĀraU 1.5.16, the worlds of those who maintain the sacred fires are reached via the moon; the worlds of the ‘seers,’ that is, devotees, upāsaka] is reached via the sun; again according to śruti, ‘By knowledge the world of the gods …’ [see ibid.]; the gods are the thirty-three gods existing at the time of creation … and their worlds are reached via the north star … . The world of Brahmā is the fourth state.”

4.36  

“in his abode” bhavane: So I read for the crit. ed.’s bhuvane (compare, for example, 1.8 above).

Ck observes, “Since [Śarabhaṅga] waited for Rāma to arrive before performing his brahma sacrifice [that is, his self-immolation], it should be clear even to a child that Rāma is brahma” (so too Cg).

5.1  

“hosts of sages … came to visit … Rāma” munisaṃghāḥ … abhyagacchanta … rāmam: “The sages come to take refuge with Rāma, now that Śarabhaṅga, who had been powerful enough to protect them, went to heaven,” Cg (though contrast the sages’ own statement in 8.14).

5.2  

“vaikhānasas”: According to the traditional interpretation, “those sages born from the nails [nakha-] of Brahmā” (so Cm, Cg, Ck, Ct, Cs, Cr; Cm, Cs, alternatively, “those who follow the path of the sage Vikhanasa on the basis of the sūtras he promulgated”).

“vālakhilyas”: Again, traditionally “those sages born from the hair [vāla-] of Brahmā” (Cm, Cg, Ck, Ct, Cr; Cm also, “those who relinquish the previous stores of food when new food is acquired”). Vālakhilyas are mythological creatures, said to be the size of a thumb (see MBh 1.27.6ff.).

“saṃprakṣālas”: “Those born from the water used to wash the feet of the Blessed One [so Ck, Ct, Cr]; or, those who live by consuming (on the same day) the means of subsistence that they collect every day, that is, aśvastanikāḥ [thus Cv reads and comments],” Cm; “those who are constantly washing their bodies,” Cg; “those who live only on water in which food has been washed,” Cs.

“marīcipas”: “drinkers of moonbeams,” according to the traditional interpretation, and Cm, Cg, Ck, Ct.

“that pound their food with stones” aśmakuṭṭāḥ: So Cm, Ck, though the commentators are more uncertain here: “those who eat raw food that has been pounded,” Ct (similarly Cr); “who eat pulverized stones,” Cs; “who strike themselves with stones,” Cg (compare ManuSm 6.17 and YājñaSm 3.49).

5.3  

“who use their teeth as mortars” dantolūkhalinaḥ: “That is, who husk rice and the like with their teeth only, and then eat it,” Cm, Cg; so Ck, Ct.

“keep themselves submerged” unmajjakāḥ: “That is, in water up to their heads, as an act of self-mortification,” Cm, Cg, Ck, Ct, Cr.

5.4–5  

“who make their abode in the open” ākāśanilayāḥ: So Ck, Ct, Cr understand the compound; Cg glosses, “‘in the sky,’ that is, in treetops”; Cm, “‘in the sky,’ by the power of their meditations on the wind.”

“ever engaged in ascetic practices” taponityāḥ: The commentators explain “asceticism” here as “the daily repetition of the veda,” on the basis of an ancient equivalence (cf. for example ŚatBr 11.5.7).

“the five ascetic fires” pañcatapaḥ: In the “mortification of the five fires,” the ascetic stands in the midst of four fires that he has built around him in a circle, while the summer sun shines above him as the fifth.

The NR considerably extends the list of ascetics (84*, 85*). We find comparable catalogs in BaudhDS 3.3.1-15; MBh 9.36.45, 12.17.10, 12.236.8ff., and BuddhaC 7.14ff.

5.7  

“lord and master” pradhānaś ca … nāthaḥ: That is, of his House and of the earth, respectively (with Cg, Ck; see 2.23.31). This is the primary construction of the verse, and the nominative mahārathaḥ accepted by the crit. ed. is disruptive and most improbable. I read the vocative with T1, 2, and M.

5.8  

“greatness” yaśasā: For this sense of the word see 61.5 below (though the tautology “[famous … for] glory” is not unknown to the epics; compare MBh 3.50.10). “Your filial devotion is profound, no less your truthfulness” pitṛvratatvaṃ satyaṃ ca … puṣkalaḥ: I agree with Cg in construing the adjective with pāda c also (against Cm, Cr). Alternatively: “Your devotion to your father is true [sincere], and your righteousness profound.”

5.9  

“Please forgive us” naḥ kṣantum arhasi: Cm comments, “Although, according to the maxim ‘It is enough for those in need simply to present themselves before good men,’ their purposes would be served merely by taking refuge with him; still, because of their extreme distress they must speak, and for this they beg his pardon” (so Cg, Ct; Cr, “This implies that people in need lose all sense of what they may and may not say”).

5.11–12  

“long-lasting … for many years to come” śāśvatīm … bahuvārṣikīm: Many manuscripts seek to remove what looks like a restriction or afterthought in the second phrase (though compare such phrases as dīrghakālam anantakam, “for a long time, endlessly,” MBh 2.68.5).

5.13  

On the doctrine that by protecting his subjects — which is his particular form of dharma — a king not only shares in the fruits of their agricultural produce but also acquires great merit, see the note on 2.4.44, ManuSm 9.306; Kane 1962-1975, vol. 3, pp. 56ff.; Spellman 1964, pp. 179-83. I understand the reference here to the sage to mean, not that the king takes a quarter of the holy man’s merit (although it is elsewhere frequently said that a good king acquires one-quarter of his subjects’ righteous merit, and a bad king one-quarter of their demerit; see for example MBh 12.66.26, 73.20, 76.6-8), but that the merit he acquires is comparable to that amount; see for example MBh 12.66.35, “By his protecting his subjects a king acquires a hundred times more righteous merit than he who follows the way of righteousness in the forest … .” Rather differently the commentators. According to Cg, Ck (so Cr), the verse is meant to answer the question, why should a king protect sages, who are unable to pay any tax (“subjects” then would refer to sages). But if the king is paid by them in righteous merit, why does he take one-quarter instead of the normal one-sixth? Cm responds to this: “The king takes a sixth of the merit acquired by people who fast or live on alms; a quarter from those who eat the produce from the area protected by the king, and a half from those who grow fat on the king’s own food and drink, this last in accord with the traditional statement, ‘One gets half the merit performed by a man who grows fat on one’s food and drink, while the performer himself gets the other half” [untraced] (so Ct).

5.14  

“brahmans most of them” brāhmaṇabhūyiṣṭhaḥ: The rest would be kshatriyas and vaishyas (Cm, Cg, Ck, Ct, Ctś); or, “knowers of brahma for the most part” (Cg, Ctś).

5.16  

“Pampā river” pampānadī-: The reading is marked as uncertain (other manuscripts give “the woodlands by [or, “the banks of”] the Pampā”). The Pampā is called a river elsewhere (see 4.3.6, though there are variants), but more often a lotus pond (3.69.5; 6.111.17).

5.19  

“the distraught ascetics” tāpasānāṃ tapasvinām: On tapasvin in the sense of “distraught, wretched” see 46.16 below, and notes on 2.23.3, 58.25, 102.2. Though the word is used in its other sense, “ascetic,” in the very next verse, the tautology here would be most awkward. The least implausible of the commentators’ suggestions here (and on the similar problem in verse 9.12, see Cs and Cr there) is Cg’s “superior ascetics” (praśaṃsāyāṃ ini, see KāśiVṛ 5.2.94).

Hereafter the SR adds,

This passage renders a bit more intelligible the use of yadṛcchayā in verse 20: “[Thus] … chance has brought me here.”

5.21  

“had bestowed this boon” dattvā varam: Why should Rāma’s pledge be called a “boon”? It is rather his duty to protect the sages, as they pointed out to him (above, verses 10ff.). The reading (a)bhayam, “(had bestowed, granted) security …” is supported by the entire NR as well as by several important S manuscripts (and note the later references, ṛṣīṇām abhayaṃ dattam in 31.12 and abhayaṃ dattvā in 32.10). I hesitate to emend the crit. ed. only because of the very peculiarity of the reading.

6.3  

“densely” saṃtatam: This reading (for the meaningless satatam of the crit. ed.) is corroborated by 5.2.13, 11.24.

6.4  

“garlanded with barkcloth garments” cīramālāpariṣkṛtam: See the note on 1.2 above.

“gloomy” ghoram: The adjective is almost never used in reference to ashrams; on the contrary, it almost always connotes foreboding. Much of the NR and some S manuscripts variously remove it.

6.5  

“hair matted with dirt and mud” malapaṅkajaṭādharam: Ck asserts that the “most widely accepted reading” here is malapaṅkajadhāriṇam (either “meditating in the lotus position [for the cleansing] of sin,” or, “meditating on the lotus [of the heart for the cleansing … ]”).

6.6  

“strive for truth” satyavikrama: See the note on 2.19.7, and Pollock 1983, pp. 276-79 (to which this example should have been added, as well as MBh 6.103.21 and 14.66.16). Many manuscripts show an uneasiness at having this epithet apply to a sage; clearly the original meaning of the compound was no longer grasped.

6.9–10ab  

“and that is why I have not yet ascended” nārohe ‘ham: As Venkatanathacharya points out (1965, p. 49 note), this is a more or less general statement, for unlike Śarabhaṅga, Sutīkṣṇa will not destroy himself after Rāma’s departure; see below, 10.26, 33, etc.

“about the time you reached Citrakūṭa” citrakūṭam upādāya: The construction adopted here agrees with Cg. The NR transposes verses 9 and l0ab, which further suggests that the three half-lines are to be construed as I have done.

6.12  

“self-controlled” ātmavān: Or, “self-respecting.” The epithet is not often used in contexts allowing a precise determination of meaning. See the note on 2.27.27, and below, 43.37 note.

6.14  

“in all matters” sarvatra: “In the means for attaining all the ends of man,” Ck; “‘everywhere,’ that is, in this world and in the next,” Ct; “in the vedas and the śāstras,” Cr.

6.17ff.  

Sutīkṣṇa’s mentioning the tame animals that visit the ashram is unremarkable, a commonplace in such descriptions. Rāma’s response, however, in verses 19-20 is peculiar. Presumably it is related to, and meant to emphasize, his love of hunting (see the note on 2.43.13-14), and the violent behavior that going armed can induce, something Sītā will caution him against later (sarga 8, especially verse 11). Mention of Rāma’s predilection for hunting at this point in the narrative may be designed to prepare us for his rash decision in the Mārīca episode (41.21, 23-33). The commentators naturally are puzzled, and the SR reflects this puzzlement in interpolating after verse 17 the silly line “There is no other shortcoming in this ashram than the animals” (104*). Cm, Cg, Ck, Ct observe, “‘enticing,’ that is, they disturb one’s meditations with their dazzling coats,” to which Ct adds, “as for example Mārīca will do later in the book”; —lobhayati is in fact the word used of Mārīca in 38.15, 40.18. Venkatanathacharya (1965, p. 52 note) seems to suggest that Rāma fabricates this reason in order to accommodate the sages with whom he has come (above, 5.21, 6.1), and who will urge him quickly to depart (7.5 below).

6.20  

“You would be implicated in it” bhavāṃs tatrābhiṣajyeta: Or, with Cr, “You would be pained on their account,” which is equivalent to the Ś1 gloss (a)bhisaṃtapyet. Cs, citing Viśva(locanakośa), might be closer to the truth in glossing “You might curse me,” or, “rebuke me.”

6.21  

“granter of boons” varadam: Cg tries to give the ornamental epithet some contextual significance: “We gather from this that Sutīkṣṇa has assented.”

“went to perform” upāgamat: See the note on 2.6.1 for this rare sense of the verb (Cg, “‘betook himself’ to the twilight, that is, he went to the lakeside on account of [“in order to worship,” Cm, Ck, Ct] the twilight”).

6.22  

“offered it to the two … men” tābhyāṃ … dadau: “As for Sītā, she eats only the remnants of Rāma’s dinner,” Cg.

7.3–4  

“fire” agnim: The tradition is much exercised over the question of what āśrama or life stage Rāma is in before and during his exile; this would be indicated in part by the number of ritual fires he maintains when in the forest. Since the singular is used in the present verse, Cg remarks, we must suppose that, at the time of his exile, Rāma had not yet instituted the three sacred fires of the householder; see further the note on 2.93.11. The NE recensions here reads ‘gnitrayasya, “the three fires.”

“(in the forest,) the refuge of ascetics” tapasviśaraṇe (vane): This qualification in reference to the forest I find awkward, and it seems not to be attested elsewhere in epic literature. Weakly Cg, “It is used to indicate that the pūjā [worship] was of a sort appropriate to the place” (all other commentators are silent). Could the form be a dual (“[the two of them, who were] places of refuge for ascetics”)? Note the use of the compound in 4.11.12 and 17, where as grammatically appropriate for this sort of compound, the inherent gender of the second member is retained with masculine antecedents. Still, the plurals in verse 4 seem to speak against this analysis.

“and seeing the rising sun” udayantaṃ dinakaraṃ dṛṣṭvā: Ritual texts are in disagreement on when precisely the morning ritual offering is to be made (see Bodewitz 1976, pp. 41-50). Cg remarks, “By the mention of the appearance of the sun after the offering of the oblation, there is suggested the doctrine that oblations are to be offered before sunrise, and therefore that the ritual activities of the Rāghavas conform to the sequence enunciated in the Kātyāyana Sūtras [see KātyŚS 4.12].”

7.7  

“smoldering fires” viśikhair iva pāvakaiḥ: Literally, “flameless fires.” The phrase is rather odd, and in fact appears to be attested nowhere else in epic literature. Perhaps it approximates the more common “smokeless fires,” as Cm, Ct, Cr gloss it (Cg, “That is, whose greatness is kept hidden”; Ck, “fires contained in coals”). It is less likely meant to suggest that the ascetics’ powers are diminished because of their fear of the rākṣasas.

7.8–9  

“like a lowborn man getting rich” lakṣmīṃ prāpyevānvayavarjitaḥ: That is, the high splendor of the nouveau riche, who is without good breeding, is insufferable.

7.12  

“ashrams” āśramapadam: I take this as a collective singular, as do Cm, Ct.

7.18  

Cg speculates: “When they entered the ashram, Sītā, thinking there to be no need for weapons in such a place, deposited them somewhere in the sage’s abode. During Rāma’s talk with the sage [verses 8-16], recognizing the brothers’ intention she retrieved the weapons and returned them. This occasions the thoughts she speaks in the following sarga.”

8.2  

This verse is far likelier to be a reflection on dharma in general (note the NR’s version, 120*), rather than specifically on the dharma of sages (so Cg).

“greatest care” susūkṣmeṇa vidhinā: “Subtle is the way of dharma” (sūkṣmā gatir hi dharmasya) we are told repeatedly in the MBh (3.200.2 etc.), not “imperceptible” (whereby Roussel 1910-1912, pp. 36-7 is set adrift).

8.3  

“even worse” tasmād gurutarau: tasmād is to be construed thus as ablative of comparison (pace Ck, Cg, and Venkatanathacharya 1965, p. 58 note). Sītā’s point, of course, is that wanton violence would be a far greater sin in Rāma than his breaking his word. The verse unobtrusively frames three main themes of the poem in general, and of the Araṇyakāṇḍa in particular: Rāma’s truthfulness in keeping his father’s word, Rāvaṇa’s sexual outrage, and the violence that accompanies it.

8.4  

“that destroys righteousness” dharmanāśanam: “This explains the preponderance of the sins expressed by “even worse” [verse 3 and note]; lying speech produces adharma, this sin both [produces adharma and destroys dharma],” Cg.

8.5  

“my handsome husband” śubhadarśana: Cg explains, “That is, his beauty itself is proof [namely, of his virtue]; compare the statement in śruti, ‘His beauty told of his greatness’ [TaiS 5.1.2.1].” On the concomitance traditionally held in Sanskrit literature to exist between beauty and virtue, see Pollock 1986, p. 50 and note 2.

8.6  

“without provocation” nirvairam: That is, “because the rākṣasas have not committed any offense against Rāma himself,” Ct.

8.8  

“Daṇḍaka”: There may be an etymological pun here, daṇḍaka- also meaning “(where there are) those who punish (wrongdoing).”

Sītā is not quite correct here. Rāma is going to Daṇḍaka because of his promise, not to the seers, but rather to Kaikeyī (see 2.16.30, 37). In any case, it is odd that she should imply he is only now setting out to Daṇḍaka (see also verse 10), which he is said to enter in 1.1 above.

8.9  

Cm, Cg, Ck, Ct all agree on what to my mind is an impossible construction here (“As I watch you setting out, and these deeds of yours, thinking about your happiness and welfare, my mind grows [bhavet] sick with worry”). Many N manuscripts read, rather more easily, “(the mind of me) who on every occasion thinks about your ultimate happiness.”

8.11  

“any forest-dweller” vanacarān sarvān: This reference should be kept nonspecific, in order to capture the irony present: “Might you not mistakenly slay some innocent forest-dweller,” that is, perhaps, “as your father once did” (see Ayodhyākāṇḍa 57-58, although strictly speaking Sītā should be ignorant of the story recalled by Daśaratha on his deathbed, and made known to no one). Cm, Ct, Cr take Sītā to mean, “mistakenly slay any rākṣasa, even one who has done no harm.”

8.14  

Indra seeks to obstruct the austerities of any ascetic whose power threatens to grow great enough to challenge his own position as king of the gods (see also 10.12ff. below).

8.20–21  

“creatures that have done no wrong” aparādhaṃ vinā … lokān: When asking Rāma’s protection, the sages had already described the “outrages” committed by the rākṣasas. In view of this, Sītā’s claim that the rākṣasas are innocent seems curious. It may be simply that the whole point of the passage is not so much to throw Rāma’s resolve into doubt (or rather, to highlight it, as we shall see in the next sarga), but instead merely to emphasize Sītā’s kindliness, and thus to intensify our sense of outrage at (or the irony of) the rākṣasas’ mistreatment of one who spoke so earnestly in their favor.

8.22  

“in the forests inhabited by men who practice self-restraint” vaneṣu niyatātmanām: I agree with Venkatanathacharya (1965, p. 65 note) in thus construing the two items; Cm, Cg, Ck, Ct, impossibly in my view, coordinate as an adjectival phrase with pāda d. Much of the NR plausibly offers, “(kshatriyas) who are intent on their own code of conduct.”

8.23  

Compare the very similar admonition of Bharata to Rāma (2.98.56), which is intended to urge just the opposite course of action. Note that vyāviddham idam here (“it is all so at odds”) corresponds to īdṛśaṃ vyāhataṃ karma in the Ayodhyākāṇḍa passage.

8.25  

“mother-in-law” śvaśrū-: No doubt Kausalyā is meant (“she would rejoice that her son was forever free from the trouble of war,” Cm), and not Kaikeyī (Cg).

8.27  

“No, true happiness is not easily won” na sukhāl labhyate sukham: Literally, “Not through happiness is happiness won.” On the charged sense of the repeated sukham see 2.98.30 and note. Although such anaphoric emphasis is not uncommon in Sanskrit, a more significant distinction may be intended here. The Jains, for example, distinguished between bliss, sukham, and the ordinary “feeling of happiness” sukhā vedanā (Jaini 1979, p. 104 note 35, and Jaini 1977). At the same time, in contrast to such ascetic programs as that of the Jains, the Buddha claimed “to attain happiness by happiness” (sukhaṃ sukhena adhigantabbam; compare Rhys Davids 1950, vol. 5, pp. xii-xiii; Theragāthā 63 and 220; Aṅguttara 2.3; Majjhima 1.93).

8.28  

“the ways of righteousness appropriate to an ascetics’ grove” dharmaṃ tapovane: As Cr rightly sees, some specification of the kind of dharma is required (see deśadharma-, “the customs of the place,” in verse 23 and kṣatradharma-, “the kshatriya code,” in verse 24). Thus the locative must in some sense be restrictive.

“But then” hi: On the adversative force of this particle, see the note on 2.98.50; tu is, in fact, read by several manuscripts here.

9.1  

“with firm adherence to righteousness” dharme sthitaḥ: “‘Righteousness’ here has the sense of his duty to protect the sages,” Cm; Cg adds, “This signifies that to Rāma the most important thing is fulfilling his promise [to the sages], even if it means suffering the torments of Sītā’s abs