Gita Rahasya -Tilak
|
CHAPTER II
THE DESIRE TO KNOW THE RIGHT ACTION
(KARMA-JIJNASA) i. e. " the preceptor is more in worth than ten lecturers, the father is worth more than a hundred preceptors ! _and the mother is worth more than a thousand fathers '. Yet, it is a well-known story that because his mother had committed a grievous sin, Parasurama, at the instance of his father, cut her throat [1]; and in the Cirakarikopakhyana of the Santi- parva [2] the question of the relative propriety of killing one's mother at the behest of one's father or of disobeying one's father, has been considered in all its bearings with arguments pro and con in a separate chapter by itself. From this it will be seen that the practice of discussing such subtle positions in life from the ethical point of view was fully in vogue at the date of the Mahabharata. Every one is conversant with the story of Sri Ramacandra having at the behest of his father willingly accepted banishment into the forests for 14 years in order to give effect to the promise made by his father. But the principle which has been enunciated above with reference to- the mother, has occasionally to be applied to the case of the father. For instance, if after a son has become a king by his own prowess, he has occasion to try some crime committed by his father, should he in his capacity as a king, punish his- father or let him off because he is his father ? Manu says :- pitacaryah suhrn mata bharya putrah purohitah I nadandyo nama rajno 'sti yah svadharme na tisthati II i. e. "May he be a father or a preceptor or a friend or a son or a priest, may she be a mother, or a wife, if he or she have not behaved according to their own duties, they are not unpuni- shable for the king; that is, the king must give them condign punishment" [3]. Because, in this situation, the religion of sonhood is inferior to the religion of kinghood. And it is stated both in the Bharata and the Ramayana, that the most illustrious King Sagara, belonging to the Suryavamsa banished his son, acting on this principle, because he found that his son was unreasonable and ill- behaved and was harassing his subjects.[4] Even in the Mami-Smrti, there is a story that a rsi named Angirasa, having acquired excellent knowledge already at a tender age, his uncles (paternal and maternal) and other elders began to learn at his feet; on one such occasion Angirasa, . in addressing them, naturally used the words : 'my children' which are used by a teacher in addressing his pupils-'putraka iti hovaca jnanena parigrhya tan" i.e. "having imparted know- ledge to them, he addressed them as 'my children' !" — Then what an uproar arose ! All the old people became livid with anger, and were convinced that the boy had become arrogant; and they made a complaint to the gods that he should be properly puni- shed. The gods listened to the pleadings on either side, and ultimately gave the decision that the words which Angirasa had used in addressing them were perfectly proper; because :- na tena vrddho bhavati yenasya palitam sirah I yo vai yuvapy adhiyanas tan devah sthaoirain viduh II |
|