(^1) This is a standard method and a figure of speech adopted by Tulsidas when he
wishes to restrain himself from describing some scene because he feels that his
description would never do justice to the actual sight because of the limitations that a
language and its words inherently have.
A typical example is found in Ram Charit Manas, Baal Kand, Doha no. 318
where Tulsidas says that no attempt to describe the delight that was felt by Sita’s
mother when she saw Lord Ram as a bridegroom can be successful even if thousands
of Saarda and Sesh try to do it in seven Kalpas—or virtually countless numbers of
years.
Besides this, Tulsidas has clearly stated in Baal Kand, Chaupai line no. 4 that
precedes Doha no. 103 that “he will refrain from narrating or describing the glamour
of Lord Shiva and his divine consort Bhavaani because they are the Father and the
Mother of this entire creation or the whole living world (and hence it would be
indecent, rude, imprudent and impertinent for him to do so).”
(^2) A similar situation is described on different occasion with respect to Lord Ram
and Sita in Ram Charit Manas, Baal Kand where we read that Sita too had felt shy
from looking directly at her beloved Lord, Sri Ram. Some of the instances are the
following: (i) Chanda line no. 13 that precedes Doha no. 325; (ii) Doha no. 326; (iii)
Chanda line nos. 9-10 that precede Doha no. 327; and (iv) Chaupai line no. 3 that
precedes Doha no. 264.
The reason for such hesitation on part of Sita is explained by Tulsidas in Ram
Charit Manas, Baal Kand, Doha no. 248 which essentially mean that though Sita
longed to look unblinkingly at Lord Ram yet she refrained from doing so because it
would look very indecent and impolite for her to do so in the midst of an assembly
where all the elders of the society were present and closely watching her every
move.]
ŒÙ0. ◊ÈÁŸ •ŸÈ‚Ê‚Ÿ ªŸ¬ÁÃÁ„U ¬Í¡©U ‚¢÷È ÷flÊÁŸ–
∑§Ù©U ‚ÈÁŸ ‚¢‚ÿ ∑§⁄ÒU ¡ÁŸ ‚È⁄U •ŸÊÁŒ Á¡ÿ° ¡ÊÁŸH 100H
dōhā.
muni anusāsana ganapatihi pūjē'u sambhu bhavāni.
kō'u suni sansaya karai jani sura anādi jiyam̐ jāni. 100.
Receiving instructions from the sages who were conducting the rituals, Lord Shambhu
(Shiva) and Bhavaani (Parvati or Uma) together worshipped Lord Ganpati (Ganesh).
Let no one express incredulity at this (i.e. at Shiva and Parvati worshipping
Ganesh) because the Gods are immortal and eternal^1. (Doha no. 100)
[Note—^1 Lord Ganesh is worshipped in the beginning of any religious event; his
worship is obligatory for success in any endeavour. Now the paradox is that Ganesh
is a son of Shiva and Parvati, and therefore it looks absurd and unbelievable that he is
worshipped by his own parents.
This apparent paradox and unconventional thing is answered in the 2nd line of this
Doha which asserts that the gods are eternal and immortal, and therefore they do not
take a birth again to become a son or daughter of someone. They are always present,
the only thing is that at some point of time they become visible and at another point
of time they are not.
Besides this, they have to conform to the law of Nature which says that
everything that has a physical existence must come to an end. So therefore, these
eternal and immortal gods exist in a subtle and sublime form as the ‘Soul’ that has no
physical form or a gross body till the time they are required to assume one such form