Rāma, Lakṣmaṇa and Sītā went from one forest to another for they were curious to see new forests and because they were forbidden to go to the cities.

[By certain rules of Sanskrit grammar, the words of] the first line could also split into te ’vanena vanaṁ gatvā, which indicates that they went to a forest for their mutual protection. Lord Rāma will state this:

avaśyaṁ rakṣaṇaṁ kāryam adṛṣṭe vijane vane
agrato gaccha saumitre sītā tvām anugacchatu

pṛṣṭhato ‘haṁ gamiṣyāmi tvāṁ ca sītāṁ ca pālayan
anyonyasyeha no rakṣā kartavyā puruṣa-rṣabha

“We should protect [ourselves] in this solitary forest so difficult to see. Go ahead, O son of Sumitrā. Sītā will follow You. I will come behind [her], protecting You and Sītā. O best of men, we should protect each other [now].” (Rāmāyaṇa 2.52.95-96)

Te ’vanena vanaṁ gatvā also indicates that Rāma went to the forest in order to carry out the instruction of His father and in order to protect the worlds. The real reason for Rāma, Sītā and Lakṣmaṇa’s going to the forest was to protect the world from the oppression of Rāvaṇa and his associates.

The first line could also be read as tevanena vanaṁ gatvā which indicates that they went to the forest effortlessly, in sport.

Vanena can refer to water as noted in Amara-kośa [43]. This indicates that they went through forests with water—they did not pass through deserts.

Bahūdakāḥ: The river that they had passed through had abundant water [44]. They crossed over that river through boat. This river is none other than the Gaṅgā. Because the scriptures describe Gaṅgā as the most important of all rivers, the mention of a mere river in this connection without any adjective further describing it indicates that Nārada Muni is talking about the river Gaṅgā.

The words nadīḥ and bahūdakāḥ use the grammatical plural form to refer to a single river Gaṅgā out of respect for her and because she had several streams. They first crossed the river and then walked from one forest to another.

Tevanena vanaṁ gatvā nadīs tīrthvā bahūdakāḥ also indicates that they crossed over Gaṅgā, Yamunā and Mandākinī. Mandākinī is a river flowing near Citrakūṭa.

Bharadvāja: The meaning of his name is found in the Ṛg Veda, Aitareya Āraṇyaka (2.2.2.1):

eṣa u eva bibhrad-vājaḥ. prajā vai vājas tā eṣa bibharti. yad bibharti tasmād bharadvājas tasmād bharadvāja ity ācakṣate.

“Bharadvāja maintains vāja. Vāja refers to ‘people.’ Because he maintains people, he is Bharadvāja. Therefore, he is called Bharadvāja.”

Vāja also refers to semen. Because he retains his semen as a constant brahmacārī, he is called Bharadvāja. Bharadvāja’s exemplary brahmacarya is noted in the Taittirīya Brāhmaṇa [45].

Bharadvāja had instructed Rāma, Lakṣmaṇa and Sītā to stay at Citrakūṭa and pointed out the way to Citrakūṭa.

Anu indicates that the princes constructed a residence appropriate to Them [46]. In this regard, the following will be stated:

subhagaś citrakūṭo ’sau giri-rājopamo giriḥ
yasmin vasati kākutsthaḥ kubera iva nandane

“This Citrakūṭa is a very fortunate mountain equal to the king of mountains for Lord Rāma, the descendant of Kakutstha, lives here like Kuvera in the Nandana Gardens.” (Rāmāyaṇa 2.98.12)

Citrakūṭa is that place that possesses astonishing (citra) hilltops (kūṭa). They constructed a leaf hut that was pleasing. It was actually constructed by Lakṣmaṇa under the direction of Sītā and Rāma.

Sītā and Rāma were absorbed in the bliss of conjugal rasa, performing pastimes at the forest near Citrakūṭa; this will be noted later in Rāmāyaṇa (2.94.18). Lakṣmaṇa, on the other hand, was blissful by engaging in menial services [to Sītā and Rāma]. He will tell Lord Rāma [before Their departure to the forest:]

bhavāṁs tu saha vaidehyā giri-sānuṣu raṁsyate
ahaṁ sarvaṁ kariṣyāmi jāgrataḥ svapataś ca te

“Your Lordship can be happy with Vaidehī in the mountain plains. I will do everything for You while You are awake or asleep.” (Rāmāyaṇa 2.31.27)

Even though there is a difference in the manner of the enjoyment of the three, they are [qualitatively] equal in their bliss. Therefore, Nārada Muni mentions here that the three of them were happy [at Citrakūṭa].This is similar to the statements:

paramaṁ sāmyam upaiti

“[At the stage of liberation, the living entity] attains supreme equality [with the Supreme Lord in terms of experiencing transcendental bliss].” (Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad 3.1.3)

bhoga-mātra-sāmya-liṅgāc ca

“[The liberated soul cannot engage in the creation, maintenance and annihilation of the material universes] because of [the scriptural texts] signifying that he is equal [to the Supreme Lord] only in terms of his experiencing [pure spiritual bliss].” (Vedānta-sūtra 4.4.21)

Ramamāṇāḥ indicates that [in their own ways, the three of them] enjoyed [their respective activities] uninterruptedly.

Deva-gandharva-saṅkāśāḥ: Lakṣmī-devī and Nārāyaṇa-deva are referred to here by the word deva. The word gandharva here
refers to one absorbed in singing. We know from the scriptures that the liberated souls in the spiritual world are constantly absorbed in glorifying the Supreme Personality of Godhead by singing Sāma Vedic hymns [47]. [Sītā-Rāma and Lakṣmaṇa were as happy as Lakṣmī-Nārāyaṇa and the liberated souls in Vaikuṇṭha.] It is hinted here that when a person becomes self-realized and then becomes fully attached to the Supreme Personality of Godhead, the Supreme Lord with His eternal consort arranges for that soul to climb onto a spiritual airplane and be respected by the transporting demigods. He then causes that soul to cross over the Virajā river and be received by His associate Amānava who then receives that soul and have him brought to a great hall bedecked with gems. The Supreme Lord Nārāyaṇa, sitting with His eternal consort Lakṣmī on a throne there, gives that soul the facility to serve Them in every manner appropriate to every circumstance at all places and at all times. Thus, He gives that soul a happiness equal to His happiness for eternity.

That Sītā, Rāma and Lakṣmaṇa were happy at Citrakūṭa will be noted later:

suramyam āsādya tu citrakūṭaṁ
nadīṁ ca tāṁ mālyavatīṁ sutīrthām
nananda hṛṣṭo mṛga-pakṣi-juṣṭāṁ
jahau ca duḥkhaṁ pura-vipravāsāt

“Having reached the very pleasant Citrakūṭa and the very auspi-cious river Mālyavatī resorted to by the deer and birds, Lord Rāmacandra was delighted, happy and gave up His distress because of having come away from the city.” (Rāmāyaṇa 2.56.40)

Though they had been city dwellers, they were almost like those had been living at the forest for a long time. The facial exhaustion visible in foreigners was not at all present in them.

NOTE. Bharadvāja was a constant brahmacārī, though a householder, according to a principle enunciated in Vyāsa-smṛti (quoted in Madhvācārya’s Bhāgavata-tātparya 3.13.12):

prājāpatya-brahmacaryam eka-bhārya-rtu-gāmitā

“Accepting a single wife and approaching her only during her fertile season is called prājāpatya-brahmacarya or the celibacy of a householder.”

See the commentary and note on Rāmāyaṇa 1.9.5 for further evidence regarding prājāpatya-brahmacarya.

The sequence outlined in the commentary for attaining the Vaikuṇṭha abode of Lord Nārāyaṇa is also spelt out in the Govinda-bhāṣya (Chapter 4) of Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa for those who engage in pure devotional service to the Supreme Lord on the path of rules and regulations (vidhi-bhakti).