Rāma considered as follows: Sati dharmiṇi dharmāś cintyante, “One deliberates on the properties of an object only if the object exists [in the first place].”¹ One’s father provides a body, the seed that can fulfill all dharmas, and he helps his child in all ways by protecting him in every manner, even when his child is in absolute ignorance. [Thus] his instruction should be more valued than even the instruction of a teacher. Therefore, in the following Vedic injunction the teacher is accepted [as an authority] later:

mātṛ-devo bhava pitṛ-devo bhava ācārya-devo bhava

“Accept your mother as God. Accept your father as God. Accept your teacher as God.” (Taittirīya Upaniṣad 1.11)

NOTE. This should not be misunderstood. Rāmacandra is not thinking about setting aside the instruction of a spiritual master on how to attain liberation from material existence or love of Godhead. He has set aside the instruction of a teacher on how to attain dharma, artha and kāma. Śrī Vālmīki has specifically referred to Vaṣiṣṭha in text 1 of this chapter as rāja-purohitaḥ, “the royal priest.”²

But the spiritual instructions of a genuine spiritual master cannot be set aside to give way to the material instructions of a dhārmika father (or mother or some other teacher). Why? Because the converse has been fully approved in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (Canto 6, Chapter 5).

Therein we find the most exalted spiritual master Śrī Nārada Muni successfully convincing Dakṣa’s sons to disobey their dhārmika father’s instructions to prepare themselves for the attainment of dharma, artha and kāma, and become celibate sages to progress on the higher dhārmika path of mokṣa. Here are some details:

Influenced by the external energy of Lord Viṣṇu, Prajāpati Dakṣa begot ten thousand sons in the womb of his wife, Pāñcajanī. These sons, who were all of the same character and mentality, were known as the Haryaśvas. Ordered by their father to create more and more population, the Haryaśvas went west to the place where the river Sindhu (now the Indus) meets the Arabian Sea. In those days this was the site of a holy lake named Nārāyaṇa-saras, where there were many saintly persons. The Haryaśvas began practicing austerities, penances and meditation, which are the engagements of the highly exalted renounced order of life. However, when Śrīla Nārada Muni saw these boys engaged in such commendable austerities simply for material creation, he thought it better to release them from this tendency. Nārada Muni described to the boys their ultimate goal of life and advised them not to become ordinary karmīs to beget children. Thus all the sons of Dakṣa became enlightened and left, never to return.

Prajāpati Dakṣa, who was very sad at the loss of his sons, begot one thousand more sons in the womb of his wife, Pāñcajanī, and ordered them to increase progeny. These sons, who were named the Savalāśvas, also engaged in worshiping Lord Viṣṇu to beget children, but Nārada Muni convinced them to become mendicants and not beget children.³

And it is clear from Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam that Nārada Muni has always been honored as one of the highest Vedic authorities by Lord Kṛṣṇa—indicating that his continuous endeavors to spread the importance of exclusively engaging in the spiritual activities of bhakti after giving up one’s service to one’s dhārmika (or adhārmika) mothers, fathers and teachers have always been approved by the Supreme Personality of Godhead.

But among one’s lower dhārmika authorities—mother, father and teacher—the instruction of a father is to be given a higher priority and weightage than the instructions of one’s mother or teacher.⁴

But isn’t Vasiṣṭha certified in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam as a great spiritual master? Yes, but here he is instructing Rāma within the purview of dharma, artha and kāma. Śrīla Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura has noted in his commentary to Bhagavad-gītā 2.41 that the instruction of a spiritual master to his disciple to engage in the nine forms of bhakti-yoga is meant to be accepted as that disciple’s life and soul.⁵ Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam 3.12.5 notes that when Lord Brahmā ordered the four Kumāras to generate progeny (an activity within the purview of dharma, artha and kāma), they set aside that order of his because they were devoted to Lord Vāsudeva and because they were interested in attaining mokṣa.⁶

In this context, an objection may be raised: Śrīla Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura, Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura and Śrīla Prabhupāda have instructed their followers to accept varṇāśrama-dharma. Should this instruction then be rejected by everyone who wants to attain liberation from material existence or in one life or pure love of Godhead?

The answer is no. As already explained in the supplementary note to Chapter 102, every Vaiṣṇava who wants to attain liberation from material existence or pure love of Godhead is not necessarily transcendental to considerations of varṇāśrama-dharma—in fact, most of them would not be eligible to transcend such considerations and therefore such Vaiṣṇavas should accept varṇāśrama-dharma since it purifies the mind. This has been elaborately explained by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa in his commentary to Bhagavad-gītā and the Vedānta-sūtra.⁷

Svaniṣṭhas and pariniṣṭhitas should accept varṇāśrama-dharma; only nirapekṣas are transcendental to it.⁸ Regarding the above-mentioned incident of Nārada Muni convincing the sons of Dakṣa as noted in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, it must be remembered that Nārada Muni himself is the king of the nirapekṣas and by his powerful association the sons of Dakṣa became nirapekṣas too, and hence transcendental to the considerations of varṇāśrama-dharma.