त्वरमाणस्ततो गत्वा जनस्थानादकम्पनः।
प्रविश्य लङ्कां वेगेन रावणं वाक्यमब्रवीत्॥
Then, quickly departing from Janasthāna, Akampana entered Laṅkā and hurriedly spoke [the following] words to Rāvaṇa.
1 The first portion of the Dvaya deals with the objective of a surrendered devotee of the Lord. The second portion deals with the method by which one can attain the objective.
2 The first word of the second portion of the Dvaya is śrīmate which refers to the husband of Śrī, and Śrī mediates between the living entities and the Supreme Lord. The First Canto ends with the marriage of the Supreme Personality of Godhead and Sītā-devī, which is the union of the Lord and the mediator.
3 The second word of the second portion of the Dvaya is nārāyaṇāya which indicates that the Supreme Personality of Godhead Viṣṇu has auspicious qualities. Nārāyaṇa is a proper noun, not a common noun or adjective, and refers to one who is the abode of auspicious qualities. In the Second Canto of Rāmāyaṇa, Lord Rāma reveals His feature of easy accessibility in His intimate friendship with Guha. The Lord also reveals other features of His personality in the Second Canto. Vijayīndra Tīrtha of the Madhva line points this out in his Nārāyaṇa-śabda-nirvācanam, a work that gives a hundred etymological analyses of the name Nārāyaṇa: arāḥ doṣāḥ, tad-viruddhāḥ guṇāḥ nārāḥ. teṣām ayanam āśrayo nārāyaṇaḥ.
4 Several sages took the opportunity to engage in devotional service unto Lord Rāmacandra.
5 Namaḥ is derived from two syllables—na and ma—and they indicate that by uttering namaḥ one negates his attitude of being independent of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. This happens when one surrenders fully unto His lotus feet, which then results in the removal of all obstacles to the devotee’s spiritual progress towards everlasting loving service unto the Supreme Lord’s lotus feet in one of His abodes in the spiritual universe of Vaikuṇṭha. In Bhakti-sandarbha (Anuccheda 236), Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī Prabhupāda quotes Padma Purāṇa 6.226.41-46 while explicating the meaning of the word namaḥ as follows—ahaṅkṛtir ma-kāraḥ syān na-kāras tan-niṣedhakaḥ, tasmāt tu namasā cātra svātantryaṁ pratiṣidhyate; bhagavat-paratantro ’sau tadāyattaś ca jīvati, tasmāt sva-sāmarthya-vidhiṁ tyajet sarvam aśeṣataḥ; īśvarasya tu sāmarthyān nālabhyaṁ tasya vidyate, tasmin nyasta-bhavaḥ śete tat-karmaiva samācaret: “Ma represents false ego and na represents the negation of that. Thus by uttering namaḥ one negates one’s independent attitude. The jīva is dependent on the Lord and he lives with dependence. Therefore one should completely reject the idea of accomplishing [anything] by one’s own capacity. Nothing is unaccomplishable for him with the Lord’s capacity. Consigning one’s body to the Lord, one should serve Him.”
6 Sītā-devī was kidnapped to Laṅkā and Vibhīṣaṇa was in Laṅkā. Mother Sītā, the internal potency of Lord Rāma, is the mediator between the living entities and the Supreme Lord, especially when they want to surrender unto Him to attain eternal loving service unto His lotus feet. Śrīmat is converted into śrīman due to certain rules of Sanskrit grammar.
7 His affection (vātsalya) is a natural consequence of the fact that He is their eternal shelter. Just as a mother is the shelter of the child in her womb and so is naturally affectionate to her child, the Supreme Lord is naturally affectionate to them.
8 Rāmāyaṇa 5.34.8. The reference to this verse is significant, for it is spoken by Hanumān when Sītā-devī specifically asks him to describe how Lord Rāma looks like.
9 This should be obvious because it contains the celebrated episode of Vibhīṣaṇa’s surrender unto Lord Rāma.
10 This is clear from the activities of Lakṣmaṇa, Bharata and Śatrughna as described in Canto 7. One might now wonder, “Isn’t this Rāmāyaṇa-based interpretation of an innocent two-part mantra too fanciful on the part of Śrī Govindarāja?” On careful scrutiny, however, there is nothing irrelevant in the aforesaid explanation. Śrī Rāmānuja’s followers are serious students of the Pañcarātrika scriptures and this category of Vedic literature contains a detailed analysis of the pāñcarātrika-mantras that are meant to be meditated upon by the sādhaka. For instance, the Ahirbudhnya-saṁhitā devotes its Chapter 52 to describing the gross, subtle and transcendental meanings of the five-syllabled viṣṇu-mantra, eight-syllabled nārāyaṇa-mantra and twelve-syllabled vāsudeva-mantra in not less than 85 verses. Following suit, Chapter 28 of Śrī Vedānta-deśika’s maṇipravāla classic Rahasya-traya-sāra contains a detailed scriptural exposition of the meaning of the Dvaya-mantra which is explained in the Praśna-saṁhitā, a Pāñcarātrika scripture. Indeed, Deśika’s exposition is 40 times longer than the explanation presented herewith by Śrī Govindarāja and it appears that the latter has just summarized the former. Since Śrī Rāmāyaṇa is born from Śrī Vālmīki’s meditation in samādhi on the order of Lord Brahmā in order to explicate the message of Vedic literature, the Rāmāyaṇa necessarily requires to be understood with reference to the Vedic scriptures. And this is what the commentator has done here.
11 Akampana wanted to be the first one to report to Rāvaṇa about the incident of Rāma’s destruction of the rākṣasas in Janasthāna.
Śrī Rāmāyaṇa is an elaboration of the [Dvaya] mantra [which contains the following two portions:
śrīman-nārāyaṇa-caraṇau śaraṇaṁ prapadye
“I surrender unto the lotus feet of Nārāyaṇa, the husband of Śrī, which grants shelter.”
śrīmate nārāyaṇāya namaḥ
“I offer my obeisances unto Nārāyaṇa, the husband of Śrī.”
This mantra is recited] while surrendering oneself [unto Lakṣmī Nārāyaṇa].
The second portion [of the Dvaya] has been elaborated till now in [this] scripture. While one carries out [a recitation of the Dvaya], the first portion [of the mantra] is [recited] first. But while analyzing the meaning [of the Dvaya], the second portion [of the mantra is analyzed first] because the method is taken up in line with the objective.1 Therefore, the second portion [of the Dvaya] has been elaborated at first [in the Rāmāyaṇa].
In the First Canto (Bāla-kāṇḍa), the union [of the Lord and] the mediator, which constitutes the meaning of śrīmate (“the husband of Śrī”) has been shown.2 In the Second Canto (Ayodhyā-kāṇḍa), [the Supreme Lord’s] manifestation of auspicious qualities such as being accessible, which constitutes the meaning of nārāyaṇāya (“unto Lord Nārāyaṇa”).3 This very word indicates that devotional service is the function [of the living entities in their relationship with the Supreme Lord] and this [function] was noted in the Third Canto (Araṇya-kāṇḍa) in the incidents prior to Śūrpaṇakhā’s arrival.4 In the incidents [after that and] ending with the death of Khara, removal of obstacles [to the attainment of the goal of life] is described and this is the meaning of the word namaḥ (“Obeisances”).5
The remaining portion of this scripture describes the meaning of the first portion [of the Dvaya]. In the remaining portion of the Third Canto, Vibhīṣaṇa’s proximity to the mediator is stated—[this explains śrīmat (“the husband of Śrī”).6 The Lord’s affection [is revealed] in the Fourth Canto (Kiṣkindhā-kāṇḍa)—this is the meaning of the word nārāyaṇa [which literally means “the shelter of all living entities”].7 The Fifth Canto (Sundara-kāṇḍa) reveals the unique excellence of the Supreme Lord’s transcendental and auspicious form, which is referred to by the word caraṇau (“unto the lotus feet”), because it has statements such as rāmaḥ kamala-patrākṣaḥ (“Śrī Rāma has eyes that resemble lotus petals.”8 The Sixth Canto (Yuddha-kāṇḍa) reveals the process of surrender [unto the Lord, which is referred to by the word śaraṇam (“which grants shelter”)].9 It should be understood that the Seventh Canto (Uttara-kāṇḍa) reveals the duties of a surrendered soul [which are referred to by the word prapadye (“I surrender”)].10
The author has thus incidentally described [Lord Rāma’s slaughter of the rākṣasas headed by Khara and Dūṣaṇa which was] the result of the sages’ surrender [unto Him]. This was required [for Rāmacandra] to kill Rāvaṇa, which was meant to be taken up [by Him in response to] the devas’ surrender [unto Him]. Now the author sows the seed [for the remaining discussion by describing] the kidnap of Sītā-devī which led to Rāvaṇa’s death.
I bow down my head and offer obeisances unto Him who is Jānakī’s hero and very life. He is capable of destroying all the worlds and recreating them.
Considering that Śūrpaṇakhā would go [to complain to Rāvaṇa], Akampana, a spy of Rāvaṇa, quickly departed from Janasthāna.11
GLOSS. Akampana departed from the bank of Godāvarī in Janasthāna [to Laṅkā] before Śūrpaṇakhā arrived [there].