FROM KHANGI SCHOOL TO CENTER FOR EXCELLENCE-3 >>>>> FIRST JOB AS GRADUATE LIBRARIAN >>>>> FROM LIBRARIAN TO CPRO TO CM KCR : VANAM JWALA NARASIMHA RAO

 FROM KHANGI SCHOOL TO CENTER FOR EXCELLENCE-3

FIRST JOB AS GRADUATE LIBRARIAN

PROFESSIONS, CHECKERED CAREER, AND LESSONS

FROM LIBRARIAN TO CPRO TO CM KCR

VANAM JWALA NARASIMHA RAO

(March 18, 2026)

The manner in which I obtained my first job and subsequent transfer as well as the progression of my early career thereafter, left a deep and lasting impression on me.  It shaped my understanding of human values in public life and helped define the direction of my professional journey. A few days before the birth of my first daughter (who today is a popular journalist running the independent YouTube channel ‘Prema The Journalist’), the results of my MA (Public Administration) examination were announced. I had passed, though narrowly, securing a third class and just missing a second division.

At that stage of life, I was uncertain about my future, whether to involve myself in village politics or to seek steady employment and build a career. On the third day after my wife delivered our daughter in Warangal, I set out from Khammam to see the newborn. That bus journey, ordinary in appearance, turned out to be a major turning point in my life and career. I happened to meet the then District Educational Officer of Khammam, Mrs Shahjahana Begum.

While travelling in a government-run Road Transport Corporation bus, I noticed a middle-aged woman standing and holding the rod belt. Unaware of who she was, I immediately offered her my seat. She accepted politely, thanking me, and we began a casual conversation. As we spoke, I shared details about myself, my educational background, my recent postgraduate results, my unemployment, and the purpose of my journey to Warangal.

At my request, she introduced herself as Mrs Shahjahana Begum, the District Educational Officer (DEO) of Khammam. I was genuinely surprised. I complimented her on travelling by public transport despite her senior position, especially when an official vehicle was available to her. Her simplicity, humility, and integrity left a powerful impression on me. She was travelling incognito, like any ordinary citizen, carrying her authority with quiet dignity. That moment taught me a profound lesson in public life, one that stayed with me long after.

Upon learning about my situation, she asked me to meet her after my return from Warangal and assured me that she would try to help me find temporary employment. True to her word, the first task I undertook after returning was to meet her in her office. Mrs Shahjahana Begum offered me instead of temporary post, a permanent job as a Graduate Librarian, with my initial posting at Government Junior College, Yellandu, about 30 kilometers from Khammam. She also assured me that a transfer to Khammam would be arranged within a few months. The process was facilitated smoothly with the support of the DEO Office Superintendent Sampath Rao, and Office Assistant Baru Sitaram Rao.

Thus began my professional life. I joined Government Junior College, Yellandu, on First August 1971, drawing a salary of exactly ₹270 per month. I developed a close friendship with the Principal, Krishna Murthy, and we often travelled together between Khammam and Yellandu on his motorcycle.

Those early months introduced me to the basic alphabets of work culture, discipline, cooperation, respect for institutions, and learning through shared experience. After about four or five months, an opportunity arose for a mutual transfer. Adiraju Subba Rao, who was working as Librarian at Shanti Nagar Multipurpose High School-cum-Junior College in Khammam, agreed to exchange postings. Accordingly, during the first week of January 1972, I joined at Shanti Nagar.

Shanti Nagar Multipurpose High School had a rich and notable history dating back to the time of the Nizam. Originally, it functioned as a ‘Madrasa’: a traditional Islamic educational institution. The term ‘Madrasa’ comes from the Arabic root ‘D-R-S,’ meaning ‘to study.’ In the Nizam’s dominion, such institutions were important centers of learning, encompassing both religious and general education. Over time, the institution evolved to meet changing educational needs while retaining its historical significance, eventually transforming into a junior college.

I was fortunate to work under a succession of dedicated and inspiring headmasters and teachers, including HV Sharma, TV Rajaiah, OV Chalapathi Rao, Durga Maheshwar Rao, Venkata Rao, Jakka Satyam, and several others. Their company was both enjoyable and enriching, and it contributed significantly to my learning and professional growth. The library at Shanti Nagar was quite old and housed books from an earlier era, many of which were likely rare and valuable. At that time, I was not yet formally qualified as a librarian. Nevertheless, using my own knowledge, common sense, and judgment, I organized the collection in a manner that made access easier for students and staff.

Much of this period coincided with the ‘Jai Andhra’ movement. Educational institutions, including ours, were frequently closed. Student attendance was minimal, and teachers often left soon after arriving. Many days passed quietly, with informal discussions among colleagues before returning home. Even in that unusual atmosphere, I continued to learn about institutional life and human relationships.

Throughout this phase, Mrs Shahjahana Begum remained a guiding influence. She advised me to become a qualified librarian, and to enroll as an in-service candidate for the Bachelor of Library Science (BLibSc) course at Osmania University. She personally took me to the then Joint Director of Education IV Chalapathi Rao, a Great English Literary Person, introduced me to him, and requested permission for my admission during the 1972–1973 academic year.

Though her request was not accepted at that time, the effort itself reflected her genuine concern for my growth. The following year, Mrs Shahjahana Begum was succeeded by Mrs Srikantam as DEO. She too forwarded my application with support. This time, it was considered favorably. Despite certain challenges, I secured admission and joined the BLibSc course around July–August 1973.

Looking back, I remain deeply indebted to Mrs Shahjahana Begum, my first role model in public service. Her humility, integrity, and willingness to help a young, uncertain graduate altered the course of my life. My time at the Government Junior College in Yellandu and Khammam Shanti Nagar High School taught me the very alphabets of work culture, learning from colleagues, respecting institutional systems, and growing through shared experience. Those formative years laid the foundation of my professional values and continue to serve as a source of strength and encouragement, both in times of distress and in moments of triumph. As Librarian I learnt to shape myself as a Journalist and Public Relations Professional.

{{From my Forthcoming Book

PROFESSIONS, CHECKERED CAREER, AND LESSONS

(From Librarian to CPRO to CM KCR)

A Journey from Khangi School to Center for Excellence}}

Rama Slaying of Tataka, Swadharma and Courage to Protect >>>>> SIMPLIFIED AND FAITHFUL RENDERING OF THE ADI KAVYA-14 : Vanam Jwala Narasimha Rao

 Rama Slaying of Tataka, Swadharma and Courage to Protect

SIMPLIFIED AND FAITHFUL RENDERING OF THE ADI KAVYA-14

Vanam Jwala Narasimha Rao

The Valmiki Ramayana is not merely an ancient epic but a timeless guide to understanding duty, courage, and righteous conduct. Each episode carries layers of meaning that continue to resonate even in today’s fast-changing world. For many young readers, especially those growing up away from India, these stories offer a gentle yet powerful introduction to Indian culture, ethics, and spiritual thought.

Among the earliest episodes of Sri Rama’s journey was the slaying of Tataka, a moment that appears simple on the surface but holds deep moral and philosophical questions. This story also teaches that difficult decisions, when made with clarity of purpose and inner discipline, can restore balance to society. It is with this understanding that the episode is retold here in a simple, meaningful manner.

Vishvamitra, the Learned Sage mentioned to Rama and Lakshmana that, because Demon Tataka lives nearby, the place where were then, became the forest of Tataka owing to her ghastly activities, destroying entire forest, rendering it as a devastated place. And hence, and precisely for that reason, she and her activities must be eradicated without any hesitation, and hinted to Rama and Lakshmana that, where there was the forest of Tataka there they had to go. 

Vishvamitra narrated the birth, marriage, and curse of demoness Tataka, who was atrocious towards the society. In today’s world, this also reflects how unchecked wrongdoing can destroy entire ecosystems or communities unless responsible individuals act. Such stories help modern readers understand that duty sometimes calls us to confront uncomfortable challenges for the greater good.

Rama wondered as to how a female was able to exert the strength of a thousand elephants and sought clarification of the Sage. ‘She assumed strength by the transfer of a boon’ replied Vishvamitra and continued narrating the details. ‘When the formidable but childless Suketu Yaksha prayed Brahma, gladdened with it, he gave his devotee a beautiful daughter, with the strength of a thousand elephants, who was named as Tataka. Suketu gave her to Jamba’s son Sunda as his wife. Tataka delivered a son, Mareecha, who by curse became an unconquerable demon.’ Such supernatural details, though mythic, symbolically remind today’s youth that power, be it physical, intellectual, or technological, can be used either constructively or destructively depending on one’s character.

‘There was a reason for Mareecha becoming a demon. When Sunda was eliminated by sage Agastya's curse, Tataka along with her son Mareecha decided to retaliate the sage. They roaringly rushed towards the sage and on seeing them like that, Agastya initially cursed Mareecha to attain demon-hood. Agastya later cursed Tataka saying that, she would no more be a beautiful looking, and instead, forthwith shall become a man eater with her form distorted, face contorted, and shape monstrous’ said Vishvamitra. This transformation highlights how anger and revenge, if left unchecked, can distort even the noblest qualities within an individual, a lesson as relevant today as it was in ancient storytelling.

He further told Rama that, furious by the curse, Tataka was vandalizing the auspicious province that was once strolled by Agastya. He also ordained Rama that, the highly atrocious and horrific behavioral Tataka with malefic valor shall be eliminated, basically for the welfare of Brahmans and Cows. Vishvamitra unhesitatingly and explicitly clarified to Rama that, there was no need for consideration regarding elimination of the female, when it comes to restore welfare of four categories of society, which has been an age-old tradition and duty. The emphasis on protecting society may be compared to how modern communities must stand up to forces, whether social, digital, or environmental, that disturb harmony and threaten collective wellbeing.

On hearing the encouraging words of Vishvamitra, Rama made it explicitly clear to his Mentor-the Sage that, in strict adherence to his father's order, the task that was entrusted by him, had to be definitely implemented. Rama also told Vishvamitra that, as his father Dasharatha directed him in Ayodhya, no word of him, be disregarded. Thus, he got ready, in preparation, to undertake the primary duty of eliminating Tataka. For younger generations, Rama’s obedience reveals the importance of honoring commitments and respecting guidance, even when the path ahead seems difficult.

Saying thus, Rama, tightened his left fist on the handgrip in the middle of the bow, and with the right hand he made a thunderous sound of the bow string making all the directions to blast. Instantly, the sound thus created, made the inhabitants of Tataka forest startled. Even Tataka was stunned by that sound, and she was painfully angry at it. She gave attention to the direction as to from where it emerged and she bitterly rushed there. This dramatic moment reminds modern readers that sometimes a courageous step or clear signal of readiness can shake even the strongest adversary.

Rama on seeing her, spoke to Lakshmana, suggesting him to notice Tataka’s ghastly physique, obviously with unstoppable and magical powers. He then rejoiced with the words that, he would make her to readily retreat by chopping off her ears and the tip of nose. Rama said that, her feminineness was protecting her, and hence would not really attempt to kill her immediately, but intended to terminate her impertinence and mobility. This reflects a profound ethical dilemma: the tension between compassion and necessary action, a dilemma modern leaders too encounter when making tough decisions.

While Rama was still speaking that way, convulsed in anger Tataka roaringly rushed towards Rama alone, swinging her arms. But the Brahmarshi Vishvamitra declared her off frighteningly, and said to Rama and Lakshmana, to be safe, and to be victorious. Throwing up dreadful dust on Rama and Lakshmana, Tataka perplexed them for a while with a massive cloud of dust, and inundated both with highly torrential stone rain, by which Rama became indignant. On forestalling her effusive stone storming with his arrow gale, Rama damaged both of her arms with arrows while she rushed towards them. The dust storm and confusion resemble modern-day distractions or misinformation that cloud judgment. Yet clarity, focus, and guidance can restore balance.

With her arms severed and fatigued she started to roar extremely at the nearby, and then provoked Lakshmana made her to lose her ears and the tip of nose by cutting them off. That guise changer vanished after variously altering her aspects, and then on baffling them with her illusoriness and discharging stone storms she moved about terribly. And on seeing both Rama and Lakshmana who were being overspread by storms of stones from all-over, Vishvamitra cautioned them. The ability of Tataka to change forms mirrors modern challenges that constantly shift, cyber threats, social pressures, or moral confusions, requiring alertness and resilience.

The Sage told Rama that, it was enough of his compassion, and hence, Tataka the sinister, behaviorally malevolent, hinderer of rituals, gripped in a short time with deceptive powers, shall be destroyed before sunset, because, demons at dusk and afterwards become irrefutable. Instantly, Rama displaying his capacity in audible archery, cleverly forestalled Tataka who had gone into invisibility, and storming stone-storms. Then, she dashed towards Rama and Lakshmana deafening vociferously. And Rama struck an arrow in her chest who was invading and speedily swooping down like a thunderbolt. She felled down and dead too.
This teaches that decisiveness at the right moment is crucial, whether in personal life, leadership, or societal issues, before problems grow beyond control.

On seeing her eliminated Indra and other Gods honored and repeatedly admired Rama. All of the gladdened gods in praise of Vishvamitra too, said that, he was blessed, and hence should show more concern for Rama, who was steadfast in following his assignments and thus must be the worthy receiver of more gifted missiles, to accomplish great deed of Gods. Then the sunset has come to pass but not before the Gods left the place. Recognition often follows those who uphold duty with discipline and humility, which are the values that remain timeless across cultures and generations.

Vishvamitra momentously satisfied with Rama and gladdened for the eradication of Tataka and kissed his forehead. He suggested that they stay there for the night, and only next day morning they would go to his nearby hermitage. Accordingly, all three comfortably stayed that night there in that forest of Tataka, which on the very day alone, was released from the curse, and it excelled out like the luxurious heavenly garden of Kubera, known as Chaitra Ratha. As had been the practice, Next day, when it was dawn Rama was awakened by the sunrise. This transformation of the forest signifies how the removal of one destructive force can restore peace and beauty, much like how clearing negativity from life brings renewed harmony.

The divine mission of Lord Sri Ramachandra incarnation began with the slaying of a woman. Yet, the Ramayana itself declared that killing a woman is a sin. Whether Killing a female righteous or wrongful, was a debatable rather controversial subject in Valmiki Ramayana. Despite scriptures view to do so was sinful, Rama's quest to establish righteousness started with the killing of a female. Nevertheless, it was said that, there was no harm to dharma since unrighteousness was eliminable though existing in the form of a female. Such moral debates encourage contemporary readers to reflect deeply on ethics, justice, and the complexities involved in choosing the path of righteousness.

Vishnu Purana says that eliminating one evildoer for the sake of many innocent is neither sin nor a crime. Both Bharata’s words and Hanuman’s words affirm this truth. Then why not Lord Sri Rama commit the act of killing a woman? The Bhagavad Gita was born precisely to resolve such doubts. Both Arjuna and Rama were Kshatriyas. Arjuna hesitated, fearing sin in killing his own kinsmen even though it was his Swadharma (Righteous Duty). Likewise, Rama was troubled by doubt, whether it was right to kill a woman in the name of Swadharma. Even today, individuals often face dilemmas where personal emotion clashes with ethical duty, and these epics help frame such dilemmas in a larger philosophical context.

What Lord Krishna taught Arjuna, Sage Vishwamitra did for Rama. Though devoid of personal desire, Sri Ramachandra performed his duty as ordained by Swadharma. Therefore, the slaying of Tataka by Sri Rama is not a sin and absolutely correct. Thus, the episode reminds modern readers, especially younger generations, that righteousness is not merely about comfort or sentiment, but about acting responsibly for the welfare of all.

The episode of Tataka’s slaying thus stands not as an act of aggression, but as a profound lesson in Swadharma, the rightful duty one must uphold even amidst doubt. While the outward narrative describes a battle between Rama and a fearsome demoness, its inner message is about discernment, responsibility, and moral courage. In a world where challenges often take new shapes, be it social, technological, emotional, the story reminds that righteousness still demands clarity, compassion, and firmness.

For the younger generation, it reinforces the idea that doing what is Right and doing Right things, may not always be easy, but it is always essential. And for adults, it renews the understanding that leadership, whether in family or society, is rooted in the ability to make choices guided by truth and the greater good. Through this simple yet profound event, the Ramayana once again affirms that Dharma, when upheld with sincerity, illuminates the path for all. {PHOTOGRAPHS COURTESY RAMA BHAKTA VIJAYA RAGHAVA DAS}

ధర్మరాజు రాజసూయ యాగం, జరాసంధ, శిశుపాల వధ >>>>> శ్రీ మహాభాగవత కథ-77 : వనం జ్వాలా నరసింహారావు

 ధర్మరాజు రాజసూయ యాగం, జరాసంధ, శిశుపాల వధ

శ్రీ మహాభాగవత కథ-77

వనం జ్వాలా నరసింహారావు

సూర్య దినపత్రిక (మార్చ్ 16, 2026)

కంII              చదివెడిది భాగవతమిది,

చదివించును కృష్ణు, డమృతఝరి పోతనయున్

                               చదివినను ముక్తి కలుగును,

చదివెద నిర్విఘ్నరీతి ‘జ్వాలా’ మతినై

శ్రీకృష్ణుడు ఇంద్రప్రస్థ నగరానికి విచ్చేశాడని, సమీపంలోని ఉద్యానవనంలో బసచేశాడని ధర్మరాజుకు తెలిసింది. ఆయన పరమానందభరితుడై తమ్ములతో, భందుమిత్రులతో, కృష్ణుడికి ఎదురేగి స్వాగతం చెప్పడానికీ బయల్దేరి, ఆయన్ను చేరుకున్నాడు. శ్రీకృష్ణుడిని ధర్మరాజు గాఢంగా ఆలింగనం చేసుకున్నాడు. ఆయన తరువాత భీమార్జునులు అలాగే చేశారు. నకుల సహదేవులు నమస్కరించారు. అంతా కలిసి ఇంద్రప్రస్థ పురంలోకి ప్రవేశించారు.

పురజనులంతా శ్రీకృష్ణుడిని చూడడానికి దారిపొడవునా గుమిగూడారు. పౌరకాంతలు ఆయన లీలావిశేషాలను ముచ్చటించుకున్నారు. ఆ దివ్యమూర్తిని తమ మనస్సులలో నిలుపుకుని ఆనందంతో మైమరచి కృష్ణ లీలలను గీతాలుగా పాడుకున్నారు. ముత్తైదువలు కృష్ణుడికి హారతులిస్తుంటే, పాండవులు ఆయన్ను అనుసరిస్తుంటే, శ్రీకృష్ణుడు అంతఃపురంలోకి ప్రవేశించాడు. మేనత్త కుంతీదేవికి నమస్కరించాడు. ద్రౌపదీదేవి కృష్ణుడికి నమస్కరించింది. ఆయనతో వచ్చిన వారందరినీ సముచిత రీతిగా గౌరవించి, సత్కరించారు. ఇంద్రప్రస్థ పురంలో శ్రీకృష్ణుడు కొన్ని నెలలపాటు వున్నాడు.

ఒకరోజున ధర్మరాజు నిండుకొలువు తీర్చి, సింహాసనం మీద ఆసీనుడై, శ్రీకృష్ణుడిని చూసి, రాజసూయ యజ్ఞం చేయాలన్న తన కోరికను వెల్లడించాడు. దాన్ని నిర్వహించడానికి శ్రీకృష్ణుడికంటే ఎక్కువైన ఆత్మబంధువులు ఎవరూ లేరని కూడా అన్నాడు. ధర్మరాజు ఆలోచన చాలా గొప్పగా వుందని, సమస్త శత్రునాశనానికి కారణమైన రాజసూయ యజ్ఞాన్ని త్వరగా ప్రారంభించమని, ఆయన నలుగురు తమ్ములు శత్రువులను శౌర్య సంపదతో సంహరించగల వీరాధి వీరులని, యజ్ఞం చేశాడన్న ఘనకీర్తిని సంపాదించి ఆయన శాసనం కింద సమస్త భూచక్రాన్ని నిలిపి వుంచమని అన్నాడు శ్రీకృష్ణుడు. తాను కూడా ధర్మరాజు ఆజ్ఞానుసారం అన్నీ చేస్తానని, యజ్ఞానికి కావాల్సిన సమస్త వస్తు సామగ్రిని తక్షణమే తెప్పించమని, సమస్త శత్రువులను గెలవడానికి ఆయన తమ్ములను నాలుగు దిక్కులకు పంపించమని కృష్ణుడు చెప్పాడు.

కృష్ణుడి సూచన, సలహా మేరకు సహదేవుడిని దక్షిణ దిక్కుకు, నకులుడిని పడమటి దిక్కుకు, ఆర్జునుడిని ఉత్తర దిక్కుకు, భీముడిని తూర్పు దిక్కుకు శత్రు రాజులను జయించి రావడానికి చతురంగ బలాలతో వెళ్లమన్నాడు ధర్మరాజు. నలుగురు తమ్ములూ అన్నగారు చెప్పినట్లు నలు దిక్కులకు పోయి, వీరాధివీరులైన రాజులందరినీ జయించి, వెనక్కు వచ్చి, ధర్మరాజుకు నమస్కరించి, తాము ఏఏ దేశాల రాజులను ఎలా గెలిచింది వివరించారు. ఒక్క జరాసంధుడు మాత్రం ధర్మరాజు అధికారాన్ని ఆమోదించలేదని చెప్పాడు అర్జునుడు. జరాసంధుడిని చంపటానికి తనకు ఉద్ధవుడు చెప్పిన ఉపాయం ప్రకారం, తాను, భీమార్జునులు కలిసి బ్రాహ్మణ వేషంలో మగధ దేశాధిపతి దగ్గరికి వెళ్లి, యుద్ధ బిక్ష ప్రసాదించమని అడిగి, ఆయనను అంగీకరింప చేసి, జరాసంధుడిని భీముడితో చంపిస్తానని అంటాడు కృష్ణుడు.

ఆ తరువాత భీమార్జునులు, శ్రీకృష్ణుడు కలిసి బ్రాహ్మణుల వేషాలు ధరించి, జరాసంధుడి రాజధానైన గిరివ్రజ పురంలోకి పోయి, జరాసంధుడిని కలిశారు. ఆయన్ను, ఆయన దాతృత్వాన్ని పొగిడారు వారు. బలి చక్రవర్తితో, శిబితో పోల్చారు. వారి మాటలు విని ఆశ్చర్యంగా చూశాడు వారిని. వారు బ్రాహ్మణ వేషంలో వచ్చిన రాజులని గ్రహించాడు. బ్రాహ్మణులు కోరింది ఏదైనా ఇచ్చి తీరుతానని నిశ్చయించుకున్నాడు. కృష్ణభీమార్జునులను చూసి, ఏంకావాలో కోరుకొమ్మన్నాడు. యుద్ధ బిక్షను ప్రసాదించమని అడిగాడు శ్రీకృష్ణుడు. తామెవరో చెప్పాడు. తమ ముగ్గురిలో ఎవరితోనైనా జరాసంధుడు ద్వంద్వ యుద్ధం చేయడం తమ అభిమతం అన్నాడు. తనను యుద్ధంలో ఎదిరించి కృష్ణుడు పోరాడలేడని, అర్జునుడు తనకన్నా చిన్నవాడని, వాయుపుత్రుడే తనతో సరి సమానంగా యుద్ధం చేయగల బలశాలి అని, కాబట్టి భీమసేనుడితో యుద్ధం చేస్తానని అంటూ, భీముడిని యుద్ధానికి పిలిచాడు. ఒక భయంకరమైన గద తెప్పించి భీముడికి ఇచ్చాడు జరాసంధుడు.

పురం బయటకు వెళ్లి భీమజరాసంధులు యుద్ధానికి సిద్ధమయ్యారు. వారి మధ్య యుద్ధం మహా భయంకరంగా సాగింది. వారి ద్వంద్వ యుద్ధం ఉగ్రరూపాన్ని దాల్చింది. ఒకరినొకరు కొట్టుకుంటూ ఘోరాతిఘోరంగా యుద్ధం చేశారు. ఇద్దరి గదాయుధాలు ముక్కలయ్యాయి. బాహువులతో ముష్టియుద్ధానికి దూకారిద్దరూ. ముష్టి యుద్ధం కూడా ఉగ్ర స్థాయికి చేరుకుంది. శ్రీకృష్ణుడు భీముడికి తన దివ్యశక్తితో అలసట లేకుండా చేసి అత్యంత బలాన్ని ప్రసాదించాడు. భీముడు చూస్తుండగా ఒక చెట్టు కొమ్మ చివరను పట్టుకుని దానిని రెండుగా చీల్చేశాడు. జరాసంధుడిని అలా చీల్చమని పరోక్షంగా సంజ్ఞ చేశాడలా. భీముడు జరాసంధుడిని కింద పడేసి, శరీరాన్ని రెండుగా చీల్చేసి, పెద్దగా అరిచాడు. కృష్ణార్జునులు భీముడిని అభినందించారు. కృష్ణుడు జరాసంధుడి కొడుకు సహదేవుడికి పట్టం కట్టాడు. చెరసాలలో వున్న రాజులను బంధవిముక్తులను చేశాడు. వారంతా కృష్ణుడిని స్తుతించారు.

కృష్ణుడు ఆ తరువాత భీమార్జునులతో కలిసి ఇంద్రప్రస్థ పురం చేరుకున్నాడు. ధర్మరాజు శ్రీకృష్ణుడికి నమస్కరించి, ఆయన అంగీకారంతో రాజసూయ యాగం చేయడానికి బ్రాహ్మణులను ఋత్విజులుగా ఆహ్వానించాడు. మహామునులెందరినో యజ్ఞానికి ఆహ్వానించాడు. కురుకుల వృద్ధులను ఆహ్వానించాడు. గురూత్తములను పిలిచాడు. దుర్యోధనాదులను ఆహ్వానించాడు. బ్రాహ్మణులు, అనేకమంది రాజులు రాజసూయ యాగానికి వచ్చారు. ఏ లోపం లేకుండా ధర్మరాజు యజ్ఞదీక్షను స్వీకరించాడు. కురు సార్వభౌముడైన దుర్యోధనుడిని, కర్ణుడిని, భీముడిని,   ఆర్జునుడిని,  నకులుడిని, సహదేవుడిని, ద్రౌపదీదేవిని, ఇలా ఒక్కొక్కరిని ఒక్కొక్క పనిలో నియమించాడు ధర్మరాజు.

బ్రహ్మాది దేవతలు యజ్ఞం చూడడానికి వచ్చారు. శాస్త్రోక్తంగా రాజసూయ యాగం జరిగింది. హవిస్సులను ఆయా దేవతలకు అందచేశారు. యజ్ఞం పరిసమాప్తి చివరిరోజున ధర్మరాజు ఋత్విజులను, సదస్యులను, గురువులను, బ్రాహ్మణులను పూజించాడు. అప్పుడు ‘అగ్రపూజ’కు అర్హుడు ఎవరని ధర్మరాజు ప్రశ్నించాడు. పరమాత్ముడైన శ్రీకృష్ణుడు అగ్రపూజార్హుడు అని సహదేవుడు అన్నాడు. ఆయనక్కడ వుండగా వేరేవాడు ఎలా అర్హుడవుతారని ప్రశ్నించాడు. అక్కడున్న పెద్దలంతా సహదేవుడు చెప్పినట్లే చేయమని ధర్మరాజుకు చెప్పారు. ధర్మరాజు అత్యంత భక్తి భావంతో శ్రీకృష్ణుడి పాదపద్మాలను కడిగాడు. పవిత్ర జలాలను తన శిరస్సు మీద చల్లుకున్నాడు. కుంతీదేవి, భీమార్జున, నకులసహదేవులు, ద్రౌపదీదేవి కూడా జలాలను చల్లుకున్నారు.

అక్కడే వున్న శిశుపాలుడు శ్రీకృష్ణుడికి జరుగుతున్న ఆ సన్మానాన్ని సహించలేకపోయాడు. ఆగ్రహంతో ఊగిపోయాడు. కృష్ణుడికి అగ్రపూజ చేయడాన్ని తీవ్రంగా వ్యతిరేకించాడు. ఇదంతా వివేకం లేని పనన్నాడు. కృష్ణుడు కులగోత్రాలు లేనివాడన్నాడు. వావివరుసలు లేనివాడన్నాడు. జారుడని, జన్మాంతందాకా చోరుడని నిందిస్తూ కృష్ణుడు అగ్రపూజకు అర్హుడు కాడన్నాడు. శిశుపాలుడు ఎంతగా నిందిస్తున్నా శ్రీకృష్ణుడు మొదలు పట్టించుకోలేదు. కాని సభాసదులు ఆ నిందలు భరించలేకపోయారు. శిశుపాలుడిని ఎదిరించారు. పాండవులతో యుద్ధానికి దిగాడు శిశుపాలుడు. అప్పటిదాకా మౌనంగా వున్న శ్రీకృష్ణుడు శిశుపాలుడిని కోపంగా చూసి, తన సుదర్శన చక్రంతో శిశుపాలుడి శిరస్సును ఖండించాడు. శిశుపాలుడి శరీరం నుండి తేజస్సు వెలువడి శ్రీకృష్ణుడిలో కలిసిపోయింది.

ఆ తరువాత ధర్మరాజు సన్మానించాల్సిన వారందరినీ సన్మానించాడు. ద్రౌపదీదేవితో కలిసి అవభ్రుత స్నానానికి గంగానదికి పరివార సమేతంగా పోయాడు ధర్మరాజు. రాజసూయ యాగం చూడడానికి వచ్చిన బ్రహ్మాది దేవతలు సకల సత్కారాలు పొంది వెళ్లిపోయారు. శ్రీకృష్ణుడిని మరికొంత కాలం ఇంద్రప్రస్థ పురంలోనే వుండమని ధర్మరాజు కోరడంతో ఆయన పాండవులతో కలిసి అక్కడే వున్నాడు. దుర్యోధనుడు మాత్రం ఆయన సహజ గుణానికి అనుగుణంగా అసూయ పడ్డాడు. ఆ తరువాత కొన్నాళ్లకు శ్రీకృష్ణుడు ధర్మరాజును వీడ్కొని, భార్యలతో, హితులతో, బంధువులతో కలిసి ద్వారకానగారానికి వెళ్లాడు.                 

       (బమ్మెర పోతన శ్రీమహాభాగవతం, రామకృష్ణ మఠం ప్రచురణ ఆధారంగా)

Ramayana, Mahabharata: Importance of Leadership >>>>> Vanam Jwala Narasimha Rao

 Ramayana, Mahabharata 

Importance of Leadership

Vanam Jwala Narasimha Rao

The Hans India (March 15, 2026)

{{In modern democratic systems, the absence of leadership may not necessarily be the absence of office-holders, but rather the absence of direction, clarity, and timely decision‑making. When leaders hesitate during crises or fail to provide guidance, citizens feel abandoned and public confidence begins to weaken. Just as the sages observed that farmers might hesitate to sow their seeds without assurance of order, modern societies also depend upon confidence in governance} – Editor’s Synoptic Note

The reflections of the ‘Learned Sages’ in the court of Ayodhya following the death of King Dasharatha, as narrated in the Valmiki Ramayana, offer a timeless meditation on the importance of Leadership in sustaining social order. Concerned about the broader consequences of a vacuum of authority and the absence of leadership, the erudite elders warn that such a condition cannot continue without consequences even for a short period.

Although the language of the Valmiki Ramayana appeared in the context of kingship, the principle it expressed transcends the political structure of monarchy and speaks directly to the broader idea of Leadership even within ‘Modern Democratic Systems.’ It touches the ‘Leadership in a Democratic Oligarchy’ especially in the Indian context, because societies require effective, responsible, responsive, and ‘Attentive Leadership’ to maintain stability and public confidence.

A comparable insight into the moral influence of Leadership appears in the Virata Parva of the Mahabharata also. During the period when the Pandavas were living incognito, Duryodhana sent spies in many directions to discover their whereabouts. Despite extensive efforts, the spies failed to identify them. At that moment the elder Bhishma on the request of Duryodhana, offered a significant observation: even if the exact location of Yudhishthira was unknown, the land where he lived could be recognized through the character and prosperity of the society around him. Yet another indication of Leadership Divinity and Qualities.

In a democracy, leadership as a concept and practice, should not reside solely in a single individual, notwithstanding capable leadership, particularly at the executive level, but within a network of constitutional institutions, such as, the elected representatives, administrators, courts, civic bodies, and civil society organizations. When such leadership is either absent, or indifferent, or ineffective, the consequences begin to resemble the disorder described by the sages of Ayodhya.

In the Ramayana narrative, Rama and Lakshmana departed to the forest, Bharata and Shatrughna were away, and the throne stood empty after the death of Dasharatha. The elders feared that society would drift into uncertainty and disorder. In modern democratic systems, the absence of leadership may not necessarily be the absence of office-holders, but rather the absence of direction, clarity, and timely decision‑making. When leaders hesitate during crises or fail to provide guidance, citizens feel abandoned and public confidence begins to weaken.

Just as the sages observed that farmers might hesitate to sow their seeds without assurance of order, modern societies also depend upon confidence in governance. Investors hesitate to invest, communities hesitate to cooperate, and public initiatives slow down when leadership appears uncertain or ineffective. The Ramayana Passage also hints at another danger: leadership that exists in form but not in spirit. Even if rulers are present, if they fail to safeguard justice and protect society, the effect can resemble the absence of governance.

In democratic systems this indifference may appear when leaders neglect the needs of the people, fail to respond to injustice, or ignore social inequalities. When public servants lose their sense of duty, the moral authority of governance diminishes. Citizens may then feel that institutions serve narrow interests rather than the common good.

This observation of sages in Ayodhya that without righteous authority corruption would flourish and officials might accept bribes instead of administering justice, resonates strongly with contemporary concerns about administrative corruption and misuse of power. It reminds that the vitality of democracy depends not merely on elections but on ethical commitment to public welfare. When those in authority possess power but lack the ability, wisdom, or courage to exercise it effectively, governance becomes fragile.

Examples quoted in Valmiki Ramayana, illustrate that leadership is not only about authority but also about competence and responsibility. Perhaps the most profound insight in the deliberations of the Ayodhya Council was that leadership provides an invisible assurance that allows ordinary life to flourish. When governance is stable and just, people feel safe to pursue their livelihoods, celebrate festivals, travel, study, and engage in trade.

Classical Telugu interpretation of an episode, in the rendering of the Mahabharata by the poet Tikkana, emphasizes that a ruler like Dharmaraja embodies a constellation of noble virtues, such as, truthfulness, justice, compassion, generosity, respect for learning, discipline of the senses, protection of the virtuous, and punishment of wrongdoing. Where such leadership exists, these values gradually permeate society itself. Prosperity naturally follows: agriculture flourishes, cattle wealth increases, and people conduct their lives with moral restraint and mutual respect.

This episode conveys a profound principle: Leadership is not merely the exercise of authority but a moral force that shapes the character of society. Just as the absence of leadership can produce disorder, the presence of virtuous leadership elevates the ethical climate of an entire community. The ruler’s character becomes reflected in the conduct of the people and the well‑being of the land.

Taken together, the insights of the Ramayana and the Mahabharata, they illuminate an enduring principle of governance. Leadership must be judged not merely by the possession of authority but by the ability to safeguard justice, inspire trust, and promote collective welfare. The elders of Ayodhya recognized that the stability of a nation depends upon the timely presence of wise and committed leaders. Their reflections remind that governance is not merely a political arrangement but a moral responsibility entrusted to those who guide society.

The narrative from the Ramayana therefore continues to illuminate modern discussions on democratic leadership. It encourages reflection on the qualities that sustain good governance, with the principles of integrity, vigilance, compassion, competence, and a genuine commitment to public welfare. A leader’s personal character influences not only administrative decisions but also the ethical tone of the society in which he or she governs.

At the same time, the reflection of the sages in Ayodhya leads to another important understanding: leadership is not merely about the physical presence of a ruler. In modern democratic frameworks there may always be a Chief Minister or a Prime Minister occupying office. Yet the true question is not whether the office is filled, but whether the individual who occupies it provides genuine, efficient, and responsible leadership. Leadership transitions in democratic systems may occur through elections, constitutional procedures, or political developments within parties.

Sometimes such changes happen smoothly when one party assumes power after another. At other times they may emerge from internal struggles, strategic maneuvering, or political calculations. During such periods, a nation may technically possess a government, yet the spirit of leadership may appear uncertain or weakened. In such circumstances the mere existence of leadership positions does not automatically guarantee clarity, decisiveness, or moral authority in governance. Leadership must actively guide institutions, reassure citizens, and provide direction during moments of uncertainty. Without such guidance, public confidence may erode and institutions may gradually lose their effectiveness.

The sages of Ayodhya intuitively understood this deeper truth. Their concern was that the kingdom required active, responsible, and righteous leadership to sustain order and stability. This insight remains profoundly relevant in contemporary democratic societies. The legitimacy of leadership ultimately rests not merely on occupying office but on fulfilling the responsibility that accompanies it. Thus, the wisdom preserved in India’s epics reminds that leadership is not defined by position alone but by the ability to protect stability, uphold justice, and serve the collective welfare of society.

Democratic governance must therefore value the role of experienced statesmen, scholars, jurists, and institutional advisers (Like ‘Learned Sages’) who may contribute to responsible decision-making process. Political systems evolve across centuries, yet the deeper principles of governance remain constant. The insights of the Ramayana and the Mahabharata together remind modern democracies that stable governance ultimately rests upon ethical, responsible, and enlightened leadership committed to the welfare of society. The reflections drawn from the Ramayana and the Mahabharata together reveal a deeper civilizational continuity in the Indian understanding of leadership.

Pondering War, Peace, and the Future of the United Nations >>>>> A Call for Moral Courage in a Troubled World : Vanam Jwala Narasimha Rao

 Pondering War, Peace, and the Future of the United Nations

A Call for Moral Courage in a Troubled World

Vanam Jwala Narasimha Rao

Conflicts may change their geographical settings, but the deeper patterns of rivalry, strategic interest, and human suffering shall remain remarkably similar with relevance. Perhaps, the reflections in my writings in the context of earlier global crises, represent decades of inquisitiveness concerning war, peace, and international responsibility. In the modern context, when tensions rise between nations, absolutely unconcerned about life and safety of civilians, the consequences are beyond borders. Ordinary people across the world bear the cost.

An old Turkish saying captures this tragic reality: ‘The horse kicked the mule, the mule kicked the horse, and it is the poor donkey that gets the shot.’ In geopolitical conflicts, the ‘donkey’ represents ordinary humanity, especially, the developing and underdeveloped world, caught between the aimless, objectless, and not directed toward any goal of stronger powers that compels to ponder deeply. The question and deeper issue concerns the larger moral and institutional framework meant to prevent war in the modern world.

The United Nations Organization was born out of the ashes of the Second World War, when humanity collectively resolved that another global catastrophe must never be allowed to occur. Its origins can be traced to a sequence of historic events: the declaration in London in 1941 by governments in exile, the Atlantic Charter signed the same year, the Declaration by United Nations in Washington in 1942, the Moscow Declaration in 1943, the deliberations at Tehran and Dumbarton Oaks, and finally the historic San Francisco Conference of on June 26, 1945 which adopted the Charter.

Eventually the UNO came into existence on October 24, 1945, about 81 years ago. The intention behind these efforts was clear. Nations would create a permanent global forum where disputes could be resolved through dialogue, diplomacy, and international law rather than through military confrontation. The UN was meant to embody the collective conscience of humanity.

Incidentally and not a surprise that, the same Tehran that was part of UN formation, the capital and largest city of Iran, and the capital of Tehran Province, is in the midst of a dire situation following US-Israeli missile strikes. Residents face emptied streets, ongoing attacks, and disrupted utilities. Despite hopes from foreign leaders for an uprising, evidence of imminent protests is lacking. People fear for their safety and struggle to find basic necessities amid the chaos.

Today, after many decades of existence, seriously and honestly speaking, UNO’s success in preventing wars and sustaining global peace, may perhaps is not even on paper, not to speak of in practice. With 193 countries as its members the UN is nothing but a gossip club and hardly anyone listens to anyone. Few instances that perhaps could be counted such as, Suez Crisis, Korean problem etc. UN success record is dismal. There exists a gap between noble ideas and reality.

Member Nations continue to pursue strategic interests that override collective decisions. Security Council and Veto power of the permanent members, propel UNO as an indecisive instrument of peace and passive platform for ceremonial debates. Numerous examples illustrating the complex interplay between regional leadership and global power politics, as well as leaders involved are available from time to time.

In the Middle Eastern History Great Persons, such as Gamal Abdel Nasser, Anwar Sadat, and Muammar Gaddafi shaped the political direction of their nations and influenced wider regional dynamics. Their decisions were frequently taken in the shadow of global strategic competition. At the same time, successive US Presidents, from Eisenhower to Ronald Reagan, George Bush, Barack Obama, and Joe Biden, have shaped the international environment through diplomacy, alliances, sanctions, and at times military intervention.

These leaders emerged during periods of intense geopolitical transformation. Nasser symbolized Arab nationalism and anti-imperialist sentiment. Sadat reshaped regional diplomacy through his bold peace initiatives. Gaddafi represented a different form of revolutionary politics that challenged Western influence while pursuing his own ideological path. Successive US Presidents influenced global events in profound ways through their policies. Since the early Cold War strategies US Leadership played a visible role in shaping international relations, with varied approaches within the broader framework of national interest and strategic calculation.

 The Philosophical Question is why humanity continue to return to war despite centuries of painful lessons. May be the nature of power itself. Nations pursue security, influence, and prestige. Moral philosophy and ethical reflection precisely remain essential. Nobel Laurette Bertrand Russell devoted much of his intellectual life to what may rightly be described as a quest for peace. He warned that technological progress, especially the development of nuclear weapons, fundamentally changed the nature of war.  Russell’s message was simple yet profound.

Movements for peace emerge from courageous intellectuals, scientists, writers, religious leaders, and civil society organizations. In the frontline should be recipients of the Nobel Peace Prize.  Their moral voice assumes special significance. These laureates, whether individuals, humanitarian leaders, or global organizations, symbolize humanity’s enduring aspiration for reconciliation over confrontation. Their recognition by the international community represents not merely past achievements but continuing moral responsibility. When they collectively advocate restraint, dialogue, and peaceful negotiation, in moments of rising hostility, their voices will help restore perspective, reminding humanity that the ultimate purpose of power and diplomacy must be the preservation of life and dignity.

If the international community truly desires lasting peace, then institutions designed to safeguard that peace must evolve with changing realities. Education, public discourse, and responsible leadership all play crucial roles in shaping this transformation. When citizens begin to view peace not as weakness but as strength, political leaders will find greater encouragement to pursue diplomatic solutions. In the interconnected world of the twenty‑first century, wars between countries often produce ripple effects felt far beyond the battlefield. Once again, the wisdom of the Turkish proverb becomes painfully evident. The challenge, therefore, lies in changing attitudes of multiple stakeholders.

Human history has repeatedly demonstrated both the tragedy of war and the possibility of peace. The institutions created after the Second World War were built on the hope that humanity had learned from its darkest experiences. Whether that hope will endure depends on the choices made today by nations, leaders, thinkers, and ordinary citizens. The time has come for a renewed commitment to the principles of dialogue, restraint, and mutual respect. The spirit of Bertrand Russell’s quest for peace reminds that intellectual courage and moral clarity remain essential in confronting the dangers of our age.

Notwithstanding its continues ineffectiveness, still, UNO remains one of humanity’s most ambitious institutional efforts to safeguard global peace. Created in the aftermath of unprecedented destruction, it was intended to prevent war through collective responsibility and dialogue. Yet changing geopolitical realities increasingly tested its effectiveness, particularly when major powers hold divergent interests. While critics question whether it has fully met its expectations, its humanitarian programs, peacekeeping missions, and diplomatic forums continue to serve millions around the world. The real challenge, therefore, before UNO is the willingness of member states to strengthen it, reform it, and genuinely empower it to act for the common good of humanity.

In the evolving international landscape, the role and outlook of the leadership of the United States naturally attract global attention. The perspectives and policy approach of Donald Trump, now again entrusted with high office, are watched with both curiosity and respect by observers across the world. While acknowledging the distinctive thought process he brings to international affairs, it may be constructive to understand more clearly the larger framework guiding his strategic choices. What are the defined goals, the inputs envisaged to achieve them, the interim gains expected along the way, and the ultimate objective in terms of long-term American interests and global stability? Such clarity would enrich global understanding and perhaps strengthen the collective pursuit of peace.