In Kamban’s Tamil retelling, a minor twist in the tale adds greater emotional intensity to the episode of Dashratha’s death.
Last rites by Shatrughna
Shortly after Ram left for the forest, Dashratha died of a broken heart. It was a tragic moment; despite having four sons, not one was by his side when he died. Two had been exiled to the forest. The other two had gone to visit their maternal uncle. When Bharata and Shatrughna returned to Ayodhya, they were shattered by the sight of their father’s corpse embalmed in a vat of medicated oil. Bharata, being the eldest son present there, was expected to perform the funeral rites. But Vasishtha informed him that before dying, Dashratha had expressly instructed that Kaikeyi’s son should not be allowed to cremate him. Thus it was left to the youngest son, Shatrughna, to cremate Dashratha.
Krittivasa’s Bengali Ramayana is amongst the earliest retellings to introduce us to the Lakshman rekha, the line that Sita was not supposed to cross. Valmiki makes no mention of this line yet today it forms an integral part of any Ramayana narration. Likewise, the story of Shabari feeding berries to Ram comes not from the Valmiki Ramayana but from the eleventh century Padma Puran.
Perhaps uncomfortable with the idea of Sita being touched by a demon, some retellings like the Adhyatma Ramayana in Malayalam suggest that the Sita who Ravana abducted was not Sita but a double. This narrative introduces us to another character, Vedavati, who is now part of Ram’s folklore.
Maya Sita
The Sita that Ravana abducted was not the real Sita. While Ram and Lakshman were away chasing the golden deer, a duplicate of Sita had emerged from the kitchen fire of Sita’s grass hut. She identified herself as Vedavati, a hermit woman whom Ravana had once tried to rape. To save herself, she had jumped into fire and sworn that she would be the cause of Ravana’s death. Vedavati told Sita of what was to pass and advised her to enter the fire and live with Agni, the fire god, until the death of Ravana while she took her place. Sita did as advised and Ravana ended up abducting Vedavati assuming she was Sita. After Ravana was killed and Ram asked his wife to prove her chastity by walking through fire, the duplicate Sita walked into the fire while the real Sita walked out. For helping Sita, Vedavati was given a boon that in Kali yuga she would marry Vishnu.
Nature has always played an important role in most Ramayana retellings. The Bhil Ramayana, also known as Rom Sitma ni Varta, informs us that Sita had six fingers. She cut the sixth finger from which rose the bamboo tree. From the Oriya Ramayana of Balaram Das comes the now-popular children’s story of how squirrels came to have a striped back.
Squirrel’s stripes
While the bridge to Lanka was being built, Ram noticed a tiny squirrel carrying a tiny pebble towards the sea, determined to play his part in rescuing Sita. While the monkeys were amused by this, Ram was so moved that he caressed the back of the squirrel. This left a mark on the squirrel’s back. Since that day all squirrels have stripes on their back, a reminder of Ram’s grateful touch.
Indian traders took the Ramayana to Southeast Asia and the story of Ram is now an integral part of Indonesian, Thai and Malay cultures inspiring theatre, shadow puppetry and brilliant mural paintings.
The Ramayana in Thailand, written by the kings of Siam, is called Ramakirti or Ramakien. It narrates the tale of Phra Ram who is king of Ayutthaya, and the avatar of Phra Narai (the Thai Vishnu). Here, Hanuman plays an important role. But this Hanuman is not the devoted celibate servant that Hindus of India are familiar with; he is a romantic adventurer who helps Ram defeat Tosakan, the Thai Ravana. The following story illustrates how Thai kings portrayed Hanuman as the very capable monkey-general of Ram.
Hanuman’s tail
A mermaid queen kept destroying the bridge to Lanka on Ravana’s instructions until Hanuman went underwater and overpowered her. When the bridge was finally built and the monkeys began to cross it, Ravana shot two powerful arrows and broke the two ends of the bridge, trapping Ram and his army in the middle. Hanuman then increased his size to that of a giant, and used his tail to bridge the gap. Ram and his army then crossed over to Lanka on Hanuman’s mighty tail.
In the war between the Rakshasas and the Vanaras, many new characters were created in many Ram-kathas to spice up the action. One of them was Mahiravana, sometimes known as Ahiravana, a sorcerer who lived in the nether regions. This character, also found in the Sanskrit Agni Puran, is believed to have been inspired by the rise of Tantra and black magic in medieval times especially in the eastern parts of India.
Mahiravana
On his brother’s request, the sorcerer Mahiravana put all the monkeys to sleep and carried Ram and Lakshman to his subterranean lair with the intention of sacrificing them to the goddess Kali so as to get more occult powers. Hanuman managed to track Mahiravana’s path and, in the form of a bee, he entered the sorcerer’s lair. ‘When he is ready to make the sacrifice, he will ask you to bow your head and place it on the chopping block,’ said Hanuman to Ram. ‘Tell him then that being the son of a king you do not know how to bow your head. Ask him to demonstrate.’ Ram did as Hanuman advised. An exasperated Mahiravana agreed to demonstrate. He bowed his head and placed it on the chopping block. In a flash, Hanuman swung the sacrificial sword and severed Mahiravana’s neck. The promised offering was made to Kali. But it was not Ram’s head that she was given. It was Mahiravana’s.
As the worship of the goddess became widespread, many tales emerged that portrayed Sita not as a victim but as the real power behind Ram who chose to appear demure so that her husband could take the credit of victory. The following story is found in the Adbhut Ramayana.
Thousand-headed Ravana
Ayodhya was once attacked by the son of Ravana. While his father had only ten heads, he had a thousand heads and was thus more powerful. All of Ram’s army tried to destroy this Rakshasa but failed. Ram and his brothers tried to kill him but were no match for him. Finally, they realized that only the power of a chaste woman could kill him. They called all the women of Ayodhya to fight the demon but none had the power to stop him. Finally, Sita was summoned. Sita transformed into Kali, with a thousand heads, and as many arms and feet, her head reaching beyond the skies, fire pouring out of her mouth. She killed the apparently invincible thousand-headed demon in an instant. The sight of Sita as Kali terrified Ram. He sang songs to her glory and begged her to return to her earthly form.
The twentieth century saw Ram on celluloid with films like Bharata Milap (1942), Ram Rajya (1943) and Sati Sulochana (1961). Ramanand Sagar’s television serial Ramayana, with Arun Govil starring as Ram, made history in the late 1980s. All of India came to a standstill when it was telecast every Sunday morning for over a year. While he used the Tulsi Ramayana as the primary source of inspiration, he did try to incorporate other Ramayanas into the storyline. The celluloid Ram has created lasting visual impressions: Ram today cannot be visualized with a moustache and for many children, Sita wore the sari in Gujarati style while she was in the forest. Like the Tulsi Ramayana, Sagar’s Ramayana ends with the coronation of Ram in Ayodhya, a happy ending that makes for family viewing. The Uttar Ramayana was treated as a separate serial.
The twenty-first century has witnessed several other recreations of the story of the Ramayana. In 2006 Virgin Comics brought out Ramayana 3392 AD, a brainchild of Deepak Chopra and Shekhar Kapur. It features a reimagining of the epic in a post-apocalyptic future where Ram leads the last of the human kingdoms against the demon-lord Ravana.
By the looks of it Ram’s story will continue to be written in the years to come. But all authors must always keep in mind why the Ramayana is to be written.
Hanuman Nataka
Valmiki heard that Hanuman had written a Ramayana. So he travelled north to the plantain grove where Hanuman resided. There, etched on the rocks, he found Hanuman’s Ramayana. It was the most brilliant piece of literature that Valmiki had ever read. Tears rolled down Valmiki’s cheeks. ‘Why do you cry?’ asked Hanuman. ‘Because your work is so beautiful,’ said Val
miki, ‘and because after reading your work no one will read mine.’ Hanuman felt sorry for Valmiki and without any qualms, with a flick of his tail, smashed all the rocks that had Ram’s tale etched on them. ‘Stop! What are you doing?’ asked Valmiki. ‘Making you happy,’ replied Hanuman. ‘I wrote the Ramayana only to remember Ram. But you seem to have written the Ramayana so that you will be remembered.’ A much-humbled Valmiki realized then that while he had written the tale of Ram, he had not absorbed the spirit of Ram’s life as Hanuman had.
The Ramayana has never been a tale of Ram’s life. It is a tale of how Ram lived for others. By retelling his tale, storytellers hope to inspire themselves and others to live as Ram did.
11
Hindutva’s Icon
Why would anyone want to learn anything
But Ram?
From the grass to the ant
Everything that lived,
Everything that moved,
Everything that stood motionless
He raised everything
To the highest of states
—Tamil song by the ninth-century poet-saint Nammalvar
Politics of the soul
Is Ram real? For Hindus, he is.
All across India are sites associated with Ram’s life—Ayodhya in Uttar Pradesh where he was born, Chitrakut, also in Uttar Pradesh, where he stayed in the early days of his forest exile, Panchavati in Maharashtra from where Sita was abducted, Hampi where Ram met Hanuman, Rameshwaram in Tamil Nadu from where he built a bridge to Lanka, and Rishikesh where he performed penance to atone for the crime of killing Ravana who though demon, was also a Brahman by birth. The days of Ram’s birth, of his victory over Ravana and of his return to Ayodhya are known and celebrated as Ram Navami, Dusshera and Diwali festivals. Even Ram’s horoscope is known to astrologers; it shows all the signs of him being a great man.
Does this make Ram a historical figure? Yes, for Hindus it does. But the Hindu notion of history is quite different from the popular notion of history as the following episode from a folk Ram-katha informs us.
Ram’s ring
Ram was informed that it was time for him to die but that Yama, god of death, could not reach him because he was afraid of Hanuman who guarded the gates of Ram’s palace. To allow Yama’s entry, it was necessary to distract Hanuman. So Ram dropped his ring into a crack in the palace floor and requested Hanuman to fetch it. Hanuman reduced himself to the size of a beetle and entered the crack only to discover that it was no crack but the entrance to a tunnel that led to Naga-lok, the land of serpents. Hanuman met Vasuki, king of serpents, and informed him of his mission. ‘Go to the ring room. There are many rings there. Maybe you will find the one that belongs to Ram,’ said Vasuki. Sure enough, Hanuman found Ram’s ring there. But to his astonishment, all the rings in the room, and there were hundreds of them, were copies of Ram’s ring. ‘What is the meaning of this?’ he asked bewildered. Vasuki smiled and said, ‘This world we live in goes through cycles of life and death. Each life cycle of the world is called a kalpa. Each kalpa is composed of four yugas or quarters. In the second quarter or Treta yuga, Ram takes birth in Ayodhya. Then one day his ring falls from earth into the subterranean realm of serpents through a tunnel. A monkey follows it and Ram up there dies. So it has been for hundreds of thousands of kalpas. All these rings testify to that fact. And look there are empty rooms in Naga-lok waiting for the rings of the future Rams.’ Hanuman realized that this was Ram’s way of telling him that he could not stop death from coming. Ram would die. The world would die. But like all things Ram would be reborn each time the world is reborn. So it would be forever.
This cyclical notion of history makes sense to a Hindu, maybe even to a Buddhist or a Jain, but not to a Christian or a Muslim.
In Christianity and Islam, time is linear, beginning with descent from Eden and ending with a return to Heaven. Life on earth began after the Serpent tempted Adam and Eve to eat the Forbidden Fruit and will end when the Devil has been defeated and all souls return to their rightful place before God. In this understanding of the world, there is no notion of rebirth. The world does not repeat itself. There is one world, one life and only one chance. Thus the world view of Christians and Muslims is radically different from that of Hindus.
Scientists will refute both these notions of history. They will say these are religious beliefs, not mathematical facts. They will say there is no empirical proof of Treta yuga or Eden. They will demand that Hindus prove that Ram was actually born in Ayodhya and Ram actually built the bridge to Lanka. They will demand that Christians prove Jesus was actually born of a virgin and that Muslims prove Muhammad actually saw the angel Gabriel in the caves of Hira.
Such demands to legitimize beliefs through science are exercises in futility. They yield nothing but outrage, tension and violence. For religion is a matter of faith, not proof. Faith does not rely on reason; it speaks in a language that is indifferent to rationality.
Science and religion traverse different paths. Science explains how things happen—how does the sun rise and how are we born? Religion seeks to explain why things happen—why does the sun rise and why are we born? Science demands proof; religion seeks no validation.
Unfortunately, modern education systems have taught us to respect only that which can be proven empirically. Unless something is scientifically explained, we do not believe it is real. But experience tells us that some of the most profound ideas of humanity—God, soul, heaven, hell, ethics and morality—are not based on logic. Still, they have helped men become better human beings and establish mighty civilizations. Can concepts that have added such value to our lives be dismissed as mere superstitions?
Answers to religious questions are fundamentally cultural, not universal, as they are based on emotion. They are manmade constructs not natural phenomena; hence the parameters which define the answers to religious questions vary over history and geography. What was sacred in the past may not be so today. What is beautiful in one part of the world may not be so in another part of the world. Our notions of ethics have changed over time. Our ideas of appropriate social conduct have transformed with the world. Thus, what is correct to a Hindu may not be so for a Christian or Muslim and what makes sense to a Hindu, Christian or Muslim may not be so for a scientist or a historian.
The truth of a religion makes sense only to those who subscribe to it. For the rest, that truth may be falsehood. Thus religion anchors itself in myth—subjective truth of the believer, which is falsehood for the non-believer. Mythology is the vehicle of that truth—the stories, symbols and rituals that communicate the idea to the people through the ages. Myth expressed through mythology constructs the context for religion and faith. The idea of Ram makes little sense without belief in kalpas and rebirths just as the idea of Jesus and Muhammad makes little sense without the presupposition of the Original Sin and Fall of Man.
Failure or unwillingness to understand this very fundamental fact—that religion is anchored in subjective truth—is the basis of communal disharmony. Sometimes this failure or unwillingness to understand is sincere—it is lack of knowledge of a cultural belief which can be rectified through education and information. But often this unwillingness to grasp this basic concept is very deliberate and strategic, born of the desire to use religion as a tool for power.
Since the dawn of civilization, religion has been used for aggrandizing one group, and demonizing another. It is naïve to ignore the political side of religion.
Ram today has become a political icon of Hindutva, a new assertive manifestation of Hinduism that demands its place in the world’s political history. Hindutva is a reaction to the traditional Hindu attitude of being tolerant and accommodating that many see as weakness.
The choice of Ram as a political icon over all the other forms of God described in Hindu scriptures is significant. Being the obedient follower of rules, he is naturally much preferred over other manifestations such as Krishna, for example, who is the mischievous rule-breaking strate
gist, or Shiva, who is indifferent to worldly issues.
Ram, the political icon, sports muscles and has an aggressive stance—something that is not seen in religious iconography. Ram, the political icon, stands alone without his wife by his side—something that is unimaginable in sacred texts. Hindutva has gained power by transforming Ram into the symbol of Hindu pride, one who is ready to strike the enemy, quite different in character from the dignified and compassionate hero of the epics. At the same time, Hindutva’s political opponents dismiss Ram as a poet’s imagination which only alienates the devout Hindu.
This conflict, created by projecting Ram in a certain, partisan light, on one hand, or denying Ram’s existence and significance altogether, on the other, has generated a powerful social and political dynamic that India cannot ignore.
But should Ram be seen only through the lens of those who use his name to justify rage or those who deny his value to the Hindu? Surely there is an alternative view of Ram, one that breaks the stranglehold of the politicians, one that focusses on the spiritual upliftment of humanity, not on the domination of one group over another? One must not forget that for centuries chanting Ram’s name was supposed to calm the mind in times of stress, calamity or bereavement, reading the Ramayana was supposed to ensure harmony and order in the household; it is only since the twentieth century, since the politicization of Ram by one group and his rejection by another group, that Ram’s name has been associated with anger, violence and tension.