Fête de Dusshera - Delhi 10-2006 / Dusshera Festival - Delhi 10-2006 (Photo credit: Wikipedia) |
Dusshera is Over. Most Indians celebrate this day as a very important festival day. A day celebrating the 'The Victory of Goodness over the Evil' and parents take their children to a violent display of a public Mob Killing of a 'demon'. The 'killing' is seen as a moral and a fun outing for the children. In a modern age of 'correct' behaviour where old fairy tales and stories are being moderated to avoid violence, abuse and racist instances of past; where even a Bible has a New Testament dropping many old testament's 'rawness'; even the Hindu old and original versions of our 'shastras' and writings have been censored or modified according to the prevalent moral thinking of the times repeatedly over the centuries.
The today's proponents of Hindu 'Culture', the so-called Hindutava, comprises mostly of self-appointed 'Hindu experts', who are not educated in the actual shastras but brought up on distorted and censored versions of a bhelpuri variety and are building their vituperative outbursts based on the same. And the idiotic masses too lazy and intellectually deficient to educate themselves just lap up the doled versions. And the distorted versions just get passed from one idiotic generation to another.It is a huge canvass to talk on and even I am not a expert on it. But I do have my personal thinking and observations as a erst-while 'Hindu'.
Coming back to the 'Rakshash' Ravana. The very word 'Rakshash' to be used for a human being like Ravana for being dark complexioned and from South India is same as a North Indian calling a South Indian a 'bhoot' or a 'Kaalu' or any other similar racist comment; and in case it is a reference to the community Ravana belonged to it still is as bad! And if one points out that they were demons class well it still is very racist. Ask a black or a tribal or a Andrew Symonds or ask our very own North Eastern folks who even today are seen by many mainstream Indians as not Indians!! A Mery Kom may just shut up these Indians for some time. So the word Rakshash for the community Ravana belonged to does not makes him a non-human being. If one talks of the demonic powers he and his brothers supposedly possessed, well some of the avatars of many accepted Gods were worse including Durga's Kaali avatar. Kaali may be feared for her 'roudra' and violence but she is called a goddess and not a demon; though she is also worshipped actually by many so called 'demons and tantriks'.
Ravana is a great scholar, a capable ruler, a player of the veena and a devoted follower of Shiva, and he has his apologists and staunch devotees within the Hindu traditions (Photo credit: Wikipedia) |
So, on my premises presented above that Ravana was a human, ok lets say a human-like being!, and Rama was in his human avatar,; lets compare the two 'Men'.
Ravana:
- Accepted universally including in the Hindu shastras as a Intellectual and a Erudite Man
- A Creative Person credited as a Master in the art of Playing Veena
- A feared Warrior
- Kidnapped Sita as a reaction for the disfigurement of his sister by Laxman (like any brother would do though not recommended!)
- Though besotted by Sita, he never touched her but waited for her to accept him (like a honourable man)
- Even when he, his family and world was destroyed he never tried to force himself on her in a very acceptable Hindi film goon way
- His traitorous, wimpy and cowardly brother Bhibashan not only deserted him but actually gave the secret of his destruction to Opponents while other talented and great warriors brothers, including the humongous but 'duh' Kumbhakaran, in the best tradition of a family loyalty and warrior code, die but do not desert him. The irony being nowadays many are named Indrajits, some perhaps Ravana, even a Kumbhkaran here and there; but hardly a baby is named Bhibashan!!
- He was married to a Rajput woman, Mandodari, from Mandor near Jodhpur. There is a temple in Jodhpur where his devotees till today worship him. ( ref: The Times of India article October 25, 2012)
While preparations for Ravana's funeral are underway, Ravana's wives headed by Mandodari (with her back to the viewer, upbraiding her hair) lament his death. (Photo credit: Wikipedia) |
- The Valmiki community in Punjab, the 2nd largest dalit caste in Punjab, switched off their lights for some time as a mark of respect for the valiant warrior 0n his martyrdom and sing hymns in his honour. According to them in Valmiki's original Ramayana, Ravana emerges as a strong and virtuous warrior. ( ref: The Times of India article October 25, 2012)
- And, he was a worshipper of Shiv, who gave him some special boons as a rewards (and punished him sometimes for his brashness but never killed him)
Shiva-Parvati seated on mount Kailash, while Ravana tries to lift it. (Photo credit: Wikipedia) |
Rama:
- Seen as a Ideal man,a Maryada Purushottam, come across many times as a Wimp
- On being banished to a forest, he wants to keep his step-mother and his obsessed (by her!) father happy but does not remembers his duty to give his wife a secure life and happiness
- His juvenile and ill-tempered brother Laxman cuts off the nose of the sister of Ravana on her marriage proposal; and the Ideal man Rama, the paragon of all what is right does not even chides Laxman , forget about punishing him for such a heinous crime against a woman! After all the Shabari episode is told to us to show Rama's secular and pro-women beliefs
- The Righteous and principled Rama kills another famous Monkey warrior Bali, on complain of Sugreev, Bali's brother, in a very deceitful and covert manner, unlike the accepted norms of those days of the rules of engagements for honourable warriors!
- And, again when the Ravana's Army seems to have the upper edge in the final war with the seemingly Invincible Ravana undefeatable by the right code of warfare, the righteous Rama at his wit's end, gets influenced by the advisors to use a unethical intelligence input by the treacherous brother of Ravana, to finally slay the Great Lankan King. All is fair in love and war was never truer even in the so-called 'Satyayug' era!!! As justifiable as the justifications of the corrupt in today's 'Kalyug', I suppose.
Rama's coronation (Photo credit: Wikipedia) |
- The Victorious Rama returns to his empire at his peak with a great victory, a great Commander and a friend Hanuman, loyal brothers, and a most loyal and committed wife Sita. What does the great Hero and the epitome of righteousness does. Listening to some gutter-level gossip and insinuations, instead of cutting off the heads off such idiots, or more normal behaviour of ignoring the imbeciles, He actually conducts a very humiliating 'virginity or purity' test of his own Wife!
- And the worst of all of them ever, He banishes his pregnant wife again on some hearsay gossip or comment never to have Sita back. Sita dies in a forest all alone with her twins protected ironically by a dreaded butcher-and-dacoit turned a sage, Valmiki, who wrote the original and the authentic Ramyana, where Ravana is depicted as a virtuous warrior!
The Irony of life is that our elders want us to believe in Rama as a role model: as a man, a ruler, a husband.
- Then why crib when the Khaps want the women to be married at 11 to avoid rapes but do not punish the rapists;
- why crib when the Politicians loot money and listen to the Khaps' opinion;
- Why crib when Media conducts Public trials of anyone accused without waiting for a fair trial
- Why crib that the Prime Minister is so silent on corruption of his ministers
Concluding this ejaculation of mine, I asked is it fair to have Rama as a role model of today's youth, men and society and have a 'Ram Rajya' as a epitome of good governance when it was a weak government, given to gossips and insinuations and a weird justice system in a guise of being just and fair to all? Looks uncannily like a Talibanic society which does exactly the same and also believes it does it to be a moral, religious and fair society!
And should we carrying on this very racist, very violent and very unfair demonised celebration of killing, as a example of immoral science, of a very erudite, a very creative and a very principled Warrior (ideal candidate for today's top B Schools!) called Ravana? When we pretend to accept the gays, the lesbians, the live-ins, the beautiful minds and Barfis coming out of the cineplexes, after having splurged parents' hard-earned money, and done hormonal things in the darkness of the theatres, --- never experienced first-hand madness or a handicap or aloneness nor accepted them in real lives -- and just putting them as Your 'Likes' on Facebooks to show how liberal and educated you are!!!!! Or displaying Books like The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged on Books admired or 'bibles' when most of you have never been on your own early in your age (or will be later) nor even having been meritorious in the real sense. So WHY cannot we accept Ravana as what he really was and let his soul R.I.P. rather than torturing it every year in your best dresses.
Ravana the leader of the Raksha of Sri Lanka (Photo credit: Wikipedia) |
I would like to dispel a couple of myths that you seem to harboring for a long time now.
ReplyDeleteSome people including you have hailed Ravana as the unsung hero of Ramayana and that too based on what you just wrote. I have objections.
The abduction of Sita by Ravana couldn't have been and wasn't carried by Ravana without involving physical force.
He didn't invite Sita to ride the chariot with him (an offer that you think she graciously accepted. He tricked Sita into believing that he was an alms-seeking saint and asked (& he didn't even do that politely; he intimidated her by saying that he would curse her if she didn't follow his command) her to leave the security of her house/cottage to give him charity (which obviously he didn't because it was actually a trap that he had laid to capture a helpless, innocent woman)
Moreover, Ravana even employed his own maternal uncle, Marich to execute his sinister plan involving Sita's abduction(and now this is another story to it; I won't describe that in detail here but I will just inform you that uncle, Marich, was in fact threatened by Ravana to obey his command & assist him in the smooth execution of this wicked plan of deceipt else Marich would face death at his hands)
He strongly pulled Sita by force (which cannot be done without touching her hand) and held on to her hand through out that journey across the skies while Sita kept on helplessly shouting out aloud for help.
He even mercilessly killed Jatayu, the king of eagles, who only tried to help Sita (he was polite enough to reason with Ravana but all was in vain) on hearing Sita's desperate cries for help during that journey.
Another blogger on her blog (I wouldn't mention her name her) too stated that Ravana was an honourable man and reminded her, of Mr. Bingley from Austen's Pride and Prejudice and how Ravana just like Mr. Bingley wooed Sita in a gentlemanly manner. I couldn't help but laugh at her folly.
Oh you think that Ravana didn't force himself Sita while she had been held as a captive in his palace's garden. You are misinformed for he did.
He even tried to violate her & outrage her modesty during that time but Sita was clever enough to safeguard herself from his malicious intentions. Sita reminded Ravana of a curse that he had brought upon himself (as a result of the same abominable act that Ravana carried out against an innocent woman, years ago, whereby he would die if he ever again tried to violate another woman against her wish). It is this curse that helped Sita protect her chastity while she was held as a prisoner by the cursed Ravana and didn't have anything to to do with Ravana's 'supposed' chivalry as proved by the above mentioned facts.
And, one of the several attempts to 'woo' Sita(rather an an act of treachery by Ravana) deserves as special mention. He asked his servants to serve Sita with a severed head of her husband, Rama on a plate. In reality it was just one of the magic tricks (very cruel indeed) played by Ravana to torture Sita and force her to accept him as her master since her husband had no died. However, his attempt was foiled when one of the Ravana's servants (who became Sita's friend) revealed the secret to the shocked Sita.
You think that the revenge that Ravana took on Rama & his family was guided by his brotherly love and pain (as he discovered her sister, Surapnakha had been disfigured by Laxmana)by means of a cowardly act of kidnapping another man's wife was justified. It was more to do with the lust than his brotherly love in his heart for his sister. The sister Surapnakha described the divine beauty of Sita to the minutest detail and how she could be his wife if he abducted her.
ReplyDeleteTalking about brotherly-sisterly love, Ravana's love for his sister, Surapnakha is questionable because he killed sister, Surapnakha's husband earning his sister's great displeasure.
And, finally coming to the episode of disfigurment of Surapnakha (the severing of her nose) at the hands of Laxman, Rama's brother. You paint Surapnakha as an innocent woman and paint the valiant Laxman as a criminal. You couldn't be more wrong. Surapnakha while travelling through the forests chances upon Rama and Ravana and is immediately attracted by their youthful appearance and beauty.
She disguises herself as a beautiful damsel and then offers a proposal to Ram. Ram very politely declines her offer stating that he is married, loves his wife intensely and thinking of another woman is a sin for him. Any decent woman should immediately retreat on acquiring such information involving a man's marital status but she feels no shame on making such offers to a married men and persists.
It is then that Rama to save himself from the trouble, asks her to go elsewhere and she then continues the same with his brother, Laxman. She then sees Sita who instantly becomes a target of her fury (of Surapnakha's fury)
Enraged by the disinterest shown by those two very noble and committed men, she leaves behind her guise and pounces upon Sita with her sharp claws (hence the name Surapnakha) in order to tear her apart into pieces, it is then that Laxmana cuts off her nose to protect the life of his sis-in-law, Sita from that cruel woman.
He doesn't even kill her for she tried to murder Sita for no fault of hers, how merciful of Laxman.
Why would Rama chide his brother for protecting his wife's life; he should actually thank his brother, Laxmana. Isn't it?
And, no Dashratha wasn't obsessed his wife, Kaikeyi. He was compelled to offer his wife her wishes because of a promise that he had made to her when she saved him in a battle. It was an act of good faith and he trusted her completely and never knew that one day, it would be misused by his wife against their own son. He considered Rama to be 'their' son too & Kakeyi too always displayed great affection for Rama even though he was her step-son.
Rama never asked Sita to accompany him to the forests but gave in when Sita kept on insisting.
Obviously, he shouldn't have even left Sita alone to enjoy the palatial comforts but then he was bound by the policy on honestly loyally followed by the clan.
He did everything to protect Sita in the forest and the abduction of Sita could also have been averted if Sita wouldn't have foiled the Rama's safety plan devised for her and forced Laxmana to leave her alone.
Rama protected Sita & loved her. He ignored her act of great malice towards his own brother, Laxmana which otherwise would have been unpardonable.
Yes, he shouldn't have bent in to the pressure of his subjects who wrongly blamed his wife and asked for her Agnipariksha.
But how is it that no one talks about the agnipariksha Laxmana went through at the hands of his sis-in-law, Sita.
It's wrong that Vibhishana has become a subject of ridicule when he actually supported the right person regardless of who his 'family' was. He comes across as a very strong character because it takes great courage to stand against the family for someone else (just because he/she is right) and doesn't allow blind love to fool himself.
The lynching of Ravana is completely different from that of the innocent blacks by the mob in the racial American society of yesteryear's for Ravana does stand for everything evil as proved above and it symbolizes the final victory of good over evil and serves as an important lesson for adults and kids alike.
ReplyDeleteI have always watched the effigies being burnt as a kid on Dusshera but I didn't turn out to be an insensitive person who advocates violence.
The term 'rakshasa' isn't racial because it wasn't solely used to describe a clan/people of a southern island; Indian mythology is replete with stories of many other Rakshasas who came from other regions too.
And, when we talk about Rakshasas, we often talk about our own inner demons too that need to be slayed/tamed.
Mandodri is depicted as a good human being in Ramayana who constantly warned her husband against the vile consequences of kidnapping someone else's wife and casting his lustful gaze on her and it is true.
Ramayana does depict Ravana to be a learned and intelligent man but at the same time does also tells us that how such a man can even fall into a state of complete ruin if guided by feelings of unjust revenge and lust & refusing to heed the wisdom of his well-wishers like his father & Mandodri (vinashkale vipreet buddhi)
Ram did what any brave, loving and committed husband would do, rescue his wife from the clutches of an evil tormentor who didn't deserve any forgiveness.
There's more to it so do allow this comment to stay because it does offer a strong arguement.
Dear Crusader: Thanks for responding. From your opening line and the fact that you have acquired a 'pseudonym' to write your feelings makes me believe that you are a person I know very likely. I respect your take on the Ramayana which you have a right to do. I could have responded to most of your objections point by point but for your anonymity which makes the discussions unfair as I wrote it openly and would prefer a 'open' and not a covert talk. So I will not respond further to this. Thanks and I respect your interpretations of the events.
ReplyDeleteWell, if that was the case, you should have not offered 'anonymous' as an option for people to post their comments on your
ReplyDeleteblog.
It simply implies that you DO accept opinions from anonymous users too. I am surprised by the sudden change in your policy.
Whether you are familiar or not with me doesn't have anything to do with my views for have to offer an opinion on my views and not me.
This just isn't an interpretation. I have stated many FACTS straight out of the Ramayana that can't be negated.
Please do strike out the 'anonymous' option if you are not ready to accept opinions from viewers who assume that status.
Do you think it takes much to make an alternate gmail or AIM id? It's quite easy.
I must knowing my identity doesn't have anything to do with debating my views.
I would also like to say I chanced upon your blog while surfing on the net and this is the first time that I did get to know you.
What you really know is that I am not a robot and that is the sole check required on your blog.
Surapnakha while travelling through the forests chances upon Rama and ****Ravana and is immediately attracted by their youthful appearance and beauty.
ReplyDeleteCorrection:
.......Rama and ****Laxmana (that was a typo error)