Tag Archives: Ramayana

Fighting for Lady Sita, Whom we know Not

Ask any Indian do they know “About” the Ramayana, and invariably they will shrug the shoulders at the sheer stupidity of the question. “Of course, I know of the Ramayana,” would be the most likely response. Query further if they actually “Know” the Ramayana, and their response will still be in the affirmative. Proceed on, and ask them if they have actually “Read” the Ramayana? There will be a long pause and in all likelihood the answer will be in the negative.

Strangely, we live in a weird time, where almost every Indian is Sita 2pretty sure that he or she knows the Ramayana (in all its intricacies) and yet has not read it in person. And when I mean reading the Ramayana here, am talking about an unabridged version of it, say like Valmiki’s Ramyana, or Tulisdas’ Ramcharita Manas, Kamban’s Kambaramayanam, the Bengali Krittivasi Ramayana, or even the Jain Paumachariyam. There are many versions of the Ramayana that are readily available in many languages. In fact, the late AK Ramanujan in his erudite (and unnecessarily disputed) essay, 300 Ramayanas had spoken about how the narrative of Ramayana had percolated in various cultures and regions, transcending the boundaries of race or religion. Little wonder, there are a plenitude of Ramayanas for any person to choose from.

Yet, even with so many versions, so many forms of Ramayana, there are not many I know, who have read a single, let alone a few of these Ramayanas.

BTW, before you go eh–wait a minute, let me clarify, reading popular fiction by Ashok Banker, Devdutt Pattanaik, or even Anand Neelkanthan does not classify as reading the Ramayana. Neither does reading the Amar Chitra Katha Series.  All these are derivatives and interpretation, at times very shoddy and unscholarly, of the Ramayana. And they don’t really count for much.

sita7The essential trouble is, thanks to the popular Ramayana series, where you had the ever smiling Arun Govil as the Ramji and beatific Deepika as Sita maiyya (which almost all people of my age and time saw rather religiously every Sunday without fail) has given us a familiarity to the epic without us ever striving for. Add to it the fact that tales from the Ramayana are staple in any Hindu home, as say dal-chawal, only deepens the connect to the epic. We feel that we know the Ramayana like a back of our hand, without ever really knowing it.

I personally came across this weird dichotomy when I attended a lecture by Dr. Arshia Sattar when she was lecturing in Mumbai. It was there, that I suddenly realised that in spite of knowing Ramayana (at least believing to be so) quite well (and there being a copy of the same in the bookshelf), I had not got down to actually reading it. Of course, am aware of the characters, the narrative and even the intentions of all those, even so, I had not taken a serious effort to read the Ramayana in its entirety. Have started the process now, as I realised my inherent ignorance. So When Dr. Sattar decided to present to us a new facet of Sita as penned by Valmiki, it came as a rather pleasant surprise.

Sita, as we know her, is a genteel goddess of goodness, often presented as an avatar of Mahalaxmi. She is a docile and dedicated wife, who sticks by the husband no matter what is thrown at her. She is the epitome of Indian values, of domesticity. Yet, even so, she is sita14not really the counter-weight to the Maryada Purshottama, she is not the Maryada Streeuttama. That is because that are a few chinks in her personality, which results in her suffering. There are many things that she does are actually meant to be a strict no-no for the rest of the ladies to do.

On the brighter side though, Sita goes through a whole ton of miseries that actually not of her making, yet she winces not, complains not, takes no offence. She is like that perfect wife that a man can wish for; loyal, faithful, obedient and yet so gorgeous that she could move a man down the path of ruin in his desires for her. She is always standing right behind her man — remember behind, not in line, a step behind.

In many ways, Sita was a creation of a masochistic and misogynist society that wanted to create a template for all the ladies to follow. Her character was crafted to send out a message, of monogamous-devoted-love towards the husband at whatever cost. This was the Sita that has been presented in front of us, and not surprisingly this is a Sita we all know; a frail woman who was a victim of her fate and could not ever stand up against the injustices perpetrated against her, especially by her beloved husband.

sita11Yet, the original Sita, as penned by Valmiki, was anything but a weakling or a frail lady. She had a mind of her own, and stood her ground when needs be. While the narrative of the Valmiki’s tale is more or less the same. The essential difference is that Sita is here not merely a caricature or a shadow as we know her to be from the later renditions, but rather an impressive lead who influences the course of the events.

Sadly, this Sita, is not known too well known beyond the literary circles. And possibly, not many would like to have it so. Let me pick a few instances from Valmiki’s Ramayana to introduce you to the Sita as she apparently was, or rather, meant to be:

Outspoken and Equal

While Sita is indeed married to Rama, and that gives her a sort of lower stature in the Indian society, but that does not mean that she considers herself to be inferior. When Rama decides to proceed to the vanwasa, he decides to do so alone. He proceeds on to inform Sita of the decision, and almost orders her to stay back. His mind is made, and his manner is curt, “You stay back here and do your duties as my wife, while am away.” Sita outrightly refuses Rama’s proposal, and says that she is coming along come what may.

Rama yields not, and tries different tracks, even going to the extent of trying to scare her, by stating that the forest is a dangerous place full of wild animals and unknown beasts, not a place for a lady like sita12her. Undaunted, Sita taunts Rama, “I always thought you were a woman in a man’s body, you can’t even take care of your wife. What sort of man are you?” Sita’s arrows find their mark and Rama has no option but to take her along to his banishment into the jungle.

A Wise Counsel

One day when Sita and Rama are in the Dandaka vana discussing things several things. In a candid moment Sita expresses to Rama her fear of his violent nature . She tells him that he is a perfect man in many ways, but yet because of his “kshatriya” or martial roots, he has a natural affinity towards violence be towards beasts or rakshasas or anyone else. According to Sita, there are three essential flaws that typical men suffer from, namely, “telling lies, coveting another man’s wife, and violation of dharma”. Since Rama has not these flaws, he is rather perfect except for his tempestuousness. Continue reading Fighting for Lady Sita, Whom we know Not

Top 10 Indian Mythological Movies

Mythology & Movies in India are linked through an intricate umbilical cord, from start to today.  Here’s looking at the top Bollywood mythological films — Check the slideshow:

 

 

 

How mythology is not a science, and why it should not be treated as one!

“Who really knows?
Who will here proclaim it?
Whence was it produced? Whence is this creation?
The gods came afterwards, with the creation of this universe.
Who then knows whence it has arisen?”

 Rig Veda, 10:129-6

 Somewhere embedded deep inside the Rig Veda — which happens to be one of the important canonical texts of Hindu religion, the four Vedas — is Nasadiya Sukta, or what is known as the hymn of creation. Of unknown authorship, this hymn poses some very cryptic and incisive queries on the purpose of life and the very existence of an all-bearing god. There is an element of agnosticism, of query, of doubt. It starts in a rhetorical fashion, posing incisive queries questioning the singularity itself. And while numerous interpretations of the Sukta have highlighted the scientific temper and the inquisitive Indian mythology1temperament of the early sages who penned this and the very many hymns found elsewhere, the fact remains that Nasadiya Sukta is also a very humane and emotional query. For instance, when asked to believe in something, don’t we always begin with scepticism and doubt, it is only later when through understanding and acceptance that we move to the next level. Until then, we are atheists, sceptics, agnostics and so on.

In that way Nasadiya Sukta is most special, it accepts doubt and empiricism as part of the man’s spiritual and scientific journey. It encourages questioning the very fundamentals, even the existence of a supreme being or many is not taken for granted. It is in this sense, Hinduism differed from all else, you did not have to believe anything that your rational mind did not. Faith was not a mandatory imposition; that is, not believing in the trinity — Brahma, Vishnu, Mahesh — did not make you any lesser of a Hindu, than say a temple priest who spent a lifetime propriating the very triad. And so the ancient Vedic Hindu was a questioning, open-minded, person, not a self-deluded proud oaf who saw Meru as the centre of the universe, denying everything else.

Much has changed in the journey from a Vedic Hindu performing a homa on a vedi in the ancient time, to the modern Hindu blogging and posting on the Vedas on FB and Twitter today. The progress of technology and evolution has left its mark on the religion itself. New gods have emerged, old have been dislodged, there have been numerous reformist movements from Arya Samaj to Theosophical Society, from Iskcon to Art of Living. Hinduism probably is the only religion in the world, where new deities keep emerging at different time, and all the time. Take the case of Sai Baba, there are numerous temples dedicated to him and many more are sprouting all the time. In fact, Shirdi which was the seat of Sai Baba has become a huge pilgrimage centre, with annual donations running in many millions. Faith is always good business in any religion.

Sadly, the Vedas to a large extent have now been relegated to the domain of the experts and the scholars, with newer texts taking their place. The Hindu theology can be broadly classified into three buckets:

  • Vedas & Brahmanas
  • Upanishads 
  • Puranas & the Epics

The four Vedas – Rig, Yajur, Attharva, Sama — primarily are a collation of hymns, rituals and prayers, propitiating the various Vedic deities (32 approximately), like Indra, Agni, Varun, Maruts, Prajapati. There’s much lesser storytelling in them, and whatever are there, the purpose is to present a reasoning for a certain ritual or sacrifice. For instance the tale of Apala in the Rig Veda provides a clue as to why certain rituals like the turmeric

Indian mythology3ceremony is performed during the nuptials. Thus, the tales are a sort of story to explain the science. There is a purpose, a well-thought objective. The sheer depth and complexity of the Vedas are tempered by such tales. Also, it is important to note that there is a lot more cultural and scientific material in the Vedas, through careful examination and interpretation, one can understand the nature of being, and the natural world that surrounds it. Indeed, there is theology and philosophy, but only to a limited extent. For instance, we get to know about how the world was created through Purusha Sukta and to an extent the Nasadiya Sukta. Matters like philosophy of religion is dealt with much greater emphasis in the subsequent works like the Upanishads.

So, broadly speaking Vedas are the scientific texts, Upanishads are the philosophical treatise, and by the time we reach the Puranas, all we are left with tales and myths. The Puranas are much later compositions and were written for a specific purpose to promote and endorse one deity over all else, thus in the Shiv Purana, you are told that Lord Shiva is ‘dev adi dev, mahadev’ (the super-duper god), the Vaishnav Purana would tell you about the Maha Vishnu, who creates a million universes with each breath lorded over by a smaller Vishnu in his own image. The Devi Purana, similarly pronounces the supreme-ness of the female deity. All this is done through prose stories, and almost every time the story of creation is reinvented with a new twist.

Meanwhile, the epics Mahabharata and Ramayana penned by Vyas and Valmiki respectively are Maha-Kavyas, great poems and work of fiction, like say Iliad and Odyssey. These are fantastical tales possibly of fantastical people and times, but then in lack of larger proof in terms of historical finding or artefact, they cannot really be considered as real.

Yet, since the epics are much a part of the religious ethos, the Hindus treat them Hindu mythology 2with much deference and respect. Considering that the two major Vishnu Avatars are at the core of each of this epic, raises the religious value of these works beyond comprehension. Little wonder, when the same epics were adopted on television the actors playing Rama and Krishna were treated like gods, and there are stories of how people would offer flowers and fruits to the TV when the episodes aired. In that particular timeslot the television set would turn into a temple of sorts. That is the power of belief.

Little wonder, the amazing tales told in the epics, or even the Puranas, are not fiction for many. There are numerous who believe them to be real, and so many scholars and researchers spend their lifetime looking for clues, meanings and physical markings of all the things and places etched out in them. This is a sort of retrofitting research, wherein you try and find the physical manifestation of a fictional object or thing. People give real world dates, 4000 BCE, 8000 BCE, 80000 BCE and so on. Ramayana came first, Mahabharata second, and so on.

Ravana_seizes_the_chariot_Puspaka_from_KuveraAnd this is essentially where the anomalies start, in the fascination and fastidiousness of proving the epics as historical contrivances, supposed scholars start building fancy hypotheses.  Thus, a Brahmastra in Arjun’s  quiver becomes an equivalent of an atomic missile, Ravan’s Pushpakvimana turns into an early age helicopter, Gandhari’s mechanism of having kids by raising 100 embryos in 100 earthen pots is like test-tube baby, replacement of Ganesha’s head with that of an elephant is surgical procedure, the Jambudweepa is another term of the ancient Pangea, the extreme slowness of Brahma’s time is actually time dilation, the Krishna’s precise and pinpointed Sudarshan Chakra is actually a cruise missile, and the list just goes on and on.

Looking from the prism of today, these scholars try to reinvent the past using the epics as the base. The core idea is to impress upon us that our lineage actually hails from a very scientific and advanced race. It is like reading Verne’s ‘20,000 Leagues under the sea’ and deducing that the medieval man had a powerful nuclear submarine like Nautilus, or using HG Wells novel to claim the indisputable existence of a time machine. The lines between fact and fiction gets blurred.

By the way, in no manner do I imply that our great ancestors were some pastoral oafs. Indeed they were ahead of their times, inquisitive and used science as a tool. Anyone who has ever visited any Indus Valley Civilization’s ruin — even excepting Harappa & Mohenjo Daro (because they are far too superlative to not impress) — would immediately realise the scientific temperament of the ancient Indians, the town planning, the right-angled streets, the sewer system, the trade mechanism, etc. do provide a glimpse into the scientific past. Continue reading How mythology is not a science, and why it should not be treated as one!

Indian Myth-busters and their unmythological bullsh**t

It is said that people that are in a tearing hurry, are often people that are terribly mistaken. While, in India we have a set of individuals who like to take immense pride and thump their chest about the vitality and immortality of their culture (read Hindu), there is another set that is virulently trying to debunk everything about it (read Hindutva). In this battle of ego and posturing, truth often gets beaten about. So, at one end you have the proud constituents claiming the superiority of ancient science by referring to tales and stories, the opponents are eagerly taking pot-shots debunking any story or theory. In the hurry to come out with fancy headline that will attract eyeballs, like “Raving Loony Hindutva History“, people tend to debunk everything or anything.  To be honest, I really liked the titled, and am sure many would have been enticed to read it just because of it.

And so is the case of another gem of a story that promises to “Rani Padmini and four other Hindutva history myths exploded“. Wherein the author, Girish Shahane, take upon his shoulders the onerous duty of showing the way. He goes on to start with a sort of sermonising stoicism, “BJP’s misreading of history, however, is also underpinned by versions of history that circulate as truth within the mainstream.” And then in reverse chronological order lists five major “myths that have gained mainstream acceptance in India”.

Before I delve deeper into what my fellow journo brother listed, I wish to clarify a few things beforehand. First up, let’s define “myth” (and I know I go through this painful exercise so very often). Now Oxford Dictionary  beautifully describes it as: A traditional story, especially one concerning the early history of a people or explaining a natural or social phenomenon, and typically involving supernatural beings or events. Without even venturing into the domain of Joseph Campbell, where he artfully defined myths as “Myths are clues to the spiritual potentialities of the human life”, we can safely conclude that myths are tales, stories and pretty fantastic.

Sadly, many educated (the uneducated can be excused) make the mistake of mixing falsity with myth. According to popular notion, myth means false, whereas actually myth means story (which could or could not be true). Thus, myths cannot be debunked, destroyed, exploded, blasted, thrown, jumped, sat, vomited (speaking of vomiting there is an interesting myth of a branch of Vedanta was revealed through vomiting — read about Taitriya Yajurveda). Myths are stories that have been far and widely accepted, they are not some ugly heirloom that needs to be smashed to smithereens. When you start with that “pehalwan” or wrestler mentality, you are bound to go wrong. Like our friend does, when he talks about myths that have gained mainstream acceptance, I mean, myths are myths because they have widespread acceptance, else they will not be so.

So, just like him I will list out his points, and see if there is any sense that can be made here.

1.  The Myth of Rani Padmini

The first one is the beautiful tale of the ever so-very beautiful queen of Chittorgarh, Rani Padmini or Padmavati. The story is pretty simple; she is supposedly a hell-of-a-looker, hearing tales of her beauty, Allauddin Khilji, attacks Chittor and asks her husband to Queen_Nagamati_talks_to_her_parrot,_Padmavat,_c1750surrender her (as part of harem) as part of settlement. Instead of doing so, the king of Mewar and her husband Ratan Singh makes a suicidal dash against his army, while, the queen and rest of Rajput ladies commit “jauhar” (stepping into fire, rather than risking their honour). The story is gleaned from an epic poem written in 1540 by Malik Muhammad Jayasi. And in a society where honour came before everything, the tale sort of became a sort of an answer to what should be done in similar situations. “Jauhar” or “Sati” was pretty common in Rajput society, and understandably so, considering they always bore the full-frontal attack of any invader making a foray into India. The story of Rani Padmini thus was meant to be an inspiring tale for the rest of the Rajput Princesses or ladies, as to what must be done, in case their husbands lost the battle.

Indeed, as the article points out, there are no real historical records of Rani Padmini, but then, that is pretty common isn’t it. Am sure, if Rani Padmini or even Rani Jodhabai would have known that their existence would be questioned epigraphically by writers centuries later, they would have surely made more efforts to that end. But then, since they did not, let’s not hold it against them. I mean for god’s sake, Christ also had no historicity associated with him, but then don’t we accept him as so.

2. The Myth of Prithviraj Chauhan

Prithviraj Chauhan was a brave and courageous Chandel ruler, in the 11th Century AD. Among his many exploits, the most defining was with Afghani invader Mohammed Ghori. He fought two battles with him, in the first one Ghori was defeated and at Chouhan’s mercy, who rather foolishly let him go. Ghori made good of the second chance, and returned with a much larger force, defeated Chauhan and then had him killed. Now this is history.

220px-Prithvi_Raj_Chauhan_(Edited)There was a poem composed by Chand Bardai, Prithviraj Raso, wherein the exploits of the king has been vastly exaggerated and he is shown as being blinded by Ghori, and based on a cryptic message from Chand which gives the detail of Ghori (Char bans, chaubis gaj, angul ashta praman, Tau par sultan hai, mat chuko Chauhan), Chauhan let flies an arrow and kills Ghori. Now this is fiction.

Sadly, our friend here is unable to distinguish between the two, and blames everyone including Amar Chitra Katha for his ignorance. I mean a person who believes and writes on history based on what he read as a kid in Amar Chitra Katha, must be kidding right? Apparently not.

3. The Myth of a Non-Violent India

The history of India, recorded and accepted, stretches thousands of years back. In all these very many centuries numerous empires came up and vanished, starting from the Maurayas, the Guptas, Cholas, Mughals, Marathas and so on. Yet, in all these years, there was never an invader on the lines of say Alexander or even say Genghis Khan from Indian soil. Yes, the Cholas and Chalukyas expanded their scope of influence in South Asia, but it was rarely of LEAD Technologies Inc. V1.01the military type.

In fact, when our friend here talks about the invasion of Lanka by “Hindu” kings like Chola, he forgets about the first ever ‘invasion’ of Lanka by an Indian king, way back in 3rd Century BCE, when Ashoka sent his son Mahinda and daughter  Sanghamitta down south to propagate the idea of Dhamma. Today, Sri Lanka is a majoritan Buddhist country, because of the seeds that were laid by Ashoka and not anything else.

India had this unique ability to assimilate, so most of those who invaded India got entwined within it, and were subsequently assimilated. So, be it the Greeks (Seleucus Nicator’s daughter was married to Chandragupta Maurya), then came the Islamic invaders, the Mongols, the French, the Portuguese, the British and so on. Each of these were in somehow integrated within the big cultural-melting pot.

The biggest and most successful exports of India have been Buddhism and Yoga, not some swords or gunpowder. Even India’s freedom struggle inspired many countries and leaders; Gandhi was an inspiration from Martin Luther King to Barrack Obama. And am sure when Swami Vivekananda was speaking about a non-violent India, he was referring to such things.

4. The Myth of Sanskrit

While, indeed, the Sanskrit is not really the “mother of all”, but yet, it is certainly not too easy to debunk either. Sir William Jones, who proposed the commonality between Sanskrit and other European Language, did so as a hypothesis. His claim was based on linguistic similarities between Latin, Spanish and Sanskrit; this led him to believe that there was a Rigveda_MS2097common “proto Indian-European source” to all these languages.

Subsequently, there have been many claims and counter-claims to the same, and the theory has been yet to be conclusively proved. That should not stop us from celebrating the sheer depth and amazing spread of Sanskrit language. Today, the biggest universities across the world are offering courses on Sanskrit, and there are many researchers doing very interesting linguistic study of the same.

And while, we are talking about the antiquity of language, did you know that the written inscriptions found at Indus Valley Sites, called as Harappan Script are not yet deciphered. Now, if and when that is done, it will be a revelation.  But then since, there is no real hypothesis to prove there, not many seem to be interested about it.

5The Myth of a 5,000-year-old civilisation

Among the 5 myths that our friend busted here, this one, without an iota was the most silly and stupid one. But before we delve deeper into the mathematics of this claim, let’s first begin by defining what exactly is “civilisation”. Oxford defines it as, “the stage of human social development and organization which is considered advanced.” The level of development and organisation can be discerned by the level of infrastructure built. Thus, a village with mud huts is not really considered ‘civilised’, while an urban centre is.

Now, when we speak of the past, Indus Valley civilisation is considered to be a hallmark on Shiva_Pashupatithat front. So, dating “civilisation” should be as simple as dating an Indus Valley site. Mehrgarh (in modern day Pakistan) is considered to be one of the oldest ruins of Indus Valley. The date of the Neolithic site has been estimated by archaeologists to be around 6500 BCE. According to Wikipedia page; “It is assumed that early Mehrgarh residents lived in mud brick houses, stored their grain in granaries, fashioned tools with local copper ore, and lined their large basket containers with bitumen. They cultivated six-row barley, einkorn and emmer wheat, jujubes and dates, and herded sheep, goats and cattle. Residents of the later period (5500 BCE to 2600 BCE) put much effort into crafts, including flint knapping, tanning, bead production, and metal working. Mehrgarh is probably the earliest known centre of agriculture in South Asia.”

This would easily mean that the proof of Indian civilisation stretches as far back as 6500 BCE that would make it, close to 8500 years old. So, the 5000-year-old myth is not really a myth but is actually history.

In the end, the purpose of articles like these is not generate a healthy discussion or encourage deliberation, but to garner hits and eyeballs. If in that pursuit, sanity, rationality and truth has to be sacrificed, then so be it. That really is the travesty of such myth-busters, who know little but claim much. Guess, one must write an article with an interesting title like “Raving Loony Myth Busters” and then possibly they will stop. Or probably not.