Time was when I was to read the "Dnyaneshwari" (she was anyways preparing for her course final examination) and the "Upnishads" with Aai. Well, we did. For some of the "Upnishads", an acquaintance of hers used to be there as well. Next, my idea was to read daily a chapter of the "Ramayana" and the "Mahabharata" with her. This project of ours was not completed though.
Does that mean my parents were not 'secular'? Believe me, they hugely were, in fact, much more than the jingoists professing the 'done' thing in a quite chic way!
Most people, to give an example, who have put the Preamble as their status today would not know when and why the terms 'socialist' and 'secular' were added to the Preamble, and by whom. Hardly would have they read the actual Constitution either!
As for Aai-Papa, their religion was more of the personal faith variety. We wanted to read all these great texts so that we get to know our roots truly. For me, reading them together with her was also a way of making her feel less lonely, a sentiment all the old people fear.
In the process, I read up the original "Ramayana" and "Mahabharata". The first aspect of the "Ramayana" that strikes you is that it houses absolutely idealistic characters. Except for the en passim Manthara and the aspersion casting citizen (incidentally, they are shown to be right in their own way!), everybody else is honour in human form.
As for Shri Rama, "charitam Raghunathsy" is simply a marvel. He is integrity incarnate. He is highly honourable. He is truthfulness itself. He is "ekwachani", true to his words. He lives the motto ''pran jaye par wachan na jaye". Even in the "Ramraksha Stotra", he is the ultimate protector of the devotee's body/mind/soul as he has absolute and total control over himself. He is miles away from any evil, even conceptually.
No disrespect meant at all, but in comparison with the ''Ramayana'', the ''Mahabharata'' is absolutely anthropomorphic. It tells the tale of quite earthy compromises, rather neat solutions out of extremely dicey situations. Jayadrath or Karna Wadh could be an easy to understand example.
And yet Lord Ram is much more maligned and misunderstood. One of the reasons could be that ordinary people love to tarnish what they themselves can never attain. Yet another, and most probably, the real, reason could be that the 'janta', even the blah-blahing pretentious types, would NOT have read the text.
I suppose, most probably, their knowledge of such texts begins with the childhood comics, and ends with the Ramanand Sagar saga on the National Television. Let me give you an example. The real Sita from the original text is NOT a weepy nobody with a blade of grass as her defence against her abominable abductor. She is very strong, decisive, highly intelligent, thoughtful, and stands by each one of her decisions. You need to read the original text to know her thus, right?
Similarly, if we were to judge the "ekpatni" Shri Rama with the twenty-first century praxis or theories, that is hardly a critique, right? True, the parameters of a couple's relationship are so different now that none can abandon an innocent partner just because some sick fool made snide remarks against her, or tried to woo/seduce her. A Ramanand Sagar Sita or an Ahilya is just not possible now! Most people, moreover, are moved these days by the trendy audio-visual and social media rather than the ancient texts.
We cannot judge the ''Ramayana'' by such contemporaneous standards though. The very paradigms are different. So is the value system, and so are the objectives/motives of the Adikavi, Rishi Valmiki. He is depicting a "maryada Purushottam", the ideal perfection who is ethics itself. As for Sita, Rama loves her like life itself. People should read the original stuff, at least, the "Uttarramcharitam"!
Unfortunately, half-baked knowledge, however smart, is always dangerous, right? Yet another issue with the "Ramayana" is that there are very many versions with multiple interpolations. On a wapp group, there was this video, repeated for two days. It was followed by highly enraged, spluttering stutters.
What was the video about? It showed Osho pontificating in a falsetto about Rama pouring moulton hot lead in to the ears of a tribal because the poor fellow heard the Vedas/the mantras being recited! Unfortunately, such quiddities are taken up to tarnish Lord Rama.
To think of it though, where exactly does this take place in the ''Ramayana"? In fact, Shri Rama is utmost, and genuinely, kind even with the flora and fauna. Remember the squirrel? The Shabari incident? Even the Wali stuff is due to Sugriva. Why, his best "aide" is Hanuman, a "kapi"! In brief, despite being excellence itself, he is most berated against! Hence the urgent need to valorise "charitam Raghunathsy", I suppose!
Pratima@ Such are the binaries of the so-called intellectuals now that everybody has to be either with us/them! The poor concept called scholarship!
No comments:
Post a Comment