Rama - The story of a history
Three were the women
If one wants to pick out the names of the persons who were responsible for turning the wheels of the epic to its intended direction, one would have to name three women, namely, Mantharä the hunchback, Kaikeyi and Sürpanakhä. Neither Valmiki nor Kamban speak much about Mantharä, excepting for the fact that she has been the maid-servant of Kaikeyi for long and came to Ayodhya along with Kaikeyi. As we have mentioned elsewhere, (See:
Kaikeyi and Mantharä) we get the bare minimum information on her from the Padma Purana that a celestial nymph by name Mantharä was asked to be born for the sake of accomplishing the purpose of the Devas, that is, setting in motion the process that would lead to the destruction of
Ravana.
Apart from this, the Ramopakhyana in the Mahabharata gives one more clue on her birth. When the decision of the avatar takes shape, the celestials speak among themselves as to who is to be born as whom, to assist the Lord in His mission. At that time, the Grandsire tells a Gandharvi to be born as Mantharä. “And in their presence the boon-giving god commanded a Gandharvi, by name Dundubhi, saying, 'Go there for accomplishing this object!'
And Dundubhi hearing these words of the Grandsire was born in the world of men as the hunchbacked Mantharä.” (Mahabharata, Vana Parva, Section 274, translated by Kisari Mohan
Ganguli)
We have seen that the epic moves every single character to the peak of its evolution from various stages of its attainment from the point when we meet them for the first time, to the last scene where that particular character appears. Every character undergoes its own development and – with the exception of Rama, Sita and Hanuman who – though they undergo all the travails, tumults and turmoil and establish their strength of character – cannot be thought of as ‘moving towards evolution’ – reaches its own pinnacle of perfection. Strangely, we do not see either Mantharä or Sürpanakhä after they play their intended roles. They thin out into nothingness abruptly. Mantharä is seen for the last time when Bharata sets out with his retinue to bring Rama back from the woods. An agonised and angered Satrughna, spotting her among the people getting ready to accompany Bharata to bring Rama back, seizes her by the locks and unsheathes his sword to kill her together with the other maidservants that surrounded her. But for the intervention of Bharata, Mantharä would have been killed that day. And what does Bharata say, when he pacifies Satrughna and what was the most important reason that stopped him from his action? Listen.
“Perceiving Satrughna enraged, Bharata spoke to him as follows – ‘Women are undeserving of death at the hands of all men. Let her be forgiven as such. I (myself) would have slain this sinful Kaikeyi of vicious conduct had it not been for the fact that the pious Sri Rama, whose mind is given to piety, is sure to get angry with me for having killed my (own) mother.
(Nay) Sri Rama, whose mind is given to piety, will surely speak not only with you but also with me if he (ultimately) comes to know even of this humpback having been killed (by
us)’.” (Valmiki Ramayana, Ayodhya Kanda, Canto 78, Sloka 21 – 23)
Kamban echoes these words of Valmiki’s Bharata.
‘munnavar muRai keda mudittha pAviyai, chinna pinnam seydhu en sinatthaith thIrvanel.’ I would have sliced down this sinner, my mother Kaikeyi, to pieces, and assuaged my unquenchable anger.
‘ennai en ayyan thurappaan endru alaal annai endru uNargilEn.’ If I had not done so, it was for the fear that my lord, Sri Rama, would censure me, repudiate me had I but ventured to do so. It was not for the fact that she is my mother that she was spared; but because my brother would not only disapprove it, but would renounce me for what I (wished to) have done. What applies to Kaikeyi, applies to this Kuni – hunchback – as well. And, therefore, refrain from what you are doing.
That brings out one of the wonderful qualities of Rama. Remaining good even to those who caused harm to him. Though she did or did not realise what she led to, Mantharä was spared; pardoned. Not because Bharata or Satrughna were ready to do so; but because of the fear of being cast off by Sri Rama, had she been harmed. Mantharä disappears from the scene from this point and we do not see her again at all. We do not even see her in the list of persons who gathered to greet Rama on his return.
If that was the case with Mantharä, Sürpanakhä disappears from the scene after kindling the desires of Ravana for Sita and sets him out on his path of self-destruction, an irretraceable move that he made, retracing becoming impossible because his stout ego did not permit it, falling head(s) over heels in unrighteous love, lust and the inability to bear the perceived ‘insult’ of being turned down, hit back and slighted by Sita. We do not see Sürpanakhä at all after that, even when the last rites of Ravana are performed.
Of Kaikeyi, we see a lot of change in her attitude. We have spoken of this in passing when we took her up for study. (See:
The mother of woes and the nurse of infamy and
The
Reformation) We will go deeper into this question in our study of
Rama.
If these were the three women responsible for turning the rudder to steer the ship into a troubled sea, who and what was the seed that contained the everlasting and towering tree of the epic?
|
