Rama - The man and the avatar
Did he mean it?
We mentioned the words of Rama a couple of posts back, (See:
In the eyes of the
poets) that he would have wrenched the kingdom from the hands of Dasaratha; but did not do so because of moral considerations. Read in isolation, they sure would sound shocking and would make gall and wormwood of the words of the person who quotes it. And the expressions on Bharata that we had quoted are diametrically opposite of what he has been telling all along, and would tell an enraged Lakshmana when he mistakes Bharata who comes to the jungle to request Rama to come back. The perfect picture of Rama that Valmiki paints seems to go a bit here and there when we hear such words from his mouth. Sastriyar quotes this sloka – which we have seen – on Rama’s remarks on
Bharata.
sukhi bata sabharyas ca bharatah kekayisutah
muditan kosalan eko yo bhoksyaty adhirajavat
(Valmiki Ramayana, Ayodhya Kanda, Canto 53, Sloka 12)
The silver-tongued orator observes thus: “Now he thinks of Bharata. He contrasts himself with Bharata. ‘I have lost everything. I have come away to the forest with my wife and with my dear brother. He, Bharata, is enthroned, is going to rule over the Kosalas and he is going to do it with his wife. He is going to have his queen by his side.’ Notice this please. This is the one place in which the wife of any of the brothers is alluded to, not by name but merely as
bharya. In no other place does the Poet allude to the other persons.”
When we look at this piece, and when we come across the words of Rama, which place Bharata on the highest pedestal, we are a little confused. We do not know which one of the two is THE real feeling, idea and expression of Rama on Bharata. Obviously, the above words of Rama are spoken in disappointment, in a state of mind that he is not ordinarily in. And that does mean that Rama’s mind was shifting from the extra-ordinary to the ordinary, and vice versa, while most of the time remaining extra extraordinary. There were times when this splendid personality did and said things just like any of us.
That’s what deserves our attention, our study. How Valmiki paints Rama as another man and how he brings out the best in him – nay, I should rather say, how Rama conducts himself in such a manner that Valmiki draws the most perfect picture of him, of the most ideal man. And compare our
kavi-chakravarthi – emperor among poets – Kamban, and his treatment of the same personality with that of his forerunner.
There is a piece of a line found in the notes of Right Hon’ble Srinivasa Sastriyar that he used for his lectures. The eminent scholar has noted thus, in his notes for his 5th lecture: “Was Rama the ideal always and every moment, in big matters and in small, to the great ones and the little ones? If so, he was a bloodless robot, an impossible prig, mounted on stilts and hardly visible in perspective.” Precisely. When we call him ‘ideal’, in our attempts to try to get a glimpse of his picture in toto, it should not be forgotten that this person was made of flesh and blood too, like any of us. Else, we would miss the wholesome picture. Else, we would misread him; misunderstand his purpose and tend to be misguided on his purposes, unable to balance between the opposing ideas that find an expression through him.
Coming back to what Rama says when he is alone in the company of Lakshmana and Sita, about to begin his life in exile. We saw what he said.
adharmabhaya bhitas ca paralokasya canagha
tena laksmana nadyaham atmanam abhisecaye
(Ibid, Sloka 26)
which the lecturer interprets as, “I could have anointed myself, putting aside Dasaratha and everybody else. Why didn’t I? I have fear of wrong-doing. I don’t want to do that which is ignoble or improper just for gain.”
But if he said that, it was not out of mere impulse. This is just an effect of a cause and not otherwise. Dasaratha himself had requested him to do so, when the three were called to his presence, before going on exile. “Fixing his gaze on Sri Rama (a scion of Raghu) who was coolly awaiting His Majesty’s permission to dwell in the forest, the king said: ‘I have been deprived of my senses by Kaikeyi through a boon (granted by me in her favour) O scion of Raghu!
Taking me captive, (therefore) be you the king of Ayodhya today.” (Ibid, Canto 34, Sloka 26)
If we miss these words of Dasaratha (which unfortunately even the eminent Sastriyar does not refer to at this point), we will not be able to see the words of Rama in perspective. We will not be able to understand that Rama – though fuming – was just reflecting on the suggestion of Dasaratha. Just as anyone who has not read Psalm 22 of the Bible, which starts with the line, “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” unable to understand the reason behind one of those last words from the cross, ‘Eli, Eli, lama sa-bach thani?’, and unable to perceive it in perspective.
Every word – be it of the epic or that of the scripture – has its design; its place; logic and reason. We, however, are not going into a detailed discussion right now. Just wait for a moment longer. The stage is getting set-up. The screen is yet to rise up. We are just peeping through.
What we were about to explain was how Kamban has handled this delicate scene. And its total absence.
|
