Rama - The man and the avatar
This is the detour
Kamban’s verses run closest to that of Valmiki up to the scene in which Rama is summoned to the presence of Dasaratha, for informing him of the change of decision. Even the words of Kaikeyi that tell him that he has been ordained by the king to dwell in the forest ‘for years twice seven’ are a direct translation from Valmiki, who uses the expression
‘sapta sapta ca varsani’ to denote a period of fourteen years. Take a look at the following sloka from Valmiki.
sapta sapta ca varsani’ dandakaranyam asritah
abhisekam imam tyaktva vasa
(Valmiki Ramayana, Ayodhya Kanda, Canto 18, Sloka 37)
“Forgoing the forthcoming installation and ensconced in the Dandaka forest, wear matted locks and the bark of trees for seven and seven years.”
And now hear what Kamban’s Kaikeyi tells Rama.
‘aazhi sUzh ulagam ellaam baradhnE aaLa,’ Let Bharata rule over this world surrounded by the sea.
‘nI pOi,’ You go ‘thAzhirum sadaigaL thAngi,’ and wear the matted locks
‘thAngarum thavam mErkoNdu,’ undertake and perform askesis
‘pUzi vem kaanam naNNi, puNNiya nadhigaL aadi,’ reside in the forest and have a dip in the holy rivers,
‘Ezh iraNdu aaNdin vaa endru iyambinan arasan endraaL,’ and return after (the passage of) years twice seven.
The words ‘abhisekam imam tyaktva’ (give up, forego, the ceremonies) become ‘Let Bharata rule,’ implying ‘do not ascend the throne, in his favour’.
‘jataciradharo’ becomes,
‘thAzhirum sadaigaL thAngi,’ ‘wear the matted locks’, though the expression ‘cira’ goes unsaid and understood.
‘dandakaranyam asritah’ become ‘reside in the forests.’ And most important.
‘sapta sapta ca varsani’’ is expressed in an equivalent
‘Ezh iraNdu aaNdu,’ ’years twice seven.’ Look at the similarity in the expression of a period of fourteen years! An almost exact word-for-word translation of Valmiki’s version.
And take a look at the reply of Rama. “At your command, though not (directly) enjoined by my revered father, I shall live in a lonely forest on this globe for fourteen years.” (Ibid, Canto 19, Sloka 23)
‘mannavan paNi andraagil, num paNi maruppanO yaan?’ asks Kamban’s Rama, almost exactly echoing in the words of Valmiki. ‘Let it be so. It may or may not be the order of the king. Would I deny, would I refuse to obey, if it were yours!’ The particular verse in question, of course, offers itself to be interpreted in two different ways, both interpretations not moving away from the spirit of the matter; but giving out a keen insight of Rama and that he has taken note of the fact that Dasaratha is unconscious at that time, as also the possible cause behind that state, suggesting subtly that Rama has understood what should have taken place between the King and Kaikeyi, bringing about an abrupt turn of events. A detailed discussion on this can be taken up later, when we arrive at this scene.
But. From this point onwards, Kamban takes his own path. Dasaratha remains unconscious throughout. He does not regain his consciousness and summon Rama to his presence, as it happens in Valmiki. Leaving the palace of Kaikeyi, Rama goes to Kausalya and Sumitra and the drama takes its shape, with Sita and Lakshmana joining him and the three leaving on exile. It is only much later that Dasaratha comes to his senses. By that time Rama had already left. He did not even come back to Dasaratha to say ‘adieu’ or take his leave.
‘pAvi, nIyE vemkaan padarvaai endru en uyirai EvinaayO?’ he would ask Kaikeyi in shock, later. ‘Sinner! Did you order him – my very own soul – to go to the forest!
‘avanum EginanO!’ And did he leave! On your words! (Implying, ‘did he go without even taking leave of me!’)
That only emphasises the fact that it is the intention of Kamban, left for us to understand, that his Rama was aware of what has actually taken place between the father and the mother. That underlines the fact that he did not come back to Dasaratha because that would necessitate the king to plead with him in ever so many words, trying to stop him from going on exile. Long, long discussions, and the arguments for and against the merits of ‘protecting the honour of the words of the father’ and accepting the exile, are skilfully avoided with a minor bypass. We will amplify on this at an appropriate time.
What we have seen is just one sample of the wonders that Valmiki and Kamban have worked with the magic of their words. The latter takes a detour at times, gives a different colour, paints a slightly different drama, nevertheless elevating the dramatis personae, and the reader alike.
|
