 Rama – Dasaratha and Rama
He plays it mild
The killing of Tataka is a matter of another debate among scholars. There are stalwarts who argue that Rama should have felt a tinge of guilt at least for once for having had to kill a woman, that too at the very beginning of his career. The figurative ‘maiden kill’ was in his case a literal killing of a woman. ‘Should a person – that too the very embodiment of piety – kill a woman, however bad she is!’ is a question that has attracted much attention in the realms of literary polemics.
Prof A S Gnanasambandan, while discussing the Ayomukhi incident – where Lakshmana severs the earlobes, nose and lips of the demoness who falls in love with him – points to a phrase in Rama’s praise of Lakshmana. We have given a quick sketch of this incident earlier, in our discussions on Lakshmana. (See:
The Ayomukhi
incident, Light of my light and
Lakshmana the
courageous) Though the incident has not been discussed as it deserves to be discussed, we have given the minimum outline, with Lakshmana in focus.
‘kollalai; naasiyaik koydhu nIkkinaai; vallai nI, manu mudhal marabinOi!’ says Rama to Lakshmana when the latter returns, severing the limbs of Ayomukhi. ‘(I am proud of you in that) you did not kill her. You stopped with severing her limbs. You know what is right. You are coming in the line of Manu, after all!’ ‘If this is what he feels about Lakshmana’s action,’ argues the professor, deduces and adds suggestively, ‘then it goes without saying that Rama must have felt bad about what he did in the Tataka incident.’ I have not given the argument in its perspective here. But what the professor argues amounts to this. Sounds plausible; but not possible. If it is not dealt with in its proper context, this would lead one to think twice on the conviction of Rama; on the way he made decisions and would give rise to several other improbable oddities. We will take up the details later, at an appropriate time.
That would take us by amazement, if not shock. ‘Did Rama ever perform such an act that he regretted later?’ would be the first question that looms large in our minds by now, instantaneously. Yes. There are some three or four occasions of which Rama regrets later on his decision or action. The pursuit of the golden deer against the wise counsel of Lakshmana, for instance. But most certainly, the killing of Tataka is not one among them. Even the killing of Vali, for that matter. “No agony is felt by me nor any remorse for what I have done,” is what Rama tells Vali. (Valmiki Ramayana, Kishkindha Kanda, Canto 18, Sloka 37) These are questions for detailed discussion, on another day.
When one looks at this incident of Tataka’s killing, one has to see the way in which Sri Rama approached the issue, began and ended up. He did try milder forms at first. It was sufficient in the case of Sürpanakhä as well as Ayomukhi. They could be stopped with the minimum show of power, and milder forms of punishment. ot so in the case of Tataka. ‘The sage wants me to kill her, O Lakshmana, but I don’t have the heart to do so,’ he tells his brother, before he steps out in action.
pashya lakSmaNa yakSiNyaa bhairavam daaruNam vapuH |
bhidyeran darshanaat asyaa bhiiruuNaam hRidayaani ca ||
(Valmiki Ramayana, Bala Kanda, Canto 26, Sloka 10)
“Behold O Lakshmana, the formidable body of the Yaksa woman; the hearts of the timorous will break at her (very) sight.”
etaam pashya duraadharSaam maayaa bala samanvitaam |
vinivRittaam karomi adya hRita karNaagra naasikaam ||
(Ibid, Sloka 11)
“See how I put her to flight today once she has been deprived of her ears and the tip of her nose, even though she is difficult to subdue and equipped with the power of Maya.”
na hi enaam utsahe hantum strii svabhaavena rakSitaam |
viiryam ca asyaa gatim ca eva hanyataam iti me matiH ||
(Ibid, Sloka 12)
“I do not really feel inclined to kill her, protected (as she is) by her womanhood. Let me put an end to her prowess (capacity to worst others) as well as to her power of motion (by depriving her of her hands and feet and thereby rendering her incapable of further devastation); such indeed is my resolve.”
Therefore, though he was convinced of the fact that Tataka did deserve to be punished, Rama’s first inclination was not to kill her. He tried with milder forms of punishment – what is known as ‘minimum punitive’ to deter her; stop her from treading her wicked ways. That worked with Sürpanakhä, as well as with Ayomukhi. Incidentally, it is Lakshmana who is involved in both these cases. But it did not work with
Tataka.
Let’s see what the poets have to say.
| 
