In my earlier blog, I equated the Ramayana with the Bible and the Quran. But there is a big difference that I need to elaborate on. Unlike the Bible or Quran, Ramayana's core is not an ideology but a narration of the life of Rama.
The immediate response from the deracinated would be - "How can you believe it really happened? There are unbelievable events narrated in it." There is no point in explaining to them that it is an Itihasa - 'It happened thus.'
So, my answer is - the core of Ramayana could have happened. What is this core?
There was this Prince Rama, son of Dasaratha. His step-brothers were Bharata, Lakshmana, and Shatrugna. He was exiled because his father had to honor the promise he made to one of the queens - Kaikeyi. Rama, with his wife Seetha and step-brother Lakshmana, left for the forest. They lived a life of a wanderer with no comforts. Seetha was kidnapped by Ravana, a powerful king of Lanka. Rama earned the trust and friendship of Sugreeva by killing Sugreeva's brother Vali. With the help of Sugreeva's army and a brilliant and strong minister Hanuman, Rama approached Lanka. Ravana's brother Vibhishana left him and joined Rama's side. The army reached Lanka and fought with Ravana's army. Finally, Rama killed Ravana, made Vibhishana, the king of Lanka, and got Seetha back.
I have trimmed the beautiful embellishments of Ramayana to give just the core. What makes Rama the Hero or God to be worshipped for millennia and Ramayana an epic narrated for millennia?
- Rama was already the darling of the king and the citizenry. Dasaratha or Rama could have ordered the killing or the arrest of Kaikeyi. That would have removed the only block between Rama and the kingdom. They both chose to honor the promise made by Dasaratha to his wife. Even in these days and times, I have seen individuals making extraordinary efforts to honor promises made - not just by them but also by their family members.
- Rama sacrificed his kingdom to honor the promise made by his father. Seetha and Lakshmana were no less Heroic. They chose to sacrifice the comforts of the palace to follow Rama and exhibited their commitment and loyalty to Rama. Bharata equally exhibited his highest values by sacrificing the position of the king but undertook the administration as his duty.
- In the fourteen years in the forest and the battlefield, Rama and Lakshmana exhibited the courage of true warriors. However, their courage is evident in their decision to leave the comforts and live a life of hardship.
- Rama killed Vali and won the friendship of Sugreeva. But Vali was more powerful. He could have been a better help than Sugreeva. That's where we see Rama's sense of justice. Again, after the killing of Ravana, Rama could have held the prosperous Lanka for himself. But he chose to serve justice by anointing Vibhishana as the king of Lanka.
Rama and other characters held themselves to such a high standard. Their values are still relevant and hold families, communities, and countries together. That is why Rama is still a Hero and Ramayana is still read and listened to.
If the values highlighted by Ramayana are so inspirational, if it has contributed to the welfare of families, societies, and countries, does it matter if Ramayana really happened or not?
2 comments:
Concise pointers; of course, we Hindus have this endless flow of Bhakti towards Rama and what he stood for - but the metaphor of 'Ramarajya' is also eternally relatable to us.
The details of what would constitute Ramarajyam that seems to be appealing to us at so many levels can also be scribed as a blog, may be?
And, one can learn (and internalize) so much from the characterizations of Hanuman, Sitamata+++ - which are again, full of dharmic, actionable pointers.
Thank you.
Yes, every character in Ramayana needs to be understood and internalized as appropriate.
You sure gave a few points to ponder over and write. Will do.
Post a Comment