Triveni Journal
1927 | 11,233,916 words
Triveni is a journal dedicated to ancient Indian culture, history, philosophy, art, spirituality, music and all sorts of literature. Triveni was founded at Madras in 1927 and since that time various authors have donated their creativity in the form of articles, covering many aspects of public life....
THE CONCEPT OF
GREATNESS IN THE RAMAYANA*
First lecture:
IN RELATION TO MAIN CHARACTERS
Dr. R. S. MUGALI, M.A, D. Litt.
The Ramayana has been a perennial source of inspiration and instruction to all those in India and abroad, who seek guidance from it in understanding the eternal values of life and in living up to them. As is well-known the Ramayana story starts with the query as to who is a man of good quality, having in him all the best that one can possess and it proceeds to delineate Rama and some other characters as ideal persons with an individuality of their own, standing in various relations with one another. They are held up as models for all time and hence regarded as great in their own way. The question naturally arises as to why they are considered great and what is the poet’s concept of greatness in human personality. In dealing with this question, one is inclined to find out how far the great characters emerge as great in the course and structure of the entire narration and also whether they are depicted everywhere as mere embodiments of one virtue or the other or as human beings, having their own weaknesses and failings that set off their great qualities and deeds.
It is obvious that the first four Sargas of this epic which are prefatory in character were composed by one or two other persons, who were probably the disciples of Valmiki belonging to a later period. It is presumed that the actual composition of Valmiki begins with the fifth Sarga, though it strikes sudden, and unconventional as an opening canto without any salutation or prayer to the divine as in the Mahabharata. Though the query in the first Sarga of the Ramayana is seemingly innocent and anticipatory, based on a full knowledge of the entire story, it is significant as a proper introduction to the great qualities of Rama, who is the main character of the story and who is intended to be held up as a model of virtue, a paragon, along with some other characters, who vie with each other in emulating him and play their roles in different capacities or relations, caring more for their devotion to duty than for profit or position in life.
The above-mentioned query and the answer to it clearly indicate the poet’s concept of greatness and of the qualities, which distinguish an ideal person, a person of true character and culture beyond time and clime. The Ramayana is the earliest epic in Indian literature, produced a few thousand years ago, containing an old story of the hoary past, mostly built creatively on the basis of some real history and yet its appeal is universal in more senses than one, mainly because of the great characters, who adorn its gallery and who stand as beaconlights on the rough waters of the sea of life. In the said query made to Narada by Valmiki, and the reply that follows, the reference is to the qualities of a hero like Rama of that particular time and yet some of these qualities typify an Ideal Person of all time. Valmiki starts by asking who is at present a man of virtue and a man of strength or heroism?”
It is not possible to make a detailed study of the character and conduct of these characters within the brief scope of these two lectures on the subject. Besides, we have already before us very detailed and penetrating character studies by some scholars, particularly the lectures on the Ramayana, delivered by the late Rt. Hon. V. S. Srinivasa Sastri under the auspices of the Madras Sanskrit Academy and published some thirty years ago. I shall confine myself to highlighting some of the crucial situations, which illustrate the poet’s concept of greatness. In the course of my study I was struck by the use of the word ‘Mahatma’ with reference to Rama and some of the other characters in numerous contexts which made me think that Valmiki was very fond of that term as a yardstick of greatness. I intend to find out what exactly is the meaning of the word according to him and whether it means the same thing in all contexts. I shall keep in mind the characters of Rama, Sita and others belonging to the Kshatriya category in my first lecture and in my second lecture I shall allude to the characters like Hanuman and Sugriva, Ravana and Vibhishana belonging respectively to the Vanara and Rakshasa categories.
The first question with which we are confronted in dealing with the character of Rama is whether he was a character at all with human virtues and human limitations. Not only that he is looked upon as God incarnate in popular tradition, he is explicitly described as God in human form by the poet himself in the very story of the manner of his birth and in other contexts. It is not easy to ignore all that as interpolation. All the same, the total impression that he makes on our mind is that of a great human being, who stood the test of time, went through sorrow and suffering and rose above it, never swerving from his cherished ideals of truth and duty. Even if he was an Avatar, which literally means coming down, he descended to the human level in order to show to what height a human can go and ascend peaks of divine perfection in the midst of human imperfection. In brief, he appeals to us as a godly man rather than a manly god.
The great qualities of head and heart, which Rama was endowed with, have been praised in the first four Sargas along with the epithet of ‘Dharmatma’
and ‘Mahatma’, presumably on the basis of Valmiki’s assessment in his original work, beginning with the fifth Sarga. It is natural because Rama was born in the family of Ikshwaku kings, who were Mahatmas all
The first crucial situation in which Rama’s greatness was tested after proper initiation and training by Vishwamitra was that of coronation, nullified by Kaikeyi’s overweening ambition and insistence. This has been worked out with masterly art in all its complex light and shade in the first 20 to 25 Sargas of the Ayodhyakanda. What is most important in this tragic turn of events is how Rama, the hero of the epic, faced it with calm and courage and upheld the noble traditions of truthfulness and self-denial for which the family was known. When his father Dasaratha told him that he would be crowned as heir-apparent, that is Yuvaraja, his friends rejoiced and conveyed the news to his mother, Kausalya. She was overjoyed and gave many presents to them. But Rama himself bowed to his father and quietly made for his residence without expressing any of his feelings, almost like a Sthitaprajna. Probably he had some premonition of what was ultimately going to happen. Or it may be that even at that young age his mind was mature enough to realise that one should control one’s feelings of joy lest it result in extreme sorrow and depression on account of a possible reverse, which is inherent in any situation, particularly where other claims can be made.
Dasaratha sent for him again and asked him to be ready for the ceremony, which would take place the very next day, as he was having bad dreams and untoward events might occur in case of delay. Even here, Rama took leave of him and went to his mother’s residence to announce the news without any display of sentiment. She was extremely happy and said “all your opponents are finished.”
The elaborate preparations for the coronation, the enthusiasm of the people, Manthara’s successful strategy of poisoning the mind of Kaikeyi, Kaikeyi’s stubborn insistence on the coronation of her son, Bharata, and sending Rama to exile, despite desperate appeal by Dasaratha–all these are too well-known to bear repetition. We have only to note here how Rama reacted to it in a very graceful and dignified manner without expressing any sorrow.
In the series of happenings that took place consequent on Rama’s resolve to go to the forest like the lamentation of his parents and the people, the determination of Sita and Lakshmana to accompany him, his speech and conduct were exemplary, befitting a great hero of noble stature. The poet often refers to him as a Mahatma quite deservedly. But this Mahatma had his moments of agitation and agony too. Sleeping on bare ground on the first night after sending away Sumantra, the charioteer, Rama said to Lakshmana in an agitated state of mind “My father must surely be restless in sleep now. Kaikeyi must have been pleased that her wish is fulfilled. Considering this suffering caused to us and the derangement that has overtaken my father, I think Kama or desire is a more powerful urge than Artha and Dharma.” The next situation, which put the trio of Rama, Sita and Lakshmana to a severe test, was that of kidnapping of Sita by Ravana, affirming the supremacy of Kama in human affairs as realised by Rama earlier, though in an agitated mood. But this supremacy of Kama or desire in a general sense was proved twice in this context, firstly in the longing of Sita for the deceptive golden deer and secondly as a craving of Ravana for Sita–both of them a part of the tragic drama, enacted by cruel destiny. In spite of Lakshmana’s warning that the deer was demon Maricha in disguise and a lure to entice them, Sita insisted on her demand to have it. Even Rama supported her and asking his brother to look after her, went off chasing the deer. This weakness on the part of two ideal characters who have cast a spell on generations of Indians, resulted in all the sorrow and suffering that followed. Rama killed Maricha but lost both the golden deer and his dear wife He returned to his residence, mocked by bad omens. He found to his great shock that Sita was not there. He blamed Lakshmana for the mishap before knowing that he was not to blame. Even after knowing how his brother was forced to leave Sita alone, Rama expressed his disapproval of that act (Read III, 59, 23-24). Though this is humanly justifiable, it may be noted how a great hero like Rama, who maintained his dignity and poise in earlier situations, was terribly upset by the disappearance of his life-partner. All the madness of the sorrow of separation and the fret and fury of Rama in the latter part of Aranyakanda only show that even great men cannot outline their limitations and yet they shine all the more through and after their suffering. We find that Valmiki has described in sufficient detail the agony of Rama wailing in the absence of Sita. One whole Sarga, viz., the very first one, has been devoted to what the poet calls his The sorrow of Rama welled up again when Hanuman returned from Lanka after meeting Sita and gave to Rama the memento of Chudamani, sent by her. He pressed it to his bosom and wept bitterly, tears gushing from his eyes. He wanted to know all about her and said, “What is more agonising than this that I see the gem without seeing my beloved, who wore it? You say that she can sustain herself only for a month in my separation. But I cannot live without her even for a moment”, (V, 66, 9, 10). Even when preparations for war with Ravana are going on, Rama pines for Sita’s company in an uninhibited manner. Strangely enough, he is more open in expressing to his brother Lakshmana the pangs of his separation from Sita and his longing for her physical contact. He says to him with an air of selfishness, “I am not sorry that my sweetheart is away from me or that she was carried away by the demon. I am only sorry that her youth is passing away! My body burns day and night in the fire of sexual passion.” (VI, 5, 5, 8) One can see how perfectly human Rama was in such situations, in spite of his being a high-souled person, or Mahatma. In the course of the war, when a faked Sita’s dead body was shown to him, Rama lamented awfully and fell down fainted. (VI 83, 10) Lakshmana had to console him, asking him not to behave like a commoner, being a Mahatma. The strangest part of the whole story is that on the death of Ravana in a prolonged battle, Rama accosted Sita, who came to meet him, with mixed feelings of joy, pity and anger. He told her “You are standing before me with your suspected character and causing pain to me like a lamp facing a person with eye-sore. You can, therefore, go where you like. I have nothing to do with you.” (VI, 118, 17-18) Sita had to proclaim her chastity with a lump in her throat and tears in her eyes. In order to prove it, she fell into fire and came out unscathed. It was only then that Rama accepted her as his devoted wife, being reminded by gods that he was not an ordinary human being but the Supreme God. Thus the image of Rama as a great character with human weaknesses is conveyed to us, though it is not entirely self-consistent. The character next in importance is that of Sita, who has been called “Mahabhaga” on more than one occasion just as Rama is called “Mahatma.” Her father Janaka, while offering her in marriage to Rama, describes her as a devoted and large-minded wife, who will always follow him like a shadow. Among the other characters, who are regarded as great, Lakshmana and Bharata require special consideration. Rama praises Lakshmana a3 his inseparable counterpart but he appears to us to be an irascible and violent counterpart on certain occasions. One can understand his resentment at his father’s submission to Kaikeyi’s demands but he goes to the length of exclaiming furiously that he should be imprisoned and killed. (II, 21-12, 19) The poet still calls him a “Mahatma”. (II, 21-20) Probably the word “Mahatma” in this and similar contexts means a heroic and eminent person like the word “Mahanubhava” in a restricted sense. But his real greatness or magnanimity manifests in his sincere desire to accompany Rama and render all manner of service to him, though there was no such compulsion, although he avers in a fit of anger that he would kill Bharata if he ill-treated their mothers. (II. 31, 20,21) He flares up again on seeing Bharata coming with his army under the wrong impression that he was coming to attack them and shouted that he would fight and kill him. (II, 96) One may ask whether these outbursts, though caused by righteous indignation, are consistent with his magnanimity. Bharata, on the other hand, is fraternal devotion and humility incarnate. He also has been called a “Mahatma” in the true sense of the term. (II, 73, 28) His refusal to abide by his mother’s demand, proceeding to the forest to persuade Rama to return and rule, his acceptance of authority as a delegate of Rama and finally handing it over to him on his return–all these acts and utterances hold him up as a model of wisdom par excellence, though of course his censure of his mother Kaikeyi is rather harsh (II, 73, 74) and lacks restraint, whatever the provocation……Rama, Sita, Lakshmana and Bharata–these are the four great characters that the author ofRamayana has delineated with superb skill. It must, however, be remembered that their greatness is set off against their weaknesses and that they are not mere, airy embodiments of one virtue or the other. All of them represent the virility and magnanimity of the Kshatriya tradition along with their limitations and weaknesses. They are depicted as ideal as well as human even at the risk of a certain degree of incoherence. Second Lecture: In this lecture, we shall deal with some of the characters, who were friendly or hostile to Rama and his kith and kin. They are found both among Vanaras and Rakshasas. Unlike the Kshatriyas, the Vanaras and Rakshasas are non-human and therefore appear to be unreal and imaginary. It is a question how far they can be treated as human characters if they are creatures of the poet’s imagination without any basis of reality. If the Ramayana story is based on some substratum of history, is the latter part, in which characters belonging to these categories play a notable role, mere myth or a mixture of myth and reality? It is possible to argue that they were neither monkeys nor demons actually but human beings, resembling them, like the Dravidians and other tribal people, who lived in the hoary past. But their speech and behaviour show a strange combination of human and non-human characteristics. Some of them are endowed with rare qualities of loyalty, service and sacrifice. Their speech and action on certain occasions elicit our admiration so much so that we are inclined to ignore their unrealistic presentation. Their refinement and culture are no less than that of human characters, who have been held up as ideal. For the present purpose, we shall treat them as characters belonging to different categories and yet rubbing shoulders with human beings and helping or hindering them in their task. Sugriva was among the first of Vanaras, whom Rama met in his search for Sita. When he came across Rama and Lakshmana for the first time, he took fright of them because he feared that they were sent by his brother Vali to put him to rout. Being, however, assured by Hanuman one of his followers that they could not do any harm to him, he became friends with Rama and reposed complete confidence in him. Being a co-sufferer, he showed great sympathy for Rama and promised him that he would try his level best to search for Sita with the help of his followers and sought his help in his own predicament. This occasion for mutual help was caused by a common grievance, viz., the kidnapping of Rama’s wife by Ravana and the capture of Sugriva’s wife by Vali, though the nature of the conflict was different in each case. As promised, Rama joined hands with Sugriva in the prolonged battle with Vali and helped to kill him. Sugriva was then crowned as the king and reunited with his wife, Ruma. He did not pay sufficient attention to the task of searching for Sita in his absorption in royal revelry. This saddened Rama and enraged Lakshmana. He, however, realised his responsibility more keenly than before and sent his armies in all directions with a specific assignment to his minister, Hanuman. It was Hanuman, who found Sita in the Ashokavana of Ravana’s capital after a good deal of adventure. In the events that followed, including a war between the Vanaras and Rakshasas, Sugriva played a major part and brought victory to Rama. We notice that he has also been called a Mahatma in more than one context. In the first Sarga of Kishkindhakanda, it is said that he, being a Mahatma, was frightened by the sight of Rama and Lakshmana. (IV, 1, 130) How can a frightened person be a Mahatma in the true sense of the term? It is clear that the word means here a great or eminent hero rather than a high-souled person. Even in other contexts in this Kanda (3-21, 12-28 and 36-12) the meaning seems to be the same rather than the original or the accepted one. He calls his brother Vali also as Mahatma, saying that he honoured and bowed to his brother when he returned after killing Mayavi. (9, 23) Vali’s wife, Tara, also calls him a Mahatma Both these Vanara brothers were heroic and generally well-meaning. Sugriva was extremely helpful to Rama though his help was reciprocal. ValI behaved almost like Ravana in his capture of Sugriva’s wife. By no stretch of imagination either ofthem can be commented with the epithet of “Mahatma”, though Sugriva is a little more worthy than Vali in receiving that kind of approbation. But it must be said that the author of the Ramayana has used this term very often without always conveying the sense, which it originally has and which strikes a common reader. Hanuman is depicted in the Ramayana as the most ideal character in the Vanara category, possessing lovable qualities of learning and culture, loyalty and devotion, service and prowess. He occupies pride of place in more than half of the epic, beginning with Kishkindhakanda. The Sundarakanda is almost exclusively devoted to him. The part he has played in cementing the bond of friendship between Rama and Sugriva, in discovering Sita and instilling hope in her heart and that of Rama as a brave and clever messenger, in his wonderful exploits, of which he alone was capable, leading to the victory of Rama in the war with Ravana and the reunion of Rama and Sita. All his achievements are actuated by altruistic motives as he has nothing to gain for himself except a sense of satisfaction on having helped a great hero like Rama out of his distress and brought about a reunion of the ideal man and wife. If any one, among the helpers of Rama, deserves richly the title of a Mahatma, in the true sense of the word, it is Hanuman, beyond any doubt. In fact, he has been called so on more than one occasion. When he crossed over to Lanka by his miraculous flight, he was described as “Mahatma”, (IV, 1-208) implying both his great prowess and his great devotion to duty, perhaps the former more than the latter. Rama praises him profusely in the very first Sarga of Yuddhakanda on his return from Lanka after meeting Sita and completing his mission. A “Purushottama”according to Rama is one who achieves success as a loyal servant in carrying out a difficult task with faith and devotion. By implication, Hanuman was such a servant par excellence. Rama regrets that he cannot do any act of joy in return for his service. So, he says, “the only thing I have with me is embrace and I shall give it to this Mahatma.” It has been pointed out that Hanuman was not free from weaknesses and shortcomings in spite of his being great in every respect.1 One of his weaknesses was failure of memory at the proper time under the curse of the Rishis, whom he troubled during their Yagas while yet a boy. Among the examples given to substantiate this is the one, in which he forgot that Sugriva had already given orders to him early enough to send search parties for Sita and placed the blame on his shoulders when Lakshmana came to Sugriva complaining with indignation that he had neglected his duty to Rama in his orgy of enjoyment as a king. Actually, however, it was Hanuman, who first reminded Sugriva of his obligation to Rama (vide IV Sarga 29) when Sugriva ordered his army chief Neela to do the needful (IV,
29, 28-30). But he did not care to see whether his orders were carried out and Hanuman had to awaken his sense of duty once again. (IV, 32) Though as a minister of Sugriva, Hanuman had to share a part of the blame, it is not correct to say that Sugriva on his own had ordered Hanuman early enough. Some other examples of his amnesia or forgetfulness are noteworthy. Notwithstanding all this, all the encomiums showered on him such as: “He was great nearly in every sense of the word. And if we take the deeds performed by him and put them in a heap, I doubt whether the heap that stands to the credit of any other character would come up to it in mere bulk. He performed great deeds of valour of physical strength which no other living creature of the time could have performed. Wise, moderate in council, always ready to see things while yet they are only coming, few can approach Hanuman in sheer greatness, in weight of achievement” are quite justifiable. There are, of course, exaggerations in the treatment of his character 2 but the concept of greatness has taken a very concrete shape in Valmiki’s conception and delineation of Hanuman as an absolutely selfless, sincere, loyal, devoted and discreet helper, ready to face any hazard and achieve wonders for the sake of a great and venerable hero in difficulty and distress. The
Ramayana, which would have been a grand saga of Rama’s promise-keeping and self-denying greatness of character as a result of Kaikeyi’s greed, goaded by Manthara, developed into a vaster and more tragic epic, worthy of being called a “Kamayana” as a consequence of Ravana’s “Kama” or lustful craving for Sita. In popular imagination, Ravana is a vile and cruel person, mad after woman. But Valmiki has delineated a very complex character in Ravana. He belonged to the Rakshasa category but he came from a family, which traced its origin to God Brahma. He was not only a very gifted warrior and king but he had also practised penance and immunised himself from the attack of any of the gods. It was his arrogance of power and weakness for women, which led to his downfall. In particular, his infatuation for Sita, unmindful of the wise and repeated counsel of Maricha, spelt his ruin. As has been rightly said, “Ravana belonged to the class, in whom greatness does not co-exist with goodness” whereas “Rama was a rare type of greatness and goodness combined”.3 It may be noted here that the contrast between the twogreat characters and the poignancy of the tragedy have been brought out more intensely in the Jaina version of the Ramayana, in which Ravana, a person of unblemished character like Rama, falls a prey to his sudden longing for Sita. It may seem rather strange that Valmiki has called him a “Mahatma” more than once in the same breath in which he calls Rama a “Mahatma.” This happens more than once. It is the presiding deity of Lanka, who for the first time boasts that she is guarding the city at the behest of Mahatma Ravana. (IV, 3-28) This may be ignored because it has come from a biased deity. Or it may be explained as meaning “a great hero” because in the same Sarga further on, she has called him a “Duratma”, whose lust for Sita is going to ruin the entire Rakshasa clan. But, a little later during the search for Sita by Hanuman, the palace of Ravana is described by the poet himself as There are other contexts in which the epithet “Mahatma” appears to have been applied to Ravana in the sense of a great or famous hero. (V, 10-12, 59-24, 69-17) Considering that the term has been employed in describing other demons like Narantaka (V, 69-71), other Vanaras also, (V, 43-1, 49-2) it may be safely assorted that it is used in the sense of
It is well nigh impossible to be comprehensive in our treatment of this subject in the course of only two lectures, which are a modest attempt to understand the concept of greatness in this great epic. It may be said in brief that the concept consists in suggesting that greatness is not perfectness and that greatness shines all the more because of weakness or imperfection. It is this deep understanding and depiction that has made Ramayana a great epic, a magnificent human document, whose appeal is universal. It is wrong to look upon this epic as a mere symbolic story of character-moulds or models. It is certainly a picture of great men and women, whose greatness, however, is humanised by their limitations, weaknesses and failings. As has been well said, “That is a great man, who, going through the mill, undergoing my experiences, suffering my sufferings, enjoying my joys, still comes out top, overcoming all those handicaps and limitations, showing in his fullest development the grandeur of human character, approaching the divinity from which he came and I came and you came, too”. 4 (It may be noted that the references in these lectures are from Srimad Valmiki Ramayanam, edited by Sri N. Ranganatha Sarma in Kannada script.) * Lectures delivered under the auspices of the Sanskrit Academy, Madras.
IN RELATION TO OTHER CHARACTERS
1
V. S. Srinivasa Sastry: “Lectures on the Ramayana”, Pp. 253-268
2 Ibid, p. 253
3
Ibid, pp. 306, 307.
4 Ibid, p. 13.