On Veneration
Nasik is a town named nose. Ravana’s sister got her nose cut off here and, in some tellings, her breasts. That really started the whole thing. It is a bit weird to see people venerating images of a man disfiguring a woman, but they do. Personally, I’ve never liked Lackshman. He disfigured my mythical aunt and later killed the mythical me (Indrajit). However, the Ramayana keeps surprising me with its humanity. This evening I sat under a tree where Lackshmana sat for 12 years in penance for killing Indrajit. I didn’t know that. It’s quite a nice gesture.
Hinduism is striking in its depth and humanity. The Gods are complicated, lovers and warriors, killers and redeemers. Destroyers, creators, etc. I have formed opinions at various times, only to find them changed. What’s left, over time, is just veneration. That is, at some point you simply don’t understand the thing anymore. You just like it. In the same way, the more I learn about the Ramayana, the less I know.
My starting point is that Rama was a bit genocidal, Lackshman his Gotabaya, and the rakshas and Ravana sorely maligned. In the superficial view this makes sense, but that superficiality is my own. Reading and visiting the epic sites, I see a lot more nuance.
Like a good soap opera, no character is entirely good or bad, and they’re changing constantly. They’re all flawed. Rama is supposed to be the ideal, but he does make mistakes. I think he’s seen as ideal in his reaction to those events (following his duty), but he still goes through a lot of human troubles, many of his own making.
Without reading or knowing too much I’d always judged Lackshman, but sitting under that tree I felt strangely in awe of him. He won, which is commendable, but then he also felt bad. I consider my own morality to be rooted in feeling bad, if only because I simply can’t do right. That is, morality is a capacity more than a fact, and it often comes tragically late. It’s not being God but loving and fearing God, I guess.That Lackshman can do tapas for twelve years for an enemy says a lot about him. A lot good. Which is a bit of a trip for me. I thought he was a thug and have been badmouthing him around town.
None of these characters are as they seemed. They are all human in action but divine in spirit and destiny. Indeed, the politics of the gods course through the drama, giving it another level of complexity. At the end there are no particular judgments that stick. All that’s left is veneration. Or, as it were, love.
I always thought Rama was a bit of, I dunno, paranoid perhaps? I mean, the way he treated Sita afterwards and all. Plus Ravana seems to be a good guy with morals. You never know.
By the way, you might want to watch this remake (of sorts) of Ramayan which I got to know from our own Ravana in the Lankanosphere.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RzTg7YXuy34&feature=player_embedded
Great work!
I’ve always liked Ramayana. Of course there are like a gazillion versions right? I guess I started liking it (ok this is going to sound silly) because the book cover had a beautiful picture of Rama & Sita. I like all the sub stories it carries as well. It’s like a million stories in one story. I prefer Ramayana to Maha Bharatha anyway, not happy with 5 brothers sharing one wife. EUGH!
Does anyone know what percentage of Indians think that Ramayana is literally true?
I had several Indians (very educated type I might add) asking me repeatedly about how Sri Lankans worship Ravana.
For comparison, here’s a similar statistic for US.
One-Third of Americans Believe the Bible is Literally True
http://www.gallup.com/poll/27682/onethird-americans-believe-bible-literally-true.aspx
We are meeting at the rowing club tmrw.
oh sorry.
i forgot you cant make it !
PEACE
@Boycy
dude, I’m still banned from the Rowing Club, whether I’m in Sri Lanka or not
Indi, you’ll probably like the Jaina versions of the Ramayana. I’m thinking in particular of Vimalasuri’s Paumacariya (ca. 3rd century, also called ‘Padmacharita’). The Jaina tellings grapple with morality and the effects of suffering on the human soul in a way the Hindu versions don’t. In Vimalasuri’s telling, for instance, Ravana is a good and virtuous man who falls from the path of virtue because of a passion he is unable to subdue. Lakshmana is a “vasudeva”, a good king who, in order to protect his subjects, takes upon himself the sin of killing (in Jainism, taking life can never be condoned, it is always a sin). Rama stands aloof from the war, renounces the world, and attains liberation. It is Lakshmana who fights the war and kills Ravana. For that sin, he is reborn into hell – the same hell as Ravana – and, having taken sin upon himself for the sake of the world and having done penance in hell, he will in the next cycle be reborn as a Tirthankara – an Arahant.
@I witness: Hard to say. Many of us can manage to believe several mutually contradictory things at the same time – it’s more or less a feature of Hinduism. Like the rocket scientists who, before launching a satellite, conduct prayers for a successful launch. They’re scientists, they know that there’s no possible way the ceremony can have any effect whatsoever on the launch, but still…