Content uploaded by Debaprasad Bandyopadhyay
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Debaprasad Bandyopadhyay on Jul 08, 2021
Content may be subject to copyright.
1
RAMIFICATION OF ŚRĪ RĀMA RAMSHACKLES US: OUR
RAM-DESI-VIR?
COMPILED BY DEBAPRASAD BANDYOPADHYAY AND AKHAR
BANDYOPADHYAY
-
,
, ’
--Rabindranath Thakur
That will be true, whatever you will compose: that which actually happens is
not all true. O Poet, the land of your is the birth-place of Rāma—and know
that to be truer than Ayodhyā. [Tr. Ācārya S. K. Chatterji]
PART-I: RĀMA AND NARRATIVE COMMUNITIES
After knowing from the Hon. PM’s Narendra Modiji’s speech that there is
“gunj” (reverberation) of the Rāmāyaṇa throughout the world, we had
Googled it and found in the Wikipedia that there are many versions (more
than 300) of the Rāmayāna⤡. Out of curiosity, we have started to read some
of the narratives and we are severely shocked by the fact that all the
Rāmayāṇas are not the same—there are different Rāmas!
As for example, in the Jātaka narratives (Pāli verses or gāthā, khuddakanikāya
and jātakakatthāvaṇṇa, daśarathajātaka), we have found that Rāma Panḍita
and Sītā are siblings and they are married couple (what a blasphemy!) also
(many scholars think that this is the nucleus of the Rāma Myth though there
are problems of dating). In the Chinese version, Rāma is supplemented by
Bodhisattva. In the case of the Khotani Rāmāyaṇa, Sītā is the daughter of
Daṣagrīva Rāvana (The King of the Brahmins). However, in the text, we found
that the astrologer predicted that she would be the destructor of the city of
2
Daṣagrīva. So, she was abandoned and a hermit rescued her. At the time of
hunting, Rāma and Lakṣmaṇa found Sītā and both of them fell in love. After
that Daṣagrīva abducted her as he fell in love with her daughter (another
blasphemy! Electra or Śatarupā Complex?! Śatarupā, the daughter of Brahmā,
was stalked by her father. Cf. ⤡ ⤡)! In this narrative, Rāvana was not killed by
Rāma but was severely injured by the latter. In the Malaya fairy tale and in
Philippin verses, Hanuman is considered as the son of Rāma. It is striking that
in the Malaya version, Lakṣmaṇa is the elder brother of Lord Rāma.
We are totally bewildered after going through two or three versions of the
narratives. There are so many different stories on the “Rāma Myth”—from his
birth to exile, marital and parental relationships, events during exile, the war,
the post-coronation of Rāma etc. And we have not found any reference of
Rāma or other characters (the King Janaka in the Upaniṣads is mere namesake
of Sītā’s foster father) in the early Brahminical or Vedic literatures. Even,
scholars say that the Mahābhārata was composed/compiled/edited much
earlier than the Rāmāyaṇa -compilation. Therefore, the Rāmāyaṇa does not
represent supposed “sanātana dharma” (later on we will discuss the ethical
issues on the deeds (character, carit) of Maryādaā Purṣottama [a la Vālmīki]
and avatāra [a la Tulsidas] Rāma). Maharṣi Vālmīki never mentioned Rāma as
the reincarnation (avatāra) of the Lord Viṣṇu except in the interpolated (?)
Uttarakāṇḍa.
In the Jaina versions of the Rāmāyaṇa, Rāma had eight thousand wives among
whom Sītā was the principle one. Lakṣmaṇa had around sixteen thousand
wives in which Prithvīsundarī was his principle one instead of Urmilā.
According to Jaina poet, Vimalasurī's Version, Rāma married thrice when he
was in exile. Lakṣmaṇa, his brother married eleven times. On the other hand,
Rāvana was projected as a different character for his abilities in meditation and
ascetic practices.⤡ ⤡ Thus, in the Jaina versions of Rāmāyaṇa, Rāma followed
the path of his polygamous father, Daśaratha, who married 350+ to 60000
women (numbers differ according to different versions. cf. Dasaratha Wives
Three, 350, Or 60,000 VIEW HERE ⤡ (As reported on 5th March, 2014 ©
Ramanis Blog)
Chatterji, S. K. 1978. The Ramayana: Its Character, Genesis, History, Expansion
and Exodus: A Résumé. Kolkata: Prajñā.
3
Sen, S. 1977. Origin and Development of the Rāma Legend. Kolkata: Rupa and
Co.
Now, the simple problem question is: Which Rāma should I worship? The
simple answer to this simple question is: the VālmīkiRāmāyaṇa ! Now, why
are we providing
relative importance
to Vālmīki ’s Rāmāyaṇa (written in
Sanskrit) keeping aside Indian bhakti poet Goswami Tulsidasji’s
Rāmacaritmānasa (written in Awadhi) or other versions of the Rāmāyaṇas , viz.
indigenous Rāmāyaṇas, performed Rāmāyaṇas, painted and carved Rāmāyaṇas
(sculptures in the temples)? May we not treat multiple narratives and
interpretations as equally valid? The (His)tories of Rama are travelling
narratives, dispersions of which prove Rāmāyaṇa’s epic character. K.
Satchidanandan aptly said,
“So when A.K. Rāmanujan speaks about 300 Rāmāyaṇa s, I am afraid he forgets thousands
of other Rāmāyaṇa s which are also there.” VIEW HERE ⤡ (As reported on 19th September,
2018 ©Sahapedia )
The matter is nothing but “likho script āpnā āpnā” (“Write your own scripts”-
an ad transmitted in the electronic media in the 90s of the last century, at the
beginning of the neo-liberal economy.)—the plural interpretations of the
Rāma-kathā prove its credentials as an epic.
See also: Richman, Paula ed. 1991. Many Rāmāyaṇas The Diversity of a
Narrative Tradition in South Asia. Berkeley · Los Angeles · Oxford: University
Of California Press.
Therefore, there are so many differAnces within the narrative community of
the Lord Rāma(s)! Even when we are confronting the authenticated edition of
the epic (The Vālmīki-Rāmāyaṇa: Critical Edition. Edited by U. P. Shah, G. H.
Bhatt, P.L Vaidya, P.C. Divanji, D.R Mankad, G.C. Jhala, Baroda: Oriental
Institute, 1960-73), we are again perplexed by the variations and themes. Even
we have found geo-botanical as well as cultural anomalies in Vālmīki’s text(s),
e.g., Śāla tree (shorea robusta) is not found in the Lanka, but Śāla tree and its
different parts were used in the battlefield. This fact questions the exact
location of the Lanka. Moreover, the cremation ceremony of the vānara (vana
nara, “forest-persons” or forest-dwellers) as excellently described by the poet
Vālmīki, followed by the Brahministic or the Vedic ritual processes, which
4
seems unlikely in the case of vānara, the inhabitants of the southern part of
the South-Eastern Asia (cf. Sankalia, Hasmukhlal Dhirajlal. 1973. Ramayana:
Myth Or Reality? New Delhi: People's Publishing House). We have also found
cloned “uncontaminated” Sītā and Lakṣmaṇarekhā in Tulsidas’ text, but not in
Vālmiki’s discursive formations.
There is another problem (as expected within the ambit of plural narrative
communities) regarding the exact birthplace of Śrī Rāma. Wikipedia has
summarized the whole controversy:
“In November 1990, the newly appointed Prime Minister Chandra Shekhar made an attempt
to resolve the Ayodhyā dispute amicably. Towards this objective, he asked Hindu and
Muslim groups to exchange evidence on their claims over Ayodhyā. The panel representing
the Muslim organization Babri Masjid Action Committee (BMAC) included R. S. Sharma, D.
N. Jha, M. Athar Ali and Suraj Bhan. The evidence presented by them included scholarly
articles discussing alternative theories about the birthplace of Rāma. These sources
mentioned 8 different possible birthplaces, including a site other than Babri Masjid in
Ayodhyā, Nepal and Afghanistan. One author - M. V. Ratnam - claimed that Rāma was
Ramses II, a pharaoh of ancient Egypt.”
“A section of historians, such as R. S. Sharma, state that such claims of Babri Masjid site
being the birthplace of Rāma sprang up only after the 18th century. Sharma states that
Ayodhyā emerged as a place of Hindu pilgrimage only in medieval times, since ancient texts
do not mention it as a pilgrim centre. For example, chapter 85 of the Vishnu Smriti lists 52
places of pilgrimage, which do not include Ayodhyā. Sharma also notes that Tulsidas, who
wrote the Ramcharitmanas in 1574 at Ayodhyā, does not mention it as a place of pilgrimage.
Many critics also claim that the present-day Ayodhyā was originally a Buddhist site, based
on its identification with Saketa described in Buddhist texts. According to historian Romila
Thapar, ignoring the Hindu mythological accounts, the first historic mention of the city dates
back to the 7th century, when the Chinese pilgrim Xuanzang described it as a Buddhist site.”
(Source: Wikipedia⤡. Emphasis added)
For more information cf.
Pokharel, Krishna and Paul Beckett. 2012. The Battle for India
’
s Soul. Wall
Street Journal.
Sharma, Ram Sharan. 1991. Ramjanmabhumi-Baburi Masjid: A Historians'
Report to the Nation. Delhi: People's Publishing House.
5
____ 2003. "The Ayodhyā Issue". In Robert Layton and Julian Thomas (ed.).
Destruction and Conservation of Cultural Property. Routledge. (pp. 127–137)
Why should we then give privilege to one oeuvre over another? Are we not
murdering the plurality of living texts, when we are choosing a preferred one
as the “original” and “authentic”? We have plural and parallel versions of the
epic. We must have to decide a single authentic static archetypical brand of Śrī
Rāma to meet the goal of ruling party’s packaged homogenized pasteurized
standardized Hindutva.
PART-II: POLYSEMOUS PROPER NAMES: RĀMA AND HIS RĀJYA
Epistemologically speaking, there are more problems regarding the denotation
and connotation of the word “Rāma” in Kabirdas or Mahatma Gandhi’s
enunciations. Let us first explore some lyrics of Kabir:
“ , ,
|
, ,
|”
“Though these are two names, Ram and Rahim are the same. He says that one should not
be mistaken that they are separate entities. Both Krishna and Karim are also one. The one
who understands this will never be delusional.”
What a blasphemy again! Kabir was synthesizing two antagonistic religions! He
was in a syncretic mood to synthesize proper names—the arbitrary signifiers at
the level of baikharī! He was transcending towards the nirguṇa Brahma by
shunning off saguṇa deities:
,
,
“Both the Hindu and Muslims are searching for the God, but have cut a sorry figure as they
do not know the nirguna Brahma ( ).”
“ , !
6
, !”
“He believed that there are four Rāmas in this world! Three of them are commonly known,
but the fourth is a lesser-known Rāma and should be recognized. One Rāma dwelt in
Dasharatha’s home, one resides within every being, one has expanded this entire creation,
and one is beyond all of them. He is the essence of all of us and all of them.”
Keeping aside the denotation of proper name of exceptional mortal being,
Kabir was emphasizing on a transcendental space (parāmārthika satya) for the
sake of mokṣa.
Mahatma Gandhi had also followed the path of Kabir (Kavīrapanthā), when he
enunciated:
“By Rāmarajya I do not mean Hindu Raj. I mean by Rāmarajya Divine Raj, the Kingdom of
God. For me Rāma and Rahim are one and the same deity. I acknowledge no other God but
the one God of truth and righteousness.
Whether Rāma of my imagination ever lived or not on this earth, the ancient ideal of
Rāmarajya is undoubtedly one of true democracy in which the meanest citizen could be sure
of swift justice without an elaborate and costly procedure. Even the dog is described by the
poet to have received justice under Rāmarajya.” (Young India, 19-9-1929, p. 305)
Ramrajya VIEW HERE ⤡
However, what is written in Vālmīki ’s Rāmāyaṇa regarding Rāmarājya?
|
|| --
While Rāma was ruling the kingdom, there were no widows to lament, nor
there was no danger from wild animals, nor any fear born of diseases.
|
|| --
The world was bereft of thieves and robberies. No one felt worthless nor did
old people perform obsequies concerning youngsters.
|
7
|| --
Every creature felt pleased. Everyone was intent on virtue. Turning their eyes
towards Rāma alone, creatures did not kill one another.
|
|| --
While Rāma was ruling the kingdom, people survived for thousands of years,
with thousands of their progeny, all free of illness and grief.
|
|| --
While Rāma ruled the kingdom, the talks of the people centered round Rāma,
Rāma and Rāma. The world became Rāma's world.
|
|| --
The trees there were bearing flowers and fruits regularly, without any injury by
pests and insects. The clouds were raining in time and the wind was delightful
to the touch.
|
|| --
|
Brahmins (the priest-class), Kṣatriyas (the warrior-class), Vaiśyas (the class of
merchants and agriculturists), śūdras (the servant-class) were performing their
own duties, satisfied with their own work and bereft of any greed. While Rāma
was ruling, the people were intent on virtue and lived without telling lies.
|| --
|
8
All the people were endowed with excellent characteristics. All were engrossed
in virtuous pursuits. Rāma was engaged in the kingship thus for ten thousand
years.
(©Yuddha Kaṇḍa of VālmīkiRāmāyaṇa VIEW HERE ⤡ See also: Mahatma
Gandhi’s Ram Rajya vs RSS’s Ram Rajya VIEW HERE ⤡)
On the other hand, Aam Aadmi Party’s views on the Ramrajya are totally
different from Gandhi’s perspective! Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, a
devotee of Lord Ram and Hanuman, emphasized on the ten principles for
Ramrajya: food, education, medical care, electricity, water supply,
employment, housing, women security and honouring the elderly persons.
VIEW HERE ⤡ (As reported on 10th March, 2021©Business Standard)
Therefore, the connotation of the iconic proper name, “Rama” is totally
different from the ruling party’s “Rama as a deity with moustache” (cf. 'Mooch'
Ado About Nothing? Faith vs Caste as Ayodhya Event Sets Off Demand for
Lord Ram's Moustache VIEW HERE ⤡ As reported on 9th August, 2020 ©
News 18 ),i.e., the militant muscular Ram as depicted in the following images in
the next section.
Gandhi was talking about free and just society without any discrimination
between caste and creed and he was brutally assassinated by a RSS-MAN.
Within the prison-house of language, he was bound to use the proper name (a
diffused and dispersed cultural construct) of a mortal being as a metaphor.
(For some more information cf. Ram Rajya: A Moral Sovereignty VIEW HERE ⤡
As reported on 21st April, 2021 ©Ram Madhav)
However, we, endowed with tāmasika attributes (the personality which resists
or suppresses manifestation of the supreme self or paramātman and in which
dark qualities predominate), are expecting Ram Rajya with following features
as depicted in Ayodhyākāṇḍa: Dishes Of Goat, Boar, horse-meat; Maireya surā
(a spicy wine made out of fruits and flowers with a natural sugar base) in the
rites of soma at the banquets (I am avoiding the popular punning of Rum and
Ram here); unisexual spa beside rivers etc. Cf. CANTO XCI.: Bharadvāja’s Feast,
Ayodhyākaṇḍa) Cf. Alchohol Consumption In Ramayana VIEW HERE ⤡ (As
reported on 30th September, 2020 ©Mythbuster) see also: From the Vedic age
9
to the Mughals and the Raj: The colourful history of alcohol consumption in
India VIEW HERE ⤡ (As reported on 22nd May, 2017 ©The Scroll.in)
PART-III: A LITTLE BIT OF SEMIOTICS ON THE RĀMA IMAGES
In the first image (see below), painted by Raja Ravi Varma, the angry Rama was
stopping the sea (we expect that the Lord Rāma would stop the consequences
of anthropogenic glocal [global+local] heating by His supernatural power).
Please note the angry eye (as expected) of the Lord Rāma.
10
And now see these posters and paintings:
Angry sa(va)ge Rama the warrior—note the Holly-Bollywood influences
11
The posters and paintings almost present a replica of Raja Ravi Varma’s
painting. However, the tender body of the lord Rāma has been transformed
into a socially constructed masculine, muscular, militant and violent corporeal.
It makes us remember the trajectory of our Hon. PM and the then President of
the USA: from Sabarmati āśrama (the abode of ahiṁsā) to the Motera Stadium
(now renamed as “Narendra Modi Stadium”) for $3 billion defense (hiṅsā)
deals ⤡. Everything is justified for the simulated profit-making business of
state-terrorism. However, it is happy to note that the ruling party will be
wealthier by getting “cut-money” from this deal following the tradition of
alleged Bofors scandal, Kargil coffin scam.
In this context, the following image, where Hon. Modiji’s face supplements as
well as displaces Śrī Rāma, may be relevant one:
Modiji, the new avatar of Śrī Rāma (Rāma-rūpī or the incarnation of Śrī Rāma),
our panacea or Rām-Deśī-Vīr, is protecting us from all the evils with weapons.
The disarmament-propagandists should be condemned in this regard and the
question of profanity does not arise.
“All That Is Solid Melts Into Air,
All That Is Holy Is Profaned,
And Man Is At Last Compelled To Face With Sober Senses
His Real Conditions Of Life, And His Relations With His Kind.”
12
PART-IV: IDOL AS A MINOR JURISTIC PERSON?
Now, let us switch over to legal aspects of deity’s rights within the ambit of
heathen anthropomorphic culture. The Raj conferred on deities the ownership
of the wealth of the temple with the “Shebait” or manager/care-taker only
acting as trustee (1921). Idols of deities (not gods) are recognized as persons
only for lawful purposes and thus named as ‘minor Juristic Person', e.g., Sri
Ravi Shankar Prasad, (Former Honourable Cabinet Minister for
Communications, Electronics and Information Technology and Law and Justice,
Government of India) a Citraguptavaṅśī, bearer of the legal suitcase (“shebait”)
of the Lord Ramlala/Ramlalla, the perpetual minor, of the proposed Rāma
temple at Ayodhyā.
An idol of deity is considered so only after its public consecration. Such idols of
deities enjoy property rights, are liable to pay taxes, can fight legally and can
also be sued, though deities cannot enjoy fundamental rights. (cf. Rights of A
Deity VIEW HERE ⤡ ©Legal Service India E-Journal)
For controversial legal details, view the following hyperlinks:
The Lord as a juristic person: What legal rights do deities enjoy? VIEW HERE
⤡ (As reported on 4th October, 2019 ©The Indian Express)
CAN AN INDIAN DEITY BE TREATED AS A JURISTIC PERSON? VIEW HERE ⤡ (As
reported on 16th July, 2020 © Legge Rhythms)
A Deity Does Not Have Constitutional Rights: Justice Chandrachud VIEW HERE
⤡ (As reported on 29th September, 2018 ©The Hindu)
God Is Not A Juristic Person, But Idol Is, Says Apex Court Idol Is, Says Apex
Court In Ayodhyā Case. VIEW HERE ⤡ (As reported on20th November, 2019
©The Times of India)
‘Explain stand on Hindu Deity Rights’ VIEW HERE ⤡ (As reported on 1st April,
2019 ©The Hindu)
13
As there are demands for moustache for the Lord Rāma, a crucial question
arises: If Ramlala (Rāma the boy) has a moustache, how can he be a “minor”
juristic person?
Why was there a demand for a statue of Lord Rāma with a moustache? VIEW
HERE ⤡ (As reported on 4th August, 2020 ©Dailyhunt)
Ayodhyā Ram Mandir :
VIEW HERE ⤡ (As reported on 3rd August,2020 ©Amar
Ujala)
The moustache, in some cultural contexts, represents masculinity, vigor,
virility, patriarchy and it is also an index of militant Kṣatriya. Kindly note that
there is a moustache allowances in the Indian Army and Police.
Hairy politics: There is discrimination between armed forces and police
when it comes to moustache allowances. VIEW HERE ⤡ (As reported on 11th
April, 2019 ©Financial Express)
Moustache allowance for UP police men hiked by 400% VIEW HERE ⤡ (As
reported on 18th January, 2019© Financial Express)
"Moustache Pay" Indian Police Officers Being Offered Additional Money To
Grow Moustache VIEW HERE ⤡ (As reported on 9th January, 2018 ©Dailyhunt)
Therefore, the brand Rāma (lālā or the boy) is to be projected as militant
Kṣatriya with the typical attributes of culturally (we are talking about gender,
not about biological sexual identity) constructed notion of “masculinity”. Thus,
“minor juristic person”, paradoxically enough, will become “major” in every
sense of the term. So, the present installed (cf. How Ram Lalla ‘Appeared’
One Winter Night In A Disputed Mosque VIEW HERE ⤡ As reported on 31st
July, 2020 ©The Federal) idol of Śrī Rāma at Ayodhyā, the minor boy will be
replaced by the statue of adult Rāma with moustache and arms and
ammunitions.
14
PART-V: SOME ETHICO-LEGAL QUESTIONS ON THE LORD RĀMA
“I hate Rāma and all his rabble”
–Michael Madhusudan Dutta
(If Dutta was alive today, he would have been banned or killed by the Modi-
Shah Gang)
Not only Michael Madhusudan Dutta, Rabindranth Thakur also observed that
the word “Ram” is often tagged with “foolish”, “goat”, “idiot”, “moron”
(/rampaMTha/, /ramchagol/, /HaMdaram/, bhoMdaram/ etc.) in derogatory
senses of the terms, but there is no antonyms for such pejorative terms, e.g.,
“intelligent Ram”. (cf. Thakur’s BaNgla BhaSa poricOY). In Bengal’s matriarchal
culture, apart from Nārāyana/Viṣṇu sub-altern Śiva and Śani, no other male
gods are preferred.
As per the Indian Penal Codes, the idol of Śrī Rāma and/or Lakṣmaṇa can be
sued for his (mis)deeds(carita) :
1. 16 years old Rāma (minor) killed TaṚakā, the beautiful yakṣinī
married to Sunda, the Rākṣasa , a forest-dweller. She lost her two
15
sons and her appearance being cursed by the sages. She took her
revenge by destroying the tapovanas (tapovanas or artificial
divine sanctuaries were created by displacing forest-dwellers—a
process of Brahminic colonization by accumulating forest) and
yajña (carbon emission is inevitable) of the sages. Ṛsi Viśvāmitra
took the help of Rāma and Lakṣmaṇa to kill TaṚakā.
Constructing tapovanas and performing yajñas entail destroying
trees, tree-products, timber (hampering the bio-diversity by the
outsiders, i.e., forest-offences) and displacement of indigenous
forest-dwellers. The revolt against such atrocities by the outsiders
must be taken into the court of justice according to contemporary
democratic regulations (cf. Section 63 in The Indian Forest Act,
1927) but not by the royal wishes in collusion with
brāhmanas/sages. It infringes “Recognition of Forest Rights Act,
2006”. Therefore, Rāma and Lakṣmaṇa’s act of killing must be
treated under the Juvenile Delinquency (IPC 302).
2. Rāma and Lakṣmaṇa mutilated Rāvana’s sister, Śūrpaṇakhā, after
she proposed them and desired sexual relationship to Rāma and
Lakṣmaṇa at Pancavaṭī (Araṇyakānḍa). The eve teasing and
goading of Śūrpaṇakhā by the two brothers defeat the ethos of
sexual civility. Cutting of the nose of Śūrpaṇakhā is a severe
punishment for making love-relationship. Even Rāma lied by
saying that his brother is bachelor (akṛtadāra, "unmarried").
Therefore, Rāma and Lakṣmaṇa will be accused under IPC Section
354A and Section 498-A for outraging modesty and for torturing,
both mentally and physically a woman. On the other hand, Rāvana
would be treated under Section 359-373 for kidnapping and
abduction.
3. When Sugrīva and Vālī were fighting together, Rāma came out
from the jungle to shoot and kill him with an arrow from behind a
tree in a cowardly way without confronting Vālī face to face. Rāma
had a logic: anyone can kill tree-dwellers/animals (śākhāmṛga). In
contemporary perspective, this type of attitude towards “animals”
(?) must be condemned as an instance of anthropocentric
16
Speciesism. This type of democide (Rāma posed himself as the
representative of the King Bharata) is also (if Vālī is at all an
animal!) a “Cognizable Offence” under the “The Prevention of
Cruelty Animals Act,1960”.
Section 303 of IPC provides that if any person, who commits
murder, is sentenced with life imprisonment or shall be
punishable to death.
4. Lakṣmaṇa stealthily, with the help of Vibhīṣaṇa , entered into the
nikumbhilā yajñāgāra for slaying unarmed Meghnāda. It was
undoubtedly an act of cowardice and it is also a case of grave
breaching of code and conduct of war. (cf. Rome Statute of the
International Criminal Court, Article 8, War Crimes⤡)
The Bengali epic poet, Michael Madhusudan Dutta, hit this point
in his /meghnadbadhkabbo/ by projecting Rāma and his brother
as villains.
5. Now let us turn our eyes to Sītā’s ill treatment at the hands of her
husband and her in-laws. There was already a lawsuit filed by “A
practising advocate, Chandan Singh filed a plea demanding that
Lord Rāma be put on trial for the atrocity of banishing Sītā to the
forests. Lakṣmaṇa, the younger brother of Ram, was made a co-
accused for his complicity in the cruelty.” (cf. Courts may not
indict Ram for mistreating Sītā – but the women of India already
have. VIEW HERE ⤡ As reported on 8th February, 2016 ©The
Scroll. In. So-called non-mainstream “folk” songs and narratives
around the South-Asia, Rāma is viewed as a cruel husband who
tortured Sītā. For detailed discussions cf. Dev Sen, Nabaneeta
"Lady sings the Blues: When Women retell the Rāmāyaṇa " ⤡
MANUSHI/Issue 108)
17
After being separated from Sītā, who was abducted by Rāvana for
many years, what did Rāma say after rescuing her? Ṛṣi Vālmīki
narrated:
viditaścāstu bhadraṃ te yo.ayaṃ raṇapariśRāmaḥ |
sutīrṇaḥ suhṛdāṃ vīryānna tvadarthaṃ mayā kṛtaḥ || 6-115-15
rakṣatā tu mayā vṛttamapavādam ca sarvataḥ |
prakhyātasyātmavaṃśasya nyaṅgaṃ ca parimārjatā || 6-115-16
"Let it be known to you that this endeavour in the shape of war,
which has been successful carried through, due to the strength of
my friends was not undertaken for your sake. Let there be
prosperity to you! This was done by me in order to keep up my
good conduct and to wipe off the evil-speaking from all sides as
well as the insinuation on my own illustrious dynasty."
Thus Rāma did not rescue Sītā for the sake of something called
“love”, but for sustaining his dynasty’s prestige. Even he was
sceptic about Sītā’s fidelity:
prāptacāritrasaṃdeha mama pratimukhe sthitā |
dīpo netrāturasyeva pratikūlāsi me dṛḍham || 6-115-17
tadgaccha tvānujāne.adya yatheṣṭaṃ janakātmaje |
etā daśa diśo bhadre kāryamasti na me tvayā || 6-115-18
kaḥ pumāṃstu kule jātah striyaṃ paragṛhoṣitām |
tejasvī punarādadyāt suhṛllekhyena cetasā || 6-115-19
rāvaṇāṅkaparikliṣṭāṃ dṛṣṭāṃ duṣṭena cakṣuṣā |
kathaṃ tvāṃ punarādadyāṃ kulaṃ vyapadiśan mahat || 6-115-
20
tadarthaṃ nirjitā me tvaṃ yaśaḥ pratyāhṛtaṃ mayā |
nāsth me tvayyabhiṣvaṅgo yatheṣṭaṃ gamyatāmitaḥ || 6-115-21
"You, with a suspicion arisen on your character, standing in front
of me, are extremely disagreeable to me, even as a light to one,
who is suffering from a poor eye-sight."
18
“O Sītā! That is why, I am permitting you now. Go wherever you
like. All these ten directions are open to you, my dear lady! There
is no work to be done to me, by you.”
"Which noble man, born in an illustrious race, will take back a
woman who lived in another's abode, with an eager mind?"
"While mentioning greatly about my lineage, how can I accept
again, you who were harassed in Rāvana's lap (while being borne
away by him) and who were seen (by him) with evil looks?"
"You were won by me with that end in view (viz. the retrieval of
my lost honour). The honour has been restored by me. For me,
there is no intense attachment in you. You may go wherever you
like from here."
Cf. Book VI : Yuddha Kāṇḍa - Book Of War © August 2009, K. M.
K. Murthy⤡
Bhattacharya, S. 1987. Prācīna Bhārata: samāja o sāhitya.
Kolkata: Ananda Publishers.
The misogynistic cruelty of Lord Rāma is transparent in the above
cited verses. Thus Rāma rejected Sītā and she was bound to
undergo an ordeal or trial by fire. Section 307 and/or 308 of the
Indian Penal Code that addresses an attempt to commit murder
and commit culpable homicide must be applicable here for both
the brothers.
Moreover, abandoning pregnant Sītā by Lord Rāma in the woods
due to the subjects’ pressure is another legal conflict. This is surely
an illegal abandonment– kick Sītā out of the marital home!
In this context, we wish to associate this event of abandonment of
Sītā with the banishment of the “Triple Talaq”. Siddharth
19
Varadarajan, in his article, Triple Talaq: “Why Just Muslims, Let's
Criminalise the Abandonment of All Wives” VIEW HERE ⤡ (As
reported on 27th December, 2018 ©The Wire) has raised some
pertinent questions regarding this act.
The key provisions of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on
Marriage) Act, 2019 ⤡ are these:
Section 3. Any pronouncement of talaq by a Muslim husband
upon his wife, by words, either spoken or written or in electronic
form or in any other manner whatsoever, shall be void and illegal.
Section 4. Any Muslim husband who pronounces talaq referred to
in section 3 upon his wife shall be punished with imprisonment for
a term which may extend to three years, and shall also be liable to
fine.
Varadarajan showed,
“According to the last census (2011), there are a total of 2.37 million across
India who identify themselves as “separated”. We have no way of knowing
whether these women voluntarily separated from their husbands or were
simply abandoned unilaterally or worse – driven out of their marital
homes.
Of these, the vast majority – 1.9 million – are Hindu women. The total
number of “separated” Muslim women is 0.28 million.”
He argued for the sake uniformity of the law, the new act must
be supplemented:
“…*t+he law be renamed the Indian Women (Protection of Rights on
Marriage) Bill, and that Sections 3 and 4 be amended to say instead:
Section 3. Any attempt by a husband to divorce or separate from his wife, in
any manner whatsoever other than as prescribed by the applicable family
law, shall be void and illegal.
Section 4. Any husband who attempts to separate from or divorce his wife in
a manner proscribed by Section 3 shall be punished with imprisonment for a
term which may extend to three years, and shall also be liable to fine.”
20
What shall we say now about Rāma? Should not he be punished
for his act of “talaq”?
6. Now, let us turn ourselves from the gender discrimination of the
Lord Rāma to his casteist attitude.
A Brahmin approached the court of the King Rāma and told that
his young son has died due to the misrule of Rāma. Nārada
informed Śrī Rāma that a śūdra was performing tapasya
“penance” by violating the rule as śūdras are not allowed to
perform yoga like brahmins. For breaking such casteist rule, the
brahmin’s child died. Rāma found the śūdra, Śambūka. Rāma
killed him.
Dr. Ambedkar, while discussing casteism in terms of the
caturvarṇa system, commented on this very casteist narrative
from the Rāmāyaṇa:
“That without penal sanction the ideal of Chaturvarnya cannot be
realized, is proved by the story in the Ramayana of Rama killing
Shambuka. Some people seem to blame Rama because he wantonly
and without reason killed Shambuka. But to blame Rama for killing
Shambuka is to misunderstand the whole situation. Ram Raj was a
Raj based on Chaturvarnya. As a king, Rama was bound to maintain
Chaturvarnya. It was his duty therefore to kill Shambuka, the Shudra
who had transgressed his class and wanted to be a Brahmin. This is
the reason why Rama killed Shambuka. But this also shows that penal
sanction is necessary for the maintenance of Chaturvarnya. Not only
penal sanction is necessary, but the penalty of death is necessary.
That is why Rama did not inflict on Shambuka a lesser punishment.
That is why the Manu-Smriti prescribes such heavy sentences as
cutting off the tongue, or pouring of molten lead in the ears, of the
Shudra who recites or hears the Veda. The supporters of
Chaturvarnya must give an assurance that they could successfully
classify men, and that they could induce modern society in the
twentieth century to re-forge the penal sanctions of the Manu-
Smriti.” (Annihilation of Caste, 1936 ⤡)
(Cf. 2021. Annihilating caste, annihilation of our Hindutva dream-
Appealing for a caste-based Hindu Nation: a letter to the President of
India ⤡)
21
I have nothing to say but to lament for a society, where gender and caste
discriminations are justified by the (il)logics of divinity! Rāma-hype in the
contemporary political scenario is nothing more than a gimmick to veil the
faces of Consequences Of Crony And Monopoly Capitalism In India VIEW
HERE ⤡ prevailed in India.
PART-VI: RAM JANMABHOOMI: DISTRACTING US FROM THE REAL
MISERIES?
When we are concentrating on this issue of Rāma, though we love (jouissance)
to read fictions, we are totally distracted from our two immediate and major
problems:
1. Catastrophic natural ecosystem due to anthropogenic glocal heating;
2. Devastating financial ecosystem (the term suffers from the fallacy of
misplaced concreteness) due to the Consequences Of Crony And
Monopoly Capitalism In India VIEW HERE ⤡ clubbed with Fascism as well
as religious extremism.
Thus, our effort for depicting intricacies of BJP-proposed Rāmarājya is futile
exercise at this moment of disaster.
We are far from the Rāmarājya, as propagated by the ruling party as lip-
service or as mentioned in the Vālmīki’s Rāmāyaṇa . We are the victims of
financial abuses
⤡
.
We have lost our faith on the Judiciary. First of all, in present situation, it will
be difficult for us to hire a lawyer— we cannot afford it. On the other hand,
unlike Socrates, we cannot plead for ourselves in the trial before more than
500 jurors. Secondly, we do not believe in the courts after viewing some
judgements of the apex court, e.g., ADR's plea in SC to bring Political Parties
under RTI, ADR's petition challenging Finance Act, 2017; Electoral Bonds and
Removal of company's limit to donate: W.P (C) 880/2017, Note on Electoral
Bonds And Opacity In Political Funding VIEW HERE ⤡ not to mention other
cases of severe injustice.
22
Thus, Judiciary has (Joy Śrī) RAMshackled, going to court is useless: Ex-CJI
Ranjan Gogoi VIEW HERE ⤡ (As reported on 14th February, 2021) © The
Indian Express
"Who goes to the court? You go to the court and regret," Gogoi said, adding
that it is those who can afford to take chances, such as the big corporate, who
approach the courts. "If you go to the court, you would be washing dirty linen
in the court. You will not get a verdict,"
"You want a 5 trillion dollar economy but you have a ramshackled judiciary,"
he commented, adding that during the pandemic, 60 lakh cases were added
at the trial courts, 3 lakh in high courts and nearly 7,000 in the apex court.
"The road map is to have the right man for the job. You don’t appoint judges
as you appoint officers in the government. To be a judge is a full time
commitment. It is a passion. There are no working hours," he said, stressing
that the training of judges should be robust.
We are subscribing our proposition by the following testimonies:
There are discriminations in between haves and have-nots in the Indian
judiciary.
Here's proof that poor get gallows, rich mostly escape. VIEW HERE ⤡ (As
reported on JULY 21, 2015 © The Times on India)
See also:
‘If you go to court, you don’t get a verdict,’ says former CJI Ranjan Gogoi
VIEW HERE ⤡ (As reported on Feb 13, 2021) ©Scroll.in
[It is to be noted that five-judge bench of the Supreme Court led by the same
Ranjan Gogoi (CJI), The unanimously pronounced its verdict on 9 November
2019 for handing the disputed land to the government of India and
subsequently transferred to the Trust after its formation. ⤡ ⤡ ]
Mukul Rohatgi, Ex-Attorney General of India, the deux ex machina behind the
miseries DHFL creditors and investors, said in the NDTV interview⤡
(12/11/2020) by reiterating Hon. Justice Krishna Iyer, “Jurisprudence has gone
astray, seem jail is rule, bail exception.”
23
The situation is bleak and we are living within a sick society. (cf. India
Wounded: A Bird’s Eye View VIEW HERE ⤡)! A guru and a tycoon feel India’s
endless bank salvage pain VIEW HERE ⤡
Where should I go now? There is no geographical place to take my refuge as
each and every space of our planet earth is destroyed by the human beings as
geological agents by means of industrialization. We are within anthropocene or
otherwise capitalocene. Increased heating of the globe along with subsequent
melting of ice are leading to the loss of land and its habitat—giving birth to
climate refugees. We inhabit the gulag archipelago. Specter(s) of Rāma, the
Messiah, the avatāra, the Übermensch (?), cannot stop such irreversible
climate crisis… the ghost of the divine Rāma, cannot stop the overflowed
ocean due to rampant melting of glaciers with his bow and arrows/arms and
ammunition. The foregrounding brand Rāma, the absolute alterity, who is
haunting now in the contemporary Indian politics, is nothing but the failure of
democratic promises of the ruling party with simulated religiosity. Lord Rāma is
an absentee with absolute permanent presence in the irreal hyperreal.
“The effectivity or actuality of the democratic promise, like that of the communist
promise, will always keep within it, and it must do so, this absolutely undetermined
messianic hope at its heart, this eschatological relation [i.e. the relation to the final
event or last judgment] to the to-come of an event and of a singularity, of an alterity
that cannot be anticipated.”
-- Derrida, Jacques. 1993. Spectres of Marx: The State of the Debt,
the Work of Mourning and the New International .( pg. 65) Routledge Classics.
Oh, we do not have any messianic hopes or expectations. We are waiting for
only imminent death due to debt in the money-signifier based economy…
catastrophic climate crisis... sacrificing ourselves for the depopulation project…
spirits of bio-weapons are haunting along with the nukes.
Andrea: Unhappy the land that has no heroes!…
Galileo: No. Unhappy the land that needs heroes.
--The Life of Galileo (1939) sc. 13
24
We are even more worried after going through the following two reports:
India Is No Longer a Democracy but an 'Electoral Autocracy': Swedish
Institute ⤡ (As reported on 11th March 2021, © The Wire)
The Freedom House also dropped India from the list of “Free Countries” in its
annual report entitled “Democracy under Siege” VIEW HERE ⤡.
India is now only 'partly free' under Modi, says report ⤡ (As reported
on 3rd March, 2021 © BBC News)
The Messianic Principle (a la Derrida) is based on Christianity and Judaism in
the context of secular democratic state. The organized Hindu religion is the
mirror image of Semitic and Christian religions. Organized institutionalized
statist Hindu religion is mimicking the principles of those “other” organized
cults for foregrounding Rāma as the Messiah. The result is: a failed state.
The king (India Is No Longer a Democracy but an 'Electoral Autocracy':
Swedish Institute ⤡) is bigger than the Messiah Lord Rāma. The subjects are
treated as “childlike” or even “childish” (minor, for detailed discussion cf.
Nandy, Ashis. The Intimate Enemy: Loss and Recovery of Self Under
Colonialism.
⤡
Bombay, Calcutta, Madras: OUP), therefore, they cannot make
any decisions- they are objectified and the idol is animated. Aunindyo
Chakravarty echoed and paraphrased the words of Nandy:
“The Modi-Shah BJP has also reimagined the relationship between the state and the people.
Elections are not central to this vision. The objective is to create a community of subjects,
who are no longer citizens. They owe absolute allegiance to the leader. They are children,
and he is their guardian. He takes decisions for them, in their best interest. The leader’s
decisions do not need the active support of the subjects. Indeed, at times, the people might
even suffer for the larger goal envisioned by the leader.
This is carefully played out in the idea of the Ram Mandir, and the attendant iconography,
where Modi is seen to be larger than the deity himself, holding his hand and taking him to
his rightful abode. Modi, with his longer hair and almost flowing beard, is presented as a
Rajarshi – a king who has attained the status of a sage. The “state-community” finds its
purest representation in the Ram Mandir, where India returns to an imaginary Ram Rajya,
outside the “western” idea of democracy.” (The making of Modi's Ramrajya: How Indian
citizens became subjects and the Prime Minister king VIEW HERE ⤡ As reported on 9th
August, 2020© The Scroll.in)
25
An image showing PM Modi walking the child Ram to a temple. It was shared by BJP MP Shobha Karandlaje on
the eve of the foundation laying ceremony of the Ram temple in Ayodhyā. | Twitter⤡/ Shobha Karandlaje
Therefore, we, who are living within the geo-political boundary of India, are
submitting ourselves to a typical oppressive authoritarian personality (a la
Erich Fromm, Adorno, T. W.; Frenkel-Brunswik, E.; Levinson, D.J.; Sanford, R. N.
⤡⤡), who is lusting for power and glory, obsession with property, revenge and
control, play in the pathological and malign character and strict super-ego
without conscience. We, the children subjects, are His Excellency’s most
obedient servants.
With a risk of taking mono-economist perspective, we think that it is not only a
problem of religious fundamentalist, it is also a problem of market
fundamentalism, where religion is used as a mask for the sake of filthy
business (Ram temple in 3 years; to cost Rs. 1,100 crore VIEW HERE ⤡ As
reported on 24th January,2021 ©The Hindu). The following video shows that
the Hindus are destroying their own heritage for constructing Kashi
Vishwanath Corridor Project VIEW HERE ⤡ (As reported on 6th July, 2021
©The Outlook). The so-called “beautification” for temple-business a site of
vandalism is created.
Strange Destruction of Self: Hindus ⤡ ⤡
26
What shall we do now? We are hearing a popular Hindi song, where it is said
that, “Oh Rāma, your Ganga the river is dirty for continuously washing the
vices of the sinners ⤡”
No, we are not overwhelmed by such blame-gaming pop song. We are taking
our recourse to Sant Kabirdasji’s song for the possible solution to the problem.
“O servant, where dost thou seek Me?
Lo! I am beside thee.
I am neither in temple nor in mosque: I am neither in Kaaba nor
in Kailash:
Neither am I in rites and ceremonies, nor in Yoga and
renunciation.
If thou art a true seeker, thou shalt at once see Me: thou shalt
meet Me in a moment of time.
Kabîr says, "O Sadhu! God is the breath of all breath."
(Trans. Rabindranath Thakur)
Where is the pharmakon (φαρμακός), the Ram-desi-vir to wash out all the vices?
Suffering come from the outer world...suffering originate from our inner
corporeal… suffering emerge from the onslaughts of the “other”, since “Hell is the
other”. There is no geo-political escape-route out of this vicious cycle of our
being-in-itself (être-en-soi). (Cf. Freud, S. 1930. Civilization and Its Discontents⤡)
Should I annihilate myself? Should I submit an appeal for legalizing active
euthanasia? Or maybe should I simply deploy a defense-mechanism, viz.,
biological regression, by reverting back to our pre-natal stage in the mother’s
womb? Or should I revolt against a system that creates such miseries through
non-violent civil disobedience movement? May we envisage the possibility of an
ecotopian alternative: local-resource based, decentralized, participatory, self-
reliant, partyless, moneyless, small-scale, low-energy efficient, coordinated
green-communities? Bypassing the crippling of creativity⤡ in the context of the
regimented, compartmentalized information-society, may we still remain
absurdly creative?
Maybe we could also go beyond all such vyāvahārika remedies to our real
miseries by submerging ourselves into the ocean of the infinite, holistic existence
by shunning off all the forms of petty ritualistic idol-worship? Let us reckon: do
27
our individual real miseries get solved by sublating ourselves, i.e., the parts, into
the supposed “whole”? “The answer my friend, is blowin’ in the wind…”
A SONG BY RABINDRANATH THAKUR⤡
“My innermost one resides within me,
And He seems omnipresent hence.
He rests within my eyes,
I need not search Him at all -
Whichever direction I look at -
He seems within sight, hence.
Traveling distances, in vain, for my wish -
To listen to your sapient words,
On homecoming I find, thus,
Lyrics of my songs having your words.
You knock doors in frenzy
In order to search Him -
O' rush at me, look at my core,
How He resides between my eyes.”
(Trans. Anjan Ganguly)
28
Proposed Plan of the Ram Temple Trust
Proposed plan of the Sunni Waqf Board consisting of a Babri Hospital
besides the proposed Mosque