Skip to main content

Whose Rama?



Book Review

Title: Whose Rama? [Malayalam]

Author: T S Syamkumar

Publisher: D C Books, Kerala

Pages: 352


Rama may be an incarnation of God Vishnu, but is he as noble a man [Maryada Purushottam] as he is projected to be by certain sections of Hindus? This is the theme of Dr Syamkumar’s book, written in Malayalam. There is no English translation available yet.

Rama is a creation of the Brahmins, asserts the author of this book. The Ramayana upholds the unjust caste system created by Brahmins for their own wellbeing. Everyone else exists for the sake of the Brahmin wellbeing. If the Kshatriyas are given the role of rulers, it is only because the Brahmins need such men to fight and die for them. Valmiki’s Rama too upheld that unjust system merely because that was his Kshatriya-dharma, allotted by the Brahmins.

One of the many evils that Valmiki’s Rama perpetrates heartlessly is the killing of Shambuka, a boy who belonged to a low caste but chose to become an ascetic. The Shudras were not allowed to become ascetics. Rama goes to Shambuka, who was doing rigorous tapas hanging upside down on a tree branch, and asks him from which yoni (vulva) he was born. No sooner does Rama come to know that the boy is born of “a Shudra yoni” than he beheads him in most ungodly indignation. What was Shambuka’s sin? That he, a Shudra, sought spiritual deliverance! Rama’s heaven is not for all.

Syamkumar’s book illustrates how Rama went out of his way to uphold the unjust and heartless Brahminical system. The answer to the titular question “Whose Rama?” is that Rama belonged to the Brahmins and their system.

Why did Rama kill Vali, Sugriva’s brother? It was his selfishness that drove him to such a dastardly act. Even Vali, a Vanara (ape) possessed far more nobility than Rama. There was no need for Rama to use such deception to kill him, the dying Vali tells Rama. What was Vali’s crime anyway? That he married his brother’s wife. Ironically, Sugriva does just that after Vali’s death; he marries Vali’s wife with Rama’s blessings. What dharma did Rama uphold then?

Syamkumar also asserts that these creatures who are portrayed as Vanaras (apes) were in fact the Adivasis of the Vindhyas and central India. The Brahmins didn’t even grant them the status of being human.

The way Rama treated Sita in the end also shows Rama as subhuman, according to the author. He emerges as a neurotic who doubted his wife’s chastity and hence subjected her to all sorts of tests including repeated fire tests. Women aren’t given much respect in Rama’s kingdom. They are expected to be their husbands’ slaves, who should be willing to burn themselves on their husbands’ funeral pyres.

Syamkumar finds it appropriate that today a lot of Hindus shout Jai Sri Ram as they go about killing people in mob violence. Rama was the personification of heartless injustice. So why not kill present-day Shambukas and Valis in his name? Valmiki’s Rama stands diametrically opposed to all the ideals presented in the Preamble to modern India’s Constitution: secularism, equality, fraternity… So it was only apt that a gigantic temple was constructed for this deity in his supposed birthplace of Ayodhya.

This book is a scathing critique of Valmiki’s Rama and his legacy which today’s rulers of India supposedly uphold. Rama is not everyone’s God. He protected the interests of a tiny minority. He seems to continue to do just that today too.

T S Syamkumar is a scholar of Sanskrit literature which he has been teaching for years now. He has also been conferred many awards for his scholarly studies.

Comments

  1. You've really been reading the deep books lately. Or maybe always?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Generally, I go for serious books. If you stumble upon my reviews of light books, be assured the books were free review copies.

      Delete
  2. Hari Om
    A book with which I might take issue; it is not that one cannot question the whys and wherefores - indeed, I believe that is what such tales are there for, to make us think deeply and decide where we stand - but if one becomes as vehement as your review suggests, one falls into exactly the same category of neuroticisim, vitriol and diatribe one seeks to oppose. This serves no purpose other than to fuel division. YAM xx

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Is it the book that you should have issue with, Yam? Or is it the political system that has become murderously oppressive for certain sections of citizens?

      I agree that the book is reactionary. I took a whole month to review this. I wondered whether I should review it at all. But I went for it in the end because I realised that a man who has been a victim of a system for generations has a right to be a reactionary. Psychological right to rebel, to let out steam, especially in a political system run by crooks and murderers.

      Jai Sri Ram!

      Delete
    2. No, not reactionary, wrong word... Rebellious, almost like an angry adolescent. But that anger is justified.

      Delete
  3. We tend to make the Avataras all Divine, as if they were not huand should mans.. Who knows, Valmiki wished his Ramsyana to.be read afresh, for each age, with the blend of Divinity snd Humanity, with all its flaws and Achilles heels... What is perhaps, heresy, as in Christianity is to negate one or the other dimension. As the Feminists do, we could apply a Hermeneutics of Suspicion, especially when start feeling a ' grain in the shoe, 'as we read any text, especially our scriptutes, craftee in the Patriarchal mould, hue and shade

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ma nishada... The opening lines of the epic that's supposed to be all about compassion. What I presented in this review is not even a tip of the iceberg that the book offers to the reader. Rama is a villain in the book. I restrained myself while reviewing the book. But your comment as well as Yamini's above makes me think that I should have been more candid with it. Rama doesn't deserve all this expedient greatness.

      I won't say that Syamkumar's book is great. But it deserves to be read especially today when India is being fed with Modiesque balderdash. Look at the latest film The Bengal Files, for example. And that sh1t will be given Bharat Ratna soon!

      Delete
  4. Not at all. On the contrary. I was only trying to provide an Epistemological and a Hermeneutical Framework, both for the author and the reviewer, to engage themselves in applying the tools of Hermeneutics of Suspicion and Deconstruction, to the person of Rama as a construct.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Adventures of Toto as a comic strip

  'The Adventures of Toto' is an amusing story by Ruskin Bond. It is prescribed as a lesson in CBSE's English course for class 9. Maggie asked her students to do a project on some of the lessons and Femi George's work is what I would like to present here. Femi converted the story into a beautiful comic strip. Her work will speak for itself and let me present it below.  Femi George Student of Carmel Public School, Vazhakulam, Kerala Similar post: The Little Girl

A Man Called Ove

Book Review   Title: A Man Called Ove Author: Fredrik Backman Translation from Swedish: Henning Koch Publisher: Hodder & Stoughton Ltd, London, 2015 Pages: 295   Ove is a grumpy old man. Right in the initial pages of the novel, we are informed that “People said he was bitter. Maybe they were right. He’d never reflected much on it. People also called him ‘anti-social’. Ove assumed this meant he wasn’t overly keen on people. And in this instance he could totally agree with them. More often than not people were out of their minds.” The novel is Ove’s story It is Ove’s grumpiness that makes him a fascinating character for the reader. Grumpiness notwithstanding, Ove has a lot of goodness within. His world is governed by rules, order and routines. He is superhumanly hardworking and honest. He won’t speak about other people even if such silence means the loss of his job and even personal honour. When his colleague Tom steals money and puts the blame squarely...

Don Bosco

Don Bosco (16 Aug 1815 - 31 Jan 1888) In Catholic parlance, which flows through my veins in spite of myself, today is the Feast of Don Bosco. My life was both made and unmade by Don Bosco institutions. Any great person can make or break people because of his followers. Religious institutions are the best examples. I’m presenting below an extract from my forthcoming book titled Autumn Shadows to celebrate the Feast of Don Bosco in my own way which is obviously very different from how it is celebrated in his institutions today. Do I feel nostalgic about the Feast? Not at all. I feel relieved. That’s why this celebration. The extract follows. Don Bosco, as Saint John Bosco was popularly known, had a remarkably good system for the education of youth.   He called it ‘preventive system’.   The educators should be ever vigilant so that wrong actions are prevented before they can be committed.   Reason, religion and loving kindness are the three pillars of that syste...

Writers and Morality

  Dostoevsky Dostoevsky was a compulsive gambler. He also consumed alcohol rather liberally. But he remains one of my favourite novelists of all time. Very few writers have produced novels that surpass the greatness of The Brothers Karamazov and Crime and Punishment . This raises a fundamental question: Should we keep a writer’s personal life totally aside while assessing the literary merit of their works? Going a little further with Dostoevsky, his personal vices gave him firsthand experience of despair, guilt, and redemption, which shaped the deep psychological and moral explorations in his novels. Raskolnikov and Ivan Karamazov were all parts of Dostoevksy’s complex personality. In other words, if Dostoevsky was an ideal human being, he wasn’t likely to have produced such great novels. It may also be recalled that most of his greatest works were written under extreme pressure from creditors who kept knocking at his door. If he were not the compulsive gambler that he was, t...

The Real Enemies of India

People in general are inclined to pass the blame on to others whatever the fault.  For example, we Indians love to blame the British for their alleged ‘divide-and-rule’ policy.  Did the British really divide India into Hindus and Muslims or did the Indians do it themselves?  Was there any unified entity called India in the first place before the British unified it? Having raised those questions, I’m going to commit a further sacrilege of quoting a British journalist-cum-historian.  In his magnum opus, India: a History , John Keay says that the “stock accusations of a wider Machiavellian intent to ‘divide and rule’ and to ‘stir up Hindu-Muslim animosity’” levelled against the British Raj made little sense when the freedom struggle was going on in India because there really was no unified India until the British unified it politically.  Communal divisions existed in India despite the political unification.  In fact, they existed even before the Briti...