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.
You've really been reading the deep books lately. Or maybe always?
ReplyDeleteGenerally, I go for serious books. If you stumble upon my reviews of light books, be assured the books were free review copies.
DeleteHari Om
ReplyDeleteA 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
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?
DeleteI 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!
No, not reactionary, wrong word... Rebellious, almost like an angry adolescent. But that anger is justified.
DeleteWe 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
ReplyDeleteMa 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.
DeleteI 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!
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