So it’s been a while since I have been thinking about this and
finally decided to pen down my thoughts. This began on the day of Dussesrah
when I was busy getting celebratory/festive wishes on Whatsapp. I was thinking
about the popular, shorter version of the story of Ramayan and how warped it
is.
So Ram, playing the ideal son, decided to give up his
kingdom keeping in mind the insecurities of his step-mother; which is cool.
But, did he discuss it out with Sita first? No! He just played the perfect son, making his parents proud. Poor Sita! She
just heard the decision taken by her husband and like a good wife (who may or
may not have wanted to escape living with her in-laws) she followed Ram into a
life of self-exile.
That wasn’t enough when Ram’s younger brother, Lakshman
decided to follow him. Again, there’s no one knows of his wife Mandavi, who
decided NOT to follow her husband into the forest and live in the kingdom with
her new family. May be she thought living her parents-in-law was better than
living 24x7 with her brother and sister-in-law. Again, Lakshman shows no
consideration for his wife’s feelings. Mind you, they’ve just gotten married.
As if that wasn’t enough male chauvinism, we see a scene of
Surpanakha, who is a strong female character in the entire story – not ashamed
about her body, is sexually progressive, knows what she wants and isn’t scared
to achieve it. She likes Lakshman and makes a pass at him, which ideally should
be applauded but isn’t. He decides she’s ugly and decides to cut her nose. Is
Lakshman any less a criminal than those who throw acid on women in a fit of
rage? But here, it’s totally cool to do all this because, well, she’s “ugly”.
So now, angered by his sister’s injury and not being able to
take any insult like any other normal brother would, Ravana is angered beyond
reason. (Compare Ravana to yourself and think about the act of your sister
being amputed for no fault of her’s and try to see reason.) So he decides that
the best strategy is ‘eye for an eye’.
He goes and kidnaps Sita (there’s a background story of him
participating in Sita’s swayamvar and losing to Ram), takes her to his palace,
keeps her in the same house as his wife, keeps her safe, but nonetheless, keeps
her with him. Ofcourse, in this case, Mandodari has no say in her husband’s
affair. Ravana atleast has the courtesy to keep Sita safe, surrounded by female
guards, in the most beautiful garden in Lanka. Sita, ofcourse is mourning and
like a good wife, decides to wait for her husband.
The husband and brother-in-law in the meantime are involving
monkeys, who have absolutely no personal issues with Ravana and are like the modern
day USA, deciding to support anyone just for whiling away their time and
resources. Of course, Ram could have gone back to Ayodhya and asked his brother
for an army and state of art weapons but no, there wouldn’t be enough drama to
it.
So after walking for long and coming up with an awesome
strategy for crossing the sea using rocks that magically float on water (wonder
what stopped him from using magic to fly across to Lanka, wouldn’t it be
faster?), Ram’s army reaches Lanka. Ravana, for some odd reason allows them to
set up camp on his land, when in fact, he knew that they wanted to wage a war
against him.
In the meantime, Bhibhishan, Ravana’s brother plays the
traitor and joins Ram. According to the story, it’s okay to do backstab your
own brother and join hands with the enemy for the “greater good”. Ram now gets
inside information. Drama ensues. Hanuman has a face-off with Ravana and slyly
informs Sita about her husband’s arrival. In all this drama, it’s absolutely
cool to burn off the houses of innocent villagers who have nothing to do with
the personal issues of Ram and Ravana but, eh, collateral damage you see!
The smell of testosterone fills the air with the scene of
war and people being killed. Finally, Ram kills Ravana, tries to act like a
nice guy by paying his last respects to the dying man and takes his wife home.
Ayodhya celebrates the return of their true king. Ram takes over the kingdom
and everyone thought that the story is over.
But no! Ram overhears a ‘dhobhi’ saying something to the
effect of ‘Main Ram nahi hu jo tujhe accept karunga’ and Ram being the “just”
ruler, banishes his wife. It doesn’t even make sense! No one officially complained
to Ram that they doubt Sita’s piousness. He just overheard someone talking to his wife
in a fit of anger. I have to give this to Ram; he, until that day, had never
questioned the loyalty of his wife. A pregnant Sita set off to the forest, no
concept of alimony existed then, and is left to fend for herself and her kids.
She, for some odd reason, decided not to go to her father’s place because “main
unpe bhojh nahi ban-na chahti” and all. She gives birth to Luv and Khush and
this is all we know. The popular version of the story doesn’t tell us if Ram ever
went back and brought Sita home, gave his children the love of a father.
And this
is why, my friends, Ramayan is the worst story ever! It's about female oppression, it has confusing concepts of loyalty, it tells you not to trust your wife in any way, it tells you that parents can be cruel under various circumstances, it tells you violence is okay, it tells you collateral damage in ego wars are okay! It doesn't impart one good teaching,except maybe, about being a good son and doing what your parents (even step-parents) ask you to.
Kya likha hai PD.. a different perspective on such a popular epic.
ReplyDeleteThanks Nelson!
DeleteYou just killed it.
ReplyDeleteThank you! :D
DeleteRamayan is not a story or Tv serial, Its a Hindu Granth. There is 300 type of Ramayan. There are many thing on which our parents opinion are different than ours, Some times they are right and sometime we are. We call it Generation Gap.So Ramayan is written ages ago.In Ramayan every story is connected to each other. And yes Ram Setu or Adam's Bridge is scientifically proven.If you really want to know full "STORY" of Ramayan and The Great Women of that Great era you should really read Ramayan once. :)
ReplyDeleteWhich is precisely why I have specifically written about the popular shorter version of the story.
ReplyDeleteAlso, while Adam's Bridge or Ram Setu might be true, there is no proof that Ram built it. We are just assuming that because the scripture is revered religiously, it's possibly a true depiction of events. Again, we do not know if these incidences actually happened for real.
There are too many things which shows existence and nonexistence of Lord Ram. Its on you how you see Positive or negative.
Delete14 Pictures That Tell Us Ramayana Might Have Actually Happened
http://www.scoopwhoop.com/inothernews/ramayana-actually-happened/
Thanks for sharing this. Have already read this but the operative word here is "might" have happened. What the article has done is tried to match the events and places in retrospection, without proof that it actually happened.
DeleteIts a big debate topic Prerna. I will not try to convince you but i am sure some day you will find and feel the glory of Ramayan. :)
DeleteLolz... This story makes me laugh louder.
ReplyDeleteThis story reflects nonetheless author's pro-women and anti-men approach. Heard this phrase "Its not what you say, its how you say matters?"
It is advisable for the author to have an in-depth knowledge of the subject and then start blogging...
Anyways, it is incumbent on me to put a light on the Ignorance and educate about the truth.
1. Main objective of Ramayan was to kill Ravana.
2. Did the Lord remarry? why? Because he was faithful to his wife
3. Why was Sita abondoned, it was for the reason of fulfillment of several curses (Brigu rishi and Vrinda).
4. There's also a story why the Lord had to involve Monkeys (Vanar sena) to attack because Ravana was cursed by Nandi that his kingdom will be destroyed by Monkeys.
5. Narad's curse to the Lord, that he has cut majority of the life with Monkeys.
6. Due to Curse from Nalkubera, Ravana did not dare to touch Mother Sita.
7. Prior to marriage, Laxman did confide in his wife about his inability to give her marital bliss.
8. Ravana abducted illosory Sita (Clone Sita in todays age), whereas, Real Sita was sent to Lord Agnis Palace; meaning, Lord did take good care of his wife, isn't???
9. Story of Surpanakha, again a sheer ignorance. Ravana did not bother to avenge his sister's insult. It was only when she pumped lust in his mind; he decided to abduct her. Ravana was least bothered with his sisters insult (Truth).
10. Sita was banished only for the reasons of fulfillment of curses...
Above 10 points are only shorter version of Ramayan that was blatantly overlooked. It was an attempt to clear the understanding.
And this so-called shorter version of Ramayan only reflects your Anti-Hindu or Anti-ramayan approach? After it is in fashion. no??
As Ravana did not confess the blunder till the end, I expect the author to behave likewisely.
May Lord Ram bless you!!!
Continuation of point 7... Laxman's wife agreed about the fact that their union will not be blissful, only then they got married...
DeleteNice Read Mr.Thite.
DeleteDear Mr. Thite, I'd suggest you read the first paragraph again.
ReplyDeleteDear Prerna, I'd suggest you read the fourth paragraph of my reply again :-)
DeleteDi...i will not debate whether it is right or wrong...its a perspective i guess...but it is really fresh...Gud job..!!!
ReplyDeleteThanks Nikku!
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletePrerna . Though i am not very well versed with ramyana but this blog seems like a pro women (Feminist) blog rather then another version of the scripture. Other then that its a grt effort.. cheers
ReplyDeleteVivek, the intention is not write another version. It's a commentary on the most popular version of the story. Cheers!
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWell guys ull are forgetting that its a blog and ramayana is a written script ...and when a writer writes he obviously pens down his imagination on a paper and eventually this creates to a story..and as we all know that these are all mythological stories..we dnt knw the fact whether it truely happened..!!! So there is no point in debating on myths..
ReplyDeleteI don't quite agree with your explanation for the reasons:
ReplyDeleteWriter has to be aware of his social obligation, only then he or she can be termed as a writer.
While defaming the character of Rama, which is reverred by lakhs of people in India, then not a debate but conflicts will arise.
Going by your logic, no one has seen the evolution of Mankind from monkeys yet we blindly accept it, for they are proved and it is taught to us... huh???
I dont think it right if your imagination spoils the picture of reverred God & Goddess... You can imagine but Yes, one might argue that these are not true, but the teaching/preaching of the Saints like to Samarth Ramdas / Gondavlekar Maharj cannot be denied, for they did exist.
Writers not keeping up with the social obligations end up facing people's ire. Please recall the instance of Shobha Dé writing about marathi food delicacies and also James Laine writing some ill stuff about Shivaji Maharaj.
I am not quite sure how much knowledge does the author possess about the subject before writing such story and maligning the Image of the reverred however one can be sure that this story was written with some preconceived notions...
I thought Lakshman's wife was Urmila and Mandavi was the wife of Bharata.
ReplyDeleteYou are right Abdul.. As i mentioned, this article only showcases ignorance of the writer.
DeleteYes you are right Ramayana is worst show ever
ReplyDelete