Ravana- A University of California (UCLA) Scholarly Article on This Greatest Personality of the World

Ravana

Ravana appears in the Ramayana as the demon-king of Lanka and the principal antagonist of Rama. In all versions of the Ramayana, he is vanquished and killed by Rama in a ferocious battle where both are compelled to call upon all the resources at their command, including the most awesome weapons.

Thus is Sita, who had been abducted by Ravana, restored to her husband. If Rama stands forth as a shining example of the virtuous ruler, Ravana is, in the common imagination, the very sign of evil. In Hindi, for instance, a man who behaves wickedly is described as behaving like Ravana, and the effigies of Ravana that are burnt at Dusshera mark the triumph of good over evil.

There are Indian traditions, however, where Ravana is not only vindicated as a figure of immense moral and physical strength, but where he appears as the chief protagonist of the Ramayana. His immense penance, learning, and devotion to Brahma earned him the latter’s gratitude.

Brahma conferred on Ravana the boon of near invulnerability, making him immune from destruction by gods or (other) demons; he also acquired the capacity to change his form, and in the Ramayana he is described as having ten heads and twenty arms. He was endowed with the strength of moving the seas and splitting the tops of mountains. Ravana’s body bore all the marks of one who had fought the devas: the thunderbolt of Indra, the tusks of Indra’s elephant Airavata, and the discus of Vishnu had all scarred him.

If Ravana had a fatal flaw, it was doubtless his hubris. When Brahma conferred on him a boon, and Ravana asked that the devas should be unable to inflict harm on him, he did not think it worthwhile to ask for protection from men or animals. Consequently, Vishnu had to incarnate himself as a human being, Rama, and it is an army of monkeys, led by Hanuman, which assists Rama in liberating Sita from Ravana’s clutches and vanquishing him. Ravana’s hubris extends so far that at first he refuses to take Rama seriously, since he thinks that the idea that any human being could pose a threat to him is utterly contemptible.

When Rama and Ravana meet in battle, it is characteristic of Ravana that he flaunts his prowess, and speaks arrogantly of crushing Rama to bits; Rama, meanwhile, simply goes about his task. When Rama sends his final weapon, the "Brahmasthra", hurtling towards Ravana, he aims it at his heart. Though Ravana had sought invincibility, and could replace his head or arms with another set, he had not thought of safeguarding his heart. Perhaps in recognition of the fact that he had nearly met his match, or that Ravana was a Brahmin by birth, well-versed in the Vedas and prolific in his knowledge of Sanskrit, Rama ordered that the funeral arrangements for Ravana be those befitting his grandeur.

No one who has read the Ramayana can have failed to wonder why Ravana, who lusted after Sita and kept her in captivity for years, did not violat her. He repeatedly urged her to become his wife, and on more than one occasion threatened to put an end to her life; but she was just as persisting in refusing his advances. Devout readers are prone to the interpretation that Sita’s purity made her inviolable. Yet Ravana had the advantage of strength, and she was his captive. The Ramayana itself suggests a number of other readings. It is said that one of Ravana’s wives dissuaded him from violating Sita.

Ravana is himself said to have been incapacitated by a curse to the effect that if he made any attempt to molest her, he would be reduced to ashes. And it is even possible to argue that, having kidnapped her, Ravana wished to have Sita for himself only if she gave her consent; to do otherwise was to abandon the badge of honor that he, the mightiest of the asuras or demons, carried. What is remarkable is his extraordinary discipline and tapasya: right beside him, subject to his overwhelming power, was a woman for whom he had a burning desire, and yet he restrained himself. Would being burnt to ashes have been so high a price to pay for so unimaginable a good?

Certainly some interpreters, such as the nineteenth-century Bengali writer, Michael Madhusudan Dutt (1824-1873), have been inclined to the view that Ravana displayed the qualities of masculinity, honor, consistency, reliability, and justice to a greater extent than did Rama.

How could Rama, a hero of an earlier, pastoral, village republic commend himself to the attention of moderns, and what was so particularly noble about a hero who, having allowed himself to be exiled, showed himself incapable of protecting his own wife? If the welfare of the nation had been entrusted in the past to inept and feminine leaders like Rama, and these supposed heroes were still held up for emulation, was it any surprise that

India had come under British rule? Though the character of Ravana may seem like a closed book, there is sufficient plurality in Indian traditions that even Ravana is capable of some recuperation.

Dr.Ambedkar & RSS: Yet Another Scholarly Article by Dr.Ram Puniyani

Ambedkar and RSS

Ram Puniyani

When RSS Sarsanghchalak said that Ambedkar supported RSS ideology (16th Oct. 2005), it was not for the first time that a political movement was trying to fabricate lies to co-opt a major thinker and political leader of totally opposite views, for its’ selfish interests.

Mr. Sudarshan was trying to buttress the RSS ideology of opposition to reservations by saying that Ambedkar did not support reservations as they are for political purposes. One recalls that reservations were part of the protective affirmative clauses for the weaker sections. The only point was that as per his scheme of things reservations will be for ten years by which time the social disabilities would be overcome and reservations will not be needed.

Who could have foreseen that the machinery already in place for implementation of the government policies would partly sabotage the implementation of reservation policy in such a way so that the desired goals would not be achieved?

No society can be democratic and strive to go in egalitarian direction unless the victims of centuries old discrimination are given special protection and nobody conceptualized it better than Dr. Ambedkar.

Sudarshan’s assertion that Ambedkar drafted a Western constitution under the pressure of Congress, insults Dr. Ambedkar in a deeper way. He was not the one to buckle under pressure. He had the values and ideas of his own, and the example of this was when he resigned from the Cabinet because Hindu Code Bill drafted by him did not pass through and also because he was side tracked in other matters of policy and planning. It’s a comment which is derogatory to the thinker and leader who did all possible to ensure that he stands for his values and ideas rather than compromises for the sake of power and pelf.

At the same time Sudarshan seems to be promoting his own postulate that Indian constitution, is based on Western values and should be replaced by the one based on Hindu holy books. It is in that direction that BJP led NDA coalition appointed the constitution review committee, which of course was a dismal failure, thanks to the opposition of RSS formulation by most of the people of this country. Ambedkar did not buckle under any body’s pressure while drafting the constitution as he was committed to the democratic values of Liberty, Equality and Fraternity (community), the one’s which have been enshrined in this book.

Also it was the constituent assembly, a reasonably accurate representative body of Indian people, which guided the constitution and not the Western influence. One can go on to say that the constitution itself was one of the major contributions of Babasaheb.

Sudarshan also asserts that Dr. Ambedkar stuck to Hindu culture while embracing Buddhism. Nothing could be farther from truth. By no stretch of imagination one can call all the tendencies prevailing in India as Hindu. The dominant tradition, which passes off as Hinduism is Brahmanism. Dr. Ambedkar called Hinduism as Brahminic theology and went on to say that he was born a Hindu that was not in his hands, but surely he will not die a Hindu. Buddhism is not a part of Hindu culture. The central part of dominant Hinduism is caste system, while Buddhism stands for social equality.

As per Ambedkar the clash between Braminic Hinduism and Buddhism is the major part of Indian history. In his understanding of Indian History he divides it into three parts. Part one Revolution, i.e. coming in of Buddhism to oppose Brahmanic caste and gender hierarchy. This is followed by counterrevolution, during which the Brahmanism attacks Buddhism at ideological level through Shankaracharya and at the social and political level by the onslaughts of kings like Pushmitra Shunga and Shashak. It is due to this that Buddhism, became extinct from India till Dr. Ambedkar brought it back.

• He chose this religion, while rejecting Hinduism, mainly because its values of Liberty, Equality and Fraternity (Community). To present him as supporter of RSS and RSS ideology is a clever deceit, a political move, to win over sections of Dalits to RSS-Hindutva politics.
  

---

Ram Puniyani is a Professor at IIT Mumbai and is associated with EKTA, Committee for Communal Amity, Mumbai .

Ram Puniyani's Scholarly Article: More Than 300 Versions of the Story of Rama?, what kind of a God or a Lord is Rama??

BJP, RSS, VHP and ABVP: Put together, these hindu fundamentalist organizations without any doubts is the grand scale MAD house of this modern world, there is no such a madhouse of fundamentalists in this entire globe like the hindus.

• Look at the entire nation of India, the amount of lawlessness and violence and ask the basic question of what is happening to India. 
• 
  
• Where is this all terrible events and tragedies come from, the straight forward answer is in the open space, most of the violence in India stems from the fundamentalists either muslim or hindus, but the hindus in the name of owning the nation in the name of hindusim is causing much more damages in the recent years than the wars of ancient times.

  These organizations attack churches, christians, muslims, Buddhists and create a chaos among dalits and they attack sikhs or whoever is raising voice against their ill conceived and pathological varna ideology, the next thing is to attack.

  These RSS people create chaos in the name of hindusism, constantly they create and maintain certain amount of barbarism in India, but yet, the Indian government cannot ban these and terroristic organizations.
  

The current ruling government is a weak, mean and useless government's of all in the history of India.

The congress cannot even understand the rampant lawlessness and fundamentalists attacks on the very freedom of India.

As long as these terrorist organizations are allowed to continue in India, chaos will multiply and one day this beautiful nation will be destroyed by these fundamentalists of hindu organizations!.

Here is a very authentic, informative and nice article about the Riddles of hindu's beliefs and how many Rama's are there in in the mythology, go read it, it is written by Ram Puniyani, a scholarly approach can be sensed while reading this article. Thanks to Ram Puniyani like genuine Indians who wants to tell this world about the truths of real India and about the hindu mafia of RSS and BJP.

Many Ramas: Many Ramayanas
There are more than 300 versions of the story of Lord Rama

The recent (Feb. 2008) rampage by ABVP activists in Delhi University protesting against the introduction of Ramanujan’s essay “Three Hundred Ramayanas”, as the reading text, was not the first such act of political vandalism around Lord Rama’s story. This essay by the much acclaimed scholar, A.K. Ramanujan is part of his “The Collected Essays of A.K.Ramanujan (Oxford1999).

Earlier in the aftermath of Babri demolition a Sahmat exhibition on different versions of Ramayana was attacked by RSS combine’s goons

. This was done on the pretext that one of the panels based on Jataka (Buddhist version) showed Ram and Sita as brother and sister, and it is an insult to their faith. Ramanujan’s essay also talks of different versions and presents five of them as an example.

Photo: Rama and Lakshmana attended by Hanuman in the forest, detail of relief inspired by the Ramayana, from Nacna Kuthara, Madhya Pradesh, 5th century CE.

It is known that there are hundreds of versions of Ramayana, Buddhist, Jain, Valmiki etc. Paula Richman in her book Many Ramayana’s (Oxford) describes several of these. And again there are different interpretations of the prevalent Valmiki Ramayana, many of which are not to the liking of those who are indulging in this hooliganism in the name of their faith. It is another matter that this intolerant attitude and aggression is done in the name of Hinduism, while asserting that Hinduism is tolerant and other religions are intolerant. It is a fascinating exercise to go through various tellings and interpretations of Ramayana’s. The RSS combine harps on the telling of Ramayana by Valmiki alone and that too its particular interpretation. Even the other renderings acceptable to this intolerant but currently dominant political force are not uniform. Valmiki, Tulsidas and later the one adopted by Rmanand Sagar for his serial Ramayana have their own subtle nuances, which are very different from each other. Ramayana has been rendered in many languages of Asia in particular. Ramanujan points out that the tellings of Ram story has been part of Balinese, Bengali, Kashmiri, Thai, Sinhala, Santhali Tamil, Tibetan and Pali amongst others. There are innumerable versions in Western languages also. The narrative in these is not matching. RSS combine takes Valmiki as the standard and others as diversions which are not acceptable to it for political reasons. The version of Ramayana it wants to impose has the caste and gender equations of pre-modern times so it is hung up upon only that version as the only one acceptable to it. Interestingly one can see the correlation between the class-caste aspirations of the narration-interpretation. In Buddhist Dasharath Jataka, Sita is projected both as sister and wife of Ram. As per this version Dashrath is King not of Ayodhya but of Varanasi. The marriage of sister and brother is part of the tradition of glorious Kshtriya clans who wanted to maintain their caste and clan purity. This Jataka tale shows Ram to be the follower of Buddha. Similarly Jain versions of Ramayana project Ram as the propagator of Jain values, especially as a follower of non-violence. What do both Buddhist and Jain versions have in common is that in these Ravan is not shown as a villain but a great spiritual soul dedicated to quest of knowledge, endowed with majestic commands over passions, a sage and a responsible ruler. Popular and prevalent “Women’s Ramayana Songs” of Telugu Brahmin Women, put together by Rangnayakamma, keep the women’s concern as the central theme. These songs present Sita as finally victorious over Ram and in these, Surpanakha succeeds in taking revenge over Ram. In Thai Ramkirti, or Ramkin (Ram’s story), there is a twist in the tale and Shurpanakh’s daughter decides to take revenge attributing her mothers mutilation primarily because of Sita. More interestingly here the focus is on Hanuman, who in this telling is neither devout nor celibate but quite a ladies man, looking into the bedrooms of Lanka. In Valmiki, Kampan and Tamil tellings Hanuman regards seeing another mans sleeping wife as a sin, but not in this Thai version. Incidentally he is a very popular Thai hero even today. Also like Jain Ramayana this Thai telling focuses on genealogy and adventures of Ravana and not of Ram. In recent times Jotiba Phule who stood more with the interests of Dalits and women, was amongst the first to interpret this mythological tale from the perspective of those subjugated by caste-varna-gender hierarchy. Phule points out that upper castes were descendents of conquering Indo-Europeans who overturned the original egalitarian society and forbade the conquered from studying texts. His mythology is woven around King Bali, who could invoke the image of peasant community. Needless to say his murder by Lord Ram from behind is condemned and is seen as an act of subjugation of lower castes by the upper castes. And Ram is seen as an avatar of Vishnu out to conquer India from the Rakshasas (those protecting their crops) for establishing the hegemony of upper caste values of caste and gender hierarchy. Dr. Ambedkar and Periyar’s commentaries are more an alternative reading of the Valmiki’s text rather then a separate version. There is a good deal of overlap in the interpretation of both. Dr. Ambedkar focuses his attention on the issues pertaining to Ram’s killing of Shambuk for violating the prevalent norm where a low caste has no right to do penance, tapasya. Like Phule he also castigates Lord Ram for murdering the popular folk king Bali. He questions Ram’s act of taking Sita’s agnipariksha, trial by fire, and his patriarchal attitude towards her. After defeating Ravan he tells Sita that he had done all this battle not to get her released for her own sake but to restore his honor, and his banishing her in response to the rumors about her chastity when she was pregnant comes for severest criticism from Ambedkar. Periyar is basically taking the same line but in his interpretation the North Indian upper caste onslaught-South Indian resistance becomes the central theme. Periyar the initiator of Self Respect Movement was the pioneer of caste and gender equality in Tamilnadu. In one of the movements, which is very less known, on the lines of Dr. Ambedkar burning Manusmriti, he planned to burn the photo of Ram, as for him Ram symbolized the imposition of upper caste norms in South India. This was a part of his campaign against caste Hinduism. Periyar also upheld Tamil identity. According to him the Ramayana story was a thinly disguised historical account of how caste ridden, Sanskritic, Upper caste North Indians led by Ram subjugated South Indians. He identifies Ravana as the monarch of ancient Dravidians, who abducted Sita, primarily to take revenge against the mutilation and insult of his sister Surpanakha. In his interpretation Ravana is practitioner of Bhakti, and is a virtuous man. The rampage by RSS combines’ ABVP can be understood also in the light of current cultural manipulation and cooption of Adivasis by Vanvasi Kalyan Ashram, another RSS progeny. This organization is at the core of anti-Christian attacks in the remote areas. In most of these Hanuman, as the loyal devotee of the Lord, is being projected as the idol of Adivaisis. This is done through distribution of Hanuman lockets etc. The symbolism of upper caste with Rama, and Adiviasis with Hanuman gives a political message given by RSS combine of the relationship of upper castes with Adivais. Similarly in these areas Shabri another destitute woman is being projected as the role model for Adiviasis. One shold also note that the telling of Ramayana in the Adivasi areas of Dangs, Gujarat, where Shabri Kumbh was held, is very different from the one prevalent in other parts of the country. The version of Ramayana to be upheld and projected by RSS combine is that of ‘Maharshi’ Ramanand Sagar’s tele-serial Ramayana, which went many steps further than some of the earlier one’s in glorifying norms of caste and gender hierarchy. As an example here Sita herself is keen to be banished to jungle by her ‘Lord and master’ to ensure that people don’t talk ill of Him. And currently this is the bottom line, and any deviation from such blind obeisance comes for severe reprimand from the RSS family. This selection of Ram and this version of Ramayana have more to do with political agenda than faith per se. And so this politics being doe in the name of tolerant Hinduism, can not tolerate the Many Rams: Many Ramayanas prevalent World over! © 2007 mynews.in

>>Other articles by Ram Puniyani