Sunday, 22 May 2016

Some Discussion on Dhol Ganwaar .. (ढोल गँवार ....)

Ramachartmanas (रामचरितमानस), written by Goswaami Tulasidasji (श्री गोस्वामी तुलसीदासजी) is considered a very sacred religious book (पवित्र धार्मिक ग्रंथ) in Northern India. Many devout (भक्त) Hindus read some four liners (चौपाई) or two liners (दोहा) everyday and a Kaand (कांड) or the complete ग्रंथ on special occasions. They readily quote appropriate Choupaai (चौपाई) or Dohaa (दोहा) as guiding divine directive on different occasions in life. The most prominent of them is:
रघुकुल रीत सदा चली आय़ी, प्राण जाई पर वचन न जाई।।
The devout persons believe that every word in this ग्रंथ is sacrosanct and is not open to 'analysis' or comments from any (ignorant or unauthorized) person.  Criticism or objection is out of question. Anybody harboring a doubt about teaching of our scriptures is warned to get doomed to perish. (संशयात्मा विनश्यति).

However, people exposed to other sources of knowledge and thinking do not get frightened and raise doubts. That gave rise to some controversies.  A particular दोहा in रामचरितमानस has been interpreted in a negative manner by some people for many generations. That part of the चौपाई is :
 "Dhol, Gawar, Shudra, Pashu, Nari;  Sakal tadana ke adhikari”
ढोल गँवार शूद्र पशु नारी, सकल ताड़ना के अधिकारी
Popular meaning of the word 'Taadanaa (ताड़ना)' is 'heavy beating', as beating a large drum (ढोल) to produce a loud sound. So illiterate villagers, servants, cattle and women were clubbed together and commonly ill treated by some powerful people as if it was sanctioned by the holy scriptures.
Social changes taking place in our country during last century, especially after the Independance, moved towards equality of all men and women. So there were objections from different quarters to
i) equating women with animals and inanimate drums
ii) equating illiterate villagers and servants with animals and inanimate drums
iii) beating or ill treating any of them.
iv) promoting casteism and gender bias
A lot of hue and cry has been generated on these points over past some years and fueled by some leaders. However, one dare not find any fault with Goswaami Tulasidasji. The learned people (विद्वान लोग) came forward to promptly plead, with explanation, that Tulasidasji could not have advocated such inhuman behavior. He had used the word Taadanaa (ताड़ना) with an altogether different meaning. So different meanings were attributed to this word to get different interpretations.

I was having a curiosity about how such a चौपाई or दोहा has appeared in Ramaayana, basically an epic describing the life story of Prabhu Shree Raamachandraji (प्रभू श्रीरामचंद्रजी). I am sure that Raamachandraji known as Maraadaa Purushottam (मर्यादा पुरुषोत्तम) would have never made such sweeping statements. Then which character in the epic has said these words to whom and in which context? After a bit of search I found that The God of The Oceans appeared in the human form in front of Shri Raamachandraji and said these words. (Still people say it is history!) I did not even know that such a conversation had taken place.
The context of this conversation will be found in this blog.
Revised on 25/05/2016 and 15/06/2016 by addition of further mails.

From: Raghuveer Rustagi

In today’s blog, I like to touch base on the so called ‘degradation' of Dalits/Shudras in Hindu scriptures- particularly Manusmriti & Ramayana. Is the demand for an amendment in these timeless scriptures justified?

Let me take first Ramcharitmaanas by Goswami Tulsidassji- specific objection has been raised on chaupai 58.6 in Sunderkaand.
 "Dhol, Gawar, Shudra, Pashu, Nari  Sakal tadana ke adhikari”
ढोल गवार शूद्र पशु नारी सकल ताड़ना के अधिकारी
This is probably the most misunderstood ‘chaupai’ of goswami Tulsidass Ji(1532-1623) in Ramcharitmaanas.

In my recent India trip in March 2016, I visited Shankaracharya Govardhan Math in Puri, Odisha, and had an enlightening discussion with a swami-scholar in the Math.

1. Context: Lord Rama threatened to release a special arrow to dry up the ocean, as simple requests with the mighty sea for a passage to Ravan’s Lanka, had failed.
Varun, the lord of oceans arose, then humbly requested Rama not to do so, as it will be violating the maryada (मर्यादा) dignity of sea. Emphasis is laid not to threaten the dignity.

2. Meaning: To clarify the meaning of मर्यादा, Tulsidassji mentioned five other examples- Dhol, Gawar, Shudra, Pashu, Nari.
As sea water provides grandeur and dignity to ocean, a drummer hits the tabor to create a particular musical note, a herdsman chastises the animal by fondling and giving endearment to it, among hindu sanatanis the tradition of cherishing the woman folk (mother/sister/daughter/wife) with reverence is well known. There is a provision to chastise servants with a view to make them disciplined and educated.

One word, Tadana (ताड़ना) is used in 5 different ways- according to the different feelings as amorousness, friendliness, chastisement and parental affection- this is the poetic imagination of Tulsidas ji.
Tadan also means testing and training for purification of mind (मनःसमाधान)

Nowhere in Ramcharitmanas, a woman is described unworthy of worship.
Ex. Dhiraj, Dharam, Mitra Aur Naari, Aapad kal parakhiyahu chaari. (धीरज, धर्म मित्र और नारी, आपद काल परखियहु चारी। )(Aranya kaand chaupai 4.4)

In other Hindu scriptures too, woman is highly dignified as illustrated below.
Yatra Naryastu Pujyante, Ramante Tatra Devata यत्र नार्यस्तु पूज्यन्ते, रमन्ते तत्र देवताः।। ….(The Manusmriti 3.56)

3. Women, ill-bred, and boors can be found in all four Varnas (Brahman, Kshatriya, Vaishya, Shudras). It is therefore, not correct to distort the meaning and associate women with shudras. Significance of human life as described in our scriptures exactly applies to every human being, including womenkind and shudras. Remember the reverence received by ancient ladies Gargi, Maitreyi, Sulbha and Shabri etc. Respect accorded to non-brahmans Sanjay, Vidur and Valmiki and others is well known. According to scriptures, financial prosperity of Shudras is assured, without the need of arakshan reservation, if the varnashram principles are correctly followed.

4. अधिकारी: The word adhikar used by Tulsidass ji is very significant. Adhikar is used in the context of authority at birth given to each living or non-living entity as its innate nature, ordained by the Lord. Purpose of life is to bring out the manifested authority in our actions and thoughts. Adhikari is our tapas, not a punishment.

5. It is noted from above, a person learned in the science of religion, and conversant in ethics and psychology is required to understand the secret of words of the great sages, not censorious or opponent. Tulsidass ji was a learned and wise person, he would not sing the glories of ramrajya (रामराज्य) by creating a disorderly havoc and choose to disgrace women and shudras of that time or in the future.

 In conclusion, there are no objectionable words in our scriptures and there is no need to reprint the scriptures.
Bishnudeo Jha:  Apr 11 at 11:57 AM
I appreciate your study n insight about our religious books.
I would like to add few things
The word Dalit is no where appearing in any religious books. It is just political creation.
The Sudras were defined well before Tulsi Das and the categorisation was based on karmas. similarly Brahmans, Kshatriyas, Vaisyas were also defined based on many factors like socisl status, education level, life styles, their behavior pattern and above all their  domain expertise unlike the normal interpretation of these words merely based on the clan/kulas etc of birth.

Vinod Agrawal : Apr 12 at 5:41 PM
There is not a single objectionable word in RAMAYANA written by Goswami Tulasi Das. Many thousand persons have got Ph.D on translation or finding the meaning / emotions of RAMAYANA. There was a grate discussion on the चोपई ( ढ़ोर, गवार, शूद्र, पशु, नाड़ी। नोट नारी)।  the meaning has been derived by the KARMA.


S Dayal :
I was fortunate to attend and listen to the live lecture of Dr. Ram Kumar Verma, who has done PHd. on Ramayana, on this as well as other popular lines of Ramayana.

According to him, (after research and analysis) there is no "Comma" between, Pashu and Naaree.  Pashunaree, is a female form of daemon.
According to his thesis, Pashunaree were Tadkaa, SoopNakha ... (many more cited in his research)

In India, there is a tradition to worship female form of God.  Again Dr. Verma, cited list ...
So the question of just an isolated word "Naaree" does not arise.  The lecture was so rich, in examples from Indian tradition and culture, that it kept the common audience, spell bound for two and half hours.
Alas, that rich tradition has slowly being diluted by economy, western / modern wayward culture.


Ravi Rustagi  Apr 14
Thanks for clarification- attempt. However, Tulsidass ji has not used comma anywhere in any chaupai. The elaborate system of punctuation such as comma, semi colon, colon, interjection, full stop etc  evolved later. The word Naree is isolated as written in Ramcharitmanas published by Gita Press Gorakhpur. I have a copy in my home.

 Dayal : Apr 14
Dr Ram Kumar Verma, analysis and conclusions are remarkable.
At one point of time all the manuscripts were burnt, the moment they were seen.  So there were group of people, who had memorized each Kand.
In order not to forget, one group will go in the forest and there will be mass chanting of one Kand of RAM Charit Manas.
They were also trained to have a good handwriting, (called Lipi, in Hindi), in order to write it legibly.

Ravi Rustagi
Sh Dayalji, Thanks for clarification- attempt. However, Tulsidass ji has not used comma anywhere in any chaupai. The elaborate system of punctuation such as comma, semi colon, colon, interjection, full stop etc  evolved later. The word Naree is isolated as written in Ramcharitmanas published by Gita Press Gorakhpur. I have a copy in my home.

 Dayal  Apr 14
Dr Ram Kumar Verma, analysis and conclusions are remarkable.
At one point of time all the manuscripts were burnt, the moment they were seen.  So there were group of people, who had memorised each Kand.
In order not to forget, one group will go in the forest and there will be mass chanting of one Kand of RAM Charit Manas.
They were also trained to have a good handwriting, (called Lipi, in Hindi), in order to write it legibly.
Vinod Agrawal  Apr 15

As regards RAMAYANA, there are various versions. Specially the lines  mentioned above. I think that this is the central point of research. To best of my knowledge our VEDAS have clear defined the Four classifications based upon the work they carry out.Hindu Mythology no where mentions the gradation based upon cast. This is the definition modern history has given due to survival of PANDITS. This cannot be taken as reference as dis course or evaluation of RAMAYANA. I do have attended discourses at GORAKHAPUR at GEETA PRESS.The original RAMAYANA is preserved there.
The word नारी  is refereed as नाड़ी. This changes the entire meaning. NADI is a known RH factor of blood. Our Vedas clearly say that the child of  married couple has effect of last 23 incarnations. Medical science also has proved this fact.
According to ASTROLOGY  नाड़ी दोष सबसे अहम माना गया है। Out of 33 events the most effective is this point only.What kind of child the couple is dependent of NADI effect. Hence there may be different versions.
The discourse I have attended way back in 1962 starts that to understand the meaning of RAMAYANA is completely based upon the mercy of GOD and most important the FAITH. Being a child at that age, I was told only two things 1. FAITH. 2.SANKALP. संकल्प सिद्धि it self a big chapter in life. The short meaning is what you want will happen. Here is that NATURE helps.
Ravi Rustagi : Apr 16
This is a new and controversial twist in Tulsidass ji’s Ramayana, and I had not heard it before that there are more than one version of Ramayana in the market, and by the same Geeta Press Gorakhpur.
I had a detailed discussion recently with a knowledgeable swami scholar in Jagannath Puri Math, who never said so. Moreover, the chaupai endings नारी नाडी are not in proper rhyme. Then the twist पसुनारी being one word without a comma, as suggested by Dayalji is an uncommon word in Hindi- difficult to gulp.
I suspect this is a way to give discredit to our scriptures, being labeled ambiguous, controversial and unrealistic!
Vinod Agrawal  Apr 16
Some big named have been taken who perhaps have total GYAN of of our grate Maha Kavaya THE RAMAYANA.and its विवेचना। There is nothing with me to do analyses as I am not the authority blessed by All Mighty to do any such sort of analyses.The very first page of Ramayan very clearly indicates that RAMAYANA HAS BEEN WRITTEN BY GOSWAMI TULASI DAS WITH THE BLESSINGS OF LORD RAMA AND WITH THE PERMISSION OF LORD SHIVA.
The person doing the analyses if not blessed by God is totally not authorized to do any sort of analyses. Ramayana also clearly say in big words that many such PANDITS will erupt to mislead public in this ERA  कलयुग॰
Me being a very small do not know much about analyses. But religiously read RAMAYAN daily past almost 50 years and daily found new meanings as I further read.
Anand Ghare  (myself) Apr 17
 I do not subscribe to a view that NONE has any right to say anything about certain scriptures. In my opinion. ALL books are meant to be read and understood. Not to be just worshiped. If the language is not currently in use, you have to interpret the meanings of some words as per your ability.
I was looking for the context in which this Chaupai is written and  came across one such interpretation that makes sense, on the link given below. The comlete Choupaai and its meaning is as follows.
प्रभु भल कीन्ह मोहि सिख दीन्हीं।
मरजादा पुनि तुम्हरी कीन्हीं॥
ढोल, गंवार, शुद्र, पशु , नारी ।
सकल ताड़ना के अधिकारी॥3॥
भावार्थ:-प्रभु ने अच्छा किया जो मुझे शिक्षा दी.. और, सही रास्ता दिखाया ..... किंतु मर्यादा (जीवों का स्वभाव) भी आपकी ही बनाई हुई है...!
क्योंकि.... ढोल, गँवार, शूद्र, पशु और स्त्री........ ये सब शिक्षा तथा सही ज्ञान के अधिकारी हैं ॥3॥
अर्थात.... ढोल (एक साज), गंवार(मूर्ख), शूद्र (कर्मचारी), पशु (चाहे जंगली हो या पालतू) और नारी (स्त्री/पत्नी), इन सब को साधना अथवा सिखाना पड़ता है.. और निर्देशित करना पड़ता है.... तथा विशेष ध्यान रखना पड़ता है ॥
The God of the Ocean says, "It is good that you have taught me a lesson and given guidance, but you only have set my limits. Drum, illiterate villagers, servants, cattle and women need to be directed or taken care of. (perhaps I am like them?)
क्या आप जानते हैं कि रामचरित मानस के... - Vaibhava Nath Sharma | Facebook

I do not think the explanations about नाडी or पसुनारी are convincing.
Shah Nawaz Ahmad  Apr 17
I wouldn't agree more Ghare Bandhu
The fear of being wrong dulls all creativity
I think that's why all scriptures dwell on seeking forgiveness
And inculcating kindness, which is another form of forgiveness
So let us discuss
But discuss with sensitivity
Vinod Agrawal  Apr 17 at

 As far as RAMAYANA is considered, this महा काव्य has been written by Goswami Tulasi Das way back in 1633.There is  short biography of Goswami Tulasi Das written in RAMAYANA before the actual Ramayan starts. According to that this book was written with the permission of GOD to save Human Kind from the torture and Crime of So Called PANDITS in the present era.
Any body can read these two pages right in start of Ramayana. In the Last chapter is UTTAR KAND ( उत्तर काण्ड ), one of the last pages may be (चोपाई 122) states to read the book leaving the analysis. I confess that I do not know the meaning of RAMAYANA. Neither I am allowed to find out, nor I have been blessed By ALMIGHTY to do so. As I part of daily routine following the best good I can do to my family to discharge my duties ( ग्रहस्थ आश्रम ), I read RAMAYAN DAILY. I spent good time as I simply like and at the same time I keep my self busy. Hence I will not be able to comment any further on the analysis part of RAMAYANA.

However, I must mention here that RAMAYANA does caution in clear words that there will be many persons in this era who will call them महा ज्ञानी। They will live a very lavish life. Most of the time they will attract opposite gender. I personally feel that few last pages of ( Uttar Kand )  may be read by the individuals interested in doing the analysis of HOLY book.


Mohan Rao  Apr 17
Agrawal Saab:  I happened to run into your statement wondering what Ramayana really meant. I think we have an all-loving God and I would not mind crossing wires with him once in a while and hence this post. I interpreted Ramayana more or less as the odyssey (prompted by the sub-word ayana) of Rama and as I see it, that is exactly what his life was. He opted to leave his rightful place as the heir of King Dasaratha, at the prompting of Kaikei (his aunt) who was driven by the urge of getting her son rule the kingdom, retreated to a forest where as fate would have it, lived a life with his brother Laxmana and wife Sita, in hut eating root vegetables and drinking stream water. His odyssey did not end there. Sita was lured into stepping out of her bounds in watching a deer and get kidnapped and end up in Lanka in the hold of Demon Ravana. Rest of Ramayana is all about his effort to locate and get his wife back after a war with Ravana. Furthermore Sita had to undergo a fire test to show her ‘purity’ when a ‘proletariat’ doubted her. I have not read Ramayana except in kid lit in my childhood and so pardon me if the story is not correct.
The point of Ramayana (or the Odyssey of Rama) is a testament to so many human values and one’s ability to withstand evil in life and an extraordinary  sense of fairness to all the people he rules that the word Rama Rajya came into being and Gandhiji used it as an exemplary way of meeting everyone’s expectations at phenomenal sacrifice to oneself. Rama is depicted as carrying a bow and arrows in symbolism and as someone pointed out tolerance has limits and there is such a thing as an ultimate call to set things right which he did in retrieving Sita from Ravana’s hold.

In the small hamlet I grew up we used to have night-log replay of the any of the ten avatars (Rama being one) during periods when monsoon didn’t wreak its havoc under the open sky where we used to carry our sleeping bags and watch the drama with sleepy eyes lying on dusty ground. I must confess most of what I remember of Ramayana is the visual knowledge of watching these night-long dramas, and won’t be surprised if some of what I heard or saw was somewhat stretched out (poetic license I guess). At another place in the world, Homer wrote his epic Odyssey which relates to wandering of Odysseus for ten years after the fall of Troy. There is something about these stories of wandering that innately satisfies the human spirit, I think. We are fortunate to have two of these (Ramayana and Mahabharata) both timeless epics sating our national ethos.

Ravi Rustagi  Apr 18

May I present the following bits of my mind.

1. The debate on intolerance can be summed up in two parts-
i). Everyone has a right to speak his mind, even if the voice is shaky, because it is his mind, and it is his tongue.
ii). No one, however has a right to speak other’s mind, like Tulsidassji’s mind in our ongoing debate, except a right to express his own shortcomings or ignorance with a desire to know better or remove personal ignorance. Take the example of Arjuna questioning Krishna left or right, because it was Arjuna’s right to ask question and dispel his ignorance pertaining to yoga. But Arjuna never ever expressed disbelief in Krishna’s preaching. This is called Shraddha, absence of all disbeliefs or misbeliefs. Shraddha is a virtue, Shansaya is a vice.
श्रद्धावान् लभते ज्ञानम्. संशयात्मा विनश्यति [BG 4.39, 4.40]. This is a fine line of demarcation between Shraddha and Sanshay. What is important is our motive Bhav, the purity of mind.

2. Let us be clear! we are very ordinary folks, compared to Tulsidass ji the rishi of his era. I fully support what sh VC Agarwalji asserts that the debate should not lose focus. Our purpose is to gain knowledge through interpersonal exchanges, rather than to show off one-up-man-ship or cause disrepute to any chaupai in Ramayana. I also agree that no one has a right to doubt any chaupai, in scriptures unless one can rise to that lofty level. The ‘misunderstood' freedom of speech is mostly in terms of political issues of today, and day to day living style in society, but not for religious scriptures.
Anand Ghare (myself) Apr 18 at 10:48 AM
I do not understand either Sanskrit or Awadhi. Neither I have any means to access any original manuscripts. So I do not have any means to know what exactly was written by Rishi Valmiki or Sant Tulsidasji. What I am reading is some commentaries written by lesser mortals of last century or the current period. There are a number of versions as they do not agree with each other. So whichever I follow, I am contradicting others. Does it mean I am showing disrespect to the Rishi?
I also have a firm belief that The God-made laws of nature are universal and they form my range of tolerance for believing any events given in the narration as myths or realities.
Shah Nawaz Ahmad Apr 18
We are all small children in front of Tulsidas
I wonder whether Tulsidas would have liked to put many injunctions to our interpretation, and understanding
Poetry is not to be understood, it needs to be revelled IN!
and i, Tulsidas is outstanding poetry!!
lets revel in the various hues of his poetry beautiful

Additions on May 25, 2016

Taswir Singh : May 23
After reading the blog I will like to agree with Sh V. C AGGARWAL JI  that interests of upper casts might have interpretted the said chopai to prepatuate  permission to tadna the lower casts,  animals   the women.
Thanks Gharae ji for your simple and straight answer that commners can also comment, on  any book and not just worship these.

It is impossible to believe that a rishi like Tulsidass can spread such a nonsense through his writing The Ramayana. (Also Maryada purshotam Shri Ram would be highly pained by such chopai as he himself  and respected everyone including animals, women, and  parja.
This is no coincidence that monkey brigade led by Hanuman ji partcipated in a big way to help him to locate Sita ji and then defeat Ravana and liberate her from his custody. Similarly when Shri Ram ji returned to Ayodhaya after completing 14 years  banwas every one celebrated the occasion irrespective of his cast or creed.
So there in all probability it is the upper cast who wrongly interpreted the chopai to fullfill their vested interest of exploiting the lower cast or downtroddens or women. (All above is from my common sense as a commoner)
Shakti Sharma : May 24
Tulsi dass's Ram charitra Manas is full of social philosophy. Pashu nari is one word.The lady whose behaviour is wild and violent need to dealt strongly.Tarka and Sharup nakhka were the example while Shabri who was  highly respected by Ram.He had relished her tasted Ber.This choupy is said by the character ocean personified in Sunder kaand when he refuse to cooperate after 3 days of request by Ram and Ram had to use His weapon power. Ram never had any contempt for low cast people.He went from Ayodhaya to Rishi Valmiki's ashram near Kanpur to seek his advice for future planning of his exile period.  On his way back from exile he took his blessings(Rishi Valmiki was of low cast by birth).
Honouring of Boat man Nishad Raj Guh while going and returning from exile is another example.
All His soldiers were monkeys and bears and He loved and respected them.
Here in this choupy tulsi das meant  " a non co-operating persons for a good cause" has to be dealt by force .
 A poet always speaks through his characters.He should be understood in the right prospective.
Dilip Vishwaroop : May 25
I have a different view on the explanation by Sh Shakti Sharma Ji.
The methodology to Train, Reform, Discipline or Punish Animals (ढोर) and Humans (here Females) can not be same or identical in nature by any wildest stretch of Logic or Imagination.
Keeping in mind how to deal with other Human beings in modern days, we all have to mould our thinking of getting things done through Brute Force. Whatever be the literacy status of the human being under question (except probably for the certified mentally sick and violent patients to keep them confined and not let them harm other innocent or non-related Society Members).
In case of a strained relationship due to either bad character or a totally negligent behaviour of the spouse (just because SHE happens to be a Wife and a FEMALE), one does not get a right to start physical abuse (even on the strength of some religious scriptures).
There are recourse available for handling those situations including a legal divorce. Not like earlier days of resorting to Abandonment or beating,  to force them to your whims.
In today's times the mental make up of the society members, specially the Male members, needs to be altered to tune up to the Evolved Standards of Equality and Dignity of the society members specially in view of the Education and the Economic Independence of the Fair Sex members.
Just because one's spouse is economically dependent and not earning, her social value and status does not get deleted. Violence in any form and for any reason ( " a non co-operating persons for a good cause" has to be dealt by force )  is strongly condemned (and Not Permitted) by the current Law of the Land.
I hope this is not taken in a wrong spirit and labelled as of voicing against Scriptures, but is taken as THE path to be followed in today's times.
There is absolutely not an iota of intention to hurt anyone's religious feelings. With malice to none !

Additions on 15/06/2016

Prakash dixit : (Jun 10)
Neither shri  Ram nor Tulsidasji 's thought is DHOL  GANWAR.  It is the  arrogant and jada buddhi Samudra who says those words .This way goswamiji has said that it is the persons like Samudra who say such things. (Samudra was arrogant in not yielding to sh Rama~s recquest for several days.  Jad Buddhi means not amenable to reason)  ( Thus we dont need to defend Tulsidasji)

From: Rustagi
Your message is a new twist on the vexing chaupai by Tulsidasji.
1. Even if Jad Buddhi Samudra is the origin, the primary responsibility still lies with the sole author, i.e. Tulsidass. In a court of law for example, the responsibility of criminal action cannot be passed on to the manufacturer of the weapon.
2. But I thought this chaupai has been dealt in ample detail. I had understood it satisfactorily from a Ramayan scholar of repute in Puri. He had explained to me - there are 5 different meanings of the word Tadana. It is the poetic genius of Tulsidasji to write a complex truth so concisely. My confusion melted away.

3. A comedian poet of Haryana admonished his wife repeating this chaupai. The wife replied - mharo naam ek baar; tharo naam char baar
Jun 14 : Comments from Ghare

This Chaupai has been discussed in detail and I think it was to the satisfaction of every one, at least almost!. 
However, I have a general query. An epic like Ramayana has several characters, some of them are negative, for example Kaikeyee, Mantharaa, Ravan, Shoorpanakhaa etc. They also would be having dialogues in the flow of the story.  Even Lakshmana is said to have lost his temper and raised his voice on an occasion. The chaupai gives thoughts of Jad Buddhi Samudra (Lord of seas) as PC Dixit has commented. I also feel we cannot say that what all of these characters spoke in the epic are the thoughts of the poet. He is giving the thinking of those characters and arguments on the opposite sides to view the issues in a broader perspective.

Shri K.Natarajan had raised this point long ago, probably by giving example of one Jabali, but perhaps it was not understood and sidelined by denying existence of that character in Ramayana or saying those were different days etc. 
However, the point remains and will remain forever.

No comments:

Post a Comment