Dignity in
disagreement , A Hindu Perspective.
Though born in a Hindu family, I never became Hindu for being
born such. Though born in a Kshatriya family, I never became a Kshatriya for
being born such. I thought of elevating myself to the enlightened state of a
Brahmin and the scriptures never hindered my path. Becoming Hindu was a great
task because it sought a journey to the depths of the superficially turbulent
ocean of fearful waves and my ignorance knew no swimming. But to learn swimming
I had to hurl myself into the waves and as I learnt diving deep I realized the
need to understand all that stood in the way and why they stood there and for
what purpose .The waves took me to different faiths that drew from the same
source. All faiths welcomed me with open arms with some undercurrents seeking
to disturb the balance. The light that led me to the Grace of all was one and illuminated
the beauty of such expanse. And as I arrived at gates enlightenment ,I had lost
my caste and my Varna , I saw one truth, the truth of permanence which served
as the foundation of all fading in time , interpreted variously but not
differently .
As I came to the surface I found the followers of the same faiths
seeking propagation of such through indulgence in indignity, I saw strange
expressions of love for the mother land. I remembered Rama the epitome of
dignity who gave up his heritance of the kingdom in deference to the wishes of
his father’s second wife who wanted kingship for her son Bharata. Convention
had it that the king should make his eldest son his successor and the old king
adhering to that, his love for his eldest son and in recognition of his
superior attributes wanted him to succeed his kingdom. Ram showed no disrespect
for the king’s second wife and despite his father’s deep agony accepted exile.
As Rama wandered in the wilderness he came across a woman
called Shabri who offered him jungle berries and each time she did so she bit a
small part of the berry to ensure that none that Rama ate was sour. Rama was
overcome by passion of this old mother; he never found time to go either into
her faith or her caste. That was the divinity, dignity and grace of heir
apparent to Ayodhya , who in Hinduism came to be revered as the ideal human ,”
Maryada Purshottam Rama “. The only questionable contradiction in this
personality was his yielding to the opinion of a washer man which resulted in
his separation with his wife. There was
no formal system of jurisprudence as we know of now to go into the legality of
the cause that resulted in such.
If Ram was the ideal man, Sita was an embodiment of virtues
who stood defiantly against Ravana the Demon King despite his pressure on her to
yield. She never did and in time during the course of her captivity even the
demon women came to revere her. Ravana had kidnapped her by deceit coming to
her as a Brahmin mendicant seeking alms and through such pretence prevailed
upon her to come out of the circle of protection drawn around her by her husband’s
younger brother Lakshman. The Kshatriya lady crossed the line in reverence to
the Brahmin which was just an overt appearance of the demon. Taking advantage
of this opportunity Ravana abducted her. And now a great battle was fought.
Ravana’s kingdom, Lanka was reduced to ashes and he and his men perished to
Rama’s might.
Fourteen years having been passed in wilderness Rama was now
forced by Bharat and the citizens of Ayodhya to return. Fourteen years of exile
had been the demand of the of the king’s wife who had sought such of the king
who perished in agony on account of such separation from his son. Bharat , the
younger brother did not assume kingship
and had approached his elder brother to return from exile but Rama would not let his demised father down
and asserted that he would not return unless the pledge his father had made to
Kaikeyi his second wife had been redeemed . Having failed in his prayers to
seek Rama’s return, Bharata begged for his sandals and as he returned to Ayodhya
placed the same on the throne as a symbol of Ram’s presence and guidance to
Ayodhya.
When the period of exile was over Bharata took back his elder
brothers and Sita back to Ayodhya to a rousing welcome of the citizens. Rama
was crowned king of Ayodhya . As Rama went about the business of his
kingdom a washer man questioned the chastity of Mother Sita . Despite great
personal agony and of the people, Rama yielded to the opinion of the last man
in his kingdom, though the washer man’s opinion did not constitute the opinion
of the majority. Sita was now decreed to give “Agni Pareeksha “, sit on a pyre
of fire to prove her chastity. This act of Rama became the questionable
contradiction which could be justified on the crucible of emotion and
traditions but perhaps not on the crucible of reason that became the edifice of
later day jurisprudence.
Kingships demised, kings were gone, in time India became a
democracy where jurisprudence was not to be guided by emotions based on here
say, which sources public opinion. It took more than twenty years for the
Bofors scam to be established, it never was. Law of the land found it
otherwise. Urgency for building a temple to Ram ebbs each time the advocates of such, garner ballots in his
name. The media sites and the news channels are littered with folktales about
scams, yet to be established. If the ultimate recourse is law then what purpose
does any propagandist trial of any individual outside its domain, serve? Faiths
fight and the Lord wonders at the irreligious division of His grace, the source
of life in all inert , uninvolved and undiminished. The inhuman dwell in
indignity dirtying each other’s linen in a manner which undermines the values
that make human a human, a conduct which runs contrary to the traits of the
ideal man “ Maryada Purushottam Rama “ with no setting of values for guidance
of posterity.
