Delhi University BA (Hons.) text says Ramayana fallacious

January 14, 2008

New Delhi: Author even sorts out a tale from Santhal folklore and puts forth the greatest outrage to Hindu psyche before the students of literature that Ravan as well as Lakshman both seduced Sita. No one on Earth so far dared to question the character of Sita so brazenly as Shri Ramanunjan has done, though, all through under the convenient cover of a folklore!

Sorting and picking out anything negative found in different versions of Ramayana spread all over the world with malicious intention has become a practice under the UPA. Despite the repeated protests by Hindu leaders, Shiksha Bharati and Shiksha Bachao Andolan, the practice still continues. In a latest instance, the Delhi University for its BA (Hons) second year course has included portions defaming and denigrating the characters of Lord Ram, Hanuman, Lakshman and Sita and projecting the entire episode as fallacious, capricious, imaginary and fake.

In a letter addressed to the Vice Chancellor, Delhi University, Shri Deepak Paintal, former head of Political Science Department in Meerut College, Meerut University and convener of Gyan Parishad, an association of academicians, professionals and social activists, Dr K.C. Gupta pointed out the outrageous contents in history books of BA (Hons) second year and BA (Pass) first year.

The chapter 'Three hundred Ramayanas' written by Shri A.K. Ramanujan in Readings for Concurent Course, Culture in Ancient India as compiled by Dr Upinder Singh, Department of History, Delhi University (BA Hons. second year) has denigrated Sri Ram, Hanuman, Lakshman and Sita and projected the entire episode as false. In another book for BA (Pass) first year, Foundation Course of Delhi University, Section 1, Relationship between Laws and Women, the authors—Shashi Motilal and Bijayalaxmi Nanda—have made very unhealthy and discriminatory remarks against women.

The Shiksha Bachao Andolan has announced a countrywide agitation against this distortion.

Prof. Gupta says he would like to draw VC's kind attention to the above mentioned course and the chapter 'Three Hundred Ramayanas' therein and to express his horror, dismay and disbelief that such a course book containing so volatile, and provocative material offending religious beliefs of hundreds of millions of Hindus all over the world, deliberately and mischievously composed, has found favour and currency with VC's university!

"We have highlighted some of the obnoxious lines, though the entire write-up is replete with provocative material. A copy of the same is enclosed for your kind perusal," he adds.

The chapter starts with a query that how many Ramayanas are there, and then a story (without indicating its source) is cited wherein Hanuman is described as 'henchman' of Lord Ram and then again as a 'tiny monkey'. In this story it is narrated that once Lord Ram's ring had fallen in a hole which reached to a kingdom below and Hanuman, in search of the ring, goes down and is caught and placed on a platter and presented before the king of spirits down below. Then a platter full of rings is presented to Hanuman and he is asked to trace the missing ring and is ridiculed to learn that every time a new Ram sits on throne, he loses his ring which in turn is collected by the king of spirits, and that there are as many Ramayanas as there are rings on the platter.

To any person of belief this story will appear to be outrageous, purposely implanted to belittle the Hindu psyche. Derogatory words like "henchman" and "tiny monkey" about Lord Hanuman who is worshipped by young and old alike throughout the length and breadth of India and overseas are just appalling.

Then the story of Ahilya has been picked and chosen to show that how king of gods, Indra, was base in character and the great rishi Gautam was no less in cursing him in the horrible way he did; so much so, that in one telling he curses that Indra's testicles fall to the ground and then, on the plea of other gods led by Agni rani's (animal) testicles are grafted in lieu of the originals rendering the event vulgar and distasteful while in the other telling of Kampan, a thousand vaginas cover the body of Indra.

By any reckoning, one can imagine what impression these selected pieces will make upon the impressionable minds of second year students, both male and female. Will the whole katha of Ramayana not be reduced to joke and mockery by presenting these poems before the class? Will it not embarrass the students and the teacher alike? Could such a piece be not avoided in the interest of, at least, decorum?

Though the author, Shri A.K. Ramanunjam, has tried to justify the presentation to show the difference in version of specific incidents in Valmiki and Kampan, but prima facie, it appears mischievous and purposely done to degrade the great epic in the eyes of modern youth and inculcate in them a spirit of hatred, repulsion and revolt against their own ancient culture. The motive appears to be either to make them atheist or agnostic and to convert them thoroughly materialistic as communists do.

The author goes on with his venture and narrates how Jains treat Ram, Ravan and Sita. He does not hesitate to dig out a theory that according to this thought Sita was even daughter of Ravan and confuses Hindu mind that it was Lakshman who actually killed Ravan and not Ram.

Shri Ramanunjan does not stop here, he brings in even oral ballads of South Indian folk into literature and cites the ballad as sung by 'tamburis' of Kannada. As per this Ravan called Ravula there, had no child. He along with his queen Mandodri went to forest and did intense tapasya. Lord Shiva appeared as jogi and gave him a mango to be eaten by his queen after certain rituals. Ravan, instead, ate the fruit himself and became pregnant. The poem detailing month-wise condition of pregnancy has also been cited.

Eventually, Ravan, out of public shame, gives birth to Sita through nasal sneeze (Sita meaning sneeze in Kannada). Ravan, out of sheer disgust then leaves Sita in the fields of king Janak!

Author even sorts out a tale from Santhal folklore and puts forth the greatest outrage to Hindu psyche before the students of literature that Ravan as well as Lakshman both seduced Sita. No one on Earth so far dared to question the character of Sita so brazenly as Shri Ramanunjan has done, though, all through under the convenient cover of a folklore!

How Ramayana called Ramkein in Thailand manipulates the episode also does not escape the vigil of our learned author. Here, he finds something to grossly denigrate Hanuman. According to this story: "Hanuman is quite a ladies' man, who does not at all mind looking into the bedrooms of Lanka and doesn't consider seeing another man's sleeping wife any thing immoral."

While describing thoughts on translation, author, on page 158 questions the very existence of Ramayana in a unique way by mocking at the very root of Hindu faith. In his own words: "A folk legend says that Hanuman wrote the original Ramayana on a mountain-lop, after the great war, and scattered the manuscript: it was many times larger than what we have now. Valmiki is said to have captured only a fragment of it. In the sense, no text original, yet no telling is a mere telling and the story has no closure, although it may be enclosed in a text. In India and in SEA, no one ever reads the Ramayana or Mahabharat for the last time. The stories are there, always ready."

Here even a folklore has been made the basis of and penned to shatter the erstwhile impregnable belief. How mischievous, how cheap!

On page 156 the author comes out stark naked with his own conclusion about the episode and the major characters exposing his mind-set and intention to the hilt. In his words: "Now is there a common core to the Ram stories, except the most skeletal set of relations like that of Ram, his brother, his wife and the antagonist Ravana who abducts her? Are the stories bound together only by certain family resemblances, as Wittgenstein might say? Or is it like Aristotle's jack-knife? When the philosopher asked an old carpenter how long he had had his knife, the latter said, 'Oh! I have had it for thirty years. I have changed the blade a few times and the handle a few times, but it is the same knife.' Some shadow of a relational structure claims the name of Ramayana for all these things, but on a closure look one is not all that like another. Like a collection of people with the same proper name, they make a class in name alone."

This approach is total negation of the greatest episode and attack on an article of faith and a sort of blasphemy.

These extracts have been cited here just as an example to give one an idea as to how and, probably, why, only negative, derogatory, humiliating and often outrageous pieces have been sorted out by Shri Ramanunjan though the entire write-up highlights only negative and defamatory tellings, through and through, which will not be difficult for one to grasp even on a casual reading. It is amazing that his genius could find no positive material supporting or alleviating Hindu psyche and tradition! Unless one is bent upon denigrating a particular thought, culture or belief, such a negative and perverse attitude is not expected by a litterateur, especially, in the background of ethos of Hindu culture.

One is well aware, how small distortion about Ram by Karunanidhi has brought furor in the whole of the country. One can well appreciate what potential, full throated abuse of all spiritual personalities like Ram, Lakshman, Sita and Hanuman, does have and what disaster it can bring to the GDP rise and send development to back burner!

Our esteemed Constitution does not permit violation of any breach of 'freedom of religion' and certainly scandalizing one's belief is the breach of this fundamental right. Indian Penal Code has specific provisions against this violation. Many petitions have been filed under these provisions, and will be filed, if a breach is not remedied.

Distortions in B.A. Pass Foundation Course (Section 1, Relationship between laws and women) read like this. We are quoting from the text verbatim:

"The relationship between laws and women is an extremely complex one. The evolution of laws from time immemorial has shown sexually discriminatory practices. Women did not have the right to vote, or the right to separate property. A married woman had no legal existence in the eyes of law. The rights of the husband over the wife included the right to punish and discipline her. The right to work, equal pay for equal work, the right to political participation have been gained in small measures after long and bitter struggles by women. This sexually discriminatory rules of law continue to be a fact of life even today not only in India, but also in the West.

"Rousseau, the famous French philosopher who was the guiding force behind the French Revolution, regarded women as secondary to men. Alfred Tennyson wrote, "Woman is the lesser man". Hobbes and Locke, eminent political thinkers who were advocates of equality regarded women as devoid of nationality and consequently not to be treated at par with men.

"In India, religious texts and political treatises also did not accord the same legal status to women. The Rigveda regards the birth of a daughter as a curse. It also equates a woman to a dog, cow and a shudra. A woman is considered bereft of intelligence.

"The Atharva Veda regards marriage as necessary for producing offspring i.e., sons only and women are considered as property.

"The Maitrajini Samhita places women at par with gambling, drinking and such other vices. The Manusmriti says that a woman should not be free and should always be controlled by her father, husband or son. However, it was largely the Hindu law with its brahmanical tilt, which was discriminatory towards women. Various customary practices amongst lower castes and tribals were egalitarian and accorded women equal status and the right to property and divorce.

"However, during the colonial period only the regressive parts of the practices were highlighted while the progressive features were suppressed, in a move to 'civilise' the people. The Britishers imposed a legal system, which was far removed from the realities of the situation. It did not proactively engage with the status and situation of women in India but brought in ideas of Victorian morality. The laws imposed by the colonial rulers legitimized and re-enforced the patriarchal ideas and Victorian norms which were discriminatory towards women.

"After Independence both procedural and 'substantive' equality were enshrined in the Constitution of India. Not only were women granted equal rights with men but in order to overcome the existing inequalities in Indian society special provisions for the welfare of women (and children) were created.

"Irrespective of this, discrimination and distinction in law remains."

This letter was sent to DU Vice Chancellor jointly by Justice N.S. Gupta, retired Judge, Allahabad High Court, Dr S.K. Mitta, retired Head of the Department of History, Meerut College, Meerut University and Shri C.P. Gupta, retired Chief Engineer of UP Power Corporation. We are yet to hear from University authorities.

Source: www.organizer.org

Also Read
» Defamations : Abuse on Hinduism
» Save Ram Setu