Sunday dusk, at the Marina beach. Near the police booth next to
the Gandhi statue. A lady was dissolving into hysterics. An occasional gasping
howl.
Most of us didn't know what was going on. Maybe somebody had
stolen her purse. Or worse, molested her.
The young policemen next to her looked about helplessly. Someone
gave her a bottle of water, which she gulped; but spilt most of it on the
grass.
There was a man holding a child next to her. He was quietly
talking to another policeman. The lady started howling and ran here and there
among the grass, screaming at the sky and the sea.
I looked at her in confusion, as did some of the public. My
cousin's wife, standing next to me, muttered, "I think she lost a
kid".
Oh God. The man with the small child must be the father. He has
to look for his other child, without losing his grip on this one. Or his grip
on sanity, as his wife was slowly going to pieces.
A sea of humanity, full of life, our beloved Marina, suddenly
seemed a terrifying dark abyss. What do you do in this scenario? Could the
police lock down the beach? Not a chance. Could they search for and find the
child? What are the odds? Could we help? Or would we make it worse, if we
tried?
The policemen must see something like this every time there is a
large public gathering. What would be the psychological effect on them, if they
had to see or experience something like this once or twice a month?
Our media, social consciousness, society often portray the
police as heartless or brutal. Or incompetent. Or corrupt.
The woman at the beach had come a complete circle, still shaking
and in tears. The man with the child was just standing there and slowly looking
about. There were two policemen, one inside, one outside the booth doing
nothing. Is our media and film industry correct? Are these guys in khaki
uniforms just thugs working for white veshti crooks?
I remembered a school day incident when I came home at 8pm
instead of 4.30 because I was angry with my father for scolding me severely
that morning. I only returned home because I didn't know where else to go. My
anger hadn't cooled, I wasn't hungry, I wasn't tired. I came back home because
I didn't know what else to do. I spent the time between 4 and 8 in Nageshvara
Rao Park. I rarely ever went inside the park, even though I walked past it back
from school every evening. My favorite place was the playground across my
house. If my parents had to search for me, where would they look?
Anyway, when I returned home, my father said nothing. I don't
remember his expression. My mother wondered why I was so late but immediately
laid out a plate and served dinner. I don't remember either parents'
expression. I was too self absorbed in my own righteousness and justified
anger. Only my grandmother was expressive, but I only vaguely remember her
happiness. It is one of the great fortunes of my life that I don't remember
much about the incident.
All this flashed through my mind as the drama played out on the
beach. I wanted to leave, I didn't want to know how this tragedy would unfold.
That kid would never be found... He would be exploited by a beggar gang or
worse a criminal gang. Or worse.....Irresponsible parents, useless police, I
thought. Even if they wanted to help what the hell could they do?
A policeman in a khaki uniform came running up the grass with a
child in his arm. The woman screamed at the child in Telugu. I don't know the
words, but we all understood......Where did your run away...after all, its the
child's fault, he was irresponsible.
Apparently some of our police can do the impossible. They can
find a needle in a haystack, a lost child in a sea of humanity, in the dusk, in
fading light, when we can barely see each other.
There was no applause. Nobody yelled at the woman. The father
didn't collapse in emotion. The rescued child didn't cry. The policemen did not
get any public appreciation. No cameras flashed though everyone had a mobile
phone. No journalist showed up. The policemen didn't break out into smiles of
relief and pat each other on the back. The watching people went back to their
previous activities.
This is a timeline (broad and imprecise) of the dynasties that rule Orissa,with a similar timeline of they dynasties that ruled Tamilnadu concurrently, as historians have reconstructed from inscriptions on monuments, copper plates, literary sources, coins etc.
A broad and imprecise timeline
Orissa (which was called Kalinga until about the twelfth century) and Tamilnadu have some interesting historical connections, though they are separated by the Andhra Pradesh geographically, roughly a 700 km length of land, with its own history. The most famous in Tamil is the 12th century epic Kalingaththu Barani, which narrates the march of the army of Kulothunga Chola to conquer Kalinga. Orissa has its own legend of the Kanchi-Kaveri raja, a fifteenth century king of the Gajapati dynasty, who invaded Tamilnadu and forcibly married a princess of Kanchi. Remarkably two of the largest temples in Orissa, Lingaraj in Bhubaneshvar and Jagannath in Puri were rebuilt by Choda Ganga kings of Kulothunga's lineage. The largest, Konarak, was built by another Choda Ganga king Vira Narasimha Deva. The name Choda Ganga itself derives from the eponymous title of Rajendra Chola, Gangai Konda Chola - the Chola who conquered the land of the Ganga (Vanga or Bengal), after conquering Kalinga on the way.
The researches of British archaeologists in the nineteenth century, especially the decipherment of Brahmi by James Prinsep, led to discoveries of ancient connections. Evidence of the Maurya king Samrat Asoka's invasion and conquest of Kalinga, is found in the Prakritam inscription at Dhauli near Bhubaneshvar. Asoka mentions Choda (Chola), Pada (Pandya), Keralaputra (Chera) and Satyaputra in his inscriptions, which are the earliest non-Tamil evidence of these contemporaries, and dynasties of the Sangam age in Tamilnadu. Ironically, most of the Sangam literature referring to this period, including a reference to "Vamba Moriyar" (the new Mauryas), had been lost in collective Tamil memory and were rediscovered by U.Ve. Swaminatha Iyer, a hundred years after Prinsep's rediscovery of Asoka and the Mauryas.
The inscriptions of Kharavela, a king of the Mahameghavana dynasty, was also deciphered by Prinsep, though subject to later reinterpretations by Cunningham and others. Among several contemporaries, Kharavela claims to have destroyed a 113 year old federation of Tamils (Tamira desha sangaatha) and having conquered Chodas (Cholas) and Padas (Pandyas) and brought back their treasures, including baskets of pearls, carried by elephants.
The histories of Shailodbhava, Bhaumakara and Somavamshi dynasties, comes almost entirely from copper plates, and an inscription in the Brahmeshvara temple in Bhubaneshvar, now reported as lost (how!?) or alternatively, moved to the Calcutta (and lost in Calcutta, maybe).
I thank Shyam C Raman, who prepared a better, more informative
timeline for the THT Orissa Site Seminar, from which I have borrowed the
information. Thanks also to Ramki J, for
the Kharavela video.
Most of
us who have gone to school, know of Pythagoras, Archimedes, and Euclid as the
famous mathematicians of ancient Greece. Some of us have heard of other great
mathematicians like Eratosthenes, Hipparchus, Apollonius, Aristarchus, etc.
But, Thales?
Most schools
of the world today, I suspect, teach science and mathematics from a predominantly
European syllabus. This is partly an effect of European colonization of most of
Asia and Africa, and dimunition of native populations in the Americas and
Australia, in the eighteenth, nineteenth
and twentieth centuries of the Christian calendar.
I am
currently reading a book titled “Archimedes”
by Thomas Little Heath, originally published in 1920, on Kindle. It is a free
download, and part of a Men of Science series.
“Greek
authors from Heredotus downwards (meaning, after him) agree in saying that
geometry was invented by the Egyptians and that it came into Greece from Egypt,”
writes Heath.
He
quotes an account : “Geometry is said to have been invented among Egyptians,
its orgin being due to the measurement of plots of land. This was necessary
because of the rising of the Nile, which obliterated (erased) boundaries
appertaining to separate owners…. Thales first went to Egypt and thence
introduced this study into Greece.”
What we
know today as the Pythagoras theorem, about the hypotenuse of right angled triangles,
is listed as Proposition 47 in Volume I of Euclid’s “Elements”, the standard European and Arab book of mathematics from
the first to eighteenth centuries. The word Elements
is the Greek word for Numbers, which
in the eighteenth century was adopted into French, English etc for the most basic
objects in Chemistry. The word Geometry is formed from two words Geo (Earth)
and Metry (measurement). The Sanskrit word for measurement is Maatra. Greek and Sanskrit are part of the
Indo European language family, so these words originate from the same root. The
Sanskrit word for geometry is Shulba Sutra. Shulba is the Sanskrit word for
rope or string; the earliest surviving books are not aboutland measurement or business but measurement
of altars for yajnas. Parallelly, jyotishaas (astronomers) developed a different
stream of mathematics to determine time based on the movement of celestial
objects.
“Thales,
who had travelled in Egypt and there learnt what the priests could teach him on
the subject, introduced GeoMetry into Greece. Almost the whole of Greek science
and philosophy begins withThales. His
dae was about 624-547 B.C. First of the Ionian philosophers, and declared one
of the Seven Wise Men in 582-581, he shone in all fields, as astronomer,
mathematician, engineer, statesman and man of business,” says Heath.
What fascinated
me is what follows, which is Heath’s listing of the contributions of Thales to
mathematics and astronomy.
In Astronomy,
Thales:
Predicted
the solar eclipse of 28 May, 585 BC
Discovered
the inequality of the four astronomical seasons
Counselled
the use of the Little Bear instead of the Great Bear as a means of finding the
pole (i.e. North Pole)
In Geometry,
the following theorems are attributed to Thales:
That a
circle is bisected by any diameter
That the
angles at the base of an isoceles triangle are equal
That if
two straight lines cut one another, the vertically opposite angles are equal
That if
two triangles have two angles and one side respectively equal, the triangles
are equal in all respects (what we now
called Side-Angle-Side congruency)
Was first
to inscribed a right angled triangle in a circle, which means he was first to
discover that the angle in a semi circle is a right angle.
Thales
also solved two problems in practical geometry
He
showed how to measure the distance from the land, of a ship at sea (using
Proposition 4 above)
He
measured heights of pyramids by means of the shadow thrown on the ground
Heath
adds, “Their character (of the theorems) shows how the Greeks had to begin at
the very beginning of the theory.”
Thales
was a practical man, a businessman, and indulged in theoretical excursions perhaps
as a pasttime. Pythagoras came a generation after him, and founded a school of
mathematics. Euclid’s famous Elements is dated to the first century, AD, six
hundred years after Thales. Pythagoras was interested in Mathematics as a
leisure activity and an intellectual pursuit. So were most of this followers; his
students and such people who pursued Geometry as an intellectual pursuit were
collectively called the Pythagoreans. They coined the Greek word Mathemata (μάθήμάτα)
from which comes the English tatbhava word Mathematics. The Greek word
Mathemata literally means “Subjects of Instruction”.
Both
Thales and Pythagoras traveled extensively around and past the shores of the
Mediterranean sea, not just Egypt. Other historians of mathematics conjecture
that Pythagoras traveled to Persia and perhaps even India. Ancient Greeks
themselves acknowledge the Egyptian origins of their mathematics. Through
formal and inductive methods, and intellectual pursuits, the Greeks elevated
mathematics to a much higher levels, especially in Geometry. Strangely very few
people of the Roman Empire that succeeded Hellenic Greece did not continue in
this path, though the Persians and central Asians who acquired Greek books via
Alexander of Macedonia’s conquest, did. Europe almost entirely abandoned
mathematics and science for a millennium, until the emergence of Italian city
states and Fibonacci’s ventures to Baghdad.
Pythagoras
is introduced to us as the fountainhead of Greek mathematics, just as Aryabhata
or some Vedic rishis are mentioned as the fountainhead of Indian mathematics. No
mention is made at all of the Egyptian origins of Greek mathematics. Similarly
while there are some references to Greeks and Romans in Indian mathematical texts,
especially of Varahamihira, in those times, there was no attempt at studying
the history of mathematics or acknowledging foreign elements borrowed.
I find
Thales a fascinating character, more so perhaps than even Varahamihira. He
reminds me of Benjamin Franklin, Antoine Lavoisier and Sir William Jones. And
Mahendra Varma Pallava.
I
strongly recommend Heath’s biography of Archimedes, from which I have excerpted.
The list of his books and their titles also tell you what the level of
mathematics was in Hellenic Greece. I also hope to read some biography of
Apollonius, whom Simon-Pierre Laplace equates with Archimedes as the great
mathematicians of ancient times.
On a
linguistic note, you can read each letter in the word μάθήμάτα based on Greek
letters use in modern mathematics texts – mu,
alpha, theta, eta, mu, alpha, tau, alpha. Notice that Greek has separate
letters θ and τ for thaत த
and taट ட like Sanskrit and Tamil, whereas
English doesn’t. So English has to use two letters th for the equivalent of
theta or त த. That’s another story for another occasion, another
blog.
There
seem to be some pictures or sculptures of Thales, though I don’t know if they
are authentic.
Thales - source : Wikipedia
This one is from Wikipedia. Several Greek philosophers kings and
others were depicted in paintings on vases, stone sculptures, bronzes, etc.
Unfortunately such depictions in India were rare before the Gupta period; any
pictures you see of mathematicians like Aryabhata, Bhaskara, or Varahamihira
are entirely the product of recent artists’ imaginations.
தீவுத்திடலில்
ஜூன் 2016 நடந்த சென்னை புத்தக கண்காட்சியில் சென்னை
நகரத்து நூலகங்கள் என்ற தலைப்பில் உரையாற்ற நண்பர்கள் பிரதீப் சக்கரவர்த்தியும்
பிரியா தியாகராசனும் பபாசி நிறுவனத்தின் சார்பில் கேட்டனர். மகிழ்ந்தே ஒப்புக்கொண்டேன்.
ஒரு சில நூலகங்களுக்கு சென்று, அங்குள்ள அலுவலர்களோடு பேசி, சில தகவல்களை சேகரித்தேன்.
சிறு வயதிலேயே கன்னிமாரா நூலகத்திற்கு என் தாய் புஷ்பாவுடன் சென்றுள்ளேன். அம்மா எத்திராஜ்
கல்லூரியில் எம்.ஃபில். பொருளியல் படித்துவந்தாள். சில சனிஞாயிறு அன்று கன்னிமாரா செல்லும்போது
என்னையும் அழைத்துச்செல்வாள்.
கன்னிமாரா நூலக புதிய கட்டத்தில்
கன்னிமாரா நூலக பழைய கட்டத்தில்
மதறாஸ் இலக்கிய சங்க நூலகம்
அக்காலத்தில்
தமிழ் படிக்கும் ஆர்வமேதும் இல்லை. குமுதம் கல்கி ஆனந்தவிகடன் பத்திரிகைகளில் வரும்
துணுக்கு ஓவியங்களை (கார்ட்டூன்) மட்டும் படித்து ரசிப்பேன். எப்பொழுதாவது பாக்கியம்
ராமசாமியின் அப்புசாமி கதைகளை வாசித்து காட்டுவாள்; ரசகுண்டு பேரை கேட்டாலே சிரிப்பு
வரும். எனக்கு ஒன்பது வயதிருக்கும். ஆங்கிலத்தில் படிப்பதிலும் ஆர்வமில்லை. ஆனால் சென்னையிலிருந்து
புனே செல்லும் ரயிலில், பொழுது போக்க யாரோ கருடன் எனும் அமர் சித்ர கதா ஓவியக்கதையை
(காமிக் புத்தகம்) வாங்கி கொடுக்க, காமிக்புக் மோகம் பிறந்தது. ஆங்கிலம் மட்டுமே. முப்பது
வயது வரை தமிழில் ஆர்வம் வரவில்லை.
சிறுவயதில்
தந்தையுடன் ஓரிரு முறை மயிலை ரணாடே நூலகத்திற்கு சென்றுள்ளேன் – ஏதோ ஒரிரு மாலை வேளை
ஏதாவது சில மாதாந்திர பத்திரிகை அல்ல செய்தித்தாளை படிக்க போவார். அதன் வாசலில் நிற்கும்
நடமாடும் தபால்வண்டியை (சிவப்பு வேன்) ஒரு முறை அவர் காட்டினார். வாய்பிளந்தேன்.
கடந்த
சில வருடங்களாய் கோட்டூர்புரம் அண்ணா நூற்றாண்டு நினைவு நூலகத்திலும் அடையாறு கே.வி.சர்மா
நூலக்த்திலும் பற்பல நாட்கள் நாலைந்து மணிநேரம் படிக்கும் இன்பத்தில் மூழ்கியுள்ளேன்.
உவேசா நூலகத்திற்கு நரசையா அழைத்து சென்று தமிழ் தாத்தாவின் கையெழுத்தும் சன்னதும்
ஓலைச்சுவடிகளையும் ரவீந்திரநாத் தாகூர் எழுதிய வாழ்த்தையும் பார்த்தது மறக்க முடியாத
திருநாள். அங்கு நண்பர் உத்திராடம் பணியாற்றி வருகிறார்; அவரைக் கண்டதும் ஒரு இன்ப
அதிர்ச்சி. அவர் சென்னை கிறுத்துவ கல்லூரி பேராசிரியர் பாலுசாமியின் மாணவர்; பல முறை
பேசி பழகியுள்ளோம். உவேசா நூலகத்தை பற்றிய பல தகவல்களை அளித்ததுடன், தே.சிவகணேஷ், ஐ.சிவகுமார்
எழுதிய “சென்னை நூலகங்கள்” என்ற புத்தகத்தையும் காட்டினார். கைத்தல நிறைகனி! எல்லா
நூலகத்திலும் வாசலிலே வரவேற்கும் மாவிலைத் தோரணம் போல இந்நூலை காட்சி வைக்கலாம்.
இருளில் ஒலித்த குரல்
ஒளிமயமான பிரதீப் உரை
நண்பர்கள் ராம்கி, சேவாலயா முரளிதரன், காந்தி நிலையம் அண்ணாமலை ஆகியோர் அறிவுருத்தி சைதை காந்தி நூலகம் பற்றி அறிந்தேன். அதன் நிறுவனர் மகாலிங்கத்தின்
மகன் நித்தியானந்தரை பலமுறை டக்கர் பாப்பா காந்தி நிலையத்தில் புதன்கிழமை நூலாய்வுகளில்
சந்தித்துள்ளேன். மகாலிங்கம் ஆச்சரியமானவர். கல்கி, ராஜாஜி, மாபொசி, ராஜம் ராமசாமி,
கண்ணதாசன், பரளி சு நெல்லியப்பர் என்ற பல ஜாம்பவான்கள் தன் நூலகத்திற்கு வந்த வரலாற்று
சம்பவங்களை பேசி நெகிழ வைத்தார்.
அதே போல் திருவல்லிக்கேணி கஸ்தூரி ஸ்ரீநிவாசன் நூலகத்து
நிறுவனர்கள் நரசிம்மன்னும் பார்த்தசாரதியும் அன்பாக பேசியதோடு, இதே ஜாம்பவான்கள் தங்கள்
நூலகத்துக்கு வந்ததை சொல்லி அசரவைத்தனர். எம்.எஸ்.விசுவனாதனுக்கு “மெல்லிசை மன்னர்”
என்ற பட்டத்தை அளித்ததே இவர்களது திருவல்லிக்கேணி கலாச்சார மன்றமே என்று தெரிந்ததும்,
நூலகத்தில் புத்தகத்தை தாண்டி எத்தனை அதிசயங்கள் உள்ளன என்பதை புரியவைத்தது.
அந்நாளில்
சேப்பாக்கத்தில் சென்னை பல்கலைக்கழக வளாகத்தில் இயங்கிய அரசு கீழ்திசை சுவடி நூலகத்திற்கு
சென்றபோது, அதன் இயக்குனர் சந்திரமோகன் அவர்களே பொறுத்து பல தகவல்களை அளித்தார். இந்த
சுவடி நூலகம் சமீபத்தில் கோட்டூர்புரம் அண்ணா நூலகத்திற்கு இடம் மாறியுள்ளது. வரலாற்று
புகழோடு அரிதான களஞ்சியமாக திகழும் நூலகம் என்பதால், ஓலைச்சுவடிகளையும் அவற்றின் பாதுகாப்பு
முறைகளையும் படமெடுத்துக்கொள்ளலாமா என்று அனுமதி கேட்டேன். மறுத்துவிட்டார். ஆனால்
தன்னுடைய கணினியில் வைத்திருந்த படங்களை படமெடுக்க அனுமதித்தார். அடுத்த நாள் அடையாறு
நூலகமும் இதைப்போல் அனுமதி மறுத்தது. பின்னாளில் அடையாறு நதி வரலாற்று தேடலின் போது
நண்பர் வெங்கடேஷ் ராமகிருஷ்ணன் அனுமதி பெற்று, அடையாறு நூலகத்து அரிய நூல்களையும் பார்க்கும்
வாய்ப்பு கிடைத்தது. முகமதிய நூலகத்தின் மேலாளரை பார்த்து தகவல்கள் பெற்றுக்கொள்ள நண்பர்
கோம்பை அன்வர் அறிவுருத்தினார். மூன்று முறை சென்றும் அவரை சந்திக்க முடியவில்லை. மயிலை
ராமகிருஷ்ண மடத்து நூலகத்திலும் மேலாளர் சென்ற போது இல்லை, அவர் அனுமதியின்றி ஒன்றும்
செய்ய முடியவில்லை, படம் கூட எடுக்கவில்லை.
ஒரு
மணி நேர உரைக்கு தயாரான பின் நாற்பது நிமிடமாக சுருங்கியது. கொஞ்சம் வேகவேகமாக பேசினேன்.
1950களோடு நிறுத்திக்கொள்ளும் நிலமை, சில நூலகங்களை பற்றி பேச இயலவில்லை. இணையமே இன்று
அனைவருக்கும் நூலகமாயினும், காகித புத்தக நூலகங்கள் வழக்கொழியவில்லை.
காணொளி
பதிவாகவில்லை என்பதால் ஒலிப்பதிவுடன் படங்களை சேர்த்து காணொளியை நான் படைத்து இணையத்தில்
ஏற்றியுள்ளேன். கீழே காணலாம்.
வத்தல்குழம்பு
சம்பவம், சின்ன மழையில் தவித்தாலும் பெருவெள்ளத்தில் தப்பித்த நூலகம், ஆங்கிலேய உவேசா
என்று அழைக்க தகுந்தவர் யார், எகிப்து மன்னர் கொடுத்த பரிசு, நூலகவியலின் தந்தை, அவர்
வகுத்த ஐந்து விதிகள், தமிழில் மருத்துவ நூலை எழுதிய அமெரிக்கர், சிவலிங்க வடிவிலுள்ள
ஓலைச்சுவடி நூல், திபெத்திய திபிதகம் என்று பல சுவையான தகவல்கள் இவ்வுரையாய்வு தேடலின்
போது கிடைத்தன. இதையெல்லாம் காணொளியில் பார்க்கலாம். இந்த நூலகங்களுக்கு நேரில் சென்றும்
காணலாம்.
S Kannan labelled a “scholar
in hiding” by my friend, V Chandrasekar, reviewed the book Siriyana Sindhiyaadhaan, a Tamil book by Dr S Ramakrishnan, at
Gandhi Study Center in Thyagaraya Nagar on Wednesday, May 30, 2018. This book
was written in the 1950s.
Here are my notes from
his review.
He introduced the
author Dr S Ramakrishnan as a Marxist scholar, a Shakespeare scholar and
connoisseur of Tamil literature. He spoke English as fluently as we speak
Tamil, said Kannan – implying that he was very fluent in English. This book is
a literary work; we have not discussed literary books of late in the Gandhi
Study Center, he gently chided.
S Kannan
The author is not to
be mistaken with the better known S Ramakrishnan, a contemporary Tamil novelist.
The subject of the book was an episode from the Ramayana, Vaali Vadham (Killing of Vaali). The death of Vali is a minor
episode in Ramayana, and is often considered the black mark in the character of
Rama, otherwise considered the epitome of Dharma. The author examines this
major deviation, the motivations behind the conduct of the various characters,
their argument and their justifications, and how the public should understand
these contradictions. This has been a long running debate in Indian society.
Kannan characterised Vali
Vadham beautifully as “a dramatic interlude in an epic poem”. The episode can
be compared with a Shakespearean play, high strung with emotion and animated disputes
and debates, and a tragedy unfolding with foreshadowing and inevitability.
Dr Ramakrishnans skill
with words is the remarkable aspect of this book. Quoting a lament of Angadhan,
Kannan says, the book tries to discusses the morality or legality of the
killing of Vali. When Rama and Lashmana kill Kabandhan, he thanks them for
relieving him from the curse and advises them that they cannot defeat the
kidnapper of Sita without a strong ally and suggests that Sugreeva is the most
suitable ally. Neither Kabandhan nor Sabari recommended Vali, but only
Sugreeva. This is significant, notes the author.
Earlier, when Vali
fights an asura in a cave and blood oozes out, his ministers advice Sugreeva that
most likely Vali is dead, so he must seal the cave and rule the kingdom. A
reluctant Sugreeva aregues against their advice, but is then persuaded to heed
it. When Vali returns, having killed the asura, he feels betrayed by Sugreeva,
and storms back full of vengeance. He pays no heed to Sugreeva’s pleas,
explanations, apology or immediate offer of the crown, or his dharmic
explanation that he only followed his minister's advice. Sugreeva flees to hide
in a hill, fearful for his life. Vali takes back not only the crown but also
Sugreeva’s wife Rumaa Taara, for his own. It is this pitiable Sugreeva, hiding in the
one place where Vali is powerless because of a rishi’s curse, whom Rama and
Lakshmana encounter in their search for the kidnapped Sita.
Rama promises to
restore both crown and wife to Sugreeva. Did Rama do so in an emotional
outburst, having lost his own wife and feeling a kindred sympathy? Even so, the
kingdom was rightfully only Vali’s. How could Rama offer Sugreeva the crown
too? Did Rama who renounced his own kingdom at the mere word of his father, feel
a greater sting at the injustice meted out to Sugreeva than to his own self?
Worse, Rama offers to kill
Vali, not merely defeat him and restore the kingdom. Where was the need to kill
Vali? But Sugreeva had realized that only the death of Vali would make Sugreeva
safe again or get back his wife. His trusted minister Hanuman employed
diplomacy at its finest to explain this to Rama.
The author argues that
Kishkinda is an undeveloped (in Kannan’s words) society which is why both Vali
and Sugreevan reacted with murderous rage than righteousness (dharmic conduct).
By undeveloped, I suspect the author implies that it is less socially evolved than
Kosala.
The next contradiction
is the different standards that Rama applied for Vali versus Ravana. Why did
Rama, who offered several opportunities to Ravana to repair his conduct and restore
Sita, and offered not to kill Ravana if he complied, not undertake any such
effort with Vali? Why didn't he even send a messenger?
How could he decide on
a death sentence for Vali, unilaterally? Was this conduct of Rama any more “evolved”?
Taking Rama at his
word, Sugreeva challenges Vali. An enraged Vali is ready to rush out to battle,
but is restrained by Tara – unfolding more drama. Foreboding disaster for her
husband, Tara, Vali's queen, counsels caution and evaluation.
Her spies, she says, have informed her that Sugreeva has acquired a formidable friend
called Rama, and Vali’s life may be in danger from this new enemy; and that he has
to be cautious in dealing with Sugreeva's latest efforts to rile him.
It is Vali’s response,
that elevates him to unparalleled moral heights – and tragically, his downfall.
Defending Rama, Vali
tells Tara she is ignorant of the character and nobility of Rama who threw away
his kingdom for an oath.
Will Dharma kill
itself, retorts Vali, for Rama is the personification of Dharma? Why would such
a great king need to befriend a mere monkey, Sugreeva? And even if he
did, would Rama, who makes no distinction between himself and his brothers,
kill one brother for the sake of another, rages Vali.
For this slight, I
would have killed anyone else but I spare you because you are a woman.
The skill of Kamban,
the peerless poet, is in full bloom in these passages, in wordplay, mastery of
metaphor and nobility of thought, in dramatic exposition and dripping irony.
Kannan recited them with unsuppressed admiration, dancing with diction and pulsing
with rhythm.
The irony is that
Vali, an ardent admirer of Rama is the one who has misunderstood him, and it is
Tara is properly understood him, underlines the author. This scene is eerily similar
to one in Shakespeare's play Julius
Caesar, where Calpurnia, his wife warns him of a conspiracy to kill him,
but he ignores it contemptuously.
Further, Lakshmana who
never hesitates to counsel Rama in all other situations, including the Mareecha
episode, has not opened his mouth since they entered Kishkinda.
But seeing Vali,
Lakshmana praises his countenance and valor. Would not even clouds and oceans treat
Vali with respect, on merely beholding him?
But Hanuman’s
persuasive skills have been so effective that anything I could say has no
effect on you Rama, he continues. Even Yama, the Lord of Death, would fear to
approach Vali, but Rama has undertaken to fill Yaman’s (கூற்று) role. When Lakshmana raises these doubts, and questions
Sugreeva’s character, of one who wishes to kill his own brother, Rama retorts, “Why
Lakshmana, would every brother be as conscientious and loyal as Bharatha?”
What a cruel swipe at Lakshmana,
the outstanding example of brotherly loyalty! Did he shut up Lakshmana with
emotion, because he could not do so with righteousness. What shuddering
contrast to the words Vali uses to praise Rama.
The author argues that
these are vakra vaatham - flawed arguments, made by Rama, because he is
following his emotions rather than sense of dharma and judgment.
When Vali and
Sugreevan wrestle Rama who has promise to kill Vali, doesn't. He explains that
he couldn't distinguish between the brothers. Was this even honest? Could he
have failed to recognize Sugreevan with whom he had been moving in close
quarters for so many days?
On the second day,
when Rama’s arrow pierced him, a surprised Vali retrieved it and then found
Rama’s name on it. And he felt ashamed on behalf of the Surya dynasty, as it
had slipped in its path of Dharma.
Lament for Vali Pullamangai temple
Then he looks at an
undisturbed Rama and is astounded that he has not even felt guilt or shame at
such an execrable deed (a phrase used by Rajaji while he wrote this episode in his Chakravarthi Tirumagan).
The parallel in
Shakespeare is Caesar’s shock, when Brutus whom he held in high regard, also stabbed
him.
Why would you have one
Dharma in your kingdom and the opposite Dharma in this forest, he asks Rama.
Why have you punished
me for the rage caused by the asura Ravana’s crime, who is unconnected to
me?
And by what authority?
We have no enmity. Even if you felt I commited a crime, I am not a subject of your
kingdom, Ayodhya. And even if I were, you have renounced the kingdom and have
not even that royal authority to fall back upon.
You have killed not only
Vali, you have killed the fence of dharma (அறவேலி), he accuses.
Chandran the moon has
flaws kalankam (களங்கம்) but now Rama by your
action you have wrought and colored even Surya with a flaw (kalankam).
Both in morality and
in law, the arguments of Vali are valid. And couched in finest Tamil poetry,
that pierces us with the injustice and cruelty of the murder, not just a
killing.
Here the author
reminds readers of the suggestions of Kabandhan and Sabari to seek Sugreeva,
not Vali. This is appeal neither to morality or legality, but simply fact that prods
us to ponder why.
Traditionally, the events
in epics are governed by whimsical Fate – a common theme in the plays and myths
of ancient Greece, but also in ancient India. But tragedy in Shakespeare's
plays is brought about by the flaws and failures of human nature. And such too
is the episode of the murder of Vali, contends Dr Ramakrishnan. The mortal
nature of Rama is here to be kept in mind, not his divinity as an avatar of
Vishnu.
When an era changes,
as did the end of Ravana and the great war that caused such havoc, like a flood
it destroys minor obstacles in its way. And Vali was only a minor obstacle. This
is the essence or thesis of this book, concludes Mr Kannan
Kannan’s narration in
Tamil was simply epic. As epic as the source Kamban from whom he quoted. I have
captured some snippets in translation. We were all in the presence of something
majestic.
The video uploaded by Mr Vijayan can be seen below. Don’t miss it for the marvelous Tamil. This English translation
is only for those who cannot savour the original Tamil, of Kamban, Ramakrishnan
and Kannan.
Notes
I had earlier mentioned Tara as Sugreeva's wife, forcibly taken by Vali. Tara was always Vali's queen. Ruma was Sugreeva's wife, whom Vali forcibly took for his own. Thanks to Rajani Arjun Shankar for the correction.
