The Ramayana's Political Effects in India
Kali Whitlow
Sheldon Pollock’s article, “Ramayana and Political Imagination in India,” is a detailed historical overview of the Ramayana’s reception. It begins with Pollock describing the present day riots taking place in India. The Muslims took control of the temple intended to honor the birthplace of Rama, whom the Hindus greatly worship, causing outrage amongst the Hindus. Those actions cause Pollock to question what time period the Ramayana began affecting political actions in India, leading him discover the beginnings of its influence around the twelfth century. Until then, the Ramayana primarily affected only literary elements while the political imagination offered in the text of the epic poem is not acted upon until around the twelfth century.
Pollock believes that the poem offers an account of two influential people, which consist of a divine political order and a demonized individual. In the poem, Rama is seen as the divine hero who defeats his evil enemy Ravana. This leads to the growth of the Rama cult as Hindu kings begin to believe that they should rule like Rama and strive to protect their culture from invaders. The Rama cult instantly starts to outgrow all others, which leads to the dominance of the political themes that are developed in the Ramayana (Pollock 281). The Hindu kings start to see themselves as the divine king Rama and begin to participate in both the human and the divine worlds.
The Ramayana has had a great impact on India’s political order. From the twelfth century on, several temples were built to honor Rama and the political influence from Valmiki’s poem continues even today. As presented in the beginning of the article, Hindus today still fight to respect Rama’s legacy.
Pollock believes that the poem offers an account of two influential people, which consist of a divine political order and a demonized individual. In the poem, Rama is seen as the divine hero who defeats his evil enemy Ravana. This leads to the growth of the Rama cult as Hindu kings begin to believe that they should rule like Rama and strive to protect their culture from invaders. The Rama cult instantly starts to outgrow all others, which leads to the dominance of the political themes that are developed in the Ramayana (Pollock 281). The Hindu kings start to see themselves as the divine king Rama and begin to participate in both the human and the divine worlds.
The Ramayana has had a great impact on India’s political order. From the twelfth century on, several temples were built to honor Rama and the political influence from Valmiki’s poem continues even today. As presented in the beginning of the article, Hindus today still fight to respect Rama’s legacy.
Critical Summary of "Epic Contests: Television and Religious Identity in India" by Purnima Mankekar
Lydia Ford
Purnima Mankekar examines how the 1980s television series, “Ramayan”, a television adaptation of the Indian epic Ramayana, affected Indian’s perception of Hinduism and provided support for Hindu nationalism in her article, “Epic Contests: Television and Religious Identity in India”. The central claim of this article is that “Ramayan” reintroduced and concreted the idea that true Indian society is Hindu. When “Ramayan” was originally broadcasted on January 25, 1987, Hindu nationalists were attempting to transform India into a Hindu nation, and many Hindus struggled with their religious identity.
“Ramayan” was watched by both Hindus and non-Hindus alike, but Hindu viewers had a deeper relationship with the television series. Most Hindu viewers claimed that they experienced bhakti, a personal connection between them and their worship, while watching “Ramayan”. Hindus also believed that “Ramayan” contained important lessons of morality, politics, ideal manhood and womanhood that could be easily incorporated in everyday life. Non-Hindu populations—particularly Muslims and Sikhs—that partook in the viewing of “Ramayan” disagreed with this belief. When interviewed by the author of this article, non-Hindus claimed that they did not believe that “Ramayan” conveyed important moral lessons. However, non-Hindus approved of the depiction of the ideal relationship between Sita and Rama, and many non-Hindu women even emphasized with Sita and her misfortunes.
“Ramayan” was aired in an attempt to promote non-tolerance of non-Hindus, but was disguised as a television series that reinforced religious tolerance of Hindus. The author of this article is biased against the acceptance of non-Hindus; she supports the idea of a pure, Hindu nation. In both the epic and the television series, non-Hindus are depicted as evil, particularly Ravan when he captures Sita. This depiction of non-Hindus provided a boost in support of Hindu nationalism. The Ramayana and “Ramayan” also portray Hinduism as India’s national culture, and caused readers and viewers (and the author of this article) to become nostalgic for what they believe is their nation’s past—a pure, utopian Hindu kingdom, untainted by non-Hindus. Many Hindus believed that both the Ramayana and “Ramayan” are historical accounts of a once-great Hindu-Indian nation, and is an accurate representation of Indian history and true Indian culture, which differs from the Muslim claim that the Ramayana does not reflect Indian culture. However, after “Ramayan” aired, Hinduism became more widely accepted and recognized in India, and this boost in acceptance of Hinduism propelled Hindu nationalism to the forefront of Indian politics.
“Ramayan” was watched by both Hindus and non-Hindus alike, but Hindu viewers had a deeper relationship with the television series. Most Hindu viewers claimed that they experienced bhakti, a personal connection between them and their worship, while watching “Ramayan”. Hindus also believed that “Ramayan” contained important lessons of morality, politics, ideal manhood and womanhood that could be easily incorporated in everyday life. Non-Hindu populations—particularly Muslims and Sikhs—that partook in the viewing of “Ramayan” disagreed with this belief. When interviewed by the author of this article, non-Hindus claimed that they did not believe that “Ramayan” conveyed important moral lessons. However, non-Hindus approved of the depiction of the ideal relationship between Sita and Rama, and many non-Hindu women even emphasized with Sita and her misfortunes.
“Ramayan” was aired in an attempt to promote non-tolerance of non-Hindus, but was disguised as a television series that reinforced religious tolerance of Hindus. The author of this article is biased against the acceptance of non-Hindus; she supports the idea of a pure, Hindu nation. In both the epic and the television series, non-Hindus are depicted as evil, particularly Ravan when he captures Sita. This depiction of non-Hindus provided a boost in support of Hindu nationalism. The Ramayana and “Ramayan” also portray Hinduism as India’s national culture, and caused readers and viewers (and the author of this article) to become nostalgic for what they believe is their nation’s past—a pure, utopian Hindu kingdom, untainted by non-Hindus. Many Hindus believed that both the Ramayana and “Ramayan” are historical accounts of a once-great Hindu-Indian nation, and is an accurate representation of Indian history and true Indian culture, which differs from the Muslim claim that the Ramayana does not reflect Indian culture. However, after “Ramayan” aired, Hinduism became more widely accepted and recognized in India, and this boost in acceptance of Hinduism propelled Hindu nationalism to the forefront of Indian politics.
Critical Summary: Rejecting Sita: Indian Responses to the Ideal Man's Cruel Treatment of His Ideal Wife by Linda Hess
Beighlie Ozmun
In Rejecting Sita: Indian Responses
to the Ideal Man’s Cruel Treatment of His Ideal Wife, Linda Hess argues
that Rama treated Sita in an extremely poor manner—on multiple occasions,
although she focuses on the trial by fire.
The first example she gives is his treatment of his wife shortly after
her liberation from the demon-king Ravana:
he goes against Indian custom and puts her on display for his soldiers,
shows her no affection, and then publicly rebukes her—even though she was loyal
to him throughout her captivity. The next moment of
rejection comes when Rama orders Lakshman to take a pregnant Sita into the
forest and simply abandon her. Even
though she passed the fire ordeal, rumors circulated about her purity—or
supposed lack thereof—and the “ideal man” wanted nothing to do with her even
though he knew her to be innocent.
Years later Rama makes a final attempt to bring Sita to live with him—as long as she passes another fire ordeal. Sita, who had lived in the forest raising her children, refused, and chooses instead to call upon the earth to swallow her—and Sita is gone.
When analyzing the way some scholars view the fire ordeal, Hess finds only support—by men, who claim that Sita is the perfect example of unhindered devotion in the way that she accepts the fire ordeal. Men often take the fire ordeal seriously—that a woman on a pyre will not burn if she is pure, and that Sita is the ideal woman because she never questions Rama’s decisions.
Some Indian women reject Sita’s actions, but admire her character: they want nothing to do with male-dominated lifestyles, but embrace her passion, power, and courage. Many imagine the story from Sita’s point of view: an honest story in which Sita is not submissive to the patriarchy, which shows that Sita is strong and adverse to her husband’s wishes by the end of the epic, and that she is her own person and Rama’s rejection has not damaged her. These poems show a free-spirited Sita who refuses to let Rama believe he has done nothing wrong, and one who will not remain silent.
Hess closes by illustrating that “trial by fire” is still common in India to test a woman’s purity and loyalty—a very dangerous practice. She includes examples of men in India taking on habits of bride-burning: men who burn their wives so they can get a new bride. Some men burn their wives as torture to extort money from her family, as if she was disloyal and more money will give them good cause to marry her anyway. A man who threw his wife out after burning camphor on her palm and seeing the skin was charred. In a traditional Hindu wedding ceremony, one of the vows is for a woman to obey her husband—even if he orders her to stay in a burning house. The fire ordeal is all too common in modern India, and unfortunately, many still accept the immoral practice.
Years later Rama makes a final attempt to bring Sita to live with him—as long as she passes another fire ordeal. Sita, who had lived in the forest raising her children, refused, and chooses instead to call upon the earth to swallow her—and Sita is gone.
When analyzing the way some scholars view the fire ordeal, Hess finds only support—by men, who claim that Sita is the perfect example of unhindered devotion in the way that she accepts the fire ordeal. Men often take the fire ordeal seriously—that a woman on a pyre will not burn if she is pure, and that Sita is the ideal woman because she never questions Rama’s decisions.
Some Indian women reject Sita’s actions, but admire her character: they want nothing to do with male-dominated lifestyles, but embrace her passion, power, and courage. Many imagine the story from Sita’s point of view: an honest story in which Sita is not submissive to the patriarchy, which shows that Sita is strong and adverse to her husband’s wishes by the end of the epic, and that she is her own person and Rama’s rejection has not damaged her. These poems show a free-spirited Sita who refuses to let Rama believe he has done nothing wrong, and one who will not remain silent.
Hess closes by illustrating that “trial by fire” is still common in India to test a woman’s purity and loyalty—a very dangerous practice. She includes examples of men in India taking on habits of bride-burning: men who burn their wives so they can get a new bride. Some men burn their wives as torture to extort money from her family, as if she was disloyal and more money will give them good cause to marry her anyway. A man who threw his wife out after burning camphor on her palm and seeing the skin was charred. In a traditional Hindu wedding ceremony, one of the vows is for a woman to obey her husband—even if he orders her to stay in a burning house. The fire ordeal is all too common in modern India, and unfortunately, many still accept the immoral practice.
A Critical Summary of Balkaran and Dorn’s “Violence in the Valmiki Ramayana: Just War Criteria in an Ancient Indian Epic”
Colin Smith
In
their article “Violence in the Valmiki
Ramayana: Just War Criteria in an Ancient Indian Epic” Raj Balkaran and A.
Walter Dorn attempt to offer more analysis into a growing scholarly topic that,
although somewhat new, is gaining academic relevance. The titular topic is of
course the evaluation of the significance of the Ramayana in developing a
modern day “…Just War criteria…” for Hinduism (659). The large majority of the
article focuses on the appearance of the criterion of today’s largely accepted
Just War criteria, derivative of early Romans and Christians, in the ancient
Indian epic, “…namely (1) Just Cause, (2) Right Intent, (3) Net Benefit, (4)
Legitimate Authority, (5) Last Resort, (6) Proportionality of Means, and (7)
Right Conduct”(659). The authors go through all seven criteria showing evidence
for the presence of, and occasional contradiction to such criterion in The
Ramayana. Through the dialogue, events, characters and narrative of the epic,
the authors give specific textual examples for each claim made in the article. In
the case of a hero such as Rama behaving contrarily to one of the staples of
the Just War criteria as he did in his self-interested slaying of Valin, the
authors describe how Valmiki justifies such a contradiction through sound
reasoning, usually maintaining that the apparent breaking of one of the criterion
is in fact in accordance with it. On the other hand, in the case of a demon
such as Ravana, they show how the disregard for such criterion leads to his
downfall.
Having validated the existence of each of the Just War criteria, Balkaran and Dorn go on to state that the fundamental Hindu virtue ahimsa, which they define for the reader simply as nonviolence, is also present in the epic, despite its apparent rarity of specific mention and the narrative being largely rooted in violence. They do note its two mentions by name, but hold in greater regard the speeches of the character Sita, wife of Rama, held true to this ahimsa even towards those who had wronged her. Perhaps the most convincing argument the authors provide relies more on the reasoning that in order for such a specific framework for a just war to be present, the warriors must respect peace overall. If one accepts their original argument that the Just War criterion is indeed present in the Ramayana, deductively, s/he must support the latter.
The authors conclude by stating that each of the seven criteria are apparent
in The Ramayana. They point out only four differences between the Hindu criteria backed by the epic and the modern day International codes and laws, thus furthering the necessary discussion of modern day Hindu Just War criteria.
Having validated the existence of each of the Just War criteria, Balkaran and Dorn go on to state that the fundamental Hindu virtue ahimsa, which they define for the reader simply as nonviolence, is also present in the epic, despite its apparent rarity of specific mention and the narrative being largely rooted in violence. They do note its two mentions by name, but hold in greater regard the speeches of the character Sita, wife of Rama, held true to this ahimsa even towards those who had wronged her. Perhaps the most convincing argument the authors provide relies more on the reasoning that in order for such a specific framework for a just war to be present, the warriors must respect peace overall. If one accepts their original argument that the Just War criterion is indeed present in the Ramayana, deductively, s/he must support the latter.
The authors conclude by stating that each of the seven criteria are apparent
in The Ramayana. They point out only four differences between the Hindu criteria backed by the epic and the modern day International codes and laws, thus furthering the necessary discussion of modern day Hindu Just War criteria.
Critical Summary of 'Hindu Ethics in the Ramayana'
Jodi Erickson
In his article “Hindu Ethics in the Ramayana,” Roderick Hindery explores the Ramayana in the context of the four ethical principles of (A) mores, (B) ethos, (C) institutions, and (D) legitimation, including subsections within each issue (288).
In his section on the mores and moralities contained within the Ramayana, Hindery touches on the subjects of universality and volition, helping to define these subjects as they appear in the Ramayana. He argues that sin, rather than being caused by “mere ignorance,” is the fault of volition and constitutes willful wrongdoing on the part of the sinner and that the facts of dharma are universal (293).
On the subject of the ethos of Hindus in the Ramayana, Hindery analyzes the motifs of truth, Rama as the archetypal virtuous man, and the affirmation of life. The actions of upholding truth and fulfilling promises in the epic are possibly not portrayed as being the same things, and Valmiki seems to disagree with Rama’s actions in many instances. Rama is seen as a “model of virtue even in the earliest narratives,” but, in later versions, Rama is exalted even to the point of complete divinization (295). Next, Hindery explores whether the central message of the Ramayana is teaching “Thanatos or life-affirmation” (296). He uses the three fundamental goals of life, “dharma (virtue, morality, or duty), kama (as pleasure and love), and artha (wealth),” to answer this question.
Hindery next examines the “systemic influences on individuals,” using women, caste members, and “agents and objects of violence” (301). Hindery mentions the gender inequality inherent in the Ramayana, citing the fact that while Rama supposedly loved Sita more than anything, she was little more than an object, and certainly not “her own person.” He then moves on to discuss aspects of the caste system in the epic, mentioning (A) religious practice, (B) marriage and mobility, and (C) economic power (303). Next, Hindery gives examples of violence in the Ramayana and discusses the reasons given for and against the use of force.
Last, Hindery speaks on the matter of ethical validation and the influences the Ramayana has had on Hinduism. He states some of the opinions regarding this topic and relates the story of the epic to real-life scenarios.
In Appendix I, Hindery summarizes (A) the epic’s international impact, (B) its various forms of presentation in classical Sanskrit, (C) popular Hindi, (D) Bengali, and (E) the Valmiki-Ramayana’s critical edition in Sanskrit (310). He next expands on the subject of sexual discrimination seen throughout the Ramayana in Appendix II.
In his section on the mores and moralities contained within the Ramayana, Hindery touches on the subjects of universality and volition, helping to define these subjects as they appear in the Ramayana. He argues that sin, rather than being caused by “mere ignorance,” is the fault of volition and constitutes willful wrongdoing on the part of the sinner and that the facts of dharma are universal (293).
On the subject of the ethos of Hindus in the Ramayana, Hindery analyzes the motifs of truth, Rama as the archetypal virtuous man, and the affirmation of life. The actions of upholding truth and fulfilling promises in the epic are possibly not portrayed as being the same things, and Valmiki seems to disagree with Rama’s actions in many instances. Rama is seen as a “model of virtue even in the earliest narratives,” but, in later versions, Rama is exalted even to the point of complete divinization (295). Next, Hindery explores whether the central message of the Ramayana is teaching “Thanatos or life-affirmation” (296). He uses the three fundamental goals of life, “dharma (virtue, morality, or duty), kama (as pleasure and love), and artha (wealth),” to answer this question.
Hindery next examines the “systemic influences on individuals,” using women, caste members, and “agents and objects of violence” (301). Hindery mentions the gender inequality inherent in the Ramayana, citing the fact that while Rama supposedly loved Sita more than anything, she was little more than an object, and certainly not “her own person.” He then moves on to discuss aspects of the caste system in the epic, mentioning (A) religious practice, (B) marriage and mobility, and (C) economic power (303). Next, Hindery gives examples of violence in the Ramayana and discusses the reasons given for and against the use of force.
Last, Hindery speaks on the matter of ethical validation and the influences the Ramayana has had on Hinduism. He states some of the opinions regarding this topic and relates the story of the epic to real-life scenarios.
In Appendix I, Hindery summarizes (A) the epic’s international impact, (B) its various forms of presentation in classical Sanskrit, (C) popular Hindi, (D) Bengali, and (E) the Valmiki-Ramayana’s critical edition in Sanskrit (310). He next expands on the subject of sexual discrimination seen throughout the Ramayana in Appendix II.