A Kantian perspective on the Ramayana
Part 1 of 5
ABSTRACT
The epic Valmiki Ramayana is a many-splendored work in that it can be studied and understood in several ways and from many standpoints. It can be approached as if it were History, Literature, Dramaturgy, Philosophy, Theology, Social Anthropology and as an ageless source of inspiration for creative and performing Arts.
Many modern and post-modern scholars of the Ramayana, both in India and Western academia, have interpreted this ancient epic to be chronicle of Hindu societal life across the centuries during the Vedic period. Their various theses have been that the cultural inheritance of modern-day India is reflected in the life of Rama. It is averred by them that Rama’s life represents archetypical Hindu philosophical temper that is deeply rooted in patriarchic culture. Using that fact as historical basis, they then draw inferences to suggest that Rama actions in the Ramayana reflect several shades of moral relativism and dissoluteness – all leading to ambiguity and ambivalence in understanding the fundamental metaphysical notions of Dharma and Adharma in the Hindu way of life. In such a line of argument, Rama often gets portrayed as being at times morally feckless, misogynistic, misogamist and insensitive to modern sensibilities about a host of identity-issues of gender, caste, ethnicity, class and sexuality.
This blogpost rather than trying to provide a counter-intuitive thesis against the western narratives of the Ramayana, or Rama’s Dharma, on the basis of ancient Vedic “Dharma-saastraa”, seeks instead to realize the same purpose by invoking the axioms and propositions of a modern and well-known German philosopher, Immanuel Kant (1724–1804). His seminal work on a system of morality titled “The Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morality“, which arguably is perhaps a latter-day subset of the much larger Hindu concept of Dharma and “Purushaartha”, is briefly examined here as illustration and support for the thesis of this essay on the Ramayana.
**************************
Of all the ten avatars that the Vedic Almighty, Vishnu, assumed during his descent into the mortal worlds in four different eras (the yuga-s “krita”, “treta”, “dvaapara” and “kali”) — and which we Hindus worship as the “dasaavataara” — the one that is dearest to me, personally, is “Raama avataara“. And these are my reasons:
Mission-mode and Multi-mission Mode
Firstly, this avatar is “poorna avataara” — an avatar of God whose tenure on earth was an entire lifetime. The only other comparable avatar is that of Lord Krishna, but every other remaining eight avatars of Vishnu were all only episodic. Vishnu assumed mortal forms like the “matsya, koorma, varaaha, narasimha, vaamana, parashurama, balaraama”. He then appeared on earth in what modern military parlance refers to as “mission mode” which is to say that the mission or purpose of the avatar was plain, simple and singular — “vidi, vini, vici“…. He came, he saw and he conquered. The avatar appeared very briefly in a single episode, remained laser-focused on the single-point mission, and once the mission was accomplished, the avatar did not linger on earth any longer. It simply disappeared as suddenly as it had first appeared. The avatar of Sri Nrsimhan, Vishnu’s avatar as Man-Lion, is perhaps the most egregious example of all the “mission-mode” avatars of Vishnu.
The avatars of Rama, and Krishna were “mission mode” too but in a broader and far more platonic sense than the others. They were undertaken for “dharma rakshanam” or “dharma samsthaapanam” i.e. the establishment of a general righteous order and/or the destruction of unrighteous order. And therefore, since these two avatars possessed the distinction of “poornatvam“, they were “multi-mission modal” in nature. In other words, since they each lasted the span of an entire human lifetime, right from arrival on earth until final departure from it, Vishnu had to undertake and complete a series of Dharma-projects, big and small, all along the way.
Covert and overt uniqueness
Secondly, personally I have always believed, that between the two “poorna-avataaras“, Rama’s avatar possesses a greater uniqueness than Krishna’s. Why? Because covert uniqueness is more exceptional than overt uniqueness. What do I mean by this?
Rama, during his long sojourn through earthly realms, went out of the way to keep his divinity concealed as much as possible… no miraculous happenings, no mysterious occurrences, no supernatural events. Krishna, by contrast, more often than not, never hesitated to make it known to one and all earthly beings that he was indeed Divinity in mortal form. And so in his avatar… plenty of supernatural and spectacular miracles, indeed.
Throughout the Rama avatar, we see divinity only in rare flashes or glimpses. Throughout the Krishna avatar, divinity was quite often flashed around in full public gaze. Rama never attempted, not once, to shed his garb of humanity. In the Krishna avatar, however, we see the charade played by the Divine masquerading as Human letting itself slip now and then… throwing off its disguise and revealing its true form and nature. Both avatars were unique of course, but then one was a little more than the other for the very reason that while one was a covert human avatar the other was an overtly divine one.
EXEMPLARITY Vs ADVOCACY
The third reason why the avatar of Rama is my most favorite one, is because I sense in it a certain quality of high-resolution consistency and unchallenged credibility which, by comparison, cannot easily be said about the “krishna avataara“. Rama was the very personification of Dharma while Krishna was more its preceptor. Throughout his avatar, Rama remained an outstanding exemplar of Dharma. Throughout his avatar, Krishna only advocated it… and enforced it too… outstandingly, of course.
The abiding principle and purpose of Rama’s “poorna-avataara” was to protect humanity from its own inhumanity or Adharma as in: “dharmO vigrahavAn adharma virathim dhanvee sa Tanveetha na:”…. i.e. Rama’s sole purpose was to protect us all from Adharma….” (As Sri Vedanta Desikan said in his “Dasaavatara Stotram”, shloka 8).
The purpose of Krishna’s avataara is stated equally clearly in his very own words to all humanity in the Bhagavath-Gita (Ch.18 shloka 66): “sarva dharmaam parithyajya….aham tva sarva paapebhyo moshaishyaami, ma shuchaha” i.e. “Forsake Dharma, your humanity, if you have to, but Surrender unto me absolutely…. I will free you from all sin and grant you liberation“.
It is in the context of the two utterances of Vishnu in two separate “poorna-avataaram-s” of his (separated as they were by the vast time-span of a whole moral epoch called “yuga“) , that I invoke here a famous line from the Shakespearean drama (Julius Caesar (III.II.22), “Not that I lov’d Caesar less, but that I lov’d Rome more”, to explain why I hold Rama’s Dhaarmic exemplarity to be a wee bit more unique than… a wee bit of a notch or cut above… Krishna’s advocacy of Dharma.
Which now brings us to the central theme of this essay: the impeachable God that Vishnu, out of divine will, chose to be in his “raamaavataara“.
IMPEACHMENT
The word Impeachment, we must remember, has a very specific legal connotation.
In many of the Constitutions of the nations of the world, provision is made for Impeachment since it is essential to preserving the rule of law. Under the Constitution, a sitting president or any of the highest members of the government, legislature or judiciary, while he or she is in office, cannot be indicted for crimes or any misdemeanor as any other common citizen can be. So the only way to subject, nonetheless, such high constitutional authorities to the rule of law, and to preserve the rule of law itself, is to provide for a very exceptional legal procedure called Impeachment by which elected representatives of the peoples Parliament can conduct a trial of the delinquent authority. Thus, impeachment allows even the highest constitutional executives of the land, such as President or Chief Justice, who despite being entitled to full immunity from all legal action against him under normal circumstances, can still be held accountable to it under the exceptional.
In all religious faiths of the world, God Almighty is regarded as the supreme authority. He is the highest law-giver and law-enforcer. In Vedantic theology, the conception of God is that He is Dharma himself and so he is above all laws. And out of all the ten avataaras of Vishnu, Rama reigns supreme in this regard as he alone is acknowledged to be the very personification of all laws of Dharma. This truth about him stands fully attested in the 43rd shloka of the Sri Vishnu Sahasranaamam:
रामो विरामो विरजो मार्गो नेयो नयो–अनयः ।
वीरः शक्तिमतां श्रेष्ठ: धर्मो धर्मविदुत्तमः ।।
Ramo Viraamo Virajo Margo Neyo Nayo-anayaH
Veerah Shaktimataam Shresshtah Dharmo Dharmaviduttamah
Amongst the many other qualities of Rama that are mentioned in the above verse, the most important one is what is conveyed through the 2 Sanskrit words “dharmo dharmaviduttamah” which in translation means this:
“Rama! He is the greatest, the supreme, and invincible. He is the foremost among the celestials and is the most valiant among the brave. He is dharma, his very nature is dharma and his incarnation is for the purpose of dharma. He is the embodiment of dharma and protector of dharma…he is the foremost and greatest among the knowers of dharma. ! Ramo Vigrahavaan Dharmah! It means Rama is an epitome, a personification, a manifestation of Dharma. Rama is the very embodiment of righteousness. It was as if righteousness itself had incarnated on earth. Dharma and Rama are inseparable”.
Everything said about Vishnu in the Sri Vishnu Sahasranamam is believed to be the truth… and let me say here that I for one believe in it absolutely. But then this truth is also rather paradoxical. It puts ordinary mortals all in a bit of a quandary. For, if Vishnu is everything that the shloka says he is, then he never can be held accountable under the Law of Dharma for any act of his. As long as he remains “dharmavidutthamah“, there is no way that this God of the Vedas can ever be judged according to Dhaarmic laws, can he?!
Not necessarily so! It need not be the case.… and that is exactly what the whole of the Ramayana and the message of the Raamavataara is all about! If Vishnu is held to be above Law, his avatar as Rama can be held, however, to account under what under common jurisprudence we know is Impeachment!
In the entire epic of the Valmiki Ramayana, the avatar of Rama went about doing deeds and engaging with the rest of the world in a manner in which it did not always appear as though that Dharma was upheld — all in either black or white, so to say. Many of his actions lead us to conclude that they lie on the grey and blurred borders between what is just and what is unjust or unfair. Some of Rama’s deeds fill us with moral consternation, even outrage. Nonetheless, as seen clearly in the Ramayana, Rama made no apologies nor did he express remorse for any of those deeds. Right till the end of the avatar, he remained absolutely convinced of the Dhaarmic validity of his deeds and felt no necessity, none at all, to either explain or defend himself against what he did.
There ought to be some reason why Rama felt no need to explain himself fully anytime for his questionable deeds? While the Ramayana itself offers no clue at all why remained Rama so reticent in the matter, it would not be unreasonable for us to infer that the reason for his silence was more studied deliberation than mere indifference on his part. It is as if Rama wanted students and devotees of the Ramayana to inquire and delve deep into his mind… to divine the mind of the Divine, as it were!
Being a “dharmaviduttamah” — “the foremost and greatest among the knowers of dharma” — it is possible Rama felt he owed no duty to explain his deeds to anyone? It is possible Rama probably did think to himself, “Why should I need to defend my deeds? My life is an open book. My deeds as an “avataara-purusha” have all been written about in every little detail in that book of Valmiki. It is there for those who read the Ramayana to try and understand my true nature and my dhaarmic codes of conduct… If some of my deeds make mortals want to deny me divinity only because it strikes them as lacking in Dharma, so be it… It only serves all the more to prove that I have acted my part as human avatar to perfection — as mere human with all his flaws, failings and warts!
“Let the world then, by all means, debate and agitate the matter as much and as long as it wishes….so long then, in fact, will Dharma at least still be contemplated upon by Man. That would serve my purpose indeed!
“And even if Man cannot hold me as Vishnu to account for my deeds under any law, mortal or divine, in the absolute sense, let him at least have the satisfaction of seeking to impeach me as an avatar of Vishnu i.e. as Rama. Let me and my dhaarmic deeds as Rama be subjected to impeachment proceedings inside the parliament of a million human minds of all generations to come. They are welcome to do so… It worries me not that I should let myself be known to them as the God who is eternally impeachable”.
(End of Part 1 — to be continued)
Sudarshan Madabushi