You are here: SriPedia - SriRangaSri - Archives - Jun 2004

SriRangaSri List Archive: Message 00059 Jun 2004

 
Jun 2004 Indexes ( Date | Thread | Author )
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]


                       
                      Srimate SrivanSatakopa Sri Vedanta Desika Yatindra 
Mahadesikaya nama:

 

                         The Eye-sore of Ayodhya
 

Sri Valmiki tells us that there was none in Ayodhya who was not beautiful, none 
who was not well dressed, none who was unadorned with scents and perfumes. The 
city and its natives had everything good going for them, with everyone attired 
in the best of clothes and ornaments. Everyone was strikingly good-looking and 
there was none who was even remotely otherwise.

It was a beautiful city, with beautiful and handsome inhabitants. Their beauty 
was not merely skin deep-all citizens of Ayodhya were of impeccable conduct and 
character, pure as Maharshis. There was none who coveted others' wealth, 
because each had enough and more. Everyone adhered to the righteous path 
scrupulously. There were no thieves in Ayodhya, because there was no need for 
anyone to take others' property. There were no atheists in Ayodhya, no 
agnostics nor anyone who did not discharge in full measure the duties enjoined 
upon him or her, as per varNa and Ashrama. Even if you were to search the 
entire city, you wouldn't find a fool or an unlettered individual-not merely 
were the citizens literate, every one of them was a scholar, says Sri Valmiki. 
There were no weaklings in Ayodhya, physically and psychologically; everyone 
lived to their full lives, were blessed with happy families, with children, 
grand children and great-grand children abounding. In short, Ayodhya was an 
ideal city, with responsible, beautiful and righteous citizens who were 
paragons of virtue. This, however, is no wonder, because in the reign of the 
fair and faultless IkshvAku Emperors, things couldn't have been otherwise. To 
put it in a nutshell, the denizens of Ayodhya were living examples of the maxim 
"yathA RAjA tathA prajA:" (As the King, so the subjects). The Adikavi is so 
impressed with the attainments of the citizens of the capital city of KOsala 
dEsam, that he devotes an entire chapter to a rapturous recounting of the 
merits of AyOdhyA vAsIs.

 

However, all these positive features in the citizenry of Ayodhya were brought 
to nought in a second and their collective will thwarted, all through the 
medium of a pitifully insignificant inhabitant of the city, of whom none 
normally took any notice. It was because of this person that Ayodhya, which was 
one big, happy family, was transformed within seconds to a city drowning in a 
bottomless pit of sorrow, the gay sounds of song and dance replaced by those of 
wailing, weeping and breast-beating. A perfect Prince was turned into a nomad, 
His lovely wife and devoted brother driven from the palace to the jungle, and 
an Emperor, who would have lived on happily for a thousand more years, died 
immediately due to unbearable sorrow. The teeming city of happy inhabitants was 
transformed overnight into almost a ghost town, shorn of its carnival 
atmosphere, with even non-sentient objects like trees in full bloom withering 
away suddenly, unable to bear separation from their youthful idol.  This person 
was powerful enough, or could wield such power by proxy, that the Coronation of 
the Paramapurusha Himself , fixed with the consent of all concerned including 
the Rajaguru Vasishtta, courtiers, and, above all, the discerning citizens of 
Ayodhya, was cancelled at the last moment, with His having to endure a jungle 
sojourn of 14 years, instead of reigning in splendour on the throne of Ayodhya.

 

Readers would have guessed by now that the subject of this piece is none other 
than the notorious Manthara, the hunchback.

 

When we hear her name, the figure that springs to our mind is that of the 
grotesquely bent form of an old woman, with a crotchety face and irascible 
temperament. She had a deformed back, which gave her a skewed perception of 
life and people, which in turn was reflected in her attitude towards others. 
Despite her looks or character, it must definitely be admitted that it was she 
who brought about a crucial turn in the epic, but for which events would have 
taken quite a different and rather uninteresting course, with Sri Rama duly 
being anointed Crown Prince and every one living happily ever after-that is, 
every one except the long-suffering dEvAs and Rishis, who would have continued 
to be tormented by Ravana and his minions. The contribution of Mantara is thus 
extremely significant, though her motives might not have been the best.

 

Do we find a contradiction in Valmiki's description of Ayodhya's residents? 
While he portrays all of them as being beautiful of body and mind, does he not 
take cognisance of Mantara, who was anything but beautiful? When the Adikavi 
tells us that the citizens of the great city had nothing but laudable virtues, 
has he overlooked the hunchback, who was a scheming specimen of jealous 
humanity? 

 

We must remember, however, that whatever Sri Valmiki has laid down is the 
gospel truth ("yasya vAk anrutA kAvyE kAchit atra bhavishyati"). Commentators 
tell us that what Sri Valmiki said is indeed true and he was talking about the 
citizens of Ayodhya, born and brought up there under the benign influence of 
the IkshvAku Emperors. Mantara, on the other hand, was an expatriate of KEkaya, 
the homeland of KaikEyi. The hunchback came to Ayodhya along with her mistress 
KaikEyi, when Dasarata brought the latter to his capital city, as his newly wed 
bride. Thus Mantara was part of the "streedhanam" or dowry KaikEyi brought with 
her to Ayodhya, it being the practice in days of yore for princesses to bring 
with them their own maids. And even in KEkaya, Mantara appears to have been an 
insignificant part of the royal household, no one knowing where she was born 
and to whom-"gyAti dAsi yatOjAtA KaikEyyAstu sahOshitA".  Thus, by all 
accounts, Mantara did not belong to Ayodhya and hence the worthy citizens of 
Ayodhya could not be faulted for having such a one in their midst.   

 

All of us know that Mantara was instrumental in asking KaikEyi to seek Sri 
Rama's banishment to the forests. But why? What harm did Raghunandana do her 
that she worked through her mistress to ensure His extradition to the cruel 
jungle?

 

We do not have an answer for this in Srimad Valmiki Ramayanam. The Adikavi 
doesn't devote much attention to Sri Rama's childhood and mentions it just in 
passing, apparently in a hurry to chronicle the momentous events that await 
detailed recording. We are just told that Rama and Lakshmana were inseparable 
and whenever the former went hunting, the latter accompanied Him and neither 
took food or water without the other being fed. This is all Sri Valmiki has to 
tell us about the Prince's infancy. It is indeed Sri Rama's misfortune that no 
Azhwar sought to rectify the Adikavi's omission and record for posterity the 
Prince of Ayodhya's bAla leelAs, as was done by Sri Periazhwar for Sri Krishna.

 

However, we do have glimpses of Sri Rama's childhood from other sources. For 
instance, Sri Nammazhwar paints a rare picture of the Prince wielding a 
catapult ("uNdai vil"). It must be indeed difficult for us to picturise the 
sober and sedate Chakravartthi Tirumagan with a catapult in His hand, but He 
did use one, avers Sri Nammazhwar-and if anybody should know, Azhwar should, 
having been blessed with unblemished wisdom by Emperuman. In the fifth decad of 
the first hundred of Tiruvaimozhi, Azhwar tells us that Sri Rama straightened 
the hunch of Mantara with a single shot from His unerring catapult-"koonE 
chidaya uNdai vil niratthil teritthAi GOvindA!". Going by this account, we 
deduce that Mantara's must have been one of the first occasions when the Lord 
displayed His glorious marksmanship, hitting the target right on the head.

 

Sri Nampillai, in his beautiful commentary on the aforesaid line, tells us that 
as in His other endeavours, PerumAL was prompted solely by compassion for the 
hunchback and, by a well-placed shot on the hump, straightened the poor 
creature's back, destroying the deformity. And He did this without the least 
harm to any other part of her physique-"ivaLudaya allAda avayavangaLukku oru 
vAttam vArAdapadi nimirttha". Hence, even in sport, we find that unlike the 
inconsiderate Krishna, Sri Rama was always compassionate and merciful even to 
the most insignificant of men and women.

 

While we don't disbelieve Azhwar, we are assailed by a genuine doubt. Azhwar 
says, "koonE chidaya uNdai vil niratthil teritthAi GOvindA!", very obviously 
referring to Krishna and not to Rama. How then can the act be ascribed to the 
Prince of Ayodhya? The commentator's reply here is again extremely enjoyable. 
Sri Nampillai says that whenever one thinks of any prank, mischief or 
misdemeanour, it is to Krishna that the mind automatically leaps. Being unable 
to associate Sri Raghunandana with wielding a catapult and hitting people with 
its ammunition, though it was indeed He who did it, Azhwar ends up ascribing 
the act to Govindan, on whose unprotesting shoulders any blame for any act 
could be laid without dispute-"teembu sErvadu KrishNanukkE AgayAlE, avan 
talayilE Erittu solludal"

 

Well, coming back to Mantara, the aforesaid episode perhaps kept rankling in 
her devious mind and she was awaiting an opportunity to "get her back". Though 
it must have done her a world of good to have her hunchback straightened, 
perhaps she didn't like the way it was done, by a mere boy wielding a catapult. 
Whatever be the reason, Mantara does not appear to have been favourably 
disposed towards Sri Rama.

 

Coming to the day prior to the infructuous Coronation planned by Dasaratha, Sri 
Valmiki appends an exclamatory mark ("YadricchayA"), to the sloka about the 
festivities coming to the notice of the scheming hunchback Manthara. Her 
movements circumscribed by her deformity, Manthara normally stays on level 
ground, finding climbing or any other form of exercise painful. However, on the 
day prior to Rama becoming the Prince of Ayodhya, Manthara takes it into her 
head to climb the steep steps to the palace terrace, from where she has a 
bird's eye view of the enthusiastic preparations for the Coronation.

 

"GyAti dAsI yatOjAtA KaikEyyAstu sahOshitA

 prAsAdam chandra sankAsam ArurOha yadricchayA"

 

 This, in turn, makes her hatch plans for ensuring KaikEyI's supremacy in 
Dasaratha's royal household and to incite the queen to seek the long-forgotten 
boons from the Emperor. 

 

Mantara, from her vantage point on the terrace, perceives the entire Ayodhya 
draped with flags and festoons, an atmosphere of celebration in the air and 
everyone head over heels with joy. She also finds Kousalya giving away riches 
to alms-seekers. Puzzled at this carnival atmosphere pervading Ayodhya, the 
hunchback investigates and finds out the impending coronation of Sri Rama. She 
rushes down immediately, as fast as her deformity would permit, and reaches 
Kaikeyi's quarters, boiling with rage-"dahyamAnA kOpEna MantarA pApadarshinI".

 

The proximity Mantara must have enjoyed with her mistress is brought out by her 
addressing Kaikeyi as "moodE!" (You fool). Sri Valmiki describes the hunchback 
as well versed in the art of speech-"vAkya visAradA". When we read Mantara's 
discourse to Kaikeyi, exhorting her to stop Sri Rama's coronation at once, we 
are struck by wonder at her persuasiveness, at her forceful, convincing and 
logical arguments, at her perseverance in the face of Kaikeyi's disbelief. If 
the poor, unlettered hunchback was able, solely by her cogent arguments, to 
convince Kaikeyi who doted on Rama, to seek His banishment, one can definitely 
imagine her powers of oratory and imparting conviction to a reluctant listener.

 

We are able to discern the gradual change of heart in Kaikeyi, almost with 
every word of Mantara's harangue. The Queen, when told by the hunchback of the 
imminent coronation, immediately removes an invaluable chain from her neck and 
presents it to Mantara, for having brought the glad tidings of Sri Rama's 
ascension. And, even after listening to Mantara's ranting and raving, Kaikeyi 
initially remains steadfast in her love for Sri Rama and tells the former that 
she doesn't distinguish between Bharata and RAma, as both are equally dear to 
her-

 

"RAmE vA BharatE vAham visEsham na upalakshayE".

 

The same Kaikeyi, after having had a prolonged earful of Mantara's venomous 
words, veers around to the view that Bharata should become the Prince in 
waiting ("YuvaraAjA") at all cost and Rama, the rightful contender to the 
throne, should be removed from the scene post-haste. If a well-read, scholarly, 
normally pure-minded lady like Kaikeyi, with a heart brimming over with love 
for Chakravartthi Tirumagan, could be transformed into a virulent opponent of 
the Prince, all within the space of an hour, it speaks volumes of Mantara's 
skills of persuasion. Her uncanny ability, to sow seeds of hate in the most 
barren of soils and to nurture them quickly into giant trees radiating odium, 
fills us with wonderment.

 

It is she again who reminds Kaikeyi of the long-forgotten boons obtained from 
Dasaratha during the SamabarAsura vadham and advises her to seek the same from 
the Emperor immediately, insisting on Sri Bharata's coronation and the 
banishment of Sri Rama for fourteen years. A perusal of the dialogue (almost a 
monologue) between Mantara and Kaikeyi, as recounted by Valmiki, would make us 
look at the hunchback with new respect (albeit laced with distaste) for her 
persuasiveness and indomitable courage-yes, courage, for, had her machinations 
been rejected by Kaikeyi out of hand, Mantara faced the most cruel of 
punishments for her campaign against the Prince of the land. Kamban attributes 
another reason for Kaikeyi's change of heart-viz., the good fortune of the 
celestials and the misfortune of the rAkshasAs. Had not the Queen undergone a 
change in attitude, Ravana would never have been confronted or killed.

 

People say that Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. How else can you explain 
Kaikeyi's statement, after listening to the "enlightening" words of Mantara, 
that the latter looked beautiful? Kaikeyi launches into a detailed and highly 
complimentary portrayal of the hunchback's physical attributes, describing her 
face as resembling the blemishless full moon, her form gracefully bent like a 
lotus waving in the wind and so on. The Empress goes to the extent of likening 
Mantara to an elegant swan in form and gait. The scheming maid is praised as 
the Queen of Hunchbacks ("KubjAnAm uttamA") and as an honourable exception to 
the rule that hunchbacks are mostly wicked, cruel and evil-minded. Not only the 
maid, but the huge lump on her back also comes in for praise, as being the 
repository of wisdom and diplomacy-

 

"Tava idam yat deergham ratha ghONam iva Ayatam

 mataya: kshatra vidyAscha mAyAyAscha vasanti tE"

 

When we love a person overly, even their negative features appear to us to be 
admirable-this is the case with Kaikeyi too, who wants to adorn the hump of 
Mantara with priceless jewels, fragrant sandal paste and the best of flowers. 

 

Well, "enough about the hunchback", I hear readers remark. However, detestable 
as she may sound, all of us have to be extremely thankful to Mantara for her 
intervention, for, had she not done so, several of the glorious Lord's 
magnificent attributes, especially that of providing succour to those who 
surrender ("abhaya pradAnam"), would not have come to light. But for the 
pitiful hunchback, the Lord's promise to the deities, to rid them of Ravana's 
oppression, could not have come to pass. And but for her, we would have had no 
occasion get acquainted with Sri Hanuman and his glory. 

 

Srimate Sri LakshmINrisimha divya paduka sevaka SrivanSatakopa Sri Narayana 
Yatindra Mahadesikaya nama:

dasan, sadagopan

 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
Yahoo! Domains - Claim yours for only $14.70
http://us.click.yahoo.com/Z1wmxD/DREIAA/yQLSAA/VkWolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 

 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
     http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SriRangaSri/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
     SriRangaSri-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
     http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index ] [Thread Index ] [Author Index ]
Home Page
http://www.ibiblio.org/sripedia
srirangasri-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
To subscribe to the list