Did Sita err?

Recently Kailash Vijayvargiya, a BJP Minister from Madhya Pradesh, India, has said that if the women of India breach the lines of morality, they will be punished, just like Sita (http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2013-01-05/india/36161573_1_kailash-vijayvargiya-babulal-gaur-maryada). While the statement is highly regressive and offensive, what is important is that it did not quite stir a hornets’ nest, except for some condemnation in the social media and a few hours wasted on the visual media.

Does this reveal a passive acknowledgement of such mindset?

This leads me to the question – did Sita err?

In Ramayana, when Sita sends Lakshman to help Rama during their exile in the jungles, Lakshman is supposed to have drawn a line (of morality) asking Sita not to breach it under any circumstances. When Ravan is supposed to have come in the guise of an ascetic asking for alms, he provoked Sita to come out and give him the arms, as he was unable to cross the zone too. According to a poetic version of this episode from the Bengali poem “Meghnadbadh Kabya” (slaying of Meghnad) written by Michael Madhusudan Dutt, Ravan is supposed to have told Sita – “Give me alms, or say you will not, so that I may go elsewhere. Are you unwilling to serve a guest today, O daughter of Janak? Do you want to blacken the house of the Raghu’s with the scandal of this, Married into it though you are?...)*

If we go with the above or any version, Ravan, in the guise of an ascetic is supposed to have threatened Sita with dire consequences for denying alms to an ascetic. So what choice did Sita have?

If Sita declined to step out and give alms to the ascetic as was the norm of the day, she would insult her illustrious in-laws, the clan of the Raghu’s who were known for being the upholders of morals and principles. She would have further maligned the family of her father, King Janak for poor upbringing which had not taught its daughters to serve ascetics. Wasn’t Sita simply following the rules set by the patriarchal norms of the then society? Just how did she breach the moral limits (so regressively known as Lakshman rekha)? Was Sita left with any choice, but to do what seemed to be the need of the hour?

This was a peculiar predicament for Sita. If she agreed with the moral code of her in-laws, then she could have harmed the established norms of the society, and if she catered to the societal norms, then she would have broken the moral code of her in-laws. At the end of the day, Sita was in such a tragic state, because she decided to follow her husband, kidnapped by a King, because her brother-in-law severed the nose of a jungle woman, and later asked to prove her chastity, by her husband. In all the cases, she had to suffer the acts of men. In spite of her unflinching loyalty and dedication, she is misunderstood, punished and banished, without ever given a chance to explain.

Sita's agni-pariksha

Sita endured it, for she had no choice as the moral-brigade of the times had enforced their rules. In her case, it was just not the King who questioned her but even a lowly born mortal (read ‘man’) questioned her morality. She was punished time and again for this single act of hers in many ways than one. But can the same norms be seen as an acceptable code of conduct today? Can stepping out at 9.30pm with a male companion be seen as a breach of morality and thus be punished and that too in such a brutal manner? Should women of today, (and I am not referring just to the 10-20% of the educated city-bred working women) live by the norms of the Puranic times? Should the modern woman, suffer what is better known as the Sita Syndrome? Also, just who are these self-appointed upholders of the medieval morality and what is their authority?

This is not just a feminine issue; it is a matter of civilisation. We cannot have predators roaming around with naked lust, and hide our women from their bloodthirsty eyes. We need to eliminate the predators themselves and let our women roam around freely in this country. We also need to vehemently shut the mouths of all the incorrect utterances of the fossilised moral brigade (be they the politicians or religious heads) and ensure that they simply do not exist. It is they who need to be put on leash, not our women.

Friends and readers of this Blog raise your voice and object to the abject utterances!

*Translated in English by William Radice, Penguin Edition

HAPPY NEW YEAR!!!

To

All my Readers

Curtains 2012

Its curtains for 2012 and I am so happy.

Usually, on the last day we turn retrospective and look back on how the year was, but I don’t intend to do that. The year 2012 wasn’t one of the best years that went by, both as an individual or as a community or as a nation. Then why look back? As they say, never follow your footsteps backwards.

So, I look forward to the New Year, 2013.

During the New Year 2013,

• I sincerely hope that history does not repeat itself.
• I hope we do not see an awful failure of governance in every aspect of administration
• I hope we do not have to see such menacingly poor law and order situation
• I hope we do not have to suffer hardships leashed out by poor Govt policies
• I hope the economy tries to improve and look-up (just as I am trying to!)
• I hope we see less of corruption (I am not asking for elimination of it!!)
• I hope we see less of corrupt leaders getting away with murder and more
• I hope we do not end up with good-for-nothing politicians all in the name of who-else-is-there-anyways
• I hope we do not get lost from our secularist credentials
• I hope our children and theirs do not have to search for empty spaces in the city and elsewhere
• I hope we do not have to worry when the ladies of our homes step out for just about anything
• I hope the self-appointed moral policemen, will open their eyes to a new age India

Personally, there is much that I look forward to and hope the year turns out good for all around me, associated with me and remotely linked to me!

I am a rank optimist and one of the firm believers of a rainbow at the end of a heavy rain. Nature hasn’t disappointed as yet by withdrawing the rainbow, so I feel quite upbeat about the year looking up.

I would like to end on a positive note in an otherwise gloomy outlook, by quoting the lyrics penned by Sahir Ludhianvi (based on his aptly titled poem, Umeed or Hope), from a 1958 Hindi film “Phir Subah Hogi” –

Woh subah kabhi to aayegi, woh subah kabhi to aayegi

In kaali sadiyon ke sar se, jab raat ka aanchal dhalkega

Jab dukh ke baadal pighalenge, jab sukh ka sagar chalkega

Jab ambar jhoom ke naachega, jab dharti naghme gayegi

Woh subah kabhi to aayegi

Jis subah ki khaatir yug yug se, hum sab mar mar kar jeete hain

Jis subah ke amrit ki boond mein, hum zahar ke pyale peete hain

In bhookhe pyase ruhon par, ek din to karam faramayegi

Woh subah kabhi to aayegi

Mana ke abhi tere mere armano ki keemat kuch bhi nahi

Mitti ka bhi hai kuch mol magar, insano ki keemat kuch bhi nahi

Insano kii izzat jab jhoothhen sikkon mein naa toli jaayegi

Woh subah kabhi to aayegi, woh subah kabhi to aayegi

If the year 2012 was characterised with a sense of hopelessness, let’s usher in 2013 with a sense of hopefulness!

Here’s wishing all of you a very .....

Woman of 21st Century

All of us know that Parashuram was an avatar of Lord Vishnu and is better known as the form of god who had a hatred for the Kshatriyas and that he was the guru of the likes of Bhishma, Drona and Karna. However, I would like to highlight an altogether different aspect of the life of Parashuram.

Parashuram, besides being an avatar of Lord Vishnu, also has the dubious distinction of being the first man responsible for matricide, i.e. killing his own mother. Let me tell you that story.

Parashuram was the son of sage Jamadagni and his wife Renuka. Renuka was a chaste woman, which was characterised by her ability to bring water from the river in wet clay or unbaked clay pots. It is said that the pot held the water only on the strength of her devotion to her husband.

Once at the river, she saw a gandharva, a celestial being, and for a moment she was smitten by his looks, just for a moment. That day, the clay pot broke and she had to return without water. Sage Jamadagni came to know about it and was very angry and commanded his son Parashuram to behead his mother immediately, which Parashuram did without questioning his father. Later, impressed by his obedience, Sage Jamadagni granted a boon to his son, who asked for his mother, and Renuka was brought back to life.

This is one story, which is often cited as an example of a child’s obedience and thereafter devotion to his parents. But let us look at it differently.

The times when this legend takes place were different. Those days the concept of chastity, devotion had different meaning and such legends were told and retold probably to shape an entire new generation with patriarchal mind-set. Limits were continuously being defined for the women folk, whose sole purpose was to serve the men-folk of the family and bear and raise children. Even a momentary lapse of focus could derail the society, was what the creators of such myths probably had in mind. Women in those days were nothing but appendages to the men, be it fathers and brothers initially, and then husbands later, sons.

But haven’t times changed? Haven’t the standards of morality changed? Does a moment (just a moment) of fascination of another person, call for such measures? Does a woman still have to define herself based on the man in the current stage of her life? Is the patriarchal society going to define and re-define, her standards and punish or eulogise her accordingly?

We are increasingly looking backwards in this respect. Woman today does not have to prove her innocence and devotion based on a man’s standards. She is not a Sita anymore, who will suffer silently for the accusation of being unchaste and nor will she testify for the ever-doubting man of her life. She is not an Ahalya who will suffer because of the lust of another man and no fault of her own, except ignorance. She is not a Renuka, who will suffer in the hands of her husband and son, for just a moment of fascination of a celestial being.

More importantly, the rule book needs to be changed. There cannot be any extra-constitutional bodies like the KHAP’s and other such ancient (dis)organisations. She doesn’t need any Lakshaman to draw any lines binding her by medieval mindsets. She doesn’t need the standards of the axe-wielding man and his patriarchal devotion (Parashuram symbolises man’s evolution to the iron-age; Read Vishnu's Dashavatar & Charles Darwin). She doesn’t need any superficial comparisons with goddesses like Durga and Kali.

For heaven’s sake, this is the 21^st century. Let the woman be a woman. 

Let her be herself.

And finally -

Quote Courtesy – indulgy.com