The funny Ramayana !
Content Warning: This post does not discriminate the book or its authors. It only attempts to show how foolish and wrong the readers (me and you) have been in understanding this epic.
Considered as one of the greatest epics of all times, Ramayana, a voluminous book, which can give my pillow a run, has kept Indians divided into Religious lines for a very long time. Over the years, many have rewritten or modified the great epic to suit to the era in which they lived, but each version has leant more closer to fantasy than reality to cater to the need of the devotees. Trying to make a super hero out of their beloved deity, Rama, his devotees have made a mockery of some of the great virtues emphasised in the book.
60,000 wives:
To begin things, lets talk about the mighty Dasharatha, the father or Rama. Dasharatha is said to have had 60,000 wives(This count varies from 3 to 60,000 based on which version you have read).
Ramayana happened a long time ago. Assuming that the average life span of a man at that time was 150 (which in itself is slightly far fetched), Dasharatha lived for about 55,000 days. Let's suppose, he started marrying at the age of 15, he had about 50,000 days to marry 60,000 women. That is he had to marry more than one woman a day from the day he turned 15 to the day he died. Possible ?
Anyway, for argument's sake, let's say that those were the days of mass marriage and the mighty king married women in hundreds. Even then, at least one-sixth of his wives would have had to die a virgin. Unless the king spent every minute of his youth pleasing women. Fantasy or reality ? You be the judge.
Husband of thousands, father of none:
Well, reading the book, this is the next thing a reader would stumble on to after being told that the man had 60,000 wives. The reader would certainly have had a debate within his head on the virility of this great king who had thousands of wives but no children.
Their suspicions would only increase when he turns a father. All his three chief wives, a year after being blessed by a priest, bore children at the same time. Too odd to be a coincidence. But let me not indulge in speculation. For now, Dasharatha will play Rama's father.
Miraculous child, Obscured teenage:
Rama, like any other superhero before him, was a unique and a special child. He was bold, brave, beautiful, naughty, smart, righteous, virtuous and all other adjectives of deification. Everyone liked him. They were supposed to. Then a big black shroud befogs his life.
All great epics have one thing in common. They strip their protagonists of their teen ages. Ramayana is no exception. His adolescence has been kept under wraps. Was it because it is too ordinary to make it into the book ? Was it filled with things that would have belittled him ?
Adolescence is the best phase in a man's life. It is the time he develops his own values and morals. Why not write about it unless you want to hide something about it ?
A prince who was no prince:
He did not hunt. He did not enjoy power or luxury. He did not govern. He did not invade. Instead, what did he do ? Brought a stone( a woman who had been cursed to be one) back to life, cured the diseased, broke a bow to marry, preached kindness and love. Was he a prince or a priest ?
As far as I see, the only sensible thing he did was to fall in love and marry a supposedly beautiful woman. Then he lets another man steal his wife ?
Supernaturally funny !
Exile and mindless brothers:
One tagged along with him and his wife on an extended honeymoon and the other stripped him of his sandals when he was venturing into the jungle.
Just before he was to become king, Rama was handed a 14-year exile, thanks to a boon granted by his father to one of his wives. The one thing that would have kept him calm at the face of adversity is the fact his wife had offered to travel with him. But what he would not have expected was the same offer from his brother Laxman. 'What ? You want to come with me on my honeymoon ?' He would have asked his Laxman. He probably cursed him too. Nonetheless, the brother tagged along.
If one of his younger brothers was insensible, another was plain stupid. Bharath stripped him of his sandals when he ventured into the wild. For what ? To adorn his throne ? A stinky sandals in place of a king ? If this was intended to show the love and respect the Bharath had for older brother, where is the respect for the subjects he ruled ? They don't deserve to be ruled by a sandal, do they ?
Kidnapped for no ransom, nor reason:
Ravana is the only character in the book who has some charisma. He loves his sister, decides to revenge her when she is disgraced, acts on it, kidnaps perpetrator's brother's wife, falls in love with her, treats her kindly. And for what avail ? Nothing. That's when you start to think 'was he the biggest loser I've ever known ?' Probably yes.
Then you just feel sorry for him. After all, he lost his son and brothers to the war. His country was obliterated. He was dethroned and handed a shameful death. For letting Sita have a wonderful life in his gardens, for showering her with care and affection, for protecting her from the beasts in the jungle and those who would have laid by her bed had he not taken her away.
I'm sure Sita enjoyed Ravana's hospitality.
The war and a fire:
Hanuman espionaged. He and his troops built the bridge. Laxman and Vibishanan fought Ravana's brothers and son. What did Rama do in the lengthy war except killing Ravana ? Wasn't he supposed to be the reincarnation of God ? Why hide behind troops ?
And when the war is over, he forced his wife to throw herself into a raging fire. To prove the world her chastity. What ? He did not do that, did he? Yes, he did. And guess what, Sita came out of the flames unharmed proving everyone that she had not been touched.
Great ! Can we have clones of Sita for firefighters. We could save a lot of lives. Humble opinion !
All is well ends well:
Every one else tried to trouble everyone else through out the book and in the end, everyone sees the truth and all lived happily together forever.
A typical, boring, bollywood-like climax.
I wish Hollywood made a parody out of it. They could rope in Christopher Nolan to direct and Hans Zimmer to compose.Tom Hanks(with a saggy skin and bent back) could play Rama, Heath Ledger(I am a dog chasing cars) could do Ravana, Joaquin Phoenix(the foxy beast) as Laxman, and goofy Eddie Murphy as insane Bharath. Michael Caine(I don't want to see a Nolan movie without him) could be pulled in for Dasharatha. Jennifer Connely, Catherine Zeta Jones and Penelope Cruz could play his chief wives. To add glamour, Salma Hayek could play Ravana's sister. Or perhaps Monica Bellucci. Christian Bale(for his disproportionate jaw) could play Valee, the ape king. I would like to see Jim Carrey as Hanuman and Morgan Freeman as narrator. Last, but not the least, Angelina Jolie could(will/must) play Sita.
Earth could be India. Saturn could play the Jungle and Pluto could double as Srilanka. The movie set will feature an artificial bridge connecting the heavenly bodies.
Well, my intention is not to offend the devotees of Rama. Or that of any other God. I just want them to know that they have dumped the juices in favour of bagasse. The essence of the book has been sacrificed to prove the divinity of Rama. Morals have been compromised for miracles.
Indian literature has produced two great gems. Ramayana - Emphasizes on familial values, and Mahabharata - Emphasizes on political values. Don't turn them into a stupid bollywood movie !
Considered as one of the greatest epics of all times, Ramayana, a voluminous book, which can give my pillow a run, has kept Indians divided into Religious lines for a very long time. Over the years, many have rewritten or modified the great epic to suit to the era in which they lived, but each version has leant more closer to fantasy than reality to cater to the need of the devotees. Trying to make a super hero out of their beloved deity, Rama, his devotees have made a mockery of some of the great virtues emphasised in the book.
60,000 wives:
To begin things, lets talk about the mighty Dasharatha, the father or Rama. Dasharatha is said to have had 60,000 wives(This count varies from 3 to 60,000 based on which version you have read).
Ramayana happened a long time ago. Assuming that the average life span of a man at that time was 150 (which in itself is slightly far fetched), Dasharatha lived for about 55,000 days. Let's suppose, he started marrying at the age of 15, he had about 50,000 days to marry 60,000 women. That is he had to marry more than one woman a day from the day he turned 15 to the day he died. Possible ?
Anyway, for argument's sake, let's say that those were the days of mass marriage and the mighty king married women in hundreds. Even then, at least one-sixth of his wives would have had to die a virgin. Unless the king spent every minute of his youth pleasing women. Fantasy or reality ? You be the judge.
Husband of thousands, father of none:
Well, reading the book, this is the next thing a reader would stumble on to after being told that the man had 60,000 wives. The reader would certainly have had a debate within his head on the virility of this great king who had thousands of wives but no children.
Their suspicions would only increase when he turns a father. All his three chief wives, a year after being blessed by a priest, bore children at the same time. Too odd to be a coincidence. But let me not indulge in speculation. For now, Dasharatha will play Rama's father.
Miraculous child, Obscured teenage:
Rama, like any other superhero before him, was a unique and a special child. He was bold, brave, beautiful, naughty, smart, righteous, virtuous and all other adjectives of deification. Everyone liked him. They were supposed to. Then a big black shroud befogs his life.
All great epics have one thing in common. They strip their protagonists of their teen ages. Ramayana is no exception. His adolescence has been kept under wraps. Was it because it is too ordinary to make it into the book ? Was it filled with things that would have belittled him ?
Adolescence is the best phase in a man's life. It is the time he develops his own values and morals. Why not write about it unless you want to hide something about it ?
A prince who was no prince:
He did not hunt. He did not enjoy power or luxury. He did not govern. He did not invade. Instead, what did he do ? Brought a stone( a woman who had been cursed to be one) back to life, cured the diseased, broke a bow to marry, preached kindness and love. Was he a prince or a priest ?
As far as I see, the only sensible thing he did was to fall in love and marry a supposedly beautiful woman. Then he lets another man steal his wife ?
Supernaturally funny !
Exile and mindless brothers:
One tagged along with him and his wife on an extended honeymoon and the other stripped him of his sandals when he was venturing into the jungle.
Just before he was to become king, Rama was handed a 14-year exile, thanks to a boon granted by his father to one of his wives. The one thing that would have kept him calm at the face of adversity is the fact his wife had offered to travel with him. But what he would not have expected was the same offer from his brother Laxman. 'What ? You want to come with me on my honeymoon ?' He would have asked his Laxman. He probably cursed him too. Nonetheless, the brother tagged along.
If one of his younger brothers was insensible, another was plain stupid. Bharath stripped him of his sandals when he ventured into the wild. For what ? To adorn his throne ? A stinky sandals in place of a king ? If this was intended to show the love and respect the Bharath had for older brother, where is the respect for the subjects he ruled ? They don't deserve to be ruled by a sandal, do they ?
Kidnapped for no ransom, nor reason:
Ravana is the only character in the book who has some charisma. He loves his sister, decides to revenge her when she is disgraced, acts on it, kidnaps perpetrator's brother's wife, falls in love with her, treats her kindly. And for what avail ? Nothing. That's when you start to think 'was he the biggest loser I've ever known ?' Probably yes.
Then you just feel sorry for him. After all, he lost his son and brothers to the war. His country was obliterated. He was dethroned and handed a shameful death. For letting Sita have a wonderful life in his gardens, for showering her with care and affection, for protecting her from the beasts in the jungle and those who would have laid by her bed had he not taken her away.
I'm sure Sita enjoyed Ravana's hospitality.
The war and a fire:
Hanuman espionaged. He and his troops built the bridge. Laxman and Vibishanan fought Ravana's brothers and son. What did Rama do in the lengthy war except killing Ravana ? Wasn't he supposed to be the reincarnation of God ? Why hide behind troops ?
And when the war is over, he forced his wife to throw herself into a raging fire. To prove the world her chastity. What ? He did not do that, did he? Yes, he did. And guess what, Sita came out of the flames unharmed proving everyone that she had not been touched.
Great ! Can we have clones of Sita for firefighters. We could save a lot of lives. Humble opinion !
All is well ends well:
Every one else tried to trouble everyone else through out the book and in the end, everyone sees the truth and all lived happily together forever.
A typical, boring, bollywood-like climax.
I wish Hollywood made a parody out of it. They could rope in Christopher Nolan to direct and Hans Zimmer to compose.Tom Hanks(with a saggy skin and bent back) could play Rama, Heath Ledger(I am a dog chasing cars) could do Ravana, Joaquin Phoenix(the foxy beast) as Laxman, and goofy Eddie Murphy as insane Bharath. Michael Caine(I don't want to see a Nolan movie without him) could be pulled in for Dasharatha. Jennifer Connely, Catherine Zeta Jones and Penelope Cruz could play his chief wives. To add glamour, Salma Hayek could play Ravana's sister. Or perhaps Monica Bellucci. Christian Bale(for his disproportionate jaw) could play Valee, the ape king. I would like to see Jim Carrey as Hanuman and Morgan Freeman as narrator. Last, but not the least, Angelina Jolie could(will/must) play Sita.
Earth could be India. Saturn could play the Jungle and Pluto could double as Srilanka. The movie set will feature an artificial bridge connecting the heavenly bodies.
Well, my intention is not to offend the devotees of Rama. Or that of any other God. I just want them to know that they have dumped the juices in favour of bagasse. The essence of the book has been sacrificed to prove the divinity of Rama. Morals have been compromised for miracles.
Indian literature has produced two great gems. Ramayana - Emphasizes on familial values, and Mahabharata - Emphasizes on political values. Don't turn them into a stupid bollywood movie !
Comments
it seems you never read ramayana ....
your whole story was based on the fact that ravana didnt do anything to sita....
Firstly of all Ravana was not as bad as you think, he wanted to attain Sita by her wish and not out of compulsion.
Secondly Sita had a boon(or something of that sort) to burn anyone who touches her without her permission..
So it must be either you or I who have to read RAMAYANA again he he he
And I never said Ravana is bad. I only said he is a fool. If whatever you said is there in Ramayana, it proves that Ravana is much bigger fool than what i had thought him to be.
And i guess, we both don't have much time to waste, reading this funny book again !
Sadly I didn't see it funny, with those words used :(
These epics are literary works and should be viewed in that context. These works helped us in understanding the prespective of those in that era. Mahabharata is one good example.. Clans in that period added some roles for their clan to the epic to ascertain their importance.. this gave an insight into these clans. Its something like that..
Religion..? I don't think if "Hinduism" existed as a religion by then. If the intent was to ridicule those who don't understand this, you ended up being one among them!
When you can appreciate Spiderman, Superman & Vijay movies... why not these?
Your Friendly Neighbour,
Sai ;)
As for your logical (or so) analysis - I can only tell that u never read the original script of Ramayana. Either you must have watched Ramayana cartoon or just playing a jerk.
BTW, Ramayana is considered a proper noun - it is even encapsulated in dictionary - considered worlds greatest epic. Now weigh the minds of all those intellectuals against ur narrow mind !
;-) . And for others ramayana is a mythology and there are hundreds of versions available in India, this is one of the blooper version
:-P , I'm loving it. .
Where did hanuman go btw?
If you still believe in chastity you are not supposed to be in this era anymore. If someone points out something absurd , try to argue him out by logic or evidences and please stop abusive languages.
Just because we use clean words , it doesnt imply we dont know the other side. We are trying to find logics and explanations, just like water in mars. So please...