Rama - The story of a history
How does that prove!
 As we observed, it is true that the Ramopakhyana, while speaking about Rama’s birth, is silent on his being the avatar of Vishnu. But that doesn’t prove any thing! Inasmuch as Ramopakhyana is a story retold, it is not necessary for it to go into all the details and to resemble its original, event for event. The faithful repetition of an event from what is supposed to be the ‘original’, in a story retold, does not confirm the correctness or otherwise of the original and the absence of such event or events do not prove that the ‘original’ or ‘core book’ would not have contained that ‘missing’ portion as well. For example, take a look at this passage from Ramopakhyana, which describes the events from the birth of Rama till the decision to enthrone him is taken.
"Markandeya said, 'The pious king Dasaratha, ever mindful of the old and assiduous in religious ceremonies, was greatly pleased when these sons were born. And his sons gradually grew up in might and they became conversant with the Vedas together with all their mysteries, and with the science of arms. And when after having gone through the Brahmacharya vows the princes were married, king Dasaratha became happy and highly pleased. And the intelligent Rama, the eldest of them all, became the favourite of his father, and greatly pleased the people with his charming ways. And then, O Bharata, the wise king, considering himself old in years took counsel with his virtuous ministers and spiritual adviser for installing Rama as regent of the kingdom. And all those great ministers were agreed that it was time to do so.” (Mahabharata, Vana Parva, Section 275 - translated by Kisari Mohan
Ganguli)
Any keen reader would not fail to notice what is missing here. Rama’s marriage. The Ramopakhyana does not mention anything about the way Rama broke the bow and took the hand of Janaki as well, as it does not mention anything about the performance of the
aswameda and putrakameshti by Dasaratha. (By the way, if the Ramopakhyana does not mention anything about the marriage of Rama and Sita, it does not mean the Mahabharata as such does not mention it! It would be available somewhere else in that enormously bulky epic, which we shall quote, presently.) If one concludes that the ‘core book’ of Valmiki could not have conceived Rama as an avatar, since Ramopakhyana, a story retold, does not contain any reference to it, it is only logical to conclude that Rama and Sita did not get married at all, since that is also not mentioned there!
Jokes apart. The Ramopakhyana does contain indirect references to the divine nature of Rama’s birth, though Brockington feels otherwise. When narrating the story of Ravana, Markandeya does mention about the special boons that he received from his Grandsire, Brahma, which assures protection to him from celestials of every kind, excepting men and monkeys. Here is how the boon is asked for and granted. “Thereupon Ravana said, 'May I never experience defeat at the hands of Gandharvas, Celestials, Kinnaras, Asuras, Yakshas, Rakshasas, Serpents and all other creatures!' Brahma said,
'From those that hast named, thou shalt never have cause of fear; except from men (thou shalt have no occasion for
fear). Good betide thee! So hath it been ordained by me!” (Ibid, Section 273)
If this idea of the boon given to Ravana is accepted, it is only natural that Ravana had to be killed only by the Supreme Being, assuming the form of the ‘most puny of all puniest of creations,’ namely, men and monkeys. And the Grandsire - Brahma - does mention this to Devas, when they rally around him, seeking to be protected. The Ramopakhyana gives the assurance of Brahma, as follows. “Brahma said, ‘O Agni, he cannot be conquered in battle by either the gods or the Asuras! I have already ordained that which is needful for that purpose. Indeed his death is near! Urged by me, the four-headed God hath already been incarnate for that object. Even Vishnu, that foremost of smiters will achieve that object!’” (Ibid, Section 274) In other words, Brahma confirms that Ravana could not be killed by anyone other than men and monkeys and soon Vishnu would achieve that object. He then commands Indra (who is referred to as Sakra in the following passage, which is his other name)
"Markandeya continued, 'Then the Grandsire also asked Sakra, in their presence, 'Be thou, with all the celestials, born on earth! And beget ye on monkeys and bears, heroic sons possessed of great strength and capable of assuming any form at will as allies of Vishnu!” (Ibid)
 ‘Indra, you go along with your celestials and beget heroic sons on bears and monkeys and be ready. You will have to be the allies of Vishnu, when he descends on earth.’ I do not know what more evidence is needed to establish that the concept of an ‘avatar’
is there in the Ramopakhyana too. Another thing. It can be seen that Hanuman is repeatedly referred to as Pavana Kumar in the Ramopakhyana. Son of the Wind God. Sugriva is referred to as son of Indra and Vali is referred to as son of Surya. Why should all these ‘sons of various celestials’ be born on earth, if it was not for Vishnu to descend in the form of
Rama!
The evidences available in Mahabharata are just not confined to the Ramopakhyana. One has to see elsewhere too in the very same Mahabharata - let us now, for the present confine ourselves to the Vana Parva - where explicit evidence is available.
|
