18:37, 7 பெப்ரவரி 2010 இல் நிலவும் திருத்தம்

Kaikeyi

The name still carries – after thousands of years – a disrepute and induces a distaste that refuses to change with the passage of time…

In our discussion on Guha, we saw Bharata speaking disparagingly about his mother, Kaikeyi when introducing her. To this day her name is spoken with embitterment. She represents all that is bad. Generations have passed and the scar on her character has not yet vanished and it will not disappear forever. While any parent would be happy to christen his or her daughter as Sita, Kausalya, Sumitra and a host of other characters figuring in the great epic, would anyone think of naming a newborn, ‘Kaikeyi’? The name still carries – after thousands of years – a disrepute and induces a distaste that refuses to change with the passage of time.

But she is the pivotal character of the entire epic. There is no Ramayana but for her. She was the daughter of Asvapati, the king of Kekeya. She was highly talented and skilled in many arts, including the training needed for charioteering during war times. It is one thing to hold the reins and drive a chariot in ordinary times and it is an entirely different art when it comes to do the same thing in a battlefield. There, the charioteer should be able to read the situation and act tactfully. Just imagine what would happen if one of the horses moves a few steps ahead, when the king has taken aim and is shooting his arrow! It was the charioteer who had to stay in complete charge of the main instrument of war that the king was dependent on. It is not without reason that when important battles were fought, kings sought the help of other kings or ministers. It was thus Krishna became the charioteer of Arjuna and Salya became the charioteer of Karna.

Rt. Hon’ble Srinivasa Sastriyar observes thus, when speaking of her. “She had abilities, talents of a kind, but she abused them for self-aggrandisement. She was by temperament disposed to domineer over people; she loved power and whoever came under her shadow regretted it. It is abundantly clear, notwithstanding all this, that she was a great character. She was cruel; she was jealous; she told lies. And even when it was pointed out that her course would involve the death of her husband, she did not hesitate to pursue it.”

That last aspect pointed out by Sastriyar, is the main reason for that distaste about her character remaining fresh in the minds of the people for such a long time. Adamantine attitude. Using the power that one happens to acquire to one’s own and personal advantage. She enjoyed the status of being the ‘most favoured queen’ of Dasaratha and stood her ground in getting what she wanted, even when she was so clear about what would happen to Dasaratha, if Rama were to be sent on exile. And remember, the epic speaks so richly of the love, respect and affection that Sri Rama had for her, more than his own mother. Kaikeyi was affectionate too.

Sastriyar says, “The only thing that redeemed her character was the affection she bore at first for Sri Rama and the affection that seems to have drawn from him. Which was the cause and which the effect, is not clear. Let us give her the credit of having been able to discern the virtues of Sri Rama and appreciating them sincerely. The Poem says however that Sri Rama made no difference whatever between his mother and her so far as his behaviour was concerned.”

How then was it possible for Kaikeyi to turn hardhearted against Rama overnight? What made her, what impelled her to pursue her cause even at the risk of death of her husband, especially when she loved Rama more than Bharata, and Rama loved her more than Kausalya? We of course know it was Manthara who brought about the change. But how can such a change be brought about at all, when the bonds were so strong?

Honey does not flow from Neem tree…

Kaikeyi to have acquired this adamantine behaviour from her mother. Sumantra who is vexed over her rigid attitude reproaches her harshly...

Rama was fond of Kaikeyi and thought of her before he thought of his own mother. The epic doesn’t cite any reason for this kind of attachment to Kaikeyi. It may be due to the fact that Rama was more a father’s child and the father loved his third queen the most. Perhaps that induced Rama or perhaps it may be due to some other reason. But the fact remains that Rama loved Kaikeyi more than Kausalya and Kaikeyi loved Rama more than Bharata.

Kamban shows this love, affection and respect that Rama had for Kaikeyi, immediately after his wedding. One always sees Rama observing the protocol on every occasion. Immediately after the wedding ceremonies were over, Rama walked to his master, Vasistha first as also the sages, fell at their feet and obtained their blessings. He walks to his father next. Now it is for him to pay his respects to his mothers. He walks towards them.

‘kEkayan maa magaL kEzh kiLar paadham, thaayinum anbodu thaazhndhu vaNangi,’ He fell at the lustrous feet of the daughter of Kekaya (Kaikeyi) with love that excelled his love for his own mother. ‘aaya than annayin adith thuNai soodi,’ He then went to his own mother (Kausalya) and prostrated before her. ‘thooya sumiththirai thaaL thozhalOdum…’ He lastly paid his respect to Sumitra.

Look at the order of importance. He first sought the blessings of Kaikeyi and walked to his mother, only afterwards. The Poet is extremely careful about these things and one can rest assured that he has ‘mixed up’ things and put Kaikeyi first in the list. Rama retains the same kind of respect and love, during all the fourteen years that he was in exile towards Kaikeyi. ‘He is carrying out his mother’s order’ is what the Poet maintains throughout, unlike in Valmiki Ramayana. When Rama returns to Ayodhya from his exile, see whom he is seeking first, for getting her blessings:

‘kaikyan thanayai mundhak kaal urap paNindhu,’ He fell at the feet of the daughter of the king of Kekaya. And then in the next line the Poet says, ‘matrai moi kuzhal iruvar thaaLum muraimayin vaNangu sengaN ayaan.’ He then bowed before the other two mothers, in order. ‘muraimayin’ he says. It means he did so in the specified order. In the order in which he has to pay his respects to them.

In both these instances, both at the beginning of the epic and in its fag end, we see Rama choosing Kaikeyi to pay his respects first, even when his own mother was standing by his side. It was an attachment of a very special kind. And the affection of Kaikeyi was not less in any way. We will see her words in detail later. But the fact remains that her heart went against Rama, in a very short time. It could not have been by a moment’s impulse that she sought what she sought. Apart from demanding the crown for Bharata, she was very particular that Rama should be sent on exile for fourteen years, despite the pleadings of poor Dasaratha to relent on at least the second boon.

This kind of an adamantine behaviour seems to have acquired by her from her mother. Sumantra who is vexed over her rigid attitude reproaches her harshly. He quotes a proverb in his remonstrance. “Indeed I account your innate disposition to be exactly similar to that of your mother. The proverb is often quoted in the word that surely honey does not flow from a Neem tree. (Valmiki Ramayana, Ayodhya Kanda, Canto XXXV, Sloka 17)

A trait acquired from mother

‘Let your son Bharata rule the country. Please do not insist that Rama should be sent on exile,’ pleaded Sumantra, ‘else the King might die…’

Certain qualities are inborn. Certain others are acquired from parents. Kaikeyi, blames Sumantra, has acquired from her mother. ‘Neither honey flows from the neem tree nor does it turn sweet for even if it is nourished with milk,’ he says. He then goes on to narrate a past incident, an incident due to which Asvapati, the father of Kaikeyi had to give up the ghost.

Asvapati was bestowed with a boon that enabled him to understand the language of all living beings, all animals and birds. He used to watch the conversation of animals, birds and ants and enjoy them himself. But the boon had a very serious limitation in that he was not supposed to share what he heard and understood from the conversation of such animals or birds and other living beings. If at all this condition is violated, he would not live after that to regret it or atone for it. It so happened that on particular day the king overheard what a bird said and laughed. The queen was puzzled. She thought that the king was laughing at her. She demanded him for the reason. Let’s hear the story from Sumantra:

“From the shrill cry of a bird heard by him while in his bed the meaning of it was accordingly deciphered by your exceedingly glorious father and he laughed over it repeatedly. Your mother grew indignant at this and, seeking (even) to hang him (in case he refused to disclose the reason of his laughter), spoke (as follows: - I wish to know the meaning of your laughter, O gentle monarch!) The King too replied to that royal lady, ‘If I tell you the reason of my laughter, my death will speedily follow from it; there is no doubt about it. Your mother then said to your father, the ruler of the Kekayas, ‘Live or die as you will (in any case) tell me the reason of your laughter. (Then alone shall I be satisfied that) you shall not laugh at me (hereafter). Told thus by his beloved consort, the said king of the Kekayas for his part correctly reported the matter to the sage who had bestowed the boon on him. Thereupon the holy man who had bestowed the boon on him replied to the king, ‘Let her die or depart (from your house for parents’ home) reveal you not the secret (to her), O ruler of the earth. Hearing the aforesaid reply of the holy man, who was pleased at heart (with him) and speedily repudiating your mother, the said king (your father) lived happily like Kubera (the god of riches). Treading on the path trodden by wicked men and seeing evil (everywhere) you too likewise are urging this emperor through infatuation to adopt a wrong course.” (Valmiki Ramayana, Ayodhya Kanda, Canto XXXV, Sloka 20-27)

‘Your mother was not worried about the fact that your father would have to die, if he disclosed her the truth. She was simply bent upon pestering him to divulge the secret to her. That was most important for her rather than the life of her husband. Now you are treading the very same path adopted by your mother. At least your father lived because he did not listen to your mother. Now it is becoming too much. Let your son Bharata rule the country. Please do not insist that Rama should be sent on exile. If he goes on exile, we will all follow him, leaving you and your son here with nobody to rule over. You are playing with the life of the king (Dasaratha). Please stop pestering the king,’ said Sumantra and looked at her face, to read any reaction there. He anticipated that his words would shake a bit, if not move, the heart of Kaikeyi. “The said queen” says Valmiki, “however, was neither excited nor agonised nor was any change observed at that time in the colour of her face.” (Ibid, Sloka 37)

If it was Manthara who changed her heart, how could she do so? What caused the change in Kaikeyi?

Kaikeyi and Manthara

The epics – both Valmiki Ramayana and Kamba Ramayana – do not speak much about Manthara. However, the Padma Purana has the following to say…

‘A kooni for Ramayana and a Shakuni for Mahabaratha,’ is a popular Tamil saying. The epics – both Valmiki Ramayana and Kamba Ramayana – do not speak much about Manthara – Kooni or the hunchbacked – as she is known in the epic. All we know about her is that she is the hereditary maidservant of Kaikeyi, who came with her from Kekaya kingdom, as Shakuni accompanied his sister from Gandhara. She is of unknown birth, says Valmiki. “A maidservant of Kaikeyi’s parents, of unknown birth, who had actually lived with her (ever since she came to Ayodhya…” runs the first Sloka of Canto 7 of Ayodhya Kanda in Valmiki Ramayana.

‘She is the personification of all sins and misdeeds of Ravana,’ says Kamban, with his touch of humour. ‘innal sey iraavaNan izhaiththa theemai pOl’ as though the effects of all tyranny of Ravana assumed a human form ‘thunna arum kodu manak kooni thOndrinaaL,’ Kooni of a mind made of wickedness inconceivable, came there. This is how he introduces her and we do not get much information on her. Let us probe a little more and find out more information on her, as she is the most important character who turned the wheel of Rama’s destiny to its original purpose.

The Padma Purana has the following to say about Manthara. “A celestial nymph, Manthara by name, was deputed by the gods to carry out their mission (in the shape of sending Sri Rama into exile and thereby bringing about the destruction of Ravana). She was given away by the king of Kekaya territory as a maid-servant of Kaikeyi.”

We can therefore infer that she has been Kaikeyi’s maid right from the time of her birth and was in the know of things, the innermost secrets of the family, since she was closest to the power centre. It was by chance that she picked up the news about the proposed coronation of Sri Rama. She noticed that Kausalya was overjoyed and was curious. If Kausalya’s happiness arouses the curiosity of this maidservant, it should ring a bell. It means that Kausalya was not very happy, as a matter of course. But that is a discussion for another day, when we study the relationship that prevailed among the three queens. We will see that later. Now coming back to the scene on hand.

“Seeing Sri Rama’s (quondam) nurse standing not very far (from her) dressed in white silk, her eyes blooming with joy, the said Manthara inquired of her: - ‘How is that Empress Kausalya (Sri Rama’s mother), full of supreme joy, is freely giving away riches to men, though devoted to wealth (herself)?” ‘How come this greedy woman is happy and is so generously giving away alms?’ That is a crude and a rather rude statement indeed, on a queen of Ayodhya – first among all queens – by a maidservant!

“(Please) also tell me wherefore such excessive rapture is being felt by these people (of Ayodhya)? And what is the overjoyed emperor going to get done?” (Valmiki Ramayana, Ayodhya Kanda, Canto VII, Slokas 7-8 and 9). When she came to know that Rama would be installed as the Prince Regent, she could not bear it. “Burning with anger, Manthara, who scented foul play (in the move of the Emperor) spoke as follows to Kaikeyi………” says Valmiki (Ibid, Sloka 13)

It is strange indeed that while all the people in Ayodhya loved Rama without exception, there was this hunchbacked, who hated him so much that she could not tolerate even listening to the good news about Rama! When the entire country looked up at him with affection, warmth, respect, love and admiration, this one could not even tolerate the very looks of him!

Rama and Manthara

When the whole world loves Rama, it is really strange that this woman must be nurturing hatred for him, for no reason at all…

When the whole world loves this boy Rama, and holds him high in its esteem, it is really strange that this woman must be nurturing hatred for him, for no reason at all. Valmiki Ramayana doesn’t give any reason for her strange behaviour. But Kamban finds a reason -

‘pandai naaL iragavan paaNi vil umizh
uNdai uNdadhanaith than uLLaththu uLLuvaaL’

She vengefully thought of the olden days when Rama was a boy and used to shoot small balls made of clay (were used as the tip for his arrows) on her hump. Later, we find Rama recalling this incident when he advises Sugriva on administration, just before the latter was installed as the King. ‘Do not even for the sake of fun, hold anyone lightly and cause pain to them – either physical or mental. Look at me. I am an example of what would happen to a man if he crosses this rule.’

‘siriyar endru igazhndhu nOvu seyvana seyyal.’ Do not do such things that would cause pain to the weak. ‘matru in neRi igazhndhu yaan Or theemai izhaiththalaal,’ Because I did not observe this rule (in my boyhood) and did a wrong thing, ‘uNarchi neeNdu,’ which caused so much agony to the ‘kuriyadhaam mEni aana kUniyaal’ hunch-backed woman of small stature (who took her revenge on me and I) ‘veRiyana eydhi’ fell in misery ‘vem thuyark kadalin veezhndhEn’ and sunk into this unending sea of grief. Therefore, be careful Sugriva. Do not take lightly of the poor, weak and invalid and make fun of them, as to cause pain to them.

That sounds convincing. And that also brings out one essential element in the nature of Rama. Sometimes, he enjoyed harmless fun. There are two more such incidents in the Ramayana, one of which is the conversation with Surpanakha. Let’s listen to what Srinivasa Sastriyar has to say on this.

“Now having said that much, let me pass on to an incident of a slightly different character which will show that Sri Rama had another quality in common with us, a quality which we have no reason whatever to condemn, a quality which I have already mentioned, a desire to enjoy himself for a little when there is occasion………” Sastriyar then cites the case of Trijata, the Brahmin with whom Rama had his fun, asking him to throw a stick as long as possible with a promise to gift him with cows measuring up to the distance from where they stood, to the point where the stick fell. He also refers to the Surpanakha incident. We will take up detailed study of these incidents when we discuss Rama. It is enough for now if we mention that this desire for harmless fun was an ingredient in his nature and also that he didn’t hesitate to apologise or repent – as the case may be – when he realises what he did. That is one of the human shades that the Poet has built into the character.

Kamban has added his own dimension to the character of Rama by including an explanation of why Manthara hated Rama. Manthara seems to remember many things that even Kaikeyi had forgotten – which were to her advantage. Seemingly insignificant, these go to show the material of which Kaikeyi is made of. From the conversation between Manthara and Kaikeyi, we are able to distil many more things. The relationship between Kaikeyi and the other two queens, for instance.

Insolent are really insecure

People who wear a mask of ‘superiority’ and are haughty are really not comfortable with themselves. They have an innate sense of insecurity…

We know what followed. Manthara waking up Kaikeyi and informing her of the hard-heartedness of her husband, who, despite holding her the most loved of the three queens, had bestowed special benefits only on the ‘son of Kausalya.’ ‘You are sleeping so happily, in complete ignorance of the disaster that is to befall on you. Wake up! Wake up and listen to me.’

‘paraava arum pudhalvaraip payandha yaavarum,’ Those who are blessed with well-behaved children of good character, ‘uraavu arum thuyarai vittu uRudhi kaaNbaraal’ would be rid of all worries and anxieties, (since character makes everything). ‘viraava arum puvikku elaam vEdhamE ana iraamanaip payandha eRkku idar undo?’ What can happen to me, who has mothered Sri Rama, who is like the very Veda to all the life forms on this earth?

‘I am the mother of Rama! What disaster can befall on me?’ Kaikeyi sounds so genuine in her love and refuses to listen to Manthara. It is a long, long argument and exchange of words between the two that ensues. Valmiki devotes a greater part of Canto 7 and the whole of Canto 8 of Ayodhya Kanda showing how persistent was Manthara, despite being scoffed at by Kaikeyi.

‘enakku nallayum allai nee.’ She brushes Manthara off. ‘You are not doing good to me.’ ‘en magan bharadhan thanakku nallayum allai nee.’ Nor are you doing good to my son Bharata.’ ‘dharumam nOkkin unakku nallayum allai.’ Taking into consideration Dharma, nor are you doing good to yourself (by what you advised me just now.)

But Manthara quite knew how to make this lady listen. She was close to her for a long time and had watched how well she related to the other two queens. Kaikeyi had been never too good or kind to the other two. Srinivasa Sastriyar observes, “It was well-known, it was notorious the way she abused her power with her husband and reduced these people to a very low status indeed.” Manthara herself draws the attention of Kaikeyi to this fact.

“It is improbable that your co-wife Kausalya (mother of Rama) who has been slighted by you in the past out of pride born of your being loved by your husband, will not repay her grudge to you.” (Valmiki Ramayana, Ayodhya Kanda, Canto VIII, Sloka 37)

You have caused untold misery and agony and inflicted suffering on that woman, because of the most favoured position you enjoyed with Dasaratha and because he loved you the most. You were proud and unthinking when you did so earlier. Now it is time for you to suffer. Kausalya, with her son having been installed as the Prince Regent, is going to pay you back in your own coin.

People call it superiority complex. People who wear a mask of ‘superiority’ and are haughty are really not comfortable with themselves. They have an innate sense of insecurity. The Concise Oxford Dictionary defines ‘superiority complex’ thus: “an attitude of superiority which conceals actual feelings of inferiority and failure.” If proof were needed, just go into the character of this woman. You will agree for sure. Manthara does not stop with that. She increases the sense of insecurity.

Insolent are really insecure II

‘You have not quite thought of another danger, my dear madam. Think of your poor father. He has too many enemies. Janaka is one among them.’

‘You do not seem to understand the implications, Kaikeyi. If Rama becomes the Prince Regent, the power goes into his hand and naturally his mother gets an upper hand over everything. When power goes into their hands, it means authority and wealth also go into their hands. Think of a situation. When mendicants come to you seeking for alms, what would you do?’

‘thooNdum innalum varumayum thodar thara,’ Those that are pursued by poverty and afflicted by misery, ‘thuyaraal eeNdu vandhu unai irandhavarkku,’ when they come to you begging for alms, ‘iru nidhi avaLai vENdi IdhiyO?’ would you go to her, seeking her permission to spend on them? ‘veLgudhiyO?’ Would you not be ashamed (to go and stand before her, for her approval)? ‘vimmal nOyaal maaNdu pOdhiyO?’ Would you rather prefer not to go there, weep it out and seek your death rather than begging her for giving alms? ‘maRuthiyO?’ Or would you say ‘no’ to those who come begging to you?

That’s a dreadful situation indeed, particularly for someone like Kaikeyi, who was a combination of too many crudities put together. To recall the words of Sastriyar, “She was by temperament disposed to domineer over people; she loved power and whoever came under her shadow regretted it… She was cruel; she was jealous; she told lies.” She can’t think of such a situation indeed. It is only natural that what one perceives of the other is his or her own inner vision of one’s own self.

When we look at others and try to assess them, are we not holding them under our own light? However dispassionate we try to be, do we not hold others from our own standpoint, of what we would do in such a situation – good or bad? Kaikeyi started looking at things differently now. The ghosts of her past woke up from the grave and she could not envision herself at the doorsteps of Kausalya, asking for her favours.

Beat the iron when it is red, it is said. Beating the iron and shaping it up is not a difficult task at all. Heating it up is. Manthara knew this so very well and persisted in lighting the fire of hatred in the heart of Kaikeyi. Now that the fire started flickering, she knew it was time for her to use the bellows to intensify it.

‘You have not quite thought of another danger, my dear madam. Think of your poor father. He has too many enemies. Janaka is one among them.’

‘kaadhal un perum kaNavanai anji,’ Because he is afraid of your loving and chivalrous husband, ‘ak kani vaay seethai thandhai un thaadhayai therugilan’ the father of Sita has not marched on your father. Janaka would not march in war against your father because he knows that when he did so, your husband would go to the aid of your father. Now, the situation would no more be the same!

‘iraaman maadhulan avan.’ He is the father-in-law of Rama. ‘nundhaikku vaazhvu ini uNdO?’ How safe is your father hereafter? Tomorrow if Janaka declares a war against your father, would Rama go to the aid of his father-in-law, or your father, who is a mere stepmother’s father?

The roots are shaken indeed.

Hari Krishnan