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.

‘ கேகயன் மா மகள் கேழ் கிளர் பாதம், தாயினும் அன்பொடு தாழ்ந்து வணங்கி ’ He fell at the lustrous feet of the daughter of Kekaya (Kaikeyi) with love that excelled his love for his own mother.‘ஆய தன் அன்னை அடித் துணை சூடி ’ He then went to his own mother (Kausalya) and prostrated before her. ‘ தூய சுமித்திரை தாள் தொழலோடும்…’ 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.

Boon or bane?

If the first situation posed a question of survival of her own self, the second possible situation was frightening indeed. This wouldn’t just stop with her. It has deeper implications. It may affect the security of her father and may be her entire race! And now Manthara is telling her that Bharata and Rama are ‘born enemies’ of each other! Even if Bharata could be pushed to the throne by some means, that might not last long, for Rama might rise in protest.

“In case Bharata rightly secures his paternal throne (as promised by his father), then only will the welfare of those (like myself) belonging to the side of your parents be ensured. Having lost his fortune, how will that boy of yours, a born enemy of Rama – whose object has been realised – and deserving a life of ease, live in subjection (to Rama)? You ought to protect Bharata when like the leader of a herd of elephants chased in a forest by a lion he is overpowered by Rama.” (Valmiki Ramayana, Ayodhya Kanda, Canto VIII, Sloka 33-35)

It was therefore essential to secure the throne for Bharata and also to protect him against the wrath of Rama. “As soon as Rama attains sovereignty of the globe Bharata will surely meet his doom. Therefore actually devise (some) means of securing sovereignty in favour of your son (Bharata) as well as an excuse for banishing Rama, his (born) enemy.” (Ibid, Sloka 39)
It is Manthara who reminds Kaikeyi of power that was lying in her hands. Kaikeyi had quite forgotten that. The incident that led Dasaratha to grant her two boons, which Kaikeyi was not desirous of asking for at that time, is narrated variedly. One popular version says that when Dasaratha was engaged in a war with Sambarasura, the axle of one of the wheels of his chariot broke. Kaikeyi, who was cursed by Dhurvasa for her rash behaviour, had lost all sensitivity in her index finger and used it as a substitute for the axle and saved the situation. Valmiki Ramayana gives a different version -

“Proceeding in a southerly direction in order to help the cause of Indra (the ruler of gods) in a war between gods and demons in the former days along with (other dependent) royal sages, and taking you (with him), your husband (Emperor Dasaratha), O Kaikeyi, marched against the city known by the name of Vaijayanta in the Dandaka forest, where lived the demon Timidhwaja (so-called because his ensign bore the emblem of Timi, a species of fish of enormous size). (Also) known as Sambara, that great demon, who knew hundreds of conjuring tricks and could not be conquered (even) by hosts of gods, offered battle to Indra. Quickly carrying off (from their beds) at night the warriors injured and grievously wounded in the course of that great conflict and lying fast asleep, the ogre-like demons used to make short work of them. There Emperor Dasaratha fought a great battle with the demons and the mighty-armed hero was lacerated with weapons and missiles on that occasion. Having been removed in an unconscious state from the field of battle by you, O glorious lady, your husband (King Dasaratha) was mangled with weapons even there and saved by you (by being taken to a still safer retreat.). A couple of boons were offered to you by him, pleased as he was (with your invaluable services on two occasions one after another) O lady with charming looks, the said Dasaratha (your husband) O queen, was (however) told by you (as follows) – ‘I shall certainly claim them when I will, O lord!’ ‘Amen!’ was the answer then given by the high-souled monarch.” (Ibid, Canto IX, Sloka 11-17)

Dasaratha was saved twice and therefore he granted two boons. But there was another path open to them to bring Bharata to power, which neither Kaikeyi nor Manthara seemed to remember.

The boon superseded

Though he ruled the earth for 60,000 years with a gynaeceum of 60,000 wives, Dasaratha had no children. At least his first two queens did not bear any child, which led him to marry his third queen, Kaikeyi. The Bala Kanda gives us the information that he had a daughter by name Santa, who was adopted by Romapada and was given in marriage to Rsyasrnga. Sumantra mentions this when he suggests to Dasaratha to bring Rsyasrnga to Ayodhya to perform putra-kameshti yaga.

“In this way (according to the suggestion of the family priest and the ministers of King Romapada) the Rsi’s son (Rsyasrnga) will be caused by Romapada (the ruler of the Anga territory) to be brought (to his own capital) through courtesans, when the rain-god will cause clouds to send down rain and Santa (Dasaratha’s daughter adopted by Romapada) will be given (in marriage to Rsyasrnga). (Valmiki Ramayana, Bala Kanda, Canto IX, Sloka 18).

But the fact remains that his patta-mahishis did not bear any child that would protect the country after Dasaratha. He therefore married Kaikeyi. At the time of his marriage, he assured the King of Kekaya that he would give the kingdom to the child borne by Kaikeyi. But it so happened that Kaikeyi also did not bear any child and he had to perform the sacrifice of putra-kameshti. Now, Rama was born to Kausalya, the first of the three queens and the assurance given to King Kekaya is nullified now, because of the changed circumstances and because of the personal charms of young Rama had won him great acclaims and favour among one and all in Ayodhya, at all levels.

However, this thought of the promise must have been troubling the mind of Dasaratha and he might have even anticipated trouble from Bharata, though Bharata’s personal quality would not have allowed him to do so. We see Dasaratha expressing his fears in a veiled manner, when he speaks to Rama about his proposal to make him the Prince Regent -

“Let your friends vigilantly guard you on all sides tonight; for ceremonials of this kind (as your installation in the office of Prince Regent are hampered by many obstacles. Your installation (as Prince Regent) in my opinion must take place during the very interval when Bharata is away from this city of Ayodhya. Although your (half-) brother Bharata scrupulously abides by the conduct of the righteous, is obedient to you (his elder brother), pious of mind and full of compassion and brought his mind under control, the mind of men nonetheless is inconstant; such is my belief.” (Ibid, Canto IV, Sloka 24-26)
‘I know Bharata is very pious and is devoid of greed. Even then, let your installation take place in his absence, for fickle is the way of human mind.’ As far as Rama was concerned, it was a responsibility he was assuming and it did not make any difference to him either to assume it or to relinquish it.

Though there is no direct mention in the epic that Dasaratha narrated the events of those days to Rama, we see Rama in possession of the information. He narrates this assurance of Dasaratha to the king of Kekaya in a later scene, when Bharata comes to Citrakuta to take him back to Ayodhya.

Was it valid?

Implored by Bharata to return to Ayodhya to accept the throne, Sri Rama tells him thus: “The assertion that you – a son born of Dasaratha, the foremost of kings through Kaikeyi – have made just now as above is reasonable. In the past while marrying Kaikeyi (your mother) O brother, our celebrated father promised to your maternal grandfather the kingdom (of Ayodhya in favour of her issue) as the best price (for the marriage). Nay, propitiated (by standing him in good stead) in a conflict between the gods and the demons, and immensely delighted, the powerful King, who held sway over the (entire) globe, granted a boon to your mother. Then, binding him with a solemn oath your aforesaid illustrious mother, who was endowed with an excellent complexion, sought (the following) two boons of Dasaratha (the foremost of men) viz., (1) rulership for you, O tiger among men and (2) exile for me; and urged thus, the king granted the aforesaid boons to her.” (Valmiki Ramayana, Ayodhya Kanda, Canto CVII, Sloka 2-6)

The above assertion of Rama confirms the assurance given by Dasaratha to the king of Kekaya. It was about this boon that Dasaratha seemed to worry. But the fact that Kaikeyi did not even mention it, and more than that Manthara didn’t even remind her of that only goes to show that circumstances had changed very widely and that it was not just or proper to insist on it now.
As mentioned earlier, Dasaratha married Kaikeyi only because the first two queens did not bear any child to rule the kingdom after him. At such a time he married Kaikeyi on the aforesaid assurance and it so happened that she also did not bear a child. Now, when the putra-kameshti was performed, all the three queens conceived simultaneously on the same day and the children were begotten from the Payasa of the sacrifice the assurance given to the king of Kekaya loses its validity. The established custom of enthroning the eldest son now takes precedence over whatever was said earlier. If instead of Kausalya, Sumitra had given birth to the eldest child, even then that eldest child would have been given the preference.

We see a situation that is very close to this in the Mahabaratha. The great king Santanu had set his mind on Sathyavathi, the daughter of the King of fishermen. Sathyavathi’s father was very specific that the kingdom should go to her children and Devavratha, the eldest son of Santanu, should not have any claims to it. Devavratha met him, and assured him that he would not do so and consented to his condition, soliciting the hand of Sathyavathi to his father, Santanu. The clever fisherman said, ‘Lad, you are good and you agree to this condition. What is the guarantee that your children would not claim it, depriving my descendants of their kingship?’ ‘I avow that I will not marry! I will remain a bachelor and there won’t be the question of my descendents staking a claim for the kingdom’ roared Devavratha, and came to be known as Bhishma from that day. That was an assurance, which was binding in all circumstances. There was no question about the circumstances in this case. But not so in the case of what Dasaratha assured.

It is simply because of this reason that Kaikeyi did not ask for it nor did Manthara remind her of it, though Dasaratha was a little uncomfortable about his assurance, riven between Dharma and Nyaya. Dasaratha’s anxiety was more out of a misconception and misjudgement of his and Bharata’s positions in respect of the assurance. He did not realise that it was not valid any more. Was there such a possibility, this hard-hearted woman would have pressed for it and would have even asked for a third boon!

How hard-hearted was this lady! How persistent was she in obtaining what she wanted, even at the cost of her husband’s life! Was there any evolution in the case of this character in the epic? Let us see the essence of the drama that took place.

In the name of Rama

Dasaratha was in an elated state of mind when he came to the gynaeceum and promised Kaikeyi in the name of Rama to grant whatever she wants. ‘vaLLal iraaman un maindhan aaNai,’ he says. ‘I won’t be stingy about showering you with my gifts. I tell you this in the name of your son Rama, the large-hearted.’ ‘I would give whatever you want as readily and as willingly as does Rama.’ ‘vaLLal,’ is the adjective that he uses to refer to Rama. Benefactor. Philanthropist who comes forward readily and happily to give; to shower the receiver with riches.

Dasaratha does not stop with that. ‘In the name of your son, Rama,’ he says. Poor thing. He was not ready for what was to come. When Kaikeyi reminded him of the two boons that are due to her, he is so ready and happy to grant them to her. After all, this was an occasion worth celebrating. He had decided to make Rama the Prince Regent. His proposal was received by the council of ministers and all others warmly. Though they were reluctant to give their consent for the king to relinquish the crown, the prospects of Rama occupying the throne delighted their hearts and that made them accept his proposal.

It was a time when Dasaratha was getting tired of his kingly duties. ‘It is time for me to retire,’ he announced and he could get the assent of the people, only because they saw Rama as the successor and were so happy about the prospects. Dasaratha felt light of heart when Rama accepted as a matter of duty what his father proposed. The occasion therefore called for celebration indeed. And Kaikeyi was the youngest of the three queens and his beloved – more beloved than any other queen for that matter.

But the inference that he had trouble at heart about the promise to the king of Kekaya becomes apparent when the fact that the matter of coronation of Rama, which has been discussed in public, decided, accepted and announced was not known to Kaikeyi – and of course Manthara – when all the others were aware of it and rejoicing. It is strange that Dasaratha did not inform Kaikeyi of this important decision. Not only that. Not a single soul around volunteered to keep them informed – despite the fact such informants are immediately rewarded for bringing the news. We have seen in a number of occasions that the informant is rewarded with a chain of gold etc. In the circumstances, the kind of information vacuum around Kaikeyi could not have been accidental.

Srinivasa Sastriyar observes: “Apparently he remembered it, but then as the brothers grew up, Sri Rama outshone the others so decisively that he was the universal favourite. The other brothers were far, far behind him, so that even Kaikeyi’s father apparently forgot it, or thought it prudent not to press it. When Dasaratha desired to make Sri Rama yuvaraja, he thought it was a favourable circumstance that Bharata was absent in his maternal uncle’s country with Satrughna. He omitted to send invitations to Asvapati and Janaka, ostensibly on account of the great distance. The real reason was that he remembered the promise he had made to Asvapati!”

With such turbulence at heart, it is interesting and curious indeed that Dasaratha was so ready to grant the boons that Kaikeyi sought. Perhaps he was under the impression that things have taken a concrete shape and it was not possible to change the course of events at this stage. Whatever it might be, he did not expect the kind of words that slipped from the mouth of Kaikeyi that day. Notice his assurance again. ‘I promise in the name of your son Rama.’

Spare my son

When Kaikeyi dropped the bombshells one by one, Dasaratha was shaken out of his frame. Leave alone his special attachment for Rama; leave alone the special charms that Rama exercised on the whole land and leave alone his being the first son of the family. It was not possible for him to go back on a decision that has been discussed, debated and decreed. He had announced it openly and the entire Ayodhya was waiting eagerly for the ceremony. How was he to go back on his decision and make serious changes to it?

On the one hand it was a question of his personal reputation and standing among the public. On the other, it was a question of abiding by his words. Respecting what has already been promised, even without knowing what was it that was promised. However, after seeing her adamantine stand, he relented and agreed to the proposal to enthrone Bharata. But he is not able to bear the thought of sending Rama on exile for fourteen years. ‘Please reconsider that,’ he begs her ‘nin magan aaLvaan nee inidhu aaLvaay.’ Your son would rule and you would rule. ‘nilam ellaam nin vayam aamE.’ All this land would come under your control. ‘aaLudhi.’ Rule over. ‘thandhEn.’ I give it unto you. ‘urai kundrEn.’ I will not go back on my words. ‘en magan, en kaN, en uyir, ellaa uyirgatkkum nan magan,’ My son, the pupil of my eye, my very life and the good son of all in the land, ‘naadu iRavamai naya’ let him not leave the country. Please spare him. Let him remain here. I beg of you to reconsider your stand on that.

Just moments before Dasaratha promised in the name of Rama, the son of Kaikeyi. Observe how so totally his words change now. You and your son (Bharata) may rule this land. Allow my son (Rama) to remain here. The position has so materially changed now! He desperately wants Rama to remain in Ayodhya and begs with Kaikeyi to drop that demand. He even touches the feet of Kaikeyi, something that cannot be even thought of by the Indian womanhood – husband falling at her feet.
“My life cannot be prolonged without my son (Rama)’ how, then, can there be (any) happiness (for me)? How can there be (any) joy without a son (even) to the knowers of the Self? (Therefore) you ought not to do an unfriendly act to me, O queen! I even (stoop down to) touch your feet. Be gracious to me.’ Wailing like a forlorn child, the said monarch – who had been gripped in the heart by Kaikeyi (who had transgressed all bounds of decorum) – sank down (unconscious) like an ailing man, not fully reaching the queen’s feet, both of which lay stretched (before him). (Valmiki Ramayana, Ayodhya Kanda, Canto XII, Sloka 111, 112)

Srinivasa Sastriyar expounds this Sloka as follows. “This woman who transgressed all maryada, all rules of proper conduct, when being caught by her, Dasaratha said, ‘I will touch your feet,’ she puts them forward. She was conscious that she was in the position of a great creditor. Dasaratha was only a poor debtor. But because he was crying, his eyes were not working properly at the time and he could not touch the feet actually, just escaped by the sheerest accident. That shows you the extent to which Kaikeyi allowed herself to go in her wickedness.” Shocking. But that’s not all. Kamban builds up the scene further.

The game plan

The scene outside the gynaeceum was quite different. They were all preparing for the ceremonials that would secure Rama as their king. It was dawn and King Dasaratha had fallen down, having lost his consciousness at the cruel demands, struck more by the necessity of having to part with his endeared son. Vasistha sends Sumantra to bring the king to the hall of austerities that was getting ready for the rites. Sumantra enters the chamber to find Dasaratha in a dazed condition. He is not able to understand as to why the King should be so pale when the joyful occasion is just hours away. Dasaratha was in no mood to speak. Kaikeyi takes charge of the situation.

“Hearing his pathetic remark and finding the king miserable, Sumantra with tightly joined palms slipped away to some distance from that place. When owing to his miserable condition, the emperor could not speak himself, Kaikeyi, who was well-versed in statecraft, replied (on behalf of the emperor) to Sumantra (as follows) – so the tradition goes. ‘Completely exhausted due to uninterrupted wakefulness during the night, impatient as he was through jubilation over (the prospect of) Sri Rama’s installation, the king, O Sumantra, has fallen asleep. Therefore, go quickly, O charioteer and bring the illustrious Prince Rama here.” (Valmiki Ramayana, Ayodhya Kanda, Canto XIV, Sloka 60-62)

‘He was so excited about the functions to be conducted in the morning, for installation of Rama as the Prince Regent. He is so exhausted because he did not sleep all through the night. He is just dozing a little.’ Clearly a barefaced lie! The fact was that Kaikeyi was not able to disclose it to anyone else before conveying the matter to Rama. She knew that Rama would readily agree to whatever was ordained – either by the king or by her own self – and she was so particular that the news on Bharata being installed as the Prince Regent and Rama’s exile should be made public only after securing Rama’s explicit ‘yes.’

As Valmiki says in the above Sloka, she was well-versed in the statecraft. She knew that the proposed move would result in a commotion and may even lead to an uprising, if it was disclosed to the people of Ayodhya, before Rama coming to know of it. If Rama could be spoken to and asked to go on exile, it would then be easy for her, for Rama would not let the word of his father go false and would handle the situation himself. It would then be his business to speak to people, convince great gurus and ministers about his undertaking the exile on himself!

That is why she does not disclose anything now to Sumantra. She says that the king was excited, was wakeful throughout the night and went to sleep just then. She does not forget to add an order to Sumantra to fetch Rama to their place. Sumantra was so happy, to hear that says Kamban – though Valmiki paints a different picture. He rushes to Rama immediately.
‘kotravar munivar matrum kuvalayaththu uLLaar,’ All the kings, sages and the people ‘unnaip petravan thannaip pOlap perum parivu iyatri nindraar’ are waiting with hearts throbbing with love for you, so similar to the love that Dasaratha has for you. ‘chitravai thaanum aangE koNarga enach cheppinaaL.’ Even your stepmother has asked you to come over there. ‘pon thada magudam soodap pOdhidhu viraivin.’ Come quickly and be adorned with the crown.

Father’s or mother’s words?

The versions of Kamban and Valmiki differ at this point to a large extent. Valmiki bases the drama on the pitru-vakya paripalana or the maintenance of the word of one’s father. For Kamban, it is not so. He portrays Dasaratha out-and-out caught in his own web of his Truthfulness and he maintains throughout the epic that the exile was undertaken by Rama at the instance of Kaikeyi, which was aided by Dasaratha. It was not the order of Dasaratha that Rama was carrying out. It was that of Kaikeyi.

This is what Lakshmana tells Jatayu in the presence of Rama. ‘Why have you come to the jungle, instead of ruling the kingdom? Were you deprived of your kingdom by demons? Ogres? Or the celestials? I will fight with them and secure your kingdom back to you,’ says Jatayu, an old friend of Dasaratha, in whom Rama and Lakshmana saw their father himself.
‘thaadhai kooralum thambiyai nOkkinaan seethai kELvan.’ When (the) father(like) Jatayu asked them thus, Rama (husband of Sita) turned to Lakshmana (‘Answer him Lakshmana!’ was what was implied.) ‘avanum than chitravai maadharaal vandha seigai ………uNarththinaan.’ Lakshmana told him that it was due to the word of their stepmother Kaikeyi and detailed all the incidents.

Hanuman, who is once again narrated of the events by Lakshmana, gets back to Sugriva and tells him thus. ‘uLai vayap puraviyaan udhava,’ Helped by him of the maned-horse (Dasaratha) ‘utru oru solaal’ by the word of ‘aLavu il karpu udai chitravai paNiththu aruLalaal,’ stepmother of immeasurable virtue, Rama relinquished the throne in favour of his younger brother.

‘maatravaL Eva matru avaL than maindhanukku aatra arum uvagayaal aLiththa iyan,’ says Vali to Tara. He who happily gave his throne to his younger brother at the instance of his stepmother.

That is what Sita tells Ravana-sanyasi. When Ravana assumes the form of a sage and approaches her when she is alone and asks her about her husband, she so proudly says, ‘dhayaradhan thol kulath thanayan’ he is born in the house of Dasaratha. ‘uyar kulaththu annai sol uchchi Endhinaan.’ He has come to the forest at the behest of his mother of a noble family.
What I have quoted above are very few places and are the words of important characters in the epic, uttered at very important junctures. It is how each and every character looks at what Sri Rama has undertaken, as far as Kamba Ramayana is concerned. Rama was serving the word of his mother. No doubt it was the word of his father, which Kamban’s Rama does not fail to acknowledge. ‘I have to serve this term so that our father does not become a liar and suffer in hell because of falsehood,’ he tells in different instances. But it was the word of Dasaratha and not the desire of Dasaratha that he was carrying out. Seen from proper perspective, it was the desire of Kaikeyi aided by the word of Dasaratha. This is what Kamban maintains. His drama is built around this theme and therefore he circumvents several incidents. The meeting of Dasaratha and Rama, for instance, is not to be seen in Kamba Ramayana.

We will see the version according to Valmiki for a while before returning to Kamban.

Father’s or mother’s words? II

More than anything else, it is amazing that Kamban makes to spell out ‘mathru vaakya paripalanm’ from the mouth of Rama himself. ‘It is the word of Kaikeyi that I have accepted and come out on exile,’ he says. The verse occurs in 'Surpanakaip Padalam' in Kamba Ramayanam.

As we know Surpanakha falls in love with Sri Rama and is so jealous about Sita. It is a long scene that would make the reader bubble with joy and laughter. The Poet has worked it out so beautifully and humorously that it serves as a turning point in the story, preparing the minds of the readers for the extreme kind of pathos that awaits him in the scenes to come.
Surpanakha’s love belongs to the rakshasa type. When you rakshasa, one need not necessarily have two horns on the head, with long and protruding canine teeth and all kinds of avalakshana of the physique. Such descriptions are poetic and symbolic representation of what is within. Surpanakha of course belonged to an asura family and was so maniacal about Rama in a trice. It could not be called love in its proper sense. Her lust knew no bounds when she set her eyes on Rama. She could not believe that the damsel by his side could be his wife. ‘These two look like sages, though they carry mighty bows in their hands. It is not possible that this woman would be his wife,’ she thinks. ‘More over, who will take his wife to such a deep jungle, which is so unsafe?’ she reasons to herself.

‘Then she must be another rakshasa woman like me, who has also assumed a beautiful form – again, like me – to enchant this man. Let me gobble her away so that I can win his love,’ she thought. She tried to grab Sita and run away into the jungle, when Rama was away for performing sandhi. Poor thing, she did not notice Lakshmana was keeping vigil on Sita from a distance.

Lakshmana severed her nose, earlobes and breasts as punishment, not killing her because though an ogress, she was a woman. Even at such point of time, she is not able to understand that Rama would not take her. She misunderstands the witty exchanges that Rama had with her earlier and believes that he must be in love with her and he is not expressing his love for her openly, only because of the presence of ‘these other two things,’ by his side.

Profusely bleeding, she makes lecherous advances towards Rama. Rama realises that this game has gone a bit too far and it was time for him to be firm. ‘tharai aLiththa dhayaradhan than pudhalvar yaam,’ he tells her. ‘We are the sons of Dasaratha, the protector of this world. ‘thaai sol thaangi virai aLitththa kaan pugundhEm.’ We have come to the jungle as instructed by (at the behest of) our mother. Rama then goes on with why he is in the jungle and tells her about his avowal to the sages to annihilate asuras from the face of the world. We will discuss this scene in detail on a later day.

The point to be seen now is, Kamban makes it very clear that Rama was carrying out the order of Kaikeyi and Dasaratha was only incidental to it. ‘My father has promised this to my mother and I have to see that his words are respected and honoured. He should not be seen as a liar,’ he says. But the onus for sending him on exile rests only on Kaikeyi and Kaikeyi alone. That is an important deviation that Kamban has made.

Rama does not speak twice!

Let us get back to the scene that we were discussing – Sumantra going to bring Rama to the palace where Kaikeyi resided. It may be recalled that it was her plan to open the subject with Rama first. It was not to open the subject. It was to tell him in clear terms. These are not mentioned in the epic explicitly but the Poet builds up the drama so very intensely that we are able to get a glimpse into the heart of Kaikeyi.
When Rama enters the palace, the people are not able to assess the right reason, for he should be going over to the place were the installation ceremonies were on and not to the palace of Kaikeyi! The Poet adds to the pathos with pieces of conversation from the people, their perception and their way of looking at it. ‘thaai kaiyil vaLarndhilan.’ He was not brought up by his mother, Kausalya. ‘vaLarthadhu, thavathaal; kEkayan madandhai.’ It was given to the daughter of the king of Kekaya; she did the penance and had the good fortune for bringing up this lad. ‘kiLar gnaalam ivan aaLa Igayil uvandhavaL.’ She is so happy about Rama becoming the successor. ‘thOgai avaL pEr uvagai sollal aridhu endraar.’ Who can measure the joy that flows in her heart, they said.
The picture turns suddenly dark once Rama enters the gynaeceum. There is a mixture of feelings everywhere. People standing out are bubbling with happiness and joy and enthusiasm. Neither Sumantra nor Rama who are entering in is aware of the real reason. Dasaratha has fallen down in a swoon and has not gained his consciousness back as yet. Kaikeyi stands close to Dasaratha, making Rama infer that there is something wrong. He is worried.
“I hope no offence has been unwittingly caused by me (against my father). (Pray) tell me the reason why father is angry with me. Propitiate him you alone (on my behalf). How, I wonder, is he not cheerful of mind, through ever fond of me? With his face downcast he does not even speak to me, affected as he is. I hope no agony caused by bodily distemper or mental anguish afflicts him; really speaking, everlasting happiness is hard to secure.” (Valmiki Ramayana, Ayodhya Kanda, Canto XVIII, Sloka 11-13)
Kaikeyi maintains a grim face. She does not show any sign of affection. Then Rama is worried about other things. “I hope no offence has been has been committed (by me) against Prince Bharata of pleasing aspect or Satrughna possessing great valour or against my mothers.” (Ibid, Sloka 14)
This was what she was waiting for! The iron is hot now, without her making any effort! ‘He has something unpleasant to tell you; but is not able to do so for fear of causing pain to you,’ she says. ‘I can tell you only if you promise that you will do whatever he says, good or bad.’ Sastriyar observes: “She binds him by a previous promise, the same way as she did her husband. Good or bad, you may like it or you may not like it, but you must do it.”
‘I do not go back on my words O mother mine!’ Rama gives his word. ‘karishye pratijaane cha ramO dhwirna abhibhashathe.’ (Ibid, Sloka 30) (Know that) Rama does not speak twice!

Years twice seven

‘thaai ena ninaivaan munnE kUtru enath thamiyaL vandhaaL’ says Kamban. Kaikeyi came to the presence of Rama who held her in his mind as his own mother, all alone, like Yama himself. He waits for the arrival of his mother and here comes Yama in the form of Kaikeyi. ‘thamiyaL’ he says. She came alone. It means that Rama and Kaikeyi were alone at this time. Dasaratha has lost his consciousness. Sumantra who accompanied Rama is not with them now. Only Kaikeyi and Rama are there.
Strangely, Lakshmana, who is the alter ego of Rama who does not move away from his side even for a single moment, is not to be seen with him now! And the Poets are silent on this matter. Just think of it. If only Lakshmana was by the side of Rama at this moment, as it has always been, would Ramayana be the epic as it is read today? Would he have spared Kaikeyi? Would it have been possible at all for Rama to give his words, without difficulty, and so very readily, if Lakshmana were with him? The scene is rather grim; but is so constructed as to show that it is pre-ordained by divine Will to make it happen this way. What else could have been the reason for Lakshmana’s most conspicuous absence, that too at the most important moment of the epic!

‘I have something to tell you Rama, which your father wants me to convey to you,’ says Kaikeyi. The promise by which she binds Rama in Valmiki Ramayana is absent in Kamban. She starts the dialogue directly. ‘endhayE Eva, nIrE urai seya iyaivadhu uNdEl, uindhanan adiyEn,’ says Rama. If it was my father who told me to do something and if it is you who is going to convey it to me, it is my salvation O mother mine!

‘aazhi soozh ulagam ellAm bharadhanE aaLa,’ While Bharata rules this earth surrounded by the sea, ‘nee pOi’ you go ‘thaazh irum sadaigaL thaangi,’ growing long matted locks of hair, ‘thaanga arum thavam mER koNdu,’ performing penance of the highest kind, ‘poozhi vem kaanam naNNi,’ remaining yonder in the deep jungles ’puNNiya nadhigaL aadi,’ bathing in the holiest of rivers, ‘Ezh irandu aaNdin vaa endru iyambinan arasan endraaL,’ and come back after (passage of) years twice-seven. So said the king.

Kaikeyi so very cunningly makes it sound like paradise, “And Wilderness is Paradise enow,” as Omar Khayyám would put it! ‘Your father wants Bharata to rule the land and he wants to you to go to the wilderness, perform penance like sages, growing matted hair, bathing in holy rivers and be back in (a trice, it is only) years twice-seven.’ Kamban has retained the expression of Valmiki here. ‘sapthaspdasa varshaaNI dandakaaranya maashridha’. “Forgoing the forthcoming installation and ensconced in the Dandaka forest, wear matter locks and the bark of trees for seven and seven years.” (Valmiki Ramayana, Ayodhya Kanda, Canto XVIII, Sloka 37)

It is not too much my dear boy, only twice seven. And mind you, it is not I, it is your father who wants you to go on exile and install Bharata in the throne instead.

How dare this lady is! How cunning! She does not even hesitate to speak such barefaced lie! Her tongue doesn’t falter, fumble or dawdle to utter such falsehood shamelessly. As is true with other character, this woman displaying the lowliest of traits also shown reaching her evolution to a higher order, as the epic takes shape.

Leave alone the king, will I disobey you?

Kamban so totally changes the drama of Valmiki, especially in this and the following scenes and he has a purpose behind it. The dialogue between Dasaratha and Rama on going on exile is absent in Kamban. Rama in fact, does not meet Dasaratha at all before he starts on his exile. We will take up the changes and our analysis one by one, as they come up in sequence.
We saw that the promise by which Kaikeyi binds Rama, before spelling the messages out as found in Valmiki, is absent in Kamban. She simply takes the law into her own hands and directs Rama to go on exile – and she had the temerity to say that these were the words of Dasaratha. The way Rama faces this situation that has so suddenly and without warning has gone topsy-turvy brings out the person of highest calibre that he is. He is not at all affected in any manner. In fact, when Dasaratha told him that he should accept the responsibility of kingship, he accepted it only as a matter of duty. This is a point to be discussed in detail when studying Rama.

When this mother tells him that he has to give up what his father asked him to do only the previous day, he is not affected. This mother tells him in so many seemingly sweet words that he has to go to the jungle for fourteen long years. That doesn’t make a difference to him. In Valmiki Ramayana, we see even Sumantra protesting to go and fetch Rama when Kaikeyi orders him. “Without hearing the king’s command, O queen, how shall I go?” he asks. (Valmiki Ramayana, Ayodhya Kanda, Canto XIV, Sloka 64). He leaves only after Dasaratha tells him to do so. “Hearing the aforesaid reply of the minister, the king spoke to him (as follows): - ‘Sumantra, I should like to see Rama, (please) bring the charming boy at once.” (Ibid, Sloka 64/65 [part])
But not so for Rama. He does not question the veracity of his mother’s words, though this affects his life and his prospects so totally and materially. It is sufficient for him if his mother says so. Mother? Yes. This stepmother was never his stepmother. ‘mannavan paNi anndraagil num paNi maruppanO yaan?’ he says. (Even) if it is not the order of the King, will I ever refuse to carry out your order? ‘en pinnavan petra selvam adiyanEn petradhu andrO?’ Is not the wealth given to my brother is (as good as) that which is given to me? ‘en ini uRudhi appaal?’ What else do I need for my good? ‘ip paNi thalai mER koNden,’ I accept this command just now. ‘min oLir kaanam indrE pOgindrEn.’ I am leaving for the bright and dazzling jungle this day and now. ‘vidayum koNdEn.’ I have your adieu, mother, already. I seek your permission to go and I am sure that you would not hesitate to bid me farewell.

So saying, he left the palace, to the palace of Kausalya. Such a loving and obedient son as Rama, there seems that something is missing here. Should he not see Dasaratha, speak with him, bid him adieu before going? Kamban says, Rama fell at the feet of Kaikeyi and then turned towards the direction of Dasaratha (who was unconscious). ‘than thuNai thaadhai paadham ath thisai nOkkith thaazhndhu.’ He turned in the direction of the feet of Dasaratha (who was lying unconscious) and paid obeisance to them. Notice that the Poet avoids the words ‘he touched his feet.’ He did so from a distance, careful not to wake him up by touching him.

Intriguing. Why did Rama not ask about what happened to his father, as he asks in Valmiki Ramayana? Why he avoids seeing him till he leaves Ayodhya?

Hari Krishnan