Reading Notes: Narayan's Ramayana, Part C
In this section of the Ramayana, two episodes stick out to me as significant -- not because they are the most important or exciting episodes, but because they parallel epic mythic tradition found elsewhere in the world (spoiler alert: I mean Greece, like always).
First, the confrontation between Sugreeva and Vali, ended by Rama, provides insight into ancient Indian battle philosophy. Vali, shot through the heart by Rama, calls out Rama for fighting with cowardice. "How could you, protector of all creatures, aim your shaft from your hiding place, like some mean hunter tracking a wild beast, instead of facing me in a fight?" (111). This philosophy -- the cowardice of archers -- reminds me of multiple instances in the Iliad, and of one character in particular -- Paris. During the Iliad, Paris is constantly hiding and shooting at the Greeks in a cowardly way, and if he's not doing that, he's just running away from a fight. (Interesting that Paris, a coward and Prince of Troy, has the only non-Greek name in the epic -- an attempt to classify eastern foreigners as dishonorable? I'm not sure, but that's too much to include in this post.) Anyway, Paris shoots Diomedes in the foot, and once he sees that he has hit his mark (sort of) he celebrates. Diomedes just looks at him and calls him a coward and a good-for-nothing on the battlefield; and even though the arrow really hurts his foot, Diomedes pulls it out and continues to fight despite the injury. This, paired with Paris' utter defeat in hand-to-hand combat by Menelaus (he needs to be rescued by Aphrodite so he's not killed) show the utter lack of bravery and fighting competence of an archer. To extend this example to the Ramayana, Rama is seen in a similar way by Vali -- a coward on the battlefield who could not stand up to a superior fighter (in the case of Paris, he could never land a hit on Menelaus, let alone Diomedes). This, ultimately, calls into question the nature of warfare as an expression of manliness. Is it manly to kill, even if it's as an archer? Is it more manly to fight and die? Is manliness worth that? These questions have different cultural framings as well as different answers between ancient Indian and ancient Greek societies and philosophies, obviously, but still remain an interesting point of comparison.
Second, the episode of Sampathi and Jatayu and their flight too close to the sun nearly exactly recalls the story of Icarus flying with the wings devised by Daedalus. Icarus and Daedalus fly away, but Icarus gets too close to the sun, and the glue on his wings melts -- just what happens to Sampathi when he flies too close to the sun, albeit in a more feather-and-flesh burning way.
The continued parallel stories from these disparate places and traditions continue to fascinate me and make me want to discover how they are connected -- through some universal human story, impressed on each of our subconscious and arising through religious belief; or through coincidence, that some symbols are easier to fashion into moralistic stories than others.
Bibliography: Narayan, R. K. The Ramayana.
First, the confrontation between Sugreeva and Vali, ended by Rama, provides insight into ancient Indian battle philosophy. Vali, shot through the heart by Rama, calls out Rama for fighting with cowardice. "How could you, protector of all creatures, aim your shaft from your hiding place, like some mean hunter tracking a wild beast, instead of facing me in a fight?" (111). This philosophy -- the cowardice of archers -- reminds me of multiple instances in the Iliad, and of one character in particular -- Paris. During the Iliad, Paris is constantly hiding and shooting at the Greeks in a cowardly way, and if he's not doing that, he's just running away from a fight. (Interesting that Paris, a coward and Prince of Troy, has the only non-Greek name in the epic -- an attempt to classify eastern foreigners as dishonorable? I'm not sure, but that's too much to include in this post.) Anyway, Paris shoots Diomedes in the foot, and once he sees that he has hit his mark (sort of) he celebrates. Diomedes just looks at him and calls him a coward and a good-for-nothing on the battlefield; and even though the arrow really hurts his foot, Diomedes pulls it out and continues to fight despite the injury. This, paired with Paris' utter defeat in hand-to-hand combat by Menelaus (he needs to be rescued by Aphrodite so he's not killed) show the utter lack of bravery and fighting competence of an archer. To extend this example to the Ramayana, Rama is seen in a similar way by Vali -- a coward on the battlefield who could not stand up to a superior fighter (in the case of Paris, he could never land a hit on Menelaus, let alone Diomedes). This, ultimately, calls into question the nature of warfare as an expression of manliness. Is it manly to kill, even if it's as an archer? Is it more manly to fight and die? Is manliness worth that? These questions have different cultural framings as well as different answers between ancient Indian and ancient Greek societies and philosophies, obviously, but still remain an interesting point of comparison.
Second, the episode of Sampathi and Jatayu and their flight too close to the sun nearly exactly recalls the story of Icarus flying with the wings devised by Daedalus. Icarus and Daedalus fly away, but Icarus gets too close to the sun, and the glue on his wings melts -- just what happens to Sampathi when he flies too close to the sun, albeit in a more feather-and-flesh burning way.
This statue of Jatayu in India is HUGE. Source.
The continued parallel stories from these disparate places and traditions continue to fascinate me and make me want to discover how they are connected -- through some universal human story, impressed on each of our subconscious and arising through religious belief; or through coincidence, that some symbols are easier to fashion into moralistic stories than others.
Bibliography: Narayan, R. K. The Ramayana.
Comments
Post a Comment