Musings of an Unknown Indian

Vakra-Tunndda Maha-Kaaya Surya-Kotti Samaprabha

Nirvighnam Kuru Me Deva Sarva-Kaaryessu Sarvadaa

II AUM Sri Ganeshaya NamahaII

सर्वमंगलमंगल्ये शिवे सर्वार्थसाधिके । शरण्ये त्र्यम्बके गौरि नारायणि नमोऽस्तु ते ॥

sarva maṇgala māṇgalyē

śĭvē sărvārtha sādhĭkē

śaranyē tryambakē Gauri

Nārāyanī namostŭtē

Yaa Devii Sarva-Bhutessu Buddhi-Ruupenna Samsthitaa |

Namas-Tasyai Namas-Tasyai Namas-Tasyai Namo Namah ||8||

Yaa Devii Sarva-Bhutessu Shakti-Ruupenna Samsthitaa |

Namas-Tasyai Namas-Tasyai Namas-Tasyai Namo Namah ||12||

Yaa Devii Sarva-Bhutessu Shaanti-Ruupenna Samsthitaa |

Namas-Tasyai Namas-Tasyai Namas-Tasyai Namo Namah ||17||

Yaa Devii Sarva-Bhutessu Shraddhaa-Ruupenna Samsthitaa |

Namas-Tasyai Namas-Tasyai Namas-Tasyai Namo Namah ||18||

Yaa Devii Sarva-Bhutessu Smrti-Ruupenna Samsthitaa |

Namas-Tasyai Namas-Tasyai Namas-Tasyai Namo Namah ||22||

Yaa Devii Sarva-Bhutessu Dayaa-Ruupenna Samsthitaa |

Namas-Tasyai Namas-Tasyai Namas-Tasyai Namo Namah ||23||

Yaa Devii Sarva-Bhutessu Maatr-Ruupenna Samsthitaa |

Namas-Tasyai Namas-Tasyai Namas-Tasyai Namo Namah ||25||

[Ya Devi Sarvabhutesu-from Devi Mahatmyam]

Pitr-Paksh (Bangla: Pitri Pakkho; literally: fortnight of the ancestors) - a time to perform Tarpan (Torpon) - ancestral rituals - has ended. Devi Paksha (Debi Pakkho) has commenced. It is Mahalaya today.

... Maa aaschhen. Maa is on her way.

And therefore, I will begin this sure-to-be-cherished post (by moi at least) with the link to an audio-visual presentation of an All India Radio (AIR) recording: "Mahalaya - Mahisasuramardini" or the subjugation of the negative or aasuricforces, represented by Mahisasura:

It is an oratorio - invoking the Goddess Durga (a manifestation of Maa Shakti - the feminine force behind the cosmos, through Sanskrit chants and Bengali devotional songs). The near-perfect rendition of the shlokas courtesy the great Birendra Krishna Bhadra, also the magical voice behind the "Mahishashura Mardini"; the enchanting music composed by the peerless Pankaj Kumar Mallick.

In Mahalaya - Mahisasuramardini,the legendary narrator (Bhadra) recites the sacred verses and tells the story of the descent of Debi Durga to earth, and goes on to describe the epic battle fought between Maa Durga and the negative or aasuric forces, represented by Mahisasura. All this: in his inimitable style, mesmerizing every household with the divine aura of his narration, as Bengalis everywhere submerged their souls in quiet moments of prayer. It is divine, it is enchanting and it is an experience in itself. One gets transported to another realm of the universe... while listening to this recitation. As the recital begins, the serene morning air resonates with the long-drawn sound of the sacred conch shell (shankha-dhwani), immediately followed by a chorus of invocation, melodiously setting the stage for the recitation of the "Chandi Mantra". Do not miss out.

"Mahisasura Mardini" is a remarkable piece of audio drama matchless in Indian culture. Though the theme is thought to be mythical and the mantras Vedic, this program is a landmark composition. But then, beneath every myth lies a true story, one only needs to peel off the many layers in order to get to it, isn't it? [The Sanskrit word véda i.e. "knowledge, wisdom" is derived from the root vid - "to know".]

... After all, what is God or what is the divine?

I see it this way:When the finite meets the infinite, when the createdmeets the uncreated, when the mortal meets the immortal- it is then that that formless force or energy, also known as God, Parmaatma, Parameshwar or the divine, is manifested.

To me, the Shiv-Parvati stories are part of our itihasa(history) of the Satya Yug - the first era. And though due to the passage of time, many myths have crept in and various people and entities have given full vent rather gigantic wings to their imagination too; yet, once we try and clear the mist, we can salvage this ancient and enthralling story beneath it all.

There clearly was a mortal Shiv and a mortal Parvati; the latter (along with her comrades) salvaged the lives of the people (of the Satya Yug) from the stranglehold of certain aasuric or negative forces; and saved their crops and livestock (and thereby their livelihood) from the attacks of gigantic-sized (daitya) ferocious, wild animals as well - Mahisasura symbolizes all of this.

Parvati (and her comrades) fearlessly stood up to and then fought against the aasuricforces when (perhaps) no one else was willing to take them on. Though triumphant, she lost her life. ... And this not only shattered (her consort) Shiv, but also elicited from the until-then-complacent-Shiv a soul-stirring vow - to wreck revenge on her killers (perhaps: the remnants of the earlier mentioned aasuric forces).

Due to their remarkable deeds, their Karm Yog, the people of the first era (i.e. of the Satya Yug) revered Parvati (and her comrades) as devi-s, manifestations of the divine Mother, more precisely that of Maa Shakti - the feminine force behind the cosmos. Parvati and her comrades' actions helped preserve the way of life (as it ought to be) and restored peace and balance in society; their efforts helped civilization to flourish well. Their stories have since been passed on from one generation to the next, and even after the passage of thousands of years, eras to be precise, colonization and much else, we still revere them and worship them. Parvati (and her comrades) remain embedded in our souls; they have etched their memories in our hearts and minds. And so has Shiv. [Divine probably comes from dev, which in turn comes from daaivic - meaning: noble traits or qualities. Therefore, divine = one who possesses noble traits or qualities. It can be animate or inanimate. Daaivic (probably) is also the root word for devi - one who possesses noble traits or qualities; and is essentially a reverential honorific for a female- entity, person, power, force or energy, that is worthy of respect and worship.]

Though mere mortals, Shiv and Parvati (along with her comrades) triumphed death by the sheer force and greatness of their deeds and actions (keerti), it transcended time and eras (yugs). They became mritunjay; they will live forever. They are Amar.

During Navaratri or Durga Puja, we not only bow to and invoke the divine Mother (Maa Shakti), but also acknowledge her many manifestations. Temples dedicated to Maa Shakti dot the country, but the deities within bear a different name. Perhaps a silent yet clear testimony: that legions of women have confronted the forces of darkness - since time immemorial. We bow to them all.

Sri Sri Chandi Path(1 of 22) Part 1 (Chapter-1):LINK.

Sarvamangala Mangalye- from Devi Mahatmyam (Chandi)

Srsstti-Sthiti-Vinaashaanaam Shakti-Bhuute Sanaatani |

Gunna-[A]ashraye Gunnamaye Naaraayanni Namo[ah-A]stu Te ||9||

Sharannaagata-Diina-[A]arta-Paritraanna-Paraayanne |

Sarvasya-[A]arti-Hare Devi Naaraayanni Namo[ah-A]stu Te ||10||

Shangkha-Cakra-Gadaa-Shaarngga-Grhiita-Paramaa-Yudhe |

Prasiida Vaissnnavii-Ruupe Naaraayanni Namo[ah-A]stu Te ||14||

Kiriittini Mahaa-Vajra Sahasra-Nayano[a-U]jjvale |

Vrtra-Praanna-Hare Ca-[A]indri Naaraayanni Namo[ah-A]stu Te ||17||

Shivaduutii-Svaruupenna Hata-Daitya-Mahaa-Bale |

Ghora-Ruupe Mahaa-Raave Naaraayanni Namo[ah-A]stu Te ||18||

Etatte Vadanam Saumyam Locana-Traya-Bhuussitam |

Paatu Nah Sarva-Bhuutebhyah Kaatyaayani Namo[ah-A]stu Te ||23||

Jvaalaa-Karaalam-Atyu[i-U]gram-Ashessa-[A]asura-Suudanam |

Trishuulam Paatu No Bhiiter-Bhadrakaali Namo[ah-A]stu Te ||24||

Argala Stotram -Jayantii Manggalaa Kaalii- from Devi Mahatmayam

Jayantii Manggalaa Kaalii Bhadrakaalii Kapaalinii |

Durgaa Shivaa Kssamaa Dhaatrii Svaahaa Svadhaa Namostu Te ||2||

Raktabiija-Vadhe Devi Canndda-Munndda-Vinaashini |

Ruupam Dehi Jayam Dehi Yasho Dehi Dvisso Jahi ||6||

Sri Durga Saptashloki- Seven shlokas from Devi Mahatmyam.

Sarva-Svaruupe Sarveshe Sarva-Shakti-Samanvite |

Bhayebhyas-Traahi No Devi Durge Devii Namostu Te ||5||

Mahalaya takes me back to my childhood and to the luxuriant kaash phool - those white wispy grasses that have been lovingly elevated to the status of flowersa long time ago. They are found in abundance during this season, as if to welcome the goddess.

I am also reminded of the fragrant shiuli phool - the white and orange flowers of the Parijaat tree. I have many a time stood bare-feet on the dew-soaked grass, underneath the Parijaat tree (in our garden) and inhaled the heavenly fragrance of the shiuli. These tiny flowers make a beautiful carpet on the green grass beneath the tree - early in the morning. ...The only thing one needs to do is to gently pick them up, put them in the flower-basket and give them pride of place in one's home. They continue to emanate their divine fragrance for several hours thereafter. It is an experience in itself.

Mahalaya is a Sanskrit word derived from Maha meaning, "Great" and Alaya meaning: "the abode" or "Soul of the World". Together it translates as: "The Great Abode, The Grand Residence, or The Dwelling of the Great Souls." It also means: illumined knowledge or enlightenment.

Devi Paksha falling on Mahalaya is a reminder to prepare oneself for the subjugation of the ego (ahamkara) during Durga Puja. It instills the spirit of surrender: to offer oneself to Maa Durga for the final destruction of the ego. She simply strikes the ego of the surrendered soul to bless with the bounty of eternal bliss of self-realization (Sat-cit-ānanda, pronounced as: sach-chid-ānanda. Satdescribes an essence that is pure and timeless; cit is consciousness; ānandais absolute bliss).

Let us thus surrender to the divine Mother - to realize the bliss of the being.

I would like to end this post by quoting a shloka from the Brhadāranyaka Upanisad:

असतोमा सद्गमय। तमसोमा ज्योतिर् गमया। मृत्योर्मामृतं गमय॥ ॐ शांति शांति शांति - बृहदारण्यक उपनिषद् 1.3.28.

Aum Asato mā sad gamaya

Tamaso mā jyotir gamaya

Mrtyormā amrtam gamaya

Aum śānti śānti śāntih"

(Brhadāranyaka Upanisad 1.3.28)

Meaning:"Aum From ignorance, lead me to truth

From darkness, lead me to light

From death, lead me to immortality

Aum peace, peace, peace."

[Aum is the sound of primal energy, the sound of the universe itself.]

Shubho Mahalaya. Maa aaschhen.

Pictures:Found while trawling the net, don't remember the links :(

Author's Note: You may read Shubho Mahalaya - Maa aaschhen: HERE.

This post is about the mesmerizing Bhavani Dayani. Here are the lyrics:

bhavAnI dayAnI mahA vAkvANI
sur-nar-muni janamAni sakala budha gyAnI ||

jaga janani jaga dAnI mahishAsura mardinI
jvAlAmukhI chaNDI amara padadAnI ||

Bhavani Dayani is a well-known Bhajan in praise of Maa Bhavani (another name for the divine Mother - Maa Shakti or Maa Durga). Set to Raag Bhairavi (Jhaptaal) of the Hindustani classical music system, the prayerful 'Bhavani Dayani' stills the senses and lets the soul speak. A composition of Pt. Bhatkhande (or Pt. Anand Kishore Singh of the Betiadhrupad tradition), it is undoubtedly Begum Parveen Sultana's absolute mastery over her art that has turned this piece into a priceless gem. I so wish to see and hear her in person. Those who have had this opportunity are very fortunate indeed. She is a true Sangeet Samraggi (an empress of great music).

This is what the lyrics mean to me:First stanza:

bhavAnI dayAnI mahA vAkvANI
sur-nar-muni janamAni sakala budha gyAnI ||

The Divine Mother, the Mother of this bhuvan (world), Maa Bhavani, is compassionate. She is compassion personified. She is respected and revered by all (janamAni). All humans sing paeans to Her greatness and glory, and thus disseminate Her many stories (mahA vAkvANI). All humans, be it the ones with noble or daaivictraits (sur), the ordinarymortals (nar) or the "awakened" ones (muni). Her name is on the lips of everyone (sakala) who is enlightened (budha) and possessesillumined knowledge(gyAnI).

Yaa Devii Sarva-Bhutessu Buddhi-Ruupenna Samsthitaa |

Namas-Tasyai Namas-Tasyai Namas-Tasyai Namo Namah ||

Yaa Devii Sarva-Bhutessu Dayaa-Ruupenna Samsthitaa |

Namas-Tasyai Namas-Tasyai Namas-Tasyai Namo Namah ||

Sarvasya Buddhi-Ruupenna Janasya Hrdi Samsthite |

Svargaapavarga-De Devi Naaraayanni Namo[ah-A]stu Te ||

[Slokas fromYa Devi Sarvabhutesu-from Devi Mahatmyam and Stotra from

Sarvamangala Mangalye- from Devi Mahatmyam (Chandi)]

Second stanza: jaga janani jaga dAnI mahishAsura mardinI
jvAlAmukhI chaNDI amara padadAnI ||

Maa Bhavani is the Mother (janani) of the universe; She is the Mother of creation itself (jaga janani). She is the greatest giver (dAnI) of all; She bestowsherblessingson the whole of creation (jaga dAnI). But, She is also the vanquisher(mardinI) of negative or aasuric forces (in every form) - forces that disturb the balance in creation (mahishAsura mardinI). When She takes on these aasuric forces, She is like a volcano(jvAlAmukhI), transforming herself into Her fierce form (ruup) - that of chaNDI; then She is no longer compassionate. However, by subjugating or vanquishing these negative forces, She is only giving them an opportunity to redeem themselves; She is not punishing them. There is nothing that is "evil" in creation. Maa Bhavani is omnipresent, is omnipotent, and is omniscient, She is creation; She is timeless (amara). O Mother, we bow at Your lotus-feet; may we always find sanctuary at Your lotus-feet. [Here lotus is a metaphor. A lotus grows in muddy water, yet remains untouched by it.]

Jvaalaa-Karaalam-Atyu[i-U]gram-Ashessa-[A]asura-Suudanam |

Trishuulam Paatu No Bhiiter-Bhadrakaali Namo[ah-A]stu Te ||

[Stotra from

Sarvamangala Mangalye- from Devi Mahatmyam (Chandi)]

Bhavani Dayani has such lovely and profound words; a mere four lines have conveyed so much!

... And it is so befitting a tribute to the greatest Mother of all - the Jaganmata, the Jagatdhatri, the Jagatjanani, the Vishwajanani, the divine Mother herself. The One who holds this entire creation together, the One who ensures that everything remains in place and that the universe does not fall apart; the One who is:

Srsstti-Sthiti-Vinaashaanaam Shakti-Bhuute Sanaatani |

Gunna-[A]ashraye Gunnamaye Naaraayanni Namo[ah-A]stu Te ||

This is how I would interpret the above stotra or shloka (hymn):

So that Creation remains in place and does not fall apart, You are there as Shakti - since time immemorial (Sanaatani),

O the Supporter and the Embodiment of all that is good and noble (the Gunas), O the greatest and the most glorious, O Naaraayanni, we bow to You.

This Bhajan (Bhavani Dayani) is dedicated to the greatest force or the energy behind the cosmos - the One that encompasses all three aspects/forces/energies, viz. Srsstti (Creation: Brhmaa), Sthiti (Maintenance or Preservation: Vishnu) and Vinaashaanaam (Dissolution: Shiv). This Bhajan is dedicated to that supreme balancer or the supreme preserving force of all - the Naaraayanni Herself; 'coz She is the one that nurtures and protects creation, She is the one that gives form and shape to this universe, rather, to creation itself, and maintains it ... just as any mortal mother gives form to new life and nurtures it. Hence, this force is She, a feminine force. She is timeless (Sanaatani). Salutations O Maa, we bow to You.

[In other words: The lyrics of this Bhajan (Bhavani Dayani) conveys the salutation to that immense force or energy behind the cosmos, to the force or energy known as Shakti; it has no beginning and no end and is formless, just like gravity. Yet, since this great force or energy supports Creation - by holding/keeping the other forces or energies in place - this formless force or energy (Shakti) has been acknowledged as feminine - She. As we know: in nature a female gives form to new-life and nurtures and protects it. By holding together or keeping the other forces or energies in place, Shakti gives form and shape to the universe and to creation, and has, therefore, been referred to (and revered) as the Jaganmata, the Jagatdhatri, the Jagatjanani, the Vishwajanani - the Mother of the universe orthe Mother of creation, thedivine Mother Herself. This Bhajan also acknowledges Her many human ruup-s, forms or manifestations; women that have courageously confronted various forces of darkness through the ages, salvaging people and society and thereby helping civilization to flourish well - by preserving the "way of life" as it should be.]

As Shri Ram said: "jananī janmabhūmiśca svargādapi garīyasī" (The Mother and the motherland are greater than the Heaven. Therefore: Paradise lies at the feet of the Mother).

Paradise also lies at the feet of the Jaganmata, the Jagatdhatri, the Jagatjanani, the Vishwajanani - Maa Shakti, the divine Mother Herself.

In the Sanaatan Dharm (Sanaatan = timeless, Dharm = way of life), a female is a form of energy (shaktiswarupini) or an aspect of Maa Shakti. She is mata, the divine Mother, or devi - the auspicious One. As a young child, she is kanya, the young Durga. As a wife she is patni,saha dharma charini and ardhangini - one half of her husband's mind, soul and being, and his partner on the path of life. As a mother, she is worthy of worship (matrudevobhava). This is because; she gives form to new life, just as the divine Mother gives form to the universe. She is sreyasi, the ultimate.

Bhavani Dayani is a Durga Bhajan. Bhajan literally means "Worship". Perhaps worship through songs and music. In ancient times, there were some that pursued the path of hard penance in order to "reach" the divine, i.e. to connect one's aatman (soul) with the divine (the forces of the universe, the forces behind the cosmos), while some others chose the path of music and songs. Music is a form of meditation, it is like a prayer, and so, devotion is an essential and inseparable part of it. Bhajan also means, "sharing" in Sanskrit. Because singing Bhajans is often a shared experience, done as a group. Normally the lyrics and melody are simple enough to be picked up by most people.

Begum Parveen Sultana, one of the foremost Hindustani classical singers of our times, has sung Bhavani Dayani in sadra style (a hallmark of her gharana - the Patiala Gharana):

"Bhavani Dayani, Bhavani Dayani Mahabak. Bani, Mahabak. Bani Sur. Nar. Muni Jana Mani Sur. Nar. Muni Jana Mani Sakal. Buddha Dnyani Jag. Janani Jag. Jani Jag. Janani Jag. Jani Mahishasura Mardini Mahishasura Mardini Jwalamukhi Chaundi Jwalamukhi Chaundi Amar.pada Dani."

Do listen to her rendition and immerse your souls in it:

Pt. Ajoy Chakraborty sings Bhavani Dayani. It is a treat for the senses:

Bhavani Dayani by Pt. Rajan and Sajan Mishra. Need I say more?

Here is a heartfelt and pristine rendition of Bhavani Dayani (Stuti in Raaga Bhairavi) by the youngUmesh Persad:

He has sung it with a lot of Bhakti (devotion) and with the Raaga's Bhaava (essence) in his heart, wisely and admirably refraining from showing-off his skills (Chaaturya-PradarSana). Hence, the Bhajan is very much "alive". With Chaaturya-PradarSana, the Bhajan slowly withers away.

There have been many that have sung this Bhajan, but when one listens to Bharat RatnaPt. Bhimsen Joshi singing the Bhavani Dayani, it appears as if the notes are riding high above to stir Maa Shakti (also Maa Bhavani) Herself - to descend on us mere mortals, to grace our souls with Her divine aura and presence. When I say, Bharat Ratna, I mean: Bhimsenji is a true jewel of India, and a rare one at that. He is the swaradhiraj of classical music in the 20th - 21st century, an emperor (samrat) of great musical note. His Bahar evokes the spring; his Megh Malhars bring to mind the rain clouds. Even in his later years, when he was physically frail, his voice had lost none of its timbre and resonance. Nor the boom and tenor that makes one feel he could summon the gods themselves. Thank you Panditji for the music and for your glorious legacy - the numerous songs that you have sung over the years. They will continue to mesmerize generations to come.

Here is a link where you can listen to Bhavani Dayani rendered by various artists (including Madhumita Saha and Pt. Samar Saha [on the tabla], Nabamita Deb, Ramkrishnadas Maharaj and Aruna Sairam).

[Note: I am looking for Padma ShriUstad Rashid Khan's emotion-charged rendition of Bhavani Dayani, as well as Bharat Ratna Pt. Bhimsen Joshi's booming-voiced version. If any of you can locate the links, please do share.]

When Tansen sang the Megh Malhar, even the dry-as-dust clouds poured forth. The notes resonated with the elements, nay with creation itself! The wonders of music through the vocals of our maestros have never ceased to fascinate. And that's how it will remain - always.

Bhairavi's looming presence in the Indian musical mind is in no small measure on account of it's close association with this great land's spiritual repertoire. No bhajani baithak can be complete without a generous dose of Bhairavi.

Sample an early Bhimsen Joshi rendering this Hari bhajan:jo bhaje Hari ko sada:

Bhairavi lends itself well to brisk, taut bandishes. Since it is considered to be the holiest of Raaga-s, Bhairavi is respectfully addressed as Shree Bhairavi.

[Bhairav- The Primordial Sound/Part-I:Link.

Bhairav - The Primordial Sound/ Part-II:Link.]

Gharana refers to an exclusive tradition, or school, of music centering on a maestro. The Urdu word gharanameans a family. Fellow practitioners and learners of a particular genre of music constitute a gharana. In this sense, the disciples of a particular guruare also identified as a gharana. To me, it appears to be very similar to our Gurukultradition (the guru-shishya parampara or the system of learning followed by our ancients; wherein the guru [teacher] imparted illumined knowledge [jnana] to the deserving shishyas or pupils. The latter in turn followed a rigourous regimen and worked hard to not only acquire this knowledge but also towards perfecting their diction).

Pandit Vishnu Narayan Bhatkhande, regarded as the father of modern Hindustani classical music, was a composer of great merit. He humourously described the meaning of the word "Pandit" as one who knows a fair amount of theory but is just passable in terms of performance. Begum Parveen Sultana amplifies on his famous sadra: Bhavani dayani. (According to some sources, this composition is attributed to Anand Kishore Singh of the Betia dhrupad tradition). Dhrupad is the oldest and most profound form of Hindustani classical vocal music. It is popular in both it's form be it vocal or instrumental music. The Betiadhrupad tradition is part of the Champaran district of Bihar (ancient Bettiah) of the 18th - 20th century. A local ruler and patron of the arts, Raja Ugrasen, laid the foundation for musical activity in the Bettiah court. The 18th and early 19th century saw the Gharanaflourish under poet kings such as Naval Kishore Singh and Anand Kishore Singh. A strong colonial presence arising from the local rajas' (petty kings and chieftains) support to the British ensured peace and plenty. However, the incurring of vast debts and surrender of lands to the British, who then used them for indigo plantation resulted in a gradual decline in prosperity and patronage. With the vicissitudes of time imposing economic hardships, only a handful of traditional practicing dhrupadiyas remain today. Here is a pic. of Pt. Bhatkhande:

[Pt. Vishnu Narayan Bhatkhande: ChaturpanditBhatkhande.

Bharat Ratna Pt. Bhimsen Joshi: a musical marvel.

Padma Shri Begum Parveen Sultana: Malhar Magic.

Here is a small write-up: Dhrupad, different styles.

Info on Bishnupur Gharana (a form of singing that follows the Dhrupad tradition of Hindustani music, one of the two forms of Indian classical music): Link.

Note: The Bishnupur gharana was essentially a Dhrupad gharana, for Bishnupur was a centre for Dhrupad culture. The Dhrupad of the Bishnupur gharana uses shuddha dhaivata in raagavasanta, a touch of komal nisada in the descending notes of bhairava.

Gharanas of Hindustani Music: Link.

A snapshot of various gharanas: Link.]

Here is a picture of an artisan painting the eyes of an idol of Maa Durga in Kumartuli (also: Kumhartuli and Kumortuli) in Kolkata. This ritual is known as Chokhkhu Daan (chakshu + daan. Chakshu = eye, daan = gift in Sanskrit).

Kumartuli is a 300-year old "Potter's Town" where the idols are hand-crafted. The word "Kumartuli" is derived from two separate words: kumar (also: kumhar and kumor), meaning potter and tuli, meaning locality or place of work. Kumars/Kumors/Kumhars are the traditional image-makers and potters.

The eyes of all Durga idols are drawn on Mahalaya, in a sacred ceremony known as Chokhkhu Daan (creation of the eyes or the Gift of the Eyes) - wherein a senior artisan paints the eyes of the goddess to bring her to "life". Chokhkhu-daan is traditionally done on the morning of Mahalaya and represents the final touch in the idol or image-making process. Guess it must be quite an experience in itself! For the connoisseur of art, a visit to Kumartuli is a must. The crowded lanes and alleys are bunched together and narrow with idols of various gods and goddesses in different stages of completion; it lends a rustic charm to the area. ... Frankly, just by watching the artists hard at work, one is transported to a different world.

May the devibless us all; may She bestow upon us the gift of perception and introspection. May She destroy all negative (aasuric) traits within us, such as: selfishness, jealousy, greed, resentment, prejudice, hatred and anger. May the divine Mother free us from ego (ahamkara). May She fill our lives with goodness (daaivic or noble traits) and positivity. May our lives resonate with joy, peace, love, hope, humility, kindness, empathy and truth. May Maa Durga the "Durgatinashini" (the eliminator of sufferings) eliminate our sufferings and remove all hurdles in the path of knowledge and reason. May the three-eyed (Triyambake)Maa Bhavani (the one who can "see" the past, the present and the future) open our mind's eye.

Yaa Devii Sarva-Bhutessu Maatr-Ruupenna Samsthitaa |

Namas-Tasyai Namas-Tasyai Namas-Tasyai Namo Namah ||

Sarva-Bhuutaa Yadaa Devii Bhukti-Mukti-Pradaayinii |

Tvam Stutaa Stutaye Kaa Vaa Bhavantu Paramo[a-U]ktayah ||

Sharannaagata-Diina-[A]arta-Paritraanna-Paraayanne |

Sarvasya-[A]arti-Hare Devi Naaraayanni Namo[ah-A]stu Te ||

Sarva-Manggala-Maanggalye Shive Sarvaartha-Saadhike |

Sharannye Trya[i-A]mbake Gauri Naaraayanni Namo[ah-A]stu Te ||

Shivaduutii-Svaruupenna Hata-Daitya-Mahaa-Bale |

Ghora-Ruupe Mahaa-Raave Naaraayanni Namo[ah-A]stu Te ||

Sarva-Svaruupe Sarve[a-Ii]she Sarva-Shakti-Samanvite |

Bhayebhyas-Traahi No Devi Durge Devi Namo[ah-A]stu Te ||

[Slokas fromYa Devi Sarvabhutesu-from Devi Mahatmyam and Stotra from

Sarvamangala Mangalye- from Devi Mahatmyam (Chandi)]

Pictures:1. Pic 01- The sacred symbol AUM - AUM is the sound of primal energy, the sound of the universe itself. 2.Pic 02 - Maa Durga in her serene Siddhidatri ruup(the ninth form). 3.Pic 03 - Maa Durga in her fierce form - the Kaalratri ruup (the seventh form). 4. Pic 04 - Bharat Ratna Pt. Bhimsen Joshi. 5. Pic 05 - Pt. Vishnu Narayan Bhatkhande. 6.Pic 06- Chokhkhu Daan atKumartuli.7. Pic 07- the three-eyed (Triyambake)Maa Bhavani.

Author's Note: You may read Shubho Mahalaya – Maa aaschhen:HERE.

The ever-mesmerizing Bhavani Dayani can be read: HERE.

Today (20.10.2012) is Maha Saptami(the seventh day of the Durga Puja). Therefore, let me begin this post with the auspicious Gayatri Mantra (also known as the Savitri Mantra):

Aum, Bhur bhuvah svah,

tat Savitur vearenyam |

bhargo Devasya dhimahi,

dhiyo yo nah pracodayat ||

Gayatri Mantra- Pandit Jasraj:

Though it is difficult to translate the Gayatri Mantra, let me make an attempt: Our ancients derived all their knowledge from Mother Nature (Prakriti) Herself; and passed it on to their deserving pupils or disciples (shishyas) - in the 'guru-shishya parampara' or tradition. This 'illumined knowledge' (jnana) was accumulated by the great sages of yore (the Munis, the Rishis, the Yogis, the Maharshis and the Brhmarshis) through the ages - from nature (Prakriti), universe (Brhmaand) and space (Vyoma.)

The word - vyoma, contains the word "OM" or "AUM" - the sound of primal energy, the sound of the universe itself.

Through the Gayatri Mantra, our ancients are trying to acknowledge all of this and are also paying their respects to the greatest guru of all(the greatest teacher of all - Mother Nature or Prakriti and Creation or Shrishti; i.e. the ones from whom all knowledge and wisdom emanates). Our ancients are, therefore, referring to them (the various sources from whom they have accumulated their knowledge, viz., AUM, Prakriti, Space) as 'devasya' - divine-like; and are urging them to continue to guide and enlighten humankind in future as well.

[Divine probably comes from dev, which in turn comes from daaivic - meaning: noble traits or qualities. Therefore, divine = one who possesses noble traits or qualities. It can be animate or inanimate. Daaivic is also the root word for devi - one who possesses noble traits or qualities; and is essentially a reverential honorific for a female - entity, person, power, force or energy, that is worthy of respect and worship.]

Sankatmochan Hanumanashtak-Pt. Rajan and Sajan Mishra:

Jay Durge Durgati Pariharini - a Bhajan by Pt. Bhimsen Joshi (Jai Maa Durga - the eliminator of all sufferings and obstacles - from this world and from one's being):

During these auspicious 10 days, as you already know, devi Durga is worshiped. Durga Puja also coincides with Navratri or the nine auspicious nights, wherein all the nine forms or ruup-sof the divine Mother, Maa Shakti or Maa Durga, is worshiped - one form per day. Maa Shakti is also referred to as Maa Adi Shakti. Both are one and the same. [Shakti = Power, Energy or Force. Maa = Mother. Adi = timeless.] Here is a depiction of Maa Adi Shakti:

Nava Durga Stuti or Stotram/ नवदुर्गास्तोत्र:

On Saptami - i.e. on the seventh day, Maa Adi Shakti's seventh form - her fierce yet compassionate ruup: that of MaaKaalraatri - is worshiped.

Now, who or rather whatis the divine Mother (Maa Adi Shakti)? And who or rather whatis Maa Kaalraatri?

Here is how I see it: That immense force or energy behind the cosmos, the force or energy that our ancients referred to as Shakti - has no beginning (adi) and no end (anant). Shakti is not created (i.e. has always been or has always existed). Shakti is timeless (adi), formless (nirākārā) and without gender, just like the force known as gravity. Shakti is not an object, as It is Adrisya, beyond the reach of the eyes. [Shakti = Power, Energy or Force. Maa = Mother. Adi = timeless.]

Yet, since this great force or energy (Shakti) supports Creation - by holding/keeping the other forces or energies (of the cosmos) in place - this formless force or energy (Shakti) has been acknowledged as feminine -and is referred to as She. This force or energy (Shakti) perhaps also negates/subdues/stops/or destroys any negative (i.e. aasuric) forces or energies (of the universe or the cosmos) from acting upon or influencing the universe or creation - thereby protecting the universe (and creation) from any harm or from annihilation.

As we know: in nature a female gives form to new-life and nurtures and protects it. Similarly: by holding together or keeping the other forces or energies in place, Shakti gives formor shape to the universe and to creation, and has, therefore, been referred to (and revered) as the Jaganmata, the Jagatdhatri, the Jagatjanani, the Vishwajanani - the Mother of the universe or the Mother of creation, the divine Mother Herself.

Maa Durga or Maa Shakti is nota person, but that formless energy behind the cosmos. It is also the most important force or energy behind the cosmos, the One that gives form and shape to the Universe (Brhmaand) as well as nurtures and protects it.

As mentioned earlier, this force or energy (that our ancients called Shakti) probably also negates/subdues/stops/or destroys any negative (i.e. aasuric) force or energy (such as poison) - from acting upon or exerting any influence on the universe or on creation; thereby protecting it - from being harmed or from being annihilated. [Remember: Vishnu = Vish + Nu and Vish = poison.]

Also: Shiv spelt backward is Vihs, i.e. Vish in another form, and it means: poison; therefore, these two forces - Shiv and Vishnu - are one and the same (Hari-Hara). It could be that the Shiv-force [or energy] absorbs a great amount of the poison and hence has been referred to as Neelkanth or 'the blue-throat-ed one', but (maybe) it also emits some amount of it. Or, it could be that the other half of the Shiv-force (i.e. Vishnu) emits poison, that Shakti - absorbs or negates, and does not allow (this poison) to enter into creation (Srsstti) or spread into the universe (Brhmaand). The energy or force that our ancients called "Brhmaa" signifies Creation. And this force emerges out of the "lotus-naval" of the force or energy known as Vishnu. Here "lotus" is a metaphor. A lotus grows in muddy water, yet remains untouched by it. Brhmaa or Creation emerges out of poison (Vishnu), yet remains untouched by it. This is perhaps due to the actions of this cosmic force (or energy) known as: Shakti.

Maybe, a sub-force (or energy) also emanates from the main force or energy (Shakti) - and this sub-force completely and totally acts upon the other formless force or energy, the one that our ancients called "Shiv". This sub-force (whom our ancients called: Kaali) keeps the Shiv-force (of the cosmos) inert. Remember: our ancients have depicted Maa Kaali as standing on the chest of Shiv, and Shiv lying inert at Her feet.

If this fearsome Shiv-forceof the cosmos is not held down in place and made to remain inert, it will result in Tāṇḍava or Tāṇḍava nṛtya (huge turbulence in the cosmos, in the universe and in creation). It will result in Pra-laya or Mahapralaya, i.e. total destruction and annihilation.

Since this sub-force (or energy: Kaali) emanates from the main force or energy (Shakti) - the former (i.e. Kaali) has been referred to as a form (or ruup) of the latter (i.e. of Shakti).

And since this sub-force of Shakti - known as Kaali - too helps in maintaining the form or shapeof the universe (by keeping the Shiv-force in place) apart from playing a role in protecting the universe (and creation) from negative forces or energies (by negating or destroying them, or maybe: by absorbing some amounts of the poison, etc) - it too is referred to as a feminine force - a She, and revered as a Mother (Maa). She is powerful, She is fierce ... and yet, She is kind, compassionate and protective - of Her children (i.e. of Creation and of everything that is a part of it). [Maa Kaali is also referred to as: Shyama Maa, Adya Maa, Tara Maa, Dakshina Kalika, Chamundi, Bhadra Kali, Shyamashana Kali ... and so on.]

Our ancients have also termed the Shiv-force as "Kaal". "Kaal" means, "time". The universe (Brhmaand) or creation exists till the Shiv-force or "Kaal" is inert. The sub-force of Shakti, known as Kaali, also means "time". And till the time the Kaali-force remains undisturbed and exerts its influence or pressure on the Shiv-force - thereby keeping it inert, the universe (Brhmaand) or creation (Srsstti) shall remain safe from any danger of annihilation.

Both "Kaal" and "Kaali" also mean, "dark". "Raatri" means night, and that too is dark. The colour Dark can be used to indicate something fearsome, something mysterious or unfathomable or something that possesses great depth. It IS also what the universe or creation and the forces or energies behind it - represent.

Our ancients have depicted Shiv, Vishnu and Kaali as dark-blue. Dark-blue is used to indicate something fearsome, like a gathering storm, a cyclone, a tornado, a hurricane or an eclipse. Or perhaps something far more fearsome: Pra-layaor Mahapralaya - destruction and annihilation. It also means: something mysterious or unfathomable; i.e. something that possesses great depth (and hence is unfathomable). Perhaps it means that: no matter how much we endeavour, we cannot subjugate or decipher nature or creation. A lot of it will still remain unfathomable to us - as "the cosmic illusion" or "maaya" - despite our best efforts.

Vishnu and Shiv are also known as Hari and Hara (respectively). Hari and Hara means: green.

Therefore, dark (Ghanshyam), dark-blue (Shyam) and green (Hari-Hara) are the colours of the universe and of creation, rather they signify or encompass creation per se. Our ancients' understood this and therefore revered nature, creation ... and the forces or energies behind it all.

They propitiated the elements, forces and energies behind the cosmos, behind creation (Srsstti) and behind the universe (Brhmaand) - through "puja" or "homa". In all of this, a certain pattern or specific rules or steps was followed. Particular kinds of flowers, leaves, herbs, ghee, fire, sandalwood paste, incense, camphor, etc; specific mantras, stotras, shlokas (i.e. hymns); and (most importantly) the ones that chanted these mantras, stotras, shlokas had to follow a certain lifestyle. Without that (i.e. if they did not adhere to or follow the lifestyle as prescribed in the ancient texts), they could not chant the mantras, stotras, shlokas or perform the rituals ("puja" or "homa"). Also: their diction had to be perfect; no guru could be a guru (teacher) without perfect diction, and no shishya (disciple) could get the blessings of the guru without perfecting their diction. Sanskrit is a language that needs to be "spoken" from the depth of one's being, and not merely from the voice-box; it is a language derived from nature and creation. [There is no "religion" or "ism" associated with "puja" or "homa"; since the word "religion" or its connotations were unknown to our ancients. "Sanaatan Dharm" is a way of life. Sanaatan = timeless, Dharm = path or way of life. It is essentially an accumulation and reflection of the wisdom and illumined knowledge (jnana)- that our ancients (men and women) derived or gathered from nature and from creation. There is no "founder". "Sanaatan Dharm" was never a cult movement or any movement for that matter, to unite people under a single "founder", 'coz there has never been a "founder". "Sanaatan Dharm" was never meant to be a religion or "ism"; it is essentially a blend of wisdom, illumined knowledge and Vigjnana - that can be acquired only when one open's the mind's eye or manas-chokhshu.]

The mantras, stotras, shlokas, et al have been composed in Sanskrit - a language steeped in antiquity, and derived from nature, creation and from the universe itself. When these mantras, stotras or shlokas were chanted, they resonated with nature, and with the elements: i.e. with the forces and energies behind the cosmos and the universe. And this is why there was a complete emphasis on diction. [Without that, it would be empty chanting, there would be little or no resonance with nature or creation; and that would serve no purpose at all.]

Some years ago, I have had the good fortune of listening to a very aged priest (Sanskrit: purohith; derived from puro = society or locality, hith = for the good of) - chanting some mantras, stotras and shlokas. Believe me, I am at a loss to describe what I felt and the calm that enveloped me. It is an experience in itself, one that is impossible to put down in words. One cannot describe it ... it has to be felt.

Only a handful of such purohith-sremain ... or maybe not. The one I have mentioned above, was clad in a simple but clean attire: a white cotton dhoti and an off-white cotton kurta; a red sandalwood tika on his forehead, feet shod in simple wooden sandals (khadam) and exuding peace and serenity from every pore of his being. Despite his age he walked erect, his voice was deep and did not quiver.

It once again made me wonder how people that led a simple life and chanted the ancient mantras, stotras and shlokas regularly, or our maestros and virtuosos - of classical music and dance, lived such a healthy life, even when they were well into their 80s or 90s. While the exponents of "living it up", "fast-life" or the proponents of head-banging "music" - seem to follow the 'live fast, die young and (try to) leave a good-looking corpse' principle, unerringly.

The force or energy known as Shiv - in His fierce form is also known as Bhairava, while the force or energy known as Kaali is Bhairava's "counterpart"; and so, Kaali is also known as: Bhairavi. The holiest of our Raags is known as Shree Bhairavi. And when the great maestros sing it, who knows, perhaps the notes rise up and reach that immense force known as Kaali. And who knows what that does? Who knows what effect resonance has? The philosophy or "way of life" followed by our ancients was rooted in wisdom, knowledge and vigjnana. Vigjnanais not to be confused with what is today understood as science, 'coz science has a lot to do with yantra-s or machines. In Vigjnana, one's mind's eye is open.

Our ancients left us many gifts, we - the moderns, have squandered almost all of it, thanks to our arrogance and petty-mindedness. While our ancients revered and preserved nature in all her beauty and glory, and made it an essential part of their being, we - their so-called descendents, have excelled in destroying nature, thanks to our relentless greed. Our ancients gave us many lessons: not to destroy, exploit or denude Prakriti or nature's gifts to mankind. We have done - for several generations now - the complete opposite. We must reflect on our actions and try to make amends - collectively. Or else, we shall all perish. Together.

We are champions at flaunting fancy-sounding terms (global warming, greenhouse effect, carbon footprint and what-not) but we do not even pause to think: what impact all these and much more are having on the forces or energies behind the cosmos. What impact all of these is having on the forces or energies known as Shakti and Kaali ... or on Shiv? And how far away is Pra-laya or Maha-pralaya, if we are to continue doing whatever we have been doing (and that too with such unabashed gusto)?

If we are to delay annihilation or total destruction, we must understand and accept the greatness of nature (Prakriti) and of creation (Srsstti). We must understand and accept that no matter how much we endeavour, we cannot subjugate or decipher nature or creation. A lot of it will still remain unfathomable to us - as the "the cosmic illusion" or maaya - that our ancients have written about.

It is time to reflect ... and a time to bow to Maa Prakriti and to Srsstti.

Here is Yaa Devi Sarva Bhooteshu by Pandit Jasraj:[It is a famous stuti bhajan and an extract from Shri Durga Saptashati; sung in reverence of the the divine Mother who is resonant in every object as the illusory power or Maaya. She is Knowledge. She is Energy. Glory be to Her. O Mother, we prostrate before thee.]:

Note: In my next post, I will try to explain as to why the formless forces or energies behind the cosmos or the formless elements of nature have been given a form or shape - by our ancients.

(Do stay tuned…)

Pictures:1. Pic 01 - The sacred symbol AUM - AUM is the sound of primal energy, the sound of the universe itself. 2.Pic 02 - Maa Durga - another name for Maa Shakti or Maa Adi Shakti. 3.Pic 03 - Maa Adi Shakti or Maa Shakti. 4. Pic 04 - Maa Durga in her fierce form - the Kaalratri ruup (the seventh form - Nava-durga).5. Pic 05 - Maa Kali.

Author's Note: You may read Shubho Mahalaya - Maa aaschhen: HERE.

The ever-mesmerizing Bhavani Dayani can be read: HERE.

Shubho Maha Saptami: Who or rather what are Maa Adi Shakti and Maa Kaalraatri? can be read: HERE.

Now, let us make a humble attempt to understand why the formless forces or energies of the cosmos or the formless elements of nature have been given a form or shape - by our ancients. If you were to ask me, I would say there are about four major reasons.

But before we delve into them, here is theMahalakshmi Stotram:

If you remember, in the Chapter 11 of the Srimad Bhagavad Geeta, before describing to Arjun (and through him to all of us) what is now widely known as - His"Vishwaroop", Shri Krishna tells Arjun: that only those that were truly "awakened" can "see" it. Those that are yet to "awaken" - cannot "see" it. Here "awakened" = one who has truly opened one's mind's eye (i.e. one's manas-chokhshu or divya drishti). Such a person is a "muni" and this is irrespective of gender, occupation, background or age. A "muni" is one who is a true "jnani" or the possessor of illumined knowledge. Note:One does not come to possess illumined knowledge (jnana) automatically, i.e. by simply reading various books or texts; one also needs to be free from ego (ahamkara) and other base (or aasuric) traits, such as: selfishness, anger, greed, resentment, and so on.

"Vishwaroop" refers to the the formlessParamaatma i.e. the Supreme Soul or the Parameswar, i.e. the Supreme Being - appearing in forms that incorporate the complete creation or Universe in it. The word "Vishwaroop" is formed by joining two Sanskrit words: "vishwa" meaning the universe and "roop" meaning form. After "sighting" this form (Vishwaroop) in his mind's eye (manas-chokhshu or divya drishti), Arjun understands the true meaning of the cosmic process and of destiny.

sri bhagavaan uvaacha:

pashya me paartha roopaani shatasho'tha sahasrashah
naanaavidhaani divyaani naanaavarnaakriteeni cha // 11.5 //

Translated: Sri Bhagavan Krishna says, "Behold, O Partha, by hundreds and thousands, My different forms: celestial, varied in colours and shapes." [Partha, as you know is another name for Arjuna.]

While describing the "Vishwaroop", Shri Krishna speaks in the first person, aham (I, Me); but He is not referring to Himself. He is simply describing that Supreme Force of the Universe or the Cosmic Energy: that our ancients called the Supreme Soul (the Paramaatma) or the Supreme Being (the Parameswar) ... and which encompasses the whole of Creation and the Universe itself. In short: Shri Krishna is describing Creation per se. However, Shri Krishna wasn't stating anything that was not already known. He was merely distilling the timeless knowledge of the 'Veds' (whether of all the four - the Rg Ved, the Sama Ved, the Yajur Ved and the Atharva Ved - I know not; but of the Rig Ved certainly) and those of the 'Panchatantra', some of the 'Upanishads', the 'Ramayan,' etc., as well. The Srimad Bhagavad Geeta is a treasure-trove that holds immense wisdom and illumined knowledge within its pages and is the jewel of ancient India's spiritual wisdom, one that is not constrained by time and space.

[Note: Shri Krishna did not "transform" Himself into "His" own cosmic form, as is mistakenly and somewhat popularly believed. He only simplified things (complex science, rather vigjnana and philosophy) to such an extent that it enabled Arjun to clearly "perceive" the Divine form of the otherwise formlessCosmic Energy also known as the Supreme Soul (the Paramaatma) or the Supreme Being (the Parameswar) - in his mind's eye. Hence, Shri Krishna says, "Behold, O Partha..."

By "... My different forms", Shri Krishna is referring to that eternal, uncreated, formless and without gender Cosmic Energy - of which He too is (and we all are) a part of. Please note: I am using "is" - since the soul or the aatma is Energy; and it too is eternal, imperishable and uncreated. The soul(aatman) is a part of that greater Cosmic Energy (also known as the Supreme Soul (the Paramaatma) or the Supreme Being (the Parameswar).

The "vision", that of "Vishwaroop", is not a myth or legend ... it is a spiritual experience.]

Let us now discuss the much-disdained "idol worship" or the much-maligned "idolatry" bit:

1.According to the timeless "way of life" also known as "Sanaatan Dharma", every thing (whether animate or inanimate) that can be found anywhere in Creation - is also a part of that Cosmic Energy, known as the Supreme Soul (the Paramaatma) or the Supreme Being (the Parameswar); since the formless and without genderParamaatma or the Parameswar "manifests" Itself asCreation (Srsstti). It includes us too. That is: our mortal bodies (sharira) as well as our immortal souls (aatman) are a part of the Supreme Soul (the Paramaatma) or the Supreme Being (the Parameswar).

This Supreme Soul (the Paramaatma) or the Supreme Being (the Parameswar) therefore, possesses manyforms or shapes, since anything, no matter what it is, whether animate or inanimate - so long it can be found in creation or in nature - automatically "represents" the shape of the Supreme Soul (the Paramaatma) or the Supreme Being (the Parameswar).

... And yet, despite the above, the Supreme Soul (the Paramaatma) or the Supreme Being (the Parameswar) remains formless (nirākārā).

This is because: Creation itself is transient; it is an illusion -known as the cosmic illusionor Maaya.

Here's why: The sky does not remain blue forever nor do the grass remain green. The mist-covered mountains, the cloud-kissed forests, the clear skies and the waters of the oceans, all appear to be blue in colour, but it is not so in reality; the clouds appearto be white, but is colourless. The snow-covered mountains appear to be golden-hued - when the first rays of the sun falls on them, but is no so in reality. A rainbow appears to be real. A newborn does not remain a newborn; it grows up to become a toddler, then a youth, and gradually attains old age; all the while the body undergoes change. New species evolve while some become extinct. Old stars die and new ones are born, a comet burn's out, a meteorite or an asteroid crashes into something, the universe is constantly expanding ... and so on and so forth; there is change happening all the time, though we may not realize it or "see" it. This is the cosmic illusion or Maaya- that our ancients have written about.

As mentioned earlier: the Cosmic Energy or the forces of the Universe (also known as: the Supreme Soul [the Paramaatma] or the Supreme Being [the Parameswar] has no gender and is formless (nirākārā, nirguna). It manifestsItself as Creation (Srsstti), i.e. through anything that is a part of or can be found in Creation. It therefore, possesses many forms or shapes, since anything, no matter what it is, whether animate or inanimate - so long it can be found in creation or in nature - automatically represents the shape of the Supreme Soul (the Paramaatma) or the Supreme Being (the Parameswar).

Just like our aatman(the soul, which is immortal or indestructible).

The aatman(which too is a part of the Parmaatma - the Supreme Soul or the Supreme Being - the Parameswar) has no shape or form of its own, it is: nirākārā and has no gender. Yet, when it takes on or inhabits a mortal body (i.e. assumes a temporary outer covering), from time to time, it receives a shape and identity of its own. In short: it then takes on a form (ākārā, saguna). But then, since this form or shape is not a permanent one, and is only a temporary or transientouter-covering, the aatman (soul) per se still remains formless (nirākārā). This too is part of that cosmic illusion or Maaya.

Here's why: the temporary or the mortal form (i.e., the outer-covering or the body, sharira) is created, it undergoes transformation, changes shape and is mortal; the aatman (or the soul) is not. The aatman was never created (immortal) and cannot be destroyed (imperishable). It has always existed. It is eternal.

Our soul (or the aatman) is a part of (and behaves in a manner very much similar to the one displayed by) the Supreme Soul (the Paramaatma) or the Supreme Being (the Parameswar). The latter has no form of its own (i.e. It is nirākārā, nirguna), and yet It also manifests Itself through everything that is a part of Creation(Srsstti). Similarly, when, from time to time, our formless soul or the aatman takes on or inhabits a mortal body (i.e. a temporary outer-covering, sharira), it too receives a form (ākārā, saguna) and identity of its own. That is: It then takes on a temporary independent shape of its own (i.e. It becomes:ākārā, saguna); while also continuing to remain a part of the formless(nirākārā, nirguna) Supreme Soul (the Paramaatma) or the Supreme Being (the Parameswar) - eternally.

This is Dvaita: the interplay between the nirākārā (the formless, the all-pervading, the omnipresent) + the nirguna (the unmanifested) and the ākārā (the with form) + the saguna (the manifested).

Shri Krishna has said, that only those that were truly enlightened or possessed illumined knowledge (jnana), i.e. the ones that have truly opened their "mind's eye" (i.e. those who are: muni) - will be able to "see" it, understand it and comprehend it. Anyone else, no matter who they were, will not. One needs to let go of ego (ahamkara), prejudice, etc to be able to "see" or "perceive" it (i.e. to be able to "see" the formless yet with form "roop" of the Cosmic Energy or the Paramaatma or the Parameswar) - in one's mind's eye.

This formless yet with form"roop" of the Cosmic Energy or the Paramaatma or the Parameswar - is everywhere in Nature, in Creation, in the Universe, and within ourselves as well - as the formless, unmanifested energy or soul + the transient perishable form or the manifested cosmic illusion or Maaya.

2.The human mind is unable to visualize, fathom or comprehend vacuum or for that matter, anything that is without form or shape (nirākārā). It needs something, anything, as a reference point.

The nirākārā (the formless, the all-pervading, the omnipresent) + Nirguna (the unmanifested) form of the Cosmic Energy (also known as Supreme Soul [the Paramaatma] or the Supreme Being [the Parameswar] is not easilycomprehended. But the medium through which we can reach that formless, unmanifested Cosmic Energy (also known as the Supreme Soul [the Paramaatma] or the Supreme Being [the Parameswar]IS the ākārā, i.e. the with form + manifested version:the Saguna.

... And hence the temporary, transient idol. The temporary, transient "idol" is a "manifested" version or form of that timeless, eternal,formless, unmanifested Cosmic Energy (or the Paramaatma or the Parameswar) that can be seen with mortal eyes. "Idols"can include anything that is to be found in nature; and is not limited to just the mud or terracotta idols that are "worshiped" these days.

... Since the formlessCosmic Energy (also known as the Supreme Soul [the Paramaatma] or the Supreme Being [the Parameswar] also manifests Itself through everything that is a part of Creation (Srsstti), our ancients have revered Creation (Srsstti) and Nature (Prakriti) and all that is a part of It. Hence, they have worshiped the trees and the forests, the water-bodies, the hills and the mountains, the rocks and the stones, the Mother earth and even the animals and the birds. Simply because: all of these were a part of Creation and the formlessCosmic Energy (also known as the Supreme Soul [the Paramaatma] or the Supreme Being [the Parameswar] - manifested Itself through them. Our ancients have also worshiped the "Panchabhoota" or the five elements of nature (i.e. air, water, soil, fire and space). All of these have predated humankind and are a part of Creation; their presence has made it conducive for humans to appear on this planet, and without them (i.e., without the five elementsof nature, along with trees, animals, mountains, et al) - humankind would not have survived until now, and will not survive in future - in the absence of these five elements. Therefore, the five elementsof nature (the Panchabhoota), along with the trees, the animals, the mountains, et al were daaivic or noble or divine-like; i.e. they possessed noble qualities ('coz they have helped Creation, and life - including those of humans - to sustain themselves on this planet).

Our ancients, through the ages, have also revered mortals (the ones that possessed noble or daaivictraits) and elevated them to the status of the divine (one who possesses noble traits or qualities; i.e. as "manifestations" of the Cosmic Energy or the forces behind the cosmos). Thus,mortal humans - men and women - that have stood up to assorted negative or aasuricforces or influences, and saved this world and its inhabitants from aasuricstranglehold or from annihilation, through the ages - have been given the status of the divine(one who possesses noble traits or qualities; i.e. as "manifestations" of the Cosmic Energy or the forces behind the cosmos) - and revered as a Bhagavanor a Bhagavati- by our ancients. [This was our ancients' way of honouring these great souls or Mahaatma-sthat have helped preserve the "way of life" or "Sanaatan Dharm" - as it ought to be, and restored peace and balance in society; and whose efforts have helped civilization to flourish well.

Divine probably comes from dev, which in turn comes from daaivic- meaning: noble traits or qualities. Therefore, divine = one who possesses noble traits or qualities. It can be animate or inanimate. Dev (an honorific for a great male) or Devi (an honorific for a great female) comes from daaivic - meaning: one who possesses noble traits or qualities. Devi - is essentially a reverential honorific for a female - entity, person, power, force or energy that is worthy of respect and worship. Devis the male version.]

Also:Bhagavan (again: an honorific for a great male) or Bhagavati (an honorific for a great female) - does notmean the Cosmic Energy (also known as the Supreme Soul [the Paramaatma] or the Supreme Being [the Parameswar]or God.

The Cosmic Energy (also known as the Supreme Soul [the Paramaatma] or the Supreme Being [the Parameswar] is not a person, It is formlessand has no gender. It is omnipresent, omnipotent and omniscient (this is because: Mother Nature and Creation that are also part of the formless Cosmic Energy - was the source of all the knowledge and wisdom accumulated by our ancients). The Cosmic Energy (the Paramaatma or the Parameshwar i.e. the Supreme Soul or the Supreme Being),manifestsItselfeverywhere; the whole of creation IS the Paramaatma, or the Parameshwar.Everything, whether animate or inanimate, if it is a part of this world, this universe or this creation, IS the Paramaatma, or the Parameshwar.

The forces of the cosmos are everywhere, and whatever is there in creation (whether seen, unseen, animate or inanimate) is a part of that "divine" or "noble" force or energy (the Cosmic Energy, also known as the Supreme Soul [the Paramaatma] or the Supreme Being [the Parameswar.]) And It includes us: our mortal body (sharira) and our immortal soul (aatman) as well.

Therefore, there is nothing that is "evil" in this world (Bhuvan), in the universe (Brhmaand) or in creation (Srristi) - as per the wisdom of our ancients, and as per the "Sanaatan Dharm" or "the timeless way of life". [Sanaatan = timeless, Dharm = path or the way of life.]

So, even when the miscreants (negative or aasuricforces or entities) are dealt with (by some or the other great human), it is nota punishment, but an opportunity for redemption - provided to those aasuric entities by these great humans.

Both 'Sur' or 'Sura' (i.e. positive forces or entities) and 'Asur'/'Ashur'/'Asura' (i.e. negative forces or entities) are required for creation, and they are present everywhere: in creation, in the universe and in this world; they are present within us (as traits), within society and within civilization as well - so as to sustain it, or rather, so as to maintain the balance in Creation.

You see,imbalance is also part of nature. ['Vikriti' is also part of 'Prakriti'.]

Bhagavan or Bhagavati comes from 'Bhagavat', which means: 'Fortunate' or 'Blessed'. 'Bhagavat' in turn is derived from 'Bhagah', which means 'good fortune'. Therefore, any mortal human who is able to rise above his or her own needs, wants, fears, emotions or attachments, and performs great deeds (keerti) for the greater good of mankind or for the good of society, is "the Fortunate One" or "the Blessed One" (or in other words: a Bhagavan or a Bhagavati). "Fortunate" or "Blessed" - since he or she will "live forever", through the greatness of his or her actions and deeds. These exceptional and great humans manage to even triumph death (which is inevitable for us all) - by becoming "mrityunjay" (mrityu = death, jay = triumph). These great souls become "amar" (i.e. they "live" eternally or they "live" forever - through their keerti or legacy). [Note: Even now we say, "Bhagya" to indicate "fate" or "fortune", and "Bhagyavan" to indicate 'someone with good fortune or on whom fate is smiling'.]

Our ancients believed that the formless forces of the universe or the energies behind the cosmos "manifested" themselves throughthese great humans - the ones that leave behind great deeds (keerti) and play their role for the greater good of mankind and for society; and due to whose actions, civilization is able to (and has continued to) flourish well.

Therefore, for our ancients, these great humans were "avatar-s" or "manifestations" - of the formless forces of the universe or the energies behind the cosmos (also known as the Supreme Soul [the Paramaatma] or the Supreme Being [the Parameswar).

Avatar/ this is how I see it: When the finite meets the infinite, when the created meets the uncreated, when the mortal meets the immortal, it is then that that formless force or energy, also known as God, Parmaatma (the Supreme Soul), Parameshwar (the Supreme Being) or the divine, is "manifested" - as an Avatar or even as a Yug Purush or a Yug Manavi.

These various titles were honorifics given out of reverence, and in acknowledgement of someone's great deeds and their impact on society and on people's lives. Our ancients acknowledged the ones that made the highest contribution towards the good of society and towards civilization to flourish well (thereby touching and impacting the lives of a vast number of people) - as "avatar".

The Chapter IV - 8 of the Srimad Bhagavad Geeta [Srimad = an honorific, Geeta = songs; Srimad Bhagavad Geeta = the 'Songs of the Blessed One or the Fortunate One'] - says:

paritranaya sadhunam

vinasaya ca duskrtam

dharma-samsthapanarthaya

sambhavami yuge yuge

Meaning:

Paritranaya: for the deliverance; sadhunam: of the devotees; vinasaya:for the annihilation; ca: also; duskrtam: of the miscreants; dharma:the principles and ideals of 'the right path' or the 'way of life' as it should be - for the good of humankind and for civilization to flourish well; samsthapana-arthaya:to reestablish; sambhavami: I do appear; yuge: millennium; yuge:after millennium.

Translation:

In order to rescue/deliver the good and the pious (the noble-hearted) and to annihilate the miscreants, as well as to reestablish the principles and ideals of 'the right path' or the way of life as it should be - for the greater good of humankind and for civilization to flourish well, I advent Myself millennium after millennium.

[Do read my post:Shri Krshn: Notes on why he is called 'Bhagavan'- where I have made an attempt to explain the above in greater detail.]

However, as you may have noticed, Shri Krishna uses the word or term "duskrtam" - for aasuric i.e. negative forces or entities. It means "miscreants". [Note: Even now we use a variation of this Sanskrit word "duskrtam". We say: "duskritakaari", and that too means: miscreants.]

Words or concepts like "evil", "devil", etc is not a part of our culture or the philosophy of life rooted in Vedic wisdom (i.e., "Sanaatan Dharm"). [Veda comes from the root vid, which means: wisdom, knowledge.]

The third and fourth reasons as to why our ancients worshiped "idols" - I will try to explain in my next post. So, do stay tuned.

Jagdambe Jagdambe, a Bhajan by Pandit Jasraj: [This stuti pad (hymns of praise) is dedicated to and in praise of Maa Jagadamba (the divine Mother, the Mother of this Jagat - also known as Maa Shakti orMaa Durga). Jagadamb Jagadamb sura nara muni sumiranta: O Maa Jagadamba, great humans, ordinary mortals and the "awakened" ones - all pray to You. Sanmukha stuti karanta, shasasrta shir sarawanta: They sing Your praise in front of You; You are ever-present in their thoughts and minds. Siraganga harakhanta, nAchata shri herambh:Bhagavan Shiv (sira ganga - the one who holds Maa Ganga in his jaata or dread-locks) smiles, as Shri Ganesh (Herambh) dances with joy]: "Herambh" means "one who is erudite, wise, respected and calm in disposition", hence the metaphor of an elephant-head.

Here is a lovely Bhajan(Sarasvathi Vandhana)/Raag Bhairavi:Ustad Rashid Khanand Pandit Bharat Bhushan Goswami: [Vocal:UstadRashid Khan, Sarangi: Pandit Bharat Bhushan Goswami]:

Well, music isdivine. It truly mesmerizes, we don't want it to end...

Shubho Moha Nobomi.

(Do stay tuned…)

Pictures:1. Pic 01 - The sacred symbol AUM - AUM is the sound of primal energy, the sound of the universe itself. 2.Pic 02 - Maa Durga along with Shri Ganesh, Sri Sri Lakshmi and Sri Sri Saraswati. 3.Pic 03 - Mother Nature in all her glory. 4. Pic 04 - Mother Nature in all her glory - yet again. 5. Pic 05 - Shri Krishna explaining the "Viswaroop" to Arjuna.

Eibar sango holo pujor bela...

Aaj Bijoyadasami. It is the tenth day today, after the nine auspicious nights (Navratr or Navratri).

Aaj Dasha-hara(Dussehra, Dashera,Vijaya Dashami, Dasara, or Dashain).

Tai, wish you all a Shubh Dussehra. Shubh Vijayadasami. Shubho Bijoya-r priti o shubhechcha.

Ayigiri Nandini Nandita Mediniby Gayathri Devi and Saindhavi:

Dasha-hara is Sanskrit, and means "remover of negativity".

May Maa Durga help subdue all the negativity within and around us. May She dispel the darkness within us. May She bless us with inner power, peace and determination.

May the divine Mother, the Motherof this Creation and the Energy behind the cosmos, Maa Durga (or Maa Shakti) bless us with the bounty of eternal bliss of self-realization i.e. Sat-cit-ānanda (pronounced as: sach-chid-ānanda). Sat describes an essence that is pure and timeless; cit is consciousness; ānandais absolute bliss.

May the devi bless us all; may She bestow upon us the gift of perception and introspection. May She destroy all negative (aasuric) traits within us, such as: selfishness, jealousy, greed, resentment, prejudice, hatred and anger. May the divine Mother free us from ego (ahamkara). May She fill our lives with goodness (daaivic or noble traits) and positivity. May our lives resonate with joy, peace, love, hope, humility, kindness, empathy and truth. May Maa Durga the "Durgatinashini" (the eliminator of sufferings) eliminate our sufferings and remove all hurdles in the path of knowledge and reason. May the three-eyed (Triyambake) Maa Bhavani (the Mother of this Bhuvan; the one who can "see" the past, the present and the future) open our mind's eye (manas chokhshu or divya drishti).

Yaa Devii Sarva-Bhutessu Buddhi-Ruupenna Samsthitaa |

Namas-Tasyai Namas-Tasyai Namas-Tasyai Namo Namah ||8||

Yaa Devii Sarva-Bhutessu Shakti-Ruupenna Samsthitaa |

Namas-Tasyai Namas-Tasyai Namas-Tasyai Namo Namah ||12||

Yaa Devii Sarva-Bhutessu Shaanti-Ruupenna Samsthitaa |

Namas-Tasyai Namas-Tasyai Namas-Tasyai Namo Namah ||17||

Yaa Devii Sarva-Bhutessu Shraddhaa-Ruupenna Samsthitaa |

Namas-Tasyai Namas-Tasyai Namas-Tasyai Namo Namah ||18||

Yaa Devii Sarva-Bhutessu Dayaa-Ruupenna Samsthitaa |

Namas-Tasyai Namas-Tasyai Namas-Tasyai Namo Namah ||23||

Yaa Devii Sarva-Bhutessu Maatr-Ruupenna Samsthitaa |

Namas-Tasyai Namas-Tasyai Namas-Tasyai Namo Namah ||25||

[Ya Devi Sarvabhutesu-from Devi Mahatmyam]

The Gayathri Manthra:

May Shri Hanuman bless us always and remove all difficulties(sankatmochan) from our lives:

manojavaM mArutatulya vegaM, jitendriyaM buddhimatAM varishThaM ।

vAtAtmajaM vAnarayuth mukhyaM, shri rAm dutaM sharaNaM prapadye ॥

[Translated: I seek refuge (sharaNaM prapadye)in Shri Ram's Envoy (shri rAm dutaM); who is swift as thought (manojavaM), powerful and swift as the wind (mArutatulya vegaM), in control of his senses (jitendriyaM), supremely intelligent (buddhimatAM varishThaM), commander of the army of forest-dwellers (vAnarayuth mukhyaM), and son of the wind-god (vAtAtmajaM).]

Jai Bajrangbali!

[Please note:the "son" of the wind-god or Pavandev = a metaphor. Shri Hanuman was the finest pilot of his era. Yes, the Ramayan clearly refers to various types of air-crafts. The Ramayan is not "mythology" or "epic" but the comprehensive itihasa (history) of the 2^nd era - the Treta Yug.

The 2^nd Pandav, Bheem, too was the finest pilot of his era - the Dwapar Yug, i.e. the 3^rd era. And hence Bheem and Shri Hanuman are "brothers".]

Sri Hanumaan Chalisa by Pt. Rajan and Sajan Mishra:

Shri Ram Jay Ram-Pt. Bhimsen Joshi and Lata Mangeshkar(Bhajan):

May Shri Ram and Mata Sita bless you always. Jai Shri Ram!

Sri Ram Sloka:

॥ जय श्री राम ॥
ईश्वर उवाच
श्री राम राम रामेति रमे राम मनोरमे ।
सहस्त्रनाम ततुल्यं राम नाम वरानने ॥
श्री रामनाम वरानन ॐ नमः इति ॥

॥ Jai Shri Ram॥Īśvara uvaacha:Sri Ram Ram Rameti Rame Ram Manorame । Sahastranaam ta tuliyam Ram naam Varaanane ॥ Shri Ram naam Varaanan AUM Namah Iti ॥

[Glory to Shri Ram. Īśvara uvaacha: The very name of Shri Ram is serene, it gladdens the heart and touches the soul. This name has many hues. Uttering the name of Shri Ram once is equivalent to chanting a sloka or a hymn a thousand times. This is because of Shri Ram's greatness and the glory of His deeds, His keerti, due to which He has been accepted by the people of the Treta Yug (the second era) ... and beyond as an "avatar" or a "manifestation" of the cosmic force or energy - known as "Vishnu". And since the cosmic energies known as "Shiv" and "Vishnu" are one and the same, therefore, the name of Shri Ram encompasses Creation Itself. AUM. We bow to thee.]

Let me end this post with the following sloka:

॥ हरे कृष्ण हरे कृष्ण कृष्ण कृष्ण हरे हरे। हरे राम हरे राम राम राम हरे हरे ॥

Hare KrishnaHareKrishna

KrishnaKrishnaHare Hare|

HareRamHareRam

RamRamHare Hare||

My humble attempt at translating the above couplet:"Hare" is Hari, i.e. Shri Vishnu, the name our ancients gave to one of the major force or energy behind the cosmos. "Hari" means green.Another major force or energy behind the cosmos is "Shiv", who is also known as "Hara" and that too means "green". Vishnu and Shiv are "Hari-Hara";one and the same. The two "avatars" - Shri Ram and Shri Krishna are one and the same (i.e., "avatars" of Hari or Shri Vishnu, and by default that of Shiv as well - since Shiv and Vishnu are one and the same). Shri Ram and Sri Krishna have been accepted by the people of the Treta Yug (the second era) and the Dwapar Yug (the third era) ... and beyond - as "manifestations" of the cosmic forces or energies - known as "Shiv" and "Vishnu". This was due to the greatness of their deeds(Karm Yog and keerti) - that helped maintain the balance in society, thereby also helping civilization to flourish well. Both, Shri Ram and Shri Krishna have prayed to that immense (feminine) force or energy behind the cosmos, the one that our ancients called: "Maa Shakti".

In the Treta Yug (the 2nd era), Shri Ram invoked Maa Shakti or Maa Durga and sought her blessings. Until then, our ancients invoked the divine Mother during the month of Chaitra (Chaitra maas). Shri Ram invoked Her before time - Akal Bodhan (untimely invocation). Since then, the divine Mother is being worshiped during the month of Ashwin (Ashwin maas) instead of during the month of Chaitra. This also helped agriculturists or farmers. Here's why: The idols were made of soil, mud or terracotta taken from the banks of the sacred river Ganga (Maa Ganga; whose waters are known for their bactericidal properties) or its many tributaries. The colours used on the idols were derived from nature (i.e. they were natural or vegetable colours, prepared from leaves, flowers, vegetables and their extracts, and even from rocks, stones and kohl or kajal). On the tenth day, when the idols were immersed in various water-bodies (visharjan), the mud and colours of the idols blended with the waters and killed harmful germs. This water was then used by the farmers to irrigate their fields. Thus, the waters acted as natural insecticide or pesticide (no chemicals were used as pesticide or fertilizer). The same thoughts and principles were applicable for all idols that were worshiped throughout the year. Also, unlike what is done these days, our ancients did not use chemicals to prepare patakas (crackers) that were burst during the puja season. They used natural ingredients; and that kept the noise level at a minimum, while the smoke emitted by these patakas killed many harmful insects.The festivals (e.g. Holi) and the pujas (e.g. Dussehra/Durga Puja or Diwali/Kali Puja, etc) were also done keeping in mind the various seasons and what they signified (e.g. ailments, crop sowing or harvesting and so on) - and accordingly a natural "remedy" was employed. Even the colours used during Holi were herbal or natural colours, made from specific leaves, flowers, vegetables and their extracts; and they not only killed the germs (in the air, soil or the waters) but also improved the immunity of the people (since they applied these colours on each other). Also: specific diet was followed during each season, and this automatically raised the immunity levels and ensured good health.

Shubh Dussehra. Shubh Vijayadasami.Shubho Bijoya-r priti o shubhechcha.

For further reading:

1.You may read Shubho Mahalaya - Maa aaschhen:HERE.

2.The ever-mesmerizing Bhavani Dayani can be read: HERE.

3.Shubho Maha Saptami: Who or rather what are Maa Adi Shakti and Maa Kaalraatri?can be read: HERE.

4. Do read Joi Maa Durga: Notes on "Idol Worship" (Part-I):HERE.

Pictures:Found while trawling the net, don't remember the links :(

This is my second Jeeves and Bertie novel and I am already an incorrigible Jeeves enthusiast... all ready to share my thoughts, yet again. I'm also quite fond of Bertie Wooster. What ho!

Thank You, Jeeves is a Jeeves novel by P.G. Wodehouse, first published in the United Kingdom on March 16, 1934 by Herbert Jenkins, London, and in the United States on April 23, 1934 by Little, Brown and Company, New York. The story had previously been serialized, in the Strand Magazine in the UK from August 1933 to February 1934, and in the U.S. in Cosmopolitan Magazine from January to June 1934; it would later appear in the American Family Herald & Evening Star, between March 24 and August 11, 1937.

In Thank You, Jeeves we encounter a host of characters. Not that they are total strangers to us; I, for one, have already made my acquaintance with them in Carry on, Jeeves. But in this novel we get a bit more peek into them, their lives, eccentricities and all.

...And we get to say hello to the young Bertram Wooster's banjolele. This current flameof his (musical instrumentally speaking) lands him in some serious trouble of the cantankerous kind - with assorted neighbours, etc. But the proverbial sky falls when the usually unflappable Jeeves too decides to turn flappable and bids adieu - at short notice.

All 'coz Bertie decides to gallantly stand by his banjolele. Very Bertie-like, I tell you.

Jeeves finds work with Bertie's old friend, Lord "Chuffy" Chuffnell. Rather, Chuffy engages him without wasting a precious moment (i.e. as soon as he learns that Jeeves intended to leave Bertie). Clearly: Jeeves' reputation precedes him and is widespread.

Bertie too (very thoughtfully and innocently) travels to one of Chuffy's cottages in Dorset - in order to continue practicing his banjolele-playing. Why to one of Chuffy's cottages in Dorset of all places? So as to avoid upsetting his city neighbours.

Btw, the banjoleleis universally renowned as the banjo. But since I had not heard of the former - the rather exotic-sounding name before, I take it that one never ceases to learn. Even from a musical instrument whose rather 'melodious' strains (as coaxed out by the one and only Bertie) invariably induce insomnia in all two-and-four-legged creatures within the vicinity. And perhaps even in the potted variety. God bless the banjolele, or rather, the hand that plays it.

However, young Bertie is not without his virtues. He seems to be a first-rate magnet and a repellent - all rolled into one; as far as the female of the species is concerned, that is. The sheer number of distaffers that have flitted in and out of his life is enough to teach the first and second graders the fine art of counting (addition, subtraction, multiplication, all included).

But this book almost entirely concentrates on Pauline Stoker - Bertie's sometime fiancée, the engagement having lasted less than 48 hours. All thanks to some rather convincing glib-talk by the permanently irascible "nerve specialist" Sir Roderick Glossop - who, in this book, is well and truly under the spell of the Dowager Lady Chuffnell.

As you know, Lady Chuffnell is also Chuffy's Aunt Myrtle, a formidable lady-ship and the owner of a rather pestilential son - Seabury. Guess, love is blind. Or perhaps it has something to do with birds of a feather and all that.

Speaking of love, let's get back to Pauline.

Bertie's sometime fiancée - Pauline - is not the type to mope around. She has admirably moved on, and even transferred her affections to Lord Chuffnell (aka Chuffy), the master of Chuffnell Hall, in Chuffnell Regis, a hamlet containing more Nosey Parkers to the square foot than any other spot in England.

Chuffy, as we know, is a childhood chum of Bertie. And Bertie too has taken up residence in one of Chuffy's cottages at precisely the same time - in order to continue practicing his banjolele-playing.Now, if this doesn't prove that the world is truly a global village, what does?

No, Bertie isn't crestfallen either; in fact he is quite the enthu-cutletand pledges all possible help for this union to materialize. He actually goes all out to make it happen. Even taking on the possessor of that formidable-sounding name, J. Washburn Stoker - who is also very much the even more formidable, ever vigilant and overprotective father of the lissome Pauline Stoker. Here Stoker Sr. appears as the fairly recent inheritor of some 50 million dollars, thanks to a final act of generosity by one of his relatives. This theory of relativity seems to play a very crucial role in many people's lives. Otherpeople's lives.

Stoker Sr. is the sort of chap who, as the Bible puts it, if you say Go, he cometh, and if you say Come, he goeth; a fellow, in a word, who, if he came to a door with 'Push' on it, would always pull.

As per Bertie.

Quite an eloquent chap, this Bertie, don't you think? None of us could have put it any better, right?

Btw, Chuffy aka Lord Chuffnell is actually Lord Marmaduke Chuffnell.

Yes, you read it right. Its Marmaduke and not Marmalade.

But imagine being saddled with a name like that... for life?! Not quite in the same league as Nelson Rolihlahla Mandela or his 27-year long incarceration though. And perhaps even worse than being deported to Kala Paani by the erstwhile East India Company-turned-British Raj. [Kala Paani:the Cellular Jail or the colonial prison situated in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands.]

As for Jeeves, he continues to float in and out of rooms and materializes rather manifests himself whenever he is urgently required. That is: whenever there are dark clouds - real or imaginary - on the horizon.

What he does here? Or what happens to that root-cause of many events - the banjolele? Well, you'll have to read this book to find that out. I won't play the spoiler. And if you have read it already, well then, read it again. :)

I mentioned earlier that Bertie went all out to make the Chuffy-Pauline union happen, didn't I? Actually, Bertie does a lot more than that. He even applies boot polish on his face, saves himself (by finishing first by the shortest of heads) in a race with his new valet (Brinkley) and the latter's carving knife. [New valet, 'coz Jeeves had flappabled himself, thanks to the banjolele, remember?]

Quite a character, this Brinkley. He even threw potatoes at the formidable Stoker Sr. - giving him a very sweetish black eye. Now, how many folks do you know that can throw potatoes like a missile (from a distance that too) and still get the bull's eye? [Pun or not, you decide.]

Bertie also witnesses a lovers' reunion/reconciliation (after a lovers' tiff, of course) - lofty endearments and all that (after one has been duly gathered in the others arms). Umm, what state the good Mr. Wooster was in then? He, horror of horrors, had not even breakfasted!! That is: he witnessed a lovers' reunion - on an empty, rumbling stomach and a boot-polish-blackened-face.

What sacrifice!

Verdict:Thank You, Jeeves is actually one story, a single story that runs through 22 chapters and 263 pages. The chapters are short and given the nature of the book you'll simply breeze through them. It's an any-time, all-weather read. Though there isn't much interplay between Jeeves and Bertie here, unlike the kind we find in Carry on, Jeeves, but you'll like Pauline Stoker. She will bring a smile to your lips.

My two pence worth:The book jacket cover is denim-blue in colour. PG Wodehouse appears in fluorescent green. Thank You, Jeeves appears in white. Quite prominent, must say. Three silhouettes, one table and a solitary figure in a crisp white shirt - make up the rest. The silhouettes clearly belong to Chuffy, Pauline and Jeeves - in that order. The large dining table (with a bright-pink cover) comes in between the silhouettes and the crisp white-shirted figure. On the table there is a tray with a coffee pot and a cup on it, which in turn is closely accompanied by a plate that is laden with crisp toasts and an egg - all Bertie's breakfast favourites.

A hand reaches for the toasts from under the table, while the body, to which the hand is attached, is doing its best to remain in hiding. A part of the face, from nose down, is revealed.

...And all of this clearly belongs to Bertram Wooster, although the face is devoid of boot polish. However, the bright-pink cover on the table could not have been Jeeves' choice.

The production quality of the book is pretty decent. The few editing errors could and should have been pruned out.

However, the novel contains the word "Negro" one too many times. Which means: the celebrated P.G. Wodehouse may not have been entirely devoid of the cancer of "racism". Or was it a word that was simply in circulation in those days, and which was used without much thought?

There are a couple of references to India as well - alongside giant spiders. Hmm.

But there is absolutely nothing about leech and Nobel Peace Prize. I mean: about a certain EU de Colognial. Nothing about the Yeast India Company either.

Not even a whiff. Too bad.

But then, thank you Plum - for Jeeves and for Bertie. And here's wishing you a belated 131^st Happy Birthday! Or is it birth anniversary?! What say, Jeeves?

Details of the book:Thank You, Jeeves/ Author: P.G. Wodehouse/ Publisher: Arrow, an imprint of Random House/ Binding: Paperback/ Publishing Date: 03/06/2008/ Genre: Classics/ ISBN-10: 978-0-09-951373-5/ ISBN-13: 9780099513735/ Pages: 263/ Price: $19.95)

Picture:The book jacket cover of Thank You, Jeeves. Courtesy: link.

I wanted to do this post on Tuesday (30.10.2012) itself, to coincide with the occasion of the 125^th birth anniversary of arguably the greatest humourist-satirist of all times - Shri Sukumar Ray.

The incorrigible Bengali in me wasn't being 'lajee' err, I mean: trying to 'conserve energy'; and despite the nip in the air, thanks to Nilamdidi, I was not contemplating on 'hibernation' either.

... I simply decided to spend my time reading that nonpareil genius Sukumar Ray's evergreen works, instead of putting thumb to keys. :)

Here is a link for you to read them too. [It is in Bangla though]:

http://www.bangalinet.com/sukumar_roy_abol_tabol_index.htm

http://sukumarray.freehostia.com/

The task of encapsulating the essence of Sukumar Ray in a single post (or even in multiple posts, for that matter) is colossal; it is simply beyond my limited talents. So, do watch this short documentary film made by his illustrious son, Satyajit Ray (in 1987, and released the same year - during the birth centenary year of Sukumar Ray, who was born on October 30, 1887):

This is the last documentary made by Satyajit as a tribute to his father, before he too passed away on 23 April 1992. Here is a bit about this 30-min documentary-film: Link.

Here is Satyajit Ray and Akira Kurosawa(regarded as one of the most important and influential filmmakers in the history of cinema):

It is erroneously said that Sukumar Ray wrote mainly for children. His works transcends all sorts of barriers, including those of: age, gender and time. A child can read them and so can an adult, whether a youth, a middle-aged person or the elderly. The humour, fun, wit and the satire part remains intact. What changes, or rather manifests itself with each reading, are the numerous layers. It is an exciting and fun-filled journey of discovery - one that begins during one's childhood and merrily continues until one's 'destination' has arrived. Therefore, one can never tire of them. Never. His works cannot be slotted with respect to events, personalities or generations either; 'coz they are ever relevant, and hence, their appeal will never diminish.

Sukumar Ray's works or legacy, if you may, have endured and will continue to endure. The true essence of humour, fun, wit and satire, in my humble opinion, is its ability to endure, and do so without an overwhelming amount of bile. Perhaps especially: without bile, i.e. in the complete absence of bile or vitriol. Sukumar Ray has achieved this, totally and completely... and effortlessly as well. And this to me is the measure of his talents... and of his greatness.

Vitriol or bile rankles. More often than not, it misses the mark and opens up yet another tributary, so to speak. Wherein: the one that was doing all the gleeful target shooting (suddenly) finds himself or herself in that awkward and unenviable position of having to pay tributes to the until-then hapless target - for some unintentional or perceived slight. We have ample examples of this, right? By contrast, intelligent satire sans vitriol finds its way into even the innermost recesses of firmly shut and airtighthearts and minds, then makes its point and leaves its imprint too. And Sukumar Ray excelled in this. Fortunately, many of his works have now been translated into English, and so, the non-Bangla-speaking world too can partake of some of these cerebral and intellectual pleasures. The flavour and taste may be somewhat altered though. For the epicurean Bengali, it is a veritable feast all the way. Always.

Sukumar Ray was claimed by that severe infectious fever, leishmaniasis, for which there was no cure at the time - on 10th September 1923. He was only 36. His only child, Satyajit[Bangla: Shottojit], was not even two-and-a-half at the time, though he has spoken about his first and few memories of his father, Sukumar. It was most probably recorded on the occasion of Sukumar Ray's 50th death anniversary in 1973. Satyajit has spoken in impeccable Bangla, marked by his characteristic lucidity and baritone. In that narration, he has also regretted not having access to the original manuscript of Ha Ja Ba Ra La (A Topsy-Turvy Tale), and the original illustrations of Abol Tabol ("Rhymes without reason" or "Weird and Random"). What a loss!

Here's an illustration of Abol Tabol (tr: Weird and Random or Rhymes without reason):

Sukumar's father, the great Upendrakishore Ray (Ray Chowdhury; Bangla: Upendrokishore Raychoudhuri) too was a genius, but has been (sadly and inexplicably) slotted as a 'children's story writer' ... not unlike the slotting that Sukumar Ray's works have also been relegated to. Why and how, I have not a clue. Perhaps the ones that did the slotting were even bigger and better humourists and satirists, who, for some reason also never put pen to paper. Or perhaps, they did, and those pages promptly made their way up the 'food chain' around assorted carts that sold jalebi-s, samosa-s, bajji-s and the like - in those days.

Umm, frankly, all I can think of is: 'RamgoruRer Chhana Haanste tader maana/ Hanshir kotha shunley bole/ Hansbo na-na na-na...'

[These are a few lines from the immensely popular "RamgoruRer Chhana" (link) from one of Sukumar Ray's masterpieces: "Abol Tabol" or "Rhymes without reason". It is about people who are humourless or humour-resistant. Congenitally. The ones that treat humour with fear or for whom sunshine in the form of smile and laughter is a calamity worse than forking out large amounts of taxes, not that they are fond of paying small amount of taxes even.]

Here is the famous RamgoruR/RamgoruRer Chhanaas sketched by Sukumar Ray:

Many words and phrases invented by the father-son duo (i.e. Upendrakishore-Sukumar) have become an integral part of the Bangla language. Several characters invented by Sukumar have become legendary in Bengali literature and culture; some characters have even found idiomatic usage in the language. E.g. in the popular movie "Miss Priyambada" (released: 1967; genre: a comedic far-fetched 'romance') that starred the grand old man of Bangla comedy: Bhanu Bandopadhyayand his great friend and on-screen Hardy: Jahor Roy, Lily Chakraborty's character dubs her maternal uncle-approved rotund suitor as "KumRo Potash".

KumRo Potash (link) is the name of one of Sukumar Ray's famous rhymes, and this word is now an inalienable part of the Banglalanguage as well. [Kumro = pumpkin, but "potash" is impossible to translate.]

Do make your acquaintance with KumRo Potash:

Bhanu Bandopadhyay also used this poem in another of his well-loved films: "Personal Assistant", a sort of romantic-comedy, unlike any that you have watched (outside of Bhanu Bandopadhyay's universe, that is). This 1959 film also featured actor-singer Ruma Guhathakurata and Tarun Kumar (younger brother of Bengal's matinee-idol 'Mohanayok' Uttam Kumar.)

Another of the great Ray's rhymes is titled, "Danpite" (link) meaning "irrevocably naughty". And any kid that is irrevocably naughty, a la Dennis the Menace, is termed "danpite" chele or "danpite" khoka in Bangla. [Chele, khoka = boy.]

Here is the sketch from Danpite:

I can go on and on... and on.

Sukumar Ray has combined two seemingly meaningless words into one - to formulate a Portmanteau, and this has in turn created new animals in his works, like the Haansjaru(duck + porcupine), Bakacchop (crane + tortoise), Girgitia (chameleon + parrot), the Singhoerin (lion + deer) and even the Ramgorur (human + lizard + cow) that also laid eggs! And whose nests were stuffed with scolding, where even the wind of humour is banned; where: you're not allowed to laugh !! [Ramgorurer basha / Dhamak diye thasha / Hashir hawa bandha shethai / Nishedh shethai hasha...]

Here is some more info on the great Upendrokishore Raychoudhuri:

Here is some more info on the nonpareil genius - Sukumar Ray. Please do read:

http://aboltabol.freehostia.com/sukumar.htm
http://www.parabaas.com/translation/database/authors/texts/sukumarray.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukumar_Ray
http://www.parabaas.com/translation/database/translations/essays/pZinia_sukumar.html
http://satadrusen.com/index.php?option=com_content&id=60&Itemid=8
http://www.himalmag.com/component/content/article/172.html [This article contains a verse (Khichudi) from Abol Tabol (Rhymes without reason) - the original in Bangla is of course by Sukumar Ray, the fairly competent English translation by Bhaswati Ghosh. It brims with Ray's fantastic creatures: Haansjaru(duck/haans + porcupine/shojaru), Bakacchop (crane/bok + tortoise/kocchhop), Girgitiaortiya-mukho girgiti (chameleon/girgiti + parrot/tiya; rather: parrot-faced chameleon), the Singhoerin (lion/singha + deer/hoerin) and Hatimir (elephant/hati + whale/timi). There is also the goat/chhagol+ scorpion/bichhe, the giraffe + grasshopper/phoding and the cow/goru+ rooster/morog.

Khichudi (Hindi: Khichdi), as you know, is a common dish popular all over India and amongst the Indian Diaspora (the probashi Bharotiyo) as well, a flavourful mixture of rice and dal (lentils) cooked with spices; also used figuratively to mean a hodgepodge or mixture. The Anglicized spelling was kedgeree.

Here is the giraffe + grasshopper/phoding:

Here is the cow/goru + rooster/morog:

And here are the Singhoerin (lion/singha + deer/hoerin)and the Haansjaru(duck/haans + porcupine/shojaru):

Sukumar Ray's legacy is a treasure-trove of laughter and fun, satire and humour and a commentary on things, persons and events that we can still find around us - 125 years after he was born and 89 years after he physically left us. But it is practically impossible to translate. For those of us that have grown up soaking in the magic of Ray's lyrics, nonsense rhymes and rhythm, our childhood (and beyond) would have remained incomplete without his priceless oeuvre.

Sukumar Ray. Loho Pronam. Tomar aashon shunyoaajike heye bir purno koro...

(Do stay tuned…)

Pictures:1. Pic 01 - Sukumar Ray. 2.Pic 02 - Satyajit Ray and Akira Kurosawa. 3.Pic 03 - Abol Tabol (Rhymes without reason or Weird and Random). 4. Pic 04 - RamgoruR/RamgoruRer Chhana. 5. Pic 05 - KumRo Potash. 6.Pic 06 - Danpite. 7.Pic 07 - Upendrokishore Raychoudhuri. 8. Pic 08 - giraffe + grasshopper/phoding. 9. Pic 09 - cow/goru + rooster/morog. 10. Pic 10 - Singhoerin (lion/singha + deer/hoerin) and the Haansjaru (duck/haans + porcupine/shojaru).

Author's note:The 1^st partof this series can be read: here.

Satyajit was multifaceted, multi-talented, auteur extraordinaire, a sort of a genius polymath himself. But ask any Bengali (who are very familiar with Sukumar Ray's works, untranslated works, that is) and they'll all say that Satyajit was Sukumar Ray's worthy son.

I mentioned untranslated works (of Sukumar Ray) since much of the original flavour is lost and/or altered and therefore gets lost in translation. Also, Banglais a language steeped in history, heritage and a rich culture of the land. English, or for that matter any other language, will not be able to grasp its essence or fathom its depth.

But then thanks to translation again, we get to read the works of greats - originally written in languages we do not know and hence, cannot read.

As for the Sukumar Ray's worthy son bit, none other than Satyajit himself understood this best. Deftly woven into some of his works would be his father's (Sukumar Ray) nonsense rhymes. E.g. the Satyajit-directed 2^nd Feludastory on screen: Joi Baba Felunath.

Jatayu aka Lalmohan Ganguly (the peerless Santosh Dutta), Feluda aka Pradosh Chandra Mitter (the one and only Soumitra Chattopadhyay) and Topshe aka Tapesh Ranjan Mitter (Siddhartha Chatterjee, in his 2^nd outing as Topshe) are briskly walking down a narrow dark alley. Jatayu is characteristically jittery and draws attention to the eerie silence and the shadows; Feludaresponds by reciting some lines from Ha-Ja-Ba-Ra-La (A Topsy-Turvy Tale.) Stunningly appropriate, given that this was the prelude to that chilling murder-of-Shasibabu sequence. [Jatayu is pronounced as: Jotayu.]

[Tapesh Ranjan Mitter, pet-name/daak-naam: Topshe, the sparkling-eyed, teenaged Siddhartha Chatterjee - in his first outing as Feluda's young cousin-cum-satellite Topse in "Shonar Kella" (The Golden Fort) - has been the best Topshe so far and will likely be the best Topshe ever, 'coz, you see, it is difficult to improve upon perfection. 'Mitter' is the Anglicized version of the Bengali surname: Mitra, pronounced as: Mitro.]

In the same film (Joi Baba Felunath, somewhat unimaginatively translated as: The Mystery of The Elephant God), Feluda tells Jatayu: "Aapnar Jnanpithphoshkey gelo" - when the latter is confused by montroputo sholko. Jatayu understands the montroputo bit, which means: mantra infused, but is befuddled by the sholko part.

[Sholko = machher aansch; the scales of a fish, in Bangla. Jnanpith is the well-known literary award, that along with the Sahitya Akademi Fellowship, is one of the two most prestigious literary honours in the country. Phoshkey gelo = missed, especially after one has been trying very hard to get hold of or target something.]

Feluda is quick torealize that Jatayu, despite being the best-selling author of super-daring thrillers and the creator of a detective character with extra-superhuman abilities (Prokhor Rudro) did not know the meaning of sholko. In those four words, Feluda effectively tells Jatayu that despite his racy detective-novels selling like hot cakes, the Jnanpith award eludes him, i.e. despite his novels flying off the shelves, critical acclaim is nowhere in sight. [It is the unmistakable Ray touch! :)]

Here is Jatayu saying 'Areiibass!!' (an exclamation in Bangla, used especially when one sees or experiences something fantastic; film: Joi Baba Felunath). Jatayu is amazed by the sight of the famous bodybuilder, Bishwashri Gunomoy Bagchi, and his temple of muscles. And onceBagchi reveals his vital-stats, Jatayu quickly brings out his notebook and jots down the various details and names: bicep, tricep, quadricep, deltoid, et al - for future reference. Feluda looks on with a hint of impish smile dancing on his lips:

[Moloy Roy, the real-life body-builder and son of the late Manotosh Roy who became Mr. Universe, says in the film: "Eta mandir, aar musclegulo tar modhye sob karukarjyo." (tr:This body is a temple, and these muscles are works of art.)

Jatayuis the name of a bird that we first come across in Maharshi Valmiki's "Ramayan". In the Feluda series, it is the nom de plume of Lalmohan Ganguly's character. Brilliantly portrayed by the irreplaceable Santosh Dutta, Lalmohan Ganguly aka Jatayu appears as an essentially good soul who is not very fluent in English and who gets intimidated very easily. He is a popular children's crime-fiction writer, drawing much of his knowledge from Encyclopedia Britannia.]

Encyclopedia Britannia. You get the point, don't you? That's sublime satire. Ray style.

The Bengali hotel manager (the 1st person from the left, checkthe 3rd pic from top) speaks about a new holy man, who has arrived in Benares: "Machhli baba. Shobaikeyi uni ekta montroputo sholko daen...". Jatayu is completely stumped: "Sholko?" Feluda casually retorts: "Aapnar Jnanpith phoshkey gelo..."

The montroputo sholko is given by the much revered Machchli-baba. [Machchli = fish; and this holy man claims to be a manifestation of the Matsya avatar.]

Need I say more?

Phoshkey Gelo (link) is also the title of one of Sukumar Ray's popular rhymes.

Those of us who do not understand a language usuallyrely on their translations - in order to read the works of some or the other literary great. But when it comes to Upendrakishore Raychaudhuri or Sukumar Ray's works, it is best if you have a Bengali friend or even a good acquaintance. Get hold of him or her and let him or her translate the works for you, in the process: peeling off the many layers (literal and camouflaged) and revealing before your mind's eye a fascinating world filled with words, phrases, verse, portmanteau,puns, creatures, events and much more - that you would have never 'met' before. It's a treat, and though it may require several readings, it's all worth it. Most translations available in the market do not try to grasp the essence of the writings. More often than not, these are literal translations and given how different the two languages (Bangla and English) are, they (the original and the translations) aren't even close. Therefore, rely on a friend.

Even Satyajit Ray, for all his genius, gave up (trying to translate Sukumar Ray's nonsense rhymes), after a while. However, during the time he somehow soldiered on, he did manage to translate quite a few of them, but the hilarity is greatly diluted. You can read half-a-dozen of Sukumar Ray's poems (a couple of them translated into English by Satyajit): here.

Nonsense Rhymes. Translated by Satyajit Ray. Calcutta: Writer's Workshop, 1970. This volume by (Sukumar Ray's son) Satyajit Ray is the slimmest and is difficult to find.

Here is another book: Select Nonsense of Sukumar Ray.

Sukumar Ray's 'Bhoy Peyo Na' (lit: Don't be Scared) has been translated into English by Satyajit as: 'Prey for Me'.

As I said, the hilarity is greatly diluted; it is nowhere near the original. However, this piece (Bhoy Peyo Na) written so many years ago, would pithily sum up the 'if you are not with us, we will bring democracy to your nation' types and their shenanigans (past and present).

In this poem, an enormous devilish-looking creature emerges from a rock or cave - to have this playful conversation with a Bengali babu. The illustration is by Sukumar Ray himself. His sketches accompany his poems and other writings. Here is that creature from Bhoy Peyo Na:

You can find some more of his illustrations: here.

Here is an illustration from Ha Ja Ba Ra La (A Topsy Turvy Tale):

The Khuror Kolhas seeped into the Bangla language and attained idiomatic usage (khuro = uncle, kol = machine or apparatus; khuror kol literally translates as: Uncle's Apparatus or Uncle's machine.)It is actually a metaphor for a situation/event/apparatus/person, actually:anything that saps one's energy (leaves onehelplessand drained in every way imaginable, but fromwhich or whom there is little or no respite). As per the illustration, the Khuror Kol appears to be a 'machine' that dangles food in front of a person - to make him travel faster. In Sukumar Ray's 'Ashombhob Noi', (in Khai-Khai - translated as Eat-Eat, but which actually means:congenital gluttony), the food is a radish dangled before a sahib's donkey. You get it right? Some relationships or even friendships are exactly like Khuror Kol. E.g. our blue-turbaned yogi and Hurricane-didi. Who is in a Khuror Kol is not difficult to decipher, no? :)

Here is the illustration of the Khuror Kol(by the great Sukumar Ray himself):

Sukumar's 'Ekushe Ain' (translated as: 'The Rule of 21' in this link) is extremely relevant even today and is one of my all-time favourites. Here are a few lines:

'Je shob loke poddyo lekhe,

taader dhore khanchaye rekhe,

kaaner kache nanan shhure

naamta shonaye aksho ude,

shamne rekhe mudi-r khata-

hiseb koshaye ekush pata.'

I wouldn't dare attempt a translation. But here is the gist: People that write poetry are captured and put in a cage. They are subjected to cantankerous cacophony at all hours. And they are then (also) made to do mind-numbing tasks.

He is lamenting the forcible death of creativity and talent, the imprisonment (khancha: cage) of a creative person and his or her creativity. (je shob loke poddyo lekhe, taader dhore khanchaye rekhe). Instead of encouragement, there is institutionalized glorification of mediocrity and much worse. Creativity, poetry, etc is forcibly killed. Maybe 'coz it is a threat to many, therefore, the mind needs to be caged/colonized; and this is achieved by subjecting a creative mind (and thought) to cantankerous cacophony (also a metaphor) at all hours. (kaaner kache nanan shhure naamta shonaye aksho ude). A brilliant, meritorious or a creative person is then forced to do mind-numbing tasks, menial tasks. His or her talent and creativity is then well and truly buried. (shamne rekhe mudi-r khata-hiseb koshaye ekush pata).

Such simple words, so very easy to understand and commit to one's memory! They greatly appeal to even four or five-year-olds (of course someone else will have to read it to them). But these rhymes will remain with them throughout their lives; and as they grow older, they will discover yet another layer. It's a veritable treasure hunt.

The way Sukumarhas presented it is simply awesome. Such deep and profound thoughts (laced with overt-yet-latent satire and dollops of sublime sarcasm) and written in such a fun and rhymical manner! When he penned them, India was a colonized nation, but even now, when we are supposedly free, they are still relevant and impactful. His seemingly meaningless rhymes have left their imprints on generations. And this will not change. No wonder he never had to ask: aaji hotey shoto borsho pore, ke tumi podicho boshi aamar kobitakhani koutuhol bhore? Aaji hotey shoto borsho pore...

But some people, like Didi, clearly have not read 'Ekushe Ain'. Noye ki?Otherwise, Sukumar Ray's photo would have been 'caged' by now. What say you? :)

Frankly, I pity the neo-Curzons and the many Macaulay-putras and Macaulay-putristhat abound this land. In their relentless quest to Cfor cat, Ofor octopussyPfor parrotYfor yo - youknowwhat and youknowwho - they simply have no idea about what they have missed out on. Tsk. Tsk.

Apparently, Sukumar Ray's works such as the collection of poems: "Aboltabol" ("Rhymes without reason" or "Weird and Random"), novella: "HaJaBaRaLa" (A Topsy-Turvy Tale), short story collection: "Pagla Dashu" ("Crazy Dashu") and play: "Chalachittachanchari" are considered equal in stature to Alice in Wonderland. However, I would say that Bangla(or for that matter all Indian languages) have a richness and depth that perhaps cannot be matched by English. 'Coz if it had, then the full glory of Sukumar Ray's works/legacy would have been fathomed by the English-speaking world (... and to some extent by the non-Bangla-speaking world too). And then, Harry wouldn't have been pottering around...

(Do stay tuned…)

Pictures:1. Pic 01 - Sukumar Ray. 2.Pic02 - Film poster: Joi Baba Felunath. 3.Pic 03 - The Bengali hotel manager, Feluda, Jatayu and Topshe deep in conversation (Joi Baba Felunath). 4. Pic 04 - Jatayu saying Areiibass!!(Joi Baba Felunath)5. Pic 05- Satyajit Ray. 6. Pic 06 - Phoskey Gelo. 7.Pic 07 - The creature from Bhoy Peyo Na. 8.Pic 08 - an illustration from Ha Ja Ba Ra La (A Topsy Turvy Tale).9. Pic 09 - Khuror Kol.

Author's note: The 1^st partof this series can be read: here.

The 2^ndpart: here.

I cannot think of any other author that has made such an impact through his or her writings, and that too with such simplicity and charm. So much so that even a four or five year old falls under its spell... and continues to read and re-read them well into his or her 70s, 80s and 90s.

Upendrakishore Raychaudhuri, Sukumar Ray and Satyajit Ray - are geniuses. Three generation of geniuses in a family, imagine!! But there is a fourth one as well - the great LilaMajumdar, Pishi(paternal aunt) to Satyajit Ray and a younger cousin of Sukumar Ray. Together they have laid the foundations of children's literature in Bangla; a 'children's literature' that one never really outgrows. Simply because: they cannot be outgrown, they become a part of us. They are a part of us. Forever.

Here is Lila Majumdar:

Upendrokishore Raychaudhuri, Sukumar Ray, Satyajit Ray and Lila Majumdar will continue to live on, through their works, via people like us, despite the best intensions of firang Bengalis. :)

Sandesh (the popular children's magazine in Bangla) found able navigators (kandari-s) in Majumdar and her prodigious nephew, Satyajit. Both of them edited and prolifically wrote for Sandesh.

[Sandesh was started by Lila Majumdar's paternal uncle (jhathamoshai, jyethu; father's older brother) - Upendrokishore Raychaudhuri, in 1913, and was later edited by her older cousin (jyathtuto-dada) Sukumar Ray - for a while; after Upendrakishore passed away in 1915. Tragically, Sukumar too was claimed by leishmaniasisin 1923. Though his younger brother Subinoy took charge, the magazine went through some difficult times and even stopped publication for a while. Satyajit revived it in 1961 and Lila Majumdar (along with her cousin, Nalini Das) was closely associated with it from 1963 until 1994 (i.e. throughout her active writing life.) The much-loved magazine probably is still in circulation. Sandesh is also the name of a popular dry sweet in Bengal;prepared with milk, khoaand khejur gur or jaggery made from khejur or dates. It is yummy, and this magazine was and remains a treat - for kids, young and young-at-heart.]

The Sukumar Ray years established "Sandesh" as a unique magazine that combined literary values with humour and fun, thoughit also contained a lot of information gleaned from all over the world. Here is the June 1988 front cover of Sandesh:

Many of Satyajit's writings were first published in Sandesh. His 1962 science fiction story - Bankubabur Bandhu (Banku-babu's Friend or Mr. Banku's Friend) was one of them. Ray also introduced his famous characters Feluda and Professor Shonku in short stories he wrote for Sandesh. [His other enduring creation: Tarini Khurohas eluded me so far. Don't know why and how. *Scratching my head*]

Here is Professor Shonku:

Here is the cover of Tarini Khuro:

Tarini Khuro literally means: respected uncle Tarini. Khuro in old colloquial Bengali means: paternal uncle (father's younger brother). Tarini Khuro is actually Tarini Charan Bandopadhyay (clipped to Banerjee.)

Fortunately, Sandip Ray (Satyajit's son) has now taken up the task of bringing the reclusive Tarini Khuro from Beniatola Lane, at College Street in Kolkata (or what was then Calcutta) straight onto the silver screen. Here's more: link.

Sandip Ray's ghost film:here.

... And it is to be released in December. Hurrayyyyy!

Although humour was her forte, Lila Majumdar also wrote detective stories, ghost stories, fantasies... and much more. Yours truly has been trying to lay her hands on Podi Pishir Bormi Baksho (tr: Aunt Podi's Burmese Box) - for years now, and though the book has proved to be elusive so far (!), yours truly has not given up. And she will not give up until this book has well and truly surrendered, 'coz her Karm Yog for this life will remain incomplete otherwise. :)

[In Podi-pishi, Podi is the name of the person. Pishi = paternal aunt in Bangla.]

Though Satyajit Ray had thought of filming Podi Pishir Bormi Baksho, it was finally made under the directorial baton of Arundhati Debi in 1972 (it turned out to be her most popular film as a director.) Chhaya Debi(one of our greatest and the most versatile of actors) played the role of the young hero, Khoka's famed aunt: Podipishi. The rest of the cast included: Ajitesh Bandopadhyay, Haradhan Bandopadhyay, Nripati Chattopadhyay, Robi Ghosh, Chinmoy Ray, Jahor Ray, Rudraprasda Sengupta, Padma Debi, among others. Umm, looks like my Karm Yog has now expanded to include watching this movie as well. Shall do so gladly.

The coverof Podi Pishir Bormi Baksho:

Here is the great lady herself (reading letters, possibly from her adoring fans):

Signature of Majumdar and Nalini Das:

Lila Majumdar: A Granddaughter Remembers:here.

More on Lila Majumdar (pictures):here.

Biographical sketch:here.

Thakumar Thikujiby Lila Majumdar: here.

Some of Majumdar's works translated into English: reviewed here.

The front covers of some of her ever-popular books: here.

The famed Raychaudhuri family's brilliant, ingenious and innovative tradition of writing - enlightened, satiric, hilarious and myriad-hued - founded by Upendrokishore Raychudhuri, perfected by his son, Sukumar Ray, was very ably carried forward by Majumdar and Satyajit, who not only made it part of their own genius, but enriched it too.

People tend to box Majumdar neatly in the children's author category, but I strongly feel it is unfair. Writers of her and say Shirshendu Mukhopadhyay's caliber should not be slotted thus. Their range is too immense to be slotted or categorized. One rarely comes across a writer/author whose work encompasses such varied subjects and displays such myriad shades. [Shirshendu Mukhopadhyay is also known as 'The Ruskin Bond of Bengal'. But having grown up on a healthy diet of his books and magical tales, and given that I still savour them, I would say Shirshendu Mukhopadhyay is Shirshendu Mukhopadhyay. You get it, right?]

Here is Srilata Banerjee (Lila Majumdar's granddaughter) and Shirshendu Mukhopadhyay at the book readingof The Burmese Box(Podi Pishir BormiBakshotranslated into English):

Upendrokishore Raychudhuri, Sukumar Ray, Lila Majumdar, Satyajit Ray, Rajshekhar Basu (aka Parashuram) and Shirshendu Mukhopadhyay are in a league of their own. And so is Ruskin Bond. They are an inspiration for other authors, including upcoming ones; as for the readers, generations have fallen under their spell and happily continue to remain thus. They inspire others to take up the pen. I would also includeSharadindu Bandyopadhyay, Sanjib Chattopadhyay, Narayan Gangopadhyay, Narayan Sanyal, Premendra Mitra, Shibram Chakraborty, Narayan Debnath, Khagendranath Mitra, Samaresh Basu, Syed Mustafa Siraj, Abanindranath Tagore, Shasthipada Chattopadhyay, Shaktipada Rajguru and Nihar Ranjan Guptain the same league. All their works are the literary equivalent of (homemade) ghee-bhaat-alu seddho-dim seddho, i.e., total awesomeness. [Of course there are greats like Rishi Bankimchandra Chattopadhyay, Saratchandra Chattopadhyay, Robi Thakur, Kaji Najrul Islam, Kaliprasanno Singha, et al. But for them, there has been no labeling, like 'children's writer', and so on. So...]

Majumdar's writings areso rich in the fantasies they evoke, in the many different worlds a child's imagination can conjure up. Lila Majumdar was a Bengali writer but one of the finest writers for children (young and young-at-heart) - anytime. Podi Pishir Bormi Bakso came out in 1949 as her third book. [First published serially in a short-lived but popular children's magazine of late forties, Rangmashal, edited by her friend and contemporary author Kamakshiprosad Chottopadhyay, the tale of a missing Burmese box of an overbearing aunt has been uncommonly popular since the time and still stays with the reader.]

An Overview of Podipisir Bormibakso by Lila Majumdar: here.

When she stepped into her 100^th year/ Splendid centurion:here.

Obituary/ Children's tales never outgrown: here.

- "To read, and never really to outgrow, Podipishir Bormi Baksho, Holde Pakhir Palok, Maku, Tong-Ling, Kheror Khata and the Shob Bhuture stories is to discover, and then rediscover many times over, all that must be kept alive - the laughing and the losing, the delicious and the terrifying, the sense and the nonsense - to keep us from turning into crabbed, old bores, out of touch with the best things of life."

... I could not have put it any better.

Lila Majumdar (signature):

Baidyanather Bori (Baidyanath's Pill, 1939), Din Dupure (Midday, 1948), Podipisir Bormibakso (1949), a comic musical drama called Bok Badh Pala (Death of the Demon Bok), Holdey Pakhir Palok (The Yellow Bird), Moyna-Shalikh,Kheror Khata, Batash Badi, Goopir Guptokhata and Bokdharmik, et al are timeless; their magic have not waned. Her memoirs: Aar Konokhane (Somewhere Else) and Pakdandi too are widely read.

Generations of Bengali kids have grown up happily reading, re-reading, re-re-reading... the adventures of Gupi, Noga, Badyinath, Pnachuda and of course of Podi-pishi. [And to think I have missed out on this one! I clearly have a bone to pick with Lady Luck. Grrrrr.] Podi Pishir Bormi Baksho continues to remain one of the touchstones of children's imagination. Here 'children' is not to be defined by their years on this planet, bujhechen?

Here is something I found on the net: link. Looks like: the non-Bangla-speaking world too can now savour this romance with the written word (that generations of Bangla-speaking kids have exclusively enjoyed.)

Good. Good.

In case you are still wondering as to why I am bringing in Satyajit Ray and Leela Majumdar (and even Upendrokishore Raychaudhuri) in posts dedicated to Sukumar Ray, the answer is that: they have enriched each others works. There are bits and pieces of Upendrokishore and Sukumar in Satyajit and Leela's works, unmistakably.

Also, both Ray Sr. and Ray Jr. (Satyajit Ray's son: Sandip Ray) have clearly doffed their hats to Sukumar Ray and to Upendrakishore Raychoudhuri. Always.

Two of our most loved characters: GoopyGyne and BaghaBynehave been brought onto the silver screen by the father-son duo of Satyajit and Sandip. There have been three films in all - until now, in the much-loved Goopy-Baghaseries.

Goopy Gayen Bagha Bayen (The adventures of Goopy and Bagha), Hirak Rajar Deshe (Kingdom of Diamonds) and Goopy Bagha Phire Elo (The Return of Goopy and Bagha) is satire, sublime satire; actually, satire at many levels, but has unfortunately and for whatever reasons, been classified as 'children's film'. The satire of the Goopy Bagha series is relevant even today and will be relevant 50 years from now. And so would the wit, humour and fun!! [Will discuss them in greater detail in my next post.]

... However, the influence of Sukumar Ray is unmistakable.

According to Leela Majumdar's granddaughter, Srilata Banerjee, her Didibhai (an endearing term for maternal grandma in Bengal) spoke about her 'Jyathamoshai' (paternal uncle; father's older brother) - Upendrakishore Raychaudhuri - and how he had to eat mainly fruits and boiled stuff because he wasn't well. It was only when her (Majumdar) own sugar level suddenly shot upand she was put on a restricted diet for a while, that she realized he may have had diabetes.

Sukumar Ray died tragically at the young age of thirty-six (due to 'kala-azar'). According to Majumdar, even when he was confined to bed, he would show her the drawings for many of the rhymes in 'Abol Tabol' ('Rhymes without reason' or'Weird and Random'). One of the last illustrations that he did was for 'Tnyansh Goru' [Goru = cow in Bangla.Tnyansh is impossible to translate.] Even when gravely ill,Sukumar had laughingly asked Majumdarwhether another twist in the character's tail would suit it or not! He passed away shortly afterwards. But this anecdote gives us a glimpse of the man and his spirit, does it not? What a loss...!

Listen to Tnyansh Goru by Swagatalakshmi Dasgupta (from the album: Pyancha KoyPyanchani,Abol Tabol - Vol 2): here.

In Abol Tabol we are introduced to a series of unusual animals, and they are all well illustrated (by Ray himself). Tnyashgoruis actually a bird, and Ray gives us the details of its food habits and lifestyle. In his usual fun and satirical way, Ray has depicted anglophiles as Tnyashgoru. This type actually ends up being neither here nor there, they are neither bird nor cow; theycan neither fly nor graze. :)

Tnyansh is part of the Bangla language now. If someone walks very slowly or extra-lethargically, it is labeled as: tnyansh, tnyansh kore chola. That is: to walk in a Tnyansh manner.

Here is Tnyansh Goru:

(Do stay tuned…)

Pictures:1. Pic 01 - Title card of the documentary-film made by Satyajit Ray (as a tribute to his father, Sukumar Ray). 2.Pic 02 - Lila Majumdar (also: Leela Majumdar). 3.Pic 03 - Stamp in honour of Satyajit Ray. 4. Pic 04 - June 1988 front cover of Sandesh.5. Pic 05- Professor Shonku.6. Pic 06 - Cover of Tarini Khuro. 7.Pic 07 - The coverof Podi Pishir Bormi Baksho. 8.Pic 08 - Leela Majumdar. 9. Pic 09 - Signature of Lila Majumdar and Nalini Das.10.Pic 10 - Srilata Banerjee and Shirshendu Mukhopadhyay at the book reading ofThe Burmese Box. 11.Pic 11- Leela Majumdar - signature.12.Pic 12 - Goopy Gyne Bagha Byne. 13.Pic 13 - Tnyansh Goru.

Onto my third Jeeves and Bertie novel, this one is titled: Right Ho, Jeeves.

It is a Jeeves novel by P.G. Wodehouse, first published in the United Kingdom on October 5, 1934 by Herbert Jenkins, London, and in the United States on October 15, 1934 by Little,Brown and Company, Boston, under the title: Brinkley Manor. Before being published as a book, it had been sold to the Saturday Evening Post, in which it appeared in serial form (from December 23, 1933 to January 27, 1934), and in England in the Grand Magazine, from April to September 1934.

Right Ho, Jeevesis mostly set inBrinkley Court, the home of Bertie's Aunt Dahlia. She is his favourite aunt. That the French culinary virtuoso, Anatole, is her resident cook and rustles up culinary (fork-and-spoon-licking) delights several times a day, contributes handsomely towards Aunt Dahlia retaining her position as Bertie's numero uno aunt. [She isn't Dahlia-like though, by any stretch of imagination.]

Right Ho, Jeeves is the sequel to Thank You, Jeeves.

A host of characters; some new (for moi at least), while to some we have already said hello to, greet us in this novel: Augustus Fink-Nottle, Hildebrand Glossop, Aunt Dahlia, Uncle Tom, Angela Travers (Bertie's cousin), Madeline Bassett and the (mastercheflyspeaking)French maestro - Anatole, apart from Bertie and Jeeves of course, make up the major ones.

[This Uncle Tom is not to be confused with thatUncle Tom - the one with a cabin. This Uncle Tom is Tom Travers, Aunt Dahlia's better half-cum-ATM machine and father ofAngela. Umm, instead of ATM machine, perhaps Venture Capital would be a better term. 'Coz Uncle Tom has clearly ventured into becoming her sole supplier of Capital.]

Augustus Fink-Nottle and Hildebrand Glossop are childhood chums of Bertram Wooster. They went to school together. However, each of them is as different from the other as can be imagined.

Augustus Fink-Nottle is better known as Gussie, and despite sharing one half of his name with Augustus Caesar; he is not even half as swashbuckling. Sporting horn-rimmed glasses and bestowed with a fish-like visage, he is the world's foremost authority on newts. [Only newts, not Gingrich. :)]

Gussie is in love with the proponent of stars-are-god's-daisy-chain - the droopy Madeline Bassett, but is too timid to tell her. Worse, all he guzzles is orange juice. And Bertie is a firm believer in the fortifying powers of stronger juices, like: rum, whiskey, gin, and so forth. The young Wooster is convinced that certain situations require stronger stuff (in the stomach) so as to get the required derring-do.

That is: he simply does not believe that a man can ask a woman to be his - on the strength of orange juice alone. Geoffrey Chaucer would have undoubtedly approved of such sentiments, and may have penned a few pieces in support of it as well, if only he were able to transcend time and space. I mean: if only he could overcome death, the afterlife and hundreds of centuries. But since he could not, Bertie had to soldier on alone... [Tothe precursor of the orange juice:Oranges of the World, Unite!]

Hildebrand Glossop (mind you: Hildebrand and not Hilfiger) is better known as Tuppy Glossop. Umm, I never knew Tuppy could be the name, or even the pet-name, of anyone belonging to the human species. It's more suited for our piscine friends, don't you think? E.g. Guppy and Tuppycould easily be the names of a pair of Goldfish, what?

Nevertheless, Hildebrand Glossop aka Tuppy Glossop is built like a pit-bull (with the mindset/tenacity to match) and has more jaw than he requires. He spends his time playing football (in summer) and tennis (in winter).

Tuppy is a true connoisseur of food, good food, and has (unknown to him) acquired a double chin. He also thinks that a shark is nothing but a flatfish. Now, what this double-chin-and-flatfish business leads to, you'll have to read the book to find out.

All I would share is:there are some rather mind-blowing and mind-numbing cross-connections, if you know what I mean. And our dear Bertie features in all of them, whether he likes it or not. [After all: he is gallant or so he thinks!]

Btw, in this novel Bertie has developed some rather overblown and utterly flattering notions about what resides between his ears. And this has also led him to take adim view of Jeeves' until-now sparking intelligence. So much so, that he is convinced that Jeeves has lost his touch. Although a certain white mess jacket with brass buttons may have played a significant role in the scheme of things.

In this novel, Jeeves not only continues to 'shimmer in and out of rooms', but has also developed the unobtrusive eel-likemanner of vanishing. ... And the (in)famous 'Worcester Sauce' makes its appearance several times.

Jeeves had been advising Gussie regarding his matters of the heart, but once Bertie returns to London, after having spentseveral weeks in Cannes in the sunny company of his dear Aunt Dahlia and her daughter Angela, he decides to take matters into his own hands. And so, Bertram Wooster embarks on a fool-proof (or so he believes) little plan of his own - to bring Madeline and Gussie together.

Now, what makes Bertie take matters into his own hands?

Well, Bertie discovers that Jeeves had advised the tongue-tied and soulful Gussie to impersonate Mephistopheles - in order to impress the rather soppy Madeline Basset. But, what does Gussie - donning scarlet tights and a false beard - do? Well, get hold of the book and read all you can. :)

Verdict:Right Ho, Jeevesis actually one story, a single story that runs through 23 chapters and 290 pages. The chapters are short and given the nature of the book, you will simply sail through them. Like Carry on, Jeeves and Thank You, Jeeves, this one too is an any-time, all-weather read. There isn'tmuch interplay between Jeeves and Bertie here, since Bertie decides to take Jeeves off the case, remember? But whatever is there makes for good fun. Bertie, Gussie, Tuppy, Angela, Aunt Dahlia and Madeline Basset provide the rest, the fun part that is. [However, the interplay between Jeeves and Bertie is far more here, than what we find in the prequel, Thank You, Jeeves.]

The production quality of the book is good, and I don't quite recall any editing errors, so either they do not exist or are negligible.

The book jacket cover is in purple and yellow. PG Wodehouse appears in (some shade of) fluorescent yellow. Right Ho, Jeeves appears in white. Quite nice and prominent, must say. There is a figure (clad in a checked suit) enthusiastically addressing an audience. It belongs to: Augustus Fink-Nottle aka Gussie.

Here's why: Thanks to his innate guile and a rare stroke of 'salesmanship', Bertie manages to wriggle out of the difficult (read: frightening, for him) task of distributing the school prizes at the local grammar school and delivering a speech. His Aunt Dahlia had successfully put him in that predicament. But Bertie sends Gussie instead, on the pretext that a great speech from him will further his case with Madeline. However, Bertie is also fully 'conscious' of his 'responsibilities' as a friend, and so decides to embolden Gussie by spiking his orange juice. Circumstances conspire to ensure that Gussie ends up imbibing more gin than Bertie had ever intended.

And therefore, what we see on the cover is an overtly-happy-and-bold Gussie delivering a gin-powered speech to his audience (at the grammar school). What follows next (?) -well, read the book to find that out, or simply re-read it. :)

My tuppyenceworth:There are several treats for the discerning reader. Uncle Tom muttering about Civilization and melting-pots, and a few observations about the French/Gauls, albeit nicely routed through the culinary maestro - Anatole; all part ofthe unmistakable clever Wodehousian satire. There's more actually.

However, what I had suspected earlier but can now fully confirm, is this: Bertram Wooster is a fan of Agatha Christie and Sherlock Holmes. Meaning: P.G. Wodehouse is a fan of Agatha Christie and Sir Arthur Conan Doyle.

In fact, P.G. Wodehouse is a very big fan of Sherlock Holmes. Why, you ask? Well, even Jeeves talks about Holmes, admiringly! Guess that's Plum'sway of doffing his hat. [Why Agatha Christie? Bertie's formidable Aunt Agatha, remember?]

P.G. Wodehouse has inspired a lot of our own greats too. Ruskin Bond is clearly one.

And after having found'Mephistopheles' here, I am convinced that the great Bengali author Narayan Gangopadhyay too has tipped his hat toPlum. [Though Bengalis aren't known to wear hats.]

Narayan Gangopadhyay's evergreen creation Tenidaof "Charmurti" and Potoldanga fame yells: "De la grandi Mephistopheles, yak yak!"

It isthe signature Tenida whoop and signifies: there's light at the end of every tunnel. Or in other words:Tenida's dimaag ki batti has come up with something.

[Charmurti = roughly translated: four musketeersand Potoldanga = an imaginary place, from where Tenida hails.]

'Tenida' (aka Bhojohori Mukherjee) is the leader of a gang of inadvertently naughty adolescent boys: 'Kyabla' (akaKushal Mitra), 'Pyalaram' (aka Kamalesh Banerji) and 'Habul' (akaSwarnendu Sen).

Bengalis have a patented word for 'para bratulas' - the unmatched 'Rockbaj'. [Para = neighbourhood or locality. Bratula = brat + dracula, i.e. impishly naughty.]

Tenida and gang don't quite fall into this category though, 'coz they are harmlessly naughty.

The suffix "da" (short for "Dada") means 'elder brother' in Bangla, and not the lumpen elements of aamchiMumbai, mind you. "Da" is also a sort ofhonorific, used to address anolder unrelated male. It essentially signifies: respect.

Some of these classic and immensely enjoyable stories havebeen translated into English, so the non-Bangla-speaking world too can now savoursome of these delights, although the flavour may be somewhat altered. In the English translations, it is Teni the Terrible, Pyalaramthe Puny, Habul the Hungry and Kyabla the Clever.

Nevertheless, what I am sure of is: these stories are worth several readings, altered flavour or not.

In his salad days, Bertie had saved the good Wooster name by conjuring up a long-winded one, during one of his run-ins with a policeman.

I found this bit in the much-watched1971 Banglaclassic "Chaddobeshi", where Uttam Kumar's character (disguised as a driverin his own brother-in-law's house!) tells the (possibly) UP-ite policeman that his name is Pundorikakkho Purokayashtho. This tongue-twister of a name saves him from being fined (for parking violation!)

Hrishikesh Mukherjee later remade this superhit and enduring romantic-comedy in Hindi- in 1975; it was titled, "Chupke Chupke". Starring Dharmendra (reprising Uttam Kumar's role), Sharmila Tagore, Amitabh Bachchan, Jaya Bachchan, Om Prakash, Lily Chakraborty, David, Asrani and Keshto Mukherjee, it too was a big hit and continues to charm even today. [TheAgradoot-directed "Chaddobeshi" starred Uttam Kumar, Madhabi Mukherjee, Subhendu Chatterjee, Bikash Ray, Tarun Kumar and Jahar Ray, among others.]

So, thank you Plum for providing inspiration for great characters, books and even cinema.

Details of the book:Right Ho, Jeeves/ Author: P.G. Wodehouse/ Publisher: Arrow, an imprint of Random House/ Binding: Paperback/ Publishing Date: 01/07/2008/ Genre: Classics/ ISBN-10: 978-0-09-951374-2/ ISBN-13: 9780099513742/ Pages: 290/ Price: $19.95

Picture:The book jacket cover of Right Ho, Jeeves. Courtesy: link.

There is a popular joke that goes like this:

Question: Kalidas ka ek bhai joote banata tha. Uska naam kya tha?

Answer: Adidas.

Kalidas (Kālidāsa), as we know is considered to be one of the greatest Sanskrit poets. He penned the 'Meghdoot' (Meghadūta) or the 'Meghdootam'.

[Meghdoot means: the Cloud Messenger; Megh = Cloud, Doot = Messenger.]

However, off late his seminal work is facing a tent-tative challenge from an even bigger seminarian work: the 'Rethdootam'.

[Rethdootam or Rethdoot means: the Sand Messenger. Reth = Sand, Doot = Messenger.]

Therefore: Move over Kalidas, this 'doot' of sundry desert-sand-and-desert-winds (and their backers and chela-s) rule the airwaves and the reams of print.

To the hapless rainforest: My sincerest apologies.

One may ask: Has Jam Rethmalani been ingesting too much hing lately... or is it some sandy desert wind whispering in his ears?

Umm, here's the answer:

Rethmalani - the greatest liar-liar - that defends a-b-c-D-e-f-g-h, is now trying to show his loyalty towards Swami Vivekananda... while blithely trashing Shri Ram!!

What next:

Guess we now have to brace for wheelchair activist, Ms. De-lite, namesake of river (working under the garb of innocent NGO), certain ace journalists (the usual suspects), curly-haired-activist-cum-award-winning-author et al - to join in, in this 'script-reading' session, soon.

Instead of naming missiles after Afghan heroes, certain entities (of a certain nation of course) should start naming them after these above-mentioned characters, to commemorate their services rendered. Moon-bucks rule! :)

With such wheelchair-revolutionaries, prolific authors, crusading activists, well-meaning journalists and Rethmalani-type 'doot' - of sundry desert winds, India does not need 'friends', what? :)

Wonder who has launched these hot-air missiles now, and what is the agenda?

... And to think that we only consider the dragon to be our enemy.Ha!

Not that there is no such thing as dragon-bucks. 'Coz without that, it would be tough for certain authors and charitable folks to maintain their hemoglobin levels. And as you know: health iswealth.

Umm, given that we are a 'free' nation with no sign of moon-bucks-nourished media, showbiz, sundry 'doots', it is a small wonder that our ancient texts and heroes/heroines have been twisted and are shown in such a sad light. Their glorious legacies and all that they have done have been washed away under a tidal wave of 'books' penned by phoren authors and (constant)blistering sandy blizzards. It is also no wonder that they are (not only) ceaselessly demeaned, buthave been turned into protagonist/lead characters of lewd jokes, strange epithets, et al. All nicely camouflaged in the garb of 'entertainment'!Scholarly 'doots' chip in too, their valuable contributions cannot and should not be ignored. :)

No smoke without fire?

Well, Rethmalani and ilkarethose dhuandhar batsmen.

Jam Rethmalani is our version of Comrade Bariq Ali, 'HMV'.

Parting shot:Jammy, jinke ghar lies-damn-lies-aur-statisticske hon, woh dusron per damn-lies nahin phenka karte...

Note:Any resemblance totics and locusts (in human-form) - is purely coincidentally coincidental.

Picture:Courtesy: link.

Author's Note:Please visit -The 'Real' Ramayana/ Ram-Rajya- to read the other parts of this series.

In this series we will also discuss why Shri Ram is considered to be 'Bhagavan', a 'Maryada-purushottam' and an 'Avatar'; why he is variously referred to as: 'Raghupati', 'Raghav' and along with Sita, as 'Patita-pavana'; and what exactly do these mean.We will also try to understand *what* Sita, Kaikeyi and Manthara were really like, *who* was Shri Hanuman, and the *kind of society* that prevailed in the 2nd era - the Treta Yug.

I urge you to read this post slowly (and if required, more than once) so as to fully understand all that I have tried to convey.

..............................................

Yours truly is not an expert on any of our ancient texts, but from whatever I have read, this is what I have gathered:

Our understanding of our ancient texts, including the Ramayan and the Mahabharat (the itihasaor the history of the Treta and the Dwapar Yug respectively) is very wrong; thanks to the concerted efforts of vested interests, 'scholars', phorenauthors, and so on. [Dwapar Yug = the third era, the one that preceded the current one.]

Remember that the Ramayan has over 3,000 re-telling and/or versions, not to mention the humongous amounts of myths that has seeped in given the passage of time or eras, and the flights of fantasy taken by many. Much of what is bandied about these days (or has been bandied about for a while now) are bits and pieces of several versions.

Ram was not the stunned-looking, expressionless creature that certain folks (including desi and phoren 'scholars' and learned 'pundits') have turned him into.

Sita was not the sad, weepy, tragic figure that certain entities have turned her into. She knew how to dismantle the 'Shiv-dhanu' - the name of the most fearsome (and destructive) weapon of that era (the 2^nd era or the Treta Yug). Perhaps it was even more destructive than the fiercest weapon we know of today.

And Ram too knew how to dismantle the 'Shiv-dhanu'. So, I hope, you can now understand their caliber.

Sita was the adopted daughter of Raja Janak, but her real mother was Mandodari - Ravana's wife (and Ravana had several of them. Raavan's appetite for a certain kind of activity was legendary.) [Raja = king.]

In fact, Sita and Mandodari were so alike that even Hanuman was confused. Hanuman was not a 'monkey' as has been (and is being) strangely stressed upon, but the finest pilot of his era. That is why he is metaphorically referred to as: Pavan-putra or Vaayu-putra; the son (putra) of 'pavan' or 'vaayu' - the Sanskrit words for 'wind'.There are clear references to a variety of aircraft in the Ramayan. Hanuman belonged to the community of humans that were collectively known as 'van-nar', i.e. 'forest-dwelling human'. [Van = forest, nar = human.]

[Note: The same van-nar have been (mis)translated as 'monkey' by legions of enlightened aliens and their spiritual offspring and disciples. While our benevolent colonizers - in their infinite wisdom and zeal to 'civilize the world' - have dubbed the modern van-nar as 'savage tribal' and 'uncivilized backward castes' (also re-figured as: 'scheduled castes'), thanks to the higher and classy game of 'divide and rule'.]

The 2^nd era, the Treta Yug, consists of a set of events, via which this era establishes certain guidelines and accepts a few things. Three of them are as follows:

1.Acceptance of humans not born the natural way - as humans. [Shri Ram and his siblings were not born the natural way.]

2. Acceptance of forest-dwelling humans (or 'van-nar') - as full-fledged humans.

3. Improvement inthe position of women and other marginalized people - in society.

Ram, along with Sita, Lakshman and Hanuman played a major role for point # 2 and # 3 - to materialize. They worked together to achieve these goals - not for themselves, but for the betterment of society.

Therefore, when 'scholars' both desi and phorensay that Ram 'forbade' Sita from accompanying him to the forest, they cannot be more wrong (to put it mildestly, that is). This is because, Ram nevertries to 'dominate' Sita the way (a large chunk of) modern husbands do. Sita does what she wants to or likes to... and Ram simply accepts her decisions. He does not feel threatened by her, nor suffer from what is known as 'inferiority complex'. This is one reason why he is hailed as: 'Maryada-purushottam'. [Maryada = loosely defined: virtuous, noble, principled, possessing good character or traits. Purushottam = the best or the finest among men.]

Here, I would also like to say that two other great women, Kaikeyi and Manthara, have been turned into villainous figures. This is a shame. However, instead of undoing this blatant wrong, we are bent on perpetuating it.

The twisting of the Ramayana, including the characters of Ram, Sita, Hanuman, Kaikeyi, Manthara, etc., probably happened after the demise of the Gupta era, when vested interests started rearing their ugly heads. These vested interests (both foreign and homegrown) then used our ancient texts (including the Ramayan and the Mahabharata) to bring down the status/position of women and to stratify society along gender lines, etc. This trend has unfortunately continued... and still going strong. [I intend to do a Ramayan series, and hence am not delving too deeply into this here, but please do put on your thinking cap - and try to figure out whyI have said that two great women, Kaikeyi and Manthara, have been turned into villainous figures.]

Sitarefused to receive instructions/education from Rishi Gautam, although the latter was the Raj Purohith (chief or royal priest) of her foster-father, Raja Janak. This is because: Gautam had killed his wife, Ahaliya. We are told that Gautam 'cursed' her and as a result Ahaliya turned into stone. This actually means:he either killed her by hitting her with a stone or buried her alive. The reason: he suspected her 'fidelity'.[Raj purohith is the one that performs and presides over all royal functions and rituals, including the coronation; imparts lessons and training to the royal offspring, takes care of all astrologyandvaastu-related matters, writes texts, decides on customs and activities, and advises the king or the ruler of the day. The pradhan-mantri or the primeminister's advises is limited to certain administrative functions like law and order, tax collection, and so on. The pradhan-mantri could not decide on rituals, astrology, vaastu, customs, and the like.]

So, undoubtedly, Rishi Gautam was an immensely influential figure that also wielded wide powers - as the Raj Purohith. Sita's action would not have gone down well with him. [Perhaps: even Raja Janak may not have been keen to take on Rishi Gautam, knowing full well his influence and clout. But Sita very likely stood firm. This, I say, from my understanding of her nature and character.]

Let us now try to understand the type of society that prevailed during the Treta Yug.

Rishi Kahoda was a wife-beater. His son, Astavakra, was born deformed as a result of it. Astavakra means: one who is deformed in eight places. [Though in our ancient texts the word 'curse' has been used to explain or indicate these things, but it clearly points towards: physical abuse.]

Rishi Kahoda beat his pregnant wife, because she corrected him at least eight times for wrong pronunciation of some textual verse. [Their son, Astavakra, was born deformed - as a result of this beating.]

Rishi Jamadagni commands his son Jamadagneya (better known as Parashurama or Parasurama: 'Rama with the axe') - to kill his own mother, and he quietly does as told. Reason:Rishi Jamadagni too suspected his wife's'fidelity'...!

Her 'crime':accustomed to and leading a life of drudgery and austerity, she once chanced upon the amorous courting rituals and mating dance between the handsome King Chitraratha - the lord (king) of the Gandharvas, and his fair maidens. Innocent as she was of such activities and being totally unaware of this aspect of love - even after the birth of five sons, she is overcome by passion and feels the stirrings of emotions hitherto unknown to her; even fantasizing about participating in those acts. But the sound of her pot of water striking the ground as it fell from her hand cut into her reverie and she rushed back to her husband's ashram embarrassed, disheveled, breathless and unable to recount to him what she has seen, blurting out a feeble explanation for her state and appearance instead. She (Renuka), a Kshatriya princess of the Suryavanshi (solar or Sun-worshiping) clan, one who had married Jamadagni - a Brahmin sage, out of her own free will and bore him five sons - is punished by that very husband for her 'transgressions'. [Read:Link.]

All this should provide uswith a reasonable glimpse into the kind of society that prevailed, the position of women, and the attitude and behaviour of learned persons, including great and venerated sages (Rishis, Munis, Maharshis, etc) - towards women (including their own spouses) - in the 2^nd era, the Treta Yug.

The great sages wielded immense influence and power; they were the ones that were responsible for performing all puja and rituals (including the ones that were to be mandatorily performed by the kings); they also gave instructions/imparted knowledge to the students, including the ones of royal descent. These sages not only decided as to who they wanted as their shishya (students) and who they did not, but they could also ask any student, irrespective of the latter's background, to leave mid-way. Whatever they asked for, as 'gurudakshina', had to be given. These sages wrote many of our texts and laid down the guidelines (for a variety of customs and rituals) - for society to follow. They were the custodians of the texts, rituals, customs, knowledge, education, et al and hence were venerated and obeyed by the people. Unquestioningly. Such was their hold.

Therefore, Sita's action would have undoubtedly riled or angered many - among the priestly class (and their cronies).

This priestly class/entity had abrogated the highest position in society for themselves: byproclaimingthemselves to be Brahmin, and twice-born (dvija).

Brahmin is a corrupt form/version of 'Brhmaan'. Brhmaan refers to 'the ultimate knowledge'; a knowledge that leads one to 'the ultimate truth' or to 'the ultimate reality' - that of the realization of the Parameshwar, the Supreme Being or the Paramaatma, the Supreme Soul. Or in other words, 'Brhmaan' helps one to 'see' or understand the unseen forces of the universe, also referred to as the Parameshwar, the Supreme Being or the Paramaatma, the Supreme Soul.

IT (the Parameshwar or the Paramaatma) cannot be seen with mortal eyes, has no shape, no form and no gender. Only when one lets go of one's ego (ahamkara) and other base aspects of one's nature, can one 'see' the formless forces of the universe in one's mind's eye (manas-chokhshyu, divya-drishti; or tritiya-nayan, the third eye.)

That is:when one truly understands that everything that is a part of Creation, whether animate or inanimate, movable or immovable, IS the Parameshwar or the Paramaatma; since the unseen forces of the universe manifested itself through whatever is part of Creation (Srsstti or Shristi). This is 'the ultimate knowledge'.

In other words: since the human mind could not understand or fathom vacuum, or for that matter, anything that is formless, it needed something, anything, as a reference point. Through the manifested (i.e. through the ākārā, saguna or through the with formand with shape entity) can one 'see' and fathom the un-manifested (the nirākārā, nirguna) -the formless Paramaatma orthe Parameshwar). [Do read:Notes on "Idol Worship":here.]

Ordinary people did not quite understand such high philosophy; and the documentation and interpretation of the texts were left to a certain group (the ones that proclaimed themselves to be'Brahmin', or a part of the Brhmaan or Paramaatma!)

They chose whom to teach, what to teach, and alsotold the rest of the population what to follow... and what to avoid.

Therefore, in a way,these Brahmins became manifestations of the (formless) Brhmaan or the Paramaatma - if you know what I mean. They could not be questioned, they had to be obeyed and revered at all costs (not only by the ordinary populace, but also by the kings and ministers.)

I hope you can now fathom or understand their status, influence and stature in society - in those days (the Treta Yug). And it is in this scenario or context that we have to see Ram, Sita, Lakshman, Hanuman, Kaikeyi and Manthara.

Sita (a Kshatriya princess) had clearly stirred a hornet's nest, by challenging these powerful and influential figures (belonging to the much-venerated priestly and knowledge-imparting community) - as a princess. These entities (with the help of other powerful entities) later on cast aspersions on her character, spread canards about her, questioned her fidelity and the paternity of her children. It is they that asked her to undergo the 'Agni Pariksha' (to 'prove' her fidelity) - a custom meticulously followed in the Treta Yug. A custom that none could question. A custom decreed by the priestly class - the ones that had declared themselves to be Brahmin, the holders of the highest position in societyand twice-born (dvija) - and a part of the Brhmaan or the Paramaatma. [This is not to say that everyone belonging to the priestly class was negative, but a large chunk of them were, and it is these types that held sway and exerted influence.]

No ruler could or was willing to challenge these entrenched interests. Ram (a Kshatriya prince) was the one that took a stand against these derogatory customs (and a lot more ills) that plagued society in that era. As a ruler (a Chakravarti Raja) - he not only outlawed them, but uprooted most of them too; but by doing so, he invariably took on these powerful and influential entities and vested interests. Both Sita and Ram suffered - as a result of their respective actions.

However, at the end of it all, certain fresh rules and guidelines were established (three of them mentioned/listed down above), and this is why 'Ram-Rajya' is so-much talked about - even today, in this fourth and current era - the Kali Yug.

[Ram-Rajya: an enlightenedadministration based on justice, merit and equality, where the ruler looks after the people or the praja with filial affection.]

Accomplishing these tasks or goals (in the face of gigantic odds) and establishing what is known as Ram-Rajya wouldn't quite have been a cake-walk, don't you think? It is also another reason why Shri Ram is hailed as 'Maryada-purushottam' - the noblest, the best and the finest among men.

Note: The picture accompanying this post is a Raja Ravi Varma painting. It depicts Shri Ram breaking the 'Shiv-dhanu' at Sita's Swayamvara. [Swayamin Sanskrit means self and vara means choice or desire. In ancient India, there was a practice of choosing a husband, from among a list of suitors, by a girl of marriageable age.]

Sita had already heard about Ram, and had seen him at the Swayamvara (before garlanding him, that is), and she had liked what she saw. [Sita is also known as Siya and Janaki; Janaki means 'daughter of Janak'; Raja Janak was her foster-father.]

Given that our ancients used a lot of metaphors in their writings, the 'Shiv-dhanu' has been depicted as a bow (dhanu = bow). However, it was not a 'bow' per se, but the most destructive of all weapons (of that era). Obviously, a consensus would have been reached amongst the rulers and other influential entities of that era, to dismantle that fearsome weapon. Shri Ram does it.

Jai Siya-Ram!

(Do stay tuned…)

Picture:Shri Ram breaks the 'Shiv-dhanu' at Sita's Swayamvara; a Raja Ravi Varma painting. Courtesy: link.

Author's Note:Please visit -The 'Real' Ramayana/ Ram-Rajya- to read the other parts of this series, so as to be able to fully understand or grasp the contents of this one.

In the 1^st part of this post, we talked about the kind of society that prevailed in the 2^nd era (the Treta Yug);we discussedwhy Ram is also known as 'Maryada-purushottam'; what Sita was like; what is meant by Ram-Rajya,who was Shri Hanuman, who were the 'van-nar', and what has happened to the modern-day 'van-nar'.

We also listed down three things that were accepted by the people of the Treta Yug. [There were a few other things that were accepted as well, but we will discuss them in myRamayan series.]

Among the 3 things listed in the 1^st partof this series, point # 2 stated: Acceptance of forest-dwelling humans (or the'van-nar') - as full-fledged humans.

Let us now discuss this point in greater detail, but first a bit more about Shri Hanuman. [Please do also read the 1^st partof this series for the sake of continuity. Link provided at the top of this post.]

In Sanskrit, "Hanu" means "jaw". "Man" comes from "mant";it means: prominent.

So, Hanuman = someone that possesses a prominent, distinctive or (maybe) a large jaw. And perhaps this feature earned him one of his many names, that of: Hanuman. He is also known as Maruti, meaning: "son of Marut". [Marut = another name for 'wind' in Sanskrit; the other two being: vaayu and pavan. It is a metaphor and alludes to Hanuman's skills as a pilot. He was the finest pilot of his era.]

Shri Hanuman and Shri Sugriva have been incorrectly dubbed as 'monkey' or 'ape', while the 'Vanar Sena' has been conveniently dubbed variously as 'monkey-army' or the 'army of apes'. [This has happened due to the translation of our ancient texts and pracheenitihasaor our 'ancient history' - by 'enlightened' aliens and their spiritual offspring and disciples.]

Vanar (also: Vaanar) is an amalgamation of two words: 'van-nar' or 'vaan-nar'. [Van or Vaan = forest. Nar = human.]

So, "vanar", "vaanar" or "van-nar" is actually "forest-dwelling human".

Therefore: the "Vanar Sena", "Vaanar Sena" or the "Van-nar Sena" = the army consisting of forest-dwelling humans. [Sena = army.]

The peopleof the Treta Yug - the ones that lived in the villages or in the cities (i.e. the ones that lived outside the forest) - didnot accept the ones (humans) that lived in the forest - as "humans".

The humans of the Treta Yug (those living outside the forest) considered their forest-dwelling counterparts (the "van-nar" or "forest-dwelling humans") as part of the "animal-world", or in other words: as "lesser humans".

The primary reasonfor this perception could be: their appearance, i.e. the way they looked. Also: their'way of life' differed quite a bit from the 'way of life' followed by the humans living outside the forest, and thistoo may have played a role in strengthening such a perception.

Shri Ram, along with his consort, Mata Sita, and younger brother, Shri Lakshman, endeavoured to change thisvery perception.

That is why he did not seek the help of his own powerful army (that of Ayodhya) and instead went to war with an army of "Van-nar Sena" - led by Shri Hanuman.

That is whyShri Ram did not even seek the help of his own highly-skilled engineers and technicians (from Ayodhya) - to build the bridge to Lanka (also known as: the Ram Setu).

The ones that actually built this bridge (setu-bandhan) across the ocean to Lanka - were the van-nar or the "forest-dwelling humans" - of the Treta Yug.

All of the above had to be done - in order to show and prove (to the rest of the humanity) that the "van-nar" or the "forest-dwelling humans" were in no way inferiorto the ones that lived outside the forest.

That is: So as to show and prove (to the rest of the humanity) that the "van-nar" or the "forest-dwelling humans" were notpart of the "animal-world"or "lesser humans".

That: they were full-fledged humans, just like the rest of the humanity that were to be found in the 2^nd era, the Treta Yug.

Shri Ram, MataSita and Shri Lakshman along with Shri Hanuman, Shri Sugriva and his army (the "Vanar Sena") - were successful in their venture. Result: The "van-nar" or the "forest-dwelling humans" were accepted by the rest of the population as full-fledged humans.

Now, can you figure out the role played by Mata Kaikeyi and Mata Manthara?

Two great women have been blithely turned into villainous figures, scorn after scorn have been heaped on them; they have been ridiculed and demeaned for centuries now. And instead of righting this horrendous wrong, we - the modern humans, and the descendents of our ancestors who lived in the Treta Yug - are bent on perpetuating it, by making them (besidesseveral others of course) the protagonist/lead characters of lewd jokes, strange epithets, and what have you. Shame on us!

Sita was not the sad, weepy, tragic figure that certain entities have turned her into. She was not a "poor" woman either. She was as courageous as courageous can ever be, as fiery as fiery can ever be and as noble-mindedas noble-minded can ever be. She was a brave-heart. Sita was a true Kshatriya, and she performed, or rather upheld - the "Kshatriya-dharma" - the 'way of life' of a Kshatriya(or the 'way of life' of a brave-heart). A 'way of life' that was essentially all about: helping and defending the weak and the oppressed, no matter what. She refused to be cowed down by fear; fear of retributions and backlash from vested interests and powerful figures. [Please do read the 1^stpart of this series to understand this better.]

... And so was Ram. He too was a true Kshatriya, and he too upheld the "Kshatriya-dharma" despite great odds and challenges.

[Note:Dharma is not "religion", such a word and its connotations were unknownto our ancients. Dharma = 'way of life' or the guiding principles of one's life.

Kshatriya = a warrior or a brave-heart; one who defends people or principles, i.e. one who protects the weak and the oppressed from negative or harmful influences or entities - anywhere. It is not limited to the battlefield per se.]

Ram, Sita, Lakshman, Hanuman, et al worked together to achieve certain goals; they were largely successful in their endeavours... and in the process, they also became the best of friends and allies.

However, as a consequence of their actions, Ram and Sita suffered a lot. This was due to the machinations of various entrenched interests, the ones they have had the gumption to challenge. Yet, they chose to soldier on, courageously. They could have led a comfortable and luxurious life, given their royal lineage. They could have chosen to accept the injustices of the time (the Treta Yug) and led a trouble-free life. ... But they did not take the easy way out, nor did they remain passive. Instead, Ram and Sita chose the difficult path of hardships and challenges, so as to improve society, and so as to improve the lives of the people.

Despite heavy odds, Shri Ram (along with Mata Sita, Lakshman, Shri Hanuman, Kaikeyi, Manthara, et al) succeeded in undoing a lot of the ills (of that era) and established what came to be hailed as the Ram-Rajya.

No wonder, a popular Bhajan has the following words:

'Raghupati Raghava Raja Ram,

Patita-pavana Sita-Ram...'

Patita = the oppressed. Pavana = the deliverer.

Ram and Sita together worked towards the upliftment of the status of women, the "van-nars" or the "forest-dwelling humans", the elderly and the poor, and perhaps also towards the upliftment (and assimilation into society) of the "tritiya prakriti" or the "third gender" (the ones that the English-language today calls as: hermaphrodite.)

All these groups were oppressed (patita) due to the societal norms that prevailed in the 2^nd era, the Treta Yug. Ram and Sita's efforts (along with those of Lakshman, Hanuman, Kaikeyi, Manthara, et al) - helped in easing their circumstances. Or in other words: Ram and Sita delivered them from their miseries.

Hence, Sita-Ramis hailed and revered as 'patita-pavana'. [This is yet another reason why Ram is also known as: 'Maryada-purushottam'. Do read: Part-1.]

... But what have we done to them?

It's shameful, to say the least, is it not? If this is how we treat our real heroes and heroines: refuse to acknowledge their glorious legacies and contributions, (rather: refuse to evenacknowledge them) and instead, get dazzled by or glorify hollow and fake pretenders, who will want to devote themselves towards the welfare of the society? Who will want to work for the betterment of the people? Who will want to surmount great odds, sacrifice personal happiness and comforts, in order to work for the greater good?

... And then, what will happen to society?

Note: The modern 'van-nar' have been shunned and condescendingly dubbed as 'savage tribal' and 'backward castes' - by our benevolent and well-meaning colonizers, the ones that have spread the blinding light of civilization all over the globe. All thanks to the higher and classygame of 'divide and rule'.

Btw, 'Caste' is an alien word. It is derived from the Portuguese word: 'Casta', which means: purity of descent.

As for women, we are aware of their currentsituation, what? A cursory glance over the newspapers is enough, right? As for the tritiya-prakriti, the elderly and the poor, well, less said the better.

... But what do we do now?

Given what we have done to our icons: ancient, medieval... and even the onesfrom our recent history, who will want to come forward - in order to undo these modern-day ills?

(Do stay tuned…)

Picture:Shri Ram, Mata Sita and Lakshman crosses the Sarayu river; a Raja Ravi Varma painting. Courtesy: link. Jai Siya-Ram! Jai Hanuman!

Since we are celebrating Bali Padayami (also known as:Bali Pratipadā), let us discuss this story, which is now a widely-believed legend.

I understand thatwe are reasonably familiar with the story itself, and therefore am refraining fromreproducing it here. I just want to share my thoughts on this story.

To me: the "Vamana-Bali" story refers to some natural event, in which a large piece of land may have sunk below the ocean, due to volcanic activity, tectonic shifts (earthquake), tsunami or some great deluge (flood).

What I am clear about is: It has nothing to do with any humans per se or with any groups or communities of humans whatsoever.

But first let us look at the various interpretations that the Vamana-Bali story has attracted down the ages (or has this happened in more recent times?):

As per the current popular-perception of the "Dasavatara", Vamana (also: Vaman) is popularly believed to be the fifth "avatar" or manifestation of Shri Vishnu (popularly perceived as the unseen and formless preserving or balancing force behind the cosmos). Many (including learned 'scholars') have interpreted Vamanas "dwarf"; while some have equated Vaman as a "Brahmin" - i.e. as an individual belonging to the highest 'caste' or position in society.

This has further been (mis)interpreted by some as: that Shri Vishnu appeared on earth in His fifth "avatar" - that of a "Brahmin" or a "Vaman"...!

[Do read:Shri Ram: Whether he was a "good husband" and what is "Ram-Rajya"? (Part-I) - HERE - to know what a "Brahmin" exactly means.]

While "Bali" has been (mistakenly) labeled as a "Demon" King. Rather: as a just and noble "Demon" king who looked after his people (praja) with care and filial affection - but who was "punished" by Shri Vishnu is His "Vaman" or Brahmin "avatar"...!!

Bali is also (mistakenly) thought to have belonged to a class of people now somehow dubbedas the "Asura" people. ... And some have (mistakenly) even written reams and reams and gone blue in the face talking about the "vanquished Asurapeople"...!!!

The so-called "vanquished Asura people" have further been variously interpreted as the Dravida people and/or the ones that havenowbeen labeled as: "backward castes" and "tribal" as well.

While Shri Vishnu in His "Vaman" or (supposedly) Brahmin "avatar" has been blithely labeled as "Arya" or "Aryan".

To my mind: all of these are terrible misinterpretations. Frankly, misinterpretations-par-excellence. Here's why:

There is no such thing as a demon - in our culture; this word has made its appearance in our collective vocabulary thanks to the translations of our ancient texts - by aliens. Therefore, we can safely conclude that things have been lost and/or distorted in translation - big time.

"Asura" does not refer to a person, people or community. "Asura" means negative; the opposite of "Sura" (which means: positive).

Any entity, or rather anything in nature (Prakriti) or creation (Srssti or Shristi) that is negative is "Asura" and anything in nature or creation that is positiveis "Sura". It is irrespective of form, shape, gender and location; irrespective of whether seen or unseen, i.e., whether manifested or un-manifested. It can even be intangibles such as: actions, thoughts, traits, qualities, feelings and the like.

[Note: Anything that is Sura or positive is also known as daaivic.Anything that is Asura or negative is also known as aasuric.]

E.g.force. The gravitational force or gravity is "Sura" or a positive force, since it helps in sustaining life on earth. Though gravity cannot be seen and has no form or gender.

While any negative natural event such as: flood, tsunami, volcanic eruption, earthquake and the like, that causes large-scale devastation of life and property, can be interpreted as "Asura" or a negative force. An epidemic (mahamari) like plague, dengue, malaria, etc is "Asura", while the organisms causing them are aasuric or negative forces (at that point in time, i.e. when they are causing the epidemic.)

Even the cells/batteries in our torches are "Sura" and "Asura" (i.e. positive and negative).

Positive traits or qualities such as: knowledge, wisdom, intelligence, strength, awareness, a calm disposition, lack of boastfulness, ability to listen, et al are Sura traits or qualities.

Shri Ganesh represents/manifests these positive or noble traits (since they cannot be seen with mortal eyes and possess no form). One way of 'seeing' them is through (the idol of) Shri Ganesh,and it is advised that one endeavours to achieve them too. Positive or noble traits and qualities are worthy of reverence or worship. Shri Ganesh is not a person. The elephant head, the bent trunk, the large body, along with the swift mooshika-vahana (the mooshika or mouse as the vahana or vehicle) - they all have their interpretations. [Will discuss in detail later.]

Opposite traits or qualities (to the ones mentioned above) such as: ignorance, half-baked knowledge, boastfulness, lack of perspective, ego, an illusion of or a lack of intelligence, et al are Asura (negative) traits or qualities. It is advised that one endeavours to let go of them at the earliest. These negative traits/qualities are not worthy of worship too.

Both "Sur" or "Sura" (i.e. positive forces or entities) and "Asur"/"Ashur"/"Asura" (i.e. negative forces or entities) are required for creation, and they are present everywhere: in creation, in the universe and in this world; they are present within us (as traits or qualities), they are present within society and within civilization as well - so as to sustain it, or rather, so as to maintain the balance (equilibrium)in society and in Creation.

A wee bit of negativity (aasuric-ness) is required for the positivity (daaivic-ness) to shine. E.g: a lamp, the blue pre-dawn hours. Also: without some amount of negativity (aasuric-ness) civilization will stagnate. And we too won't be able to accumulate good karma.

Therefore, "Sura" and "Asura" have a very wide definition and scope. They do not indicate towards any 'caste' or 'community'.

"Vaman" is neither "Brahmin" nor "dwarf". Vaman = small-sized humans.

The first humans on earth would have been small in size:due to the still-hostile environment/terrains, food may not have been abundant, and so on and so forth. E.g. certain groups of people like: the (African) Bushmen are small in size. But they are very much human.

Hence, "Vaman" refers to the first humans - i.e. the small-sized humans - that evolved on this planet.

As for Bali, we have "Mahabalipuram", we have "Bali" (in the Far East) and we have "Babylon" (which to me, is a corrupt version of Mahabalipuram or rather:Bahubalipuram, resulting out of the change in phonetics over time).

There may have been a great volcanic eruption, or a major tectonic shift (e.g. an earthquake of devastating proportions), a gigantic tsunami or a great deluge (flood) that may have resulted in a large chunk of landmass being swallowed up by the waters. And this could have happened near modern-day Mahabalipuram, Bali (in the Far East) or even near modern-day "Babylon".

But if any of you were to ask me, I would plump for the first one, that is: near modern-day Mahabalipuram. This is because, in my mind, I am clear that this event (whether a devastating earthquake, an underwater volcano, a tsunami or a great flood) has happened near modern-day Mahabalipuram.

Here's why: I have no doubt in my mind that the continent of Africa was attached to ancient India, and some natural event (earthquake, flood, tsunami or volcanic eruption) led to its separation and becoming a separate entity. And in the process, some chunk of landmass may have gone below the waters. And this very likely would have happened near modern-day Mahabalipuram. [Note: The continent of Australia too may have been a part of the single landmass (that originally consisted of Africa, India, Australia). It too may have separated from the mother-landmass and become a separate entity, as a result of this natural event.]

I say that the continent of Africa (and maybe Australia) was attached to ancient India, because there is no other way that certain islands with drastically different-looking people could be existing so near to modern-India. These islands are clearly (at least to my mind) a remnant of ancient Africa and ancient Australia; bits of the landmass that separated from the mother-landmass (due to one or the other earlier-mentioned natural events) - but did not go below the waters.

Even a cursory reading of the Devi Mahatmyam("The Greatness or the Glory of the Devi": written to commemorate the glorious acts of Parvati and her comrades - in the Satya/Sat Yug, the 1^st era), the Ramayan (the comprehensive historyof the 2^nd era, the Treta) and the Mahabharat(the comprehensive history of the 3^rd era, the Dwapar Yug) - will corroborate what I have just mentioned.

As for the current-version of the Vaman-Bali story, 'scholars' and sundry vested interests (both homegrown and phoren) have given it a very different twist, not to mention some very unpalatable spice, rather tadka. Sadly.

Imagery of humans or animals was used to describe everything. E.g. a celestial event has been described through the imagery of 'Rahu' and 'Ketu'. Both Rahu and Ketu have been depicted as human figures, but we must look beyond the imagery. And once we do, we can figure out without much ado that our ancients have clearly indicated that the earth initially had two moons (i.e. two satellites), and that one of them was destroyed. The debris of the destroyed moon or satellite would have scattered all over outer-space, (probably) some of it also rained down on other graha-s (planets) such as Venus or Mars, but a portion of them would definitely have fallen on earth, right?

And this too may have been the catalyst for or caused the devastating earthquake/ the gigantic tsunami/ or the great deluge (flood) - that was ultimately responsible for the large landmass (the one described above) to sink below the ocean. [Note: Please do also remember that the moon, the sole existing satellite of the planet that we inhabit, Mother Earth, exerts immense influence on the water-bodies and on us as well, since our mortal bodies too largely consist of water.]

That, to my mind, is the Vaman-Bali story - bequeathed to us by our ancients.

Our ancients used a lot of metaphors, allusions and imagery in their writings, but instead of deciphering them, it is us - modern humans and their (unworthy) descendents - that havebusily given a different colour and flavour to all of them, or have allowed others to do so gleefully. What a shame!

It is in our best interests to cleanse our treasure-trove of ancient knowledge, as well as our ancient history or pracheenitihasa, of all the unwanted aspects that have seeped in and crept in over time. It is best that we do not take our ancient texts including the Devi Mahatmyam, the Ramayan and the Mahabharat at face value. They are immense repositories of knowledge, in fact they are a veritable treasure-trove of knowledge and an inalienable part of our culture and heritage, but which have, unfortunately, now come to be labeled as 'scriptures'. [All thanks to overtly daaivic or benevolent but covertly aasuric or malevolent aliensand their spiritual offspring and disciples.]

............................................

Shubh Deepavaliand aShubho Kaali Pujoto you all. May the festival of lights, dispel the darkness within and around us. May the divine Mother Shakti (in the form of Maa Kaali) strike away all negativity. May She bless us with happiness, good health and prosperity.

[Do read:Who or rather what are Maa Adi Shakti and Maa Kaalraatri?- HERE.]

PS: We must also take a re-look at what is popularly known asNaraka Chaturdashior the legend of Narakasura, and refrain from taking it a face-value. This story too describes certain natural events besides havingpositive lessons or morals woven into it. Our ancients knew how to inculcate good values in children and youngsters, while simultaneously passing on knowledge and history in an interesting manner - for sure. Salute to their wisdom!

Parting shot: I have still not been ableto figure out as to just why our ancient texts - that are nothing but immense repositories of knowledge - have been suddenlylabelled variously as: "Hindu Mythology", part of "Hindu Epic" and "Hindu Literature". Given that no "ism" existed during those times or eras (yugs), howcan these ancient repositories of knowledge be dubbed as "Hindu mythology", et al?

Especially: since priorto the arrival ofthe overtly daaivic(benevolent) but covertly aasuric (malevolent) aliens on this great land (via gloried boats), these very "Hindu Epics", "Hindu Mythologies" and "Hindu Literature" were simply known as: "Itihasa" - history. So?

(Do stay tuned…)

Picture: "Vaman-Bali" - as popularly depicted in Bali Pratipada or Bali Padayami.Courtesy: link.

Author's Note:Please visit -The 'Real' Ramayana/ Ram-Rajya- to read the other parts of this series, so as to be able to fully understand or grasp the contents of this one.

In this post, we will discuss *why*the battle between Ravana and Ram (plus his allies: Hanuman, Sugreeva, Lakshman and the Van-nar Sena) happened, the *real* reasons behind Sita's "kidnapping" and*what* it achieved; a glimpse of Ravan, the "Dasavatara" and *what* it actually depicts or explains, *what* the Narasimha-avatar and the Vaman-avatar *really* signify, a snapshot of some *ancient* communities (like:Kirat, Riksha,Kinnara,Kimpurusha, etc)and who *really* was Jambavan.

....................................................................

We have traditionally associated qualities like sharpness, perception, foresight, statesmanship, and the like with Shri Krishna, and with Chanakya. And (unfortunately), we have turned Shri Ram into a one-dimensional, expressionless figure, thanks to popular shows, etc.

But from what I understand, Shri Ram is no less far-sighted or statesman-like than Shri Krishna or Chanakya. In fact, he is a statesman-par-excellence. Here's why:

One of the tasks he set out to achieve (at the age of 25) was to elevate the status of the "Van-nar" (forest-dwelling human) in society; that is: to ensure their acceptance as full-fledged humans by the rest of the humanity (that lived outside the forest - in the 2^ndera or the Treta Yug.) Ram, along with his consort: Sita, younger brother: Lakshman, Hanumanji, Kaikeyi, Manthara, Sugriva, his "Van-nar Sena" (army consisting of forest-dwelling humans), et al - succeeded in this venture. [For details, do read:Part-II:HERE.]

But that was not all. There were still other issues to be settled, the most important ones being: to secure the lives of his praja (subjects) and the praja of his allies, to secure the borders of his kingdom (and those of his allies), and to ensure peace.

One part of this was achieved - with Bali gone, and his younger brother Sugriva installed on the throne (with Bali's son, Angad, declared as the crown-prince or Yuvaraj). Therefore, after Sugriva, Angad would ascend the throne.

And given that all of them had become the best of friends and allies, so, as far as Ayodhya and Kishkindhya was concerned, there was peace and brotherhood.

However, to my mind, Ram and/or Ayodhya's intelligence (and perhaps even Kishkindhya's as well) may have perceived a threat - likely to emanate from elsewhere, more specificallyfrom Lanka (or maybe even from the then king of Lanka - Ravan). Here's why:

Not unlike the deceased Vannar-raj(king of the "van-nar") Bali, Ravan too was a knowledgeable, well-read and a powerful king. Both Bali and Ravan were good rulers and looked after their respective praja (subjects) too.

However, their respective drawbacks were the same: excessive ego and rage.

Ravan's ten heads is a metaphor: it points towards his great intelligence and knowledge, yes, but it also alludes to his gigantic ego.

Much of the confusion that exists about Ram and Ravan stems from the fact that: many people sympathize with Ravan, since he is also believed to belong to a certain group. While Ram is believed to belong to a different group - which has further beenbolstered by his name figuring in the "Dasavatara".

However, the "Dasavatar" - the (popularly believed) 10 incarnations or manifestations of that formless and without gender cosmic force that our ancients called Shri Vishnu - could not have been predicted. 'Coz the first 4 avatars clearly preceded the appearance of humans on earth.

The first 4 avatars are as follows: 1. Matsya avatar (fish) 2. Kurma avatar (tortoise) 3. Varaha avatar (wild boar) and 4. Narasimha or Nrisingh avatar (lion-man).

The 5^th avatar is: Vamana avatar, i.e. dwarf or small-sized humans.

"Vaman" is not"Brahmin". Vaman = small-sized humans.

The first humans on earth would have been small in size: due to the still-hostile environment/terrains, food may not have been abundant, and so on and so forth. E.g. certain groups of people like: the (African) Bushmen are small in size. But they are very much human.

Therefore, the Vaman avatarclearly refers to groups of small-sized humans, like the Bushmen or maybe even the Yakshas(yakṣa) and yakṣīor Yakshini(yakṣiṇī).

The 4^th avatar or the Narasimha avatar (lion-man) could very well be the Kinnara and the Kimpurusha, or maybe even the early Kirāta (Kirata-or Kirati).

Kirat-or Kirati: means "people with lion-like nature". It is derived from two words: Kira = Lion and Ti = people, and it also means: "people from the mountain". [There is a very good chance that Maa Parvati, and her comrades, like Mata Vaishno Devi, also known a Maa Sherawali, belonged to this group. Some groups of ancient Tibetans, Gorkhas, Nepali, Ladhaki and the earlyinhabitors of ancient Himachal Pradesh, Uttaranchal, Chattisgarh, Odisha, Bengal, Bihar, Jharkhand, Assam, Manipur, Mizoram, Meghalaya, Tripura, Nagaland, Arunachal Pradesh, etc., too may have been Kirat-or Kirati.]

The Kimpurushas have been described as "lion-headed beings". The "lion head" may be an exaggeration - for their heavily-bearded head. And thisalong with their looks or facial features may have reminded one of a lion. E.g,Yeti or the elusive snow-man. [Certain sturdy and courageous groups of humans - that lived in and around the highly rugged and difficult terrain of the Himalayan region too were perhaps known as the Kimpurusha. And their facial features may have instantly invoked the image of a lion - in one's mind.Bhagavan Shiv, very likely hailed from this group. I think some groups of the ancient Tibetans, the Gorkhas, the Nepali, Ladhaki, etc were known as the Kimpurusha. And we may also consider the ones that celebrate or perform the Bhuta Kola and the Aati Kalenja - as belonging to this ancient group of humans - collectively known as: Kimpurusha.]

As for the Kinnaras, we may want to take a closer look at the ones that celebrate or perform the Royal/Regal Tiger dance (Kannada: the Hulivesha, Hulivēṣa | Tulu: the Pilivesha, Pilivēṣa) as well asthe Puli Kali, a similar dance-form in neighbouring Kerala. ["Puli" = Leopard/Tiger and "Kali" = Play - in the Malayalam language. Puli Kali is also known as Kaduvakali. Some groups of humans in ancient Himachal Pradesh and surrounding areas too may have been Kinnaras. And we absolutely cannot rule out the possibility ofMata Vaishno Devi, also known a Maa Sherawali, having belonged to this group.]

Therefore:to my mind at least, the "Dasavatara" clearly shows the "evolution of the earth" and points towards the first humans as well.

Our ancients had a unique way of describing things or events: in camouflaged language or coded text. Everything was given a name, a gender and a shape; popular figures/characters were used to depict various events whether on earth or celestial. This was done for the sake of comprehension or ease of understanding. [Some stories from our ancient texts, featuring popular characters, were essentially penned to inculcate good values or ethics in children and youngsters, while some others were written to amuse them as well as each other.These should not be mixed with the main narrative, else they will confuse big time.]

... And one of the popular figures used in the "Dasavatara" - to explain the evolution of the earth - has been Shri Ram (and this has, to a certain extent, created some confusions about him.)

Ravan hailed from a community known as: Rakshasa.

The Rakshasas are thought to be Cannibals. But just like humans have diverse food habits, viz: vegetarian, non-vegetarian, fish-eaters, and the like, we can safely assume that all Rakshasas were notCannibals. [Remember:Hidimbi, a Rakshashi and Bheem, a non-Rakshasa human had married, and their son was Ghatotkacha. Hidimbi's brother, Hidimba was a cannibalistic Rakshasa, Hidimbi was not. And Hidimbi isworshiped even today.]

Ravana clearly was nota cannibal, and so was his younger brother, Vibhishana. However, we cannot be so sure about his other brother, Kumbhakarna and about his sister: Surpanakha. Kumbhakarna and Surpanakha were both very likely cannibalistic in nature.

However, besides these two, there would have been several other cannibals in Ravan's kingdom (Lanka) and amongst his army as well.

And this, along with Ravana's nature and ambition, may have been a cause for worry to Hanuman and Sugriva (of Kishkindhya) and Ram, Sita and Lakshman (of Ayodhya).

However: it could also be that Ravana (being a great ruler himself) may have been concerned about the cannibalistic Rakshasas(in his kingdom). But he was in a dilemma. If he stopped them, they would have looked for prey elsewhere: Kishkindhya was nearest, followed by Ayodhya.

And Ravana could not have killed his cannibalistic subjects himself, since that would have been tantamount to gynati-hatya, i.e. equivalent to killing one's own, and this may not have been considered a good thing to do (according to the societal norms prevalent during the 2^ndera, the Treta Yug.)

Even in the Mahabharata (the itihasa of the 3^rdera - the Dvapar Yug) we find Arjun unnerved by the possibility of "gynati-hatya".

Now, whatever the real reason may have been, the battle ensued. The motives were:

1. To elevate the status of the "Van-nar" (i.e. forest-dwelling humans) in society, that is: to ensure their acceptance as full-fledged humansby the rest of the humanity (the ones that lived outside the forest in that era - the 2nd era, the Treta Yug.)

2. To eliminate the cannibalistic Rakshasas present in Lanka - so as to ensure that the non-cannibalistic variety (humans, van-nar and non-cannibalistic Rakshasas) could flourish - both in Lanka and elsewhere. This would automatically ensure peace, and eliminate the constant fear amongst the non-cannibalistic humans - both in Lanka and elsewhere.

3. To elevate the stature of Ram and Sita in the eyes of their praja, etc (subjects, officials), so as to give them some Moral Gravitas and authority: in order to enable them to put an end to certain derogatory customs and other ills that plagued society in that era. A routine ascension to the throne, as Raja Dasharatha's heir, would not have provided any Moral Gravitas or authority whatsoever. [Do read the 1^stpart of this post: HERE- to understand the kind of society it was, and the power wielded by certain groups/entities.]

Ram and the "Van-nar Sena", et al went to Lanka in order to eliminate the canibalistic Rakshasas. However, Ravan himself came out to fight on the 3^rd day itself. Ram asked him to go back, since he was not there to fight him per se. But after a while, Ravan's ego got the better of him. [He was probably unable to bear the taunts that his much-vaunted Lankan army (actually: the cannibalistic ones amongst them, and the other cannibals in his kingdom) was under pressure from a bunch of "van-nar"; given the status or position of the van-nar in the eyes of the others.]Result: a full-fledged battle ensued, wherein Ravan led the Lankan army, that had by now been ordered to come out in full force. Mandodari tried her best to restrain him, but he ignored her advice.

The rest as they say, is history.

At the end of the war, lying on his deathbed, Ravan realized his error of judgment and repented. Ram sat at his feet and sought forgiveness - for (though reluctantly) he was, in a way, responsible for the demise of a great king and a gynati as well (since both of them were sun-worshipers). He sought Ravan's advice and urged him to share his wisdom - about good governance. [Ram was not yet a king then, he was still a Yuvaraj.]

Ravan happily shared his wisdom and experience, and blessed Ram. After a while, he passed away. Kumbhakaran too was claimed in that battle.

Thereafter, their noble-hearted and mild-mannered brother, Vibhishana, was crowned the king of Lanka. Mandodari married him, and no doubt her wisdom and advice would have played a part in Lanka's continued prosperity.

Therefore, Sita's "kidnapping" by Ravana may have been part of a plan (to provide Ram, Sugriva, the "Van-nar Sena", et al an opportunity to attack Lanka, in order to eliminate the cannibalistic Rakshasasresiding there).

Unfortunately, things escalated or got out of hand, due to Ravan's ego.

The 2^nd optioncould be: that Ram, Sugreeva and Hanuman may have perceived a possible threat - from Lanka, or more specifically a Lanka under Ravan (given his ego) and the cannibalistic Rakshasas. And they may havecollectively decided to pre-emptit, rather than wait for unwanted events to happen, since that would mean loss of precious lives and property and draining of resources.

Sita would have agreed (or volunteered) to be the catalyst, so as to provide the necessary opportunity to the others - for attacking Lanka. [We have already discussed about her character and nature in the previous parts of this series: Do read:Link.]

However, if thishappened: then, I don't think that Ram would have ever agreed to the above-mentioned plan without being completely assured about Sita's safety. Therefore:it can be safely assumed that both Ram and Sita were aware that Mandodari was Sita's mother. And that she did wieldenough clout with Ravan - to ensure Sita's safety. [However, this should not, in any way, take away or dilute her courage or contribution one bit. To me: Sita was very much the lynch-pin.]

After the end of the battle, Ayodhya, Kishkindhya and Lanka became strong allies. And they also collectively shared good terms with the Riksharaj (King of the Rikshas) Jambavan (also: Jambavantha). Shri Hanuman alongside the wise, intelligent and experienced Jambavan also became Sugriva's advisers.

[Note: Jambavan was not a bear, but the leader of another group of forest-dwelling humans who may have borne some facial resemblance with bears. [Therefore, his bear-like appearance is just an imagery.] He ruled over Jamvanta Nagari. Ancient India was referred to by various names: Bharatvarsha, Bharatkhanda, Jambudvipa, and so on. The word "Jambudvipa" literally refers to: "the land of Jambu trees", where Jambu is the name of the species of fruit (also called Jambulor Indian Blackberry) and dvipa means "island" or "continent".

Therefore, Kapishreshtha (Foremost among the "van-nar") - Jambavan may have derived his name from Jambudvipa. Perhaps: his clan was one of the oldest. The Rikshas were yet another kind of Van-nar or "forest-dwelling human".]

Therefore: since all of them became great friends and strong allies, unnecessary skirmishes and unwanted loss of precious lives and property was avoided. Also: given their combined strength, none would have wanted to make mischief with any of them. Ayodhya, Kishkindhya,Jamvanta Nagari and Lanka could now concentrate on the welfare of their respective people. Trade would have flourished amongst the allies, leading to even greater prosperity. Peace prevailed: since they did not have to waste time, energy and resources - in fighting each other or being wary of each other.

... And such an environment too would have bolstered: Ram-Rajya. [Read the 1^st part of this series HERE, and the 2^nd part:HERE, to know more, or to re-read them.]

Now, suppose all these events had not happened? How thenmay have the situation between Ayodhya, Kishkindhya, Jamvanta Nagari and Lanka played out?

Not unlike the one we have between: India, Kukri-land, Lama-land and Dragon-land?

... And then??

Being alert and perceptive is good, right? And preempting a threat or danger is immensely better than innocently relying on promises, peace-treaties and the like, and then suffering the consequences. What?

So, if we have to understand certain events or characters from our ancient history (pracheen itihasa), and figure out their actions, we must do so as dispassionately as possible and as knowledgeably as possible. We mustn't lose sight of the big picture. This is my humble inference. What do you think?

Jai Siya-Ram!Jai Hanuman!

Shubh Deepavali and a Shubho Kaali Pujo to you all. May the festival of lights, dispel the darkness within and around us.

Note: However, neither Bali nor Ravan are "evil", since such a concept is notpart of our culture. They both were noble kings, that had certain weaknesses or drawbacks, and these led to their downfall. No person or entity, whether living or non-living, animate or inanimate, seen or unseen, is free from negative aspects/qualities, weaknesses or drawbacks. Both positive forces or entities and negative forces or entities are required for creation, and they are present everywhere: in creation, in the universe and in this world; they are present within us (as traits or qualities), they are present within society and within civilization as well - so as to sustain it, or rather, so as to maintain the balance (equilibrium) in society and in Creation. A wee bit of negativity (aasuric-ness) is required for the positivity (daaivic-ness) to shine. E.g: a lamp, the blue pre-dawn hours. Also: without some amount of negativity (aasuric-ness) civilization will stagnate. And we too won't be able to accumulate good karma.

However:just as Shri Krishna has nothing to do with the "Raas-leela" and the "Gopis" per se, the burning of Ravan and his brothers' (i.e. Kumbhakaran and Vibhishana's) effigies (in an eventpopularly known as: the "Ram Leela") - are clearly a later-day phenomenon.

................................................................................................

P.S.:In this post, we talked about the "Dasavatara" a bit, right? Here is my humble attempt to understand as to: why the formless forces (of the universe) that cannot be seen and has no gender been given a form/shape, a name and assigned a gender - by our ancients?

The human mind cannot understand, visualize or fathom vacuum, or for that matter, anything that possess no form or shape (nirākārā). The human mind, therefore, requires something tangible - as a reference point.

And it is precisely for this very reason that the various forces (of the universe) that cannot be seen (with mortal eyes), has no gender and possess no form or shape has been given a form/shape, a nameand assigned a gender (based on their nature) - by our ancients. [These forces collectively sustain creation, and thereby life, and have therefore, beenrevered by our ancients. These forces cannot be seen (with mortal eyes), hasno form or gender, just like the force known as: gravity.]

Vishnu is the name of one such force of the universe. [Vishnu = Vish + Nu, and Vish = poison. Therefore, the Vishnu-forceof the universe has been depicted with a gigantic reptile with 5-heads. It conveys the extent of poison that this Vishnu-force contains and emits.]

Shiv spelt backward is Vihs, i.e. Vish in another form, and it too means: poison; therefore, these two forces - Shiv and Vishnu - are one and the same (Hari-Hara).

Since the Shiv-force (of the universe) has been depicted with a one-headed reptile, therefore, we may conclude that this force too emits some amount ofpoison, while absorbing much of the poison emitted by the Vishnu-force. And that is why: the Shiv-force of the universe is also known as "Neelkanth" or "the blue-throated one".

The energy or force that our ancients called "Brhmaa" signifies Creation. And this force emerges out of the "lotus-naval" of the force or energy known as Vishnu. Here: "lotus" is a metaphor. A lotus grows in muddy water, yet remains untouched by it. Brhmaa or Creation emerges out of immense poison (Vishnu), yet remains untouched by it.

For greater clarity, please do read:Who or rather what are Maa Adi Shakti and Maa Kaalraatri? -HERE.

There, I have also made an humble attempt to explain what is Kaali, what is Shakti and why these two formless forces of the Universe (Brhmaand) that have no gender are consideredas "feminine" and revered and worshiped as the "divine Mother".

I have also attempted to explainthe Gayatri Mantra;besides: what "dev","devi" and "divine" means.

(Do stay tuned…)

Picture: The Setu Bandhan(bridging the ocean) being carried out by various groups of "Van-nar" (forest-dwelling humans). Picture courtesy: Razmnama: illustration to Persian translation of Mahabharata by Akbar.

Author's Note:Please visit -The 'Real' Ramayana/ Ram-Rajya- to read the other parts of this series, so as to be able to fully understand or grasp the contents of this one.

The picture that you see is of the 'Jetman'.

1. So, *how* do you think Shri Hanuman reached Lanka?

2.*What* do you think is meant by Hanuman's giantleap (300 miles) to Lanka?

As we all know, Hanumanji waspowerfully-built (his body was as hard and strong as a 'vajra', remember?), and therefore, an appendage (like a Jet-suitor a jet-propelled wing) couldbe strapped around his body, and with that in place, he could easily *leap* across to Lanka, a la the Jetman. A one-man Flying Machine in every sense of the word! [More:HERE.]

Hanuman was the finest pilot ('Pavan-putra', 'Vaayu-putra', 'Maruti') of his era, and the Ramayan clearly talks about a variety of aircrafts (vimanas). The Jet-suitis just one of them.

Yet, the one that inspired a succession of "man-s": the 'Superman', the 'Spiderman', the 'Batman'... and now the 'Jetman', is still being called 'monkey' or 'ape', and his feats dubbed as part of 'epics' and 'mythology'. Ha!

[Do read:Part-Iand Part-IIto know who*really* was this great human: Shri Hanuman, and who really were the 'van-nar' and the 'Van-nar Sena' and what they achieved.

Btw, Shri Hanuman did not have a tail, it is a metaphor to indicate that the 'van-nar' or the "forest-dwelling human" of the 2^ndera (or the Treta Yug) was not accepted by the rest of the humanity as "full-fledged human". The rest of the humanity (those that lived outside the forest) considered them (the 'van-nar' or the "forest-dwelling human") as part of the 'animal-world'; that is to say: as 'lesser' humans; and hencethe (metaphoric) tail.

Shri Ram, along with Sita, Lakshman, Kaikeyi, Manthara, Shri Hanuman, Shri Sugriva and his 'Van-nar Sena', et al endeavoured to change this perception, so as to integrate the 'van-nar' or the "forest-dwelling human" with the rest ofhumanity. Shri Jambavan too played a major role.

Do read Part-III- to know who really was this other great human: Shri Jambavan.

The 2^nd Pandav, Bheem, was the finest pilot of his era - the Dwapar Yugor the 3^rd era. And hence, Bheem and Shri Hanuman are "brothers".]

3. Now,*how* do you think the 'Rakshasas' or the cannibalistic humans*flew* around at will?

Pretty much in the same manner, right?! All they had to do was to just strap on the Jet-suit (or a jet-propelled wing) and vroom!!! Wherever they wanted and whenever they wanted. Bingo! Plus: they had a variety of aircrafts (vimanas) at their disposal. Shri Hanuman's 'leap' was therefore not a 'physical leap' as we have been led to believe - but one that was achieved through the use of very advanced technology.

Note: The custom-built Jet-suit (or the jet-propelled wing) sported by the 'Jetman' weighs 55kg,has a wingspan of two metres,4 engines and can exceed speeds of 200km/hr. It took ten years to develop and more than 15 prototypes.

The 52-year-old Yves Rossy, also known as 'Jetman', is known as "the first man in history to fly with a jet-propelled wing" - a feat achieved in: November 2006.

But... is he really the "first man in history to fly with a jet-propelled wing"? *What* do you think?

Frankly:what the self-proclaimed modern and 'developed world' has only somewhat managed to do 5000-years into the current and 4^th era (the Kali Yug) is not new to us at all. 'Coz all this and much more was not only known and achieved (many times over) but also bettered by our ancients that lived in the 2^nd era, the Treta yug - itself.

What a wondrous land was ancient India then!!

Given the variety of wondrous technologies that were atthe disposal of our ancients (and which we, the moderns, have studiously ignored), I have no doubt in my mind that Shri Hanuman's Jet-suit or even the ones sported by the cannibalistic (or perhaps miscreant) humans (the 'Rakshasas') would have been far superior to what the modern 'Jetman' flaunts. Frankly: far, far superior. And the various aircrafts (vimanas) at their disposal were nothing like what we see today. They were far more advanced - in all respects.

I say this because: Shri Ram and his siblings were very clearly born as a result of IVF therapy.

... But it was a very advanced In Vitro Fertilization or IVF therapy/technology: where nothing was injected into the body via an operation or through the vagina. It could be ingested!

Clearly: 'modern science' is as yet unaware of such advanced medical science, which was known to our ancients in the 2^nd era or the Treta Yug itself...!

What a wondrous land was ancient India then...!!

And to think all this and much more have been labeled variously as: 'epics', 'mythologies', 'scriptures' and the like...!!!*Sigh*

Should we still continue to take our ancient texts, that are nothing but a treasure-trove of wisdom and knowledge, and our ancient history, our pracheen itihasa - that of our ancestors - at face value?

The humans that preceded us - in the Satya Yug (the 1^st era), the Treta Yug (the 2^nd era) and the Dvapar Yug (the third era) - would have been very different from us, the modern humansof the 4^th era or the Kali Yug. In every way: i.e. in appearance, height, strength, longevity, caliber, intelligence, intellect, perception, knowledge, science and technology, the arts, and so on and so forth. We 'moderns' -enslaved by our arrogance and a linear view of history - have failed to acknowledge all that.

Infact: We have done even better. We have simply refused to acknowledge them!

... Well, what can one say?

.................................................................

May Shri Hanuman bless us always and remove all difficulties(sankatmochan) from our lives:

manojavaM mArutatulya vegaM, jitendriyaM buddhimatAM varishThaM ।

vAtAtmajaM vAnarayuth mukhyaM, shri rAm dutaM sharaNaM prapadye ॥

[Translated: I seek refuge (sharaNaM prapadye)in Shri Ram's Envoy (shri rAm dutaM);who is swift as thought (manojavaM), powerful and swift as the wind (mArutatulya vegaM),in control of his senses (jitendriyaM), supremely intelligent (buddhimatAM varishThaM),commander of the army of forest-dwellers (vAnarayuth mukhyaM), and son of the wind-god (vAtAtmajaM).]

Please note:the 'son' (putra) of the wind-god or Pavandev/Vaayudev/Marut = a metaphor. Shri Hanuman was the finest pilot of his era. ['Pavan-putra', 'Vaayu-putra' and 'Maruti' probably was to our ancients what 'pilot' is to us.Perhaps even: 'Vaayudoot'. Or 'Vaayudoot' could have been the name of a type or fleet of aircraft, or even of the 'air-force'.] Yes, the Ramayanclearly talks about various types of aircraft. The Ramayan is not'mythology' or 'epic' but the comprehensive itihasa(history) of the 2^nd era - the Treta Yug.

Jai Bajrangbali!

Here are some more pics of the 'Jetman':

(Do stay tuned…)

Picture: The 'Jetman' and Shri Hanuman ('leaping' across the ocean to Lanka.)Pic courtesy: Link.

Author's Note:Please visit -The 'Real' Ramayana/ Ram-Rajya- to read the other parts of this series, so as to be able to fully understand or grasp the contents of this one.

*Who*really is a'fire-born'? *How*was Draupadi born?*What*was the procedure through which Shri Ram and his siblingsborn?*What* sort of humansdoes the'Ram-avatar' represent?A*horned*human-is it possible?*What*wondrous technologies were known to our ancients?

Let us now discuss as to: *what*really the 7^th avatar (of the 'Dasavatara') -popularly known as the 'Ram-avatar' - represent or signify. We will also discuss *who* Rishi Rishyasringa was and *why*he was named Rishyasringa (meaning: the 'deer-horned'). And what is the 'Unicorn'.

The 'Ram-avatar' does not have anything to do with Shri Ram per se. Shri Ram has been used to depict or signify what is known as the 'Ram-avatar' - so as to convey certain things very clearly.

The 7^th avataror the'Ram-avatar' represents yet another set of humans that walkedon earth - those notborn the natural way. That is:those that were born out of their respective mother's womb, but not conceived naturally.

[Note: Do read PART-IIIto know *what* really the 4^th 'avatar': the 'Narasimha-avatar'and the 5^th'avatar': the 'Vaman-avatar' represent or signify.]

Shri Ram and his siblings (Bharat, and the twins: Lakshmanand Shatrughna) were not born the natural way. They were not conceived naturally, though their gestationhappened in their respective mother's womb.

Shri Ram and his siblings were very clearly born as a result of IVF therapy.

... But it was a very advanced In Vitro Fertilization or IVF therapy/technology: where nothing was injected into the body via an operation or through the vagina. It could be ingested!

However, there probably may havebeen some debate about whether thesehumans were 'full-fledged humans'or not and whether their presence was 'good' for the rest of the humanity or not - amongst the people of the 2^ndera or the Treta Yug.

After Shri Ram and his brother, Shri Lakshman, provedthemselves and achieved various tasks and goals during their 14-year 'van-vaas' (forest-stay), all doubts or debates regarding whether such individuals were 'full-fledged humans' or not, or whether such individuals were 'good' for the rest of the humanity or not, were put to rest. [Note: Do read the other parts of this series to understand what all they achieved. Links provided at the top of this post.]

Humans notborn the natural way (i.e. though born out of their respective mother's womb, but not conceived naturally) were accepted as 'full-fledged humans' and as 'good' for society: after Ram, Lakshman, Sita, et al proved their caliber.

And *this*would have undoubtedly helped childless couples. It would have also contributed towards bettering the lot of women, who otherwise have to bear most of the brunt or stigma - for childlessness. And Ram was a benevolent ruler; he looked after his people with filial affection. All this would have undoubtedly contributed towards: Ram-Rajya.

Our ancients used camouflaged language (metaphors, imagery) and coded texts in their writings, but a little attention to the Ramayan makes the above (i.e. IVF therapy) very evident.

However, instead of deciphering our ancient texts, we have mired ourselves in reams and reams of cobweb: conspiracy theories:soap-opera-style, multiple remixes and TRP-linked narratives. [TRP:'coz whether on the small-screen, the big-screen or viathe various stage-plays and wandering theatres, the main purpose has always been to attract the audience, for greater return on investment (RoI). And its not rocket science to figure out what happens then: unlimited spice and tadka.]

The narrative says: Dasaratha had three queens (Kaushalya, Kaikeyi and Sumitra) yet nooffspring or heir. [It is a possibility that he married multiple times in order to beget a son or heir, and this may have been an accepted practice in the 2^nd era - the Treta Yug.]

But given that he had three queens and still no offspring indicate that the medical condition lay with Dasaratha. And no doubt he would have been a very worried man, since after him there would be a succession issue.

We are also told that once on a hunting trip (on the banks of the Sarayu River), in the fading light of the dusk he mistook a young man for a deer (because of the gurgling sound of the pitcher that was being filled with water.) This young man, Shravan Kumar, wasthe son of a venerated and aged sage, Rishi Shantanu. As soon as he was hit, Shravan cried out in agony. Dashrath realized his mistake and ran to the young boy. He found Shravan badly hit in the chest and lying in a pool of blood. Dashratha was immensely pained at the sight and sought forgiveness. Shravan forgave him, but asked him to take the pitcher of water to his aged and blind parents and quench their thirst. He died soon after.

The remorseful Dasaratha did as told. He narrated the events to the elderly Rishi and his wife. They would, understandably, have been extremely shocked and heart-broken.

Here, the narrative tells us that they 'cursed' Dasaradh: that he too would die of 'putrashouk' (i.e. grieving for a son); and thereafter they (the blind, elderly sage and his wife) too ascended to heaven.

All this is *clearly*camouflaged language, filled with imagery.

I interpret it as: After having inadvertently killed the young Shravan, a remorseful Dasaratha located the blind sage and his wife and narrated the events. The shocked and grief-stricken parents then severely and harshly chastised him. [*This* has been meant as 'curse'.]

[Note: 'Curse' is a metaphor that has been used several times in our ancient texts, essentially to indicate: physical abuse - something that we have discussed in some detail in Part-I.That is: Rishi Kahoda beating his pregnant wife, as a result of which, their son was born deformed in eight places. And therefore, he was named: Ashtavakra.

'Curse' has also been used in our ancient texts to indicate 'severe and harsh chastisement'.

In Raja Dasaratha's case, the metaphor of 'curse' has been used to indicate the second option, i.e. 'severe and harsh chastisement'.]

Dasaratha would have begged forgiveness since whatever had happened had happened inadvertently. He had not done it knowingly or consciously. After hearing out his pleas, the elderly sage and his wife may have been convinced of his innocence and as a result forgiven him too.

Raja Dasaratha may have then shared his worry: that of not having an heir or offspring - with them.

And the aged Rishi Shantanuprobably directed him to Rishi Vashisht (also: Vasistha Muni) with the full assurance that Rishi Vasistha knew of or possessed a remedy. Thereafter, RishiShantanu and his wife very likely passed away due tocardiac arrest as a result of severe shock and grief. [*This* has been indicated by: their ascension to heaven.]

[Note: Rishi, Muni, Maharshi, Brhmharshi, etc essentially were titles by which learned, venerable and knowledgeable persons were known and referred to - in ancient times. The titles differed, based on the level or the amount of knowledge they possessed and may have been upgraded, once they gathered more knowledge.

Killing a learned person (or a sage and their offspring) may not have been considered a good thing to do, as per the accepted norms in the earlier eras - the Satya/Sat/Krita Yug (1^st era), the Treta Yug (2^ndera) and the Dvapar Yug (3^rd era).

Also: notice the similarity between 'shock' and 'shouk' [as in: 'putrashouk' - that we discussed earlier.]

Now, lets get back to where we left off.

We talked of Rishi Vashisht knowing of or possessinga 'remedy'. Now, *what* could that remedy be?

Here the narrative tells us: that soon after all this (i.e. his encounter with Rishi Shantanu) Raja Dashratha performed two yajnas(also: yagya, yaga or ritual) with the help of Rishi Rishyasringa on the advice of Maharshi Vashistha. One was the 'Ashwamedha'; the other was the 'Putrakameshti'.

We will concentrate on the 2nd one, i.e. the'Putrakameshti'. So far: it has been thought to be a 'ritual' or 'yagna' performed to beget a son or heir. [Putrakameshti = Putra + kameshti, i.e. to beget a son.]

The narrative says: As the conclusion of the 'Yagna' drew near, 'Agni' sprang out from the 'yagnakunda' and handed Dashratha a pot of 'kheer', advising him to distribute it among his queens.

Here is clearly a bunch of imagery. [Until now, we have mistakenly and literally taken 'Agni' as 'fire'. But none of our ancient texts can be taken at face value.] Here's why:

'Agni' = a metaphor to indicate the 'outcome' of a laboratory/scientific/technological/or medical process.

'Yagna' = a metaphor used to indicate a laboratory or a technological process per se.

'Yagnakunda' = a metaphor to indicate the 'specifics' of any laboratory or technological process. That is: the 'instruments' or the 'method' used or employed in any laboratory or technologicalprocess.

The Mahabharat (the itihasa or the history of the 3^rd era, the Dwapar Yug) says that Draupadi emerged from 'agni', along with her brother, Dhristadyumna - from the 'yagnakunda'.

This can be explained as: 'Agni' signifies purity. And anyoneborn out of a purely laboratory/scientific/medical process that does not require even the gestation to happen within the womb of the mother or even of a surrogate mother, was completely 'agni-born' or of 'pure-birth', in a manner of speaking. [It can perhaps also be euphemistically termed as: virgin-birth.]

Both Dhristadyumna and Draupadi were totally 'agni-born' or 'fire-born'. That is: there was no human element - whatsoever - involved in their birth process. They were (completely) *born* as a result of a very advanced scientific or medical process held in a laboratory.

Now, what could *this* process or technology be? Very obviously: stem cells and 'cloning technology'.

But a very advanced cloning technology that the world has still not seen in the current era (i.e. 5000 years into the 4^th era, the Kali Yug.)

The Mahabharata clearly talks about very advanced technology including some awesome medical technology - stuffs that the modern world is as yet unaware; or has discovered only recently (and that too in lesser forms.)

In the Mahabharat, when they talk about the *birth* of the Kauravas, or more precisely when the mannerof their birth is described, I think they are again referring to a very advanced medical science, where babies need not be gestated in the womb of the mother or a surrogate mother. It can happen outside the body!

The Kauravas were born as a result of a 'test-tube' process, where even their gestation happened in *pitcher-shaped incubators*, outside their mother's womb.And given that Gandhari "gave birth to a hard piece of lifeless flesh" after "two years" of remaining "pregnant", one cannot rule out the involvement of *stem cells* and cloning technology. Advanced 'Parthenogenesis' is a possibility as well.

... And to think that we possessed all this knowledge and technology with us - thousands of years ago! In the 2^nd (Treta) and 3^rd eras (Dvapar) itself!! So, what a wondrous land was ancient India then!!!

Now, consider Jarasandha: he was clearly a conjoined baby. The Rakshashi, Jara, separated the useless part (obviously via a surgical or medical procedure)... and hence Jarasandha lived. [Rakshashi = a female cannibalistic human; though some would have been non-cannibalistic too, since say: all modern humans are not non-vegetarians.]

All these should be pointers enough for us to seriously re-think all the self-proclaimed titles of: 'modern', 'developed', 'scientifically advanced', 'technological advancement', and the like that we have bestowed upon ourselves. Even the so-called 'developed' world is not a patch on our ancients.

... And therefore, it is a small wonder that our ancient itihasaor history have been turned into 'epics', 'mythologies' and even 'scriptures'. What ho?! :)

We *must* take a re-look at our ancient texts; we *must* stop taking them at face value or ignoring them as 'epics', 'mythologies', and the like.

Lets get back to the Ramayan and the birth procedure of Shri Ram and his siblings.

As you can see: Shri Ram and his siblings were *not*completely 'agni-born' or 'fire-born' (i.e. of 'pure-birth' or 'virgin-birth'.)

*This* can be concluded from the appearance of the word (rather: metaphor) of 'kheer' (literally: a popular sweet-dish).

The narrative says: As the conclusion of the 'Yagna' drew near, 'Agni' sprang out from the 'yagnakunda' and handed Dashratha a pot of 'kheer', advising him to distribute it among his queens.

Therefore, Shri Ram and his siblings were *very clearly* born as a result of IVF therapy (and since 'kheer' has been the metaphor used for it, the therapy probably wasoral, meaning: everything was ingested.)

... So, it was very clearlya very advanced In Vitro Fertilization or IVF therapy/technology: where nothing was injected into the body via an operation or through the vagina. It could be ingested! [As can be inferred from the metaphor of 'kheer'.]

We can also infer that: Rishi Rishyasringa and Maharshi Vashistha have jointly conducted this IVF therapy.

Rishi Rishyasringa was so-named since he is said to have possessed a 'deer-like horn' on his head. [And this too may have contributed towards our itihasa being variously labeled as 'epics', 'mythology'and 'myth'.]

To my mind:this 'horn' was a small growth (on his forehead) that he may have been born with. And hence, he may have been named: Rishyasringaor 'the deer-horned' - after this distinctive feature, just as how Rishi'Asthavakra' was named after his distinctive feature, the eight deformities he possessed or was born with. [Asthavakra = one who is deformed in eight places. Rishyasringa = the 'deer-horned'. Rishya = deer, Sringa = horn. Since he was also known as Eka-sringa, or the 'one-horned' (also:'Unicorn'), therefore, the number of horn-like growth on his forehead would not have exceeded one. Also: Rishi Rishyasringa would have undoubtedly contributed towards what we today know as the: Unicorn. But was he the only one? *That*we will discuss in the next post.]

A horned individual or human may not be common but not impossibility either.

Here's why: This elderly Chinese woman has been growing from her forehead a horn than resembles a goat's:

Read more:Link.

Therefore, a horned individual or human is *not* impossibility, right? This should explain the 'Unicorn' *myth* to some extent. What say you?

Rishi Rishyasringa may have sported a somewhat different 'horn', one that may have been further embellished by a few smaller sub-growths or 'sub-horns', and this may have inducedthe people to think of a 'deer-horn'. Is that not a possibility? What do *you* think?

[Note:Pañcāla Naresh - Raja Drupad - may have commissioned the process (euphemistically referred to as: 'yagna') for a single heir (a male or son). However, the process may have also led to a female or a daughter - Draupadi. Dhristadyumna and Draupadi therefore, may have been twins. [Pañcāla is also known as Panchala.]

It is clearly *not* IVF therapy, since there has been no usage of metaphors like 'kheer'. However, a very advanced process involving stem cells and cloning technology cannot be ruled out (i.e. a process which was far more advanced than the one used to 'sire' the Kauravas'.) Reason being: there is no mention of 'pitcher-shaped incubators'. And hence: an even moreadvanced version of 'Parthenogenesis' is a possibility too.

Whatever it may be, one thing comes through: not only was the medical technology at the disposal of our ancients extremely advanced, they could also be fairly certain aboutthe gender of the child (or children) born out of such a pure or complete medical process.

As for *how* this was possible, meaning: how could they have had such scientific wonders at their disposal, which we, the self-proclaimed 'advanced and developed' people do not possess - we will discuss in our subsequent posts.]

Parting shot: It saddens me to see *how* yet another great woman, Draupadi no less, has been made the butt of jokes, et al. Frankly, it is not at all difficult to figure out *why* the Mahabharat War happened? Rather:why the Mahabharata War *had to* happen? And *why* Kunti broke the norms of that era and ensured that her daughter-in-law was married to all of her five sons, at once. That is: that Draupadi had 5 husbands - at once.

While: the norms accepted by the society in the 3^rdera (the Dvapar Yug), allowed women to have more than one husband, it was: one at a time. Not together. [This also clearly points towards the extremely skewed male-female ratio prevalent in that era.] Kunti broke this norm. And there is a very big reason behind her action; though it has absolutely nothing to do with the skewed male-female ratio of that era.

If we *only* try to understand the roles played by Shri Krishna, Kunti and Draupadi, the entire history of the 3^rd era (the Dvapar Yug) resting within the pages of the Mahabharat - will be crystal-clear to us. We will then very clearly figure out just *why* Krishna, Kunti and Draupadi did what they did.

Sadly, we are keener to create soap-opera-style narratives involving them. And this has landed our heritage and us in quicksand. As for Draupadi, we have turned this great woman into someone that 'lusted' after Karna! No, she did not. There was no 'revenge' involved either. And neither was Kunti the scheming or tragic figure that various people and entities have collectively and concertedly turned her into. It is us, thatlustily debate over: who Draupadi loved the most, whether her husbands, the Pandavas, fought amongst themselves (over her) and the like...!

Frankly: all of this and much more (i.e. all of the various 'topics'for intense 'debates'), is a figment of our collective drought of imagination and propensity towards learning by rote. It isalso indicative of the direction modern humanity has taken. Sadly.

(Do stay tuned…)

Picture: The popular depiction of the 7^thavatar(of the 'Dasavatara') - the 'Ram-avatar'. A Chinese woman with a horn on her forehead; a horn that resembles a goat's horn.

Yet another novel from the Jeeves canon, Joy in the morning is a joy to read.

Joy in the Morning is a novel by P.G. Wodehouse, first published in the United States on August 22, 1946 by Doubleday & Co., New York, and in the United Kingdom on June 2, 1947 by Herbert Jenkins, London. Some later American paperback editions bore the title Jeeves in the Morning.

The title derives from an English translation of Psalms 30:5:

"Weeping may endure for a night, but joy cometh in the morning."

About Jeeves: After having read three novels (Carry On, Jeeves, Thank You, Jeeves and Right Ho, Jeeves) from the Jeeves cannon, I was (understandably) curious to know Jeeves' full-name. ... And soon enough, I found out: Reginald Jeeves. Its got a nice ring to it, what say?

But wait till you hear Bertie's full-name. It is: Bertram Wilberforce "Bertie" Wooster.

Phew! Wonder how he managed with such a tongue-twister of a name when he was knee-high.

It seems: Bertie's middle name, "Wilberforce", is the doing of his father, who won money on a horse named Wilberforce, in the Grand National - the day before Bertie was born, and insisted on Bertie carrying that name for the rest of his life. [I guess: a horse-loving parent will be a horse-loving parent. Always.]

Lets get back to Jeeves: Created in 1915, Jeeves continued to appear in Wodehouse's work until his final completed novel Aunts Aren't Gentlemen in 1974. He was Wodehouse's most famous character. [No disputes there, what?!]

In his 1953 semi-autobiographical book (Bring on the Girls!), written with Guy Bolton, Wodehouse suggests that Jeeves was based on an actual butler called Eugene Robinson that Wodehouse employed for research purposes. He recounts a story where Robinson extricated Wodehouse from a real-life predicament. Wodehouse also recounts that he named his Jeeves after Percy Jeeves (1888–1916), a then-popular English cricketer for Warwickshire. Percy Jeeves was killed at the Battle of the Somme (WWI) during the attack on High Woodin July 1916, two months before the first appearance of the eponymous butler who would make his name a household word.

Well, all I can say is that: there probably have been few tributes that has matched or surpassed this one.

The most invaluable nugget contained in the book ("Wodehouse at the Wicket" by P. G. Wodehouse and Murray Hedgcock) traces the origin of the name Jeeves to Percy Jeeves, a Warwickshire professional cricketer known for his impeccable grooming, smart shirts and spotlessly clean flannels. Wodehouse probably saw him take a couple of smooth, effortless catches in a match between Gloucestershire and Warwickshire. The name, the immaculate appearance and the silent efficiency stuck... and the inimitable manservant appeared first in 1916, just weeks after the original Percy Jeeves died in the war in France.

As for the 1915 or1916 conflict:

Jeeves and Bertie first appeared in "Extricating Young Gussie", a short story published in September 1915, in which Jeeves's character is minor and not fully developed and Bertie's surname appears to be Mannering-Phipps. The first fully recognizable Jeeves and Bertie story was "The Artistic Career of Corky", published in early 1916. As the series progressed, Jeeves assumed the role of Bertie's co-protagonist; indeed, their meeting was told in November 1916 in "Jeeves Takes Charge".

And that should explain Percy Jeeves' influence:the fictional character of Jeeves taking off in such a big way from 1916 onwards.

Frankly: Thank God for Percy Jeeves! Else a lot of our laughs would have remained un-laughed.

Here's why: apparently the Jeeves (of 1915) was originally intended for one-time use with two speaking lines!

Its good that this changed, 'coz no Jeeves, ... no Bertie, as we know him that is; and no Jeeves and Bertie, ... no P.G. Wodehouse - as we know him either.

[It reminds me of that popular nursery rhyme: For want of a nail the shoe was lost. For want of a shoe the horse was lost. For want of a horse the rider was lost. For want of a rider the battle was lost. For want of a battle the kingdom was lost. And all for the want of a horseshoe nail.]

Ha!

Jeeves has inspired an Internet search engine as well: Ask Jeeves, and is now a generic term in references such as the Oxford English Dictionary too.

Jeeves's first name of Reginald was not revealed for 56 years, until the penultimate novel in the series, Much Obliged, Jeeves (1971), when Bertie hears another valet greet Jeeves with "Hullo, Reggie." The readers may have been surprised to learn Jeeves's first name, but Bertie was stunned by the revelation "that he had a first name" in the first place.

Well, so am I. :)

My twopennyworth: In Joy in the Morning, there is no bothersome banjolele, but Spinozamakes its appearance.

Spinoza is Jeeves' favourite philosopher. He likes to relax with "improving" books such as the complete works of Spinoza, or to read "Dostoyevsky and the great Russians". He finds Nietzsche "fundamentally unsound".

Which means: Wodehouse may have found Spinoza's work invigorating.

As for moi: Spinoza reminds me of a witch's spindle - the type one finds in Fairy Tales ... and pizza. And since neither Spinoza nor Pizza interests me sufficiently, I will quickly opt for the freshly-made ginger bread instead - anytime. :)

Jeeves has an encyclopedic knowledge on everything under the sun and above it as well: philosophy, literature, poetry - especially romantic poetry, science, history, cuisine, psychology, politics, geography; even medicine - remember his legendary and magical concoctions?!

He is perhaps the original Prof. Google, the one that held forth when the creators of the modern 'Google' were invisible and floating in the air.

Incidentally, Satyajit Ray too thought of 'Google' long before 'Google' existed. Google's creators were not yet born when Ray created 'Sidhujyatha' whose formal name is Shiddeshwar Basu. Ray's extremely popular fictional detective character - Feluda - describes him as 'the walking encyclopedia'. While Sidhujathadescribes himself thus: 'Sherlock Holmes had an elder brother, Mycroft Holmes. Although he was very lazy, he was really a big brother to Sherlock in intelligence. Even Sherlock often used to pay visits to Mycroft for his help. Similarly, I am the Mycroft to Felu.'

Sidhujyatha lives in Sardar Sankar Road, Lake Market, Calcutta. He is a bibliophile and has an extensive base of general knowledge, current and historical affairs. He is a close friend of Feluda's father, being neighbours in their ancestral village. Feluda's jyatha(uncle - "jyatha" is the endearing word for father's elder brother in Bangla) is said to have a photographic memory and is a vast source of information and comes in handy when Feluda is in need of some. His vast knowledge comes from his collection of varied kinds of newspaper clippings that he has accumulated over the years. The role was played by Harindranath Chattopadhyay in 'Shonar Kella' ('The Golden Fort'), Ajit Bandopadhyay in 'Baksha Rohoshya' ('The Mystery of the Kalka Mail') and by Haradhan Bandopadhyay in 'Kailashe Kelenkari' ('A Killer in Kailash') and 'Gorosthane Sabdhan' ('Caution in the Graveyard').

Harindranath Chattopadhyay was also seen in the Hrishikesh Mukherjee directed classic (and Rajesh Khanna starrer) - 'Bawarchi'. He has by far been the best Sidhujyatha, and it is unlikely that he (or his portrayal) can be bested.

The word 'potential' is a big favourite in Bengal and Bengalis are big on all the unsung geniuses (heroes or otherwise) who could have made it but didn't. The workaholic Ray too reveals a soft corner for the unsung genius; in the way he wrote Sidhujyatha (played brilliantly on screen by Harindranath Chattopadhyay.) When complimented by Felu ("If you had been a detective, we would have been out of work"), Sidhujyatha simply responds: "If I had done a lot of things, a lot of people would have been out of work. So, I don't do anything. I just sit here and keep the windows of my mind open... "

Classic.

[The suffix "da" (short for "Dada") means 'elder brother' in Bangla, and not the lumpen elements of aamchiMumbai, mind you. "Da" is also a sort of honorific, used to address an older unrelated male. It essentially signifies: respect.]

The storyline: In Joy in the Morning we meet a host of characters, besides Bertie and Jeeves of course. They are: Bertie's formidable Aunt Agatha and her husband Lord Worplesdon aka Uncle Percy (Percival "Percy" Craye); his fetchingly attractive former fiancée and yet another Spinoza-fan, Lady Florence Craye; her impish brother Edwin and her currently oafish and formerly dumb brickish suitor - 'Stilton' Cheesewright aka G. D'Arcy Cheesewright - the possessor of a "beefy frame, pumpkin-shaped head and a face that looked like a slab of pink dough."

Well, I had heard of several Cartwright, but Cheesewright (?) - this is the first.

Stilton is an old chum of Bertie from their days at Eton and Oxford; here he appears as the local bicycle riding copper at Aunt Agatha's rural village - Steeple Bumpleigh. He is also engaged to Florence Craye who was in residence there.

There's also the (almost celebrity) writer George 'Boko' Fittleworth (who's had his photograph in the Tatler) and Zenobia ('Nobby') Hopwood.

Boko's dress sense is bohemian-unique to say the least; he is never seen without his grey trousers with a patch on the knee. On meeting Boko for the first time, the extremely sartorially-sensitive Jeeves had "winced visibly and tottered off to the kitchen, no doubt to pull himself together with cooking sherry" - as per Bertie.

Boko and Nobby "are planning to leap in among the orange blossoms" - thanks to Cupid's dart, but Uncle Percy is the looming obstacle.

Bertie, given his charitable disposition and spirit... volunteers to de-obstacle Uncle Percy sufficiently enough for the lovebirds' "leap in among the orange blossoms" to materialize.

However, as usual, fate has something else in store. And our dear ol' Bertie finds himself at the center of some renewed romantic attention from the Spinoza-loving formidable intellectual and the author of 'Spindrift' - Lady Florence Craye. Thissets off the proverbial Newton's Third Law of Motion: for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction - from Stilton of course, but from a handful of others as well. The impish Edwin too chips in. So what does Bertie do? Well, read the book (or re-read it) - to find that out and enjoy some laughs.

There's some mention of Catsmeat Potter-Pirbright. Funny name. [There's no Dogsmeat though. And no Harry Potter or Fulbright either.]

Much of the action happens in the precincts of Steeple Bumpleigh Hall and Wee Nooke, some of it at the East Wibley Town Hall. A brooch and a Sindbad the Sailorcostume too play their respective parts. And so does a 'porpentine'.

Wodehouse is a great fan of Sherlock Holmes (and Sir Arthur Conan Doyle).He is a 'fan' of Agatha Christie, but a fan of Monsieur Poirot.I'm not sure of his opinion about Jane Austen though.

There's a bit about Othello and Romeo, Longfellow and Tennyson. But there is also something about Shakespeare going about stealing ducks, and an old Bacon and Shakespeare gag about Bacon having written Shakespeare's stuff for him and then, possibly because he owed the latter money or it may be from sheer good nature, allowing him to take the credit for it.

Umm, this must be one of the earliest instances of 'outsourcing' and 'exploitation' or is it free labour or some sort of barter system? [What say you?]

There is something about Cyrano de Bergerac too.

Hmm. Guess Wodehouse is rather ambivalent about Shakespeare.

But he is quite effusive about Sir Walter Scott. 'Coz Young Lochinvar appears a few times.

[Just in case you want to re-read this lovely poem (that most of us read way back in school), here is a link.]

... Wodehouse is undoubtedly a diehard romantic.

Verdict:Joy in the Morning is a single story that runs through 29 chapters and 296 pages. As usual, the chapters are short and make for a breezy read. Like Carry on, Jeeves,Thank You, Jeeves, and Right Ho, Jeeves, this one too is an any-time, all-weather read. There is a reasonable amount of interplay between Jeeves and Bertie here... and what could be better than that?!

The production quality of the book is good; I don't quite recall any editing errors either, so ifat allthey exist, ignore them.

The book jacket cover is in a (sort of) parrot green and cherry red combo. PG Wodehouseappears in bright cherry red. It shines. Joy in the Morning appears in white. Nice. There is a figure clad in the colourful Sindbad the Sailorcostume (whiskers and all) riding a bicycle and pedaling hard. Who do you think it could be?

Details of the book:Joy in the Morning/ Author: P.G. Wodehouse/ Publisher: Arrow, an imprint of Random House/ Binding: Paperback/ Publishing Date: 01/07/2008/ Genre: Classics/ ISBN-10: 978-0-09-951376-6/ ISBN-13: 9780099513766/ Pages: 296/ Price: $19.95

Picture:The book jacket cover of Joy in the Morning. Courtesy: link.

Author's Note:Please visit -The 'Real' Ramayana/ Ram-Rajya- to read the other parts of this series, so as to be able to fully understand or grasp the contents of this one.

Kaikeyi was a great woman. What *really*was the reason behind Ram, Sita and Lakshman's 14-year-long exile?

We have grown up listening to stories from the Ramayana, and we have all been told that Kaikeyi and Manthara were two 'evil' women that exiled Ram, Sita and Lakshman to the forest - for a period of 14 years.

Reason:Apparently she wanted her son 'Bharat' to ascend the throne, instead of the eldest of Raja Dasarath's sons: Ram.

And we all have somehow believed this version, despite having known what had pre-ceded and after-ceded Ram's exile - purportedly orchestrated by the 'evil' Kaikeyi and egged-on (or instigated) by the 'evil' and scheming Manthara.

The narrative says:Maharshi Viswamitra was facing a lot of disturbance from the cannibalistic Rakshasas, who did not allow him to perform his activities and rituals in peace. Tadaka Rakshashi, her son - Maricha, and their companions are mentioned. [Cannibalistic humans were known as 'Rakshasas' or 'Rakshasis'; remember: we are discussing a completely different era or yug - where a varied kind of people as well as flora and fauna may have been found.]

Maharshi Viswamitra lived in the Dandaka Aranya (or Dandaka Forest). [There may have been some unwanted wild animals too.]

Fed-up with the disturbances and trouble caused by the Rakshasas, he visited Raja Dasaratha and asked him to send Ram - so as to subdue the Rakshasas, and let him live in peace.

Raja Dasaratha offered to go himself. But Maharshi Viswamitra specifically asked for Ram.

[The narrative says: Ram was 15 or 16 years old then. We will discuss this in a while.]

Ram, as we know, was Raja Dasaratha's son from his eldest queen: Kaushalya; the 2^nd queen, Kaikeyi's son was Bharat; the youngest queen - Sumitra - had twins: Lakshman and Shatrughna.

All four of them were known to have grown tall, strong and handsome.

All four brothers were close to each other; though Ram was closest to Lakshman, while Bharat was closest to Shatrughna.

Therefore, when Raja Dasarath acquiesced to Maharshi Vishwamitra's request, Lakshman too accompanied Ram.

In the Dandaka Aranya, they fought off the obnoxious Tadaka Rakshasi and killed her. Then they subdued Maricha who fled along with his companions (whoever remained, that is.)

Maharshi Vishwamitra was, needless to say, very pleased... and gifted some rare weapons to Shri Ram (or probably shared with him the procedure to make them) - as a token of his appreciation.

Thereafter, they proceeded to Videha (capital: Mithila), where Raja Janak was holding the Swayamvar of his foster-daughter - Sita. [Videha is now known as Janakpur.]

[Swayam in Sanskrit means self and varameans choice or desire. In ancient India, there was a practice of choosing a husband, from among a list of suitors, by a girl of marriageable age.]

Ram, the then Prince (Yuvaraj) of Ayodhya, too participated in the 'Swayamvar'. We are told that he was the one that successfully broke the 'Shiv-dhanu'.

[Given that our ancients used a lot of metaphors in their writings, the 'Shiv-dhanu' has been depicted as a bow (dhanu = bow). However, it was not a 'bow' per se, but the most destructive of all weapons (of that era). Obviously, a consensus would have been reached amongst the rulers and other influential entities of that era, to dismantle that fearsome weapon. Shri Ram does it.]

Ram and Sita were married (in Mithila, now in Nepal) and returned to Ayodhya via Lumbini. Dasarath and others accompanied them back with great fanfare. [In 249 BC, Samraat Asoka erected a pillar in Lumbini with an inscription referring to the visits by both Shri Ram and Bhagavan Shri Gautam Buddh to Lumbini.]

[Lakshmana married Sita's sister: Urmila. Bharata and Shatrughan married Sita's cousins: Mandavi and Shrutakirti respectively.]

Therefore, Ram could not have been a 15 or 16 year old. At that age he would have been a student.

We can also infer that during his time spent in Dandaka Aranya, he may have made certain observations:

1.The threat that ordinary humans faced from cannibalistic humans (also known as 'Rakshasas' (male) and 'Rakshasis' (female). He would most certainly have realized that for the non-cannibalistic humans to live in peace, and to survive and prosper, the cannibalistic variety had to be dealt with.

2. The plight of the 'van-nar' or the 'forest-dwelling humans' and the attitude of the rest of the humanity towards them, as well as the threat that they too faced from the cannibalistic humans - could not have escaped his attention either.

[Note:It is also possible that many of the Rakshasas and Rakshasis may have essentially been people who were inimical to the kingdom (and people) of Ayodhya, Kishkindhya, Jamvanta Nagari, etc. and were creating disturbances for them.]

... Therefore: something clearly had to be done.

And Ram may have figured out the amount of time that would be required in order to accomplish the following tasks:

1. To integrate the 'van-nar' or the 'forest-dwelling humans' with the rest of the humanity (and with society). That is: to ensure that the rest of the humanity accepted them as 'full-fledged humans'.[Do read:Part-I, Part-II, Part-IIIandPart-IV- to know more.]

2. To improve the status and position of women and other marginalized people - in society. [Do read:Part-I, Part-IIandPart-III- to know more.]

3.To ensure the acceptance of humans not born the natural way as full-fledged humans. [Do read:Part-V- for greater clarity.]

4.To secure the lives of his praja (subjects) and the borders of his kingdom, so as to eliminate unnecessary skirmishes or wars, and to plug the unwanted drainage of time, energy and resources - of his kingdom and of his people.

5.To establish peaceful relations with some of the neighbouring kingdoms and the people living there.

[Remember:Videha was already an ally - after his marriage to Sita; while Koshalaand Kashi were allies as well, since Kaushalya and Sumitra hailed from Kosala and Kashi respectively. We will discuss whereKaikeyi hailed from - in the next post.]

However: RajaDasarath was aged, and Ram's coronation was to happen shortly.

And so: Shri Ram would clearly have been in a dilemma. Here's why:

1.After his coronation, he would be the king or the monarch (Raja) and no longer the Yuvaraja(or Prince). And for the king to be absent from his kingdom (and subjects) for a long period of time - would not have been acceptable to the praja(people) and others (officials, etc).

2.He had no intention of renouncing the throne and leading the life of an ascetic.

3.He could not have requested to be passed over - for coronation either, since thatwould have been contrary to the norms accepted by the society in the Treta Yug (or the 2nd era.)

4.Any request to the Raj Purohith (or the chief priest), to his father: RajaDasaratha or to his mother: Kaushalya - would have been futile.

5.Trumpeting or publicly articulating the reasons for his wanting to be away for some years - would have defeated its very purpose.

Our ancients followed a clear process of succession; according to the laid-down rules, the eldest son would ascend the throne, provided he did not have any physical or psychological issues.

Ram had neither... and he was the eldest son.

But he hadto be away - for a certain number of years, so as to accomplish some tasks (listed down earlier in this post), and therefore, an acceptable alternativehad to be found. That is: someone who could occupy the throne - in the interim period. Someone - who would be acceptable to everyone else as well...

Now, whodo you think could help him achieve all of this - smoothly?

Not Kaikeyi?

Though we know that Kaikeyi was Ram's step-mother, yet we find that she had never differentiated between Ram and her own son: Bharat. She had always loved them equally.

Kaikeyi was also a brave warrior. Many years ago she had saved Raja Dasaratha - in the battlefield - from certain death, and then nursed him back to good health. A grateful Dasarath quite obviously wanted to show his gratitude and offered her 'two boons'. Meaning: she could ask for any two things and he would give them to her (or get them for her.)

Kaikeyi had never used this gift of 'two boons'; since there was never any need for it. And she was also Raja Dasarath's favourite queen.

... It is unlikelythat Ram was not aware of all this.

Now, lets move on.

Shortly before Ram's coronation, we find Kaikeyi putting forth her demands to Dasarath, reminding him of his 'two boons'. ... And the demands were:

1.That Ram is exiled for 14 years.

2.And that: her son - Bharat (who was younger to Ram but older to Lakshman and Shatrughna) be crowned instead.

Dasarath, quite obviously was shocked, since Kaikeyi had always loved Ram and Bharat equally. And her demands (made so close to Ram's coronation) - meant breaking the accepted norms or rules of succession.

However, since he was bound by his words, he therefore, had no other alternative but to acquiesce.

Ram was duly exiled for 14 years (Sita and Lakshman accompanied him) - to Dandaka Aranya. Lakshman accompanied them by choice, while Sita was the lynchpin- for everything that had to be done and accomplished.

[Do read:Part-I, Part-IIandPart-III- to understand *who* Sita really was and *what* she was really like.]

Now, the question is: if Kaikeyi so wanted her son - Bharat - to ascend the throne, why did she not exile Ram and Sita (and if necessary Lakshman as well) - forever? Why only for 14 years and why to Dandaka Aranya?

Why does Ram (along with Sita and Lakshman) straightaway go to Dandaka Aranya via Chitrakoot? And how come Kaikeyi is able to tellBharat (once he returns from his maternal grandfather's place after receiving urgent summons from Maharshi Vasistha) – that Ram has been exiled to Dandaka Aranya? What does all this mean?

We all are good at solving crosswords and Sudoku, right? I guess: we should also try and solve the many riddles weaved into our ancient texts, and decode them. About time, don't you think? :)

And: I also hope that given all that we have discussed so far, we can now quite clearly make the connection and join the dots, so as to figure out just whythis 14-year exile had to happen. What say you?

As for the specific time period of 14 years: Ram was a warrior and would have been an excellent planner and strategist too. He may have figured out that in order to achieve the above-mentioned tasks, he also needed to: get acclimatized with unknown and difficult terrains, get to know the people there and build trust and friendship with them; understand the terrain and the people - so as to have a good idea about his neighbouring nations and territories; get used to a different culture, 'way of life' and language, obviously he would have had to learn different languages in order to interact with the 'van-nar' and vice versa; some terrain-clearing may have been required - rocky and forest terrains; negotiations had to be held, also: intelligence gathering, planning and strategizing; building prototypes and testing them; training, sourcing materials and building a bridge, fighting battles, etc. [Nala was the 'van-nar' architect-engineer who led the sethu-bandhan. The Setu was used for pedestrian traffic between India and Sri Lanka right until 1480 when a major cyclone destroyed it.]

[Note:Ram could not have been a teenager when he killed Tadaka Rakshasi. He was 'exiled' at the age of 25; before that: he was married, and prior to that, he had come to 'Dandaka Aranya' on Maharshi Vishwamitra's insistence. Also: all of these events could not have had much of a time lapse between them, though it would have certainly provided them with sufficient time to think and plan - discreetly; and some time for Ram and Sita to get to know and understand each other.

Therefore:It is possible that some mistranslations have resulted into Ram being erroneously described as a teenager. Just like: a clear mistranslation says that Ram and Sita were happily married for 12 years before their exile. Very likely: the stated 12 years may have been 12 months.]

Dandaka Aranyawas a big forest that lay between the Godavari and the Narmada rivers. Some passages of the Ramayana represent it as beginning immediately south of the Yamuna River. Dandak was also a kingdom, rather: a colonial state of ancient Lanka - under the reign of Ravana. Ravan's representative/brother - Khara - ruled this state or province. It was also a stronghold of all the Rakshasasthat lived in the Dandaka Forest.

It is possible that Ravan may have occupied this area by force.

Ravan's 10 heads was a metaphor: a testimony to his great intelligence as well as vast ego. But it may also have been an allusion to 10 kingdoms. Therefore:either the sea has swallowed up some parts of ancient Lanka, or we may want to explore the possibility of (modern) Australia having been a part of ancient Lanka and ancient India. [Do read:Link.]

(Do stay tuned…)

Picture:An illustration of Kaikeyi and Raja Dasaratha.

Author's Note:Please visit -The 'Real' Ramayana/ Ram-Rajya- to read the other parts of this series, so as to be able to fully understand or grasp the contents of this one.

What *really* was Manthara's role? [Please readPart-VI– so as to get the drift.] A glimpse of the 'Treta Yug' or the 2nd era. *What* does Shri Hanuman tearing open his chest to reveal the image of Shri Rama and Sita mean?

The narrative tells us that Manthara was a trusted maid of Kaikeyi from her parental home. She is variously referred to as: 'Kubja' (hump-backed) and 'Vamani' (dwarf woman). This is a clear indication that she belonged to the group of people known as the Yakshas (male) and Yakshis (female). These were dwarf or small-sized humans. [Do read:Part-III- for greater clarity.]

In ancient times, these little people were mostly engaged in guard duties, such as: to guard the treasury, etc. They were renowned for their loyalty and for their strength.

Their knowledge of nature, plants and medicine is also well-documented. When Shri Hanuman went to get the 'Sanjeevni Booti' - the medicinal herb whose juice could revive the unconscious Lakshman, he was not quite aware as to: what plant it was, what it looked like or where exactly it could be found. However, the Yakshasthat lived in the mountains (the Gandhamadhana Parvat) guided him.

Manthara undoubtedly would have been extremely trustworthy and loyal, so much so that she would have under no circumstances, even in a moment of weakness (say: due to all the scorn being heaped on Kaikeyi) – would have revealed *anything*.

Also:Kaikeyi, who was known to have loved Ram and Bharat equally, could not have asked for Ram to be exiled for 14 years – all of a sudden, out of the blue! Right?

Quite obviously: a background had to be created. And for that to happen, someone who could be totally trusted was required. And this is where Manthara came into the picture.

There is a strong possibility that Ram may have maintained a covert correspondence with Ayodhya - in order to keep tabs on the goings-on there. This - he would have maintained with Kaikeyi - and no one else. Hence, Manthara would have been required. Since Kaikeyi, being a queen... would not have been able to do everything herself.

I say this because: Bharat and Shatrughna severely chastise Manthara and even attempt to assault her. The commotion draws Kaikeyi's attention. She stops Bharat and Shatrughna from assaulting Manthara, by saying that it was not right to hit a woman, and that: Ram would be very displeased if he heard of it.

Now, why did she say that? How could Ram (who was in exile) get to hear of it?

What do you think?

To my mind: Only four people were in the know: Ram, Sita, Kaikeyi and Manthara.

I do not think any of it would have been shared with Lakshman and Bharat (and Shatrughan as well), 'coz they would, very likely, not have accepted any of it, let alone co-operate. And: they were also known to have been somewhat emotional.

In fact, Bharat (along with Shatrughna) had been away - visiting his mother's place i.e. his maternal grandfather's place (Kekeya Mahajanapada or kingdom) - when all this happened. Later, he met Ram (at Chitrakut) during the exile period itself, and begged and pleaded with him - to return to Ayodhya. On being unsuccessful, he asked Ram to give him his 'paduka' (footwear)instead. This is because: in our culture, the feet are worshiped. Touching the feet of one's elders is a mark of respect.

As for the 14 years (exile period): we have seen in Part-VI-how an adult Ram has been mistakenly turned into a teenageror how say, a period of 12 months has been (mis)translated into 12 years.

Therefore: whether the exile was for 14 years or for a somewhat lesser period: we can only conjecture.

[Note: We do not know what happened to the community known as: Yakshas and Yakshis - given that a lot of intermingling between various groups of people has happened over the centuries.

However I wonder: whether the ones we call 'dwarf' today, are a type of Yaksha or Yakshi? I say this: 'coz even though they are very small in size, this does not seem to be a hindrance in any way. They are physically strong, lead a normal life and can procreate as well.

Incidentally: Tuberculosis (TB) is called 'Jakkha' in Bangla. So, we may want to explore whether this disease (or epidemic, or a series of such epidemics) caused the Yaksha population to dwindle - many years ago.

We must also take a closer look at our various ancient dance-forms. These are not restricted to entertainment alone, but very clearly convey aspects of our ancient culture, history and heritage. E.g. Kathakali. This dance-form may provide more information about the Kirat, theKinnara and the Kimpurusha ("people with lion-like nature" or "people from the mountain"). Ditto: the various dance-forms including the war-dances from the mountainous regions in the north or the north-eastern regions of our country. While the Yakshagana and the Chaudance-forms may provide some clues about the Yakshas and the yakṣīor Yakshini - of yore. We may also want to look at the Bhuta Kolaand theAati Kalenja, apart fromthe Royal/Regal Tiger dance (Kannada: the Hulivesha, Hulivēṣa | Tulu: the Pilivesha, Pilivēṣa) as well as the Puli Kali, a similar dance-form in neighbouring Kerala. ("Puli" = Leopard/Tiger and "Kali" = Play - in the Malayalam language.) Do read:Part-III - for more info on these various groups of humans.]

We have discussed about Shri Hanuman and Shri Jambavan in some detail (in our earlier posts in this series). Shri Hanuman very likely belonged to a clan or community that had a monkey-totem. While: Shri Jambavan belonged to one that had a bear-totem (or maybe: sported a bear-mask). The Kirat and the Kimpurusha were groups that had a lion-totem or headgear while the Kinnara were communities with a tiger-totem or mask.

And their facial features e.g. the jaw-line may have invoked the image of an ape or a bear - respectively. As forthe Kirat or the Kimpurusha("people with lion-like nature" or "people from the mountain") - do watch a monk meditating, it will invoke the image of a lion in your mind.

We are (somehow) convinced that Nandi and Bhringiwere bulls. But they were clearly humans hailing from a community with a bull-totemor one that sported a headgear of bullhorns.

Therefore: we must examine the different totems, masks, costumes, body-paint, head-gears, sculptures, crafts, jewellery, paintings, languages and attire - of the many groups of people that still live in the forest or in and among the hills and mountains - all over our country. Who knows, we may (still) be able to gather some info - about some of our ancient groups and communities. And who knows we may be able to get some clues about the evolution of the human species.

I say this 'coz: given the passage of time and the movements between people, there has been a lot of intermingling of people as well as intermingling of blood. And all of this has given rise to a new set of humans: groups and communities... as well as culture and languages. Yet, despite all the proverbial water that has clearly flown under the bridge, we may still be able to find some traces of our ancient culture, history and heritage. And we must treasure whatever little we can salvage.

What say you?

Also: Please remember:

The Ramayana is geographically very correct. We are only attempting to piece together the events, in as dispassionate a manner as possible.

There has been a huge amount of flights of fantasy, mistranslations, misinterpretations,various crosscurrents and a mixing of multiple narratives - into the main narrative w.r.t the Ramayana. There are over 3000 re-tellings and versions (India and beyond), and counting! And half-baked knowledge has been responsible for the twisting of the Ramayanaand the mutilation of our ancient history. Sadly.

[Note: What we today know as the Valmiki Ramayana is thought to be the work of several people, besides the 'aadi kavi' or the first poet - Maharshi Valmiki. We will discuss in our later posts as to why this is so. Not just bits and pieces, but two whole 'khands' - parts or chapters - are accepted as having been latter-day 'add-on'. And the much-bandied-about'Lakshman Rekha' is a part of one of these two added 'khands'...! Isn't it strange that added bits are bandied about everywhere, while no effort is made to scrutinize the narrative - in order to weed out the 'impurities' that has so obviously seeped in?!]

Well?

Each era is distinct. Here we are discussing a completely different era or yug - the 2^nd era, the Treta Yug. We cannot view it or discuss itthough the prism of the current one. That will be unfair to say the least... as well as misleading.

The terrain that we see today is a much-changed one. It obviously would have been totally different - in another era. In all likelihood, it would have been heavily forested, infested with a completely different set of flora and fauna, wild animals included - the kind that we don't see now or rather: won't get to see - ever. And there would have been a much greater number of hills, mangroves and water-bodies too.

The land area itself would have differed. It would have undoubtedly been much larger. Over the years, due to the action of the waters, chunks of land would have slowly but surely been swallowed up by the sea and the ocean. Some natural events too would have contributed towards changing the landscape. [Read: Link.]

Humans would have been very different as well, and far more diverse than we see today.

And Ram, Lakshman, Sita, et al would have been very different from us - modern humans- in all respects: height, strength, appearance, longevity, intelligence, perception, caliber, knowledge, technology, and what have you. Both the Ramayana and the Mahabharata very clearly talk about awesome technology, something that the modern world (5000 years into the 4^th era or the Kali Yug) has still not seen...! [Please read:Part-V– to get an idea of how advanced our ancients were.]

[Our ancients undoubtedly had far more sophisticated technology at their disposal than most of us moderns (enslaved by our arrogance and a linear view of history) - are willing to give them credit for. E.g., the Ashoka Pillar at Sarnath, the Iron pillar of Chandragupta II Vikramaditya in Mehrauli, the cave temples of Ajanta and Ellora, the Egyptian mummies and the pyramids, the drainage system, wells and water-storage system of the Indus-valley cities (i.e. the Sarasvati Civilization), the Stonehenge - to name a few. And many of these are from the current era or yug itself.

Yet, no matter how much or how hard we try... we cannot replicate them. In fact, we won't even come close.]

Also: the constraints and challenges (faced by the people of the Treta Yug) would have been different - in all respects, than what we (moderns) experience today, or have been experiencing for the past few generations.

The type of society and the societal norms followed and accepted in the 2^nd era or the Treta Yug - is nothing like what we see around us today or are used to seeing or accepting.

Societal norms were far more rigid, and important personalities like the kingswere bound by their words or by their 'dharma' (duty). They followed 'Raaj-neeti' or 'Raaj-dharma' - the 'way of a king' or the 'principles or duty of a king' and 'Kshatriya Dharma' i.e. the 'way of a Kshatriya' or the 'way of a brave-heart'.

'Raaj-neeti' or 'Raaj-dharma' is not to be confused with what passes for 'politics' today.

The society that we see today or have been seeing for a while now is far more flexible and accepting of many things. There are no rules or words that bind. And thisof course works both ways. However: the earlier ears (yugs) were completely different... and unlike the current one.

Ram was a human, not God - as we have been led to believe. He did not possess any magicalpowers to make things happen either. It was only through 'Karm-Yog' that Ram and Sita (along with Hanuman, Jambavan, Kaikeyi, Manthara, Sugreeva and his 'Van-nar Sena', et al) - were able to achieve all that they have achieved - despite huge odds and challenges. And no less a personthan Shri Krishna has paid the highest tributes to Shri Ram, while describing that unseen and formless force known as the Paramaatma (the Supreme Soul) or the Parameshwar (the Supreme Being) i.e. divinity - in the Srimad Bhagavad Geeta.

Do remember: we are discussing an era (yug) when the 'van-nar' (forest-dwelling humans) was not even considered as humans. They were shunned and taken as part of the 'animal world' or as 'lesser humans'. [The so-called tribal of today does not have to face such a plight.]

There are reasons for Ram not having sought the help of his own powerful army (that of Ayodhya + Videha) and instead going into battle with an army of 'Van-nar Sena' (i.e. an army of forest-dwelling humans) - led by Shri Hanuman. [Videha = the kingdom from where Sita hailed; after her marriage to Ram, Videhawas a staunch ally of Ayodhya.]

There are reasons for Ram not having sought the assistance of his own highly-skilled engineers and technicians (from Ayodhya) - to build the bridge to Lanka (also known as: the Ram Setu). [Do read:Part-I, Part-IIandPart-III.]

[Nala was the 'van-nar' architect-engineer who led the sethu-bandhan. The Setu was used for pedestrian traffic between India and Sri Lanka right until 1480 when a major cyclone destroyed it.]

In the course of our discussions, we have had a glimpse of the kind of society that prevailed in the Treta Yug(the 2^nd era) and we have seen how shabbily even venerated and learned persons treated women, and the immense influence they wielded on society. [Do read:Part-I.]

Therefore: In order to undo a variety of ills that plagued society (in the Treta Yug) especially in light of the influence and power wielded by certain sections, a routine ascension to the throne, as Raja Dasharatha's heir, would not have provided any Moral Gravitas or authority whatsoever - to Ram. That way: he would have been bound by the norms and duties of a king, and would have had to abide by them too. Long absence was not a possibility as per the norms of the Treta Yug, and articulating the reforms or changes he wanted to bring about - would have defeated its very purpose. There would have been a lot of resistance from powerful entities. Remember a king of the Treta Yug cannot be equated with a dictator. They were bound by guidelines, and societal norms were very rigid. [Please read:Part-I, Part-IIandPart-III– in order to know more.]

We have unfortunately turned Ram into a one-dimensional figure, which he clearly was not. He possessed great foresight and has done what had to be done, by adopting appropriate methods... instead of relying on rituals in order tobetter the conditions of the people.

Instead of placidly accepting the norms and the various injustices prevailing in the 2^nd era (Treta Yug), Ram and Sita chose to do something about it - in order to improve the conditions of the people.

Ram has been erroneously termed as: a 'Perfect Man' or an 'Ideal Man'. 'Maryada-Purushottam' does not mean 'Perfect Man' or 'Ideal Man'.

Someone that accepts the prevailing norms (maryada) of society and abides by them or works accordingly: is known as:'Maryada-Purush'.

But someone that *goes beyond* the accepted norms prevailing in society and changes them - for the greater good: is 'Maryada-Purushottam'.

Ram is known and hailed as: 'Maryada-Purushottam'. He possessed the courage and the moral wherewithal to go beyond the accepted norms of the society (in the Treta Yug) and change them - for the greater good, i.e. for the upliftment of society and for the improvement in the lives of the people.

Also: When various 'knowledgeable' persons say that Ravan could have easily ravished Sita in captivity, but did not - and then take this as a sign of his noble-mindedness, they simply choose to overlook the fact that Sita was Mandodari's daughter. [Mandodari was Ravan's favourite queen. Sita and Mandodari were so alike that even Hanuman was confused.]

And it is these types that misrepresent what Sita's 'Agni-Pariksha' was all about, and then blithely twist certain texts to say that 'Ram subjected Sita to purification rituals since her chastity was questioned'...! He did not. [We will of course discuss what Sita's 'Agni-Pariksha' actually means, in our forthcoming posts.]

[Note: To know *who* Sita really was, i.e. *what* she was really like... and how shabbily women were treated in the Treta Yug: Do read:Part-Iand Part-II.]

'Sita' or 'Seeta' is derived from 'Seet' - an instrument used to dig up the ground, especially for agricultural purposes. It is said that Raja Janak of Videha (now known as Janakpur) found her abandoned in a ditch, adopted her and brought her up as his own daughter. [Mandodari may have abandoned her for whatever reason, or Sita may have been lost or kidnapped.]

However: it is beyond a shred of doubt that we prefer theatrics and narratives that are high on emotional content. Plus: we love to learn by rote. In fact: we have managed to become champions at it.

How else do you think we have not taken a closer look at the Ramayana and sought to separate the grain from the chaff, in order to get a clearer picture?

How else do you think we have been celebrating 'Ram-Leela' year after year with so much gusto, where even the effigy of Vibhishan is burnt?! Since: Vibhishan and Ram were friends and allies...!

Unbelievable, right?!!

Now, let us considerour ancient texts. We know (and have discussed) that they are peppered with metaphor, imagery or camouflaged language. Here's yet another example:

What does Shri Hanuman tearing open his chest to reveal the image of Shri Rama and Sita mean?

Well, it simply means: body art or tattoo. As simple as that!

Yet such heavy-weather has been made of it...! Just think of the numerous serials on television or the many stage-shows - and how they project this simple thing. Not to speak of the various books and illustrations. They have all contributed handsomely towards a warped version of our ancient history or itihasa. :)

Yes, our ancient texts are filled with metaphors and imagery. But this should not surprise or baffle us at all. Simply because: this is how our ancients wrote. If we are to examine our ancient texts like the Devi Mahatmyam, the Shiv Puran, the Ramayana, the Mahabharat, et al, this pattern will become very clear.

It is we, the 'moderns' that have not been able to fathom, decode and decipher. Instead: we have royally entangled ourselves in cobweb and confusion. And theatrics. :)

Our ancient itihasa cannot be looked at in isolation. They are like flowers strung together on a string, and hence they have to be viewed as a whole; else the big picture will remain incomplete.

The 1^st era or the Satya/Sat/Krita Yug: the Devi Mahatmyam and the Shiv Puran.

The 2^nd era or the Treta Yug: the Ramayana.

The 3^rd era or the Dvapar Yug: the Mahabharata.

There is continuity. [Of course there are several other texts too. And they all contain a wealth of info, provided we are able to separatethe grain from the chaff - if you know what I mean.]

In my humble opinion, what needs to be done is this: havingcrisp, concise, sharp, taut, decoded versions of all the above (the Devi Mahatmyam, the Shiv Puran, the Ramayana, the Mahabharata), in simple language (that is easy to understand and comprehend) - resting within the same covers, is the way to go. Some illustrations would definitely help, since visual depiction leaves a greater impact than mere text. [However: we should not confuse the Shiv-Parvati stories with the Shiv-Satistories. Also: the possibility that the Devi Mahatymam and the ShivPuran(may be) depicting the early part of the 2^nd era (the Treta Yug) cannot be ruled out.]

(Do stay tuned…)

Picture: 1. Kaikeyi and Manthara. 2. Shri Hanuman 'tearing open his chest' to reveal the image of Shri Ram and Mata Sita.

Shubho Mahalaya - Maa aaschhen.

The ever-mesmerizing Bhavani Dayani.

Shubho Maha Saptami: Who or rather what are Maa Adi Shakti and Maa Kaalraatri?

Joi Maa Durga: Notes on "Idol Worship" (Part-I)

Shubh Dussehra. Shubh Vijayadasami. Shubho Bijoya-r priti o shubhechcha.

Thank You, Jeeves by P.G. Wodehouse

Abol Tabol, etc: The Peerless Sukumar Ray. (Part-I)

Abol Tabol, etc: The Peerless Sukumar Ray. (Part-II)

Abol Tabol, etc: The Peerless Sukumar Ray. (Part-III)

Right Ho, Jeeves by P.G. Wodehouse

The 'Rethdootam': An Ode to Jam Rethmalani and ilk.

Reclaiming our History | Decoding the Ramayana: The real Shri Ram: Whether he was a "bad husband" and what is "Ram-Rajya"? (Part-I)

Reclaiming our History | Decoding the Ramayana: The real Shri Ram: Whether he was a "bad husband" and what is "Ram-Rajya"? (Part-II)

Bali Padayami: A Re-look at the 'Vamana-Bali' story, and notes on Sura/Asura, Demon, Avatar, Vaman, Shri Ganesh, Arya, Dravida, etc. (Part-I)

Reclaiming our History | Decoding the Ramayana: The real Shri Ram: Whether he was a "bad husband" and what is "Ram-Rajya"? (Part-III)

Reclaiming our History | Decoding the Ramayana: The real Shri Ram: Whether he was a "bad husband" and what is "Ram-Rajya"? (Part-IV)

Reclaiming our History | Decoding the Ramayana: The real Shri Ram: Whether he was a "bad husband" and what is "Ram-Rajya"? (Part-V)

Joy in the Morning by P.G. Wodehouse

Reclaiming our History | Decoding the Ramayana: The real Shri Ram: Whether he was a "bad husband" and what is 'Ram-Rajya'? (Part-VI)

Reclaiming our History | Decoding the Ramayana: The real Shri Ram: Whether he was a "bad husband" and what is 'Ram-Rajya'? (Part-VII)