A four-member committee had been formed to decide on Ramanujan essay at Supreme Court directive
Delhi University's Academic Council seems to have relied on the opinion of one expert, conveniently ignoring the collective opinion of the remaining three, in its controversial decision to drop A. K. Ramanujan's celebrated essay on the Ramayana from its history syllabus.
An expert committee comprising four acclaimed historians, whose names have not been revealed, had been formed at the direction of the Supreme Court following a writ petition by some Right wing groups that the essay hurt their religious sentiments. The expert committee then placed before the AC its report which ostensibly resulted in scrapping of the essay.
The essay, “Three hundred Ramayanas: Five examples and three thoughts on translations,” was quoted by the AC as inappropriate to form a subject of history, given its religious theme.
'Appropriate'
However, expert A noted: “The recommended readings from the essay is very appropriate as it critically and objectively traces out the developments in historical perspective with great vision and unassailable scholarship…I see nothing objectionable, repeat nothing objectionable, in this scholarly essay on Ramayana by Ramanujan.”
The essay was also quoted as being religiously offensive to the Hindu community, to which expert B said: “Recently I came across a pamphlet describing the objections by people who claim to be the spokesmen of the Hindu communities in India. They are silly and superficial and really expose the ignorance of the authors regarding their own unique heritage.”
The essay was also termed offensive and an attempt to discredit Valmiki's Ramayana, to which expert B observed: “No sanctity or special privilege can be attached to any version. Keeping in mind the description of the South Indian as vanaras with long tails or rakshasas with huge ugly animal shapes, the miracle weapons and supernatural feats of heroes, no sane person can consider the Ramayana as works of history…Indian scholarship has always regarded Valmiki's Ramayana as Adikavya (the earliest poem) and the poet is by definition completely free in his world of imagination...apare kavya samsare kavireva prajapati – the poet is the supreme creator in the boundless world of poetry.”
His thoughts are echoed by expert C who said: “By all accounts there is no single version of the Ramayana, many writers, poets, dramatists and scholars have interpreted the story in their different ways. In fact, if the story had been static and did not hold the potential of re-narration, perhaps it would not have survived over 2,000 years.”
Expert B then goes on to categorically state that “the recent trend among advocates of Hindutva to consider this work as being composed of actual historical data is deplorable. It is contrary to our tradition, sanity and commonsense, and an insult to our scholarly culture”.
However, the opinion of expert D who termed the Indian psyche incapable of handling different versions of the Ramayana, seems to have convinced the AC to scrap the essay. “Epic personalities are divine characters and showing them in bad light is not easily tolerated,” he noted.
'Affecting sensibilities'
Expert D also observed: “Although these (other versions of the Ramayana) are literary pieces, they are bound to affect the sensibilities of impressionable minds. If the teacher explains the background of these versions, the students may be convinced, but I doubt if college teachers are well-equipped to handle the situation which, is likely to become more difficult in the case of a non-Hindu teacher.”
Keywords: Ramayana syllabus row, Delhi University, A.K. Ramanujan, Ramanujan Ramayana essay, Three Hundred Ramayanas
Even educated Indian couldn't come out of the cultural bondage! They condemn Dowry, yet they gladly practice. They advocate freedom of speech, rational outlooks, scientific, creative or innovative thought and practice but they held to their religious belief blindly. They don't allow any one to question it! Anything contrary to their believe is anti-social,anti-indian...etc. what an irony! This is India.
In one program i came to know that the essay says Ram and Sita were
brother and sister, Sita was Ravan's daughter, and Hanuman was a
"kamuk" person. I condemn it strongly. Isn't it offensive. Please
reveal the essay with the names of people supporting it. I promise,
These people will not see sun light again.
I dont understand why some Hindus are becoming so defensive about Hinduism and all things related. This attitude belonged more to the Semitic religions at one time or another in history;Hinduism was too vast to be so constrictive in its thoughts. Arent university students capable of deciding what is true and what isnt? Throwing out an essay, just because it may allegedly hurt sentiments seems to me not to be a sort of censorship but cowardice. Delhi University must reverse this decision.
When I opened 'Bhagvad Gita', in the preface it was written that there are more than 50 versions of the Gita in English language alone.
After the death of the great writers, vested interests add things deliberately to the dead author's work so that it benefits a particular group or community -- the History is replete with such instances. Even the Bible has different stuff added to it in different versions -- any book needs to be read in the right spirit. There will be many versions and interpretations of any great work -- what Delhi University has done must be reversed.
There are many things in India that bind the entire Indian population together (especially Hindus) in their ideals, thoughts and social behavior and Ramayan has been first among them for centuries. Unfortunately, the people (especially Indian historians, majority of whom belong to leftist ideology) with left or west oriented perspectives to perceive the things in India, always try their best to break or confuse the Indian society on these ideals. The analysis of history is supposed to be based on objectivity but when it comes to analysis of Hindu related facts majority of Indian historians conveniently escape this criteria to establish their prejudices about the things that have united the people of this country for ages. This so called "intellectual analysis” by Ramanujan of Ramayan should be made part of the syllabus but be left for "scholarly" interpretations.
In his article "Is there an Indian way of thinking? -An informal essay", AK Ramanujan posed these questions:
"Is" there an Indian way of thinking?
Is there "an" Indian way of thinking?
Is there an "Indian" way of thinking?
Is there an Indian way of "thinking?"
Reading the comments of the experts, each one seemed to have analyzed along these lines: "Is" there an Indian way of thinking? - Expert A; Is there "an" Indian way of thinking? - Expert B; Is there an "Indian" way of thinking? - Expert C; Is there an Indian way of "thinking?" - Expert D; If this is true, then AKR made his point!
The recommendation of Mr D, that a non hindu may not be in a position to do justice to Ramayana does not appear to be realistic. Former chief justice of the Madras high court Mr Ismail was an authority on Ramayana and it was an intellectual treat to hear his lectures. Another authority is Dr.M.M,Basheer , Former head of the Dept of Malayalam of the University of Calicut. A faculty member will do justice to the subject and Mr D has done injustice to faculty in the world. Now the matter will be decided by the Honble Supreme Court and let us await the decision Of the Court.
there is no trouble with the essay. those who wish to read it can of course read it. its a democratic nation but i think it cannot be included in a syllabus or as an essay. the students who have a religious thought to it can be hurt by this essay. i wish that the original version of the essay should be published on the net so that we can read it.
The late Ramanujam wrote something based on what he fancied as a compilation of his
reading of Kannada and other language versions. There was no need for including it in a
History course. If, instead, he had gone to find out about the existence of Sri Rama to
examine the ruins under Babri Masjid(he was secular and should have been allowed) and
produced a work of history, he would have deserved a place in the scholars in the area.
If the article goes against the faith or even if it is perceived to be so, better not include it.
should people go to college to study ? i prefer them to be degree shops.the critical thinking and moral value systems need to be learnt in the real life -from friends,families and life.
i've no faith in poorly paid fellows who howl at the blackboard to impart any knowledge.
schooling and college is overrated.i'd read the book myself,dont need no stinking university to tell me how to think
In saying "conveniently ignoring the collective opinion of the remaining three" (underline "conveniently") the author, a reporter I suppose of "The Hindu" seems to be taking a side, rather than just reporting a story for the readers to opine.
Anyway, leaving that aside, Ramayana belongs in the realm of Religion, Faith and Literature not History. Being so it is not a subject for historians, though historians could examine if there is a historical basis for the work. As some readers pointed out, research scholars and students pursuing doctoral studies could be interested as a subject of curiosity. In any event, it is not a main subject for historical research and given the sensitivity of the subject from a Faith point of view and difficult nature of the subject for teaching at lower levels it is better left alone. Just becuase three of the four experts decide one way it does not mean extraneous reasons of common sense and rationale could not prevail. I agree with the committee's decision
Please put the original essay by A. K. Ramanujan on the web so that every one has the opportunity to read it and participate in the discussion. These things have become a common practice and it seems people have become more sensitive to text rather than the spirit.A few years ago a controversy was created regarding a prize awarded by Sahitya Academy to one of the renowned Odiaa writer for his work titled Sita Swayamvaram and an equally heated debate was generated over the writings of Dr. Ambedkar in the book the Riddles in Hinduism.
Come on, if it's a scholarly exercise it means to illuminate the minds of the students. If a student finds it disagreeable, there is always a scope of discussion and ofcourse,if that student is still not satisfied he is free not to agree with the essay. As for explaining the background, I think at Graduation level this exercise is more left on the students to explore using other books, journals and such facilities. If they are unable to find it, well the teachers are always there. I think such discussions on our religion and culture are a healthy practice. They exhort the students to gain insight into the religion and the way it has evolved through the years. We need to broaden our scope of view, narrow-mindedness will leave the growth of the society stunted.
All the above arguments are quite valid.R amayana and its characters are being seen as real as part of every hindu's faith. Historian's opinion is only of academic interest and it is in no way binding on the faith of us hindus. So they are free to give any opinion on ramayana. Hinduism has never been afraid of alternate views. We will still celebrate rama and ramayana. The only trouble is these historian's opinion being quoted in real life forums like judicial reviews or any events specially designed by forces who have been assigned the full time job to discredit hinduism in disguise.
The act of accepting the biased and unscholarly observation of member "D" is unfortunate. Because it is an incapacitating and underestimation of the capabilities of faculties (irrespective of their religious affiliation) and a myopic vision that the Hindu teacher can explain Ramayana better than a non Hindu. Similar to say that the act of Delhi University is ridiculous and obviously the Hindutva stooges made it such a controversial issue, which always been a score card in their history of communal politics. However the downgrade of Universities to the grade of some communal fascist organisation and their vision of history and politics, is contemptible... I am wondering that how one sort of history could prevail and tell the story of the so called Indian plurality and version diversity in its culture religion language and social attitude.
Valmiki ramayana is considered the oldest version and later many people with good or bad intention tweaked the stories to suit their purpose. Any deviation from the original with negative view and ill intentions is surly hurt the believer of faith. religios scriptures enjoy people's devotion and has nothing to do with modern historical approch of subject. critical anyalysis of such scripture serve no purpose in sharpening the understanding of HIstory as a subject. Author himself is not a historian but a prominent language scholar. Expecting any historical value out of his work would be like searching nuclear physics in kalidas poetry. Those who oppsing the move have no reason as how the essay would help history student. Author has not mention any reliabel source of all teh diff version of ramayan he had mention.
As a 'common man' (nither the expert A nor B,C ... ) who takes out many leaves out of the rich and dynamic tradition of this country, if you read AKR's essay, believe me, you will love your culture , country and Ramayana even more. The fact is that the essence of our culture and tradition (Please do not restrict to 'Hindu', I meant 'Indian') is 'openness' and 'acceptance'. Anyone, who has imbibed the essence of our tradition, would not find anything offensive or disturbing. I do not have any stand on DU's AC decision, but the essay is a scholarly one, which is surely going to enrich our knowledge and belief in RAMAYANA.
I agree with alok singh. At graduate level students are expected to make deductions on their own. However, its dumb to see history not to be mixed with literature. If the historian writes, instead of bringing a plant he brought the entire mountain, could it not indicate that he did not know what to bring and hence he brought everything that could possibly help. How a non-intellectual interprets it is a different matter, subject to that non-intellectual. But devaluing a fantastic work is deplorable both Valmiki's and Ramanujan's. But such topics being open to personal interpretations can be introduced as appendixes and not mainstream syllabus.
The university professors and today`s scholarly persons should not touch the indian spirituality. This is not their business. Leave our holy Granths as they are, if anybody wants to learn anything he should learn from religious people. Can our scholarly persons ever write something about other religions, i am sure there will be big problem and no scholar will ever dare to do it. Don`t injure the religious fellings of Hindus. The word Hindutava used shows hatred towards Hindus.
The Ramayana and its different versions represent the diversity of thought and belief. A sincere effort should be made to bring such discussion to the mainstream so that people can celebrate the diversity instead of fighting on the name of faith.
I think I would agree with all the experts. While the comments of the first three experts (A,B,C) were objective and related the scholarly content of the essay, the expert D's comments is more subjective and pragmatic. As, said by expert D, if the teachers are capable of narrating the background then the essay could be included. However, such scholarly expertise is difficult to find and in this case could lead to disharmony with certain imams and Evangelists trying to take advantage of each and every incident to their advantage. So, in my perspective, it would be advisable to reserve the essay for some higher studies (like PhD) while sticking to the background for other purposes.
I have been a student of science and what we read in even in text books as a student of science does not believe untill it is suppoted by mathematical proof or logical facts universal in nature, so I think this essay will be read by students of graduation and they have, till that time, developed enough mental power that they can analyse critically the views of auther supported by facts and inferences. it will be a gross injustice with intellect of students to scrap this essay fom syllabus only on the basis that this hurts sentiments of hindu community untill it is find based on wrong facts and infrences of data used for its composition.
If we look at the comments of the 4 we conclude on one thing that the essay is not fit to be given as a subject to be taught and understood the story of Rama as the life of a great Man.the students should not be confused with various versions since they are not matured enough to appreciate the literary values exposed by the writers.Only the research students should be given to study this paper and enjoy the beauties of different versions.If we take up study of Kamba Ramayanam,we could see many subtle changes made by Kamaban taking into account Tamil culture and thinking alient to Sage valmiki time and thoughts.Sri.T.N.Seshachalam (late)had treated the work of Kamban in his series of articles in the tamil literary weekly"Kala Nilayam,(1928 to 1935),in this angle and explained the deviations in his own literary style.Not only research students but tamil lovers could appreciate these articles by T.N.S.
Please Email the Editor