Most academicians at Delhi University are feeling betrayed by their own fraternity, the reason — the Academic Council's recent decision to drop from the history syllabus a celebrated essay by the late scholar and linguist A. K. Ramanujan on the Ramayana, despite intense opposition from the history department.
The essay, “Three Hundred Ramayanas: Five examples and three thoughts on translations,” which forms part of the B.A. History (Honours) course, had attracted the ire of Hindutva activists because it talks about 300 different versions of the Ramayana that abound in our country and beyond. And when the decision to scrap the course was put to vote at the Academic Council meeting this past Sunday, only nine of the 120 members present dissented.
“This is definitely not an academic decision but a glaring example of an academic institution succumbing to pressure from the Right wing. The council has severely compromised on its standards and has conveyed to our students the message that only the ideology that is supported by the majority will be accepted,” said AC member Rakesh Kumar, who was one among the nine to express a dissenting opinion against scrapping of the essay.
His opinion is echoed by the present department head, Prof. R.C. Thakran. “This essay is rich in academic content and there have been two resolutions in the past in which the history department unanimously agreed that as far as history as a subject is concerned, this piece is important for our students. But the resolution of the AC is binding and we cannot really do anything further about this.”
A writ petition had been filed in the High Court on the grounds that the essay hurt religious sentiments. The matter was then taken up by the Supreme Court, which directed the university to seek the opinion of experts and place it before the Academic Council. “The names of the expert team were kept confidential, three of the four members were happy with the essay but the fourth member expressed an opinion that second year students may find it difficult. Nothing religiously offensive was found by these experts,” said Prof. Renu Bala, another dissenting AC member. “There was no need to even ask for a vote. The essay should have been kept on its academic merit. Our culture is diverse and so are our legends. We give these students the right to vote when they turn 18, so why not the right to think,” she asked.
In 2008, activists from the BJP-backed Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad barged into the history department to protest the teaching of the Ramanujan text and vandalised the place, forcing the then department head, Prof. S.Z.H. Jafri, to hide in his own office. “What is the value of my opinion? When the Academic Council has passed this resolution, the history department has no choice,” he rued.
Meanwhile, academics are incensed with the manner in which the essay was scrapped. “They had no regard for the report of the expert committee, the history department's views or the arguments put forth by the dissenting members. The Vice-Chancellor just told the AC that the essay should be deleted in the interests of the university and they voted in his favour. This decision conveys to our students that there is no space for dissenting voices,” said Executive Council member, Abha Dev Habib, who had, as an Academic Council member in 2008, been among those who had supported the continuation of the essay despite the controversy surrounding it.
“We are disappointed with the Vice-Chancellor, who despite being an academic has indulged in such a regressive act. By removing such texts, a sort of fascism is being encouraged, no educationist will be happy with such a decision.”
University officials, however, state that the entire matter is a non-issue and that the whole matter was taken up for hearing by the AC only because they had to provide an answer to the Supreme Court. “The essay says things like Ravana was Sita's father and that Rama and Sita were siblings, so obviously we don't want to teach such things to our students,” said a university official not wishing to be named.
Historians and writers ridicule this argument. “It is a matter of deep shame for all of us that A.K. Ramanujan's great essay on the Ramayana is banned by the Central University of Delhi,” Kannada writer U.R. Ananthamurthy told The Hindu. “Even the most orthodox of our scholars who admire Valmiki's Ramayana are still aware of many versions of the Ramayana that exist along with it. Even Valmiki's Ramayana has different readings in the country.”
Kannada writer Chandrashekhar Kambar, the winner of this year's Jnanpith award, said: “The Ramayana and the Mahabharata are texts which have been re-created many times over by several cultures in India and outside. Intolerance shown towards a scholarly study of these versions should be condemned by the entire academic fraternity.” Prof. Ananthamurthy added: “India has always made a distinction between Shruti, Smriti and Purana. There are different Shrutis for different believers, which remain mostly unchanged like the Vedas, the Koran and other scriptures. On the other hand, Smritis and Puranas are dynamic and change with time and culture. And great poets like Bhasa took the liberty of resolving the entire problem of Mahabharata without a war. It is strange that religious beliefs and practices are being commercialised and vulgarised in the modern world. We have given up the celebration of diversities of beliefs that our ancestors practiced. The banning of Ramanujan's essay on the Ramayana is an insult to the imagination of the Jains, Buddhists and several folk practices.”
(With inputs from our Bangalore bureau)
Keywords: Ramayana syllabus row, Delhi University, history department, A.K. Ramanujan, Three Hundred Ramayanas
Why would anyone want to do this to the most tolerant, peaceful,generous,diverse and amazingly wonderful religion.....I think there is only one reason, they want to DESTROY it.....so why should just a hand full of people,(who think they represent all hindus) be allowed to do it.It is our duty to protect it from these fundamentalists.
It is surprising that AKR's beautiful and interesting essay on 300 Ramayanas has been purged. It is by far the most enjoyable essay, I have read. Particularly, the anedote concerning Hanuman's visit to the nether world ( or is it the Naga Kingdom), and his innocence mingled with utmost devotion to Rama is a testament to Hanuman's character. I see nothing embarrassing in the essay. Far from it, it is educational and entertaining. It does not in any way insult the mythological spirit of Ramayana. As a matter of fact, it enhances it to a veritable level! That there are different versions of the Rama-Katha is not new. The women's version of Ramayana, usually recited by the Telugu elderly women may be the next one that gets purged, because it gives an adorably different insight and perspective of Sita, not found either in Valmiki or Tulasi Das! Alas! What are we leading into!
Valmiki ramayana is the first and the original Ramayana written by Valmiki. Inspired by the greatness of the story a lot of poets wrote in Sanskrit and vernacular languages.So the Valmiki Ramayana is the most authentic as considered by the acharyas of sanatana dharma ,whether it is a fiction or historical .But people often get confused with the story given in the other Ramayanas and consider them as the authoritative.It is not correct .
Tut tut. It is dangerous if half witted political parties decide what Hinduism is. Hinduism contains within it different and often conflicting philosophies and traditions. There have always been debates between different groups of believers like the advaita followers, vaishnavites etc, but never any attempt to repress any view. Do these ABVP thugs know anything about the history and philosophies of our country?
It is not possible in India to hold on to a critical assessment of anything that is connected to any religion. After all, our flag itself represents religious symbols and our anthem sings to the "aadhinayaka". Modern secularism finds no place in our country.
If gods exist, of any religion, why do they need to be protected? Are gods vulnerable to being destroyed by humans? If yes, then they are not gods. If no, then why do humans fight and kill each other to protect their gods?
The article has shown only half of the story. It gives the opinions and observations of dissenters loud and clear. But I would also like to hear the views expressed by the Right Wing people. If their argument is along the lines -'We want only one Ramayana or You can not analyze Ramayana' - then we should certainly oppose it.
Even though the DU has taken a lop-sided decision to acquiese with the extremists, it would have been better has an arguement is presented from the other side as well. Half truth is more dangerous than ignorance.
My understanding was that India was a secular country, where the views of all people were allowed to be practiced freely. So why is this occurring? If you do not agree with the essay, feel free to disagree with it. But do not restrain others from forming their own opinion on it. This issue isn't so much about the religion as it is about freedom of thought. The essay is only discussing how Ramayana is universal and present in nearly all cultures around the world, albeit in different ways. Instead of this being a point of pride, we are not only denouncing those other cultures for doing it "incorrectly", but also forbidding our own from having an open mind. How is this right? It's not anti-Hindu. It's an opposition to freedom of speech disguised shamefully under the blanket of religion.
Academic analysis is not tampering. It enlightens our mind to other schools of though and kills our ignorance. Isn't that the basis of Hinduism (and the Ramayana)? Rama himself would have opposed this.
I have followed many of your readers coment about Ramayana. I read it in an english version by Sir Richard Burton, when I was in my mid twenty in 1956. It left me with the thought that Valmiki was one of the greatest epic poet but very little of religion.
I am not concerned with the hundred versions of Ramayana. On that the reporter can interview Kancha Iliah. Nobody questioned the democratic exercise of the Academic Council. If 111 out of 120 members vote in favour of a decision, how democratic is it to insist that the views of the nine who voted against must prevail?
I am not even concerned with the subject matter of the report. The issue is the manner in which the reporter covered it. More precisely, it is an issue of collapse of editorial oversight that at one time imagined the birth of the Hindu Taliban in 15 minutes of public disorder in Mangalore in which no one was beheaded or stoned to death.
Rajay: Quran is a Shruti. It is not something written by follower by remembering but it is written by Prophet Muhammad (PBUH). There is never and nowhere diiffrence in Quran. Thier is no different version.
Hinduism is a way of life, it allows individuals to interpret the scripture as he/she deems fit. This is the reason why our gods are represented in so many forms so one can worship the form he/she can relate to most. Nothing is set in stone, everything is fluid and changes with the time & circumstance (The reason the religion has survived so long). Hindus should be free to take what they want from the Epic. No person has the right to dictate how the epic should be told.
It is a real tragedy that the Ramayana has been dropped from the syllabus. There are many version of the epic and I see no harm in the exploration of other version. The Hindutva activists are free to believe the version they think is authentic, but don't impose your views on others, that is not what Hinduism is about.
I fully agree with Bill Poser's very educated comment,& regret that reactions such as Anand's are anything but educated-they are heinously POLITICAL.The'sacred' is a valuable PERSONAL space looked at/studied by scholars:their job is to study,analyse,not to "believe'or 'revere'.The issue here is not Hindu or anti-Hindu-there are versions of the Ramayana in non-Hindu countries,& that's awesome,isn't it Anand?
There are scholars abroad whose awesome knowledge &loving work with the Ramayana,the Vedas etc would put all of us to shame,dear Anand & ABVP friends,for most of us shout 'sacred' without knowing a thing about anything!I wonder if u guys have even read the essay in question? Just as there can't be just one recipe for a dish,there certainly can't be just one interpretaion of our texts-that too imposed by the ABVP!The A.C's decision is most unacademic.SHAME!
There cannot be a more biased coverage of a news than this. When 111 of 120 academicians have voted for removing the objectional essay on Ramayana, why the reporter has chosen to quote the views of only the tiny nine dissenters. The anti-Hindu bias of the reporter is very loud and clear. Any religious theme of Hinduism cannot be assigned to tasteless and cheap analysis.
To Rit and others who ask why other sacred books such as the Bible and the Qur'an are not subjected to critical analysis, I answer that they are. The Old Testament, for example, has been the subject of an enormous amount of critical analysis since the 19th century, addressing which parts were written when and by whom, which parts are historically accurate, which parts ancient myth, and which parts doctored or made up to support a particular political faction. Different versions have been actively sought and compared. This process was begun by German Christians, but today many leading scholars are Jews, both religious and secular, many of them in Israel. A hotly debated issue, for example, is whether the conquest of Jericho by Joshua actually took place or whether the Israelite kingdoms developed in place. We Jews have found that such studies enrich our understanding of our history. Why should Indians be any less capable of studying their own history without censorship or violence?
I am all for securalism but the same standards must apply to everyone, regardless of caste/religion. I wonder what would be the reaction if someone published an article/essay critical of the beliefs/practices of other religious communities. Would any University in India dare to include any such article/essay in their history syllabus or would the media, including your paper, publish such material?
You cannot justify obnoxious interpretation in the name of freedom of thought or otherwise. You cannot dis-respect the sacred in the name of academic exercises, or freedom of thought. Ramayana is a story adored by millions of ordinary Hindus like me, and any attempt to tamper its sacred nature or lore, and reduce it to yet another book which can dis-sected and analyzed is unacceptable. Why don't the historians and other academics try doing the same with the Koran or Bible in our country? After all, these are books which originated sometime in our history. That however won't be acceptable because its not "secular". Shame on to academics who justify such interpretations of Ramayana, and when it comes to literature of other religions, leave out because of their so-called secular values.
Who is afraid of the Ramayan? Who wants Ram, Sita, Laxman, Bharat and Ravan to be forgotten?
A question to Prof Ananth Moorthy: Is Koran a Shruti or Smriti ? Looks like a misunderstanding. First we cannot equate two different streams with idealogies of shruthi, smriti. But should you do it then Koran is Smriti- What is remembered by the followers of the messenger of god. Is not it ?
The blind zingoism and intolerance of diversity (which is the essence of our culture)is again raising its head despite (is it because of) the modern communication methods
Indian thought has always been suppressed (and distorted) by the brahaminical fanatics from the time of Buddha. The destruction of the whole literature of Charvaka, distorting Sankhya, defiling astronomy of Vrahamira with the story of Rahu and what not. So long Indians don't settle accounts with their own conscious and the destructive nature of the brahamanical fanaticism, propagated by the rulers.
This is an absolutely shocking decision. Come on DU, why are you doing this? And Deepanita, the manner in which the Ramayana has evolved and undergone shifts in story line and narrative structure is a vital area for study by historians, I would have thought.
If Ramayana is mythology why does it figured in History syllabus?
Please Email the Editor