IN political Hinduism, Rama is a Hindu Ben Hur, a muscle-bound super-nationalist, vanquishing enemies of 'ram-rajya'. But the BJP denies it is anti-Ravana. Says party vice-president Kailashpati Mishra: "Rama is linked with the identity of India. Anyone who is a true nationalist is a follower of Rama. But Ravana is a brahmin 'vidvan' who could not free himself from his 'rak-shasa' tendencies."
Ravana, according to BJP leaders, is a fallen Brahmin, a powerful monarch but trapped in "adharma", a scholar and devotee of Shiva, who had to be punished for his "sin" of coveting Sita. "It is a misconception to say that we see Ravana as a 'Dravidian villain', says another BJP vice-president Jana Krishnamurthy. "We don't see the Ramayana as a story of 'northern' heroes and 'southern' villains. It's a moral fable regardless of geographical location." A king is guilty of "adharma" if he becomes an egoist or covets another's wife, Mishra explains.
"How can Karunanidhi claim Ravana as a Dravidian icon?" asks Krishnamurthy. "Karunanidhi's party is vehemently anti-Brahmin. How has he forgotten that Rav-ana was a Brahmin? He was also a devotee of Shiva. Isn't the DMK supposed to be opposed to both Brahmins and to Shaivites?" BJP general secretary Govindacharya says Ravana has become a political tactic of the last resort. The rationalism of the Dravidian movement was western in inspiration, owing more to the Westernised atheism of Periyar than to the 'sanskriti' of the Indian people. "The three planks of the Dravidian movement—anti-God, anti-North and anti-Brahmin—of the 1920s have all failed," he says. "The anti-God issue didn't click, the remnants of the anti-North plank is the language issue and the anti-Brahmin plank has been fulfilled and thus has become irrelevant. The false controversy of Rama vs Ravana sells for those who want to live in the past, in vain."
In any case, there is a need to free mythological figures from what Govindacharya calls "the malady of Macaulayism," or a westernised and "rationalist" view. "History must be seen according to sanskriti, dharma and parampara." The politics of the Ramayana is distinct from its study. Analyses focus on social and economic transitions than on the symbolism of characters. Historian Romila Thapar has written that the spread of the Ramayana was contiguous with the development of a centralised monarchy and the Rama figure contributed to the institution of kingship. Historian D.R. Chenana says the Ramayana is an agricultural myth which shows how settled communities of food producers colonised poorer, more primitive groups of hunter-gatherers—referred to as 'Vanaras' or 'rakshasas'.
It's also been pointed out that the Ravana cult is not restricted to the south. Paula Richman in Many Ramayanas writes that the Dalits of Maha-rashtra have embraced Ravana as a hero. Certain Jain Ramayanas see the story entirely from Ravana's perspective. Sections of Nadars claim Mahodara (Ravana's prime minister) as their ancestor. Bengali poet Michael Madhusudan Dutt's Meghn -adavadha Kavya identifies Ravana with several heroic figures such as his son Meghnad. Dutt emphasised Ravana's tragedy and saw Rama as morally flawed.
However, the BJP maintains that the character of Ravana illustrates 'anyay' (wrong). "If Rama is the ultimate ideal of manhood, Ravana illustrates the pitfalls that can tempt a king. To see the Ramayana as 'north Indian' is to ignore warriors like Parashuram who were supposed to have come from Kerala," says Krishnamurthy.
Tags