Q2: When Rama attacks Vali from behind a bush, delivering a fatal blow, Vali asks, “When strong men commit crimes, they become heroic deeds?” (101). How does Rama defend himself against claims of injustice against Vali and a betrayal of his own code? Has he committed a selfish act, one based on “impure knowledge”? Or is Vali’s way of understanding this act limited?
Q3: In Chapter 5, Narayan writes, “The fates were at work and this was to be a crucial moment in their lives. Normally, Rama would have questioned Sita’s fancy, but today he blindly accepted her demand” (82). How should we read this passage? Did the gods intervene and make Rama “weak,” or is this Rama’s humanity showing through? Can everything in the book be explained away by karma?
Q4: How does the character of Hanuman—though a monkey—embody many key Hindu beliefs about individual identity and duty? Why might he also be a cultural metaphor for the role of a hero himself? (indeed, in Hindu thought, Hanuman is almost as important as Rama).
Q2: Rama claims he is a man who is fighting against evil. He believes that since Sugreeva asked for his help, as a friend, it is his duty to protect and fight along side his friend. I believe Rama feels an emptiness because he was not able to protect his wife, so he is trying to protect and help any other good that may need his help against evil. Rama is acting solely upon the story of Sugreeva, so his knowledge could be impure. Rama is a wise man though. He knows that no thing would just spend their time on a mountain without ever getting off of it on their own, without any reason. Vali eventually understands where Rama is coming from. It was wrong of Vali to keep Sugreeva on the mountain without ever letting him explain what really happened. Rama was just helping a "friend".
ReplyDeleteQ3: I read this passage as a husband just saying, "yes dear" and going to do what his wife is nagging at him to do. I do not think the gods intervened at any point, it just shows that Rama is in fact human and wants to do whatever it is to make his wife happy for the moment. Rama is a great warrior, but his one weakness would have to be his beautiful wife Sita. You can really tell how much he loves her when he breaks down after her name is mentioned. I believe karma plays a large role. In the eyes of Vali and Sugreeva, Vali had it coming for him. Did Rama have it coming for him that his wife be taken from him?
Q1: The passage reminds me of the conflict between Rama and Soorpanka. While reading this passage (ignoring the fact that she's an evil she-demon) she brought up some pretty solid points to Rama about the good things that could come from him marrying her. She says that if they get married her brothers would have no choice but to be kind and take him as part of the family, which reminds me of royal peace treaties through marriage. She also says she will teach Rama the arts and tricks of her family, along with other things like serving him and doing whatever he wants and so on... Despite these appeals, Rama stays true to his perfect character and denies her because they aren't pure offers and would eventually cause harm to others.
ReplyDeleteQ3: I read this passage the same as Mariah, I didn't really even question his actions because it seemed like a natural response to me. Sita, being his weakness, asked him to do what seemed like a menial task and he obliged without even thinking because "Hey, my wife wants a pet so I'm gonna please her!" I think it's a glance at his sometimes human-like personality and meant to inspire more adoration towards him as a character because he's willing to do anything to make his woman happy. From my limited understanding of karma, it seems like everything in this book can be explained away by karma. It seems like even outside of this book, in the regions that follow the beliefs of karma, they truly believe karma explains the "why" for everything. I don't see how this book would be any different. Like, any time anything happens, and you're wondering how or why it happened, someone's just gonna be like "because karma". Also, anytime an action results in something else (Sita wanted that jewel covered deer so Rama went and got it, resulting in her capture) you could pretty much just say "because it was meant to happen that way in order for karma to be fulfilled". It seems karma can pretty much be used in all instances because it's not like anyone actually KNOWS their past life or alternative outcomes.
Q1: I think that the passage that best highlights the point that acting before thinking is a work of evil is when Rama goes to capture the golden deer for Sita. His brother knows that it must be a trick, and even warns him that it would put Sita (and likely him, as he seems to be the practical one in most of these situations) in danger. Rama ignores this, and goes and hunts down the deer. However, after realizing it’s a trick, he cannot make it back in time to save Sita as his brother has already gone to find him, again after being urged to do something before the thinking clearly about what would happen. I find it funny that Sita and Rama both have this same flaw, as it seems to be one of their only ones that we see so far in the book.
ReplyDeleteQ2: Rama defends himself by saying that Vali had done evils that, while they were accepted by his culture, were wrong enough that any being of intelligence should have been able to recognize them and stop. Lakshmana also defends him by saying that they had already made a promise to Sugreeva. I however, believe that they are glossing over their conversation about how they weren’t sure if they should interfere in a family affair. Both Rama and his bother have apprehensions about it, but don’t seem to have anything to mention. I believe that they might have committed an act of “impure” knowledge, and I think that Rama is supposed to be seen as slowly getting more desperate on his quest to get Sita back.
Q2: Rama believes that his actions are justified because his works are always ultimately for the greater good. Although Vali tries to defend his behavior by addressing cultural differences between man and monkey, but Rama explains that basic moral code has no cultural boundaries when it comes to creatures of intelligence. Also, Rama made vow to Sugreeva, binding him to dharma. This entire dilemma might be another example of Rama's internal conflict. While the Vishnu side of him keeps him level-headed and morally conscious, his humanity is becoming increasingly evident in the face of a morally grey conflict.
ReplyDeleteQ3: I think that karma can be tied into any event in the story, but it's definitely not the only factor driving the story progression. It's important to remember that although Rama is 100% god, he's also 100% human, which means he can be emotionally compromised at times. This can often be his kryptonite, as his love for Sita causes him to act rashly and irresponsibly. It is possible that this is the intervention of the gods, because Sita's kidnapping could be used as incentive for Rama to fulfill his purpose and go after Ravana.
Q1 I think that a passage that best represents the quote from The Bhagavad Gita is the passage where Rama shoots Vali. When Vali is asking why Rama shot him in the back instead of facing him head on Lakshmana replies that Rama had already made a vow to Sugreeva, and had Rama went to Vali as well, Vali would have made a similar appeal, which would have caused confusion. Therefore causing a work of darkness.
ReplyDeleteQ3: I saw that when Rama said yes blindly, that he was just doing it as something nice for his wife. She wanted the deer, she can have the deer. Besides, Rama could be thinking about how easy it is to kill a deer. I think that this showed more of Rama's humanity by showing us the amount of love he has for his wife.