Wednesday, September 28, 2011

Rama Meets The Bodhisattva

Although they are unlikely to have ever read it, most people probably know that the Ramayana is one of the two great Indian epics and is considered a sacred texts by Hindus. It tells the story of Rama and Sita, their exile and their triumphant return. What most people do not know is that there is no single texts called the Ramayana but many of them. The most well-known is the one composed by Valmiki in 24,000 verses. This is considered the Ramayana, the standard one, the one by which all the others are judged. But there is no good reason for doing this other than that Valmiki’s Ramayana is the most widely known version in northern India, that its contents are the most detailed and interesting and that its language is exceptional. Valmiki used an earlier Ramayana, perhaps several of them, as the basis of his own great work. Some of the other versions of the Ramayana are the so-called Southern, the Western and the North-Western Recensions. Then of course there is the Jain Ramayana, which other than following the rough outline of Valmiki’s is an entirely independent work. The Thai Ramayana differs greatly from the Indonesian one, not just in what it says but in its story line, and both are very different from Valmiki’s. And when I say different, I mean really different. In one version Ravana not Rama is the hero. In some versions Sita is Rama’s sister, not his wife. The Malay Ramayana, Hikayat Seri Rama, and the Lao version, Phra Lak Phra Lam, make Lakshmana the hero and Rama his sidekick.
None of this detracts from the Ramayana’s, or more correctly, the Ramayanas, importance, their influence has been enormous. They have left their mark on nearly every aspect of Indian life. Tulsi Das’ rendering would easily be the most widely read book ever written in Hindi. It could be plausibly argued that the Indonesian Ramayana has had more influence on that country’s art, sculpture, architecture and literature than Islam has had. And Thailand? Go to Wat Phra Keo, the most important Buddhist temple in the country, and it is not the life of the Buddha that is depicted on the walls of the passageway around the main shrine but scenes from the Thai Ramayana, the Ramakien. The former capital of Thailand was named Ayodhya, after Rama’s home town, not Kapilavatthu. All kings of the present ruling dynasty of Thailand take the throne name Rama, not Siddhattha, Suddhodana or even Buddhadasa. What the Bible is to Europe, the Ramayanas have been to India and wide areas of South-east Asia.
Now this is a Buddhist blog so what am I doing going on about the Ramayana? Well, here is another fact that I suspect you didn’t know. The earliest version of the great epic is the Buddhist one, the one found in the Jatakas (No 461). It’s called the Dasaratha Jataka, Dasaratha being of course the name of Rama’s father. Now although the Dasaratha Jataka is immediately identifiable as a version of the Ramayana it differs greatly from most other versions. For example, Rama and Sita are siblings, not husband and wife; Dasaratha does not banish them but sends them away to protect them from their jealous step-mother; they are exiled to the Himalayas, not to Dandaka in the Deccan; there is no reference to Lanka or Ravana; Rama and Sita return to Benares not to Ayodhya after their exile, and somewhat uncomfortably, they then marry.
Now reading Valmiki’s Ramayana, and I confess to not having read it all, one discovers little bits of Buddhism popping up here and there throughout it. For example, the story of King Sibi giving his eyes to the blind man (Jataka No 499) is there. I strongly suspect that the exile of Vessantra as told in the Vessantra Jataka (No 549) was the inspiration for Rama and Sita’s exile in Valmiki’s Ramayana, although I don’t know what scholars say about this. Having said all this, it is also true to say that the Dasaratha Jataka is not a literary masterpiece and Valmiki’s Ramayana definitely is. It is nowhere near as long (is any poem?), it lacks its narrative charm and excitement, and its didactic elements are much more limited. If you are interested in reading the Ramayana (and you have 6 month to spare) have a look at http://www.valmikiramayan.net/ where you will find the Sanskrit text and a word by word translation of it with notes.

9 comments:

  1. What is your opinion about the Thousand and One Nights? Do you see any possible buddhist sources in it ? I see for example the figure AlAddin as deriving from Al Uddin, i.e. the Siddha from Uddiyan, commonly known as Guru Rimpoche.

    ReplyDelete
  2. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Dear Venerable,

    Is Rama a historical person & is he/his story mentioned anywhere in the Tipitaka and was he a deity like Brahma,Sakka during The Bhagavas' lifetime? Could you
    point out the earliest mention of Ramayana?

    Regards

    ReplyDelete
  4. Dear Yashas, I have only ever read parts of The Thousand and One Nights and I have never heard that it contains material in common with the Tipitaka, although this is possible. As for your comments on Uddyan (Uddyana), this name is a late one and is not mentioned anywhere in the Tipitaka. It does not even occur in the Milindapanha (1st BC-2nd cent AD) which was written in the region bordering Uddyan.
    Dear Blogger, scholars generally consider Rama to be a ‘proto-historical figure’, i.e. he is a legendary figure possibly based on a real person. As for the age of the Ramayana, the names Rama, Sita and Laksmana occur in the Vedas and the later Samhitas and Brahmananas although they do not contain anything like a Ramayana story. The earliest version of the story is, as I said, the Dasaratha Jataka although the story no doubt goes back long before it. Different versions of it probably existed as an oral ballad for centuries before the Buddha.

    ReplyDelete
  5. In commenting on the verses in the Dhammapada which are shared with Jains and turn up in the Mahābharata, scholars generally seem to say that all three traditions were drawing on a common pool of wisdom verses.

    Of Jainism, the Vedic Vedic religion and Buddhism, Buddhism is by far the youngest and shows clear influence (often in the form of rejection of ideas) from the other two. If there is a commonality a better bet would be that the Buddhists had borrowed - look at Buddhist cosmology which is a mishmash based on Vedic cosmology.

    That said it's very common to find Indian religious traditions borrowing from each other, and sometimes it is possible to tell who borrowed from whom. For instance it's clear that the Sakkasaṃyutta is really just partially digested stories from the Vedic tradition. There are several other Jātakas which share themes and personalities with the Epics, though you've noted two of the obvious examples.

    Anyway this is a good example of the phenomenon. What it shows, I think, is Buddhists interacting with their neighbours.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Dear Jayarava,,
    Thanks for your comments. If you are not aware of them already see if you can have a look at Johannes Bronkhorst’s ‘Greater Magadha’ (2007) and ‘Buddhism in the Shadow of Brahmanism’ (2011). Another most interesting read on related themes is Giovanni Verardi’s ‘Hardships and the Downfall of Buddhism in India’ (2011). All are easily available and you’ll only have to mortgage your home to be able to afford them.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Dear Venerable,

    We observe throughout history that brahmins are the ones assimilating emerging ideas.It makes me wonder why the early adherents of the Dhamma found the need to either rely heavily or develop parallels or even absorb[Sakkasaṃyutta?] ideas from rival traditions.Didn't the Arhats of the time[ex.compilers of the tipitaka during Ashokas' reign] feel guilty to put words into the The Bhagavas' mouth,incorporate such thoughts the The Bhagava might have outrightly rejected?And also by doing so wouldn't it imply they were doubting The Bhagavas' teaching or hint something lacking in The Historical Buddhas' (Sammasambuddha) declarations?

    Regards

    ReplyDelete
  8. In C. de Saram's Pen Portraits of Ninety Three Eminent Disciples of the Buddha there is disciple no. 64 named Udaya, who is famous of his supernatural powers. Might he not be from the country of Uddiyan ?
    According to chinese pilgrims who visited Uddiyan, on their way, Buddha has visited that place during his teaching career.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Dear Yashas,
    Udaya means growth or increase. Uddyana (the ancient name for the Swat Valley, and there was a variety of ways of spelling it) comes from uyyaana meaning a garden. There is no relation between these two words.

    ReplyDelete