Oh, the love-hate relationship I have with the Ramayana.
I liked in the Translator's Note that it is pointed out that the Ramayana was not meant for scholarly elites, rather meant to be accessible by anyone. Then towards the end of the introduction, it is pointed out that constant retelling of the Ramayana makes "the text both organic and dynamic" (26). So even by us as college students in Birmingham, AL reading the story, we add to its work in progress. The Ramayana invites the reader, listener, or teller to be an avid component of the story in general.
Also while reading the introduction, I felt the author, Sattar, drawing parallels between Rama and Jesus. This could be totally in left field and irrelevant but I found it very interesting. Sattar explained how Rama was divine and human. His divinity was just as necessary as his humanness, but for different reasons or tasks. I am intrigued to see if there are more parallels throughout the story. The line, "Rama has to continue to act as a man precisely because he is a god and not in spite of his divinity" (16) made me immediately think of different ways I have heard people speak about Jesus's divinity and humanness.
Lastly, I found it interesting the mirroring of characters that Sattar pointed out and the significance of it. The mirrored characters are essential for so many reasons. Particularly the need for Ravana because "Rama needs an opponent worthy of himself, someone who will challenge him to the fullest and yet be unrighteous enough to warrant the harshest treatment" (12). I am curious to see how the mirroring of different characters develops throughout the book.
Questions:
Even though Sattar makes it clear that the Ramayana "does not derive its meaning from a sacred geography or history" (31), is their research to suggest the validity of the Ramayana as history? On the page before it states that many scholars believe epics grow from core legends that more than likely occurred, thus there is the possibility that some events from the Ramayana did happen in reason. I wonder what research has been done or if anyone has been able to tie different events or storylines from the Ramayana to historical people in ancient India history.
How prevalent is the Ramayana for Hindus who live in Western culture? The introduction spoke on the prevalence of the story throughout India and Southeast Asia, even that it has developed its own identity in Indonesia, but does the Ramayana extend and stay with people who may move from India or Southeast Asia into other parts of the world?