1726-1736-1-PB

8/13/2019 1726-1736-1-PB

1/10

8/13/2019 1726-1736-1-PB

2/10

RAA RAOS THE SERPENT AND THE ROPE7e tc. , occu r th rough out the book . But R a ja R a o is no t expo undin g any system of philo so ph y, as a brief look at one of the

passages w i l l s h o w :

To be orthodox, to be a smartha, I said to m yself, is to accep t thereal . Stalin is orthodox; he is crude and smelly like some Jesuitfather, he the product of a seminary. But Trotsky promised usbeauty, promised us paradise. There is a saying that when Trotskywas talking of the beautiful wo rld revolution , Sta lin was m ak ingstatistics of the bovine riches of Soviet Russia. . . . But the smartha-some Innocent III knows this world is intangible, and allworlds therefore are intangible, and turns his vision inwards. . . .2

T h e l o n g passage meande rs on , th rough N apo leon , B ea t r ice , E v aB r a u n a n d t ha t C a t h a r H i t l e r ; but is merely a reflection ofR a m a s w a m y ' s m i n d an i l lu stra tio n of the w ay it w ork s, seeingpara llels in the most disparate charac ters an d incid ents of history.T h e passage above is not a d ef ini t ion of the m ea nin g of smarthaw h i c h is what one would expect if i t were to be read as aph i losoph ica l treatise in fact he completely skips over the rootmeaning of the word (a smartha is l i ter ally one w h o follows thesmrithis, the t rad i t ion a l law s; fo l lowers o f San kara ch arya cal lthemselves smarthas). O n e not ices that such passages do notb u i l d u p to any c on clu sio n; they on ly vaguely form ulate thed i c h o t o m y betw een C om m un ism , T an t r a , the Jew ish accep tanceof the real i ty of the world on the one hand, and Nietzsche, theSuperman and the Ca thar re jec t ion of the wor ld on the o ther.

Ramaswamy does no t fo l low Sankara to the exc lus ion of o thersystems of Indian phi losophy, though he t ime and again proc la ims h is fa i th in Ad vai ta -ve da nta and Sa nk ara . A cons iderat ion of the w ay he approaches the Fe m inin e Pr in cip le makes th isc lear. Fo r Ra m asw am y, the Fem in in e is no t on ly the Maya ofA d v a i t a ; it is also the Sakti o f T a n t ri e ph i losophy, the Prakritiof the Samkhya sys tem of Ind ian ph i losophy and the una t ta ina b le M o t h e r C h u r c h o f th e C a t h a r s . W h e n R a m a s w a m y saystha t the w or ld is fo r an n ih i la t io n , one feels that he is expressingthe may avada ( theory of Maya) that the serpent-an d-ropeanalogy suggests; at other places, he stresses the independentimp or tanc e of w om an , and th is resembles the Sam kh yan v iewpoin t . Most schools o f Ind ian ph i losophy be l ieve in two p r i n -

8/13/2019 1726-1736-1-PB

3/10

8 SHYAMALA A. NARAYANciples underlying the universe: the act ive , the dynamic, theFemin ine , which i s the mate r ia l cause of the unive rse, an d the

passive, the t ranscendenta l, the M ascu l ine Abso lu te . Sam kh yaphilosophy is dualist ic : prakriti, the Fe m inin e, is an independentreal p ri n ci p le ; i t is , how ever, w ith ou t consciousness, an d theuniverse appears because of the reflection of the consciousPurusa ( the M as cu lin e pr inc ipl e) ; al l creation is the result of theinteract ion of the two pr inciples . Advai ta (Sankara's n o n - d u a lism) differs f rom Sa m kh ya in den ying independ ent real i ty to theFemin ine P r inc ip le Maya, the cause of the universe . According

to Sankara , Brahman, the Ab solute , has two aspects: the t ranscendent Nirgunabrahman, an d the creative Isvara, i n w h i ch heis associated w it h Maya. Maya is nei ther iden t ical w it h Brahman n o r separate; she is an unthinkable , a logical , unexplainablem ystery. Sh e is an etern al falsity o w in g whatever false appearance of reality she possesses to her association w it h Brahmanon whom she is dependent . Ramaswamy's glorif ication of theFe m inin e ( the Q ueen 's C or on at i on occasions a ver i table hym n

to the Femin ine , pp . 357-58) is mo re in l ine w it h the T an tr icconcept of the Feminine. Maya to the T an tr ic wo rshipp er is theD i v i n e M o t h e r Mahamaya, Shakti ( power, ene rg y ) . S iva andSakt i are two aspects of Brahman, an d b ot h are equ ally rea l , theAbsolute and the Creat ive . The world is accepted as Sakti, notas an unconscious pr in ciple dependent on the M asc ul in e . I nthe Sakta m eth od , i t i s not by d enia l of the w o rl d , but by andthroug h the w or ld , w hen kn ow n as the M ot h er , tha t l ibe ra t ion

is attained. Wo r l d enjoym ent is m ade the means an d instrumentof l i b e r a t i o n . 3 I t is obvious that Raja R ao has great sympathyfor the Sakta ph i losophy, which l ike Ramanuja's school ofVisistadv aita, believes i n the absolute rea li ty of the Fe m in ine .H is next novel , The Cat and Shakespeare, has a hero who believes in worship of the Feminine; the cat of the t i t le is takenf rom Ramanuja's ph i lo sophy, w h ich advocates total surrenderto the Mothe r w ho w i l l come to our rescue even as the passive

kit ten is lifted u p an d car rie d by the cat. It is inter estin g tha tsome of the most beaut i ful hymns to the Mother in Sanskri t havebeen ascr ibed to Sankaracharya one can worship the Mothereven when bel ieving that the world is an i l lusion.

8/13/2019 1726-1736-1-PB

4/10

RAA RAOS THE S RP NT AND THE ROPE9I n d i a , observes H e i n r ic h Zimmer , is one of the great homes

of the popular fable. . . . The vividness and simple aptness of the

images drive home the points of the teaching; they arc l ike pegsto which can be attached no end of abstract reasoning. 4 Andit is through the fables that Ramaswamy's Ve da nt a is best expressed. The nature of Maya as cosmic i l lus ion which ceases toexist only for the person in a state of i l l u m i n a t i o n is brought outwel l by the story of Radha, Krishna's beloved, and her crossingthe rain-swollen Jam una river. Kr ishna tells her to repeat thef o r m u l a : Kr is hna , the brahmachari (celibate), wishes that waybe made. The river makes way for her, and she returns afterfeeding the sage Durvasa on the other bank by saying: D u r -vasa, who is ever in upavasa (on fast) says open and let mepass. A n d Radha began to sob, Wh at a lie the wor ld is, whata li e. A n d Kr is hn a comforts her, saying, Th e w o r l d , my dear,is not a lie, it is an i l lu s ion .

U n f o r t u n a t e l y, Ramaswamy does not leave his comments onA d v a i t a at the level of the fable; he plunges into direct exposi t ion . He claims to present Sankara's school of thought, andscoffs at new interpretations, as his remarks on Sr i Aurobind oshow: Aur obi nd o wanted, if you please, to improve upon theA d v a i t a of Sri Sankara which was l ike trying to improve onthe numerical status of zero . . . you can no more improve onVe d a n t a than improve on zero {The Serpent and the Rope,p . 297). Ramaswamy does not pay sufficient attention to thetexts, and presents an inaccurate account of Advaita, as thepassage explaining the title shows:

The world is either unreal or real the serpent or the rope.There is no in-between-the-two and al l that's in-between ispoetry, is sainthood. You might go on saying all the time, No,no, it's the rope, and stand in the serpent. And looking at therope from the serpent is to see paradises, saints, avataras, gods,heroes, universes. For wheresoever you go, you see only wi th theserpent's eyes. Whether you cal l it duality or modified duality,

yo u invent a belvedere to heaven, you look at the rope from theposture of the serpent, you feel you are the serpent you are the rope is. But in true fact, wi th whatever eyes you see there isno serpent, there never was a serpent. {The Serpent and theRope, p. 340)

8/13/2019 1726-1736-1-PB

5/10

1

SHYAMALA A. NARAYANThe key concept of Sankara 's advai ta i s Maya, the in-between -th e- two w h ic h Ra m asw am y d iso wn s. S an k arach ary a d i d n o t

consider the w o r ld u nre al he pos tu lated three k ind s of bein g :the real (sat), t he un rea l (asat), a n d maya o r mithya ( i l l u s i o n ) .Sankara cons idered the wor ld the rea lm of maya, someth ingw h i c h defies s tr ict classif icat ion into real or unreal (sad-asad-vilaksan). H i s p o e m Vivekacudamani ( T h e C r e st Jewel ofD i s c r i m i n a t i o n ) sums up the ideas expressed in his variouscomm entar ies . H e expresses the concept of maya qui te clearlyin verses 108 an d 109 of tha t w or k :

Avidya o r Maya called also the undifferentiated, is the powerof the lord . She is without beginning, is made up of the threegunas an d is superior to the effects. She is to be infer red by oneof clear intellect only from the effects She produces. It is She whobrings forth the whole universe. She is neither existent (sat) nornon-existent (asat) nor partaking of both characters; nei thersame nor different nor both; neither composed of parts nor anindivisible whole nor both. She is most wonderful and cannot bedescribed in words.5

Ra m asw am y 's expos i t ion over looks th i s t h i rd key category, n e it h e r r ea l n o r u n re a l i n S an k ara 's w o rd s . D a v id M c C u t c h i o n canha rd ly b e b l amed wh en h e mi su n d er s t an d s Ved an t a an d says:

Raja Rao 's serpent and rope are Shakespeare's b u sh an d b e a r. 6

T h e rope , fo r San ka ra is no t s im ply i l lusion ; i t is C os m ic I l lus ionw h i c h i s un iversa l and wi thou t a beg inn ing , and which ends on lyfor the person who reaches a state o f i l l u m i n a t i on . For the restof h um an ity , there is a serpent , an d always was a serpent .Sw am i Pra bh av an an da exp la ins the concep t thus : Maya, saysSa nk ara , i s not only universa l bu t beginningless an d endless . Adis t inc t ion must be made, however, between maya as a universalpr inc ip le an d i g n o ran ce (avidya) w h i c h is i n d i v i d u a l . I n d i v i d u a lignorance is beginningless , but i t can end at any moment ; i t i slos t when a man achieves sp i r i tual i l l u m i n a t i o n . Th u s t h e wo r ldm ay van ish f rom the consciousness of an in d iv id u al an d yetcont inue to exis t for the rest of m a n k in d .7

Some jus t i f icat ion could be found for the overs impl i f icat ionevident in the exposi t ion of the t i t le, because i t is addressed toM a d e l e i n e , a F r e n c h w o m a n . W h e n th e same phraseology is putin to th e m o u th o f Ra m a ' s s ch o l ar ly g r an d fa th e r, R am an n a , th e

8/13/2019 1726-1736-1-PB

6/10

RAA RAOS THE S RP NT AND THE ROPEreader conversant w i t h Advai ta feels uncomfortable. Rama talksof his grandfather w i t h great respect: Grandfat her Ra mann a

taught me this or that, of Amaru, N i r u k t a , the Isa and Kenaupanisads (p . 28 4) . Rama thinks nostalgically of the simplevillage Brahmin's l ife, who would read the Ma nd uk ya Upan isadw i t h Gaudapada's K a r i k a , and then Sankara's commentary oni t . Gaudapada's Karika has been hailed as a basic text of A dv a i t a by Sankara; he says that it embodies in itself the q u i ntessence of the substance of the authentic philosophy of Ved a n t a . 8 This is what the Karika has to say about Maya:

The unreal cannot be bom either really or through Maya. Forthe son of a barren woman is born neither in reality nor ini l lusion. (Gaudapada's Karika, III, 28)

T h r o u g h o u t the novel, Ramaswamy confuses the state of mayaw i t h the unreal analogies l ike the horns on the head of a hareo r the barren woman's son, applied by Sankara to the unreal(asat) are used by Ramaswamy for Maya. Th is is how his

scholar ly grandfather explains the doctrine of M aya :. . . and Grandfather Ramanna reading the Upanishads to oldfogeys, who come and listen, afternoon after afternoon, saying,

O h yes, Maya, it's like the son of a barren woman or the hornson the head of a hare, and the shaven widows and the tuftedheads saying, So it is indeed, Rammanore. The Serpent andthe Rope, p. 150)

Ramaswamy hardly ever talks about the three states of beingpostu lated by Sankara; when he does mention the central doctr ine of Sankara, he uses the wrong analogy for it :

Accord ing to the H i n d u concept there is not only satya andasatya, Tr u t h and Un t r u t h , but also mitya (sic), i llusion likethe horns on the head of a rabbit or the son of a barren woman.Paradise, I argued, was the inversion of T r u t h . . . . So does thedeer dr ink water of the mirage or the barren woman have herson. The Serpent and the Rope, p. 382)

The analogy of the mirage, which depends on the real desert,is used, l ike the serpent based on the rope, for mithya this isqu i te different from the square circle or the barren woman's son,analogies for asatya, ideas whic h are altogether unreal and

8/13/2019 1726-1736-1-PB

7/10

12

SHYAMALA A. NARAYANim ag ina ry, w h ic h represent a to ta l im pos sibi l i ty or a f la t con trad ic t ion i n t e r m s . 0

Raja Rao has very successfully used Sanskrit to b u i l d up theI n d i a n a tmo sphere of the no vel . M a n y of the Sansk ri t quo ta t ionsin The Serpent and the Rope a re f rom Sank aracharya ' s adva i t ichy m ns , thus rein for cin g the suggestion of th e serpent an d thero pe of the t i t le . R am as w am y loves the languag e, and i t is c learf ro m the novel that the stotras of the Brihadstotraratnakara area par t of h is consciousness . Raja Rao himself mentions th is bookof Sanskri t hymns as next only to the Ramayana and the Mahab-

harata in the inf luence i t has h ad on h im . R a o adm its thatSanskr i t is a language w h ic h he kn ow s poo r ly bu t unders tandsd e e p l y. 1 0 P rofessor M . K . N ai k has no ted the nu m ero us e r rorsin S a n s k r i t q u o t a t i o n s ,1 1 but he stops wi th c i t i ng a mistake oft rans l i te ra t ion . R a j a R a o m ust have l aboured under a great disadvantage in pu bl i sh ing such passages of Sanskrit transli teratedin to E ng l i sh , and perhaps m istakes in p r in t in g cou ld no t beavoided. But no attempt has been made to correct these mistakes

i n the second (In d ia n ) ed i t ion . A t p laces , the t rans la t ion doesnot correspond w i t h the transli terated passage. For ins tance,towards the end of the novel , Ramaswamy turns to Sanskri t toexpress h is sense of a l iena t ion from the w o rld :

Kashwam koham kutha yatha ka m janani ko m tatah?W h o are you and whose; whence have you come?

(The Serpent and the Rope, p. 407)

Verse 23 of Sankara 's famous chant Bhaja-Govindam startskastvam koham kuta ytah k me janani ko me ttah ( W h oare you? W h o am I? W hen ce have I come? W h o is m y m otheran d w ho is m y fa the r? ) . T h e passage a r t is t ica l ly suggests R a m aswamy 's vairagya (d i senchantment w i t h t he w or ld ) , bu t theSansk r i t -know ing reader is d is t racted by the poor t ransla t ion. Atanother point , the t ransla t ion is wholly unrela ted to the Sanskri t . In the f i rs t chapter, Ramaswamy ta lks of chant ing theGangastakam to L i t t l e Mother, very sensi t ive to Sanskri th ym ns , bu t wha t has been publ i she d i s a t rans l ite ra t ion ofR am a's of t - repeated (an d consis tent ly m ispr in ted ) word s ofSankara ' s Kasipancakam :

8/13/2019 1726-1736-1-PB

8/10

RAA RAOS THE SERPENT AND THE ROPE 13Kashi kshetram, shariram tribhuvana jananim ...'A n d nigh the river-bank Thy water is strewn

Wi t h kusha grass and flowers,There thrown by Sages at morn and even.M a y the waters of the Ganges protect us,

(The Serpent and the Rope, p. 36)

These mistakes may be ascribed to the difficult ies inherent inpub l i sh ing a complex book. But there is one inexplicable sl ip Rao's render ing of the Gayatri mantra :

I had said it day after day, almost for twenty years; I must have

said it a mil l ion mil l ion times : l

OM, O face o f Tru th wi th a diskof G o l d , remo ve the m ist (of ignoran ce) that I may see you faceto face.' But this time I said it quietly, tenderly, as one speaks tosometh ing near, b rea thfu l , in t imate . . . . (The Serpent and theRope, p. 248)

T h i s is not a misprint as its repetition a few pages ahead shows :

. . . Grandfather Ra m ann a . . . wh o had first whispered unto myear the Gayathri , lOM, O face of Tr u t h . . . ' (The Serpent and

the Rope, p . 251)I t is th is version wh ich R a ja R ao uses in a footnote to theor ig ina l ed i t ion of Kanthapura, an d his notes to the A m er ic aned i t ion ( 1963 ) repeat the m istak e :

T h e Ga yath ri m antra runs as follows: O face of the True Sun,now hidden by a disc of gold, may we know the Reality, and seethee face to face. 1 2

T h i s is not a translation of the Gayathri, how ever f ree. Va rio ustranslations are given below:

W e meditate on the adorable glory of the radiant sun. M a y hed i rec t our in te llec t . Swam i M ad h av an an da1 3

M a y we meditate on the Adorable Light of that Divine Generatorw ho quickens ou r und erstanding . ' S w a m i y i m a l a n a n d a

W e meditate on that excellent light of the Su n. M a y he i l luminate ou r m inds. j L . Shas t r i

L et us med itate on the D iv in e Br illian ce . M a y its light inspirewh o quickens our und erstandin g. p La p e

8/13/2019 1726-1736-1-PB

9/10

14

SHYAMALA A. NARAYANI n fac t , no word in the or ig inal corresponds w i t h a s ingle wordof R ao 's . W e suspect that R a j a R ao is t ransla t ing not the

Gayathri, bu t th is h ym n f rom the Brhadaranyaka Upanisad:T h e Face of Truth is h idden wi th a disc (vessel) of gold. OPu san (Su n) remove it , so that I, whose reality is Tr u t h , may see(the face)

(Brhadaranyaka Upanisad, Book V , section xv, i )

The Gayathr i is not jus t a hymn; i t is considered the greatest ofm an tras , an d the first th in g the dui ja ( twice -bor n) boy is taughtd u r i n g h is in i t ia t ion ce remony. Thereaf te r, o r th odo x brahm insrecite it at least thric e a day, at sunrise, no on an d sunset. T h eGayathr i can be cons idered the H i n d u m a n t r a ; it is said that theviolent H i n d u m obs d u rin g the Pa r t i t io n of In d ia in 1947 usedto test any man who c la imed to be a H i n d u by asking him torecite the G ay at h r i . On e is inc l ine d to suspect th at R a ja R aow o u l d have fa i led and been thrown to the wolves .

G r a n t i n g tha t Rao's remarks on A d va i t a (w h ic h he alwaysrefers to as Vedanta , as i f i t were the only system of V e d a n ta)and his Sanskrit are incorrect, the question arises how far i taffects the novel . I f we look for an erudi te Advai ta scholar inthe charac ter o f Ra m asw am y, we sha l l be d isappo in ted . T h emany al lus ions in the novel have another funct ion to perform,for the novel is to be read not as philosophy but as poetry. Theno vel has been com pare d to T . S. E l io t ' s The Waste Land,an d I . A . R ich ar d s ' com m ents on the m an y a l lus ions in El io t ' spoems are equal ly t rue of Raja Rao's no vel :

These things com e i n , not that the reader m ay be ingeniou s oradm ire the writer 's erud ition but for the sake of the emotionalaura which they bring and the att i tudes they incite.1 7

T h e ideas are of all kin ds, abstract a nd con crete, general andparticular, and, like the musician's phrase, they are arranged, notthat they may tell something, but that their effects in us maycombine into a coherent whole of feeling and attitude and produce a peculiar liberation of the wi l l . They are there to beresponded to, not to be pondered or worked o u t.

1 8

T h e o p e n i n g passage itself of The Serpent and the Rope showsh o w R a o uses the many a l lus ions not to exhibi t the erudi t ion ofhis central character but for the atmosphere they generate; an

8/13/2019 1726-1736-1-PB

10/10