Scion of Ikshvaku (Ram Chandra, #1)

by Amish Tripathi

‘Expecting people to follow rules just because they should is being too hopeful. Rules must be designed to dovetail with selfish interest because people are primarily driven by it. They need to be shepherded into good behaviour through this proclivity.’

‘A relationship is not just for fun, it is also about trust and the knowledge that you can depend on your partner. Relationships based on passion and excitement do not last.’

But will freedom help each person realise his dreams? What if one person’s dream is in conflict with that of another’s?’ Bharat gave that question some careful thought before replying. ‘You are right. A strong man’s effort will always overwhelm that of a weak man.’ ‘So?’ ‘So the government has to ensure that it protects the weak. We cannot allow the strong to keep winning. It would create discontent among the masses.’ ‘Why, Dada?’ asked Shatrughan. ‘I would say, allow the strong to win. Will that not be better for the society as a whole?’ ‘But isn’t that the law of the jungle?’ asked Vashishtha. ‘The weak would die out.’ ‘If you call it the law of the jungle, then I say that this is the law of nature, Guruji,’ said Shatrughan. ‘Who are we to judge nature? If the weakest deer are not killed by tigers, the population of deer will explode. They will eat prodigious amounts of greens and the jungle itself may die out, in the long run. It is better for the jungle if only the strong survive — it is nature’s way of maintaining balance. The government should not interfere with this natural process. It should merely establish systems that ensure the protection of the weak, giving them a fair chance at survival. Beyond that, it must get out of the way and let society find its own path. It’s not the government’s job to ensure that all achieve their dreams.’ ‘Then why even bother with a government?’ ‘It’s needed for a few essentials that individuals cannot provide: an army to protect t...

feminine civilisations decline, they tend to become corrupt, irresponsible and decadent.’

The masculine way of life is defined by truth, duty and honour. At its peak, masculine civilisations are efficient, just and egalitarian. But as they decline, they become fanatical, rigid and especially harsh towards the weak.’ ‘So when feminine civilisations decline, the masculine way is the answer,’ said Ram. ‘And, as masculine civilisations decline, the feminine way should take over.’ ‘Yes,’ said the teacher. ‘Life is cyclical.’

‘Maharishi Shukracharya.’

Most Asuras were actually related to the Devas. In fact, the Devas and Asuras descended from common ancestors, known as the Manaskul. But the Asuras were the poorer, weaker cousins, scorned and half-forgotten members of an extended family. Shukracharya remoulded them with a powerful philosophy of hard work, discipline, unity and fierce loyalty for fellow Asuras.’

‘Well, the Devas weren’t cowards either. It was the Age of Kshatriya, warrior-like qualities were highly sought after. They were probably as good as the Asuras in the art of warfare, if not better. The Asuras succeeded because they were united by a common purpose, unlike the Devas who had too many divisions.’ ‘Then why did the Asuras eventually decline? Did they become soft? How were the Devas able to defeat them?’ ‘As it often happens, the very reason for your success, over a prolonged period of time, can lead to your downfall. Shukracharya united the Asuras with the

concept of the Ekam, the One God. All who worshipped the One God were equal in His eyes.’ Ram frowned. ‘But that was hardly a new idea! Even the Rig Veda refers to Ekam, the One Absolute. To this day we call him the Sum of all Souls, the Parmatma. Even the followers of the feminine principle, like the Devas, believed in the Ekam.’ ‘There is a nuance that you’re missing, Sudas. The Rig Veda states clearly that while the Ekam is the One God, He comes to us in many forms, as many Gods, to help us grow spiritually, in the hope that we will eventually understand Him in His original form. After all, variety is what surrounds us in nature; it is what we relate to. Shukracharya was different. He said that all other manifestations of the Ekam were false, leading us into maya, the illusion. The Ekam was the only True God, the only Reality, so to speak. It was a radical thought for that period. Suddenly, there was no hierarchy in the spiritual journey of both, the one who knew no scripture, as well as the one who was an expert on them, simply because they both believed in the Ekam.’ ‘This would make all human beings equal.’ ‘True. And, it worked well for some time for it obliterated all divisions within the Asuras. Furthermore, the dispossessed and oppressed

suddenly raised their social status. But like I’ve said many times, every idea has a positive and a negative. The Asuras thought that everyone who believed in their Ekam was equal. And what did they think of those who did not believe in their Ekam?’ ‘That they were not equal to them?’ asked Ram, tentatively. ‘Yes. All efforts to impose the concept of the One God upon minds t...

Giving a sharp sword to a child is not an act of generosity, but irresponsibility. Is that what happened with the Asura...

rigid intolerance creates mortal enemies with whom negotiation is impossible. But the feminine way has other problems; most importantly, of how to unite their own behind a larger cause. The followers of the feminine way are usually so divided that it takes a miracle for them to come together for any one purpose, under a single banner.’

replicated. Some improvements and adjustments are necessary. Questioning must be encouraged. And, it has to be tailored to suit our current circumstances.’ ‘Why not the feminine way?’ asked the guru. ‘I believe leaders of the feminine way tend to shirk responsibilities. Their message to their followers is: “It’s your decision”. When things go wrong, there’s no one who can be held accountable. In the masculine way, the leader has to assume all the responsibility. And only when leaders assume responsibility can society actually function. There is clear direction and purpose for society as a whole. Otherwise, there is endless debate, analysis and paralysis.’

Vashishtha smiled. ‘You are oversimplifying things. But I will not deny that if you want quick improvements, the masculine way works better. The feminine route takes time, but in the long run, it can be more stable and durable.’ ‘The masculine way can also prove to be stable, if we learn lessons from the past.’ ‘Are you willing to forge such a new path?’ ‘I will

you achieve what I think you can, the Suryavanshis could end up representing the masculine way of life and the Chandravanshis could carry forward the legacy of their ancestors, the Devas. Like I said, names don’t matter.’

down pathetic camp in the middle of nowhere.

Change is difficult for the people of the masculine way of life. They are only guided by their law and, if that is out of sync with the times, it is very difficult

for them to accept and initiate change; instead, more often than not, they will cling more strongly to the certainties of their law. We don’t see the attitude of the feminine civilisations towards change as open-minded and liberal; instead, to us, it appears fickle, corrupt and debauched.’

If karma is giving you a negative signal repeatedly, then it is not testing you, it is trying to teach you.

Your responsibility is great; your mission is all-important. Stay true to it. Stay humble, but not so humble that you don’t accept your responsibilities.

He belongs to all, and at the same time, to none.

This fundamental misunderstanding between our world of forms, and the Ekam’s formless world, makes them believe in the lie that my God is the true God and your God is a false God.

Just like a wise human will have no preference for his kidneys over his liver, the One God will not pick one group over another. It’s stupid to even think otherwise.’

‘Exactly!’ said Ram. ‘If He is my God, if He picks my side over someone else’s, He is not the One God. The only true One God is the one who picks no sides, who belongs to everything, who doesn’t demand loyalty or fear; in fact, who doesn’t demand anything at all. Because the E...

‘Shukracharya was right in wanting to create a perfect masculine society. Such a society is efficient, just, and honourable. The mistake he made was that he based it on faith. He should have built it purely on laws, keeping the spiritual separate from the material. When times change, as they inevitably do, one finds it impossible to give up on one’s faith; in fact, one clings to it with renewed vigour. Difficult times make men cling to their faith even more strongly. But if you base a masculine way of life on laws, then, possibly, when needed, the laws can be changed. The masculine way of life should be built on laws, not faith.’

Maybe the Devas should acknowledge the few positives that emerged from that horrific violence. They were forced to confront the evil that the caste system had descended into; they needed unity. In my opinion, the most important reform that Lord Indra was able to carry out was making the caste system flexible once again.

some good can emerge from the most horrific of events. There is something positive hidden in every negative, and something negative hidden in every positive. Life is complicated, and a balanced person can see both sides. For

Swagruhe Pujyate Murkhaha; Swagraame Pujyate Prabhuhu Swadeshe Pujyate Raja; Vidvaansarvatra Pujyate. A fool is worshipped in his home. A chief is worshipped in his village. A king is worshipped in his kingdom. A knowledgeable person is worshipped everywhere. Ram smiled. A city dedicated to knowledge.

‘I asked, if marriage is not a political alliance, then what is it?’ ‘Well, to begin with, it is not a necessity; there should be no compulsion to get married. There’s nothing worse than being married to the wrong person. You should only get married if you find someone you admire, who will help you understand and fulfil your life’s purpose. And you, in turn, can help her fulfil her life’s purpose. If you’re able to find that one person, then marry her.’

Her face was creased with concern. ‘I am with you, Ram.’ Ram remained silent. Strangely, a long-forgotten image entered his mind: of the arya concept of Emperor Prithu; Prithvi, the earth, had been named after him. Prithu had spoken of the ideal human archetype of the aryaputra, a ‘gentleman’, and the aryaputri, a ‘lady’, a prototypical human partnership of two strong individuals, who didn’t compete for exact equality but were complementary, completing each other. Two souls that were dependent on each other, giving each other purpose; two halves of a whole. Ram felt like an aryaputra, being held, being supported, by his lady. Sita continued to hold Ram in a tight embrace. ‘I am with you, Ram. We will handle this together.’ Ram closed his eyes. He wrapped his arms around his wife. He rested his head on her shoulder. Paradise. Sita looked over her husband’s shoulder and glared at Vishwamitra. It was a fearsome look, like the wrathful fury of the Mother Goddess. Vishwamitra glared right back, unrepentant.

For Ram, an ideal state was one which treated everyone as equal before the law. Sita had thought long and hard about the meaning of equality. She felt that just promoting equality before the law would not solve society’s problems. She believed that true equality existed only at the level of the soul. But in this material world, everyone was, in fact, not equal. No two created entities were exactly the same. Among humans, some were better at knowledge, others at warfare, some at trading and others offered their manual skills and hard work. However, the problem, according to Sita, was that in the present society, a person’s path in life was determined by his birth, not by his karma. She believed that a society would be perfect only if people were free to do what they actually wanted to, based on their karma, rather than following the diktats of the caste they were born into. And where did these diktats come from? They came from parents, who forced their values and ways on their children. Brahmin parents would encourage and push their child towards the pursuit of knowledge. The child, on the other hand, may have a passion for trade. These mismatches led to unhappiness and chaos within society. Furthermore, the society itself suffered as its people were forced to work at jobs they didn’t want to do.

Maharishi Shakti, now known as Ved Vyas, a title used through successive ages for those who compiled, edited or differentiated the Vedas. He was born a Shudra, but his karma turned him into not just a Brahmin, but a rishi. A rishi was the highest status, below Godhood, that any person could achieve. However, today, due to the rigid birth-based caste system, a Maharishi Shakti emerging from among the Shudras was almost impossible. ‘You may think this is unworkable;

She proposed that all the children of a kingdom must be compulsorily adopted by the state at the time of birth. The birth-parents would have to surrender their children to the kingdom. The kingdom would raise these children, educate and hone the natural skills that they were born with. At the age of fifteen, they would appear for an examination that would test them on their physical, psychological and mental skills. Based on the result, appropriate castes would be allocated to the children. Subsequent training would further polish their natural talent, after which the children would be put up for adoption by citizens from the same caste as the ones assigned to the adolescents through the examination process. The children would never know their birth-parents, only their caste-parents. ‘I agree that this system would be exceedingly fair,’ conceded Ram. ‘But I can’t imagine parents willingly giving up their birth-children to the kingdom permanently, making the decision never to meet them again, or even know them. Is it even natural?’ ‘Humans moved away from the “natural way” when we began to wear clothes, cook our food and embraced cultural norms over instinctive urges. This is what civilisation does. Among the “civilised”, right and wrong is determined by cultural conventions and rules.

when polygamy was considered abhorrent, and other times when it was considered a solution when there was a shortage of men due to war. And now, for all you know, you may succeed in bringing monogamy back in fashion!’ Ram laughed. ‘I’m not trying to start a trend. I don’t want to marry another woman because I will be insulting you by doing so.’ Sita smiled as she pushed her long, straight hair away from her face as it dried in the breeze. ‘But polygamy is unfair only according to you; others may disagree. Remember, justice in terms of “right” or “wrong” is a man-made concept. It is entirely up to us to define justice in new terms of what is fair or unfair. It will be for the greater good.’ ‘Hmm, but it will be very difficult to implement, Sita.’ ‘No more difficult than getting the people of India to actually respect laws!’ laughed Sita, for

‘Tou...