THE STORY OF ‘ONAM’ FOR THE UNINITIATED
Canberra, 2 September 2012
Disclaimer: This is the story of the great King
Mahabali who is said to have ruled Kerala in the days of legends, as I was told
when I was a little boy and as I remember it now after having read more about
the legend along the way. I do not, by any stretch of imagination, claim that
this is the authentic story; there could be many omissions and commissions in
its retelling below. However, I am certain that it captures the essence of the
legend. The comments in parenthesis in italics are wandering thoughts that
occurred to me as I was penning this late one night, attributable only to me
and perhaps not to be taken too seriously.
Onam is a festival of the
Malayalis—people originating from the South Indian State of Kerala who speak
the language Malayalam as their mother tongue—which they celebrate around
August-September each year. The actual dates vary in the Gregorian calendar because
the festival is celebrated during the month of Chingam in the Malayalam
calendar. The Malayalam calendar is based on the lunar schedule with the dates
of Onam being determined by the movement and position of the stars. Therefore,
the actual dates vary each year, both in the Gregorian as well as in the
Malayalam calendar. Today Onam is the state festival of Kerala and officially lasts
for ten days. The origins of the festival is lost in antiquity but the legend
around which it is explained echoes similar stories in many civilisations of
the triumph of the Gods over what they considered ‘evil’. [More appropriate would be to say that the Gods got rid, by any means
possible, of people and things that could have inconvenienced them or would
have diluted the adulation of the common people towards them. This is perhaps
because in the olden days before history the Gods, demons and the common people
lived in much greater proximity to each other and mingled with each other on a
daily existentialist manner, thereby making it necessary for the Gods to guard
their status very zealously, since their strength lay in the worship of the
common man] The story of Onam and the Emperor of Kerala, Mahabali, is one
such. There is another aspect of Onam that makes it unique—at least in its contemporary
form, Onam is more a social festival than a religious one with all Malayali’s
participating uninhibitedly in the celebration irrespective of their religious
faith. Considering that the legend around its origin is distinctly Hindu in all
respects, this non-religious nature of its celebration could be attributed to
the enlightened rule of the kings of the area—prior to Indian independence, the
current state of Kerala was three distinct kingdoms, those of Travancore in the
south, Cochin in the middle and Malabar in the north, ruled by three separate
royal houses— who cultivated a strong sense of religious tolerance in the Malayalis.
The Legend of Mahabali
Background
Hiranyakashyapa was an Asura (Demon)
king of great prowess who was intolerant of any worship of the Gods, especially
of Vishnu to whom his son Prahlada was devoted. [In the days before history could be authenticated and fact and fiction
were imaginatively intertwined in the retelling, and because of the
intermingling of the Gods, Demons and common people, it was possible for an
Asura prince to be an ardent devotee of one or more of the pantheon of Gods
without having to surrender his Asura status] Hiranyakashyapa was slain by
Vishnu in his incarnation as Narasimha (man-lion) to protect his devotee
Prahlada from being killed by his own father. [The story of this incarnation is another legend that could do with a
retelling since it involves tricky situations brought about through boons
granted by Gods to mortals] So it is obvious that, although an Asura,
Prahlada was the beloved of the Gods. After his father was slain Prahlada ruled
the kingdom wisely and under a sort of protective umbrella of the Gods,
particularly Vishnu. Mahabali was Prahlada’s grandson and even more pious, just,
and accomplished than his father. In fact it is said that even as a child
Mahabali excelled in his devotion to Vishnu. He grew up to be a wise and benevolent
ruler who was loved by his people. He was also a great warrior—this is
extrapolation since there are no general statements or explanations regarding his
expertise, or otherwise, in warfare. The conclusion that he was a great warrior
stems from the belief that he expanded his kingdom extensively; that he was
able to conquer or bring under his control the heavens, where king of the Gods
Indra ruled, the whole of the known earthly world, as well as the netherworld. Since
the Gods and also the other earthly kings would not have surrendered their
kingdoms without a fight it can be surmised that Mahabali was a great warrior
and war-captain. In any case, his deeds of benevolence and charity spread his
fame as an able and just king far and wide to an extent wherein the Gods
started to feel threatened that their status and following within the common
people would be diminished. [After all, common
people only wanted to be secure, happy, prosperous and well looked after and
they would shift their loyalty to whoever provided them these fundamental
requirements!]
Here it is necessary to take a
bit of a diversion in the narrative to understand the sequence of events that
followed this apparently benign situation in Mahabali’s kingdom. [As is common in mythology, one story meanders
into others and comes back to mainstream again embellished by other factors and
is almost always overlapped by others and here too, the case is the same] There
are two versions of what transpired. The first version: it is believed that the
Asuras and Devas (Demons and Gods) were the offsprings of Kashyapa through his
two wives—Diti (Asuras) and Aditi(Devas). Aditi complained to her husband that
Indra the king of Gods was becoming less important to the common people because
of the increasing following and stature of Mahabali. She was taught a divine
mantra and rituals to propitiate Vishnu, which she did, and so obtained a
promise from him that he would set matters right and the story of Mahabali goes
on from there. The second version: the Gods were annoyed and obviously jealous
that Mahabali had become the ruler of all the three worlds. [Jealousy, which in contemporary terms would
be a failing of mortals, was one of the predominant character traits of the
Gods, at least in mythology!] They approached Vishnu who was of the opinion
that since Mahabali was such an accomplished and revered king and doing so may good
deeds he was eligible to be elevated to become a Deva or God and that the Gods
who had complained should be demoted to being Asuras or Demons because of their
naked display of jealousy. [This may not
have been an acceptable option for the Gods and there could have been the
beginning rumblings of a revolt at that time. This is a conclusion arrived at
by the almost immediate change of tactics from Vishnu, following…] However,
he also decided to ‘test’ the proclaimed generosity of Mahabali, the just king.
There is a further nuance to this situation. There is also a theory that Vishnu
had himself set up Mahabali to become equal and even surpass the power,
splendour and stature of Indra to degrade the great pride that Indra was
displaying on being the king of Gods. Indra finally complained to Vishnu of the
growing power of Mahabali, and that some of the Gods were stating that there
are now two Indras, Mahabali being the second. Vishnu decided that Indra had
been taught a lesson in humility and set forth to take action and reinstitute
equilibrium since a world with two Indras would be imbalanced.
During this intrigue in the
heavens—irrespective of which of the two versions are correct and conceding
that the two could also have been combined to ensure that Vishnu could not
refuse to take action—Mahabali was immersed in conducting the sacrificial rite
that indicated the completion of the conquest of the three worlds. This
sacrificial rite is variously called Viswajit (winning the world) Yagnam (rite)
or Aswamedha (triumphant horse) Yagnam. [The
modus operandi for the two is different although they both are celebratory of
world victory] Mahabali had all the reasons and the right to carry out this
Yagnam considering his achievements and more importantly his righteous nature. Although
this story is about the people of Kerala, the Yagnam is supposed to have been
conducted in Brigacham (current day Bharuch in Gujarat) on the banks of the
sacred Narmada river. Mahabali, ever the generous king, also proclaimed that he
would not refuse any request made to him during the performance of the Yagnam.
The place where the Yagnam was being conducted need not be considered a
contradiction even though the story is about Kerala; after all Mahabali had
conquered the three worlds and could carry out the Yagnam anywhere he wished. [There is further dichotomy regarding the geographic
rigour of the story as the rest of it unfolds]
Vishnu decided that this was the
opportune time to act. He had by this time already assumed three
incarnations—those of a fish, wild boar and Narasimha the man-lion who had
slain Mahabali’s grandfather—to save the world from disaster or evil and
decided to go into his fourth incarnation. However, in this instance the world
was not endangered, in fact it was in very good shape under the rule of
Mahabali the benevolent. The issue at this stage was that the Devas were not in
good shape, being eclipsed by the Asura king Mahabali. Therefore, matters had
to be rearranged to suit the requirements of the Gods. [From a contemporary viewpoint the move to depose a just king, read
ruler, purely because he was an Asura, read unacceptable because of his
caste/creed/religion/beliefs or whatever else an Asura would have been in those
days, would be considered ‘politically incorrect’. However, in those days
political correctness was not a matter of consideration, the necessity was to be
in power!] Vishnu decided to restore the ascendancy of the Devas, by
intervening on their behalf. He assumed the form of a small Brahman boy,
Vamana, and proceeded to Mahabali’s Yagnam to set things ‘right’.
The Event
Vishnu was also aware of
Mahabali’s declaration that he would grant all requests through the period of
the Yagnam and had formulated a plan to take advantage of the king’s generosity
to put in place the plan to ‘dethrone’ him. What Vishnu did not cater for was
the inherent aura that would emanate from him, even though he was in the guise
of a small Brahmin boy, which could be recognised by persons of knowledge who
had achieved a high level of self-actualisation. Such a person was
Shukracharya, Mahabali’s spiritual guide, Guru and a sage in his own right, who
could also, at will, have accurate visions of the future. He immediately
recognised Vamana as an incarnation of Vishnu Himself and he hastened to advise
Mahabali not to promise anything to the Brahmin lad. Obviously, not only had he
seen through the disguise, he had also seen the future and the reason for
Vishnu’s unexpected visit and wanted to keep his pupil out of trouble. However,
he was too late in reaching Mahabali with the advice, since Mahabali had
already welcomed the charismatic Vamana into the audience chamber with all
traditional honours due to an accomplished Brahman and promised in his
customary manner that he would fulfil all Vamana’s desires. Vamana replied that
he did not want anything of great value but only the extent of land that his
three footsteps would cover, sufficient for him to sit down and carry out his worship
and penances. At this stage Shukracharya intervened, told Mahabali the true
identity of Vamana and exhorted him not to acquiesce to the request. Having
seen the future, this was the only way the Guru could now try to protect his
beloved pupil.
The conflict between obedience to
one’s Guru—who had been the prime advisor in the move to conquer the Devas and
under whose supervision the Yagnam itself was taking place—and the inner
integrity of a great king who would not under any circumstances go back on his
word must have been a conflict that would have incapacitated the mental faculties
of a lesser human being. Here once again the greatness of Mahabali is
demonstrated, and one suspects that Vishnu knew what his decision would be.
Mahabali with great regret at having to disregard his mentor’s advice and
having apologised to him determined to honour the promise he had made at the
beginning of the Yagnam and to grant the wish of Vamana. Two things happened:
one, Shukracharya cursed Mahabali to be reduced to ashes for having disobeyed
him and two, Vamana now turned back into the normal form of Vishnu and not only
that, continued to grow in size until he touched the heavens and then towered
above it. [In the legendary days it was
also almost customary for Gurus, who had been nurturing their wards for years,
to turn round and curse them at the slightest misdeed, let alone direct
provocation. This is in sharp contrast to contemporary teachers, who if they
develop any kind of affection for a pupil at all, will go to extreme
extends—legitimate or otherwise—to ensure their success and further progress. Maybe
the concept of integrity has undergone a drastic change for the worse over the
years. In those days the distance between Gods, Demons and the common people
were not as distinct as it is now and it was normal for them to interact almost
on a normal day-to-day basis. One also suspects that there was less hero
worship of the Gods since their ‘human nature’ would also have been on display
for all to see]
Vishnu, now in his forbidding and
gigantic form, measured the entire earth with one footstep and with the second
covered all of heaven and looked around expectantly for place for the third
footstep that had been promised by the King. Mahabali bowed his head and
requested Vishnu to place the third footstep on his head as he had no land left
to honour his promise. Vishnu/Vamana did so and in the process pushed the
Emperor into Patala, the netherworld. [Here
arises a fundamental geographic conundrum. The Yagnam is said to have been held
in Bharuch in Gujarat, but the place where the king was pushed down to Patala
is said to be the village of ‘Thrikkakara’ (a colloquialised version of
‘Thrikkal’, meaning heavenly or venerated foot and ‘kara’, which in Malayalam
is equated to a small district or township) in the old kingdom of Cochin. But
then, if one footstep was sufficient to measure the entire earth, what is a discrepancy
of a few thousand kilometres when sending a good king into hell?]
One cannot ever say that the Gods
were not gracious in their victory over their enemies, whether the adversary
was good or bad. This is true of almost all mythological stories—so also in
this case. Just short of being banished into Patala, Vishnu granted Mahabali a
last wish, a boon if one can call it that under the circumstances in which it
was granted. The King, forever looking out for the welfare of his subjects,
requested as his last wish permission to revisit his kingdom once a year in
order to see for himself that his people were being looked after and doing
well. [In contemporary terms this could
be termed a sort of audit of the prevailing circumstances] The wish was
granted and Mahabali willingly descended into Patala, with his honour and
integrity intact, having kept his promise and not having ever broken his word.
It is ironic that the name Mahabali actually means ‘great sacrifice’ and the
King was banished while he made the greatest sacrifice in order to fulfil a
promise that had been made to a duplicitous God. [Truth is supposed to triumph at all times, sometimes after a bit of
struggle. Here one is constrained to ask what the interpretation of truth was
in this context. Do the Gods have a complete monopoly over the truth, or is
truth of Demons and lesser mortals a lesser truth that can be trumped by the greater
truth of the Gods?]
There is an old saying in
Sanskrit attributed as one of the famed Chankya Shlokas (perennially relevant
sayings of Chanakya, the Prime Minister of the Gupta Empire, India around 400
B.C.E and who is considered an expert in the art of diplomacy and statecraft) that
explains the pitfalls of a human being—however great—being endowed with unusually
developed or expanded character traits. In translation, it states that Ravana
the King of Lanka died because of an extreme sense of pride that was openly
demonstrated; the Kauravas were destroyed because of their extreme conceit
demonstrated repeatedly; Mahabali was ruined because of his excessive
generosity, repeatedly demonstrated; essentially anything in excess will always
lead to one’s downfall. This is a statement that has stood the test of time and
is as applicable today as it was when coined far back in antiquity. The
reference to Mahabali and his excessive generosity is directly related to the
legend that is being recreated here.
The few days that Mahabali visits
his kingdom every year is celebrated by the Malayalis as Onam, to commemorate
the memory of the benevolent rule of a great Emperor. Irrespective of the
actual conditions in which they are at the time, the people of Kerala put on a
façade to ensure that ‘their’ King would go back after his yearly visit with
the belief, and relieved to see that all was well with his subjects. The
feasts, the festive mood, wearing of new clothes, all are meant to convey to
the King that the same conditions that they enjoyed during his flawless reign
still exist today. [Perhaps the people of
Kerala do not want to believe that their King, with his obvious capability to
divine things, will be able to instinctively understand that what he is seeing
on his yearly visits is only a façade. Or perhaps his visit is the glimmer of
hope for the people, that he will see their plight and act, in some unfathomable
way, to restore his original benevolent rule. Who knows? There is another
aspect to this situation. Since Mahabali ruled the earth and heaven, one
wonders why only a small sliver of land in the southwest coast of India
celebrates the yearly return of a brave and revered King who was unjustly—at
least it seems so from the generally accepted version of the story—banished to
cater for the vanity of a proud but often incompetent king of the Gods. Why is ‘Onam’ not an international, or at
least an all-India festival?}
The Celebration of Onam
Before going into the details of
the celebrations, it is necessary to mention that there is also another belief
regarding what Onam stands for, although this is not a popular or much believed
version. Once again, the story is supported by other stories and overlaps onto
some others. This version starts with the story of the creation of Kerala as an
entity. Parasurama, a later incarnation of Vishnu than Vamana, after completing
his task of the destruction of the Kshatriyas (the warrior ruling class) [for reasons that warrants another
retelling] wanted to have some virgin land to carry out worship and penance
towards the end of his life. It is believed that, therefore, he stood at a
place called Gokarnam in the north (part of erstwhile Malabar) and threw his
weapon, the famed battle axe, north across the sea. It landed at Kanyakumari,
what is today the southern-most point of India. The area in between was
recovered from the Arabian Sea and became what is today known as Kerala. In
this version of the legend Onam is believed to be the celebration of the day
that Parasurama threw his battle axe to reclaim land from the sea to create
Kerala. [This theory cannot be considered
authentic since the timeframe of Vishnu incarnation of Parasurama occurred much
after his incarnation as Vamana]
Onam is celebrated over ten days
in Kerala, each day having its own importance and associated rituals and
traditions, culminating in ‘Thiruonam’ (sacred onam), and marks the return of
Mahabali to Kerala. The day after this is the official end of the festivities
and is considered as the day in which Mahabali returns to his heavenly [actually it should be netherworld]
abode. There is also a temple dedicated to Vamana in ‘Thrikkakara’ that is
directly linked to the legend of Mahabali and Vishnu’s Brahman boy incarnation.
Conclusion
Mahabali’s rule is considered the
golden era of Kerala. There is a poem/song, written in Sanskritised Malayalam [that is an oxymoron since ‘good’ Malayalam
is semi-Sanskrit] that is sung even to this day and which categorically extols
the virtues of the rule of Mahabali. The fundamental points brought out are
that during Mahabali’s reign [of note here
is that it does not say great king or Emperor, but again colloquialises the
King’s name to Maveli, which gives an indication of the spread of equality in
his kingdome] : all people were equal; they were free from harm; there was
neither anxiety nor sickness; deaths of children were unheard of; there were no
lies; there was no deceit or theft; measures and weights were right; no one
cheated or wronged his neighbour; and all the people formed a single classless
society. This is utopia by any calculation. [In
contemporary terms, this is the description of an ideal nation created by a
society that believes in and practices equality—of gender, race, colour and
creed—emancipation, free speech, rule of law, and people’s unhindered participation
in governance] It is only fitting that these ideals, albeit in legend,
should be the cornerstones of the state of Kerala, which has the distinction [dubious?] of being the first state or
country in the world to elect a ‘Communist’ government to power through a truly
democratic process. It might also explain the evolution of Onam as a predominantly
social rather than a religious festival, despite its pronounced religious
origins.
No comments:
Post a Comment