Vali Vadham 37

[Guest guest]

Who is an animal?

 

 

 

As we saw yesterday, Vali did not speak against what Rama said, in Valmiki.

Here is how he responds: "What you have said, O jewel among men, is precisely

true; there is no doubt about it. Indeed a dwarf cannot argue with a giant.

Certainly you ought not to find fault, O scion of Raghu, with me even for the

unbecoming and unpalatable words that were addressed by me (to you) before this

through mistake. Indeed you have directly perceived the truth about the (four)

objects of human pursuit and are a wise man. Nay, you are devoted to the good

of the people and your mind is clear and unbaffled in determining your duty and

weighing the circumstances on which you base your decision." (Valmiki Ramayana,

Kishkindha Kanda, Canto 18, Sloka 45-47)

 

Though the questions remain unanswered, Vali is satisfied with what Rama gives

out as his reason. The critical eye of Kamban has picked up the lacunae and

therefore he changes the drama to put further arguments into the mouth of Vali.

The question that was put forth by many critics of Ramayana for a long time was

thus included in Kamban.

 

'I am after all an animal and your human laws would not be binding on me,' was

how Vali countered Rama. 'Don't tell me that!' retorted Rama. 'You cannot

claim to be an inferior creature and take defence behind what was exempted for

innocent animals. You say these laws were prescribed for humans and not

animals. Okay. Why was it that animals were exempted? Simply because they

cannot see the difference between what is right and what is not. But you do not

fall under that category.'

 

'nalam koL dhevarin thOndri,' you were born of very high parentage. The very

Indra is your father. 'navai aRak kalangala ara nal neRi kaaNdalin,' Because

you have studied the scriptures and know and understand them fully well,

(without faults of knowledge - navai ara - such as uncleared doubts and

understanding the text in a different way) 'vilangu alaamai viLangiyadhu' it is

established beyond doubt that you cannot be categorised as an animal.

'aadhalaal alangalaarkku Idhu aduppadhu andrum aam arO.' It therefore does not

befit a person of your stature (to act like what you did and to defend it like

how you do).

 

Know one thing for certain. That it is an animal or not, is not judged by mere

appearance. 'poRiyin yaakayO?' Is the attainment and stature of a person or a

being goes according to the body that he she or it receives by birth? 'aRivin

mEladhu andrO?' Is it not to be based on the intellectual attainment?

 

Education makes all the difference. It empowers one to see things in the right

perspective. It enables one to know and understand his society, his people, the

principles and ideals that are to govern one's life. You were provided with the

opportunity to learn, to understand the high values and without doubt you come

from a highly accomplished parent who could have - and has - guided you, imbued

you with values. After learning all the scriptures and values, how do you claim

exemption under a law that did not take animals into account, just because they

do not have the opportunity to undergo a study under an able teacher and

understand righteousness?

 

This argument of Rama, put forth by Kamban is very valid even this day. If we

take a look around us and we can see this rule operating around us in a somewhat

modified form - for which also Kamban has laid down specific conditions.