रस्सी किस ने काटी (Who Cut the Rope)

रस्सी किस ने काटी (Who Cut the Rope)

Fact, Fiction and History

Debi Prasad Choudhary

Los Angeles, 02/20/2024

(In modern Ramlilas, Hanuman uses zip-line but Sita is still played by a man)

Forty years ago, my good friend A.K. Sharma in Physical Research Laboratory narrated a funny story about an incident in Rama Lila in a village that I enjoy telling others even today. In a village Rama Lila setting, the actor in the role of Hanumanji was supposed to enter the stage with Gandhamargan Hill, with medicine plant for brother Lakshman on his hand. He was sliding through hooks on a rope to give an impression of coming to stage on airways. This would give a dramatic effect for the audience. Unfortunately, while sliding the hooks on the rope, they got stuck and Hanumanji could not progress further towards the stage, where he was to land. After a considerable delay, the manager of the troop ordered to cut the rope, so that Hanumanji can be dropped on to the stage by his own weight. When the rope was cut, Hanumanji fell on the stage, but due to hard landing, the actor had painful wounds. At this time, the actor in the role of Sri Ram asked anxiously, that was not scripted, "भाई हनुमान  , बड़ी देर लगादी !" (Brother Hanuman, you took so much of time to come!). The actor in Hanuman costume was angry as he had a painful fall, and said with disrespect, "आबे इसे छोड़ | ये बता रस्सी किस ने काटी ?" (Forget about my late arrival, tell me who cut the rope?). I have been enjoying this narration ever since I heard from Sharmaji. Only recently I considered it seriously to study how to separate the fact from fantasy. The fact is that the actor in Hanuman costume had a painful fall and that was important. The fictional relationship between the two characters became secondary in front of hard reality. What actually happened in the past, who knows? How did Hanumanji travelled in air with the hill on his hand? It is the creativity of the director of the drama, to enact or narrate in his own way to convey the story to his audience, how it happened in the past. Ramayana describes an fascinating account of interplay of Gods, humans and damons. How exactly each event, described in Ramayana, happened depends on the narrator. This is recognized by the great post Goswami Tulasidas in Sri Ram Charitmanas, stating "नाना भांति राम अवतारा , रामायण सतकोटि प्रकारा | " (Sri Ram appeared in many ways and so, Ramayana is of billions of type!). In another context he says, हरी अनंत हरी कथा अनंता , कहइ सुनइ बहु बिधि बहु संता | (God is endless and His stories are endless. Saints describe Him differently.) This is especially true, when we describe an incident of history, when none of us were present. The narrator collects information from many sources and presents the way he thinks it happened. For example, Saint Tulasidas completely ignores various incidents that might demean Prabhu Ram, who was his worshipful. This is completely understandable.

How I became an astronomer and now a professor in physics in a reputed university is also a curious story. Soon after highschool, I wanted to become an engineer or a doctor and appeared in many competitive examinations. I did not get success in any of these competitions and ended up in college. Later, of course, after reading a text book by famous Indian scientist M. N. Saha, my real interest in physics started. But, to start with there was no ambition to become an astrophysicist. Now, I can say this because I am a successful scientist who has published many research results in reputed journals of the world. If that were not the case, I would have always tried to hide this history and tell how motivated I was in my childhood to reveal the secrets of the nature. Some of my relatives tell others it was known from my childhood that I would become a scientist! Who and how the history is narrated depends much on the capacity for fictionalization of narrator and less on the facts.

In my high school history lessons, I learned that Mughal emperor Akbar was good and Aurangzeb was bad. My father told that Aurangzeb imprisoned his father and gifted him the head of his brother to become the emperor. I had no respect for the last Mughal emperor and forgot about it. When I came to north India for higher studies, I learned there is a road named after this bad emperor and was surprised, and that was the end of my curiosity on this matter. But in recent years,when his name was removed and many public discourse dealt with his cruelty, I wanted to know more about this historical character.

I came to know that he ruled a vast land in Indian subcontinent, from Afghanistan to southern India for over 50 years. He lived a simple life, never used public money for personal use. He disliked sending gifts and money to the rulers of his holy land Macca. He had a spiritual master and desired to be buried besides the master in a simple tomb. He had strong religious ideas and detasted those who were not aligned with his philosophy of religion. These are similar to many rulers like Emperor Ashoka among many. I learned about Aurangzeb (alamgiri) from the writings of Sir Jadunath Sarkar. Mr. Sarkar started his career as a teacher and was interested in studying history. He did not have any ambition of getting favour from ruling class or did not have inferiority complex. He studied history, from authentic sources and compiled. Like Goswami Tulsidas, Mr. Sarkar wrote history for his own satisfaction. Now, I understand, why there was a road in Delhi named after Aurangzeb, after all people who did that were no less learned than those who removed. 

So, I think learning history from scholars in universities that are verified with rigorous peer review or from the writings of the people who like to learn. Those sources are enjoyable than those from the writers who are angry and want to establish the racial superiority by fictionalizing the past. Now, I started liking history. I want to know what happened to those who lived in the land where I was born.