The Good in Bad

I have always enjoyed reading the Mahabharata and Ramayana and consider them to be the greatest works ever. According to me, every incident in them has more than just one surface meaning and teaches a lot of lessons to the one who delves deep. Very recently my father was propounding his ideas on the Shabari story. He called the story distasteful and an insult to Lord Rama. He has always believed that the epics are great literary works by genius minds but he finds the idea of them actually having happened to be ridiculous.

His views on Shabari left me wondering... Why would a distasteful story be woven into an otherwise grand literary piece? Why would Valmiki want to portray an incident which did not have a good moral behind it? I told myself - there was no way this incident did not have a strong moral lesson behind it. Though I initially could not tell what, I was sure that there were hidden messages.

Often, when you tell yourself there is good, and you try hard to see good in something that looks bad otherwise, you end up finding it. My counter-argument to my father's theory is that the incident is not distasteful and that it teaches us three things:-

(1) It tells us how far we are from Lord Rama as human beings. If we were offered half-eaten fruits, we would either admonish the offerer or excuse ourselves from eating them (my favourite excuse is "loose motions" when I don't want to eat something). The Lord did not do that; he could see the devotion of the lady and he ate the fruits without complaints. At a higher level it means - when we come across something unsavoury, we must stop to think as to what could have caused it. The effect may be unpleasant, but the cause need not be so.

(2) It tells us how far we are from Shabari as human beings. If we had prior notice that Lord Rama would visit our home, we would try to clean the place as much as we could and we would purchase those ridiculously costly Australian Apples (Rs. 30/- per piece and sometimes even more) or Alphonso Mangoes from Food World (dunno cost because I have never purchased them). We would wear the best clothes we have and try and put up a home which does not look like what it normally does. Shabari did not; her devotion was pure. Unlike us, she thought costly apples/mangoes would not impress the Lord. At a higher lever it means - the best way to impress the best it to be true. For example, the best way to answer tricky questions in an interview is to talk from the heart and not try to put up an image that is not what you are. Abstract generalities and infinitives are no good. To impress the best, be simple.

(3) Thirdly, I think there is a general moral. If you look at it from outside, offering someone half-eaten fruits is not wise. Shabari was blinded by her devotion and I think this incident tells us that too much of something, even if the "something" is good by itself, could finally look bad. Devotion is undoubtedly good, but too much of it in Shabari manifested in an act which an outsider would definitely brand as crazy. I don't think the moral directly takes a stand as to whether too much devotion is good or bad. It is just that you need a Lord Rama to appreciate you when you reach such high levels. As an example, it could happen that you read too much and write extremely complicated fundae in an exam that could cause your evaluator to not understand you. Reading a lot is good, but too much could result in disaster. I dunno if that is good or not!!!

I am posting this because I am not sure my analysis is complete and there is a chance that my analysis is wrong too. I gladly invite comments.