Navratri is a fascinating time. South Indian families celebrate it with "golu" (or "kolu" as some choose to correct others)- idols and dolls are brought out of the dusty attic and arranged in steps. Shiva, Vishnu and Devi occupy centre-stage and share their space graciously with the Queen's Guard- that motionless soldier at the Buckingham Palace with the enviable head of hair! Ganesha, Kartikeya, Rama with Lakshmana, Sita and Hanuman, the Statue of Liberty, the Swiss cow-bell, the Taj Mahal, the snake charmer, the "marapaachis" (wooden couple), saints like Raghavendra swami and Adi Sankara, the "chettiar couple" selling grocery items- it is a motley crowd all right, but for nine days, they fill the home with their lively presence and make the occasion so entertaining.
No "golu" is complete without the ubiquitous "dasha-avataaram set". No golu is complete without glaring errors in arranging them! Seldom do folks go in for a "good sized dashavataram set". It looks as if the ten idols are purchased small, so that all of them can completely fit in one row with enough elbow room between them. There is also the occasional hazard of an over sized "matsya" or a "kalki" kept so close to the edge of the steps... that it can tip over...leaving only nine of them standing for the rest of the days!!
Invariably, the idols are small and lack detail. Most of them, except for the notable exception of Vamana and Kalki are coloured blue for Lord Vishnu is blue-hued. Moulds used for crafting the idols seem to have become jaded with repeated use over the years. The result is that the plough that Balarama wields looks exactly the same as Parashurama's axe as does Rama's bow.
To complicate it, Varaha is a boar and Kalki is depicted as a horse. It looks as if the same mould is used to cast both the idols and they are distinguished based on just their skin-tone. Varaha is black and Kalki is white. Matsya looks like a mermaid and Kurma has a turtle for its feet. Given the size of the images, they look just the same.
Surprisingly, folks who keenly celebrate golu are at a loss to even name the avataras in order. No wonder they can't get the arrangement right! Everyone begins with earnestness- "matsya", "kurma", "varaha"- the fingers go up in quick succession. Somehow, after the 4th avatara, they suffer a sudden bout of amnesia and lose steam. They reel off the rest of the avataras that they know and find that two fingers are still unaccounted for! They need to start from the beginning.. and suddenly remember that they missed Vamana the last time. But their count gets no better and this time, three fingers still remain!! It is inexplicable. Sometimes, you feel you need to help them out by saying "you forgot to count yourself!!" but the joke doesn't cut and you run the risk of being snubbed, for being plain silly.
The upshot is.... total confusion when it comes to dashavataram arrangement. There are golus where the avatarams are broken in half and arranged in 2 rows- a total no-no and completely robs the grandeur of the set. In some places, Kalki has traded places with someone as early as Varaha. Matsya and Kurma are swapped and when it comes to the sequence of "parashurama-rama-balarama-krishna", lesser said the better. No one ever gets it right.
There is a problem with Balarama. There are many who feel that he shouldn't be there in the first place. Like Ravindra Jadeja, Balarama needs to prove that he actually belongs to the side. We hope he can vindicate his selection with a match winning performance, but it may be too late, even with Balarama's all round capabilities!
Yuvraj's fans are sure that he is a better allrounder than Jadeja. So too, in the dashavataram side, there is a strong contingent out there, which would like Balarama's place taken up by Lord Buddha. But if you place Buddha, the batting lineup needs to be changed. Buddha can bat only after Krishna whereas Balarama is a better batsman and would play before Krishna! It all becomes terribly confusing.
But "golus" in South India rarely feature Buddha. Buddha didn't accept the validity of the vedas supposedly and it was reason enough to leave him out of the side. In the South, they go with the time tested side where Balarama always plays- no questions asked.
A South Indian lady invites friends home for golu, some of whom are from North India as well. They recognise the avataras on the steps and start the enumeration drill of "matsya", "kurma"...and stumble when it comes to Balarama.
"Arey Balram!?... but Krishn and Balram grew up together at Vrindavan no!? They are brothers kyon? How can they be different avataras?"
It is a tough question. Our South Indian "golu lady" stammers and slurs.
What people conveniently forget is that there is a more obvious example of avataras appearing together- Parashurama. Parashurama spanned three avataras- he was of course the hero in his own time, but he continued to live on and later confronted Rama. Not just that- he was present in Krishna's time too and taught archery to Karna and even battled with Bhishma.
Hence, this argument is not a satisfactory one to drop Balarama.
It all boils down to contribution and what value he brings to the side. It is here that Balarama faces a challenge. Either his exploits are actually few or he did not have a good marketing wing.
There are few stories where Balarama comes across as a true match winner. He is a little like Dravid- when he gets a hundred, a Laxman or a Sachin also scores a century and Dravid's contribution is overshadowed.
Many years ago, Adarsh Chitra Katha competed with our good old Amar Chitra Katha and brought out a comic on Balarama. We were still kids and hadn't yet learnt to read and had to be satisfied looking at the illustrations. In this book, Balarama took on a powerful monkey and with his bare hands, completely beat him up. The illustrations were engaging. To our childish eyes, the monkey looked like Hanuman... (despite the anachronism) and it appeared as if Balarama could challenge even the mighty Hanuman!
It was much later that we started to read and found out that the monkey was just another nondescript asura with an ape like form and had nothing to do with Hanuman! Even that prowess could not be ascribed to Balarama.
In the interest of maintaining the sequence in "golu" correct, I propose Buddha to be added to the pantheon. His image is well known and least confusing. You wouldn't trade his place for..say Narasimha! Even a person with reasonable knowledge of chronology would place him after Krishna.
Another approach would be to truncate the number of avataras to nine- nava-avataars for nava-raatri!
May I suggest an amicable solution to this entire mess- can these idols be made with the sequence numbers written at the bottom? As simple as that! It will solve the problem for good.
Till then, I will continue to be a proof-reader and inspect every golu... till they all get it right!!
Buddham sharanam gacchaami! Peace! Peace! Peace!!
No "golu" is complete without the ubiquitous "dasha-avataaram set". No golu is complete without glaring errors in arranging them! Seldom do folks go in for a "good sized dashavataram set". It looks as if the ten idols are purchased small, so that all of them can completely fit in one row with enough elbow room between them. There is also the occasional hazard of an over sized "matsya" or a "kalki" kept so close to the edge of the steps... that it can tip over...leaving only nine of them standing for the rest of the days!!
Invariably, the idols are small and lack detail. Most of them, except for the notable exception of Vamana and Kalki are coloured blue for Lord Vishnu is blue-hued. Moulds used for crafting the idols seem to have become jaded with repeated use over the years. The result is that the plough that Balarama wields looks exactly the same as Parashurama's axe as does Rama's bow.
To complicate it, Varaha is a boar and Kalki is depicted as a horse. It looks as if the same mould is used to cast both the idols and they are distinguished based on just their skin-tone. Varaha is black and Kalki is white. Matsya looks like a mermaid and Kurma has a turtle for its feet. Given the size of the images, they look just the same.
Surprisingly, folks who keenly celebrate golu are at a loss to even name the avataras in order. No wonder they can't get the arrangement right! Everyone begins with earnestness- "matsya", "kurma", "varaha"- the fingers go up in quick succession. Somehow, after the 4th avatara, they suffer a sudden bout of amnesia and lose steam. They reel off the rest of the avataras that they know and find that two fingers are still unaccounted for! They need to start from the beginning.. and suddenly remember that they missed Vamana the last time. But their count gets no better and this time, three fingers still remain!! It is inexplicable. Sometimes, you feel you need to help them out by saying "you forgot to count yourself!!" but the joke doesn't cut and you run the risk of being snubbed, for being plain silly.
The upshot is.... total confusion when it comes to dashavataram arrangement. There are golus where the avatarams are broken in half and arranged in 2 rows- a total no-no and completely robs the grandeur of the set. In some places, Kalki has traded places with someone as early as Varaha. Matsya and Kurma are swapped and when it comes to the sequence of "parashurama-rama-balarama-krishna", lesser said the better. No one ever gets it right.
There is a problem with Balarama. There are many who feel that he shouldn't be there in the first place. Like Ravindra Jadeja, Balarama needs to prove that he actually belongs to the side. We hope he can vindicate his selection with a match winning performance, but it may be too late, even with Balarama's all round capabilities!
Yuvraj's fans are sure that he is a better allrounder than Jadeja. So too, in the dashavataram side, there is a strong contingent out there, which would like Balarama's place taken up by Lord Buddha. But if you place Buddha, the batting lineup needs to be changed. Buddha can bat only after Krishna whereas Balarama is a better batsman and would play before Krishna! It all becomes terribly confusing.
But "golus" in South India rarely feature Buddha. Buddha didn't accept the validity of the vedas supposedly and it was reason enough to leave him out of the side. In the South, they go with the time tested side where Balarama always plays- no questions asked.
A South Indian lady invites friends home for golu, some of whom are from North India as well. They recognise the avataras on the steps and start the enumeration drill of "matsya", "kurma"...and stumble when it comes to Balarama.
"Arey Balram!?... but Krishn and Balram grew up together at Vrindavan no!? They are brothers kyon? How can they be different avataras?"
It is a tough question. Our South Indian "golu lady" stammers and slurs.
What people conveniently forget is that there is a more obvious example of avataras appearing together- Parashurama. Parashurama spanned three avataras- he was of course the hero in his own time, but he continued to live on and later confronted Rama. Not just that- he was present in Krishna's time too and taught archery to Karna and even battled with Bhishma.
Hence, this argument is not a satisfactory one to drop Balarama.
It all boils down to contribution and what value he brings to the side. It is here that Balarama faces a challenge. Either his exploits are actually few or he did not have a good marketing wing.
There are few stories where Balarama comes across as a true match winner. He is a little like Dravid- when he gets a hundred, a Laxman or a Sachin also scores a century and Dravid's contribution is overshadowed.
Many years ago, Adarsh Chitra Katha competed with our good old Amar Chitra Katha and brought out a comic on Balarama. We were still kids and hadn't yet learnt to read and had to be satisfied looking at the illustrations. In this book, Balarama took on a powerful monkey and with his bare hands, completely beat him up. The illustrations were engaging. To our childish eyes, the monkey looked like Hanuman... (despite the anachronism) and it appeared as if Balarama could challenge even the mighty Hanuman!
It was much later that we started to read and found out that the monkey was just another nondescript asura with an ape like form and had nothing to do with Hanuman! Even that prowess could not be ascribed to Balarama.
In the interest of maintaining the sequence in "golu" correct, I propose Buddha to be added to the pantheon. His image is well known and least confusing. You wouldn't trade his place for..say Narasimha! Even a person with reasonable knowledge of chronology would place him after Krishna.
Another approach would be to truncate the number of avataras to nine- nava-avataars for nava-raatri!
May I suggest an amicable solution to this entire mess- can these idols be made with the sequence numbers written at the bottom? As simple as that! It will solve the problem for good.
Till then, I will continue to be a proof-reader and inspect every golu... till they all get it right!!
Buddham sharanam gacchaami! Peace! Peace! Peace!!
No comments:
Post a Comment