ma nishada - ಮಾ ನಿಷಾದ

These are famous words of the epic poem Ramayana. The translation - don't, hunter!. The verse goes

मा निषाद प्रतिष्ठां त्वमगमः शाश्वतीः समाः ।
यत्क्रौञ्चमिथुनादेकमवधीः काममोहितम्॥ 

The context is also well known - sage Valmiki witnesses a hunter kill one of the birds who were engrossed in maithuna.  And he felt terribly sorry for the bird which has been separated and uttered unconsciously "ma nishada" - Don't. 

Not don't shoot, not don't kill because hunter has already killed. Don't get any king of peace and happiness. That is a strong enough curse - even stronger than mortal curse. 

But shooting any bird is a sin - it is being separated from its mate. And if it's a female bird - it's chicks are denied the care and nurture. 

Killing is bad. Creation and destruction are the works of God - not of human. When you can't produce a creature - most men can't, you have no right to destroy one. 

I am reminded of the book - "My name is red"- the story of miniature artists depicting the stories from their scripture. Most artists then believed that one should not draw anything from imagination - because creating is the work of God. And if you create - draw something you are committing sacrilege.  

So one should not hunt. And corollary is one should not eat meat. Meat does not come from super markets - it is produced when someone, some where kills another creature. 

Again don't count me one of the hindutva - non-veg haters. As a wannabe liberal I believe in freedom of food like any other freedom. But killing any animal is very cruel - when we make such a hue and cry for even a prick on our fingers. 

So ma nishada. Valmiki is also being elitist here. The hunter is killing to feed his family. He is killing so that his children do not go hungry the next day. Valmiki being a sage does not have a family to feed. Probably he is under the protection of some king or the other - who feeds and shelters him. So easy for him to say don't.  

I remember a TV serial - a starving mother and her sons find a ripe jack fruit in some field and happily bring it home and devour it. While they are eating, one of the sons asks "amma, is it wrong to steal?". And the mother replies " It depends on whom you ask". If you  ask a mother of starving children, stealing is not such a terrible sin. But if you ask the person from whose field one of the many jackfruits is stolen - stealing is a sin and needs severe punishment. 

 So nishada has to hunt. But this hunting of this hunter birthed an epic poem - like an apple some where caused laws of gravity to be expounded. 

Disclaimer - the next few paragraph may hurt your feelings. But I can't help it. 

The two epics of our religion - Ramayana and Mahabharatha are sexist to the core. 

What makes me say that. Consider Shoorpanakha - she wants to wed Rama or Lakshmana and expresses her desire. And they disfigure - cut off her noses and ears. Why? Because a woman expressing her desires is so demonic? 

Then Sita - she has been kidnapped, brought back. Just because a washerman comments about her, Rama finds it his duty to abandon his pregnant wife and send her to deep forest. The wife who had followed him to the woods and stayed with him in a hut in mean jungle for 14 years. The wife who was kidnapped for no fault of hers. He sees it is his duty to set an example for his subjects by abandoning his wife. Aha, what a great and noble example. 

Some how the queen has become impure by staying in the house of demon. Some how it is her fault that she is abducted. And she must be punished.

The sane Ramayana has many such prejudices against women. 

You may argue that the times were different. Women were different - they thought 'my husband hasn't beaten me even once today. He must be angry'.  They knew no better. 

But we who praise and pray and glorify this work - we know better. Right?