¹ This statement and the following synopsis put me in conflict with a significant body of scholarly opinion, which has denied that the problem of evil is important in Indian religion. The background to this widely held misjudgment will become apparent below. On the problem of whether or not there is a problem of evil in India, see the incisive discussion by O'Flaherty, Wendy Doniger, The Origins of Evil in Hindu Mythology (Berkeley: Univ. of California Press, 1976), pp. 1–9Google Scholar.

² See, e.g., the opening line of Rāmānuja's commentary on the Bhagavadgītā, where God's svarūpa is “opposed to all that is evil and extending solely to what is good” (nikhilaheyapratyanīkakalyāṇaikatāna): Śrī bhagavadrāmānujagranthamālā (Kancipuram: Granthamālā Office, 1956), Śtrībhagavadgītābhāṣyam, p. 1.

³ On the problem of Kampaṉ's date, see Zvelebil, K., Tamil Literature (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1975), pp. 181–84Google Scholar. For an introduction to Kampaṉ's worldview, see Shulman, David, “The Cliché as Ritual and Instrument: Iconic Puns in Kampaṉ's Irāmāvat¯ram,” Numen, 25 (1978), 135–55Google Scholar.

⁴ See the discussion by Masson, J. Moussaieff, “Fratricide among the Monkeys: Psychoanalytic Observations on an Episode in the Vālmīkirāmāyaṇa,” Journal of the American Oriental Society, 95 (1975), 672–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar. However, Rāma is in any case in search of an ally, and has already been directed by the monster Kabandha to seek out Sugrīva as a step toward finding Sītā: V¯lmīkirāmāyaṇam (hereafter Rām.), ed. Sastrigal, K. Chinnaswami and Sastri, V. H. Subrahmanya (Madras: N. Ramaratnam, 1958). 3–72. 11–27Google Scholar.

⁵ Rām. 4.2–22 (condensed).

⁶ See the summary of the commentators’ remarks in Masson (n. 4 above), and in Sastri, V. S. Srinivasa, Lectures on the Ramayana (Madras: Madras Sanskrit Academy, 1949), pp. 144–64Google Scholar.

⁷ For Sugrīva's cowardice, see, e.g., 4.11.80; for his appropriation of Tārā before Vālin's return to Kiṣkindhā, see 4.46.9. As we shall see, Sugrīva's character is important to the later tradition for didactic purposes.

⁸ Kampaṉ follows Vālmīki closely in this respect. It is hard to believe that the poet does not share the sentiments he puts in the mouth of Angada weeping over the fallen Vālin: “O my father, my father—you did no evil in thought or action to anyone in all this sea-girt earth, yet now you suffer pain.…” Ir¯m¯vatāram 4.7.142. (I have used the edition of Kopālakiruṣṇamācāriyar (Madras: Vai. Mu. Kopālakiruṣṇāmacāriyar Kampěṉi, 1967]).

⁹ Narayan, R. K., The Ramayana (London: Chatto and Windus, 1973), p. 97Google Scholar. Narayan bases his work on Kampaṉ.

¹⁰ Cf. 4.7.115, where Rāma is described by the poet as “he (who follows) the rules of Manu.”

¹¹ Rām. 4.16.5; 4.17.14–19.

¹² See the discussion of this problem by Srinivasa Sastri (n. 6 above), pp. 5–13.

¹³ See Shulman, “The Cliché” (n. 3 above), on identification with the ideal as the emotional focus of rāmabhakti.

¹⁴ Compare Bāṇa's description of Lake Pampā in Kādambarī, kathāmukha (Poona: Oriental Book Agency, 1951), 20Google Scholar: Pampā is a new ocean created by Varuṇa after Agastya drank up the sea. The verse quoted above appears in the introduction to a haunting lament by Rāma, who is forlornly searching for the lost Sītā; this lament in turn introduces the Vālin-Sugrīva episode. The initial note of disharmony and pain sounded in relation to the god's experience on earth will later be echoed and developed further in the story of Vālin.

¹⁵ Rām. 1.57–60; Ir¯māvatāram 1.10.108–18.

¹⁶ On Viśvāmitra, see Biardeau, M., “Brahmanes et potiers,” Article liminaire, Annuaire de l'École Pratique des Hautes Études, 89 (1971–72), 51–52Google Scholar. A folk icon of Viśvāmitra from Tirumullaivāyil (near Madras) gives him the appropriate title karimuni, “the black sage”—no doubt an indication of his association with darkness and disorder.

¹⁷ Biardeau, p. 38; cf. David Shulman, “Tamil Flood Myths,” Journal of Tamil Studies, 12, in press.

¹⁸ Irāmāvatāram 4.7.113, 4.8.7. A panel at the eighth century Kailāsanātha shrine in Kān﹣cipuram depicts Vālin with Rāvaṇa worshipping the ātmalinga of Śiva.

¹⁹ This image is hinted at again in verse 140, at the end of the chapter, when Aṇgada sees Vālin lying “not on a mountain-like bed of fragrant flowers, but on a sea of blood.” The transition from milk to blood is significant; the Tamil mythological tradition often associates these two fluids (and the two colors white and red). See Shulman, David, “The Serpent and the Sacrifice: An Anthill Myth from Tiruvārūr,” History of Religions, 18 (1978), 107–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Beck, Brenda E. F., “Colour and Heat in South Indian Ritual,” Man, 4 (1969). 553–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

²⁰ Thus, in verse 29 Vālin is again compared to Viṣṇu, this time as Narasimha; and in 30, Vālin's shout extends over the entire universe “like the foot of Trivikrama which stretched across the earth.” Similarly, in retelling the Bali-Vāmana myth, Kampaṉ compares Bali to Viṣṇu's avatar as the Boar (Irāmāvatāram 1.8.18).

²¹ See O'Flaherty, Wendy Doniger, Hindu Myths (Harmondsworth, Eng.: Penguin Books, 1975), pp. 273–74Google Scholar; Mah¯bhārata, Southern Recension (Madras: V. Ramaswamy Sastrulu & Sons, 1931), 1.12–15Google Scholar; R¯m. 1.45.15–32, with verses added after v. 18; Ir¯māvatāram 1.9.5–26

²² Iṉṉ uyir naṭp’ amaintu.

²³ Literally, “to the two kinds of action,” i.e., good and evil deeds, both of which chain the doer. Cf. the later Śaiva Siddhāntin concept of iruviṉaiyōppu, detachment from the two kinds of action: Dhavamony, Mariasusai, Love of God according to Śaiva Siddhānta (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1971), pp. 214–15Google Scholar.

²⁴ Note that this argument turns around Rāma's claim in the Sanskrit text that Vālin, as a mere monkey, can have no claim to justice.

²⁵ See O'Flaherty, The Origins of Evil, passim. Kampaṉ puts this idea rather mildly in 114: among the flawed and the low-born, there are some who follow the dharmic path, while even among the sages and the gods of diverse natures there are those who do evil.

²⁶ Note again the red-white color combination, as in n. 19 above.

²⁷ Literally, “he looked in the direction” (tikkunokkiṉaṉ, 55, not specifying Rāma's presence)—for, axiomatically, there is only one direction for all in need of help.

²⁸ In Hindu myth, water (or Soma) kindles and feeds fire; thus the doomsday fire in the subterranean mare's-head devours the water of the ocean and is never quenched.

²⁹ Vālin's heroic feat of pulling out Rāma's arrow recalls the Tamil mythic motif of the monkey who tries to uproot the immovable liṉga: thus Vālin breaks his tail at Kāṉcipuram by pulling at the Vāyuliṅga (thereafter called Vālīccaran). See Kāṉcippurāṇam of Civaṉāṉacuvāmikaḷ (Kān﹣cipuram: Muttamiḻ accakam, 1964), 62.117–19Google Scholar. Hanūmat has a similar adventure at Rāmeśvaram: Skandapurāṇa (Calcutta: Gopāla Printing Works, 1959), 3.1.44.82–117, 3.1.45.1–90, 3.1.46.1–79Google Scholar; Cetupurāṇam of Nirampavaḻakiyatecikar (Madras: Vittiyānupalaṉam Press, 1932), 40.77–243Google Scholar.

³⁰ See, e.g., Irupāvirupaḵtu of Aruṇanti civācāriyar, 4, in Měykaṇṭa cāttiram (Madras: South India Saiva Siddhanta Works Publishing Company, 1972), pp. 188–89Google Scholar. And see the discussion by O'Flaherty, The Origins of Evil (n. 1 above), pp. 168–73.

³¹ See Ir¯māvatāram 1.7.2–3, 15, where īram and its synonym pacai (both words connected to images of moisture and coolness) are pointedly opposed to the barren, desolate state of mokṣa in its conventional meaning of release from terrestrial life.

³² This theme of disgrace, paliˍ, harks back to the heroic ethic of the Caṅkam period: the ancient heroes sought glory (pukaḻ) and shunned blame paḻi), especially the charge of cowardice. Thus Ceramāṉ Pēruṉceralātaṉ could fast to death because he had received a wound in his back during the battle of Věṇṇippaṟantalai (see Puṟanāṉūṟu 65). See Kailasapathy, K., Tamil Heroic Poetry (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1968), pp. 88–90Google Scholar. There is also a convergence here with the apparently pan-Indo-European theme of the warrior's sins: see Dumézil, G., The Destiny of the Warrior (Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1969)Google Scholar, passim. Indra is the outstanding Indian example of this theme. In one South Indian version of the Vṛtra myth, Indra kills Vṛtra from an ambush, as Rāma slays Vālin; the evil of Brahminicide then pursues Indra to his hiding place in a cave in the middle of the sea. When Indra complains to Brahmā that he has killed many demons but never before been afflicted by evil, Brahmā explains that Vṛtra was a learned, pious demon devoted to Śiva, and that Indra slew him unfairly, while hiding—hence Indra could not escape the consequences of evil. Tiruvārūrppurāṇam of Aḷakai Campantamuṉivar (Madras: Kalāratnākaram Press, 1894), 13.1–53Google Scholar.

³³ See Hart, George L. III, The Poems of Ancient Tamil, their Milieu and their Sanskrit Counterparts (Berkeley: Univ. of California Press, 1975) pp. 93–119Google Scholar; Shulman, David, “The Murderous Bride: Tamil Versions of the Myth of Devī and the Buffalo-Demon,” History of Religions, 16 (1976), 120–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

³⁴ Thus Sugrīva does not marry Tārā in Kampaṉ's version. See Zvelebil, K., The Smile of Murugan: On Tamil Literature of South India (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1973), p. 212Google Scholar; Sarma, C. R., The Ramayana in Telugu and Tamil: A Comparative Study (Madras: Lakshminarayana Granthamala, 1973). pp. 94–97.Google Scholar

³⁵ Sūkṣmah paramadurjnṣeyaḥ satām dharmaḥ plavaṃgamal hṛdisthaḥ sarvabhu﹣tānām ātmā veda śubhāsubhe (4.18.15).

³⁶ Both the Vaiṣṇava and the Śaiva traditions, however, offer many examples of extreme and highly valued fanaticism as well.

³⁷ Govindarāja, commenting on the Sanskrit text (4.18.45), gives a very similar explanation of Rāma's action, and adds that if Vālin had taken refuge with Rāma, Rāvaṇa would have followed suit, and the divine mission would have thus been frustrated. See Srinivasa Sastri (n. 6 above), pp. 147–48. This notion is allied to the concept of the “necessary sacrifice” that is so prominent in the Mahābhārata and related folk myths. Another possible justification for Rāma's ambush, also beloved of the commentators on Vālmlki, is of a more practical nature: Vālin is said to have been promised by Indra that half the strength of any opponent who confronted him openly in battle would be transferred to Vālin; therefore Rāma, not wishing to violate the boon, shot him from a hiding place. Kampaṉ has Vālin boast of this useful gift in 4.7.19–20. See Srinivasa Sastri, citing Govindarāja, pp. 158–59.

³⁸ The Southern Vaiṣṇava tradition refers to this key idea as prapatti or śaraṇāgati. See Lester, Robert C., “Rāmānuja and Śrī-Vaiṣṇavism: The Concept of Prapatti or Śaraṇāgati,” History of Religions, 5 (1966), 266–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

³⁹ For examples and discussion, see Shulman, David, The Mythology of the Tamil Śaiva Talapurāṇam, (Diss: University of London 1976), pp. 433—42Google Scholar. The pattern derives from the older idea of coercive tapas.

⁴⁰ E.g., Skandapurāṇa 6.107.1–77.

⁴¹ In this sense Vālin is still capable of prapatti and, indeed, now wins salvation.

⁴² ṛgveda 5.62.1. See Kuiper, F. B. J., “The Bliss of Aša,” Indo-Iranian Journal, 8 (1964), 120CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Kramrisch, Stella, “The Triple Structure of Creation in the ṛg Veda,” History of Religions, II (1963), 272Google Scholar.

⁴³ Here is one link between rāmabhakti and the notion of esoteric truth so characteristic of Indian religion on many different levels. Tamil refers to the Veda as marai, “the secret.”

⁴⁴ The seemingly paradoxical opposition here of “all” and “all that remains” may reflect the tension between the concepts of the center/totality and the excluded remnant which is the source of new life. See Shulman, “The Serpent and the Sacrifice” (n. 19 above).

⁴⁵ (Madras: Ār. Ji. Pati Kampěṉi, 1974). Vālmīki, too, suggests that Vālin attains heaven (4.18.30–36), but here it is simply a matter of wiping the slate clean: Vālin has erred and been punished and may therefore be released.

⁴⁶ This is the explicit formulation of the texts; but the great popularity of the demon-devotee also seems to depend upon an earlier concept of sacrifice, or self-sacrifice, as the path to power. On the demon-devotee, see O'Flaherty, Origins of Evil (n. 1 above), pp. 127–38. The common pattern of dveṣabhakti—salvation through the intimacy gained by intense hatred for the deity—is not relevant to the Vālin episode; Vālin loves the god who attacks him.

⁴⁷ Mahābbārata 1.103.1–38. This is the background to Dharma's birth as Vidura.

⁴⁸ Mahābhārata 18. 1–3. See the discussion by Zaehner, R. C., Hinduism (London: Oxford Univ. Press, 1962), pp. 114–24Google Scholar.