The recent telecast of Shrimad Ramayana on Sony Entertainment TV prompted a nostalgic journey through the timeless tales I had heard in my childhood from my maternal grandmother in the 1960s, my visits to locally held Ram Lila every year during my childhood, and the earlier telecast of the serial Ramayana by Ramanand Sagar in 1987-88.
Traditionally, Queen Kaikeyi has been portrayed as a narrow-minded, selfish queen responsible for banishing Rama, Lakshmana, and Sita to the forests for fourteen years to benefit her son Bharat. This view is endorsed by both Valmiki and Tulsi Ramayana. In Valmiki’s Ramayana, Kaikeyi’s actions are driven by her ambition to see her son Bharata ascend the throne. She is influenced by the schemes of her maid, Manthara, who stirs up Kaikeyi’s fears and desires to secure power for Bharata. Both the Valmiki Ramayana and Tulsi’s Ramcharitmanas depict Kaikeyi as a complex character whose actions have far-reaching consequences, with the Tulsi version offering a more nuanced portrayal that includes themes of redemption, forgiveness, and devotion to Rama.
However, in this blog, we digress a bit and try to explore the strategic angle of Kaikeyi’s action.
Why a Strategic Perspective?
Revisiting the episodes and connecting them with the events when Viswamitra took assistance from Rama and Lakshmana to eliminate Tadka and Subahu, we learn that the Rishis or the intellectual lineage of mainland Aryavarta felt threatened by the Rakshasas clan deep inside the mainland Aryavarta. The Rakshasas were very aggressive and threatened the intellectual assets of the mainland, who were the researchers and guides of ancient times. Besides this, I began to contemplate that Queen Kaikeyi, by no means, seems an ordinary woman. She was a brave and strategic character who took part in the affairs of the State and wars. Even the two boons that she sought from King Dasaratha emanated from her role in saving the life of the king during the war with the formidable demon Sambara. Isn’t it likely that she might have given counsel to her husband using her strategic foresight and concern for mainland Aryavarta as a whole, where the aggressive clan of Rakshasas was gradually gaining ground and threatening the intellectual assets? Couldn’t her counsel have been for the kingdom’s safety and well-being?
Unfortunately, Kaikeyi received a bad name for her insistence on sending Ram away from Ayodhya. The reasons for this are well known. Her timing for raising this issue with King Dasaratha was bad because it led to spoiling the event of the coronation of Rama as king, which was an unpopular decision and looked to favour Bharat. Further, this resulted in the demise of her husband, who couldn’t stand the separation from his dear son Rama.
But no one, not even Maharishi Valmiki, whose Ramayana was written during the contemporary times, would know what exactly happened inside the walls of the palace!
Arguments in Favor of Queen Kaikeyi
Kaikeyi’s Proficiency: Kaikeyi’s proficiency in the art of war and governance positioned her uniquely among the queens. She was the only one among the three queens who participated shoulder to shoulder with her husband in wars. She displayed exceptional courage and devotion to her husband, which elevated her position, and she became a subject of envy with Kaushalya, who despite being the senior-most among the queens, felt neglected. It is unlikely that her strategically inclined brain wouldn’t have noticed the aggressive advance of the Rakshasa clan into mainland Ayodhya with expansionist designs, as is also noted by Ravana deputing Khara and Dushana together with a fourteen-thousand-strong army to Dandakaranya, whom Lord Rama later eliminated, following the amputation of the nose of Shurpanakha which happened deep inside the mainland of Aryavarta at present-day Nasik. This is far away compared to Lanka. It is unlikely that a queen with the foresight of Kaikeyi wouldn’t have been distressed by the escalating influence of Ravana and his brothers into mainland India. It is possible that she demonstrated a keen understanding of geopolitical dynamics and sought to check this influence before it became unmanageable and reached further to threaten Ayodhya.
Why specifically Dandaka or Dandakaranya region: Let’s assume Kaikeyi just wanted coronation of Bharat instead of Rama and she wanted Rama away to ward off any future threat, then why she would specifically ask for him being sent to Dandaka region? This purpose could have been achieved by sending Rama anywhere else, say to Aravali or Himalaya? Could there not have been a strategic reason behind it?
Was Rama’s Exile Truly a Banishment or a Strategic Assignment?: Ravana had appointed his stepbrothers, Khara and Dushana, to govern the Dandakaranya region with a formidable Rakshasa army. Their rapid advancement posed a threat to the intellectual assets of the mainland Aryavarta, where Rishis were engaged in vital research and development. Given this imminent danger, strategic wisdom dictated the need to counter their progress.
If Khara and Dushana’s mandate was to strengthen control over the Rakshasa clan, then Rama’s mission to the forest cannot simply be dismissed as banishment. Rather, it might be perceived as a challenging yet crucial task. Despite its stark contrast to the comforts of Ayodhya’s palace, Rama’s journey to the forest was essential to safeguard the Arya clan and its intellectual resources. Therefore, viewing it solely as a punitive measure overlooks its strategic imperative in protecting the realm’s interests.
Protecting Intellectual Assets: The presence of Rishis, esteemed scholars of the time, stationed in the deep forests underscored the threat posed by territorial encroachment. This is confirmed by Sri Rama’s visit to the Ashram of Maharishi Atri, the location of which was camouflaged by Maharishi to protect it from the Rakshasa clan. He also cautioned him about impending dangers in the Dandakaranya region, already infested by the Rakshasa clan. Kaikeyi’s counsel to King Dasaratha to deploy Rama and Lakshmana aimed not only to safeguard the kingdom but also to preserve its intellectual and spiritual heritage.
Choosing the Right Warriors: Recognizing Rama and Lakshmana’s unparalleled martial skills, as also demonstrated by the killing of Tadka and Subahu, Kaikeyi proposed sending them to counter Ravana’s growing dominance. Their prowess in warfare made them the most suitable candidates for such a daunting task, especially when compared to Bharat and Shatrughan, who according to the account were deputed to Yudhajit to earn experience in warfare, by Kaikeyi only after Rama and Lakshmana had attained that experience fighting Tadka and Subahu.
Resourceful Approach: Acknowledging the logistical challenges of maintaining an army far from Ayodhya, Kaikeyi proposed that Rama and Lakshmana create their resources by taking help from research carried out by Rishis, befriending the tribals and monkey clan, which Rama later did by collaborating with King Sugreev to fight Ravana. Kaikeyi was fully aware of Rama’s magnetic personality and character. She also foresaw that such collaboration would ensure perpetual peace and further safeguard their kingdom.
Unfolding Complexity: The failed attempt by Shurpanakha to marry one of the brothers serves as a precursor to the escalating conflict. This event, coupled with the impending threat posed by formidable warriors of the Rakshasa clan, such as Khara, Dushana, and Trishira, who occupied the Dandakaranya region on behalf of Ravana, laid the groundwork for the ensuing turmoil. The subsequent abduction of Sita by Ravana further intensified the tension, ultimately culminating in a full-scale war.
Positive Outcome: Despite initial controversy, Kaikeyi’s actions ultimately seemed to have paved the way for a positive outcome. The establishment of a friendly government in Lanka, Kishkindha, and all through to Lanka ensured that there would be no wars in the future, which are a drain on the prosperity and stability of any kingdom. This might have been the reason for the much-coveted ‘Ram Rajya’, where people lived in peace and prosperity. This signifies the success of her strategic manoeuvres.
Conclusion
In conclusion, examining Kaikeyi’s role through a strategic lens offers a different perspective into her motivations and actions. It prompts further investigation into whether she has been unfairly vilified. At first glance, she appears as a shrewd strategist whose decisions, though unconventional, may have been motivated by a deep concern for the welfare of the kingdom. Her actions, far from mere selfishness, may have been driven by a desire to protect the realm’s interests, preserve its intellectual heritage, and ensure long-term peace and prosperity.
By reevaluating Kaikeyi’s role in the Ramayana from this perspective, we gain a more nuanced understanding of her character and contributions to the epic narrative. Rather than being solely condemned, she emerges as a complex figure whose decisions, though controversial, may have been guided by a strategic vision for the greater good.
Inspire Positivity 