Girish Karnad (May 19, 1938 – June 10, 2019) was an incredible Indian actor, filmmaker, and writer who made a huge impact in the world of Kannada literature and beyond. He was a Jnanpith award winner and worked across various languages like Hindi, Tamil, Telugu, Malayalam, and Marathi. When he started writing plays in the 1960s, it was a big turning point for modern Indian playwriting in Kannada.
For around forty years, he wrote plays that often mixed history and mythology with today’s issues. He even translated his works into English and got a lot of praise for them. At the time he began writing, Kannada literature was really influenced by Western literature, and many writers were choosing topics that didn’t feel very local or connected to their roots. But then, after reading C. Rajagopalachari’s version of the Mahabharata in 1951, something clicked for him. Karnad discovered a fresh way to use historical and mythological stories to explore modern themes and the existential struggles of people today. He created characters who faced deep psychological and philosophical challenges, making his work resonate with many.
One such play of his is ‘The Fire and the Rain’, which is counted among Karnad’s most popular and highly acclaimed plays. Originally written in Kannada as ‘Agni Mattu Male’, this play takes its story from the later chapters of the Mahabharata. During the Pandava’s pilgrimage to the heavens they pass through a sacred spot and Sage Lomaasha narrates to Yudhishthira the story of the death and resurrection of sage Yavakrita.
The Story of Yavakrita
Once there were two sages who were friends—Raibhya and Bharadwaj. Raibhya had two sons, Paravasu and Aravasu, while Bharadwaj had one son, Yavakrita. Yavakrita envied the respect that Raibhya and his sons received. He wanted to be wiser and more knowledgeable. Instead of taking the traditional route of studying under a guru, he decided to go into the jungle and commit to deep penance to force the gods to grant him knowledge.
Indra, the king of the gods, came down to teach him about the flaw in his approach. However, seeing Yavakrita’s stubbornness, Indra ultimately granted him knowledge of all the Vedas and beyond.
Later one day Yavakrita is passing by Raibhya’s hermitage and finds that his daughter-in-law, alone, and rapes her. When Raibhya learns of this he creates two creatures – a beautiful woman who entices Yavakrita and a rakshasa who kills him. Upon seeing his son dead Bharadwaj is grieved and dies, but not before setting a curse on Paravasu that he will be the cause of his father Raibhya’s death.
The curse comes to fruition when, one day, Paravasu returns home utterly exhausted after performing a yajna for a king. In the darkness, he mistakes Raibhya for a wild animal and, in self-defense, shoots an arrow, accidentally killing him. To protect Paravasu, Raibhya’s younger son takes the blame for the death, allowing Paravasu to continue with his yajna. In his grief, Aravasu prays to the gods and manages to bring his father, Bharadwaj, and Yavakrita back to life.
The story illustrates how, despite possessing extensive knowledge, Yavakrita ultimately had no control over his senses because he failed to follow the proper path of serving a guru, leading to his downfall.
Book: The Fire and the Rain
Girish Karnad significantly alters the story to incorporate themes of love, betrayal, jealousy, and revenge. The play is set against the backdrop of a prolonged drought affecting a kingdom. Paravasu, the chief priest, is conducting a seven-year-long sacrifice to appease Indra, the god of rain and the king of all deities. The action begins as the sacrifice is nearing its conclusion.
Upon reading the play, we observe that the relationship between Yavakrita, referred to as Yavakri in the play, and Paravasu’s wife, Vishakha, is altered. In this version, Yavakri and Vishakha were lovers before he left for a ten-year penance. She is later married off to Paravasu and endures an unhappy life, striving to be the ideal wife and daughter-in-law. When Yavakri meets Vishakha again, they engage in a conversation. Vishakha reveals that during the first year of their marriage, Paravasu hardly spoke to her. He was perpetually in search of knowledge and used her body to satisfy his physical desires. And then he left for the sacrifice and has not seen her in seven years. By the end of their conversation, Yavakri manages to coerce her into having intercourse with him.
Then there’s Raibhya. Here the highly revered sage is presented as a vile old man. When he learns about Vishakha’s infidelity he calls her a whore and slaps and kicks her. He is angry at Yavakri for ruining his family’s reputation and awakens a Bramharakshasa, a Brahmin soul stuck between the mortal world and the afterlife, to kill Yavakri. When Vishakha goes to warn Yavakri about the danger to his life, he reveals how he did this as revenge, because he believed that his father Bharadwaja deserved more respect than Raibhya.
After Yavakri’s death Paravasu comes to the hermitage in secret at night. This leads to a scene where Vishakha has a conversation with him where she conveys her feelings of loneliness and misery. She reveals that Raibhya was envious of his own son for becoming the chief priest in the sacrifice instead of him, and he expressed this jealousy by sexually assaulting his daughter-in-law. Additionally, she highlights that both he and Yavakri exploited her body for their selfish needs. After Vishakha’s heartfelt outburst, she asks Paravasu to kill her with an arrow to free her from her disgrace. Instead, Paravasu shoots the arrow at Raibhya.
One might assume that he killed Raibhya out of anger. However, he reveals that he was aware of Raibhya’s jealousy. He says that Raibhya had killed Yavakri to divert his attention from the sacrifice, ultimately ruining it. And that is why he killed Raibhya. He tells Aravasu that he mistakenly thought their father was an animal in the dark and shot him. Later, he placed the blame for Raibhya’s death on Aravasu.
And then we come to Aravasu, the younger son of Raibhya. He is portrayed as the simple and innocent younger son of Raibhya, caught in this convoluted drama. He has no interest in learning the scriptures; instead, he dreams of dancing and performing alongside his lover, Nittilai, a tribal girl. Aravasu wishes to marry Nittilai and is even willing to abandon his Brahmin caste for her. However, due to a series of unforeseen events, he is unable to do so, and Nittilai’s father has her marry another man.
Nittilai is not merely a love interest for Aravasu; she is given a voice and actively questions the rules and traditions that bind her. She questions Yavakri’s search for knowledge, asking why he did not ask Indra to end the drought, helping all the people in misery. Ultimately, when she is married against her will, she chooses to run away to be with Aravasu.
The most significant change that Karnad makes to the story is the ending. In this version, Indra is pleased with Aravasu and grants him a boon. The scene depicts the souls of all the dead characters standing, hoping to be brought back to life. However, the Bramharakshasa then begs Aravasu to ask for his freedom from the cycle of life and death, which Aravasu does. So, opposite to the original story, Yavakri is not resurrected. He faces the consequences of his actions.
Reading the original story and then the play, it is not hard to tell why Karnad made the changes. The most prominent reason is that the original tale entirely sidelines the woman who was sexually assaulted. Paravasu’s wife is a plot device that leads to Yavakrita’s death. The story tells us that Since Yavakrita gained knowledge through a shortcut, he had not achieved the control over his senses that comes with proper study under a guru. That is why he raped the woman. In the end, he is brought back to life, and it is presented as a happy ending
The play provides the wife with an identity by giving her a name, Vishakha, and a voice of her own, allowing her to express herself as an individual, which is absent in the original narrative. Her voice is presented as the voice of rebellion against the patriarchal society that reduces women to nothing but tools for pleasure. He does the same with the character of Nittilai as well. She is put into a marriage against her will, however, she dares to not accept that as her fate.
Karnad depicts the casteism prevalent at the time, and unfortunately still exists today in the play. It is earlier established in the play that actors are of low caste, just because they indulge in pretense. Even if a person is born a Brahmin, he loses his caste if he becomes an actor. Earlier in the play, when the character of the actor-manager comes to offer to perform a play to please Indra, he is asked not to look at the sacrificial pyre, as it will pollute the sacrifice.
The story of Nittilai depicts casteism but from a different angle. Aravasu is supposed to be present in front of Nittilai’s whole village and ask for her hand. Nittilai’s father, who is the village chief is distrustful of Brahmins, as he believes that they only like to use women from lower caste for sex, but would not marry them. Later when Aravasu is unable to come, Nittilai’s father has her married that very night. Because of the exploitation from the upper castes, the chief becomes extremely distrustful of the Brahmins.
Girish Karnad, in his play ‘The Fire and the Rain’ is a perfect example of his humanistic approach to seeing the world. Despite presenting the world as a place full of suffering, selfishness, and betrayal, in the end, there is a clear commitment to moral values. Karnad explores the very unfortunate ills of modern society through using mythology as the backdrop.
