Monkeys are by no means unique to India nor are they as ubiquitous as everyone makes them out to be. They do make it an exciting subcontinent – you always have to close your doors and windows, can’t leave anything on the motorcycle, and make sure you hide your bag of peanuts (and not just in your lower pant pocket). They can be horrifically ugly, as I discovered traveling through Orissa on the east coast and as this photo above demonstrates. They can also be adorably cute, especially if there’s a mother with a wee baby clinging to her. The eeny weeny monkey baby seems so little and helpless but it’s important to remember that the baby is hanging on to mother and not mother holding the baby (like cat and kitten or human and human baby); he is still responsible for not dropping out of that treetop and some day, on his own, he’ll let go of his mother when he’s able to climb the branches on his own.
Many places have monkeys, but in my understanding monkeys sometimes keep more to their own (many parts of Asia) or become subjugated by humans, kept in cages for human entertainment (I know of examples in Colombia), definitely separated and put in the animal domain. Monkeys are interesting in India because the divide is not so clear. All old world monkeys have opposable thumbs like us. In the north of India the apes are big. So big they come over and steal your glasses like some school bully, and unless you’re fast or offer food, you’re going to be blind til you find the next optician’s. Or they steal your Lonely Planet guidebook on some remote mountaintop and they’re so mean-looking you don’t dare to try to grab it back and just watch as the primate tears and eats page after page, leaving you guideless and not knowing when the next train departs for Haridwar. (This is a friend’s story- I’ll leave out the details of how she used subterfuge and kicked the ape to retrieve the half-eaten, monkey-eared book, of which the yet-untraveled regions had already been digested.)
 |
| Mountain monkeys -Himachal Pradesh (northwest of India) |
My friend’s foot-to-foot combat with the monkey is somehow representative of monkeys in India today, as in the past. Competition for terrain is complicated as urban and village sprawl take over more and more land area, but the monkey can adapt more easily than most animals to city life since he’s pretty much like man anyway, except doesn’t dress up in suit and tie to go to work. This tension between man and ape isn’t perceived in India as conflict, except in the monkey’s random acts of destruction and petty theft scavenging for food. As with most things, Indians are quietly passive in their non-reaction to the monkey’s mission to sneak into your home and eat every fruit and nut he can get those four hands on, later exhibiting his “I’m king here” stance on your rooftop and balcony. The Indian man’s best defense against monkey vandalism are screens on windows and locks on doors but that seems to be man’s only assertion of his superiority and it’s pretty laissez-faire.
 |
| Elephanta monkey contemplation |
Monkeys are obviously not humans but it’s a blurry divide, the main differences for me being A.) amount of body hair (in some specimens) B.) agility and C.) the monkey always does what he wants to and humans wish they could (this includes climb the walls, play all day, laugh and tease friends, run and jump around everywhere – basically do parcour and do it well all day long - , play with his tail, copulate, masturbate anywhere and anytime, steal your food and eat it, steal my food and eat it, and tear your motorcycle seat to shreds, just for the heck of it). I don’t want to paint these apes too harshly; they are also capable of and display a vast array of “human” emotions: nurturing, love, affection, intimacy, sharing, helping the other, grooming, fear, and I would swear an appreciation for the ephemeral beauty of life, as I observed on the other coast, on Elephanta Island near Mumbai. As this mother held close her nursing baby, she breathed in the aroma and beauty of a small flower, possibly with more sensitivity than you or I would. She transected the nurturing mothering act with a moment of intimacy and union with the flower, the sort of union achievable in ekāgraha dhāraṇa, a contemplation bordering on meditative union.  |
| Himalaya monkey |
 |
| Finishing off some monkey business |
Valmiki’s juxtaposition of monkey and man is not coincidental as it has always been ever present in India. His treatment of man and monkey relations is more remarkable. Of course these Ramayana monkeys aren’t really monkeys but rather the offspring of gods and the like who with great strength and many abilities assume the form of numerous monkey species, numbering in the millions and millions. They’re not monkeys but they spend all their time pretending to be (while they can take on the form of man or of creatures ten or one hundred times their size or of anything else, it seems – typically they’re described as “as large as a mountain” – now that’s one big monkey). The fact that they keep their monkey form by choice means it must be a lot more fun than an anthropomorphic one or any other for that matter. These monkeys do everything that any human does (talk, eat, get drunk, stay up late at night), and surprisingly, as they take a heroic, leading role in the book, they do these things better than humans would or could. Rama’s alliance with the monkeys is double-fruited, beneficial for both sides, but the fact that Rama chooses and uses monkeys to help his victory as opposed to humans, who could just as easily have helped him in massive numbers, helps demonstrate Valmiki’s point. The inherent monkey nature/animalism which we all share (but which we can subdue and/or transcend temporarily to achieve our goals) is projected onto this monkey form as a contrast to the ideal, god-like human form.
 |
| Finally, a more interesting Adam & Eve story, according to Tibetan tradition |
So the progression/transformation/change of the monkey characters is the most interesting part of the story, just as is the monkey/human overlap. When the monkeys overcome their monkey nature and use their higher qualities they achieve great things, join forces, cross great oceans and defeat enemies. Curiously enough, when the monkeys have achieved great things (the moment of finding Sita, the return to King Sugriva after discovering Sita and doing reconnaissance of Lanka, etc), they revert to their monkeying around, jumping, kissing their tails, wreaking havoc and getting drunk and tearing things apart. On the surface the message seems to be that if we humans can overcome our monkey/animal nature (and get over that grief, please!!!!) we can achieve greatness, an idea that’s prevalent in many yogic and Brahmanic texts. (And then after doing good and transcending “animalism”, we can also celebrate, loosen the slack and monkey around again afterwards, too!)
In the Ramayana, the monkeys are the ones who save the day, not Rama, who’s supposedly an ace-archer, god and the ideal king but who just sits around moping in his grief, hopeless, useless and apparently quite helpless without monkey Hanuman. So much for the greatness of man or god. I like to think Valmiki is suggesting the necessity of animal cooperation, union with the other and a common life mission between man and beast, because man apparently can’t do anything on his own, in isolation.
 |
| Hanuman shrine at Banganga Tank in Mumbai, where Rama thrust a spear through the earth |
It’s curious because so many big words praise Rama as the best, but he almost never does anything heroic except kill a bunch of demons (10,000 in one sitting) with massive bloodshed (kill, kill, kill, then think! he even has to be reprimanded by his wife for so much thoughtless destruction) and heap brotherly love on dear, moon-faced Lakshmana (which I agree is well-deserved, as Lakshmana is the best brother ever!). Rama isn’t painted so well; frankly, he’s totally incapable of getting over his grief and loss over his abducted wife and dead father, incapable of getting on with life (the message is stated pretty clearly by different characters repeated times through the book). Some king!
Our monkey hero Hanuman, on the other hand, is soft-spoken, always thinking before speech and action, and he doesn’t just save the day sometimes, he saves the day EVERY TIME in the book, except for two instances where birds save the day (1. an aged vulture reveals where Sita has been taken and 2. aruda, the eagle mount of Vishnu and King of the feathered race, undoes the serpent fetters trapping Rama and Lakshmana during the war on the island of Lanka). Humans pretty much never get anything done right on their own without animal friends, and always animals who can be seen as competition or horrible creatures (vultures eat the dead and are considered gross in Indian culture just as they are ominous and bode badly in the west).
 |
| The man of my dreams |
It’s pretty crazy actually because the monkeys also almost never do anything right without Hanuman. Sugriva is the monkey king who befriends Rama, and supposedly a great upholder of dharma and correct action, but I feel pretty ambivalent about him because he ruthlessly gets Rama to kill his brother on the throne in a political twist after having previously abandoned the same supposedly dear brother to his certain death, trapped underground while fighting a demon – there seems to be a lot of latent jealousy and unrighteousness here. He also takes his dead brother’s wife and does a lot of copulating with her, totally ignores his promise to help Rama, spends his days and nights reveling in parties, drunk and having lots of sex, for nights and weeks and months, while despondent Rama is gloomy and desperate and unable to act and poor Sita, such a beautiful queen, is left suffering and fasting alone, even without a change of clothes, held hostage in the most beautiful garden on what’s supposed to be the most beautiful island ever with the most organized city ever while being offered the greatest riches by Ravana, who’s actually depicted as quite dashing and attractive and massively strong, correct in his actions, an excellent king for his people and ensuring prosperity for his race! Plus he’s got the most beautiful airplane-like mode of transport, a white vehicle called Pushpaka that flies in the sky and transports you superfast. Sounds rough, huh! According to everything described in Ramayana, I would actually prefer to stay with Ravana on the most beautiful island ever and ride around in his huge airplane the size of a palace grounds; he seems like a perfect and respectful man except for him having 10 heads. Ravana, by action and word, isn’t such a bad guy except for the fact that he’s on the wrong side, thinks he’s the best (he seems to be from his actions as well) and has a pretty big ego (duh, he’s got 10 heads). Sita suffers because she chooses to. Ravana is a great king and a great man (Valmiki’s words, not mine) and she doesn’t go with him because she’s already married and likes that wimp Rama and because Ravana is bad because he’d already destroyed Indra and all the gods, gandharvas, etc in order to reign all-powerfully. By act and word, Ravana is neither as bad as people think he is, nor is Rama as fantastic as people think he is. It’s all pretty ambivalent actually.
But I was explaining how Sugriva is supposedly the best monkey king ever, ruling with dharma, but he just spends his days and nights (and months!) decadently, having sex with lots of monkey girls and monkeying around. The whole while, Hanuman is upset that the king isn’t keeping his promise and he is the one who insists that Sugriva take action and help Rama, the god, who is unable to help himself. So yes, once Sugriva is convinced, the rest of the monkeys clean up their act fast and come from all corners of the earth (or the subcontinent) and save the day quite fast. They’re given a month to find Sita, and then humble Hanuman makes his heroic leap to Lanka, finds Sita, wins her friendship, on his way back decides to kill most of Ravana’s progeny and burn down most of the city. Then the monkey architect Nala is enlisted to build a bridge so all the monkeys and Rama can cross to Lanka to start the fighting (because no man would be able to do this). In battle, while Ravana’s forces use weapons, the monkey troops are so resourceful and use tree stumps, branches and rocks to fight, demonstrating independence (non-dependence on other things to be successful, one of the principles in the Yoga Sutras). At one point (actually two instances), when Rama and brother Lakshmana are totally bloodied and wounded, Hanuman makes a leap to the Himalayas and brings back magical curative herbs to heal their wounds. In an endearing act, unable to recognize which herbs he needs to take back, he actually picks up the whole mountain and carries it back to the injured, of course being considerate enough to jump back again to Himalaya and return the mountain to its place!
 |
| Topiary of Hanuman carrying off the mountain, he's got the mountain in his right hand, a mace in his left and a silly hat (Mumbai) |
So yeah, the monkeys save the day, point made. Rama only managed to kill Ravana through the use of a verbal weapon bestowed by god Indra (a verbal command/magic mantra which makes the magic weapon appear to do the deed). So it’s not like Rama even did it with his own powers. There are so many charming details I could share but it’s better to experience these oneself upon reading. Then you can see for yourself that human/god Rama, all the gods (all the hosts of gods rooting for Rama to be victorious, as they had been destroyed and had their powers taken away by Ravana), humans and all the world are unable to manage without the animal community and without friendship to help get beyond one’s moments (or years) of weakness and one’s grief. In this story, the animals are crucial for re-establishing a proper balance on earth. Just as animals were a vital part of the “society” and for survival of the human community thousands of years ago when Ramayana was created, so do we today need these animal friends who, despite possibly being perceived as competitors on our turf, are necessary for our physical survival and emotional and psychological well-being. I’d present more examples to defend my argument of the animals’ role in ensuring the emotional well-being of Rama and other humans, but as I type I can see a monkey out my window, kissing his tail in contentment and jumping with delight because he’s managed to swipe somebody’s nut stash……
