In India, nuance went out of the debate centuries ago: Amish Tripathi

Unlike author Monica Cantieni, you said during the Then What Happens discussion at Tata Literature Live that you easily visualise your characters. Is it because the imagery of Indian Gods already exists?

Right, having grown up with stories of Indian gods we have some visuals in mind. But overtime, they differ from the dominant ones for individuals as well as society. Gods were depicted differently in the Gupta period from their depiction in the Maurya empire. Modern impressions are influenced by calendar art and Raja Ravi Varma’s paintings. Mine take from modern perceptions of a heroic body.

Traditional Indian stories, you said, didn’t end with a conclusion. Can you elaborate?

In the last few centuries, we’ve seen a lot of Persian influence with narratives of love, often doomed love, especially in Bollywood. There’s been Greek influence too and modern stories have a great West-inspired with a conclusive end, a sense of catharsis, be it tragic or otherwise. But I was referring to traditional Indian stories such as the Ramayana, Mahabharata or Puranas; they don’t end with a conclusion. By the end, they leave you troubled and with more questions than you started with. The purpose of our ancient stories was to make you think.

What made you fall back on this Indian tradition?

I learnt the tradition from stories of our myths and scriptures because my grandfather was a pandit and my parents are deeply religious. So we grew up with it.

And generally what triggers ideas for your books?

They all begin with a philosophy - something I’ve thought of, want to convey or wish to debate. The story works as a wrapper to convey it or at least make readers think about it. At the heart of the Shiva Trilogy is this question - What is evil? About 11–12 years ago, while watching TV, my family discovered that ancient Persians called their gods asuras and demons devas, the exact opposite of our reference. If ancient Indians and Persians had met, we thought they would have called each other evil—debating your god as my demon and vice versa. Who would be right? Neither. They are just two different ways of life. Then, the next obvious question was, so what is evil—it exists beyond petty human rivalry. And answer occurred to me, based on my own views and my understanding of the Upanishads. Ancient people (Indian/ Persian/ Egyptian) didn’t see someone radically opposite to them as evil, and for them evil also existed for a purpose. Unlike today’s simplistic ideas of good and bad, they had a far more nuanced approach. That’s the logic I build in the Shiva trilogy.

What philosophy will inspire your next one? How many books will the Ram Chandra series see?

The Ram Chandra series is about asking what’s an ideal society and how do we create one. All over India, most people will answer Ram Rajya. But ask them what Ram Rajya is and you’ll get many different answers. So it’s worth debating so that we can arrive at what we should be doing in today’s society. The series may have five books.

Are you broaching these subjects because you feel the nuance is lost today?

In India, the nuance went out of the debate centuries ago. If one side is dominating, it’s not a debate. Earlier we only had Westernised or elitist views as power lay only in New Delhi and South Bombay - the rest of India was just trying to survive. But post the 1991 economic growth, power got dispersed and many new people joined the mainstream, the debate. Now the debate needs to be constructive and a positive bent of mind where a different point of view doesn’t become evil.

For the stories, you could have used a secular backdrop with regular people to be more inclusive, why did you use Hindu mythology?

I think these stories are really well suited to convey philosophies. And for any author, stories emerge from an area that s/he has knowledge. I have ideas about other religions’ figures too and will hopefully write about them, but I want to challenge your assumption that this national heritage (the epics) only belongs to Hindus. It belongs to everyone. Modern genetic research shows that most people of the Indian subcontinent, irrespective of caste, religion or country come from the North Indian or South Indian genetic groups, which too have mingled heavily over the past 6,000 - 7,000 years. So from a genetic basis, this heritage belongs to all of us. My readers are not only Hindus, just as Tirupati, many south Indian temples, Ajmer Sharif, Mount Mary church are visited by people of all communities. And that’s the natural Indian way. We should celebrate it. Only the extremists hold an exclusivist approach.

Today many people shy from the religious tag and prefer being seen as spiritual. What’s your personal outlook?

In the Indian way, you’re free to follow what you wish. The Charvakas were atheists as were the samkhyas and mimamsas, who believed in the Vedas, but not god.

I believe in Shiva, but like knowing about philosophies of all faiths. My puja room has an idol of Shiva, Durga ma, Ram, Ganesh... and also pictures of Guru Nanak, Buddha, the Kaba, Mother Mary, the star of David, Zarathustra ji. So did my parents. I’ve said this publicly in India and no one found it odd, but elsewhere people were surprised. If there’s something good to learn, how does it matter where it comes from—your life will improve.