lOMoARcPSD|20715033

FIRE AND RAIN

Girish Karnad
The Fire and the Rain is Karnad's transcreation in English Published in1998, of the Kannada version of his play
titled “Agni Mattu Male”. The play is based on the myth of Yavakri taken from chapters 135-138 of the "Vana
Parva" (Forest Canto) of the Mahabharata. It is a tale told by the ascetic Lomasha to the Pandavas during the
course of their exile. The Fire and the Rain with its symbolic and allegorical overtones is a dramatic representation
of the quintessential conflict between good and evil. The play begins with a Prologue, is divided into three Acts
and ends with an Epilogue. 'Fire' is the dominant metaphor which engulfs the dramatic action of the play. The
fire of passion, lust, revenge and betrayal consume both good and evil. The flaming hostility between the two
cousins, Paravasu and Yavakri, scorch the lives of all the principal characters. The dramatic action moves between
the two opposing polarities of Yavakri's vengeance and Arvasu's humanity.
The Play’s Basis: FIRE AND RAIN
The Myth of Yavakri The Fire and the Rain is Karnad’s most complex play which is based on the myth of
Yavakrita taken from chapters 135-138 of the Vana Parva (the forest canto) of the Mahabharata. Karnad spent
nearly thirty seven years to complete the play. In his note on The Fire and the Rain , Karnad briefs the original
myth of Yavakri: There were two sages, Bharadwaja and Raibhya, who were good friends. Raibhya was a learned
man who lived with his two sons while Bharadwaja concentrated on his ascetic practices. Yavakri, Bharadwaja’s
son, nursed a grievance against the world, for he felt his father did not receive the respect and recognition he
deserved. He further went off to the forest and did tapasya (penance) so that he could obtain the knowledge of
the Vedas from the gods direct. The rigours of his ascetic practice were such that Indra, the lord of gods, appeared
to him, but only to persuade him that there were no such short cuts to knowledge. Knowledge has to be obtained
by studying at the feet of a guru. But Yavakri was so adamant that Indra ultimately relented and let him have his
wish. Bharadwaja, being a wise man, was anxious lest the triumph turn his son’s head and cautioned Yavakri
against delusions of omnipotence. But his fears unfortunately proved well-founded. For one of the first things
Yavakri did was to corner Raibhya’s daughter-in-law in a lonely spot and molest her. Yavakri’s misdemeanour
incensed Raibhya. He invoked the Kritya spirit. He tore a hair from his head and made an oblation of it to the
fire. From it sprang a woman who looked exactly like his daughter-in-law. From another hair he similarly brought
forth a rakshasa (demon). Then, he sent the two to kill Yavakri. The spirit in the form of the daughter-in-law
approached Yavakri seductively and stole the urn which contained the water that made him invulnerable to
danger. The rakshasa then chased him with a trident. Yavakri ran towards a lake in search of water, but the lake
dried up. Every spot with a bit of water in it dried up at his approach.
Finally, Yavakri tried to enter his father’s hermitage. But a blind man of the Sudra caste, who was guarding the
gate, barred Yavakri’s entry. At that moment the rakshasa killed Yavakri. When Bhardwaja learnt from the Sudra
how his son had died, he was naturally distressed. Although he knew that his son was to blame for all that had
happened, he cursed Raibhya that he would die at the hand of his elder son. And then shocked at his own folly in
cursing a friend, he entered fire and immolated himself. Raibhya’s two sons, Paravasu and Arvasu, were
conducting a fire sacrifice for the King. One night when Paravasu was visiting his home, he mistook the black
deer-skin which his father was wearing for a wild animal and unintentionally killed him. When he realized what
he had done, he cremated his father and returned to the sacrificial enclosure. There he said to his brother Arvasu:
‘Since you are not capable of performing the sacrifice alone, go and perform the penitential rites prescribed for
Brahminicide. I’ll carry on with the sacrifice.’ Aravasu did his brother’s bidding. When he returned to the
sacrifice-ceremony, Paravasu turned to the King and said, ‘This man is a Brahmin-killer. He should not be
allowed to enter the sacrificial enclosures.’ The king promptly ordered his servants to throw Aravasu out, although
the latter kept protesting loudly that he was innocent. Aravasu retired to the jungle and prayed to the Sun God.
When the gods appeared, he asked them to restore Yavakri, Bharadwaja and Raibhya back to life and make
Paravasu forget his evil act. The gods granted him the boon. When Yavakri came back to life, the gods
reprimanded him on his folly and asked him to pursue knowledge in the right manner.2

1 | Notes On Fire and Rain by Girish Karnad Prof Divya K.B, Dept Of English, Jindal College For Women

Downloaded by Erika Karata (g5avsn9r@10mail.tk)

 lOMoARcPSD|20715033

The Play’s Theme and the Story

In this play, Karnad skillfully exploits the myth of Yavakri and that of Indra-Vritra to focus on the negative and
positive impulses of the human being, the immoral qualities of the priestly class and how they dominate and
exploit the lower class people. The play also highlights the innocent, pure and natural world of the lower castes.
The story of Arvasu and Nittilai which begins as a subplot grows in significance and towards the climax takes
centre stage. The Fire and the Rain is divided into three acts along with Prologue and Epilogue. By making some
alterations in the original story, Karnad unfolds the inner mind of each character. The central action of the play
focuses on the motif of revenge, futility of false knowledge and the feebleness of human nature. In order to make
his play more effective and relevant to the contemporary society, Karnad deviates from the original episode at
several places. Besides, he has introduced a few additional characters like Nittilai, the tribals, and the actors who
together with Arvasu make up the subplot. Bhardwaja and Raibhya, the two friends in the myth are made as
brothers in the play and their sons become cousins. Again he makes Vishakha as a lover of Yavakri. In the myth,
Raibhya creates the female spirit from his hair that resembles his daughter-in-law Vishakha and asks her to assist
the Brahma Rakshasa in the killing of Yavakri. However in the play, Vishakha herself goes to Yavakri to inform
him about the impending danger. Raibhya’s character is also altered considerably. He is made to appear as lustful,
suspicious, jealous, and revengeful murderer. In the myth, Paravasu kills his father unintentionally but, in the
play, it is done deliberately. In the myth, the Brahma Rakshasa goes to live with the female spirit but in the play,
he wants liberation from his state of limbo between life and death. The most vital change is made in the character
of Arvasu. In the play, he is not a learned priest. On the contrary, he is shown as an artist in the drama. Arvasu is
seen to be in deep love with a tribal girl, Nittilai and wishes to marry her. Through the sincere and honest love of
Arvasu and Nittilai, Karnad raises the problem of the caste system. Paravasu’s character as the immoral Chief
Priest of the fire sacrifice remains unchanged. The structural plan of The Fire and the Rain runs into three parallel
streams: Raibhya and Vishakha at the hermitage, the sacrificial place with Paravasu as the Chief Priest and story
of Nittilai and Arvasu with the company of the theatre. The most significant addition to the myth in the play is
the story of Indra and Vritra taken from the Rigveda. It is very effectively presented through the play-within-the-
play enacted by the troupe of actors and Arvasu to emphasize the treachery of a brother against brother.
Commenting on the inclusion of Indra-Vritra myth in the play Karnad himself aptly remarks: The tale of Aravasu
and Paravasu fascinated me as an unusual variant of this Indian obsession with fratricide… I cannot remember
when I decided to incorporate the Indra-Vritra legend in my plot, but years later, while rereading the original
version, I was astonished to find that right at the beginning of the tale of Yavakri. 3 The play starts with the
Prologue which presents the complicated details of the fire sacrifice ceremony. The entire action of the play
centres on the ritual of fire sacrifice. As the play begins, it is noticed that the land is a drought-ridden. So, the
King of this region has determined to conduct a fire sacrifice in order to propitiate Indra, the god of rains.
Paravasu, the elder son of Raibhya, is the Chief Priest who conducts the ceremony of a seven-year-long fire-
sacrifice with several other priests. As the afternoon session of the fire sacrifice is over, the Actor-Manager of
a troupe comes there and requests them to grant him a permission to stage a play in honour of the fire sacrifice.
The prologue throws light on the inner world of the characters that represents them as the embodiment of fiery
desires and ironically it is in the fire that they seek final liberation: Yavakri in the funeral fire and Paravasu in the
sacrificial fire. We are tempted to perceive fire as a pervasive symbol in all its potentials in the play.4 The first
act one focuses on the issue of love-marriage of Nittilai, a tribal girl and Arvasu, a younger son of Raibhya. While
conversing with Nittilai and Arvasu, Andhaka, in the role of Sutradhar-actor, refers to the penance and
achievements of Yavakri, the son of sage Bharadwaja. Karnad has ironically used Yavakri’s penance to criticize
the typical tendency of the Brahmins to attain universal knowledge for fulfilling their private ends. Soon after his
return, Yavakri learns that Vishakha, his childhood mate, has married to Paravasu, his rival cousin. He meets her
in a lonely place in the forest. She succumbs to Yavakri’s fascinating words after her initial resistance. Raibhya,
considers it the insult of the entire family. To take revenge on Yavakri, he creates “Kritya” spirit,i.e. Brahma
Rakshas. Vishakha informs Yavakri her father-in-law’s evil intention. But he is quite confident of his safety since
he has the consecrated water with him to take revenge on her family. This knowledge makes Vishkha to turn the
tables on Yavakri by pouring all the sanctified water from his kamandalu. To save his life anyhow, he starts
running to reach his father’s hermitage. Ironically, Andhaka stops him entering his own father’s hermitage. The
2 | Notes On Fire and Rain by Girish Karnad Prof Divya K.B, Dept Of English, Jindal College For Women

Downloaded by Erika Karata (g5avsn9r@10mail.tk)

 lOMoARcPSD|20715033

Brahma Rakshasa appears there and kills him with the trident. In the second act, Paravasu, against the rules of
the fire sacrifice, returns home to meet his wife. The knowledge of her wife’s seduction by Yavakri as well as by
his own father and his (father’s) feeling of jealousy for not getting the role of the Chief Priest of the fire sacrifice
renders him infuriated and outraged. Ultimately, he kills his father with his arrow in cold blood. Paravasu goes
back to complete the fire sacrifice asking Arvasu to perform the rites of penitence. But to Arvasu’s surprise,
Paravasu treacherously blames him of killing his father, when the former reaches the sacrificial area, after
performing all the funeral rites of his father. In the assault, made by the Brahmins and the king on the order of
Paravasu, Arvasu gets wounded. What Arundhati Banerjee states about Vijay Tendulkar’s play The Vultures is
fit for Karnad’s The Fire and the Rain also: The beating up of the father by his own sons, …the mutual hatred
among the members of family underline the fundamental evil inherent in human nature. 5 The third act three
starts with Nittilai, now a married woman, comes to Arvasu to nurse him back to health. The play juxtaposes the
contrasting situations. The playwright, here, explores the two worlds : (i) a stormy, sentimental world that is
characterized by greed, wickedness, sensuality, and (ii) a fragile, sensitive world that is characterized by love and
generosity. Raibhya Paravasu, and Yavakri represent a world of villainy, malice and ill-will, whereas Nittilai and
Arvasu represent a world of love and benevolence. The act concludes with the instruction of the Actor-Manager
to Arvasu about the rules of mask performance. The Epilogue takes the audience from the world of Yavakri to
that of Indra Vishwarupa and Vritra a play-within-the –play, in which Arvasu is going to perform the role of
Vritra, the demon. Vishwarupa and Vritra, sons of Brahma, meet and embrace each other. Indra, their eldest
brother feels jealous of Vishwarupa thinking that his greatness and popularity has eclipsed his personality. So, he
decides to kill him. In order to succeed in his plan, Indra organizes a fire sacrifice and invites Vishwarupa. The
moment Vishwarupa tries to enter along with Vritra, Indra stops him objecting to the company of Vritra being a
demon, a Rakshas. When Vishwarupa was offering oblations to the gods, Indra moves behind and plunges his
thunderbolt into Vishwarupa’s back. Vishwarupa collapses screaming loudly. This event of fratricide, enacted on
the stage, renders Paravasu guilt-conscious. By using the Brechtian technique of theatre-audience contact, Karnad
throws light on the reciprocal relationship between the theatre and life. Brahma Rakshasa who is pleading
Paravasu for his release, now leaves him. The audience is greatly perplexed at the increasing sounds and gestures
on the stage. Indra’s vicious laughter, Vishwarupa’s heart-rending screaming and Paravasu’s anxious outburst—
all seem mounting towards terrific emotional explosion. In this regardVanashree Triphathi rightly observes: The
Paravasu-Arvasu parallel with Indra-Vritra and Vishwarupa is complete. Paravasu’s calling the demon, Brahma
Rakshasa, loudly… reverberates in Arvasu a recognition of himself as Vritra-the Demon… Reality is doubled,
and tripled, as Arvasu finds himself enacting two roles, all set to avenge the fratricide of Indra – a prototype of
his brother’s actions. In Vishwarupa’s dying exclamation “You, Brother? Why? I trusted you.” (56) The memory
of the gross betrayal of his own brother becomes fresh in Arvasu’s mind. 6 Arvasu, forgeting that he is acting, is
about to attack Indra (Actor-Manager). However, Nittilai comes and takes off his mask of Vritra. Her interference
makes Arvasu normal. But at the same moment, her brother and husband reach the spot and she is killed
mercilessly with a knife by her husband. She dies like a sacrificial animal. Arvasu takes her corpse to the
sacrificial place. The voice of Indra is heard from the skies, saying, “Arvasu, son, do not grieve….Ask for any
boon and it shall be granted.” (173) Arvasu wants the life of his beloved to be restored, but the Brahma Rakshasa
implores him for his own release. Arvasu, remembering Nittilai’s benevolent nature, asks Indra to release Brahma
Rakshasa. The play ends in rains. Rain is there not because of sacrificial ritual, but because of the human sacrifice
in the form of Nittilai and the grand and noble self sacrifice of Arvasu. Thus, the Shakespearean technique of the
play-within-a-play bridges the gulf between the main plot and the subplot and it brings about a reversal of events.

CRITICAL INTERPRETATION
• The fire connotes both the negative and positive human impulses such as anger, jealousy, revenge, betrayal,
and lust. The rain, on the contrary, denotes the rain of human love and sacrifice, compassion, forgiveness,
revival and regeneration. Commenting of various meanings of Agni, P. Jayalakshmi appropriately states: Agni
works as anger and revenge in Raibhya, Paravasu, and Yavakri. In Vishakha, it burns as lust; and in the people
as hunger due to the persisting drought. In all of them, except in Vishakha, Agni burns as sacrificial fire without
its accompanying grace as vision or light. However, this apparently overarching element of Agni (Fire) in the

3 | Notes On Fire and Rain by Girish Karnad Prof Divya K.B, Dept Of English, Jindal College For Women

Downloaded by Erika Karata (g5avsn9r@10mail.tk)

 lOMoARcPSD|20715033

title of the play burns to convey the lessons the human being must learn about the subjugation of one’s ego to
the Universal Being. Much of the agony in the lives of the major characters is played out on the canvas of
human consciousness till they learn this all-essential lesson of humility.7
• In The Fire and the Rain, the fire sacrifice is a symbol of power and that of spiritual and intellectual peak of
knowledge for Brahmins as priests. The fire sacrifice represents self-gratification, self- examination and
self purification of jealously, envy, power politics and supremacy of their sectarian attitude.

• The play depicts various problems such as caste system, patriarchy, man-woman relationship, existentialism,
problem of identity and loneliness, etc.

• Through the myth of Yavakri, the play explores the futility of false knowledge and evils resulting from pride,
jealousy, lust, and anger. Yavakri, Raibhya and Paravasu are the victims of egoism and they misappropriate
their knowledge for avenging one another. The worlds of Yavakri, Raibhya and Paravasu are filled with
hypocrisy, hatred, treachery, violence and revenge. The seduction of Vishakha by her own father-in-law and
brother-in-law, the killing of the father by his own son, and that of nephew by his uncle (indirectly), the
brother’s attempt to catch his own brother in his treacherous trap throw light on the fundamental evil that
resides in human nature. The pursuit of knowledge does not make them free from evils resulting from pride,
jealousy, lust and revenge. Another important theme, the playwright wants to focus is the perennial problem
of caste system. The Fire sacrifice is organized to propitiate the god of rains. Low caste people are prohibited
to enter the holy area. Priests are directed not to leave the precincts and not talk to the shudras and not to give
themselves to sensual pleasures.

• The play is Karnad’s comment on caste as well as gender-biased society. Both the female characters try their
best to raise a voice of rebellion. But the extent of their resistance is determined by the gender and caste group
to which they belong. It is also observed that their characters are shaped by their respective social positions.
Nittilai is as oppressed as Vishakha or maybe even more, but the oppression in the latter is unnecessary and
avoidable. As a member of a family of the learned men trained in leading disciplined life, such treatment for
Vishakha is unjustified. In the case of Nittilai, the suffering is due to caste division and gender bias in society
and ignorance of men in her community: thus suffering is made unavoidable and inescapable.”

• “Nittilai and Vishakha are both victims of male control, consequent to which is the oppression and exploitation
inflicted upon them by the often violent heterogeneous male subjects. Nittilai seems to suffer double
marginalization, as is often the lot of communities divided on lines of caste and colour, she is marginalized
from the mainstream as belonging to Sudra caste. In her own community, she is presented for demanding her
right to take a life partner of her choice.” Nittilai and Vishakha appear to be in the search for identity. Both of
them suffer from the problem of anonymity. Although Vishakha belongs to an upper-caste Brahmin family
her position is not different from that of Nittilai. Her social position does not provide her any privilege.
Throughout her life, she is dominated by her so-called learned male counterparts. Nittilai belongs to the family
of hunters. Both of them are the victims of the male dominated society in which they are subjected equally to
violent displacement and silencing. These women characters bring to notice the burning reality of the society
that women have been used by their male counterparts as stepping stones in their power struggle. No doubt,
they try to challenge that oppression but in the process they meet with a tragic end. Suffering is their lot, the
badge of their tribe. It is so,because ... humanity is male and man defines woman not in herself but as relative
to him, ...she is the incidental, the inessential as opposed to the essential. He is ... the Absolute- she is the
Other.10 Both the women characters appear to be the witnesses of womankind’s endless suffering in the male
dominated society.

• Thus, the position of women in the patriarchal system of society is one of the major thematic concerns of
Karnad’s plays. The women characters in the play are the victims of patriarchy. Vishakha is exploited by her
husband, father-in-law and her former lover. She becomes a sexual instrument in the hands of the male
characters to avenge each other. And Nittilai becomes a victim of the tribal patriarchy. “The braminical
4 | Notes On Fire and Rain by Girish Karnad Prof Divya K.B, Dept Of English, Jindal College For Women

Downloaded by Erika Karata (g5avsn9r@10mail.tk)

 lOMoARcPSD|20715033

patriarchy in the play reduces the woman to sexual exploitation and neglect by men vying with one another
for knowledge and power. Simple as it may appear to be, the tribal patriarchy also proves to be lethal towards
women who do not abide by the community rules framed by the male elders. 12 Vishakha’s loneliness in the
male-centric world is very effectively presented in the play. She suffers from loneliness because of her selfish
and treacherous lover and her self-centred husband“The image of an empty water-pot covered with cobwebs,
lying in a corner, discarded, to be replenished with life-giving water, is suggestive metaphorically of the
condition of Vishakha’s life— dry, barren and empty.”

• In The Fire and the Rain, Karnad emphasizes that Brahminism is no Godism. He dwells on the merits of
Brahminic qualities like goodness, gentlemanliness, truth and sacrifice, but condemns the devil-like priesthood
and inhuman acts of fire sacrifice at the cost of human life. Paravasu, Yavakri, Raibhya and Bharadwaja belong
to a high Brahminic class and their quest for spiritual power and universal knowledge does not bring them to
the state of supremacy as they are involved in the sub-human, sub-standard and un-Brahminic acts of jealousy,
power hankering, ruthless curse for total ruin of each othe

• The characters involved in the quest for knowledge and superiority mirror their meaner qualities in fires of
sex, anger, politics and jealousy. Politics- power within the knowledgeable person present the bitter reality of
ancient society. Raibhya, Paravasu and Yavakri are the representatives of this society who wanted to get
power, prestige and social recognition by hook or crook, particularly by following the unethical ways and
means. They invest their energies in the possession of power which made them isolated from society. First of
all, Paravasu has gained priestly honours, name and fame but still he was dissatisfied with it. His ambition is
to become equal with Indra. So he crushes or kills those who came in his path, including his own father and
wife. Raibhaya claims superior intellectual and cultural caliber than his son, Paravasu. His unrest wish is that
he should be appointed as the chief priest of fire sacrifice. But the king appoints Paravasu as the chief priest
which made Raibhya jealous. His jealousy results in killing of Yavakri at sacrificial time, particularly for
disturbing Paravasu in the last stages of sacrifice. Indeed the father feels jealousy about the prosperity of his
own son. Yavakri, the power greedy person is disturbed by the growing prestige of Raibhaya family.
Paravasu‟s marriage with his former beloved, Vishakha and his appointment as a chief priest instead of sage
Bharadwaja creates vile designs in Yavakri‟s mind. Therefore he deliberately molests Vishakha in order to
disgrace Paravasu and disrupt the fire sacrifice. Thus he uses his former beloved as a tool to exercise his
vengeance upon Raibhya family. Finally he is punished by Raibhya for his dark deed. On the whole, the game
of power politics results in the extermination of these characters. Indeed their deaths are due to jealousy, rivalry
and competition. Thus they become the victims of power-struggle game. It is criticism of power politics of
Raibhya and Bharadwaja family in general and Brahmin community of Vedic period in particular.

• Use of myths in the plaY : It is a play, which is based on the myth of Yavakri, Indra and Vritra. The eternal
conflict of good and evil continues from the period of the Mahabharata to the modern contemporary society.
The myth of Yavakri is a story of ambition to achieve the universal knowledge directly from the Gods but not
from the human gurus, which is unjustified and immature. Knowledge without experience is dangerous to
humanity is the message passed on by Gods to Yavakri as well as to human beings on earth. The mythical play
within play is enacted in the last section of the play and depicts Indra‟s attempt to destroy Viswa, his
stepbrother, in order to be unrivalled in all the domains. Indra considers himself to be the legitimate son of
Brahma; he cannot tolerate the existence of Viswa, the son of Brahma from an earthly woman or Vritra. It is
a fight for supremacy. Viswa is played by the theatre manager; Vritra by Arvasu. Arvasu is a character in the
original play and his task is to protect humanity. He is severely wronged by his elder brother Paravasu and
falsely accused by him as their father‟s murderer. Paravasu, the chief priest of the seven years‟ fire sacrifice
conducted in the King‟s palace inorder to propitiate God Indra, represents Indra in the play. The drama of real
life runs parallel to the myth. The play underlines the need for supreme human quality, that is mercy and
compassion represented by Nittilai, the beloved of Arvasu, who belongs to the Shudra class–the tribe of
hunters. Nittilai as a „lamp into hurricane‟ symbolizes the rains of human love.The play illustrates the use of
myth in a powerful way. The game of trickery and treachery adopted by Indra in order to kill Virtra in self-

5 | Notes On Fire and Rain by Girish Karnad Prof Divya K.B, Dept Of English, Jindal College For Women

Downloaded by Erika Karata (g5avsn9r@10mail.tk)

 lOMoARcPSD|20715033

defence is the story of modern politicians in the realm of reality. They are much superior to Gods even in their
art of treachery, deceit and cunningness. The myth of the Mahabharata is the story of modern hero of every
family and the play through the myth of Yavakri, an elitist Brahmin, tells the sad aspect of jealousy, power
politics, and neglect of woman.

Conclusion
In The Fire and the Rain, Karnad has succeeded in projecting harsh realities of the modern civilization which is characterized
by stress, strain, confusion, frustration, loneliness, disintegration, and meaninglessness. While depicting the drawbacks and
vices of both an individual and society, Karnad’s humanitarian approach and his commitment to human values are clearly
perceptible. Although the theme of revenge, hatred, violence pervades the entire atmosphere, the play marks the triumph of
goodness over evil. That is why the play ends in rains.
Audio Link of the play in Kannada
Agni Mattu Male - Audiobook - ಗಿರೀಶ ಕಾರ್ನಾಡ - Storytel

SUMMARY
The play The Fire and the Rain occurs in a small region of India long ago that has experienced a lack of rain for
ten years. The king proposed to propitiate the Gods through fire sacrifice. So that God would be pleased and send
rain to the parched land. In this fire sacrifice Paravasu the son of a learned Brahmin Raibhya, was appointed as
the Chief Priest. And the play deals with this appointment and the disappointments of certain other characters.
One disappointment definitely with reference to the father going by ancient Indian tradition, a lot of emphasis
was put on age seniority i.e. age has always been respected. Older people have always been considered wiser
because of their wider experience. Going by this tradition the learned Raibhya should have been appointed as the
chief Priest but for practical reasons longevity of life span, the King chose to appoint Paravasu, the elder son as
the Chief Priest. This appointment had disappointed and agonized the senior. The high priest of the temple,
Paravasu is eager to perform a ceremony to bring rain. The Rain opens with the representative of an actor`s group
expressing their desire to give a dramatic performance as a means of entertainment for the Gods. After much
discussion the group is given permission to perform at the fire sacrifice. The play performed by this group of
actors has a dual audience. First group performing the fire sacrifices as well as the survivors of the drought
stricken kingdom. Second group the actual audience watching the play. In this sense the play performed by the
group of actors is the play incorporated within the main frame of the play „The Fire and the Rain’ Meanwhile,
Paravasu‟s younger brother Aravasu is romancing Nittali. Aravasu is a Brahmin, but Nittilai is of a lower cast,
and there is a difference between Brahmin and Tribal customs. Tribals are more free, more open in making a
marriage proposal or declaration. Declaration of being fit normal and willing to marry had to be made in front of
the entire village as per tribal customs. Aravasu a Brahmin was unaccustomed to this idea and was both nervous
and embarrassed about following this tribal custom. Aravasu has very clear idea about his position with reference
to his family that he is inferior and therefore considered quite worthless by everyone. He is also clear about the
one thing that he wanted in his life is to dance, sing, act, and be with his beloved Nittilai. Paravasu has marital
problems of his own, having abandoned his spouse Vishaka, who is establishing a liaison with Yavakri,
Paravasu‟s first cousin. Yavakri, who has just returned from ten years of meditation, believes that Paravasu is
unfit to be the high priest. His actual behavior and words are far from those of a purified and enlightened person.
After all the penance and sacrifice he has done with God, he continues to be a victim of lust and desire something
not acceptable from an enlightened monk. Thus the reality turns out to be that Yavakri is not very different from
what he was 10 years. For all the apparent „knowledge‟ he is said to have acquired, is as ignorant and uncontrolled
and coarse as he was before. He does not have the mastery of controlling his emotions and desires. All his
knowledge is incapable of making him realize what was inappropriate in speech and acts. Through this the
playwright raises the issue of knowledge versus wisdom. Blind Rabiya the father of both Paravasu and Aravasu,
summon a demon to kill Yavakri, and asks Vishaka to save her lover by asking him to remain in his house for
the whole day. After hearing her father-in-law words, Vishakha seeks Aravasu‟s help. When Aravasu reaches
the place of Yavakri to save him from demon, demon kills Yavakri. After finishing the funeral rites of Yavakri,
6 | Notes On Fire and Rain by Girish Karnad Prof Divya K.B, Dept Of English, Jindal College For Women

Downloaded by Erika Karata (g5avsn9r@10mail.tk)

 lOMoARcPSD|20715033

Aravasu reaches the place of Nittilai‟s village. That is the day Nittilai‟s father has summoned the villagers to
meet Aravasu in order to approve of their marriage. Because of cremation duties and other family matters delay
Aravasu‟s arrival in Nittilai‟s village, her father loses Sankar and Sriprabha 89 patience and hands her off in
marriage to the first volunteer. There is a conflict between father and son, selection of Paravasu at the fire sacrifice
instead of the father who is senior in knowledge, experience, wisdom and age. Father`s opinion about the King`s
choice is very bad of worsens after he sees the son`s behavior returning home when there is still a month left for
the sacrificial rite. Pravasu has responded Rabiya that if he returns back to the ritual in the morning no one would
know. The father was shocked at this response because of the foolishness of the response during sacrificial rites
were more for the sake of self and God and not for the public. Paravasu: The king often says he would have
preferred you to be the Chief Priest. But it was a seven year rite. They thought ….a younger man safer.(29)
Raibhya: full of anger, is full of contempt on the son`s and King`s behavior. Raibhya: if you want to be alone
with wife, send that fool somewhere else. I don’t need him .It’s not the wild beasts one has to watch out for ---
it’s the human beings (30) Soon, Paravusu kills Raibhya because he disrupted the sacrifice by killing Yavakri
and he had behaved indecently with his daughter-in-law Vishakha. Hence according to Paravasu, Raibhya his
father deserved to die. He asks Aravasu that he has to return to preside over the yajana and cannot leave the
precincts of the sacrifice before the completion of the tenure. Arvasu complies with the orders of his brother
which results in his being accused of murder and beaten almost to death. A dying Aravasu is rescued by the actor
manager and nursed back to health by his beloved Nittilai. The care and concern shown by Nittilai in his hour of
need lends a healing touch to Arvasu who had been wounded emotionally and physically by his brother. Arvasu
wanted to take revenge for the betrayal by his brother because he was convinced that the chain of events that had
occurred recently happened because he was about to reject his caste by getting married to Nittilai. The two deaths
and their outcome had driven him away from Nittilai. Paravasu revenges his brother in two ways, one by denying
his permission to act and by creating circumstances in which he could not get married to Nittilai. Nittilai who
belonged to a hunter tribe that was very close to nature was full of practical common sense. She dissuaded Arvasu
from the idea of revenge, because she sincerely thought that there would only be more bloodshed if Arvasu tried
to take revenge. This would only lead to more sorrow and suffering. The bloodshed of revenge did not have the
capacity to set right or change in any way anything that had gone wrong. Her advice was to leave things as they
were so that suffering might be minimized. When Aravasu regains his strength, he performs in a play wearing a
mask in front of Paravasu, the priest, and the villagers. At a dramatic point in the play, Aravasu deviates from the
script to burn down the temple, killing Paravasu, while villagers from Nittilai find her in the audience and slay
her. With dying Nittilai in Aravasu‟s arms, the God Indra suddenly appears, offering to grant Aravasu a single
wish. Although he could ask to rain, Aravasu clearly wants Nittilai alive. Indra says that such a wish would
reverse time, but ultimately the same events would repeat. Then the demon who killed Yavakri appears, begging
Aravasu to ask Indra for his release from a condition in which he can neither live normally nor die peacefully.
Aravasu then asks Indra for the demon‟s freedom, reasoning that Nittilai would have made the same decision.
Rain falls in abundance.

7 | Notes On Fire and Rain by Girish Karnad Prof Divya K.B, Dept Of English, Jindal College For Women

Downloaded by Erika Karata (g5avsn9r@10mail.tk)