Yesterday, we
read about the death of Abhimanyu which seemed to be part of the war-strategy of
Lord Krishna. Did he seem like a villain who was out to eliminate the young
Pandava princes and get them to sacrifice each of them and leave the Kuru clan
with no survivor (except Abhimanyu’s unborn son, Parikshit)?
Not exactly! Yes
Abhimanyu was killed as a part of a plan, but a plan which was way beyond the
battlefields of Kurukshetra.
Before it was
time for Vishnu to take the mortal birth of Krishna, each of the gods were
expected to contribute towards the massive destruction that was expected on
earth, i.e. in the war of Kurukshetra (as they say, everything is destined).
Many sources say, that the Pandavas, who were the sons of gods, were actually
the representatives of the said gods (like Yudhishtir represented Dharma, Bhima
represented Vayu and Arjuna represented Indra, etc.). As a part of this design,
Abhimanyu was the reincarnation of Chandra, the Moon-god’s son, Varchas.
As an arrangement,
Chandra did not want to part with his son for too long and so had agreed to
part with him only for sixteen years and also wanted his son to be known as a
hero. This was known to Krishna, and thus he is supposed to have ensured that
Abhimanyu died a heroic death at the young age of sixteen and leave the world
and go back to his father, Chandra.
The fact that
the death of Abhimanyu was the turning point in the war has been well accepted
by one and all. The death of his favourite son, from Subhadra, made Arjuna cry
for blood and bring out the warrior in him.
This should be
seen as the utilisation of a useful piece of information for a larger cause – a
great skill to possess in the field of strategy. The vows of Draupadi, the
hardships they had to undergo, the treachery and the unfairness meted out to
them, besides Krishna’s rendition of Gita had not quite had the desired effect
on Arjuna that was needed in the kind of battle that was being fought.
Abhimanyu could have been eliminated as any other death in the battlefield, but
the way he got killed, roused the passions and anger in a relatively cold
Arjuna who was not fighting to his potential and was avoiding all the seniors
of the Kaurava army. His death changed the whole attitude of Arjuna and there was
no looking back thereafter.
Many scholars
have also opined that this could have also been done to serve as a lesson to
one and all that half knowledge is dangerous and that wars have to be fought
through a combination of strategy and bravery, not just the latter.
So can we still
blame Krishna for the death of Abhimanyu, or should we see as a masterstroke in
the master plan?
I strongly feel that sacrificing Abhimanyu or Iravan for bringing out the warrior iin Arjun doesnt make him a great warrior. Infact Krishna playing this shrude political move against his nephew for the throne was indeed to blame. As for thr reincarnation thing, I also have a blog on it and I repeat here that death coming at sixteen and brutal torturous murder is different. Death could have been peaceful or normal one on one like a warrior. And I also feel that this situation was unfair for uttara as well. She did nothing to deserve all this sorrow within a year of her marriage and in her pregnancy. Parikhit didnot deserve to never know a father. Abhimanyu never deserved this death and not even know about his son...
ReplyDelete