Vulnerability

All of us in life have vulnerability – something that is a weak spot in our life. It could be ones character trait, or a liking for something material or person, or anything, but everybody has vulnerability or vulnerable zones.

Mythology has exemplified this vulnerability into a weak spot for many a mythical hero, which ends up as a cause for destruction. Let us see some of these vulnerabilities which led to their nemesis.

One of the first that comes to my mind is Achilles Heel, which is synonymous to the phrase ‘weak spot’. To say that someone has an Achilles Heel is to imply that the person has a weak spot or a major vulnerability.

Achilles was the son of a mortal father and the nymph Thetis. Thetis was very beautiful and had attracted Zeus, the King of gods. But, then he came to know about a prophesy, that the child of Thetis would be far greater than his father, and Zeus was not interested in losing his position. One by one, all the gods lost interest in her and she had to settle down for a mortal by the name of King Peleus. When Achilles was born, in a bid to ensure that her son would be immortal, Thetis dipped the baby Achilles in the River Styx. This made Achilles invulnerable, except for the place where Thetis’s fingers had gripped him while dipping, which was his heel. Thus his heel was mortal enough to strike a deadly blow during the Trojan War. Achilles was killed by an arrow by Paris, which was divinely guided to Achilles’ heel.

Thetis dipping Achilles in River Styx- Painting by Ruben

In Mahabharat too we have many such examples. Towards the end of the war of Kurukshetra, when the Kauravas were suffering heavy casualties, Gandhari sent word to Duryodhan to come and see him without wearing any clothes before the crack of dawn. She would open her blindfold from her eyes, which had immense power due to her piousness and fidelity, and her glance would make him invulnerable to any weapons whatsoever.

When Duryodhan was on his way, he was stopped by Krishna, who ridiculed him for allowing his mother to see a grown-up male without any clothes and that too for the first time, since Gandhari had not seen any of her sons. Being chastised he decided to cover himself below the belt with a banana leaf. When Gandhari opened her blindfold, the power of her eyes made Duryodhan’s entire body invulnerable, except for his thighs. Later, during a duel, Bhima hits Duryodhan on his thighs, leading to Duryodhan’s death.

The above are examples of physical vulnerability. But there are many instances where we find examples of non-physical weaknesses in man’s life.

An interesting example is that of the Jewish hero, Sampson. Sampson was chosen by God to deliver Israel from the hands of the Philistines who were occupying the land and oppressing Israel. To enable him in his mission, God had granted him immense power and this power resided in his hair. As Sampson grew up, he started falling for prostitutes and they soon became his weakness. In one such moment of weakness, he fell in love with a harlot, by the name of Delilah. Delilah was paid by the Philistines to learn the secret of his heavenly strength, and Sampson who was not supposed to reveal this to anybody, committed the cardinal sin of telling it to Delilah. Soon, Delilah put Sampson to sleep and later shaved his head. When Sampson woke up, he was given to the Philistines, who blinded him and put him in prison. It is said that Sampson’s, weakness for women, made him immensely vulnerable and there are many an instance when he lands in problem, and sways from his heavenly duty.

Delilah shaving Sampson's hair while he was asleep

In Mahabharata, we find many examples of non-physical weaknesses in man’s life. Karna was known for his charity. The cause of charity was so great for him, that he even decided to give his body armour (kavach) when asked for making him vulnerable to attacks in the forthcoming war of Kurukshetra, the time when he would have needed it the most. Dhritarashtra’s weakness was his son, Duryodhan, Yudhistir’s weakness was the game of dice and Bhima’s weakness was food and each of them had paid a heavy price for not being able to conquer their weakness. 

A man’s (for that matter, woman’s too!) Achilles Heel can be anything – sex, alcohol, drugs, woman, anger, arrogance, greed, selfishness, laziness, procrastination, etc. There is no end to the vulnerabilities that we are surrounded by in life. It is important to understand and recognise them. One should be aware of what is ones weakness, not like Sampson, who did not know that his weakness for women would get him into trouble or like Yudhistir, whose ‘innocent’ love for gambling led him to lose everything again and again. Ignorance of one’s weakness or not accepting the same, both can lead to grave situations.

Now that you know all about vulnerabilities……what is your Achilles Heel?

Gandhari’s Hundred Sons

One of my readers sent me the following after reading “Gandhari and her Karma ” dated June 25, 2012, –

“Hi Utkarsh………, had a question too. Gandhari had 100 sons, as we all know it takes 9 months for incubating a baby (unless they had machines for the same at that time) and if she had 1 baby at a time, by the time the 100th would be born the first one would be 75! So how old was Gandhari during the war? Or did she give birth to all 100 at the same time? In which case, biologically, it would be difficult for all 100 to survive. What do you think?”

An interesting question and often asked by many. How can someone have 100 sons together or even one after another? Could it be that she had many combinations of twins, triplets, quadruplets, etc. many times over?

Mythology is replete with instances which are known as supra-normal births (beyond the range of normal or scientifically explainable), where births have taken place from fire, any body fluids, like tears and sweat, or from body parts like thigh, etc. This is essentially done, to connote a sense of ‘difference’ on the said character and also to hint that the character is destined to do in-human acts or feats. This was the then author’s way of assigning an importance to the character in reference. We will not get into such instances as all heroes in mythology have had ‘different’ births, like Krishna, Jesus, Hercules, Rama, Ganapati, to name just a few. Mahabharat is full of supra-normal births, be it Dronacharya, Kripacharya, Draupadi and her brother, and of course, Gandhari’s hundred sons.

The birth of Gandhari’s hundred sons, in brief – After Gandhari had conceived it was close to two years and she had not delivered. When she heard the news of Kunti’s children being born in the jungles, she was frustrated and angry and in her state of rage, she started beating her stomach. Soon she delivered a mass of flesh. Vyas had once blessed her with a hundred sons (a common blessing in those days) and when she saw the mass of flesh, he was called. He immediately instructed her to assemble a hundred jars with ghee (oil) in it. Gandhari at this stage expressed her desire to have a daughter too. As soon as the jars were assembled, Vyas divided the ball of flesh into a hundred and one parts and distributed each into the jars. He asked her to cover them and leave them, and soon she was the mother of hundred sons and one daughter.

Many later day thinkers hint at the concept which is better known to us today as ‘in-vitro fertilisation’. Today we know of such methods of IVF and cloning whereby births can be ‘made’ through artificial methods. I am by no means saying that Vyasa was a gynecologist and nor am I saying that people then had knowledge of such modern methods of reproduction. It could just be the figment of a creative writer’s imagination who had imagined a possibility, without going into the intricacies of the method. Also, don’t forget what is said at the beginning of the epic Mahabharata – “What is found herein may also be found elsewhere; What is not found herein does not exist.”

Another theory says that there weren’t a hundred sons, but just two, i.e. Duryodhan and Dushsshan. This gains ground as in the entire epic; these were the only two whose names had cropped up time and again (though later, we have heard of Vikarna, the Kaurava who was against the war). Also, the pregnancy lasting for two years lends credence to this theory. People of antiquity had never quite been able to explain the concept of twins (You can read more about twins in mythology in my earlier series "Twins – A case of peaceful co-existence. " dated May 1, 2011). The two-year pregnancy could have been put in to explain the birth of twins.

Another version is that the evil of Duryodhan was equal to that of hundred people; a concept similar to that of Ravana’s ten heads which implied his immense intelligence and knowledge. Mythology, like fiction also thrives on hyperbole and on a more simplistic note, this could be just that.

Another version takes the help of etymology (the study of the origin of words). Duryodhan means one who is difficult to fight, (‘duh’ – difficult & ‘yodh’ – to fight) representing ego & Dushasana means difficult to control. Representing ‘huge ego’ and ‘lack of control’ as a hundred only gave a sense of proportion to the immense trouble that the duo could unleash.

A philosophic explanation is as follows – Dhritarashtra represented blind mind and Gandhari represented blind intellect following the blind mind. Together they breed unfulfilled desires, dreams and ambitions, all unleashed on what stood for reason and law (dharma). The result of such a clash could only be a war of epic proportions!

The sheer beauty of what the authors of antiquity wrote is brought out by such representations, which to a rationalist mind might seem ridiculous and jest-worthy! Modern thinking should be used to understand the deeper meanings in the myths and not to look down and make fun of what was written way back, when ‘science’ was not a subject. I guess this is what education is all about!

I hope I have been able to answer my readers query!!

Gandhari and her Karma

In a previous article - Dhritarashtra of Modern Times (dated June 12, 2012), we read about the karmic destiny of Dhritarashtra. How it was destiny that made him blind and made him endure the death of a hundred sons. Mahabharata has numerous such examples which give similar reasons for ones suffering in the present life.

From Dhritarashtra, let’s move on to Gandhari. Why was she destined to live a life of blindness, when she was not naturally blind and why did she have to endure such tragedy?

Dhritarashtra and Gandhari

Gandhari was the daughter of Gandhar, the modern day Kandahar, in Afghanistan. She tied a cloth on her eyes when she came to know that her would-be husband was born blind and vowed never to see what he couldn’t. Many say that she made a mistake and if she had not done this, she would have been a great help to her blind husband, and the course of Mahabharata would have been different. Gandhari’s logic however, was that she did not want to seem superior in any way from her husband and make him feel small, and this act of hers had made her his equal. Some even say that she did this as a silent protest to the high-handed behaviour of Bhishma, who despite Dhirtarashtra’s disability had nearly forced the King of Gandhar to agree to the alliance. In the modern world, her act could be questioned, but in Mhabharata, she was hailed as an ideal woman.

Her blindfold is supposed to have given her an inner view to the world around her and though she missed a lot, she never lost ‘sight’ of the fact that the Pandavas were not treated justly. On many occasions she is known to have advised her husband and chastised her son Duryodhan. At the end of the war of Kurukshetra, she is supposed to have asked Lord Krishna, whom she blamed for the war and the death of her hundred sons, especially Duryodhan, as to what had been the reason for such a tragic life.

According to Lord Krishna, long back, while cooking rice, she had poured hot water of the boiled rice on the ground outside her kitchen. This hot water killed all the hundred eggs laid by an insect. This act of hers had earned the wrath of the mother insect who is supposed to have cursed her that she too would have to endure the deaths of her sons, as she had. (In many villages women are advised not to pour hot water from the rice on the ground; they should pour it after it has cooled down or mix cold water before draining it off!). According another local rendition of Mahabharata from the East, she was cursed by the mother turtle whose eggs, Gandhari had once crushed one by one.

The above is a classic case of karmic destiny which has been illustrated time and again through various characters of Mahabharata. Rather, it seems to be an underlying theme of Mahabharata. This might have been done by the authors of the times to ensure that one takes care of one’s actions in the present life. Even if this is done out of a fear for the results in the next life, one will ensure that he or she does little or no harm. How would one react to ones shortcomings in this life? Well, one school of thought would feel that if the karmic theory is to be subscribed to, then people would stop making efforts to change the hardship and simply live with it. Contrary to this, one can say that one would accept it as destiny and not be unnecessarily self-critical. Accept and move on to face the new challenges that have been in store!

I guess this theory of Karmic destiny is a case of glass half full!

There are a number of such characters in Mahabharata, who were what they were, due to the theory of karma. All but one, who was a tragic character for no theory of karma.

We will discuss this character next time! Keep reading….