A Blog on Mythology and occasionally on Reality.


This is a Blog on Mythology, both Indian and World and especially the analysis of the myths.

In effect, the interpretation of the inherent Symbolism.


Pages

Showing posts with label Krishna. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Krishna. Show all posts

Wednesday, March 20, 2013

Krishna – the deserter



All of us know how Lord Krishna stopped Arjun from fleeing the battlefield, just before the battle of Kurukshetra in the epic Mahabharata. A lesser known myth tells us of Krishna himself doing the same at one point of time, but with a difference.

After Krishna killed his uncle, Kansa, he installed Kansa’s father, King Ugrasen on the throne of Mathura as the King of the Yadavas. The killing of Kansa had upset Kansa’s father-in-law, the mighty and powerful, King of Magadh, Jarasandha, since two of his daughters were married to Kansa and were now widows. Both the daughters returned to Jarasandha and urged their father to avenge their plight.

Jarasandha decided to kill Krishna and laid siege on Mathura. The army of the Yadavas was no match to that of Jarasandha’s huge army, but the Yadavas managed to send them back under the able leadership of Krishna. Jarasandha is supposed to have attacked Mathura more than seventeen times, each time inflicting a huge blow to the Yadavas and the casualties kept mounting and soon the Yadavas had an army which was only name-sake.

It was then that Krishna decided to leave Mathura and got Lord Vishwakarma to build a new city for them. Vishwakarma made a walled-city called Dwarka, the city with gates, which was well fortified and safe on an island on the West. However, the Yadavas saw this eviction from Mathura as an act of weakness and protested. Krishna explained to them, that he was capable of killing Jarasandha, but his time had not come, and he would not do anything which was against destiny. Also, Jarasandha’s enmity was not with the Yadavas, but with him. Krishna felt that risking the lives of so many and inflicting casualties on the community was unfair. After a lot of deliberations, King Ugrasen agreed with Krishna’s views and they decided to shift.

Soon Jarasandha laid siege, and this time set the entire city of Mathura on fire. But Krishna and others had already slipped out of Mathura. This singular act of his, earned him the epithet of ‘Ranchod-rai’, one who flees from the battlefield, or the deserter. Time and again, Krishna has been taunted for this desertion and even called a coward in Mb, but many see this as an act of practical sense. Putting an entire community at risk for what was a personal enmity was unfair. Also, it is always better to fight an equal war and when one is ready. The Yadavas were not ready and were no match to the mighty army of Jarasandha. Balarama, the elder brother of Krishna had protested to this plan of desertion, but Krishna prevailed, much to the dislike of Balarama and many others.

Fighting in battles is not just an act of bravery, but also that of strategy. Jarasandha never attacked Dwarka which was well fortified, proves the point that Krishna’s decision was that of good war strategy, which in the long run led to no casualties and no bloodshed. His decision to take on Jarasandha later when he had able support of warriors worthy of Jarasandha, proved beneficial to the entire community.

A single epithet of the deserter did not reduce his importance, rather only enhanced it as a master-strategist with a practical sense rather than a misplaced sense of patriotism.

The critical difference of Krishna’s desertion and Arjun not wanting to fight the war of Kurukshetra, is that Arjun had developed cold feet and was having moral dilemma whereas Krishna’s desertion was part of war-strategy. You can read more on this in one of my earlier articles  Arjuna's Dilemma .
There exists a famous temple of Ranchod-rai in Dakor, Gujarat. The formation of the temple and the idol of the temple have its own rich mythology, which will be for some other day.

So did Krishna ever manage to eliminate Jarasandha? That too is for another day!!!


Wednesday, March 6, 2013

King Muchukunda – Indian Rip Van Winkle


Statue of Rip Van Winkle in Irvington, NY

As children all of us have read or heard about Rip Van Winkle. Rip Van Winkle is a short story, written by Washington Irving in 1819. The story is based during the years before and after the American War of Revolution. Rip Van was of Dutch origin and well-known in his village. Once to avoid his wife’s constant nagging about his laziness, he went to the mountains, and due to some strange turn of events, fell asleep for twenty years. When he woke up, he was an old man, and the village had changed and so had all the people.

Let me tell you about a Rip Van Winkle from Hindu mythology.

King Muchukunda was born in the Ikshvaku dynasty, also known as the Suryavamsha. Some of the well-known kings of this dynasty were the likes of Raja Harishchandra and Lord Ram. Once the gods were having a tough time with the demons and were losing all the battles. The gods approached King Muchukunda to bail them out till Kartikeya, son of Lord Shiva was ready to take up the leadership. Muchukunda fought the demons for many years without rest. Later, Lord Indra approached him and asked him to ask for a boon for the services rendered by him. Muchukunda was so tired that he asked for the boon of sleep and whosoever woke him up, should be burnt to ashes.

Having received the boon from Indra, Muchukunda, went down to earth and found himself a cave and went off to sleep. According to the epic Mahabharata, ages later, during the times of Lord Krishna, there was a warrior by the name of Kalayavan who was undefeated in battles due to a boon he had received by the gods. It was foretold that Krishna would be the cause of his death, but in his arrogance, he did not heed it. He waged a war on Mathura and decided to face Krishna in a battle. When the two armies came face to face, Krishna started walking off the battle field.

Kalayavan followed him from the field, till he saw Krishna entering into a cave. Krishna found the sleeping Muchukunda, and spread his upper garment on him and hid himself. When Kalayavan entered the dark cave, he could not see anything, and when he noticed Krishna’s garment. He tugged on to it and woke up Muchukunda. As soon as Muchukunda, opened his eyes, Kalayavan was reduced to ashes, thus bringing an end to the terror he had unleashed.
Painting - Vishnu appears to Muchukunda in the cave
Muchukunda then saw Krishna and immediately realised that this was none other than Lord Vishnu. When Muchukunda came out of the cave, he noticed that it had indeed been a long time since he was sleeping and he found that men had become a lot shorter since his time. He realised that he was a misfit in the world, so on the advice of Krishna, he went towards the North to the Gandamadana Mountains to do penance to attain moksha.

King Muchukunda was supposed to be a king from South. The Muchukunda river, today better known as the Musi flows as a tributary of the river Krishna in Andhra Pradesh.

Strange coincidences, sans the element of time, between the two stories of Rip Van Winkle and King Muchukunda, right?



Pics courtesy - Wikipedia

Friday, August 10, 2012

Krishna and Karna Meeting


On the occasion of Janamashtami, the birthday of Lord Krishna, I would like to take up an aspect from the epic Mahabharata, for which he has been much maligned.

This refers to the meeting between Lord Krishna and Karna prior to the war of Kurukshetra, where Lord Krishna reveals to Karna his parentage. Many have questioned the timing of this act, since it was just before the war and have accused him of trying to ‘buy’ the support of Karna. Was this not an emotional blackmail, which would have weakened him just when he needed to be strong? Was this not an act of extreme selfishness, especially when Karna was the greatest adversary of Krishna’s protégé, Arjun? Also, was it ethical to lure him with Kingship and all that was Pandavas to be his (surreptitiously speaking, Draupadi too)?

To understand this act in perspective, it is important to understand the background. Lord Krishna was always against the war as he was well aware of the quantum of destruction of human lives. He had made all efforts to avoid a war, much to the disagreement of many who see him as a God.

Right at the beginning, when the war was first proposed in the city of Virata, it was Krishna who had advised against it. When Arjuna came to seek his participation in the battle, he wowed not to take up arms in the battle and that he would not fight. But even that did not stop the war. All who have done justice to the epic would vouch for his earnest effort to stall the war. Seeing no alternative, he proceeded to Hastinapur hoping that he would be able to broker peace by meeting the seniors of the Kuru clan there. The meeting was not fruitful; rather it was quite acrimonious when Duryodhan ordered that the ‘cowherd’ be arrested. Thus this last effort too was wasted.

Krishna never doubted the ability and the sincerity of Karna. One would also agree that Karna was a major strength of Duryodhana. If Karna’s assistance was not forthcoming, Duryodhana would never be so forceful for the war. If he felt that Karna was with his enemies, he could have refrained from the war and that was Krishna’s major objective of trying to stall the war. The offer to Karna to defect and all that was offered to him was not to ‘buy-him’ but to make the last–ditch effort to stop the massive destruction which only he could foresee.

Needless to say, that this was in the interest of all. First, it was in the welfare of Karna, as he would become the King and would also be in the right company which he so deserved. Second, this would benefit Duryodhana too as in the event of a war; there was a distinct possibility that he would not only lose his kingdom, but his kith and kin too. Third it would also give Kunti a chance to accept Karna her first born and allow some legitimacy to the much-insulted Karna on his parentage. It was in the interest of the Pandava’s too as with the avoidance of war, the Pandava’s would be absolved of the barbarous war and slaughtering of their kin. This single act of revealing to Karna his identity was an act of supreme righteousness and goodness as the advice would save innumerable human lives.

Was this a selfish act on the part of Krishna? It is pertinent to mention here that if Krishna’s intentions were malicious, then he could have revealed Karna’s parentage in public. If he didn’t achieve his prime objective of stopping the war, at least he would have had him broken in public. It could have created some rift between him and Duryodhana and Krishna would still have benefitted. But he did nothing of that sort. Krishna gave the brave his due and did not compromise with his sense of privacy right till the end of the epic.

It is important to see certain things in the right perspective, though it is quite interesting to see things tangentially. Tangential vision creates for juicy controversy and gossip. But an educated and matured mind should see things in the right perspective, especially since we are talking of an important character in Mahabharata. Detractors and sceptics abound in this world and there are a many. But readers of this Blog are encouraged to see things the way they are and ought to be.

Anybody disagreeing can write to me with their views, as debate is the foundation of a matured society, as against outright criticism.

Happy Janamashtami to one and all, believers and non-believers!!

Earlier articles on Janamashtami -

This is Utkarsh Speaking: Arjuna's Dilemma
This is Utkarsh Speaking: Krishna

Wednesday, July 4, 2012

Abhimanyu’s Death


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?


Tuesday, July 3, 2012

Death of Young Pandava Princes – Part of war Strategy (?)


Let me tell you three stories from Mahabharata, which shows Lord Krishna’s strategic moves during the war of Kurukshetra, all having a common theme.

First the stories.

Story # 1 –
In spite of all that Krishna had to tell Arjuna in the form of Gita, Arjuna still developed weak-knees when it came to attacking/fighting seniors like Bhisma and Drona. In the war, there were no seniors and no brothers, all were adversaries, was something Krishna was not able to instil in Arjuna. Krishna noticed how, Arjuna would avoid fighting Bhishma and Drona and somewhere lacked the ‘killer-instinct’. This was noticed by Drona and understood Arjuna’s predicament since Drona had been Arjuna’s teacher and understood him well. So he made a plan to strike the Pandavas knowing well that Arjuna wouldn’t attack him. He planned that Arjuna would be made to chase and fight the massive Narayani army of Krishna (which was fighting on behalf of the Kauravas), while they collectively attacked the other Pandavas elsewhere. Once, Arjuna was busy fighting the Narayani army single-handedly, Yudhishtir was getting surrounded by all the stalwarts of the Kuarava army, in what was known as the chakravyuh, or an entrapment. Breaching it and coming out of it unscathed was an art which needed a skill that many did not have. Arjuna’s sixteen year old son, Abhimanyu, knew how to breach it, as he had heard his father tell his mother about it when he was in her womb, but did not know how to come out of it, as his mother had fallen asleep, by the time Arjuna reached the breaching part and seeing Subhadra asleep, he stopped there.

Abhimanyu agreed to breach the chakravyuh and Yudhishtir promised to rescue him once he was in. As decided, Abhimanyu managed to breach the entrapment and release Yudhishtir, but once out, the entrapment surrounded Abhimanyu and the brave lad was killed by all the Kaurava seniors as Yudhishtir could not breach the chakravyuh. Many say, that though Arjuna was fighting elsewhere, Krishna was aware of this and he allowed this to happen. Why? Because of an effect that Krishna wanted out of Arjuna. The death of Abhimanyu enraged Arjuna so much that he lost all semblance of war-rules and went on a rampage the next day. Krishna had managed to light the fire, needed in a warrior, but Arjuna had lost his son in the war.

Story # 2 –
Just before the, the war of Kurukshetra began, Lord Indra under the instructions of Lord Krishna, came in the form of an ascetic and asked for two of the most precious thing from Karna, at a time, which Karna had reserved for doing acts of charity. This was the Kavacha, or the armour that he was born with and which also made him invincible. Seeing him dripping with blood as he cut off the armour which was part of his body, Indra was moved and gave him a spear, which would kill any one person he wanted to, and nothing, no craft nor magic could come in the way. Karna had kept the spear for his arch enemy, Arjuna. When Krishna came to know about this, he decided to unleash Bhima’s giant son, Ghatothkach on the Kaurava army, who ended up inflicting heavy casualty on the Kaurava army. With every step, he would kill thousands of soldiers and crush horses and elephants under his feet. With no option left, Duryodhan pleaded that Karna use his spear to stop the heavy destruction that the Kaurava army were facing and Karna had to give in and hurl the spear, killing Ghatothkach, but leaving Karna with less chances of killing his enemy, Arjuna.

Thus Krishna managed to save the life of Arjuna, but got Bhima’s son killed.

Story # 3 –
I will not delve into the details of the final story, as this has been discussed at length in my earlier articles. This pertains to the story of Barbareek (http://utkarshspeak.blogspot.in/2012/02/barbareek-aka-khatu-shyam-baba.html) and Iravan (http://utkarshspeak.blogspot.in/2012/03/iravan-south-indian-barbareek.html ). Both the characters were directly related to the Pandavas and were asked by Krishna to sacrifice themselves for the success of the Pandavas, which they did.

Conclusion –
So what are we to make out of these acts by Krishna? 
Sons of the Pandavas, being made to die young, to save the lives of their fathers or to ensure the success of the Pandavas? 
Was this fair on the part of Krishna who was also the master strategist in the war of Kurukshetra? 
Was this inevitable or was there some other way out? 
Or can we ascribe this to the age-old adage – “All’s fair in (love &) war”.

You tell me…..





Friday, June 29, 2012

Karna and his karma


In a couple of previous article we read about how ones present life was affected due to the acts of one’s past life, w.r.t. Dhritarashtra and Gandhari from the epic Mahabharata. Our epics are full of examples of Karmic destiny, especially Mahabharata. Nearly all characters have been subject to this, including Lord Krishna.

However, Karna was one character in Mahabharata whose tragedy had nothing to do with his past life (or so it seems as nothing has been found in any texts). His tragedy is due to his being good, yes; all that goes wrong with him is because he wanted to be of help to someone. Let’s see how.

It is said that Karna was training under the great ascetic-warrior, Parashuram (who was also an avatar of Lord Vishnu). Karna had told him the truth that he was raised by a charioteer and did not know his caste. Once, Parashuram went off to sleep with his head on Karna’s lap. A blood-sucking insect bit Karna on his thigh. It pained Karna, but he did not move, lest it woke up his Guru. When Parashuram came to know about it, he was shocked that someone could bear so much pain in spite of all the blood that had been lost. According to him, only a Kshatriya could have it in him to bear such pain and Parshuram hated Kshatriyas. This enraged Parashuram so much that he cursed him that, all that he had learnt from him would go in vain, as he would never be able to use it, especially when he needed the most.

Isn’t this tragic? Karna was honest enough to say what he did as he had no clue about his parentage and by not moving after the insect bite, he was only allowing his Guru a peaceful nap. Was this fair?

Another legend says that long ago, Karna saw a young girl crying as she had spilt milk on the ground. To stop her from crying, Karna is supposed to have taken soil from the ground where milk was spilt and squeezed out the milk so that the child could have it. This angered Bhoo-devi (Earth-deity) and she is supposed to have cursed Karna that it would be the same soil that would one day, hold him to his death, as he had squeezed out milk from her soil.

During the war of Kurukshetra in Mahabharata, at a very strategic point, the wheel of Karna’s chariot was stuck in the soil and no efforts would get it out of the soil. He got down the chariot to do so physically, as he had forgotten the magic formula taught to him by Parashuram to release a wheel if stuck on the ground, is when he gets hit by Arjuna. His end was brought by the act of kindness that he had shown to his guru and the crying girl.

This make one feel that Karna’s tragedy had nothing to do with his karma, but was some sort of a conspiracy to make sure that he suffers. The following story also lends credence to the same theory.

Karna’s charioteer was Shalya, the King of Madra. Shalya was the maternal uncle of the younger Pandavas, i.e. Nakula and Sahadeva. When Kings and regions were aligning themselves for the great war of Kurukshetra, Shalya left for the battlefield. On his way, he was pleased to see that arrangements were made for his army and was impressed at the thoughtfulness of the Pandavas. Later he learnt that he had been duped into accepting the hospitality, from the Kauravas, due to which he had to fight on behalf of the Kauravas. To humiliate him further, Duryodhan asked Shalya to be the charioteer of Karna, the arch-enemy of the Pandavas. On Krishna’s advice, Shalya would continuously praise Arjuna during the battle, to de-motivate and distract Karna.

Also, when anything goes wrong with a chariot, it is the responsibility of the charioteer to alight from the chariot and repair it. When Karna’s chariot got stuck on the ground, Karna is supposed to have asked Shalya to do so, but Shalya refused to alight as he was a King and it was below his dignity to such things, besides the fact that he did not know how to get the wheel out of the ground. It was only when Shalya refused to do anything, did Karna have to alight, disarming himself, which made him vulnerable to Arjuna’s attack.

All this lends credence to the theory of conspiracy. Where is karmic destiny here? Karna had been wronged from the time he was born to an unwed mother, Kunti. All through the epic he had been insulted about his lack of knowledge of his parentage, when two of the most important characters of the epic, Kunti and Krishna were actually aware of it but had opted to keep quiet. He is apprised of the truth at a wrong moment in the epic and that too as an effort to buy his support. At the end, he dies a heroic death. It is said that the day he was killed, the war came to an early end for that day, as all the charioteers from both the sides mourned his death, as he was raised by a charioteer.

Could the author of the epic have decided to create a tragic character and thus such characterisation? Or was it the ideal example of a good guy on the wrong side?

Whatever, be the case, Karna’s tragedy had nothing to do with his karma.

Thursday, June 21, 2012

Ratha-yatra of Puri


Today is the famous Ratha-yatra festival in India which is celebrated with much fanfare in Puri, Odisha and other Eastern parts of India. Lately, the festival is celebrated in many other parts, under the aegis of ISKCON group.

Last month, I had written a few articles on the similarities of our Ratha-yatra with similar yatras in Nepal and Egypt (http://www.utkarshspeak.blogspot.in/2012/05/ratha-yatra-in-india-and-abroad-part-2.html ). But today we will focus on myths and legends of the Puri Ratha-yatra.

According to the most prominent legend from Skanda Purana, after the war of Mahabharata, King Indradyumna was very intrigued when a travelling pilgrim told him about the practice of worshipping of Nila Madhava (Blue Vishnu) in the region of Nilanchal (Blue Mountains) in the present day Odisha. The next day, Vidyapati, the kings brother set out for the region to have a look at the deity. The Savara king of the region, received Vidyapati and assured him to take him to see the deity the next day, but under the condition that he would be blindfolded to and from the temple. Vidyapati agreed, but took some mustard seeds in his pocket, in which he had made a small hole. The entire route to the temple was strewn with mustard seeds so that the route would be marked with mustard flowers for him to seek out the way next time he wanted to go.

Later Vidyapati returned to his region and told the whole story to King Indradyumna, who then set out to see the deity by himself. On reaching the spot, they were surprised to see that the deity was missing and the whole area was covered with sands from the nearby shore. The King came back dejected. Later he was told by Narada Muni to perform Ashwamedha Yagna to appease Nilamadhava. On the completion of the yagna, they heard a divine voice tell them that his prayers have been answered and that they would find a log floating on the waters soon, which would have divine marks like a conch-shell, etc. The king should carve out images of three gods and install and worship the same. Soon after they found a log of wood floating with such marks and the log was of neem tree. Around the same time an old Brahmin came from nowhere and suggested that he could do the work best as he understood the divine marks, but with a condition that he would do it behind closed doors and would not come out of the room till the idols were ready and nobody should come in before it was ready.

Soon the carving started and everybody grew curious day by day, just as were the King and his Queen. One day they heard no sound coming from behind the doors and the Queen was sure that the old Brahmin was dead. She ordered the doors to be opened. As soon as the door was opened, the old Brahmin vanished from there and there were only the unfinished idols. Since that day, the unfinished idols have been worshipped in the same form. Many say that the old Brahmin was none other than the divine architect, Lord Vishwakarma, himself.

The idols are made of wood, so the idols have to be replaced once in a while. The idols are replaced in the years when there are two Ashad (June/July) months, as per the Hindu calendar, which comes once in 24 years in a well marked event known as the Nav Kalevar. The belief is that in such a year the earth and the universe undergoes some change in its shape and form, and thus the Lord of the universe, Jagannath too receives the same change. The old idols are buried in the temple premises. The present idols were last replaced in the year 1996. The new idols continue to be made, coloured, carved, etc. in the same manner as the original.

The temple is the house for Lord Krishna, as Jagannath, his brother Balabhadra or Balarama and their sister Subhadra. According to a legend, Lord Jagannath had once expressed his desire to spend a week at his aunt’s house. About two kilometres from the Jagannath temple is the Gundicha Mandir, which is supposed to be the temple of the aunt of Lord Jagannath. Since then, every year on the Ratha yatra day, all the tree deities are taken out in a grand procession in three different chariots to Gundicha Mandir. There the deities are taken inside the Gundicha Mandir where the triad rest for a week and return to the Jagannath temple in what is known as the ‘ulta-rath’ or the reverse-chariot.

Some versions say that Subhadra wanted to meet her parents in Dwarka and the procession is to mark this occasion. Some other versions say that Kansa, Krrishna’s uncle had sent his messenger Akrur, to fetch Krishna to Mathura from Gokul. All of Krishna’s friends and his gopis blocked the way and Krishna had to pacify them that he would not be harmed. The ratha-yatra is also supposed to be in commemoration of this separation of Lord Krishna from Gokul and his childhood friends and gopis.

Yet another local version says that the mortal remains of Lord Krishna was transformed in a wooden log which was found by a local Savara (an aborigine of the region) who started worshipping it. Later King Indrayumna took it from him and carved out three idols out of it and established a temple for the same.

There are many other legends associated with the Lord and his chariot. But what is interesting is the origin of the cult of Jagannath and his worship. This we will discuss next.