Woman of 21st Century

All of us know that Parashuram was an avatar of Lord Vishnu and is better known as the form of god who had a hatred for the Kshatriyas and that he was the guru of the likes of Bhishma, Drona and Karna. However, I would like to highlight an altogether different aspect of the life of Parashuram.

Parashuram, besides being an avatar of Lord Vishnu, also has the dubious distinction of being the first man responsible for matricide, i.e. killing his own mother. Let me tell you that story.

Parashuram was the son of sage Jamadagni and his wife Renuka. Renuka was a chaste woman, which was characterised by her ability to bring water from the river in wet clay or unbaked clay pots. It is said that the pot held the water only on the strength of her devotion to her husband.

Once at the river, she saw a gandharva, a celestial being, and for a moment she was smitten by his looks, just for a moment. That day, the clay pot broke and she had to return without water. Sage Jamadagni came to know about it and was very angry and commanded his son Parashuram to behead his mother immediately, which Parashuram did without questioning his father. Later, impressed by his obedience, Sage Jamadagni granted a boon to his son, who asked for his mother, and Renuka was brought back to life.

This is one story, which is often cited as an example of a child’s obedience and thereafter devotion to his parents. But let us look at it differently.

The times when this legend takes place were different. Those days the concept of chastity, devotion had different meaning and such legends were told and retold probably to shape an entire new generation with patriarchal mind-set. Limits were continuously being defined for the women folk, whose sole purpose was to serve the men-folk of the family and bear and raise children. Even a momentary lapse of focus could derail the society, was what the creators of such myths probably had in mind. Women in those days were nothing but appendages to the men, be it fathers and brothers initially, and then husbands later, sons.

But haven’t times changed? Haven’t the standards of morality changed? Does a moment (just a moment) of fascination of another person, call for such measures? Does a woman still have to define herself based on the man in the current stage of her life? Is the patriarchal society going to define and re-define, her standards and punish or eulogise her accordingly?

We are increasingly looking backwards in this respect. Woman today does not have to prove her innocence and devotion based on a man’s standards. She is not a Sita anymore, who will suffer silently for the accusation of being unchaste and nor will she testify for the ever-doubting man of her life. She is not an Ahalya who will suffer because of the lust of another man and no fault of her own, except ignorance. She is not a Renuka, who will suffer in the hands of her husband and son, for just a moment of fascination of a celestial being.

More importantly, the rule book needs to be changed. There cannot be any extra-constitutional bodies like the KHAP’s and other such ancient (dis)organisations. She doesn’t need any Lakshaman to draw any lines binding her by medieval mindsets. She doesn’t need the standards of the axe-wielding man and his patriarchal devotion (Parashuram symbolises man’s evolution to the iron-age; Read Vishnu's Dashavatar & Charles Darwin). She doesn’t need any superficial comparisons with goddesses like Durga and Kali.

For heaven’s sake, this is the 21^st century. Let the woman be a woman. 

Let her be herself.

And finally -

Quote Courtesy – indulgy.com

 

Caste System

A recent TV show has brought back the discussion on Caste System. Since childhood (which was quite a long time back!), we have read about the ills of Caste system, but am surprised to see the same thing being discussed and I recently found myself teaching my child about the same. The discussion brought up many things, besides the issue that is caste pre-decided? Does one inherit a caste based on his birth? To rephrase it, is caste more of an accident than choice? Was this how it was envisaged in the first place? 

Well, as they say, let’s begin at the very beginning….

According to the Purusha sukta (Purusha sukta is a set of hymns from the Rig Veda which deals with the subject of Creation); every aspect of the universe was created from the cosmic Purusha, man. From his mouth, arms, thighs and feet were born the four varnas, or classes’ of people, viz. Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas and Shudras. The apparent objective of this class-based society was division of labour. The Brahmins were to take the responsibility of teaching (which also involved research and upholding the religious and related institutions). The Kshatriyas were to take care of all the people, govern and provide security to their subjects. The Vaishyas were entrusted with carrying on the responsibility of business, which was farming and cattle-rearing, besides doing all such acts that generated revenue. Finally, the Shudras were to provide services which could be in the form of providing labour. Division of labour is not an unheard subject; rather all societies (and organizations) work towards this.

So far so good….

The ills started to be visible, when domination of one led to discrimination with the other. Of all, the Shudra was the most oppressed and discrimination led to their isolation from the mainstream. The foremost issue that comes up, is – is caste pre-decided? What if the son of a Brahmin is brave and capable of fighting for an army? What if the son of a Vaishya is intelligent enough to become a teacher? What if the son of a Shudra is able to transcend his caste into any of the other professions? 

It is here that things have gone haywire. The caste system was purely for division of labour and if someone was good in another area, they were not stopped. There have been examples of such crossing of caste barriers which have gone down well with the-then powers-that-be and nobody has quite raised even an eyebrow. Let us see some examples –

Sage Vishwamitra – Vishwamitra was a Kshatriya ruler, Kaushika. Once King Kaushika stopped by the hermitage of Sage Vasishta, who ensured that the King and his army were treated to a lavish meal. Kaushika was surprised at the arrangements and enquired of the Sage about such arrangements. The sage told him about his calf, Nandini who had provided for everything needed for the meal, and that the calf was the daughter of Lord Indra’s cow, Kamdhenu. On learning this, the King asked for the calf as he could do more justice to its powers than a sage in a remote hermitage, and even agreed to pay a price for her. When the sage declined form parting with it, Kaushika tried to take it away by force. Sage Vasishta, then through his yogic powers waged a war with the army of the King and soon took the King as a prisoner. The sage pardoned Kaushika and let him go. Kaushika then learnt a lesson that power was not in physical strength or in an army, there was greater power in knowledge and from that day, he started his quest for this power in the form of penance. To cut a long story short, after many trials, he was accorded the title of Brahmarishi by none other than Sage Vasishta himself. An example of a Kshatriya becoming a sage and being accepted by the community.

Parashuram – Parashuram was not a Kshatriya, but all that we know of him has to do with wars and battles. His rage against the Kshatriya caste is well known and is said to have spent a lifetime in eliminating the Kshatriyas from the face of the earth. Whatever one knows about Parashuram, has got to be with his acts of warfare and his teaching the said skills to some of the well known characters of Mahabharata, like Bhishma, Drona and Karna. His association with axe as his weapon is also well know. 

Dronacharya – Dronacharya in the epic Mahabharata was born as a Brahmin. His youth was spent in poverty, but he trained under Parashuram, and was an expert in the arts of weapon and warfare. Later he goes on to become the military teacher for the Pandavas and Kauravas and was also a general during the war of Kurukshetra. A Brahmin, who was an expert in the art of war and weapons.

Finally, an example from History.

Chandragupta Maurya – Chandragupta was a Shudra, but went on to become the ruler of the Magadh Empire and he was brought in to rule, by none other than a Brahmin, Chanakya. Chanakya had to face strong criticism and opposition from the then clergy who opposed this move of his, but Chanakya argued and stood his ground. During one such argument, he is supposed to have said that the caste system, did not allow anyone to inherit ones caste based on ones birth, but it had more to do with one’s ability and capability. Chandragupta went on to become the founder of the Mauryan Empire and was also credited to be the first unifier of India and one of the finest Emperors that India has seen.

Detractors will say that the caste bias existed in the epics which I have quoted, and is visible when Dronacharya declines from teaching the likes of Karna and Eklavya saying that they couldn’t take training under him since they were not Kshatriyas. I would see this not as an issue of caste, but more as a case of favouritism. Arjuna was Drona’s favourite and he wanted him to be the best archer and that was the driving force behind not training the two. 

This brings us back to the issue of caste system as many of us know it. The ills of caste system and the exploitation started centuries back. This happened when the interpretation was changed from a logical division to the politics of division. The masters of interpretation became the twisters of many a fate. Once the practice of Sati had sanction in religious texts, but it did not find any place in a modern society. Human sacrifices and animal sacrifices have given way to symbolic sacrifices of vegetables. Many such aspects have been given a decent burial and we have moved on, without hurting anybody’s religious sentiments. 

Why can’t the same happen to the caste-system, which has outlived its time and relevance, if any?

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.

Vishnu’s Dashavatar & Charles Darwin – Part 2

Yesterday, we read about the similarities of the first five avatars of dashavatar with Darwin’s theory of evolution. Let us now go through the other five avatars to trace the cultural evolution of mankind.

The sixth avatar of Lord Vishnu was Parashuram, a rugged primitive warrior with a battle axe. This form could be a symbol of the cave-man stage of evolution and his usage of the axe could be seen as man’s evolution from the stone age to the iron age. Man had learnt the art of using tools and weapons and exploit the natural resources available to him.

The next avatar is that of Rama, a king who obeyed all the norms of the society as laid down, even at the cost of his personal discomfort. This form also displays a sense of altruism that was expected from a man amongst men – who was to set the ideals of living and even set an example of exemplary ethical standards. This also shows that society had started forming norms and rules and the life of savagery and might-is-right was over. Kings, government, rules and a distinct class system was beginning to fall in place.

This brings us to the next avatar of Lord Krishna, who was shown as a philosopher who taught the methods to deal with the contradictions of the society. He gave mankind the novel ways of handling ethics and evils both in an objective manner. Showing Lord Krishna’s childhood as a cowherd also depicts the fact that man had learnt the domestication of animals and had learnt to make use of the animal resources available to him and respect the same. Along with Krishna, is his brother Balarama, who is depicted with a plough, which goes on to show that man had also begun to depend on agriculture and had learnt to make use of land and earn from it. This also puts an end to the nomadic life style of the uncivilized man.

During the times of Rama and Krishna, there are a number of concepts introduced to man, which shows that man had begun to even think in a creative manner. The earlier avatars dealt with and depicted the baser instincts of man. But these two avatars had started giving wings to man’s thought process. Thus in Ramayana we find the mention of Pushpak Vimana (a flying machine), crossing of seas by Hanuman, sanjivani-buti (life saving drugs), etc. Similarly, in Mahabharata, which also deals with the life and times of Krishna, we see the evils of the society, games played by the people (chaupar), Sanjay relaying the battle from a distance through divya-drishti (divine-vision), mention and occasional usage of weapons of mass-destruction (brahmastra and divyastra), births which were not normal and which needed external help, all akin to modern methods of aided-reproduction, etc. (Please note that I am not saying that people had the ‘technology’ then; all I am saying is that man had evolved to a stage where he could allow his creative thoughts to think of such aspects of life – which too is a stage in the cultural evolution of mankind).

This brings us the ninth avatar of Lord Vishnu, i.e. Lord Buddha. The story of Buddha symbolizes the emergence of non-violence and human rights as viable doctrines. Till the stage of Rama and Krishna we have seen man thinking of rules and norms of living in a society. We have seen aspects of politics and forms of governing and the life of battles and its repercussions. Buddha gives man a meaning of existence. He gave man the ideals of a class-less society and that all were equal, irrespective of status. Buddha taught man to think beyond material comforts of life. He introduced the concept of Moksha and Nirvana, and made them the ultimate goals of life. We are supposedly still in this stage of evolution and each one of us are seeking our own ways of achieving individual Moksha, though we have not quite found the formula of world-peace!

This completed the entire evolution of man, which started from nothing, to an evolved evolution.

The tenth avatar of Lord Vishnu, i.e. Kalki, is an imaginary incarnation and is still awaited. Kalki depicts a warrior mounted on a flying horse with a sword who is ready to fight any extra terrestrial invader. The symbolism here is not very clear. Different scholars have opined different regarding this avatar, some say that this avatar will bring a complete destruction which will take us back to where we started, whereas some say that this could be the idea of a single leader who will unify the world under a single rule/ruler. (We will have to wait and watch and if something happens during my lifetime, please be ready to find it in this Blog!).

To conclude – it is important to understand that Lord Vishnu’s dashavatar came much before Darwin propounded his theory of evolution. However, this does not undermine Darwin’s efforts in any way, as his theory is more granular and with a lot of scientific evidence that our rational mind has got used to. On behalf of Charles Darwin, I would also like to mention that he had never read the Hindu scriptures and in no way did he use this to formulate his theory of evolution!

Vishnu’s dashavatar has definitely eliminated some stages of evolution, but one can’t overlook the beauty of presenting what today is scientifically an acceptable theory. Moreover, Darwin stopped at the evolution of man, but the dashavatar goes beyond the physical evolution of man, it traces man’s cultural and cerebral evolution too. Needless to say, that the theory has some overlaps, like Parashuram making an appearance during the times of Rama and Krishna, but if you leave such things to the theorists and as aspects of ‘creative indulgence’, then one can’t help but agree that this is definitely one of the best theories of evolution. 

Finally, my favourite statement, (at the cost of repetition) – all that we read in mythology is not without meaning and every aspect has more to it than what meets the eye!