The "Good or Bad" series: Ashwatthama

Image: netra-creative-vision.blogspot.com

Ashwatthama should be an easy call. The son of Dronacharya, Ashwatthama develops enmity towards the Pandavas and loyalty to Duryodhana (not unlike Karna) and commits several wrongs that seem to me to be unparalleled in the Mahabharata.

Ashwatthama is considered a partial avatara (amsha) of Shiva..

When Ashwatthama is still a child, Dronacharya is insulted by King Drupada (father of Draupadi) when he goes to ask for a cow to feed milk to his son. It is only after this incident that Kripacharya offers him a position as a teacher to the Pandavas and Kauravas. There perhaps was some anger in Ashwatthama towards Drupada (and hence Draupadi) due to this slight.

Ashwatthama's real enmity towards the Pandavas starts when they kill Dronacharya on the battlefield due to a 'lie' by Yudhishtira. When Drona is told by many that Ashwatthama is dead (not entirely untrue, because an elephant by the same name had died), he refuses to believe anybody but Yudhishtira. Yudhishtira confirms the death of the elephant, but Krishna blows his conch to blot out Yudhisthira's reference to the elephant. Drona, on hearing this, drops his weapons, and sits down in meditation on the battlefield. Seizing the opportunity, the Pandavas (Arjuna?) finish him off. Surely this must have angered Ashwatthama enough to commit all the atrocities he eventually does at the end of the war.

As a side note, it is interesting that there are several warriors in the Mahabharata that are considered unbeatable at one point or another. Bhishma is the first, whom even Parashurama is unable to beat (the Amba story), and he is only taken out when Shikhandhi is used to make him drop his weapons. The second is Arjuna, although his case is slightly weak, given that he is protected against Karna once or twice. Drona is deemed unbeatable in the Mahabharata war (although he is beaten by Arjuna in the Virata parva battle), and hence the Pandavas resort to trickery to take him out. Bhimasena is of course invincible and he routs most of the key bad characters in the entire Mahabharata.

Towards the end of the war, Ashwatthama resorts to killing several warriors in the Pandava camp including the sons of the Draupadi/Pandavas (mistakenly assuming that they were the Pandavas themselves) in stealth at night, not becoming of even a lowly soldier let alone a top warrior in an army.  

Ashwatthama also directs his brahmAstra at the womb of Uttara (daughter of king Virata, wife of Abhimanyu) to finish off the as-yet unborn Parikshit, since he would be the last of the Kuru clan. Krishna uses his chakra to protect the child and mother, but only ends up reviving the child after a still-birth.

Lastly, Duryodhana, in his death bed, requests Ashwatthama to have a child with his wife Banumati, so that that child can be the ruler of Hastinapura. While Ashwatthama does not actually oblige, he neither accepts not refuses to Duryodhana, not a good quality for someone who should immediately know the right Dharma.

On the last item, Vyasa himself sires Pandu and Dhritarashtra (with Ambika and Ambalika) to keep the Kuru clan alive. Is that considered Dharma because he is a rishi and God Himself? Or is it because Vyasa is a son of Satyavati (the fisherman's daughter who is married to Shantanu) and he is obeying his mother's command and acting on behalf of his now-dead younger brother Vichitravirya? In this case, the continuation of the clan is for the good of humanity, perhaps, while not so in the case of Duryodhana? 

Law and Order, Dharma

Courtesy: Wikipedia.org

I have always believed that law and order is the primary duty and reason for existence of the government in a state. All other regulations or activities that one would expect a government to do will fall under law and order.

To begin with, life is probably the most important thing that living beings covet. The state must first protect life. That is, when we step out to go to the market, we should not fear for our lives, or face any intimidation that includes potential for violence against our selves.

Going up the 'pyramid', personal belongings, the environment and natural resources, etc., become important. These get into areas where no one man is necessarily affected directly, but the state needs to take on the responsibility for future generations, as well as for the protection of nature in general.

In some ways, the United States, and the modern Western world in general, are successful and just societies (relatively) because of the presence of reliable and effective law and order. Even Jinnah believed this, while unfortunately other Indian leaders of the time unfortunately didn't accord law and order as much importance.

The Manusmruti is probably the oldest book on law and order, and is supposed to cover not just crimes and such but a horde of other do's and don'ts, rituals to be followed, duties of the different classes of people, etc. I began reading a translation of Chanakya's Arthashastra a few months ago. Like the Manusmruti, the Arthashastra too is not necessarily an account of the laws in vogue at the time they were written. The Manusmruti is of course much more ancient than the Arthashastra.

By the way, here's an interesting article by Stephen Knapp on the 'Purpose of Government According to the Mahabharata' where he discusses Manusmruti.

In the Mahabharata, Yudhishtira is hailed as 'Dharmaraja'. An example of his sense of justice is when he chooses to have Nakula brought back to life when all his brothers are killed by a divine 'demon' (Dharma, who Yudhishtira is an avatara of?) Yudhishtira's reasoning for bringing Nakula back in spite of the chance of bringing the powerful Bhima or Arjuna back was that his father had two wives, and he the first wife's son was alive. It was only just to have a son of the other wife alive too, ahead of Arjuna or Bhima. The 'demon' (who was just testing Yudhishtira) brings back all his brothers alive anyway, overjoyed by Yudhishtira's Dharmic stance. Dharma is hence a matter of not just law, but of ethics as well. No punishments for not being Dharmic in many cases.

There probably are some things that are plain obvious to us regarding dharma. Should I kill an animal and eat it just because it is going to be tasty? No. How can you drink milk, it after all is from the cow and intended for its own calf? This is more difficult to answer, but the shrutis (Vedas), Puranas and the Manusmruti all talk of the cow's products as being made available to mankind, and therefore not being off limits. Protecting mankind is the duty of the cow, and taking care of it is ours (putting it between two buns isn't). On other topics, the question of dharma can become tricky, especially since most of us have very limited knowledge.

Getting the Pandavas' uninteresting grandparents out of the way...

My intro post was about the start of the Mahabharata, with Devavrata becoming Bhishma. This is in continuation...

Probably the most uninteresting characters in the Mahabharata were Bhishma's step brothers  - Chitrangadha and Vichitravirya.

Chitrangadha, the elder of the two becomes the king of the Kurus when Shantanu is gone. He soon dies childless, and the still very young Vichitravirya ascends to the throne with Bhishma ruling on his behalf. I'm guessing that Bhishma is already quite old by this time (say 50 or so), but probably still young given the lifespans in those times.

Bhishma hears of the king of Kashi announcing a swayamvara for his daughters - Amba, Ambika, and Ambalika. Since Vichitravirya is too young, Bhishma decides on go to the swayamvara on his behalf. But... he has other plans for the swayamvara itself. There probably are different varieties of swayamvara, including contests (like the one Arjuna wins at Draupadi's swayamvara), and others where the princess chooses one herself. Irrespective of the mode of the swayamvara, there appears to have been a rule that any suitor prince can kidnap the princess and challenge the rest of the princes to battle. If the kidnapper wins, he gets to marry the princess. Not sure what happens if he loses. I suppose he would be considered disqualified, and the swayamvara would continue as before. Or, maybe the prince that wins against the kidnapper prince is considered the winner of the swayamvara.

Since Bhishma is at this swayamvara on Vichitravirya's behalf, he decides to take the kidnap route. By the way, I read a quasi-history/indology article (or maybe it was a documentary) a while ago that places the Mahabharata, or at least parts of it in Central Asia, since the kidnapping of girls to marry them is apparently common there even now (?). I'm losing patience with  indology researchers who jump to conclusions based on what appears to be flimsy evidence. But I digress...

Bhishma kidnaps the three princesses, challenges the other assembled princes, and dashes off to Hastinapura. On the way, he is challenged by several of the other princes who lose easily. Even Shalya, himself a mighty warrior loses. Shalya is important in this episode because he and Amba have already taken a liking to each other, and Amba expects him to be her man at the end of the swayamvara.

On reaching Hastinapura, Amba reveals her interest in Shalya, and Bhishma lets her go. However, Shalya refuses to accept her because she was won by someone else. Amba now finds herself in a spot, and goes back to Bhishma to ask him to marry her. Bhishma refuses, saying he has already taking a vow to remain a bachelor for ever. Amba is now furious, because she has no options ("it's complicated"). She then requests Parashurama to fight Bhishma for her revenge, which Parashurama accepts.

(image courtesy wikipedia)

Bhishma and Parashurama fight for 23 days, and is unable to fell Bhishma. Some versions of this story say that Bhishma decides to use an astra that Parashurama has no knowledge of, at which point the Gods and Parashurama's father rishi Jamadagni intervene and stop Bhishma and Parashurama, respectively.

I'm not sure why Parashurama, an avatara of Vishnu, who is all seeing-knowing, ends up in this situation, but that's a different matter. The Parashurama character deserves a dedicated post..

Anyway, once Parashurama declares that Bhishma is invincible in battle, Amba decides to take her fight to her next birth. She prays to Shiva, and obtains a boon that she will be born a man who would remember his past birth, and will also be the cause of Bhishma's death. Amba is hence reborn as Shikhandi (to Drupada, Draupadi's father), who fights on the side of the Pandavas in the Mahabharata war.

The story now shifts to the Mahabharata war, where knowing that Bhishma would not fight Shikhandi, the Pandavas plan for him to face Bhishma. The Pandavas do this based on Bhishma's suggestion when they seek his advice on defeating him. Even though Shikhandi is a man, I suppose the reason Bhishma would not fight him is that the true nature of Shikhandi is female. Some schools of thought hold that each soul is inherently male/female, and hence a mere accidental birth (for whatever reason) in the opposite sex would not change the inherent.


(image courtesy sbonlifensuch.wordpress.com)

There are only two episodes in the entire Mahabharata (that I am aware of) where Bhishma drops his weapons and welcomes death. Is this selfish behaviour or a character flaw as the commander of an army? Perhaps, but more on this question later.

The first incident is at the start (?) of the Mahabharata when Arjuna refuses to fight Bhishma. Krishna tells Arjuna that if he wouldn't fight Bhishma, then he would finish Bhishma off. On seeing Krishna rush towards him, Bhishma drops his weapons and welcomes death at the hands of the supreme being. This incident, of course, do not end in Bhishma's death because Arjuna stops Krishna and agrees to fight.

(image courtesy indianetzone.com)

The second incident is when Shikhandi (Amba!) is put by the Pandavas before Bhishma on the battlefield, and challenges him to a fight. Arjuna takes Shikhandi along in his chariot, and when Shikhandi challenges Bhishma, the latter drops his weapons.

This being the only chance to take Bhishma out, Arjuna puts arrows into Bhishma and lays him on the bed of arrows.

While it is Arjuna who fells Bhishma, it is Shikhandi who 'causes' his death, technically satisfying Shiva's boon while still giving Bhishma an honourable death at the hands of Arjuna. Arjuna brings Bhishma's mother Ganga to him, by shooting an arrow into the ground (baan-ganga) that creates a fountain of water for him to drink from. Bhishma also recites the Vishnu sahasranama on his death bed, singing Vishnu's praise. Bhishma, not wanting to die in Dakshinayana, postpones his death (boon from his father Shantanu) until the start of auspicious Uttarayana (just before sankaranthi/pongal).

Telugu movie Narthanasala - Virata Parva

This post is part movie review, part Virata Parva episodes.

Of all the Indian movies (well, Telugu and Tamil mostly) on the epics, I like Narthanasala the most. Karna in Tamil comes close, primarily due to Sivaji Ganesan. Many other potentially good performances are wasted due to bad casting. Also, too much DMK-style dialogues, a reflection on the politics-cinema cross pollination during the time.

And I wonder why none of the Mahabharata movies has a good actor in the role of Bhima - not even in Narthanasala. It's usually some physically huge fellow that looks deliberately dim-witted, making the powerful character a laughing stock. More on Bhima later.

Narthanasala wins out for the several great performances - from SV Ranga Rao as Keechaka, NT Rama Rao as Arjuna, the incomparable Savithri as Draupadi. While I didn't understand all the dialogues, the familiar story carried me through.

In the Virata Parva of the Mahabharata, the Pandavas are in the 13th year of their exile. They are required to be incognito, and if caught, would be required to repeat the 13 years. The Pandavas and Draupadi pretend to be civilians and decide to stay in Matsya, ruled by King Virata.

(By the way, there are ancient temples in Pakistan, in a location of importance to the Mahabharata. Chakwal is the region they are supposed to have spent their first 12 years in exile. Katasraj Temples: Wikipedia.)

Yudhishtira acts as a scholar/astrologer (?), Bhima as a cook/kitchen aide, Arjuna as a eunuch/dancer, Nakula as a keeper of the horses (?), and not sure about Sahadeva.

Arjuna is aided by a curse from Urvashi - that he must serve as a eunuch for a year. So, he chooses to turn a eunuch for the 13th year and is employed in teaching dance (learned from Urvashi I think) to Virata's daughter Uttara. NT Rama Rao does a good job as Arjuna in Narthanasala. At the end of the 13 years, Arjuna helps the Matsya kingdom defeat the Kaurava attack, thus revealing himself. When Virata comes to know of their identities, he proposes his daughter in marriage to Arjuna, but Arjuna refuses (since he has taught her, he is like a father to her). She is instead married to Abhimanyu. Not sure if Uttara is Abhimanyu's first wife, or if it is Subhadra.

While NTR does a good job, the best performances are definitely by SVR and Savithri. SVR's monologue in front of the mirror, and his subsequent intoxicated dialogues with Savithri are legendary.

 

Watch Narthansala if you haven't already - even if you don't follow Telugu too well (I don't)! The entire movie is available in Youtube, in parts.