Women of the Weak Topic

Fyodor Dostoevsky refers to a gruesome murder on the opening chapters of ‘The Idiot’. He was referring to ‘Crime and Punishment’, but he being Dostoevsky, was without doubt reacting to the deterioration in contemporary social life in Russia at that time.

We are presently reading about a similar dreadful event in an ‘advanced’ world where a much educated married female colluded with her lover to finish off her current family. So much for ‘harmony at work’! It is a long journey from the Ape to the Man and many are there who could not finish it yet.

Years ago, a leading publication in India came out with a cover story on the Women of epics wherein bloodshed was the order. It was with great enthusiasm that one started reading this rather disappointing compilation by different authors. The editors in this case obviously presupposed ‘epic’ to be ‘Indian’. Even among those Indian, they chose only Ramayana and Mahabharatha. They chose ten females without any hint of the syllogism in choosing the names or them in any ratiocinative order. Who were they? Sita, Draupadi, Tara, Kunti, Kaikeyi, Gandhari, Satyavati, Mandodari, Ganga and Ahalya.  

There were no authentic names on the subject. Writers spread their self-indulgence throughout the blurb, without giving a new slant to any story. The story failed to suggest what is parallel for the modern woman. Is it feminism? Is it life and times of women post 2000? It did not give any direction to the reader, apart from the usual rhetoric. Except one, nobody visualized the psychological perspective of the characters in the epics, with suggestions to the modern woman. However, she too escaped by quoting instead of sharing her views.

Two of the selected characters, Kaikeyi and Gandhari, did not have multiple spouse (or were not so accused) and may stand apart as unique role models for the new woman. It is not explained why they are among the others.  ‘Little known facts’ are sometimes misleading as in the cases of Tara and Kaikeyi. Tara is a well-respected figure in Ramayana. Sugreeva protects her by taking her as ‘wife’ and not as outrageously suggested by sexual relationship. One should doubt Sugreeva’s capability for that! Kaikeyi of course went with Bharatha, among others to meet Lord Rama, immediately after Dasaratha’s death.

Let us take one by one,

 Sita

Sita was the reason for the epic ‘Ramayana’. The sole purpose of Avatar of Lord Rama was to kill Ravana. He fails in life afterwards. The situation involving disappearance of Sita is to be further researched as it is close to self abdication by sinking into an abyss. Why the bard refused Sita ‘Swargarohana’ or ‘Moksha’ like others? Is Lord Krishna making up the folly of Lord Rama by protecting 16008 women as wives and caring for numerous Gopikas? Is Radha, a repetition of Sita?

 Draupadi

Draupadi’s relationship with Lord Krishna is not examined. Lord Krishna however, saw her as the life partner of Arjuna, Krishna’s cousin and close friend.

All the same let us not forget that Krishna also perceived his sister Subhadra as the chariot of Arjuna! During the time just before the War, was Lord Krishna remorseful about Draupadi? Krishna blesses her that all her wishes would come true. If she could not keep her karma, by loving Arjuna more than others, how could this failed character be a role model?

Tara

We should not miss the advice of Lord Rama to Tara after Bali’s death. She has to live to make Angada, the King. Here, everybody understands Sugreeva as a frivolous character. He is survived because of his intelligent ministers. Sugreeva sends Tara to pacify an angry Lakshmana when Sugreeva fails to deliver help in finding Sita. After Ravana’s death, Sita insists on meeting and bringing Tara to Ayodhya. Tara did command respect.

 Kunti

Kunti had the most troublesome life. That she is adopted explains many things? This must be why she looked beyond to seek happiness. Only Lord Krishna could foresee that she couldn’t feel comfortable in Hastinapura after the death of King Pandu. This is why he sends a messenger. She was of Yadu clan and was among wily Kshatriya Kuru kings and ministers.
 If a female child was unwelcome in those days, how come a king adopts her? If Dharmaputra carried the image of sage Vidura, then whose image Karna carries to be called, ‘Suryaputra’? In the light of stories of child abuse, she is a role model in stark contrast.

 Kaikeyi

She was the most beautiful queen among the wives of Lord Dasaratha. She helped Dasaratha in war, sitting beside him! We understand that on the occasion of the name giving ceremony of all young princes, Guru named Bharatha so because he is to be an expert in ruling the country. So, he is rightfully the King. Here, it was the tradition, which necessitated in his abdication of throne. (The same tradition, later do not help Prince Duryodhana in Hastinapura!) Once her role is over, Kaikeyi is forgotten in Ramayana. Only Lord Rama understood and continued to support her, despite once losing patience over the suffering of Sita.

Gandhari

Gandhari had to marry Dhritrashtra, who was the eldest of the two Kuru Princes. Remember that all other kings were afraid of Prince Bheeshma. Gandhari blindfolded and sacrificed her life. Duryodhana is their eldest son and Hastinapura should naturally belong to him. When Akroora reached Hastinapura at the behest of Lord Krishna, the knowledgeable King sends him back, saying, will of the God prevails. Why should Gandhari curse Lord Krishna after the war? Lord Krishna does not give any detailed teaching of Dharma to her at this stage, so unlike him, but bows to destiny. Gandhari stands in contrast to Kaikeyi.

Satyavati

She has little to offer to any woman. She has not made any decision, all by herself which could affect the epic Mahabharata. Even if it was she, who demanded her sons to inherit the throne, she might only have learned from past ‘mistakes,’ and to look beyond. She was however not in a position to prevent any alternative outcome.

 Mandodari

Her resemblance to Sita must be peripheral. It is said that she survived a lost daughter to the Sea. Mandodari knew that her husband’s actions would land him in trouble. When Ravana managed to get all around him including his son killed, this was so intolerable that she looses her patience and aids Angada in a certain way to disrupt Ravana’s ‘Homa’. Ravana, is one who was destined to be killed only by Lord Rama. Mandodari is a role model in endless patience and tolerance and not as suggested to be an early (helpless) acolyte of Ravana.

 Ganga

When analyzing Ganga’s actions, we should think why the eight vasus did not wish to live on earth after their birth. Is it OK if a sage curses somebody to be ‘born’ on earth? The eight vasus were taking refuge in a slip of tongue by the sage Vasistha. Vasistha meant that they should experience the agony of life on earth. Ganga obliges to save them. Now, this is a most precious thought as unlike any other occasion, we come close to the biblical belief that if born on earth, one suffers and might do evil. Traditional Hindu thought follows that, through birth as ‘man’, one can lead life to Moksha (Purushartha), whereas no other form of life has this benefit. One gets this special form, after being born in several other forms. What do we learn, then, from Ganga?

 Ahalya

Versions on her story differ. One view is that Indra took the guise of sage Gautama to sate his selfish lust. Gautama on his return from bathe sees Indra’s semblance and questions him, upon which, he curses Indra. We don’t know the truth except that she was to await Moksha by the touch of another man!

 Victims of a virtuous world

 Many women characters in Epics like Ramayana and Mahabharatha, are made victims of the circumstances. They were as confused as we are when they had to make important decisions. The result was war, destruction, agony and suffering. Lord Krishna stands apart.  He was the ultimate teacher and protector. Yet, he could not prevent the end. He could not influence everybody.

Despite the above examples and most modern psychological help, we are seeing that Men and Women lack ability for logical reasoning and analysis, in expressing emotions. It is a long way to a satisfactory emotional quotient for everybody! We are seeing the end result, all around us.

In the Ahalya’s case for example, can we say that, if both were aware of the attraction for each other (as suggested in one version) and if they analyzed the alternatives, results could have been different!

We all should learn on our ‘response’ to emotions. We need learning and not role models and this is unfortunately continuous throughout life. We can become better individuals. It is a choice.

----------------------