On reading my earlier post a reader had suggested a book which I am assuming is Yuganta by Irawati Karwe. I found a version online and downloaded it and am reading it now. It is an analysis of the various characters in the Mahabharata. I have nothing against women per se, and I am all for equality between men and women. In fact I support women's empowerment (conditions apply). Somehow two articles on the epics I read, both by women, have raised my hackles. One was an extremely feminist view of the Ramayana where the author(ess?) lambasts the treatment meted out to Sita - how she went to the forest at such a tender age, her banishment to the forest etc). I wish to point out that Sita went willingly against all advice for her to stay back in Ayodhya. I cannot totally explain the banishment part but let me just say that I would probably like to have a discussion with that lady (the writer).
One of my colleagues is from IIMA's agri business program. Apparently Yuganta was recommended reading by their ethics faculty member. The writer raises some questions about Bhishma - did Bhishma accomplish anything via his vows consiering that a lot of strife happened anyway, why did he accept the general's position for the war etc. I am not a scholar of her level but I shall attempt to answer her questions on the various characters in my next few posts.
Krishna says in the Gita to do one's work because it has to be done, without expectation or concentrating on the results. I would answer her question about the utility of Bhishma's vows via this sloka. Tomorrow the Prime Minister can say that given our history with Pakistan the Kashmir issue will never be resolved and give up peace talks. Is that justified. Here I must confess that my argument can be given by some as an example of the concept called reductio ad absurdum introduced to me by Sheldon Cooper of the sitcom, The Big Bang Theory.
She asks why he was silent when Draupadi was being humiliated. There is a story I read in a Telugu children's magazine. I do not know whether it exists anywhere in Hindu literature or is a fabrication but it provides an answer. When after the war Bhishma tells the Pandavas some good practices to be followed an angered Draupadi questions him as to why he was silent when she was being humiliated and is spouting advice now. He answers her that as a subject of Duryodhana/Dhritarashtra he could not go against his liege. Why Bhishma took up the generalship can probably be answered by combining the logic of the present and the previous para.
I think I shall have quite a few bones to pick with the author.By the way, after reading Ashok Banker's version of the Ramayana I posted a comment on his site expressing my anguish. It does not seem to have been approved (will it be?) and is not visible now. I shall post a link to it if it does get approved.
