Share it amongst yourselves!

“Share it amongst yourselves!” – A mother orders her five sons; with least realization, that this order would change the course of history of an entire nation. Along with history, this would also change the perception and mindset of people (especially men) towards women over generations and for centuries to come. This order, which came from a woman, made a princess a single wife of five warrior brothers. The mother, obviously, is Kunti, the Rakhi Gulzar of Mahabharata, and the five brothers are her five sons (post her marriage to the Kuru King – Pandu). The woman being commoditized by this order is the dark yet radiant beauty, Draupadi, the daughter of the King of Panchal, Dhrupad.

It so happened, that King Dhrupad had organized a swayamvar for his daughter Draupadi and had invited warriors from all over the country to participate (priests were allowed too, though nobody expected them to win in front of the famed warriors of the nation). In this contest, the one who would pierce the eye of the model of a fish rotating on the ceiling by looking into its reflection in the water below would win the Draupadi as his wife. Every man in the arena desired, yet only few could lift the bow, even few could string it but only one could actually hit the target. This “one” was none other than the famed archer, Arjun, the third son of Kunti and the favourite student of Drona. During this period, the Pandav princes were wandering through forests, disguised as priests. They sustained on alms that they gathered during the day.

The epic Mahabharata, which is 99.75% full of serious episodes and heart wrenching descriptions, has very less scope for humour. But poor Pandavs, of course being unaware of that, playfully told their mother that they were back with the day’s alms, alluding at Draupadi. Our dear Rakhi, almost in a reflex, ordered the five brothers to share it amongst themselves. The rest is history! Draupadi had to marry the five brothers and stay with each one for a year; starting with Yudhishthir, and repeating the cycle every five years. The same Draupadi became the queen of Indraprastha and led a life of luxury for years in the Palace of Indraprastha. The same Draupadi gave birth to five sons of the five Pandavs during this period. The same Draupadi was gambled in a treacherous game of dice and was lost. The same Draupadi was pulled with her hair and dragged to the court in one piece. The same Draupadi was disrobed in the court in front of her five husbands and elders of the family.

Vyas surely wanted to explore many aspects of the human character by putting such an intricate character into the epic. Draupadi’s entry is at the time when the seeds of war are being sown in the politics of Hastinapur. Her entry into the Kuru household serves as timely rain that would help the seeds grow into a giant tree that would shower its fruits in the form of blood on the land of Kurukshetra. If it was not for Krishna, one would always consider the Kurukshetra war only a war for Draupadi’s vengeance and not a war for Dharma.

Birth:

Though some versions say that Draupadi was a “free gift” that emerged from the sacrificial fire, along with her brother, others state that Dhrupad had demanded a daughter too who would marry into the Kuru household and bring it to ashes. (The TV saga queen of modern times, Ekta Kapoor, seems to have taken motivation for her vamps from the King of Panchal!) Whatever may be the true case, Draupadi did marry into the Kuru household and it did turn into ashes. But is she to be blamed for this entirely? I have my doubts.

Swayamvar:

What would one call a father who offers his daughter in marriage to the best archer, just because, he is the best archer? (This is like declaring all the IIT and IIM pass-outs of the country as the most eligible bachelors and jeevansathi.com asking only for your CVs.) It was not that Draupadi was forced to marry any winner against her will. She did reject Karna (because he was a charioteer’s son or because Krishna suggested her to do so is for one to wonder) who was a king and gave chance to a Brahmin (…in disguise, Arjun). But does it still justify Dhrupad’s act of making his daughter the trophy of a contest? (The condition was ultimately set by him, not Draupadi). And does the best archer prove to be the best husband? On reading the epic one would rather say, he proves to be the worst!

Note: Though he was defeated by Arjun, Dhrupad developed an extreme liking for his archery skills and designed a contest that, in his opinion, only Arjun could win.

Sharing:

Is sharing such a big virtue? So big, that a woman can be commoditized for its sake? That she can be compared to alms and distributed among brothers equally?

Kunti did put sharing in high regard. Maybe, for her sharing things was equivalent to sharing people (she had shared with Madari her sterile and celibate husband - Pandu and her boons for conceiving sons). But, did this give her the authority to decide on Draupadi’s part whether she was willing to be shared? Agreed, that she ordered out of ignorance and later expressed her repentance on making that statement, but what stopped her from taking her statement back? Was she the Salman Khan of Wanted who could not go back on her commitment? Or maybe, she did not want Draupadi to have a higher moral ground than her in the family - I have conceived sons from four, you conceive from five at least! Maybe, the saas-bahu ego clashes existed even then.

It is suggested that Kunti had seen the liking for Draupadi in the eyes of the five brothers and she feared that her marriage to only Arjun could create rift between the brothers. To avoid a conflict, she ordered them to share Draupadi. (Look sons, here is a wedding cake, cut it into five pieces). Perhaps, this was one of the reasons why even Yudhishthir did not protest against it as one would expect the epitome of righteousness to. The world would see him following his mother’s orders while he would actually be living his biggest fantasy.

Note: It is said that in her previous life, Draupadi had asked a husband who would be righteous, powerful, the best archer, beautiful / handsome and patient. Shiva offered her five husbands, each with one of the above mentioned qualities since one man could not have all these qualities. These, however, appear more as excuses to justify the ironical situation of Draupadi created by Kunti’s order.

Stake:

As if all that had happened before was less and Draupadi deserved still more. Already wronged by her mother-in-law, it was now her turn to be wronged by her husbands. (MS Word raised an objection when I used husbands instead of husband in this sentence. Perhaps, even Word does not approve of Draupadi’s situation that resulted from Kunti’s statement.)

Duryodhan had invited Yudhishthir to a game of gamble which he could not say no to. Shakuni promised Duryodhan that he would win each and every possession of Yudhishthir as Shakuni could never be defeated in dice. From staking his personal possessions to his chariot, from slaves to mistresses, Yudhishthir finally staked everything he had, including Indraprastha. Hold on, there is still more to come. He then staked his brothers one by one and lost each time. He then staked himself and lost again. And then something happened that would raise a question on Yudhishthir’s integrity and stain his reputation forever. He staked Draupadi. (How right was he in staking Draupadi and how wrong, is a different debate and I should take it sometime later.) 

Duryodhan, who had always envied the successful and loved-by-all Pandavs had also hated Draupadi as she had once called him blind son of a blind father, when he had fallen inside an illusionary water-pond in her palace. It was his day to avenge all the insult and insecurity he had ever gone through because of the Pandavs and their wife. He ordered for Draupadi to be dragged to the court and stripped naked in front of the kings and family. The five husbands, the elders of the family and the noblemen present in the court could do nothing more than gritting their teeth.

Note: In her time of crisis, it was Krishna who came to Draupadi's rescue and covered her with a celestial cloth while Dushasan was disrobing her. 

Was Draupadi actually Yudhishthir’s property that could be gambled away? If yes, did he have any right to put her at stake as he had already lost himself? If no, then how did he have any right to gamble her in the first place? These questions were raised in the court by her and the most venerable sages of that time were dumbfounded when asked to answer this. They still haunt every individual when he reads this epic.

But it does not end here! If for the time being, we assume, Yudhishthir had the right and he actually put Draupadi at stake and lost her (though it was Arjun who won her in the Swayamvar), was what followed after that justified? Just because Draupadi became his slave, did it give Duryodhan the right to offend and humiliate her limitlessly? Did a statement like, “Blind father, blind son!” touch such levels of discourteous behavior that to avenge it Draupadi had to be disrobed in public? If we say yes, then are we not inadvertently celebrating the animal within the men who avenge their unfulfilled love or minor insults through heinous crimes like molestation and rapes? Karna unabashedly blurted in the court that a woman who sleeps with five husbands is a whore and deserves no respect. If this were true, would Karna support Kunti’s similar humiliation too (who was married to Pandu but gave birth two four sons from four different gods?), especially on knowing that she was his mother? Does knowledge of somebody’s personal life (howsoever screwed it is) give one the right to violate the already unfortunate’s fundamental rights? I see it as an episode where Draupadi was wronged not only by her husbands, but also by her in-laws, uncles, the entire Kshatriya community; in fact, the entire society.

Note: Karna does repent his decision later and admits that out of over-confidence of the moment and irritation of getting rejected at Draupadi's swayamvar, he had misbehaved. But the damage had been done, and Draupadi did pay a price for it!

When one reads the story of Draupadi, one is indeed filled with surprise, concern and sympathy for her. Post the public humiliation episode, she spends thirteen years in exile longing for revenge. After the war, Bheem does avenge her humiliation but this comes at a loss her five sons and million others.

One wonders why a woman, who was born a princess, was immaculately beautiful and followed the orders of her elders religiously suffered this terrible fate. Was it her unparalleled sensuality that created troubles for her time and again? Did Vyas want to tell us that the desirable qualities of pulchritude if possessed in excess can also go against us? Did he want to direct our attention towards the deterioration of women's status in the society and that it happens not only because men dominate but also because the older women inadvertently create situations that females of future generations have to pay for (like Kunti creates for Draupadi)? Or did he just want us to realize that even the best of people might suffer the worst things for no fault of theirs? 

Did he want to bring to light the coward reticence of our so-called society that sets huge ideals but does little for the helpless at the hour of need? Had Draupadi not been a shared wife, would her fate have been different? If yes, then does this not mean that the evil Duryodhan inside every criminal only seeks an excuse to validate his howsoever ghastly actions against women? These are again some questions that Mahabharata poses with no clear answers. One can just wonder and introspect. But one thing is pretty well-known and I am sure Asaram would agree with it. At the time of getting disrobed, Draupadi did address Dushasan as her brother-in-law. He still went ahead. And he went ahead unashamedly!

The Mother of all confusions - Family-Tree of Mahabharata

Whatever is there in the world is here!

What is not here is nowhere in the world!

This phrase about Mahabharata can be deemed as true as truth itself. This huge epic, with plenty of stories and infinite tales never ceases to fascinate its readers with the dimensions it covers. However, confused in the maze of stories and tales, one actually forgets the actual track. The track of the family-line around which revolves the entire epic. The family-tree of Mahabharata fame Kuru household that ruled over the city of Hastinapur. After my years of understanding the epic, I decided to summarize it. I tried Photoshop, MS Word, Excel, Paint; a combination of these, and many other softwares. I failed. I tried drawing it with pen on a chart paper. I failed there too. Will a blog help to understand it completely? Of course not. But I hope it will still give a better understanding into this confusing maze of relationships.

If there is something more complex and intricate to understand than the nervous system of human beings, it is indeed the family tree of Kurus. Mysterious men and women with weird abilities and interests, confused sexual orientations and impractical desires transform this tree into a labyrinth. Indra, the Emran Hashmi of mythology, and his force comprising of uncountable gods added more to the confusion by fathering sons on women who were either lonely or married to sterile and/or impotent husbands. Besides gods, there were rishis, gandharvs, rakshasas, nagas, asuras, yakshas, nymphs and many more species that married into or provided heirs to the main line of the Kuru clan.

Disclaimer: I have tried my best to keep the flow of the article serial. However, different stories or folk tales may appear here and there depending on the situation. Though the son of each generation had many more sons, I will mention only that son of every generation who was a progeny of the main Kuru bloodline. 

Legend:

God (with capital "G") = The Almighty (Either of the three: Brahma, Vishnu or Shiva)

gods (with small "G") = (Indra, Agni, Vayu, Chandra etc. I might use gods and devtas interchangeably.)

Most of the readers of Mahabharata are interested in knowing about the characters involved in the war only. However, characters that appear in the epic before and after the war were equally interesting. Their passions, their ideals and their decisions go a long way in affecting future generations. It took me three days to decide where to start from. The earliest link of the chain I could find was the guru of the gods, Brihaspati.

....and so begins the mother of all confusions....

Disclaimer: Although I have referred plenty of sources before summarizing this, there can be variations that occur from different narrations and interpolations of the epic over the generations. No offence or spreading of misinformation intended. 

So there was this Rishi called Brishaspati who performed all sorts of yagnas for the gods to help them defeat their eternal enemies, Asuras. His wife was Tara, a young and beautiful woman, who was much exasperated by the indifference of her over-busy husband towards her. As a result, she eloped with Chandra, the Moon-god. A deceived Brishaspati refused to perform any yagna for the gods till Tara returned to him. She returned, but pregnant. On inquiry, she confessed that it was Chandra's son and not Brihaspati’s. In rage, Brishaspati cursed the child in the belly to be born of neutral gender.

The child of neutral gender thus born was Budh. Impossible, as it might have been otherwise, Budh found a woman named Ila and married her. Ila, by the way, was a man before and was transformed to a woman following an accident when she entered a forest where Shiva had cast a spell. Budh's sexuality  varied between the waxing and waning of moon and so did Ila's. Hence, both Budh and Ila complemented each other. They had many sons and daughters. Since Budh emerged from the Moon-god, his lineage was thus known as the Lunar dynasty a.k.a. Chandravansh and his descendants were called Chandravanshis.

One of the sons of Budh, Pururava fell in love with the celestial nymph, Urvashi and married her. She  bore Pururava many sons before she returned to Indra’s abode. After she returned, a heart-broken Pururava became mad and could not rule anymore.

Note: One of the sons of Pururava established the kingdom of Panchala and another one established Gandhar. Over a period of time, the Kuru household accepted wives for their sons from these families transforming the family tree into a family web.

Then there was another descendant named Yayati (great-grandson of Pururava), who was a great fine king but was wronged by circumstances and over-powered by women. He married two women who were best friends turned enemies, one a Brahmin - Devyani; another a royal - Sarmishtha. He bore sons from both and lived happily, but not for long. A curse made him lose his manhood and it could be resolved only if one of his sons would agree to suffer for the father. He  first summoned his elder son Yadu, who stating this was against Dharma, refused. Then he summoned the obedient Puru who agreed. Yayati thus cursed his son Yadu that he and his descendants would never become kings and blessed his son Puru that he and his descendants would. Years later, Yayati released Puru from the curse and went to paradise handing over the throne to  Puru.

Note: Yadu moved away and settled in Mathura. Puru continued to rule in Hastinapur. Generations later, Krishna would be born in the Yadu family and Arjun would be born in the Puru family. Arjun would marry Krishna’s sister, Subhadhra, who would give birth to Abhimanyu. This was, therefore, a wedding within the family.

Moving on, the son of Puru, Dushyanta inherited the throne of Hastinapur. One day, while he was on hunt, he met a woman called Shakuntala in the hermitage of Rishi Kanva. From the union of Dushyanata and Shakuntala was born Bharata, the great king from whom is derived the name of our country, Bhaarat.

Note: Rishi Kanva had adopted Shakuntala when he found her in a forest unattended but sheltered by a flock of birds. Shakuntala was born when the river-nymph Menaka had succeeded in wooing Rishi Kaushik and made him give up his meditation on Indra’s decree. Both Kaushik and Menaka had abandoned Shakuntala as she was the result of no marriage but only momentary passion. Children suffer due to faults of their parents throughout this epic.

Bharata's wives presented many sons to him but he was not satisfied with any of them. He felt his sons did not resemble him, or perhaps, were not as capable as him to inherit his throne. So he adopted a son called Vitatha, who was presented by the gods.

Note: Vitatha was born when Brihaspati (father of Budh) had forced himself upon his younger brother’s wife, Mamata. Both Brishaspati and Mamata had abandoned Vitatha too, just like Shakuntala's parents abandoned her. 

The greatness of Bharata lies in the fact that he gave capability higher priority over blood relations when it came to inheritance. The later kings of the Kuru dynasty would not follow Bharata’s footsteps which will ultimately become the cause of the Great War.

Generations later there was another ruler of the Bharata kingdom, called Shantanu, son of Pratipa and grandson of Kuru, who in turn was the grandson of Bharata. He fell in love with river-goddess, Ganga. Ganga bore Shantanu eight sons. She drowned her first seven sons in river Ganga immediately after their birth and only the last son was kept alive. This son was named Devavrata and for the knowledge and military prowess he possessed he was sure to inherit the throne. Later, Shantanu married an irresistibly attractive fisherwoman, named Satyavati. This marriage was on a condition that Devavrata would renounce the throne and only Satyavati’s children would become the kings. Devavrata happily gave away the throne for his father’s pleasure, much like Puru, and even pledged to stay celibate throughout his life to avoid any conflict between his sons and those of Satyavati. Due to this terrible oath that he took for his father, he was named "Bheeshm". 

Note: Satyavati was the daughter of a King called Uparichara and a cursed-to-be-fish nymph called Girika. How their unison took place defies all scientific logic ever known to mankind and hence, out of scope of this article. Satyavati smelt dreadfully of fish and was also called Matsyagandha. Before her marriage to Shantanu, Satyavati had an encounter with a sage called Parasara who had desired to make love to her in the middle of the river, on an island, keeping her virginity intact yet making the fish-odour to disappear. The son born from this unison was Krishna Dwaipayana, later to be known as Ved Vyas, the compiler of the Vedas and the author of the Mahabharata.

Devavrata's oath to stay celibate is a turning point in the epic as it technically ends the Kuru bloodline. All sons born in the family after this would be through Niyog (explained later) or boons. However, in my opinion, the bloodline ended much earlier when Bharata rejected his sons and adopted Vitatha. But since Vitatha was the son of Brihaspati, who was also the great grand-father of Pururava, probably, the bloodline was back on track!! 

So Satyavati now had three sons: a secret son from Rishi Prasara; VedVyas, and two sons from Shantanu; Chirtrangadha and Vichitryaveer. Chitrangadha died without making much place in the family history. Vichitraveerya however had two wives, Amba and Ambalika, but even he died without giving the Kuru clan an heir.

There was a much prevalent concept of Niyog in those times.

According to this concept, if the man of the family line was impotent, sterile or dead but his wives were fit to bear a child, then a hermit or a god was invited to impregnate the wife. The child thus born would be considered the son of the husband and not of the outsider. These were the laws of marriage. Please note, this was done solely on the will of the woman and was not forced on her. 

Note: As far as I know, the non-husband man who was invited was supposed to be someone who had renounced the world and was less likely to develop any emotional feelings towards the woman he would impregnate. He was not supposed to meet that woman again in life. 

Ideally, this entire lineage should also be named after Brihaspati and not the Moon-god as Tara was Brihaspati’s wife, but I guess it is referred to as Chandravanshi (emerged from the Moon-god) to make readers aware. Or maybe, because Tara's unison with the Moon-god was not Niyog but infidelity.

Coming back to the widows of Vichitraveerya, they had little options left but Niyog. Satyavati requested Bheeshm to be the man but he clearly refused on the grounds that he had taken the vow of celibacy which he would not give up even for the cosmos. Satyavati so summoned her son from Parasara, Ved Vyas to perform Niyog on Amba and Ambalika. Now Vyas was dark, with matted hair and certainly not handsome looking as compared to the earlier Kuru sons who were well-built and were immaculately groomed warriors. During Ambika’s encounter with Vyas, she closed her eyes out of fear and thus was born the blind Dhritarashtra. During Ambalika’s encounter with him, she turned pale and so was born the weak (it was probably a euphemism for impotent/sterile) Pandu. Unsatisfied with the two results, Satyavati wanted another Niyog to take place but Ambika sent her maid instead who gave birth to a perfectly normal Vidur (even though Vidur was perfectly normal and had all the capabilities of a king, he would be denied the throne because he was born of a maid. Such was the irony of the situation!).

Note: I find the involvement of Vyas in Niyog quite controversial as he would re-appear in the epic throughout. However, he was the biggest sage time had ever seen and maybe, he was capable of fathering sons of three women, still being emotionally unattached.

Finally, came the generation that would actually participate in the war at Kurukshetra. Both Dhritarashtra and Pandu wanted their respective wives, Gandhari and Kunti to give birth to sons first so that they would inherit the throne. Dhritarashtra, since was capable and allowed, did his job earlier than Pandu. Pandu, who was sterile and cursed that his unison with his wife will be his moment of death, however had to find another way out. He asked his wife Kunti to summon the gods through the boon she had received as a result of extra-ordinary hospitality she had offered to Rishi Durvasa. Thus gods performed Niyog on Kunti one-by-one and the results were the following:

Dharma: son born was Yudhishthir

Vayu: son born was Bheema

Indra: son born was Arjun

Ashwini Twins (summoned for the second wife of Pandu, Madri): Nakul and Sahadev

Meanwhile, Gandhari’s pregnancy had not resulted in anything and had prolonged unbelievably. An exasperated Gandhari called for her maids and ordered them to hit her belly with an iron rod till a still ball of flesh came out. Rishi Vyas divided this piece into one hundred and one pieces and put them in pots of ghee. Thus were born hundred sons and one daughter of Gandhari.

Note: So one cannot say that test-tube babies are a modern-day invention. The idea does have its roots in this epic.

Collectively, the sons of Pandu-Kunti were called Pandavs and the sons of Dhritarashtra-Gandhari were called Kauravs. 

Altogether, four generations participated in the war at Kurukshetra, with Bheeshm being the oldest Kuru and Abhimanyu (son of the Pandav Arjun) being the youngest. After the war, only the five Pandavs will remain alive and the son of Abhimanyu, in the womb of his mother.

Note: Draupadi had five sons from the five Pandavs: Prativindya from Yudhishthir, Satsoma from Bheem, Shrutakirti from Arjun, Shaitanik from Nakul and Shrutasena from Sahadev. All five sons would be killed at the end of the war by the son of Drona, Ashwatthama.

All said and done, this is how the Kuru family tree would probably look like. Of course, this is highly incomplete with no mention of the sons who resulted from extra-marital affairs or other 'unimportant' marriages. 

Note: This picture is my own hard work. It is still incomplete. And I do realize it can never be completed. Should you still ever want to access this picture in full size, kindly write to me. Displaying it here in full size hampers the look of my blog!

PLEASE DON'T READ THIS: During the thirteenth year of their exile, Pandavs took refuge in the kingdom of Matsya. Matsya was allegedly the kingdom of descendants of a twin brother of Matsyagandha (Satyavati), hence the similarity in names. Uttara from the Matsya kingdom was accepted as Abhimanyu's bride! May God save you from shocks, if any!

Karna VS Arjun

It is certainly not the Salman – SRK starrer Karan Arjun that I am referring to. I am referring to the two sons of the Rakhi Gulzar of Mahabharat, Kunti; one who was born before her marriage to Pandu and one who was born after. The reason I have picked this topic for my writing is that every time one reads a different version of this epic, one’s opinion of the character and military prowess of the two brothers gets dented and painted (no offence to Abhijit Mukherjee). The reader gets emotionally attached to either of the two characters and insists on defending his / her favourite. However, like the countless other questions it raises, the Mahabaharata does not clearly answer even this, that who out of these two archer sons of Kunti was a better warrior. However, in the end Arjun does kill Karna. But does this make him a superior warrior? Let’s try to figure this out.

Background:

One should always be aware of the pros and cons of the boons and also trust the god (devata) or God (one of the three manifestations of the Almighty; Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva) from whom he/she receives them. If the receiver doesn’t, the unexpected happens. This “unexpected” in Kunti’s case was a son born with celestial armor and earrings. As a result of extraordinary hospitality she had offered to him, Kunti had received a boon from Rishi Durvasa that enabled her to conceive a child (some versions say “a son”) from any god she summoned. I am sure Indra would have been elated at this gracious boon of Durvasa and would have started waiting for his turn. Anyways, a teen aged and unmarried Kunti, out of curiosity, summoned the Sun-god and after a series of censored events conceived a child. Though being a Kshatrani (woman of a Kshatriya caste), she wasn't probably as audacious as Preity Zinta of Kya Kehna and so abandoned the child in a wooden box in river Ganga. This box was discovered by the charioteer of the Hastinapur King Dhritarashtra, Adiratha, who raised this new born as his own son. This child grew up to be known as a master-archer called Karna.

After her marriage to Pandu, Kunti did not get many opportunities to conceive a child from her husband for different reasons stated. Some state that he was busy in wars and conquering kingdoms (D’oh), others state that he was sterile; some say that he abstained from touching Kunti fearing the curse of Rishi Kindam. (Rishi Kindam had cursed the already sterile and unfortunate Pandu that his moment of intimacy with his wife will be his moment of death as Pandu had hunted down Rishi Kindam and his wife while they were getting intimate in cervine form in a forest). So after years of celibacy on realizing that he might die childless, Pandu shared his concern with Kunti. Knowing her husband’s limitations (pre and post curse), Kunti suggested of conceiving sons through Durvasa’s boon. So began the process of summoning the gods one by one. Long story short, Indra finally got lucky and eventually Kunti and Pandu got a son named Arjun (third in line, after Yudhishthir from Dharma-god and Bheem from Wind-god).

Analyzing Karna and Arjun on the basis of skills of a warrior.

Training: (Karna = Arjuna)

Though raised by a charioteer, Karna always had this inexplicable urge to learn archery. Driven by his love for his son, his father, Adirath (Dhritrashtra’s charioteer) took him to Dronacharya and requested him to take Karna as disciple. However, Dronacharya did not accept Karna on the grounds that the school was meant only for Kshatriyas or royals and Karna was neither. Karna was thus denied mentor ship of an invincible fine teacher but only to receive it from some one much greater; sage Parshuram, the sixth avatar of Vishnu himself and also the teacher of Dronacharya himself. The epic states that Karna became Parshuram’s favourite student perfect in all martial arts and celestial weapons.

Note: Parshuram had agreed to train Karna only because he was made to believe Karna is a Brahmin (Parshuram is believed not to have mentored any Kshatriya, except for Bheeshm, because of his disliking for the ostentatious Kshatriya valour that went against humanity time and again). Later, when Parshuram devised that Karna’s veins overflow with strength of Kshatriya blood, he felt deceived and thus cursed Karna to forget his most important teaching (the use of Brahmastra – the weapon of Brahma) on the day he would require it the most.

Arjun, however, managed to get the training of Dronacharya much easily as he was recognized as a Kshatriya from the very beginning and his teacher could, thus, accept him as a student. Arjun’s dedication towards learning archery impressed Dronacharya greatly and he vowed to make Arjun the best archer on earth. Arjun learnt the skill of shooting at night (hence came to be known as Gurakesh), using the bow with both hands and conquering his sleep(...boy!). Pleased with his unconditional dedication for his teacher, Dronacharya also blessed Arjun with the mantra for the Brahmastra.

• Teachers: Equal
• Shooting skill: Both never missed a target, hence, equal.
• Celestial weapons: Equally matched

Note: Karna would forget the use of Brahmastra when he would require it the most as a result of Parshuram's curse. However, this does not make Arjun any better as the Brahmastra will not be used eventually between the two warriors.

Valour: (Karna = Arjun)

In this context, neither could beat the other one clearly. Both Karna and Arjun had displayed their valour and fearlessness at many instances. If Arjun had saved his teacher from a crocodile as a child, slain numerous demons in the forest and won many provinces, Karna too had displayed his valour and had proved his mettle during his Vijay-yatra.

Draupadi’s Swayamvar: (Karna < Arjuna)

There is no doubt in the fact that Karna was equally capable of piercing the fish’s eye like Arjun. Draupadi, however, did not allow Karna to contest for her hand. Some say it was on Krishna’s advice, some say she did not want to marry a charioteer’s son. Whatever may be the grounds, she did make the statement, “My varmala will not embellish the chest of a charioteer’s son.” So, Arjun got a chance and won Draupadi for marriage, only to share her later with her four brothers.

However, after this when the kings had decided on abducting Draupadi to throw her in a pyre and avenge their (so called) insult, there followed a brief conflict between Karna and Arjun where Arjun did beat Karna.

Note: This conflict does not have much relevance in terms of the military prowess as Arjuna was disguised as a Brahmin and Karna withdrew out of surprise.

Possessions: (Karna = Arjun)

Karna was blessed with the following possessions based on his birth and Karma:

• Celestial Armor and Earrings – They had the capability of resisting attack of any celestial weapon.
• Shiva’s bow (received from Parshuram) – An unbreakable bow with multiple strings from which hundreds of arrows could be shot in one go.

 Arjun was blessed with the following possessions:

• The bow “Gandiva”: Arjun received this bow from the Fire-god and it equaled Shiva’s bow in strength and capacity.
• Divine Chariot: Th Fire-god blessed Arjun with a divine chariot as well that could run faster than any other chariot and could be summoned by chanting a mantra.
• Celestial weapons: On his visit to Swarga, Arjun received many celestial weapons from his father, Indra.

Both Karna and Arjun possessed bows with equivalent capabilities. However, when one states incidents where Arjun beats Karna, like in the Virat war, one should keep in mind that Karna never carried Shiva’s bow (until the final day) and combated Arjun with an ordinary bow every time. Reason: unknown.

If Arjun received celestial weapons from his father, Indra, then Karna received celestial armor and earrings from Surya. These could resist all celestial weapons that Arjun possessed, making the both equal.

Arjun does possess a divine chariot that Karna doesn’t but since during a combat the chariots are supposed to be stationary and do not create any difference to the performance otherwise, Karna and Arjun are again equals in this context.

Note: Karna’s celestial armour and earrings were taken away by Indra when he came to Karna disguised as a priest. The generous Karna did not turn him away, in spite of knowing the repercussions of his generosity. However, Indra gifted him his “Shakti” that Karna would be able to use in war, but only once. 

The Final Day of War:

As of now, Karna and Arjun are equally matched with an exception of Brahmastra (that Arjun had but Karna did not). What then creates the difference that ultimately leads to Arjun's triumph and Karna's death? What are the reasons that Karna’s situation is so pathetically hopeless when compared to Arjun’s on the day of their final combat?

Krishna’s revealing of truth followed by Kunti’s emotional drama:

The master strategist of the Pandavs, in hope of averting the war, disclosed to Karna the secret of his birth and tried to bribe him with five brothers, Indraprastha and Draupadi. While Karna rejected Krishna’s proposal staying faithful to Duryodhan, he was much deeply struck by the fact that in the war he will have to fight his younger brothers and was hence rendered emotionally handicapped. He still requested Krishna to keep this a secret so that Pandavs would not be affected by this information while they fight. Later, Kunti met Karna and after a whole lot of emotional drama requested him to spare the lives of her sons. A grief-stricken Karna was highly disturbed on discovering that even at the eleventh hour his mother thought of well being of Pandavs but did not display a zilch of affection for him. He still promised Kunti that she will forever be known as mother of five sons. He will not harm the sons of Kunti, except for Arjun. 

Hence, on the day of final combat Karna was under a huge emotional pressure of killing his own younger brother and keeping the promise to his friend at the same time. Arjun, however, had no such pressure but was rather equipped with the strength of his hatred towards the son of the charioteer who had horrifyingly insulted his wife, Draupadi, in the court and had hacked his son, Abhimanyu, to death, unfairly, in the battlefield.

Note: Arjun was not in the best state of mind either as he had slayed down Bheeshm and had witnessed the unjust and brutal killing of his beloved teacher followed by the news of his sixteen year old son being hacked by the elite Kaurav warriors. But on the day of his combat with Karna, he was comparatively in a better state as he had risen above that grief for that moment. Krishna, in fact, had to remind him of these instances to goad him to shoot a disarmed Karna.

Shalya’s revenge:

Since Shalya had been duped into fighting for the Kaurav side, the Kshatriya code of conduct expected him to fight for Kauravs but his enmity for them made his heart side with the Pandavs. When Karna requested Shalya to become his charioteer, trying to honour him by comparing his charioteer skills with Krishna, Shalya took it as insult to his status as a king and a warrior. Shalya thus made a point that during the war he will bog down Karna by infesting him with fear for his opponent Arjun and his charioteer Krishna.

During the war, he constantly praised Arjun and Krishna while demeaning Karna and making him realize his lower status in the society and his limitations as a warrior. Karna was thus stripped of the most important armor of a warrior, confidence, while he was facing his younger brother on the day of final combat. Arjun, on the other hand, was under the divine protection of Krishna who bolstered his confidence every time he became apprehensive or was awed by Karna's extraordinary skills.

The effect of Curses:

Karna was burdened with two curses on the day of final combat. One, by Parshuram, would make him forget the mantra to be chanted to call the Brahmastra and the other one by a sage would push his chariot down into the earth at the most crucial moment of the war. Both these curses took effect on the final day and Karna could escape neither. When he requested Shalya to push the chariot out, he refused saying that it was below his dignity as a king. When he tried to summon the Brahmastra, he failed. Karna, thus, had to descend from his chariot to pull it out.

In spite of all these strengths and weaknesses of the two, the combat was equally matched. Still, when Karna was alighting from his chariot he had this hope that Arjun would resist from shooting till the time he is back on chariot as this was a code of war. He pleaded Arjun to stop his arrows until he pulled out the wheel. Krishna, however, did not want Arjun to wait. He goaded the reluctant Arjun to shoot at Karna while he was busy pulling out the chariot wheel. 

This makes one wonder: Why? Why did Krishna goad Arjun to kill a disarmed Karna? Did he fear that once Karna would return to his chariot it will take Arjun monumental effort to beat him? Maybe, Arjun would not be able to beat Karna at all. Maybe, he wanted Karna to realize that people who break the code of war (like Karna did in case of Abhimanyu), deserve to die by the same means. Maybe, he considered the wheel in Karna’s hand a logical equivalent to a weapon as Abhimanyu, in his dying moments, had fought with a wheel. Maybe, he wanted Karna to receive a death of honour, the honour that he had been deprived of throughout his life. (A warrior like Arjun, having to kill Karna when unarmed made Karna receive a warrior status almost equal to the mighty Bheeshm.) Maybe, he did not want to answer this question explicitly that who was a better warrior out of the two great sons of Kunti. Maybe, he just wanted us to ponder upon their situations and understand their contexts.

A Society in Shams!

13 days after the unfortunate incident of gang-rape in a moving school bus in Saket, a piece of news arrives from Singapore informing the nation that the victim has breathed her last. Reactions mixed with outrage, sadness, shock and disgust mark the news, headlines and Facebook status messages all over the country. Weeping women, sympathizing men, helpless police and reticent government officials feature on all news channels (including India TV). Some demand the hanging of culprits, others demand their castration, and many others suggest many more creative punishments in hope of justice. 

In the midst of all this, a few questions arise too: Can justice be achieved only by bringing the convicts to retribution? Will the castration of convicts prevent rapes in future? Had the victim survived, would her life have become normal the instant the convicts would be punished? Books and movies describing (probably, in intricate detail) the egregious incident are already in minds of many authors and directors. I wonder how many of them would address these questions and attempt to find their answers. 

Can justice be achieved only by bringing the convicts to retribution?

If the answer to this question is a plain "YES", then the problem is quite easily solved. Hang the convicts! But neither the answer is so direct, nor the problem is so easy. A violated mind seeks revenge, and when the violated mind is convinced it is right, its desire for revenge increases. Justice is nothing but that revenge in disguise. Still, there is somewhere a huge difference between the two. I say so because justice has always had a positive connotation while revenge has had negative. Then where does lie the difference? 

To understand this difference the focus should be on the victim, the one who is demanding justice / revenge. Is the demand for justice / revenge coming out of resentment that he / she feels for his / her fault or is it coming out of agony that he / she feels because of fault of the convict. I do not think any human mind that has learnt this news has a doubt about the category in which a rape (in this case gang-rape) victim falls. 

Will the castration of convicts prevent rapes in future?

I feel the answer to this question can be found with sheer logic and staying unaffected by emotions. If the answer to this is no, then there has to be some other punishment? If the answer is yes, I guess one is talking about castrating each and every man on earth! However, I still wonder if you can prevent a castrated man from inserting a rod inside a helpless woman!

Had the victim survived, would her life have become normal the instant the convicts would be punished? 

This is the most important of all questions and demands serious introspection. If the victim is saved and the convicts are punished, do we provide a society where the victim can again be a part of it like before? Will the women accept her normally and not out of social pressure, sympathy or mercy? Will a man accept the proposal of a rape victim if offered in marriage? (Forget accepting, will he even consider?) As much easy as it is to say or even show in actions, it is far more difficult to accept in mind. And so this becomes the biggest problem, bigger than the rape incidents and the punishments coming along; for this requires a change in self and not the system and humans do suffer from bad eyesight when they look into the mirror. 

No rules, no laws and no government are capable of preventing crimes. They can, at max, punish the convicts. To control crime, change has to come from within. There has to be respect for woman, empathy for others and numerous other positive inner transformations  our parents, grandparents, teachers and scriptures have taught over the generations. Shedding these thoughts might have appeared cool but the effects of shedding them are, clearly, far more uncool!!