the roaring lion from colombia, gabriel garcia marquez started off with lamenting about one hundred years of solitude but then dragged to kidnappings and nostalgia.
mj hypnotised with thriller but then dozed off being invincible.
maradona showed the world what soccer was in '86 but the world also saw him caught in his own debauchery in '98.
what is it with sudden sparks of creativity?
why is it that they are not able to sustain the energy?
five point someone was an okay read even for a non-academic guy like me. enlightened by the flush of youth with dil chahtha hai, the book was more like a screen-story than an actual novel. the i saw him fall down the path...
i just finished reading his latest novel '2 states' and i regret it. the 'supposed' novel is a mix of ddlj and ek duuje ke liye. a punjabi boy with a tamilian girl with 2 sets of impossible families. just when he feels there needs to be an entertainment quotient, he puts in a pinch of sex.
in all his books, it seems his heroes are the irresistable mephistopheles', who fall into the most cranky situations and come out victorious. phew!!!
let me see how far this guy is going to go, digging into is own history for plots...
Sunday, December 6, 2009
Saturday, September 12, 2009
taare zameen par and kanchivaram
the indian governement appoints a committee to chosse the best movie released that year, which is then sent as india's official entry to the academy awards (oscars) for a nomination for the best foreign film the following year. from 1957, the committee has been diligent in sending a movie to the oscars almost every year. mehboob khans' 'mother india' was the first indian movie to be sent at the 30th academy awards in 1957. the movie also made it into the nomination category. after that, the country with the largest film industry in terms of movies released per annum could make it to the nomination only twice, with 'salaam bombay' in 1988 and 'lagaan' in 2002. for the this year, the indian committee send aamir khan directed 'taare zameen par', unfortunately it did not make it to the nomination of an award ceremony that did see ar rahman and resul pookutty grab three of the coveted awards.
the indian government established the directorate of film festivals in 1954. every year a national panel appointed by the government selects the winning entry, and the national award ceremony is held in new delhi, where the president of india gives away the awards. this is followed by the inauguration of the national film festival, where the award-winning films are screened for the public. declared for films produced in the previous year across the country, they hold the distinction of awarding merit to the best of indian cinema overall, as well as presenting awards for the best films in each region and language of the country. due to the national scale of the national film awards, it is considered to be the equivalent of the american academy awards. this years jury headed by the eminent sai paranjpye selected priyadarshan's tamil movie 'kanchivaram' as the best film. sharad goekar was awarded the best child artist award for his performance in the marathi movie 'tingya'.
well, the governement had appointed both the committies and the juries have come out with completely different winners in the best film category. when darsheel safary won most of the popular awards for his dyslexic act in taare zameen par (tzp), sharad was nowhere in the picture. if 'kancheevaram' was the best movie, the why was tzp sent to the oscars. or, was it because 'tzp' didnt make it to the nominations that it was not awarded the best picture? the previous indian nominations or for that matter, the nominations in the best foriegn film category have gone to films that depict the culture of that land. tzp could have happened anywhere in the world. kancheevaram, on the other hand is about a silk-weaver in the town of kanchipuram well known for its kancheevaram sarees. it is about how he promises his daughter at birth that he would marry her off in a silk saree, a highly impossible wish considereing the low wages the weavers were paid. the communist wave gets hold off him and he is caught in a vortex that leaves him emotionally fragile and finally he uses the silk to cover the dead body of his daughter. kanchivaram is a movie that is pure indianness in each of its frame.
it is a well-known fact that, for the west only two indian entertainments sell - gandhi and poverty. all the rest is unacceptable to them. 'mother india', 'salaam bombay' and 'lagaan' had whole dollops of poverty in them, but still seeped in indian history.
i am not saying that 'kanchivaram' would have been nominated or that 'tzp' is a bad film. indeed my eyes went wet when ishaan awasthi was unable to get up and walk to the podium when it is announced that he had defeated his art teacher ram shankar nikhumbh in a painting competition. but oscars dont give a dime about star status - all the khans or kapoors are just actors for them, not demi-gods like we project them to be.
the indian government established the directorate of film festivals in 1954. every year a national panel appointed by the government selects the winning entry, and the national award ceremony is held in new delhi, where the president of india gives away the awards. this is followed by the inauguration of the national film festival, where the award-winning films are screened for the public. declared for films produced in the previous year across the country, they hold the distinction of awarding merit to the best of indian cinema overall, as well as presenting awards for the best films in each region and language of the country. due to the national scale of the national film awards, it is considered to be the equivalent of the american academy awards. this years jury headed by the eminent sai paranjpye selected priyadarshan's tamil movie 'kanchivaram' as the best film. sharad goekar was awarded the best child artist award for his performance in the marathi movie 'tingya'.
well, the governement had appointed both the committies and the juries have come out with completely different winners in the best film category. when darsheel safary won most of the popular awards for his dyslexic act in taare zameen par (tzp), sharad was nowhere in the picture. if 'kancheevaram' was the best movie, the why was tzp sent to the oscars. or, was it because 'tzp' didnt make it to the nominations that it was not awarded the best picture? the previous indian nominations or for that matter, the nominations in the best foriegn film category have gone to films that depict the culture of that land. tzp could have happened anywhere in the world. kancheevaram, on the other hand is about a silk-weaver in the town of kanchipuram well known for its kancheevaram sarees. it is about how he promises his daughter at birth that he would marry her off in a silk saree, a highly impossible wish considereing the low wages the weavers were paid. the communist wave gets hold off him and he is caught in a vortex that leaves him emotionally fragile and finally he uses the silk to cover the dead body of his daughter. kanchivaram is a movie that is pure indianness in each of its frame.
it is a well-known fact that, for the west only two indian entertainments sell - gandhi and poverty. all the rest is unacceptable to them. 'mother india', 'salaam bombay' and 'lagaan' had whole dollops of poverty in them, but still seeped in indian history.
i am not saying that 'kanchivaram' would have been nominated or that 'tzp' is a bad film. indeed my eyes went wet when ishaan awasthi was unable to get up and walk to the podium when it is announced that he had defeated his art teacher ram shankar nikhumbh in a painting competition. but oscars dont give a dime about star status - all the khans or kapoors are just actors for them, not demi-gods like we project them to be.
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
a pious offering of songs
at one point or other in their life, christians will memorise the 23rd chapter of the book of psalms - a book devoted to songs and prayers. even i had a shot at memorising it, not for the sake of the 'divine' purpose but to have verses/words in my armour when i would sit for some competition at the church. down the lane, i completely forgot it, maybe because poetry was never my forte. i loved sentences not five words on a single line. but, gitanjali changed that.
gitanjali was a collection of 103 poems by the bengali poet rabindranath tagore which, after translation, became sensational throughout the world and tagore became the first non-european to win a nobel prize, for literature in 1913. 'git' means song and 'anjoli' means a prayer offering.
the lines in 'gitanjali' that will always have a special place, somewhere in me:
where the mind is without fear,
and the head is held high;
where knowledge is free;
where the world has not been broken up
into fragments by
narrow domestic walls;
where words come out from the
depth of truth;
where tireless striving stretches its arms
towards perfection
where the clear stream of reason
has not lost its way
into the dreary desert sand
of dead habit;
where the mind is led forward by thee
into ever-widening thought and action;
into that heaven of freedom,
my father,
let my country awake.
gitanjali was a collection of 103 poems by the bengali poet rabindranath tagore which, after translation, became sensational throughout the world and tagore became the first non-european to win a nobel prize, for literature in 1913. 'git' means song and 'anjoli' means a prayer offering.
the lines in 'gitanjali' that will always have a special place, somewhere in me:
where the mind is without fear,
and the head is held high;
where knowledge is free;
where the world has not been broken up
into fragments by
narrow domestic walls;
where words come out from the
depth of truth;
where tireless striving stretches its arms
towards perfection
where the clear stream of reason
has not lost its way
into the dreary desert sand
of dead habit;
where the mind is led forward by thee
into ever-widening thought and action;
into that heaven of freedom,
my father,
let my country awake.
Tuesday, August 18, 2009
'teardrop on the cheek of time'
this blog is about the taj mahal. indians consider the taj mahal to be the 'symbol of love' - a tomb constructed by a husband for his wife when he was devastated by her death. the iwans, pishtaqs, minarets, chattris, guldastas, finial - theres a lot to brag about and i dont intend to. i have read some interesting facts about the taj mahal and i am jotting it down here. now, as to if they are true, it all depends on the perimeters of imagination that can draw a fine line between myths and legends....
for the basic all-known facts:
the taj mahal is the most photographed mausoleum in the world, built by mughal emperor shahjahan in memory of his third wife, mumtaz mahal who died while giving birth to his 14th child. the construction began in 1632, a year after mumtaz's death and was completed in 1653 (a total of 22 years) employing thousands of artisans and craftsmen under the supervision of principal designer ustad ahmed lahauri and architects abdul karim ma'mur khan and makramat khan. mumtaz's body was stored at burhanpur (modern madhya pradesh) where she had died and it was after the completion of the taj mahal that her remains were shifted to the mausoleum. the taj mahal was an epic of persian and mughal architecture.
now, for the meatier ones:
1. 'badshahnama' (the chronicles of an emperor) written by shahjahan's court historian has recorded that: a) mumtaz's birth-name was arjumand banu begum and upon her marriage at the age of 19 to prince khurram (the later shahjahan), she became mumtaz-ul zamani. b) shahjahan took over the 'raja mansingh palace', a grand mansion of unique splendor (imaarat-e-aalishaan) with a dome on top, from maharajah jaisingh of jaipur in 1632.
2. 'aadaab-e-alamgiri', 'yadgarnama' and 'muruqqa-i-akbarabadi' are three letters that prince aurangzeb wrote to his father, emperor shahjahan during 1652. in those letters, the prince has described the delapidated condition of the mausoleum (water leaks and cracks on the dome) and that he was going to renovate them on his expense. this proves that either the taj mahal was not a recent construction or that a really bad job had been done.
3. 'kapad-dwara', the secret collection of entries by the maharajahs of jaipur records a request that shahjahan made to the jaipur princes for a building complex on the banks of yamuna river (taj mahal of course). the entry also records that, in 1634, shahjahan demanded immediate provision of marble from maharajah jaisingh for the three firmans; just two years after mumtaz's death. if shahjahan had really built the taj mahal in a span of 22 years, why the urgency just after 2 years when the initial frame construction would have anyhow taken 4-5 years.
- the above three historical evidences reveal that shahjahan had never built the taj mahal. it was already there as the 'raja mansingh palace'. shahjahan converted it into the taj mahal and used it as the mausoleum of mumtaz-ulzamani, as per her last wish.
4. jean-baptiste tavernier (1605-1689) the french jeweller who visited agra, has recorded in his travel memoirs that shahjahan buried mumtaz near the 'taj-i-makan' (the taj building) and he was the first to record that the construction of taj mahal took 22 years and that most of the work was of scaffolding.
5. english traveller peter mundy who visited agra in 1632 (the year of mumtaz death) has recorded the presence of the taj-e-mahal with its tombs, gardens and bazaars. so, it means the taj mahal was there earlier.
6. german traveller johan albert de mandelslo visited agra in 1638 and has made interesting observations of the mughal empire but suprisingly, he has made no mention of the taj mahal, which was supposedly in its sixth year of construction.
7. an american laboratory conducted carbon 14 test on a piece of wood that formed the riverside doorway of the taj mahal. the test revealed that the door had its origins in 1335 (300 years before shahjahan).
- the above foriegn travelogues reveal that that taj mahal was not a new construction but a renovation on an already constructed structure, which could be the 'raja mansingh palace'.
8. it is necessary to remove the shoes at a hindu temple whereas it is necesary to wear them at a cemetary. if the taj mahal was indeed a tomb, why is there the tradition of removing the shoes?
9. the term taj mahal was never recorded in the mughal chronicles. 'mahal' is not a word used for buildings constructed by the muslims. its is a word synonymous with hinduism meaning 'mansion'. how could a tomb be called a 'mansion'. since the taj mahal was the renovated 'raja mansingh palace', it means 'taj' and 'mahal' are words having sanskrit connections. the taj mahal is a corrupt form of the sanskrit term 'tejo mahalay' signifying a shiva temple.
10. agra is an ancient centre of shiva worship through ages and traditions. there were five shiva dieties in five temples in agra that the shiavites were supposed to worship. presently there are four - balkeshwar, prithvinath, manakameshwar and rajarajeshwar. the fifth was the agreshwar mahadev nagnateshwar which was destroyed centuries ago. the agreshwar mahadev nagnateshwar (the great god of agra; the deity of the king of cobras) was consecrated in the tejo mahalay (the great abode of the tej) temple. from the 12th to the 18th centuries, the agra region was dominated by the jats who invoked lord shiva with the name 'tejaji'.
11. 'vishwakarma vaastushaastra' mentions that the 'tej-linga' was one of the shiva-lingas. such a tej-linga was consecrated at the agreshwar mahadev nagnateshwar thereby becoming the tejo mahalay.
12. the taj mahal has a trident pinnacle over the dome. a full scale of the trident pinnacle is inlaid in the red stone courtyard to the east of the taj. the central shaft of the trident depicts a kalash (sacred pot) holding two bent mango leaves and a coconut which is a sacred hindu motif. identical pinnacles have been seen over hindu and buddhist temples in the hamalayas. tridents are also depicted against a red lotus background at the apex of the stately marble arched entrances on all four sides of the taj. it was believed all these centuries that the taj pinnacle depicts an islamic cresent and star was a lighting conductor installed by the british. on the contrary, the pinnacle is a marvel of hindu metallurgy since the pinnacle made of non rusting alloy, is also perhaps a lightning deflector. that the pinnacle of the replica is drawn in the eastern courtyard is significant because the east is of special importance to the Hindus, as the direction in which the sun rises.
13. the two buildings facing the taj mahal in the east and west directions have identical design, shape and size but have but have been deemed as a community hall and a mosque. how could similarity constructed buildings have different purposes? the 'nallar khana' is indeed a drumhouse which is a necessity in a hindu temple but not in a musilm cemetary. between the mosque and the drumhouse are a flight of stairs leading to a traditional treausry well, common in hindu temples of the 17th century. such an elaborated, multistoried treasury chest is unnecessary in a muslim tomb.
14. mughal chroniclers recorded dates of all important events - the birth of princes, marriages, ascension to throne, battles, deaths etc. but the burial date of mumtaz has not been recorded. was it because it never took place? the court papers have no records about the contruction of the tajmahal - no accounts of the materials or manpower used. the plants grown in the gardens of the taj mahal during its construction were those which were used exclusively for the worship of lord shive. consider this, who would want to grow fruits or flowers in a cemetary? would an emperor visit his beloved's resting place to have fruits?
- the above reveal that shahajahan had spent 22 years in converting a hindu temple dedicated to lord shiva into a muslim mausoleum for his wife.
15. the limestone walls and marble basements seem to cover up all the idols. jean-baptiste tavernier's travelogue states that shahjahan had plundered the tejo mahalaya shiva temple, uprooted the shiva idols, planted the cenotaphs, inscribed the holy quran along the arches and walled six of the seven stories. the french traveller, francois bernier who was emperor aurangzeb's physician for 12 years, has stated in his work, 'travels in the mughal empire' that initially, non-muslims were denied entry into the basement when shahjahan had taken over the 'raja mansingh palace' because the basement was a treasure house of gold, silver and gems dedicated to lord shiva. it seems mumtaz's cenotaph was grafted in place of the shiva-linga.
16. prophet muhammed has ordained that the burial spot of a muslim should not be marked by a single tombstone, but ironically, the taj mahal has two graves, one in the basement and another on the first floor chamber, both for mumtaz. the two cenotaphs were erected to cover up the two shiva-lingas, since hindus install two shiva-lingas on two stories, as can be seen in the mahankaleshwar temple in ujjain or the somnath temple. the closed-up rooms and walls of the taj mahal have sanskrit inscriptions and idols of shiva.
17. the eastern and southern pavilions of the taj mahal have several graves cluttered together mostly of queens and maids. like his predecessors, shahjahan finally used the mausoleum to bury his other queens and maids which means...is it indeed the symbol of love? shahjahan is one mughal emperor who had a thousand concubines and fifteen wives in his harlem. his court chronicles even gives space to imagine that he had an affair with his daughter jahanara. so the fact that the loss of one of his beloved's would inspire him to build a grand mausolem is highly far-fetched. the entire taj mahal complex has 400-500 rooms, too many for a dead woman or alive for that matter.
18. above mumtaz's centotaph hangs a chain by which now hangs a lamp. before capture by shahjahan the chain used to hold a water pitcher from which water used to drip on the shivalinga. it is this earlier hindu tradition in the taj mahal which gave the myth of shahjahan's love tear dropping on mumtaz's tomb on the full moon day of the winter eve. it was of this incident that rabindranath tagore said - teardrops on the cheek of time.
the archaelogical survey of india should be applauded for not bringing such 'explosive' truths to the forefront. because, i personally, would not want the taj mahal to be another babri masjid... in an india where everyone is waiting for a chance to lift arms against one another, if that hindu temple was pulled down to form a muslim tomb, let history lay rest, let us dream of shahjahan-mumtaz on the same track as that of romeo-juliet...let the beauty of the taj mahal stand as a beacon to beauty itself.
for the basic all-known facts:
the taj mahal is the most photographed mausoleum in the world, built by mughal emperor shahjahan in memory of his third wife, mumtaz mahal who died while giving birth to his 14th child. the construction began in 1632, a year after mumtaz's death and was completed in 1653 (a total of 22 years) employing thousands of artisans and craftsmen under the supervision of principal designer ustad ahmed lahauri and architects abdul karim ma'mur khan and makramat khan. mumtaz's body was stored at burhanpur (modern madhya pradesh) where she had died and it was after the completion of the taj mahal that her remains were shifted to the mausoleum. the taj mahal was an epic of persian and mughal architecture.
now, for the meatier ones:
1. 'badshahnama' (the chronicles of an emperor) written by shahjahan's court historian has recorded that: a) mumtaz's birth-name was arjumand banu begum and upon her marriage at the age of 19 to prince khurram (the later shahjahan), she became mumtaz-ul zamani. b) shahjahan took over the 'raja mansingh palace', a grand mansion of unique splendor (imaarat-e-aalishaan) with a dome on top, from maharajah jaisingh of jaipur in 1632.
2. 'aadaab-e-alamgiri', 'yadgarnama' and 'muruqqa-i-akbarabadi' are three letters that prince aurangzeb wrote to his father, emperor shahjahan during 1652. in those letters, the prince has described the delapidated condition of the mausoleum (water leaks and cracks on the dome) and that he was going to renovate them on his expense. this proves that either the taj mahal was not a recent construction or that a really bad job had been done.
3. 'kapad-dwara', the secret collection of entries by the maharajahs of jaipur records a request that shahjahan made to the jaipur princes for a building complex on the banks of yamuna river (taj mahal of course). the entry also records that, in 1634, shahjahan demanded immediate provision of marble from maharajah jaisingh for the three firmans; just two years after mumtaz's death. if shahjahan had really built the taj mahal in a span of 22 years, why the urgency just after 2 years when the initial frame construction would have anyhow taken 4-5 years.
- the above three historical evidences reveal that shahjahan had never built the taj mahal. it was already there as the 'raja mansingh palace'. shahjahan converted it into the taj mahal and used it as the mausoleum of mumtaz-ulzamani, as per her last wish.
4. jean-baptiste tavernier (1605-1689) the french jeweller who visited agra, has recorded in his travel memoirs that shahjahan buried mumtaz near the 'taj-i-makan' (the taj building) and he was the first to record that the construction of taj mahal took 22 years and that most of the work was of scaffolding.
5. english traveller peter mundy who visited agra in 1632 (the year of mumtaz death) has recorded the presence of the taj-e-mahal with its tombs, gardens and bazaars. so, it means the taj mahal was there earlier.
6. german traveller johan albert de mandelslo visited agra in 1638 and has made interesting observations of the mughal empire but suprisingly, he has made no mention of the taj mahal, which was supposedly in its sixth year of construction.
7. an american laboratory conducted carbon 14 test on a piece of wood that formed the riverside doorway of the taj mahal. the test revealed that the door had its origins in 1335 (300 years before shahjahan).
- the above foriegn travelogues reveal that that taj mahal was not a new construction but a renovation on an already constructed structure, which could be the 'raja mansingh palace'.
8. it is necessary to remove the shoes at a hindu temple whereas it is necesary to wear them at a cemetary. if the taj mahal was indeed a tomb, why is there the tradition of removing the shoes?
9. the term taj mahal was never recorded in the mughal chronicles. 'mahal' is not a word used for buildings constructed by the muslims. its is a word synonymous with hinduism meaning 'mansion'. how could a tomb be called a 'mansion'. since the taj mahal was the renovated 'raja mansingh palace', it means 'taj' and 'mahal' are words having sanskrit connections. the taj mahal is a corrupt form of the sanskrit term 'tejo mahalay' signifying a shiva temple.
10. agra is an ancient centre of shiva worship through ages and traditions. there were five shiva dieties in five temples in agra that the shiavites were supposed to worship. presently there are four - balkeshwar, prithvinath, manakameshwar and rajarajeshwar. the fifth was the agreshwar mahadev nagnateshwar which was destroyed centuries ago. the agreshwar mahadev nagnateshwar (the great god of agra; the deity of the king of cobras) was consecrated in the tejo mahalay (the great abode of the tej) temple. from the 12th to the 18th centuries, the agra region was dominated by the jats who invoked lord shiva with the name 'tejaji'.
11. 'vishwakarma vaastushaastra' mentions that the 'tej-linga' was one of the shiva-lingas. such a tej-linga was consecrated at the agreshwar mahadev nagnateshwar thereby becoming the tejo mahalay.
12. the taj mahal has a trident pinnacle over the dome. a full scale of the trident pinnacle is inlaid in the red stone courtyard to the east of the taj. the central shaft of the trident depicts a kalash (sacred pot) holding two bent mango leaves and a coconut which is a sacred hindu motif. identical pinnacles have been seen over hindu and buddhist temples in the hamalayas. tridents are also depicted against a red lotus background at the apex of the stately marble arched entrances on all four sides of the taj. it was believed all these centuries that the taj pinnacle depicts an islamic cresent and star was a lighting conductor installed by the british. on the contrary, the pinnacle is a marvel of hindu metallurgy since the pinnacle made of non rusting alloy, is also perhaps a lightning deflector. that the pinnacle of the replica is drawn in the eastern courtyard is significant because the east is of special importance to the Hindus, as the direction in which the sun rises.
13. the two buildings facing the taj mahal in the east and west directions have identical design, shape and size but have but have been deemed as a community hall and a mosque. how could similarity constructed buildings have different purposes? the 'nallar khana' is indeed a drumhouse which is a necessity in a hindu temple but not in a musilm cemetary. between the mosque and the drumhouse are a flight of stairs leading to a traditional treausry well, common in hindu temples of the 17th century. such an elaborated, multistoried treasury chest is unnecessary in a muslim tomb.
14. mughal chroniclers recorded dates of all important events - the birth of princes, marriages, ascension to throne, battles, deaths etc. but the burial date of mumtaz has not been recorded. was it because it never took place? the court papers have no records about the contruction of the tajmahal - no accounts of the materials or manpower used. the plants grown in the gardens of the taj mahal during its construction were those which were used exclusively for the worship of lord shive. consider this, who would want to grow fruits or flowers in a cemetary? would an emperor visit his beloved's resting place to have fruits?
- the above reveal that shahajahan had spent 22 years in converting a hindu temple dedicated to lord shiva into a muslim mausoleum for his wife.
15. the limestone walls and marble basements seem to cover up all the idols. jean-baptiste tavernier's travelogue states that shahjahan had plundered the tejo mahalaya shiva temple, uprooted the shiva idols, planted the cenotaphs, inscribed the holy quran along the arches and walled six of the seven stories. the french traveller, francois bernier who was emperor aurangzeb's physician for 12 years, has stated in his work, 'travels in the mughal empire' that initially, non-muslims were denied entry into the basement when shahjahan had taken over the 'raja mansingh palace' because the basement was a treasure house of gold, silver and gems dedicated to lord shiva. it seems mumtaz's cenotaph was grafted in place of the shiva-linga.
16. prophet muhammed has ordained that the burial spot of a muslim should not be marked by a single tombstone, but ironically, the taj mahal has two graves, one in the basement and another on the first floor chamber, both for mumtaz. the two cenotaphs were erected to cover up the two shiva-lingas, since hindus install two shiva-lingas on two stories, as can be seen in the mahankaleshwar temple in ujjain or the somnath temple. the closed-up rooms and walls of the taj mahal have sanskrit inscriptions and idols of shiva.
17. the eastern and southern pavilions of the taj mahal have several graves cluttered together mostly of queens and maids. like his predecessors, shahjahan finally used the mausoleum to bury his other queens and maids which means...is it indeed the symbol of love? shahjahan is one mughal emperor who had a thousand concubines and fifteen wives in his harlem. his court chronicles even gives space to imagine that he had an affair with his daughter jahanara. so the fact that the loss of one of his beloved's would inspire him to build a grand mausolem is highly far-fetched. the entire taj mahal complex has 400-500 rooms, too many for a dead woman or alive for that matter.
18. above mumtaz's centotaph hangs a chain by which now hangs a lamp. before capture by shahjahan the chain used to hold a water pitcher from which water used to drip on the shivalinga. it is this earlier hindu tradition in the taj mahal which gave the myth of shahjahan's love tear dropping on mumtaz's tomb on the full moon day of the winter eve. it was of this incident that rabindranath tagore said - teardrops on the cheek of time.
the archaelogical survey of india should be applauded for not bringing such 'explosive' truths to the forefront. because, i personally, would not want the taj mahal to be another babri masjid... in an india where everyone is waiting for a chance to lift arms against one another, if that hindu temple was pulled down to form a muslim tomb, let history lay rest, let us dream of shahjahan-mumtaz on the same track as that of romeo-juliet...let the beauty of the taj mahal stand as a beacon to beauty itself.
Sunday, August 16, 2009
reminiscences of summer '09
i have filled my blog entries mostly with topics that are of interest to me. i would like to give this entry a change. i would like to blog about the recent days of my life.
my parents left for a 2 month vacation on july 27th. due to the scorching heat, the site timing has been changed to 0500-1200 hours. its a bit tough to get up early morning, get dressed and then sleep for one hour through the journey to ras laffan. along-with work, i would read 'times of india', download songs, chat with friends. he he...
i reach back home by 1230 hours. either i heat up the food that i prepare on fridays (mostly chicken / mutton masala that might last for 3-4 days) and have it with 'quboos' or i fire up a sadia chicken burger in an arirang bun greased with mayo-chilli. i would then go through the manorama newspaper. my cousin nithin would drop by 1330. we would chat, murder some rothmans and catch up on any english movie being shown on cable. he would leave by 1500 hours. then, i would watch any movie on my dell or the 34gb-10 seasons-244 episodes of record-breaking american sitcom 'friends' that nithin had given me. i would then have a 90 minute nap.
in the evenings, if i am alone i would continue with my oil paintings of raja ravi varma or try out some songs on my guitar. most of the days, my friend ninesh drops by. we might have some fosters or whisky.
i might wound up my day by reading some book or listening to some ghazals. i am currently reading 'the tin drum' by gunther grass.
on thursdays, i go out for a movie. i will have some drinks and sleep late. i get up real late on fridays. i do my washing, preparing of food and clean up the house. then i have a real slow bath and sit down for lunch. the evenings would be spend with friends.
that sums up most of my days.
my parents left for a 2 month vacation on july 27th. due to the scorching heat, the site timing has been changed to 0500-1200 hours. its a bit tough to get up early morning, get dressed and then sleep for one hour through the journey to ras laffan. along-with work, i would read 'times of india', download songs, chat with friends. he he...
i reach back home by 1230 hours. either i heat up the food that i prepare on fridays (mostly chicken / mutton masala that might last for 3-4 days) and have it with 'quboos' or i fire up a sadia chicken burger in an arirang bun greased with mayo-chilli. i would then go through the manorama newspaper. my cousin nithin would drop by 1330. we would chat, murder some rothmans and catch up on any english movie being shown on cable. he would leave by 1500 hours. then, i would watch any movie on my dell or the 34gb-10 seasons-244 episodes of record-breaking american sitcom 'friends' that nithin had given me. i would then have a 90 minute nap.
in the evenings, if i am alone i would continue with my oil paintings of raja ravi varma or try out some songs on my guitar. most of the days, my friend ninesh drops by. we might have some fosters or whisky.
i might wound up my day by reading some book or listening to some ghazals. i am currently reading 'the tin drum' by gunther grass.
on thursdays, i go out for a movie. i will have some drinks and sleep late. i get up real late on fridays. i do my washing, preparing of food and clean up the house. then i have a real slow bath and sit down for lunch. the evenings would be spend with friends.
that sums up most of my days.
Thursday, August 13, 2009
howard roark - the creative free thinker
'howard roark laughed. he stood naked at the edge of a cliff.'
with these words, ayn rand unleashed 'the fountainhead' in 1943. howard roark is the protagonist of 'the fountainhead'; he is a fiercely independent, brilliant young architect of the modern school, whose bold and innovative designs are rejected by an orthodox society' yet he belives in the merit of his revolutionary designs and has the courage to stand for them in the face of an antagonistic society. the theme of the novel is 'individualism v/s collectivism' - the conflict between the individual who thinks for himself and the collectivism of those who allow others or external factors to dominate their decisions and life.
ideal man: roark is not the product of his upbringing, his economic stature, his family, his religious training or his social background, instead, he is a product of the choices he had made. he is an example of free will - the theory that an individual has the power, by the virtue of the choices he makes, to control the out come of his life. a man's thinking and values are not controlled by god or the fates or society or any external factor - but solely by his own choice.
integrity: it is the 'practice what you preach' virtue - it is the principle that says - you must put into practical action the ideas that you hold. but then, first, you must hold ideas. integrity requires a man to be a thinker. he is not a hypocrite to think something and practice something else. the only thing sacred in the world is the mind of a thinking man.
positive selfishness: roark is true to his values, his convictions, to his thinking, to his mind, to his self. despite being down to his last penny, he gives up a lucrative, publicity-genertaing commission in order to stand by the integrity of his design - and thats what he calls 'selfish'. to be true to one's self , one must first have a self. he must think independently he must judge, he must form values and he must act in pursuit of those values. he must never sacrifice them.
practical morality: roark proves that, in order to succeed,one does not need to betray his principles and play along-with the game. he is committed to his designs. he prefers to work under the scorching sun in a granite quarry rather than compromise with the smallest details of his designs. he has faith in himself and his designs. towards the end of the nearly 700 page novel, he achieves a significant commercial success. it proves that he is practical because he is moral and not vice-versa and that these two qualities can exist in a casual relationship.
free thinker: the essence of 'howard roark' is an unswerving devotion to his own thinking and judgement. animals employ characteristics as speed of foot, size, stength, claws and fangs, wings in order to survive whereas man cannot rely on these physical attributes. he must be a thinker to grow food, build houses, manufacture clothes and perform other creative actions necessary to prosper on earth. for this, each man must accept responsibility for his own thinking and his own survival. he must stand by his principles and values rather than bend to the opinions of others. such willingness to live by one's own thinking is true independence and integrity - this is virtue. moral virtue is a requirement of practical success, not a hindrance to it. although all are blessed with the power of thought, many of them chose not to use their's and instead look for an authority figure - 'conformists' who refuse the responsibility of thought and self-directed motivation taking the path of least resistance in life.
'the fountainhead' was initially rejected by twelve publishers who were committed to traditional plots and forms of story-telling. some thought it was too intelluctual, some thought there was no market for such a book while others rejected it because it glorified individualism and repudiated the collectivist ideas so popular among the then intelluctuals. ayn rand refused to comply or dilute her theme. when a reader at bobbs-merrill loved the theme and fought for its publication, the book seemed to live the theme it propogated. its theme of glorifying the independent mind not only captures the essence of the human spirit but, more fundamentally, expresses the deep human yearning for freedom. 'the fountainhead' is a theme and a novel that will live forever.
a standing ovation to the free-thinking spirits of issac newton, thomas alva edison, machiavelli, michaelangelo, leonardo da vinci, albert einstein, picasso and many other original thinkers who thought freely, developed their ideas and struggled against a conservative society.
with these words, ayn rand unleashed 'the fountainhead' in 1943. howard roark is the protagonist of 'the fountainhead'; he is a fiercely independent, brilliant young architect of the modern school, whose bold and innovative designs are rejected by an orthodox society' yet he belives in the merit of his revolutionary designs and has the courage to stand for them in the face of an antagonistic society. the theme of the novel is 'individualism v/s collectivism' - the conflict between the individual who thinks for himself and the collectivism of those who allow others or external factors to dominate their decisions and life.
ideal man: roark is not the product of his upbringing, his economic stature, his family, his religious training or his social background, instead, he is a product of the choices he had made. he is an example of free will - the theory that an individual has the power, by the virtue of the choices he makes, to control the out come of his life. a man's thinking and values are not controlled by god or the fates or society or any external factor - but solely by his own choice.
integrity: it is the 'practice what you preach' virtue - it is the principle that says - you must put into practical action the ideas that you hold. but then, first, you must hold ideas. integrity requires a man to be a thinker. he is not a hypocrite to think something and practice something else. the only thing sacred in the world is the mind of a thinking man.
positive selfishness: roark is true to his values, his convictions, to his thinking, to his mind, to his self. despite being down to his last penny, he gives up a lucrative, publicity-genertaing commission in order to stand by the integrity of his design - and thats what he calls 'selfish'. to be true to one's self , one must first have a self. he must think independently he must judge, he must form values and he must act in pursuit of those values. he must never sacrifice them.
practical morality: roark proves that, in order to succeed,one does not need to betray his principles and play along-with the game. he is committed to his designs. he prefers to work under the scorching sun in a granite quarry rather than compromise with the smallest details of his designs. he has faith in himself and his designs. towards the end of the nearly 700 page novel, he achieves a significant commercial success. it proves that he is practical because he is moral and not vice-versa and that these two qualities can exist in a casual relationship.
free thinker: the essence of 'howard roark' is an unswerving devotion to his own thinking and judgement. animals employ characteristics as speed of foot, size, stength, claws and fangs, wings in order to survive whereas man cannot rely on these physical attributes. he must be a thinker to grow food, build houses, manufacture clothes and perform other creative actions necessary to prosper on earth. for this, each man must accept responsibility for his own thinking and his own survival. he must stand by his principles and values rather than bend to the opinions of others. such willingness to live by one's own thinking is true independence and integrity - this is virtue. moral virtue is a requirement of practical success, not a hindrance to it. although all are blessed with the power of thought, many of them chose not to use their's and instead look for an authority figure - 'conformists' who refuse the responsibility of thought and self-directed motivation taking the path of least resistance in life.
'the fountainhead' was initially rejected by twelve publishers who were committed to traditional plots and forms of story-telling. some thought it was too intelluctual, some thought there was no market for such a book while others rejected it because it glorified individualism and repudiated the collectivist ideas so popular among the then intelluctuals. ayn rand refused to comply or dilute her theme. when a reader at bobbs-merrill loved the theme and fought for its publication, the book seemed to live the theme it propogated. its theme of glorifying the independent mind not only captures the essence of the human spirit but, more fundamentally, expresses the deep human yearning for freedom. 'the fountainhead' is a theme and a novel that will live forever.
a standing ovation to the free-thinking spirits of issac newton, thomas alva edison, machiavelli, michaelangelo, leonardo da vinci, albert einstein, picasso and many other original thinkers who thought freely, developed their ideas and struggled against a conservative society.
Sunday, August 9, 2009
the first pandava
in the indian epic 'mahabharatha' by maharishi ved vyas, karna is considered the greatest warrior by krishna and bheeshma. a warrior whose life inspires humanity 'not to loose heart in the struggles that one may face in life'.
loss of identity: pleased by kunti's hospitality, sage durvasa decides to bless her. the sage is able to foresee her future of having an impotent husband, and so, he grants her a mantra with which she could call upon any god of her choice and beget a child. still unmarried, kunti, out of curiosity, invokes the mantra calling upon sun-god surya. the sun-god appears before her and grants her a son, as radiant and robust as the god himself. the baby was born with kavacha (armor) and kundala (earrings). surya assured her that she would still remain a virgin. fear of shame, kunti places the child in a basket and floats it into the ganges. in this way, the child who was supposed to be the first pandava; who should have lead the pandavas to victory at the war of kurukshetra; who was more righteous than yudhistra, more valiant than bhima, a better warrior than arjuna - was deprived of his identity.
quest for knowledge: more than riding the chariot, karna was interested in the art of warfare. he requested dronacharya to teach him. but drona refused him because he only taught kshatriyas and karna was the son of a charioteer. karna was the first prince and had all the rights to learn the warfare from the best possible teacher but destiny didn't give him a chance. had he been aware of his lineage, his mother would have refused him. karna approached parashurama who had a hatred to wards kshatriyas and taught only brahmins. karna approached him as a brahmin and trained to become such a diligent student that parashurama considered him an equal.
respect for elders: when parashurama was asleep on his lap, karna did not move when a scorpion stung him. it was a deep wound and blood flowed out of his thigh, but still he did not move. parashurama realised that karna should be a kshatriya for being able to withstand such pain. in his anger, the guru cursed him that his martial skills would fail him when he needed it the most. karna's plea of mercy softened parashurama but the curse could not be reoked. instead he gifted karna with the celestial weapon, bargavastra and his personal bow vijaya. it is assumed that lord indra had taken the form of the scorpion to reveal that karna was a kshatriya.
misuse of talents: after his education at parashurama's karna set out on a journey during which he practiced the 'shadbavedi vidya' (hitting target by observing sound) and accidentally killed a cow mistaking it to be a wild animal. the brahmin who owned the cow cursed him: like he killed a helpless animal, he would be killed when he would be most helpless. karna was excited at having completed the art of warfare, though he got cursed he gained the weapons of his guru. he was excited and like his mother, used the knowledge he gained at the inappropriate moment.
helpful and righteous: karna found a girl crying over a pot of spilt ghee since her evil step-mother would be angry at her carelessness. unable to pacify the girl, karna takes the ghee mixed with soil and squeezes with all his strength, extracts the ghee and pours it back into the pot. but bhoomidevi (goddess of earth) angers at the pain that karna caused for the sake of a mere child and so, curses him that just as he held the soil, the goddess would hold his chariot wheel during battle, making him vulnerable to the enemy. karna helped the girl but did not bother to realise that he might be, unknowingly hurting others. there are times when one might face blows in life but that does not mean that one should stop doing good.
value for friendship: when karna challenged arjuna at the hastinapura open archery tournament, he was denied the chance because he was not a prince. kunti who was seated in the gallery did not have the courage to acknowledge that karna was the first pandava. duryodhana, the eldest of the kauravas and arch-rival of the pandavas, saved karna from humiliation by making him the king of a small kingdom requesting only friendship in return. this developed a strong bond between karna and duryodhana, two warriors who should have been rivals. both of them were the eldest of the warring families and would never have developed a friendship. they should have fought against one another in the finals - the 17-day kurukshetra. his friendship with duryodhana earned him intense rivalry with his unknown brother arjuna and enmity in general with the five pandavas, of whom he was the eldest.
standing up for principles: though he was a loyal friend to duryodhana, he expressed his dislike of shakuni to him. he continuosly advised duryodhana to use his prowess and skill to defeat enemies rather than resorting for deceit or trickery. when the kauravas fail in their attempt to kill the pandavas by setting fire to the house of lac, karna chides duryodhana telling him that cowards are doomed to fail. he exhorts duryodhana to be a true warrior.
pioneering efforts: duryodhana forcefully carried away the princess of chitragandha when she refused him at her swayamvar. the other kings pursued duyodhana and karna defeated them single-handedly. karna was able to defeat jarasandha by finding out his achilles heel during the battle. krishna came to know about it and he later helped bheema in defeating jarasandha by exploiting the achilles heel that karna had initially found out.
generosity: upon becoming a king, karna took an oath that anyone who approached him with a request at mid-day (when he would be worshipping the sun) would not go away with the request unfulfilled. when it was decided upon the kurukshetra war, the king of the gods, indra who was also the father of arjuna feared that karna might end up killing arjuna. it was the kavacha-kundala that would make karna invincible and immortal in battle and so indra decides to take them from karna. the sun-god surya warns his son of indra's intentions. indra disguises as a poor brahmin and approaches karna during his mid-day worship and asks for the kavacha-kundala whichkarna gives off readily by severing them from his body. humiliated by his generosity, indra gives karna the boon to use indra's most powerful weapon - vasavashakthi, but only once.
egoistic complex: at draupadi's swayamvar, karna was easily able to wield and string the bow and he would have gone off with her, if she had not humiliated him by calling him a 'sutputra' (son of a charioteer). his words hurt him and he failed. he was the righful person to claim draupadi, being a true warrior and being the first pandava. but the words had hurt his ego. he could not make himself realise that he was a king. he could not make himself wield and restrung the bow.
moment of weakness: karna was against duryodhana's plan to defeat the pandavas in a game of dice with trickery and deceit. just to please duryodhana, he is present at the game that leads to draupadi's 'vastraharan'. when the kauravas start to strip her, karna insults her saying that 'a woman with more than four husbands is a whore'. the whole incident makes arjuna vow to kill karna. while it can be argued that karna's part in the strip was the cause of his downfall, his act can also be justified since it was draupadi who had unjustly humiliated him during the swayamvar.
loyal and honorable: when krishna fails in peace negotiations with the kauravas, he approaches karna, the finest warrior. krishna reveals to karna his identity as the eldest pandava and requests him to join his brothers; moreover, the pandavas would be ready to accept him as their brother and future king. karna refuses the offer citing his loyalty to duryodhana. he also reveals that, since krishna is with the pandavas, defeat is certain for him and the kauravas and he was ready to accept it. krishna accepts karna's sense of loyalty and accepts his decision. he promises to keep karna's lineage a secret and bows down to him - maybe the only time when the divine krishna bows down to the mere human. later, kunti meets karna in person and reveals him as her first son. she asks him to join the pandavas and become the future king. karna refuses citing his unflinching loyalty to duryodhana. he promises her that he will not kill any of the pandavas except for arjuna which will, in either way leave kunti with five sons. he also requests kunti to keep his royal birth a secret. upon her request, he also promises her that he would not use any divine weapon more than once during the war.
the war within: bheeshma could not accept the leadership of the son of a charioteer. so, karna enters thebattlefield on the eleventh day after the fall of bheeshma. on the thirteenth day, his act of killing the unarmed and outnumbered abhimanyu (son of arjuna) is considered the reason for the damage of his image as an honorable warrior. on the fourteenth night, karna uses the vasavashakthi (the boon from indra) to slay ghatotkacha, the half-asura son of bhima. with the use of the weapon, krishna was sure that victory could now be theirs. on the sixteenth day, karna almost killed arjuna with his powerful nagastra but was saved by krishna. he could have used the nagastra a second time and slat arjuna but he stuck to the promise he made to kunti. it was towards sunset that karna could kill arjuna a third time on the same day, but he remembered the law of the battle laid forward by bheeshma that killing after sunset was morally wrong. on the seventeenth day, arjuna's arrows pushes bcak karna's chariot by several feet while the latter's arrows pushes back arjuna's by a few inches, so he is surprised when krishna praises karna. krishna explains that karna's chariot bore only the weight of karna and the charioteer while arjuna's chariot had the weight of the whole universe (krishna was the avatar of lord vishnu) in them and despite that, karna was able to move them by many inches. karna praises arjuna on his ability to deftly restring the bow. it seemed that both of them were well-matched and equal. then the earlier curses on karna started to rise. his chariot wheel sinks into the loose soil (bhoomidevi's curse); he finds himself unable to remember the incantations of the divine weapons (his guru parashurama's curse); and finally when he seeks the permission from arjuna and krishna and gets down from the chariot to remove the sinking wheel, krishna forces arjuna to bend the rules of the battle and kill karna when he is helpless (the brahmin's curse). when karna came to know that the pandavas were his brothers, his hatred towards them had vanished and just to be loyal to duryodhana, he went along with the war whereas the pandavas, his enemies were unaware that karna was their elder brother. arjuna is able to slay karna using a normal arrow. the death of karna made the most righteous woman in the epic, gandhari, the mother of the kauravas, to curse krishna.
despite being on the evil side, karna is considerd a formidable warrior, a courageous spirit who braved impossible odds on life. he is adored for his generosity. he is considered an example of how misjudgement can waste all the fine qualities of an individual.
karna never got his dues but he never stopped trying...
loss of identity: pleased by kunti's hospitality, sage durvasa decides to bless her. the sage is able to foresee her future of having an impotent husband, and so, he grants her a mantra with which she could call upon any god of her choice and beget a child. still unmarried, kunti, out of curiosity, invokes the mantra calling upon sun-god surya. the sun-god appears before her and grants her a son, as radiant and robust as the god himself. the baby was born with kavacha (armor) and kundala (earrings). surya assured her that she would still remain a virgin. fear of shame, kunti places the child in a basket and floats it into the ganges. in this way, the child who was supposed to be the first pandava; who should have lead the pandavas to victory at the war of kurukshetra; who was more righteous than yudhistra, more valiant than bhima, a better warrior than arjuna - was deprived of his identity.
quest for knowledge: more than riding the chariot, karna was interested in the art of warfare. he requested dronacharya to teach him. but drona refused him because he only taught kshatriyas and karna was the son of a charioteer. karna was the first prince and had all the rights to learn the warfare from the best possible teacher but destiny didn't give him a chance. had he been aware of his lineage, his mother would have refused him. karna approached parashurama who had a hatred to wards kshatriyas and taught only brahmins. karna approached him as a brahmin and trained to become such a diligent student that parashurama considered him an equal.
respect for elders: when parashurama was asleep on his lap, karna did not move when a scorpion stung him. it was a deep wound and blood flowed out of his thigh, but still he did not move. parashurama realised that karna should be a kshatriya for being able to withstand such pain. in his anger, the guru cursed him that his martial skills would fail him when he needed it the most. karna's plea of mercy softened parashurama but the curse could not be reoked. instead he gifted karna with the celestial weapon, bargavastra and his personal bow vijaya. it is assumed that lord indra had taken the form of the scorpion to reveal that karna was a kshatriya.
misuse of talents: after his education at parashurama's karna set out on a journey during which he practiced the 'shadbavedi vidya' (hitting target by observing sound) and accidentally killed a cow mistaking it to be a wild animal. the brahmin who owned the cow cursed him: like he killed a helpless animal, he would be killed when he would be most helpless. karna was excited at having completed the art of warfare, though he got cursed he gained the weapons of his guru. he was excited and like his mother, used the knowledge he gained at the inappropriate moment.
helpful and righteous: karna found a girl crying over a pot of spilt ghee since her evil step-mother would be angry at her carelessness. unable to pacify the girl, karna takes the ghee mixed with soil and squeezes with all his strength, extracts the ghee and pours it back into the pot. but bhoomidevi (goddess of earth) angers at the pain that karna caused for the sake of a mere child and so, curses him that just as he held the soil, the goddess would hold his chariot wheel during battle, making him vulnerable to the enemy. karna helped the girl but did not bother to realise that he might be, unknowingly hurting others. there are times when one might face blows in life but that does not mean that one should stop doing good.
value for friendship: when karna challenged arjuna at the hastinapura open archery tournament, he was denied the chance because he was not a prince. kunti who was seated in the gallery did not have the courage to acknowledge that karna was the first pandava. duryodhana, the eldest of the kauravas and arch-rival of the pandavas, saved karna from humiliation by making him the king of a small kingdom requesting only friendship in return. this developed a strong bond between karna and duryodhana, two warriors who should have been rivals. both of them were the eldest of the warring families and would never have developed a friendship. they should have fought against one another in the finals - the 17-day kurukshetra. his friendship with duryodhana earned him intense rivalry with his unknown brother arjuna and enmity in general with the five pandavas, of whom he was the eldest.
standing up for principles: though he was a loyal friend to duryodhana, he expressed his dislike of shakuni to him. he continuosly advised duryodhana to use his prowess and skill to defeat enemies rather than resorting for deceit or trickery. when the kauravas fail in their attempt to kill the pandavas by setting fire to the house of lac, karna chides duryodhana telling him that cowards are doomed to fail. he exhorts duryodhana to be a true warrior.
pioneering efforts: duryodhana forcefully carried away the princess of chitragandha when she refused him at her swayamvar. the other kings pursued duyodhana and karna defeated them single-handedly. karna was able to defeat jarasandha by finding out his achilles heel during the battle. krishna came to know about it and he later helped bheema in defeating jarasandha by exploiting the achilles heel that karna had initially found out.
generosity: upon becoming a king, karna took an oath that anyone who approached him with a request at mid-day (when he would be worshipping the sun) would not go away with the request unfulfilled. when it was decided upon the kurukshetra war, the king of the gods, indra who was also the father of arjuna feared that karna might end up killing arjuna. it was the kavacha-kundala that would make karna invincible and immortal in battle and so indra decides to take them from karna. the sun-god surya warns his son of indra's intentions. indra disguises as a poor brahmin and approaches karna during his mid-day worship and asks for the kavacha-kundala whichkarna gives off readily by severing them from his body. humiliated by his generosity, indra gives karna the boon to use indra's most powerful weapon - vasavashakthi, but only once.
egoistic complex: at draupadi's swayamvar, karna was easily able to wield and string the bow and he would have gone off with her, if she had not humiliated him by calling him a 'sutputra' (son of a charioteer). his words hurt him and he failed. he was the righful person to claim draupadi, being a true warrior and being the first pandava. but the words had hurt his ego. he could not make himself realise that he was a king. he could not make himself wield and restrung the bow.
moment of weakness: karna was against duryodhana's plan to defeat the pandavas in a game of dice with trickery and deceit. just to please duryodhana, he is present at the game that leads to draupadi's 'vastraharan'. when the kauravas start to strip her, karna insults her saying that 'a woman with more than four husbands is a whore'. the whole incident makes arjuna vow to kill karna. while it can be argued that karna's part in the strip was the cause of his downfall, his act can also be justified since it was draupadi who had unjustly humiliated him during the swayamvar.
loyal and honorable: when krishna fails in peace negotiations with the kauravas, he approaches karna, the finest warrior. krishna reveals to karna his identity as the eldest pandava and requests him to join his brothers; moreover, the pandavas would be ready to accept him as their brother and future king. karna refuses the offer citing his loyalty to duryodhana. he also reveals that, since krishna is with the pandavas, defeat is certain for him and the kauravas and he was ready to accept it. krishna accepts karna's sense of loyalty and accepts his decision. he promises to keep karna's lineage a secret and bows down to him - maybe the only time when the divine krishna bows down to the mere human. later, kunti meets karna in person and reveals him as her first son. she asks him to join the pandavas and become the future king. karna refuses citing his unflinching loyalty to duryodhana. he promises her that he will not kill any of the pandavas except for arjuna which will, in either way leave kunti with five sons. he also requests kunti to keep his royal birth a secret. upon her request, he also promises her that he would not use any divine weapon more than once during the war.
the war within: bheeshma could not accept the leadership of the son of a charioteer. so, karna enters thebattlefield on the eleventh day after the fall of bheeshma. on the thirteenth day, his act of killing the unarmed and outnumbered abhimanyu (son of arjuna) is considered the reason for the damage of his image as an honorable warrior. on the fourteenth night, karna uses the vasavashakthi (the boon from indra) to slay ghatotkacha, the half-asura son of bhima. with the use of the weapon, krishna was sure that victory could now be theirs. on the sixteenth day, karna almost killed arjuna with his powerful nagastra but was saved by krishna. he could have used the nagastra a second time and slat arjuna but he stuck to the promise he made to kunti. it was towards sunset that karna could kill arjuna a third time on the same day, but he remembered the law of the battle laid forward by bheeshma that killing after sunset was morally wrong. on the seventeenth day, arjuna's arrows pushes bcak karna's chariot by several feet while the latter's arrows pushes back arjuna's by a few inches, so he is surprised when krishna praises karna. krishna explains that karna's chariot bore only the weight of karna and the charioteer while arjuna's chariot had the weight of the whole universe (krishna was the avatar of lord vishnu) in them and despite that, karna was able to move them by many inches. karna praises arjuna on his ability to deftly restring the bow. it seemed that both of them were well-matched and equal. then the earlier curses on karna started to rise. his chariot wheel sinks into the loose soil (bhoomidevi's curse); he finds himself unable to remember the incantations of the divine weapons (his guru parashurama's curse); and finally when he seeks the permission from arjuna and krishna and gets down from the chariot to remove the sinking wheel, krishna forces arjuna to bend the rules of the battle and kill karna when he is helpless (the brahmin's curse). when karna came to know that the pandavas were his brothers, his hatred towards them had vanished and just to be loyal to duryodhana, he went along with the war whereas the pandavas, his enemies were unaware that karna was their elder brother. arjuna is able to slay karna using a normal arrow. the death of karna made the most righteous woman in the epic, gandhari, the mother of the kauravas, to curse krishna.
despite being on the evil side, karna is considerd a formidable warrior, a courageous spirit who braved impossible odds on life. he is adored for his generosity. he is considered an example of how misjudgement can waste all the fine qualities of an individual.
karna never got his dues but he never stopped trying...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)