Short Stories from Mahabharata: 4. Expansion of Kuru Clan- the progressive/regressive nature of Mahabharata
Birth of Dhritarashtra, Pandu and Vidura
Satyavati's son's Vichitravirya and Chitrangada are dead. Hastinapur throne is empty without any heirs. The old Rajmata is now cursing her decision to be greedy of her son's reining the throne. She now is left with young daughters in law and no heir. She tries to cox Bhishma to marry/ impregnate them so that she can have a heir for Hastinapur. Unfortunately, he is not in on the plan, because is already tied in his oath.
Now there is a twist, we learn that Satyavati with master skills has given birth to another son; magically I might add, named Vyasa. So he is now bestowed with the opportunity to impregnate the DILs. Vyasa being a modest man that he is tells his mother that he is not physically or socially desirable right now and that he to be given some time to become decent. Which unfortunately he is not allowed. Now when the DILs are called upon for the task, they gladly accept. Apparently its very clear to the rajkumaris that there only task in world is to procreate and by whatever means. DNA doesn't really carry a meaning here, can't decide if its good or bad.
Now in what ever form Vyasa is witnessed, the first one Ambika closes her eyes in fear and hence Dhritarashtra is born blind; and Ambalika turns yellow of disgust, and so Pandu is born anemic and has a bad health. Rajmata on hearing is prognosis wants to give another chance to the process (reminds me of the Handmaid's tale); but both the ladies are too scared to meet with Vyasa again and sent their maid, who is absolutely fine and gives birth to Vidur.
This was Mahabharata and more than a 100 years back. I would call it progressive and regressive at the same time. Women not getting the entitlement to voice opinions of not wanting to procreate with a stranger. A kingdom led by woman, but she is so absorbed in the power of providing heir and hence being relevant that she did not realize that she is subjecting her DILs to an unnecessary trauma. A son who does his job of giving the sons and not looking back for any amount of credit or felicity. And Bhishma being the leader and sorn in caretaker of Hastinapur and not interfering in any of this oppressive behavior. Mahabharat is full of contradictions, and hence what i had read on Pedagogy of the Oppressed long back seems true to its words- "Leaders who do not act dialogically, but insist on imposing their decisions, do not organize the people--they manipulate them. They do not liberate, nor are they liberated: they oppress.” Satyavati on occasions proved just to be that.
Satyavati's son's Vichitravirya and Chitrangada are dead. Hastinapur throne is empty without any heirs. The old Rajmata is now cursing her decision to be greedy of her son's reining the throne. She now is left with young daughters in law and no heir. She tries to cox Bhishma to marry/ impregnate them so that she can have a heir for Hastinapur. Unfortunately, he is not in on the plan, because is already tied in his oath.
Now there is a twist, we learn that Satyavati with master skills has given birth to another son; magically I might add, named Vyasa. So he is now bestowed with the opportunity to impregnate the DILs. Vyasa being a modest man that he is tells his mother that he is not physically or socially desirable right now and that he to be given some time to become decent. Which unfortunately he is not allowed. Now when the DILs are called upon for the task, they gladly accept. Apparently its very clear to the rajkumaris that there only task in world is to procreate and by whatever means. DNA doesn't really carry a meaning here, can't decide if its good or bad.
Now in what ever form Vyasa is witnessed, the first one Ambika closes her eyes in fear and hence Dhritarashtra is born blind; and Ambalika turns yellow of disgust, and so Pandu is born anemic and has a bad health. Rajmata on hearing is prognosis wants to give another chance to the process (reminds me of the Handmaid's tale); but both the ladies are too scared to meet with Vyasa again and sent their maid, who is absolutely fine and gives birth to Vidur.
This was Mahabharata and more than a 100 years back. I would call it progressive and regressive at the same time. Women not getting the entitlement to voice opinions of not wanting to procreate with a stranger. A kingdom led by woman, but she is so absorbed in the power of providing heir and hence being relevant that she did not realize that she is subjecting her DILs to an unnecessary trauma. A son who does his job of giving the sons and not looking back for any amount of credit or felicity. And Bhishma being the leader and sorn in caretaker of Hastinapur and not interfering in any of this oppressive behavior. Mahabharat is full of contradictions, and hence what i had read on Pedagogy of the Oppressed long back seems true to its words- "Leaders who do not act dialogically, but insist on imposing their decisions, do not organize the people--they manipulate them. They do not liberate, nor are they liberated: they oppress.” Satyavati on occasions proved just to be that.
Comments