Dhritarashtra, we have already learnt that was born to Ambika and Vyas and he was born blind as his mother closed her eyes when she saw Vyas as she was scared. All through his life he lived in this inferiority complex that he is incomplete and not at par. This did not stop him from gaining knowledge and skills of ruling the kingdom and acquiring more. This character is the most criticized in the story of Mahabharat and even by the past and future of India. I have my logic that Dhritarashtra's qualities were defined by the following four incidences of his life.
First, when it was time for identification of King of Hastinapur, his bother Pandu was given preference on him as he was "intact" and not disabled as per his brother and prime minister, Vidur. He did step down but always held it against Vidur and Hastinapur kingdom. Dhritarashtra, was held in highest regards by his brother Pandu; and stepped in as king only after he was allowed by his brother. This was the only respite blind Dhritarashtra had, but he was left with bitterness throughout his entire life.
Secondly, when Dhritarashtra was married to Gandhari, princess of Kandhar; she obliged but tied a blindfold to her eyes thinking that this was her destiny and that if her husband can't see the glory of world she is not entitled to the same. Dhritarashtra, who thought that maybe he shall be completed by Gandhari and she will help him see what he can't by himself. He was disappointed by her move and never appreciated her love for him. Gandhari was Dhritarashtra's open critic and wanted to guide him and take benefit of the intelligence she possessed, which Dhritarashtra discounted as she couldn't see as him. This drove a wedge between both of them for life and affected the King and queen and their relations with their sons as well.
Duryodhan is criticized by every one in entire history; except for Dhritarashtra. He always saw his son's arrogance as a projection of his own own ambition. He always thought that Duryodhan was as capable as any of the Pandu sons and that his claim on the throne of Hastinapur was valid. As a rule in Bharata clan, that a person is made king it's on their merit and credibility; not based on their DNA. This was once broken in time of Shantanu's rein, but it wasn't Shantanu who did that, the decision was made by Bhishma out of hid love for his father. But in case of Dhritarashtra, it was different as it was expected of him to learn from mistakes of Bhishma Pitamah. But Dhritarashtra's ambition weighed on him and he raised Duryodhana telling that he will be the king one day. This was the third reason.
And lastly, it was the influencers around him like Shakuni. He was Gandhari's brother; who felt that something wrong happened with her sister when she was married to a blind man and devoted his life to making Dhritarashtra or his son rein on Hastinapur. His is one character that deserves a new post itself. But I would say that the low morale of Dhritarashtra was fed by the sympathies of Shakuni. He was as close to solace as Dhritarashtra could get.
Dhritarashtra, repented the repercussions of his actions, but never could blame Duryodhana. Dhritarashtra represents - excessive unrestrained attachment (Vyasanga). Krishna calls him the root of evil in Mahabharat when he goes for the peace mission to Hastinapur. (He calls Duryodhan the tree of evil and Dhritarashtra as it's root - root of all evil is unrestrained obsessive attachment / blind obsession). In a world where we all want our children to be better then us and attain everything that we couldn't. That's all Dhritarashtra hoped for. It was his naked ambitions that drove what happened in Hastinapur in form of Mahabharat. But given these four drivers could we blame him, could he be any different if the first two could have been avoided? Just a question to ponder on.
First, when it was time for identification of King of Hastinapur, his bother Pandu was given preference on him as he was "intact" and not disabled as per his brother and prime minister, Vidur. He did step down but always held it against Vidur and Hastinapur kingdom. Dhritarashtra, was held in highest regards by his brother Pandu; and stepped in as king only after he was allowed by his brother. This was the only respite blind Dhritarashtra had, but he was left with bitterness throughout his entire life.
Secondly, when Dhritarashtra was married to Gandhari, princess of Kandhar; she obliged but tied a blindfold to her eyes thinking that this was her destiny and that if her husband can't see the glory of world she is not entitled to the same. Dhritarashtra, who thought that maybe he shall be completed by Gandhari and she will help him see what he can't by himself. He was disappointed by her move and never appreciated her love for him. Gandhari was Dhritarashtra's open critic and wanted to guide him and take benefit of the intelligence she possessed, which Dhritarashtra discounted as she couldn't see as him. This drove a wedge between both of them for life and affected the King and queen and their relations with their sons as well.
Duryodhan is criticized by every one in entire history; except for Dhritarashtra. He always saw his son's arrogance as a projection of his own own ambition. He always thought that Duryodhan was as capable as any of the Pandu sons and that his claim on the throne of Hastinapur was valid. As a rule in Bharata clan, that a person is made king it's on their merit and credibility; not based on their DNA. This was once broken in time of Shantanu's rein, but it wasn't Shantanu who did that, the decision was made by Bhishma out of hid love for his father. But in case of Dhritarashtra, it was different as it was expected of him to learn from mistakes of Bhishma Pitamah. But Dhritarashtra's ambition weighed on him and he raised Duryodhana telling that he will be the king one day. This was the third reason.
And lastly, it was the influencers around him like Shakuni. He was Gandhari's brother; who felt that something wrong happened with her sister when she was married to a blind man and devoted his life to making Dhritarashtra or his son rein on Hastinapur. His is one character that deserves a new post itself. But I would say that the low morale of Dhritarashtra was fed by the sympathies of Shakuni. He was as close to solace as Dhritarashtra could get.
Dhritarashtra, repented the repercussions of his actions, but never could blame Duryodhana. Dhritarashtra represents - excessive unrestrained attachment (Vyasanga). Krishna calls him the root of evil in Mahabharat when he goes for the peace mission to Hastinapur. (He calls Duryodhan the tree of evil and Dhritarashtra as it's root - root of all evil is unrestrained obsessive attachment / blind obsession). In a world where we all want our children to be better then us and attain everything that we couldn't. That's all Dhritarashtra hoped for. It was his naked ambitions that drove what happened in Hastinapur in form of Mahabharat. But given these four drivers could we blame him, could he be any different if the first two could have been avoided? Just a question to ponder on.
Comments