My dear Saumya,
I cannot thank you enough for such a lucid and detailed response to my various doubts and questions. It was really very nice of you to have taken so much trouble over this.
Your explanation of the Vrinda-Tulsi tale is lovely. I suppose that is the origin of the saying Main tulsi tere aangan ki.
I also appreciate the distinction you are making between the cases of Ahalya and Vrinda . Vishnu does the same thing when he kills the mother of Shukracharya, though it could be argued that it was her duty to protect the sharanarthis, the asuras who took refuge in her ashram. But it was very sad for Vrinda, to have become the cause of the death of her beloved husband and also subjected to this personal indignity
Hi Shyamala you wont believe me when I will say how glad I am to see people discussing our mythology with as strong foundation as yours. Questions that you have raised here and before are as potent as they could get and I think they have equally potent answer. But for that we need to look deeper and look at all the incident in entirety. We will not be able to find our answers if we consider the anomalies as individual incidents. We all know a lot precedes any act of Vishnu, Shiv, Or Bramha. To answer your question I will have to first draw your attention towards the fact why purans were brought into being. For that first we have to accept Hinduism as more of a philosophy of life rather than a mythology. The vedas were as difficult as they could get. To ease their interpretation upnishads, Aranyaks, And brahamans came into being. Vedas lay down the philosophy of transformation of one from Sakar to Nirakar Bramha. for those who found even the Brahmins difficult to be interpreted (trust me I tried studying them, they are way way beyond my comprehension. When I can very safely say that I have a very well acquainted with Sanskrit and Hindi.) Purans (form of stories came into being.) The actions by these characters in the end were to show how a life of a person should be and how a society should be. Vishnu was designated the duty (dharma) of maintaining the universe (palan). Now neeti shastra as well as Geeta says one should opt for a personal downfall or personal indignity to maintain his dharma over opting personal upliftment (even spiritual) by loosing their dharma and adopting someone elses. When Vishnu killed SHukracharya's mother he followed what he has propounded. So he did when he killed Vali and so he did when he chose to compromise Vrinda's chastity. This is what I was able to understand I may very weel be wrong. There is still a lot to understand and study and learn but from whatever little I know this is what I could gather.
As you have yourself pointed out, there are so many moral ambiguities in our epics and our puranas, such as Rama killing Vali from hiding, which was clearly contrary to yuddhadharma. In the current version of the Ramayana being shown on TV, while they exonerated Kaikeyi by showing that she was expressly requested by Indra to demand the two boons and have Rama exiled, they could not explain this away, so they fudged it.
I have not seen Ramayan yet I never knew it was being telecasted. will now go ahead and watch that also. I have already talked about Vali's Vadha but I just remembered one more thing. In Tulsi Krit Ramayan Vali asks Rama.." why did you kill me like a hunter, does it befit the stature of lord Ram."
to Which Ram answered "one who does not follow Neeti himself should not expect his opponent to follow it. You cannot have a set rule for your self and another for your opponent." In other ways he just reiterated one has to be treated in the same way as he treats others. " Shathe shatyam smacharet" as in Neeti shastra
Reverting to the first point, I am sure you are right. But the interesting thing is that Shukracharya,while trying to bring Vrinda round, avoids stating it as a general case (which is what he does when arguing the same point with Jalandhar earlier), and instead presents it as a particular one applicable to Jalandhar. I suppose he felt (undoubtedly with justification, seeing how stupidly obstinate the girl is, clinging to the sanctity of her father's commitment long after the commitment has vanished into thin air), that she would not agree otherwise.
Well I guess we have to give that much of creative liberty to the CVs
The other thing is that this concept is not limited to the puranas.If you read Thakazhi Sivashankaram Pillai's very famous novel Chemmeen (the red fish), about the fisherfolk of his native Kerala, the core principle is the same: that the fisherman is safe at sea only so long as his wife is chaste, but once she falters, the wrath of the goddess of the sea will kill her husband!
Is this novel translated in English..I would love to read it
Also, there is the other question of what happens when two men with pativrata wives fight to the death, like Ravana and Lord Rama. My grandmother always told me, while reciting Panchakanya smare nityam, sarva paapa vinashakam, that of the five - Tara, Mandodari, Ahalya, Sita, and Draupadi - the purest, in mind and body, was Mandodari. I could never understand how she won over Sita, whose apaharan was not her fault, whereas Mandodari was safely tucked away in Lanka, safe from lecherous eyes. Be that as it may, the next question is why Mandodari's paativratyam is not able to preserve her husband's life.
@ bold I am answerless...I am trying to trying to think in the terms of both the women but is literally impossible to come to a conclusion. I need to look into this. Thanks for raising this question if ever I get a convincing answer to it. I will comeback and respond. Now for the Panchkanya, The supremacy is established not based on what they went through alone but also is based on their upbringing, their ancestry, Their birth and much more. Other than Mandodari and Tara all the three others belong to the superior humans. Tara is a Monkey a shade better than asur. Mandodari comes from asur clan and still has a strong sense of righteousness, chastity, and Dharma. She had been continuously warning Ravana of the consequences. Look at how Sita was born...she was not naturally born...same way Draupadi was achieved through Yagya ...and Ahilya is a ved knowing sage too. I hope I have put forth my view.
But she does curse Sita when she is leaving for Ayodhya, that just as she had destroyed her, Mandodari's happiness, she too would never have any happiness in her life. And of course it came true.
This culture of curse and impulse is something that I am not very comfortable with and fail to understand the entire reasoning behind it. All that I can absorb from all this curse giving is that one has to pay for his conscious and unconscious acts no matter what and no matter why.
I agree completely with your account of the various aspects of Shiva in Jalandhar. It is a great pity that he has to be destroyed, even if he is merged back into Shiva. He is so fascinating even in his wrongheadedness, and even more so when he is so incredibly soft towards the woman he loves. Of course a lot of this impact is due to Mohit Raina's mastery over the nuances of facial expression.
@ bold agreed. Mohit Raina is definitely doing an impeccable job.
As for Jalandhar being rescued at 11:59 hours, so to speak, it is not only in our movies and TV shows that this happens. In films everywhere, bombs, including nuclear bombs, are always defused when there are only 1 or 2 seconds to go to detonation. The best example in a Hollywood film that comes to my mind was in George Clooney's The Peacemaker, where the tripwire for a nuclear bomb is severed with one second to go. The only saving grace there was that it was done by a woman nuclear scientist, who was not wearing mini shorts!!
I don't watch many Hollywood movies ...not a big Hollywood fan either...but I agree with every thing you said. I guess we also look forward to dramatization. It give us thrill I guess.
I would very much like to see photos of your miniature paintings, if it is not too much trouble. I will PM you my personal e-mail id, and as I am sure you would have scanned copies of photos of the individual paintings, I hope you can share them with me. I am a great lover of traditional miniatures, whether of the Mughal, Rajasthani or Pahari schools in India, or of the Persian school. I remember an incredible collection of 16th century Persian miniatures, From the Court of Shah Tahmasp , that I had the good fortune to be able to see at the Smithsonian in Washington, when I was posted at our Embassy there. They gave each visitor a magnifying glass at the entrance, and after over 3 hours of peering at the unbelievably detailed brushwork, I had a solid headache, but was I happy!
@ bold. The court of shah Tahmasp at Smithsonian is definitely and undoubtedly a master piece. I used to paint at one point of time influenced by the Rajput style of art, but that was when I was in India and had access to SurSagar and Meghdoot. That is where I was getting my scenes from. But for past ten years I have been painting mostly landscapes and nature. I don't live in India anymore, though will soon be going back and am so looking forward to it.I have a facebook page www. facebook.com/mytinypaintings. check it when ever you have time.
It is a pleasure to enter into such wonderful discussion with you. I have seen our younger generation as well as my contemporaries raising very weird and futile questions on our philosophy and mythology very rarely do I come across someone raising questions which make me look deeper into what I know and what I still need to know. I am glad I became aquainted with you.
Lots of love
Saumya
