Hope and Kools, three excellent and thought provoking posts. Objectively, I concur with almost all points. Subjectively, I need to dissent, for a mature discussion-a lone voice here but not as a discordant note. If I am too late, and hence you're not willing to discuss here I'd understand, take it as a lack of opportunity earlier in daily routine of the day.
For the first part, I agree comprehensively. Mother. The word invokes our brightest and earliest moments- life at its pristine beginning enveloped in a security of the word LIFE itself. Spiritually too, she is nearest to godliness. In my faith, her benevolence is explained as 'sakaam karuna' (compassion out of attachment)- next only to that of our gods- 'nishkam karuna' (compassion without attachment). She builds our three bodies- 'audarik,vaikriya and aharak' as our soul's temporary abode in this life. As such, our indebtedness to her is immeasurable. Of three limitless indebtedness to Sumata, Supita, Suguru, hers is first arisenâŚ.
My dissent is for the second part. When Hope says, the comparison is 'disturbing', It is. But may I assume, she has not read its first occurrence? For it was contexted in a mother's unjustifiable demands- Even gods can't demand 'injustice'. Manav's indebtedness is question less. But, does that give Savita a right to demand or insistence to come him along her way abandoning his wife? As Kools says, that is not what we are askingâŚjust little tact and silent discharge of his duties to old parents. But how normally- rather how at all- she is allowing him to do so? What right does she have to burn another mother's womb in very presence of that mother? For all her accumulated baggage? Or the way she unleashed a public onslaught on her son, (validity of that onslaught- the banishment effected by her son or her own dictate - is another point), had she given a glance at her son's hurt eyes or withered face at helplessness to subside this road show from his mother? What kind of dark possessive love is this? Not a mother's pure love. Kools- 'Savita is not right' is not enough here. That was a broad day light murder attempt. (there's concept in my tenet - Kumata and a son's duty to bring her around to correctness). She is losing some of her claims. Her limping retreat later was only artificial. You may rightly say it was lack of exposure by many episodes on my part to miss that 'baggage', but that day she was phony- with a gold set in one hand and not a glance towards his burnt son. That was more a competent Usha Nadkarni then hurt Savita. Contrast this to her earlier attempt to shield her offspring at Rasika's party. I was fearing a very awkward scene of an aged woman's unbecoming danceâŚBut Usha Nadkarni gave a dignified mother's dignified Lavani- shaming the offender then being shamed herself. (Incidentally turn around point). Then onward, she knows in her heart, Archana is not wicked (whatever her other faults and likely to be reconciled again), but yet when Archana asks her, what should she do to make her happy- a blunt order- get out of Manav's life. Is she not a far away portrait of a loving mother we are cherishing above- let alone imperfect?
I know, I might be irritating and perhaps misfit here. But this is not an attempt to put a dissenting note, just for the sake of a dispute. I sincerely believe in above, as well as I DO respect and cherish both of yours' posts on mother. If you feel anything otherwise, please allow for that as my limit in presentation and language. My POV.
Kyunki Saas Bhi Kabhi Bahu Thi 2
All things Korean
Ganesh Kartikeya
Anupamaa
