The Curse or Karna

 Hello friends!

I am Bhavna Sosa, student of department of English MK Bhavnagar University.   This blog 'Curse or Karna' is assigned by our Yesha Bhatt maam. 

Tyagraj Paramasiva Iyer  Kailasam, 1884–1946, was a playwright and prominent writer of Kannada literature. His contribution to Kannada theatrical comedy earned him the title Prahasana Prapitamaha, "the father of humorous plays" and later he was also called "Kannadakke Obbane Kailasam" meaning "One and Only Kailasam for Kannada".

2) Is 'moral conflict' and 'Hamartia' there in Karna's character?

What is ‘Hamartia”?

Hamartia arose from the Greek verb hamartanein, meaning "to miss the mark" or "to err." Aristotle introduced the term in the Poetics to describe the error of judgment which ultimately brings about the tragic hero's downfall. As you can imagine, the word is most often found in literary criticism. However, media writers occasionally employ the word when discussing the unexplainable misfortune or missteps of celebrities regarded as immortal gods and goddesses before being felled by their own shortcomings.

Karna's role in moral context. Well there was nothing moral about karna. He was a great warrior but so was satyaki, bhagdatta, duryodhana and many other. If we read Mahabharata, we see that duryodhana has done many evil. Karna, he was involved in almost all of those evils and sometimes he was the instigator. We see that karna is known for his charity but he always boasted about his charity. He gave his kavach to Indra but received a weapon to kill Arjun so that was no charity it was a trade. Karna didn't even cared for duryodhana, all he wanted was a fight to death with Arjun. If karna was morally correct then he would stop duryodhana from doing evil things.

If we read about karna's past then we see that he was a demon named sahastrakawach in his previous birth. Guess destiny didn't want him to loss his demon nature.

3) Karna - The voice of  Subaltern :

It is said that whatever is not described in the Mahabharata does not exist, even the Ramayana and all the Puraanas are summarized in this epic. The greatest of all Puraanas, the Srimad Bhagavata Maha Puraana are present there in Mahabharata. There are so many characters in the great epic Mahabharata but Karna comes across as the most evocative one. One cannot but be awed by his towering personality and sheer strength of character, and at the same time help to identify oneself with the moments of frailty in his tragic life. It is the realistic mix of nuances that makes Karna such a credible and lifelike character. The intriguing story of a hero who despite being born to royalty was brought up lovingly by a lowly charioteer and his wife, his whole life was one great struggle against cruel destiny and all the odds placed in his way by the inequities of his  way by the inequities of his time. 

Once upon a time one of the ancestors of the Royal House was Shantanu who was married to Ganga. They had a son Devarata, who later came to be known as Bhishma because of the terribly difficult vow he took in order to establish father Shantanu to marry Satyavati the daughter of a fisherman as his second wife. She gave him two sons, Chitrangada and Vichitravirya. Both died without any children Devarata had taken a vow of celibacy so that there could never be any child of his who could ever claim the throne. The magnitude of the sacrifice gave him the name Bhishma. Ironically Satyavati now was forced to ask him to beget children on the widow of Chitrangada and Vichitravirya but he refused in keeping with his earlier vow. Satyavati was then compelled to call upon her illegitimate son Vyasa, born before her marriage to Shantanu, through Parashar Rishi, to beget descendants of the two widow, Ambika, and Ambalika. Vyasa being very ugly, the widow of Vichitravirya closed her eyes at his approach and consequently gave birth to a blind son, Dhritarashtra. The widow of Chitrangada turned pale and gave birth to a male child, Pandu. A third child, Vidura, was born to Vyasa from a royal maid. He was the only one who was normal among the three children. The sons grew up and Bhishma arranged the marriage of his nephews, Dhritarashtra married Gandhari and begot a hundred sons, the eldest being Duryodhana. Pandu had two wives Kunti and Madri. Kunti already had an unacknowledged son Karna from Surya before marriage. He was brought up by Adhiratha, a charioteer and his wife Radha after Kunti abandoned him. He suffered ignominies all his life being branded a charioteer's son and hence a charioteer. Kunti gave Pandu three sons. Yudhishthira from Dharma, Bhima from Vayu and Arjuna from Indra. Madri had twins, Nakula and Sahdev from the Ashwins. Although Pandu was younger; he was made king because of his brother Dhritarashtra's blindness. However, he died prematurely and Dhritrashtra assumed royal power. The five Pandavas or the sons of Pandu were educated at the royal court of Hastinapura together with the hundred Kauravas, sons of Dhritarashtra; Ashvatthama, the son of Drona and Karna were the two other students taught by the two Brahmana gurus, Dronacharya and Kripacharya.

5) Interpretation of myths- deconstruction 

The imageries of the moment of death of all the four great warriors have frozen so deeply in the psyche and culture over the ages, that all our ‘proofs’ whatever they might be, despite their force of Truth are helpless before a common acceptance! The appeal of the imageries is conscious and subconscious as well, and therein lays their power! The imageries are very powerful allegories and commentaries on the life, living and deed of the great Four! They also have didactic value and archetypal appeal! Another reason for the power of the imageries is their appeal to the ‘martyr’-self in man! Man has a natural inclination for martyrdom - be it real achievement or rationalization of powerlessness! The four imageries provide four powerful archetypes of martyrdom! 

Bhisma lying on a bed of arrows penetrated by deadly Shafts is imagery dramatic in its irony, and ironic in its dramatic evocation of simultaneous symbolic meaning of sleep or rest and death (a Vyasa-Shakespeare connection?)! Wasn’t Bhisma sleeping while living? Wasn’t Bhisma dead while sleeping? Weren’t the harmful lots surrounding him throughout his life the penetrating and painful shafts? Having sacrificed his legal rights to the throne in the Yajna-fire of his father’s lust, could he sleep that night while Shantanu gamed with Satyavati? Could he sleep on the nights when Chitrangada and Bichitrabirya suspected him of having illicit relationship with Satyabati? Could he sleep on the nights of Chitrangada and Bichitrabirya’s death? Could he sleep on the nights when Vyasa entered his brother’s wives thereby ending the royal Puru-blood forever? Could he rest peacefully, having been marginalized from the policy-making bodies of Hastinapur owing to the machinations of the powerful Bharadwaja-Gautama ministers? He certainly felt like lying on a bed of arrows! Endless shafts penetrated him, as he stood static! Pandu’s renouncing the throne and death, the Kuru-Pandava rivalry, Jarasandha’s threat, the Panchala threat - the shafts came in endless numbers eating into his vitality! Bhisma’s life is so active yet passive! It is indeed ironical that arrows of death emancipated him from the arrows of life! Whom else does the ‘bed of arrow’ befit?

Drona sat on his chariot, his eyes closed, his weapons exhausted! He had a Brahmana body but Khsatriya mind! As Dhristadumna pointed out to him rightly, he never ever performed the six duties of Brahmanas - ‘assisting at sacrifices, teaching, giving away, performance of sacrifices, receiving of gifts, and study’. Drona in his illusions and delusions was as static in his life as he was at the time of his death! He had a static soul in the chariot of his body! He could not have high moral authority having used his disciples for his own selfish gains! He had no contribution to the Vedic culture! All through his life he had been sitting in a pretentious posture. In his case too, stasis at the time of death ends the stasis of his life!

It is said Karna’s chariot wheel stuck to the ground at the time of his death! Weren’t his wheels stuck in his life too? He was one whom even Bhisma certified (Section CXXIV of Bhisma Parva) - ‘equal to Phalguni himself or the high-souled Krishna ….. equal to a child of the celestials and certainly much superior to men’. But was his chariot ever on the right track? Could he realize his potential, or rather, allow himself his full potential? 

In the Rig-Veda, the chariot wheel is a symbol of the sun. The Sun rides a chariot driven by seven horses. Karna, the Sun, is both the chariot and the chariot wheel! The wheel stuck in earth is Karna-sun being eclipsed! Kunti’s other name ‘Pritha’ also means earth. The Karna-sun-wheel is stuck in Pritha-fate! Karna trying to lift the wheel is Karna trying to lift his own fate from the mud! His inherent goodness was of no good to do that!

Bhisma, Drona, and Karna share another common thing. The common blood! They have Bharadwaja-Angira blood and therefore Puru-blood running through their veins! We know Ashwathama and Kripa survived. If that indicates Bharadwaja-Gautama survival despite Vashishtha-Bhrigu-Kanva victory, the myths might well be the creation of Puru-vamshi affiliated poets! One evidence of this is the myth of Kripa’s (a gautama!) immortality! Kripa’s myth strains our imagination as he is said to have been the Acharya of even Janmejaya’s son! Another evidence is the myth of Ashwathama’s immortality and also his new avatar as the next Vyasa! The composition of Mahabharata was not always in Vashishtha or Bhrigu hand! If the composition period extends up to the Gupta period or even later, it is natural some powerful Bharadwaja-Gautama-Angira poets contributed to the corpus! The myths might also be a device of the Shaivites in their war with Vaishnavites! Or, as Bankim Chandra speculated, they might even be the creation of Krishna-devotees to drive home the point that Krishna being the supreme personality of Godhead is above human morality! Whatever the motive or motives, nothing but the literary motive is our chief concern here!

Thank you for visit my blog.