In the CC, I've connected the writer of the article. Martand, please go through the trailing responses.
On 11/1/16, Vedprakash Sharma <vedprakash.sha...@gmail.com> wrote: > So now, it is the Indian mythology, which is been wrongly targetted. > Logic has good as well as bad aspect. > Through logic, many criminals are saved in courts and many common men and > women are kept in jail though they have not committed a crime. > So we can find fault if we desire so, in anything. > MahaBharata and Ramayana are no exceptions. > But in Europe, history tells that the disabled were brutally killed as they > were considered bad for society. It is not mythology but the real history. > In indian culture, there is a stigma against disability, but they are > treated comparatively well compared to other culture. > > Vedprakash Sharma > http://www.musicalexpressions.myehome.in/ > > -----Original Message----- > From: AccessIndia [mailto:accessindia-boun...@accessindia.org.in] On Behalf > Of Boopathi P > Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2016 8:02 AM > To: disability-studies-india <disability-studies-in...@googlegroups.com>; > AccessIndia: a list for discussing accessibility and issues concerning the > disabled. <accessindia@accessindia.org.in>; brailleacl > <braille...@googlegroups.com> > Subject: [AI] Fwd: Indian Mythology Has a Problem With Disability- The Wire > Article. > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Karthi Govarthanan <karthimaengl...@gmail.com> > Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2016 19:30:18 +0530 > Subject: Indian Mythology Has a Problem With Disability- The Wire Article. > To: "uday. ganesh01" <uday.ganes...@gmail.com>, sivaramanvvs > <sivaraman...@gmail.com>, pathisamy <pathis...@gmail.com> > > Indian Mythology Has a Problem With Disability > > BY MARTAND JHA ON 31/10/2016 > > Mythology has taught us to enable discrimination against disabled people, > portraying them negatively and telling us that they deserve it because of > sins committed in past lives. > > Sanjaya meets Dhritarashtra as his envoy for peace negotiations. Credit: > Wikimedia Commons > > It is said that one can find every aspect of life in the holy text > Mahabharata and if one doesn’t find it there, then chances are little that > one will find it elsewhere. But while it is true that the > Mahabharatacontains elements of philosophy, life, war, intellect, passion, > jealousy and treachery, one element is not discussed as it should have been: > disability. The character associated with it is Dhritarashtra, who is > negatively portrayed throughout the text. In fact, many believe that he is > to blame for the epic battle between the cousins (Pandavas and > Kauravas) because he adamantly insisted that his son, Duryodhana, should be > king after him, instead of the more worthy Yudhisthira. > > Since very few people in India have actually read theMahabharata, the don’t > know about the character of Dhritarashtra before he became king – an aspect > that has been cautiously kept hidden. Both Dhritarashtra and his > step-brother Pandu had a very cordial relationship. Pandu, being the younger > brother, held Dhritarashtra in very high-esteem – and it was reciprocated. > > Both were disciples of the great Bhishma, their uncle who was also looking > after the administration of the kingdom since there was no king on the > throne at the time. Bhishma himself couldn’t take the throne because of a > vow he had made earlier in his life. Since Dhritarashtra was older, he was > trained to be a king, while the younger brother, Pandu, was trained as a > warrior and lead the army and become thesenapati. Bhishma trained the > brothers so the kingdom could go into safe hands. > > Bhishma’s idea was sage, because Dhritarashtra was visually impaired from > birth and thus couldn’t fight wars. He was trained in administration, > management, decision-making, delivering justice – all very important aspects > of being a king, while the aspect of war was left to Pandu, who could > militarily assist his older brother. As a team, they could have achieved > wonders. > > But when Dhritarashtra was being crowned, Vidur, the young prime minister, > who was also taught by Bhishma, objected to him becoming king. How can a > blind man sit on the throne of a king, he had argued. How could the kingdom > be a great empire if the king is blind? How could important decisions be > made on the battlefield if the king is sitting safe in the capital? > > Nobody said anything to Vidur’s questions because a king with a disability > was unprecedented. As a result, Dhritarashtra had to step down; his > disability was taken as his inability. Denied his rightful place, this > became a turning point for Dhritarashtra and guided the person he was to > become. > > After a short period of time though, Dhritarashtra was made the king because > Pandu left his throne and eventually died. It was only out of compulsion > that Dhritarashtra was accepted as king. Had he been made king the first > time around, he wouldn’t have been made as conscious about his ‘disability’. > Now, he was a ‘sloppy second’, someone’s ‘reject’ and he knew this very > clearly. Now the question is, when Dhritarashtra sat on the throne, was the > Kaurava empire anything short of a mighty empire? Was the administration > poor, were people unhappy, was justice not delivered? The answer is no, > because Dhritarashtra had people like Bhishma around him, along with Vidur, > who took care of the intricacies of administration. > > All the wrongs began to emerge later, when his son Duryodhana was born. > Dhirtarastra wanted him to be king after him, even though Duryodhana was > unworthy, simply because he wanted to ‘undo’ the injustice done to him. He > wanted to ensure that his son wouldn’t be a ‘sloppy second’ like him and > that’s why his son was raised believing the throne was his birthright. > > Nobody is born bad but it’s society which ‘makes’ or ‘breaks’ an individual. > Our society just saw the bad person Dhritarashtra became, but turned a blind > eye to what led him there. Since he was disabled, people who have > historically discriminated against differently-abled people were further > encouraged to justify their attitude towards differently-abled people. > > One may wonder what mythology has to do in this context. Indian society is > deeply affected by our mythology and its characters. The illiterate know > about these stories. The impact of our mythology is such that people > identify with the characters and inculcate values drawn from them into their > own lives. The depiction and characterisation of disabled people in Indian > mythology is extremely negative and people have used the stories to justify > their discriminatory attitude against differently-abled people. > > The case of Dhritarashtra is not just about a disabled person has been > depicted in poor light. If one looks at the Ramayana, the character of > Manthara has also been demonised to a great extent. In fact, she has largely > been blamed for sending Rama on exile for 14 years. Manthara was the maid of > the queen, Kaikeyi, and is seen as instrumental in convincing the queen to > ask Dasharatha to grant her the two boons that he had promised her a long > time ago. Under Manthara’s influence, Kaikeyi asked the king to make his son > Bharat the next king of Ayodhaya instead of Rama. > However, some folktales point out how Manthara didn’t have anything to gain > by sending Ram to exile. Instead, she suffered heavy public scrutiny that > linked her character to her orthopaedic disability, because of which she > couldn’t stand erect. > > Mostly, our mythological texts have shown disabled people either as > powerful, cunning and mischievous characters or as beggars in a state of > extreme pain and poverty. Also, disability and mocking disability is > justified in the name of sins carried from their previous births. Rarely can > one encounter disabled characters in a positive light. One such character > was Ashtavakra, who was physically disabled since birth. Born in a Brahmin > family, he mastered the Vedasand other holy scriptures at an early age. He > was mocked by the intellectuals in King Janaka’s court on account of his > disability, where he had gone to participate in a shastrartha(philosophical > debate). > > Ultimately, he defeated his mockers and earned a lot of praise from > everyone. But this story from the Chandogya Upanishad sets a dangerous > precedent, if observed carefully. The subtext is that if you are > intellectually capable, your physical disability doesn’t matter. Then, if a > disabled person is not an intellectual, does it gives others the right to > mock his or her disability? The moral seems to be that a disabled person has > to be extraordinary to earn basic respect, a phenomenon that continues > today. > > The time has come to ask tough questions, to point out the wrong messages > which have been disseminated by these texts and to re-interpret these texts > in the light of the present day situations so that differently-abled people > are not judged by the wrong morals of our mythological texts that relegate > disability and disabled people to negativity. > > In "Rights" > Categories: Rights > > Tagged as: Chandogya Upanishad,disability rights, Mahabharata,mythology, > Pandavas and Kauravas,Ramayana. > > The Wire is published by the Foundation for Independent Journalism, a > not-for-profit company registered under Section 8. > > The Wire’s journalism is partly fundedby the Independent and Public Spirited > Media Foundation. > > > > -- > Regards > Boopathi P > PhD research scholar, > department of English Literature, > School of literary studies, > EFL University. > Hyderabad-500007 > India. > Mobile: +91-9843693951 > > > Register at the dedicated AccessIndia list for discussing accessibility of > mobile phones / Tabs on: > http://mail.accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/mobile.accessindia_accessindia.org.in > > > Search for old postings at: > http://www.mail-archive.com/accessindia@accessindia.org.in/ > > To unsubscribe send a message to > accessindia-requ...@accessindia.org.in > with the subject unsubscribe. > > To change your subscription to digest mode or make any other changes, please > visit the list home page at > http://accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/accessindia_accessindia.org.in > > > Disclaimer: > 1. Contents of the mails, factual, or otherwise, reflect the thinking of the > person sending the mail and AI in no way relates itself to its veracity; > > 2. AI cannot be held liable for any commission/omission based on the mails > sent through this mailing list.. > > > --- > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > > > Register at the dedicated AccessIndia list for discussing accessibility of > mobile phones / Tabs on: > http://mail.accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/mobile.accessindia_accessindia.org.in > > > Search for old postings at: > http://www.mail-archive.com/accessindia@accessindia.org.in/ > > To unsubscribe send a message to > accessindia-requ...@accessindia.org.in > with the subject unsubscribe. > > To change your subscription to digest mode or make any other changes, please > visit the list home page at > http://accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/accessindia_accessindia.org.in > > > Disclaimer: > 1. Contents of the mails, factual, or otherwise, reflect the thinking of the > person sending the mail and AI in no way relates itself to its veracity; > > 2. AI cannot be held liable for any commission/omission based on the mails > sent through this mailing list.. > -- Avinash Shahi Doctoral student at Centre for Law and Governance JNU Register at the dedicated AccessIndia list for discussing accessibility of mobile phones / Tabs on: http://mail.accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/mobile.accessindia_accessindia.org.in Search for old postings at: http://www.mail-archive.com/accessindia@accessindia.org.in/ To unsubscribe send a message to accessindia-requ...@accessindia.org.in with the subject unsubscribe. To change your subscription to digest mode or make any other changes, please visit the list home page at http://accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/accessindia_accessindia.org.in Disclaimer: 1. Contents of the mails, factual, or otherwise, reflect the thinking of the person sending the mail and AI in no way relates itself to its veracity; 2. AI cannot be held liable for any commission/omission based on the mails sent through this mailing list..
