Bhishma, arguably has been the most discussed character from the mega epic
Mahabharata. More often than not, he had been under scanner and been criticised left,
right and centre for his debated inability to stop Draupadi's disrobing among other
things and the eventual happening of war. Criticism of Bhishma has gone to the point that it has become like a trend among all newbies who explore the text that "read the text and blame Bhishma"! But was Bhishma as simple the character as it seems and was his decision making as easy as it sounds to enthusiasts like us? Can someone with divine origins and one who stood undefeated against Parshurama in battle, be such a simply silly person?
Let’s try to explore in yet another curious case.
All the criticism which Bhishma faces, roots of it mostly go to his oath of never marrying
and serving loyally to the seated king of Hastinapur while never becoming king himself.
So was the oath the real problem? Was his oath one of its kind? Is this just the case of
some impulsively taken imprudent oath?
In terms of not marrying and renouncing the kingship, his oath sounds one of its kind
but overall, there was nothing new with lifelong oaths and narratives are replete with
such incidents. Lord Ram for instance took a vow that besides Sita, he would never have
another wife. Vows, oaths, and promises are synonyms of commitment which gives
strength to one's character and without which, nothing worthwhile can take shape.
Just like muscles take shape after years of commitment to exercising, society takes shape
afteryears/decades of commitment to reforms and so on. Unfortunately, in most of such
cases the judgement drawn is a bit skewed and too output based.
Certainly there seems nothing wrong with taking vows nor was anything wrong with the
vow Devvrata took after which he became “Bhishma”. Oath was taken to prevent internal
conflict in the kingdom to maintain peace and reduce the possibilities of any "game of
thrones” being played between multiple contenders to become the king. He simply
denied sowing the seed of a plant which could bear toxic fruits. The oath was gigantic
and indeed a matter of extra-ordinariness.
As a prince himself, all he wanted was prosperity of his nation which any good citizen
would anyways desire. He wanted for his nation, a rule of righteousness coupled with
enough strength to protect it. But could he, or anyone for that matter have imagined that it would take that long for his wish to complete? Having the boon of iccha mrityu or death
by wish, he certainly must not have desired to live that long and witness all that trauma.
He, who can renounce marriage and throne, can he not renounce life itself? Bhishma was
at the receiving end of many tragedies and clearly did not live long just for the sake of it.
Nor did he live a life one would yearn for! Who would want to live 4 generations only to
fight his own great grandchildren in battle and die at their hands? Grand-sire Bhishma and young Abhimanyu taking arms against each other in the Kurukshetra battle was such a pity!
What was the real problem then if not the oath? Let's continue the discussion in part II Stay tuned! (Link to part II)
Comments
Post a Comment