Well we can debate over this article, it is not really as simple as it it described, but I would like to question the author alright lets accept our scripture gave a bad impression but what about author who has constantly called us differently abled? Are we really differently abled? If not then why most of the intellectual are using this terminologies? Most of the articles we read wither from the media or individuals everybody is using terminology such as differently abled, special needs and so on hope we will aware media and other individuals not to use such terminology. So dear author Hope next time while writing articles against the discriminatory practices or provisions against person with disability you will not use terminology such as differently abled.
On 11/1/16, Mahendra Galani <[email protected]> wrote: > very true > At 08:01 AM 11/1/2016 +0530, you wrote: >>---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: >>Karthi Govarthanan <[email protected]> >>Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2016 19:30:18 +0530 Subject: >>Indian Mythology Has a Problem With Disability- >>The Wire Article. To: "uday. ganesh01" >><[email protected]>, sivaramanvvs >><[email protected]>, pathisamy >><[email protected]> 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 beenn 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 oof 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 imporrtant 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/[email protected]/ >>To unsubscribe send a message to >>[email protected] 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.. > > > > with warm regards > Mahendra Galani > Whatsapp/Viber/Skype/Imo/Facetime +43 699 174 555 95 > Addresse, Herbststrasse 101/16/1 > 1160 Vienna, Austria, Europe > > > > > > 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/[email protected]/ > > To unsubscribe send a message to > [email protected] > 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.. > -- we want peace not pieces. regards, Danish Mahajan 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/[email protected]/ To unsubscribe send a message to [email protected] 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..
