Name: Vyas Nupur H.

Roll No: 43

Paper no 4- Indian writing in English

Topic: Critical note on the deconstruction of myth in “The Purpose”

Submitted to M.K .Bhavnagar University, Department of English

Email Id : nupurvyas1995@gmail.com

Date: 14|10|2015

Year: 2015-2017

To evaluate my assignment click here

Introduction

 What is Myth?

A simple definition of Myth is a story handed down through the history, often oral tradition that explains or give value to the unknown. Myths are often stories told by a particular people such as Indians in Egyptians, and Greeks, romans and others. They are especially linked to religious beliefs and rituals. Rituals were believed to invoke a type of Magic that would the aid war, help achieve prosperity or make choices and promote stability in the land.

What is Deconstruction?

 Introduction:-  

Deconstruction is a critical Outlook concerned with the relationship between text and meaning. Jacques Derrida’s 1967 work of grammatology introduced the majority of Ideas influential within the deconstruction. Language is a system of Signs and words only have meaning because of the contrast between these signs.

Critical note on the deconstruction of myth in “The Purpose”

The Purpose, written over a period of six years, is a tragedy in two acts, the main characters are Eklavya and Arjuna and Drona. The Central idea is that the aim of learner finally determines his proficiency. Behind the mighty characters of the play looms an unseen power, with its own purposes hidden even from the Great Bheeshma.

Kailasam had brought his theme from the Indian epics. The playwright has made changes in original myth and gave it a totally new form. His English plays are small but significant effort to perceive and convey an original pattern of re-interpretation of traditional myth for this purpose he looked fresh some of the Fringe character from the Mahabharata. He attempted to bring into limelight marginalized of Fringe character such as Eklavya. Kailasam’s uniqueness lies not merely in evoking our sympathies for Eklavya but also in elevating them to the level of tragic heroes who were masculine, skillful and capable of achievement. In addition, Kailasam attempted to reveal in these heroes the features that the colonizers believe they possess and which accounted for their superiority over Indians. The purpose highlights Eklavya’s ambition to become the greatest Archer in the world in order to protect his fawns from the wolves, just as it highlights the questionable motivation of other heroic character shabby treatment of the low caste Hero. There purposes of Kailasam can be linked to the broader purpose of the Nationalistic movement of India to rewrite India's past as a foundation of the nationalistic feeling movement and sense of self.He innovates  his characters beyond the roles assigned to them by the authorized versions of the great epics, and he transforms them from

passive victims to active participants thus fitting them into Western definition of masculinity. “The purpose” by T. P. Kailasam is drama in two acts, the story is based on Adipurva from the Mahabharata. The story moves around Eklavya and Arjuna and their purpose behind learning archery. Both have want to learn archery from the great Dronacharya now, if we try to evaluate the story of play “The purpose” by comparing it with the story of Mahabharata then we will find a vast difference in both the things.

                         In Mahabharata, Arjuna is drawn as a heroic character possessing superhuman quality. He is drawn as a noble, kind, worries committed to his duty kind of person. We cannot imagine him doing any bad things About Arjuna we have a very good image in our mind. He is the greatest Archer in the world. This is the myth we heard from our childhood, so we cannot imagine this ideal characters committing any wrong things. But Kailasam challenges this myth and makes an attempt to present this myth  in totallydifferent way, with his own perspective in with his own perspective. In the play “The purpose” Kailasam has drawn Eklavya a marginalized character in Mahabharata as hero of the play, whereas Arjuna is drawn as not good character. In the play Arjuna’s intention behind learning archery was not noble.  He wanted to learn only because he wanted to become greatest Archer in the world. This was the only his limited ambition. we cannot imagine a character like him thinking so selfishly  but in this place it is not so. In contrast to this Eklavya, is a nishadha boy wanted to learn archery not for his personal ambition but he wanted to protect animals. His intention was Nobel he has no personal aspirations. He behaves like a real hero. and at some extent, playwright has shown him greater than Guru Dronacharya also. Eklavya is drawn here as a fast learner noble and greater kind of character in comparison to Arjuna. This all are the things when Kailasam perspective differs from the myth of Mahabharata. Arjuna and Eklavya both wanted to learn archery. Dronacharya teaches archery to Arjuna but cannot accept Eklavya’s proposal because of his promise to Arjuna.  Both of them have different purpose behind to learn archery. Arjuna wanted to become a greatest archer in the world and Eklavya explains that he wants to learn archery to save lives of innocent animals. Arjuna’s purpose behind learning archery is self-centred while Ekalvya purpose is noble. This is the point where the perspective of Writers differs. Rejected by GuruDrona Eklavya leaves the ashrama but with firm decision to learn archery. Eklavya put gurudrona  idol and because of his hard work and guru bhakti becomes the great archer. In the 2 act Eklavya is far ahead then Arjuna in archery. In anger Arjuna says that he will tell everyone that Guru Drona has not kept his vow. To save his Guruji from social criticism Eklavya gives willingly his thumb to drona as Guru Dakshina.

This is the change made by Kailasam.  Here the perspective differs.  The behavior of Arjuna is unexpected in this play. It is my personal ambition to become a greatest Archer in the world- Arjuna. But how can prince personal ambition? He must be patriotic, think about other. And more than that Arjuna says “I have trouble” at that drona says you usually have problem in learning, and your aim is wrong. This has double meaning. Now this is Arjuna is different from Mahabharata. In the play he is a self-obsessed. His understanding is a very limited. Whereas Ekalavya after learns after even watching behind the tree. Ekalavya says  that this boy partha  will never improve, he still making mistakes. All this things shows the upliftment of the character of Eklavya. Thus the Kailasam has highlighted the character of Eklavya. Arjuna is portrayed as anti –hero. Eklavya is nobler than Arjuna so the story told by Maharshi Ved Vyasa, in the Mahabharata is conflicting with the story told by T.P. Kailasam in “The purpose of purpose” In the Purpose, T.P.Kailasam’s Eklavya is greater than Arjuna. Through Eklavya is a nishidha boy, his purpose in learning archery is for the betterment of others. In actuality it is the duty of the prince, but the prince Arjuna is selfish. The reader are  looking at the story from different perspective and that are of the writers. Both the writers have created truths in their individual perspective. Their individual perspectives  are contradictory. The Mahabharata story of Prince and in the purpose Kailasam has given voice to marginalize.

Conclusion:

              We cannot prove Ved Vyasa   right and Kailasam wrong or vice versa. So the reality presented by the writer is just their individual perspective not the truth.

Paper no 4- Indian writing in English

Topic: Critical note on the deconstruction of myth in “The Purpose”

Submitted to M.K .Bhavnagar University, Department of English

Email Id : nupurvyas1995@gmail.com

Date: 14|10|2015

Year: 2015-2017

Introduction

 What is Myth?

A simple definition of Myth is a story handed down through the history, often oral tradition that explains or give value to the unknown. Myths are often stories told by a particular people such as Indians in Egyptians, and Greeks, romans and others. They are especially linked to religious beliefs and rituals. Rituals were believed to invoke a type of Magic that would the aid war, help achieve prosperity or make choices and promote stability in the land.

What is Deconstruction?

 Introduction:-  

Deconstruction is a critical Outlook concerned with the relationship between text and meaning. Jacques Derrida’s 1967 work of grammatology introduced the majority of Ideas influential within the deconstruction. Language is a system of Signs and words only have meaning because of the contrast between these signs.

Critical note on the deconstruction of myth in “The Purpose”

The Purpose, written over a period of six years, is a tragedy in two acts, the main characters are Eklavya and Arjuna and Drona. The Central idea is that the aim of learner finally determines his proficiency. Behind the mighty characters of the play looms an unseen power, with its own purposes hidden even from the Great Bheeshma.

Kailasam had brought his theme from the Indian epics. The playwright has made changes in original myth and gave it a totally new form. His English plays are small but significant effort to perceive and convey an original pattern of re-interpretation of traditional myth for this purpose he looked fresh some of the Fringe character from the Mahabharata. He attempted to bring into limelight marginalized of Fringe character such as Eklavya. Kailasam’s uniqueness lies not merely in evoking our sympathies for Eklavya but also in elevating them to the level of tragic heroes who were masculine, skillful and capable of achievement. In addition, Kailasam attempted to reveal in these heroes the features that the colonizers believe they possess and which accounted for their superiority over Indians. The purpose highlights Eklavya’s ambition to become the greatest Archer in the world in order to protect his fawns from the wolves, just as it highlights the questionable motivation of other heroic character shabby treatment of the low caste Hero. There purposes of Kailasam can be linked to the broader purpose of the Nationalistic movement of India to rewrite India's past as a foundation of the nationalistic feeling movement and sense of self.He innovates  his characters beyond the roles assigned to them by the authorized versions of the great epics, and he transforms them from

passive victims to active participants thus fitting them into Western definition of masculinity. “The purpose” by T. P. Kailasam is drama in two acts, the story is based on Adipurva from the Mahabharata. The story moves around Eklavya and Arjuna and their purpose behind learning archery. Both have want to learn archery from the great Dronacharya now, if we try to evaluate the story of play “The purpose” by comparing it with the story of Mahabharata then we will find a vast difference in both the things.

                         In Mahabharata, Arjuna is drawn as a heroic character possessing superhuman quality. He is drawn as a noble, kind, worries committed to his duty kind of person. We cannot imagine him doing any bad things About Arjuna we have a very good image in our mind. He is the greatest Archer in the world. This is the myth we heard from our childhood, so we cannot imagine this ideal characters committing any wrong things. But Kailasam challenges this myth and makes an attempt to present this myth  in totallydifferent way, with his own perspective in with his own perspective. In the play “The purpose” Kailasam has drawn Eklavya a marginalized character in Mahabharata as hero of the play, whereas Arjuna is drawn as not good character. In the play Arjuna’s intention behind learning archery was not noble.  He wanted to learn only because he wanted to become greatest Archer in the world. This was the only his limited ambition. we cannot imagine a character like him thinking so selfishly  but in this place it is not so. In contrast to this Eklavya, is a nishadha boy wanted to learn archery not for his personal ambition but he wanted to protect animals. His intention was Nobel he has no personal aspirations. He behaves like a real hero. and at some extent, playwright has shown him greater than Guru Dronacharya also. Eklavya is drawn here as a fast learner noble and greater kind of character in comparison to Arjuna. This all are the things when Kailasam perspective differs from the myth of Mahabharata. Arjuna and Eklavya both wanted to learn archery. Dronacharya teaches archery to Arjuna but cannot accept Eklavya’s proposal because of his promise to Arjuna.  Both of them have different purpose behind to learn archery. Arjuna wanted to become a greatest archer in the world and Eklavya explains that he wants to learn archery to save lives of innocent animals. Arjuna’s purpose behind learning archery is self-centred while Ekalvya purpose is noble. This is the point where the perspective of Writers differs. Rejected by GuruDrona Eklavya leaves the ashrama but with firm decision to learn archery. Eklavya put gurudrona  idol and because of his hard work and guru bhakti becomes the great archer. In the 2 act Eklavya is far ahead then Arjuna in archery. In anger Arjuna says that he will tell everyone that Guru Drona has not kept his vow. To save his Guruji from social criticism Eklavya gives willingly his thumb to drona as Guru Dakshina.

This is the change made by Kailasam.  Here the perspective differs.  The behavior of Arjuna is unexpected in this play. It is my personal ambition to become a greatest Archer in the world- Arjuna. But how can prince personal ambition? He must be patriotic, think about other. And more than that Arjuna says “I have trouble” at that drona says you usually have problem in learning, and your aim is wrong. This has double meaning. Now this is Arjuna is different from Mahabharata. In the play he is a self-obsessed. His understanding is a very limited. Whereas Ekalavya after learns after even watching behind the tree. Ekalavya says  that this boy partha  will never improve, he still making mistakes. All this things shows the upliftment of the character of Eklavya. Thus the Kailasam has highlighted the character of Eklavya. Arjuna is portrayed as anti –hero. Eklavya is nobler than Arjuna so the story told by Maharshi Ved Vyasa, in the Mahabharata is conflicting with the story told by T.P. Kailasam in “The purpose of purpose” In the Purpose, T.P.Kailasam’s Eklavya is greater than Arjuna. Through Eklavya is a nishidha boy, his purpose in learning archery is for the betterment of others. In actuality it is the duty of the prince, but the prince Arjuna is selfish. The reader are  looking at the story from different perspective and that are of the writers. Both the writers have created truths in their individual perspective. Their individual perspectives  are contradictory. The Mahabharata story of Prince and in the purpose Kailasam has given voice to marginalize. Name: Vyas Nupur H.

Roll No: 43 Name: Vyas Nupur H.

Roll No: 43

Paper no 4- Indian writing in English

Topic: Critical note on the deconstruction of myth in “The Purpose”

Submitted to M.K .Bhavnagar University, Department of English

Email Id : nupurvyas1995@gmail.com

Date: 14|10|2015

Year: 2015-2017

Introduction

 What is Myth?

A simple definition of Myth is a story handed down through the history, often oral tradition that explains or give value to the unknown. Myths are often stories told by a particular people such as Indians in Egyptians, and Greeks, romans and others. They are especially linked to religious beliefs and rituals. Rituals were believed to invoke a type of Magic that would the aid war, help achieve prosperity or make choices and promote stability in the land.

What is Deconstruction?

 Introduction:-  

Deconstruction is a critical Outlook concerned with the relationship between text and meaning. Jacques Derrida’s 1967 work of grammatology introduced the majority of Ideas influential within the deconstruction. Language is a system of Signs and words only have meaning because of the contrast between these signs.

Critical note on the deconstruction of myth in “The Purpose”

The Purpose, written over a period of six years, is a tragedy in two acts, the main characters are Eklavya and Arjuna and Drona. The Central idea is that the aim of learner finally determines his proficiency. Behind the mighty characters of the play looms an unseen power, with its own purposes hidden even from the Great Bheeshma.

Kailasam had brought his theme from the Indian epics. The playwright has made changes in original myth and gave it a totally new form. His English plays are small but significant effort to perceive and convey an original pattern of re-interpretation of traditional myth for this purpose he looked fresh some of the Fringe character from the Mahabharata. He attempted to bring into limelight marginalized of Fringe character such as Eklavya. Kailasam’s uniqueness lies not merely in evoking our sympathies for Eklavya but also in elevating them to the level of tragic heroes who were masculine, skillful and capable of achievement. In addition, Kailasam attempted to reveal in these heroes the features that the colonizers believe they possess and which accounted for their superiority over Indians. The purpose highlights Eklavya’s ambition to become the greatest Archer in the world in order to protect his fawns from the wolves, just as it highlights the questionable motivation of other heroic character shabby treatment of the low caste Hero. There purposes of Kailasam can be linked to the broader purpose of the Nationalistic movement of India to rewrite India's past as a foundation of the nationalistic feeling movement and sense of self.He innovates  his characters beyond the roles assigned to them by the authorized versions of the great epics, and he transforms them from

passive victims to active participants thus fitting them into Western definition of masculinity. “The purpose” by T. P. Kailasam is drama in two acts, the story is based on Adipurva from the Mahabharata. The story moves around Eklavya and Arjuna and their purpose behind learning archery. Both have want to learn archery from the great Dronacharya now, if we try to evaluate the story of play “The purpose” by comparing it with the story of Mahabharata then we will find a vast difference in both the things.

                         In Mahabharata, Arjuna is drawn as a heroic character possessing superhuman quality. He is drawn as a noble, kind, worries committed to his duty kind of person. We cannot imagine him doing any bad things About Arjuna we have a very good image in our mind. He is the greatest Archer in the world. This is the myth we heard from our childhood, so we cannot imagine this ideal characters committing any wrong things. But Kailasam challenges this myth and makes an attempt to present this myth  in totallydifferent way, with his own perspective in with his own perspective. In the play “The purpose” Kailasam has drawn Eklavya a marginalized character in Mahabharata as hero of the play, whereas Arjuna is drawn as not good character. In the play Arjuna’s intention behind learning archery was not noble.  He wanted to learn only because he wanted to become greatest Archer in the world. This was the only his limited ambition. we cannot imagine a character like him thinking so selfishly  but in this place it is not so. In contrast to this Eklavya, is a nishadha boy wanted to learn archery not for his personal ambition but he wanted to protect animals. His intention was Nobel he has no personal aspirations. He behaves like a real hero. and at some extent, playwright has shown him greater than Guru Dronacharya also. Eklavya is drawn here as a fast learner noble and greater kind of character in comparison to Arjuna. This all are the things when Kailasam perspective differs from the myth of Mahabharata. Arjuna and Eklavya both wanted to learn archery. Dronacharya teaches archery to Arjuna but cannot accept Eklavya’s proposal because of his promise to Arjuna.  Both of them have different purpose behind to learn archery. Arjuna wanted to become a greatest archer in the world and Eklavya explains that he wants to learn archery to save lives of innocent animals. Arjuna’s purpose behind learning archery is self-centred while Ekalvya purpose is noble. This is the point where the perspective of Writers differs. Rejected by GuruDrona Eklavya leaves the ashrama but with firm decision to learn archery. Eklavya put gurudrona  idol and because of his hard work and guru bhakti becomes the great archer. In the 2 act Eklavya is far ahead then Arjuna in archery. In anger Arjuna says that he will tell everyone that Guru Drona has not kept his vow. To save his Guruji from social criticism Eklavya gives willingly his thumb to drona as Guru Dakshina.

This is the change made by Kailasam.  Here the perspective differs.  The behavior of Arjuna is unexpected in this play. It is my personal ambition to become a greatest Archer in the world- Arjuna. But how can prince personal ambition? He must be patriotic, think about other. And more than that Arjuna says “I have trouble” at that drona says you usually have problem in learning, and your aim is wrong. This has double meaning. Now this is Arjuna is different from Mahabharata. In the play he is a self-obsessed. His understanding is a very limited. Whereas Ekalavya after learns after even watching behind the tree. Ekalavya says  that this boy partha  will never improve, he still making mistakes. All this things shows the upliftment of the character of Eklavya. Thus the Kailasam has highlighted the character of Eklavya. Arjuna is portrayed as anti –hero. Eklavya is nobler than Arjuna so the story told by Maharshi Ved Vyasa, in the Mahabharata is conflicting with the story told by T.P. Kailasam in “The purpose of purpose” In the Purpose, T.P.Kailasam’s Eklavya is greater than Arjuna. Through Eklavya is a nishidha boy, his purpose in learning archery is for the betterment of others. In actuality it is the duty of the prince, but the prince Arjuna is selfish. The reader are  looking at the story from different perspective and that are of the writers. Both the writers have created truths in their individual perspective. Their individual perspectives  are contradictory. The Mahabharata story of Prince and in the purpose Kailasam has given voice to marginalize.

Conclusion:

              We cannot prove Ved Vyasa   right and Kailasam wrong or vice versa. So the reality presented by the writer is just their individual perspective not the truth.

Paper no 4- Indian writing in English

Topic: Critical note on the deconstruction of myth in “The Purpose”

Submitted to M.K .Bhavnagar University, Department of English

Email Id : nupurvyas1995@gmail.com

Date: 14|10|2015

Year: 2015-2017

Introduction

 What is Myth?

A simple definition of Myth is a story handed down through the history, often oral tradition that explains or give value to the unknown. Myths are often stories told by a particular people such as Indians in Egyptians, and Greeks, romans and others. They are especially linked to religious beliefs and rituals. Rituals were believed to invoke a type of Magic that would the aid war, help achieve prosperity or make choices and promote stability in the land.

What is Deconstruction?

 Introduction:-  

Deconstruction is a critical Outlook concerned with the relationship between text and meaning. Jacques Derrida’s 1967 work of grammatology introduced the majority of Ideas influential within the deconstruction. Language is a system of Signs and words only have meaning because of the contrast between these signs.

Critical note on the deconstruction of myth in “The Purpose”

The Purpose, written over a period of six years, is a tragedy in two acts, the main characters are Eklavya and Arjuna and Drona. The Central idea is that the aim of learner finally determines his proficiency. Behind the mighty characters of the play looms an unseen power, with its own purposes hidden even from the Great Bheeshma.

Kailasam had brought his theme from the Indian epics. The playwright has made changes in original myth and gave it a totally new form. His English plays are small but significant effort to perceive and convey an original pattern of re-interpretation of traditional myth for this purpose he looked fresh some of the Fringe character from the Mahabharata. He attempted to bring into limelight marginalized of Fringe character such as Eklavya. Kailasam’s uniqueness lies not merely in evoking our sympathies for Eklavya but also in elevating them to the level of tragic heroes who were masculine, skillful and capable of achievement. In addition, Kailasam attempted to reveal in these heroes the features that the colonizers believe they possess and which accounted for their superiority over Indians. The purpose highlights Eklavya’s ambition to become the greatest Archer in the world in order to protect his fawns from the wolves, just as it highlights the questionable motivation of other heroic character shabby treatment of the low caste Hero. There purposes of Kailasam can be linked to the broader purpose of the Nationalistic movement of India to rewrite India's past as a foundation of the nationalistic feeling movement and sense of self.He innovates  his characters beyond the roles assigned to them by the authorized versions of the great epics, and he transforms them from

passive victims to active participants thus fitting them into Western definition of masculinity. “The purpose” by T. P. Kailasam is drama in two acts, the story is based on Adipurva from the Mahabharata. The story moves around Eklavya and Arjuna and their purpose behind learning archery. Both have want to learn archery from the great Dronacharya now, if we try to evaluate the story of play “The purpose” by comparing it with the story of Mahabharata then we will find a vast difference in both the things.

                         In Mahabharata, Arjuna is drawn as a heroic character possessing superhuman quality. He is drawn as a noble, kind, worries committed to his duty kind of person. We cannot imagine him doing any bad things About Arjuna we have a very good image in our mind. He is the greatest Archer in the world. This is the myth we heard from our childhood, so we cannot imagine this ideal characters committing any wrong things. But Kailasam challenges this myth and makes an attempt to present this myth  in totallydifferent way, with his own perspective in with his own perspective. In the play “The purpose” Kailasam has drawn Eklavya a marginalized character in Mahabharata as hero of the play, whereas Arjuna is drawn as not good character. In the play Arjuna’s intention behind learning archery was not noble.  He wanted to learn only because he wanted to become greatest Archer in the world. This was the only his limited ambition. we cannot imagine a character like him thinking so selfishly  but in this place it is not so. In contrast to this Eklavya, is a nishadha boy wanted to learn archery not for his personal ambition but he wanted to protect animals. His intention was Nobel he has no personal aspirations. He behaves like a real hero. and at some extent, playwright has shown him greater than Guru Dronacharya also. Eklavya is drawn here as a fast learner noble and greater kind of character in comparison to Arjuna. This all are the things when Kailasam perspective differs from the myth of Mahabharata. Arjuna and Eklavya both wanted to learn archery. Dronacharya teaches archery to Arjuna but cannot accept Eklavya’s proposal because of his promise to Arjuna.  Both of them have different purpose behind to learn archery. Arjuna wanted to become a greatest archer in the world and Eklavya explains that he wants to learn archery to save lives of innocent animals. Arjuna’s purpose behind learning archery is self-centred while Ekalvya purpose is noble. This is the point where the perspective of Writers differs. Rejected by GuruDrona Eklavya leaves the ashrama but with firm decision to learn archery. Eklavya put gurudrona  idol and because of his hard work and guru bhakti becomes the great archer. In the 2 act Eklavya is far ahead then Arjuna in archery. In anger Arjuna says that he will tell everyone that Guru Drona has not kept his vow. To save his Guruji from social criticism Eklavya gives willingly his thumb to drona as Guru Dakshina.

This is the change made by Kailasam.  Here the perspective differs.  The behavior of Arjuna is unexpected in this play. It is my personal ambition to become a greatest Archer in the world- Arjuna. But how can prince personal ambition? He must be patriotic, think about other. And more than that Arjuna says “I have trouble” at that drona says you usually have problem in learning, and your aim is wrong. This has double meaning. Now this is Arjuna is different from Mahabharata. In the play he is a self-obsessed. His understanding is a very limited. Whereas Ekalavya after learns after even watching behind the tree. Ekalavya says  that this boy partha  will never improve, he still making mistakes. All this things shows the upliftment of the character of Eklavya. Thus the Kailasam has highlighted the character of Eklavya. Arjuna is portrayed as anti –hero. Eklavya is nobler than Arjuna so the story told by Maharshi Ved Vyasa, in the Mahabharata is conflicting with the story told by T.P. Kailasam in “The purpose of purpose” In the Purpose, T.P.Kailasam’s Eklavya is greater than Arjuna. Through Eklavya is a nishidha boy, his purpose in learning archery is for the betterment of others. In actuality it is the duty of the prince, but the prince Arjuna is selfish. The reader are  looking at the story from different perspective and that are of the writers. Both the writers have created truths in their individual perspective. Their individual perspectives  are contradictory. The Mahabharata story of Prince and in the purpose Kailasam has given voice to marginalize.

Conclusion:

              We cannot prove Ved Vyasa   right and Kailasam wrong or vice versa. So the reality presented by the writer is just their individual perspective not the truth.

Conclusion:

              We cannot prove Ved Vyasa   right and Kailasam wrong or vice versa. So the reality presented by the writer is just their individual perspective not the truth.

To evaluate my assignment click here