Page 153 - Communication Processes Volume 3 Communication Culture and Confrontation

128 Guy Poitevin

living creatures languish and perish on earth. This gives him a powerful
stake and bargaining power to keep the gods in check.
In this regard, two contrasting facts are taken for granted, though
not stated by the narrative. First, the gods should worry about the
continuation life on earth as a matter of concern: the welfare of living
beings appears to be entrusted to their care and monitoring capacity.
Second, in addition to this, their impotence at preventing any harm
being done to this life and their inability to forthwith and on their own
-
counter the fatal move of Vayu is all the more amazing. Both facts act
as basic evidences in the eyes of the narrator and his audience. Let us
only take note of them for the time being without entering into the
semantics of these assumptions.
Against this backdrop, the issue facing the gods consists in finding
the ways and means to control the move of terrestrials against life on
earth. Two different means are conspicuously devised by a shrewd
Śankar. Both of them find their rationale in the Achilles’ heels of the
.
terrestrials whom he has to outwit. The weakness of the one is the
strength of the other and vice versa.
-
With Vayu, the way around is an apology in the name of all the gods
-
-
in order to placate Vayu’s rage. Vayu is pleased with the gods coming
down to him and falling on their knees through their representative.
The latter’s official apology—as counterfeit as it might be—and humble
request to oblige is an acknowledgment of sorts of dependence and
-
powerlessness. This is enough to cure Vayu’s wounded ego: this seem-
ingly avenges his previous defeat (the fall on earth of his son). Then
-
a compromise is possible: Hanuman is not welcome into heaven, but
-
Vayu finds gratification and pride in obliging the gods and blowing life
again. And the gods are satisfied that life is maintained so that every
living being may henceforth as a rule remain obliged to their kind
agency and give them credit for breathing in peace.
With the donkey, Śankar is helpless as long as the donkey is faithful
.
-
to his promise and takes the side of Vayu, as agreed upon. His loyalty
-
towards Vayu is essential to the victory of the terrestrials; Śankar’s
.
request remains futile and unheeded. Thus, even a donkey can keep
gods in check. The gods’ representative appeals to the donkey’s self-
conceit and inflated ego, and manipulates him easily. The gullible
terrestrial shifts his loyalty.
The fact that the weakness of the one is the strength of the other is
reflected, diachronically, in the whole narrative developing through