Mythological Weapons

[duhastmish]

another great mystery is the rasleela of mathura on janamastmi. till today no one is able to figure it out how everything which is kept in order get disturbed by morning in a temple on janamastmi. those who tried to find out either went crazy or became a crzy fan of krishna.

there is also a temple there where the parda is constantly closed and opened continuously. it is said that if u gaze in the eyes of that idol it can turn you crazy for love of krishna.

i think its also one of those mythological weapon . the desi peanut.

-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x

but one thing is for sure - those guys could actually do better work than drdo.

and yeh krishna was cool - my fav. hindu god. he was like charlie sheen in two and half men.

 

[Joe Shearer]

It is an excellent idea to try out one thing at a time. It is an equally good idea to assume that others know as much if not more than one does, and is good for one's soul as well.

However, your self-assurance and confidence in every single aspect of your communications is truly impressive, and so too the genuine depth of knowledge that you display so effortlessly.

I sincerely appreciate it.

If it were possible to arrange a suitable release of excess air once a day, and thus retain a little humility, sadly in short supply at the moment, you may turn out to be an outstanding commentator.

Wow, So long a post, my patience duly rewarded.
I will try one thing at a time.

That is an excellent idea, to start with.

It would be an equally good idea if you follow up every aspect of every answer fully. Do yourself the favour to read carefully what others have written; none of it is casual or accidental.

For instance, the posted link also contains a description of how the chakram was used. Possibly you have missed that.

Secondly, the finger-whirling technique can be used only with very small chakrams, although this was the traditional way in which Sri Krishna used his Sudarshan Chakra; the way he carries it, constantly whirling on his forefinger, says it all.

However, this is grossly impractical; the quoit technique - frisbee, as you have called it, and as it is indeed called in modern times, although war-quoit is what it was and it was like a quoit that it was used - is actually the correct one for larger sizes.

The reason is that smaller quoits/ chakram are not very effective, taking too long to reach launch velocity around the finger (try it for yourself; I have).

Secondly, a small quoit does not travel far. So in close combat, if you see someone pluck the chakram out and start twirling it about his finger, you don't just sit there and wait to be sliced open, you put your shield up, if bearing a shield, or take alternative (rather urgent) action, either offensive or defensive. It is at ranges outside sword or spear range but not much further that a small finger-launched quoit might be effective, largely because of surprise.

Only the very smallest are launched like that. The larger ones, the ones, for instance, that the soldiers wear as part of their headgear, even now, in the Sikh Regiment, are thrown backhanded, from the right hand from a tucked away position deep towards the left outward at the enemy.

This is not the wrong technique, as you have said; it is the correct one for the larger sizes. It also allows a slightly longer range, awkwardly out of the reach of hand-weaponry, and is difficult to intercept if otherwise engaged in close combat with someone else, the ideal battle situation when it is to be used.

In other words, it is best used against an enemy swordsman or pikeman or spearman already fully engaged a slight distance away, and unable to pay full attention to you wrestling with your headgear to pluck a quoit out!

You are possibly influenced by the mythical method, the method used by Krishna in launching his Sudarshan Chakra, which as it happens is a practicable method, save for the fact that such a technique would not carry long distances (mythical references and mythical distances may be left in the myths - let the myth bury the myth).

For close quarters combat, it is a complete fiasco. I would strongly not recommend to anyone a pause in close quarters combat and a retirement to release a chakram, place it on a suitable forefinger, and then start twirling it. What the opponent or any random passing swordsman or spear-holder would do with this lengthy interval doesn't bear thinking about. So if you find yourself in a sword-fight or a knife-fight, don't bother to pause to unlimber your quoit; if you do that, you are history.


Sikhs know how to use Chakram, War Quoits (Not to be confused with Sudarshana Chakra or Quoit of Zena).

As a matter of fact, the technique that you have described as 'correct', the finger-launched technique, is exactly that used for the Sudarshan. So it is a little confused, more than a little confused, to say that that the Sikh Chakram is not to be confused with the Sudarshana.

I remember seeing a video on youtube in which a young Akali warrior shows some sword forms and then threw some chakram, first small about 4 inches diameter, by whirling very quickly chakram around index finger, hand at the level little above head, and with a snap hurl it towards target.
A correct technique indeed.

Only for very small chakrams, but generally wrong for larger sizes, for the reasons mentioned above.

He, Akali, then threw larger chakram (about the size shown in your posted link) like a Frisbee, hand wrapped around outer edge, pulled back under other armpit, released imparting a spin with the power of arm.
A Wrong technique, i am afraid.

And how did you come to that magisterial conclusion? What I have described, I have described on the basis of the practices of the Buddha Dal Nihangs, who keep up these practices to this day. And they demonstrated this precise combination of technique, with the use of the finger-launched technique not ruled out for smaller quoits.

In short, there are two techniques for the two size-ranges, and it is incorrect to describe one or the other as canonical.

 

[Joe Shearer]

actually what u r talking about is chakra. though in sanskrit it is called chakram. sudarshan chakra was different in terms as it was formed from the sun dust along with pushpak vimana and shivas trident. it has 2 spikes rotating in opposite direction. and i guess it had some 10 million spikes if i remember correctly.

Have you read post 69 before writing this?

It is uninteresting to read the same information from different sources not very far apart in the thread. As you started the thread, I should have assumed that you would read whatever others are contributing to it, with some care.

You don't seem to be of the same opinion.

sincerely,

 

[Alternative]

It is an excellent idea to try out one thing at a time. It is an equally good idea to assume that others know as much if not more than one does, and is good for one's soul as well.

However, your self-assurance and confidence in every single aspect of your communications is truly impressive, and so too the genuine depth of knowledge that you display so effortlessly.

I sincerely appreciate it.

If it were possible to arrange a suitable release of excess air once a day, and thus retain a little humility, sadly in short supply at the moment, you may turn out to be an outstanding commentator.

I have no excess air or something, just that I don't have enough time to respond/post, hence have to resort to bits. Please bear with me, its been 19 years since I left college.
Thanks for your kind words, and yours words of advice duly noted.

Now continuing from my last post, Chakram of Sikhs(War Quoits) of Larger sizes, The throwing technique was that I came to know, used a round 'stick' (of sufficient strength and diameter)same way as index finger for short chakram. That technique in my view, can generate much more power than Frisbee throw.
Spin and speed determine the efficacy of chakram, and i reckon that, Frisbee style throw of large chakram would not generate enough spin and speed, against an opponent at 70-80 meters, to cause serious damage (sever a limb or head etc.).
I am not aware of the practice of Buddha Dal Nihangs.

I remember seeing paintings (may be in Lahore Museum, or history books, or in both), a number of chakram, 'tied' with waist belt of sikh sardars on their left side.
When sikhs wanted to carry a concealed weapon even when in peace,(as a part of their religious obligation..?), small chakram was carried within layers of turban. one may carry it in battle in turban on his choosing.
The finger technique of throwing small chakram is not that slow which you seem to infer. for example, when you learn to punch, you closely follow movement of your hand, twist of wrist, bend of knuckle, throw of shoulder, sway of hip etc. but when you have mastered the form, after 3 or 4 year of practice all these stages are hardly precept-able to you or onlooker. you can throw 4 or 5 punches per second easily.
Similarly, you will be amazed with the results if you persist with practice and try to better your technique, spin swirl and throw in one go.
...to be taken up shortly....

 

[Alternative]

[COLOR="Blue"
Are you are looking for economies of scale? You know, mass graves and things.

If so, and always bearing in mind your words from the following passage, regarding "History", might I hazard the opinion that while it is difficult dating myths and multi-authored epics like the Ramayana, it was probably 'composed' over a longer period of time than the Mahabharata, probably starting with a root-story of characters from the 8th or 7th century BC, and finally reaching its definitive form around four hundred years later, sometime during 500 BC and 400 BC? I am saying this for several reasons:[/COLOR]
[LIST=1]
[*][COLOR="BLUE"]The main verses dealing with the youth of Rama and his growing up show that the 'composer(s)' were familiar with Aryavarta as it developed in the first millennium BC, transitioning from the Heroic Age of the tribes that we see in the Mahabharata to the age of the Mahajanapadas, to the growing power and influence of the eastern stretches of the Gangetic Plain, and kingdoms such as Mithila and Ayodhya.
[*]Later chapters and verses are abruptly different, and are quite unconnected to Indian geography (leave alone the retrospective identification of places in the epic with some geographical feature today. In fact, I would personally argue, given that the mission is to make a complete fool of myself, for a provenance that is truly ancient, even older than the very firmly founded Mahabharata, and reflects a story that the Indo-Aryans brought to India with them in some prototypical form.
[*]This is due to the epic's use of the words [/COLOR]Vanara and Asura. While Asura is known to us linguistically, having featured in the cleavage between Indo-Aryan trekking east into Balkh, Afghanistan and the Pamirs, and then the Hindu Kush, and Iranians following the Avesta, trekking west in the wake of the east Iranian speaking Medes and Persians, into the Iranian Plateau, the word Vanara is pure magic. The Rg Veda already calls monkeys 'kapi'; it is tempting to see in the word Vanara a throwback to the Proto-Indo-European Vanir, the Vanir who, with the Aesir, vied with Odin and his warband for mastery of the world.
[*]Much becomes clear if we think of the Vanara as primaeval Titanic figures, much like the Titans themselves, not the monkeys of the ancient south Asian jungle but a mythical set of beings, demi-gods, descended with equal mystery as the gods themselves, and dominated by the gods through accident of circumstance. The Asura we already think of in similar terms, and with little or no discredit: in real life, I bear an Asura name from this epic, and it causes no surprise or difficulty in daily life.
[/LIST]



Very true; oh, very, very true.

...'tis not so deep as a well, nor so wide as a church-door; but 'tis enough, 'twill serve.



Ah, so!

I knew that dratted thing stood for something important.

Thanks for the tip. It makes things so clear now.



We shall keep to your words, and hew to the bone.

However, I was not curious merely about why you wrote about steel, but also about what you wrote about it; this may not have come through in my tangled way of writing, and you may not have understood that I was asking you that question. Just a quick foretaste of the kinds of trials you will undergo.

Your interpretation of the myth is marvellous; I am left speechless.

Finally, I am hopeful that we will find an answer to your question about the Sudarshan Chakra by working unitedly together, at least as long as from Treta to Dwapar.

It is already 311 Dwapara in ascension, by the short count of Sri Yukteswar's Holy Science.
I hold no rapier in my hand, just thoughts to share. and harbor no bad intentions.
thanks for the info regarding age of epics and etymological perspective.
I will not insist on clicking the thanks button

 

[Manas]

i think its also one of those mythological weapon . the desi peanut.

-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x

It seems "desi peanut" weapon was created at your home, that's pretty much along expected lines .

 

[Joe Shearer]

I never thought I would meet my match, at least not on a Pakistani defence forum, and it is with astonishment that I murmur to myself, "Tomare bodhibe je, Gokule barichhe shay!"

Ah, well! All that is left is to sing, in tune with the sergeant and his squad from the Pirates of Penzance, "An Asura's lot is not a nappy one!"

Pair of war quoits - Throwing Blades and Sticks - Object 1906.64.1 Pitt Rivers Museum

Your explanation of how to throw a quoit is so convincing that I am left doubting the evidence of my eyes. Let us go on to other things, O Pale Galileean!

On steel, too, after flirting with disaster, you have an all-too-plausible explanation for things, and here it is below:
In fact I had not asked any question.... but was trying to be eloquent...in phrasing my post

Ah, those were rhetorical questions! I see!!

One can only retire baffled and frustrated fury, like a bull in full charge who is informed that he is colour-blind and the cape he is charging is actually bright green in colour........

My post reproduced below:


If 2000 or 3000 years ago, any body to writ down about how to forge steel blade? how to gauge temperature? how to carbonize steel? then above description will hold true.
Color of heated metal or alloys were observed to estimate temperature........ hot blade dipped in blood(fluid having high carbon content??) to give extra strength to steel.

And all that careful explanation about Wootz and the origin of the word Damascus in steel-making (not from the city, naturally, but from the Arab word 'damas') down the drain, considered irrelevant; the person making statements and asking questions simply trying to extend things in order to give himself something to do!!!

I have no excess air or something, just that I don't have enough time to respond/post, hence have to resort to bits. Please bear with me, its been 19 years since I left college.

This forty-years-since-he-left-college collection of rusty memories and moth-eaten information graciously declares that he will bear with you. Like a Maruti 800 agrees to bear with a Ferrari.
Thanks for your kind words, and yours words of advice duly noted.

Hah! Just look at him, folks! trying to get me to drop my guard with humility and stuff! Thinks I'll fall for it.

Now continuing from my last post, Chakram of Sikhs(War Quoits) of
Larger sizes, The throwing technique was that I came to know, used a round 'stick' (of sufficient strength and diameter)same way as index finger for short chakram. That technique in my view, can generate much more power than Frisbee throw.
Spin and speed determine the efficacy of chakram, and i reckon that, Frisbee style throw of large chakram would not generate enough spin and speed, against an opponent at 70-80 meters, to cause serious damage (sever a limb or head etc.).
I am not aware of the practice of Buddha Dal Nihangs.

I remember seeing paintings (may be in Lahore Museum, or history books, or in both), a number of chakram, 'tied' with waist belt of sikh sardars on their left side.

If I could interject weakly into this torrent of words, that's so he could draw it right-handed, for a throwing quoit like action

When sikhs wanted to carry a concealed weapon even when in peace,(as a part of their religious obligation..?), small chakram was carried within layers of turban. one may carry it in battle in turban on his choosing.

The finger technique of throwing small chakram is not that slow which you seem to infer. for example, when you learn to punch, you closely follow movement of your hand, twist of wrist, bend of knuckle, throw of shoulder, sway of hip etc. but when you have mastered the form, after 3 or 4 year of practice all these stages are hardly precept-able to you or onlooker. you can throw 4 or 5 punches per second easily.

Similarly, you will be amazed with the results if you persist with practice and try to better your technique, spin swirl and throw in one go.
...to be taken up shortly....

Let's be quite clear;

It is already 311 Dwapara in ascension, by the short count of Sri Yukteswar's Holy Science.

I hold no rapier in my hand, just thoughts to share.

Note you have spotted clue; note to myself: guy's a tough, unrelenting customer!

and harbor no bad intentions.

thanks for the info regarding age of epics and etymological perspective.

I will not insist on clicking the thanks button

My dear chap, a bloke wouldn't have thanked others more than a thousand times without discovering the '''thanks" button!

 

[LEGENDARY WARRIOR]

@divya

who knows these incantations to summon these weapons???

 

[Alternative]

Joe Shearer

My dear chap, a bloke wouldn't have thanked others more than a thousand times without discovering the '''thanks" button!

In this you seemed to have missed the clue. Your previous post

Ah, so!

I knew that dratted thing stood for something important.

Thanks for the tip. It makes things so clear now.

so my response was

I will not insist on clicking the thanks button

my attempt was to make a light comment in the context, and no way was intended as a rebuke or insulting. I have been on this forum for more than 3 year (member for a little more than one year), though rarely posting, and know the contribution of senor members.

 

[Alternative]

And all that careful explanation about Wootz and the origin of the word Damascus in steel-making (not from the city, naturally, but from the Arab word 'damas') down the drain, considered irrelevant; the person making statements and asking questions simply trying to extend things in order to give himself something to do!!!

this is simply incorrect. if you would follow the order of my posts then it should be sufficiently clear. I only answered/posted in the context of quoted messages.
Your contributions are acknowledged, but I wanted to clear impression (or confusion) that I was asking question.

Hah! Just look at him, folks! trying to get me to drop my guard with humility and stuff! Thinks I'll fall for it.

What on earth I would do with your guard down? hex to the bone?

This forty-years-since-he-left-college collection of rusty memories and moth-eaten information graciously declares that he will bear with you. Like a Maruti 800 agrees to bear with a Ferrari.

You are too generous in showering praise. I know really myself in the larger context of things, where do I stand, what I am worth...... nada, zilich, shunaay, zero....

 

[Joe Shearer]

I sometimes get the feeling of getting too clever by half.

The comment about surely having known what to do with the 'Thanks' button doesn't belong there in logical sequence. It was a musing about your original remark, a sort of harking back. I got the sequence quite OK, and there's nothing insulting nor rebuking in what you said: it was excessively solemn, perhaps, a little smug, but not unbearably so, and quite acceptable on the whole, acceptable enough for me to try a little mock-humility.

That vein has been played out; entirely. It now has the demerit of putting you on the defensive, seeking to explain things to me which were entirely understood and accepted. Putting you on the defensive is entirely undesirable, so it stops here, now.

Please read my next post continuously with this.

Joe Shearer



In this you seemed to have missed the clue. Your previous post


so my response was

my attempt was to make a light comment in the context, and no way was intended as a rebuke or insulting. I have been on this forum for more than 3 year (member for a little more than one year), though rarely posting, and know the contribution of senor members.

I'm tempted to play for the laughs by deliberately misunderstanding your typo and asking why we are all suddenly Latino, but on the other hand, till you understand that most of what I write in a certain vein is intended to be funny, it may be better to abstain from the arcane sense of humour.

It is better to confine myself to pointing out that senior member I am not, though a lurker for a good year or so before joining, and currently promoted to my full level of incompetence.

 

[Joe Shearer]

And all that careful explanation about Wootz and the origin of the word Damascus in steel-making (not from the city, naturally, but from the Arab word 'damas') down the drain, considered irrelevant; the person making statements and asking questions simply trying to extend things in order to give himself something to do!!!

this is simply incorrect. if you would follow the order of my posts then it should be sufficiently clear. I only answered/posted in the context of quoted messages.

Your contributions are acknowledged, but I wanted to clear impression (or confusion) that I was asking question.

With hindsight, what was intended to sound bemused came out sounding waspish, in one sub-clause, downright churlish. That certainly was the opposite of what was intended; apologies.

Hah! Just look at him, folks! trying to get me to drop my guard with humility and stuff! Thinks I'll fall for it.

What on earth I would do with your guard down? hex to the bone?

Shield me from the One Power, was more what I feared.

This forty-years-since-he-left-college collection of rusty memories and moth-eaten information graciously declares that he will bear with you. Like a Maruti 800 agrees to bear with a Ferrari.

You are too generous in showering praise. I know really myself in the larger context of things, where do I stand, what I am worth...... nada, zilich, shunaay, zero....

We shall see, we shall see.........

Meanwhile, there is a thread, worded something like "India tells China: Kashmir is to us what Tibet, Taiwan are to you", to which I would invite your attention. Do take a look at it; if you find something worth remarking upon, it would be interesting to read it.

With warm regards,

 

[Alternative]

Now 'issues' resloved, I will continue from the my post no. 124.
Joe Shearer

Your explanation of how to throw a quoit is so convincing that I am left doubting the evidence of my eyes. Let us go on to other things, O Pale Galileean!

(Ignoring Pale Galileean and what ever he done) In Urdu and similarly in Punjabi throwing a chakra is said "Chaker Chalana" same like 'teer chalana' as against throwing a stone will be 'phater phankna' meaning, implied use of a machine or contraption. in this case use of simple stick.
I have always held that small chakram is to be thrown with finger technique and larger chakram with use of stick, then I saw a video on youtube (already mention in previous posts) and was surprised with the frisbee throw.
It is one thing to split a melon at twenty feet then an armed opponent at 70-80 meters away.
I declared this technique wrong, rather prematurely, may be, this was quite handy by cavalry at shorter distances, like a hand gun. your following observation quite handsomely fits scenario.

If I could interject weakly into this torrent of words, that's so he could draw it right-handed, for a throwing quoit like action

Now, Furthering the discussion, the most important part
Joe Shearer

If As a matter of fact, the technique that you have described as 'correct', the finger-launched technique, is exactly that used for the Sudarshan. So it is a little confused, more than a little confused, to say that that the Sikh Chakram is not to be confused with the Sudarshana.

Your old post quoted above, and from it I can deduce that you hold the Sikh Chakram is the same(in physical design, function, wielding techniques etc) as Sudarshan Charkra with out the garb of Myth.
Is my inference correct? if so, i am utterly surprised beyond your belief.
For me, both of them are quite different designs, specs, wielding techniques etc., that is, two altogether different weapons.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Now 'issues' resloved, I will continue from the my post no. 124.
Joe Shearer


(Ignoring Pale Galileean Google the phrase or google Swinburne ;-) just joking, btw!and what ever he done) In Urdu and similarly in Punjabi throwing a chakra is said "Chaker Chalana" same like 'teer chalana' as against throwing a stone will be 'phater phankna' meaning, implied use of a machine or contraption. in this case use of simple stick.
I have always held that small chakram is to be thrown with finger technique and larger chakram with use of stick, then I saw a video on youtube (already mention in previous posts) and was surprised with the frisbee throw.
It is one thing to split a melon at twenty feet then an armed opponent at 70-80 meters away.
I declared this technique wrong, rather prematurely, may be, this was quite handy by cavalry at shorter distances, like a hand gun. your following observation quite handsomely fits scenario.



Now, Furthering the discussion, the most important part
Joe Shearer


Your old post quoted above, and from it I can deduce that you hold the Sikh Chakram is the same(in physical design, function, wielding techniques etc) as Sudarshan Charkra with out the garb of Myth.
Is my inference correct? if so, i am utterly surprised beyond your belief.
For me, both of them are quite different designs, specs, wielding techniques etc., that is, two altogether different weapons.

We are both on equally treacherous ground here; watch out!

We are comparing an existing weapon, with recorded use (albeit of varying effectiveness) with a mythical weapon. It is obvious that a 'comparison' cannot exist between a fact and a non-fact. Vishnu is described with his Shankha-Chakra-Gada-Padma; does that mean that we need to speculate on the physical existence of a four-armed human being? Obviously not; four arms on a being was to indicate the superhuman nature of that being, not surely to be taken seriously to the extent of seeking to work out the ergonomics of using four arms and hands as against two.

So a comparison between the Sudarshan and the Sikh Chakram must necessarily be between recognisable attributes of the two objects. It cannot be a blind and unreasoning literal comparison between the two in terms of their full and definitive description, as we will then be in the trap of comparing a Sikh Chakram like weapon with the precision-guided-missile effects of the Sudarshan, along with a loiter mode with a built-in stellar navigation suite. No literal comparison is possible, or we have to visualise a Sikh casting his quoit to hover in front of the Sun at a sufficient distance from the Earth to eclipse the Sun altogether.

The same logic applies to considering the divine third attribute, the Gada. We do not know what this celestial mace did. We do know that a set of exercise weapons exists, even till today, called Gada, just like the Lord's weapon; we do know the standard exercise suites intended to bring proficiency in wielding the Gada, not for martial prowess. So we can surmise that the divine Gada at least did what the normal Gada does; we assume that for both weapons.

My comparison is intended to say only that the Sudarshan Chakra, carried on Krishna's forefinger, was presumably thrown like a light Sikh quoit, judging by how the similar-sized historical object was wielded. The comparison is not intended to be dragged off its chariot and brutally clubbed by its opponents on the grounds of blasphemy.

 

[Alternative]

We are both on equally treacherous ground here; watch out!

We are comparing an existing weapon, with recorded use (albeit of varying effectiveness) with a mythical weapon. It is obvious that a 'comparison' cannot exist between a fact and a non-fact. Vishnu is described with his Shankha-Chakra-Gada-Padma; does that mean that we need to speculate on the physical existence of a four-armed human being? Obviously not; four arms on a being was to indicate the superhuman nature of that being, not surely to be taken seriously to the extent of seeking to work out the ergonomics of using four arms and hands as against two.

So a comparison between the Sudarshan and the Sikh Chakram must necessarily be between recognisable attributes of the two objects. It cannot be a blind and unreasoning literal comparison between the two in terms of their full and definitive description, as we will then be in the trap of comparing a Sikh Chakram like weapon with the precision-guided-missile effects of the Sudarshan, along with a loiter mode with a built-in stellar navigation suite. No literal comparison is possible, or we have to visualise a Sikh casting his quoit to hover in front of the Sun at a sufficient distance from the Earth to eclipse the Sun altogether.

The same logic applies to considering the divine third attribute, the Gada. We do not know what this celestial mace did. We do know that a set of exercise weapons exists, even till today, called Gada, just like the Lord's weapon; we do know the standard exercise suites intended to bring proficiency in wielding the Gada, not for martial prowess. So we can surmise that the divine Gada at least did what the normal Gada does; we assume that for both weapons.

My comparison is intended to say only that the Sudarshan Chakra, carried on Krishna's forefinger, was presumably thrown like a light Sikh quoit, judging by how the similar-sized historical object was wielded. The comparison is not intended to be dragged off its chariot and brutally clubbed by its opponents on the grounds of blasphemy.

I started commenting on Sudarshana Chakra on the premises that their are certain mythological weapons mention by thread starter that were in fact actual weapons but later given mythological status.
By 'mythological status I mean, that the effectiveness, use, functions etc. are blown out of proportion/world/imagination and include all attribute mentioned by you.
I think or rather hold that there was a weapon, like all the weapons we ordinary humans had, (like sword, lance, axe, bow arrows etc., no fancy stuff), a type of chakra, which was not like the Sikh Chakra (this title being used indicative purpose only)........ Later given attributes like ..... bow and arrows .. factual use and mythical use.