As he was the guru of your namesake, Ambi-bhai, you should know better, and most of all, in this - these - toxic threads, you should avoid confusing Romeo with Krishna. The man shot through his heel was Achilles; Paris shot him, and he was vulnerable only there, as his mother, Thetis, the immortal nymph, dipped him in the River Styx, holding him by that heel, the only part of him not to be dipped.
Krishna, however, my favourite character from the Mahabharata, died due to the soles of his feet being pinkish. His body was the colour of a Jamoon fruit, purple black, as all the old gods that the autochthones worshipped were, and unlike the Vedic gods. The soles of his feet, however, were lighter in colour, and stood out in contrast. After the Yadavas slaughtered each other (
nihil novi sub sole, or,
plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose),
Balarama stopped his life, and Krishna went off to the forest to meditate, finally sitting on the ground with his feet straight out and the soles showing. A hunter caught the flash of lighter flesh and shot him through his heels, and Krishna died of that wound.
It stung when you asked an historian to narrate the tale; Krishna, and the Mahabharata itself, belong to proto-history, not to history. No Hindutvavadi acknowledges the difference, of course; the Greek historia is rendered Itihasa in Sankritic languages, a most lamentable confusion arising from that. We then take all the bodies of work described as Itihasa as literal, down-to-earth historia, which they sadly are not. Thank you, Ambidextrous, for subtly aiding and abetting your wolf-pack in their predatory work.
I have that member on my ignore list. However, he is right; the Greeks identified Krishna with Herakles.
Love your views but hate your orthography.
