: The Universal Message Of The Mahabharata
In its all-comprehensive dimension the Mahabharata compares with, and owes its
existence to, the Vedas. Economics, sociology, politics, accountancy, the art of war,
chemistry, astronomy – all this is included in here along with philosophy and
spirituality1. If the roots of them are to be found in the Vedas, the studies have taken a
concrete shape in the epic. The novelty in the Mahabharata, as compared with the
Vedas, is that it is itihasa, which, the Vedas are not. The definition of itihasa is this:
Itihasa combines both old happenings, as well as words of advice
regarding dharma, artha, kama and moksa.2
In other words, in order for history to be itihasa, the chronicles must be dealt with in a
setting of the four vargas, i.e., the four ends of human
life: dharma, artha, kama and moksa, indicative of all the dimensions of spirituality
that they encompass in their interrelation. It is in this sense that Hindu history is not
secular in its absolute severance from the spiritual setting. However, it is secular in
that spirituality is acceptable here in its various expressions, in conformity with the
individual's psychological leanings, as well as his aptitude to follow a path leading to
the goal. In the Gita Sri Krishna says to Arjuna:
In whatever way one worships me, I reciprocate accordingly. O Partha! People follow
my paths in all directions.3
Secularism can be found present in the Vedas in its own way. The mantras in them
are meant for the well-being of the whole of humanity, extending even to the world
beyond the sub-human level. Thus, although the Mahabharata is a continuation of the
message of the Vedas, its setting in the format of itihasa anchors it to the everyday life
situation.
In the Mahabharata the two theistic traditions – Sattvata and Pasupata have received
attention in detail.4 The narrator of the story, however, does not indicate preference
for the one over the other. Sri Krishna is of Sattvata descent, and is trying to restore
the practice to its old glory, adding his own touch of genius to it. He never expresses
disapproval to any other spiritual schools except by way of offering constructive
suggestions to help strengthen their spiritual moorings. It is interesting in this context
of overall acceptance and inclusiveness to refer to the following sayings of
Vaisampayana to Janamejaya in the 'Moksadharma' part of the Mahabharata:
Samkhya, Yoga, Veda, Aranyaka and Pancaratra – they are all but one, being limbs of
one another. All of them taken together contribute to the practice of the Ekantins, for
whom Narayana is the supreme. As the waves, originating in the ocean, go back to it,
in a similar way, these great waves of knowledge, indeed go back to Narayana.5
Just a little later he says again:
O the wise king! Accept all of the following: Samkhya, Yoga, Pancaratra, the Vedas,
and Pasupata – as embodying knowledge, even though their ways vary.6
One does not need to speculate in order to see the perception of the underlying unity
in the different ways in the above excerpts from the Mahabharata.
This broad secularism within the parameter of spirituality, and certainly not outside its
periphery, is what is distinctive of Hinduism since ancient times. The overall thrust
toward optimism, as inherent in spirituality as such, has been the first principle of
truth in the Hindu system. Even apart from Sri Krishna's own contribution, viz.,
giving one's maximum toward the good of all, the literal truth, i.e., satya, has never
been accepted in the tradition as divorced from rta, its spiritual base. It is little wonder
that the excellent literary work that has been produced in the tradition, including the
Mahabhahrata, has no place for a tragic ending. It is worth repeating that according to
the great aesthetician Anandavardhana, the dominating mood of the Mahabharata is
peace, and not chivalry. In the social psyche, death, however imposing or violent it be,
is not the last word, but is precursor to prospective well-being of the agent in peace
and harmony in future lives. Rta was considered so much part and parcel of one's
being, till the other day, that the social psyche would not allow display of 'gross'
things on the stage like killing, even when it would come to acting. We must keep in
mind that this is not legal censorship, but social stigma based on preferences in life
with a view to enhancing its quality, the way it was perceived by the people. Other
religions originating in the Indian sub-continent, like Buddhism and Jainism, would
share such broad features with Hinduism. Although they claim to embody exclusive
truth in their own ways, they bear the influence of the Mahabharata, which embodies
the spirit of tolerance and synthesis, in having avoided physical combativeness with
the other religions, in tolerance of these other faiths. The Mahabharata, as we have
noted, has not given the stamp of exclusive finality to any specific spiritual path.
In the Mahabharata we see examples of tolerance not only regarding the other ways
of spiritual pursuit, but even in actual war situation where violence is supposed to be
practised. There are definite rules to follow in the battle, like not killing or injuring the
women or children. In the words of Christopher Isherwood:
In the first place, it is sometimes said that the battle of Kurukshetra cannot possibly be
compared to a battle in modern war. It was, in fact, a kind of tournament, governed by
all the complex and human rules of ancient chivalry. A soldier mounted upon an
elephant may not attack a foot soldier. No man may be struck or shot at while running
away. No one may be killed who has lost his weapons. And we are told in the
Mahabharata, that the opposite armies stopped fighting every evening, and even
visited each other and fraternized during the night.7
Even Duryodhana and his associates would go by these norms! It is indeed hard to
imagine this happening in today's 'civilized society'. All this was a cumulative effect
of a continuous effort on society's part over millennia that had come down to the times
of the Mahabharata in spite of the fact that overall moral standards have taken a nosedive signifying emergence of dictators like Jarashandha, Kansa and Sisupala, even in
the democratic setting. The relevance and importance of the Mahabharata is in taking
the stride on, in order to reestablish the age-old value, at a time when discord is
tearing apart the social fabric. Thus the mantras that have been revealed in the Vedas
have taken an interpretation in light of the itihasa that the poem is, signifying a new
value system on the basis of the old. Moksa, we have seen before, does not rob the
other vargas of their legitimate place in the Mahabharata. We are reminded of the
famous saying of Bhima:
Dharma, artha and kama are to be pursued on an equitable basis. Those attached to
one of them exclusively are certainly to be despised.8
Our simple claim is that in view of the overarching presence of the parameter of the
vargas, which is included in the concept rta, pointing to an orderly functioning of the
apparently divergent dimensions of well-being in their connected move to freedom,
the Mahabharata's message is after all spiritual. It is the thread of the Vedanta, which
is the other name for the Upanisads, that binds the Vedas and
the Mahabharata together with this message. This indeed is where the importance of
the Gita lies in so far as it is the connecting bond in the Mahabharata which takes the
message of the Vedanta even further. If artha and kama are important in so far as they
tie with dharma leading ultimately to moksa, all the sciences and other studies dealt
with in the Mahabharata after all point to the Gita where actions in all directions are
encouraged from the perspective of karma yoga toward holistic benefit. Even the rigid
caste system in society is not considered as ultimate here.
The Gita is looked upon as so important an interpretation of the Upanisads, as well as
a continuation of the thoughts contained therein, that in the Vedantic tradition it is
taken as occupying the position of one of the three main scriptural texts. According to
Shankara, the Gita contains 'the essence of the Vedas'9 The Gita is described in
the Mahabharata as 'comprising all the studies'.10 It 'is the milk from the cow that all
the Upanisads are'. Nilakantha in his commentary on the Mahabharata says:
The interpretation of all of the Vedas is to be found in the Mahabharata; the
interpretation, however, of the Mahabharata is to be found in the Gita in its entirety.
No wonder she is considered as embodiment of all knowledge.
According to Tagore,
It does little good to say that the Mahabharata is an indiscriminate compilation of
hearsays. … As the magnifying glass on one of its sides contains the sunrays as they
are, while the other side reflects their concentrated beam, similarly,
the Mahabharata on one side contains the vast amount of hearsays, while on the other
it has the concentrated glow of it all. The Bhagavad Gita is that glow. The final
message of the history of India is indeed the synthesis of jnana (discrimination
between the true and the false), karma (action) and bhakti (devotion).11
He says at yet another place that 'India has expressed herself in the Bhagavad Gita'
and 'the preacher of the Gita has given a unified shape to the thought of India at one
single place' here.12 This certainly refers to the unification of the ways
of jnana and bhakti in the new value system with that of karma, and the mode of
action as crystallized in karma yoga that takes into consideration all in a holistic way,
transcending the narrow limits of one's own. Tagore emphasizes:
Nobody can disregard the greatness of the Gita. However, when the great Kurukshatra
war is impending, at that moment there would be no country in the world other than
India that can listen to the Bhagavad Gita with rapt attention.13
Tagore thinks:
The Bhagavad Gita has not become old today, it will never be. However, to recite the
whole of it putting a halt to the Kurukshetra war is undoubtedly a fault according to
the literary standard. There are literary ways to attribute the ideas of the Gita to Sri
Krishna. Nevertheless, to say that exception has been made here in consideration of
the great ideas involved means no discredit to the Gita after all.14
In fact, it was quite 'needed that the ideas (of the Gita) be introduced in the vast
canvas' of the Mahabharata, 'in the forefront of the Indian psyche.' For, 'in
the Mahabharata it is the Gita that adds a lustre to the ancient thesis of
synthesis,'15 held so dear to India's heart, signifying to Tagore her very special
characteristic. 'History, according to many,' Tagore says, 'is only the history of the
trodden path; there is there is no aim or ultimate goal involved. However, India saw a
Truth of her own history, which the Mahabharata has hung at the four-way
intersection as the lamp marking the ultimate destination. The Gita is that lamp. …
There is a message of unparallelled unity of a great people in it '16 Indeed, this
message is universal to all human beings. This message finds a concrete shape where
the story of the Mahabharata ends. Tagore says:
A European poet would have ended the Mahabharata with the victory of the
Pandavas in the war. Our Vyasa, however, said: 'The end does not come with
assuming monarchy, but with renouncing it.' Our goal was where everything ended.17
He says again:
The war of Kurukshetra evaporated in the final chapter. The Mahabharata did not stop
where it should for the story lover; it moved on having demolished the great story in a
moment's pace, like a playhouse made of sand. Those, who have a detachment to the
world as well as the story, got their truth through this, and did not grumble. 18
This is because
The fixed gaze of a great detachment is steadily imbedded in the midst of all the
upheaval of action present in the Mahabharata. Action here does not end with itself.
In all the chivalric grandeur, affection and hatred, violence and counter-violence,
attempt and achievement in the epic, the detached tune of the great exit at the
crematorium can be heard.19
'Although about the whole of the story of the Mahabharata,' he says, 'is occupied by
description of fights, fight is not the end of it. There is no description here of the
violent rejoicings of the Pandavas after they rescued the lost wealth from the ocean
filled with blood. The story shows instead the victorious Pandavas abandon the
conquered riches beside the ashes of the funeral pyres in Kurukshetra, and take the
path of detachment toward the land of peace. Such is the final dictate of the epic,
which is addressed to the humanity of all times.'20
The interesting thing about all that we have said here is that the literary analysis that
helps Tagore arrive at the final message of the Mahabharata, is after all a legacy he
inherits from Anandavardhana, taking the process of analysis started by this ancient
aesthetician to a subtler depth. In the fourth part of his Dhvanyaloka, Anandavardhana
says:
And in the beautiful poem the Mahabharata, the great sage has pointed to freedom as
the final aim by depicting the extinction of the Yadavas as well as the Pandavas,
which elicits a feeling of detachment to the world. Peace is indicated as the main
mood of the poem.
According to him, the other moods in the epic, including chivalry which is so
prominently present here, are but subsidiary to the main one. Nilakantha, the
commentator on the Mahabharata, has inserted a moral to the beginning of his
commentary to each and every chapter of the epic as pertaining to the specific chapter.
At the beginning of the seventeenth chapter he says that human beings are not
satisfied even after having enjoyed the world in so many ways; the way to peace
opens only with forsaking all the desires. At the start of his commentary on the final
chapter he points to freedom as the ultimate aim of human life, wherein lies its
culmination.
All this clearly shows Tagore's words on the epic to be part of the continuing tradition
of the Indian psyche. However, the superb way he presents the thoughts, in
combination with the subtlety of his analysis, takes the ideas to a new height. They
perfectly fit in with what Sri Ramakrishna, the nineteenth century spiritual figure of
India, used to say over and over again, viz., that one gets the meaning of
the Gita through the meaning of the title of the scripture done in the reverse order. 'Gita' reverses to 'Ta-gi', which means the renunciate, and derivatively, the attitude of
renouncing.21 It is important to emphasize that by renunciation Sri Ramakrishna
would not necessarily mean the literal, but more importantly, the attitudinal kind, so
that with it in place comes the real enjoyment in the world, not at the sensual level,
but at the spiritual, – an enjoyment which is very much missing otherwise.22 This
indeed is the spirit of the original Gita where examples of kings like Janaka, who
would practise renunciation in the world, are cited to show how the message of the
scripture takes concrete shape in accepting all actions as yajna or sacrifice.
II: The Place Of The Gita In The Mahabharata
The first stumbling block in the way of finding the intimate relation between
the Gita and the Mahabharata is the occidental scholars' position to the effect that the
former is an interpolation into the latter. The reason offered is as follows: The war is
going to start. The mood in the battlefield is tense. How can there be room for such a
high-flown philosophical discourse at such a highly charged situation? Moreover, it is
too long a discourse, running into hours, to take place at the stipulated moment when
both sides are ready to charge. In reply we can say this. The dialogue between Sri
Krishna and Arjuna, which comprises the Gita, got started when Yudhisthira, the
leader of the Pandavas, was making a ceremonial visit, unarmed, to the stalwarts of
the opposite side, viz., Bhishma, Drona, Kripa and Shalya, asking for their formal
permission to begin the fight. The visit must have taken some time to cover all four.
Although they belong to the opposite side, Yudhisthira has an intimate relation with
them, and there is a mutual feeling of respect between them. Fixing of the war
procedures to follow has not been formalized between the two sides yet, prior to the
start of the fight, which takes its own time, too. The words of Sri Krishna are the
words of counsel to his dear friend Arjuna who is well-versed in the scriptures, having
studied the Vedas and the Vedangas as a Ksatriya, and has succumbed, all of a
sudden, to the prospect of fighting his near and dear ones. Sri Krishna finds that the
best way to offer counsel is at the philosophical plane accessible to the subject. Even
granted that the actual discourse could have been shorter than the final form it takes in
the hand of the narrator, it indeed does not follow that the ideas contained in
the Gita as found today were not originally there, even in a less elaborate form, or that
the initial written version was itself interpolation. True, the original version of
the Mahabharata, known as Jaya, consisting of 24,000 verses composed by Vyasa,
eventually developed into 100,000 in the Vyasa tradition, specifically with additions
made by his disciples Vaisampayana and Sauti Ugrasravas. However, this does not
mean that anything and everything found its way in, keeping in view the rigourous
way tradition used to be maintained in India. The main point to take into consideration
is not simply what was originally there to start with, holding its stamp of historical
authenticity. We have to take into consideration the whole of the Mahabharata, the
southern recensions included, that took shape over a period of time, and assumed
authenticity of the tradition, reflecting as well as moulding it through millennia. It is
this Mahabharata that is of interest to the Hindu as itihasa, with the system of values
imbedded, and not the possible historical one.
Anantalal Thakur advances a final argument in favour of the intimate textual relation
holding between the two scriptures. He shows at some length that a vast number of the
verses of the Gita are present elsewhere in the Mahabharata, some times more than
once, verbatim, if not just in spirit. Thus he takes the challenge of reconstructing
the Gita from out of the rest of the Mahabharata even if we prune it off the main
poem taking for granted, for argument's sake, that it is interpolation after all.
According to Thakur, this demonstrates that a relation of inseparability obtains
between the scriptures, as tradition will have them. Pending the final working out of
the project as indicated by him, it may be worth our while to have a taste of a few of
the examples he cites in order to have a feel of what the project is all about.
One of the main tenets of the Gita is that caste is determined according to one's
specific nature and the activities one pursues.23 This view has been found, at least in a
partial form, advocated at various places in the Mahabharata. For instance, in
the Ajagara Parva, Yudhisthira defines a Brahmin in terms of the virtues he
possesses,24 a point of view we find Nahusa in agreement with. In Araneya Parva he
repeats the stand that presence of the requisite virtues alone is determinant of
Brahminhood.25 In the dialogue between Bhrigu and Bharadvaja we see Bhrigu take
the same stand.26 Thus, we not only find the idea mentioned in the Gita present
elsewhere in the Mahabharata, we get a thorough interpretation of it in the latter
where caste is not defined by birth. Although commentators later would like to take
Sri Krishna's view in light of their own specific leanings, in terms of caste by virtue of
birth, it appears that the interpretation offered by Vyasa in the Mahabharata is more
authentic and consequently more fitting, too.
Here are some more examples of references of utterances or events in the Gita that
Thakur cites as traceable elsewhere in the epic.
The dejection of Arjuna, and Sri Krishna showing his universal form, in course of
offering him counsel, have been referred to in 1/1/18. The Parva-samgraha-parva,
i.e., the table of contents of the Mahabharata (1/2/67-68), places the Gita-parva (that
deals with the Gita) in-between the parts designated as the Bhumi-parva (that deals
with the land, i.e., the kingdom that the fight is on) and as the Bhishma-vadhaparva (that deals with Bhishma's murder). The table of contents specifically mentions
that when Arjuna was found infected with defects having their roots in infatuation, Sri
Krishna removed them with reasons. (1/2/246-7). Subsequent to the Gita in
the Mahabharata, the part Bhishma's Murder starts with five and half verses
dedicated to the greatness of the Gita.27 In the southern recension of the epic, during
Bhishma's final oblations to Sri Krishna, specific mention has been made of his
exhibiting his universal form to Arjuna during the discourse that the Gita is.28 At the
beginning of the Anugita, Arjuna refers to the advice he received from Sri Krishna in
the Gita, and requests him to repeat it, as he has forgotten it by now (14/16/5-7). Sri
Krishna obliges by giving a plain summary. At the end of the Anugita, the sage
Uttamka asks Sri Krishna to show his universal form as he had done to Arjuna during
the discourse in the Gita.29
The Moksa Dharma part of the Mahabharata contains the Narayani sub-part where
the genesis of the philosophy in the Gita has been related. It is called Ekanta
Dharma which was introduced by Narayana who gave it to Narada, from whom
Vyasa received it.30 At the beginning of the Kalpa seven, Brahma gave this way to
Daksa who introduced Aditya to it. From Aditya it went to Vivasvan, who passed it
on to Manu, from whom Iksaku received it. The passage of the philosophy from
Vivasvan to Iksaku via Manu is related in the Gita.31 The Mahabharata gives further
details on the origin of it. There is more information about its nature there. The
philosophy in the Gita accommodates human urges and impulses (pravrtti), as does
the Ekanta Dharma.32 The long dialogue between Bhishma and Yudhisthira, known
as the Varsneya Adhyatma Sastra,33 i.e., the spiritual message of the Vrsnis, centering
around moksa, parallels the Gita in many ways, for the practice of the general
philosophy of the Gita was in vogue among the Vrsnis for a long time. Bhishma is its
follower as well as propagator. When Bhishma relates to Duryodhana the greatness of
Sri Krishna,34 the ideas bring to mind those present in the Gita. In the Sabha Parva,
Bhishma establishes Sri Krishna as the greatest of all men.35 In 2/38, the verses 10,
20, 22, 25, 26, 27, 28 and 29 remind one of the verses in the Vibhuti Yoga (The Divine
Glory, chapter ten) in the Gita.
The above indicate in some general ways that the Gita is present elsewhere in
the Mahabharata, bearing an intimate relation with it. Detailed evidence for presence
of specific expressions, as well as ideas contained in the Gita can be worked out on
the cues supplied by Thakur. The process of finding out that the Gita is imbedded in
the Mahabharata has the added advantage in positing the Mahabharata as the support
base for required interpretation on the Gita, even to the disregard, if needs be, of the
traditional commentaries offered by the various schools, when they tend to be
parochial to their respective points of view. Thakur gives a specific example of how
the traditional commentators could possibly have been misled when clues from
elsewhere in the epic provide the required help. This only shows that the two
scriptures are organically related, and hold each other together in the psyche of the
Hindus.
The example pertains to Sanjaya relating to Dhritarashatra, the king, the state of
affairs in the battlefield prior to the start of the fight. He relates to the king that
Duryodhana approaches Drona and mentions about the soldiers present on the
Pandavas' side. In course of his conversation with the great fighter, Duryodhana uses
the adjectives 'paryapta' and 'aparyapta' to compare the strength on both sides. 36 In
Sanskrit, 'paryapta' means sufficient, and the other word, which is its negation, means
just the opposite.37 Taken literally, Duryodhana's use of words should mean that he
feels the strength of his own side to be insufficient, whereas that of the opposite side
appears quite sound. However, Anandagiri and Madhusudana Sarasvati think that
because of the greater number of soldiers on Duryodhana's side, in comparison with
the count on the other, Duryodhana means that he has greater strength himself. We
must not lose sight of the fact the dictionary meanings of the words here have been
twisted to convey the intended meaning. Therefore, both commentators are tempted to
offer an alternative version of interpretation, according to which the strength on
Duryodhana's side is 'paryapta', that is, sufficient, sticking to the regular meaning of
the word, whereas that on the opposite side is not so. Here the adjectives are not being
linked to their adjacent nouns. Keeping the meanings of the words whichever ways
they go, the commentators want Duryodhana to express the supremacy of his own
strength in the verse in comparison with that of the opposite side. First, the meanings
are twisted; alternatively, the connections of the words are, keeping the meanings
intact. However, this interpretation does not conform to Duryodhana's previous
description of the Pandava army as 'mighty' when he seems to express his
apprehension of its arrangement by Drona's 'able student, the son of Drupada',38 who
is well conversant with Drona's fighting techniques, and by implication is possibly
able to out-maneuver it. We must emphasize that there is a special reason for
apprehension here. Drupada is Drona's great enemy. The latter had got a son through
performance of sacrifice for the purpose of killing Drona who had usurped half of his
kingdom. The interpretation of the commentators does not tie also with the evidence
of Duryodhana and his associates' deep anxiety and loss of courage triggered by the
war cries from the Pandavas' side a little later, as cited in the Gita. The exact
expression used is: 'The (severe) sound (of the conch-shells from the Pandavas' side,
in response to Bhishma sounding his own conch-shell) pierced the hearts of
Dhritarashtra's sons.'39 In fact, just after uttering the verse under consideration to
Drona, the interpretation of which is being questioned, in the next verse, Duryodhana
makes an imploring appeal to the great general for coordinating with Bhishma, the
commander-in-chief, in a united effort to fight the enemy. The appeal does not make
much sense if he is confident of the strength on his side. Sridhara Swami and
Visvanatha Chakravarti take the literal translation without twisting the meaning or
arrangement of words. This seems to be in keeping with the spirit in the rest of
the Mahabharata. Duryodhana knows that the chiefs on his side are not united for a
cause, some of whom he himself holds suspect. His great friend Karna is at odds with
the other stalwarts – Bhishma, Drona and Ashvatthama. Even the ordinary soldiers do
not hold Duryodhana in high esteem. The picture on the other side is glaringly
opposite. There is absolute unity there. There were only two instances of discord
documented on the Pandava side – once between Yudhisthira and Arjuna, just before
Karna was killed, and the other time between Sattaki and Dhristadyumna, after the
killing of Drona. Both are instances of hitches on the spur of the moment, without any
deep-rooted discord lying there, and the situations were readily brought under control
with the able management leadership of Sri Krishna.
The Mahabharata emphasizes that only physical or numerical strength or courage do
not lead to victory, the victorious must take to truth, non-violence and an abundance
of enthusiasm.40 Elsewhere it is said that the king can conquer the world with the help
of a small number of soldiers who are attached, well-meaning and satisfied.41 Also,
the king whose soldiers are well satisfied, consoled, pure in dharma and are
disciplined, can win a battle even with the help of a small number of soldiers.42 Fifty
soldiers can destroy a mighty army if they are well coordinated, joyful, dedicated to
sacrifice their lives, and are charged with determination. Even five or seven nobles
can defeat the enemy with solid mutual understanding and adequate
determination.43 War is not won only with numerical strength of soldiers.44 Certainly
these sayings in the Mahabharata count toward determining the meaning of the words
in question and their syntactic connection following the way of Sridhara Swami and
Chakravarti.
III: The Message Of The Gita
Christopher Isherwood points out a contrast between the settings of the Gita and
the New Testament. He says:
To understand the Gita we must first consider what it is and what it is not. We must
consider its setting. When Jesus spoke the words which are recorded as the Sermon on
the Mount, he was talking to a group of followers in the most peaceful atmosphere
imaginable, far from the great city, far from all strife and confusion. He was
expressing the highest truth of which man's mind was capable, in general terms,
without reference to any immediate crisis or problem. And even in the Garden of
Gethsemane, when he told Peter to sheathe his sword, he was addressing a dedicated
disciple, a monk, a man who was being trained to preach and live the spiritual life. For
Peter, there could be no compromise. He must learn to accept the highest and strictest
ideal, the ideal of non-violence.
The Gita is very different. Krishna and Arjuna are on a battlefield. Arjuna is a warrior
by birth and profession. He corresponds to the mediaeval knight of the Christendom.
His problem is considered in relation to the circumstances of the moment. The Gita
fits into the epic poem, the Mahabharata, and must be read in the light of previous
happenings. It is not simply a sermon, a philosophical treatise.
This, I believe, is the cause of much misunderstanding. We all tend to remember most
clearly the part of a book which we read first. The opening chapters of the Gita deal
with a particular case: they are concerned with a soldier and the duties of a soldier.
Later on Krishna passes from the particular to the general, and utters the same truth
which were afterwards taught by Jesus and the Buddha. But the first impression is apt
to remain. The superficial reader closes the book and remembers only Arjuna and the
battle. He says to himself: "Krishna tells me to fight.
Krishna, it must be repeated, is not talking to a monk. We must be glad of this, not
sorry. The vast majority of mankind are not monks, but householders. What a great
teacher has to say to a married man, a soldier, is of immediate interest to the world at
large.45
Just prior to the passage quoted above, Isherwood says:
Personally, I prefer to forget the Kurukshetra and ancient India altogether, and
imagine a similar dialogue taking place today, in a plane over the European front or
the Japanese positions in the Pacific island. If the Gita has any validity, its relevance
is equally to this war and this very year.46
What Isherwood says, to my mind, is that the Gita relates to everything that we do in
life, including the war, in favour of or against it, from the perspective of doing it well
and right. He wrote the essay 'The Gita and War', where the above excerpts are from,
in 1944, when the World War II was on. There is war going on all over the world
today, in its every part. The relevance of the Gita to us today is not only regarding
how to live and carry on our duties in such a world, but more importantly, regarding
what we must live for, and how one must live for the livable. We are taking part in the
war today, everyone of us, though not necessarily in the battlefield, as in the olden
times. This is but apparent after the happenings of 9/11. The Gita is friendly advice, a
series of sermons, and above all, a philosophical discourse. It is a short, but
complicated book on philosophy, amenable to new interpretations for every
successive generation. This shows its vitality and richness. The philosophy to me is
important in that it organizes the thoughts contained into a totality. We have seen the
intimate relation holding between the Gita and the Mahabharata. The relation is all
the more pronounced when we see the well-rounded discourse that the Gita is as a
culmination of the whole of the Mahabharata, the devastating war and the inner peace
that the conflict ultimately points to, not simply as a poetic truth, but as the truth of
life, to be lived for our own sake as well as for the sake of others. If there is a message
in the Mahabharata, it is that of the ithasa it is, as we have already seen. We noted
that the message has found its full shape in one place, which is the Gita. However, we
must be cautious in pointing out that the message of the Mahabharata that
the Gita portrays must be found out throughout the epic, and not perused in an
isolated way in the Gita. In fact, to repeat what Thakur emphasizes in his writings,
the Mahabharata is the best commentary on the Gita, not only in supplying its base,
as well as the frame of reference, but also providing specific interpretations of
concepts in cases of need. We propose to end with the following excerpt from him:
It could very well be advisable to compare the concepts occurring in the Gita, which
need further explanation, with their scattered mention in the Mahabharata, toward a
unified understanding of both the books. We may mention only a few of such
concepts here: the relation between the eternal and the ephemeral,47 the cause and the
effect, the manifest and the unmanifest, the theory of creation, the knower and the
field of his knowledge,48 the Brahman and its maya, the theory of action without
anchorage in desires,49 the earthly ways of involvement vis-à-vis the
transcendental.50 The discussions to be found in the Mahabharata on the areas would
undoubtedly be of great interest to the reader of the Gita.51
Footnotes:
1. Vyasa designates the Mahabharata in the first chapter of the first part
as arthasastra, dharmasastra, kamasastra, itihasa, kavya and purana.
2. Dharmarthakamamoksanam upadesa-samanvitam, purvavrtta-kathayuktam itihasam
pracaksate, Mahabharata, Chitrasala Press Edn. The sloka has been quoted in V.S.
Apte's The Practical Sanskrit-English Dictionary, Revised and enlarged edn., Prasad
Prakasan, Puna, 1957, under the entry Itihasa, and the above reference has been
provided there. It appears also in Visnu-dharma, 3/15/1.
3. Gita, 4/11.
4. Satvata: Mahabharata, 12/335, 340, 344, 348. Pasupata: Ibid, 13/17,18.
5. Mahabharata, 12/348/81-3. All the practice of the Ekantins is ultimately centred in
Narayana.
6. Ibid, 12/349/64.
7. Isherwood, Christopher, Bhagavad-gita: The Song Of God, Translated by Swami
Prabhavananda and Christopher Isherwood, Sri Ramakrishna Math, Madras, p. 35.
8. Mahabharata, 12/157/40.
9. Sarva-vedartha-sarasangraha-bhuta, Introduction to the Gita-bhasya.
10. sarvasastramayi, Mahabharata, 6/43/2.
11. Rabindranath Tagore, Parichay, 'Bharatvarshe Itihaser Dhara' ('The Flow of
History in India').
12. Rabindranath Tagore, Prachin Sahitya (The Ancient Literature), 'Dhammapadam'.
13. Rabibdranath Tagore, Prachin Sahitya (The Ancient Literature) 'Kadambari
Chitra'.
14. Rabindranath Tagore, Sahityer Swarup (The True Nature of Literature), 'Satyer
Matra' ('The of Literature').
15. Rabindranath Tagore, Mahatma Gandhi.
16. Rabindranath Tagore, 'Bharatvarshe Itihaser Dhara' ('The Flow of History in
India').
17. Rabindranath Tagore, Chithipatra (Letters).
18. Rabindranath Tagore, Prachin Sahitya (The Ancient Literature), 'Kadambari
Chitra'.
19. Rabindranath Tagore, Prachin Sahitya (The Ancient Literature), 'Kumarsambhava
O Sakuntala'.
20. Rabindranath Tagore, Kalantar, 'Arogya'.
21. M, The Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna. Translated by Swami Nikhilananda from the
original recording in Bengali, Ramakrishan-Vivekananda Center, New York, 1942, p.
255. The Gospel mentions in the original Bengali version that the word in the reverse
order is derived from the Sanskrit root 'tag' and does lead to the desired meaning.
Home
SIGN IN
ABOUT US
ADVERTISE
SYNDICATION
WRITE FOR US
CONTACT US
The Diplomat
CENTRAL ASIA
BLOGS
ASIA LIFE
EAST ASIA
INTERVIEWS
OCEANIA
PHOTO ESSAYS
SOUTH ASIA
VIDEOS
SOUTHEAST ASIA
PODCASTS
MAGAZINE
ECONOMY
DIPLO
RISK INTELLIGENCE
S
Image Credit: Wikimedia Commons
3 Political Lessons from the Mahabharat
An ancient epic’s lessons for India ring true today.
By Akhilesh Pillalamarri
August 23, 2014
This past weekend, the Indian television show the Mahabharat finished airing. The
show, which began airing in 2013, was a version of the ancient Indian epic,
the Mahabharata, and was widely successful, garnering millions of viewers daily. Its
success followed that of another televised version of the epic that ran from 1988 to 1989.
The Sanskrit epic itself is the world’s longest epic poem, at 100,000 couplets or 1.8
million words. It is ten times the combined length of the Iliad and Odyssey and three
times the length of the Bible. Structurally, the Mahabharata is a compendium of ancient
Indian mythology, history, political theory, and philosophy, and has sometimes been
described as an ancient encyclopedia of Indian knowledge. The holy Hindu scripture,
the Bhagavad Gita, which is considered a summary of the vast Hindu religious and
philosophical literature, is also contained within the Mahabharata. Historians believe
that the epic is based on certain core events that occurred in 10th to 8th century BCE
India, which then grew over time to become the epic, while on the other hand
traditionalist Hindus believe it to be a true reflection of historical events. In any case,
the Mahabharata is considered the most representative work of the diversity of Indian
and Hindu thought in existence.
However, despite its encyclopedic nature, there is an underlying plot and storyline
throughout the entire epic that holds it together. Philosophical and political works are
scattered throughout the epic as dialogues between characters, most of who are involved
in political and military situations. At the risk of oversimplifying an incredibly complex
epic, the Mahabharata is similar to an ancient Indian Game of Thrones, with numerous
factions competing for political power in a variety of states. The main story of the work
is a dynastic struggle for the throne of Hastinapura (located between modern Delhi and
western Uttar Pradesh), the kingdom ruled by the Kuru clan. Two branches of cousins of
the Kuru family struggle for the throne: the Kauravas and the Pandavas. Although the
father of the Kauravas is the elder brother of the father of the Pandavas, he is initially
disqualified from ruling in favor of his younger brother due to being blind. His eldest
son, Duryodhana, claims to be the rightful heir to the Kuru throne on the basis of being
the eldest son of the eldest son even though the eldest Pandava, Yudhisthira, is older
and is considered the legitimate heir apparent. Eventually, the struggle between the
Kauravas and Pandavas culminates in the great battle of Kurukshetra, in which
the Pandavas are ultimately victorious. Throughout the epic, it is implied that the
Pandavas are in the right because they follow dharma (righteousness).
Enjoying this article? Click here to subscribe for full access. Just $5 a month.
It is fortunate that the show, the Mahabharat was so well received because it serves as a
reminder to Indians and the rest of the world that the Indian tradition contains more
than just the idealism and non-violence typified by figures such as Jawaharlal Nehru
and Mahatma Gandhi. It contains advice that is similar to the wisdom and realpolitik of
Sun Tzu and Machiavelli – practical strategies that serve the ultimate goal of political
and military triumph. The two main figures in the Mahabharat, who expound on these
strategies are Shakuni, the maternal uncle of the Kauravas, and Krishna, the maternal
cousin of the Pandavas, who is considered the avatar of a Hindu god in Hinduism.
Together, these two characters expound on a variety of political strategies that could be
of practical political relevance today. This is especially important, since it gives Indians a
realistic way of looking at the world that is rooted in their civilization.
Here are some important political takeaways from the show and epic:
There’s no point in occupying the high moral ground if you lose in the
process
Contemporary Indian politics is often saturated with an obsession over maintaining the
high moral ground, no matter the cost. As the Diplomat reported previously, this mode
of thinking led to a disastrous war with China in 1962. This idealism has always been
present in Indian thinking, and has often been disastrous. In an anecdotal story, the
Hindu king Prithivraj Chahaun defeated and captured the Muslim Afghan invader
Mahmud of Ghor in the 1191 first Battle of Tarain. However, he released his prisoner as
that was considered morally correct. In 1192, Mahmud returned, and defeated,
captured, and executed Prithivraj, an event that lead to Muslim rule over the entire
Ganges river valley, the heartland of India. In the Mahabharata, Krishna on the other
hand, recommends the use of deceitful and immoral strategies in the service of moral
causes. The ends justify the means when major issues are at stake.
War is sometimes justified
The Hindu tradition has acquired a reputation for being exclusively non-violent, due to
the influence of Gandhi. Gandhi argued, to an extreme, that it would be better to uphold
the principle of non-violence over resorting to violence for any cause, even in selfdefense. On the other hand, the Mahabarata accepts the idea of a just war. According to
Shakuni, war is an option that should only be resorted to after political solutions fail, but
once resorted to, it ought to be fought to its conclusion. The epic’s Krishna also
tells Arjuna, a Pandava, that once a war breaks out, it is not only justifiable but
mandatory to fight if it is for a good cause. It is also mandatory to resort to war to bring
about a desired conclusion rather than to walk away from violence out of the principle of
non-violence. Modern India’s treatment of war and its military often seems half-hearted
and restrained because of its deep discomfort with power on moral grounds. However, it
would do well to remember that only by accepting the use of power can it truly achieve
its goals.
Rules and customs ought to be interpreted flexibly
Throughout the Mahabharat, both Krishna and Shakuni argue that rules and customs
should serve certain social functions and that when they cease to do so, they should be
discarded or loosely followed. Duty can thus be amended when it pursues a course of
action that is inflexible. In the Mahabharata, the Panadavas felt honor bound to play a
game of dice to the end, even though it resulted in the gambling away of their kingdom
and their queen. In many parts of India today, a bloated sense of following a narrow
rule-based honor leads to caste-based discrimination or violence against women. If
following such a strict sense of morality leads to actions that are immoral, then it is
better to evaluate one’s notion of duty and honor.
The Mahabharata, though an ancient epic, still has a lot to teach modern India. This is
why it still continues to be relevant and widely popular today, spawning successful
shows, retellings, and plays. Its timeless lessons continue to guide Indian thinking,
always pulling it away from extremes – the extreme of idealism and the extreme of
immorality. Rather, it argues that is sometimes better to resort to what seems to be
unjust in order to achieve a greater justice.
Topics
Asia Life
Tags
Hinduism
Indian history
Mahabharat
RELATED STORIES
August 26, 2019
A Changing India: A Land of Dichotomies and Magic
India contains multitudes.
Read Story
Defying Deification: Indian Politicians as Hindu GodsIndia’s Sabarimala Temple and the Issue of Women’s
EntryIndia’s Evolving Linguistic LandscapeAdopt a Heritage: Should Private Companies Be Caretakers of
Indian National Monuments?Paying Attention to India’s Saints of All Faiths
LATEST BLOGS
September 06, 2019
Why the Mutually Assured Destruction Rhetoric in Hong Kong Is Dangerous
To pull Hong Kong back from the edge, all potentially influential parties must act – with strategic
savvy.
Read Post
Size vs Statecraft: How India and Japan Play the Major Power GameAugust 2019: What I Saw in
KashmirFully Invested: India Remains the China-led AIIB’s Biggest BorrowerToward a US-India Reset:
Pivoting Trade and Strategy TogetherA Return to Normal for Beijing and Pyongyang?
LATEST FEATURES
September 05, 2019
Checking in on China's Nuclear Icebreaker
Speculation has trailed the news that China’s first nuclear-powered icebreaker ship was in the works.
Read Feature
Popular Support Grows for Indicted Nepali JournalistThe US Democrats’ China DebateWhat Really Caused
the Violence of Partition?Chennai’s ‘Man-Made’ Water CrisisCelebrating Democracy and Peace in TimorLeste
FOLLOW US
Facebook
Twitter
Google
RSS
NEWSLETTER
Sign up for our weekly newsletter
The Diplomat Brief
Subscribe New sletter
POPULAR STORIES
August 29, 2019
Is China Getting Ready to Finally Reveal the DF-41 Intercontinental-Range Ballistic Missile?
Is the long-awaited DF-41 expected to make an appearance?
Read Story
August 28, 2019
China’s Dominance on Display in the South China Sea
Beijing’s repeated provocative actions in the South China Sea leaves the region worse off.
Read Story
August 28, 2019
Kyrgyzstan Attempts to Isolate Local Islam
Kyrgyz authorities profess a separation of state and religion while also paradoxically preferring one
version of Islam.
Read Story
INTERVIEW
August 20, 2019
Aksana Ismailbekova on Patronage Politics in Kyrgyzstan
What lays beneath the surface of Kyrgyzstan’s dramatic political scene?
Read Interview
More Interviews































REGIONS
Central Asia
East Asia
Oceania
South Asia
Southeast Asia
TOPICS
Blogs
Diplomacy
Risk Intelligence
Economy
Environment
Features
Interviews
Magazine
Photo Essays
Podcasts
Politics
Security
Society
The Diplomat's Quiz
Videos
BLOGS
China Power
Flashpoints
Asia Defense
ASEAN Beat
The Pulse
The Koreas
Tokyo Report
The Debate

























Crossroads Asia
Trans-Pacific View
Pacific Money
Asia Life
Oceania
ARCHIVES
Sport & Culture
Indian Decade
A New Japan
New Leaders Forum
New Emissary
Tokyo Notes
APAC Insider
Asia Scope
China, What's Next?
James Holmes
Tech Biz
Zachary Keck
THE DIPLOMAT
About Us
Partners
Advertise
Syndication
Privacy Policy
Contact Us
© 2019 The Diplomat. All Rights Reserved.