Mahabharata/Jaya - Krishna and Khandavaprastha

"Make Khandavprastha your land of action - karmbhoomi". Thus spoke Krishna to Yuddhistira and his brothers who were brooding over the fact that they got a raw deal.

Krishna's story in a nutshell: Krishna and his leela was very famous. Krishna was the son of Kunti's brother Vasudeo, son of Surasena (who had given Kunti in adoption to Kuntibhoja). Kamsa was Krishna's maternal uncle. At the time of Vasudeo's marriage with Devaki, astrologers had predicted that the eighth child born will kill Kamsa. Kamsa was an unjust king who had jailed his own father Ugrasena and forcefully, claimed the throne. Paranoid, Kamsa jailed Vasudeo and his wife and killed every baby of theirs. The seventh child was conceived in Devaki's womb but transferred to Vasudeva's other wife, Rohini, who lived with her brother Nanda who lived in Gokul by goddess Yogamaya. Her eight child is smuggled out of the jail  on the night he was born by Vasudeo who exchanges him with Yashoda's (Nanda's wife) girl child. It is said that Yogamaya had ensured deep sleep in everyone at that time. Kamsa, tries to kill the girl child the next day but the child transforms into a goddess who says his killer child is already born and what is destined will happen.

Krishna and Balaram grew up in Gokul. Kamsa tried many ways to kill the newborn babies but Krishan would always defeat those plans. Krishna was a favourite among the village girls. He would often steal their clothes while they were having bath in the river. He would make them come out naked and then return the clothes to him. Yet, they never found him vulgar. Maybe, they saw that there was no lust but pure love and naughtiness in the eyes of Krishna.


Krishna grows and kills Kamsa and then instills Ugrasena as the king of Mathura. Kamsa's powerful father in law, Jarasandha, attacked Mathura for 17 times. It is said that Kalayavan, the commander of Jarasandh's army who would attack the 18th time, was destined to destroy Mathura. But maybe it was only Krishna's love for violence and political knowledge that he advised the Yadava clan to move to Dwaraka, island in the west coast of India. This proves that Krishna realizes the limitations of his army and he would rather move and live in peace somewhere else rather than live in constant war conditions in Mathura.He had no qualms in being called a coward as the result was that he avoided a war and provided a better life to his clan. Sometimes, it makes sense to withdraw from the battle. 


Krishna used marriage alliances to strengthen and widen his political friends and reach. Thus, when his aunt Kunti's sister was married to the Pandavas he came to visit them. Thus, entered Krishna into Pandava's life.

Krishna was a wise and self-realized man. He is unique among all the realized beings yet. He would marry many women, flirt with many, get involved in administration and yet, he was attached to none of his roles. Through the life of Krishna, the world can learn how to live a detached life and act without any worry about it's results. He encourages man to participate in the world and yet, not be it or of it but yes, be in it. He shows us to renounce not the world or our actions but the feelings, concepts and desires that come with it. 


Coming back to Hastinapur, Dhritharashtra invites Kunti and the pandavas along with their newly wedded wife to their home. Word had reached them and Kunti too knew that they cannot do anything to the Pandavas as King Drupada was their ally.

King Dhritharashtra then decides to divide the current kingdom into equal halfs and gives Khandavaprastha (a great forest) to Yuddhistira to rule. When brothers are discussing about this, Krishna instructs them to accept it and transform it. This was just the start of the strong relationship that would develop between Krishna and Pandavas, the ones who always following the righteous conduct meets injustice throughout.

Mahabharata/Jaya - Draupadi's Swayamwara and becoming a common wife

"The son of charioteer cannot compete for my hand in marriage". Thus spoke Draupadi when Karna was about to try the task.

Pandavas were present there in the guise of the Bhramins. As per some folklore, Krishna is also present and recognizes the Pandavas. He even smiles at Arjuna. All the princes try their hand but they are unsuccessful. The task was to string the heavy metal bow, hit the eye of the rotating wooden fish on the ceiling by looking at its reflection on the water in the pot below.

After all the princes attempt and failt it, Karna stands up to perform the feat. He did this only because he did not want Hastinapur, Duryodhana's kingdom, to be insulted by the princes' failures. Karna had started to string the bow with ease (which other princes were unable to do) when Draupadi humiliated and rejected him. Drupada had planned this task for Arjuna itself. In some folklore, it is Krishna who gestures Draupadi to reject Karna. When everyone failed, Drupada compromised and let the brahmins try it.

Arjuna, disguised as a Brahmin, completed the task with ease. Yuddhistira then left with Nakula and Sahadeva leaving Bhima in charge of protecting Arjuna. As expected, the other princes started protesting against this. Bhima broke a pillar and stood between Arjuna and the others.

This was one of the first insults Draupadi threw in this epic. This particular one shows the prevalent caste system being followed by Draupadi. Karna was a warrior though not known while Arjuna was a warrior disguised as a brahmin. It is fine for a woman to marry a man of the higher caste but they cannot go lower. Also, it again shows that you should not judge a person based on his birth or but by his actions. Caste is determined by actions only.

When Arjuna and Bhima returns with Draupadi to their hut in the forest, they jokingly call out to their mother "Mother Kunti, See what alms we got today". Kunti was busy with some kitchen work and without looking orders them to distribute whatever it is between the brothers equally. By then, Yuddhistira and the twins are there. As per some folklore, it is said that Kunti saw the lust in the eyes of Yuddhistira and the other brothers. She knew that the Pandavas are strong only if they are united. Hence, she did her greatest political masterstroke and ensured that Draupadi is shared between the brothers. It is said that Kunti knew well enough that the Pandavas had gone to the Swayamwar and knew that Arjuna or any of her sons will win the event. Hence, she acted as if she did not know about what "alms" the  brothers were speaking about. Yuddhistira then also raised a precedent of Vidula who had married the ten Prachetas brothers. In some folklore, Yuddhistira desired Draupadi and took the advantage of Kunti's words. He stated that one never knows what destiny came out and made Mother Kunti speak so.


Later Krishna consoled Draupadi by sharing the knowledge of her past life. In an earlier life, Draupadi had invoked Shiva for a husband who was honest, husband who was strong, husband who was very skilled, husband who was handsome and husband who was a knowledgeable. Shiva had granted her this wish literally and provided her with 5 husbands. In some retellings, Shiva states that one man cannot have such qualities so she will have to marry 5 men.

Normally, Shiva grants boons easily and then Vishnu has to manage and rectify the result out of it. So it is said that Krishna had actually sent such a man with all those qualities. It was none other than Karna. But Draupadi herself rejected gim. Hence, now she married a man who did not object to sharing her with his brothers. This was in a way result of her own action of rejecting Karna. Maybe, that is why Draupadi loved Arjuna the most but always desired Karna. Was her decision autonomous or assisted by Krishna (as he knew that Karna will side with Duryodhana), I don't know. But her decision then had a great bearing on the future events. The other thing that needs to be noted is that Draupadi never objected to being shared. Also, later in many retellings, Draupadi's desire and attraction to the respective qualities of Arjuna come into the foreground.


Prince Dhrishtadyumna had followed the brahmin who had won her sister in Swayamwara and was thrilled to learn that it was no one else but Arjuna. He and Drupada did not though agree to her being shared by the 5 brothers. Yuddhistira again debated here and ensured that they agree. This shows Yuddhistirs debating skill on Dharma and also maybe a prevalent culture of polyandry.

Mahabharata/Jaya - Shikandi, Dhrishtadhyumna and Draupadi

"A son to kill Drona. A son to kill Bhishma. A daughter who will marry into the Kuru household and divide it". Thus prayed Drupada invoking the mighty Shiva who blessed him so.

After graduation day of the Pandavas and Kauravas, Drona exacted his revenge on King Drupada. He asked his students to capture and  bring Drupada alive to him as Guru Dakshina (fees). All the princes went and fought with the forces. Arjuna, the intelligent one, cried out to his brothers that Drupada was the target and not the other soldiers. So they just directed themselves towards him, removing anyone who came between them and Arjuna climbed up into Drupada's chariot and held him captive. Later, Bhima tied him with a rope and the Pandavas gifted him to Drona. Drona said to Drupada "Now you are a slave and not my friend. All your kingdom is mine. But then, I will distribute this kingdom into half between us. Now you are my friend again as we are equals now. As your friend, I am also taking one cow from your side." Then he released Drupada.

Drupada could not bear this humiliation. He invoked Lord Shiva to take revenge on Drona and Drona's students. Man, though forgiven for his mistake will not accept it and wants to retribute those trivial insults. Here both Drona and Drupada had forgotten forgiveness is one of the most important dharma.

Drupada's wife got him a daughter. The astrologers told him that this child will later be a man. It was none other than Amba's rebirth whose life was ruined by Bhishma. I will delve on this more during the chapters on the great war.

Drupada then sought the help of Yaja and Upayaja who knew the secret art of creating a magic potion which if consumed by women would produce children. When it was time to give the magic potion to Drupada's wife during the yagna, the queen was having a bath. The sages said that these things cannot wait and threw the potions to the fire. From this fire was born Dhrishtadyumna (destined to kill Drona) and Draupadi (who will marry into the kuru clan and divide it). They were born at their youth stage itself. Maybe this was just an elaborate creative license to cover up the fact that Drupad might have adopted them to devise his strategy. 


This story was narrated to the Pandavas while they were living in the forest by Sage Dhaumya. Sage Dhaumya had advised them to come with him to the feast organized for Draupadi's swayamwara. Kunti saw this as a great opportunity to get a powerful ally. 

Mahabharata/Jaya - Killing of Bhakasur

"It is our duty as guests to share the hosts problem and resolve it. Also, the kshatriya dharma (warrior code) states that helping the helpless is the first rule for a warrior". Thus spoke Kunti before she could choose which of her children should go with the food to the rakshasa. 

Kunti and her children had made base in a small village called Ekchakanagri. They were disguised as Bhramins and living off on alms. One Brahmin family had provided them with shelter. This shows the prevalent culture of the times where people used to render hospitality to strangers. Athithi Devo Bhava (Guests are gods in disguise) was still followed. I have heard that in ancient times every househols would keep a tub of drining water or butter milk outside their houses so that travelers can quench their thirst as and when they pass by. 

One day Kunti enquires the family of their concern, seeing the worry in their eyes. The male of the family states that there is a tyrant Rakshasa, Baka, who used to terrorise the village. The villagers then had come to an agreement that one person from a family will take food to Baka and offer himself as well rather than Baka terrorising the village randomly. Now it was the turn of this family.

In this phase of the story she is the guide and decision maker of the Pandavas. She knows that her sons (especially Bhim) are capable of killing this tyrant. Also, this will bring in more people support later when the people come to know that they were no other but the pandavas. 

Kunti volunteers Bhim will take the food. Kunti states that she has 5 children and even if 1 dies, she will have the remaining 4. The rest is as they say is history. Bhim goes with the feast. He himself devours the whole food. Then he kills Baka. 

Kunti and Pandavas leave their guests house before they could attract any further attention as the villagers wanted to throw a celebration for the death of Baka. 

Kunti knew that they cannot yet afford to be found out by the Kauravas. It was still not the right time but it was about to change.

Mahabharata/Jaya - Hidimbi marries Bhim

"Once he begets a child, then he must return". Thus spoke Kunti to Hidimbi when the latter asked for her consent to marrying Bhim. 

In the forests, the Pandavas came across a cannibalistic Rakshasha (this might be nothing but a cannibalistic tribes found in the forest at the time). Bhima fought and killed him. In between, he also received some assistance from a female rakshasha. After killing, the female Rakshasha introduces herself as Hidimibi and confesses that the one who dies was her brother Hidimba. Then she proposes Bhim to marry her. This shows the lack of laws of orderly marriage in the forest tribe. Civilization has not caught up yet. They are still victim to passions and instincts. Bhima refuses and then she asks Kunti. 

Kunti is now aware that they have dangers back home as well. Any kind of relationships with this forest tribes will be beneficial to her sons. Also, Bhim has killed Hidimba and hence, this relationship will negate any hostility. But then Hidimbi is a forest tribe, lower than the lowest caste of the civilised society. He checks with Yuddhistira who confirms that there is no problem in Bhim getting married to Hidimbi. This shows how Yuddhistira determines castes. Yet, Kunti knows as royal prince it is not suitable for Bhim to have such a wife. Yet, she plays a masterstroke (not better than the one she will play later). She consents to it on the condition that Bhim will leave her as soon as she begets a child. 

And what a child is born! That child is Ghatotkacha and what an important role he plays in the great war. 

Mahabharata/Jaya - House of lac

"The mouse is the only creature who does not get harmed during a forest fire." Thus answered Yuddhistira to Vidura's question the night before Pandava's and Kunti were to leave for Varnavat for a festival.

Yuddhistira was crowned the Crown Prince of Hastinapur leaving Duryodhana fuming. Shakuni pulled up his plan at the right time. Shakuni and Duryodhana had a palace constructed out of flammable items in Varnavat. Then Duryodhana convinced his father to order the Pandavas to visit the Varnavat festival this time. Even Queen Kunti agreed to go with her sons. Duryodhana and Shakuni's plan were to set the palace in fire along with the Pandavas.

Vidura always had his doubts on Shakuni and Duryodhana. Through his spies, he came to know about their devious plan. Vidura wanted to warn the Pandavas before they leave for the palace. Finding Shakuni and Duryodhana already there in the Pandavas palace, Vidura asked this riddle to all, "Which animal is not harmed during a forest fire?" That is when Yuddhistira answered.

Also, just before leaving for their trip Vidura informed Pandavas to check the exits of the palace. The Pandavas deciphered that there was certainly something fishy here. Then once in the house, as per some folktales, Kunti saw some ants making holes in the walls and taking some items as food. On further investigation, they came to know that the house was made of lac and wax. It was not hard then to decipher what the plan was.

Vidura had sent a tunnel digger to the Pandavas. A tunnel was dug secretly. Vidura informed them about the date when Duryodhana had planned for the fire to take place. One night before the dooms day, Kunti invited a Shudra lady and five men to the palace. She offered them wine till they lost their consciousness. Then showing her political insight, instructed Pandavas to set the palace on fire and they escaped through the tunnel.

Duryodhana and Shakuni were thrilled on hearing this news. The elders were distraught and Vidura acted as if he is mourning. Now here Kunti (or maybe Vidura in some retellings) showed her political strategy. Kunti decided that this was not the correct time to go back. The Kauravas might kill them if they found out that they were still alive. Advising her sons (especially Bhim and Arjun) to be patient and show restraint. The correct time to return has not come yet.


The metaphor of the mouse is an excellent one over here. the mouse survives the forest fire as it lives in a burrow under the ground. So many times life brings us problems and issues. Maybe, it might make sense to not attack some problem head on but then wait and let it pass on. You might come unscathed if you are sensible.

Mahabharata/Jaya - Graduation day and KARNA

"Birth is obscure and men are like rivers, origins of which are unknown". Thus spoke Duryodhana in defence of that brave young man whose challenge to Arjuna was rejected based on him being a son of a charioteer. This shows that Duryodhana was wise and well versed with Dharma. He was indeed a big hearted fellow and his hatred was only against Pandavas. he would often question the legality of the Pandavas as they were not of royal blood but did not even blink an eye before supporting the young man. Maybe, this was fueled by the favoritism shown to Arjuna by Teacher Drona, hatred fueled by Uncle Shakuni and his ambitions of becoming a king triggered by his father. What a deep sentence, what deep meaning and yet not practised all the time. 


It was graduation day. All the elders, the king, the queens and the teachers were present. All the princes gave an exhibition of their skills in a friendly competition. Bhima and Duryodhana's duel got very personal and then the duel was stopped by Ashwathamma, on the directions of Drona. Then it was Arjuna's turn. Arjuna dazzled everyone with his skills. He was clearly the favourite among the masses as well as the family. Then as Drona announces Arjuna as the greatest archer, a youth objects to it from the gate of the arena. The youth makes his way to the center and throws a public challenge to Arjuna. He claims that he can do all that Arjuna can. When Drona asks his name, he replies, "Karna".

Karna is the greatest tragic hero in this epic and yet, he inspires all. Unknown to him, he was the son of Kunti and the eldest brother of Pandavas. Sage Durvasa was very happy with the service provided by young and unmarried Kunti. He blesses her with a chant with which she can invoke any god and have a child through him. A young Kunti tries to test this and invokes Sun God. She is apprehensive and requests Sun God to not impregnate her when He does come to her as invoked by the chant. But you have to pay for your actions and then there are somethings with which you cannot play. She begets a son from him. Kunti is an adopted daughter of the childless Kunti-Bhoja. So maybe along with this factor and the social stigma of having a child out of wedlock, she places the child on a casket and discard it in the river Ganga. This might be just an elaborate cover up by the poet to not disclose that the sage might have used the vulnerable and young princess for his own lust. It also awards a divine birth to Karna as he is one of the greatest, if the not the greatest, archer of his time. It is also said that Karna was born with a natural golden plated shield and earrings. They were awarded by the Sun God his protection. This made Karna invulnerable to any attacks. Is this some sort of a metaphor or a miracle birth or some other birth defect which might have enabled Karna to be strong? 


The baby was then found by Adirath, who was then the chariot of King Dhritarashtra. Adirath and his wife Radha take care of the baby as their own. Adirath resigns from his job and Sanjaya is employed in his place.   Karna grew up along with Shon, the younger son of Adirath and Radha. Karna always had an inclination towards archery and warfare. Seeing this Adirath had taken him to Drona to get trained. Drona insults Karna by saying that since he is not from the Kshatriya caste, Drona cannot teach him. Karna points out Ashwatthamma to Dronacharya who is studying along with the princes though he is a Brahmin. This clearly shows the double standards of Drona. Drona himself was a Bhrahmin - priestly order, and yet he was living like a warrior. He was teaching his son as well. But when it came to others, he will speak about the Varna Dharma - Caste Systems. Drona, though respected, yet was not following Dharma. Mahabharata/Jaya will speak that caste is not determined by birth but by actions as  we will see. 


Now this insult would have affected Karna. From birth he has been called as a Charioteers son, though he has an inner feeling that he has more. Drona did not educate him on this ground. He had heard about Drona's favorite student, Arjuna. Maybe, this incident sparked that eternal race with and hate towards Arjuna in the mind of Karna. Karna was a self taught archer as well. After listening to Arjuna's test on the eye of the parrot, he told Shon he can do better.. He had Shon hold a wooden Parrot high up in the tree. Karna released 2 arrows simultaneously and pierced both the parrot.

Then to complete his education he underwent training from Sage Parshurama. Maybe, he had tried getting into other schools as well but his background might have hindered it. So this he lied to Parshurama that he was a Brahmin. Parshurama hated Kshatriyas (the warrior caste). Completing education from Parshuram, he had come back to Hastinapur in time for the Graduation day. He would have to pay for the lie he told to Sage Parshuram. I will leave that for another chapter though.


So back to the arena where he had just made a dramatic entry, he throws a public challenge to Arjuna for a duel. Family priest and teacher Sage Kripa introduces Arjuna's lineage and asks for Karna's background. Karna knows that his background might be a problem. He knows himself as a charioteer's son but always felt the warrior in him. In the meantime, Kunti recognizes him as his son (through his ear rings and chest shield) but does not disclose it to anyone. Then Sage Kripa reminds him that only a prince or a king from a warrior clan can challenge another prince in this arena as per the rules. In this moment of silent insult, Duryodhana, the supposed villain of the epic, stands up and utters the lines mentioned in the beginning of this passage. He says "No lion can give birth to an antelope. Look at this young man and you can see that he is a brave warrior'. Keeping the rule in mind, he makes Karna the king of Anga. Karna's coronation is also done at the same time. Karna feels indebted and honoured at this act of Duryodhana. Did Duryodhana do this to win Karna to his side as he did not have anyone equivalent to Arjuna in his side? Vyasa does not answer this but as the story goes on, we are left to make our own conclusions. Karna asks how he can ever repay this act of kindness. Duryodhana replies " With your freindship for life".

Duryodhan heads back to the pavilion. The duel was about to resume when Adirath walks in all happy to know that Karna has been made a king. Karna falls at his feet to take blessings when Bhima heaps his insults "He is a charioteers son. Duryodhana, give him a whip and leash and have him drive your chariot. Arjuna, come up. He is not worthy to be your opponent". Duryodhana gets angry and there is a commotion in the pavilion. Kunti faints. The sun was about to set and the elders decide that there cant be any use of weapons after sunset as it is against the rules.

The more we try to empathise with Karna, we are forced to reckon if any act of kindness or favours should be gleefully accepted. Should we see who is the person helping us? Should we make us so indebted that we might not be happy again?

Mahabharata/Jaya - Shakuni and Bhima meets the Naga king

"Ensure that the Kuru kingdom is destroyed. Carve my finger bones into dice and they will always follow your bet". Thus spoke King Subala to his youngest son Shakuni inside the prison cellar.

It is said that as per Gandhari's astrology her first husband was sure to die soon. As per the customs then, she was married to a goat which was killed immediately. This was not known to Dhritharashtra during his marriage to Gandhari. Years later, Dhristharashtra learns about this, is insulted by marrying a widow and locks the entire family of Gandhari in the prison cellar (so that this news does not spread). Everyday the family is fed only a handful of rice which will not be enough for everyone and yet, the King cannot be blamed of starving his in-laws. Subala was wary of this. Subala took a decision that Shakuni who was the most intelligent and the youngest will survive and everyone was to give their share of the food. The family members died one after the other till Subala and Shakuni is left. Subala somehow was able to gain pity from Dhritharashtra for Shakuni before passing away. Also, before he could die he had broken Shakuni's one leg with a iron bar so that Shakuni always remembers how the family died. It is then he gave the instructions mentioned above. Shakuni then stays in Hastinapur in her sister's palace till his death.

This illustrates the story behind someones seemingly evil actions. Without knowing the background, we can't state that Shakuni was pure evil. Maybe, he was trying to met out justice to the treatment his family had received. Thus, he poisoned Duryodhan's mind against the Pandavs and planned treacherous methods. Shakuni  was instrumental in ensuring the great war breaks out and eventually it destroys the kuru clan. But yet, he was not an out and out evil person. He was just another human trying to avenge the wrongs done to his family. 


Shakuni convinces Duryodhan to mix poison with porridge and offer the same to Bhima. Shakuni reasons that Bhima is the strong man and he needs to be eliminated so that Duryodhan's road to the crown cannot be challenged by any of the Pandavas. Duryodhan does as instructed and throws Bhima to the river. Here, he is escaped by the Naga community. This community is related to Kunti (which I am not explaining here) and knowing that this is Bhima they cure him completely. Also, their medicinal herbs increases his strength by multiple times. This shows that then forest people had advanced science of Ayurveda but was kept a secret and not disclosed outside the group. Maybe, that is why those sciences have now died out.


When Bhima returns, he finds that the people had thought that he had already died. He also understands that this was Duryodhan's plan. But then as per Yuddhistira's advise (or Kunti's advise as in some retellings), the truth about Bhimas poisoning is never revealed to the elders.

Mahabharata/Jaya - Arjuna's test

"I see an eye, only an eye". Thus spoke Arjuna in one of the test put by Drona.

Arjuna was very competitive and had an inner fire to be the very best. He saw the Drona did not impart all his knowledge with the princes but with Ashwathama. Finally, Drona gave into this persistence and promised that he will make Arjuna the greatest archer in the world. Drona openly used to declare that Arjuna is favourite student.

Arjuna too maybe deserved the attention. Arjuna had seen Bhima eat in the dark from which he perceived that his arrows should hit the target just like the hand carrying the food to the mouth. Arjuna used to practise archery in the dark as well.

Once, the princes came across a dog with arrows in it's mouth. It was placed in such a way that the dog did not die but it could not longer bark. Arjuna was also maybe insecure. Drona sensed it and went on to investigate the matter. They met Ekalavya who confessed that it was him who had done the feat. He also confessed he had made a statue of Drona and practised archery as per direction from Drona himself. Drona had rejected Ekalavya earlier based on his lower caste. Drona was bound by his word that he would make Arjuna the greatest archer. Hence, he asked for Ekalavya's right thumb as Guru Dakshina (Fees). Ekalavya without any hesitation cut it out and gave it.

Was it fitting for a teacher to promise his disciple that he will be the greatest in a particular field? Was it fitting for a teacher to openly announce and at times, maybe discriminate his favourite disciple? Was keeping up with one's word more important rather than rewarding someone's merit? This are the questions that are unanswered in this chapter.

In an archery test, Drona asked his students to aim at a parrot placed hanging from a tree. Before releasing the arrow, he asked "What do you see?".

Yuddhistira said "I see a parrot".

Duryodhana, to outdo Yuddhistira, said, "I see a stuffed parrot placed on a tree".

Bhima, to outdo Duryodhana, said, "I see a stuffed parrot places on a tree under a clear blue sky".

Arjuna answered as mentioned above.

Other than being a formal test, readers can see this metaphorically as well. Yuddhistira was decently focused but not much. Duryodhana and Bhima had completely lost focus on the main aim. Only Arjuna was on targetted focus. So in this journey of life, it is upon us to be an Arjuna or anyone else. Although we might be aware of the target, our vision might be skewed by so many other distractions happily found in life. Should we share our focus on them or just on our own way? 

Mahabharata/Jaya - Drona

"Friendship exists among equals. I am king and you are a poor brahmin (priest). Ask anything as a charity and I will give it to you. But don't claim it as friendship". Thus spoke King Dhrupada to Sage Drona when the latter had asked the king for 1 cow. Little did he know that he had provided just another reason to ensure the Great war happens.

Drona and Dhrupad had studied at the same Gurukul during their chidhood. Dhrupad had then declared to Drona that they are friends and whatever belongs to him belongs to Drona.

Drona had grown onto a poor priest. He was married to Kripi. They were so poor that Kripi used to give their son Ashwathama rice water as milk. Seeing this plight, Drona had gone to Dhrupad for help. But Dhrupad's arrogance and insults angered Drona. Drona left and learnt martial arts and warfare from Sage Parshuram. Drona had his own ideas as to how to avenge his insult while promising Parshuram that he will never impart this knowledge to a Kshatriya ( warrior caste).

Was Dhrupad right in this? If you take the written word of the law, Dhrupad was on the right side. But it did not have any meaning in the eyes of love. Maybe, that is why Mahabharata/Jaya also speaks about the friendship of Krishna and Sudama. Krishna, like Dhrupad, was a rich warrior while Sudama, like Drona, was a poor priest. Krishna shared everything he had with Sudama even without asked. This again shows the law as per Krishna. In his eyes as in the eyes of love, everyone is equal. Love cannot be given and help cannot be lent based on someone's caste. So Dhrupad though sticking to the word of Dharma was still maybe unrighteous. Krishna on the other hand shared his love with anyone who came to him thereby, being worshipped and loved in return.

Kripi's brother was Kripa who was employed with Hastinapur as a family priest and teacher. Now, Dhritharashtra knew that his children had a headstart already with education before Kunti brought her children to the palace. He used to invite Kripa for small pretext or otherwise always interfering with the Pandavas' studies. So it was decided that Drona will help in educating the Kauravas and Pandavas.

Once when the princes were playing, the ball fell into a pit. They saw an old man next to the pit. This old man pulled up the ball by pinning a glade of grass against each other. Surprised, the children went to Bhishma who realized it was none other than Drona. 

Mahabharata/Jaya - Birth of Duryodhana and the rest of the Kauravas

"He will bring misfortune. Let us be rid of him". Thus spoke Vidura at the birth of Duryodhana. he had predicted this from the way palace dogs were wailing. This shows that man, if wise enough, can read the signs of what is going to happen from nature.

Gandhari was distraught when she heard that Kunti, who had conceived after her, gave birth to Yuddhistira. Gandhari had been carrying for 2 years now and after hearing this news, she hit her abdomen with an iron bar so as to forcefully deliver the child. Instead, a lump of flesh came out. Rishi Vyasa helped her by breaking this ball of flesh to 101 pieces and storing it in separate jars. Thus were born the hundred sons and one daughter of Gandhari and Dhritharashtra. They were to be called the Kauravas.

Duryodhana's jar was the first to be opened. When he came out is when the Vidura read the signs and requested the above. Gandhari refused. Only if people were intelligent enough to listen to the wise. But, Gandhari had already put a blindfold on herself. So maybe, it was to show how limited her vision was. But then, in the future, we will see that she had a good knowledge about Dharma and tried to convince Duryodhana and his brothers to follow the same. Also, this peculiar birth would indicate that the rishis of then had the required scientific knowledge of creating and developing embryo. 

During her long pregnancy, Dhritharashtra had slept with a maid out of whom was born Yuyutsu. He too like Vidura was fit but can never ascend to the throne as he was born of a low class mother.

In the meantime, Kunti had borne 2 more children. Bhima was born at the same time as Duryodhana. Madri had given birth to the twins. Then one day, Pandu could not resist himself and forced himself on Madri while she was in middle of a bath (or coming after a bath). Madri too did not put much of a fight but the curse took effect and Pandu died. Madri, maybe feeling guilty or feared living in the palace accused of causing the young king's death, performed a Sati - Burnt herself on the pyre along with the cremation of her husband. She handed over her twins to Kunti. This is when she stated," Me or you, who would you have rather look after the children alone?". This shows the strength of Kunti and the belief of Madri. Madri knew she cannot be strong enough to take care of another woman's children as hers and she wont be able to live in the politics of the palace.

Kunti took all the children and returned to the palace. 

Mahabharata/Jaya - Birth of the Pandavas

"Give me a son so that I can father a king". Thus spoke Pandu to Kunti in the forest when he heard that Gandhari was pregnant.

Pandu was depressed when he heard about Gandhari's pregnancy. So Kunti reminded her of the Niyoga Dharma (copied from Devdutt Patnaik's Jaya) in the following words "There was a time when women were free to go to any man they pleased. This alarmed the sage Shvetaketu who saw his father Uddalaka, unfazed by his mother's association with other sages. Shvetaketu then introduced the law of marriage so that the women were bound to husbands,enabling all men (children) to know who their fathers were. If their husbands were unable to give children, they could go to men chosen their husband. Children borne by the wife belonged to the husband, irrespective of who actually fathered them".

When Pandu decided to implement this law, Kunti told her about her boon. Rishi Durvasa had blessed a young Kunti with a chant which would help her invoke any god and beget a child from her. Maybe, this was because the Rishi knew through his yogic foresight that she will need this in her future. This incident also speaks about the sexual hospitality which was followed at the time where men used to offer their daughter or wives to revered guests as a service.

But Kunti did not disclose everything at this juncture. I will reveal it at the time when needed.

It is said that Kunti first invoked the Lord Dharma (Yama) of whom was born, Yuddhistira (it means the one who will be stable in a war/fight). Rationally reviewing this, Vidura was revered as an incarnation of Yama. So it is quite possible that Pandu might have chosen his younger brother first. Critics would state this as the reason to why Vidura always sides with Pandavas right from the beginning. But then yama is the dispassionate judge of one's actions. It would be unfair to blame him so.

Pandu was not happy with 1 son. So Kunti invoked Lord Vayu (lord of the winds) who gave her Bhima and Lord Indra (King of heaven) who gave her Arjuna. Kunti informs Pandu that she has been with 4 men now and cannot go for a fifth one as that would be against the law. So Pandu instigates her to lend this chant to Madri. Madri requests Kunti to invoke the twin gods, the Ashwini twins (Lords of Morning and Evening star). Thus, was born Sahadeva and Nakula. After this, Kunti refused to invoke any other gods for Madri. With one chant, Madri had begotten 2 children. Well versed with the politics, Kunti did not want to in any way have her seniority descended to below Madri (incase Madri invokes another twins and gets more children than Kunti). In that decision, she saved her own interest.

Yuddhistira was the embodiment of righteousness, Bhima was strong, Arjuna was to be a great archer, Nakula the most handsome and Sahadev was wise/knowledgeable.

Their miraculous or divine births might not be historically accurate. It might have been used to imply their nature or qualities. Yuddhistira, son of Dharma, was to adept at the law of Dharma. Bhima, born of wind, will be as strong as might wind and temper too would blow hot or blow cold time and again. Arjuna, born of Indra, was someone who can never be defeated in a war. Nakula would be as beautiful as the morning while Sahadev would be as knowledgeable as a man should be at the end of a day in the evening if he knows how to read the signs. It is said that Sahadev was great at astrology and knew what was going to happen. But he did not speak up as he wanted to ensure that Krishna would be their friend and be with them. It is only in the evening that one can observe the position of the stars and make mathematical calculations. Maybe, that is why he is the son of the evening star. It is claimed that he put together various occult sciences to help predict future.

Mahabharata/Jaya - Gandhari, Kunti and Madri

"As per the law, no blind man can be the king". Thus spoke Vidura at the time of the crowning of the new king. Hence, Pandu was chosen as the king although he was younger to Dhritharashtra. Vidura who was taught the ideal laws of Dharma could not see why Bhishma (for once) wanted Dhritharashtra to be the king.

Dhritharashtra, Pandu and Vidura was raised by Bhishma as his own. At the time of coronation, he had selected Dhritharashtra to be the king before Vidura objected citing the law. This was the only time when Bhishma had wanted to not follow the law by the word. But then when objected to his decision by the same law, he gave in. In some retellings, it states that Bhishma was aware of Dhritharashtra's ambition to be the king which was very strong. It was at that time when Vidura stood up with the word of the law.Dhritharashtra was was quite saddened by this event but did not voice it out in the open.

Bhishma went to the kingdom of Gandhar and sought princess Gandhari for Dhritharashtra. In some folklore, Gandhari was not informed about the prince's blindness till she came to Hastinapur for the wedding. Out of anger, she blindfolded herself for life. In other retellings, Gandhari empathised with her husband a lot that to share his sorrow, she put the blindfolds on herself.

Is Dhritharashtra and Gandhari's blindness subject to a metaphorical review? As we will see in the future, Dhritharashtra is blinded by his love for his son and unable to execute his kingly duties in a just way. Gandhari too has handicapped herself and hence, cannot guide and help her sons grow properly. The sons become hateful towards their own cousins. Also, Gandhari's blindfolding herself makes us question about how we can forget one role (of a mother) to perform another role (of a wife) perfectly? Gandhari is again a strong woman and respected for this action but the epic wants to us to remember the results of this action.

Pandu went to Kunti's Swayamwara and was selected by her for marriage. Failing to conceive a child from Kunti, a second wife was purchased for Pandu. She was Madri, sister of Shalya, king of Madra. Of her too, Pandu did not beget a child. Vyasa never clearly statess the reason but in some folklore it is stated that Pandu was impotent. Also, Kunti's fertility was already proven (though as present it remains a secret).

Kunti might have felt insulted at Pandu marrying (purchasing) another woman to be his wife. Being a princess herself, she might be aware of the politics of the time. Maybe that is why she was adamant that her future five sons should always be united so that they can be the ruling party.

In the meantime, Pandu was becoming a powerful and famous king. He was conquering new lands and bringing them under his rule. Dhritharashtra tries to conceive a child through Gandhari so that he can beget a child before Pandu and this son can reclaim what was rightfully Dhritharasthra's.

Pandu incurs the curse of Sage Kindama as he kills Kindama and his wife while making love. Pandu was hunting and fired an arrow at what looked like an antelope. Only on coming closer, did Pandu realise it was Sage Kindama and his wife. The curse was that Pandu will die as soon as he embraces a woman with the intention of making love. Pandu decides to leave his throne and proceed to the forest to perform penance. The crown is handed over to  Dhritharashtra who will rule it as a regent.

Kunti and Madri, the childless women and maybe, pious wives, decides to accompany Pandu to the forest.

This curse is again maybe put here to cover up Pandu's impotence as well as to correlate Pandu's death. The role of Kunti and Gandhari and their bearing on the epic is quite prevalent. This trivial situation too but was again one of the many factors for the great war. As we go ahead, we will see that there is no one person or event responsible for the great war as well as many of the events leading to it. The epic is an awesome scripture to indicate man his helplessness in face of the events that occur. How he reacts or rather acts, maybe that is the only freedom. Result of the actions is never in man's hands.

Mahabharata/Jaya - Dhritarashtra, Pandu and Vidura

"Go now, as you are. I cannot wait". Thus spoke Satyavati to his son Rishi Vyasa who was born out of a wedlock. Patience is an important quality which no matter what the aim is should never be deserted. But Satyavati could not wait.

With Bhishma stuck to his vow, Satyavati called her illegitimate son who was born out of a wedlock. She requested him to make the two princesses pregnant. Rishi Vyasa agreed but sought a year so that he can groom and prepare himself as years of penance had made his skin hoarse and hair matter. But Satyavati could not wait and informed him to do it now.

Ambika was so disgusted by Vyasa'a looks that she shut her eyes when he touched her. The child conceived through her was Dhritarashtra, the blind one.
Ambalika grew pale when she saw Vyasa. The child conceived through her was Pandu, a pale (albino?) weakling and maybe, impotent.
Maybe, this in a way shows that the child might have to bear the fruits or thorns of the actions of the parent.

Satyavati was disappointed with the imperfect children and ordered Vyasa to got to Ambika again. Ambika sent her maid this time to Vyasa who made love to him without any inhibitions. Out of this communion was born Vidura. Vidura was perfect and fit to be a king, but he could not crowned as he was born of a maid.

It is claimed that Vidura is none other than Yama (Aka Dharma), god of death, living out a curse. Once it so happened that a group of thieves took refuge in the hermitage of Sage Mandavya who was lost at the time in meditation. When they were discovered, the kings guard accused Mandavya of aiding them. He was put into jail and tortured and impaled. When he came before Yama, he demanded an explanation for this suffering. Yama informed him that as a child, Mandavya had impaled tiny insects on a straw and hence, your suffering was a repayment for this karmic debt. Mandavya did not agree that an innocent acts committed as a child should be punished like this and cursed Yama/Dharma to an earthly life as a man who though fit to be a king will never be crowned inspite of all the perfect qualities.

Mahabharata/Jaya often speaks of boons and curses. It need not mean that the people who offered them were always powerful or so. It needs to be seen as a tool of implementing the Law of Karma. In the simplistic times of telling this story, it would have made sense to use curses and boons to explain the complicated laws of Karma. Vidura's life as well as Mandavya's life story here in a way explains the bigger picture or reason behind terrible things happening to seemingly good human beings. It also explains that every action, no matter consciously performed or not will result into a future set of event/events/actions. Mahabharata/Jaya in such is a treasure which implores the human mind to see beyond what appears. 

Mahabharata/Jaya - Amba, Ambika and Ambalika

"I have taken a vow and I will never break it". Thus spoke Bhishma in 2 instances. Once to princess Amba (which would eventually result into his downfall in the great war) and then to Satyavati (which is one of the many causes for the great war).

King Shantanu passes away after the birth of 2 sons through his wife Satyvati. Chitrangada, the eldest, was an arrogant one and dies in a battles with a Gandharva (rationally would be forest tribe involved in some sorcery). Chitrangada was unmarried at the time. The second child, Vichitraveerya (name denotes strange masculinity), was a only 16 and was a weakling. So Bhishma (who is ruling as a regent) goes and kidnaps the three princesses of Kashi - Amba, Ambika and Ambalika.

Princess Amba was already in love with Prince Shalva and was planning to select him during the swayamvar. She informs Bhisma that she has accepted Shalva as her husband in her heart. As per Righteousness, Bhishma sends her back to Shalva who refuses to take her back (as per the warrior code of him loosing to Bhishma while fighting to avoid the kidnapping). Amba goes back to Vichitraveerya who refuses her sighting that he cannot accept her as she already had another man in her heart. Dejected, Amba goes to Bhishma and requests him to marry her. Bhishma then reminds her of his vow because of which he cannot marry her. Bhishma again gives importance to his vow when a woman's life could be ruined. Angry, Amba leaves him in search of a person or power to kill Bhishma. Amba is no ordinary woman but her anger is very powerful. I will delve on this when we reach the chapter of the Great War.

Vichitraveerya over indulges in sexual life, ignoring his stately resposibilities and dies an untimely death without bearing any children. Vyasa has never explained this but in my research somewhere it mentions he dies of TB. Satyavati is eager to ensure that the family line moves on as well as being the mother of kings. As per the law of niyoga dharma, any child a woman bears belongs to the husband. Citing this, she requests Bhishma to make love to the 2 princes. Bhishma reminds her of the vow he has taken, ironically to satisfy her. This again shows Bhishma's blind adherence to the words of the law rather than the spirit. Now when there is a threat that the family line can be completely over, he still does not bulge from his vow. This is a vow which has lost all meaning and purposes but he still carries it on. That is why later Krishna in someways shows us later that the end is important more than the journey (if the end is for rightful dharma, then you might have to bend a few to achieve it). Bhishma in his rigid ways will never be able to do it. Hence, he is unable to handle or foresee Shakuni's treachery in the future. He is unable to find a way out. The old value system just like his vow is meaningless. 

Mahabharata/Jaya - Satyavati, Bhishma

"I shall never marry. I shall never be with a woman. I shall never father children". Thus declared Devavrata on Satyavati's condition (in some folklore it her father's) that only her children and her children's children should be the king if she has to marry King Shantanu. This is how Devavrata came to be known as Bhishma - the one who took the terrible vow.

King Shantanu had declared Devavrata as the crown prince. But then during a hunting expedition, he sets his eyes on Satyavati (a fisherwoman) and falls in love with her. He is sad and depressed to know that she will not marry unless he agrees that only her children will be the king. He does not agree to it and comes back sad. Seeing the condition of his father, Devavrata enquires about this with the king's charioteer. He then goes to Satyavati's house who places the same condition again. Out of his love for his father, Devavrata takes above mentioned vow.

Mahabharata shows us the power of desires. King Shantanu is old and it was his time to retire and renounce but a mere sight of Satyavati creates a desire to marry again. Should he have done that?

Devavrata was the crown prince of Hastinapur. He takes this terrible vow which looked noble and honorable at the time. But is that correct? Was Devavrata just a son? As a crown prince, he had other responsible role as well. Did he balance this act? Did he think about the result of his sacrifice? Do we have a right to make such oaths when we are not sure how this world works?

Satyavati's role here again shows the amount of power/respect that a woman carried in the society then. She was also politically strong to ensure that she and her children are never disrespected because of their lower class by placing those 2 conditions. Mahabharata has always had strong women portrayed in it's story.

Bhisma was to then have a very complicated life. Although well qualified to be a king, he cannot be the king. He has renounced the primary duties of the householder, yet he is not an ascetic. His oath then becomes his biggest attachment. The rigid values that he symbolises in this epic is noteworthy. It would have worked in the era of Ram or in Satya Yug. But now the society was not an ideal one and corruption was breaking in. Righteousness needed to be guarded in whichever way but the rigidity of the old system would not be able to do so.

Bhisma was a classic example of the old values which were no longer applicable to the current times. Civilisation, like a human, has their stages. Hence, we have the four yugas where spirituality or lack of it defines the essence. Bhisma does not adhere from his oath even when his entire clan might end. Bhisma, though well versed in the scriptures of Dharma, does not interfere with Kamsa or Jarasandh. It takes Krishna and his politics to end the tyrannical regime. Bhisma does not ensure that the law of Dharma is being followed in Bharatvarsha. Krishna ensures that by having Yuddhistir do the Rajasuya Yagna. Maybe, that is why Bhisma had to die for the new era to dawn. Strict adherence to the words of Dharma is not enough but it needed to be opened up and changed according to the needs of the time. That is what was lacking in Bhisma and we will see that as the story progresses. 

Mahabharata/Jaya - Shantanu, Ganga

"Yes, I promise I will never question you" . Thus spoke King Shantanu of Hastinapur to Ganga in response to her condition for her to marry him. At the time it looked like a romantic, innocent and maybe, a little naughty promise. Maybe, it shows that it was quite a matriarchal society or maybe at least in that part of the region. Ganga as a woman had a right to reject/accept a king as well as imply a condition. Women were maybe highly respected then. Time, though, has changed concepts now. But then, little did anyone know that it will be just one of the many factors which would almost end up King Shantanu's own clan. Maybe, the most important question is if a man can give more prominence to one role than the other in the efficient working of a society? Can a king make such a promise? Won't this lead to chaos?

Ganga beared King Shantanu 8 children (sons) in all. But every time right after the birth of a child, Ganga would go and drown the child in the river Ganga. King Shantanu stayed silent and lived up to his promise till the seventh child. But he could no longer hold himself back at the birth of the 8th child. He told Ganga to stop this and let him have at least one child.

Ganga, the wise one, informed that all these children were Vasus (facilitators of primary Gods) who were once cursed to 1 earthly life by Sage Vasistha for stealing their cow during their vacation on Earth. These Vasus had then begged Ganga to be their mother and then kill them as soon as they were born (thereby finishing their earthly existence soon). Maybe, that is how she too came around to get married to the king. But now since the king had broken his promise, Ganga did not kill the child but informed the king that the child will live a terrible life (as per the curse). Ganga took the child with her, taught her under the guidance of Sage Parshuram and returned him to King Shantanu when he was a teenager. This was Devavrata - who would later be called Bheeshma.

Every action has a cause behind it. Primarily, the individual atma would be solely responsible for them. Maybe, that is what was shown in this story of the Vasus birth and immediate death. Also, the action (of Ganga) on the outside might look cruel but it was much more noble. Likewise, King Shantanu's action to stop her looked noble but as we will see with the future developments that it was not. In all, it makes us reflect if we have enough knowledge of the world to jugde anyone else's action. How much do we know and think before we jump in and try to change something? As I have read that mythologies are stories to reflect upon. They will not shout out the truth but it depends upon the reader to reflect and understand and then derive the truth out of it. Should we read our life and all the life around us in the same manner before we  judge and condemn? It is for us alone to answer..

Mahabharata/Jaya Series - 1

Off late, I have been hooked onto the greatest Indian epic of Mahabharata originally known as Jaya. Reading Devdutt Pattnaik's "Jaya" (read it twice) provides you the understanding why this epic was not actually called Mahabharata by Sage Vyasa. After that, I have downloaded and watched twice Mahabharata - TV Series which was played in Indian television channels in 1988-99. It was well made and the Geeta Saar episodes too were pretty well laid. Of course, they do not tell the complete story. So Arjuna and Yuddhistir's quarrels, Shikandi becoming a proper man later and Kunti's polity at having stopped Madri from using the chants after the birth of twins are not shown. The biggest injustice was that the last test of Yuddhistir was excluded. The greatest lesson of the epic was taken off.

I then read C. Rajagopalachari's translation and some poorer works like "The palace of Illusions" (Epic through the eyes of Draupadi) and "Mahabharata through the Eyes of Bhimsen". I am looking forward to reading "Mrintyunjay" which is a retelling of the epic through the eyes of Karna, the biggest tragic hero in the Epic.

So what is Mahabharata/Jaya about? I have read that Mahabharata has all the situations/dilemmas a human life can come across. I cannot confirm that but yes, it does speak about eunuchs, impotency, truth above love, transvestites, man changing to a woman, slavery, etc. among many other spiritual and societal conflict.

The more you read or hear it, it reveals so much more. Of course, Bhagavad Gita was born out this epic.

There are so many spiritual lessons that we can learn from this epic if we take it metaphorically. Kurukshetra is the land where the great war for upholding Dharma (way of righteousness, way of Truth). This land can be implied as the mind/heart of you, an individual. You have all your five qualities (Pandavas) and if guided by the Intellect (Self - Krishna) you might be able to destory all the age old vasnas (tendencies/qualities inherited by you from previous births symbolised as Bhishma and Drona) and also the 100 different new desires/qualities (symbolised by the Kauravas). That is a "holy war" every person has to battle in one's life. Vyasa too have indicated through Geeta Saar that every one is alone in this war.

But then, just that victory is not enough. It is a continuous journey as evidenced with the victory of Yuddhistira. Righteousness (Yuddhistira), Physical strength (Bhima), Concentration - need to maintain balance(Arjuna), Vanity (Nakula) and Knowledge (Sahadeva) are important qualities of a human. But if you ever let any one other than righteousness guide you, you will not receive the ultimate moksha - liberation. In the last journey to heaven, all the Pandavas except Yuddhistira does not reach the abode of Self.

The above one's are just my own personal personal and very simple conclusions. Other than that, anyone who's read or heard a little about Mahabharata/Jaya knows that the Epic shows the position of a human in the design of the cosmos as well as the freedom of action/will and destiny. It also shows how no event is actually independent but just a result of an earlier event or events. No one person can be blamed for the great war as it was a result of so many decisions/actions undertaken by the characters.

So I have decided to start a series of posts on Mahabharata. I am not sure but I will try to post commentaries on the characters and the lessons their lives teach to the rest of humanity. it is not important to me if this ever happened. But a rational explanation would be that a similar event would have taken place, the then historians/ wise sages transformed it into a poet (with creative liberties) and ensured that humanity learns the lessons from this.

Sadly, the ironical thing about History is that it repeats itself and no one learns from it.

Sachin Tendulkar - Don't believe the hype

From April 2011, Sachin has missed scoring his Hundredth century in as many times he has come out to bat. If Martians were to come and listen to the hullabulloo, then they would be wondering he must have scored 50+ runs in almost all the innings. But then, even if he gets out at 38, media would make it out like he just missed it. At the same time, there is another player by name of Rahul Dravid (a cricketer with substance) who has scored about 5 centuries (4 in England). As has been the case always, Sachin still hordes the media while Dravid (and another special gentleman i.e. VVS) goes about doing the job of batting.

It was pretty amusing to see Sachin stating that his Hundredth 100 is just a number. Really, then why the hell did you farm the strike from VVS in Kotla? Please also tell us what the hell where you thinking by refusing a single of the leg bye when VVS was half way down the pitch. Thank God, there is justice somewhere and you got out in the same over. That innings was typical of the way this so called legend and gentleman has approached his game.

Sachin's first 70 runs are for the team and the rest, for himself. People have accused Gavaskar of being selfish, but will never say anything about this fake god.

Sachin has been playing cricket from 1989. Please remind me of any impossible situation where he has put his hand up and taken the team through with his batting. Ok, there was that Sharjah of 1998. Then what? I still remember the 1996 WC S/F where the whole nation was let down by him in the most important match so far (and others too let the country down but then they were never called the best). Coming to think of it, the only time Sachin has really carried the team through in ODI (while chasing) was against Australia in 2008. Hmm, once in the so called 22 year legendary and godlike career. Not so, is it?

Where was Sachin when India needed 316 runs in Dhaka or Karachi? It was Dada who made a century and then Robin Singh carried us through. Where was Sachin when India needed 326 in Lords 2001? Ohh, that's right... he got out trying to play an inside out shot to the left arm spinner. Yeah, he was never happy playing in the No 4 spot. He never has gotten to the idea of batting where the team needs him the most. But as always, he will open in ODI and #4 in Tests. Where was Sachin when the team relied on him to stop the charge of the Aussies in 2001 in test matches? Oh yeah, VVS and Dravid made history. The point I am trying to make is that Indian cricket witnessed great change only when the real big three - Dada, Dravid and VVS started cementing their places.

Sachin is just a choker, playing to delight the statisticians. And hence, historical innings are played by Dravid, Sehwag and VVS. Infact, Ishant too did play a great 4th innings in Mohali along with VVS to win against Australia. Thank god, it was ishant and not Sachin. I would take Ishant anyday to bat alongside VVS while chasing 40-50 runs. Sachin's so called 200 runs in ODI was a pain to watch once he reached 180. Dhoni had to score for India and Sachin scored for himseld. Hence, it took him about 7-8 overs to reach 200.

Sachin's selfishness and hypocrisy has been out in the open for all the 22 years but no one ever writes about it. His disappointment at having been stranded at 194 against Pak in Multan was such a clear sign. Any team management with spine would have punished the player for telling the media that the team could have waited for 2-3 overs before declaring so that he can make his 200. Really, I mean, after giving about 1 hour of post tea session and being clear about needing to up the ante, you still need time. Dravid and Dada did the right thing of declaring and reminding him that the team comes first. But that is something that Sachin just does not believe in.

How many times have we seen Sachin opening in the Test matches or batting at any other position than 4? Then check the same thing about Dravid and Laxman? You will see who the real team players are and why they often come up with historical innings. Dravid's 32 out of 36 centuries have been for a winning cause. Add to that the 78 he made while chasing 270+ runs (in partnership with Dada who made 98) in kandy, 1999. Compare that to Sachin and see the shallow side of the USELESS 52 centuries. Most of them have been for draws which clearly shows that he makes most of those runs when the pitch has been more docile and batting was easier for both the sides.

Dravid also has finished up matches in ODI's in the second half of his career. Sachin made 93 runs in WC 2003 against Pak but as usual it needed Dravid and Yuvraj to strike a handsome partnership and FINISH the match. Sachin's 175 against Australia while chasing 365 in an ODI has gone to show on that he still has no idea how to finish the match. The stroke he played to get out (Dilscoop) shows that he just cannot handle the real match pressure when it reaches it tipping point.

Here are a few questions you all might want to ask to verify if Sachin is really the greatest batsman (and if he is really the most important wicket) for India:
1.) Whom would you have batting at the crease with 40-50 runs to win - VVS, Dravid or Sachin
2.) What was Sachin's contributions to the 2 greatest turning points of Indian cricket - Natwest 2001 and Eden 2001?
3.) When was the last time you saw Sachin selfless and fearless? He has always refused to open in Test matches or come in at that critical #3 position. He always pulled his weight around to ensure that he opens in ODI's and score more centuries although the team would have used his experience at #4.  Two hoots to what the team needs.
4) Lara and Viv batted the same way through out their careers and so did Gilchrist. Can you say the same about this man? Heck, he is incapable of that in 1 innings. Let him reach 80 and then see the difference.
5.) How many times have your heart been broken when you clearly see that a special innings is needed and Sachin just gets out? You will see that all of his hundreds have come when the match situation is not critical (not the stipulation) and there is not even 1 wonder innings like Dravid or VVS he has played in his so called 22 year career.

Sachin's contributions to Indian cricket has been pretty much as expected from a gifted batsman - A few wins  here and there, consistent scores (may or may not help the cause of the team) and as it has spanned for about 22 years with no threat to his place, it is little wonder that he has made all this number of centuries. I mean, who cares when you have a Dravid or a VVS to sacrifice their spots and face the music  upfront as and when required while this so called legend will wait for his number to come in and bat. Please someone show me atleast 1 wonder innings.. something unbelievable, against the wall kind of innings. But the choker has none. He can only bat when all things are hunky and dory and there is a settled batsman at the opposite end.

Look back and you will see that the Indian team has been carrying Sachin for the last 11 years. Sachin was there before 2000 and after that as well. Yet, the real heroes who did change the face of Indian cricket are - Dravid, Dada, VVS and to lesser extent, Kumble and Sehwag. Indian cricket is wherever it is because of the sacrifices that the above mentioned gentlemen has done keeping in mind to feed the ego of a teammate who wants to be remembered as nothing but a statistician's delight.