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.