MAHABHARATA: A Tale Of Contradictions!

Sage Krishnadwaipayana Vyasa-Author of Mahabharata

Being an Indian, I have always been fascinated by our epics, Ramayana and Mahabharata. Out of the two, Mahabharata attracts my curiosity the most due to its complexity and richness. The wide variety of characters that is present in this colossal work, by Krishnadwaipayana Vyasa, is simply phenomenal. 

I am someone who has read the English translation of the above-mentioned epics and have heard countless versions of it. But reading the epics were truly life-altering experience. That is when I came to know how different the incidents narrated in the epic is from the many oral retelling or popular versions of the epic. Nothing is as I thought; the villains no longer feel like villains but the so-called heroes or heroines' actions turn out to be not so heroic and at times, highly questionable as well. 

Majority of Indians know the gist of Mahabharata....fight of good against evil, the victory of Dharma against Adharma, avenging a woman's insult etc. But when I looked for all these incidents in the epic, I saw none. What I saw was two sections of a family fighting for the throne and the riches and the glorious lifestyle that comes with it. There was no victory for dharma; no one sought to avenge a woman's insult but there was indeed massive loss of life.

The trouble began with the aged Hastinapura Emperor, Shanthanu who lusted after a beautiful fisher girl named Sathyavathi and gave the promise to her father that it will be her sons who will sit on the throne of Hastinapura, not Devavratha Bheeshma, the eligible heir. This act by Shanthanu itself is very questionable as he himself was not a biological heir. Emperor Bharata refused to crown his own biological sons stating that none of them was eligible to become a ruler and in turn crowned Shanthanu whom Bharata considered most "eligible"! Unfortunately, the same Shanthanu went against this noble notion of Bharata and allowed his lust to take the better of him and denied the right man from becoming the ruler. I feel this is the biggest irony of Mahabharata. Add Sathyavathi to the situation who after the demise of Shanthanu takes up the cause of propagating her own line in Kuru Vamsha, that too as fast as possible. The presence of the all-powerful Bheeshma must have made her insecure but she goes on to mess things up royally. Both her sons die without providing an heir and in the quest for an heir, she invites Sage Krishnadwaipayana Vyasa, her son born out of wedlock, to impregnate her daughters' in law. Vyasa does advise her that the queens should not be impregnated so soon after their husband's death and they should wait for a year, doing penance. But Sathyavathi, without even considering the feelings of the ladies involved, refuses outright and forces the queens to have sexual intercourse with Vyasa of repulsive appearance. The result: out of the two Princes born one is blind the other is weak! Satyavati, in a way, is shielded by Vyasa who asks her to go on Vanaprastha, preventing her from witnessing the massive carnage created by Shantanu's unjust acts and her own greed. From then on it is a nose dive for the Kurus as the biological heirs of blind Dhritarashtra and the adopted sons of weak Pandu end up as arch enemies.

Vyasa states the enmity is started by an 'evil' Duryodhana due to jealousy towards Pandavas.  Let us look at the many behaviours of the 'antagonists' and the 'protagonists'. I came across an incident in Adi Parva where it is mentioned that Bheema was a bully of epic proportion and used to attack and injure Duryodhana's younger brothers severely to the point of near-death, just for fun! Neither Kunti, Yudhishthira or Kuru Elders stop or even try to stop Bheema. After mutely witnessing the brutality of Bheema towards his little brothers, Duryodhana, for the first time, retaliates by poisoning Bheema and throwing him into the river. So how does this becomes jealousy on the part of Duryodhana? The curious thing is Pandavas who are extolled as 'the paragons of Dharma', insults Radheya Karna (Kunti's glorious yet tragic son) because he is of mixed caste yet the 'evil' Duryodhana openly accepts and stand up for him. For this act by Duryodhana, Karna sacrifices his life for the cause of his friend who gave him acceptance and respect.

Beema throwing an elephant at Radheya Karna fighting his chariot

Isn't that ironic? An 'evil' Duryodhana standing up for an innocent man yet the 'perfect' Pandavas abusing him? Why didn't Yudhishthira, the epitome of goodness, intervene to protect Karna from Bheema's insults. This isn't where it ends. Eklavya loses his thump solely due to Arjuna's acute jealousy. And a casteist Drona accepts Arjuna's heartless demands and destroys Eklavya's talent. How can noble souls do this? Yet the Govt of India gives awards for a great teacher (Dronacharya Award) and exceptional performer (Arjuna Award) in these two people's name; the two elitists who destroyed others just to boost their ego!

Later Pandavas are sent to Varanavatha by Dhritrashtra to live in Lakshagriha where they are supposed to burn alive. This crime is often blamed on Shakuni, Duryodhana and Karna but in reality, they had nothing to do with it; this conspiracy was the brainchild of Dhritarashtra and his minister. But of course, Pandavas survive it and Kunti chooses the scapegoats for their death ruse, in the form of an unfortunate Nishada mother and her five sons. Kunti personally feeds them with drugged wine and are left to be burnt alive by Bheema. Yes, in the end, Kunti too is burnt to death.  Kunti's callousness comes into the forefront in the form of Draupadi who is used as an object to be parted between her sons, that too for the sake of their unity !!! Why should any disunity arise as Kauravas numbered in 101 never had any internal strife? To me, Kunti's actions seem like that of a sadistic mother in law than anything else.  Anyway, with the help of Drupada and  Krishna and after a mega genocide of the Naga clan, Pandavas become powerful and invites Kurus for the Ashwamedha. Duryodhana is gravely insulted by Pandavas after a series of instances which (if one looks closely) were purposely designed to insult the former who was a royal guest. Disgusted, he pledges vengeance and of course turns the tables on Pandavas by holding a dice game where Yudhishthira bet himself, his brothers,  Kingdom, every man, woman and child (except of course the Brahmanas) and even their wedded wife Draupadi, as possessions! How on earth can this man be considered an ideal King?

Everybody is very vocal about Kurus & Karna insulting Draupadi but is silent on the way she ended up as a bet in the game. Who had more obligation to Draupadi: her own husbands or the Kurus? The strange thing is that Duryodhana, as opposed to television serial depictions, didn't even bet a coin in the game as he simply told Yudhishthira to win the first bet which the latter never did! Neither did Karna called Draupadi a 'whore' and worse the experts now say that the disrobing itself never happened! Yudhishthira of course moronically loses everything that he got by the hard work of his brothers and as Draupadi's mega dowry, to Kurus. They are condemned to exile in the forest and one year in disguise as servant class or shudras whom they had total scorn for, while in power. How can the 'noble' Yudhishthira be a gambler? Does he learn anything from his experience? NO. Yudhishthira during their disguise takes up the job of a court gambler at Virata all the while his wife and 3 brothers toiled hard! For this gambling addict, the very capable Duryodhana had to be murdered? Nowhere in Mahabharata says Duryodhana was cruel to his subjects; on the contrary, he was considered a noble and benevolent Prince.

The exile leads to war as peace talks failed. Noticeably Draupadi's pleas for vengeance is turned down and war happens only when it made clear that they won't get power. Arjuna plainly tells Draupadi that the war is fought for power and wealth and not to avenge her; must have been very difficult for her to accept that too from her 'favourite' husband. As for Karna, a scared Indra begs for Karna's impenetrable armour and the former gives it away. Then on the eve of the war, Krisha and Kunti play the most inhuman emotional blackmailing on Karna by revealing his birth secret. Karna stoically stands through it and rejects every offer that is placed at him. Kunti shamelessly begs for her sons' life and Karna gifts it to her. She also gets a promise from him that he won't use the same weapon twice in the impending war! Yet people call him an 'adharmic'! Karna's fate is thus sealed by his own mother. Both Krishna and Kunti have no shame in offering Draupadi to Karna as if she was some sex slave. Probably that is what they think of her; a sexual object that can be offered to anyone! Maybe that is the result of Draupadi's karmas, for being arrogant and for insulting and rejecting Karna purely for his mixed caste.....Later, in an outright deceitful war, the 'righteous' Pandavas murder basically every single Kuru fighter through cheating. Of course, there is the blanket excuse of Kaurava side being the 'villains' but what is the point of this whole farcical 'dharmayuddha' if the so-called 'righteous' has to cheat to attain victory?

 Duryodhana hits the final nail on Pandavas' misdeeds and exposes how hollow their victory really was, through the following lines: "I have studied, made presents according to the ordinance, governed the wide Earth with her seas, and stood over the heads of my foes! Who is there so fortunate as myself! That end again which is courted by Kshatriyas observant of the duties of their own order, death in battle, hath become mine. Who, therefore, is so fortunate as me? Human enjoyments such as were worthy of the very gods and such as could with difficulty be obtained by other kings had been mine. The prosperity of the very highest kind had been attained by me! Who then is so fortunate as me? With all my well-wishers and my younger brothers, I am going to heaven, O thou of unfading glory! As regards yourselves, with your purposes unachieved and torn by grief, live ye in this unhappy world! Sanjaya continued, 'Upon the conclusion of these words of the intelligent king of the Kurus, a thick shower of fragrant flowers fell from the sky. The Gandharvas played upon many charming musical instruments. The Apsaras in a chorus sang the glory of king Duryodhana. The Siddhas uttered loud sound to the effect, "Praise be to king Duryodhana!" Fragrant and delicious breezes mildly blew on every side. All the quarters became clear and the firmament looked blue as the lapis lazuli. Beholding these exceedingly wonderful things and this worship offered to Duryodhana, the Pandavas headed by Vasudeva became ashamed. Hearing (invisible beings cry out) that Bhishma and Drona and Karna and Bhurishrava were slain unrighteously, they became afflicted with grief and wept in sorrow."

From my readings, I have come to the conclusion that the Kurus, Duryodhana and Karna were purposely demonized. Many researchers have pointed out the fact that Vyasa has made so many contradictory statements in the epic. But the question that formed in my head when I read this notion was this: did Vyasa accidentally made those contradictory statements or was he really trying to tell us the truth, veiled as contradictions? I feel it is the latter after all history is written by victors! Maybe he felt that by using contradictory statements he could tell the truth to the world.

References and credits:

1. "Bhima throws elephants at Karna" from Wikimedia Commons  
2. "Vyasa.jpg" from Wikimedia Commons
3. "The Mahabharata" English translation by K. M. Ganguli