“A steady mystic stays the same / In infamy as well as fame” ~Bhagavad Gita

I have been trying to revive my reading habit and what better way than to read one of the greatest epics of all times?

I think the genius of the Mahabharata is not in telling a story but in enabling the reader to ponder on the thousands of what-ifs that could have branched out. This epic touches on almost all aspects of the human condition - there’s statecraft, religion, spirituality, politics, conduct, and character, all wrapped in the creative robes of mysticism and magic – talk of shape-shifters, demons (“rakshasas”), demi-gods, cool magical weapons (Sudarshan chakra and Arjuna’s Gandiva), Indra loaning out his weapons to Arjuna (and later, Karna) and just the unfettered mixing of the divine in the matters of the terrestrial.

In terms of literary plots, the Mahabharata is a masterclass in story-telling, there’s, of course, foreboding and the idea of the immutable character that just manifests before the act is carried out - for example, Shakuni’s malicious nature, the jealousy of Dhuryodhan, and the individual natures of each of the Pandavas.

I have read Amit Majmudar’s Mahabharata trilogy as I found it quite accessible and engaging.

The game of dice

The Mahabharata is a treat for statisticians and economists examining the very nature of causality (a problem plaguing humanity since time unknown). The most famous instance is the game of dice.

After losing everything, Yudhisthir remarks that the Gods have tested him and given him “everything back” when Dhritarashtra intervenes and orders that Dhuryodhan not be unreasonable and gives him everything back.

Was the game of dice really a test? And more importantly, did Yudhisthir really succeed by being patient or was he just stupid? The point is that Dhritarashtra’s decision to restore Yudhisthir’s wealth is not conditional on the outcome of the bet. Therefore, to associate his restoration as a consequence of his patience and piety is wrong, in my interpretation.

I think the deeper question is: for how long can the faithful afford to be faithful? The concept of the earthly world as an illusion and distraction and a test for the faithful as presented in the Islamic faith also urges believers to be patient (Quran 2:153) . However, for obvious reasons, being courteous, virtuous, and honest in an unfair, dishonest, and corrupt world leads to suboptimal outcomes for the practitioner of honesty; this is the classic prisoner’s dilemma problem in an uncoordinated setting where the Islamic system aspires to establish the coordination protocol. See Scott Alexander’s Meditations on Moloch .

Dharma and the Morality of Doing Right

I was about to write the morality of doing good in the heading but have understood that defining “good” is a much harder task than defining “right” which I define as doing maximal justice while affording kindness.

The Mahabharata reminds us constantly of the necessity of sticking to our values, of doing the right thing even though it may lead to suboptimal outcomes (loss, death, pain, misery) as you distort the trough of evil. What I like is how the lesson is subtle and hidden behind the predicaments of the characters, unlike, for example, the Quran where the lesson carries authority and a directive nature (Quran 2:155) .

Bhishma: “I will not abandon my war ethics even if everyone else around me has” said after he was informed of the abandonment of war practices by both the armies on the battlefield of Kurukshetra.

Bhishma: “I wish you victory but I will do everything to prevent it” said when one of the Pandavas came to seek his blessing just before the war.

The Mahabharata is replete with such conflicted dialogues (boons and curses and promises and vows) exposing the tension manifested in the decisions and stances that the characters had to justify. This is a much closer representation of how people form opinions and take sides in the real world.

The What Ifs

I can go on and on about the what ifs. There’s just so many things you can discuss at length, plots within plots, all forming an interconnected mesh of rich storytelling.

Once you read about the scale of destruction and loss and bloodshed in the Mahabharata, one question is most likely to arise: could it have been avoided? And then the mind follows each event in the causality chain and goes back and back? Would it have stopped if the Kauravas had not insulted Draupadi in the court of Dhritarashtra? Or, if Vyasa had not assisted in the birth of Duryodhan? Or what if Ambika had not closed her eyes on seeing Vyas? Or if Shantanu had not lusted over Satyavati? Or if Amba had not been wronged by that stupid prince? And on and on, we can go on until we arrive at the origin itself - the Creation. But there is no cause of the Creation, therefore, all events that follow it must be meaningless.

Good and Evil

The themes in Mahabharata are a reflection of the human condition. The plots and the subplots all recursively subscribe to the same or similar themes even if the plots are different, vividly imagined, and utterly creative. There’s the lust of men and men’s hunger for war. These are no-brainers. And then the idea of the opposites - the creation and the destruction. There’s the ideas of good and evil but these are very subjective. For example, the Mahabharata is traditionally narrated from the Pandava’s perspective so the reader is implicitly signalled to think of them as the “good” guys – exiled and unjustly wronged. Whereas the evil Duryodhan refused to follow customs, broke the rules of war and tradition and insulted the weak and dishonoured Draupadi. As a society, we associate Duryodhan’s character with evil, but why? Because they lead to societal instability. But from Duryodhan’s perspective, was he wrong? If someone ever wrote the Mahabharata from the Kauravas perspective, I think it will be hard to still justify the Pandavas as the “good” guys. Duryodhan was always second, the second-loved pupil of Dronacharya (Arjuna being the first), the second in strength to Bhima, second-in line to the throne after Yudhisthir, everywhere he went, he was bested by the Pandavas. And was it fair that Arjuna got his weapons as a gift from Indra? Or, that Krishna assisted the Pandavas on the battlefield? Is the divine a fair match for the earthly? And there is not less blood on the hands of the Pandavas either. And what about the dilly-dallying of Arjuna during his exile?

But this is in conflict with the central theme of the Mahabharata - the relativeness of good and evil. The non-absolute fluidity of labelling actions and events and thoughts and consequences as good or bad. And the very act of writing things down itself – the manner of writing is political.

Death, the Ultimate

Interestingly, the God of Dharma or justice is the God of Death, Yama. I think it’s a beautiful association. Death gives us urgency, a sense of belonging, and a purpose. It is the fear of death that motivates men. To create or to destroy. There would be no action if everyone was immortal. Everyone would just be bored.

(Ir)Responsible Men

There have been many kings and leaders and they have all been wise and being wise means choosing peace even when war is possible - especially when war is possible. Dhritarashtra could have prevented war but he just stood by like a bystander and blamed “dharma” or fate or whatever it is for what he knew was coming. I remember this quote by Dante Aligheri or someone

“The deepest place in hell is reserved for those who remain neutral in times of moral crisis” ~

This guy could have prevented war but he just stood by. In my opinion even to struggle against destiny is obligatory on man if it means peace. Especially when you know that your struggles and revolution would be met with no fruit. Peace and prosperity is the ultimate goal.

He reminds me of countless babus and people in authority today who have the power and position to bring about change but all they care about is wrongfully filling their own coffers while millions suffer - millions of humans who are starved, who do not have basic dignities of life - healthcare, home, clothes even, and education or a chance to better your condition. Every atom of my body and every strand of my soul hates such word weaving, action less men.

Conclusion

A lot can be said and discussed about the Mahabharata and a lot of more able people have done it before me already. These were just some of my scattered thoughts and reflections of what I found most interesting. Finally, I would like to end with some of my favourite quotes:

Do you fear disgrace, warrior? I thought you feared nothing, said Krishna to Arjun after being insulted by the Trigartas.

Paraphrased from the Gita:

Thy right is to work only, but never to its fruits; let not the fruit of action be thy motive, nor let thy attachment be to inaction.