Good evil etc. are not part and style of our (bharat's) analysis and exploration about this world and dharma. Before thinking of dharma-yuddha or good verses evil, one has to understand clearly what is dharma.
Dharma signifies rta (laws) preserving a natural order in the universe. Unlike religions dharma is not a group activity or about a group. It is very individualistic. It has very little to do with whether other person is good or evil etc. It is an effort, an individual in his life to take next step in his/her life in such a way that it preserves a natural order in the universe and traditions in the society. There is a general sentiment in our country that each person in his life knows instinctively what is next step in his life which is as per dharma.
Dichotomy of dharma is expressed well in this short story. A king was roaming in the forest. He saw suddenly a tiger chasing a deer. He thought - if I do not kill tiger he will kill deer. I should save. He uses his bow throws arrow and kills tiger.
Back in his palace, he wonders, did he do right as per dharma. after all it is in nature of tiger to kill for his food. So "who am I to disturb this and kill tiger?".
He could not decide and asks his mantri. The mantri tells him - yes it is nature of tiger to kill. But you are king of this land. It is your duty to not allow violence against any one at least in front of you. Saving deer was your duty. So you did right as per your rajdharma. As a raja this was your duty and rajadharma.
Beautiful example Soumya.. Thanks for sharing it.. I thought a lot about this as well.. The 'subtle art of dharma', as Bheeshma puts it, is intricately linked to our epics.. Along with dharma, Mahabharat is also about karma and choices.. For example, Bheeshma's oath was to always protect Hastinapur's throne.. When he proposed the division of Hastinapur into two, he could have interpreted his oath and his dharma to now mean protecting both Hastinapur and Indraprastha.. But he doesn't interpret it that way.. Now, would we call this his dharma or his karma?..
Not much beyond the needless gambling and wagering in the game of dice I suppose.. To repeat it twice was even more foolhardy, despite knowing what Duryodhan was up to..
I am not disputing that the Pandavas were much better compared to Duryodhan.. My limited point was that Duryodhan , while an inferior human being, is not pure evil incarnate.. If you consider 'all is fair in love and war' as a legit dharma, thats pretty much what he practiced..
Let me put it this way.. Duryodhan considered himself to be always at war with the Pandavas, right from the beginning.. If we condone the adharma of the Pandavas during the 18 days of battle, I would argue that the same gesture can be extended to Duryodhan as well during the duration of his 'war' with the Pandavas.. Look at him beyond his actions towards the Pandavas and he is not all that evil a person..
Right. Don't argue with the broader premise of the blog. For that matter even Shalini felt he was unfairly reviled for being a limp & he, his sister, and nephews got an unfair hand. No wonder he spent his lifetime mastering the roll of the dice
Shakuni you mean.. Now that you mention him, he is probably one character who doesnt get the attention he deserves.. He seems to have shaped Duryodhan's worldview much more than anyone else.. Wish someone writes a book on him!
Such a great read!! Thanks for sharing
Good evil etc. are not part and style of our (bharat's) analysis and exploration about this world and dharma. Before thinking of dharma-yuddha or good verses evil, one has to understand clearly what is dharma.
Dharma signifies rta (laws) preserving a natural order in the universe. Unlike religions dharma is not a group activity or about a group. It is very individualistic. It has very little to do with whether other person is good or evil etc. It is an effort, an individual in his life to take next step in his/her life in such a way that it preserves a natural order in the universe and traditions in the society. There is a general sentiment in our country that each person in his life knows instinctively what is next step in his life which is as per dharma.
Dichotomy of dharma is expressed well in this short story. A king was roaming in the forest. He saw suddenly a tiger chasing a deer. He thought - if I do not kill tiger he will kill deer. I should save. He uses his bow throws arrow and kills tiger.
Back in his palace, he wonders, did he do right as per dharma. after all it is in nature of tiger to kill for his food. So "who am I to disturb this and kill tiger?".
He could not decide and asks his mantri. The mantri tells him - yes it is nature of tiger to kill. But you are king of this land. It is your duty to not allow violence against any one at least in front of you. Saving deer was your duty. So you did right as per your rajdharma. As a raja this was your duty and rajadharma.
Beautiful example Soumya.. Thanks for sharing it.. I thought a lot about this as well.. The 'subtle art of dharma', as Bheeshma puts it, is intricately linked to our epics.. Along with dharma, Mahabharat is also about karma and choices.. For example, Bheeshma's oath was to always protect Hastinapur's throne.. When he proposed the division of Hastinapur into two, he could have interpreted his oath and his dharma to now mean protecting both Hastinapur and Indraprastha.. But he doesn't interpret it that way.. Now, would we call this his dharma or his karma?..
What is Pandavas adharma before the war?
Not much beyond the needless gambling and wagering in the game of dice I suppose.. To repeat it twice was even more foolhardy, despite knowing what Duryodhan was up to..
I am not disputing that the Pandavas were much better compared to Duryodhan.. My limited point was that Duryodhan , while an inferior human being, is not pure evil incarnate.. If you consider 'all is fair in love and war' as a legit dharma, thats pretty much what he practiced..
Let me put it this way.. Duryodhan considered himself to be always at war with the Pandavas, right from the beginning.. If we condone the adharma of the Pandavas during the 18 days of battle, I would argue that the same gesture can be extended to Duryodhan as well during the duration of his 'war' with the Pandavas.. Look at him beyond his actions towards the Pandavas and he is not all that evil a person..
Right. Don't argue with the broader premise of the blog. For that matter even Shalini felt he was unfairly reviled for being a limp & he, his sister, and nephews got an unfair hand. No wonder he spent his lifetime mastering the roll of the dice
Shakuni you mean.. Now that you mention him, he is probably one character who doesnt get the attention he deserves.. He seems to have shaped Duryodhan's worldview much more than anyone else.. Wish someone writes a book on him!
see twitter. A senior wrote an extremely thoughtful book :)
Thanks.
Noticed you are a Djoker fan. Sharing my blog on.. ahem.. Federer.. Do have a look! https://mangomanindia.substack.com/p/adios-federer