Pandu was the fourth man in her life to contribute to her miseries: her two fathers, the illegitimate son and now her husband. When everything had seemed within reach, his one rash act dashed Kunti’s hopes. Pandu and Madri escaped to death, but Kunti had to traverse the hard, stony path of her life alone.
During the period when they were hiding in the forest, after the burning of Laakshyagriha, it was she who encouraged Bhima to become the lover of and to marry a rakshasa (demon) woman—Hidimbaa. This woman was very useful to the Pandavas, and later, her son gave his life for them in the war. Kunti got Bhima to kill the demon Baka. And it was she, as mentioned earlier, who determined that Draupadi was to be the wife of all her five sons. With this move, Madri’s and Kunti’s sons were welded into one unbreakable whole. Later, this proved to be an effective bar against all of Duryodhana’s plans to set them against one another. Kunti had always given, not only her impartial care but also her heart to Madri’s sons. Towards her own sons she was stern and dutiful, while there was a bond of genuine affection between her and Madri’s sons.
Kunti’s suffering and hope during the years of her sons’ exile is very well described in Udyoga Parva.6 Draupadi chose to go into exile with her husbands, leaving her children behind. Kunti, though not in exile, suffered greater agonies because she had to live among enemies and witness their prowess and prosperity. When Krishna went to negotiate a treaty with the Kauravas, he called on her. When he left Hastinapur after the negotiations had fallen through, she sent messages with him for all her sons.
She reminded Bhima and Arjuna not to forget their humiliation. Her main appeal, however, was to Dharma. This was her eldest son, the heir to the throne. But he desired neither war nor conquest. She said:
Yudhishthira is the very soul of dharma. Tell him, ‘By your behavior you are destroying dharma. You are aware only of one dharma, the dharma of the sluggish unlearned Brahmins who are caught in a mesh’ of words. But Brahmadeva created the Kshatriyas from his powerful chest so that they live by the force of their arms and protect their subjects. A king who forgets his dharma goes to hell and drags with him all his subjects. What was yours by the right of inheritance from your father has been lost. Recover it. Make it your own. Your behavior pleases the enemy. No shame is greater than that I should live on other people’s charity while you are still alive. Remember the dharma of the Kshatriyas. Do not throw your ancestors, younger brothers and yourself into hell.
Her words clearly reveal her mortifications, her hopes for the future and her unbending will. These words motivated the Pandavas to agree to wage war on the Kauravas to get their share of inheritance. Kunti was the unifying force behind the Pandavas, guarding them and keeping them safe at all times. It was her strong will and unending endurance that helped her sons achieve what they did at the end of the war. If not for her, Yudhishthira would never have agreed to go to war with the Kauravas, and it was because of his initiative that the other Pandavas followed suit. Kunti was the reason why the Pandava household was a tight-knit family. Had she not deliberately asked the Pandavas to share Draupadi among themselves as a common wife, they would not have stayed united till the end. Her only mistake was her curiosity which bore her Karna, and then abandoning him. But this one incident is not sufficient to tag her personality traits as negative. For the most part, her flaws can be pinned as minor human flaws that any normal human being could possess as a result of his or her circumstances.
Apparently, Kunti’s actions and behaviours are inconsistent to those of the other Kurus. She displays extraordinary courage and emotional stability throughout the epic. The aforementioned instances in the Mahabharata clearly indicate that she was a pillar of support to Pandu and his five sons. She was certainly a DNA disruptor, from whom the Pandavas inherited courage, emotional stamina, family orientation, and finally a commitment to dharma as life’s guiding principle. These traits were likely missing in the Kuru lineage before she came along.
3
PANDAVAS
Evil Actions and Connivances
While reading the Mahabharata, one gets familiar with the endless number of characters, and finds that each character is propelled by an alternate reason, which shapes his/her fate. The striking likeness of these characters to people around us, in our present-day society, is the thing that makes the Mahabharata a most fascinating book.
In this chapter, I will be focusing on those deeds of the Pandavas that cannot be regarded as entirely ethical according to the classical definition of dharma. Since, from the beginning to the end, it has always been pointed out by various characters in the epic that the Pandavas were on the side of ‘dharma’ and the Kauravas symbolized ‘adharma’, we will see that on many occasions, the Pandavas too resorted to means and methods that were not ethical or moral in the truest sense. The Pandavas too were the culprits of some vicious misdeeds—largely some tricks committed in the battle upon Krishna’s urgings. In the eyes of the epic’s Vaishnava editors, who glorify Lord Krishna and try to establish a pro-Pandava moral valence even in the face of immoral actions on both sides, all of Duryodhana’s wrongdoings are contained within a single flaw: his blindness to Krishna’s divinity. The rules and structures that signify ‘dharma’ get substantially diluted on the battlefield. Krishna resorts to several strategies that can be justified only if one submits to the idea of the Kauravas representing ‘adharma’ who are to be vanquished at any cost, and even then, by subscribing to the principle that means justify ends. The lie uttered by Yudhishthira to deceive Drona, Bhima’s striking Duryodhana below his waist, and Arjuna’s killing of Karna when he was unarmed, are some of these questionable strategic measures.
When we examine the Pandavas’ actions individually as well as collectively, we can see that at times they too resorted to adharma—unfair means to achieve their ends. Yudhishthira hangs on so emphatically to nonviolence and peace that it turns into the very purpose behind the horrendous Kurukshetra war. The inherent quality in Yudhishthira to maintain a strategic distance from any conflict is demonstrated on numerous occasions, as he doesn’t strike back at any of Duryodhana’s insults, settles down with half the kingdom with no grievance, accepts defeat in the game of dice and the resulting exile for thirteen years. Even after all the dishonorable treatment meted out to him, his wife and his siblings, he is anxious to avoid war by negotiating for five pitiful villages in place of the whole kingdom of Hastinapur. His brothers, being the obedient younger ones, agree to all his decisions.
Though Yudhishthira is always associated with an exemplary sense of ‘dharma’, one does find in him the misgivings and uncertainties that plague an ordinary person. His weakness for peace and nonviolence, and his reservations about his stature in Hastinapur are at the forefront. But before we delve deeper, it is important to understand what one means by ‘dharma’ as it is always rendered synonymous with Yudhishthira, the ‘Dharmaputra’ (son of Yama, the lord of dharma). Dharma, if translated into English, can be referred to as laws that every individual abides by, and which empower him with the strength and the courage to face any moral, ethical challenges in life.1
The Actions
The first instance where one gets a glimpse of Yudhishthira’s weaker side is when the Pandavas are in disguise in Ekachakrapura, after they escape an attempt on their lives in the palace of lac. They seek refuge in a Brahmin’s house, who provides them with shelter and food. One day, Kunti finds the Brahmin and his family in extreme grief and asks them the cause of their distress. The Brahmin tells her that the villagers of Ekachakrapura are tormented by a rakshasa named Baka. He would enter the village at his convenience and devour the villagers and their cattle. So, the villagers made a pact with him that each day one member from a family would bring the rakshasa food and drink. The rakshasa agreed to it, but he would also devour the person who brought him the food. It happened to be the Brahmin’s family’s turn to send one of their members to the rakshasa the following day. Thus, they were grief-stricken, trying to decide who would be
the one to go. Upon hearing the pitiful story and deciding to help the Brahmin and the villagers, Kunti volunteers to send her son Bhima, whose physical strength and prowess was matchless. Moreover, she feels indebted to the Brahmin who had provided them with shelter when they were in dire need of it. She convinces the Brahmin to accept the help, and ordains Bhima to take the Brahmin’s place in taking the food to the rakshasa. Bhima accepts the offer willingly and goes to meet the rakshasa. When Yudhishthira learns of this, one is surprised to find him angry and upset at his mother’s actions. He admonishes her for her rash decision, as she had placed Bhima in a perilous situation. Though one expects him to be worried for his brother, here he is more worried about losing Bhima’s support and strength in fighting the Kauravas. He bursts forth, saying:
What rash act hast thou done, O mother! . . . That Bhima, relying on whose arms we sleep happily in the night and hope to recover the kingdom of which we have been deprived by the covetous son of Dhritarashtra, that hero of immeasurable energy, remembering whose prowess Duryodhana and Shakuni do not sleep a wink during the whole night and by whose prowess we were rescued from the palace of lac and various other dangers, that Bhima who caused the death of Purochana, and relying on whose might we regard ourselves as having already slain the sons of Dhritarashtra and acquired the whole earth with all her wealth, upon what considerations, O mother, hast thou resolved upon abandoning him?’2
A person who was hitherto hailed as calm, unperturbed and wise, suddenly reveals the ugly side of his fear and unease about his future, thereby exhibiting neurotic characteristics. One wonders where his sense of justice and dharma went when he questions his mother for helping a family that had given them refuge when they most needed it.
At this juncture one wonders if he is any different from people like Duryodhana, Dhritarashtra, Shakuni and the rest. But the slip is only momentary as he quickly gathers his wits upon Kunti’s wise counsel. As she points out Bhima’s invincible strength, which is impossible to beat, and also to the dharma of protecting the weak and the needy, he calms down instantly, his faith restored in his mother’s wisdom and Bhima’s prowess. One sees in him the willingness to accept his mistake and correct himself, but there is also a nagging thought if the reconciliation is too quick to be natural. Does he actually accept his mistake or does he accept his mother’s decision because he finds no other recourse? It might seem like overanalyzing a natural reaction of fear and shock when one’s younger brother has been sent to face a rakshasa of immense power, but when this incident is juxtaposed with other similar incidents where Yudhishthira manipulates things to gain the utmost benefit, one does see that he had in him the shrewdness to turn things around in his favour. Draupadi’s swayamvara and her marriage to the five Pandavas is one such incident.
As we discuss the shortcomings of Yudhishthira, we should also keep in mind that these were not predominant, unitary traits in him, but temporary lapses that any mortal being is capable of. He is quick to accept his mistakes and recover from censure to mould himself into a better person.
When Arjuna wins Draupadi’s hand in the guise of a Brahmin youth, the assembled kings deem it a great insult and challenge Drupada (Draupadi’s father) to fight them. As Arjuna stands in support of Drupada, Bhima joins Arjuna. In all this confusion, Yudhishthira, with Nakula and Sahadeva, quietly leaves the place unnoticed. It is obvious that he reaches home before Arjuna and Bhima return with the bride. One can view this act of Yudhishthira cynically, a perspective usually not used for him. What follows is an excellent example of his astuteness in perceiving and analyzing the pros and cons of a particular incident, and taking appropriate decisions. He manipulates, and possibly orchestrates, an excellent drama, as Kunti unwittingly asks the brothers to equally divide amongst themselves whatever they had earned. It is possible that Yudhishthira who had left Drupada’s court much earlier had informed his mother on the outcome of the swayamvara. Moreover, Kunti cannot be so forgetful as to ask her sons to share their alms, as they had left for the swayamvara with her blessings. Hence, it does not take much time to deduce that Yudhishthira had seen to it that Draupadi became the common wife of all five brothers. He puts his mother in front of him, as he knows that his mother’s words will not be denied, and also that he cannot initiate this act. He was capable of playing behind the scenes. Here, Draupadi’s consent to be the wife of all the Pandavas was completely ignored (even though she, who unhesitatingly refused to marry a suta putra in her swayamvara, and was capable of fiercely defending her stance in front of everyone, did not really show her unwillingness in this situation either.) Since, all the Pandavas did not object to Yudhishthira, (even though Arjuna might have had discontent in his mind but agreed to stay united under Yudhishthira’s supervision), it could be seen as a collective decision from their side. Moreover, the fact that the other Pandavas desired her, despite Draupadi having been won by their brother Arjuna, was enough to determine that their decision to marry Draupadi was also laced with lust. Even though, according to traditional Indian values, the elder brother’s wife is considered equivalent to one’s mother, and the younger brother’s wife is considered equivalent to a sister.
Though on surface it might seem manipulative, but when the larger picture of the Pandavas’ unity emerges, it is easy to see Yudhishthira’s political shrewdness, which was desired in a Kshatriya at that time. Of course, the argument arises whether it is appropriate to ignore Draupadi’s interests, while ensuring better prospects for the Pandavas. But one also has to keep in mind the precarious situation of the Pandavas whose lives were under constant threat from the Kauravas. At any cost, they had to gather support and the power to shield themselves from Duryodhana; and Drupada would be a powerful ally. Further, they had to remain united to take on the Kauravas. Yudhishthira had to ensure that there wouldn’t be any discord among the Pandavas regarding Draupadi—as he sees the eagerness in all their eyes when looking at Draupadi.3 Thus, Yudhishthira instantly declares that Draupadi will be their common wife. Not only did Yudhishthira predict dissention among the brothers on Draupadi’s pretext, he also realized the complications that would arise if Draupadi wedded only Arjuna. What if Drupada extended his support to Arjuna alone? What would be the position of the other brothers in that case? As Yudhishthira did not want even a remote chance of Arjuna deserting his brothers, he took a firm step in eliminating the problem even before it arose. Thus, Yudhishthira’s decision to make Draupadi the common wife of all five brothers can be seen as an excellent example of his highly evolved emotional skills. The Pandavas’ wedding to Draupadi had more than political implications and emotional complications. These actions by Yudhishthira clearly indicate that he was not a simple novice or as ‘dharmic’ as portrayed in the epic. There is a possibility of secondary versions, perspectives and viewpoints.
When Duryodhana’s character was analysed, it was seen how cunningly he tricked Shalya (Nakula and Sahadeva’s maternal uncle) to support him in the war. Yudhishthira goes a step ahead and approaches Shalya at a time when he is guilty of extending his support to Duryodhana. This again, could be seen as a collective decision of the Pandavas, since the brothers followed Yudhishthira in administrative decisions without questioning his authority. Taking full advantage of Shalya’s guilt, he makes Shalya promise, that at a crucial juncture when Shalya was Karna’s charioteer, he would demoralize Karna by insulting him and praising Arjuna. He requests Shalya, ‘There is no doubt that thou wilt act as the charioteer of Karna. Thou must damp the spirits of Karna then by recounting the praises of Arjuna.’4 This incident gains significance when one comprehends the master craftsman in Yudhishthira. He is shrewd enough to know that in the crucial battle between Arjuna and Karna, Shalya would be chosen as Karna’s charioteer, as his skills are unmatched by anyone but Lord Krishna. Next, he knows how important it was for Karna to prove himself better than Arjuna. Karna was plagued by the insecurity of not knowing his biological parents. His entire life was a torment as he unsuccessfully fights for recognit
ion equivalent to that of Arjuna. Not only is he denied this recognition, but is jeered at and insulted as a person of doubtful parentage, in spite of his extraordinary military skills. Yudhishthira chooses to strike at Karna’s vulnerability to demoralize him, and thus ensure victory for the Pandavas. Right from the day Karna steps into the arena, challenging Arjuna to fight with him, Yudhishthira identifies a formidable foe in him. Karna’s military skills terrified Yudhishthira as he ‘. . . was impressed with the belief that there was no warrior on earth like unto Karna.’5 This knowledge makes Yudhishthira not just cautious of war, but he also starts strengthening the Pandavas in the eventuality of war. In spite of knowing that Karna was an unparalleled warrior and the only one capable of defeating Arjuna, he asked Shalya to humiliate him and call him incompetent in the battlefield. Even though there is nothing dishonest in this act, it can still be regarded as misconduct for a person like Yudhishthira who claimed to speak nothing but the truth.
There is no justification for Yudhishthira’s behaviour in this case. The condition put forth to Shalya by Yudhishthira, on behalf of all the Pandavas, was only based on fear and insecurity, because they knew that Karna was powerful and skilled enough to take Arjuna down in battle. The reason could have been battleground strategy and not an unethical practice per se. And since it did not violate the rules of war, it could be said that they were trying to provoke Karna’s insecurity, leading him to make a bad move, which they could use to their advantage.
Duryodhanization Page 11