Some Characters of the Mahábhárata

Intellectually, the most important aspect of Krśńa’s personality was:

• the creation of great personalities
• the clear demonstration that satya ultimately triumphs and papa is ultimately defeated.

Whatever Parama Puruśa does in the mental sphere, that becomes a reality for human beings.

What devotees think internally remains mental imagination only. To depict Ramachandra as an ideal human being, Valmiki and Tulasidas had to compose the epics Rámáyańa and Rámacaritamánasa.

The events described in these epics are not real. But the characters and the events of the Mahábhárata are factual.

Jayadratha

Humans should ask of Parama Puruśa only non-attributional devotion.

Sometimes they ask material or psychic things from Him, but Parama Puruśa may or may not grant such things.

Jayadratha asked a special boon from Shiva to make him immortal – he should die neither during the day nor at night.

God blessed him as he wished, and Jayadratha actually died at dusk, which was neither day nor night.

Shakuni

A certain part of the human mind always remains concealed in almost every case.

“Let others suffer” – Shakuni harboured this sort of sadistic internal desire.

You will come across some people in every village who get a crude pleasure in setting people against one another.

Shakuni was the Prince of Gandhara (present-day Afghanistan).

In those days Gandhara was one of the provinces of the Gandhara Empire.

Gandhara was famous for its distinctive style of art.

Shakuni knew that only those who received God’s favour would be victorious. And that’s why by setting the Kaoravas against the Pandavas he in fact did a disservice to the Kaoravas.

Shakuni’s role in the Mahábhárata was very, very significant. The final outcome of the war establishes the fact that it is simplicity that always triumphs, not duplicity.

Karna

In many cases aristocratic blood is given more importance than one’s individual noble deeds.

Karna was the first child of Kuntii, although she was not legally married to anyone.

He was her son by a king named Suda. Such things received social support in those days.

Later, Karna was brought up by a charioteer.

Throughout his life be was an out-and-out idealist.

He was the most trusted friend of the Kaoravas. He has some striking points of similarity with Bhisma.

For example, if someone did some service to him, he always remained faithful to him. He followed a code of simple morality.

Strict adherence to spiritual morality may lead to the parting of friends.

Spiritual morality ultimately wins over simple morality. But common people always commit mistakes on this point.

It is never proper to extend support to immoralists.

As Bhisma, the grandfather, had accepted the food and drink of the Kaoravas, he continued to support them.

He tried to change Duryodhana’s attitude. But he did not exert pressure on him.

Karna did not even try to change Duryodhana’s attitude, much less exert pressure on him.

Bhisma had no parallel in terms of sincerity and devotion.

But in terms of valour, Karna was greater.

There was a curse on him that during the war his chariot wheels would stick in the mud.

Under such circumstances he might pray for a truce with his enemies, as a righteous fight always presupposes two equal fighters.

But to his credit, Karna did not make any such request of his enemies.

He fought against the Pandavas who were always backed by Krśńa. But he breathed his last with Krśńa’s name on his lips.

Karna’s was an excellent character with 1 defect: he valued simple morality more than spiritual morality.

Dronacarya

He was the tutor of both the Kaoravas and the Pandavas.

He taught them the scriptures as well as military skill: He was both shástraguru and shastraguru.

Why was he defeated in the fight?

Teachers should, as a rule, have equal love and affection for all their students.

But Dronacarya was clearly partial to Arjuna.

When he discovered to his displeasure that Arjuna was growing to be a greater warrior, he disclosed some secret military skills to Ashvatthama, his own son.

Ekalavya

He was another disciple, had profound regard for Dronacarya. But when Dronacarya learned that Ekalavya was born of a low-caste family, he outright refused to accept him as a disciple.

This outright refusal was extremely unbecoming of an acarya.

Not all are competent to become acaryas. Partiality is a serious lapse on the part of any teacher.

So far as archery was concerned, Ekalavya was more expert than Arjuna or Ashvatthama.

Once Dronacarya went to Ekalavya and noticed his excellent feats of archery.

On being questioned, Ekalavya let him know that having accepted Dronacarya as his teacher, he had acquired that sort of skill.

But shockingly, in the name of guru daksina (sacerdotal fee for the master), Dronacarya demanded the thumb of Ekalavya) and thereby spoiled the brilliant career of Ekalavya.

Shrii Krśńa had to conceive of such a character just to open the eyes of other members of society.

It is only proper that one treat the virtuous and the sinful alike. We must look upon all with equal respect, thereby maintaining harmony in society.

As a result of his discriminatory treatment of his disciples, Dronacarya had a serious fall in the battle.

Dronacarya was neither an ideal man nor an ideal teacher.

So it became imperative to eliminate such an acarya from society.

That’s why Shrii Krśńa resorted to duplicity and advised Yudhisthira to announce before the assembled people in deceptive language, “Ashvatthama hatah iti naro kunjaro va” – “Ashvatthama is killed. This may be Ashvatthama the man or may be Ashvatthama the elephant.”

The Ashvatthama who was killed was in fact an elephant, not Ashvatthama, the son of Dronacarya. But the announcement was made in such a way that Dronacarya was convinced that his son was killed, and was overcome with grief. It was easy for the Pandavas to slay him.

Arjuna

He acted on the advice of Lord Krśńa. Both the Pandavas and the Kaoravas, on the eve of the Mahábhárata war, went to Lord Krśńa and approached him for military help.

It was essential to bring about a balance between justice and politics. Politics always relies on diplomacy.

Krśńa pretended to be asleep. Duryodhana sat at the head of Krśńa’s bed and acted in conformity with royal dignity, but Arjuna preferred to sit at Krśńa’s feet. So when Krśńa woke up from his false sleep, his eyes first fell on Arjuna.

Krśńa contrived an indirect diplomatic plan.

He proved that spiritual force was much stronger than physical force, and that it was only spiritual force that could show light to the world. Duryodhana, in spite of having a vast army, couldn’t realize that only the force of righteousness could win the war, and not the crude physical force.