On first reading Yudhisthira seems to be one of the simplest characters in the Mahabharata. Always truthful, honest, a model statesman and yet a closer reading of the epic brings out the contradictions that plague him.
All the other Pandavas are well etched out and consistent in their actions. They have recognizable vignettes and their actions make sense in hindsight. Yudhisthira is different.
Despite him being the son of Dharma, the god of justice he is an incorrigible alcoholic and an inveterate gambler. He conspired to lose his kingdom not once but twice and in the same manner. Has a grander fool ever been seen? He also placed upon the betting table his brothers and his wife thus effectively enslaving them. No man with even a vestige of decency would do such a thing and yet we are supposed to believe that he is honest, forthright, infinitely wise and knows what the right thing to do at any point of time is. One can also sense at times his envy of his brothers abilities and their martial prowess. He knows that the kingdom that he holds is not his own doing but the result of his brothers' effort. Even Draupadi is wed to him owing to Arjuna's archery, Bhima's strength and Kunti's stupid promise to have everything shared. Perhaps this is why he places the bets in the first place because he never really feels that the kingdom of Indraprastha and Draupadi are his in the first place.
4 comments:
"Perhaps this is why he places the bets in the first place because he never really feels that the kingdom of Indraprastha and Draupadi are his in the first place."
You are right, but this is what he says before he turns around for the second time by the invitation of Dhritarashtra he says:
दैवं हि प्रज्ञां मुष्णाति चक्षुस्तेज इवापतत् ।
धातुश्च वशमन्वेति पाशैरिव नरः सितः ॥
"As a brilliant body falling before the eye deprives the power of seeing so does Fate over reason. Man, tied as it were with a cord, submits to the sway of providence". (MB.2.58.18)
In the end, during my reading of the entire Mahabharata, this theme of providence is one that is always questioning my understanding of why things happen the way they do in the world. Sure we perform Karma, but is it really human agency or just actions to perform the "Divine Will".
I agree with the first part of the assessment of him not considering as his own in the first place.
I find the second a bit hard to digest though. Why play the game when you know you will lose everything that you have worked towards. Isn't that stupidity.
I really do think choice plays an important role in the epic and everything that happens is a result of those choices. (You could always say though that the choice has already been made beforehand)
Before I go onto giving more of my opinions, I would first like to thank you for this conversation. I am currently reading the Mahabharata sloka-by-sloka (Mahabharata: Sanskrit Text with English Translation [9 Vols-Set], Edited by Ishvar Chandra Sharma and O.N. Bimali. Translated by M.N. Dutt). I had first read the Mahabharata as a translated story but now I am seeing how going to the original text gives more insight on the themes that are developed within the main story (Jaya).
Is it possible for such a coincidence to occur that as I was reading the Mahabharata the answer to this question of providence arises within the story itself? I am currently on Book 3, Chapter 30+
Context: The Pandavas are now in their 12 year exile and are in the Dvaita Forest:
ततो वनगताः पार्थाः सायाह्ने सह कृष्णया।
उपविष्टाः कथाश्चक्रुर्दुःखशोकपरायणाः॥१॥
“Thereupon the sons of Pritha with Draupadi banished to the forest, sat one evening, stricken with grief and sorrow and began to talk with one another” (MB.3.27.1
Draupadi as I read is still shaken by everything that has happened and is asking the same questions that we are asking ourselves (“Why play the game when you know you will lose everything that you have worked towards. Isn't that stupidity?”)
Also it is important to remember that Yudhishthira said he would go to Duryodhana’s Sabha and only gamble if he was offered to do so. He said he wouldn’t initiate it himself. How I understand this, Yudhishthira, also known as Dharmaraja, said it was impossible for him to refuse a challenge of any nature, as he was a Kshatriya and thus was obligated to stand by this code of honour.
I have posted a link to the lines which I am referring to so you can read them in their full context (they are not that long and to answer such questions we have to read a lot sometimes [something I learned the hard way]:
This is Chapter 30 http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m03/m03030.htm
I think majority of us can relate to Draupadi when she says, “If the act done pursueth the doer and none else, then certainly it is God himself who is stained with the sin of every act. If however, the sin of an act done doth not attach to the doer, then (individual) might (and not God) is the true cause of acts, and I grieve for those that have no might!"
At this point I am agreeing with everything she is saying and I couldn’t wait to hear Yudhishthira response…
This is Chapter 31 http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m03/m03031.htm
For me the part which really questions my scepticism is the part when he says, “O thou faultless one, if the virtues that are practised by the virtuous had no fruits, this universe then would be enveloped in infamous darkness. No one then would pursue salvation, no one would seek to acquire knowledge not even wealth, but men would live like beasts. If asceticism, the austerities of celibate life, sacrifices, study of the Vedas, charity, honesty,--these all were fruitless, men would not have practised virtue generation after generation. If acts were all fruitless, a dire confusion would ensue. For what then do Rishis and gods and Gandharvas and Rakshasas who are all independent of human conditions, cherish virtue with such affection? Knowing it for certain that God is the giver of fruits in respect of virtue, they practise virtue in this world.”
What do you think about what Yudhishthira says?
Hey apologies for the late response. Somehow I just missed this.
You are much better read than I am as I have read the story from translations and interpretations. Let me go to the source.
In my opinion Yudhishthir was perfectly right in accepting the challenge. It was his duty and his dharma to do so but to lose everything was perhaps taking it too far. He could have stepped out at any time.
I like what Mahabharata says about virtue though. That is a quote I will treasure.
I will definitely read the whole translated volumes of Mahabharata now.
Post a Comment