Saanp (साँप)

साँप, तुम सभ्य तो हुए नही,

नगर मे बसना भी तुम्हे नही आया|

एक बात पूछूँ? उत्तर दोगे?

कहाँ से सीखा डसना? विष कहाँ पाया?

- आग्येय 

कविवर अज्ञेय आधुनिक कलाकार के मर्मज्ञ एवं दार्शनिक कवि हैं। सांप कविता के आधार पर उन्होंने शहरों में रहने वाले कृतघ्न जनों को बड़े तीक्ष्ण ढंग से व्यंग किया है। सांप एक ऐसा जीव है, जिसे मानवीय व्यवस्था के अनुरूप सभ्य नहीं कहा जा सकता और ना ही नगरीय व्यवस्था के अनुरूप वह रह ही सकता है, फिर कवि को आश्चर्य होता है कि, वह ना तो सभ्य है और ना ही शहर में रहना उसे आता है किंतु उसका एक गुण है कि वह डसता है और ऐसा विष वमन करता है जैसे नगरों में सभ्य कहलाने वाले कृतघ्न लोग करते हैं। अतः कवि सांप को संबोधित करते हुए कहता है कि यह तो बताओ कि तुमने यह डसने की कला कहां से सीखी जबकि तुम वास्तव में नगर के निवासी नहीं हो। वास्तव में आज के परिपेक्ष्य में 'आदमी-आदमी को डस रहा है और सांप बगल में हंस रहा है'। अज्ञेय जी द्वारा रचित सांप मुक्तक काव्य नगरों में रहने वाले सभ्य कहलाने वाले व्यक्तियों पर एक तीखा व्यंग्य है। नगर में अनेक ऐसे व्यक्ति हैं जो दिखने में तो सभ्य लगते हैं किंतु उनके दंत(व्यवहार) सांप से भी अधिक विषैले होते हैं। कवि का विचार है कि सभ्य समाज में अनेक ऐसे लोग हैं जो सर्प से भी अधिक विषधारी हैं, और वे समाज में ऐसा विष फैलाते हैं जिसका कोई इलाज नहीं है। सांप वास्तव में सभ्य नहीं है और ना ही नगरवासी किंतु नगर में सभ्य जनों की भांति डसना जानता है, इस पर कवि को आश्चर्य होता है। प्रस्तुत मुक्तक नगर में रहने वाले सभ्य जनों को वास्तव में कृतघ्न होने के प्रति इशारा करना कवि का उद्देश्य है, और मानव मात्र को डसने वाले मनुष्य पर एकमात्र सांप के माध्यम से यह कविता व्यंग है।

I remember having studied this poem in the 8th grade Hindi text book. I loved the poem as it was the smallest to remember! I never cared to understand it then. However, now that I do understand the meaning and the timelessness of this poem, I do realize that this is such a hard satire on the mankind.

For my non-hind reading or speaking friends - 

The poet "Agyeya" is making a satirical reflection on the ungrateful, spiteful people living in the urban dream through the means of a snake. A snake is neither domesticated nor urban, hence can never be called a civilize being. Yet, it has its own quality of biting others and spitting venom - just like ungrateful beings do to others. The poet asks the snake that where did you learn such an act of spitting venom and biting others, when you have never lived in a civil society or have been into a city? As per poet, there are much more dangerous creatures in the society that call themselves civilized, yet are full of poison that is even more hurtful than a snake's venom. These people disguise themselves as learned, wealthy, kind or whatever, but do not give a moment to think about others. 

Don't you agree with the poet in his analysis?

Vyasa's agony

 ऊर्ध्वबाहुर विरौम्य एष न च कश चिच छृणॊति मे
     धर्माद अर्थश च कामश च स किमर्थं न सेव्यते
 न जातु कामान न भयान न लॊभाद; धर्मं तयजेज जीवितस्यापि हेतॊः
     नित्यॊ धर्मः सुखदुःखे तव अनित्ये; जीवॊ नित्यॊ हेतुर अस्य तव अनित्यः

These are the verses from original text of Mahabharata from the chapter 18. These are verses 49-50. In these verses Ved Vyasa, who is deemed as the author of the epic and possibly the great grandfather of the entire event, cries out loud throwing his arms up in the sky. He says - "With uplifted arms I am crying aloud but nobody hears me. From Righteousness is Wealth as also Pleasure. Why should not Righteousness, therefore, be courted? For the sake neither of pleasure, nor of fear, nor of cupidity should any one cast off Righteousness. Indeed, for the sake of even life one should not cast off Righteousness. Righteousness is eternal. Pleasure and Pain are not eternal. Jiva is eternal. The cause, however, of Jiva’s being invested with a body is not so." - transliteration taken from http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m18/m18005.htm.

Mahabharata is a text that has shaped the Indian philosophy and understanding for a very long time. The great epic moves from one story to the other exemplifying the role of various emotions and one's actions. It moves around the characters as they engulf themselves in the internal battle of duty, righteousness, pleasure and result of the actions they perform. It is well known to many characters in the epic as to they suffer for their own deeds and their actions do have reactions. Yet, no one tries to do what is right? The problem is "right" from which perspective? Mahabharata as an epic, opens a plethora of perspectives for us to look at its own characters.

The characters in the epic probably did not understood their own future. They did not even understood the full picture. But we as readers do. When Vyasa composed the epic, he named it "Jaya" meaning victory. He purposefully omitted the question "over whom?". The epic hints at one's victory over themselves. Only when we can learn from the lives of the characters in the epic and imbibe the true meaning, shall we be able to achieve "Jaya". But, who has the patience?

Mahabharata is not kept in many households. It is prohibited from bringing into homes and even reading from start to finish. People believe it may cause disagreements and quarrels in the household. Little do they realize that the book is full of learning for a household. Every character in the book is displayed to led a family life and participate in the procreation of the nature.

When Vyas completes his great epic, he wonders in dismay as to when shall people listen to him? He has been telling everyone to be righteous, be compassionate towards others. This is the only way that shall help everyone survive. Yet no one listens! Better still, no one listens even now......

Vyasa in his attempt to throw his hands in the air and trying to tell the path to everyone is portraying an image of a teacher or a preacher who has a message from the God himself. Ain't that a messenger? Ain't that is what followed in many other religions across the world? The issue in this approach is that of a compliance. When a preacher or messenger tells you a way, the followers must adhere to the path , else they shall digress. The hindu philosophy, however, takes a different approach of an ocean. The ocean is full of knowledge and riches. It is unto the seekers to find what they want in the ocean, using whatever way they want. Probably because compliance is hard to follow!

Sri Krishna told Arjuna the lessons of Gita and explained to him the path to lead a life. Even then we find it hard to live by the lessons from Gita. Compliance is definitely hard, even when the path is shown by God himself. 

Did Yudhisthira tell a lie?

Long time back I wrote a small article on the topic of Ashwathama’s death – “Ashwathama is dead”.  Ashwathama was the son of Dronacharya – the teacher of Kauravas and Pandavas. Dronacharya could only be defeated when Yudhishthira confirmed the death of Ashwathama.

It is said the Yudhishthira was embodiment of the Dharmaraja himself and was known for his principles. It is said that his compliance to principles and rules was so impeccable that his chariot would always be levitated above the ground by about 4 inches. This was an extraordinary feat, only available to gods themselves. However, the moment Yudhishthira replied to Drona affirming the death of Ashwathama, his chariot dipped by 2 inches. Though Yudhisthira’s affirmation was truthful, it was not complete truth for Drona. Yudhishthira’s character was forever marred by this affirmation.

Dronacharya in his young days was a good friend with a young prince who later became a great king – Drupada of Panchal. When they grew up, their situations changed – Drupada inherited the kingdom while Drona resorted to teaching and gathering alms by begging. Drona went to Drupada and reminded him of the promises made in the childhood days and demanded half the kingdom. His demand was considered audacious and was laughed at in the court. A hurt Drona then went on to become the teacher in the Hastinapur court where he taught the Kuru princes. As a teacher he was expected to report on all his pupils to his patron – Bhishma and Dhritarashtra. He was expected to utilize corrective measures to make sure that the princes were learning properly and adhering to the principles. Even at the time of the Mahabharata war, Drona aligned himself to Kauravas due to his love for his own son and also because he was a salaried employee of the court.

Many years later, when the questions arose on Yudhishthira’s character, Sri Krishna came to his rescue. Sri Krishna explained that Drona had forever worked in situations that favored himself. He had been blindsided by his love for his son. Drona demanded the kingdom to provide for his son. Drona served in Hastinapur as he wanted to provide for his son. Drona refused Eklavya, because he wanted to be a teacher only for Kuru princes. Drona refused to teach Karna for his low birth. Drona aligned himself with Kauravas, because Ashwathama was a friend to Duryodhana. Every time, when the choice presented itself to Drona, he always chose what benefitted him and his son. Based on all this, Sri Krishna decreed that Drona had lost his right to listen the truth. Hence it was his fault and not Yudhishthira’s.

How is this story relevant to us? We live in a world that is driven by information. Information that is collected by us through many sources. And then we analyze the same for ourselves and then relay the information with our own flavor attached to it. At times, we form opinions that are stronger than the information itself and bias our judgement. We all play the role of an influencer for at least someone in our own life – parents, children, spouses or siblings are the easiest examples. With the increasing popularity and the ease of resource, the social media is proving to be the largest behemoth in the field of information dissemination. I would urge everyone to be cautious while assimilating all that the social media has to offer. Use it wisely, else you too may lose the very right to listen the truth.