Vyasa's agony - Continued

In my previous article - "Vyasa's agony", we saw that even at the end of a great epic, a great composition, the composer himself is not happy and is frustrated.

Why is this happening? We saw a few arguments in my last post. Let's try to probe further.

Think, when you take up a daunting task or any challenge. And then you work hard and take the efforts to the completion of the task. How do you feel? Satisfied? Happy to have completed the challenge?

But in the case of Mahabharata, Vyasa is neither happy nor satisfied. A composer, having composed a great verse is still not satisfied - and has something more to tell? What could it be?

The answer lies in the name of the composition itself - "Jaya". The composition was cleverly named as Jaya or the victory, without signifying over what or over whom. Almost every story within the great epic, depicts the clash of ideologies within the minds of the characters. Shouldn't it be safe to assume, that the story is about one's victory over self?

It is said, that the Mahabharata takes the teachings from the Veda's to a next level. One of the central ideas of the Vedas is that the "Dharma" or the principle of life is to overcome one's inherent inclination towards the animal instincts. As we saw that the first incarnation of Vishnu is suggested to be the “Matsya Avatar” or the fish. The fish signifies the food chain wherein the larger fish eats the smaller fish for itself to grow or sustain. At the same time, the growth of fish signifies the ever-growing lust for property. Vishnu tries to tell Manu through this story that there is no concept of a property or belonging in nature. It is but natural that the things will continue to grow and take their own course with or without your intervention. Thus, the law of the jungle is the law of the nature – no concept of property and law of survival. However, the human mind or the creation is superior to the rest of the creation. It can think and empathize with the others. It has the capability to understand its own needs and the needs of the others. The “Dharma” thus is the understanding of your own and others’ needs and act accordingly. The “dharma” as described in the Vedas teaches the humans to empathize about others and take appropriate steps. The Mahabharata text is seen to be blatantly violating this very principle. The Pandavas burn a forest to develop their own capital. The Kauravas snatch the kingdom from Pandavas using every possible trick, and later refuse to give away even the small bit of land. Kansa took his own father as prisoner to become the king. Drupada refused to relent to his friend Drona’s needs and called upon a bloody war.

All throughout the text Mahabharata is filled with stories wherein a simple act of caring for others could have avoided the war situation. The war termed as the war for principles or the truth or “Dharma Yudh” left both sides with losses – Kauravas lost everything, and Pandavas lost their sons. If only they could overcome their thirst for property and care for other’s needs, both the sides would have survived and flourished.

Possibly this is what Vyasa wants to tell us when he lifts his hands and cries that no one wishes to listen to him when he suggests how to live as per dharma! Today, many households refuse to keep Mahabharata in the homes and many households prohibit reading the complete text. They believe it may cause issues like separation in the family. However, I believe we are missing the very point that Vyasa wanted to emphasize – “Empathize” – follow the dharma, by caring for others.

I wish to create a world which can meet Vyasa can be proud of and can reduce his agony a little bit. Would you agree?