Mahabharata - Greatest Epics of all Times - Its Causes, Known or Unknown. Points to Ponder.

We all have read or at least heard Mahabharata since childhood. The stories in it have been the favorite grandma/grandpa stories of all times. There have been many different versions to it. These versions may be region specific or presenter specific. Much has been mentioned about Mahabharata. There have many books written on it. Many TV serials have been made on it - the famous being B. R. Chopra's version. I too have heard many a times the different stories of Mahabharata. I have seen many television serials too. But now, when I ponder over the different versions that I have heard, seen or read, I think about the many possibilities that have taken place, which lead to the occurrence of this 18 day epic war.

The general & the most famous concept is that the war mainly took place due to the injustice done by Duryodhana & his brothers over Pandavas. The entire war, was as commonly known as the fight for justice. Duryodhana is always depicted as the unjust villain. And Pandavas the just heroes. But as is always known, what one sees is actually what is presented. Hardly has someone tried to find out the actual cause. The cause of the real truth, which many a times is not seen, is hidden and needs to be found out.

1. One of the most obvious causes of Mahabharata, which is the most famous cause too, is Duryodhana. His inability to part with the kingdom & his envious nature have known to be responsible for the war. He has always been associated with Adharma. And his constant bad acts have been related to be the direct cause of Mahabharata. But is this direct association the only cause of the war?? Was the claim to throne made by Duryodhana, all together wrong?? 

2. Dhritrashtra the blind king, who ruled the kingdom in the absence of his younger brother Pandu, has also been associated to be the direct cause of Mahabharata. His blind love for his son is attributed to being the main cause. But must he always bear the brunt? Should the onus of the main cause of war be put directly on him?? No. His love for his son was not actually that blind. Keeping aside his physical disability, he had ruled his kingdom effectively in the absence of his younger brother Pandu. He was the elder brother of Pandu. Yet he was denied his right to descend on the throne because of his physical disability, taking into account that Pandu too was physically disabled, i.e. that he was pale (probably suffering from anemia). He had ruled aptly for many years in Pandu's absence. His 1st born son, Duryodhana, had no physical or mental disability whatsoever. Duryodhana had been adequately trained in respect to politics & warfare. So why was the right to descend on the throne denied from Duryodhana?? The one thing Dhritrashtra could have done, was to stop Duryodhana from plotting against Pandavas and could have taught him to fight justly against them, for his rights. But weren't his actions, normal human reaction to a given situation??

3. Pandu was the younger brother of Dhritrashtra. Being physically more able than Dritrashtra, he was given the throne. But as some versions of Mahabharata show, he suddenly renounced his throne, handed over the rule to Dhritrashtra & went to the forests to live a life of an ascetic. So why are everyone blaming Dhritrashtra when the ruling king Pandu gave up his throne to him??

4. The 1st born, of both Dhritrashtra & Pandu were both able. It was the duty of many elders in the family to aptly divide the rule among Duryodhana & Yudhishtira. But, as this did not happen, this became one of the causes of Mahahabharata.

5. Bhishma's vow of celibacy should also be labelled as one of the main cause of the war. An extremely able ruler, gave away his rights of being a king for the sake of his father, Shantanu's love. He took a irrevocable decision. But had he been the ruler, the entire issues that developed later, would have never evolved.

6. It were elders like Bhishma pitahmaha, Drona aacharya, Kripa aacharya who maintained a tolerant behavior to certain unjust incidences like disrobing of Draupadi in court in which she was not meant to be. A court which was full of only the masculine sex.

7. The princess of Gandhar, the queen of the blind king Dhritrashtra, Gandhari, was a just & an able queen. She never wanted her husband to feel the brunt of his blindness even more after her arrival. To suit her husband, she tied a band of cloth around her own eyes, so that she would be as equal as her husband. But unfortunately, the band around her eyes, left her blind eyed, like her husband, to most of the evil activities of her brother, Shakuni. She could have been a good wife even without that band. Had she been able to see, she would have been able to bring her son up nicely. She would have been able to shield her son from the evil intentions of Shakuni. She could have been able to raise her sons with good characters.

8. Disrobing of Draupadi in a full court room is attributed as one of the causes. A court room which was supposed be filled with men only. A place where all the limits were broken. Some insignificant incidences related to Draupadi have also been cited. Like she calling Karana - Sutputra & Duryodhana - blind son of a blind father. But her way of talking was too a personal reason to incite a war. Yes, disrobing had became a very big bad issue and hence has been associated.

9. Pandava's are usually related with Dharma. But were their actions 100 % just? No. Were their actions 100 % logical? No. Yudhishtira knew that he could not play Chausar as good as Shakuni mama. He knew Shakuni was extremely good at mind games. He knew that Shakuni's dice were always manipulated. Yet, he played. Put everything on the bet. Money, property, brothers, wife. How could he take this illogical & shameless decision?? Just to prove his stance in the game.

Now the next point, was a new story or a version which I have recently read somewhere & I fully agree that this might have been one of the reasons for the war.

10. It is contemplated that Mahabharata was not a war between cousins but a war between two kingdoms. Drishtadyumna was the son of Drupada, king of the Panchalas. His sister, Draupadi, was married to the Pandavas. Dhristadyumna‘ was the supreme commander of the Pandava army. More than half of the refined & skilled divisions of Pandava's army had contributions of Panchala in it. But why did the Panchalas have such a huge stake in the war? Why was Drishtadyumna made commander-in chief? Dhristadyumna was Draupadi's brother and therefore, brother-in-law to the Pandavas. So, it becomes his morale responsibility to support Pandavs in best possible way. 

There was an intense rivalary between the Kuru and Panchala kingdoms since ages. They were originally one kingdom, ruled over by Puru and his sons but over the years, split into two. The enemity got intensified about 20 years prior to the Mahabharata war. The history faintly suggests that the war was not, in fact, a war between cousins. It was in fact, a war between two kingdoms, with the Panchalas pushing for a favorable regime change in the form of the Pandavas.  

During their 13 year old exile, the Pandava's did not take their son's born from Draupadi with them. They stayed with Dhristadyumna. The eldest, Yudhishtira's son Prativindhya, was the heir to the Pandavas & if Yudhishtira would have become the king, the Panchalas would have had a very influential position in his reign. 

Also, a point to ponder over. Why would Bhishma, Drona, and other people of wisdom and principle join the 'adharmic' Kauravas against the 'dharmic' Pandavas? The answer is because the battle is not between the Kauravas and Pandavas. The battle was between two kingdoms. And for Bhishma and Drona to "join the Pandavas" was in reality equivalent to them joining the Panchalas. They were not fighting on the side of adharma: they were merely fighting on the side of their own kingdom against an ancient and powerful enemy. 

And the most important point, Arjuna suddenly got a cold feet about fighting against his guru and his relatives just before the war. Krishna had to recite the Bhagavad Gita to him to give him strength. But had he not already fought against the same guru/relatives, during his exile? Why would he have such thoughts now when he had no such feelings during the previous war? Could it be because he understood that in this war he and his brothers were possibly mere pawns?

Now it actually makes me think, what was the role of Lord Krishna? When it actually was not Dharma vs Adharma. When the Pandava's & the Kaurava's, were both right as well as wrong. Why had the Vishnu incarnation been made to be born on the earth, specifically to be siding with the Pandava's??? Probably somebody can answer.

Also, the herd mentality, is harmful. Nobody actually evaluated the main reasons for the epic war. Everybody just blamed Duryodhana & Dhritrashtra.

What we see, may not be 100% true. This epic war teaches us many things. For a fight to reach an extreme level, blame has to be uniform & there has to be an intense scrutiny of everyone &; of every situation.

With this, I leave the readers on a thinking mode. To think on the various stories of Mahabharata which teach us to look at any given situation from different angles. Also, to analyze the various difficult situations in our personal life & to act tactfully.

Images: Courtesy Google Images