I have come across many people who are of the opinion that the Mahabharata is not some sort of a fairy tale based on a few basic facts, but an undistorted history of a bygone era, when human beings had supernatural powers and interacted regularly with the gods. There is another theory that those people were incredibly advanced in technology, the 'gods' were aliens, the vimanas were spaceships, and the divyastras nuclear and biological weapons. While the first speculation cannot be true, the second might have some amount of truth in it. The likes of Daniken or Rael may possibly be too far fetched in their assertion that human civilization is a gift of the extra terrestrials, but it's likely that the ancients had an amount of scientific and technical knowledge that would seem incredible to us.
Unfortunately, whatever they knew has been lost under layers of poetic distortion and exaggeration, through ages of ignorance. A great deal of research needs to be carried out before we may reach at a conclusive theory on the advancements of Ancient Indian Science. Developed as they were in terms of Physiology, Medicines, Mathematics and Astronomy, we do not have enough evidence to conclude that they were equally advanced in terms of technology. On one hand we have descriptions of weapons that are almost identical to nuclear missiles, intricate description of Vimanas, and on the other we have fallacious notions about the solar system and planets.
Was the birth of Duryodhana and his brothers an example of human cloning?
Were the Pandavas born of artificial insemination?
Were there weapons that could obliterate millions in the blink of an eye?
Did the Shalwa King actually attack Dwaraka from a spaceship?
Sad as it seems, we would probably never find answers to these questions. Perhaps we would never be able to uncover the reality of a science that remains hidden behind strata of later additions and modifications made by a less intellectual progeny.
Saturday, July 7, 2007
The Mahabharata
The Mahabharata, like its less illustrious predecessor, the Ramayana, has left a larger than life impact on the Indian psyche. Perhaps the fact that it entails all the possible dimensions of human behaviour is a reason people still identify so intensely with this wonderful piece of literature. The aim of the Ramayana is but to sing the glory of the Maryada Purushottam , and thus put forward a life story that is supposed to be perfectly ideal in all respects. And in a bid to glorify Rama, the Ramayana has done little justice to the other main characters; their personalities have been painted shabbily and casually, most being severly unidimensional.
The Mahabharata, on the other hand, does not have any central character: and though the basic story revolves around the clash among Kuru princes for power, there are stories within stories, and branches coming out of the stem that lead to twigs and leaves. Even the villains have virtues, and the heroes have vices, and it is difficult to single out a spotless character in the entire epic. All the main characters are painted as strong, emotional and determined individuals who are keen to speak their hearts out. They behave in manners that appeal even to the modern man. Even Yudhishthira, the epitome of virtuousness gets criticised by his younger brothers for his folly. Draupadi doesn't weep in sorrow for the abuse she faces, but censures her husbands for her misery. It is here that the Mahabharata by far surpasses the Ramayana. The great warriors no longer remain aliens fighting a space odyssey, but people like us, people who think and feel the way we think and feel. And through this realization, our heart bleeds for Karna's misery; our hatred ignites to see Dusshasan's atrocities and our conscience cries against Bhishma's helplessness.
Traditionalists might argue religiously that the aim of this epic is to spread the lessons of the Bhagavatgeeta, but in fact, the book is much larger and much greater than that inspiring speech attributed to Krishna. The Mahabharata is more than just the history of a family feud. It's a reflection of life itself. And like life, its appeal is eternal.
The Mahabharata, on the other hand, does not have any central character: and though the basic story revolves around the clash among Kuru princes for power, there are stories within stories, and branches coming out of the stem that lead to twigs and leaves. Even the villains have virtues, and the heroes have vices, and it is difficult to single out a spotless character in the entire epic. All the main characters are painted as strong, emotional and determined individuals who are keen to speak their hearts out. They behave in manners that appeal even to the modern man. Even Yudhishthira, the epitome of virtuousness gets criticised by his younger brothers for his folly. Draupadi doesn't weep in sorrow for the abuse she faces, but censures her husbands for her misery. It is here that the Mahabharata by far surpasses the Ramayana. The great warriors no longer remain aliens fighting a space odyssey, but people like us, people who think and feel the way we think and feel. And through this realization, our heart bleeds for Karna's misery; our hatred ignites to see Dusshasan's atrocities and our conscience cries against Bhishma's helplessness.
Traditionalists might argue religiously that the aim of this epic is to spread the lessons of the Bhagavatgeeta, but in fact, the book is much larger and much greater than that inspiring speech attributed to Krishna. The Mahabharata is more than just the history of a family feud. It's a reflection of life itself. And like life, its appeal is eternal.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
