Many of us Hindus, as children, were told (or read ourselves) the basic story of the Mahabharata over and over.  I have taken so much from it, and it has truly affected my perspective on life.  That being said, I cannot truly give the epic that responsibility without studying it more thoroughly.  Before this, I had never read more than a children’s version!  I am sure many of you readers may feel similarly, and so one reason why I have chosen to write about my experiences reading these versions is for you to find one that appeals to you.  I hope that all of you will someday (if you haven’t already) pick up a more thorough version of Vyasa’s story.

Having finished Rajaji’s version, I thought I might share with you all a few memorable passages from it.  (If you’d like to read it yourself, here is an online version, which is only 217 pages!)  What I particularly like about this version (who knows, it may be true with others as well) is Rajaji’s delicate commentary throughout the story.  Sometimes it gets to be a bit too much.  Here is a passage from when the Pandavas are attempting to make peace with the Kauravas while simultaneously preparing for battle:

In December 1941, the Japanese were carrying on negotiations with the Americans and, immediately on the breakdown of those talks, took them unawares and attacked Pearl Harbour destroying their naval forces there.  Drupada’s instructions to the brahmana would show that this was no new technique and that, even in the old days, the same method was followed of carrying on negotiations and even sincerely working for peace, but simultaneously preparing, with unremitting vigour, for outbreak of war and carrying on peace talks with the object of creating dissensions in the enemy’s ranks.  There is nothing new under the sun!

A bit much, right? At other times, Rajaji’s words precisely capture the idea of the story.  He details a side story of a brahmana and a dutiful wife with the following end remarks:

The moral of this striking story of Dharmavyadha so skilfully woven by Vedavyasa into the Mahabharata, is the same as the teaching of the Gita, that man reaches perfection by the honest pursuit of whatever calling falls to his lot in life, and that this is really worship of God Who created and pervades all (Bhagavad Gita XVIII: 45-46).  The occupation may be one he is born to in society or it may have been forced on him by circumstances or he may have taken it up by choice but what really matters is the spirit of sincerity and faithfulness with which he does his life’s work.

There are too many times in the Mahabharata where people clearly make the wrong decision.  Rajaji comments thus:

The Puranas wherein right conduct is always preached, sometimes set out stories in which conduct, not in conformity with Dharma, seems condoned.  Is it right, one may ask, for religious books thus to seem to justify wrong?

A little reflection will enable one to see the matter in proper light.  It is necessary to bring home the fact that even wise, good and great men are liable to fall into error.  That is why the Puranas, although ever seeking to instill Dharma, contain narratives to show how in this world even good people sometimes sin against Dharma, as though irresistibly driven to do so.  This is to press home the truth that howsoever learned one may be, humility and constant vigilance are absolutely necessary if one wishes to avoid evil.

Why indeed, did the great authors of our epics write about the lapses of Rama in the Ramayana and Yudhisthira in the Mahabharata? Where was the need to make mention of them and then labour arguments to explain them away, thereby disturbing men’s minds? It was not as though other had discovered the lapses and Vyasa and Valmiki had to defend their heroes.  The stories are artistic creations in which lapses themselves impress the desired moral.  The parts dealing with the lapses deeply distress the reader’s mind and serve as solemn warnings of pitfalls which wait to engulf the careless.  They dispose the mind to humility and watchfulness and make it realise the need for divine guidance.

The modern cinema also projects on the screen much that is bad and immoral.  Whatever may be the explanation offered by the protagonists of the cinema, evil is presented on the screen in an attractive fashion that grips people’s minds and tempts them into the path of wickedness.  Not so in the Puranas.  Although they do point out that even great now and again fell into error and committed wrong, the presentation is such as to warn the reader and not to allure him into evil ways.  This is the striking difference between our epics and the modern talkies, which arises from the difference in the character of the people who produced them.

Ok, he again goes a little too far in the last paragraph (or sentence).  Rajaji is clearly not of our generation!  But I find the rest of his discussion illuminating.

Rajaji presents an interest view of choices in a chapter on Balarama’s lack of involvement in battle (Krishna’s elder brother is torn between sides and loses all interest in the world):

This episode of Balarama’s keeping out of the Mahabharata war is illustrative of the perplexing situations in which good and honest men often find themselves.  Compelled to choose between two equally justifiable, but contrary, courses of action, the unhappy individual is caught on the horns of a dilemma.

It is only honest men that find themselves in this predicament.  The dishonest ones of the earth have no such problems, guided as they are solely by their own attachments and desires, that is, by self-interest.  Not so the great men who have renounced all desire.  Witness the great trials to which, in the Mahabharata, Bhishma, Vidura, Yudhisthira and Karna were put.  We read in that epic how they solved their several difficulties.  Their solutions did not conform to a single moral pattern but reflected their several individualities.  The conduct of each was the reaction of his personality and character to the impact of circumstances. Modern critics and expositors sometimes forget this underlying basic factor and seek to weigh all in the same scales, which is quite wrong.  We may profit by the way in which, in the Ramayana, Dasaratha, Kumbhakarana, Maricha, Bharata, and Lakshmana reacted to the difficulties with which each of them was faced.  Likewise, Balarama’s neutrality in the Mahabharata war was a lesson.

Perhaps I include these specific passages because I agree with them, but I cannot avoid that bias.  One of the reasons I feel compelled to read the epic in so many different ways is because the story itself appeals to me in so many ways.  For me, the Mahabharata is the truth of life: that we humans are all faced with difficult decisions and we navigate these decisions by following our moral compass, our Swadharma.  That is all we can do to make peace with, and in, the universe.

Related posts:

1. Authentic or Apocryphal? Does it even matter? In one of the discussions with Swami Tyagananda during the...
2. Question of the Week: Are Hindu Epics Literature, History, or Scripture? Ram Navami was this past Friday, and for that reason,...
3. Learning from others Hindu tradition encourages learning from others through things such as...

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

More importantly, are the answers to these questions even relevant spiritually? Sonali wrote an excellent post about different ways to interpret these epic texts. The three categories she posits are: history, literature, and scripture. There are certain aspects of these epics that may seem unrealistic, and cause us to doubt their historical veracity. But does that matter, if we primarily view these epics as scripture, or even solely as literature?

While there is plenty to discuss just considering the Ramayana & Mahabharata as literary works, I want to focus on the spiritual interpretation of these texts – this is, after all, Swadharma. To consider these texts as scriptures is to draw, or attempt to draw, moral lessons from them. Did Yudhisthira act appropriately when gambling with Shakuni and putting Draupadi’s honor at stake? Was Bharata’s decision to try to disobey his mother and put Rama on Ayodhya’s throne the right one? By answering these questions, one is creating, or perhaps simply applying, certain rules about the proper way to act. So if we consider that the true value of these scriptures is that they provide a source for a moral code, does it even matter whether these events are hypothetical or actual?

I don’t think so. Fables & exaggerations are used all the time for teaching moral lessons. So clearly, the historical inaccuracy of a set of events doesn’t preclude them from being used as a source of morality. What is essential is posing a question about what is “right”, and then answering it, or at least prompting the reader to answer it. For example, the events of the Mahabharata set the context for the discourse of the Bhagavad Gita, one of the most well-known sources of moral guidance in Hinduism. To connect this back to Sonali’s original post (and to disagree with my own comment on that article eight months ago!), I think that you can indeed consider the Ramayana & Mahabharata as scripture without considering them as history.

Related posts:

1. Question of the Week: Are Hindu Epics Literature, History, or Scripture? Ram Navami was this past Friday, and for that reason,...
2. (How) does history matter? Sid and I attended a lecture-demonstration yesterday by the Carnatic...
3. Why religious texts? We have two extremes regarding religious texts — one is...

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Hinduism has many proscriptions for familial relations — the rakhi festival is one example, and filial piety in general is another. It is said in Hindu mythology that when Lord Ganesha was asked to race against his swifter brother thrice around the universe, that he instead walked around his parents three times, hands clasped in reverence.

There are also many examples in mythology of friendship — for instance, in the Mahabharata, there is the bond between the warrior Arjuna and Lord Krishna. In the other great Hindu epic, the Ramayana, the brotherly love and friendship between Rama and Lakshmana is deep and profound.

But most important to our lives as college students in a co-ed school is the subject of romantic relationships. It’s a touchy subject, especially since the vast history of Hinduism seems to consider marriage as the only legitimate romantic interaction. Lord Vishnu may be married to Lakshmi, but I doubt that prior to marriage they went on a first date, followed by a candlelit dinner. And even the most romantic courtship in the epics, that between Sita and Rama, was just a matter of stringing a bow.

It’s not clear how this old attitude about romantic relationships as solely marriage translates into the present — the more important question is, should they? Or should we disregard them and pursue what we want? I’m inclined to disregard them, since today’s society is different from that of the epics. But at the same time, there’s a feeling of obligation to considering what our ancestors thought and felt. Considering how much time college students spend thinking about romantic interactions, this is clearly an issue that Hinduism has left unaddressed.

Family, friendship, and romance — how do you feel about the relationships in your life, and how do your personal beliefs affect that?

P.S. I’m not familiar with any scriptural advice on any of these matters, so do comment if you feel you’ve read something relevant.

Related posts:

1. Question of the Week: Are Hindu Epics Literature, History, or Scripture? Ram Navami was this past Friday, and for that reason,...
2. A Post-Valentine’s Day Thought In light of the fact that Valentine’s Day was yesterday,...
3. Why am I a vegetarian? I don’t know why I am a vegetarian. I was...

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

1. History: There seems to be evidence supporting the fact that Rama did in fact exist. I remember hearing a long time ago that a bridge was found underwater, connecting India and Sri Lanka — this may have been the famed bridge talked of in the Ramayana! Ayodhya exists, and there seem to be records that King Rama was real. Of course, this brings obvious mistrust when thinking of certain aspects of the story — if the Ramayana is an accurate depiction of history, how could Ravana have ten heads? Is it really logical to believe that an army of monkeys helped Rama in his struggle? As Swami Tyagananda mentioned during his lecture, these may be exaggerations of history — for example, Ravana’s “ten heads” may be symbolism for his bloated ego, that was accidentally turned into a literal interpretation over the centuries. The army of monkeys may have been representative of a tribe of natives that helped Rama to victory, etc.

2. Literature: It is possible to view the Ramayana as simply a work of literature, and a tribute to the creativity of the human mind. In this sense, we don’t need to worry about the potential historical inaccuracies, and there is no need to worry about the lessons we should be learning from the story. Thinking of the Ramayana as literature eliminates the problem that Ravi mentioned in his post — since there is no scriptural value to the text, we need not worry about whether Rama was right or wrong for certain actions, and we can selectively incorporate what aspects we like into our lives.

3. Scripture: Viewing the Ramayana as a source of spiritual inspiration is a third way of looking at the text. By doing so, we are required to examine the validity of the moral decisions made by Rama and the other characters, and confirming (or disagreeing) with these values can provide the cornerstone for our own moral judgements. As Swamiji said, this approach brings the Ramayana into modern times, as something applicable to us even today — instead of viewing it as (irrelevant) past history or a mere creative work, viewing it as a spirtual source gives it a certain legitimacy that allows us to apply it even today.

That being said, it is important to question whether the values are still applicable today – do you agree with the values represented in the Ramayana and Mahabharata?

How do you view the Hindu epics? Are they historical sources, literature, scripture, or something different for you?

And depending on what you view them as, do these epics have any effect on the way you live your life? What role, if any, do the epics play in your life?

Related posts:

1. Authentic or Apocryphal? Does it even matter? In one of the discussions with Swami Tyagananda during the...
2. Question of the Week: Causes for Debate in the Ramayana The Ramayana is one of Hinduism’s most holy texts, and...
3. Question of the Week: Hinduism and Relationships We may all need food, water, and shelter to survive,...

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Rama’s obedience to the rules of family and law is certainly admirable, but at times can be disconcerting. As a member of the ruling family who clearly garners the most praise and respect from his people, Rama’s decision to travel to the forest because of his father’s bad judgment decades earlier, despite the fact that his brother, Bharat, is ready to restore him as King, and the fact that Rama would certainly have the public support to take back the throne if he desired, poses the question of which is more important: a responsibility to the people and a moral duty, or a responsibility to misguided laws and wishes made long ago (in this case, by a stepmother, Kaikeyi)? One of Rama’s character marks was his will to always, without fail or exception, obey the laws and norms of his society and family. As a contrast, in the Mahabharata, Krishna encouraged and told Arjun he had to fight against members of his own family, even if it meant that he would be breaking societal norms. Arjun had a greater moral duty to fulfill. This is not to say the rule of law is not important; the last eight years have shown us that obeying the rule of law is of utmost importance in a democratic society. But the Ramayana does not discuss the rule of law in a democratic society; it discusses societal and family norms that are many millennia old.

The most disconcerting element of the Ramayana is the general treatment and portrayal of his wife, Sita. Sita is nothing if not a good wife and friend to Ram; she goes with him to a dangerous forest for 14 years, after all. And to his credit, Ram (with the help of Lakshman, Hanuman, and a formidable monkey army) goes to Lanka recover his wife from the demon, Ravana. The trouble starts afterward, when Ram has his wife, Sita, march through a fire to prove her faithfulness to him through her years in captivity. The logical justification for this is fairly light, at least by my progressive standards: if Sita was possibly unfaithful to Rama during her captivity by a huge, ugly, demon, it probably was not by choice, and in this case, Ram is looking to punish her for being raped by a demon during his absence. Not only this, but why is Ram’s faithfulness never questioned? Between a highly eligible heir apparent to the throne and a woman imprisoned by a cruel demon, it seems sensible that one would worry slightly more about the faithfulness of the crown prince.

Despite the humiliating nature of the very action, Sita does walk through the fire and proves her obedience to Rama. Yet because people of the empire spread rumors about her supposed infidelity, Rama sends her on a second exile to the forest to live with the sage Valmiki, where she lives briefly before re-entering the Earth. The message that Rama’s action sends about the treatment or image of women is very sad. Sita did nothing to deserve a second exile and a depressing and lonely end to her life, and what does it say about a man when he values the pristine image of his royal throne above his wife’s well-being and happiness? Many will argue that Rama was just following the societal norms of the time, to which I would argue, if Rama was one of the greatest figures in our entire religion’s history, why did he not break convention for principles (women’s equality, general fairness) that are almost universally respected by good people in today’s world?

Many counter-arguments will be proposed to the points I make here, and I hope they will be. A common one might be that the Ramayana must be read in the context of the time period it was written in; I will agree that human society has definitely become more progressive since the time of the writing of the Ramayana, but I would also say that it is then necessary to change our views of the story for the times. There are still a multitude of worthy lessons to learn from the Ramayana; Rama is no doubt a good person, Lakshman is a very loyal and admirable character, Hanuman is courageous and unbelievably brave, and Bharata is a wise and kind brother to Rama. The Ramayana, however, just as the Bible is in Christianity, must be viewed with a critical eye as well; our faith and culture must promote gender equality and flexibility of thought and doctrine if Hinduism is to stay relevant in the future.

Related posts:

1. Question of the Week: Hinduism and Relationships We may all need food, water, and shelter to survive,...
2. Question of the Week: Are Hindu Epics Literature, History, or Scripture? Ram Navami was this past Friday, and for that reason,...
3. Authentic or Apocryphal? Does it even matter? In one of the discussions with Swami Tyagananda during the...

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.