The Mahabharata is the great Indian Epic, which contains as its central theme the narrative of the conflict leading up to the battle of Kurukshetra, followed by the great battle itself, and lastly the resolution after the battle and its aftermath. The origin of the conflict is the dissention between the Gods (Devas) and the demons (asuras). These two groups in their fight for supremacy find it necessary to incarnate as humans who form the two opposing groups in the battle. At times, it’s also the feud between the Devas as it is manifested in the rivalry between Karna and Arjuna who are the sons of Surya (the god of Sun) and Indra (King of Heaven) respectively. Hindus regard the Mahabharata as a religious text and the meaning conveyed by Mahabharata is the meaning of Dharma that Hindus should essentially adopt. The political party in power in India is a propagator of the Hindu Dharma but the meaning of Dharma has been bent severely to support their political agenda. The debate over Babri Masjid has been twisted to center on Dharma (which as per the current politicians means religion) over the past 25 years.
Dharma has been a part of politics since ancient India, and the concept of Dharma is mentioned, even in the Rig Veda. The Mahabharata delivers the meaning of Dharma in a political setting very relevant in today’s India. It is important to consider the meaning of Dharma in the most ancient and sacred texts of India. Professor “P.G.Yogi” in his paper “The Vedic and Buddhist concept of Dharma” explores the meaning of Dharma in the Vedic texts. In his introductory paragraph, he states that it “is one of those Sanskrit words that defy all attempts at an exact rendering in English or any other tongue.” The word, as per Professor Yogi, is derived from the root dhr (to uphold, to support, to nourish). He says the word Dharma typically has the meaning “religious ordinances or rites” in the Vedas.
- Hence, even the oldest texts realize that Dharma is not the religion itself. Let us move on to Dharma in an ancient political context, specifically during the reign of the great emperor Asoka. Paul Hacker and Donald R. Davis Jr. in their paper “Dharma in Hinduism” talk about the interpretation of Dharma by the great King Asoka. In their paper, they talk about an inscription of the Indian emperor Asoka from the year 258 BC that was discovered in Kandahar in Afghanistan a few years ago. Inscriptions of this ruler are well known throughout India and its border regions. The new inscription contained Greek text and therein appeared a Greek rendering of the Indic dharma: the word ‘eusebeia’. They claim that Emperor Asoka was an enthusiastic Buddhist but not a religious scholar. Even if Asoka’s understanding of Dharma was highly influenced by Buddhism, it was not meant just for Buddhism. He understood by Dharma a right and moral conduct, the exercise of duty towards the human community. Greek Scholars have stated that the word ‘eusebeia’ refers not only to the veneration of Gods but also to a generally “reverential attitude towards life.”
- Hence as per “Paul Hacker” and “Donald R. Davis Jr.” Asoka’s understanding of Dharma was one where human beings respected each other and were morally upright. Thus, in ancient India, Dharma in politics meant to bring about a society where people respected each other that would improve social welfare. In modern India, politicians have twisted the meaning of Dharma to be purely religious. Everyone who follows a religious path has a common Dharma. But as we shall see Dharma is not supposed to be shared, it is different for every individual. Controversial BJP (Bharatiya Janata Party, the ruling party in India right now) Member of Parliament, Sakshi Maharaj, in January said population rise was due to a certain community and it allowing four wives and 40 children. He said (translated into English), “There are problems in the country because of population growth. Hindus are not responsible for that. Those responsible are the ones who talk of four wives and 40 children.”
- This shows the extent of communal politics in India and how ‘Dharma’ has come to mean religion in India today. The ‘pioneers’ of Hindu Dharma are misleading the population, for political gains. To understand the essence of Dharma in the political context, the best source of information is the Mahabharata. It evaluates Dharma in the most complicated political situations and delivers a meaningful result. “Iván Kovács” in his paper “The Concept of Dharma and its Significance in the Mahabharata” gives us a list of interpretations of the word Dharma by various scholars. One of them was the interpretation by “Paramahansa Yogananda”, who explained Dharma in his translation of the Bhagavad Gita as follows- “Dharma . . . is often translated as ‘religion’ or ‘duty.’ It is a comprehensive term for the natural laws governing the universe and man, inherent in which are prescribed duties applicable to given circumstances. Broadly speaking, man’s dharma is to adhere to that natural righteousness that will save him from suffering and lead him to salvation”
- This interpretation of the word Dharma takes into account both the religious aspect as well as the aspect of Dharma being closely related to Karma. One should note that this interpretation has been arrived at as a translation of the Bhagavad Gita which is the primary religious texts of the Hindus. If the text talks about Dharma, how can Dharma come to mean the text or an entire religion? The Mahabharata gives us an understanding of Dharma in several situations and often connects them together. Every event in the Mahabharata either has a message or a relevance later in the narrative. While many episodes in the Mahabharata help us understand Dharma, we should particularly focus on two episodes that make the meaning of Dharma very clear. The first and probably the most important episode in the whole of Mahabharata is the dice game or the Dyuta.
- To understand how this episode conveys the meaning of Dharma we should look at a few characters involved in this episode and their reactions and decisions. Firstly, the build up to the Dice game begins with Duryodhana’s visit to Yudhisthira’s palace built by Maya. As Emily Hudson puts it in her book “Disorienting Dharma: Ethics and Aesthetics of Suffering in the Mahabharata”, ” Duryodhana, the Kaurava prince, has just witnessed his cousin Yudhiṣṭhira’s spectacular rise to universal sovereign at the royal consecration and is ‘burning’ (dahyamāna) with envy.”
- Due to this impassioned state of his he falls prey to the tricks of Yudhisthira’s grand hall, stumbling into ponds that he mistakes for land and lifting his skirts to keep them dry on crystal pavements that he sees and thinks are ponds. Arjuna, Bhīma, and their servants ridicule him, adding to Duryodhana’s humiliation. Duryodhana wanted revenge, and his uncle Sakuni tells him that Yudhisthira loves to play the game of dice but does not know how to play it. On the other hand Sakuni is an expert in the game of dice. He says he will be able to get Yudhisthira’s kingdom from him in the game.
Duryodhana approaches his father and convinces him to invite Yudhisthira for the game. The question which one might ask over here is that, was it really Duryodhana’s dharma to implement the dice game? If we answer this question from morality’s point of view, we would probably end up with the conclusion that the idea of the dice game to humiliate Yudhishthira and take away his wealth is actually adharma. But while reading the text for a moment, Duryodhana is victimized in this scenario by the cruel treatment of the Pandavas, and the Pandavas are the evil characters. So, should it not be that the ‘good person’ , given the scenario, should act as per his Dharma. And at this point we are again faced with the question, what is Dharma? As readers, we are quite sure in our heads that what Duryodhana is doing is not the ‘right thing’ to do. But if it is not the right thing to do, how can this be dharma? Emily Hudson’s comment on Duryodhana’s decision and condition gives us an insight to analyze this situation better. She says – “A close analysis of the text suggests that the turbulent quality of Duryodhana’s mind, caused by his responses to what he witnesses in the world, leads to his despicable behavior.
At the same time, it suggests that virtue and vice have less to do with conduct and more to do with quality of mind.” (5) Thus, using Emily Hudson’s argument we can conclude that Dharma has less to do with morality (virtue and vices), as it is not the conduct, but the quality of mind. This whole incident and decision-making will affect the political scenario of Hastinapur (the capital city of the Kurus). Thus, this situation will later help us analyze Dharma in the political context of the Elephant city (Hastinapur). The most important character in this episode is Yudhishthira. There are different stages in the narrative when his decision comes into question. The first is when Duryodhana invites him for the dice game. Yudhisthira knows that there is some trickery involved and therefore the wise decision would be to refuse. But he does not do that. Being the son of Dharmaraja himself, we should believe that his actions are guided by Dharma. Hence, we can conclude that the wisest thing to do is not always Dharma. Also, when Sakuni proposed the dice game, he said Yudhishthira loves dice games. This also raises the question whether Yudhishthira accepts the invitation because of his Kshatriya Dharma or because of his desire (Kama). Furthermore, when he loses his entire wealth, he bets his kingdom. Wasn’t his Dharma as a king to always protect the Kingdom? Then why did the son of Dharma himself make such a choice? Lastly, when he bets his wife, Draupadi, what Dharma guided him to bet his wife in a game of dice?
In the context of the larger narrative, we need to understand why these decisions were taken, and how do they help in bringing forth the concept of Dharma in a political context. Having thought about the two key characters that caused the dice game to happen, let us analyze the implications of Dharma in the situation rather than in the decision making of the characters. As Emily Hudson puts it, “… as we turn our attention to the presentation of dharma in the episode of the dice game. This discussion will center on Draupadī’s question to Yudhiṣṭhira (Whom did you lose first—yourself or me?), its impact on the hall (i.e., how it renders the elders in the hall silent and passive), and its impact on us, the audience.”(7) Let us revisit the situation and order of events. Yudhishthira stakes and loses Draupadi in the dice game. Duryodhana asks an usher to bring Draupadi into the hall. Draupadi sends the usher back with the question whether Yudhishthira lost himself first or her. When the usher poses this question in front of the assembly everybody is confused. The kings and elders have a tangled discussion on Dharma. This discussion is based on two closely connected questions. The first is regarding Draupadi being forced to come into the room and the second is regarding the validity of Yudhisthira’s claim. The second question is more about the rules of the game and the logic. If Yudhishthira did not have a right over himself, how could he have a right to stake anything? The elders in the room have no answer.
Bhishma leaves the evaluation of the situation to Yudhishthira as he says that Dharma is too subtle to be interpreted. Bhishma later goes on to give a deathbed speech on Dharma, but he avoids judging the situation here. Why did he not just step in and stop the ‘wrongdoing’? The fact that Bhishma believes that Yudhishthira is the best person to judge the scenario shows that the fact that Yudhishthira being the son of Dharmaraja understands Dharma the best. What it also shows is that everyone does not necessarily take actions based on their Dharma. The fact that this situation could not be resolved lets Duryodhana humiliate and disgrace Draupadi in the court by disrobing her. As Emily Hudson notes in her book,” What is so disorienting about the silence of the elders? First, it calls into question their ability to perceive dharma. This raises the question of whether dharma can be perceived at all, an implicit anxiety that runs through the text.”(8) Thus, we see that Dharma did not lead to justice in the court where the dice game is being played in the presence of the son of Dharma himself (who seems to involved in the adharma). Will there be some compensation of this later in the text? If yes, how? Does this imply that Dharma and Adharma can equalize each other and Dharmaraja lets Adharma happen so that he can maintain the balance in nature? Moving on from the dice game to what the dice game leads to- the great war of Kurukshetra. Arjuna refuses to fight in the beginning of the second chapter, as he believes it is not right to kill one’s kinsmen. His charioteer Krishna, who is actually an incarnation of Lord Vishnu himself, then decides to guide him and make him realize his Dharma. This is the moment when Sri Krishna recites the Bhagavad Gita to Arjuna. Dharma is the first word of the Gita.
Even today the people consider the Bhagavad Gita to be the primary Hindu religious text. Amidst all this conversation there is one word that has remained untouched- Karma. Luke M. Ironside in his article “The Concepts of Dharma and Karma in the Bhagavad Gita” says, “Karma literally translates as “Action” or “Work” and, alongside Dharma, plays a fundamental role in the teachings of the Gita – as well as in Indian philosophical and religious thought as a whole – where it refers to the spiritual principle of action and reaction, or of cause and effect in the phenomenal world.”(9) In all our discussions above we have treated Dharma to be the predecessor of Karma. It guides actions and decision making. And the reason we tend to do so is probably because of the Bhagavad Gita, which establishes a clear connection between the two. As Luke M. Ironside writes- “Dharma and Karma are thus conceived of as a pair of forces at work in the life of the individual. Arjuna’s Dharma, as defined by his caste, is that of a warrior, or Kshatriya. It is the duty of Arjuna to fight and engage in war, and this Dharma is in turn generated by his Karma, which has been accumulated in his present and past lives. Karma is therefore the real driving force that compels Arjuna into action, irregardless of the present intentions of his false ego.”(10) The readers might be thinking that why should we digress onto the teachings of Krishna to Arjuna when our topic of discussion is Dharma. As Iván Kovács says in his paper “If it is kept in mind that dharma, among other things, also means “code of conduct,” “righteousness” and “morality,” then any serious investigation regarding the Soul, when seen as the source of inspiration for righteous or moral behavior, seems to be justified.”(11) One of the verses of Gita talks about the importance of doing what one is supposed to do. Chapter 3 verse 35 of the Bhagavad Gita says , “One’s own duty (svadharma), though deficient in quality, is superior to duty other than one’s own (paradharma), though well accomplished. Better it is to die in svadharma; paradharma is fraught with fear and danger.”(12) This verse makes a very strong claim about svadharma and paradharma. Here we come understand that Dharma is not a universal property. It varies from individual to individual. This could explain why certain actions that might seem to be adharmic are actually in concurrence with Dharma. As Krishna tells Arjuna that his Dharma as a Kshatriya warrior is to fight and kill and he should do that without grief because that is what is supposed to happen. Thus, Arjuna’s Karma is to follow his Kshatriya Dharma. This diversion from the path of morality and virtue is often explained by Krishna as an undoing of a past adharma. It almost comes across to the readers like two negatives make a positive. Is that really how Dharma is supposed to work?
There is another iconic example of this kind of Dharma where Krishna uses some past happening to justify the present. This happens when Arjuna is battling Karna and Karna’s chariot’s wheel gets stuck in the ground. Karna believes that his Kshatriya Dharma does not permit him to attack an unarmed person. But Krishna tells him he has a greater Dharma to kill Karna and fulfilling that negates his subverting of the Kshatriya Dharma. We see Yudhishthira himself subverting Dharma when he uses treachery to bring about the death of Drona by saying that “Ashwatthama Hatha Kunjara” (Ashwatthama, the Elephant, is dead). These events display a continuous abuse of morality. Duryodhana conducting the dice game, Yudhishthira accepting the invite, Draupadi being humiliated in the court, Arjuna killing an unarmed Karna, the Pandavas killing Drona and Bhishma by treachery and Krishna (an incarnation of Lord Vishnu himself) overseeing all of this and guiding the Pandavas to do so. The teachings of the Bhagavad Gita itself seem to be undermined many a time. Dharma has been classified into Svadharma and paradharma. Thus, one thing that is very clear here is that Dharma can surely not be a general idea applicable for everyone. It is relative. Moreover it is situational and thus dynamic. As it has been propagated in a religious text, it cannot be the religion and it is the guiding principle for Karma. The principle of elimination seems to narrow down our understanding of Dharma up to a great extent but it still does not paint a clear picture about what is Dharma in a political context. If we look at the Mahabharata as a whole, it seems to be a very fair text, one where virtue triumphs over evil. Dharma in the Mahabharata makes sure that the so-called evil brothers, the Kauravas, are punished for their actions and intentions. In the very beginning the Kauravas wanted the entire kingdom and not share it with the Pandavas. Hence, one would believe that Karma would get back at them. And as we see, it does in the end. But for that to happen, Dharma has to be dubious at times to make a latter adharma seem to be dharmic. If the dice game did not happen, the Pandavas would not have a legit reason to exterminate the Kauravas.
The Pandavas were the benevolent rulers, and their coming to the throne would imply that the society as a whole would benefit. Thus, Dharma makes sure that the socially optimal situation is arrived at, by hook or by crook. But the question that remains unanswered here is that where did this Dharma get lost in the tides of time? Today, Dharma has come to mean religion. The Bhagavad Gita teaches us to follow Dharma, which would in return protect us from sorrow. But we have politicians today who speak about protecting Dharma themselves. Yogi Adityanath (Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh) said that he would protect the Sanatana Dharma(term used to denote the “eternal” or absolute set of duties or religiously ordained practices incumbent upon all Hindus, regardless of class, caste, or sect.) as there is a conspiracy against it.(12) How can one person protect Dharma? The Mahabharata gave us a Dharma, which in the long run guarantees peace and harmony and justice. Even in the past, Asoka wanted a Dharma that helps society respect one another. However, the abuse of this word has led to communal riots in India such as the Gujarat riots of 2002 (The burning of a train in Godhra on 27 February 2002, which caused the deaths of 58 Hindu returning from Ayodhya triggered the violence.), and the Muzaffarnagar riots of 2013. The Mahabharata delivers a very subtle meaning of Dharma, which has a universal status, not pertaining to a particular religion.