Indian Classical Texts_ Are they History, Mystery or Mythology_ _ 2ndlook.pdf

8/14/2019 Indian Classical Texts_ Are they History, Mystery or Mythology_ _ 2ndlook.pdf

1/15

Skip to content

Skip to search - Accesskey = s

2ndlook

Indian Classical Texts: Are they History, Mystery or Mythology?

Posted in History, India,politics, Propagandaby Anuraag Sanghi on June 26, 2012 7 Votes

Over the last 8-12 centuries, Indian historical figures have undergone religiofication.

Result Indias political history has been lost.

From:The true believer: thoughts on the nature of mass movements | By Eric

Hoffer | Page 6

Religiofication as Eric Hoffer defined it, was all about turning practical purposes into holy causes.

As noted, this leads tothe politicization of religion and the religiofication of politics.

An important element of -Bharat-tantra was restrictions on power of elites over otherpeople. Hence, power to criminalize or demonize people was anti--Bharat-tantra.

Why is Krishna Worshipped

Krishna was a completely different story. Off the top, I can think of the ten really big

achievements.

1. Unarmed Combat: Krishnas killing of Kaiwalyapidu, Kamsas rogue elephant, the deaths ofChanura and Mustika and of Kamsa himself were all chronicles in unarmed combat, where as

children, Krishna and Balarama showed that even children can defend themselves. This went later to

China and we have the birth of Kung-fu.

2. Kill-and-eat:Krishna pioneered the grow-and-eat economy with dairy as the backbone of the

food chain. He started with the cleaning of Yamuna which I presume was heavily polluted by

endless dumping of meat-waste. You only have to see how animal fat is extracted or glue (sares)

made from animal waste (bones and skins) to understand how polluting this is.

n Classical Texts: Are they History, Mystery or Mythology? | 2ndlook http://2ndlook.wordpress.com/2012/06/26/indian-classical-texts-a

2 09/05/2013 0


2/15

Krishna, it was who probably, replaced animal fat with dairy fat and his love of butter was an

indicator of this change. Krishnas jumping into the polluted Yamuna, to get his ball, and the killing

of Kaaliya nag, is how he cleaned the Yamuna by transforming a kill-and-eat food system to

grow-and-eat system.

3. Animal Husbandry:He also pioneered the taming of the bull-calf which is why he is called

natho.

4.Agriculture: Balarama pioneered ploughing and irrigation the backbone of agriculture.

5. Transportation:As a charioteer he popularized fast transportation which is why you will find

him in all parts of India.

6. Plant Breeding:He brought the legendary Parijaat tree which is the famous Baobab tree from

probably West Asia or Africa (supposedly flying on a Garuda). Baobab tree is unique tree that lives

for hundreds of years, can store enough water for a small village population, and its fruit and leaves

have great nutritive value.

7. Escape From Superstition: Krishna swept away all the superstitions and ancient folk-gods

during the Goverdhan incident.

8. Diplomacy:He laid out principles of diplomacy during Shishupal Vadh and his peace embassy

before the War of Mahabharata.

9. Marriage & Society: He also reinforced the principles of free marital choice in the

Subhadra-Arjun incident with well-structured arguments and negotiations.

10. His warcraft was second to none which is why he alone was enough for the Pandavas. He

was the inventor of the discus the Sudarshana chakra. As an expert war-charioteer, he played a

crucial role in Mahabharata.

Thus Krishnas contribution in politics, ethics, combat-and-warcraft, transportation, animal

husbandry, agriculture have never been duplicated in history.

Krishnas two most famous killings were Kamsa and Jarasanda. Both these rulers were prolific

imprisoners. Krishna killed both of them and Narakasura. All three have been mentioned as

rulers who imprisoned people.

How many people were imprisoned in Ram Rajya? How many people did Yudhisthira or YadavaKrishna imprison?

Here is an interesting review of literature and treatment of Krishna in India over the centuries.

The narrative below misses out many such points but remains a powerful study of the forgotten

colossus the political Krishna.

Bankim Chandra Chatterjee wrote Krishna-Charitra in 1886. Since then, more than a

century has gone by. This work of Bankim, one of the finest in Bengali literature, has


2 09/05/2013 0


3/15

remained within the confines of Bengali, totally unknown to the vast readership of the

country as well as of the world. Bankim brought Krishna out from a maze of confusion

and misinterpretations created by myriads of interpolations and inexactitudes

propagated by many ill-informed and little-informed Western writers. He had the

gigantic task of separating the grain from the chaff in his quest for the historicity of

Krishna and, in that process, to some extent, that of theMahabharata.

Bankims was the first attempt to establish the historicity of Krishna and consequently ofthat portion of the Mahabharata that deals with Krishna. In the process we find that

Krishna emerges as a supreme human being with all the desirable human qualities in all

their resplendence, and not as a God churning out miracle after miracle from his divine

repertoire. Bankim put forward Krishna as an ideal before the nation to be emulated, to

be followed as a ideal man and not to be worshipped as a god who remains a Utopian

dream forever.

Bankim was a pioneer, a pathfinder who limited his study only to Krishna, basing his

research entirely on cold logic and scientific analysis. He destroyed some extremely

popular myths which had found their way into the socio-cultural milieu of the entire

country, namely the miraculous slaying of Kamsa, Jarasandha, Sishupala, Jayadratha and

Drona. He established them as a simple matter of normal battle, bereft of any divine

interference of godly prowess or base political machination.

Bankim began to writeKrishna-Charitraas a skeptic but by the time he reached the end

he had become a devotee of Krishna, an ardent believer in Krishna as God.

Bankim identified the decadent Babus in Kamalakanter Daptar, Muchiram Gur etc.,

lashed at them viciously and resurrected Krishna from confusion, misinterpretation and

intellectual oblivion to put him up before them as an idea who must be followed,

emulated, as an ideal around whom they should mould their own personalities. Like the

proverbial phoenix, must arise a generation of rejuvenated youth, conscious of their

responsibility in a subject country, led by the hand of the Krishna he had created. Bankim

provided Krishna. We have seen the excellent impact of it in the history of our

Independence.

Why did Bankim choose Krishna and not Rama, the other epic hero who could do no

wrong the maryada purushottama considered the ideal human being throughout the

length and breadth of the country? There is a reason. Bankim was mainly concerned withBengal. He was a part of the Bengal Renaissance and his target population was the

Bengali. He wrote in Bengali for the Bengali reader and Rama is not the popular deity in

Bengal. It is Krishna throughout. Therefore, he decided to deal with the character of

Krishna. He knew that he could get the attention of the common Bengali only if he wrote

Krishna-Charitraand not Rama-Charitra.But he found the Krishna of Chaitanya, the

Krishna of the brilliant Vaishnavapoets Jayadev, Vidyapati, Chandidas etc., the Krishna

of the Bhakti cult, a romantic, erotic and rather soppy Krishna who went about

gallivanting in the groves of Vrindavana along with Radha, Chandravali and other gopis,


2 09/05/2013 0


4/15

playing his irresistible flute. The whole of Bengal was drowned in the worship of this

Krishna.

Instead of the emotionalism of the lyric poet, he brought out the toughness of the epic

poet. He attempted to replace the erotic Krishna of the Bhagavata, Harivamsa, Chaitanya

and the Vaishnava poets by the tremendously powerful personality of the epic, totally

divested of his godhood, and involved in nation building, shifting power centers, politics,

diplomacy, using peace and war according to requirement in short, using hisoverpowering but human wisdom and intelligence in the struggle for supremacy,

resulting finally in the establishment of truth over falsehood, of good over evil, and of

right over wrong. Here we find a Krishna bathed in the brutality and complexity of

real-life struggle who is far removed from the flute-wielding romantic totally immersed

in inane activities like hallisha krida. We find a strategist, a diplomat and a warrior,

instead of a lover, a stealer of womens hearts and butter and cheese.

The tremendous political acumen of Krishna is highlighted in the way he used all the four

principles ofDandanitito destroy the malignant power centers, create new alliances that

emerged as counter balances to the existing power structure and use diplomacy to bolster

the Yadava interest. He used war and peace, he used marriages and he used his basic

superior intelligence for this one purpose. Consequently, the Yadavas accepted him as

their supreme commander. It took some time. It also took some effort. But in the final

analysis, he emerged as the leader whose judgement and veracity could not be disputed.

His political acumen combined with his sharp intellect, personal courage and physical

prowess established him as a major force. The contemporary powers came to regard the

Yadavas under Krishna with respect and fear. It has not been spelt out clearly anywhere

in the Mahabharata but his guiding principle must have been the establishment of a

Yadava hegemony on the political map of northern India. Every evidence seems toindicate that. To understand his plans and actions clearly, the political situation of the

country at the time of Krishna must be visualized.

The prevalent political situation has its roots in Yayatis lust. He gave the kingdom of

Pratisthana (later shifted to Hastinapura by Hasti and his son Vaikunthan) to his

youngest son Puru, depriving his other sons, Yadu, Turvasu, Druhyu and Anu.

Consequently, they established themselves elsewhere in the country. For the purpose of

our discussion, we shall ignore the others as they are not relevant and concentrate in the

progeny of only Yadu and Puru, i.e. the Yadavas and the Pauravas.

Between Yayati and Yudhisthira and Krishna, there are twenty-six generations. Much

naturally happened during these years. We find a sort of internal conflict within the

Paurava and Yadava clans and also existence of bad blood between the Yadavas and

Pauravas. These naturally had developed and distanced the clans and sub-clans over a

period covering these twenty-six generations. The main Paurava line continued at

Hastinapura. We find Dhritarastra ruling a very powerful political assemblage that

included such stalwarts as Bhishma, Drona, Kripa, Kama, Ashvatthama, Vidura and

Sakuni.


2 09/05/2013 0


5/15

Another line of the Pauravas left Hastinapura (or were made to leave) and conquered

Chedi from the Yadavas. This was another reason for the Yadava-Paurava enmity that

began with the ouster of Yadu. Later, of course, this line re-established the Yadavas at

Chedi and moved on to establish their sway in Magadha. We find one of the finest

statesmen of the time, ruling at Magadha was Jarasandha, who easily was superior to any

contemporary, including Krishna, in might, diplomacy and power. He even managed to

alienate the Southern Yadavas from the mainline Yadavas of Mathura and bring them

inseparably under his tutelage. This Paurava line became supremely antagonistic towards

the Mathura Yadavas after the slaying of Kamsa. Jarasandha vowed to annihilate them

totally.

The third Paurava line went and established themselves at Panchala (around Badaun,

Bareilly etc.), and were known as the Panchalas. There was bitter enmity between these

relations and neighbours which even the gap of generations could not dilute. In fact it

went on increasing, finally culminating in the Kuru-Panchala War.

The Yadavas spread all over. The mainline Yadavas remained in and around Mathura.

Other lines went to Dvaraka, Mahismati, Vidarbha. Chedi, Avanti, Dasharna, even up toMysore. The entire Paurava kingdom practically was surrounded by the Yadavas. But

though the Yadavas were a large clan, there was no cohesion among them. There was a lot

of conflict within the Mathura Yadavas, mainly due to Kamsa who became king after

imprisoning his father Ugrasena. There was no peace due to the power struggle between

Andhakas, Shinis, Sattvatas, Vrishnis etc. The southern Yadavas were not friendly

towards the Mathura Yadavas. Even though two of Vasudevas sisters were married to the

kings of Karusha Chedi, they remained firmly on the side of Jarasandha who took

advantage of the situation. He married his daughters to Kamsa, supported him in his

ascendancy and brought Mathura too under his control. In this way, it was Jarasandha

who controlled the entire Yadava clan for some time. Even when Jarasandha attacked the

Mathura Yadavas, Vidarbha, Chedi, Dasharna, Avanti, Karusha etc. joined his imperial

forces.

Besides these warring relatives, there were other power centers in the country. The most

important were the Matsyas of Virata (Jaipur of today) who played a vital role in shaping

the course of history of the time, Salva of Sauva (Punjab) and Paudrak Vasudeva of Anga,

Pundravardhana etc. Also, there were Gonanda of Kashmir, Subala of Gandhara, etc.

These were all friendly towards Jarasandha and joined the imperial forces in their

campaign against Mathura.

This, in very short, was the political situation of northern India when Krishna appeared

on the scene with his heroic abilities, superior intellect and tremendous political

foresight. He, having been thrown into the situation, was quite clear in his objective. He

had to retrieve the Yadavas from the political quagmire into which they had fallen and

slowly re-establish them as the supreme power in North India to take their rightful place

as the heirs of Yayati by replacing the usurpers, the Pauravas. His course of action was

also clear to him. He had to bring back unity among the belligerent Yadavas. He achieved

this which a masterstroke of diplomacy, a combination of brain and brawn. He slew


2 09/05/2013 0


6/15

Kamsa and his henchmen but did not assume power himself. Neither did he put

Vasudeva, his father, on the throne. Instead, he brought back Ugrasena, Kamsas hapless

father and set him on the throne. This endeared him to all the Yadavas, irrespective of

clans, including Kamsas supporters. Then, when Jarasandha attacked to avenge the

death of his son-in-law, he kindled the Yadavas with the spirit of patriotism and provided

inimitable leadership in the defence of Mathura. It is a remarkable achievement of

Krishna that he was able to defend Mathura with a handful of Yadavas against the

colossal imperial army that included practically all the major powers of India, namely,

Salva, Gonanda of Kashmir, Chedi, Bhishmaka, Virata and of course Duryodhana and his

brothers. This imperial force was thwarted time and again not only by Krishnas personal

courage and prowess, but also by the leadership provided by him. All the Yadavas stood

by him as one. By the time he retreated to Dvaraka in the face of the superior forces of

Jarasandha, he had achieved his goal. The entire Yadava clan, the Bhojas, Vrishnis,

Andhakas, Shinis, Kukuras, Sattvatas etc. swore by him and looked up to him as their

natural leader in all matters of importance. Every future incident reconfirmed his

position as leader and the bond of the Yadava brotherhood went from strength to

strength. The path was not free of obstacles. Nevertheless, he achieved what hewanted-unity among the Yadavas. He did not succeed in bringing the southern Yadavas

immediately into his fold. But by this time, the Mathura-Dvaraka Yadavas had already

emerged as a major force, feared even by Hastinapura.

Having united the Yadavas, Krishna found it necessary to consolidate. Though powerful,

the Yadavas were politically isolated and had powerful enemies. So, he needed political

alliances, which would help him in containing or removing the enemies. His main

adversary was Jarasandha and his allies. He realised that only after destroying him, could

he turn his attention to Hastinapura, his final goal. That Duryodhana joined Jarasandha

in the siege of Mathura, must have weighed with him considerably in his antipathy

towards the Pauravas. But, first of all, the alliances.

Krishna saw that to destroy Jarasandha, he had to use the Pauravas, the other most

powerful nation. For that, he needed to make an inroad into them. Luck was with him. He

found the Pandavas. There were three distinct reasons why the Pandavas must be chosen

as allies. First, they were individually extremely gifted, not only in the art of warfare but

also in the qualities of head and heart. Most important, they too were isolated, without

much political support and constantly persecuted and hunted by their kinsmen of

Hastinapura. They needed help. Secondly, they were matrimonially linked with the

Panchalas, the biggest hardcore enemies of Hastinapura. That too suited him very well.

Thirdly, the Pandavas were his natural allies, being his first cousins, through their mother

Kunti who was the sister of his father Vasudeva. Providence was therefore with him. He

needed the Pandava-Panchala alliance and they needed the power of the Yadavas at their

back. He therefore extended the hand of friendship which was gratefully accepted. He

chose for his friend Arjuna, who he saw was the most versatile, balanced and capable

among the five. Arjuna was certainly the kingpin in this alliance and he needed

cultivating. He did it with such consummate grace and finesse that Arjuna could nor even


2 09/05/2013 0


7/15

think without Krishna and was always willing to do what was pleasing to Krishna. So,

what began as a political need ended up as a deep emotional involvement for both. This

attitude of Arjuna had far-reaching effects. It was not for nothing that Arjunas grandson

inherited the empire. Krishna ensured it with a Yadava angle to it. It was a dubious

Paurava inheritance with a strong Yadava flavor. He conceived a plan the moment he saw

the Pandavas and nurtured it fondly, always progressing steadily towards the

fructification of his ultimate plan.

Krishna used another traditional diplomatic instrument, matrimony, for securing political

alliances. His grandfather and father used it, with only limited success. Pritha, Vasudevas

sister, was married to Pandu who did not live long. So this alliance did not produce the

expected results, except, that it provided Krishna with the invincible Pandavas and,

through them, with a strong foothold in the Hastinapura sphere of influence. Two other

sisters were married to the Yadavas of Chedi and Karusha. These were not successful at

all as, in spite of these marriages, Chedi and Karusha remained firmly in alliance with

Jarasandha. However, there was another powerful Yadava kingdom in the neighborhood

of Chedi. which also was an ally of Jarasandha. This was Bhishmaka of Vidarbha and hisson Rukmi. Bhishmaka was also very friendly with Sishupala of Chedi and had planned to

marry Rukmini, his daughter, with Sishupala. Krishna wanted to rectify the situation and

win the powerful Yadavas of Vidarbha to his side. He abducted and married Rukmini

hoping that this marriage would unite the Vidarbhas with the Mathura-Dvaraka Yadavas,

but this effort failed. Vidarbha was incensed with the abduction and was driven more

firmly to Jarasandha. This also enraged Sishpuala of Chedi, who was already a sworn

enemy of his cousin Krishna. In the end of course, we find that Rukmi came to join the

Pandava forces on the eve of the war, with an expressed desire to do something pleasing

to Krishna. But how much of it was political expediency (since the Krishna of now was a

much more powerful person than the Krishna of yore) and how much of it was his

genuine feeling for a brother-in-law, is a matter of conjecture. But it did not matter any

more. Neither Krishna, nor the Pandavas needed him.

When Krishna realised that he would have to base his activities solely on this Pandava-

Panchala alliance he strove to make it more lasting and powerful. He wanted to bring the

Yadavas too into this alliance. And this he decided would be done through Arjuna. He

arranged the marriage of his sister Subhadra with Arjuna which was most unusual, as

Arjuna and Subhadra were first cousins. Unusual but politically very useful. Also this

marriage brought the Yadavas into the Panchala-Pandava alliance firmly. This marriage

therefore he nurtured fondly. He brought up Abhimanyu and trained him to be the equal

of Arjuna and himself. Such allegiance was not paid to the sons of Draupadi, which is

significant. The new alliance becomes powerful but not enough. Now Abhimanyu had to

be married. Opportunity presented itself in the form of the Matsya Princess, Uttara. Why

did Arjuna prefer Abhimanyu and not any of the sons of Draupadi who were equally

available and marriageable? Perhaps, Krishnas farsightedness and well-laid plains bore

fruit now. Arjuna was never in love with Draupadi. His beloved was Subhadra whom he

married out of love. So, it was not surprising that he considered Subhadra and


2 09/05/2013 0


8/15

Abhimanyu to be his family. Draupadi after all was not his alone. She was more of a

political entity, a matter of convenience. Also, Abhimanyu was the rephew of Krishna,

Arjunas friend, philosopher and guide. Arjuna would always do what pleased Krishna.

Who else could he choose except Abhimanyu? This marriage further confirmed the

Yadava claim on Hastinapuras throne, because Abhimanyus son Parikshit would be the

king of Hastinapura later. And Abhimanyu or Parikshit were more Yadavas than

Pauravas. Abhimanyus mother and grandmother were Yadavas. His father was not

strictly a Paurava. Both Arjuna and Pandu did not have any Paurava blood in them. Both

were kshetrajna sons of their family.

The political outcome of this marriage was an invincible alliance of Paurava-Panchala-

Yadava-Matsya which the marriage of one of Draupadis sons could not have brought

about effectively. It brought the Yadavas into direct contact with the Matsyas. This axis

very conclusively set up a balance of power which more or less neutralised the immense

authority of the Hastinapura monolith.

In all this power game, what is bewildering is the marriage between Krishnas son Samba

and Duryodhanas daughter Lakshmana. It is true that Krishna did not know anything

about it. It was Balarama who went and rescued Samba and Lakshmana from the clutches

of Duryodhana who had forcibly detained Samba for his misadventure of marrying aud

trying to abduct Lakshmana. This is intriguing. Did the marriage please Krishna? Or was

he enraged? Did it add to his negative feelings towards Duryodhana for imprisoning his

son or was he happy on being presented with another, possibly useful, alliance? However,

this marriage did not in any way affect the course of history, nor does it throw any light

on the character of Krishna.

All through these happenings on the matrimonial front, Krishna kept himself busy, witheliminating those malignant powers that were irretrievably inimical towards the Yadava

cause. No amount of diplomacy would have helped. Some he removed himself, others he

tackled with the help of the Pandavas. He systematically destroyed Kamsa, Kalyavana,

Hamsa Dimbaka and Sauvaraj Salva. Then he saw that unless Jarasandha was eliminated,

the Magadha confederacy, the most powerful one at the time, could not be broken. He

also knew that there was no power in the country that could take on the Magadha

confederacy in direct conflict. Nor could he handle it alone. So he took recourse to

stratagem and, with the help of Bhima and Arjuna, slew Jarasandha. Then he went on to

destroy Sishupala of Chedi, Paundraka Vasudeva of Pundravardhana and other minor

adversaries to clear the stage for the final holocaust which he knew must come. The

Magadha confederacy was completely defused. He had realized that if all these people

came to help the Kauravas, nothing could save the Pandava alliance.

An interesting gambit, which was often employed by Krishna, also bought him

considerable allegiance from the erstwhile enemies. He never usurped the territory of the

vanquished. He established their surviving relatives or the throne and returned the

territory. He made Ugrasena, father of Kamsa, the king of the Yadavas. He gave the

empire of Jarasandha to his son Sahadeva. He made Dhrislaketu the king of Chedi after


2 09/05/2013 0


9/15

his father Sishupala was slain. These kings gave their loyalty to Krishna out of gratitude

for his magnanimity. Consequently we find them at the side of the Pandavas during the

War. Kalhana tells us that Krishna placed one of the female relatives of Gonanda on the

throne of Kashmir. He was a kingmaker and not a king. And in the history of mankind we

have seen time and again that it is the kingmaker who wields real power, never the king

thus made.

Therefore, Krishna succeeds in all his plans. He unites the Yadavas. He removes theenemies. He makes the Yadavas very powerful through various alliances. He uses

marriage effectively for the purpose. And for the final battle, he sets up a powerful axis of

Yadava-Panchala-Pandava-Matsya aided by his grateful proteges against the Hastinapura

allies. All the time, the Pandava interest is never lost sight of. When suddenly, at the end

of the War, Abhimanyus unborn son was also killed (which eventuality even he had not

foreseen), he resurrected him so that he could become king. Why did he do it? Why not

one of Draupadis sons who also had died on the same night? The tragedy of Draupadi

was that nobody really cared for her. She was a queen, she was a wife and she was a

woman with very feminine emotions and frailities. This Draupadi was always ignored.She was a piece on the political chess-board of the time, to be used at convenience.

Arjuna preferred Abhimanyu to her sons, because he was Subhadras son and Krishnas

nephew. Krishna preferred him because he was Subhadras son and more or less a

Yadava. For the same reason, he resurrected Parikshit. Draupadis sons were not Yadava

relations and for Krishna it was necessary that a Yadava relation survived to rule

Hastinapura. It was a political necessity for him. He was all for Draupadi. But whenever

there was any clash of interest between Draupadi and Subhadra, he invariably chose

Subhadras cause, because the Yadava interest coincided with that of Subhadra, not

Draupadi. For Krishna, blood was always thicker than water. Therefore, it was Subhadra

and her progeny who must survive to carry on a Yadava history (even if it is in the guise

of a Paurava history).

The blood and water theory seems to be apposite when we consider an aspect of the

Mahabharata which is not much talked about. Why did the Yadavas refrain from joining

the War? Why did no one question them on this? Again it was Krishna. Krishna offered

only himself without arms, and an akshauhini of Narayani Sena (probably mercenaries)

who were as powerful as he was (mere sales talk, no doubt, but enough to fool

Duryodhana). That is all. Satyaki joined the Pandavas out of friendship with Arjuna and

Hardikya Kritavarma joined the Kauravas, out of an old enmity with Krishna, And, most

surprisingly, at the end of the War when everyone died, the only survivors, besides the

Pandavas, were Satyaki and Kritavarma. Krishna, one feels, prevented the Yadavas from

annihilation by keeping them away. Out of all the nations, only the Yadavas survived to be

supreme and to be the rulers of the earth. It was an unparalleled master-stroke which

may not be a appreciated but was in total consonance with his policy of establishing a

Yadava hegemony.

At the end of it all when all the dust settles down on Kurukshetra, when the earth has

drained the blood of eighteen akshauhinis and is ready once again to pick up the reins of


2 09/05/2013 0


10/15

life after bathing in death, we find the Yadavas at the helm of affairs. And a little later, we

find Subhadras grandson Parikshit on the throne of Hastinapura and Krishnas grandson,

Vajra, on the throne of Indraprastha that was founded by the Pandavas on the site of

Yayatis ancient capital. The wheel had indeed turned full circle. Yayati created a rift

between Puru and Yadu by throwing out Yadu. His successor, after 26 generations,

brought the Yadavas back into power in the land of their ancestors. If one is a little more

gracious to Krishna, one can of course say that he brought the progeny of two brothers,

who had fallen out, once again together in Parikshit who was both a Paurava as well as a

Yadava.

Power brings decadence and decadence destroys a race. The Yadavas were no exception

to this rule. They destroyed each other before the grieving eyes of Krishna. He had made

them powerful, saved them from the war and brought them so far. But he could not save

them from themselves. This was the peculiar tragedy of Krishna. Nevertheless, he

succeeded in placing the Paurava-Yadava Parikshit on the throne of Hastinapura. This is

where he won.

Bankim perhaps did not get an opportunity to place this aspect of Krishna-Charitraon

record. He did not give Krishna the credit for being a supreme leader of men, a diplomat

of indisputable caliber and unrivalled political far sight. Bankim failed to place Krishna in

the political geography of the country and to underline his political acumen in bringing

about a completely new political setup. Bankim missed this master statesman, but then,

as he himself has said, Krishna is an ideal person in every field of human activity.

Therefore, we have no difficulty in including Krishnas political excellence within

Bankims comprehensive definition.

via Bankims Krishna-Charita by Maj. Gen. Shekhar Sen.

In the rest of the world, religion was politicized and politics underwent religiofication. But India with

the tradition of -Bharat-tantrastopped at deification of political figures.

Outside India, even Gautama Buddha, a huge political reformer, in post-Saraswati India, was deified

while in India he was revered as a teacher.

Piercing this mist of religiofication, will be the biggest challenge that Indians face.

Related Articles

Bharattantra Break Out: Julian Assange is a Sign (2ndlook.wordpress.com)Of the mythical world(thehindu.com)Tale of two mothers(thehindu.com)Praying to Durga(thehindu.com)

Tagged with:bankim chandra chatterjee,bengal,bengali literature, Kamsa, Krishna, Mahabharata


22 09/05/2013 0


11/15

19comments

Bharattantra Break Out: Julian Assange is a Sign2000 years Of World Manufacturing History

19 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

adminsaid, on June 26, 2012 at 3:26 pm Rate This

Indian Classical Texts: Are they History, Mystery or Mythology?: Piercing the mist ofreligiofication is the biggest goo.gl/pqZHrSt. PT Barnum (@StPTBarnum) June 26, 2012

Reply

1.


@StPTBarnumRama was unkind to Maithili. So the people of Mithila Maithil, Banga,Axomiya and Odisha are't fond of him

jbeck (@geffbeck) June 26, 2012

@geffbeckInteresting thought. Though that entire story is probably a later dateinterpolation.St. PT Barnum (@StPTBarnum) June 26, 2012

Reply

2.

vihangsaid, on June 26, 2012 at 5:17 pm Rate This

Krishnas two most famous killings were Kamsa and Jarasanda. Both these rulers were prolificimprisoners. Krishna killed both of them.

I am sorry to remind you that Jarasangha was killed by Bihma. Krishna just guided Bhima what to do toprevent reunification of his torn apart body.

Reply

Anuraag Sanghisaid, on June 26, 2012 at 5:33 pm 1 Votes

You are absolutely right.

But Krishnas role was much beyond just giving the trick to stop to Jarasandhas healing.

He was instrumental in choosing Jarasandhas as the target; making a strategy for thebout; taking Arjun and Bhim with him; and provoking Jarasandha to the fight. (Erratum:Also remember that Jarasandha was the husband of Dushala the only sister of the

3.


22 09/05/2013 0


12/15

Kauravas. By Indian values, Jarasandha was also Pandavas brother-in-law.

Hence, after Jarasandha had abducted Draupadi, he was let go, because killing himwould widow Dushala. See correction below. Jarasandha was king of Magadha modernBihar. Jaya dratha was King of Sindhus modern Sindh in Pakistan.).

So, while the physical death may have at Bhims hands; the need to kill Jarasandha wasKrishnas understanding and strategy.

Reply

Nananshisaid, on June 27, 2012 at 5:57 am Rate This

Dushalas husband was Jayadratha. Jarasandha is different from Jayadratha.Jarasandha wasKamsas father-in-law. He had attached Mathura 17 times, so Krishna had to shift his capitalto Dwarka. He was killed so that Yudhishtira could perform the Rajasuya Yagna.

Reply


@StPTBarnumThere is no Ur'Ramayana. There is the Adi Kavi's workjbeck (@geffbeck) June 26, 2012

Reply

Anuraag Sanghisaid, on June 26, 2012 at 6:20 pm Rate ThisTwo things.

One I have made no mention of any Ur-Ramayana. So, I dont know why you are raisingthis issue?

Two But, I do think that there may have been a Ur-Ramayana. As per ValmikiRamayana, Narada was very unhappy with the state-of-Rama-Rajya story in existence atthat point of time.

Narada then inspired Valmiki to take up the job of composing the Ramayana. I presumethat this happened many centuries after the death of Raghu Ramachandra.

As per Pushkar Bhatnagars astronomical dating, RaghuRam lived and ruled around7000 BP. The birth of Ganges as described in the Ramayana (if it is a part of the original)

and not an extrapolation, can be dated around 3000-3500 BP.

Even if it was an extrapolation, this proves that 4000 years after the death of Raghu Ram,the Ramayana-history was being written, expanded, polished, embellished, refined.

So, while we may not know of it, or a copy may not exist, Ur-Ramayana is still a validconcept, I would think.

Reply

4.


22 09/05/2013 0


13/15


Removing religion from our epics to understand the political views and true history.2ndlook.wordpress.com/2012/06/26/indJay Balakrishnan (@jithu2k1) June 26, 2012

Reply

5.


Indian Classical Texts: Are they History, Mystery or Mythology? Who is the "political"figure Krishna ?wp.me/p8KUL-25Xvia @StPTBarnumaslan anandolu (@amunhay) June 26, 2012

Reply

6.

Sunilsaid, on June 26, 2012 at 10:25 pm

2 Votes

Anurag,

You forget Narakasura who imprisoned 16000 princesses on various kingdoms. Krishna freed them, withhis wife Satyabhama herself killing him. Not just that, when the princesses were apprehensive that theywill not be accepted back in their kingdoms because they were with Narakasura, Krishna asks them totell them they are Krishnas Wives and hence get dignity back!

Reply

Anuraag Sanghisaid, on June 27, 2012 at 3:38 am Rate ThisYes!

So the

- 95kings who were prisoners of Jarasandha

- The 16,000 princesses of Narakasura

- The imprisonment of Ugrasena; Devaki and Vasudeva by Kansa

These three readily come to mind. Krishnas war against imprisoning kings is a saga inBharattantra that we no longer hold significant.

Under Desert Bloc influence, we believe that putting people in jail will solve problems.All empirical evidence goes against this belief.

Yet the maya of this idea is so strong!

Reply

7.

Rajendra Guptasaid, on June 27, 2012 at 1:27 am8.


22 09/05/2013 0


14/15

Rate This

Over the last 8-12 centuries, Indian historical figures have undergone religiofication. Result Indiaspolitical history has been lost.Absolutely right. We need to do a de-religiofication of ancient Indian history.

Reply

ramansaid, on June 28, 2012 at 6:27 am Rate This

Fabulous piece anurag, thanks for bringing this perspective

Reply

9.

anasuyasaid, on June 28, 2012 at 11:33 am Rate This

wonderful reading

Reply

10.

xsaid, on July 7, 2012 at 12:21 am 3 Votes

Sri Krishna grieved the passing of Yadavas?

The author of the extract may have grieved. Not Sri Krishna, who says in Gita,

Author attempts to reduce Sri Krishna to a selfish man engaged in selfish aggrandizement. It is the resultof the selfish tinted glasses the author has put on.

self-aggrandizing ppl do not produce text like Srimad Bhagavad Gita.

Reply

11.

manusaid, on July 7, 2012 at 12:46 am 2 Votes

Are we ready to see the men/women behind our gods The realisation they were human like you andme and yet could accomplish so much is way better than they could do it coz they were gods what can

we do. Coming to the above narration Whatever political motive he had for doing what he did Hedid define dharma by his actions Never becoming the king of the annexed kingdoms but instil therightful heirs Giving peace a chance Standing up for the oppressed and annihilating theoppressorsEven rebelling against the gods of the time (Indra) and telling us humans to believe in ourown actions not mercy of some ever giving god . God I dont knowOur greatest ancestors to walkthis earth YES!

Reply

12.

The Greatest Kings in Indian History - Page 73said, on July 8, 2012 at 6:09 am Rate This

13.


22 09/05/2013 0


15/15

[...] [...]

Reply

an immense practical advantage: clarity in the midst of confusion power of language blog:partnering with reality by JR Fibonaccisaid, on July 13, 2012 at 5:36 pm Rate This

[...] Indian Classical Texts: Are they History, Mystery or Mythology? (2ndlook.wordpress.com) [...]

Reply

14.

adminsaid, on July 17, 2012 at 9:07 am 1 Votes

Indian Classical Texts: Are they History, Mystery or Mythology? | brilliant article! Politicalhistory has been lost goo.gl/YJX0PAmit (@AmitK2K) July 16, 2012

Reply

15.

Leave a Reply

Get a 2ndlook on

Email Subscription

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 1,002 other followers

2ndlook Blogs


Date post:	04-Jun-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	raj-sharma
View:	224 times
Download:	0 times

Indian Classical Texts_ Are they History, Mystery or Mythology_ _ 2ndlook.pdf

Documents