How hurt people hurt people 1 – Karna Character Analysis

Transcript

This is an AI-generated transcript and may contain some errors.
Thank you for coming here today afternoon.
Am I audible Juhu? So, as I mentioned, I will speak today on the topic of Karna, victim cum victimiser. How hurt people hurt people and how we can stop doing so. So, I will take this in three different aspects.
One is, we will be discussing the storyline of the life of Karna. Second is, we will be discussing some ethical issues involved in those incidents. And along with that, we will be discussing primarily the emotional issues involved.
And usually knowledge progresses when we see the familiar in the unfamiliar. When we see the familiar in the unfamiliar. That means, you know, we all have our biases.
Although we try to bias free, you know, we all have our prejudices. Especially the postmodern ethos is very much for social justice. Let’s be against any kind of prejudice.
So when we see some people, when we have people of a particular race, people of a particular nationality, people of a particular religion, we have a particular preconception about them. But then when we meet them, we say, this person is just like me. And we start.
So when we see the familiar in the unfamiliar, a connection happens. And then there can be deeper understanding. Otherwise, there is simply stereotyping the people.
The people here are like this, people here are like that. But there are, there is black, there is white, there are shades of grey, which is where most people reside in any community, any group of people. So similarly, when we study or hear, read ancient books of wisdom, such as the Mahabharata.
At that time, at one level, we could see them just as stories. Nice stories, entertaining, action-packed stories. But knowledge or understanding will deepen when we can see the familiar in the unfamiliar.
Okay, these stories are interesting stories. But what do they deal with? They deal with core human issues that are relevant at all times. The Bhagavad Gita itself, it is not just a book about war.
Although some people say that the Bhagavad Gita was spoken by Krishna to Arjuna to get Arjuna to fight the war. But that is a very superficial understanding. Because Arjuna does not ask at the start of the Gita, whether I should fight or I should not fight.
He asks, In 2.7 in the Bhagavad Gita, I just said that, I’m asking you, to you, dharma, what is dharma? What is the right way of acting? The word dharma is quite deep in its import. And we’ll discuss that in due course. But yeah, he basically asks, what is the right way of living? And that is a question that is universal.
So, in fact, the question that leads to the speaking of the Bhagavad Gita is also the question that underlies the Mahabharata. Every book has a defining theme. So the Mahabharata’s defining theme is that what is dharma? Kaha dharma? What do we know? How do we know what is dharma? All the characters there are trying to understand what is the right way to act and they’re trying to act accordingly.
And some succeed, some fail, some fall somewhere in between. And their journeys are what are explored through the book. When we understand this, they’re all making decisions.
All the specific situations we face will be different. But the decisions we have to make, we all have to, we all base our decisions on something. Should I go here? Should I go there? Should I develop this relationship or that relationship? Should I take up this career or that career? Should I focus on this activity? Should I focus on that activity? Our life is defined, is determined by our decisions.
The decisions that we take at particular times in our life. Some decisions, they come out, turn out to be brilliant. Some decisions turn out to be disastrous.
But our life is largely determined by the decisions that we have taken. So, in the Mahabharata, there are different characters who take different decisions at different times. And like in any book.
But here, in the Mahabharata, there is deliberation. What is the right course of action? And after that deliberation, some people come to a right understanding. Some people rationalise their wrong understanding.
So, among all the various characters in the Mahabharata, Karna is a character which many people connect with very easily. The storyline of Karna is at one level tragic. He was born in a hero’s family.
He was a Kshatriya. Kshatriyas are martial guardians of society. They are meant to fight when necessary and protect people from offenders, wrongdoers, criminals, aggressors.
And Kshatriyas are meant to be chivalrous, heroic, strong, charitable, virtuous. Now, he, although he is born in a Kshatriya family, but I presume most of you know the story of Karna, basic storyline. So, I will not go into the story specifically.
I will focus on the analysis over here. So, he, because he was adopted by a Suta family, by a family of charioteers, so he never got the honour of a Kshatriya, although he had many of the qualities of a Kshatriya. And he, whenever anyone would call him a Suta, Suta is a charioteer or a charioteer’s son, Suta putra he would be called.
Now, that word would be like an unbearable hurt for him. He felt that he deserved the honour of a Kshatriya and he did not get that. He felt that he would be hurt by that.
So, he was hurt and he in his life, often the focus when people, many books have been written about the Mahabharata, especially from Karna’s perspective and how life was so unjust to him. At one level, we all get this feeling, sometime we are getting a raw feeling, you know, people are treating us unfairly, life is treating us unfairly. And because of that, we all can quickly connect with Karna.
So, for me personally, when I read the Mahabharata, probably first time at the age of four or five, then I saw the television depictions at the age of eight, nine. From that time, I could connect with Karna immediately. I like Arjuna, I like Arjuna’s heroism.
And of course, it all depends on how particular characters are depicted. Every depiction has a particular angle to it. So, depending on how they are depicted, it varies.
But to be blamed for something that is not in one’s control. If Karna, he never, he is, you know, I was born with a family, but I have the calibre of a Kshatriya. Why should people label me for something that is not in my control? And at one level, that’s true.
So, that puts one in that situation. Basically, all of us have a social need to be accepted and respected in whichever circle we belong. And often we, in order to be accepted and respected in our particular social circles, we may often do various things which we would normally not do.
Students, when they come to college, if everybody in the college drinks, if it’s a college where most people are taking drugs, then just to belong to that group, people do certain activities which they would normally not do. Peer pressure is actually fear pressure. The fear of being left out, the fear of being isolated, the fear of having to be all alone, to have no friends, that fear makes us do things which we would normally not do.
And especially when one wants acceptance and one is not getting acceptance, then one is, and suddenly somebody gives one acceptance. That’s what happened with Karna when Duryodhana accepted him, Duryodhana embraced him. I’ll come to that incident a little bit later.
But this principle that we all need, we all are social creatures and we need a sense of belonging. Now, this is an essential human need. But what will define our character, our destiny is where we get our sense of belonging from.
From which social circle we get our need to be accepted, respected, fulfilled. If that social circle is of people who are If that social circle is of people who are of people who are virtuous, then we of people who are virtuous, then we do we need this? No. Hare Krishna.
Hare Krishna. It’s better? Yes. So, thank you.
So, we all need to be, which circle we get that sense of being accepted and respected. We will conform to that. If that circle is of virtuous people, then wanting to belong to that circle will impel us to become virtuous.
But if that circle is of people who are given to vices, then we will succumb to vice. However, at a time when one is feeling lonely, isolated, neglected or even rejected, one cannot really discern. One just wants acceptance.
Wherever one may be. And that state is an emotionally vulnerable state. So, I said earlier that among all the characters in the Mahabharata, I connected the best with Karna.
There’s a personal reason for that. I had polio since my childhood, when I was one. And I was, my parents always put me with cultured friends.
With every school, every community, there are people who were not so cultured. So, there were some friends who somehow, I would call them friends, some boys, who would tease me, call me cripple, cripple. So, at that time, it would hurt me terribly.
I was very small at that time. So, when I would hear, on the TV or read in the book, people calling Karna as Sutaputra, I could connect with him. Now, when it’s not in his control, why is he being labelled for something which is not in his control? And when one is being labelled like that, that is a very emotionally vulnerable position.
Not only is one hurt, but one desperately wants some acceptance, some sense of belonging. So, Karna’s entry in the Mahabharata is quite dramatic. The Pandavas and the Kauravas have both completed their martial education in the academy of Drona.
And then, one day, they are exhibiting their skills. The idea at that time was that it is not democracy, it is monarchy. But still, the rulers had to have the faith of their citizens that these rulers are capable of protecting us.
And one capability was the capability of fighting. So, the princes who had just finished their training, they were all exhibiting their martial skills. How good they were at archery, at sword-fighting, at spear-throwing, at various skills, wrestling, waist-fighting.
So, the Kauravas and the Pandavas, both were exhibiting their skills. And the citizens had all assembled over there. And they were cheering.
Now, after all the various Kauravas exhibited their skills, the Pandavas exhibited their skills, Bhima and Duryodhana were almost equal in their skill at waist-fighting. Bhima was better in terms of strength, Duryodhana was better in terms of skill. It was an exhibition match, because it was a martial exhibition.
But damn, both of them had such strong animosity that when they were exhibiting their skills, their match started getting into a rest. They were trying to beat each other up. So, Duryodhana told Ashwathama, call it off.
It’s an exhibition match. Stop it. Stop it.
And then after that, Arjuna When Arjuna exhibited his skills, he just excelled everyone else. The kind of wizardry that he demonstrated with his archery expertise was mesmerising. All the citizens were applauding.
And as they were applauding, Duryodhana’s envy was burning intolerably. Duryodhana was also, in his own way, pretty insecure. If you go back in the history, the Pandavas had been born and brought up in a forest.
Pandu had taken voluntary retirement and he was living more or less a retired life in the Himalayan mountains. And at that time, Duryodhana was born as the eldest of the hundred Kauravas and he grew up as a pampered child. Because Pandu was living far away in the forest.
So, nobody knew whether he would ever have children and whether they would become successful. So, Duryodhana grew up with the entitlement mentality. I am going to the king.
And everybody is pampering him. But when the Pandavas came back, because Pandu passed away, then, because Yudhishthira was so cultured, the attention shifted to him. And from that time, Duryodhana started feeling insecure, struggling in things.
And he found that Bhima was much better than him in strength. Duryodhana was the strongest among all his brothers. But he found Bhima was more than a match to him.
But he felt, he knew that there was going to be conflicts between him and the Pandavas. He felt that, I can deal with them. And Yudhishthira is no threat.
Yudhishthira was virtuous, but he was not such a great warrior. But he felt, Arjuna, who will deal with him? I don’t have anyone. As Arjuna was exhibiting his skills, suddenly, in the Maharishi exhibition, came a tall, powerful looking, unknown, effulgent man.
And he said, I can do, I can excel everything that Partha has done. Do I have the chance, have the opportunity to do this? So Drona and Kripa, they were the teachers over there, looked at each other. Actually, at one level, this was a, this was a private exhibition.
It was of Drona’s students, the ruling princes of the Kuru dynasty. So Karna, in a sense, had no reason to be there. But Karna was itching for an opportunity.
Because he had developed tremendous skills in warfare, but he needed to make his presence felt. So he thought, this would be an opportunity. And he came there.
And when he came, at that time, he, I mean, exhibiting all the skills that Arjuna said, he did that. Karna said that I’ll do better, but he managed to equate whatever Arjuna had done. And then when he realised that he was not able to excel Arjuna, he said, can I challenge Arjuna further? Arjuna had already become incensed to see this, who’s a gatecrasher coming in like this.
So Arjuna said, immediately the Karna spoke. And then they were about to start fighting. As they were about to start fighting, see there is physical action and there is emotional action.
The physical action is what often catches our attention. But underlying emotions are very important also to understand why people do what they do. If you look at the physical action, then it’s just an entertaining story.
If you look at the emotional action, then it becomes not just an entertaining story, it becomes an illuminating story. It becomes an educative story. It guides us about how we should or should not act.
Now in this case, Karna, he was about to start fighting and naturally he was asked, that was a tradition over there, before you start fighting, the qualifications of the two contestants have to be described, the antecedents have to be described. So he said, all of us know who Arjuna is. Oh warrior, tell who you are.
Who is, at that time, a very hierarchical society. So whose son are you? Which dynasty do you belong to? And then Karna looked down and then by his silence the answer meant that he was not, did not belong to a royal dynasty. Some of the people there started mocking him.
He doesn’t belong to a royal dynasty. How can he fight? So at this point, as soon as Duryodhana had seen Karna performing, he said, Karna will be the foil to Arjuna. He just wanted to win Karna over.
And for that purpose, he said, oh, how can he not be a member of the royal dynasty? He has skills which equate the best of the archers. If he does not belong to a royal dynasty, how does it make a difference? He said, look at his skin, look at his voice, he must be belonging to a royal dynasty. He said, can a deer ever give birth to a lion? He is a lion.
He cannot give birth to a deer. As he was speaking like this, he realised that he was winning people over. And just, the final master stroke, he said, okay, if still you think that he cannot fight because he does not belong to a royal dynasty, I will make him a member of the royal dynasty.
I give him the kingdom of Anga. And he restored the kingdom of Anga. At one level, this is a very charitable act, heroic act.
If standing up for someone who was, who was being oppressed, that’s what it appeals to. It is at one level. At another level, let’s look at what is happening.
First of all, Duryodhana is not the king. He is one prince. And there is no unambiguous right that he has to the kingdom.
So, the Angadesh, which he gave to Karna, it was not his to give. It was not his to give. The Pandavas, they went along with it because once charity is given, it’s a matter of the family’s honour.
It’s a matter of dynasty’s honour. So, he gave a charity which actually did not really belong to him. But that apart, how was he doing? He, he was trying to emotionally get win Karna over.
Karna was overwhelmed at this point. This was, this was the moment of his greatest honour. He had shown how he was equal to the greatest archer of that time.
And suddenly, because of his birth, he was about to be dishonoured. And then, at that time, when Duryodhana supported him, he felt so overwhelmed by that. He is talking about that need for belonging.
So, there is full friend for him over there. And he said, Oh, Duryodhana, I am so grateful to you. You have honoured me so much.
What can I do for you? Duryodhana, whatever be his vices, he was an expert politician. So, he said, Oh, Karna, I do not want anything from you except your friendship. In a beautiful way, he put it.
Oh, Karna, that you will have throughout my life. And those words, that promise went on to one Karna later. You will have my friendship throughout your life.
And then, as he was being bestowed, the royal throne coronation was being performed by putting some sacred water on him. At that time, his father, Adhirath, he was in the assembly watching. He was delighted to be seeing his son.
Thank you. And Karna immediately got up and offered his obeisance. Then he introduces his father.
And then, it was understood that he was not a suitable, he was not a Kshatriya, he was a suitable. But then, it was decided that now that he will be coronated as a king, the fight was about to begin. But by this time, as the discussion was going on, all these things were happening, the sun set.
And the martial exhibition was one day. So, the fight never took place. So here, at this point, Karna was won over by Duryodhana.
And Karna was actually a virtuous person. Among all the characters in the Mahabharata, the most complex is that of Karna. He is a virtuous person, but it was this association with Duryodhana.
It’s so distorted. So, thereafter, the Kauravas planned, under Shakuni’s scheming, to send the Pandavas off to the forest, to the Varnavat, where they could be burnt alive. That was the plan.
Now, Duryodhana saw that Pandavas were becoming very popular and he was resenting their popularity. He said that, it’s like say, there is one big movie going on. Another movie, the same city is going on.
That movie is not that good. It’s also good. But this movie is like a movie filled with superstars.
As long as this movie is going on, nobody will care for the other movie. Maybe if this movie is stopped, then people will start caring for the other movie. So, Duryodhana felt that as long as the Pandavas are in town, he will never be able to shine.
So, he had a scheme to have the Pandava centre. He said, they will go away and you will arise and they will never come back. So, now at that time, when they made this plan, Karna said, why are you scheming like this? Let’s challenge the Pandavas for a fight and you defeat them in a fight and then you can take the kingdom from them.
The kingdom will be yours if you defeat them in a fight. Shakuni said, Karna, you are a child. There is no reason to fight the Pandavas.
When you fight the Pandavas, they are extremely powerful. You may not be able to win. Karna said, no, I will be able to defeat Karna.
Shakuni, Duryodhana was caught between Karna and Shakuni. And Duryodhana, Shakuni was a zealot and he was for some nefarious scheme. At that time, Karna opposed him.
I can’t do this. Let’s fight. Let’s fight well.
Karna had a lot of confidence in his own capacity to fight. But over a period of time, he started losing. His inner compass started getting distorted.
Now we have a magnet. The magnet normally points to the true north, wherever it is. But the magnet is placed in an area which has its own magnetic field.
Some houses, some buildings, they have their own magnetic field associated with them. So, if a magnet is placed in an area which has its own magnetic field created by it, then the magnet may not point to the true north. It gets distorted.
So, we all have our inner compass. Now, our conscience is the voice within which tells us what is right and what is wrong. And our conscience is shaped in various ways.
Our conscience is shaped at one level by our culture. By cultural upbringing, we are taught certain things are right, certain things are wrong. And that shapes our conscience.
Apart from that, our past actions, our previous karma, that also shapes what we consider to be right and what is wrong. And beyond that, we are at our core source for parts of God. So, God, Krishna, is there with us in our own compass.
And his coming when? We do not know that. So, when we get the voice of conscience, whether it is the spiritual voice of God, whether it is the voice of our impressions from the past or whether it is the voice of the impressions we got from the culture around us. And that we may not know.
But all of us have a sense of right and wrong. Now, whether that sense is truly right and truly wrong, that’s a different issue. This is an important point because we will see how Karna’s moral compass misleads him.
Let me explain this that all of us, whichever part of the world we are in, whatever culture we are in, we all have some moral sense, some sense of right or wrong. Somebody says, somebody stamps on your neck, why did you do that? Oh, I didn’t see you. Whatever they say.
When they ask the question, why did you do that? That itself implies that the question implies you should not have done that. Another person may give you a reply saying, normally I would not have done that but because of this I did it. So we all have a sense of right or wrong.
Nowadays there is this whole idea of moral relativism. If it feels right to you, it is right for you. If it feels wrong for you, it is wrong for you.
And they say there are no absolute moralities. However, the relativization of morality, there is no absolute. That is itself questionable because we all, we ask any person in any part of the world, they say whatever you feel is right, whatever you feel is wrong, that is how it is.
They say like that. But then you ask them, do you feel like there is somewhere, in some part of the world, some people are doing some things which are totally wrong. Of course, there are certain people that are abusers or abusing children.
So what does it mean? It means that you, if you say morality is completely relative, what are you doing? You are imposing your moral standard on those people and saying whatever you feel is wrong. So actually we have, that means there is a universal moral sense that is right and there is wrong. Now there is a specific expression of that sense.
In certain cultures, certain things will be considered right. In certain cultures, certain things will be considered wrong, specifically. But fundamentally there is a guidance.
There is a sense which guides us that there are right things and there are wrong things. Now in Karna, so our inner sense of what is right and wrong, that is affected by our circumstances. Just like a magnet which points towards the true north stops pointing towards the true north when it comes under influence of another magnetic field.
So like this, Karna’s moral compass starts getting distorted because of the association with the north and especially the association of Chakuni. Thereafter, then the Pandavas, they all go or rather go to the Swayambhar. And at the time of Swayambhar, the Pandavas had been sent to the Paranavar forest where the house had been burnt and they had escaped and they were really incognito.
So they came as Brahmanas and Duryodhana also came there, Karna also came there and the Yadus also had come there, Krishna and his dynasty. But Krishna had told them that that Draupadi is meant to be the bride of Arjuna. So none of us should compete for her life.
So they didn’t compete over it, they just came to participate, just be there because they were invited. And then the target was set and the various princes came to exhibit their skills. So Duryodhana came.
Now Duryodhana he missed the target, no other king came and he was close to it. Finally Karna was coming forward. Now the Mahabharata itself has many different versions.
There are different recensions of the Mahabharata. Mahabharata itself is a very big book, 110,000 texts. So in the original text of the Mahabharata what happens over it? There are many ways in which this incident is depicted where it is depicted as Karna is being insulted in this particular book.
So I will talk about the different recensions. There is a book called the Mahabharata Satpahindhana which is a commentary, which is like a summary analysis of the Mahabharata done by Madhavacharya and there in it it is described that actually Karna came and shot but he missed the target by a hair’s breadth. There are other recensions in the Ramayana or the Mahabharata which say that Karna came as he was about to about to contest at that time he was told you cannot come.
You are not born in a Kshatriya family and therefore Draupadi cannot marry somebody who is not a Kshatriya. So Karna infuriated insulted grievously mortified but this came back. Now this was a terrible discrimination against the world over it.
Interestingly after that none of the Kshatriyas could do this. None of the Kshatriyas could hit the target. At that time Arjuna he was in the Brahmana’s garb at that time.
He came and then he looked up to Drupada and said is a Brahmana allowed to compete in this assembly. So Drupada looked curiously the Brahmanas are expected to present and they would do charity. He did not expect a Brahmana to actually participate in the contest.
But what to do? None of the Kshatriyas were actually able to meet the target. He said yes the Brahmanas are always worshipable for the Kshatriyas. Yes you can compete.
And now some of the Brahmanas were saying what is this Brahmana doing? You know he will make a laughing he is so attracted by Draupadi’s beauty that he has lost his good sense and he will make a laughing stop for all Brahmanas now. He will lift the bow also. Some of them said no no you don’t know the power of Brahmanas.
He said that Arjuna before he contested he asked him. See Karna he was in a society Krishna says in the Bhagavad Gita that at that time Krishna Bhagavad Gita is a part of the Mahabharata Krishna says in the Bhagavad Gita that that ancient knowledge yoga which I had given that has declined that has gone down and therefore I have given this knowledge again to Arjuna. That means what Krishna is saying is that the culture at this time was not the ideal culture.
That culture was itself a declined culture as compared to the standard culture. So this caste by birth and the discrimination that came by that. Krishna is saying it’s a declined culture.
It’s not a standard culture. So it was discriminatory no doubt. But that discrimination was just a part of it.
So Karna by presuming that he could contest and then not being allowed to contest. He set himself up for insult. It was sad that he was insulted.
It was hurt badly at that time. But that hurt could have been avoided if he had asked. Arjuna did that.
Although Arjuna had said that Brahmins are all Kshatriyas. So Karna did ask. Arjuna asked.
And Arjuna won the hand of the authority. And after he won the hand of the authority, the Kshatriyas were furious. In ancient Indian society, there were these two centres of power.
The Brahmins were the centres of intellectual power. The Kshatriyas were the centres of political power. And although the roles were significantly well divided, but still whenever there are multiple centres of power, always conflict is possible.
So, this was an occasion when the Kshatriyas felt that the Brahmins were engrossed in their territory. How dare this princess whom we have come to marry, how dare this Brahmin come and take her. Therefore, they said, this Drupada, he has invited all of us Kshatriyas here just to insult us and therefore we should punish him.
And they all started charging towards to attack Drupada. And so, a formidable set of Kshatriyas was attacking and the minister said, the minister was a very duty conscious person. The minister said to Arjuna and Bhima, he said, now Drupada is your father-in-law, it is our duty to protect you.
So, Arjuna immediately, he had the same bow which he had used for shooting the target. Drupada just garlanded him and he took that same bow. Now Bhima looked around, there was a huge saag tree over there.
They sprang towards that, he wanted to uproot the tree and use it. So they should have caught him by the shoulder and said, don’t uproot that tree. We are, right now we are incognito.
If you uproot that tree, everybody will come to know you are Bhima. No ordinary person can do that. Use some more ordinary weapon.
And then they both fought. They both came to defend. And as Arjuna was shooting arrows as Bhima was swinging with all the Chakras fell back.
Shalya alone fought with Bhima and Arjuna fought with Karna. Karna fought with Arjuna. They were fighting, fighting.
Now Karna was shooting arrows and Arjuna was countering. Karna was just fighting like a Brahmin. He was fighting with every single arrow that he was shooting.
Arjuna was effortlessly countering him. He did not know this was Arjuna. He kept fighting, kept fighting, kept fighting.
Finally, he realised that Arjuna was just too good a man. He was looking elsewhere and he saw that he must pick up Shalya and flung him on the ground and Shalya fell unconscious. Karna just lowered him.
He said that martial power, Kshatriyas never equal the spiritual power of the Brahmins. I will not fight with you. He scored it off.
And then the Pandavas left with Draupadi. So here, this was the point where Karna was, you could say, publicly hurt because he was rejected in an attempt to be a suitor for Draupadi. He felt angry towards Draupadi.
He felt angry. He was already having an issue with Arjuna. So it was, for him, now he had been rejected when he tried to win Draupadi and then Draupadi had chosen Arjuna.
So he had an issue. There was a strong grudge with Draupadi at that time. And eventually, all of us, we have certain emotions.
And usually when we think of emotions, we deal with them in two ways. Either we express that anger at someone, yes, let’s vent it out. And then we express that anger.
We speak and do things that are terrible sometimes. When we are angry and if we speak something and there is somebody else and they record our speech and they tell us, was that me? How could I speak that? How could I have spoken that? So when we express our emotions unfiltered, it can become very unsavoury. So the other option is if I don’t express my emotions, I repress my emotions.
But repressed emotions don’t go away. stay there. Anger when it is repressed becomes hate.
Anger when repressed becomes hate. So here Karna could not express his anger against Arjuna, against Draupadi. That slowly started morphing into strong animosity towards them.
And that animosity, the emotions that are repressed, they come out in extremely ugly way. So when someone has hurt us, at that time, we have to get back at them. I have to get back at them.
We may or may not consciously contemplate it, but that strong feeling of resentment and animosity is there. And then, when somehow the opportunity comes up, we can get it back. Sometimes at that time, all that pent up hatred that is there just bursts forth and can come up in a very ugly way.
And that is what happened to Karna. It was true that he was hurt, but what he did later as a revenge for that was completely out of the motion. What that happened when the gambling match took place? The gambling match is itself a long incident and I am not going into all of it.
I will just focus on our theme. So, Yudhisthira was told that, Vyasadev told him that, after this man, that when the Rajya Yuga was performed, when Yudhisthira was coronated like monarch who rules above all things, emperor of all things, then Vyasadev told him, although you have become the emperor, your reign will not be steady. He says, about some years down the line, a decade or so, a terrible war was fought, which many Kshatriyas were defeated and after that, you will have a war with your relatives.
So, at that time, Yudhisthira said that, I will, in order to, what causes war? War is caused by dissension, quarrels. Quarrels are caused when we don’t pay due regard to others. He said, henceforth, I will always obey my elders and that way, I will try to avoid quarrels.
So, then, Yudhisthira sent a message to Yudhisthira, come for the gambling match. All this is going to lead to disaster. Just a second.
If you gamble, you will die. Some things which you can easily overcome, this is made for trouble. If somebody is, say, there is going to be a very important sports match, say, football match, baseball match, cricket match, in an area between two teams which are already very polarised, two teams are very intense rivalry and both the teams’ fans are living in that area, the fans tend to go violent and a match is held over there, now this is made for disaster.
So, such matches have to be done with a lot of security, otherwise terrible things can happen. Yudhisthira saw this match is made for disaster. But then, because he had taken that vow, I was opening my eyes and he considered Yudhisthira to be his father, father was not there, his uncle was in his father’s place, so he could not refuse.
And the gambling match went on and on and on. Eventually, the gambling match itself was unfair because Yudhisthira had to fight against Duryodhana, they were both kings, but he had Shakuni fighting in his place. Shakuni was a professional gangster.
It’s like if it is an entertainment match, sometimes say, two kids in a block, may say let’s have a wrestling match. And when they are about to have a wrestling match, the kid comes along, kid B is there, but kid B says instead of me, a professional wrestler will fight. This is supposed to be an exhibition match between the two of us.
How can you get a professional wrestler over him? So, Shakuni was like a professional gangster. Yudhisthira pointed out, this is not according to the rules. So, Duryodhana just said, if you are afraid to fight, if you are afraid to play, you needn’t play.
Duryodhana looked at Yudhisthira and remained silent. At this point, the match went on, it was just doomed, it was rigged against Yudhisthira, lost everything. Finally, he gambled Draupadi.
And when he lost Draupadi, the chaos had erupted suddenly, everybody was lamenting, but the Kauravas were doomed. And it was this time that Karna’s animosity which had been repressed just came out in an unspeakably agonising way. He said, now Draupadi is now your slave.
Now let us have her dragged to the centre and let us have her paraded, encroached in front of everyone. Karna was a Kshatriya. Kshatriyas are meant to protect citizens.
And one of the members of the society protected his freedom. So you know what, if we look at Karna’s character, this was not Karna actually. But he didn’t do that.
It was uncharacteristic of him, but he did it. And it is to Karna’s credit later that he regrets it. When he reads Bhishma’s he says, it was only out of the desire to please Duryodhana that I spoke like that and acted like that.
But it was not just because of the desire to speak to Duryodhana, but it was also that he Duryodhana has an animosity towards Arjuna, towards the Pandavas and Karna also had an animosity specifically towards Arjuna and towards Draupadi. So then he suggested Draupadi to be dragged to the assembly and in this room. It was Karna who suggested this idea.
And for them it was not just lust so much, it was power. It was what Draupadi represented that we have dishonoured you and we will dishonour your wives. And as the whole incident went on and on at one particular point even before Arjuna this.
After Draupadi was dragged to the assembly and before Draupadi was disrobed, at that time Draupadi raised a question. Actually in this whole Vastraharan this whole gambling and disrobing incident it is often we focus on how Krishna miraculously protected Draupadi. That is true, that is miraculous.
But actually the character who comes out, who shines through it the most is Draupadi herself. She remains firm in her adherence to dharma throughout and unfortunately the character who comes out directly through it is Krishna. So with Draupadi she is a woman but she is also Kshatriya and she is resourceful she is intelligent.
So when she understands what is happening she wants to somehow stay off disaster. So she catches on to it and she says if Krishna had already gambled me gambled himself and lost himself how could he have gambled me if he was not his own master how could he be my master. And then she raises this question so she raises this question in the whole assembly.
Nobody answers. Dhritarashtra remains silent. Finally Nishma is there unless he feels obliged to speak and Nishma says Gandhari or Draupadi that even in the midst of a calamity you are remembering dharma and reminding yourself of dharma that is glorious.
Now your adherence to dharma is extraordinary and universally lauded. Regarding your specific question he says a wife always belongs to the husband but if the husband is not his own master then how can he be the master of his wife. Now when we use the word wife belongs to the husband or the husband is the master of the wife you have to understand this is not in the sense of objectification.
It’s very different since because we see over here that the Pandavas lost all their positions first. After losing their positions they lost themselves and after that they just gambled throughout the world. If at all they gambled it was not a possession in the sense of object.
It was a possession who was more precious than they themselves. After they gambled themselves they gambled them. So like that so when Bhishma says your question because these two principles of morality are there, principles of Dharma are principles are there.
I don’t know which one is right so I’m confused and when Bhishma could not answer her she the whole assembly was looking where everyone else will speak. At that time one of Duryodhana’s brother Vikarna got up and Vikarna said that oh assembly please answer her question but a stressed person comes to assembly of kings of rulers to seek justice and nobody answers her then answer the stressed person the whole assembly will be culpable please answer the question but nobody answers if one of you are into answer I will answer based on my wisdom and he gives three reasons first is he says that this whole gambling match was rigged because Shakuni was fighting against Yudhishthir instead of Duryodhana fighting against him secondly Yudhishthir fought this gambling match although he didn’t want to only because constrained by his elders to do so and thirdly the gambling mania had gone beyond all limits so there are four vices to which men are vulnerable gambling intoxication hunting and womanising and when men get infatuated by these four things they often do terrible actions whatever they do under the spell of these four activities that should be seen as infatuation that should not be taken seriously so I feel that this whole gambling match and all its results should be declared null and void and the Pandavas along with Draupadi should be sent back on the retreat to their kingdom and Vikarna spoke this practically everybody in the assembly cheered but as this cheering was going on suddenly Karna Karna waved his hand stop stop silence and Karna said I have seen many improper things happening in this assembly but nothing is as improper as the words of Vikarna Draupadi will drag with the assembly that is not as improper as Vikarna’s words what is he saying he says Vikarna you are but a child that is a strategy which was used although there is not much age difference because probably a few years younger than Karna that’s all but you are just a child elder brother 3-4 years older than younger brother you are just 40 I am a child so nobody forced Yudhishthir to gamble he gambled by his own choice and he accepted the terms of the math he chose to gamble nobody forced him to do that and he stayed properly nobody is your post in the room and he knew well and he knew that he had lost himself when he stayed properly. If he is Dharmaraj, if he is Rangda, then why are you questioning the Dharmikas? So this way Karna told the whole thing, so eventually Karna, he saw that the audience was conflicted, whether he was going to win them over or not win them over, not sure.
So then he launched an extremely low attack, you know, Karna had also spoken, Antarapani is an honourable Kshatriya, he should never dishonour me like this. Then he backed it, there are what are called as ad hominem arguments, ad hominem means instead of attacking the argument, you attack the arguers, attacking the character of the arguers, they try to discredit the argument, it is called ad hominem argument, they consider it very cheap arguments. Those who do not have, those who do not have points to argue with the content of the argument, they cast aspersions on the character of the arguers, so that is the ad hominem argument that Karna used over him, he said that as far as Draupadi is concerned, now what dharma can she know, she herself has got 5 husbands, she is a prostitute, now whether for a woman who is a prostitute like this, what is honour, what is dishonour, now even if she is disrobed publicly, there is no dishonour in that, it is Karna who suggested that she be dragged and she be disrobed.
Now here, Karna’s atrocious behaviour goes beyond this, for any woman, for a honourable woman to be publicly called a prostitute, it is, yes Draupadi had 5 husbands, having 5 husbands is unusual, but she had not done anything to snag 5 husbands, she had just beautifully been a part of the society and then by a highly religious belief that she had got 5 husbands, it was, then Gyasadev had sanctioned it, Draupadi herself had apprehensions about it, Gyasadev spoke about it, Gyasadev told her a previous life story about how Lord Shiva has sanctioned it, so she had simply beautifully gone according to what her ancestors had told her. So, actually, to everybody, all of us, when we have a particular desire, we have a particular perception, we try to, we try to shift the facts in a way that it supports us to, our version of reality, we shift the facts. So, here Karna was trying to shift the facts.
If you look at the facts objectively, there is no rational way in which Draupadi could ever be compared to a prostitute. Yes, she had 5 husbands, but they were all beautifully married, not by any scheme on her part, but by the arrangement of her elders, sanctioned by a very faithful Gyasadev. So, therefore, this was just the worst side of Karna’s manner.
And then a suggestion that she would disrobe. Now, why disrobe? Because basically, he had felt dishonoured, that he had not been allowed to compete in the assembly, and now he wanted to dishonour her back. And that’s how he dishonoured, tried to dishonour her, and Krishna, you know, he also brought Krishna into the meeting.
And then the disrobing was stopped. That’s one thing, another thing. Now, actually, the Mahabharata, it is not specifically described that it was Krishna who came there.
The Mahabharata simply says that a saree is inexhaustible, and with the inexhaustible saree, Dushyasan got exhausted. And the assembly lauded Draupadi’s chastity because of which a saree can be inexhaustible. And then after that, actually Krishna’s miraculous intervention does not end the incident.
Then, when that particular scheme doesn’t work out, then Karna suggests that actually Draupadi is our slave now. She should go and live where all the other mills live, and she should clean our palace in the room where the mill is clean. And then, as Draupadi was being led away like that, at that time suddenly Vidura finally spoke.
He said, oh Krishna, I have been warning you, disaster is about to happen. What you have allowed to happen has gone beyond all limits. The sacrificial fire that you had always kept lit in your altar, that has gone off.
Now, at that time Dhritarashtra is also caught. Dhritarashtra is to some extent, he knows about Dharma, but he is very attached to his son Dhritarashtra. But when he hears, this is a very inauspicious warning, that oh, the sacrificial fire has gone off.
Now things are going to be fine. So he says that, stop this all. At last, too late, but he takes a stand.
Till now, he will just stand, sit, don’t do anything. Enough is enough, he says. Then he realises that, it is Draupadi who will be most severely incited.
And he realises that the Pandavas have also taken fearful imprecations, fearful vows of revenge. And he realises a disaster may happen. How to avert it? So Draupadi has been acting throughout most ominously.
So he speaks to Draupadi. He says, oh Draupadi, actually I have called this match simply for examining the visual skills. Things went too far.
But you have stuck to Dharma throughout and your character is virtuous. So I am pleased with you. Please ask for some benediction.
And she says, please release my husband Yudhishthir. Now, there is a whole different character analysis of Draupadi’s character and her behaviour. Now she, in public, she does not blame Yudhishthir.
He stands by his side over there. And Duryodhana tries to play husband against wife over there. When this whole incident is going on, he says, oh Draupadi, if you say that Dharma Raj, Yudhishthir committed Adharma by gambling, then I will release all of you.
So he tries to create a split between husband and wife. He is saying, wife should say that husband has committed Adharma. Draupadi is too intelligent.
He says, Yudhishthir never wanted to play this gambling match. He says, those who made him play this gambling match, let them decide whether he will play this or not. See, there are some questions.
The expertise needs to know which questions to answer and which questions not to answer. So Draupadi to the Rajan, throws the ball back in their court. Anyway, Rajan says, release Yudhishthir.
He says, yes, it is done. If you ask for something more, it is back. He says, release my other husbands along with their husbands.
With that alone, they will regain everything that is with me. So Draupadi also, in her gentle words, she is issuing a threat of war. Now if that happens, they will gain back everything that is with me.
Yudhishthir says that. So Guru Yudhishthir says, yes, I give that back. Ask for something more.
He says, no. He is a Kshetra. He says, a Kshetra is not meant to ask for more than two moons from anyone.
This is enough for me. Yudhishthir says, I am not satisfied. I will give you everything back.
Whatever has been lost, I will give it back to you. So, as the Pandavas are moving out, at that time, Karna, once again, can’t resist the temptation. He says, no.
Just look, all these warriors, they will be celebrated now on worlds as heroes who were saved by a woman. Draupadi is having her moment of glory. But Karna cannot tolerate even that.
And Yudhishthir’s head is hung low as they go out. So, of course, after a game of Duryodhana and Shakuni, Yudhishthir asks, what have you done? How did you give up the kingdom like this? They are already angry with us. Now if they have the power of the kingdom, they will immediately attack and they will destroy us.
Yudhishthir says, Yudhishthir, there is this conscience, there is attachment, there is constant conflict between the two. He says, what should I do? I can’t tolerate the idea that my sons will be attacked and killed. What should I do? Just call them back again and have another gambling match.
They are all called back. And they have another gambling match in which they lose and then they are sentenced to 12 years in exile and 1 year in cognitive exile. But the point here which I am making is that yes, Karna was hurt.
Karna was terribly hurt by whatever happened. Since his childhood, that he was a Sutaputra, he was called a Sutaputra, that kept, that hurt him. And especially when the moment for winning the Draupadi’s hand had come and he was deprived of that, he was hurt.
He was hurt. It’s true he was hurt. But there is also a proportion.
So we could say, hurt people hurt people. When somebody is hurt, those people they go and hurt other people. So Karna was hurt at the time of Draupadi Swayamvar and he hurt Draupadi.
He hurt all the Pandavas. But still, there is a sense of proportion. Okay, a Kshatriya hero not being allowed to participate in a Swayamvar, that is an insult.
But to publicly disrobe a woman, to publicly call a woman a prostitute, that is an offence of an entirely different scheme. So what happened is that Karna was terribly hurt. He let that hurt fester within him.
And when that hurt was festering within him, it came out in an extremely ugly way. Extremely ugly way. Why did it fester like that? And why did it come out in such an ugly way? Because not only was the hurt there, along with that he was associating with somebody wicked.
That was Duryodhana. Duryodhana’s wicked ways, Shakuni’s cunning ways, they combined together with Karna’s own hurt. It all came out in an extremely ugly way.
So most of us, when we are having our own, we will discuss this whole, the denouement of this past time later, or this story later. But here, to understand it, usually we think of emotions in two ways. When we express them or we repress them.
When we express them as it, it hurts others. When we repress them, it festers within us. And it comes out eventually among the younger.
But there is a third option beyond expressing emotions and repressing emotions. A third option is processing emotions. We need to process our emotions.
And the processing of emotions is what helps us to channel the energy of the emotional construct. Emotions themselves are not intrinsically necessarily good or bad. Emotions are simply our responses to situations.
If I look down from a 100 story building, I feel fear. Fear is a response to the stimuli of the engine. It is there.
Similarly, if somebody insults me, I feel angry. Something which is very important for me is stolen away. I feel mad.
I feel angry, irritated. They are just responses to emotions. Emotions at one level are simply responses, are inner responses, are mental responses, psychological responses to events in life.
But at the same time, we are not just emotional creatures. We are also rational creatures. And as rational beings, we have the capacity to process our emotions.
When we don’t process the emotions, then they take control of us. When they take control of us, often, sooner or later, they will make us act in unhealthy ways. In ways that we eventually regret.
This is what happened with Karna. He was hurt and did not process that hurt. There was a festering wound that was always there within him.
And it came out in an indescribably ugly way when he dishonoured Draupadi. It is not just between him and Draupadi. It is not that Draupadi personally had anything against Karna.
She was just following the tradition of her time. And he couldn’t marry her because of that. But what he did was, the way it came out was like a personal attack against her very core character.
And usually when we are hurt by others, then naturally that hurt is for him. And it needs to be dealt with appropriately. Yesterday I was in Leicester and there was a four-part seminar on From Grudging to Gratitude.
There we discussed about how to process resentment and hurt when someone has wronged us. And that is what I will discuss in the second half of the seminar. Right now, let’s have a few questions if any of you have.
And then we’ll have a break. Do you have any questions? I’ll summarise what I discussed till now. So today I spoke on the theme of how hurt people hurt people.
I started with how understanding happens when we see the familiar in the unfamiliar. If we just hear stories, then we entertain. But if we see familiar ethical emotional issues in the stories that we hear, then we say, oh, this is relevant to my life.
When we study the Mahabharata, the storyline itself is dramatic, but along with that, there are ethical decisions about Dharma. And there are emotional issues which impel people towards certain actions. So if we understand that, then the Mahabharata will become far, far more relevant to us.
I discussed about Karana how we all need a sense of belonging. We want to be accepted and respected. And with social circle, we choose to be accepted and respected.
That social circle is where whose values will conform to. If that social circle is virtuous, then we will become virtuous. If that social circle is given to ISIS, we will give it to ISIS.
For Karana, he had the qualities of Kshatriya in terms of calibre, and fighting skills. But he was always labelled as a Surtaputra, as a charioteer. And he desperately craved for acceptance among charioteers.
And at the moment of his greatest honour, when he had equalled the skills of the famed archer Arjuna, it seemed he was going to get the greatest dishonour. Because he was not allowed to compete because of his low worth. And then, when Duryodhana bestowed upon him the kingship of hunger, he was very emotionally vulnerable and he became overwhelmed.
He rashly committed, I will be a lifelong friend. And that, on one side, his feeling of being hurt, of being deprived because of Kshatriya, because of his purported low worth, that led him to join forces with Duryodhana, which distorted his moral compass. We all have a conscience, which is culturally shaped by our present circumstances, which is shaped by our past karma through the impressions, and which also sometimes channels the voice of God.
But as a magnet, it can get distorted from true north, if it is another bigger magnetic field. Like that, Karna’s moral compass became distorted by the association of Duryodhana. Duryodhana himself had no special love for Karna.
He simply wanted to get back at the Pandavas, who he felt had usurped his right to the kingdom. And he saw Karna as a foil to Arjuna. Now, in Draupadi’s framework, Karna was not allowed to fight, and he was hurt because of that.
But it was also his presumptuousness, when he assumed that he would be allowed to compete. And Arjuna did not have a presumptuousness. He asked for permission.
So, he was hurt too. That’s true. So, when we express emotions with others, when we repress emotions, they become super.
And they come out in far and near ways at the opportune moment. And that unfortunate opportune moment came in Draupadi’s framework, in Draupadi’s Vastraharanam. So, there, it is Karna who suggested the idea that Draupadi, drag him to the assembly and give him this robe.
He was dishonoured, and that’s why he wanted to dishonour her, to get back at her. And through her, to get back at Arjuna and the Pandavas. And then, he not only gave a terrible suggestion, he also used his intelligence to counter Kalikarna, who was trying to stop this atrocity.
And finally, when he found his arguments were not being persuasive, he referred, he resorted to ad hominem argument, attacking the character of Draupadi, calling her a prostitute. So, eventually, he, even when the disaster was to some extent avoided, and Pandavas were going back to Draupadi, he again further attacked her. This was a hero who was saved by a woman.
So, he was hurt. Yeah, that’s true. But then there is a sense of proportion that is completely lost.
And the way he tried to dishonour and attack Draupadi, it’s grievous, it’s outrageous. So, when our emotions, we don’t repress them, they will come out in extremely ugly ways. For expressing or repressing emotions, we need to process them.
And then we have an emotional side, but we also have a rational side. With the rational side, especially when it is guided by spiritual wisdom, we can learn to appropriately process emotions, and then deal with them. How we can do that, in the second half of our session.
Thank you. Are there any questions? Yes, please. Thank you for that.
I have two questions. The first is about the conscious part. So, Dhritarashtra, in the beginning, was… There was one point that he reacted more virtuous, and then… Who, Dhritarashtra? Yeah, when he was told, okay, Draupadi, what do you want? And then he fell back to his own weakness of… So, my question is, in spiritual life, when we shift out of this inner voice of conscious, or listening to Krishna, we listen to the mind, or to these bad habits, and then it sort of becomes like a cycle.
How do we come back to our right place in the heart? It becomes more difficult. Okay. So, sometimes in our spiritual life, we slip off from our right course of action because of the weakness of the heart, and then we want to come back.
So, when we get entangled into offensive mentality, because of our conditions, how can we come back on track? Basically, the process of connection with Krishna in bhakti is essentially a process of repeated reconnection. We will get distracted and disconnected by the power of the mind, by the power of senses, by the power of the world around us. But then as soon as we realise it, we come back.
So, if you see a person who is driving a car, at one level they are doing nothing, they are sitting there, holding the wheel, and they don’t seem to be doing a lot of work. You know, the small adjustment that they do, little bit this way, little bit that way, that’s what keeps the car on track. Similarly, the plane.
The plane is, say, the plane comes from, say, New York to London. So, now it is not that the plane always goes in a straight line. Because of the vane, because of its vane, it keeps moving off track.
You know, going backward. The pilot or the machinery of the plane is made to auto-redirect. So like that, we will go off track.
But you don’t have to say that, you know, if you go off track, it is not necessary that you have to go back to the starting point and then start again. So you go off track, again make course correction and go towards the destination. So that means, we have to become more conscious.
First, we become conscious of our actions. I am doing this, I should not be doing this. But as we become more spiritually adept, we become conscious of our consciousness.
I am thinking like this. If I think like this, then things will grow. This will become a desire.
This will become a craving. This will become an intention. And then, I fall for it.
So, whatever it is, if we realise, okay, we have done some action wrong, at least correct it at that time. But more vigilant, especially if we are studying Shastra carefully, if we are associating with devotees who are vigilant in their spiritual life, then we catch our mind before the mind catches us. We catch our mind.
The mind is like, come on, do this. Watch this. Touch this.
Eat this. Go there. Speak this.
So, when the mind impels us to do this, we catch it before it catches us. We catch it as the mind is speaking. I am not going to do this.
But if we don’t catch it, then it catches us. It catches us means, we identify with it. And then we do that particular thing.
It is like that, you know, to become conscious of our consciousness. What we need to do? Don’t identify with the mind. Identify the mind.
I am feeling angry. That’s identifying with the mind. The mind is feeling angry.
That’s the mind speaking. Shout back at that person. Give them a piece of your mind.
That’s the mind speaking. So, if we… That’s why when we start practising bhakti, we can actually see our mind in action. You see, when we are trying to chant Hare Krishna, the mind is going here, going there.
Even sometimes we feel, what is the use of my chanting if I can’t concentrate? No. If my mind is bantering all the time, what is the use of my chanting? At the very least, during chanting or through chanting, we become conscious that there is something inside me that is not me. That there is something inside me that is not me.
And I have this mind. I don’t want to go there, but the mind is going there. That means this is something different from me.
Just becoming aware of that is also a significant step forward in our spiritual evolution. So, we need to do continuous course correction. That course correction can be to become conscious of our actions.
And better still, we can become conscious of our consciousness. And that happens through the association and study of scripture. Yes, please.
So, Karna essentially wanted revenge. What’s the difference between Draupadi wanting her revenge later on? She also wanted revenge. And Dhritarashtra, Aravind, etc.
have the same traits. So, Karna wanted revenge and Draupadi wanted revenge. What is the difference? Two main differences.
When Krishna told, Draupadi was ready to let go. When Krishna went with the peace proposal to just five villages, when Krishna told, Draupadi was ready to accept it. She was angry, but she was ready to accept it.
When Krishna proposed to Karna, Karna did not. Krishna told Karna, why are you fighting on the side of wives? I will talk about it more later. But, Draupadi did not let that revenge make her do any adharma.
She did not tell her husband that go and kill Kauravas when they are sleeping at night. What Karna did was adharmic. So, to try to dishonour honourable women in public, highly adharmic.
So, yes, there is anger and anger can be accepted sometimes. We will discuss later on about forgiveness and then forgiveness is applicable when justice is to be done. So, actually if you look carefully, what the Pandavas did was, they did not fight for revenge.
They fought for adharma. If they had been fighting for revenge, then, that had been their primary motive and they would never have agreed to a peace proposal. So, they fought for adharma.
So, in that sense, yes, at that moment of being violated, being angry, Draupadi took that vow. But she was throughout guided by Karna. Karna, unfortunately, was not guided by adharma.
That’s the major difference between the two. Thank you. So, normally, back in that time, getting the status of a Kshatriya is respected in society and his position is certainly more important than emotional, emotional action or emotional needs.
When Karna reacted like that in a public forum, how come nobody in society or any of the elders reacted or took away his position of being a Kshatriya for the community? When he tried to dishonour Draupadi? Yes. So, when Karna tried to dishonour Draupadi, why did nobody take away, punish him for that? Why did nobody take away his position? Actually, at that time, Dhritarashtra was a very passive ruler. And actually, if you see, Dhritarashtra had already tried to cheat him in the Pandavas and Yamuna match.
Nobody took any action on Dhritarashtra also. So, Dhritarashtra and Karna both belonged to the same group. Basically, they were the people who had power.
And the elders, for all of them, for different reasons, Dhritarashtra, because he was attached to Dhritarashtra, Bhishma, because he was bound by a vow, all of them, he just rendered helpless at that time. He spoke out. But beyond that, he did not have the power to do anything.
So, basically, those in power had themselves either been rendered powerless or those in power were on the side of Niranjan and Karna. That’s one way to actually question. Did the master just have any questions? Regarding this need to be accepted, how can we help children? It’s so important.
Because sometimes they get, as you said, because they’re not accepted in a certain circle, they have this need, and sometimes they don’t know how, and they become… they don’t behave properly, and they go… they’re not… But even for the parents, they see their children, they’re not behaving. So how, as a parent, how can we help have our children in the right way? Not to force them, but… Yeah, that’s true. So, children need to be accepted.
And sometimes in today’s society, they may go on the wrong track. How can we, as parents, help them? That’s why the children also need some kind of community. If there are other devoted kids around them, then at least there’s some similarity in values.
And… beyond that, in a free society, you’ll see that even in childhood also, there is goodness, passion, ignorance. So even among children, there are some children who are more studious, more inclined towards… actually they’re relatively sattvic. Others are more inclined towards passionate, some others towards ignorance.
So social influences are there on everyone. But the stratification in goodness, passion, ignorance is also there everywhere. So within the social circle that they have, we can encourage them to, as much as possible, connect with those kids who are more and more of goodness.
So there is basically one human being can influence another human being pragmatically three ways. Now we can we can provide, we can share knowledge, we can provide facilities, and we can set an example. There are only three things you can do by guiding the humans.
We provide knowledge. This is right, this is wrong. This will have this consequence, this will have that consequence.
We provide that knowledge. Along with that, we provide or create some facilities. Okay, these are children, you know, okay, you shouldn’t watch this movie, or you shouldn’t play this kind of games.
But I need to do something. I can’t just leave. What do I do with my time? So the children, they come to a temple, they can’t be expected to attend the same classes with us, parents actually.
So we have to create facilities for them. And those facilities have to be at a level which they can connect with. Sometimes as devotee parents, we expect our children to be reincarnations of Prahlad Maharaj.
That’s not going to happen. They are going to be children. we have to create the facilities for them to play, to enjoy, to have fun at their level.
And also to be connected with Krishna at their level. So create facilities. And that’s why in many places, either we have devotees starting their own schools, or the temple community coming forward and starting a school.
Many parents do homeschooling. Or I have to select which schools the kids go to. Then I have to select the school very carefully.
So basically, it’s telling them right or wrong is important. But along with that, providing facilities is also important. And then after that, we’re setting an example.
And the children, children are very sharp, actually. I saw a joke recently. A pastor is asking a child, he says, why should we be silent in the church? Why should we be silent in a church during a sermon? Because everyone is sleeping.
Sleep during sermons. So the children see that, you know, the parents are saying, you should go for classes, but in the classes, they are still sleeping. Children catch that.
So actually, the parents are in the class. So if we are doing these three things, then we are doing all that is humanly possible. And then they will, by their own intentions, by their own freedom, make good choices.
To some extent, in the childhood, we have to make choices for them. We have to tell them, do this, don’t do this. And as they grow older, they are going to assert their freedom.
And they have to be given that rule. So if we have given them the knowledge, the facilities, and the example, then the chances are very high that they will themselves make all the choices. Sometimes they will go off on the wrong track.
But those impressions will be there in the heart. And that will bring them back on the right track sooner or later. Sooner or later.
So basically, if we provide them facilities, then usually the children, if they, if something is explained to them properly, and is also made easy for them to do, then it is not so difficult for them. But if something is imposed on them, this is what you have to do. And it is not explained to them in a way they can understand.
There are certain things, especially in young childhood, do this, don’t do this. That is important. But beyond that, as they grow older, at that time, they may explore a little bit.
And that’s why we can have a good community, a good college, or a good like-minded, same-age people who are on the right track. That helps a lot. And sometimes I’ve seen here in America that devotee children from various parts of the country, they come, not here, I’m in America, sorry, UK here.
But here we have a hybrid youth group also. So, you know, devotees from various parts of the country, they come together for some youth get-together. And they don’t feel a sense of loneliness.
Oh, I’m just one or two person doing this. So many others doing it. And they’re nice people.
So basically, somehow or the other, they have to feel that sense of belonging in the devotee community. And they won’t feel that sense of belonging with others. They need to feel that with their own age group.
That is the facility we create. Then they will, in due course, immediately sometimes, or sometimes in due course, they’ll make the right choices. The answer is One question I have is about modern relativism.
Essentially, what you feel is right is right. And how do you kind of feel part of the devotee community and over the years have just to understand what’s right and wrong. What do you do about the general society where people don’t have spiritual, they don’t have connections with philosophy and knowledge.
And you’re still operating in this world where you’re facing relativism. People are on that plane. So how do you deal with that? That also cannot be a recipe for a society which works in a proper way.
Okay. In a broader sense society, which does not accept spiritual authority, how do we counter the idea of modern relativism? Yes, the two things over here. First is our own practise.
The second is our explaining to others. One of the advantages of the contemporary postmodern ethos is people are highly individualistic. If you want to do your thing, I won’t interfere with you.
Most people, they let you do if you want to be a vegetarian, you want to be a vegan, be a vegan. If you want to live this way, live this way. Initially they try to pressurise us but we just remain firm.
People allow us to do. They let us do what we want to do as long as we let them do what they want to do. So as far as our own practise is concerned, the fragmentation of society to some extent is in a sense positive.
As I said, people don’t exert too much pressure. Especially literally. Once you are in a corporate position or something like that, you live your own life, let me live my own life.
It’s like that. That’s the advantage and we can just say this is the principles I live by. Now secondly, if I try to explain what we are doing, we often try to give the moral judgement before we give the philosophical context.
It’s like saying, I’m seen as a bitch over here. And I’m seen as a good role over here. Naturally I’ll go along this road.
But if somebody doesn’t have proper rights, they’re not seen as a bitch over here. And don’t go there. Why should I not go there? Don’t go there.
Why should I not go there? You just don’t understand. There’s a ditch over there. I don’t see any ditch.
Rather than telling that, just offer them the sticks. Ah, there’s a ditch. I shouldn’t go there.
So what happens is, rather than telling about our moral standards, we can focus first on sharing the philosophical understanding. That will give rise to the moral standards. Without that philosophical understanding, often the moral standards will just seem repressive, regressive, or arbitrary.
That’s what you believe. But it’s not just a matter of what you believe and what I believe. Philosophy has a strong rational aspect to it.
That is the basics of the Bhaktivisdham of the Bhagavad Gita. They can be very rational and mystical. And when we give this philosophy to context, and today’s world, you know, what is sinful? Our sinful is sinful.
In a sense, nobody likes that word today. So, we need to be sensitive about that. Rather than saying that this is sinful or this is wrong, we can focus more on the point that whether this is going to help you grow or this is going to hinder your growth.
So, from the spiritual perspective, we are against certain activities, the regular principles. Our focus is not just that they are sinful. Our focus primarily is that they will hinder our spiritual growth.
So if people get a spiritual understanding, then the moral principles that we are talking about, they start to make more sense. So now, the two things, the three things over here, one or other. What you say is unacceptable to me.
What you say is intelligible, but not acceptable. And what you say is acceptable. Are you intelligible to me? So know what you are saying.
It’s unacceptable. Intelligible? Okay, you are coming from there. This is how we look at things.
That’s why we think like this. Acceptable? Yeah, I agree with that. So see, most people, for them to come to the level of acceptable, that’s going to take a very, very long time.
But, if we just directly present the moral principles, this is right and this is wrong, then they will go directly to the level of unacceptable. They will reject us only. But rather, if we present the philosophy, explain the philosophy, and then we talk about the morality, then at least it will be intelligible.
Oh, that’s where you are coming from. Okay. Okay.
I understand what you are saying. I don’t accept it, now that I am going to follow it. But I accept it.
If they come from the level of unacceptable to intelligible, that itself is a progress. And if we present philosophical understanding properly, then they do come to that level. And then beyond that, it will be much more our conduct.
You know, how we behave, how much we behave of our talk. You see that. And from the acceptable to the intelligible, they move towards the acceptable also.
Will that answer your question? Yeah. I mean, generally, it does answer my question, but I think it’s your behaviour is what people get to see, right? Moral standards and philosophy.