Were the Kauravas harassing their citizens – were they tyrants who needed to be removed by force?

Answer Podcast

Transcript

This is an AI-generated transcript and may contain some errors.
Thank you.
Question. Were the Kauravas harassing their subjects and others? So, would that make the Pandavas’ attempts to overthrow them, the overthrow of irreligious people, of tyrants? Answer. Yes, we see three things over here broadly.
Not just what a person does specifically to someone else, but what is the overall disposition that is seen. And what does that disposition tell about the probability of a person doing something? And how is a person overall disposed toward the divine? So, during the period of the exile, Mahabharata does not focus so much on the narrative of what the Kauravas were doing. So, we don’t exactly know whether the Kaurava kingdom was prosperous because of the exploitation of the citizens or not.
But even if we assume, even if we accept for our argument’s sake that Arjuna was, that while the Pandavas were in exile, the Kauravas were not persecuting them, persecuting the citizens, then still that doesn’t mean anything specifically. All that it means is that during that time, they were not oppressing. But in future, they might start it again because they could very well be waiting to grab power and to not, to wait to win over the citizens.
And once the citizens have been won over, then there is no need to again and again, once the citizens have been won over and especially once the challengers, possible challengers have been sidelined, eliminated. Say if the Pandavas completely renounce their kingdom, claim to the kingdom and the Pandavas are no longer a threat to the Kauravas, then what happens? Then after that, then he might start oppressing citizens outright and terribly. So, he might just be waiting to stabilize his power.
And once the power is stabilized, then he goes off and does whatever he wants. Now we may say, how can we know that he would do something like this? Well, we can know it from the fact that he was ready to disrobe and dishonor Draupadi even in the presence of elders right in the family, right in the court. So, to molest a woman is itself bad, but most people would do that in a private place.
If somebody is brazen enough to molest a woman in public, then that indicates that they have no sense of shame practically and they are doing whatever they feel they can get away with and that is a dangerous place to be in. So, it’s like somebody molests a woman not just in private and not just in public, but in the court or in the police station. So, the Kuru assembly was the place where a person could and should be able to expect justice.
But instead of getting justice, if the kind of crime that does indicate that person has a total brazenness and that brazenness is alarming. So, that’s one point to be considered. We can know the fact that if he could do that in public, then surely once he had unchallenged power, he would do that in a serious way to others also.
So, that’s one thing to consider. The second thing rather to consider. The first is that it might just be a strategy to wait till the people are won over and challengers are sidelined.
And the third point is that he openly defied Krishna. When a peace proposal came and Krishna himself came with the peace proposal, then at that time he completely defied Krishna and he was very arrogant with Krishna, which indicates that he didn’t have any respect for even God. So, now that open defiance for God is indication that whatever morality he had, would not last for very long.
So, ultimately the purpose of a king is not just to not do unfair things to the citizens, but is also to help them rise in God consciousness. And if they are to rise in God consciousness, then the only way they will rise is by having a king who is favorable to God and who is helping them, also engaging them in activities that will take them closer to God. So, his aversion to Krishna indicated that he would not be able to fulfill the responsibilities of a king properly.
And citizens under him would be in that sense misled. And so he had to be removed. So, in this way we can understand that it was important for Arjuna, it was important for them to have this particular situation taken handle properly.
The Pandavas had to open Kauravas for ensuring that a person with a known track record of brazen, brazen envy and lust and arrogance and a known track record of defiance to God could not stay, should not stay in power.