The Difficulty of Being Good-The Subtle Art of Dharma (Part II)

(Continuation of the previous post)

Krishna, the 'noble' charioteer.

Krishna giving counsel to Arjuna

Be intent on the action

Not on the fruits of the action 

Krishna gives this advise to Arjuna to prod him to take up his arms and to fight the enemy. When Arjuna realized that he would have to kill his own cousins, uncles and teachers to win the war, he developed a cold feet and he put down his weapons. At this juncture, Krishna gives his counsel to Arjuna, which is available to us in the form of Srimad Bhagvad Gita. Krishna says that one can attain moksha or salvation by doing his karma or duty. While performing the duty, one should not be bothered about its consequences. When a man dwells in his mind on the object of sense, attachment to them is produced. From attachment springs desire and from desire comes anger. So duty bound deeds should be done without letting the nature of results to affect one's actions. 

Krishna, was advocating an alternative way to attain salvation. The other ways are through jnana yoga, wherein one through the employment of his intellect tries to gain knowledge about the supreme being and  through bhakthi yoga, wherein one through utmost devotion and love attains oneness with the cosmic soul. But these two ways are not easily adoptable for a man of world. These two calls for solitude and  renunciation of world. So, by suggesting that one can attain salvation through a detached and religious performance of one's duties, Krishna was opening the doors of salvation to a man of world. 

Krishna tells Arjuna that being a kshatrhriya he has the duty to fight for his kingdom. Moreover, the war was not merely for the reclamation of kingdom. It was a fight for justice. So Arjuna has the duty of punishing the unjust and eliminating evil. Therefore he should not let his personal affections to come in the way of his duties. 

But this philosophy of 'nishkama karma' can also be problematic at times.German philosopher Hegel recognized the moral attractiveness of 'doing one's duty for duty's sake', and agreed that this was a great moral intention but also pointed out the practical difficulty in knowing what one's duty is(p.134). The moral law of acting disintrestedly does not necessarily lead one to virtuous acts. For example  Adolf Eichmann,Nazi SS Officer, considered by many to be the 'architect of holocaust', during his trial in Israel sought to justify his evil acts on the grounds that he was not acting for selfish ends;he was doing his duty to his country.  He implied that he generally felt sympathy for the jews. However, he steadfastly stuck to his job because he believed that everyone should do one's duty unaffected by sympathy. He was obeying the highest law by doing his duty.

                                                                                                     Adolf Eichmann

This sort of extreme, if not absurd, extrapolation of the philosophy of nishkama karma  could be arrested with the theory of consequentialism. It suggests that acts, per se, do not have any morality attached thereto. The morality of the act is judged from the consequence of it. It is an extension of the doctrine of utilitarianism, which was devised by Jeremy Bentham and was developed by J.S.Mill. It suggests that an act which promotes pleasure is good and an act which promotes pain is bad. All deeds should be seeking to promote the greatest happiness of the greatest numbers.

During the Kurukshetra war, Krishna too employs this philosophy. It forms the edifice for the aphorism 'ends would justify the means'.  Thus he prods Yudhishtira to  deceive Drona into believing that his son Ashwatthama is dead. He encourages Arjuna to kill an unarmed Karna. He also encourages Bhima to kill Duryodhana through foul play. All these acts were blatant violations of the recognized rules and norms of war. Krishna says 'Casting aside virtue,ye sons of Pandu, adopt some contrivance for gaining victory'(p.185). This causes Duryodhana, during his dying moments, to accuse Krishna of perfidy. He states that the victory was achieved through deceit and trickery and had it been a fair fight Kauravas would have won comprehensively. 

Duryodhana may have had good reasons to denounce Krishna, but Krishna believes that Duryodhana is really the guilty one. He blames him for the failure of peace talks. He firmly believes that once you make the fateful decision of going to war, then you must win at any cost. As he sees it, the Pandavas cause is just, and once the war begins the only thing that matters is victory. Ends justify the means. We can see a manifestation of moral relativism in Kurukshetra. And one would not be wrong in presuming that Krishna would be the first one to breach  the Geneva Conventions, if  it is a jus ad bellum(just war).

Karna's insecurities

    Arjuna killing Karna

Karna is often perceived as a 'wronged hero'.He had an unfortunate birth. Despite being born as a kshathriya, he had to live as a charioteer, a low-caste. His apparent low-caste origin caused him a lot humiliations throughout his life. Dhraupadi shunned him during her swayam-vara by stating 'I do not choose a charioteer'. His utmost adherence to his virtue causes him to voluntarily relinquish his boons. And at the war, he gets killed through foul means .

In this book, the author tries to examine the psychology of this tragic-hero. He suggests that Karna might have been suffering from 'status-anxiety'.Mahabharatha is set in a rigid social order regulated by the varna system and Karna is eager to establish his place in the society. He is conscious of his skills and talents and that leads him to think that he deserves a more worthy position in the society. But the tag of 'charioteer's son' dogs him all his life. And when a beautiful woman like Dhraupadi delivers the snub, it is unbearable. 

Like most people, Karna wants to be 'somebody'. It must have hurt him to sit in the stands at the tournament where Pandavas and Kauravas exhibited their skills. Later when his own skill is discovered and he is praised by the crowd, Karna begins to feel worthy. Anxiety about one's place in the world tends to distort one's character. It makes Karna excessively proud and boastful(P.156). The shrewd Duryodhana is aware of Karna's insecurity, and he seeks to exploit it for his ends. He renders Karna the much coveted recognition and place, and that makes Karna loyal to him, till the end. Karna's loyalty is blind and unquestioning and he connives at Duryodhan's misdeeds. When Dhraupadi was getting humiliated, Karna supports it by stating that a woman who sleeps with five men has no dignity and that she ought to be humiliated(p.40). While doing that Karna was avenging the humiliation he suffered at Dhraupadi's swayam-vara.

Karna can be characterized as an 'others-centric' person. He is too conscious about others' perception about him. He values fame and reputation above everything. When Surya, his father, cautions him about Indra's ploy to snatch the boons of immortality and invincibility from him, he is categorical that he would not resist that, for he fears 'infamy than death'(p.172). He does not pay heed to his father's counsel that there are other things in life that matter more than fame, such as the 'human duties of the living'. Even Surya's parting words, 'What use is fame to a dead man?It is like a garland on a corpse', could not shake his resolve.

Karna was suffering from an ego problem. He was favourable to anyone who appeased his ego(Duryodhana). And he was vindictive to anyone who scorned his ego(Dhraupadi). This ego-centric attitude blinds his objectivity and impairs his reason. His eagerness to inflate the leaky balloon of ego which was susceptible to tiny pin-pricks of neglect led to his predicament. Karna's search for his identity reminds one of the terrible mistake society makes in assessing a person on the basis of his origins. Even now, we have not redeemed ourselves completely of the scourge of casteism. So the rigid social hierarchy, which does not value a person on the basis of merit but on the basis of origin, is equally culpable for Karna's follies. At the root of status-anxiety is an excessive concern about what others think of us. At this juncture, Albert Camus' wise words could be helpful. 'To be happy one must not be too concerned with the opinion of others. One should pursue one's goals single-mindedly, with a quiet confidence, without thinking of others'.

Revenge and Remorse

Revenge, the primitive yet potent emotion is an underlying theme of the epic. Most of the events in the epic are a manifestation of it. Most of the characters succumb to it. Dhraupadi's need to avenge her humiliation is one of the factors which led to the war. Arjuna avenges the gruesome killing of his son Abhimanyu. Ashwatthama's vendetta against the Pandavas for killing his father Drona in an unfair manner goads him to effect the brutal decimation of Pandavas' sons. So revenge, in all its superlative forms, recurs throughout the work. This has tempted many to think that the main theme of the work is revenge. The recent movie 'Rakht Charithra', directed by Ram Gopal Verma, sought to attribute its theme 'Revenge is the purest emotion', to the epic. This is either a result of selective reading of the epic or selective quoting(And the Censor Board, rightly, admonished the producers of the film for this distortion, and they diluted its impact by including a quote by Mahatma Gandhi.)

                                                                

One who is besotted with this crude emotion will not think about anything else, and would be bent on realizing it at any cost. One can adopt any desperate measures, can stoop down to any reprehensible level, for the sake of retribution. The fate of Ashwatthama is illustrative of this. Hence, society has institutionalized this emotion through it's criminal justice system, wherein state would be carrying out retributive justice on behalf of its wronged subjects. This mechanism is imperative for preventing the social fabric from withering.

From a holistic appraisal of the work, one would understand that the epic never attempts to glorify revenge. It also highlights the dire consequences which arise therefrom. After the war, a sense of hollowness assails everyone. The winning of war does not lead the Pandavas to any form of satisfaction or contentment. It is a pyrrhic victory for them. On the contrary, the immense wreckage and irreparable loss caused by the war make them remorseful. And, the virtuous Yudhisthira is the one who gets tormented by remorse the most. 'There are no victors in war' he laments. Even the Mauryan emperor Ashoka also underwent similar feelings after the Kalinga war. Yudhishthira, who is vulnerable to dogmatic morals, wants to abdicate the kingdom which was won through violence, and wants to lead the rest of the life as an ascetic repenting for his horrific sins.

                                                     

                                                       Bhishma advising Yudhisthira(Mughal Painting)

At this juncture, Bhishma, who was felled by Arjuna and had been lying on a bed of arrows since then, advises Yudhisthira about the dharma of a king.He suggests that renouncing kingdom would amount to cowardice and escapism. He also states that a king has to use danda or force for protecting his state. Society exists because it is in everyone's interest to have peace and peace can prevail only if there is a sovereign authority to punish those who breach it. And Yudhishtira, who is always at a loss to reconcile the duties of being a kshatrhriya and the words of his conscience, again adopts a pragmatic middle path and ascends to the throne.

What is Mahabharata all about?

Mr. Das observes that Mahabharata is not a tale intended to celebrate and romanticize royal valour and war heroism. If that was the case, the epic should have ended right after the victory of Pandavas. But the epic does not stop there. A mood of voidness permeates the epic after that, and it goes on to suggest the futility of war and other acts of human vanity. Krishna, the strategist of Pandavas, who is accursed due to the wrath of Gandhari, dies a banal death like an animal in the forest. One should behold that Krishna is an incarnate of God, and he is also depicted as vulnerable and fallible. The Pandavas, after ruling the kingdom for a while, gets disenchanted with worldly affairs and embarks upon a journey for salvation.

So what is it suggesting?One can sense nihilistic undertones in the epic which is announcing that life is inherently meaningless. Shakespeare was also suggesting this when he said 'Life is a tale, told by an idiot. Full of sound and fury, signifying nothing'(Macbeth Act 5 Scene 5). After all the sound and fury of Kurukshetra war, the characters in the epic grapple with this feeling of nothingness. They realize that all the coveted values and cherished possessions of the world, be it glory,happiness, wealth, beauty or talent, everything is transient and ephemeral. As Yudhishtira says 'time cooks all of us', and in that the texture of everything changes. So in search of something eternal, something which is not susceptible to the change of time, they set out. One may recall that the author of the book, like the Pandavas, felt disenchanted with the success in corporate life, and quit the job and embarked upon a journey for gaining knowledge and enlightenment. 

Commentators throughout the ages have wrestled with the overall meaning of Mahabharata. Among the most celebrated was Anandavardhana, who lived in Kashmir in ninth century A.D. He suggests that epic's world-weary message is that we should cease to desire and should seek liberation from the worldly life. The miserable end of the Kauravas and Pandavas suggests that the great sage who was its author meant to convey a disappointing conclusion with a poetic mood of peace. The aim of this work is to produce disillusionment with life and point us towards the human aim of liberation from the worldly life.(p.297-298).

But at this age, I do not possess the transcendental wisdom to understand the spiritual and metaphysical connotations of the epic. The epic, to me, appears like a wonderful portrayal of all human characteristics, its vanities and frailties, thereby validating the claim which it makes in the beginning. What comes in the way of engaging creatively with the world is human vanity, whose many faces are displayed in abundance. Vanity in the form of mischievous ego or ahamkar, enslaves human beings and is sometimes expressed as Duryodhana's envy, Dhritharashtra's hypocrisy, Karna's status anxiety or Ashwatthama's revenge. Vanity is an irresistible aspect of human condition and invariably spoils our engagement with the world(p.280).

Mahabharata is a series of precisely stated problems imprecisely and inconclusively resolved, with every solution raising a new problem. To say the least, it leaves us with an awareness of possibilities of life. What my understanding is that, a sort of moral ad-hocism is more desirable than a form of moral dogmatism. It could be a hasty, if not immature conclusion. One thing is quite clear. Morality is something which eludes concrete definition. And it is quite difficult to identify goodness and therefore it is difficult to be good. Even the epic shares this thought.

               Because of its subtleness, the deeply hidden dharma cannot be discerned. At first sight it appears in the form of a fairyland city, but when scrutinized by the wise it dissolves again into invisibility. Because people are inclined to abide by the principle of political advantage, no kind of generally beneficial behaviour presents itself, by which one person profits, grieves another. Modes of behaviour are universally characterized by diversity. For this reason one should seek true dharma and not follow the ways of the world. (p.294)

And what is this true dharma? It is for all of us to find out in our own individualistic way.

(Concluded)

Disclaimer

1. The author of the blog has not read the original text of Mahabharatha. The views expressed in the blog are the inferences drawn by the author from the interpretation given to and understandings derived from the epic by Mr.Gurucharan Das.
2. Some of the views expressed in the blog are the personal conclusions of the author of the blog. They may not be reflected in the book by Mr. Gurucharan Das.

References

1. All page references are taken from the hard bound edition of 'The difficulty of being good' published by Penguin India in the year 2009 
2. The statements in italics are taken from the English translation of the text of  Mahabharatha. The page numbers mentioned next to the statements refer to the book under review here, and the original source of the statements could be traced from the said book.

The Difficulty of Being Good-The Subtle Art of Dharma (Part I)

"What is here is found elsewhere

  What is not here is nowhere"(p.xxxi)

The great epic Mahabharatha starts with this seemingly boastful claim of encompassing everything that is within the scheme of nature and character of human beings. Irrespective of the veracity of the claim, one thing can be surely said about it: it is everywhere in the Indian culture and tradition. This epic has deeply influenzed the Indian psyche and  has played a vital role in forming its conscience. Its omnipresence can be felt in the popular cultural traditions  including folklore, literature and movies. My first  tryst with work happened through Amar Chithra Kathas, which had  deftly illustrated the events of it. But there the emphasis was on the action and not on the characterization. Then there was this tele-serial made by B.R.Chopra, which had taken the nation by a storm. That, at least made the story of the epic familiar to me. However, the sop series, with its emphasis on faith and the super-natural, somehow failed to depict the colossal moral ambiguity that defines the characters in it. The grey shaded characters' faces were refurbished with rouge and mascara, and were presented to us in clearly distinguishable shades of black and white. Even the movies inspired from the epic, ranging from Thalapathy(Tamil 1991) to Rajneeti(Hindi 2010) were guilty of this crime.

For anyone who is intrigued with the ambivalence and the ambiguity of Mahabharatha, Gurucharan Das's 'The Difficulty of Being Good-The Subtle Art of Dharma' would prove to be a good read. The book tries to examine the puzzle of morality in the light of the epic, and also tries to address the question 'why be good'. According to the author, he had undertaken the task of writing this work to assail his 'mid-life crisis'. Mr. Das, who had served as a CEO of Procter&Gamble for many years, felt disillusioned with the success defined in terms of credit and debit entries of  corporate accounts, and to plug the void that had crept into his life he embarked upon an 'academic holiday' to read and understand Mahabharatha.He shares with us his understandings through this work.

The envious Duryodhana

 Duryodhana,as depicted in Yakshagana(Kannada art-form)

 

If there is anyone in Mahabharatha who could be identified as an antagonist, that is Duryodhana and he is the first one who is subjected to the author's analysis. The author concludes that the main emotion which drove the actions of Duryodhana and triggered off the subsequent dramatic events was envy. Right from the young age, he was envious of the Pandavas, and had attempted on many occassions to destroy them. He'd tried to poison the young Bhima; had tried to roast them in the palace of lacquer. But the Pandavas, sometimes through divine intervention or through acts of fortune, managed to escape unharmed from the devious ploys employed by Duryodhana.  When the Pandavas finally established their kingdom at Indraprastha and drew attention and praises from everyone, he could not digest that. Engulfed in the tentacles of the green monster of envy, his reason takes off on a leave, and he gets more diabolic and devises a trick that could finish off the Pandavas for ever.

However, Dhritharashtra, his father and the king of Hastinapur, tries to reason with his belligerent son. But Duryodhana has his own reasons. He argues that it is the duty of a king to further the interest of his kingdom. A prosperous neighbour always poses a threat to one's kingdom. So, it is in the best interests of his kingdom that he is planning to destroy them, lest the Pandavas would attack and conquer Hastinapur. A kshatriya's duty is to prevail...Kingship is enjoyed by brave princes after conquering their foes in the battle(p.14)An enemy,however tiny,whose might grows on and eventually destroys one, is like an anthill which destroys a tree(p.4).

The words of Machiavelli and Kautilya resonate in Duryodhana's rationalizations. He is a subscriber of  'realpolitik',which refers to politics or diplomacy based on practical considerations, rather than on ideological notions or moralistic premises. Adolf Hitler, Henry Kissinger, George.W.Bush etc. were devout observers of this school of pragmatism. But, we can also see that Duryodhana's underlying emotion was envy, and all these dharmic arguments are merely providing a rationalization to his crude emotion.

Envy is an emotion, which is prevalent in every human being. The human tendency to evaluate one's well-being by comparing it with that of another is the cause of Duryodhana's distress. The author observes that envy could have been  the driving force behind the Holocaust movement and communist revolutions. If greed is the sin of capitalism, envy is the vice of socialism, he argues(p28). At this juncture, Yudhishthira's words could be enlightening. 'Envy of another is ignoble behaviour. Be content with what you have. Perform your duty-therein lies happiness'(p.13). However, this sort of self-absorbed mindset may not augur well for our everyday existence. The competitive spirit is the factor which causes the advancement of society and improvement of our lives. So, a sort of healthy competitiveness, which encourages one to excel not by destroying others but by harnessing one's potential to the maximum, could be the mantra to a happy and successful existence. Envy, like that of Duryodhana's, is a destructive weapon, which can destroy both the agent and its object

Dhraupadi's Questions

Dhraupadi Humiliated:Painting by Raja Ravi Verma

The most disturbing and revolting event of Mahabharatha is the disrobing of Dhraupadi which happens in the royal court of Hastinapur. The naive Yudhishthira, intoxicated with the game of dice, wagers his wife and loses her. When Dhraupadi is callously dragged to the court by Dushassana, she asks Yudhishthira.

'Whom did you lose first, yourself or me?' (p.34)

Dhraupadi might have asked the question in an expression of her rage and disgust, alluding to the senselessness of Yudhishthira. However, that questions had many connotations. Yudhishthira himself had wagered himself and had lost. So he was a slave and he could not have wagered Dhraupadi, for a slave is a master of none.Thus, the question posed by Dhraupadi assumed the status of a legal puzzle.

Bhishma, the conscience keeper of Hastinapur, then rose to solve her query. He employs his statesman's acumen to dissect her query from a strict legal perspective. One who has lost himself in a gamble cannot wager anymore of his possessions. Because, the moment he loses himself, he ceases to be the owner of them.  But a wife belongs to her husband and the acts of the husband would bind her. So, if Yudhishthira has staked her, Dhraupadi is bound by it.  He also refutes the argument that he did not make the wager in accordance with his free will. Bhishma asserts that the game was fair and valid. In short, Bhishma asserts that the acts of Yudhishtira were within the confines of law. Finally Bhishma tells her:'As dharma is subtle, I fail to resolve your question properly'(p.36). Thus, Bhishma, like Pilate of New Testament, fails to summon courage to listen to his conscience and washes off his hands. 

Disappointed with the response, Dhraupadi asks 'What is left of the dhrama of the kings?'(p.40). This is a more powerful question. Grasping that the laws of the state would not aid to protect her dignity, Dhraupadi is appealing to a higher dharma. This is a jurisprudential conundrum. If an act is within the confines of law, would that become morally right?. This tussle between law and morality has puzzled jurists since time immemorial. What should be done when the law of the land fails in delivering justice? The common law jurisdiction had devised the concept of equity, to mitigate the error of common law by allowing courts to apply justice in accordance with natural law. An act which is inherently abhorrent, which shocks the conscience of the society, should not be permitted and if the postulated law is impotent to deal with it, then the judiciary should act in accordance with its good conscience and employ its wisdom to subvert the prevalence of injustice. Bhishma failed to do that.Pilate failed to do that. The Indian judiciary failed to do that during emergency time in cases like A.D.M Jabalpur v. S.S. Shukla (AIR 1976 SC 1207). In the court of Hastinapur, there was the voice of Vidura who had heeded to the dictates of his reason and objected to the violation of Dhraupadi's modesty. Like the Vidura of Hastinapur, Judge H.R.Khanna, listened to the dictates of reason and dissented from the flawed majority judgement of ADM Jabalpur case, to attempt to prevent the disrobing of democracy and constitution. Although their opinions did not prevent the act, they shattered the moral validity of the reprehensible acts. What India need is people with such moral integrity and wisdom, who, instead of merely applying the dead letter of law, would give effect to the spirit of law to prevent injustice. If, through sophistry and technicalities, unjust acts are clothed as legal ones, travesty of justice would  happen. Simple Dhraupadi, with her housewife's logic, was addressing this issue.

Why be good? 

Exile of the Pandavas

 

Consequent to losing the dice game, the Pandavas have to spend twelve years in exile and spend one additional year incognito. While biding their time in the forest, Dhraupadi asks Yudhishtira to take up arms and fight against the Kauravas. But, he does not heed to that. He states that he had given word to them and breaking that would offend dharma. Moreover, being a person who abhors violence, he dismisses the idea of fighting them too.  But Dhraupadi states that they themselves have been victims of adharma and there was no need to observe the word given to the violators of dharma. She states. 'Dharma is supposed to protect the good king, but I find that it doesn't protect you...When I see noble, moral and modest persons harassed in this way, and the evil and ignoble flourishing and happy, I stagger with wonder. I can only condemn the Placer, who allows such outrage'(p.64).


Most of us share Dhraupadi's angst at the problem of unmerited suffering. Why do bad things happen to good people? This is something which none of us can fathom and we feel that the cosmic sense of justice is inherently absurd and cruel. This feeling has given rise to the  philosophy of nihilism and absurdism propounded by people like Nietzsche and Camus. They assert that life is inherently meaningless and valueless and it would be an absurd effort to find meaning in it. It states that if human beings, instead of wrestling with the incomprehensible, embrace the absurd wholeheartedly, life would become a less stressful experience. It is a philosophy of utmost resignation and submission.  Life is just a progression of accidents and it would be a futile effort to make sense out of the randomness of life. When Shakespeare said 'Like flies to wanton boys, we are to the gods;they kill us for their sport'(King Lear Act 4 Scene 1), he was also evoking the same feeling.


The Holy Bible too addresses this puzzle. Jesus states, 'That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust(Matthew 5:45). Since the Father in Heaven, makes sun rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the just and the unjust alike, one should not be judgmental about others acts and should forgive the unjust and evil. It suggests that our sense of justice could be different from that of the cosmic sense of justice. 


But Yudhishtira addresses this conundrum in his own unique manner. He says : 'I do not act for the sake of dharma. I act because I must. Whether it bears fruits or not, buxom Dhraupadi, I do my duty.I obey dharma, full-hipped woman, not for its rewards...but by its nature my mind is beholden to dharma.'(P.66). He realizes that life, like a loaded game of dice, is inherently meaningless, and that one has to create ones own meaning to it; and he finds the meaning of life in the strict adherence to dharma.Franz Kafka through his work 'The Trial' is also propounding the same thing. We human beings get ourselves entangled in a maze of events and assigned unique roles in lives, we must search deep within the apparent absurdity of life to attain spiritual self-realization.(Even while addressing such existential puzzles, one can see that Yudhishtira's mind is pulsating with admiration for the beauty of Dhraupadi, and he does not forget to intersperse his reply with words of appreciation for her immense charm). But his 'beautiful and long-eyed' Dhraupadi is not completely convinced with his reply. She reminds him that, being a kshatriya, he has the duty to preserve his state and his dependents, and if he is not fighting, he would be violating his kshatriya-dharma.

Thus we witness a conflict of the norms. When the norms of the society are in conflict with higher norms, viz the norms which appeal to one's conscience, which one should be permitted to prevail. Yudhishtira's sva-dharma, his duty to his clan, was in apparent conflict with his sadharana-dharma,his duty to his moral conscience and world at large. He is adamant that he is not going to offend the universal dharma for the sake of his clan-dharma. He was demonstrating what went on later to become the 'Grunnorm' theory of Hans Kelsen, which states that a lower norm should give way to a higher norm.


But he wavers from this supreme idealistic position when Kauravas refuse to honour their word after the period of exile. When met with humiliation again, he adopts a tough stand and calls for war. He states. 'In times of trouble one's duty alters. When one's livelihood is disrupted and one is totally poverty-stricken, one should wish for other means to carry out one's prescribed duties...which means in dire situations one may perform normally improper acts'.(P.78).Desperate times call for desperate actions. Chastened by thirteen harsh years in exile, he has become pragmatic. He adopts a position which can be termed as 'reciprocal altruism', which states that one should portray a friendly face to the world, but should not let himself to be exploited.  Machiavelli also states that a man who wishes to profess goodness at all time will come to ruin among so many who are not so good. He realizes that his earlier super-moralistic view or Duryodhana's amoral real-politik view do not befit the capacity of a king and he adopts a middle-path of moral pragmatism. Any form of absolute, be it meanness or goodness, is not advisable in this world.Turning the other cheek may be a good ideal to practice for an ascetic, but a king cannot afford to do that. Hence it follows that, morality is not absolute and its worth depends on its place and time. Is it not said that anything which is done out of place and out of time is a sin? So, the morality of an act is absolutely dependent on its circumstances.

(To continue)

Disclaimer

1. The author of the blog has not read the original text of Mahabharatha. The views expressed in the blog are the inferences drawn by the author from the interpretation given to and understandings derived from the epic by Mr.Gurucharan Das.
2. Some of the views expressed in the blog are the personal conclusions of the author of the blog. They may differ from that of the views propagated by Mr. Gurucharan Das.

References

1. All page references are taken from the hard bound edition of 'The difficulty of being good' published by Penguin India in the year 2009 
2. The statements in italics are taken from the English translation of the text of  Mahabharatha. The page numbers mentioned next to the statements refer to the book under review here, and the original source of the statements could be traced from the said book.

4Play Season III(The Tournament)

(Continued from previous posts)
The keenly awaited event came. The moment of reckoning for 4play came, which would witness the culmination of one month of rigorous practice, which often left us  rain-drenched, mud-smeared,bruised and sprained. And this time, 4Play was with proper jerseys and football apparels.  We had got ourselves Brazilian yellow jerseys. Thus, like a bunch of canary birds, the team took to the field, with a lot of anticipation and hope.

4Play v.Blitzkrieg

Our first match was against 'Blitzkrieg'-a first year team. But this time, that fact didn't make us complacent. The thrashing handed out to us by another first year team in our debut game was still fresh in our minds. Once bitten, twice shy. So we were circumspect.

The tournament was happening at a new venue-the army sports ground at Khadki. And it has to be said that it was not at all conducive for the game. With its uneven, bumpy surface, the ground resembled a freshly ploughed paddy field. The only good thing about the ground was that the ground had proper goal posts with nets, which prompted one player to cheekily remark that the goalie would not have to strain a lot to fetch the ball. Whether finding solace at the presence of goal nets is indicative of fatalism or criminal casualness, would be another academic debate. Anyway, that summed up the mindset of the team-charged up for the game, but not bogged down with expectations.

The goofy goalie

The game started very sedately,and leisurely went on like an afternoon siesta. But I was really nervous for the initial moments. Never before has a football game given me tense moments. It was the first time I was playing a proper match as a goalie. A goalie's job, although physically less demanding, can be mentally strenuous. He is the solitary guard of the honour of the team. When his comrades are making advances, he encourages them, cheers for them. When the opponents advance like an unruly wave, he coordinates the defense to set up a formidable fort which could dissipate the attack. His mind has to travel with the ball and has to use all possible means to ward off danger. The shots could come from anywhere, in any form,even from his trusted comrades also. He is the sentinel on the qui vive, who cannot afford any minor folly; a clumsy move, a casual fumble, an act of indiscretion- that could prove fatal. He is the ultimate repository of the hope of the team.  And his solitariness makes his mistakes more conspicuous. Its a tough task, remarkably carried out by luminaries like Fabien Bartez, Oliver Kahn, Buffon, Iker Casillas etc. And I was called to be in that league. 

But, I couldn't do justice to that calling. It was my goof-up which failed our team in the first match. The match was going on quite uneventfully for the first ten minutes. Contrary to our speculations, our opponents turned out to be quite mediocre. But one impulsive act of mine-that turned out to be fatal. One of their attackers was proceeding through the left wing. Then I was afflicted with the 'goalie's dilemma'-whether to charge ahead to intercept the advancement or to stay back and react accordingly. To be preemptive or to be reactionary. On an impulse, I decided to charge ahead. I managed to intercept the ball. But instead of trying to pick up the ball, I tried to kick it. But the kick turned out to be a dud. The presence of grass also impeded the motion of the ball. The opponent got the ball. I sensed danger. There was no one guarding the goal post, except a defender who was not very reliable. And one of the opponents was strategically positioned in front of the post. The other player crossed the ball to him. I ran parallel to the projectile of the ball. I almost mouthed. "No. don't score now. Wait till I come. There is no heroism in scoring in an unguarded goal post". I lost the race against the ball. And they were not in look for heroism. With a tender header, he put the ball into the post, breaking our hearts.And that goal was like an albatross around my neck. It pricked me throughout the game(pricks me even now).

But we were resilient in our counter-attacks. But, we could not finish it clinically. I also made amends for my folly with some decent saves.  However, goal was eluding us. As our strikers reached the goal post, they fizzled out. On many occassions, our opponents outpaced us. It could be that, those eighteen year old kids, with less alcohol and nicotine in their veins, had more vigour and stamina.  For the first time, being in the twenties seemed like being old. 
Rainbow's Cameo 

However, its not that we were tensed and dejected during the game. While the match was in progress, the monsoons clouds gave way to sun, thereby causing the blossoming of a resplendent rainbow in the sky. And some of my team mates, instead of being involved in the game, detached themselves from it to indulge in the grandeur of the rainbow.  Further, they were drawing the attention of the other involved players to it and they also gazed at it with deep awe and admiration. For a while, most of the 4players were bewitched by the nature's portrait. Its quite understandable, when one is not capable of being a Messi or a Ronaldo on the football field, despite the best efforts. But, to be a Wordsworth or a Keats on the football field, when one ought to be a Messi or a Ronaldo, that is something beyond reason. However, that was in harmony with the theme of 4play-'Celebrate,don't compete'. And they were taking it to a different level. Thus unmindful of the result, 4Play continued to play, celebrating each moment of it, and we lost the game 1-0. The best result produced by 4play.

4Play v. L.O.L- The Napoleon's Waterloo
Our second match was against L.O.L(Legends of LMAO). They were also like us only, a hotch-potch team comprising football illiterates. But, they had managed to upset Blitzkrieg, and it meant that if we defeat them with a margin of two goals, we could advance to the semi-finals. Thus, for the first time, 4play had a reasonable chance of advancing to the semis. And our Napolean(Joe) was sure that we would win. He also assured us that he would score goals to help us win.

But before the match, I had an ominous thought. LOL had an orange jersey, like the Netherlands team and we had a Brazilian yellow. And the match was like a virtual quarter-final. Would this be like the quarterfinal match between Brazil and Netherlands in FIFA World Cup 2010, where Brazilians were defeated. But I was quick enough to dispense such thoughts. It would be a crime to assume ourselves as the Brazilians and a severe crime to assume LOL as the formidable Dutch. 

We had adopted an attacking strategy for the game, since we had to win at any cost. But some of our key players-Rishav Dutt, Siddharth Basu and Shaabaz Navaz-were badly injured and  were not available for the game. That made our defense very weak. We were very attacking in the first half and produced many near chances. But a stupid free kick conceded by us in the second half ruined all our hopes. Jayant Dahiya of LOL, took a powerful kick which went way above the defense wall and I misjudged the trajectory. The ball landed right behind me and dashed into the net. That seemingly innocuous shot caused a lot of despair. A sense of dejection gripped the team. And they capitalized that interim lethargy on the part of 4Play, and Shodhan Babu scored the second goal within five minutes. 

That woke us up from our dejection. We fought back. The resurgent wave of our strikers constantly lashed out at their goal post. But,the impenetrable fort formed by GP Singh and Anshul Mangla stoically weathered our attacks and that much coveted goal did not happen.  As though the pain was not enough, they scored one more goal; that was the coup de grace. And it came from Andy, my ex-room mate, also a clumsy football player who took advantage of the unguarded goal post. In my attempts to prevent their bombardments, I had lost balance and had fallen flat on the ground. Before I could regain balance, he caressed the ball that had leisurely rolled onto his legs, into the goal post. That was the third goal.No, the third nail. With two nails struck on each palms and one on the foot, the crucifixion of 4Play was complete and there was no scope for any resurrection. When the final whistle went, our opponents LOLled at our predicament. We too LOLled at the dark comedy-the ones who came with the hope of scoring two goals are going out conceding three goals.

That was the end of the tournament for us and a sense of void gripped us.  The football tournament and the practice session were a good way to escape the mundane concerns of life like placement, job,assignments,moot courts etc. All good things in life would end soon. And for many of us, this could be the last football match of our life.Very soon, most of us would be doing dignified slavery in some corporate law firms or practicing disguised unemployment in the sleepy corridors of some court and we don't know if that uncertain future would be gracious enough to grant us an opportunity to play the game again. Though 4Play didn't present us victorious moments, it provided us many good memories which are worth cherishing for ever. The sheer pleasure in kicking the ball, that is something inexplicable. That such a simple act could be a source of immense satisfaction is testimony to the inherent beauty of life. Anyway, for the time being, its the end of football game for many of us.

The 4Play Squad 2010: From top left- Himanshu Agarwal, P.J.Joe Paul,Nikhil Ranjan, N.C.Raghav Chakravarthy, Eeshan Chaturvedi, Ganesh Sangeeth, Manu Sebastian(GK),Neelanjan Pal Chaudhary, Aniruddh Thakur, George Mathew, Anuj Kapoor, Ashwin Panicker(C). Also(not in the image)-Rishav Dutt, Siddharth Basu and Shaabaz Navaz.

"Laughing at the face of defeat requires a lot of courage"-Napoleon

(THE END)

P.S- Due to some unfortunate events happened during another match, the tournament was subsequently called off, thereby leaving it truncated.

Team 4 Play-Season III (Practice and Formation)

(Continued from previous posts)
Is it not often said that the journey is better than the destination. This could be true,as in retrospect, the practice sessions seem more enjoyable and cherishable than the actual matches. Fresh with a new outlook, armed with new players, and empowered with invaluable experience of two seasons, 4 Play started its practice sessions, in search of that hitherto elusive victory.

The Advent of Napoleon.

The most precious acquisition of 4 Play was P.J.Joe Paul, who prefers to call himself the Napoleon. He was instrumental in forming a motley football team in his first year,which had performed quite well. Further, he was a good player, with good technique and requisite skills. Adding on to that was his unconditional loyalty for 4 Play, which he had made evident in his first year itself. Thus,for the first time, 4 Play had a genuine player in its ranks.

It has to be said that his infectious enthusiasm was pivotal in the crystallization of 4 Play III. That overwhelmed the lethargy that had afflicted many members, especially some fifth year members(specifically me). It was one of those moments when adolescent effervescence won over youthful indolence. Along with the Napoleon came his lieutenants too-Aniruddh Thakur, Nikhil Ranjan and Shaabaz-infusing 4Play with freshness of talent.

But there was another issue to be sorted out. Our incumbent goal keeper Himanshu Singhal's services were not available for the tournament. As per 4 Play tradition, the post had to devolve upon the next person with the longest limbs, which, unfortunately, happened to me.But I was not willing. It also didn't help that some one,in a very inopportune moment, recollected that I'd  bragged earlier(in another inopportune time) about being a star goalkeeper at the school level. Anyway, my protests notwithstanding, the goalkeepership was vested in me. No one had taken my hollow boastful comments seriously. So there was no question of proving anything;just the task of improving everything.

 Meet the Spartans

Our practice sessions involved playing friendly matches against fellow competitors. One of them was the 'Spartans', a team largely comprising third year students.Our first match against them was very memorable on many counts. Firstly, 4 Play scored its first ever goal; secondly 4 Play ,for the first time in its history, took lead.The first goal came in the form of a clinical shot from our Napoleon. It goes without saying that we were very ecstatic. But, like all ecstasies, this one was also short lived. They were quick in retaliating.

Our biggest weakness was the goal keeper. No, I wasn't the goal keeper in that match. On an experiment, George Mathew was deputed as the acting goal keeper.But he proved to be very ineffective as a goalie.Whenever the ball came towards the post, he, like an ever obliging nymphet, opened his legs widely. And the Spartans were virile enough to take good advantage of the ample gap between the legs. They scored twice and took the lead.

The match was about to get over and we had resigned to fate. Then another miracle occurred. Anuj Kapoor, very stylishly, scored an equalizer for us. The goal was scored from a very tight angle, almost 180 degrees with the post, like the way Maicon scored for Brazil against North Korea in Fifa 2010. Incredible! That was our expression. Whether it was a fortuitous fluke or an amazing display of skill would be a redundant academic debate. The significant fact was that the scores were equal(2-2).But, victory proved to be elusive. In the dying moments of the match, they scored again. One Spartan played a casual shot at the post; and our goalie did his leg-parting again, handing them victory. We lost the match(3-2).

After the match, it was decided that I would be the permanent goalie. One more problem became evident. Although we were creating chances, the killer instinct which converts them into goals was found  to be wanting.The  problem was with our main striker, Joe. He would advance to the goal post, breaking through the opponents' defense; but when the moment for shooting comes, he would pass the ball to some other player who may not be in a very advantageous position,thereby spoiling the chance  Joe was selfless, to a fault. Maybe he had read some mystic books or Buddhist teachings and his ego was  completely annihilated.

The Bong Connection

The solution to our problem came in the form of a Bengali duo-Neelanjan Pal Chaudhary and Siddharth Basu. It was our captain's enterprising skills that got these otherwise low-profile guys of our batch in our  team. Neel was an exceptional player-technically sound, fast, powerful and confident. We had another face-off with the Spartans. The reloaded 4Play team was like the Persian army to the Spartans. We comprehensively dominated them. The trio of Joe, Neel and Anuj raided their goal post. Their goal net was constantly disturbed with our powerful shots. They could offer no resistance. The defense played with utmost coordination and warded off all the Spartan advances. In short, we routed them with seven goal. Yes, 7-0. That was the final scoreline. 4 Play's first victory. That too a humongous one. Our confidence levels were elevated to a new height. That impelled us to invite Nemesis, one of the best teams in college, for a friendly match.

Fight Club

'Friendly match' would be misnomer to describe that match. It was a bloody match. Nemesis was a formidable team and had been consistently faring well in college tournaments.So we had no hopes of winning the match. We just wanted to put up a good fight. Indeed, the 'fight' happened .

For the first ten minutes, we played quite well. All their advances were effectively intercepted. We also managed to create some chances for ourselves. There was an exceptional shot by Joe Paul, which went above the post by a whisker.

Then came the nasty moment. It happened when one of their players, was faking an injury and was appealing for a penalty kick. His demands were completely unwarranted, as he had fallen down himself while advancing with the ball. I had jumped to catch the shot and he lost his balance and fell down. There was no physical contact at all. And the fellow was putting on all kinds of histrionics to get a penalty. This we could not agree. That led to an altercation. Our technical arguments were retorted with  personal abuses. We realized that reasoning with them would be pointless. Why to cast pearls at swines?

During this melee, one of them took exception to a junior member of our team arguing against him. Despite being in the final year, he was still carrying the shabby baggage of junior-senior divide, and could not appreciate a fourth year member refuting his arguments. With his flaccid ego hurt, he pounced upon the junior member and started to assault him physically. We intervened. There was a lot of pushing and shoving; names calling;  But tempers cooled after a while and game was resumed, largely due to the intervention of Neel who behaved like a perfect gentleman during the commotion. After a while, it happened again. While the game was in progress, the said member of Nemesis, without any provocation, physically overpowered the said junior member of our team. That led to further skirmishes. 

They were creating fights for no reason. Maybe like the Australians, they were artificially creating fights to psychologically subjugate the opponents or they were plainly obsessive, compulsive thugs. Maybe they enjoy the 'kick' they get from orchestrating fights. Most of their players were subscribers to a primitive school of machismo, who took  pride in physically overpowering weaker counterparts(and only the weaker ones) and abusing the harmless female family relations of the adversaries. They were like brawny bulls-full of raw power but having no discretion;and the only utility of their intellectual faculties was in churning out  vivid abuses which would refer either to anatomical impossibilities or sociological improbabilities.

Despite the lack of civilization and refinement, it has to be admitted that Nemesis was an exceptionally good team. They had gifted players who played with incredible coordination. They defeated us quite comprehensively. 14-0. Yes. It could be even more, as everyone stopped counting after a point. But does skill justify belligerence?Would talent warrant boorishness?Perhaps,one should take a look at Sachin Tendulkar or VVS Laxman. Anyway, after the match teams parted ways cordially, at least superficially. Shallow niceties were exchanged. Hollow apologies were submitted.

That was the end of it. The practice sessions were a good learning experience. As it is evident, there were good times;bad times and ugly times. Ya, life is like that-a potpourri of various feelings. Thus,emboldened with its new experiences, Team 4 Play III set out to face the real test.

(To be Continued)

******************

DISCLAIMER

THE STATEMENTS MADE ABOUT 'NEMESIS' PLAYERS ARE STRICTLY IN CONTEXT OF THE MATCH AND HAVE REFERENCE ONLY TO THEIR ON-FIELD BEHAVIOUR AND NOT TO THEIR OFF-FIELD CHARACTER.