Krishna A study Based on Mahabharata by Nagesh D. Sonde
The Preface Knowledge is what one knows, Wisdom is what one experiences. Knowledge which does not lead to Wisdom is worthless the words spoken or the paper in which they are written. Knowledge is sourced from external instruments of communication ; Wisdom is sourced from within as experience. Therefore Knowledge is possible to be communicated and transferred ; Wisdom is experience to be experienced, being personal is not possible, cannot be communicated and transferred. Therefore all attempts to communicate and transfer have ended in failure. Since Knowledge is possible to be communicated and transferred, when one listens to or reads any thing that is communicated one feels the words were some times or the other heard or read. Since Wisdom is not possible, cannot be communicated, when one listens to or reads any thing that is communicated one can at best relate one’s own experience as some thing similar or dissimilar to one’s own experience. No one can supplant other person’s experience as one’s own experience. It could similar but not the same.
Therefore whatever words I have written here are words sourced from Knowledge, the external sources, which I can communicate and share with others; whatever Wisdom I have or may have is sourced from within, which I can speak about but not communicate and share with others. They will remain my own and will never be of others.
sa%ya, the Prime Existence is One, experienced as One, but spoken variously. What is spoken or read as words which is the source for Knowledge can be instruments to experience but cannot be Wisdom, the experience. Wisdom, experience is not accumulation of Knowledge but uninterrupted, continuous conscious awareness now and here.
Therefore it is not sufficient if one knows many things about Krishna from scriptures but if he does not experience the divine essence within his gross form then reading scriptures, whether Vedas, Upanishads or Bhagavad Gita would of no use – all being mere repetition of words – "naanauQyaayaad\bahUHCbdana\, vaacaao ivaglaapnaM ih tt\ |". oooo
Few words in the Beginning
No human being or divine has ever and any where in the world has captured the mind, speech and actions of people over generation and millenniums as Krishna has done. In that respect he has been incomparable and unique in his diverse personality accepting and absorbing in himself everything that life is and represents. His uniqueness lies in his being beyond man's empirical understanding reaching absolute spiritual height and retaining his form as undisputed religious icon. He has been the subject matter of legends and literature, political and theological dissertations, controversy and conflict. From age to age his images has changed so much in the minds of the believers and the skeptics, poets and artists having reflected the temper of every age and times that it is difficult to separate the historical Krishna from the mythical one. Yet history has started revealing the secrets of his life and times, that it offers an unclear opening of the window with some definite suggestions of the spiritual playing its role in the temporal world. Yet it has left in many mouths some inconvenient taste, which is difficult to identify, nut which orthodox believers try to gloss over and with which the skeptics have been holding them at ransom. In the early ages when heart ruled the mind of the masses, the Krishna-form became dominant the Krishna-Consciousness becoming the stuff of highly sensitive thinkers. Evolution has greatly expanded the horizon of the human mind, but has failed miserably the frontiers of human consciousness.
Under the circumstances the modern man is scarcely qualified to understand the declaration made in Bhagavad Gita : "naantao|isma mama idvyaanaaM ivaBaUtInaaM prmtp | eYa tU_oSat: p`ao>ao ivaBaUitiva-strao mayaa || yaViWBaUitma%sa%vaM EaImadUija-tmaova vaa | t<adovaavagacC %vaM mama tojaaoM|SasamBavaama\ || Aqavaa bahunaOtona ikM &atona tvaajau-na | ivaYTmyaahimadM kR%snamaokaMSaona isqatao jagat\ ||‟. His uniqueness lies thus in his being beyond man's empirical understanding reaching absolute spiritual height accepting him as the whole, complete and entirety of divine decent, the essence the Krishna-Consciousness in incarnation, absorbing in himself everything that life is and represents „vaasaudova: sava-imait‟ all other incarnations being partial, incomplete and contextual. Krishna becomes divided in parts in his anthropomorphic form, one part accepting him alone emotionally as the religious icon and not the essence which the form represents. It is unfortunate that Krishna’s iconic influence should have among large masses and in popular religion should have created a dichotomy between his form and the essence which his form should have so eloquently is expected to represent as extensive and comprehensive representation of Vishnu, the all-pervading and all-comprehensive deity.
Many will agree with Einstein who said, „The most beautiful and most profound emotion we can experience is the sensation of the mystical . . . He to whom this emotion is stranger, who can no longer wonder and stand rapt in awe, is as good as dead. To know that what is impenetrable to us really exists, manifesting itself as the highest wisdom and most radiant beauty which our dull faculties can comprehend only in the most primitive forms - this knowledge, this feeling, is at the centre of true religiousness‟. Therefore, knowing that emotive receptivity is stronger than the intellectual, Krishna says that whatever form one desires to be communion with him, that communion he makes firm and well-established – „yaao yaao yaaM yaaM tnauM Ba>: Eawyaaica-tuimacCit | tsya tsyaacalaaM EawaM tamaova ivadQaamyahma\ ||‟. Even then among the thousands scarcely one strives for perfection and those who strive and succeed one becomes aware of my existence truly well - „manauYyaaNaaM sahsa`oYau kiScaVtit isawyao | yattamaip isawanaaM kiScanmaaM vaoi<a t%vat: ||‟. Therefore emotive receptivity and experience comprehension can only be harbinger to the intellectual receptivity and comprehension leading one to be reflective and one‟s consciousness to be meditative that „vaasaudova: sava-imait‟.
Dvaipayana Krishna was a seer of infinite splendour who enlightened of the immeasurable interplay of the forces of light and darkness - „Wyaa h p`ajaap%yaa:, dovaaScaasauraSca | tt: kanaIyasaa eva dovaa: jyaayasaa Asaura: ; t eYau laaokoYvaspQa-nt ;…||‟ (Brihad Aranyaka Up. I.iii.1), which Shankara explains dovas as the enlightened few and Asaurs as the un-enlightened many, struggling with each other for mastery over the worlds both being the descendants of Prajapati. ?t the immutable cosmic law and Qama- the perennial principle of righteousness were common for both and frightful punishment being imposed for any failure to follow them, making every element of creation a medium for fulfillment of the divine intent and purpose, either fully and comprehensively as in the case of Krishna or partially and for special purpose as in the case of other descents, or indirectly through other elements in nature animate as well as inanuimate making the instruments of operation – „inaima<amaa~M Bava savyasaaicana\‟.
This fundamental principle was demonstrated by Vyasa using the constant and recurring struggle for superiority between Pandavas and Kauravas with the prominent role played by Krishna. While Pandavas recognized and acknowledged Krishna’s divinity and accepted him as a friend, a relative, an advisor, intellectual guide, the initiator, moving force, the master mind behind all their actions, Kauravas did neither recognize nor respect Krishna’s divinity at best accepting him as a leader of clan, a statesman among the polity, recognized in the three worlds, who could be a powerful ally and a dangerous adversary. There were still others, though were conscious of his spiritual origin and wise in spiritual matters, were bound by their temporal attributes and inclinations born of nature – „p`kRto: ik`yamaaNaaina gauNaO: kmaa-iNa sava-Sa: |‟.
When Vyasa recorded the events in Jaya in prosaic traditional bardic form designed and describing Kuru family, Gandhari’s righteousness, Pandava’s truthfulness, Kaurava’s misdeeds, he transformed the tale to bring out Krishna’s greatness and divinity, as the ancient seer born again. He had not pretensions about the characters; Pandavas were never accepted as quintessence of virtues nor Kauravas were shown as embodiment of evil. Both were shown conscious of the principles of righteousness, though Pandavas were more righteous and divinely ordained owing to their divine origin while Kauravas were rarely righteous being influenced by sense organs and desires under the influence of dark and obscure forces. Krishna was the divine consciousness born establishing himself in p`kRit, the human form, acting more as a human being with all the imperfections of human body than as an impartial as arbiter as the Brahman.
Vaishampayana’s austere and noble imagination transformed Krishna’s personality with striking divine status associated with vedic Vishnu ceasing to be [ithasa and becoming more of a scripture of divine consciousness manifest in temporal context. The text thereafter became the vehicle for many diverse Vyasas in the generations and centuries that followed, for incorporation of the history of a people, the social, moral, ethical, religious and philosophical consciousness of Indian culture. Mahabharata is said to have contained many concealed mystical truths, which Vyasa knows, his son Shuka knows and perhaps Sanjaya too – „ga`nqaga`inqaM tda cak`o mauinaga-UZM kutUhlaat\ | yaismana\ p`it&yaa p`ah mauinaWO-payanais%vadma\ || AYTaO Slaaoksahsa`aiNa AYTaO SlaaokSataina ca | AhM vaod\ima Saukao vaoi<a saMjayaao vaoi<a vaa na vaa ||‟, the study of the Mahabharata not being
complete unless one unravels the mystical secrets concealed, and it is not sufficient to know the legends relating to the Krishna-form unless one becomes wise to the Krishna-Consciousness concealed therein.
Mahabharata needs to understood intellectually beginning since all the human actions are performed as inter-play of human attributes and inclination born of nature – ‘p`kR%yaOva ca kmaa-iNa ik`yamaaNaaina sava-Sa: | ya: pSyait tqaa%maanamakta-rM sa pSyait ||‟ Krishna’s descent along with those of Pandavas and Kauravas responding to them when they perform their actions in life, rising to their individual spiritual regeneration becoming aware of their own spiritual essence in which the divine intent and purpose has designed them to be. One would be advised to be guided by Sri Aurodindo who said, „All existence is a manifestation of God because He is the only existence and nothing can be except either a real figuring or else a figment of that one reality. Therefore every conscious being is in part or in some way a descent of the Infinite in to the apparent finiteness of name and form. But it is veiled manifestation and there is a gradation between the supreme being of the Divine and the consciousness shrouded partly or wholly by ignorance of self in the finite‟.
Therefore, even as those who read Mahabharata and Bhagavat Purana become enlightened to this truism that „Avatara AsaM#yayaa hro: sa<vainaQaoiWjaa: | yaqaaivadaisana: kulyaa: sarsa: syau: sahsa`Sa: || ?Yayaao manavaao dovaa manaupu~a mahaOjasa: | klaa: savao- hrorova sap`jaaptayastqaa || eto caaMSakla: pumasau: kRYNastu Bagavaana\ svayaM |‟, they also cannot overlook the statements made by Krishna himself that „tiddM inaiScatM bauw\yaa pUvaO-rip maha%maaiBa: | dOvao ca maanauYao caOva saMyau>M laaokkarNama\ || AhM ih tt\ kirYyaaima prM puruYakart: | dOvaM tu na mayaa Sa@yaM kma- katu-M kqaMcana ||.. yat\ tu vaacaa mayaa Sa@yaM kma-Naa vaaip paNDva | kirYyao tdhM paqa- na %avaaSaMsao SamaM prO: || or as declared, by Drupad that „idYTsya ga`inqarinavat-naIya: svakma-Naa ivaihtM naoh ikMicat\ | kRtM inaima<aM ih varOkhotaostdovaodmauppnnaM ivaQaanama\ ||.. dOvaao ih vao<aaprmaM yad~ |‟ or by Duryodhana’s statement that he responds to life as prompted by his attributes and inclination, leaving everything to transpire as per will of the divine „jaanaaima Qama-M na ca mao p`vaRi<a: jaanaamyaQama-M na ca mao inavaRi<a: | konaaip dovaona )id isqatona yatha inayau>ao tqaa kraoima ||‟.
It becomes unreasonable to assume the divine descent took only in Bharatavarsha to the exclusion of all the other parts in creation. If Brahman is considered as the all-pervading Vishnu then he would be enveloping and maintaining the entire regions of creation. Therefore to limit the divine descents only to those mentioned in Indian context would be irrational. If one accepts the thesis that Brahman dwells in every thing that is created, it being more luminous in some than in others, then it would be reasonable to accept every element in creation, whether animate or inanimate, which is luminous more prominently
would be justifiable to be accept as divine than the other elements. One is inclined to agree with Shankara when he says that there is no difference as regards Brahman or wisdom of Brahman between giants like rigvedic seer Vamadeva and the present day human beings lacking in strength of character – „na ih mahavaIyao-Yau vaamadovaaidYau hInaavaIyao-Yau vaa vat-maainakoYau ba`*maNaao ivaSaiYastiW&anasya vaaist ||‟. Wisdom is not denied to any one to whichever people, place, or period, provided that they have the desire and inclination for the wisdom of Brahman, by whatever name he be referred. That is the reason why in every parts of the world only some are considered divine and not all, only those in whom the divine attributes and inclinations are more evident than the others. This has been the case earlier as it has been recent times.
It was the author‟s objective not to project Krishna primarily as the god descended in human form to destroy the unrighteous and protect the righteous ones but to show how the human form in which the divine consciousness has become more luminous „ya: sa naarayaNaao naama dovadova: sanaatna: | tsyaaMSaao vaasaudovastu kma-Naao|nto ivavaoSa h ||‟ against great odds to re-establish the cosmic law, ?e and Qama-, in spite of the daunting factors which he had to encounter in doing so in an atmosphere where the inevitable course of Time as the Kali yuga was casting its long shadow on the minds of the people. Because the luminous essence becomes evident only when it becomes manifest in gross form – „AprM yacca mao $pM p`aduBaa-avaoYau dRYyato |‟ Krishna was observed to perform multifarious activities in his life, prompting Vyasa when telling the tale of the internecine struggle between Pandavas and Kauravas used the role played by Krishna as the representative model for divine descent. The author has tried to tell the story, as far as possible, as documented by Vyasa as Itihas, and later transformed by later writers to make it a scripture, without allowing himself to be overwhelmed by the divinity of Krishna or be burdened by the righteous attributes of Pandavas or by the unrighteous attributes of the Kauravas or their associates. In Shanti Parva we find Bhishma telling Yudhishthira that Krishna is the supreme luminous lord and described variously as the all pervading Purusha and what Vishnu himself told Narada whatever one desires to know about the great all-pervading Vishnu, such one should approach men of wisdom, and as the sage having fully realized the supreme and eternal divine essence and has acknowledged it., knowing Krishna as verily the inconceivable supreme being and not a human being has advised significantly to surrender.
When seen from this perspective it becomes apparent for one to judge the divine consciousness operating even in the world which we experience even to day, where and how great ones in spite of tripping and succumb to small fragile temptations and how small persons some times display supreme robustness and remarkable display of righteousness. There is great interplay of the forces or darkness and of light in the manifest creation, neither on a larger scale or a platform can be treated as righteous or unrighteous, all becoming the light and shade. Sri Aurobindo points out that "All problems of existence are essentially problems of harmony. They arise form the perception of an unsolved discord and the instinct of an undiscovered agreement or unity. To rest content with an unsolved discord is possible for the practical and more animal part of man, but impossible for his fully awakened mind, and usually even his practical parts only escape from the general necessity of accepting a rough, utilitarian and un-illumined compromise. For essentially, all Nature seeks a harmony. Life and matter in their own sphere as much as mind in the arrangement of its perceptions‟. Therefore, what Vyasa seems to tell the readers is – Here is life, make your own choice.
This is the purpose one should set for oneself; this is the purpose which the author has set for himself, intent for not only to be enraptured by the role played in the Krishna-form but also reveal in the Krishna-Consciousness, not failing in that attempt to becomes struck by the beauty of Sanskrit language, which becomes the instrument for Vyasa to bring out Krishna’s multi-facet personality to the present generation as he did to the ancient Yugas, as simple child prodigy as well as an adolescent, wise in wisdom far beyond his age, a devoted son, a consummate lover, a mature conciliator, a shrewd diplomat, a scheming practitioner in real-politic, a man of the worlds speaking words transcending empirical event, a consummate philosopher wise in intellect, a disciplined ruler and a compassionate judge, as particular as he is universal, palpable in the present moment and yet perceptible beyond the constraints of Time, as earthly as he is sensual, as temporal as he is spiritual, supreme Person, god and Brahman.
The author has mainly relied on Mahabharata published by Gita Press, Gorakhpur, though the one edited by Dr. V. S. Sukhtankar has been generally accepted as exhaustive and reliable. The Gita Press edition contains many verses, prevalent in South India, which do not find place in Sukhtankar’s edition, and the Author has included many of these quotations for clarifications and making people aware of the beauty and elegance of Sanskrit language. Gita Press edition is available at low cost with translation in Hindi, making it easy for one to possess more further study, containing many more instructive and illuminating passages.
A disclaimer:
The Author does not claim any higher knowledge than those possessed by the readers, nor does he claim to have read and understood the whole of Mahabharata well. He has tried to be illuminated by wisdom from whichever knowledge it could be sourced, even as every human being has sourced, no matter how much intellectually he is receptive, reflecting and meditating on them. Wisdom is what exists as the Prime Existence, Knowledge is what one has expressed as experience of that Wisdom. Therefore, there is every possibility and probability that expression of experience by two or more persons could be same or similar, there being nothing fresh or new that has not been spoken earlier.
There are also bound to be mistakes in understanding, in interpretation, in response, in recording as well as reproducing, in grammar as well as in syntax. All these errors or shortcomings are entirely those of the Author. Therefore, one needs to and should independently be receptive, reflective and meditative on what is recorded, interpreted and suggested, without accepting or rejecting.
Only when one understands and becomes consciously aware of the comprehensive and all-pervading character of Krishna-Consciousness, only then can be exult like the vedic seer, „vaodahmaotM puruYaM mahantmaaid%yavaNMa- tmasa: prstat\ | tamaova ivaid%vaaa|itmaR%yaumaoit naanya: pnqaa ivaVto|yanaaya ||‟, if not in this life at least at the end of many births „bahUina janmajanmaanto‟ hoping to be delivered from the shackles of life.
___________
