Last evening, we had Dr ChandraPrakash Dwivedi at our home for dinner (thanks to Amitabh). I had met Dr Dwivedi before but last night was different…

We talked not just about “Chanakya” but also Buddhist philosophy, film-making, Vedanta and some of his recent projects, including “Upanishad Ganga“.

And I learnt what it is to be truly humble…The first thing that strikes you about the man is his humility. In spite of his prodigal talent and extraordinary creativity, there is not a trace of arrogance or pretensions.

If you ever get a chance to hear him speak – or meet him – don’t miss it.

In the meantime, I am looking forward to “Upanishad Ganga“. Here is a little bit more about it (courtesy Chinmaya Mission):

• In each episode the main Upanishad concepts will be explained through a blend of traditional and contemporary approaches, through drama, dance, music and captivating stories. Each episode is aimed at depicting teachings that have practical implications in daily life and that inspire individual, inner transformation.
• The cost of each episode is approximately $35,000.
• To date over 13 episodes have been completed and previewed by the creators as well as people from various backgrounds. Their high acclaim and positive feedback has been greatly inspiring.

Incidentally, as many of you would know, the words “Satyameva Jayate” come from one of the Upanishad’s – “Mundaka Upanishad“

To close off this post, a short clip from Chanakya…this is one of my favourite ones (you may need to increase your volume settings).

Acharya Vishnugupta’s Valedictory Address  (”Samavartan Samaroh“) at Takshashila

Somewhat Related Posts:

The “Raja-Mandala” approach to containing Pakistan

“Eclipse of the Hindu Nation” – Excerpt from Chapter 2

Post from: || Satyameva Jayate ||

On Chanakya, Gautam Buddha & Upanishad Ganga

*** What is “Dharma”? – Concluding Part by K Harapriya ***

Can one fight a dharma yudh against adharma?

The Mahabharata gives a pretty clear answer —-yes, we can fight a dharmic war mostly although some acts of adharma will be committed.

This will seem like equivocation to most people because we tend to believe two prevailing myths:   one, that dharmic people should be held to much higher standards than the totally adharmic;   and two,  that the forces of  evil (adharma) are naturally weaker than the forces of the righteous (dharm).

Both of these are not true. Firstly, holding the dharmic to much higher standards than the adharmic, will weaken the righteous.

Secondly, the  Mahabharata tells us that the adharmic are often as strong as or stronger than the dharmic.   This may be because they are not constrained by any moral code,  and  may in fact,  be victors in most battles and wars. It is therefore necessary to evolve strategies to fight them, taking advantage of their weaknesses.

Several examples are given in the Mahabharata but the three most poignant ones are the killing of  Bhisma, Drona and Karna.

Bhisma

In the Bhisma Parva of the Mahabharata,   the battles between the Pandavas and Kauravas are documented.  According to  Kisari  Mohan  Ganguli’s  translation of the Mahabharata,   the war raged on for many days with Bhisma decimating many of the Pandava forces.  Arjuna always has the  moral reluctance to kill his Guru and uncle. He repeatedly brushes of Krishna’s exhortation to kill Bhisma.  He says, “ How… shall I fight in battle with the grandsire who is my senior in years, who is possessed of wisdom and intelligence, who is the oldest member of our race?”  He even recounts how he used to climb onto Bhisma’s lap as a child and call him father to which Bhisma replied, “I am not thy father but thy father’s father”.

Arjuna  is at many times (as evidenced in the Gita) ready to give up the kingdom if it would stop the fighting.  Here, he is very similar to Yudhishtra.

It is Krishna who provides the moral compass and the correct perspective. He says “one should slay even an aged person endowed with every merit and worthy of reverence if he cometh as a foe, or indeed any other who approacheth for destroying oneself”

Bhisma on the other hand, does not suffer from such doubts and conflicts.  He puts every effort into killing as many of the Pandava army as possible.  When Duryodhana repeatedly approaches him and questions him on his  inability to kill the Pandavas,  Bhisma is very offended because he knows that he has put all his effort into killing them.  In fact, Arjuna goes from his half-hearted attacks to a full blown attack on Bhisma, using Shikandin only after realizing that the Kauravas have no moral angst in destroying him or his sons.  It takes Arjuna ten days of battle to come to this realization.

Drona

Similarly, Drona too has no affection for the Pandavas when he approaches them as a foe.  We can tell this from the episode of the killing of Abhimanyu.  In that incident, both Drona and Karna lead the Kauravas against the sixteen year old warrior.   Abhimanyu was surrounded by eight warriors.  When  Abhimanyu  loses his horses and is on the ground,   Dushasana’s  son hits Abhimanyu on the head with a mace.  None of these actions trouble Drona.  As a guru of the Pandavas, and the son of the great Rishi , Bharadwaj,  one would  expect Drona to have a clear sense of dharma;  yet  associating with the  immoral Duryodhana has perhaps changed Drona.  We see time and again the overwhelming doubts the Pandavas have over their actions while none of the Kauravas have even the slightest troubling of the conscience.  This includes Karna who actively participated in the killing of his own nephews Ghatotkacha and Abhimanyu.

Karna

One of the enduring stories  about Karna, is the inherent nobility and grace of Karna.   Here was the true son on Kunti, the first born, the son of the resplendent Surya,  the one unjustly disowned by his mother at birth, yet one who valorously gives his kavacha (armor) and kundala (earrings) to Indra who appears in the form of a mendicant.  True, Karna is all these.  In fact, he comes across as a more likable person than Arjuna, because he had to struggle so much in life to achieve anything.  Yet, he is also one who stands by and watches Duryodhana cheat in a game, and has his brother’s wife dragged out by the hair. Karna is one of those who attack Abhimanyu when Abhimanyu has lost his chariot and weapons. He has no problem asking for Indra’s weapon when he gives him his armor and earrings and asks for Indra’s weapon to kill Indra’s son Arjuna.  Karna’s hatred of Arjuna was so great that he hesitates to use Indra’s  shakthi against Ghatotkacha until Duryodhana pleads with him, since Ghatotkacha is decimating the Kaurava army.

Krishna’s advice to Arjuna during the fight with Bhisma and Karna are often held up by modern critics as inciting violence.  It is often said that the violence Krishna supports to remove the adharmic from power is in itself the very embodiment of adharma.

This understanding of the Mahabharata is fundamentally flawed. To claim that Krishna’s advice is immoral is to claim that a human has no moral authority or obligation to defend himself. In fact, even animals understand the moral imperative to defend themselves.  It is useless to talk of ahimsa when confronted with the violent foe; likewise to claim that one should follow the strictest of rules when confronted with an enemy who is stronger and follows no rules is ultimately suicidal.

It is in this context that we have to understand Krishna’s advice.  Bhisma, Drona and Karna are invincible. This is how Krishna views them.  There is no way to kill them except through the use of strategy which exploits their weaknesses.  Bhisma’s weakness was that he would not fight against Shikandin because Shikandin was born a woman.  The  fact  that Shikandin in now a man fails to impress Bhisma.  When Arjuna uses Shikandin as a shield, he does not do so through trickery.  Bhisma knowingly refrains from fighting. This then is Bhisma’s choice.

Likewise, in the death of Drona, there is no other way to defeat him.  Yes, Yudhishtra lies that Ashwattama is  dead, knowing that Drona will think it is his son and not the elephant.  That is indeed an act of adharma.  Yet, Drona in fact commits a greater sin in refraining from fighting after he hears this. Has he not pledged his duty and loyalty to Duryodhana?  Should he not have continued fighting, unhampered by emotions as a true warrior should? Unfortunately, Drona is further hampered by his own karma - his humiliation of King Drupada and his demanding guru dakshina from Ekalavya without even teaching him. Ultimately, his death is caused by his own actions, including his support of  Duryodhana.

In the case of Karna, it is a combination of Karna’s own karma coming to haunt him. Karna acquires his skill partially by lying to Parasurama that he is not a Kshatriya.  When Parasurama finds out, he curses Karna with a memory lapse at a crucial period.  He is further hindered by the fact that he has given his divine armor and earrings which protected him.  However, even these need not have affected him, if he had not supported Duryodhana.

In these three examples, there is the underlying message that ultimately, those who commit adharma and those who support the adharmic (even if they themselves do not commit any adharmic acts) are considered equally culpable .

Mahatma Gandhi’s interpretation of the Gita

In our post-independent times, Gandhi has emerged as an alternative interpreter of the Gita.  His focus on Ahimsa, where one never resorts to violence, no matter what the provocation, is considered a legitimate interpretation of the Bhagavad Gita.  However, there is a fundamental flaw in such an interpretation. Ahimsa, as a concept when there is reference of it in the Mahabharata and other Indian texts, mostly refer to the non-killing of the vulnerable (children, women, unarmed men and animals).    There is no reference to ahimsa when one is confronting forces that seek to destroy one.  In fact the Gita clearly states that is one’s moral duty (dharma) to protect oneself and one’s dependents. Gandhi’s concept of ahimsa is from Jainism and more in line with the Christian concepts of martyrdom, where one dies for the cause and is immediately elevated.

In Hinduism, one may fight a battle and die in it, but the death for one who refuses to fight on the battlefield holds no special greatness.  Hindus do not embrace martyrdom.  Martyrdom only exists in religions where heaven is promised only to those true believers and people who die for the religion.  In Hinduism, swarga was attained not on the basis of belief but in performing duty. Thus, we see in the Mahabharata, Bhisma, Drona etc. all go to swarga since they did their duty as kshatriyas, even though they supported the adharmic.

In conclusion, the concept of dharma alone is pradhaana (prime importance) in our religion. Ithihaas, Purananas, and the Vedas help us determine what is  dharma because we truly understand that if we uphold dharma, it will protect us.

Dharmo Rakshathi rakshithaha – he who protects dharma will be protected by dharma.

*** End***

Follow the links to Part 1 and Part 2.

Related Posts:

A humble attempt at understanding “Dharma” – Part I

Understanding Raj-Dharma

Post from: || Satyameva Jayate ||

What is “Dharma”? – Concluding Part

*** What is “Dharma”? – Part II by K Harapriya ***

Lessons of the Mahabharata

One epic which still holds profound lessons for us,  is the Mahabharata.  Here is an epic where a central character, Duryodhana, is an ambitious king who seeks wealth and power.  These desires, in themselves,   are the hallmark of a kshatriya and therefore befitting a king.  He, as the first born son of the first born Dhritarashtra ,  considers himself the rightful heir to Hastinapura.  Leaving aside the practice of the time in which the most dharmic prince  usually rules,  we can see that Duryodhana  has a legitimate  claim.  His desires and ambitions in themselves are not adharmic.  The adharma flows when he tries to usurp his cousins’ kingdom of Indraprastha.   His ambition has become greed and he cannot tell the difference.   Instead of seeking war outright, which as a Kshatriya would have been dharmic, he tries to burn down the Pandava’s palace of wax, then cheats them at a game and finally decides to go to war since he cannot honour his own promise to grant the Pandavas Indraprastha if they fulfilled the conditions of the bet.

Thus, the war of   Kurukshetra   starts with a war within Duryodhana’s   personality—his desire to do what is wrong conflicting  with  his knowledge of what  is  right.

Dharma and individual psychology – How to determine what is dharma

Duryodhana, and in fact all antagonists in Hindu epics, are a useful study of human psychology. The human psychology,   as understood by Hindus, is one that is dominated by raga and dwesha – objects, experiences that the individual desires to have (raga) and objects and experiences that the individual seeks to avoid (dwesha).  This eternal conflict of seeking the pleasurable and avoiding the painful informs the individual’s actions.  They impact the individual’s seeking of wealth (artha) and pleasure (kama).  Thus, wealth is desired not only for what it can bring us (material possessions) but also for what it helps us avoid (the pain of poverty).

Within the Mahabharata, various characters present us with the raga,  dwesha conflicts which governs   their actions.  Just as Duryodhana wants to compound his wealth by cheating his cousins out of their share, Yudhishtra has his own set of raga – dwesha issues.  Here is a man whose desire for being perceived as dharmic becomes more important than actually preserving the dharma in society and fighting for it, which is his duty as a kshatriya.  This is what allows him to pledge his wife after he had lost himself in the betting. This is what allows him to witness his wife being molested in public by Dushasana without raising a finger to defend her.  (Here he fails both as a king and as a husband).

Determining what is the correct path is often very difficult; when conflicts arise within oneself as to which path to pursue, the path of duty (what one should do) takes precedence over what one wants to do.  Yet even in this, we see that it is not an easy decision.  Referring to the Mahabharata, should Yudhishtra have agreed to go to the forest in exile, or should he have fought immediately?  The correct path is probably one that is suggested by Bhima, going to war immediately.  Agreeing to exile, as Yudhistra did,  went against his Kshatriya dharma, as well as Raj dharma, since he needed to protect the people of Indraprastha and not spend years in the forest.

The problem with Yudhistra is one that plagues most dharmic people and societies.  Does one fight to defend oneself  when confronted with the adharmic actions of another or does one try to negotiate one’s way out of it?

Preserving dharma

In times such as these – when Hinduism (as in the inclusive term of civilization and cultural ethos and world-view) appears to be under attack – while we ponder on how to protect this unique culture and civilization, one important point is that no dharma can be protected unless we protect the dharmi (one who practices the dharma). The only way to preserve a living culture is to make sure that those who practice it, are able to do so freely and that all threats to them are removed permanently.  It is important to remember that the threats to dharma are not only those forces which actively try to destroy the dharmi and his way of life,  but also those forces who  give support to the adharmic.

This is not a new problem though. The threat to the Pandavas , who are  embodiment of dharma,  were not only the Kauravas, but also all the allies of the Kauravas.   Even though some of those allies are good and dharmic in themselves, the very fact that they support Duryodhana means that they need to be destroyed.

One of the most valiant heroes of the Mahabharata was Bhisma.  Here was a man who should have been the King of Hastinapura.   In fact, he was the only true descendent of King Shantanu.  Yet, to please his father, he not only makes a promise to give up the throne and embrace celibacy, he also promises to protect the throne of Hastinapura.  Yet, when he supports Duryodhana, knowing that Duryodhana is wrong and a cruel man, Bhisma loses his moral compass—he becomes a party to adharma.

There are others who don’t recognize that when they have become supporters of adharma, they become adharmic themselves.    Both Karna and Drona, recognize the illegitimacy of Duryodhana’s claim, yet support him.   They fall into the common misconception that loyalty is more important than preserving dharma.

It is important to note that Duryodhana might never have gone to war without the support of these three; in fact, if Bhisma, Drona and Karna had refused to back him, he might have been forced to negotiate.

Watch out for the concluding part this weekend: Can one fight a dharma yudh against adharma?

Post from: || Satyameva Jayate ||

What is “Dharma”? – Part II

*** What is “Dharma”? by K Harapriya ***

In the last great battle of the Kurukshetra war, Bhima is engaged in a fight to death with the wicked Duryodhana, whose greed and jealousy alone were responsible for the entire war.  After many days of fighting, a bruised and tired Bhima looks over at Krishna, the spiritual guide of the righteous Pandavas. While the rightful king Yudhishtra, the embodiment of dharma, who has staked the kingdom on the outcome of this fight, looks on, Krishna taps his thigh. The hint is to do the unthinkable, to break the warrior code and hit Duryodhana below his waist where he is weakest. Bhima does exactly that, Duryodhana is killed, and the battle is won.  Was this dharmic?  What is dharma? Is it worth preserving?  More importantly, is it even possible to have a dharma yudh (righteous war) against the forces of adharma?

Multi-layered definition of dharma

Sanatana Dharma, also known as Hinduism, has been described as a religion or a family of religions. It has a common thread of beliefs including the belief in karma and samsara, and the belief in the Vedas as pramana (a means of knowledge).  However, there is an even more basic principle which connects all the branches and beliefs of Hinduism and unites all Hindus.  This is the concept of dharma.

Dharma is the single uniting theme which informs Hindu beliefs and can be considered the foundation on  which Hinduism rests. It is defined as  “ that which upholds”.

In common parlance, it has multiple meanings depending on the context used.  It means duty (one’s obligations and responsibilities);   the right action in a given situation;    that which is in conformity with Rta (God’s /Natural laws); and also one’s religious role. Dharma is the first of the four purusharthas (the goals of man). It is followed by artha, kama and  moksha.  However, none of the other three are considered legitimate if one pursued them without reference to dharma. Artha (prosperity/security) obtained without reference to dharma is considered a crime.  Kama (pleasure) pursued without reference to dharma is considered debauchery. As for moksha, the adharmi could go nowhere near it.

Mere duty or righteous action does not, however, explain the depth of word.  Dharma exists within the Hindu world-view at several levels.  There is individual dharma, Svadharma,   which pertains to individual action which is undertaken to satisfy individual needs.  Within Hindu thought, desire and ambitions were not considered sinful or wrong and individuals were encouraged to satisfy their needs and desires through righteous actions.

Then, there is the dharma pertaining to family, society and the nation.   The concept of duty changes according to the situation and there is a clear precedent in deciding the correct course of action when there  is a conflict in the roles one plays.  Thus, duty to oneself is subordinated to one’s duty to family; one’s duty to one’s own family is subordinated to one’s duty to one’s community; and one’s duty to one’s own community is subordinated to one’s duty to the nation.

Dharma was further defined in terms of caste or community. Caste identities did not only refer to religious practices but also vocational practices.    Caste and community based dharma reveals the true pragmatic nature of the Hindu world-view.  For Hindus, values need not be universal (held by all members of society or pertaining to all situations).   By that,   Hindus understand that a value may be held by the majority of people at a given time, but it does not necessarily hold true for all times or all communities.  Thus,  ahimsa (nonviolence)  was a value that was held important.  It is extolled in the Mahabharata and in the Thirukkural.  Yet, there were communities, such as the Kshatriyas, who were entrusted with protecting society and had to use force  for this purpose.  Likewise, while religious texts like the Vedanta scorned material wealth and possessions, there were communities engaged in businesses and trade who were considered important for the economic prosperity of the entire nation—this then was their dharma

Since the concept of Dharma accommodated different life paths and practices, determining what Dharma is, in a given situation becomes very important to the Hindu.

Role of Ithihasa in Hindu values

Since the right course of action has to be determined according to dharma (righteousness) and the present situation, Hindus have throughout the ages pondered on how to determine what dharma is.  One of the primary teaching methods used has been the oral transmission of Ithihaasa and the Puranas.  Within the Hindu tradition though, only the Ramayana and the Mahabharata are considered Ithihaasa (historic). These two epics consider the life events of specific individuals and allow the reader to glean insight from the characters of these stories and their lives and situations.  The purpose of Ithihaasa is to teach the individual and the community how to determine what dharma is and how to act on it.  Our epics have played a central role in presenting us with paradigms in the form of characters whose behaviour and conflicts mirror our own situation.   Even though the stories are of a different time, we see that in our epics, the characters are motivated by the same desires that govern us— the desire for wealth, fame, pleasure, status and finally liberation.  The characters in these epics have choices in their actions and choices in how to respond to their own desires.

*** End of Part I ***

Tomorrow: Lessons from the Mahabharat

Related Posts:

A humble attempt at understanding “Dharma” – Part I

Understanding Raj-Dharma

Post from: || Satyameva Jayate ||

What is “Dharma”? – Guest Post by Harapriya

Please take a moment to remember the ones who did not come back

And have a look at this series on National Heroes

|| Jai Hind, Jai Bharat ||

Start this weekend with a story on Hyderabad’s links to Islamic terrorism

Next, read Sandhya Jain on the apparent unravelling of Jammu & Kashmir

Then read a retelling of the story of Shantanu by Jai Joshi

and finally, a personal request from Sanjeev Sabhlok, founder-member, Freedom Team of India.

Excerpts from all the articles below, as always.

.

*** Excerpts from How Indian-born Islamic militants are trained in Pakistan by Damien McElroy ***

…The Sunday Telegraph has learned that scores of young Muslim men have disappeared from the central Indian city of Hyderabad, suspected of leaving for Pakistan to be trained by the country’s Islamist terror groups.

As many as 40 potential recruits are reported to have left the city – which has a large Muslim minority – under extremist guidance, while many other young men cannot be traced.

Police efforts to track the youths have floundered in the wake of the Mumbai attacks last month. A wall of community silence has protected the activities of teachers and other shadowy figures working inside fundamentalist Islamic schools and mosques.

“We have tried to establish where the city’s youth has gone but we don’t know,” said Hyderabad’s police commissioner, Prasada Rao. “We know they have gone to other places, either Indian states or abroad. We are checking but the parents or the others will not let us into what’s going on.”

…Extensive surveillance operations and intelligence investigations have failed to penetrate the inner workings of Hyderabad’s radicals, officials admitted.

Officials at the DJS madrassahs – religious schools – in Hyderabad were not willing to discuss the disappearance of the city’s young men.

While there is no suggestion that the organisation orchestrates terrorist acts, the DJS carries a message on its website that is explicit about the right of Muslims to resort to violence.

“The DJS has trained and are training thousands of Muslim youths to defend themselves and to help, protect and defend the other Muslims,” it states, before adding that once trained in “self defence” members can leave to join any other Muslim group.

It continues that “the long term goal of the DJS remains to achieve the supremacy and prevalence of Islam in practice in its entirety”.

*** End of Excerpts ***

*** Excerpts from Unravelling J&K by Sandhya Jain ***

…A leading national daily on Saturday reported a ’strong’ Indian reaction to Syed Mehdi Shah, newly elected ‘first chief minister’ of Gilgit-Baltistan, calling it the “fifth province” of Pakistan.

An embarrassed external affairs ministry rushed to declare: “the entire state of Jammu & Kashmir is an integral part of India by virtue of its accession to India in 1947. Any action to alter the status of any part of the territory under the illegal occupation of Pakistan has no legal basis, and is completely unacceptable.”

Doubts about New Delhi’s true intentions, however, arise because of the persistent mishandling of the State’s integration with India. First, Jawaharlal Nehru was manipulated by Louis Mountbatten into taking the Pakistan invasion to the United Nations and preventing the Indian Army from recovering the captured territories. The UN called for plebiscite and then sent Sir Owen Dixon to ’suggest’ de facto partition of the State, with India keeping Hindu areas of Jammu and Buddhist Ladakh, while Pakistan kept the captured Northern Areas and Occupied Kashmir, and further received Muslim-dominant Doda, Poonch and Rajouri districts of Jammu! The proposed plebiscite was confined to Kashmir Valley, and north of Chenab declared the ‘new’ international border. As there was no way that Nehru could sell this proposal to his own cabinet, it died a natural death.

Yet Nehru, like the Bourbons, forgot nothing and learnt nothing. For reasons that defy cogent analysis, the Maharaja’s Accession was not treated as final, at par with the accession by other princes. The Hindu king of a critical state was treated like a pariah, and a dangerous concept of ‘Muslim precedence’ granted to this Muslim-majority region, laying the foundations for the erosion of India’s civilisational ethos in the critical Himalayan frontier, and subsequently across the land. Special status was granted to Sheikh Abdullah and his Muslim Conference, who drove the nascent Republic crazy with their shifting stands on every negotiated issue. Article 370 is the enduring legacy of that poor exercise in statesmanship.

…Since then (2001), a variety of ill-conceived unofficial and official dialogues, including ‘quiet talks’ with separatists in quest of a ‘unique solution’, have further compromised the Indian position on Kashmir, with myriad state politicians flexing their muscles and demanding autonomy, pre-1953 status, self-rule, even independence.

…Mehdi Shah’s statement suggests that Islamabad is moving to formalize the status quo and turn Gilgit-Baltistan into a province of Pakistan. New Delhi must realize this means Islamabad will no longer support the fiction of ’self-determination’ for the people of J&K; all ‘diplomacy’ will involve de facto or de jure surrender of Indian territory.

…It is pertinent that only Mirwaiz Umar Farooq, chairman, All Parties Hurriyat Conference, with whom Home Minister P Chidambaram is engaged in ‘quiet talks,’ supported Pakistan’s political-administrative package for Gilgit-Baltistan, saying it met long-standing local aspirations. Mirwaiz was in recent months allowed by the Centre to visit Washington, London, and the Organisation of Islamic Conference, and appears to be in the loop on the emerging Western-Pakistan synergy to dismember India from the north, formally augment Pakistan for the Afghanistan war, while furthering western strategic objectives in the region.

…It is pertinent that Indian intelligence and diplomatic sources would have known about the November elections in Gilgit-Baltistan, but Indian public opinion was kept carefully in the dark. Why, in six decades, has Indian intelligence failed to build ‘human resources’ in a region badly treated by Pakistan; to sponsor a party that could have come to power?

Were it not for Mehdi Shah’s political taunt, New Delhi would have continued to preside over moves to balkanize India via Jammu & Kashmir. Islamabad’s next step will be to grant official Pakistani citizenship to the people of Gilgit-Baltistan. Is South Block ready for that?

*** End of Excerpts ***

*** Excerpt from Shantanu – The Ancestor by Jai Joshi ***

It has been argued that the devastation of the Mahabharat war has it’s roots in the deeper history of the Kuru family. It has been argued that the first seeds of that war were sown during the reign of King Shantanu.

This is his story:

King Shantanu was the emperor of Hastinapur, a descendent of King Bharat. He was a powerful monarch and ruled his people with truth, justice and love. In his realm none were sick or poor or without food. All were employed. All were safe.

One day, Shantanu was riding his chariot along the banks of the Ganga river when he chanced to see a stunningly beautiful maiden sitting on the riverbank. She was dressed in white silk robes and had lustrous black hair and creamy skin. Her eyes were dark and liquid and fathomless.

His heart stopped in his chest. He alighted from his chariot and approached the lady. “Who are you?” He breathed.

She looked at him, her gaze piercing through him and making him almost delirious with desire. “I am Ganga,” she said.

He realised she was the goddess of the river and daughter of the creator, Father Brahma. “I am King Shantanu of Hastinapur and I am in love with you. Will you marry me, Goddess Ganga, and be my queen?”

She blushed and looked away. “Yes,” she said and Shantanu was the happiest man on earth. “But on one condition.”

Shantanu rambled: “Anything, everything. Whatever you want.”

“Oh King, hear my condition first. I will marry you but only if you promise never to question me or stop my actions, ever.”

“Yes, yes, of course.”

“Think again, great King. You should not be so quick to make decisions.”

Shantanu brushed aside her warning. “I’ll do anything to have you as my wife. I agree to your condition.”

Read the rest of the story here.

*** End of Excerpts ***

*** Excerpts from Sanjeev’s Request for Assistance ***

Dear Readers of “Satyamave Jayate”

I’m grateful to Shantanu for this opportunity to reach out widely to his readers about the possibility of organizing outreach events for the Freedom Team of India.

I’m visiting India in a few weeks. During this visit I propose to speak in as many small or big events as I possibly can, about the need for good people to come together to contest elections to promote freedom and good governance in India.

While some events are already being organized separately, I would like to speak as extensively as possible during this visit. So I seek your support (and perhaps a little bit of help) in organising a small speaking engagement during the following dates:

- Late afternoon/evening on 14 February 2010 in Jorhat (or before 11:30 on 15 February)
- 16-18 Feb 2010 in Guwahati
- 24 Feb – 4 March 2010 in Delhi (I’m also happy to talk outside Delhi during this period, subject to my availability).

The hope is to keep this event very simple without any special preparation. Just an opportunity to talk to a few good people. Indeed, the event can be tailored to the needs, and shrunk somewhat if needed.

I’d appreciate if you write to me on this at sabhlok AT yahoo DOT com, and how this can be organized to make it convenient to get the relevant audience.

*** End of Excerpts ***

Thats it for this weekend. Have a restful, safe weekend.

Past weekend readings are here.

Post from: || Satyameva Jayate ||

Weekend Links: J&K, Hyderabad and Shantanu’s story