Lockdown has allowed me to enjoy the rerun of the epic Mahabharata (new one). Back in 2014, reaching home by 8pm to catch this thought provoking hour used to be a major draw for me!

Pandavas created Indra-prastha and lost it to the Kauravas. The Kauravas played a trick to win the beautiful city while the Pandavas were banished to exile as punishment. Upon their return from exile and subsequent denial of their rights led to the Great War (Mahabharath).

While preparing for the war, both – the Kauravas and the Pandavas – reached out to Krishna to seek his help. When offered a choice, Kauravas (Duryodhana) asked for Yadava-sena (Krishna’s army), while Pandavas (Arjuna) opted for Yadava-shreshtha – Krishna himself.

While, that story hasn’t changed, my understanding has. Earlier I was struck by  Duryodhana’s greed and hatred towards his cousins. I used to wonder what could have been done to avert this – not to follow certain rules (handicapped , even though the elder, cannot be the King) and how Dhritrashtra could have worked on his anger and not pass it on to his children (shadow). In other words, I was looking at the history and what happened.

Today for me what stands out is: Duryodhana takes what Krishna has while Arjuna takes what Krishna is.

Arjuna had learnt his lessons in the exile – to worship Sarawati (wisdom) for what it is; Duryodhana, protected from such learnings, seemed caught up in the confusion and belief that I am what I have, not learning to separate the possessions (finite) from the progress (infinite). He continued to focus on owning things at the cost of being.

This is a pattern you may have noticed in groups and systems that you are part of and perhaps at times in yourself? The more I have, the greater/bigger I feel I am. When mine becomes me, I am playing out Duryodhana in life.Bigger house, bigger car, more wealth etc are all manifestations of Duryodhana playing out. And when I strive to become my better version, making peace with my reality and continue to improve without becoming possessed with materials, I am playing out the rewired Arjuna.

My reflections on this epic now, reminds me of a classic tale from the Vishnu Puranas:.

A man was performing ablutions in a river when a fish approached him and pleaded, “Please save me from this big fish who is on my tail!” Responding to the plea of the little fish, the man collected it into a small pot. In that moment, the man saved  the fish and the fish was safe.

As the days went by, the fish kept getting bigger, utilising all the resources provided by the man and the man kept shifting it to bigger pots to satisfy its ever growing needs.Neither did the man think that the fish could fend for itselfback in the river not did that fish think of itself as capable and ask to return to the river. With growing dependency on the man, the fish kept growing and being moved from pot to pot, each bigger than the earlier one, until there was no choice but to move the fish to the pond, which it soon outgrew as well. Finally, there came a point when it rained s relentlessly leading to a deluge and then the Pralaya.

The Pralaya that is a destruction is also the beginning of a new era.

Ref 7 Secrets of Vishnu (Devdutt Pattanaik)

The man interferes with the law of the jungle – a law only humans can overturn due to their capacity to imagine. By shifting the fish in a pot the man has created a culture to keep the fish safe. The man feels the fish emotions (fear) and interferes with the nature.

However, since the pot belongs to the man, it is his property. Man cannot include everybody. The man continues to feel compassion for the animal and keeps providing it with safer places. Man continues to abide by his dharma. Animal does not have the capacity to imagine and is very happy in the safety of the pot. However, the man has not interpreted the larger pot as a lack of contentment by the fish. Fish continues to be the way that has been beneficial. The fear has grown and so has the need for a bigger pots. There is lack of sensitivity from either side.

Man’s attachment with the fish and the satisfaction to provide for it’s safety ensures that he remains blind to the impact this has created on nature. The man wonders why he had to face such a consequence, even when he engaged in a noble deed. At first he blames the rain, but soon the realization dawns upon him.

Just like the Kauravas did not realize that having more is not the same as being better, the  man in the above story – a representation of all human beings – didn’t realize that his obsession with keeping the small fish safe (attachment) led to a great calamity.

This tale’s relevance in today’s era is unmistakable.

Consumerism of our times – in owning more things, bigger gadgets, we have fallen into the Duryodhana behaviour (What I am is me; mine is me), making us insensitive to the impact on nature. Our attachment to external things has made us dependent on what we possess. The exile that this lockdown has resulted in, is perhaps a call to bring Saraswati (wisdom) back, to exercise restraint and caution.

The pandemic has created a space for each of us to reflect on: “How much do I require to live life that is respectable to all – a life that does not create exclusion, dependency?” Blindly seeking and owning more (bigger pots, Indra-prastha) is not going to lead to safety because what I have is not me. What I become is me. Our ability to imagine (manas) is what we need to nurture; we need to grow out of the Kaurava attitude of possessing things that don’t belong to us, that we don’t need. Covid-19, the Pralaya of our times, is an invitation for a new beginning.

While I know there were 100 Kauravas and only 5 Pandavas, I remain hopeful.