Mahabharata Interpretation
Question: Swami, current state of world affairs is, indeed, nightmarish. Injustice, disorder, unrighteousness, and falsehood are rampant. Forgive me, Swami, if my question is not proper. Kindly clarify my doubt. How much justice did prevail in the age of the Mahabharata [a Hindu epic]? Besides serving poisoned food to the Pandavas [the five brothers who personified virtues], setting fire to the house of lac that they stayed in, and attempting to murder them in other ways, the Kauravas [the 100 cousins of Pandavas that personified negative characteristics] denied them their rightful share of the kingdom; they did not give the Pandavas even five villages, and in fact, they did not give so much space as the point of a needle. How much of the moral code or the law of the time did the Kauravas follow? Was there any peace in that yuga [age]?
Bhagavan: The distinctive dharma [code of conduct] of the Dwapara yuga [during the period of Lord Krishna’s incarnation] is not fully found in that yuga. The beginnings of Kali yuga [Iron age—the present age] and its mode and behavioral style were already noticeable. Shakuni [maternal uncle of the Kauravas] was largely responsible for the wicked conduct of the Kauravas. Heeding his advice and egged on by him, they behaved in the way they did. Undoubtedly, behaving in an unrighteous manner was the fault of the Kauravas.
Remember that all this took place in the kingdom of Dhritarashtra, the blind king—the Kauravas’ father. Blindness is but the failure to recognize sathya [truth], dharma [righteousness], shanti [peace], and prema [love]. One day as he was walking along the main streets of his kingdom, Dharmaraja [the eldest of the Pandavas] saw a farmer transporting bags of paddy [rice in the husk] in carts. He asked the farmer, “Sir! Why are you carrying paddy in bags? You could have left it in the fields, couldn’t you?” The farmer replied, “O King! A few days ago, our paddy was stolen from the fields. That is why we are pouring it into bags and moving it into our homes.” Dharmaraja noticed the negative signs of the approaching Kaliyuga.
On another occasion, he [Dharmaraja] noticed a woman walking brazenly in the main street, and uninhibitedly conversing with a man. He thought, “Oh! The Kaliyuga is at hand.” Another day, he observed the citizens hanging iron lumps at the entrance to their homes. He asked them, “What is this?” The people replied, “O King! Now that so many thefts are taking place, there is no way to secure our belongings, ornaments, and food grains. That is why we are using these lumps called locks.” Thus, even in the [tail end of] Dwapara yuga, the symptoms of Kali yuga were evident.
Question: Swami, it is said that Draupadi [Pandavas’ wife] laughed derisively at Duryodhana [eldest of the Kauravas] in the Mayasabha [court of illusion], which made him furious and revengeful and ultimately led to the Kurukshetra [the place where the Pandavas and Kauravas fought] war. Will you kindly bless us with your special interpretation?
Bhagavan: These are words of those who do not know the reality. Draupadi was not an ordinary person. She was a queen, known for her chastity. She was the wife of the great Pandavas. It is ridiculous to say that she laughed at Duryodhana in the Mayasabha. You are mistaken if you think so. She was not of the type to laugh at people. Those who don’t know what had actually happened think like this.
On that day after taking a head bath, Draupadi was drying her hair and was about to come out of the palace through the main door. It was at that time that Duryodhana fell down mistaking the place for open ground when there was water. Watching, this, the maidservants started laughing at the ludicrous sight. As Draupadi was coming out just then, Duryodhana saw her and mistook her for laughing at him. In fact, she did not laugh at all. So, it was the fault of Duryodhana to think so.
There was no flaw in Draupadi. She never raised her voice at any time. Contented with whatever she had, she was never tired of serving the Pandavas under any circumstances. She was the noblest of them all. It is your foolishness to think that she laughed at Duryodhana or at any other person.
Source: Satyopnisad, Vol. 1 & 2
