Age of Gandharvas

As per Hindu mythology, this age in which we live, is called the Kali Yuga or the age of Kali. Dwapara was the brother of Kali. Dwapara was also mentioned sometimes as a friend and some times as a companion of Kali. The age (Yuga) before Kali Yuga was called Dwapara Yuga, named after Kali's brother Dwapara. As per Hindu mythology (Mbh 1.123, 3.58), Kali and Dwapara were Gandharvas. It is strange that two successive ages of pre-history were named after two Gandharvas! One would expect Kali and Dwapara to be mentioned as Asuras (Asuras were in absolute opposition with the Devas as per Hindu belief. Asuras were usually represented as evil in Hindu tradition and Gandharvas were usually not represented so. At the most Gandharvas were considered mischievous or dangerous but generally considered as benevolent and as allies of the Devas). Since, the last two Yugas belongs to Dwapara and Kali, they thus belongs to the Gandharvas.

The Gandharva-Gandhara connection

There are several references in Mahabharata were the words Gandharvas and Gandharas were used interchangeably. There were also found references in Mahabharata, ofGandharva-territories in ancient India, which some times coincided with the Gandhara kingdom in the north-west or sometimes with the colonies of the Gandharas in and around India. This included territories in north-west (coinciding with Gandhara), north (southern Tibet), Saraswati basin (western Rajastan) and Saurashtra (Surat). Balarama in his pilgrimage along the dried up Saraswati river found several settlements of the Gandharvas along the river. Mahabharata also mentions about the Gandharvas living in the north of Himalayas in company of the Devas and Yakshas. Arjuna in his millitary campaigns had visited and defeated some of these Gandharva kingdoms. Ramayana mentions about a kingdom of Gandharvas (called Sailushas) which coincides with the Gandhara kingdom. Raghava Rama's brother Bharata and his two sons defeated these Gandharvas and established the towns of Puskalavati and Takshasila named after the two sons of Bharata, viz Taksha and Puskala. Both these cities were later well known as the important cities of Gandhara.

Thus, there is a lot of reason to speculate that the Gandharvas were same as the Gandharas or in some point of time in history both these words meant the same people or geography.This would mean that the age of Dwapara and Kali were the ages in which the Gandharas (Gandharvas) got more prominence or power in ancient India.

The Gandhara-Gandharva influence in the ancient Indian politics, culture and society

Sakuni, a Gandhara chief, interfered with the politics of Kuru Kingdom, which was the center of power of ancient India during the period of Mahabharata. Sakuni was the maternal uncle of the Kuru king Duryodhana and had great influence on him. Sakuni was sometimes mentioned as a Gandharva and sometimes his sons and brothers too were mentioned as Gandharvas. A Gandharva by the name of Chitrangada is mentioned as killing the Kuru prince Chitrangada. Gandharvas were mentioned as having some military advantage over ordinary warriors as they possess some weapons that can create illusions (Chakshusi) during battle. Thus the Gandharvas had some advanced military technology with them. The Gandharva military formation in battle also is mentioned in Mahabharata, during the Kurukshetra war. Another Gandharva of the name Angaraparna has fought with Arjuna. In yet another incident the Gandharva Chitrasena has fought with Duryodhana. Thus the Gandharvas started influencing ancient Indian politics right from Mahabharata age (Dwapara Yuga). It is a possibility that after the rule of the last Kuru kings viz, Parikshit and Janamejaya, the Gandharvas dominated the ancient Indian politics and ancient India which was reeling under a socio economic depression due to the after effects of the Kurukshetra War. Thus this period was considered as the Kali Yuga or the age of Kali, where Kali could be a powerful Gandhara (Gandharva) ruler who conquered ancient Indo-Gangatic plane.

There is reason to speculate that Kali was a real ruler probably of Gandhara origin, since in Mahabharata, where it explain the life of Parikshit (grandson of Arjuna, son of Abhimanyu) it mention about the encounter of Parikshit with Kali. Parikshit and his son Janamejaya is mentioned as battling with the Gandharas. Janamejaya is mentioned as conquering Takshasila, a stronghold of the Gandharas. The epic also mentions about the contrast of the culture expounded by Kali and Parikshit. In Gandhara, there was no special status to priesthood and caste was a matter of choice and there were no strict distinction of four castes. This culture is mentioned in Mahabharata as Bahlika culture. Gandhara was one of the Bahlika countries along with Kekeya, Madra and Kamboja. The word Bahlika was used to denote 'outsiders', and all the people in the north-western part of ancient India were collectively called the Bahlikas (the outsiders). They followed a variant of Vedic culture (called the Bahlika culture), while the Vedic religion in its dogmatic form was followed strictly in the Indo-Gangatic plain of ancient India.

The predominance of the Bahlika culture with the rise of Gandhara power in ancient India through Gandharva (Gandhara) rulers like Kali and his brother Dwapara, could have come in conflict with the priest-class of ancient India who might have considered these developments as unwelcome and they might have coined the term 'Kali Yuga'. They might have held Kali responsible for all the evil that prevailed, including the socio economic depression that ensued after the great war of Mahabharata.

The changes in the cultural fabric of ancient India, that became predominant in the Kali Yuga, were also present in the age before Kali (ie during the period of Kurukshetra war). Hence that era that preceded Kali era might have subsequently got named as Dwapara Yuga, named after that constant companion of Kali. There is also a remote possibility that Dwapara and Kali where two successive Gandharva rulers separated by decades or centuries who brought tremendous change in the ancient Indian cultural fabric.

Several cultural traditions in India are named after the Gandharvas. A form of folk-music was called the Gandharva music (Gandharvan paattu) in Kerala. A folk-dance-music form found in Karnataka is called Yaksha-gaana. It served as a medium to spread the stories of epics like Mahabharata in southern India. The Yakshas were considered as related to the Gandharvas. The Gandharvas, even from the epic age, were famous for their patronage for dance, music and art. A type of recital of Indian classical music is named after Gandhara. A form of sculpturing is described as Gandhara sculpturing.

In Mahabharata, the art of music and dance is termed as Gandharva-Veda (meaning the knowledge of the Gandharvas). Arjuna is mentioned as learning this art from the Gandharvas.

The system of marriage, in which a man and a woman marries or unites based on mutual consent is known as the Gandharva marriage. This is in contrast to the traditional marriage system in India, which needs the consent of the parents. Women who enjoyed more freedom in later Indian societies, especially in Kerala, were sometimes nick named as 'Kaantaari' (Gandhari) and some women who expressed their emotions more openly were considered to be under the influence of the Gandharvas. More freedom to women, less rigid caste-system, greater interest in art, dance, music and sculpturing, greater importance of trade and commerce, greater prominence of the Vaisyas (traders) and the Sudras (farmers, craftsmen, sculptures, architects and workers skilled in animal husbandry, medicine, metal industry, mining, road construction etc) - all of these were characteristics of the change in culture, brought forth by the Gandharas (Gandharvas).

Rise of dominance of the trading kingdoms in ancient India

It is also a known fact that, there were several colonies of Kambojas (who along with the Gandharas were all Bahlikas) in ancient India after the epic age (after the Kurukshetra war). These colonies belonged to Kamboja traders (Gulf of Khabhat in Gujarat, Kalyan in Maharastra etc). There was a Kalinga city of the name Rajapura and there was a Kamboja city of the name Rajapura, showing a Kamboja-Kalinga connection. The Kamboja's of Simhapura, near Kashmir (visited by Arjuna during his northern military campaign, as per the epic Mahabharata), as part of their sea-trade established colonies in Lanka as Sinhalas. They reached south-east Asia and formed Kampuchia (Cambodia). There were some notable Gandhara colonies also spread across India, attested by place-names like the Gandhara village and the Gandhari river in Kalyan, Maharashtra. The colonies of Dwaraka at places like Gomanta (Goa) and in the western shores upto Kerala were also notable. Some of them were trade-centers and some were sea-ports. Kambojas, Gandharas and the Yadavas of Dwaraka had given extreme importance to trade, that include sea-trade and trade though land using the trade-routes like the Uttarapatha, the Dakshinapatha, the Dwaraka-Kamboja route and the silk-route. Sea shore Kingdoms like Kerala, Pandya, Lanka, Chola, Andhra, Telinga, Kalinga and Vanga had sea-trade relationships with Dwaraka, Sindhu-Sauvira, Sivi, Madra, Kekeya, Gandhara and Kamboja. Relationship of the Sivis in the Indus valley and the Cholas in the south-eastern shore of India is mentioned in the epic Mahabharata. Some traditions in Kerala like the inheritance laws where sister's son, not ones own son, inheriting property, is similar to the practice prevailed in Madraka and other Bahlika countries of the Indus valley, indicating a cultural exchange, which most likely occurred through sea-trade. The mainstream Vedic kingdoms like Kuru and Panchala which were dominated by Brahmanas and Kshatriyas, did not focus much on this sea-trade culture. However, one of the main trade-route through the land, called Uttarapatha was dominated by Kuru-Panchala kingdoms and their allies like the Kasi-Kosalas, the Magadhas and the Angas. These kingdoms demanded excessive toll on all the goods traded through these trade route which carried goods from the sea-ports of Vanga in the east and Dwaraka in the west.

However there were goods exchanged between the trading Bahlika kingdoms and the Kuru-Panchalas as well as other kingdoms of the Uttarapatha route, like the Kasis, Kosalas, Magadhas and Angas. The most important commodity that the Bahlika kingdoms traded with the Kuru-Panchalas and Kasi-Kosalas were the horses. Horses of excellent bread, that were used in battles were of Sindhu breed or were from Kamboja or from the highlands of the Gandhara kingdom. The Gandharva Angaraparna is mentioned as trading with Arjuna where he gave him excellent horses belonging to the Gandharva country in exchange of Arjuna's weapon of fire. Arjuna also collected as tribute, excellent horses from the Gandharva country to the north of Himalayas. In Kalyan (Maharashtra) which was an ancient sea-port belonging to the Kamboja or the Gandhara traders, we find mention of horse-trade, where horses were transported through land and also through sea in ships. The places like Ghodbunder (Thane, Maharastra) where horses (Ghoda) were held, attest this fact.

The difference of the Kuru-Panchala, Kasi-Kosala culture with the trading kingdoms is evident from the fact that the Kuru-Panchalas called all those tribes in the eastern and western shores of India as the Mlechaas. Pandava Bhima, in his millitary campaign is mentioned as having collecting tribute from the Mlechaas inhabiting the mouths of Ganga (on the shores of Bay of Bangal in West Bangal and Bangladesh). Nakula's military campaign to the west led him to the Mlechaas in the west along the Indus river and upto where the Indus joined the Arabian sea. Some time the term Mlechaa included the southern countries like the Cholas, Pandyas and Keralas encountered by Sahadeva in his military campagin to the south. The Vangas and Kalingas were sometimes included with the Vedic kingdoms (that followed the Vedic culture of the Kuru-Panchalas) but sometimes termed as Mlechaas. All of these Mlechaa kingdoms engaged in sea-trade with the Yadavas of Dwaraka, with the Sindhu-Sauviras and Sivis, with the Bahlikas (the north-western traders who followed a variant form of Vedic religion viz the Madrakas, the Kekeyas, the Kuru-Bahlikas, the Gandharas and the Kambojas) and with the other trading civilizations of the world that probably included the Yavanas (the Greeks) and the Chinas. Interestingly, even the Yavanas and the Chinas were counted as Mlechas by the Kuru-Panchala people according to the references in Mahabharata. Among all these Mlechaas, the Mlechaas of India who were on the western shore of India, probably centered around the mouths of Indus river joining the Arabian sea were known to the outside world as 'Meluha'. (There are others who identify Meluha with Kerala).

It is speculated that the great war of Kurukshetra was a conspiracy of the trading kingdoms of ancient India to eliminate this Kuru-Panchala nexus which failed to recognize the importance of trade (a pre-occupation of the Vaisyas), but focused more on military excellence (a domain of the Kshatriyas) and religious scholarship (a domain of the Brahmanas). Though the seed of the war was sown as a dispute between two factions of the Kuru kingdom (the Pandavas and the Kauravas), this war was grown into such great proportions due to the vested interest of individual kingdoms who participated in the war. Kambojas were known to sell their troops to both the warring parties. Sudakshina Kamboja sided with the Kauravas, while the Panchalas bought an elite class of Kamboja warriors called Prabadrakas for their side favoring the Pandavas. After receiving favors from Kaurava king Duryodhana, Madra king Shalya is mentioned as siding with the Kauravas in the great war. Similarly the Yadavas of Dwaraka also (another trading kingdom like the Kambojas) fought the war on both sides, probably seeking monitory gains like the Kambojas. The Narayana troops of Dwaraka were bought by Duryodhana to fight for him, while Vasudeva-Krisha and Satyaki with his force sided with the Pandavas. The Bhoja Yadavas under Kritavarma sided with Duryodhana. At the end of the war, the Panchalas who survived the battle was mysteriously annihilated in a night attack, though this intelligence was available to Vasudeva Krishna Yadava. Thus we see that the Kuru-Panchalas were completely annihilated in the war, to the exception of the Pandavas, who were in favor of the Dwaraka-Yadavas and thus to the trading culture.

Power struggles within the trading kingdoms

Though there was some common objective and common culture shared among the trading kingdoms of the west like Dwaraka, Gandhara and Kamboja (as well as the Sindhu, Sauvira, Sivi, Madra and Kekeya kingdoms that lied on the banks of Sindhu (Indus) river), there were political differenced between these kingdom. There is reason to speculate that these trading kingdoms themselves competed for dominance. Hence they sided with the opposing parties in the Kuru Pandava struggle.

Gandharas favored the Kauravas. There is a myth in Mahabharata, where Duryodhana is mentioned as an incarnation of Kali, the Gandharva!. Sakuni is mentioned as an incarnation of Dwapara, the Gandharva. Dhritarashtra, the father of Duryodhana is mentioned (Mbh 18.4) as an incarnation of a Gandharva king of the name Dhritarashtra! Duryodhana's mother was a Gandhara lady (Gandhari), and thus he had inherited Gandhara (Gandharva) genes from mother's side. Similarly, the Pandavas had the genes of Yadavas (since Yudhisthira, Bhima and Arjuna were sons of Kunti who was a Yadava lady) and Madrakas (since Nakula and Sahadeva were sons of a Madra lady (Madri)). The Kambojas and the Sindhu-Sauviras sided with the Kauravas due to nuptial relationships. The Madrakas headed by Shalya (maternal uncle of the Pandava-twins) though were in favor of the Pandavas were forced to side with Duryodhana. A main reason could be that all the other trading kingdoms that surrounds Madra, like the Gandharas, the Kambojas the Sindhu-Sauviras, the Sivis, the Kuru-Bahlikas (kingdom of Somadata and Bhurisrava), and the ruling elite of the Kekayas all sided with the Kauravas and Madra king Shalya had no choice but to side with Duryodhana, pretending to repaying his debt of becoming a guest in Duryodhana's military camp.

Thus the trading kingdoms were severely polarized. Kingdoms like Kekeya were split with one group supporting the Pandavas and the other group supporting the Kauravas. Similarly the Yadavas with their capital in Dwaraka were also split with one group (headed by Kritavarma) favoring the Kauravas and the other group (headed by Satyaki) favoring the Pandavas. The Yadavas at Dwaraka and the Gandharas at Puskalavati were the two major trading kingdoms who were engaged in a constant struggle for dominance. There were mentions in Mahabharata of war between Dwaraka and Gandhara, some of them led by Vasudeva Krishna, who once abducted Gandhara ladies and humiliated Gandhara chiefs. The Dwaraka-Gandhara conflictwas probably for establishing dominance on the Dwaraka-Kamboja trade-route that connected the sea-ports of Dwaraka with Uttarapatha, a route which connected the sea-ports of Vanga, and which lead to the silk-route of the north west, giving access to rich trade of goods from China and central Asia. The Dwaraka-Gandhara conflict was also fought diplomatically, as it is very evident from the epic Mahabharata. Both established blood relationship with the Kurus. While Sakuni influenced Duryodhana through politically motivated activities, Vasudeva Krisha from Dwaraka influenced the Pandavas and tilted the politics of Hastinapura in favor of the Yadavas.

The decline of Dwaraka and the rise of Gandhara

It is difficult today, to ascertain who had the last laugh. If we examine what has happened after the Kurukshetra war, we find that 36 years after the war, the seed of in-fighting that was sown into the Yadava community of Dwaraka, probably through the conspiracy of the Gandharas and which was strengthened in the battlefield of Kurukshetra, grew larger and larger, and led to a great war among the Dwaraka-Yadavas. Though the Mahabharata epic gives very less detail about this war compared to the Kurukshetra war, it is certain that the rule of Yadavas in Dwaraka ended with that colossal mutual destruction. The great trading nation of Dwaraka is gone and the magnificent sea-port of Dwaraka sank into oblivion. The only clue left in the epic is the mention of the curse of Gandhari! The epic attribute the curse of Gandhari to the destruction of the kingdom of the Yadavas in Dwaraka. This Gandhari connection gives away the clue that it was the Gandharas (Gandharvas) who conspired for the destruction of Dwaraka.

Subsequently we find mention that the remnant unit of Yadava forces led by Arjuna from Dwaraka to Kuru kingdom were met with destruction by forces of Abhiras and Sudras. Yadava ladies were abducted by them. These people seem to be allied to the Gandharas, since Abhiras were considered as a trading community migrated from the north-west which includes Gandhara kingdom. Thus we find the emergence of a Vaisya (Abhira) - Sudra power against the prevalent dominance of the priest class and the warrior class. Yadavas, though were considered initially as equal to the trading community, started behaving like they were the warrior class and thus alienated from the trading class. This explains why in Mahabharata epic Vasudeva Krishna is mentioned as desiring to eliminate his own kinsmen (the Yadavas) due to their mis-use of power and their warrior type behavior, though they had a background as traders, and should have focused on constructive trade and economic progress, thus building a prosperous nation rather than on war and destruction.

However, the epic mentions that Yadava rulers were installed at Indraprastha (in the Kuru kingdom) and at Martikavati (in Salva kingdom, which now had become part of the Kuru kingdom). We also find mention in the epic about the encounter of the Gandharva Kali with the Kuru king Parikshit and the encounter of Gandharas in Takshasila with the Kuru king Janamejaya. In both these encounters the Gandharvas were defeated temporarily. In spite of this, the Gandhara (Gandharva) influence had later dominated ancient India, so that the age was known as Kali Yuga, named after Gandharva Kali. Yet today we find that Kali was mentioned in a bad light and Krishna is worshiped as a divinity. We find that the Gandharva marriages (where a man and woman marry or unite with mutual consent, without the involvement of the parents) are prevalent in this current age of the Gandharva Kali, while Krishna worship also is predominant in this age!

Krishna, in a historical perspective

Some people are remembered for a few years after their demise. Some are famous enough to be remembered for centuries. Only there are a few who are remembered by humanity for many millania. Vasudeva Kirshna, Yadava, was such a great personality. Most conservative historical estimate place Krishna to be born before 1000 BC.

Krishna was the son of the Yadava chief Vasudeva and his wife Devaki. Hence he was known as Vasudeva Krishna or Vaasudeva.

In this blog I am trying to analyze Krishna's personality as a human being. We all know the divinity of Krishna and the influence he has on Hindu religion and on the devotees spread across the world. I am here focusing on the life of Krishna as a statesman, political reformer and a great philosopher.

Krishna as a statesman and a political reformer

Krishna was the key political figure, in overthrowing Kansa the king of the Kingdom of Surasena (Mathura district in Uttar Pradesh, India). The kingdom of Surasena was the native kingdom of the Yadava clans constituted by the Andhakas, Vrishnis and Bhojas. It was a beautiful kingdom situated on the banks of river Yamuna and lied to the south of the powerful kingdom of the Kurus (Faisabad district in Uttar Pradesh as well as eastern parts of Hariyana). Its capital was Mathura, a city which retains its name even today. By overthrowing Kansa, Krishna re-established the old king Ugrasena on the throne and stabilized the kingdom, from collapse due to factional fighting within the kingdom. The next threat came from outside the country, from the kingdom of Magadha (Patna district in Bihar, India). The ruler of Magadha, Jarasandha, attacked Surasena many times and weakened its millitary. Krishna and other Yadava chief tried all thier best to hold on. Eventually they had to flee from their native kingdom to the south and to the west.

Later, with the initiative of Krishna, the Yadavas who fled from Surasena formed a new kingdom called Dwaraka. Its capital was Dwaravati a city well protected by mountains on all sides, in an island, not far from the Gujarat coast. This made it immune to attacks from land. The kingdom prosepered by sea trade, with sea-faring kingdoms. Dwaraka had ancient roads connecting it to kingdoms like Kamboja (Jammu district, and areas to the west of it in Pakistan) and with major trade routes like Uttarapatha. Dwaraka's influenced reached to as south as Kerala along the western sea-coast of India, leaving many cultural establishments in Gomanta (Goa), Gokarna (in Karnataka) and Guruvayoor (in Kerala).

Krishna established a tie-up of Yadavas with the Pandavas, a faction of Kurus, who were fighting against the established Kuru Kingdom. This tie up prooved profitable to the Yadavas, stratagically. With the help of the Pandavas they overthrew the Magadha king Jarasandha who were thier biggest enemy. Thus the rising power of the Magadhas as a prominent power of ancient India was subdued and the Kurus continued as the major political power of ancient India during the period of Mahabharata epic. For the assistance rendered by the Pandavas in overthrowing Jarasandha, Krishna in turn helped the Pandavas to win the Kurukshetra War against the Kurus headed by Duryodhana. Thus the rule of the Pandava Yudhisthira was re-established by Krishna at Indraprastha (Delhi).

In his endevour of supporting the Pandavas, Krishna faced opposition from his own men, including his own brother Bala Rama and other leaders like Kritavarman. However the leaders like Satyaki and Chekitana stood besides him. But Krishna had to pay a price for this polarization among his own people. The Yadava chiefs faught the Kurukshetra War, on both sides, and even after the war ended, the enimity among the Yadava leaders continued. After 36 years, since the Kurukshetra War, another war broke among the Yadavas, in their own kingdom. This resulted in the absolute destruction of the Yadava kingdom in Dwaraka.

But the help Krishna extended to the Pandava Yudhisthira, paid off. When the rule of Yudhisthira ended, he established the Yadava prince Vajra on the throne of Indraprashta along with the Kuru prince Parikshit, at Hastinapura. Thus the royal lineage of the Yadavas continued through the prince Vajra.

The following sections shows glimpses of Krishna's political life, as a supporter of the Pandava cause, and as a mediater among his own kinsmen.

When Pandava Arjuna eloped with the Yadava Princess Subhadra, Krishna pacified his kinsmen with the following words:- (Mahabharata, Book 1, Chapter 223) "Even this is my opinion: go ye cheerfully after Dhananjaya and by conciliation stop him and bring him back. If Partha goes to his city after having vanquished us by force, our fame will be gone. There is no disgrace, however, in conciliation."

During the preparations for the Kurukshetra War Pandavas held many discussions camping at Upaplavya (a city in the Kingdom of Matsyas, identified to be in the Alwar district of Rajasthan). Everybody knew that the war will cost a great deal of destruction of human life and wealth. Pandavas, Krishna and other kings discussed on peaceful resolution of the dispute with the Kuru king Duryodhana. Krishna expressed his openion as follows:- (Mahabharata, Book 5, Chapter 5) "As we are desirous of adopting a politic course, this is, no doubt, our first duty; a man acting otherwise would be a great fool. But our relationship to both the Kurus and the Pandus is equal, howsoever these two parties may behave with each other. If that chief of the Kuru race should make peace on equitable terms, then the brotherly feelings between the Kuras and the Pandus will sustain no injury. If on the other hand, the son of Dhritarashtra should wax haughty and from folly refuse to make peace, then, having summoned others, summon us too, for war. "

Krishna also offered aid in war for both Pandava Arjuna and Kaurava Duryodhana as both were his kinsmen. (Arjuna was married to Krishna's sister Subhadra and also was the son of his aunt Kunti, the sister of Vasudeva. Duryodhana's son Lakshmana was married to Krishna's daughter).

Arjuna was the beloved friend of Krishan and so secretly wished to help him than Duryodhana and spoke thus:- (Mahabharata, Book 5, Chapter 7) "There is a large body of cowherds numbering ten crores, rivalling me in strength and known as the Narayanas, all of whom are able to fight in the thick of battle. These soldiers, irresistible in battle, shall be sent to one of you and I alone, resolved not to fight on the field, and laying down my arms, will go to the other. You may, first select whichever of these two commends itself to you." Arjuna chose Krishna and Krishna's army went to Duryodhana. Krishna served as the key war-strategeist for the Pandavas in the Kurukshetra war.

Krishna was chosen by the Pandavas to approach the Kurus as an ambassedor of peace. Mahabharata, Book 5, Chapter 83):- "I will go to king Dhritarashtra, desirous of accomplishing what is consistent with righteousness, what may be beneficial to us, and what also is for the good of the Kurus. "

Krishna was always troubled by the in-fighting among the Yadava chiefs. Here is a passage describing the dialemma of Krishna, thinking about his freinds who quarrel among each other:-
(Mahabharata, Book 12, Chapter 80):- "I never behave with slavish obsequiousness towards my kinsmen by flattering speeches about their prosperity. I give them half of what I have, and forgive their evil speeches. As a fire-stick is grinded by a person desirous of obtaining fire, even so my heart is ground by my kinsmen with their cruel speeches. Indeed those cruel speeches burn my heart every day. Might resides in Sankarshana (Balarama); mildness in Gada; and as regards Pradyumna, he surpasses even myself in beauty of person. Although I have all these on my side yet I am helpless. Many others among the Andhakas and the Vrishnis are possessed of great prosperity and might, and during courage and constant perseverance. He on whose side they do not range themselves meets with destruction. He, on the other hand, on whose side they do range themselves, achieves everything. Dissuaded (in turns) by both (viz., Ahuka and Akrura,) I do not side either of them. What can be more painful for a person than to have both Ahuka and Akrura on his side? What, again, can be more painful for one than not to have both of them on his side I am like the mother of two brothers gambling against each other, invoking victory to both. I am thus, afflicted by both."

Battles of Krishna

The epic Mahabharata describes many battles fought by Krishna, and his conquest of various kingdoms. He defeated the king Naraka of Prakjyotisha (Gohati). He also conqured Bana or Vana of Sonitapura (Sonitpur of Assam), to the east of Prakjyotisha. (Some historians consider the location of Prakjyotisha and Sonitapura to be along the Sindhu river in Pakistan). Bana later became an ally, as Krishna's grandson Aniruddha married Usha, the daughter of Bana. He belonged to the Daitya clan of Asuras. In (Mahabharata, Book 5, Chapter 62), Krishna is described as the slayer of Vana and Bhumi’s son (Naraka). Krishna married Rukmini, his first wife, by abducting her from the Vidarbha Kingdom (Vidarbha retains it name as the Vidarbha region in Maharashtra). He also abducted and married a Gandhara princess in the same manner. Krishna aslo attacked and conqured the Pandya Kingdom in the south.

Krishna as a Philosopher

The best internet resource for Bhagavat Gita (MP3 Audio of each Sanskrit-verse in 18 chapters with translation to any language of choice, Hindi and English included):- http://www.bhagavad-gita.org/

One of the most astonishing aspect of Krishna was the Philosopher in him. He authered the famous Bhagavat Gita, the Bible of Hindus. How he amassed this great knowledge is revealed in the Anugita chapters of Mahabharata, which stats that he got this knowledge by interactions with many learned men, and by his own meditations.

The following was what Krishna told to Arjuna when later told to repeat what he discoursed as Bhagavat Gita, in the midst of the Kurukshetra War.

Bhagavat Gita in Krishna's own Words (Mahabharata, Book 14, Chapter 16):- "I made thee listen to truths that are regarded as mysteries. I imparted to thee truths that are eternal. Verily, I discoursed to thee on Religion in its true form and on all the eternal regions. It is exceedingly disagreeable to me to learn that thou didst not, from folly, receive what I imparted. The recollection of all that I told thee on that occasion will not come to me now. Without doubt, O son of Pandu, thou art destitute of faith and thy understanding is not good. It is impossible for me, O Dhananjaya (Arjuna), to repeat, in detail, all that I said on that occasion. That religion about which I discoursed to thee then is more than sufficient for understanding Brahma. I cannot discourse on it again in detail. I discoursed to thee on Supreme Brahma, having concentrated myself in Yoga."

Krishna mentions about the knowledge he obtained from a certain Brahmana. (Mahabharata, Book 14, Chapter 16):- "On one occasion, a Brahmana came to us. Of irresistible energy, he came from the regions of the Grandsire. He was duly reverenced by us. Listen, to what he, said, in answer to our enquiries.The Brahmana said, That which thou askest me, O Krishna, connected with the religion of Moksha (Emancipation), led by thy compassion for all creatures and not for thy own good,--that, indeed, which destroys all delusion, O thou that art possessed of supreme puissance I shall now tell thee duly. Do thou listen with concentrated attention as I discourse to thee." - words of Krishna.

Extracts from Bhagavat Gita the Philosophy of Krishna

(Mahabharata, Book 6, Chapter 26):- "There is no objective existence of anything that is distinct from the soul; nor non-existence of anything possessing the virtues of the soul. This conclusion in respect of both these hath been arrived at by those that know the truths of things. Know that the soul to be immortal by which all this [universe] is pervaded. No one can compass the destruction of that which is imperishable. It hath been said that those bodies of the Embodied soul which is eternal, indestructible and infinite, have an end."

(Mahabharata, Book 6, Chapter 26):- "As a man, casting off robes that are worn out, putteth on others that are new, so the Embodied (soul), casting off bodies that are worn out, entereth other bodies that are new. Weapons cleave it not, fire consumeth it not; the waters do not drench it, nor doth the wind waste it. It is incapable of being cut, burnt, drenched, or dried up. It is unchangeable, all-pervading, stable, firm, and eternal. It is said to be imperceivable, inconceivable and unchangeable. "

(Mahabharata, Book 6, Chapter 26):- "All beings (before birth) were unmanifest. Only during an interval (between birth and death), O Bharata, are they manifest; and then again, when death comes, they become (once more) unmanifest. "

(Mahabharata, Book 6, Chapter 27):- "In this world, two kinds of devotion; that of the Sankhyas through knowledge and that of the yogins through work."

(Mahabharata, Book 6, Chapter 29) Arjuna said,--"Thou applaudest, O Krishna, the abandonment of actions, and again the application (to them). Tell me definitely which one of these two is superior." The Holy One said—"Both abandonment of actions and application to actions lead to emancipation. But of these, application to action is superior to abandonment. He should always be known to be an ascetic who hath no aversion nor desire. For, being free from pairs of opposites, he is easily released from the bonds of action.
"
(Mahabharata, Book 6, Chapter 29):- "He who is wise never taketh pleasure in these that have a beginning and an end. "

Other Dimensions of Krishna's Personality

Mahabharata is the oldest text mentioning about Krishna and seemed to be authentic about his true charecter. Harivamsa, a later addition to Mahabharata as well as Mahabhagavata Purana speak about his childhood and his role as a lover among the milk-maids (Gopikas) in the villages (Gokula and Vrindavana) where Krishna passed his childhood and tean-age days. The Bhakti cult which describe Krishna as an incarnation of Vishnu ( a Vedic God ), gave more importance to this aspect of Krishna, viz that of a charming and carishmatic child who did miracles and that of a tean age lover.

Mahabharata

I started reading the Indian epics from the age of ten. Mahabharata of Krishna Dwaipayana Vyasa, in Sanskrit translated to Malayalam by Dr PS Nair was my first book. This became a craze and I continued analyzing these books.

My strong belief is that mythology (see Euhemerus) is nothing but a transformation of history. Absolute events transform into history after a few decades and history transforms into mythology after a few centuraries. It is always possible to extract history from mythology and absolute events from history, but with a predictable loss of information.

My view on the Indian epics Mahabharata and Ramayana is that they are the substitutes of history of the period they describe. Just like a candle-light is better than total darkness, these epics serve to tell us something about those periods. In the absence of a proper history to describing these periods, Mahabharata and Ramayana serve as something close to it. They are closer to historical documents than to mythological or imaginative works. It is very inappropriate to dismiss them as mere imaginations or as fables and legends or even as mythology. Careful readers can easily separate, fact and fiction from the narrations in Mahabharata and Ramayana.

I will put it this way:-

• Mahabharata:- Historical content (aprox. 70%) Mythological (non-historic)content (aprox 30%)
• Ramayana:- Historical content (aprox. 60%) Mythological (non-historic) content (aprox 40%)
• Puranas:- Historical content (aprox. 50%) Mythological (non-historic) content (aprox 50%)

Geographical and Historical content in Mahabharata and Ramayana

In Vyasa's own words, Mahabharata is:-

(MBh 1.1) the mystery of the Veda, and other subjects have been explained by me; the various rituals of the Upanishads with the Angas; the compilation of the Puranas and history formed by me and named after the three divisions of time, past, present, and future; the determination of the nature of decay, fear, disease, existence, and non-existence, a description of creeds and of the various modes of life; rule for the four castes, and the import of all the Puranas; an account of asceticism and of the duties of a religious student; the dimensions of the sun and moon, the planets, constellations, and stars, together with the duration of the four ages; the Rik, Sama and Yajur Vedas; also the Adhyatma; the sciences called Nyaya, Orthoephy and Treatment of diseases; charity and Pasupatadharma; birth celestial and human, for particular purposes; also a description of places of pilgrimage and other holy places of rivers, mountains, forests, the ocean, of heavenly cities and the kalpas; the art of war; the different kinds of nations and languages: the nature of the manners of the people; and the all-pervading spirit;--all these have been represented (in this work).

The highest concentration of geographic information in Mahabharata is found at the start of Bhisma Parva (Mahabharata: Book 6) chapters 6 to 12, where he mentions more than 10000 geographic entities like rivers, lakes, place-names and names of kingdoms, regions, and sub-continents. Bhishma parva is belived to be the starting point of the core of Mahabharata, authored by Vyasa known as Jaya. The rest of the epic that preceeds Bhisma Parva and that succeed Sauptika Parva (book 10) is believed to be accumulated over this core called Jaya which grew to the work called Bharata and later to Mahabharata.

Thus true to what Vyasa says, his work Jaya starts with astronomy (contemporary to that period) and geography. After he explained these, in subsequent chapters he explains the philosophy of the age, in the form of Bhagavat Gita. Some say Bhagavat Gita is a later addition, though Vyasa seems to know much of this philosophy himself, since one of his (and his race of Vyasas, which probably spanned many generations, and whose descendents, even now use the surname Vyas or Byas) major activity was to classify Vedas (hence the name Veda-Vyasa (the one who divided or classified the Vedas)). Then he begins the main portion of his work which is the Kurukshetra War, where he describes the art of war, its strategies and finally its ill effects.

The Sabha Parva (Book 2), Chapter 14 contains passages that show glimpses of a political scenario, resulted due to the rising power of Magadha against the established Kuru rulers and how this threat is subdued by the combined policy of the Kurus (represented by the Pandavas) and Yadavas (represented by Krishna). In a later period we see that the Magadhas re-emerged as the major political power overshadowing the Kurus, which is part of the recorded history. Mahabharata also gives a glimps of other cultures like the Naga culture, which was spread all over India before the emergense of the Kurus. Most of the Kuru-Panchala cities had an older name showing there Naga origin, such as Hastinapura of the Kurus, which was formerly known as Naga-pura, Indraprastha of Kurus, which was built by clearing an earlier settlement of Nagas at Khandava-prastha and Ahichatra of Panchalas, which, as the name Ahi (Naga) indicates, belonged to the Nagas.

Ramayana, as the name indicates is an account of travels (ayana) of Rama, and thus is related to geography. At least, Valmiki when he named the epic as 'Ramayana' (which directly translates to travels of Rama) had this thought in his mind, and developed his epic to describe the extensive travels made by Rama from Ayodhya to Lanka. In later stages this original intent was long forgotten. Focus was shifted to the tragic story of Rama and Sita.

Divinity of Rama and Krishna

In a much later stage (effected by the Bhakti movement) Rama was considered as an incarnation and thus a divinity. While this transformation is within the scope of Indic-belif system (especially the Vedanta philosophy), which state that divinity is inherent in every human and in evey creature and it is upto every individual to express this divinity, we should not ignore the actual human named Rama and his historicity. Rama was a person, who, due to his inner strength of charecter, was able to express his inherent divinity, to the extent that later generations revered him as a god or as an incarnation (Avatara).

Much the same happened to Krishna, as revealed by epic Mahabharata. My view is that, while it is consistent with the Indic belief-system to consider them as gods, one should not be blind to ignore the actual human-being behind these divinities, to the extent that it becomes impossible for others to analyze their historicity. By the same coin, those who study the historicity of these personalities should not hurt the religious sentiments of people who consider them as divinities. Again, those who adore them as divinities, should know that the images of Rama or Krishna, are a means to attain the ultimate divinity and are not to be mistaken as the ultimate divinity, which as per Vedanta principles, is within ones own self.

Epic literature and fossils

I always tend to think about the similarity of epic literature and fossils. Just like fossils preserve signs of the existence of a creature that lived in the past, epic literature preserve information about the people and their lives in the past distorted yet reconstruct-able. Just like fossils are deposited layer by layer, epic literature is accumulated in layers after layers. By knowing in which fossil-layer a fossil belongs we are able to approximately know in which time the creature is fossilized. Same is more or less true with information crystallized inside layers of epic literature.

Epic personalities and distant light sources

Another analogy that comes into mind is the nature of epic personalities and their similarities with distant light sources as explained by astronomy. In astronomy we know that some of the distant stars that we think as single are actually binary stars, multiple stars or some times even a galaxy of stars. Some times these stars that appear as one are never related and could be located at locations separated by light-years and appear as one as they happened to be on the same line of sight from us.

This is true with some of the epic personalities like Vyasa and Vasistha. Due to their temporal-distance in the past they seem to us, when analyzing the epic literature, to be a single person. But close study reveals them as a generation of people. Some times multiple personalities that lived at different ages and different places are fused together into one personality. Many personalities in epic literature, including Rama and Krishna shows this fusion of multiple personalities.

Transmission loss of information in epic literature

Deep analysis of epics reveals that at their cores are actual events that occurred in some point of time in the distant past. Later, these turned into contemporary history. But unlike in our age, this historical information was transmitted from generation to generation through oral traditions. Information theory states that loss of information is inevitable due to the principle of entropy that maintains that any ordered system (coded-information being one example of an ordered system) is bound to lose its orderliness and tend to be chaotic. Ancient people who transmitted the epic history through oral traditions invented fables to fill the gaps that formed because of the missing information which was again due to information loss owing to the transmission loss. Thus history turned to mythology.

A typical example is the lack of knowledge of actual number of people who participated in the Kurukshetra War. This was substituted by a table (a hymn) that explains the relations between various divisions of the army like Akshauhini and Anikini (MBh 1.2). If we follow this calculation we get an impossible figure (considering the human-population of that era) as the number of soldiers and animals who took part in the war. Some historians had used this impossibility to rule out the historicity of Kurukshetra War, dismissing it as a fable. By the same way lack of knowledge of exact duration of the war resulted in the myth that it took place in 18 days, making the war much more impossible to occur historically. This is the negative effect of adding fables to historical facts.

Some times the gaps in information is not due to transmission loss. The information required in a later stage some times is never transmitted initially but became a necessity subsequently. An example is the lack of information about the exact origin of the Kauravas and the Pandavas. This lead to the fable that Kauravas were all born out of a dead-fetus born by Gandhari, which were divided into hundred pieces by Vyasa and that the Pandavas were born of the five well known Devas. The fables about the birth of Drona, Kripa, Dhristadyumna and Panchali were also are other examples.

Some times absent information is never substituted by any fable but are approximated by other means. Examples are the names like Panchali and Gandhari (and also Kaikeyi in Ramayana). The original author (Vyasa) seems to be ignorant about their actual maiden names. The name Panchali, Gandhari and Kaikeyi were derived based on their mother-land viz the Panchala, Gandhara and Kekeya Kingdoms. Another name of Panchali, is Draupadi, which is derived from her father Drupada, the king of Panchala. Yet another name of Panchali is Krishna, which could be the name by which she was called by her parents, but we can never be sure, since it can be a name derived from her physical appearance. She was darker in hue compared to other ladies and hence was called Krishna (the dark one). Same applies to Vasudeva Krishna and Krishna Dwaipayana Vyasa.

Steps taken to prevent the transmission loss

The ancient sages had devised a means to minimize the transmission loss by rendering the literature as poems and hymns, coded in a metric-system (Matra:- guru and laghu sounds) so based on their phonetics. This is much like the check-sum used to ensure the integrity of transmitted information in digital transmission. Though this helped to reduce the distortions that occured during oral transmission of epic literature, it could not eliminate the information-loss completely.

Similary one of the major occupation of the ancient sages and people who handled this epic literature though oral transmission was to assemble togather at one place and render the whole epic commited in memory so that others can varify that they are having the same version and errors had not crept in. This tradition is still existing in India, in spite of the fact that the entire epic has already been writen down and commited to text, and now into hypertext over Internet. The myth of Ganesha writing down the Mahabharata, as Vyasa rendered it from his memory is a glimps of the stage at which the orally transmitted epic is writtend down into text for the first time, possibly by Gana-Patis (heads of the republics) of those ages.

Preservation effect of fables

There is a positive effect also in adding fables to historic facts. They serve to make the information more attractive and appealing which could encourage a society who were less inclined in preserving historical fact than in preserving stories that invoke a sense of wonder and those that deals with their religion. The fiction part of the epic serves as an outer envelop that preserve the core historic information by continuous retelling over generations so that they reach us now (like a fruit is preserved by its outer covering, until it is ready to be consumed by its intended consumers). The ancient sages some times deliberately added these fables to the factual information to make the information long lived. This is like the mummification of information, which otherwise could have dissipated completely in course of a few centuries.

Comparing Illiad and Oddyssy to Mahabharata and Ramayana

Comparison of Illiad and Odyssey which are much less in size compared to Ramayana and Mahabharata, to the extent that the later ones are considered some-how to be a retelling of the former (Homeric) works, seems to be like comparing the stars like Sirius and Betelgeuse to the Sun. Due to proximity to Earth, the Sun is the most familiar star for people of Earth. But in absolute terms Sirius and Betelgeuse are obviously much larger and majestic than the Sun. Who ever says that Mahabharata or Ramayana are a retelling of Homeric works are doing this due to their greater familiarity with Homeric works and their lack of familiarity with the works of Vyasa and Valmiki.