Mahabharata – 175
by
Sankar Mukherjee
and Dr Ramesh Chandra Mukhopadhyaya
Aadivamsavatarana Parva
by
Sankar Mukherjee
and Dr Ramesh Chandra Mukhopadhyaya
Aadivamsavatarana Parva
The
Legitamation of the Mandavya story
Silence
is a recurrent motif in the Mahabharata The Mandavya episode is significant on
many counts. Firstly the episode tells us of a society where there was no wise
method to distinguish the saints from a criminal as it is with us today.Neither
the king nor his men can distinguish a saint who observes a vow of silence from
a person who does not respond to the enquiries of the kings or the police
people. We do not know why the king Parikshit punished a saint who was plunged
in silence. What wrong did the saint do for which he was oddly punished by
Parikshit? One wonders whether the kings like Parikshit were like Lactogen
feeding babies of today! Can’t the kings of those days tolerate thirst for an
hour or so? Because their horses were not ordinary ones but pegasus. Mandavya
was also punished in the same way because of his maintaining silence. But the
narrator however probes into the case and tells us that he was punished because
of his doings in childhood. Mandavya can resist death and endure torture by
virtue of his penance. But he cannot prove his innocence in front of the king
or the police surgeant. He can argue with the god of death and justice. But he cannot
argue with a king. As it is with Mndavya, many innocent persons are brought to
books for no fault of theirs in the present legal system as well. Be that as it
may Mandavya could communicate with numerous sages with extra sensory powers
that baffle our imagination. And those sages flocked to Mandavya in the
disguise of birds.This adds a fairy tale motif to this episode.The episode
points out that one has to reap one’s actions.Mandavya pinned an ant when he
was a child.And for that his anus was pierced with an iron rod when he was
pretty old and a saint by occupation. As a saint he wished no one any harm.It is a pity that the god of
justice paid no regard to the life and activities of Mandavya as a saint which
should have redeemed offences if any commited by Mandavya unknowgly when a
child. Consequently in his conversation with the god of justice he said that no
child up to the age of fourteen should be punished for wrong doing if any.In
our time also if children do any offence they are not sent to jail. Instead
they are sent to juvenile court and to reformatories. We have to mark that the
god of justice had to acknowledge the ruling of Mandavya. Since that time on
the surface, crime if any, committed by children were not taken into account. It
seems that the notions of right or wrong are not always properly developed in
children. But if we pin our faith on transmigration of soul children do not
come empty handed. They bring the clouds or the resultant of their actions from
their earlier births. How can law judge on such a priori inclinations? It is a moot question. However it is said
that Mandavya cursed the god of justice for doing wrong to Mandavya.So even the
god of justice enjoys no immunity from the decrees of man. But ironically
enough the sages and saints will only those things that are beneficial to the
world. When the god of justice incarnates
as sudra or one among the working class and when in the mortal shape of
Vidura he proves that he is the fountain of good will, common sense, wisdom and
knowledge, should we not go to the working class men to purge ourselves of the
grossness and crudities from which we upper classes do suffer?