#Mythology: When Draupadi Calls Krishna as Saviour

In the infamous episode from the Mahabharata, where Draupadi, the wife of the Pandavas is in trouble as she is lost and owned by Duryodhana during game of dice, as people recall, she first tried to call upon all elders present in the court and asked them to help her. When no one saved her, in the end she prayed to Krishn, her friend and brother, and he, using his divine power saves her by giving her the ability to keep extending Saree into an endless thing.

There is an interesting aspect about this incident.

We can note that she first called out all elders in the court for protection. During the time she would not have remembered Krishn because she was a 'logical mind' and hence she was arguing with her husbands and all other elders. Because of her arguments she is considered a feminist symbol today. But when nothing else helped, in the end, she gave up i.e. shut down her logical mind and turned ‘inwards’ spiritually. After she did that, she got God's help and was protected.  

Thing to note here is that she was helped by God when she accepted that she was 'helpless' and weak and needed protection. (Something which modern feminists may not like to acknowledge because for them religion is one more constraint.) Until she had her strong ‘ego’, she did not recall Krishn and hence remained vulnerable. Message is that if we have to choose spiritual protection, ego is our biggest enemy.  

This can also be extended in the matters of all relationships – ego is an enemy.  

- Rahul Tiwary

Shri Ram Never Banished Ma Sita to Forest

Ramayana, Rama's journey or Rama's way was originally told to the world by sage Valmiki. Valmiki is revered as Adi Kavi, i.e. world's first poet, for he wrote Sanskrit's first shloka. Valmiki authored Ramayana which is called Valmiki Ramayana, one of the two greatest epics of Bharat (India). In Valmiki Ramayan, Rama is not referred to as God but is called 'The Supreme Man' (narapungav). Valmiki tells the story of Prince Rama of Ayodhya, who leaves claim on the throne in order to obey his father and goes to live inside the forest where his wife is abducted by mighty king of Lanka, Ravana. Rama raises an army consisting of monkeys (Vanara Sena) and other animals of the forest, invades Ravana's Lanka and brings his wife back after killing Ravana in a battle. Valmiki Ramayana does not tell anything like Ram abandoning his wife Sita later in his life. 

It is said that Great Sage (Maharishi) Valmiki was contemporary to Rama. It is said that his original name was Ratnakara who was reformed and did great penances taking Lord's name. He was lost in such deep penance that an anthill grew around him and hence he is called as 'Valmiki', literally meaning 'one who sits in an anthill' in Sanskrit. Rama met Valmiki during his period of exile and had interaction with him. Later on, Valmiki taught Ramayana to Lava and Kusa, Ram and Sita's sons. 

There is a popular perception that Rama abandoned Sita and sent her to live in the forest because people had started to put doubts on her purity since she had stayed for many years in a faraway land of Lanka inside captivity of Rakshanas King Ravana. But the matter of fact is that Valmiki does not tell anything like this. Also, great scholars have called this perception of exile a piece of imagination. 

I would quote noted scholar and freedom fighter C. Rajgopalachari in his book 'Ramayana'; Epilogue; from Pages 475-476:

“I have followed the story of the Price of Ayodhya as told by Vaalmeeki. There was a legend current among people that after recovering Seeta, for fear of scandal, Raama sent her away to live in the forest. This pathetic episode must have sprung from the sorrow-laden imagination of our women. It has taken shape as the Uttarkaanda of Raamaayana... how can we comment on a work composed thousands of years ago and coming down to us in palm-leaf manuscripts subject to corruption?"

K. R. Sundararajan, professor of theology at St.Bonaventure University in New York, writes in his book "Hindu Spirituality: Vedas Through Vedanta, Volume 1", Page 106-107 [here]:

"Uttara Kaanda is considered by scholars to be a larger addition to the orignial story of Valmiki, possibly added during the third century AD. many scholars also believe that there are interpolations in the first book, especially those passages which depict Raama as a human manifestation of the god Vishnu, which could be assigned to the first century AD. It is generally held that Ram in the "original" Valmiki epic was depicted only as a human hero and that those passages, mainly in the Baal Kaanda, where his divine roots are traced and his links with Vishnu emphasized, are to be considered later additions to the story. However, these interpolations, which were made shortly after the period of Valmiki, show us something signigicant about the Hindu perception on Rama. Ram is no ordinary hero; rather he is superhuman and his story, the Ramayana, is a sacred story."

Several versions of Ramayana exist because characters of Ramayana became part of people's life and consciousness and all creative writers, poets, and artisans tried to present the characterizations in different shades and forms using their creativity. During the 12th century AD, Kamban wrote Ramavataram in Tamil basing his text on Valmiki Ramayana. During early 14th century Saptakanda Ramayana was written in Assamese by Madhava Kandali. Valmiki's Ramayana also inspired the Sri Ramacharit Manas by Tulasidas in 1576, an Awadhi language epic written in Bhakti tradition. Gujarati poet Premanand wrote a version of Ramayana in the 17th century and Ramayana was also written in Marathi by Sridhara in the 18th century. Not even Hindus, but Muslims have 'Mappila Ramayana' which deals with the story of Sri Rama, part of Mappillapattu, a genre of songs popular amongst the Muslims in Kerala and Lakshadweep. Buddhist have their own variant of Ramayana, which perhaps was used to propagate their own ideas like celibacy and denouncing marriage. There is also a Jain Ramayana. But the fact remains that all others were written after Valmiki Ramayana. Some authors and poets only elaborated and developed the characters from Valmiki's epic, while some totally changed the story or added completely new portions, which were at times not much appreciated by some others. 

The following is mentioned on HARE KRISHNA-HARE RAM [website] and also [here]: 

Many Hindus, like the followers of Vaishnavism, consider the entire section of Uttar Kand in Ramayana to be interpolated, and thus they do not accept the authenticity of the story claiming that Sita was banished. A general narration of Ramayana does not state it so. It says that Sita later lived in her father's kingdom of Mithila with her sons Lava and Kusha as per the North Indian (especially in present day Uttar Pradesh and Bihar) custom that children be brought up in their nanihaal, or maternal grandmother's place. Sita and her sons later lived at Valmiki's ashram for the boys' education and military training.

The whole of Valmiki Ramayan is presented in translated form at the website: http://www.valmikiramayan.net/ This website also quotes a book by Ramakrishna Mission and mentions: 

While stabilizing the original text of Ramayana, historians surmised that portions of two Books [Kaandas], namely Book I, Bala Kaanda and Book VII, Uttara Ramayana (not listed above) are later additions - "The first and the last Books of the Ramayana are later additions. The bulk, consisting of Books II--VI, represents Rama as an ideal hero. In Books I and VII, however Rama is made an avatara or incarnation of Vishnu, and the epic poem is transformed into a Vaishnava text. The reference to the Greeks, Parthians, and Sakas show that these Books cannot be earlier than the second century B.C......" [The cultural Heritage of India, Vol. IV, The Religions, The Ramakrishna Mission, Institute of Culture]

Two other very good points are mentioned at this [blog]: 

There are two proofs that Uttar Kand in Valmiki Ramayan is not the original part of Ramayan and it has been added later:  

1) Fal-Shruti evidence: Fal-shruti of a book (of religious importance) describes that what spiritual or other benefits one can get after reading that book or chapter. Exactly fal-shruti is either given at the end of a book or at the end of each chapter in some books. In valmiki Ramayan we can see that fal-shruti is given at the end of yuddh kand and not after each chapter. And that also describes the importance of reading whole RAMAYAN not yuddh kand alone. It means that the whole book ends with the end of yuddh-kand. But when the fal-shruti describes the benefits of reading RAMAYAN and Ramayan ends with it, why would the book proceed again with Uttar Kand? 

(2) Difference in language: When linguists tested the language of Valmiki Ramayan, they stated that there is a clear difference in the language of uttar-kand and the language of rest of the Ramayan. It seems that there is a difference of minimum two centuries between them.

While going through many references and texts and reading what great scholars like C. Rajgopalachari have said after having first hand experiences of reading authentic religious and historical texts, I would like to conclude personally that Uttar Kand seems clearly a later addition to the original text and we should not criticize anything basing our arguments on the stories mentioned in it. 

- Rahul Tiwary 

Note: Views expressed are personal and do not represent views of any person or organization associated with the author. Author is not responsible for authenticity of the references and websites mentioned as source. 

Ramayana and Mahabharata by C. Rajgopalachari

If you are thinking about reading any epics, or thinking about recommending some to your kids or younger ones, I would highly recommend Ramayana and Mahabharata as presented by C. Rajagopalachari. The learned scholar and a wonderful narrator has presented the old stories in most scientific ways and his books are very relevant for the young and modern day readers.

Here are the flipkart links to the two books. You can get the books also at major book stalls. If you like e-books, you can search to download free copies of the same, if you can get.

Ramayana: http://www.flipkart.com/ramayana-8172763654/p/itmdyu5jj7zhvryg

and

Mahabharata: http://www.flipkart.com/mahabharata-8172763689/p/itmdyyxtcvpzxxf9

 

School of Hinduism (Discussion-1 on Lesson-1)

This discussion followed after one quote which I posted within School of Hinduism (Lesson-1)

Original post:

Hindus are advised against reading the Mahabharata inside their homes for the fear that ideas in that book such as brothers fighting over property will pollute family values. They prefer reading the Ramayana because in it brothers never fight over inheritance. The principle underlying this custom is called "sympathetic or imitative magic". According to this events in a household are influenced by the ideas expressed in sacred symbols, rituals and narratives. That is why during marriage and childbirth symbols associated with fruition and fertility and opulence are placed in all corners of the house.

# Friend1:

IMHO it is just superstition born from ignorance. Mahabharata teaches us some very important things, one of them being not to fight over inheritance. But most importantly, it shows how elders can fail : fathers, teachers, etc. It shows theoretical knowledge is useless : like drona, bhishma, etc. I personally feel that it is very relevant for today, given that it was written on the eve of kalyug.

Just have a strong attachment to it :)

# Me:

It shows even God has to take up means which were considered adharma, in order to win and establish dharma. drona was killed by yudhisthira's white lie, karna by trick against kshatriya's dharma, duryodhana killed by hitting below belt, not to mention insult to draupadi while her husbands lost her in gamble. Mahabharata was a dark time, no one, not even Krishna could remain to path of true dharma. If it teaches us to abandon fair play and kill bad people after becoming bad ourselves, it is debatable

In a symbolic tale, all pandavas except yudhisthir die before reaching swarga because they had flaws. yudhsthr himself had to spend a day in nark. krishna dies because of gandhari, curse who lost al her sons. not one character in mahabharata is flawless. this is why it has more negatives than positives for the common man. but in ramayana many are flawless, its lessons serve as our ideal.

more than anything else, ramayana tells what ideal brother, wife, husband, father, friend and bhakt could be. it is not the same in mahabharata. because of this ramayana is our ideal and worthy of reading by whole family... btw what do yoy think are lessons from mahabharata for family values?

also, if you can plz explain why you think bhisma's knowledge was theoritical? imo if there is one character who remained on the path of dharma from the beginning till end, it was bhishna. because of his fear kauravas didnt play as evil as they were... but first, lessons from mahabharata for family values...

# Friend1:

i have no dispute with what you say. Its like this. To bat well, I must know the right technique. But a good teacher must also teach the results and consequences of the bad technique. Mastery and perfection is achieved with equal knowledge of both good and bad. To know only the good is incomplete knowledge.

The lessons from mahabharata are very deep. For example, it is common to see in family disputes one of sons is uncomprimising. Parents keep saying "For us all are equal". Mahabharata illustrates the consequences of such action on part of the elders : its the end of the vansh or ancestral tradition. We see this all around. Mahabharata has a lot of bitter lessons, which I agree are not for everybody.

After all, Lord Krishna did appeal to Dhritrashtra, who was the king, and invested with all authority to stop the war. Thus he too was responsible. The relevance to today is self evident.

As for flaws, Mahabharata is guidance for mankind in the Kali Yuga. Not to say Ramayana should not emulated. One must have knowledge of all.

#Me:

Your point is good... ramayana and mahabhrata are from different times which have different values... even definitions of dharma are diff in the times. but when we want an ideal, it should be flawless, having perfection... people may call it unreal but ideal has to be that much higher... like we try for 100 but get 90 and we are still better than f we tried fotr 70 and ahieved 69... i agree that there are many lessons from mahabharata but as an ideal to aspire for, Ram Rajya is our ideal...

#Friend1:

No doubt. Ram Rajya is the ideal. But even in Ram Rajya, we shall still teach our kids about demons. To keep them away from it, will only make them fall into it. Free will is essential.

#Me:

right... just for reflection, in Ramayana i think the barbarians were termed rakshasas.... so easy to identify and eliminate... but in mahabharata times it was so difficult to discriminate between manava and rakshasa... like kansa was a rakshasa or human? duryodhana could very well be a rakshasa if present in ramayana times... even pandavas who gambled and put wife on bet, even before that they shared one wife, all were against dharma during ramayana times...

But we have very good examples of great family values from mahabharata... pandavas were ideal sons... draupadi was almost an ideal wife... pandavas were ideal sons towards mother... krishna balram ideal brothers... krishna arjuna ideal friends... bhishma ideal son for his father... bhishma's great vow an ideal... arjuna rejecting menaka for good reason... krishna's ideal role as a diplomat... on the other side there are so many nonideal characters showing us what not to be...

#Friend2:

Sorry to participate and disagree with everything, most flawed character in Ramayana was Ram himself, the one who outed his own wife, based on some stupid low life. If this is the family value ram raja gives no wonder, in India women empowerment needs to be fought for.

#Me:

Friend I have done some research and read much on this. The portion where Ram deserts Sita comes in uttar ramayana which is not authentic. Most authentic tale of Ram's life is as written by Valmiki who lived himself during Ram's time. And his Ramayana doesnt mention anything like this. I have read C. Rajgopalachari's Ramayana too which he had written after much research himself. He says that this part of Sita's exile seems to have come afterwards in folk tales due to women's fears and C. Rajgopalachari clearly says that Sita's exile is not there in oldest scriptures and has been added afterwards... So learned that we are we should not believe in any such stories... Also in the stories and fictions which mention this episode, they said Raja Ram left Queen Sita because Praja didnt want her. He never gave his wife away, so he never remarried and when in yagya he was needed to sit with his wife, he sat with Sita's golden idol... when Sita left this world he too enteres the river...

So for all practical purposes Sita's exile is an unauthentic story which entered our folklore and should not be taken  seriously to make our opinion... Ram has always been the perfect husband... and i think we should correct the mistaken opinion of as many people as possible...

# Friend1:

Lord Ram was not only a husband : he was also a king, a father, etc. The part in uttar ramayana is the portrait of an ideal king. The first part is ideal student, then ideal son, then ideal husband, then ideal warrior, finally ideal king, and last ideal father. Further, he did not take another wife during the time, and pined for Sita only, and loved only her. The message is that an ideal ruler should be above reproach, and must listen to what his people want. If Sita lived in an ashrama, Lord Rama too lived in great sorrow during this time. Just bcoz he was living in a palace can be no comfort. He was not exactly gambling the nights away if thats what you think.

December 18, 2011 at 12:01am · UnlikeLike · 2

The idea is that of the bond that the two shared. Both grieved for the loss of their beloved. Neither was attached to wealth and power. It is an ideal that is naturally hard for us to grasp in this Kalyuga.

#Me:

You are very right... thanks a lot for putting it so well... Even in the later versions and additions where Ram is shown to leave Sita,i is reprentation of an ideal King... An ideal king has to make personal sacrifices if the people so want... queens were examples to whole public and when people started susecting her on her purity, to make good example, Ram is shown as leaving Sita... but he is never shown to be himself suspecting her or having mistrust... This dilemma of choosing between

December 18, 2011 at 12:11am · LikeUnlike · 1

This portion even though unauthentic shows the dilemma or conflict between different duties or dharmas...

Some more good examples from mahabharata... Karna is ideal daani, krishna ideal brother to draupadi, vidur ideal counsell, ghatotkach ideal son to bhim, abhimanyu great kshatriya, gandhari ideal wife... karna ideal friend to duryodhana... and so on... if we think we can find so many inspirations... but in totality Ram rajya is ideal for family values and culture...

#Friend3:

Concept of ramarajya doesn't fits well in today's society. Mahabharata is more appropriate. Even in Ramayan not everyone was ideal, kaikayi for instance.

he only perfectly ideal character in Mahabharat was karna. Others were ideal too but their ideals came out of teaching, belonging and convenience. Karna was the only character who had choice to change his alliance but he did not do so out of his friendship to his friend. He even donated his arms knowing fully well that this is deception. If it were Arjuna, I am sure Krishna might have helped him to dodge the situation.

Bhishma, Drona, Gandhari, Dhritrashtra all suffered due to their lack of conscience. I somewhere read about theortrical knowledge among comments. Thats explanable. Doesn't matters who is right or wrong, no one has got authority or right to insult a woman neither in public nor in private. What happened with Draupadi, was not the fault of her husband or duryodhan. All the elders who were present there were even more responsible for that. It was wrong on Drona's part, if he cannot instill good manners in his pupils he shoud have stopped them with all his authority.

It was wrong on Bhisma's part, he was the eldest and most experienced member of the family and he should have used his powers. Even after that they had a choice, both Bhishma and Drona should have abstained themselves from the war. Being a teacher (Drona)and being eldest of the family(Bhishma) they were supposed to be neutrals.

#Me:

For Karna, as i said he was ideal daani and ideal friend to duryodhana... or but his friendship was more loyalty than friendship. a good friend is a good adviser... but alas he always advised duryodhana to start war and was part of adventures to kill pandavas by trick. so he is never an ideal friend anyone can aspire for.. on the other hand he is ideal when it comes to loyalty. next he remains hateful and full of vengeance all through.. he was not the only lost royal in the family...

Vidura was exactly his case a generation back...not owned up legally... but he remained peaceful and balanced... karna was never balanced, though full of kshatriya valore but unthoughtful and quick and always ready for war... popular modern literature and fiction tries to make him a hero as people love underdogs but we need to read original classics to understand characters properly and fully...

For draupadi's incident and bhishma... as we know dhritirashtra returned all the kingdom kauravas won in gamble just after that event... it happened due to bhishma's pressure.. without bhishma's presence as keeper of dharma duryodhana wud have killed pandavas long time back. he and elders did all they cud, but there are limits. on draupdi if her husbands were wise enough to put her for gamble it was no business of others to interfere.. in that time also some women were keeps and if pandavas wanted

If pandavas were ok with letting their wife be slave of duryodhana, who were others to object? of course Krishna came to object and he saved draupadi... in the epic of mahabharata it was krishna who played role of keeper of dharma, if others cud do it he never had to take Avatar!

Bhishma and Drona could not be neutral to the war until they followed dharma... they were bound to protect the throne and pandvas were attacking it... dhritirashtra was the king and duryodhana was yuvaraj, they had to side with the throne... if they sided with pandavas or didnt support kauravas they wud not be kshatriyas and lose their honor...but they had to side with evil. in mahabharata it is shown as conflict between dharmas and ordinary morality vs higher morality...

You are right that kaikai was not ideal. people know the ideal characters in ramayana and they are flawless... like Ram, Sita, Bharat, Lakshman, Hanuman, Angad,... The character of Kaikai is there in Ramayana to test the character of Ram... if there was no kaikai or manthara Ram wuld not have achieved that much height and fulfilled purpose of his avatar... Vishnu had taken birth as Ram to eliminate rakshasas including ravana and all that happened was part of maya.in m.b. no 1 is flawless

#Friend1:

On the question of bhishma and drona, i would go with shweta. they were the elders, and if they had taken a stand the war would never have happened. Even then were it to happen, at least the elders would have done their duty. But in Mahabharata, none of the elders follow their duty

If we accept the dictum of "no action is also action", the elders were the most responsible for the war.

The actions of elders were shameful regarding draupadi. We must remember that any private deal if illegal or immoral can be nullified by the state. That is the duty of the king. Yet such a shameful act happened in the royal court.

Actually, these books are meant to illustrate certain things to us. The fact that Ved Vyas put Drona and Bhishma in the losing faction, opposing the Lord, should leave no doubts as to the intended meaning

#Me:

Duryodhana had gone to Draupadi's swayamvar and Drupadi had insulted him calling him Andhe ka Beta. So Duryodhan wanted to take revenge on her and hence the insult. Next if we start judging, elders of Gangeya who became Bhishma should have fought and protested against him for his "illegal and immoral" act of kidnapping 3 daughters of Kashiraj? I fear we should not judge that time and kings' ways from the ethics of our times. In a way, each character of MB paid price for his or her karma.

That court of Hastinapur where Draupadi was insulted represented all that was wrong with that time. When the bad guys are at their evil best, good guys lose their mind, protectors and elders confuse dharma and become mere spectators, when king is blind, and humanity in draupadi's form is insulted, Bhagwan has to come on earth to cleanse all the rot... only He can do it and he show us what is dharma and what is evil...

Management lessons from Mahabharata

Coaching or Mentoring is a great tool in management for talent development. This small piece tells how the Mahabharata teaches us the key points:

Trust in coaching: Krishna and Arjuna

In the Mahabharata, the Pandavas are shown to have fought with the Kauravas on a matter of principle.

Arjuna was the person on whose shoulders the morale of the Pandavas rested. His well-being heralded victory and he stood for all that was supreme Pandava valour and glory. He had two biological older brothers, so he was not solely responsible for looking after the family. However, Arjuna was a little vain and sensitive, and felt he had nobody to look up to. Krishna filled this void. Krishna’s style of mentoring relied on certain building blocks.

Krishna proclaimed his love for Arjuna publicly and attached the highest importance to his friendship with Arjuna. They spent much time together and Krishna took every opportunity to demonstrate his love for Arjuna. On one occasion, they fought a battle which pleased Lord Indra. Lord Indra offered Krishna a boon. Guess what he asked for? He asked that his friendship with Arjuna continue forever! This built great trust in the relationship. Trust is the first building block in the mentoring.

The second feature was that Krishna was always supportive of Arjuna but never interfered with his life. At no point did Krishna take the decisions or the actions required, he merely offered his advice to Arjuna. At any rate, Arjuna had a fragile personality, the kind that would not accept interference by someone else. Krishna ensured that after proffering his advice, he gave Arjuna his own space so that the protégé felt no sense of dependence on the mentor.

The third feature was that the relationship was one of cheer and warmth. Arjuna took his tasks very seriously and had frequent outbursts of temper. Krishna showed himself to be a friends and comrade despite the moodiness of his protégé, so that Arjuna felt free to open his heart to him.

The fourth feature of Krishna’s mentorship was that when required, he criticized Arjuna’s decisions openly but never insulted or denigrated him personally. Krishna’s focus was on the issue, not on the person. Thus he was always non-judgemental.

The fifth feature was that Krishna never left Arjuna to fend for himself just because he had chosen a path which Krishna was not supportive of. When Arjuna’s son Abhimanyu was killed in battle by Jayadratha, Arjuna vowed that by evening he would either kill Jayadratha or commit suicide. Krishna did not think this was a good idea, but he stood with his protégé to help him complete his difficult task. Lastly, when Arjuna faced a personal crisis on the battlefield, Krishna came to his rescue by propounding the Gita; it was not a mere sermon but a way of looking at the issues he was facing and helping Arjuna to resolve his dilemmas himself.

(Taken from the book “The Case of the Bonsai Manager”, by R. Gopalakrishnan)

Management lessons from Mahabharata

Coaching or Mentoring is a great tool in management for talent development. This small piece tells how the Mahabharata teaches us the key points:

Trust in coaching: Krishna and Arjuna

In the Mahabharata, the Pandavas are shown to have fought with the Kauravas on a matter of principle.

Arjuna was the person on whose shoulders the morale of the Pandavas rested. His well-being heralded victory and he stood for all that was supreme Pandava valour and glory. He had two biological older brothers, so he was not solely responsible for looking after the family. However, Arjuna was a little vain and sensitive, and felt he had nobody to look up to. Krishna filled this void. Krishna’s style of mentoring relied on certain building blocks.

Krishna proclaimed his love for Arjuna publicly and attached the highest importance to his friendship with Arjuna. They spent much time together and Krishna took every opportunity to demonstrate his love for Arjuna. On one occasion, they fought a battle which pleased Lord Indra. Lord Indra offered Krishna a boon. Guess what he asked for? He asked that his friendship with Arjuna continue forever! This built great trust in the relationship. Trust is the first building block in the mentoring.

The second feature was that Krishna was always supportive of Arjuna but never interfered with his life. At no point did Krishna take the decisions or the actions required, he merely offered his advice to Arjuna. At any rate, Arjuna had a fragile personality, the kind that would not accept interference by someone else. Krishna ensured that after proffering his advice, he gave Arjuna his own space so that the protégé felt no sense of dependence on the mentor.

The third feature was that the relationship was one of cheer and warmth. Arjuna took his tasks very seriously and had frequent outbursts of temper. Krishna showed himself to be a friends and comrade despite the moodiness of his protégé, so that Arjuna felt free to open his heart to him.

The fourth feature of Krishna’s mentorship was that when required, he criticized Arjuna’s decisions openly but never insulted or denigrated him personally. Krishna’s focus was on the issue, not on the person. Thus he was always non-judgemental.

The fifth feature was that Krishna never left Arjuna to fend for himself just because he had chosen a path which Krishna was not supportive of. When Arjuna’s son Abhimanyu was killed in battle by Jayadratha, Arjuna vowed that by evening he would either kill Jayadratha or commit suicide. Krishna did not think this was a good idea, but he stood with his protégé to help him complete his difficult task. Lastly, when Arjuna faced a personal crisis on the battlefield, Krishna came to his rescue by propounding the Gita; it was not a mere sermon but a way of looking at the issues he was facing and helping Arjuna to resolve his dilemmas himself.

(Taken from the book “The Case of the Bonsai Manager”, by R. Gopalakrishnan)

Book Review: Shiva An Introduction by Devdutt Pattanaik

‘Shiva An Introduction’

By Devdutt Pattanaik

Vakis, Feffer and Simons Pvt. Ltd

ISBN 978-81-8462-013-9

Dr. Devdutt Pattanaik is one of India’s most popular present day mythologists. My curiosity to know more about Hinduism and to get real meaning of our mythology or the inherent symbolism found a savior in him. His pen is so powerful, knowledge so deep and expression so simple that I think he is changing the way we look at Hinduism and Hindus, and revitalizing the world’s interest in Hinduism and India.

Shiva, the destroyer among the Hindu Trinity of Brahma-Vishnu-Mahesh, is an enigma in himself; a figure who attracts men and women, grownups and children, kings and fakirs alike. Here is a book which presents a very rational and comprehensive picture of the same. The book covers all aspects of Shiva, like his life story, his marriage, family, his different forms and roles, festivals, worship methods, temples and history… The language is uncomplicated and written in such a wonderful encouraging tone that the reader won’t be able to remain without loving the experience of reading this book…

I would also call it a book of revelations. I was able to know about many rather unknown facts from this book that I consider myself lucky to have read it.

The book is full of illustrations and images both colored and B&W. The collection of portraits of ancient temples and images make it such a rare collection to reserve. The book is also printed on very good quality smooth paper and is of a much bigger size. These features make it a book worth collecting and preserving for life…

In my opinion this book is a must read book for all Hindus or anyone interested in understanding Hinduism in general and Shiva in particular.

- Rahul