The Cambridge History of India, Vol. I: Ancient India v1.c22.42

v1.c22.42

The sociological data of the epic period show that society had advanced from a period when rude manners were justifiable and tricks were considered worthy of a warrior to one when a finer morality had begun to temper the crude royal and military spirit. This is sufficient explanation of that historical anomaly found in the Great Epic, the endeavour on the part of the priestly redactors to palliate and excuse the sins of their heroes. Arjuna shoots his rival, Karṇa, while the latter is helpless. But an act like this, which was doubtless considered clever at first, became repugnant to the later chivalry. Then the demi-god hero Kṛishṇa is made to be the source of the sin on the simple ground that if divine Kṛishṇa commands, it is right. Arjuna is now made to shoot reluctantly, in obedience to the divine command. But this may not be cited as a precedent against the later code, because it was a special case in which the act was inspired by God from occult motives outside the sphere of human judgment. So with many other sins committed by the heroes. They reflect an old barbarity later excused. It is not necessary to assume with Holtzmann, von Schroeder, and others that the epic tale has been 'set upon its head,' that is, that the whole poem was originally in honour of the Kurus, and was then rewritten to honour the Pāṇḍus, and that in this last process the 'sins of the Pāṇḍus' reveal the original attitude of reproach taken by the Kuru poet². There is a difference morally between the Kurus and Pāṇḍus. The Pāṇḍus offend against the later military code. Thus the Kurus reproach the Pāṇḍus because their chief warrior interfered in a combat between two warriors and killed his friend's foe, who was being worsted in the fight. The Pāṇḍu simply laughs at the reproach. 'Why' (says he) 'of course I killed him. I saw my friend worsted, and interfered just in time to save him,' intimating, as is clearly stated afterwards, that a conflict on a field of battle is not a polite duel ('That is no way to fight'). But the Kurus are just as wicked as the Pāṇḍus, only they are diplomatic. Their sins smack of cultivated wickedness. They get an expert gambler to ruin their rival. They secretly seek to burn their enemies alive. They form a conspiracy and send out ten men under oath to attack Arjuna. They slay Arjuna's son first, in order to weaken Arjuna's heart. In a word, they are cunning and sly; the Pāṇḍus are brutal and fierce. Two types of civilisation are embalmed in the poem.