Bhagavadgita Cogitations - Gandhi's Assessment of Gita - Part II

[Guest guest]

Part II: Is Mahabharata Historical or Allegorical ?

We next proceed to discuss Mahatma Gandhi's doctrine of allegorism. The great

question is : Is Mahabharata historical or allegorical ? Mahatma Gandhi tells

us on this point that ever since he was first acquaint with Sir Edwin Ainold's

translation of the Bhagavadgita, called the ` Song Celestial', in 1888- 89, he

had felt that it was not a historical work. "I do not regard Mahabharata", he

tells us, "as a historical work in the .accepted sense of the term"

(pp.123-24) This does not mean that the persons in the Mahabharata are not

historical ; but the many situations, speeches, dialogues, interpretations,

conclusions and so forth need not necessarily be rcorded a: historical. They

are what the great Vyasa has put into the mouths of the great actors. Mahatma

Gandhi advances three arguments for regarding the Mahabharata as allegorical

rather than historical : (1) In the first place, he tells us that the Adiparva

contains very powerful evidence in support of his Statement. Vyasa ascribes

to many of the heroes of the Mahabaratha either sub-human or super-human

origins. These cannot be regarded as historical in any sense. For example,

Bhisma, he tells us, was born from the Ganga; Karna from the Sun, Dharma from

the God of Death, Bhima :from wind and Agastya from a pitcher. Who can say

that these actors or anything connected with them may be regarded in any sense

as historical ? (2) Secondly, as Mahadeva Desai has put it, it is permissible

to poets, dramatists and historians to ascribe imaginary characters to

historical persons. For example, we may see how the great Shakespeare painted

Richard III as a diabolical being.

 

"So misshapen and sent before my time into the world, that dogs bark at me

when I halt by them. "Thucydides, that great historian, who has by general

consent been regarded as a very conscientious historian, has not hesitated to

introduce imaginary dialogues or to invent speeches for his characters in

order to elucidate the different situations. Thucydides has himself told us

that he has deliberately done so in order that the lesson might be well

impressed upon the minds of his readers. (3) Thirdly, Mahatma Gandhi tells us,

if we interpret the Mahabharata more in an allegorical than in a historical

sense, then the Bhagavadgita itself might be taken to represent the moral duel

that is perpetually going on inside us. Historical names have been introduced

by the author of the great epic only to drive home ethical and religious

principles. For example, .the Pandavas were regarded as forces of light,

Kauravas as forces of darkness and the Kuruksetra as the human body in, which

they played their part. Arjuna and Karna might themselves allegorically be

taken to represent the " individual ego and the great In-dweller. " In this

way, according to Mahatma Gandhi, we have to interpret both the Mahabharata

and the Bhagavadgita more in an allegorical than in a historical sense.