In Sarala Mahabharata, that is. “Oh really!”, one would say. But just one trait: neither can be content. In different ways, though!
Insatiable, says the poet Sarala, was Bhima’s hunger for a fight, for food, for sleep, and for sex. He was simple and guileless, and pronouncedly sensuous. Wild, full of superhuman energy, and lacking in patience, this son of god Pavana (Wind) would often thoughtlessly jump into a fight. If he was fighting, he loved to feel his adversary’s blood in his hands. The brutal way he killed Dussasana was not required by the oath he had taken to kill him. Killing the enemy from a distance with an arrow was not for him. But archery was rated most highly in the world of Sarala Mahabharata, in fact, in all versions of the ancient story of the Pandavas and the Kauravas in any language. Bhima’s mother knew that he would never be adept at archery because he lacked intelligence and concentration. He proved her eminently right. The preceptor Drona once set up an archery test for his pupils. One, lacking in concentration and focus, would not be able to hit the target, and the archer had to do it on his very first attempt; there would not be a second chance for him. Bhima failed miserably. He could be easily provoked, and once provoked, he would become very violent. He would become abusive and could even attack his adversary, whoever he or she might be. Once, when his mother Kunti showered abuses on Krishna in the language most foul, he could not stand it and raised his mace to hit her. Krishna’s intervention saved Kunti. Later, he slapped the severed, living head of Belalasena, his son, to his death because he did not support his assertion that he was the sole architect of the Pandavas’ victory in the Kurukshetra War. For Bhima, it was an act of betrayal by his son. Violence was ingrained in his nature; it defined him best. On this account, both his mother and his elder brother, Yudhisthira, the embodiment of dharma, considered him dusta (wicked) and sometimes scolded him, calling him dusta.
His craving for food was well known. When his mother sent him to the asura (demon), Baka, with a huge amount of food the villagers had collected for the asura, he was secretly happy. In the forest, he had eaten roots and fruits for too long. He was already gulping the food when the asura came. The demon showered blows on him, but he kept eating, unaffected by the asura’s blows and abuses, and dealt with him only after he had consumed the entire food. As for his sleeping habit, Sarala says almost nothing about it. A reader of Sarala Mahabharata would have hardly associated long sleep with him, had Sarala not told us in so many words that he could never have enough sleep. As for his sexual conduct, it was above reproach in the sense that not even once in the narrative did he cast a lustful look at a woman who was not his wedded wife. His hunger for sex was with respect to Draupadi alone. He had wild sex with his first wife, the asuri woman (demoness), Hidimbaki, but he lived with her only for a short time.
To turn to Krishna. Warning Duryodhana about Krishna’s nature, said Sakuni to him: “danena atriputi je manena atriputi / bhagate atriputi je jnanena atriputi (not content with (ritual) giving, not content with honour / not content with devotion, not content with knowledge)” – one cannot satisfy him with gifts, honour, devotion, or knowledge. However much one gives him these things, it would always be inadequate.
Krishna had gone to the Kaurava court as Yudhisthira’s emissary. There he told King Duryodhana that in order to avoid war with him, all the Pandavas wanted was just five villages. Duryodhana flatly refused. He wouldn’t give anything to the Pandavas, he said. Later, outside the court, in private, Bhishma told him that it would not be right to send Krishna empty-handed; so he should give two, if not five, villages to the Pandavas. Duryodhana relented and was willing to go by Bhishma’s advice.
This was where Sakuni said what is mentioned above. For Sakuni, giving the Pandavas was actually giving Krishna. Duryodhana must not give Krishna anything in order to please him. He simply could not be pleased. He told him about King Bali. Appearing as a dwarf at the jajna (fire sacrifice) that King Bali was performing, Narayana told the great asura king that he came from a very poor family and asked him for a little piece of land in which he would perform his religious rituals – all the land He required was whatever would be covered by three steps of His. Bali thought that the dwarf didn’t know how little he was asking for. He asked him to ask for a great deal more as dana (ritual gift), but the Dwarf avatara wanted nothing more than three steps of land. Bali’s preceptor Sukracharya warned Bali that the dwarf was Narayana Himself and He had arrived to deprive him of all his possessions and power. Bali wouldn’t listen; a dwarf is a dwarf, his steps are small, so how would it matter if the guru was right that he was Narayana Himself? But when the time to give dana came, the dwarf’s foot was not a dwarf’s foot. Bali was the lord of the bhuloka (earth) and the higher lokas (worlds) as well. In His two feet, the Dwarf covered all that. When the third foot emerged from his navel, Bali offered his head to Him and Narayana despatched him to the Netherworld. The great Bali perished because he wanted to fulfil Narayana’s demand, said Sakuni to Duryodhana. Krishna was the same Vamana, he told him, and had come to dispossess him of everything that he had. He advised him to give Krishna nothing at all. If he gave him just one village instead of two, he would absorb the entire universe of space in that one village, like what Vamana had done, and Duryodhana would be left with nothing to even stand on. So Duryodhana must abandon all thought of pleasing Narayana with a gift of two villages.
The wise Bhishma intervened and told him that his narrative was incomplete, so his conclusion was wrong. After sending him to the patala loka, Narayana made Bali the Indra there, where he was like Indra of swarga loka in every respect. Not just that. He Himself left his own abode and stayed with him for his love for him. But all this made no impression on Duryodhana; quite understandable, one would think. Who would sacrifice his today for his tomorrow, especially when he has wealth, power, and status!
So, Bhima and Krishna were similar in just one respect, but unpack that similarity and you find a great difference. Bhima’s discontent was with respect to his bodily cravings. He couldn’t get certain pleasures to the level of his satisfaction. In Sarala Mahabharata, it is unclear whether Narayana wanted anything from anyone: dana, mana, bhakti, or whatever else. One cannot please him by giving Him anything whatever – this is all that this celebrated narrative says. In the spirit of our ancient knowledge, all we can say is the following: He is not pleased if you worship Him, He is not displeased if you do not worship Him. He is not pleased if you pray to him and sing his mahima, his glory; he is not displeased if you abuse him. Then what remains for us to do? Witness His leela, perhaps? At least that’s what I think poet Sarala says to his listeners and readers across centuries in his Mahabharata, popularly known as Sarala Mahabharata.
(The views expressed are the writer’s own)
Prof. B.N.Patnaik
Retd. Professor of Linguistics and English, IIT Kanpur
Email: bn.patnaik@gmail.com
(Images from the net)