I have to be honest, the movie was quite a load to have to take in a single setting. I found the book to be significantly easier to understand, though my western manner of thought still left me at times scratching my head. As someone who doesn't entirely accept that destiny is pre-determined, some of the attitudes about wealth kinda pertubed me a bit.
On page 101 of The Mahabharata (as translated by Chakravarthi Narasimhan), during the second paragraph of Udyoga Parva, Book XL, Yurdhisthira states the following:
"Wealth is said to be the best virtue. Everything is established on wealth; and rich men live in this world, while poor men are practically dead. Poverty is a greater danger to a man than death; for it destroys his prosperity, which is the source of his virtue as well as his pleasures. A man who is born poor does not suffer so much as one who, after having enjoyed great prosperity and a life of great happiness, is deprived of it."
I have trouble processing that this statement comes from the King of the Pandavas who is reknown for performing sacrifices.
My question to you, however, is this: do you agree with Yurdhisthira? Why or why not?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Hi William
ReplyDeleteNarashiman's book is not so comprehensive an penetrating in analysis. Is uggest you get a copy of the book 'The lore of the Mahabharata' by Amalesh Bhattacharya which answers this beautifully.
In that there is scene where all the five brothers are debating the importance of Dharma/Artha and Kama and which should be accorded most importance.
Roughly translated it is debating about Virtue/Ethics/Lawfulness- Dharma vs Material Resources/Wealth-Artha
Aesthetic and Sensual pleasures-Kama
Only if a human balances the three and does not neglect even one though s/he may give prominence to one can life's goal-Moksha be attained.
I do not believe that money is the most important thing in life. I think it is very wrong to think less of someone, or think their life is worse because they do not have money. While I have been blessed and have never had to live in poverty, I would never be so arrogant to think that because a person is poor, his life is not worth as much as mine. Of course you need income to survive, but many people live wonderful lives while not having a lot of extra income. So overall, I do not agree with Yurdhisthra, when he said that wealth can make or break a person.
ReplyDeleteI think Yurdhisthira is giving an insight of his feelings. He was born from Dharma into royalty and wealth. Then, because of his gambling issue he lost it all and was sent to live in the forest without any of the commodities that he is accustomed. I feel that he is acknowledging that living in poverty makes him feel like a dead man. Yurdhisthira had never lost his virtues as a king before; perhaps now that he has nothing and is attempting to reclaim his throne he fells he can comment in poverty being a greater danger than death, because he now knows what poverty is and how being poor is an obstacle to excel in society. With that being said, I agree with Yurdisthira because poverty is a real obstacle to attain the education one needs in order to succeed in society as one example.
ReplyDeleteI think Yudhisthira says this because he is expressing how he felt when he lost in the dice game against Sakuni which resulted in the loss of himself, his kingdom and Draupadi. When he lost the game for the second time, he went into exile for twelve years and in hiding for one year. I am sure he felt like he was in another world when he was in exile since he was probably so used to all of his luxuries given that he was a Pandava. Therefore, he is trying to explain the difference between a wealthy lifestyle and a poor lifestyle. When he says that “a man who is poor does not suffer”, I think he is trying to say that if you do not know what you are missing out and are not accustomed to living a wealthy/different lifestyle, then living a poor lifestyle is not bad. I do not necessarily agree with him, but I can definitely see where he is coming from. For example, I live with my grandparents, parents and brother in a single family house so I have my own room and space. However, if we were forced to move into a two bedroom apartment, I would miss having my own room and personal space and would feel as if it was torture living in such a small space. On the other hand, if I grew up in a two-bedroom house with just as many people, I would not know what it is like to have my room, so I would not know what I was missing out on and therefore I would not miss it.
ReplyDeleteI totally agree with you, the film is A LOT to take in, in one sitting. Though, by accident I found out there are 2 versions. The first version is 5.5 hrs and the other is 2:50 hrs. They are the same thing but one has some things omitted. The first time I checked it out of the library I got the 5 hr film and the second time the only one they had left turned out to be 2:50 mins.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Yurdisthdira that rich men live in this world while poor men are practically dead, because poverty destroys his prosperity. But I don't agree that wealth is a virtue. That statement completely goes over my head as to why someone would believe that.
I agree with Yudisthisthira when he says, "wealth is said to be the best virtue...is deprived of it," but as much as I would like to disagree with this statement our entire society is based on how much we make.
ReplyDeleteYes, there are those who do live happily without a ton of money but they still have enough to survive. There are people who think that money shouldn't matter, and it shouldn't but it really does. The stories that you hear about someone being poor and then make it big are known because they are an anomaly. It is extremely difficult to get out of poverty no money, no education; no education, no decent paying job, ect. Everytime I hear someone talk about how money shouldn't matter I am always reminded of the Everclear lyrics,
"I hate those people who love to tell you,
Money is the root of all that kills
They have never been poor
They have never had the job of a welfare christmas"
Now I don't think that people who are wealthy are better then those who are not, I don't think Yurdhisthira did either which is why he was generous, he knew that he had enough to give to those who didn't. Yet, I do understand why wealth would be a virtue, attaining money is a key goal in a person's life, it's the "American dream", and what we're told to do as children.
I also think that it would be a bit worse for someone who once had money to lose it and be poor, they know what its like to have money when you're poor and always have been you know exactly what you're dealing with and what you're gonna get. If you suddenly become poor then it's a shock to your system, think about it how many movies are based on a rich snobbish person becoming poor?