ISSN No. 0974-035X An Indexed, Refereed & Peer Reviewed Journal of Higher Education

Towards Excellence UGC-HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT CENTRE, GUJARAT UNIVERSITY, AHMEDABAD, INDIA

ANDHAYUG: POLITICS AND ITS CONSEQUENCE

Malhar Jayesh

INTRODUCTION

My idea or intention in this research paper is to show how politics is still we can see in our current time and its evil consequence on us and most of the people, so therefore one can aware that if we do bad politics (treachery, violence) there will be evil consequence. So we should have to contribute in the fight against bad politics and we have to do good actions with putting truth in the center and live in harmony. To justify my idea or intention, I took Dharamveer Bharati’s most famous play “Andhayug” and The story of the and some contemporary great people’s actions.

Dharamveer Bharati (1926-1997) was a renowned Hindi novelist, poet and playwright, a Padmashree award winner. The play “Andhayug” (originally written in Hindi and translated by Alok Bhalla in English) is also called “the blind age” is a verse play written in 1954 by a renowned play writer by Dharamveer Bharati, which is based on the ancient epic, written by sage Vedvyasa. This five act tragedy is also known as the first important play of modern age, following the 1947 atrocities, as allegory to its destruction not just human lives, but also ethical/moral values, and is metaphoric meditation on the politics of violence and aggressive selfhood. The Mahabharata war dehumanized both individual and society, thus the victor and vanquished loose eventually. Bharati made a political statement against war and violence through this work (Andhyug).

Bharti wrote this play just after the independence and partition of Indian subcontinent. He wanted to show the people the moral consequence of war at that time by comparing Hindu/Muslim fighting in 1947 with / fighting in Mahabharata (kurushetra)

March, 2017. VOL.9. ISSUE NO. 1 www.ascgujarat.org Page | 38 Towards Excellence: An Indexed, Refereed & Peer Reviewed Journal of Higher Education / Mr. Malhar Jayesh / Page 38-46 war. The play “Andhayug” throught gives the lesson of not fighting to their characters and the characters are shown either guilty or tired from war. Dharamveer Bharati wants to tell people through this wonderful play not to fight for land otherwise they will have to face such consequence. ABOUT POLITICS There are two types of politics one based on the treachery and the other based on truth. One serves the king’s personal interest while the other serves the nation. The aim of the first is to be on the throne forever while the aim of the second is to remain in the hearts of the people.

REASONS FOR MAHABHARATA WAR As based on Epic Mahabharata it is interesting to know why the war happened and the reasons of war because everything has happened due to war. The war was occurred because of the throne of . Firstly as I know (because there are a lot of versions of Mahabharata) the big reason for the war was Dhritrashtra’s ambivalence and filial love for his son who became arrogant and has wrong ambitions. Secondly when Duryodhana at the Indraprasth (the Pandavas live after the division of Hastinapur city) which is also called Mayanagari (iluusion home) fell down into a little water pond by illusion. At that time laughed irresponsibly at him and tells Duryodhana that, “The blind man’s son is also blind.” This leads Duryodhand hate to Draupadi and becomes revengeful. And the last reason can be said to be the game of dice between Pandavas and Kauravas leading to Mahabharat.

POLITICS OF TREACHERY As talking about politics of treachery, Yudhisthir who is regarded as essence or symbol of truth was not left to do politics. He did not tell the lie but in kurushetra war. While was fighting against pandavas and for kauravas side and there were no chance left to defeat him so Yudhisthir, told Drona that Aswtthama is died. (Aswtthamaa is Drona’s son’) and Drona threw his weapons down on the battlefield and at that time Dristmanyu the son of Drupad, the brother of Draupadi who was fighting for in war, he seeing Droana unarmed, killed him to pieces with his sword. The politics is played here by treachery that is the name of an elephant which is Yudhisthir’s half truth, which is morally not right because Drona thought that he was his son Ashwatthama.

March, 2017. VOL.9. ISSUE NO. 1 www.ascgujarat.org Page | 39 Towards Excellence: An Indexed, Refereed & Peer Reviewed Journal of Higher Education / Mr. Malhar Jayesh / Page 38-46

Shakuni was regarded as the most brilliant strategist, treacherous man. First he planned to kill by giving him poison in his food when he was a child. But Bhima became stronger after having that poison. Then when Yudhistir became Yuvaraja, crafted a plan to burn them in Laakshagraha (wax house), but Pandavas saved by ’s ethics. The most cautionary politics of Mahabharata was regarded as the game of dice. Shakuni first emotionally blackmailed Dhritrashtra for arrange dice game between Pandavas and Kauravas. And tell Duryodhana that when the play begins tell I, Shakuni will play for you, it is not more that he gave his dices to Duryodhana and tell give it back in the game because Shakuni knows that Vidura’s athics will not allow to play with Shakuni’s own dices.So he made treachery by taking back his own dices by the hands of Duryodhana. The dices was army of war for Shakuni and boon for his ancestors made by bones that it has to do what Shakuni would say. The dice game between the Pandava and became reason for the war because in that Pandavas lost their everything-wealth and honour. Even Kauravas humiliated not only Kuru clan and also whole mankind through the disorbing of Dhraupadi as she then became very angry and want revenge for that humiliation, tells pandavas that she need Dussashan’s blood to wash his hair which he had dragged in the kingdom of Hastinapur.

The Krishana, the Lord of universe who is regarded as a moral centre was also playing mind politics (brain washing) He knows everything what will be happened in the future. He was the one who can stop the war if he wish but for the Dharma he was doing this.The example of ’s mind politics is shown, while ordered Duryodhan that I will open my blind fold and make your body adamantine polish of precious stones. So go and bath in and come return nude in front of me that Bhima will never defeat you in the fight. As Duryodhana came after the bath, Krishna saw him and stop him made Duryodhana mind brain-washed by telling him. As you had humiliated your land Hastinapur or Kuru clan and now what are going to do. You are nude and go to stand in front of your mother. Is this call a warrior? Duryodhana after words, wears a leaf cloth around his thighs and when in the war Bhima and Duryodhana were fighing, Bhima was almost defeated that time it was Krishana who knows that it is the break the code of law in war to hit down the chest in a mace fight but Krishna

March, 2017. VOL.9. ISSUE NO. 1 www.ascgujarat.org Page | 40 Towards Excellence: An Indexed, Refereed & Peer Reviewed Journal of Higher Education / Mr. Malhar Jayesh / Page 38-46 treacherously tell Bhima to hit at Duryodhana’s thighs (by signing language) and therefore Bhima broke Duryodhana’s thighs and killed him.

As the Mahabharata story ends after so much treachery, the people finally realised that they ultimately found truth (Dharma) with the cost of millions of people’s death. The last survivoers became tired and realised the futulity of war. The story of Mahabharata gives the message of not to fight and recognize the evil ones (like Shakuni, Dhitrastra) in contempary society. The evil flourished even today as it did in ancient Hastinapur. You will see untruth disguise as truth, but if ones suffered remind the last word of Mahabharata story that, “Life is the result of your actions.” POLITICS OF VIOLENCE As we talk about politics of violence, I would like to give examples of the characters from the text ‘Andhayug’. The Characters are either became violent of violence, feels guilty or looks tired after the dangerous war of Mahabharata.

As we talk about violence, revenge which was spread all around Kurukshetra or Hastinapur, we can assume that people like Ashwatthama, Bhima, Yudhisthira, Duryodhana, Kritvarma, or many other were fighting because their mind was either brain-washed, morally blinded or they are ambitious or in a wild rage but when we saw Kripacharya who was the Kulguru of Kuru clan, Whose duty was to give lesson of not to fight but after Duryodhana’s death we saw him fighting, attacking on the Pandava camp with Ashwatthama and Kritverma burned the Pandava camp with fire. The most terrific vengeance and violence is shown from the character of Ashwatthama, which is the central character of the play. He is one of the survivors and only savior left from the Kaurava clan, who was still thirsting for revenge after the annihilation of Kaurava clan (Kuruvansh). Ashwatthama embodies what the Kaurava have stood for all along – ambition instead of peace, power instead of companionship, avoidance of responsibility instead of justice, contempt for everything instead of hope for the well being of all things. Yudhisthir’s politics or half truth lead Ashwatthama to take revenge of his father’s treachrious and heartless death. He became violent, cruel and turns from man to beast; he himself called him beast.

March, 2017. VOL.9. ISSUE NO. 1 www.ascgujarat.org Page | 41 Towards Excellence: An Indexed, Refereed & Peer Reviewed Journal of Higher Education / Mr. Malhar Jayesh / Page 38-46

Ashwatthama became monster and morally blind. He treacherously attacked the Pandava camp at night with Kripacharya and Kritverma. As per the rules to attack at night in war is regarded treachery because it is against the code of war. He became totally beast as first he badly killed an old medicant in th forest and also killed Dhristmanyu, Draupadi’s five sons at Pandava camp, while they were sleeping. Ashwatthama, not only that but he crossed all the limits of human nature and dharma by leaving Brahamastra, that will kill all the Pandavas. But at that time Ved came and informed him that Arjuna also left Brahamastra and if those two collide with each other that lead the annihilation or destruction of the whole humankind and there won’t be another future generation. At the end of the play, in the last chapter we can see people became morally blind, tired after war and feels guilty themselves, like Yuyustu, Dritrastha, Gandhari. Yuyustu himself did suicide by snatches the spear from Kripacharya’s hand and plungs it into his own heart. Gandhari and Dhritrastra walk towards the forest fire and died. Yudhisthir became sorrowful after became king. Ashwatthama was wounded but not die and feels bad for his revenge and after knowing Krishna’s truth and At last Lord Krishna who also accept the curse of Gandhari and after 36 years tells old medicant to kill him. As we see all these consequence are bad but atlast this play also gives the message of antiwar or do good actions. But we cannot consider that Mahabharata or the play ‘Andhayug’ only talks about or gives the message of violence and darkness in humankind. Bharati’s play ‘Andhayug’ is considered as an Anti-war play and throught the play gives the lesson of not to fight. As one way Lord krisna playing politics but for the welfare of the future of mankind,for Dharma,duty or sustain society well. As Ved Vyasa said, “Life is the result of your action”. Gandhari, after Krishna’s acceptance of curse became sorrowful ad said, “O Krishna, what have you done. I did not weep like this for my hundred sons. You could have refused to accept my curse.” And finally she realizes that she had lost all her sons including Krishna.

POLITICS OF TRUTH As we already shown the consequence of treachery and violence that ultimately leads to truth (Dharma) but there are other events or deeds of some great people in the world who took to the road of truth and leads their peoples life welfare and better than before and also not giving

March, 2017. VOL.9. ISSUE NO. 1 www.ascgujarat.org Page | 42 Towards Excellence: An Indexed, Refereed & Peer Reviewed Journal of Higher Education / Mr. Malhar Jayesh / Page 38-46 big cost to their country or people. But they sacrifice themselves by taking these tasks as they have assassination by someone. e.g. Gandhiji, Martin Luther. As we all know about Mahatma Gandhi, he was regarded “The Father of Nation” in India and we honored him as Mahatma. He was the prominent leader of Indian Nationalism in British ruled India. In 1927 at Sabarmati Ashram Gandhiji wrote his view on truth. “God is truth. The way to truth lies through Ahmisa (Non-Violence) As we became a little contradict that like Gandhiji, Yudhisthir also walk on the road of truth, But when we carefully observed we can see the difference between the truth of both peoples. For Yudhisthir he along with the truthful man playing politics (Ashwatthama’s half- truth) regareded gambler. (Loss all in dice game) in participated in Violated war of Mahabharata. On the other hand Gandhiji never participated in Violence but protested by Dandi Salt march, Quit India movement, Undertook long fast etc. regareded as non-violence actions. Through these movements he faught for the independence and Welfare for society. He never lied and always spoke truth even his weapons regarded as truth and non-violence. Nelson Mandela is also regarded as the symbol of truth and one who took the road like Gandhiji. He revolted violence which was occured in South Africa, Suffered lot, went several time in Jail. He declared his commitment to peace between the black majority and white majority. He did not participated in violence but took the road of truth for the Welfare of Society.

OTHER CRITICS TELLS ABOUT THE PLAY AND THIS SUBJECT

It is interesting to see how past and present connect each other and some events don’t change. Here a playwright says that the play is an allegory of the pathos and the feeling of hopelessness and helplessness experienced by millions of people around the globe, as violence and hatred have seeped deeply into the social fabric of various countries. He compared the historical events that occurred during the Mahabharata war, same in modern times too, it accurately captures the sentiment of loss as felt by both the victim and victor. Mr. Vaishnavi a playwright describes Adhayug as a classical play and said it beautifully outlines the fact that every act of violence inevitably debases not just the affected individuals but the society at large. For example Dhrirashtra’s ambivalence and filial love for Duryodhana leads

March, 2017. VOL.9. ISSUE NO. 1 www.ascgujarat.org Page | 43 Towards Excellence: An Indexed, Refereed & Peer Reviewed Journal of Higher Education / Mr. Malhar Jayesh / Page 38-46

Mahabharata war, Kurushetra massacre and not affected Dhritrashtra but whole society suffers, millions of people die.

CONNECTION WITH CONTEMPARY ISSUES

As in the Mahabharata when Kauravas and Pandavas were fighting for Hastinapur land, at that time Bhisma suggested a middle way to stop this fight. Bhisma gave the idea of divide the Hastinapur city into two parts. That time played politics by emotionally blackmailing Yudhishtir by telly him to give Hastinapur to Duryodhana (which was supposed to be the good part of Hastinapur city) and tell Yudhishtir to live in deserted place called Khandavprast (’s place) which can be said one of the reasons of Mahabhrata war. This is exactly the situation that I compare when the partition happened between India and Pakistan and its subsequent fight between Hindu and Muslims throughout the country. During the British raj in India, the Britishers played politics by made the Hindu-Muslim to do fight with each other as same Shakuni did in Mahabharata. He continues played politics to made Pandava’s and Kaurava’s fight with each other. The playwright Dharamveer Bharti also drew directly on the experience of the Second World War, fresh in human memory in 1955. He has beautifully connected the Mahabharata war with the Second World War and show people the dangerous consequences of both the wars of the world that how people suffer from the Second World War – physically and morally blinded throughout the world by giving examples of Dhritrashtra, Gandhari, Aswatthama, Yudhishtir, Yuyustu and even the lord of the universe Krishna after the Mahabharata war. This is the same politics of taking (snatched away) one’s land by fight that we can see Pandava and Kaurava were fight for the land of Hastinapur and lead to the destruction of both wars. The other examples such as Godhra kand,Indiragandhi’s assassination, Reservation fight, world trade centre, Bombay, the fight occurred in Assam between Bangladesh Muslims and Bodo Assames, etc… are I think connected more a less to the Mahabharata war, and the politics which is the center of these events/violence.

March, 2017. VOL.9. ISSUE NO. 1 www.ascgujarat.org Page | 44 Towards Excellence: An Indexed, Refereed & Peer Reviewed Journal of Higher Education / Mr. Malhar Jayesh / Page 38-46

CONCLUSION After seen consequences in the play, I understood or found the futility of war, revenge or violence. It is waste from both sides as who won (victor) or who lost. So as Mahabharata story gives the message of do good actions, I tried to do good actions for the welfare of the society.

As I heard or read about the people who says that God or good things are always present in the universe, even in the worst time. That same thing I experienced while I was reading the epic Mahabharata and play ‘Andhayug’. Throughout the play lord Krishna is the moral centre or always present. But people are not acknowledging him. The people have not learnt even after seeing the bad conditions of people and lead to take revenge instead of thinking that this is the bad consequences of some bad actions, violence or treachery and they face the same consequences. As finally we got dharma in the end through Mahabharata ‘politics of treachery’, Andhayuga’s ‘politics of violence’ but the cost was high because millions of people died. But at the third part the ‘politics of truth’ as we could see. There would be some sacrifices of people but after all we did get independence through Gandhiji’s truth that makes people’s lives better even today through their truthful actions. The most important thing that I understand is, the truthful (Dharma) way always leads to good life. This above statement is clarify justified in my seminar paper as in Mahabharata, People reached truth by treachery, in they got truth through violence and revenge. Above both examples people paid lot of cost- millions people died and many affected morally but as the truthful way of Gandhi Ji, Mandela and M. Luthor , people ultimately get the good life.

At last I want to convey people that ultimately we have to go under the shadow of truth. So why should we take the path of treachery and violence?

March, 2017. VOL.9. ISSUE NO. 1 www.ascgujarat.org Page | 45 Towards Excellence: An Indexed, Refereed & Peer Reviewed Journal of Higher Education / Mr. Malhar Jayesh / Page 38-46

BIBLIOGRAPHY

➢ Bharati, Dharamveer.”Andhayug” .Ilahabad: kitabmahal,2004.print. ➢ Bharati, Dharamveer.”Andhayug”.Trans: Alokbhalla. New Delhi: Oxford University press.2005.print. ➢ Singh, Jyotsana.”colonial narratives/cultural dialogues”.London:Routledge,1996.print. ➢ Dalmia,Vasutha.”poetics,plays and performances”. New Delhi: Oxford University press.2006.print. ➢ Dharwadkar,arpana.”theatre of independence” New Delhi: Oxford University press.2006.print.

Malhar Jayesh Lecturer, Gujarat Arts and Commerce College (Evening), Ahmedabad. E-mail [email protected]

March, 2017. VOL.9. ISSUE NO. 1 www.ascgujarat.org Page | 46