P Kharel

German scholar Max Mueller (1823- 1900) said: “There’s nothing that’s not in the Mahabharata.”
So it is.
Educated in Sanskrit and settled in England by the time he was 25, Muller spent years understanding and learning the oldest of Vedic verses, the Rig Veda, and other texts on Asia’s culture and religion. While many revel on the texts, others pretend indifference with their bewildering silence over the monumental manuscript handed down from the ancient deep.
To many a “trendy” outlook, quoting Eastern texts is not the “in” thing in many an intellectual circle. To them, for instance, putting a tika on the forehead is dismissive as a misplaced sense of exhibitionism “in this day and age”. Such educated are consumed by how others might size them and not by exercising their critical faculty and conscience. The problem is complex.

Had the Vedas originated in the tongue of Latin, Hebrew or Greek, it might have had another meaning for the lords of wisdom since the modern colonial times that marked the beginning of the new opening and reawakening, enlightenment and campaigns for civilising barbarians who followed religions not conforming to the invading forces’ or the colonisers’ own. The Mahabharata (Great Epic) illustrates a similar challenge.

Mammoth read
The Himwatkhand covering the high Himalayas and surroundings, including Nepal and a sizeable part of present day India, was a centre of knowledge, meditation and compositions of ideas. Composed in the ambience of the Himalayas as the background in Nepal, the Mahabharata reads in a volume eight times thicker than the Greek Homer’s Iliad and Odyssey combined. The monumental manuscript’s breadth and depth, together with the galaxy of characters, offer a breathtaking read representing various shades of life. But the vast volume is not accorded the mention it deserves.
Rather than intellectual integrity, narrow sectarian considerations seem to be the cause of such persistent distancing since so long. Only a select few, who study it for critical comment, give their interpretation and appreciation.

Italian philosopher and historian Niccolo Machiavelli (1469-1527) published “The Prince” in 1513. He is widely hailed in the West and other parts of the world as the “father of modern political science”. Considered as a thought-provoking work by European intellectuals, it did not impress the East much. For Kautilya, also known by several other names including Bishnu Gupta and Chanakya, is credited with several other works in the third century BCE, i.e., some 17 centuries before Europe’s Renaissance and the Italian philosopher’s work.
One of Kautilya’s compositions was Arthasastra, which dealt with politics, governance, economics and revenue, among other topics. With a strategy of keeping a ruler prepared for sudden serious surprises and unpredictable consequences pertaining to matters of statecraft, security and personal safety, he warned that the seemingly closest ones could be potentially the greatest security risk because of their close proximity to power centres.
The guardian and teacher of the Maurya King Chandra Gupta, who ruled a vast part of north India and its periphery, counselled: “A ruler keeps his eyes open through spies (and) improves his own discipline by continuing his learning in all branches of knowledge.” Kautilya dwelt upon the intrigues and conspiracies that could brew within and outside the corridors of power. He outlined eight schedules of about and an hour and a half each from dawn to well past dusk for a ruler.

The day’s official business began with a briefing on the intelligence reports covering significant events and incidents that occurred during the night. Before he retired from the day’s official work, he again obtained briefing on the reports filed by spies from different corners covering the hours since dawn.
Bharat Muni, author of Natyasastra, lived about 6 centuries before the English speaking world’s dramatist William Shakespeare (1564-1616). Bharat Muni’s most notable work is the earliest, highly comprehensive and minutely detailed document on various aspects of dance, music and drama on the stage. The “rasa” theory seeks to transport individuals in the audience into another parallel world of reality to experience one’s own latent urges.

With 6,000 couplets, Natyasastra touches upon also stage play’s director, producer, language, dialogue, decorations, music, instruments, audience types and a host of other aspects. The meanings of each body part movement and dance step offer rich explanations. A presentation’s main theme, characterisation and key manifestations are found in its dominant rasa.
Denoting the juice or essence of life, the “rasa” theory includes sringar (love/romance/beauty), hasya (laughter/humour), kaaruna (sorrow/compassion), roudra (anger), veera (/heroism/valour), bhayanaka (fear/terror), bibhatsa (disgust), adbhut (surprise/wonder/marvel) and shanta (peace/tranquillity). Presentations are categorised on the basis which of these qualities dominate the theme and slant of its narrative and pitch.

Without parallel
Natyasastra and Arthasastra have no comparison in the BCE centuries. Although many Western scholars recognised Machiavelli as the “father” of political science, Kautilya is way ahead of the Italian author, given the centuries old gap in the time period between the two. Somewhere in-between might lie the actual cause of reluctance in some quarters the recognition and discussion the works originating in the East merit.
Biases and dogmatic blinkers ruin the prospects of serious debates and critical conclusions. Some religious heads discourage yoga because they consider it to be an exclusive manifestation of Hindu religion. The error in judgement is, in recent decades, being gradually realised, as indicated by the hundreds of thousands of people with different religious faiths having begun practising yoga for the benefits it delivers.

Anyone excluded from public debates or barred from floating ideas disliked by a ruling or dominating group lives in an environ not free and fair. The need for any reasonable mind is to wake up to the facts, and accept and recognise the strength of a concept or measure as per the demands of scholarly integrity. Blinkers are no shield for critical scrutiny that history does. They belong to elite clown schools that grow to become a graveyard for originality.
Ignoring good ideas originating in other lands or communities cannot hide the facts. Sooner or later, the lapse is bound to be corrected, even if it might mean centuries of delay.

(Professor Kharel specialises in political communication.)