Yuganta: Ashwatthama, Drona,

Karna, and Krishna

These three chapters of Yuganta revolve around three key themes: the eternal
ends vs. means debate, “paradharmo bhayavah”, and the concept of dharma
 Do the means adopted, however underhanded they may be, justify
the end goal they bring about?
Ends vs. means
 Who decides if the “end” being pursued is “right” or “noble”?
 Character explored: Krishna

 “It is far better to perform one’s natural prescribed duty, though

tinged with faults, than to perform another’s prescribed duty,
though perfectly. In fact, it is preferable to die in the discharge of
“Paradharmo one’s duty, than to follow the path of another, which is fraught with
bhayavah” and smriti danger”
 Questions of “who am I” and “what is my place?” – forgetting sense
of duty
 Characters explored: Ashwatthama, Drona, Karna, and Arjuna
 One’s dharma is to work for the greater good of the society and not
Concept of “dharma” or
just care about one’s personal standing in the society
righteousness  Character explored: Karna
2
The four characters explored, particularly when humanised as in Yuganta, have
a multitude of personality traits – positive and questionable – that inspire their
Krishna
● Skilled strategist: crucial
hand in overall strategy
and the defeats of each of
the characters
● Fair and just: provides
Duryodhana and Arjuna
the “choice” between him
and army
● Conception of “dharma”:
convinced of the
“righteousness” of the
cause with adherence to
one’s duty paramount
leadership styles
Karna Drona & Ashwatthama
● “Paradharmo bhayavah”:
● Loyalty: despite knowing
defecting from the path of
about his lineage through
a Brahmin to perform
Krishna, stayed loyal to
other duties
Duryodhana - but promise
● Abandonment of duty in
to Kunti is questionable
the face of personal loss:
● Generosity: known widely
Drona surrendered on the
as a giver of alms - but
battlefield and began
unquestioned adherence
meditating, whilst
to this ideal leads to his
Ashwatthama enacted the
downfall (“kavach kundal”
war’s preeminent act of
and promise to Kunti)
gross misconduct
3
 While Krishna’s leadership skill and influence is evident despite functioning
without a post, the three other characters serve as commanders but still display
a lack of initiative

Karna Ashwatthama Drona

● Rash with actions and ● Party to acts beneath his

remarks: Responsible for ● Driven by vengeance and stature: Decision to side
initiating the exhibited cowardice: with the Kauravas; failure
“cheerharan”; challenging Assumed command and to act during the
a younger Arjuna slaughtered innocent “cheerharan”; killing of
● Failure to lead by people on the final day Abhimanyu; excessively
example: Fled when ● Lack of perspective: ager to prove himself as
attacked by the Failed to abide by the general
Gandharvas; incident in value system he had to ● Lack of forgiveness,
Virata adhere to, and betrayed a serenity, self-control:
● “Headstrong, misplaced conflict between the Revenge on Drupada was
kindness, runs away from duties of a Brahmin and a self-serving and excessive;
battle, makes mistakes in Kshatriya treatment of Eklavya was
judgement” manifestly unfair
4
Krishna, even when stripped of the godliness as in Yuganta, can be instructively
and favourably compared with other great leaders such as Chanakya and
Ends vs. means
A fierce belief in the
“righteousness” of their cause
Comparative styles of leadership
– by post and by design
Lincoln
 Chanakya’s tactics to make Rakshasa swear fealty to
Chandragupta, Krishna’s strategy to defeat each major character in
the war, and Lincoln’s suspension of basic civil liberties in the
conduct of his campaign
 Chanakya is convinced that Chandragupta is the appropriate heir to
the kingdom and is the best “agent” for the furtherance of his goals,
Krishna is steadfast in his belief that a warrior’s duty on the
battlefield is secondary to familial loyalty or devotion to teachers,
and Lincoln was prepared to go to any extent to save the Union
 Krishna and Chanakya are not “leaders” in a classic sense –
Krishna is well regarded by the Pandavas who defer to him
frequently for his wisdom and counsel, whilst Chanakya is “only” the
advisor to the king
 Lincoln, on the other hand, is front and centre of the battle and is
“cloaked in immense power” – but contrast with Jackson, his
successor, in the same post
5
The central lessons of the Mahabharata are timeless, and the three questions
for thought are intended to provoke debate on the contentious issues herein

Does the pursuance of underhanded means undermine the righteousness of

1
the resultant end?

Should one let loyalty to a cause or a leader overpower one’s sense of

2 righteousness? Whilst undoubtedly a virtue, is loyalty a necessary trait for a
leader?

In a modern sense, is the primacy of adherence to duty overstated? If following

3 your duty results in you siding with “evil”, is it not better to take the “other
path”?