Arjuna vs Karna

Mahabharata, the great epic of India and one of the finest literary contributions of the Hindus to the world is a treasure trove of wisdom. The many characters, their histories, personalities, ambitions and motivations all combined and interacting with each other serve to provide lessons into Humanity and Morality like no other tale. It is in this story that a most gripping and fascinating contest takes place between two mighty warriors who are essentially the anti-thesis of each other in terms of circumstances that befall them: Arjuna and Karna.

Arjuna won because he was on the right side, Karna lost because he was on the wrong side and that is the supposed summary of the entire contest. Naturally, for such a complex duel such a simplistic summary is insufficient and given to misinterpretations. It is not uncommon for people living in tough times to sympathize with the loser, especially if that loser lost to circumstances that people themselves rebel against. Same is the story of Karna. He is perhaps the most revered warrior of the Mahabharata, simply because he lost to the same set of circumstances that the people today face and fight against. Is it true however? Who defeated Karna? I firmly believe that it was neither Arjuna, nor Krishna, nor circumstance, nor Adharma. The defeat of Karna was ensured by Karna himself. As long as Karna would battle an opponent of weaker skill, he would win. However, were he to be matched with an opponent of equal skill then the divine consciousness would pitch in and the odds would favor the warrior with more righteous Karma. This is exactly what happened with Karna when he fought with Arjuna on each occasion; his Karma became his undoing.

But wasn't Karna very generous? Without a doubt he was. However the war of the Mahabharata wasn't fought for the protection of generosity alone; had that been the case then Karna would have been the warrior that would have commanded the same respect as Arjuna did, on the battlefield or off it. The Great War between the Pandavas and the Kauravas was fought for the protection of Dharma and generosity is but a small part of it. It wasn't that the Pandavas weren't generous or that they were parsimonious, only that they weren't as famous as Karna in terms of giving away things to the needy. Mind the word famous for it is the one word that people often use, and wrongly so, to distinguish between the worthy and the unworthy. On the other hand, Karna had proved himself to be incapable in the defense of Dharma, the central point of all conflict.

How had he proved himself incapable? Must all his capabilities be judged from the one incident where he insulted Draupadi? Is it not possible that it were an isolated incident, an error of judgement of an otherwise great man? It is the most common viewpoint of those that today look upto Karna as being the light of inspiration in their endeavours against oppressive institutions and circumstances. True that the mistreatment of Draupadi was an unforgivable mistake, however it has never been the cornerstone of Karna's story. The entire definition of Karna has always been his lineage, his upbringing and the social complications arising out of that odd history. He was talented beyond measure and possessed all qualities that pointed to a royal descent and yet was never accepted in the royal circles, always treated a lesser man, forever forced to obey the social rules of that time. He rebelled, was chastised and he rebelled again. It was natural for him to hope to measure his skill against the mighty Arjuna, a man who had by then acquired a name beyond the confines of the Kingdom of Hastinapura for his prodigious talent. If only Karna could prove his skill in comparison to Arjuna, he might be recognized for what he was and reclaim the nobility of his descent which was lost because of circumstances over which he had no control. When he challenged Arjuna in the Royal Games, he was rebuked for wanting to compete in a Royal event with a Prince. Karna hit a wall, a wall which he felt his talent and skill could not have scaled over, for there was no way that he could prove his royalty without demonstrating his skill and he could not demonstrate his skill without being royal, or so he felt, for his entire life. This was why he so gladly accepted when Duryodhana offered him the Kingdom of Anga, without pausing to think that it was a gift which he could never hope to repay, not even with his life. Had Duryodhana won the war, would Karna be free of his moral obligation to aid his friend? The answer is no. Did Karna's death repay the debt of that gift? Again the answer is no, for after all Duryodhana had hoped that Karna would counter Arjuna in the event of an all-out war with the Pandavas. By dying at the hands of Arjuna, he failed to fulfill his friend's hope. Like I said, Karna had, of his own volition, taken a debt that he could never repay. That, and nothing else, is the whole story of Karna. The reasons for his Dharma and Adharma can be traced back to this occurrence in his life. He insulted Draupadi not just because his friend was insulting her, but because he cherished having her in his power and wished to extract revenge for being insulted during her Swayamvar. He attacked the defenseless Kingdom of Virat and participated in the cowardly massacre of Abhimanyu.

Arjuna, for his part was a character who was been massively underplayed by all. It is not uncommon for people to find legends and stories that will underplay the main protagonist. Since the original Mahabharata was written, there have come to the fore many such characters that may have surpassed Arjuna but never did because circumstances eliminated them, be it Barbarik or Eklavya or others. Was Karna another such character who may have been metamorphosed from one of the leading antagonists to a protagonist in the wrong place at the wrong time? That is a matter of opinion, I suppose. What cannot be denied however by any informed opinion is that there are virtually no characters in the Mahabharata that could have surpassed Arjuna in terms of skill and power with the obvious exception of Krishna himself. In fact, in one story Krishna himself dueled with Arjuna and was forced to use the Narayana Mahaastra while Arjuna deployed the Pashupata Mahastra. The fight was then called off by wise men for the direct deployment of such powerful weapons meant the end of the world. His skill and power apart, what sort of a man was he? The third oldest brother amongst five with virtually no chance of ever ascending to the throne and yet the most powerful and talented of all. The man who won all situations and sacrificed every time for the good of his family. Who won Draupadi? Who went on a pilgrimage for intruding at a moment made possible by him and made unavoidable by circumstance? Who braved the Himalayas so as to secure a strategic advantage for his brothers? Who resisted all temptation of the Apsara of Heaven, Urvashi, got cursed for it and still did not give in to anger or indecency? Who refused to marry Uttara, the daughter of Virat, as a reward for having saved the Kingdom from certain destruction? Who was it that laid down weapons and was willing to sacrifice all the worldly pleasures so that he may be spared the burden of killing near and dear ones? Who did not rely on any of the Divyastras to finish off the Kaurava army, even after the defeat of Bheeshma when the risk of collateral damage was eliminated? Perhaps it was Karma that Arjuna's direct line ruled Hastinapura after the war was over and the Pandavas had left for pilgrimage, I wouldn't know.

I do know one thing however and I believe in it wholly. It is our Heroes that define us; our outlook towards life and the choices that we make and the response we give to various situations that confront us. Of course, it is a matter of opinion, but I would prefer to idolize Arjuna rather than Karna and it always has to be either one of them for it can never be both at the same time. Arjuna always for his commitment to his duty and his Dharma rather than Karna for his lack of self-conviction and thirst for success at any cost, the definition of success being left for the society to work out. Arjuna always for not bothering about the world or opinions in doing what he felt was right rather than Karna for caving into the society's hierarchical mindset. Arjuna always for being the winner in spite of all the odds and not Karna for being the loser because of the odds. I feel this choice between Karna and Arjuna will decide the course our life and our Nation has to take. My choice is Arjuna. Make yours.