WEALTH OR ATTITUDE

Vanavasa is synonymous to Ramayana and Mahabharata. In fact, both the epics illustrate how Vanavasa, meaning forest dwelling, was the turning point in the lives of the protagonists and the entire classic. With the ill advice of Manthara, Kaikeyi wanted to break Ayodhya, not physically but emotionally. To an extent she was successful but she was failed by her very son for whose sake she acted against the will of the entire kingdom. She learned her lessons quickly but Lord Rama was undeterred. He had a bigger mission to achieve. So He did not return to Ayodhya for the next 14 years. It was in the forest that He actually achieved many things. 

 

Unlike Ramayana, the Mahabharata has many twists and turns with regards to Pandavas going to forest. It was not only painful like Rama's vanavasa, but also very brutal.  They were disrobed of their honour more than their power. But pandavas demonstrated that if one really wants to grow then he could, with the experience of adversity, where he is forced to deal with challenges. Growth with inheritance from ancestors and growth with the experience of complete poverty are two very different phenomena. The comparison is not to determine which is better because that cannot be stated. But those who grow with nothing have great experiences to share. Pandavas had the prosperity of attitude (ATTITUDE OF PROSPERITY?), that was never taken away from them. 

 

Dharma calls for consistency in practice. Only those people are willing to take challenge to grow beyond the normal capacity. Normal people are flexible with regards to dharma; if it is profitable to follow dharma they’ll do it. But if adharma gives a larger profit, they are willing to sell even dharma for profit. For adharma, dharma is a tool. For Dharmik people, dharma is the destiny and journey. And only such Dharmik people are qualified to break the so-called disintegrated dharma to establish integrated dharma. 

 

For Pandavas, the Vanavasa experience became their abroad university learning. But this ‘abroad’ was not the organized, sophisticated and stable place; It was a forest with lots of uncertainty. But their skills of attitude were their constatnt companions to move from one place to another, learning more and more.

 

The Clash between the Pandavas and Kurus was that of wealth without prosperity of right attitude, versus wealth of right attitude. With the right attitude, wealth becomes a mere detail. And without the right attitude, wealth becomes the essence.  So what are we looking: wealth or attitude?