Abstract
In the Mahābhārata, Kṛṣṇa is regularly accused of ignoring harm that befalls its various characters. In fact, the Sanskrit verb upekṣ (“to overlook, disregard, or ignore”) is applied more consistently to Kṛṣṇa than any other figure in the epic. Through its use, both the Mahābhārata and the tradition raise a question: how can Kṛṣṇa be indifferent to two genocides (the massacre of the Kurus and the Yādavas) and the mistreatment of Draupadī? Although previous studies on theodicies in the epic have focused on the issue of Kṛṣṇa’s omnipotence (or lack thereof) in the Mahābhārata, this article argues that the question of omnipotence is irrelevant because Kṛṣṇa does not want to prevent the suffering of a large-scale war—his neglect is intentional. From this question of (intentional) neglect, the theological problem of indifference to suffering arises for these early readers of the Mahābhārata: under what circumstances is it justified for Kṛṣṇa to neglect the suffering of others, despite being able to prevent it? In presenting this problem, this article also draws attention to the importance of commentaries on the epics and Purāṇas as a source of study for vexed ethical and theological questions such as this one.
Highlights
In the Mahābhārata, Krsna is regularly accused of ignoring harm that befalls its various characters
We are told in the Mahābhārata that Krsna disregards two genocides—the massacre of the Kurus and the Yadavas—andalso turns a blind eye to Draupadı when she is being forcefully disrobed by the Kauravas
There are a host of candidates who could be accused of ignoring harm in the Mahābhārata, a tale riddled with violence and genocide, the epic applies upekṣ most consistently to Krsna
Summary
The term that will anchor this study—upekṣ—has a wide semantic range and is not always used in other genres to mean indifference. More than other Sanskrit texts, it is the Mahābhārata that fleshes out a nuanced understanding of indifference and its ethics. There are a host of candidates who could be accused of ignoring harm in the Mahābhārata, a tale riddled with violence and genocide, the epic applies upekṣ most consistently to Krsna While this term had wide currency at ̇ ̇. These verbs, do not recur frequently enough in an epic (or larger Sanskrit) context to be a systematic marker of indifference like upekṣ. When the narrator summarizes the dicing match, he touches on Krsna’s reaction upon hearing about what happened: nātiprītamanāś cāsīd vivādāṁś cānvamodata | dyūtādīn anayān ghorān pravṛddhāṁś cāpy upaikṣata || (1.1.93) Though he [Krsna] was not very pleased, he permitted the disputes, and overlooked (upa ̇ikṣata) the other terrible misconduct that increased, beginning with the gambling match. The terrible conduct that the bard describes from thereon—the dicing match, the disrobing of Draupadı, and so on—are all framed as acts that Krsna allows to take place
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
