Bhagavad Gita - 1 Points to Ponder

1.     The conversation of Bhagavad Gita happens at two locations -

                          a.     Between indecisive Arjuna and certain Krishna and

                          b.     Between Sanjaya with divine vision and blind Dhritaraashtra.
Preaching Arjuna was fruitful as he had honest queries and he unflinchingly submitted to Lord Krishna to show him the pathway. Even though Dhritaraashtra heard the running commentary of the entire conversation between Krishna and Arjuna he persisted with his blind love for his son and the dominion. Even Lord could not change the thought process of the blind Dhritaraashtra. The author probably wants to convey that Bhagavad Gita is for the believers. If one is a non-believer and looks at it with skepticism one may not be benefitted.

2.     There is an underlying anxiety running around. Author starts with the anxiety of Dhritaraashtra, continues with that of Duryodhana, Drona, Bhishma and finally Arjuna. We can see that Dhritaraashtra, Duryodhana and Arjuna - all are interested in the end result of the war though in different sense.

3.     Diplomacy is to say what you have to say without really saying it. Diplomacy finds its place in human life because we resist hearing things that are not dear to our ears.

4.     Arjuna was very capable warrior who had won many battles and had killed many before. Now the guilt that he has to kill his own for his selfish motives has started in him. He is unable to overcome and is overwhelmed by it. But he is not completely convinced about his decision not to be a part of the war. So he tries to find many reasons why he should not be a part of the war though he believes that the war is inevitable and he would not be able to prevent it.

5.     Capability and performance are two entirely different entities. Arjuna was an excellent warrior with immense strength. But when he himself is not convinced what he is about to do is right he loses his strength so much so that he is even unable to stand. Capacity along with undeterred conviction results in performance. When one is not convinced about the very purpose of one's own decision, one cannot expect undeterred conviction and thus performance. One has to be clear in one's mind why he/she is doing what he/she is doing. Lack of clarity leads to confusion, indecisiveness and inability to perform.

6.     Let us assume momentarily that Bhagavad Gita is just a mythological literature and does not have any historical value. What would be the value of Bhagavad Gita if all these ethical questions were raised by anyone other than Arjuna? If it were to be a simple soldier he would have been probably just sent home or imprisoned. If it was Nakula or Sahadeva it would not have a similar impact. If it was Karna, Drona or Bhishma an entirely different meaning would have been attached to their ethical questions. If it were either Bheema or Yudhishtira the conversation would not have been so intimate. Arjuna and Krishna were of same age and had extreme intimacy to share their inner feelings. No two people in entire Mahabharata share such an intimacy to have no barriers and keep their minds open to each other. As it was an honest discussion between two people the author was right in choosing Krishna and Arjuna because of their intimacy to unfold Bhagavad Gita.

7.     Moreover one has to be in that position of strength and influence to raise ethical questions. If an ordinary soldier had raised similar questions he would have been either termed a coward or a traitor. The person who is raising these questions is as important as Krishna, the preacher, to have an impact on the reader. It had to be none other than Arjuna.

Bhagavad Gita 1-46

sanjaya Uvaacha:

EvamuktvaarjunaHa sankhyE rathOpastha upaavishat

visRujya sashraM chaapaM shOkasaMvignamaanasaHa || 46 ||

Sanjaya said:

Having said thus, Arjuna overwhelmed by sorrow and grief set aside his bow and arrow and sat in his chariot in the middle of the battlefield.

Sanjaya was narrating this entire episode to Dhritaraashtra. He said that Arjuna was overwhelmed by sorrow, grief and guilt of possible destruction an entire family. He would not stand any more. He has said what he had to say. He has decided not to be a part of the war even if it means his own death. But he was unwilling to be responsible for the grave consequences of the war. He knew that if this war was fought whether he was party to it or not the consequences would be dire as he argued. Even though it was not in his scope to prevent this war he did not want to be a part of such a war with dreaded consequences. Thus he resigned, dropped down his weapons and sat in his chariot in the midst of the battle field.

Bhagavad Gita 1-45

yadi maamaprateekaaramshastram shastrapaaNayaHa

dhaartaraaShTraa raNE hanyustanME kSHEmataraM bhavEt || 45 ||

It is safe for me to be unarmed and unwilling to wage war, even if I would be killed by the sons of Dhritaraashtra armed with various weapons.

Arjuna says that it is safe for him to be unarmed. He is unwilling to wage such a war which would bring calamity. He does not want to be the factors in precipitating such a situation. He would rather prefer to get killed by the sons of Dhritaraashtra than to kill them. By doing so he would not be blamed for the precarious situation that would prevail after the war. He does not want himself to be responsible for all the consequences of the war he described in the previous verses. Dying would be a safer and better option.

Bhagavad Gita 1-44

ahO bat mahat paapaM kartuM vyavasitaa vayaM

yad raajyasukhalObhEna hantuM swajanamudyataaHa || 44 ||

Alas! What an irony that we have decided to commit such grave sins such as killing our own kinsmen just for the pleasures and greed of the kingdom.

Arjuna is taken aback by his own decision to fight the war when he envisions the consequences of the war. He thinks that for the sake of his own greed to win the pleasures of the kingdom he had decided to kill his own relatives and friends in this war. By doing so he thinks he would also be responsible for destruction of the families, society and the civilization. Nothing would be greater sin then pushing a civilization into chaos and anarchy.

Bhagavad Gita 1-43

UtsannakuladharmANaaM manuShyaaNaaM janardana

narakE niyataM vaasO bhavateetyanushushruma || 43 ||

Oh Janaradana, We have heard from wise gurus that people belonging to such destructed and spoilt families will dwell in the hell forever.

 

Arjuna calls Krishna as Janardana - which means the one who protects the people probably to remind him that he being the protector should ensure that his people should not suffer. War brings chaos and adharma prevails. Family and social values will be destroyed. People belonging to such families and civilizations have no option but to dwell in hell forever. Every day (nityam) will be a hell for them. Future looks very grim with collapsed system and society. Is it not the responsibility of Janardana to protect the future of the people?  Arjuna in a way is reminding Lord Krishna himself his duties as Janardana. By saying we have heard Arjuna indicates that he does not have first hand information of such societies. It means to say that he has not witnessed such a society because dharma is still prevailing. The future will be such that the civilization will be pushed to a situation which no one has witnessed before.

Bhagavad Gita 1-42

dOShairEtaiHi kulaCGnaanaaM varNasaMkarakaarakaiHi

utsAdyaMtE jaati dharmaaHa kuladharmaascha SaaSvataaHa || 42 ||

Because of the misdeeds of these destructors of the families and Varnas, family values and social values will be destroyed forever.

Once the varna system and the families are destroyed there will be no more family values in the society. Rebuilding these values again will be an impossible task and these values are at the risk of being lost forever. The destructors of the families and the system will predominate and prevail and there will be chaos forever. There is an irony when the author indicates through Arjuna to Krishna that the eternal dharma will be lost forever!

Bhagavad Gita 1-41

saMkarO narakaayaiva kulaGnaanaaM kulasyacha

pataMti pitarO hyEShaaM luptapiMDOdakakriyaaHa || 41 ||

Destruction of Varnas will lead towards hell. Destructors of the families will also demolish their ancestors by not performing the customs of Pindodaka.

Destruction of the Varna system will make life hell. Extinction of clans and dynasties leads to a chaotic situation where families are destroyed. This destruction of family means there are no more family values in the society. When there are no family values the generations to come will not remember their ancestors. They will not perform the valuable customs like offering rice-balls and water to their ancestors. This leads to the downfall of the ancestors too.

The author describes the chaotic situation in the aftermath of the war of such enormity. Majority of the men will be dead or wounded. Choosing able partners from one's own clan or dynasty would be a challenging task. Few elders survive who could guide and enforce or ensure the younger generations follow the family values. Morality, values, righteousness find it difficult to survive in those desperate and chaotic environment. Once family is destroyed the entire civilization is destroyed. Customs and traditions followed by the ancestors will be forgotten and so the history. Any civilization that forgets its own history is dead. Then there is neither future nor value for the past.

Bhagavad Gita 1-40

adharmaaBibavAt kRushNa praduShyaMti kulastriyaHa

streeShu duShTaasu vaarShNEya jaayate varNasaMkaraHa || 40 ||

Oh Krishna, when Adharma prevails women in the family are corrupted. Once women are corrupted there will be destruction of Varna system.

Arjuna further says that if Adharma becomes a prominent feature then there will be no place for values in the society. It will be chaos everywhere with nobody to guide or follow dharma. This will not leave the women unaffected. They will be corrupted. Once they are corrupted there will be no value for the varna system and there will be relationships between varna resulting in the destruction of varna system. When there is no system then the future generations to come will be without any values. Dharma will be destroyed forever and only adharma will prevail. Hence Arjuna sees no point in the war.

One more interesting thing here is the Arjuna calls Krishna as Varshneya. This means the one who belongs to Vrushni dynasty. By doing so the author wants Arjuna to further enhance the effect of destruction of dynasties, clans and families to impress up on Krishna.

Bhagavad Gita 1-39

kulakShayE praNashyanti kuladharmaaHa sanatanaaHa

dharma naShTE kulaM kRutsnamadharmObhibhavatyuta || 39 ||

With the extinction of the family Sanatana dhrama and the family values will be destroyed. When Dharma is lost the entire family will be in the clutches of Adharma.

This great war at Kurukshetra was considered to be Dharma Yuddha. It was not just for the kingdom. It was a war of Dhrama versus Adharma; good versus evil. The purpose of the war was to protect the good so that it prevails and is reestablished. Arjuna questions whether this great war would achieve that. When majority in the family, clan or dynasty are killed who will be remaining to follow the right values? It will result in a catastrophic situation where there will be nobody to guide or follow the Dharma. Then only Adharma is going to prevail and rule. Is this what we want? This war does not seem the serve the very purpose for which it is fought. Arjuna rightly questions why he should then fight this battle when it does not serve the purpose for which it is fought.

Bhagavad Gita 1-37, 38

yadyapyEtE na pashyaMti lObhOpahataachEtasaHa

kulakShyakRutaM dOShaM mitradrOhE cha pAtakaM || 37 ||

kathaM na jnEyamasmAbhiHi pApAdasmAnnivartituM

kulakShayakRutaM dOshaM prapashyadbhirjanArdhana || 38 ||

Their hearts are completely influenced by greed that they are unable to see the sins of extinction of the family and deceiving their friends. But oh Janardhana, we are able to foresee and understand the sins of extinction of the family why can't we refrain from this war?

Arjuna says that the hearts of Kauravas are completely overtaken by the greed which has blinded their thought process and has perished their ability to see the dire consequences of their action. They are unable to perceive the sins they are committing by deceiving their own friends and killing their entire family. But we unlike them are able to foresee all these terrible consequences of fighting the war with our own people. This will literally result in extinction of entire dynasty. When we can foresee and are aware, is it right on our part in this terrible war. Is it not sinful to commit a mistake when you are completely aware of its consequences?

This is an excellent argument by Arjuna that we have to keep in mind the consequences when we act. Whether the act itself is correct or not will be decided not by the action but by the expected consequences. Most of us think the same way. We always think about the consequences of our action before we act. This is ingrained even in our judicial system. A person with no ability or reduced ability to be aware of the consequences of his/her action may have a reduced sentence or even be freed. Intent rather than the action becomes more important. In this sense it makes sense to us when Arjuna says that we refrain from the war when we are aware of the terrible consequences the war is going to bring up on us.

Bhagavad Gita 1-36

pApamEvAshrayEdasmaan hatvaitAnAtatAyinaHa

tasmAnnArhA vayaM haMtuM dhArtarAShTrAn sa-baMdhavAn

swajanaM hi kathaM hatvA sukhinaHa syAma mAdhava || 36 ||

"We gain only sin if we kill such invaders. So killing sons of Dhritaraashtra is not suitable for us. Oh Madhava; how can we be happy after killing our own relatives and friends?"                                  

Arjuna says killing such invaders (felons) will not do any good to us. It will only add to our sins. So killing sons of Dhritaraashtra is not suitable for us. This seems to be an interesting argument. On one side Arjuna says they are invaders but on the other side he says killing them is not a good idea. The author wants to highlight how weak this argument was. Arjuna in an attempt to make his view of not participating in the war goes on giving multiple reasons. When one is not convinced about one's own idea but has to convince others about the same one will choose a main reason and substantiate with multiple other reasons which may or may not be valid. This is what Arjuna is trying to do. How can killing the invaders be disgraceful? So Arjuna continues and says that he cannot be happy after killing his own relatives and friends. So the main reason is killing being at war with his relatives and friends. It means to say that if the opposition were unrelated to him he did not have a problem to fight them. He was not bothered about the human loss if they were not related to him.

Bhagavad Gita 1-32, 33, 34, 35

 kiM nO raajyEna gOviMda kiM bhOgairjeevitEna vaa

yEShaamarthEkaaMkShitaM nO raajyaM bhOgaaHa sukhaani cha || 32 ||

ta imEvasthitaa yuddhE praaNaaMstyaktvaa dhanaani cha

aachaaryaaHa pitaraHa putraastathaiva cha pitaamahaaHa || 33 ||

maatulaaHa shvashuraaHa poutraaHa shyaalaaHa saMbaMdinastathaa

Etaanna haMtumicchaami ghnatOpi madhusoodana || 34 ||

Api trailOkya raajyasya hEtOHa kiM nu maheekRutE

Nihatya dhaartaraaShTraannaHa kaa preetiHi syaajjanaardana || 35 ||

"Oh Govinda, what is the use of the kingdom, what is the use of the pleasures and even life when for whose sake we are fighting for have assembled here ready to sacrifice their lives and wealth in this war. Oh Madhusudhana, my teachers, fathers, sons, grandfathers, maternal uncles, fathers-in-laws, grand children, brothers-in-law and all other relatives have assembled here ready to sacrifice their lives. Even if they want to kill me I am not willing to kill them. Oh Janardhana, forget about the kingdom on earth, even if I am offered the three worlds I am not ready to fight with them. What pleasure would we derive by killing the sons of Dhritaraashtra?  

Arjuna calls Krishna by different names like Govinda, Madhusudhana and Janardhana which are the names of Vishnu as specified in Vishnu Sahasra Namam - The thousand names of Vishnu. He justifies further his decision of not partaking in the war in the above slokas. Arjuna says that all those people for whom he wanted to win the war, the kingdom, pleasures and wealth have lined up on either side ready to sacrifice their kingdom wealth and even their lives. What is the use of him fighting for them when they have lined up against him and ready to sacrifice. The possibilities are that his relatives may not even recognize that he fought for them or they may even be killed during the war and may not be alive to enjoy the kingdom and the wealth. All those assembled were his relatives, his teachers, friends and well wishers. When this is the situation what for should I fight. I do not see any purpose anymore in this war. Even if I am given Triloka I do not see a purpose in the war and here we have assembled after all for a kingdom on earth and piece of land. I would not kill the sons of Dhritaraashtra for this piece of land when in my mind I am not even accepting the offer of Triloka. It seems very logical that one need not fight such a gruesome war at the end of which most of the relatives are killed and there are only few survivors to enjoy the kingdom      . The end result of the war for Arjuna is the gaining of kingdom and wealth and it seems logical if that is the reason for the war then there is no need for such a terrible war.

Bhagavad Gita 1-31

na cha shrEyOnupashyaami hatwaa swajanamaahavE

nakaaMkShE vijayaM kruShNa na cha raajyaM sukhaani cha || 31 ||

"Oh Krishna, I do not foresee I will get any credit or honor by killing my own people and moreover I do not desire the kingdom nor the pleaures or happiness associated with it.

Now Arjuna is substantiating why he does not want to go for war. Kshatriyas fight for honor. He argues that by killing his own people he would not be expecting to gain any honor. If there is no honor in the battle why fight and kill his blood relatives. He then further argues that when he is neither desirous of ruling a kingdom nor the luxury associated with it then what is the aim and motive for him to fight.

Bhagavad Gita 1-30

na cha shaknOmyavasthatuM bhramateeva cha mE manaHa

nimittaani cha pashyaami vipareetaani kEshava || 30 ||

"Oh Keshava, I feel that I do not even have the strength to stand, my mind is disillusioned and is reasoning out so that I see only extreme consequences.

He calls him Keshava which has many meanings.

a.     The one who killed the demon Keshi

b.     Kah - Brahma, ah - Vishnu and Isa - Shiva which is the trimurti concept

c.     One who has long beautiful uncut hairs

Arjuna continues to explain Lord Krishna his state of mind with an intention to get proper guidance from him. He says is mind is disillusioned and is unable to think straight. His mind is thinking only the extreme adverse consequences of the war especially because those involved and would be affected were related to him.

Bhagavad Gita 1-29

vEpathushcha sharIrE mE rOmaharShashcha jaayatE

gaaMDeevaM sraMsatE hastaat twak chaiva paridahyatE || 29 ||

"I am feeling a tremor in my body, my body hairs have straightened up, my bow Gaandeeva is slipping off my hand and my skin is having a definite burning sensation"             

The author is explaining the state of mind of Arjuna and its reflection on his body. All these are signs of sympathetic stimulation - muscle tremors, piloerection, sweating resulting in slipping of the bow, drying up of the mouth and cutaneous vasodilatation resulting in hot sensation.      

Bhagavad Gita 1-28

Arjuna Uvaacha:

druShTvEmaM swajanam kRushNa yuyutsuM samupasthitam

seedaMti mama gaatraaNi mukhaM cha parishuShyati || 28 ||

Arjuna said: Krishna, Looking at all my relatives assembled here with a desire to fight, all my body parts are shaking and my mouth is drying up.

Arjuna was foreseeing the devastating consequences of the war. He knew that this Great War will kill many of which many were related to him. He was emotionally very perturbed and felt very sad which shook him and dried his mouth.

Bhagavad Gita 1-27

tAn sameekshya sa kouMtEyaHa sarvaan baMdhoonavasthitaan

kRupayaa parayaaviShTO viShIdannidamabraveet || 27 ||

Having had a look at all kinds of relatives, Kounteya (son of Kunti) was very disturbed and overwhelmed with emotion he said these words. He was very disturbed not because of the war itself but by the fact that he has to fight against those who were related to him. Relationships are what are bothering him rather than individuals themselves.

Bhagavad Gita 1-26

Tatraapashyat sthitaan paarthaHa pitRoonatha pitaamahaan

Aachaaryaanmaatulaan bhratRoon putraan putraan sakhIMstathaa

Shwashuraan suhRudashchaiva sEnayOrubhayOrapi || 26 ||

Partha saw his fathers (meaning brothers and cousins of his father), grand fathers, teachers, maternal uncles, brothers, children (meaning includes children of his brothers and cousins), grand children, friends, relatives and his well wishers in both the armies.

Partha saw all his relatives, friends, teachers and well wishers in the army. It was a war where generations of his grandfather to that of his grand children were involved - that is five generations. And they had assembled to fight against each other.

Bhagavad Gita 1-25

bhIShmadrONapramuKataHa sarvEShaMcha mahIkShitaam

uvaacha paartha pashyaitaan samavEtaan kurooniti ||25 ||

Hrishikesha placed the chariot in front of Bhishma Drona and other rulers and said " Partha look at all the Kauravas assembled here."

Being the controller of minds or thoughts and knowing exactly what is happening in Arjuna's mind, Krishna placed the chariot in front of Bhishma and Drona to enhance the existing feeling within Arjuna. This will lead him to burst out and ask questions which would give a chance to Lord Krishna to clear his confusion and establish clarity. Any work done with dual mind is futile and thus Krishna wanted to bring the clarity in Arjuna's thoughts. He also addresses Arjuna as Partha - means son of Pruthe. Pruthe was the sister of Vasudeva (father of Krishna) and she came to be known as Kunti after she was adopted by the King Kuntibhoja. So addressing him as Partha Krishna shows his affection as his close cousin.

Bhagavad Gita 1-24

saMjaya uvaacha:

yEvamuktO hriShIkEshO guDAkEshEna bhaarata

sEnayOrubhayOrmadhyE sthaapayitwA rathOttamam || 24 ||

Sanjaya says: "O King of Bharata dynasty, listening to what Gudakesha said, Hrishikesha took the great chariot and placed between both the armies."

Gudakesha is one of the names of Arjuna. Gudaka meand sleep and Isha means lord or one who has won over. So Arjuna had won over sleep and was in a state of eternal consciousness. It means to say that Arjuna was a very wise man who had won over ignorance. Hrishikesha means the lord of minds or controller of minds of all beings. The author compares and contrasts both Arjuna and Lord Krishna to show the completeness of God. Though the reason of moving the chariot between the two armies was beyond the comprehension of many, Lord Krishna knew what was going on in Arjuna's mind exactly.

Bhagavad Gita 1-22, 23

yOtsyamAnAnvEkShEhaM ya yEtEtra samAgatAHa

dhArtarAShTrasya durbuddhEryuddhE priyachikIrShavaHa || 23 ||

"I intend to see all those who have assembled to fight on the side of and to please the wicked minded son of Dhritaraashtra."

Arjuna says that he want to visualize all those who have assembled in the battlefield on his enemy side. But he does not want to tread too close to the enemy lines but want to be equidistant from both the sides. He knows who are on his side but he wants to see who have actually assembled on the enemy lines. This is probably a strategy to assess the strength of the enemy just like the batsman sees all around to assess the field placement so as to select his shot before facing the bowler. Or he asks Hrishikesha who is the master of minds to pull his mind out of his strengths and place it equidistant from strengths and weaknesses so that he assesses his weakness before fighting them.

Bhagavad Gita 1-21, 22

Arjuna Uvaacha:

senayOrubhayOrmadhyE rathaM sthaapayamEchyuta || 21||

yaavadEtaan nireekShEhaM yOddhukaamaanavasthitaan

kairmayaa saha yOddhavyamasmin raNasamudyamE ||22||

Arjuna says: "Oh Achyutha, place the chariot between the two armies so that I can see as far as possible all those who have assembled here with a desire to engage in the battle."

Arjuna asks Krishna to take his chariot and place it in between the two armies so that he can get to see all those assembled to participate in the war. The most interesting point is senayorubhyomadhye.

The author conveys us many things by placing the chariot between the two armies:

1.     The best position to assess the strength and weaknesses of two sides is to be equidistant from either.

2.     Arjuna is undecided about dharma and adharma. His thoughts are swaying. He does not know what is right and what is wrong. He does not know what to do. This position shows the status of Arjuna's mind.

3.     By placing Arjuna's chariot at the center the author wants to bring the entire Bhagavad-Gita to the center stage.

4.     When one is preaching he has to be unbiased. So the author brings the preacher Lord Krishna to the center which is an unbiased position. What he tells is applicable to all whether it is a friend or foe.

Arjuna calls Krishna as Achyutha which means who is flawless. He has his own doubts about himself and the author wants to highlight the difference between the turbulent minds of Arjuna in contrast with that of Krishna who is Achyutha.

Also Arjuna says that he wants to see as far as possible so as to visualize all those who have assembled for the war. The meaning may be:

1.     It gives us an indication of the enormity of the armies so that it could not have been possible to see all those assembled.

2.     It may mean that it was not humanly possible to visualize the entire army. This puts a limitation to the human capacity in spite of being unbiased to realize good and bad thoughts within one's own mind which are at constant war with each other.

Bhagavad Gita 1-20

atha vyavasthitaan dRuShTvaa dhaartaraaShTraan kapidhwajaHa

pravRuttE shastra saMpaatE dhanurudyamya paaMDavaHa ||20||

 

hRuShikESham tada vaakyamidamaaha maheepate

Oh, lord of the earth, seeing the sons of Dhritaraashtra and their army holding their weapons, Kapidhwaja lifted his bow and said to Hrishikesha as below."

Different names of Arjuna and Lord Krishna have been used in Bhagavadgeeta. Knowing all the names of Lord Krishna is beyond the scope of this discussion. At least we can have a look at the ten names of Arjuna

1.     Arjuna - Shining or famous like silver

2.     Phalguna - Birth star uttara Phalguni

3.     Partha - Son of Prithe (other name of Kunti)

4.     Vishnu - conqueror of enemies

5.     Kiriti - wears celestial diadem given by Indra

6.     Gudakesha - One who has won over sleep

7.     Kapidhwaja - One with Hanuman in his flag

8.     Shwetavahana - One who has white horses yoked to his charriot

9.     Bhibatsu - The frightening one

10.  Vijava - One always wins wars

11.  Savyasachi - Skillful in using both arms

12.  Dhananjaya - one who brings prosperity

13.  Parantapa - one who concentrates the most

14.  Gandivadhanva - One who possesses the mighty bow Gandiva.

In this shloka Arjuna's name is mentioned as Kapidhwaja. Kapi means Maruthi, Hanuman. He had promised that he would be in the flag of Arjuna during and war and protect him and bring victory to him.

Bhagavad Gita 1-19

saghOShO daartharaaShTraaNaaM hRudayaani vyadaarayat

nabhashcha pRuthiveeMchaiva tumulO vyanunaadayan ||19|

"The tumultuous sounds of the conches that filled the earth and the skies made the heart of Duryodhana quiver."

The unified response from the great warriors of the Pandava army filled the atmosphere which not only echoed in the skies and the earth but also in the heart of Duryodhana and his army. If the sounds of mere conches itself was so tumultuous then it is left to once imagination the dreadfulness of the war. One has to blow ones conch to show their readiness for the war. Even Arjuna blew his conch and the war was about to begin.

Bhagavad Gita 1-17, 18

kaashyashcha paramEShwaasaHa shikhaMDIca mahaarathaHa

dRiShTadyumnO viraaTashcha saatyakishchaaparaajitaHa ||17||

"The king of Kashi, Shikhandi, Drishtadyumna, Virata, Satyaki who are all great warriors and the unconquered;"

dRupadO droupadEyaashcha sarvashaHa pRuthiveepatE

soubhadrashcha mahaabhaahuHu shaMkhaM dadhmuHu pRuthak pRuthak ||18||

"Drupada, the sons of Draupadi, son of Subhadra (Abhimanyu) with his mighty arms all blew their respective conches together - listen of the Lord of Earth."

 17 and 19: The king of Kashi, Shikhandi, Drishtadyumna, Virata, Satyaki, Drupada, sons of Draupadi and Abhimanyu all blew their conches respectively at the same time. The author enumerates all the leading warriors on the Pandava side again and their response to Bhishma's call was in unison. This showed the unity and the spontaneity of the Pandava army which fought as a team rather than as a group of individuals. And also there is no mention of what the great warriors of the Kaurava army did. That is not at all the focus of Sanjaya (or rather the author).

Bhagavad Gita 1-16

anaMtavijayaM raajaa kuMtIputrOyudhiShTiraHa

nakulaHa sahadEvashcha sughOShamaNipushpakou ||16||

"The son of Kunti, king Yudhishtira blew his conch named Anantavijaya where as Nakula and Sahadeva blew Sughosha and Manipushpaka respectively."

 Of the five Pandavas the two got mentioned in the previous shloka. In this one the author mentions the other three Pandavas. Pandu had two wives Kunti and Madri. Yudhishtira, Bhima and Arjuna were sons of Kunti where as Nakula and Sahadeva were the children of Madri. After the death of king Pandu, Madri ends her life in his pyre and Kunti looks after all the five Pandavas (without any discrimination). Thus the author mentions here Yudhishtira as the son of Kunti and not the same about Nakula and Sahadeva. Yudhishtiras conch is named as Anantavijaya meaning unending victory. The conches of Nakula and Sahadeva were Sughosha and Manipushpaka respectively.

Bhagavad Gita 1-15

paaMchajanyaM hRuShIkEShO dEvadattaM dhanaMjayaHa

pouMDraM dadhmou mahaashaMkhaM bheemakarmaa vRukOdaraHa ||15||

"Hrishikesha blew Panchajanya and Arjuna (Dhananjaya) blew his conch named Devadatta. Bhima (Vrukodara) blew his great huge conch called Poundra."

In response to the sound of Bhishma's conch, Krishna blew his Panchajanya, Arjuna blew his Devadatta and Bheema his great conch Poundra. The author is slowly getting Krishna and Arjuna to the center stage. The first to respond should have been the CIC of Pandava army, but there is no mention of Drishtadyumna yet.

Bhagavad Gita 1-13, 14

tataHa shaMkhascha bhEryascha paNavaanaka gOmukhaaHa

sahasaivaabhyahanyaMta sashabdastumulObhavat ||13||

Following the sound of Bhishma's conch shell, many instruments like conches, drums, horns were played simultaneously causing tumultuous sound of war.

tataHa shwEtaiRhayairyuktE mahati syaMdanE sthitou

madhavaHa paaMDavaaSchaiva divya shaMkhau pradadhmatuHu ||14||

"Then Madhava (Lord Krishna) and Arjuna (one of the Pandavas) who were seated in their great chariot yoked to white horses blew their celestial conches." 

Madhava and Pandava are seated in the great chariot, the charioteer is Lord Krishna himself, and the color of the horses is white signifying purity, flawlessness. There is also an analogy that horses are like thoughts in the mind and the controller is the charioteer - the Lord. By signifying that the conches of Arjuna and Krishna are divine the author is giving us an indication about the unfolding of the divine interactions.

Bhagavad Gita 1-12

tasya saMjayan harSham kuruvRuddhaHa pitamahaHa

siMhanaadaM vinadyOchchaiHi shaMkhaM dadmou pratapavaan ||12||

12-1 "In order to cheer him up the eldest of the Kauravas, the great grandfather makes a lions roar and blew his conch shell with vigor."

12-2 "In the mean time the eldest of the kauravas, the great grandfather makes a lions roar and blew his conch shell with such vigor it made Duryodhana very happy."

The translation can be made either way. And both of them convey a different meaning.

12-1 - Bhishma was listening to the conversation between Duryodhana and Dronacharya. He understood the anxiety that Duryodhana was experiencing. Bhishma conveys to Duryodhana that he is not weak and he still has such a capacity that he can terrify the enemy camp just by his lions roar and the sound of his conch shell. He also meant that once in the battlefield a real Kshatriya would not worry with anxiety but only fights with valor. This he did either to reduce the anxiety of Duryodhana or to ridicule his anxiety.

12-2 - Bhishma was not listening to the conversation between Duryodhana and Dronacharya. He being the CIC and eldest of all the Kauravas had to initiate the battle by his lions roar and blowing his conch shell. That was the protocol. Bhishma was just following the protocol as he was a person who abided by the protocols, rules and regulations throughout his life. Nothing mattered to him as long as he could keep up to the word given by him - even if he had to fight on the side of adharma. He was bound by his own words/Pratigna.

Bhagavad Gita 1-11

ayanEShu cha sarvEShu yathabhagamavasthitaH

bhiShmamEvaabhirakShaMtu bhavantaH sarva Eva hi ||11||

"So everybody should be situated in their respective positions and protect Bhishma from all the sides."

CIC plays a major role in any war. He plans the strategies and implements those plans and his presence in the middle will boost the confidence of all the soldiers. If he is injured then it is a major drawback to any army. So what Duryodhana said is correct by military strategy. But it may also mean that Bhishma is already old and weak and it is the responsibility of Dronacharya to protect him. He again appraises the importance of Dronacharya and satisfies his ego.

Bhagavad Gita 1-10

aparyaptam tadasmaakam balaM bheeShmaabhirakShitam

paryaptam twidamEtEShaaM balaM bheemaabhirakShitam ||10||

"The strength of our army which is protected by Bhishma is immeasurable where as that of Pandavas protected by Bheema is measurable.”

There are different meanings attributed to aparyaptam and paryaptam. If we take the meaning of aparyaptam as immeasurable and paryaptam as limited or measurable then he was trying to encourage everybody on his side and was conveying that he would win the war. It is always advantageous to be on the winning side due to the benefits one would derive after the war. If aparyaptam meant insufficient as some have been trying to analyze it means that Duryodhana was specifically trying to woo Dronacharya. Bhishma had a soft corner towards Pandavas and was also older than Dronacharya. Bhishma would not be able to fight this war to his fullest capacity. So the onus to win the war was on Dronacharya who was next in line to become the CIC. Thus highlighting the importance he was satisfying the ego of Dronacharya.

One more important thing to observe is that the he says Pandavas army was protected by Bhima, even though Drishtadyumna was the CIC of Pandavas army. Since the childhood Duryodhana wanted to eliminate Bhima, but Bhima survived every assault. Bhima was at the center of his thoughts. He was his main opponent. If we look at Mahabharata closely, the real hero would be Bhima and not Arjuna as the main villains - Duryodhana and all his brothers were killed by Bhima. Duryodhana's fear about Bhima is only legitimate.

Bhagavad Gita 1-9

anyEca bahavaha shooraamadarthE tyakta jeevitaaha

naanaa shastra praharaNaaha sarvE yudha vishaaradaaha || 9||

There are many other courageous heroes on our side who are capable of attacking with various weapons, skilled in the art of war and are ready to sacrifice their lives for my sake.

Duryodhana mentions only seven great warriors on his side where as twenty of them on the Pandavas side. He mentions neither himself nor Dushyasana in the list which is surprising. Others he knew were on his side, would not leave him, were ready to die for him and they did not really need mentioning by name.

Bhagavad Gita 1-8

Bhavaan bheeshmascha karNasch Kripascha samitinjaya

Ashwathamaa vikarNascha soumadattistataivacha ||8||

"Thyself, Bheeshma, Karna, Kripacharya who are all war winners and we also have Ashwatthama, Vikarna and son of Somadatta (BhuriSharavas)"

Bheeshma was a great warrior and nobody had any doubts about that. He was also a man who was elder to Dronacharya and he was responsible in bringing Dronacharya to Hastinapura as a guru for both Pandavas and Kauravas. He was a man acclaimed to be on the righteous path. He was now the Commander-in Chief. By mentioning Drona's name before that of Bheeshma Duryodhana is trying his level best diplomatically to prevent the defection.

Karna was a great warrior, had been victorious in many wars and was close to Duryodhana's heart. It is only unthinkable that he would not mention his name. If he had an option he would have mentioned his name first, but he knows very well that both Dronacharya and Bheeshma would be upset by this. Moreover Karna was not in the battlefield as he had decided that he would not fight as long as Bhishma was the CIC.

He then cleverly mentions the names of Kripacharya (Drona's brother-in-law) and Ashwathama (Drona's son). As mentioned earlier, attachment to Ashwatthama was the greatest weakness and that blinded him to fight for Duryodhana than for Dharma. Duryodhana highlights Ashwatthamas name only to harness this weakness of Drona. All this probably indicates that even Drona was uncertain similar to his favorite pupil Arjuna. If Arjuna was uncertain whether to participate in the war, Drona was uncertain about the side on which he would like to be in the war and Duryodhana was making sure that Drona was fighting on his side.

Vikarna was one of the hundred Kauravas. He was the only one in the entire Hastinapur assembly who objected the way in which Kauravas had snatched the kingdom of Pandavas in the game of dice and the way in which Draupadi was treated in the aftermath. Neither Drona nor Bheeshma had objected the heinous way in which Draupadi was treated. By mentioning Vikarna's name he wanted to say that the only person who objected him was also on his side and those who were silent spectators during that time were equally culpable as him if they were thinking that Duryodhana was wrong.  Hence defection at the time of war was not the right thing to do.

Soumadatti - Son of Somadatta - Bhurishrava. Somadatta was the son of Bahlika who was the elder brother of Shantanu. Somadatta wanted to marry Pruthe (later Kunti) who was sister of Vasudeva against their wishes. Sini - father of Yuyudhana fought on behalf of Vasudeva a bitter fight to defeat Somadatta. Because of this Bhurishrava and Yuyudhana (Satyaki) were bitter enemies. This was again their personal war akin to that of Drona and Drupada.

Bhagavad Gita 1-7

asmakaMtu vishiShTaayE taannibhOdha dwijOttama

naayakaa mama sainyasya sagnaarthaaM taan braveemi tE ||7||

"Oh greatest among Brahmins (Dwijas)! Let me highlight now for completion sake, the great warriors on our side though you know them."

Duryodhana while enumerating the warriors on the Pandavas side actually was expressing his concerns that winning the war would be difficult as long as these warriors who are maharathas and some equal to Bheema and Arjuna. Then he realizes that this would cast a negative effect on his army and warriors. So he tells to Dronacharya that he has not enumerated the warriors on our side as we all know them but he would still tell their names briefly for completion sake. By saying so he is trying to hide his own anxiety and to keep the spirits high of other warriors of his army.

Bhagavad Gita 1-5, 6

druShTakEtushcEkitanaha kashirajascha veeryavaan

purujitkuMtibhOjashca shaibhyashca narapuMgavaha ||5||

Yudhamanyushca vikranta uttamoujashca veeryavaan

saubhadrO draupadEyaashca sarvaEva maharathaha ||6||

"Duryodhana further enumerates all the leading warriors on the side of pandavas like Drushtaketu, Chekitana, Kashiraja, Purujit, Kuntibhoja, Shaibhya, Yudhamanyu, Vikranta, Uttamouja, son of Subhadara (Abhimanyu) and 5 sons of Draupadi. He says all these (15 people) are great human beings and at the same time great warriors."

If we include Bheema, Arjuna, Yuyudhana, Virata and Drupada, in his list of warriors on the Pandavas side he highlights 20 warriors. It is to note that name of Lord Krishna is not mentioned because Krishna said that he would take part only as a charioteer for Arjuna and that he would not use any weapons during the Mahabharata war. There is a philosophical message in this that one has to fight his/her own war and God is there only to guide us but not to fight.

There is probably an order in the way Duryodhana mentions the names of the warriors with the youngest mentioned last. But it looks like he broke this convention when he mentioned Yuyudhana first. This highlights the importance he attaches to Yuyudhana. It is also notable that Abhimanyu and sons of Draupadi gets mentioned along with other great warriors. Everybody knows about the valor of Abhimanyu when he single handedly fights the entire Kaurava army for an entire day in eighteen day battle (amounts to 5.56% of the battle) and it takes 6 maharathas to kill him. He also mentions Draupadi's sons though their role is not much highlighted either because they were really great warriors or because they were on his hit list and he desired to eliminate entire Pandava family.

Bhagavad-Gita 1-4

Atra shoora mahaShwasa bheemarjuna samayudhi

Yuyudhaano viraatascha drupadascha maharathaha ||4||

"There are great courageous warriors who are equivalent to Bheema and Arjuna like Yuyudhana, Virata and Drupada."

Duryodhana knows that Bheema and Arjuna are the key opponents. They are the gold standards against whom he compares all other warriors. And moreover they are at the centre of his thoughts, especially Bheema whim he tried to eliminate since childhood and who turns out to be the terminator of the entire Kauravas and the real hero of Kurukshetra war.

Of all the people, the first name he mentions is that of Yuyudhana. Yuyudhana also known as Satyaki was a great warrior, a close friend and devotee of Lord Krishna and the only Yadava other than Krishna to be on Pandavas side. There is a story both Duryodhana and Arjuna had approached Krishna before the start of the war to woe him on their side. Knowing this Krishna pretended to be sleeping. Duryodhana came first and sat near his head end and then arrived Arjuna who sat near his foot end. It was natural that as soon as Krishna opened his eyes he saw Arjuna and spoke to him. When Arjuna told that he came to ask for his help, Duryodhana immediately told Krishna that he had come first and that Krishna should offer his support to him. But wise Krishna told that when he opened his eyes he first saw Arjuna. He told that they can either choose Lord Krishna or his entire army but the first choice would go to Arjuna as he saw Arjuna first. Duryodhana was overwhelmed with joy when Arjuna chose Lord Krishna because he would get the support of mighty Yadava army. But Satyaki decided for himself that in this Dharmayuddha (Battle for righteousness) he would fight on the side of Pandavas. The pinch that Satyaki, a great warrior, instead of being on his side is on the other side probably made Duryodhana put him first on the list.

Then he mentions Virata. Pandavas hid in his kingdom during Agnaatavasa (the 13^th year after finishing 12 years of vanavasa). Virata is not known to be a powerful king as he was subdued by his brother-in-law Keechaka, who was killed by Bheema. But still Virata is second in the list of Duryodhana probably because he felt that Virata came in his way of identifying the Pandavas during agnatavasa. Had he found them, then the war would have postponed by at least another 13 years as Pandavas had to do their second round of Vanavasa and agnathavasa.

The third name is that of Drupada. Duryodhana was worried if he would get the full support of Drona as all his favourite pupils, especially Arjuna was on the other side. That is why he brings Drupada again and again into picture to remind Dronacharya that it is his personal war too and he cannot falter or change sides at this time.

 

Bhagavad-Gita 1-3

Paschaitaam Panduputrena aachaarya mahateeM chamoom

yooDaam drupada putrENa tava shishyEna dheemataa ||3||

"Look at the mighty army of the Pandavas which has been organized by your able pupil the son of Drupada"

Drishtadyumna - the son of Drupada was the Commander-in-chief (CIC) of the mighty Pandavas army. Drupada and Drona were childhood friends when they were at the gurukul of Sage Bharadwaj. Drupada had promised him half his kingdom once he occupies the throne. Later when Drona turns up and asks for half the kingdom Drupada humiliates him and throws him away.  Drona temporarily retreats but did not forget the humiliation. Drona trains Pandavas and with the help of them defeats Drupada, holds him as prisoner, takes away half the kingdom and humiliates him before he releases him. Drupada performs Putrakaameshti Yagna and gets Drishtadyumna as his son who was destined to kill Dronacharya. Though Drishtadyumna was destined to kill Drona, he did not turn him away when he came to his gurukul to learn from him as he thought it was his duty to teach anybody who came to his doors to learn. Duryodhana tries to freshen up the old wounds when he reiterates that the CIC of Pandavas army is Drupada's son.  He probably wanted to say that Drona was not just fighting for Duryodhana but was fighting his personal war too. He also reminds that he should not be generous again in this war against his enemies who were his pupils.

{* The words Aneekam and Chamoom have been used for describing the army of Pandavas. The composition of the armies is described as in the table below:

Name for Army Stages	Charriots	Elephants	Soldiers	Horses
Patti	1	1	5	3
Senamukha	3	3	15	9
Gulma	9	9	45	27
Gana	27	27	135	81
Vahini	81	81	405	261
Prutana	261	261	1215	783
Chamoo	783	783	3645	2349
Aneekini	2349	2349	10935	70470
Akshouhini	23490	23490	109350	704700