Wednesday, July 15, 2015

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.