Wednesday, November 13, 2024

POLITICS OF THE WAR CODE

 

The negotiations to avoid war between the Pandava and the Kaurava brothers had failed and war was imminent. Duryodhana appealed to the kings who had chosen to fight for him to give him victory. They told him that the Pandavas themselves were great warriors and with Krishna on their side, they were invincible. Notwithstanding all this, they would fight for him with full commitment and while having darshan (sacred viewing) of Shri Krishna on Arjuna’s chariot, they would fall in the battlefield and attain moksa (liberation).

Duryodhana turned to Bhishma. He told him that many great kings and warriors had joined his side and in contrast Yudhisthira’s army was small. Would the huge Kaurava army not vanquish the small Pandava army easily, he asked the venerable Bhishma. Bhishma said the question was not how large his army was and how large the enemy’s. It was within Bhurishrava’s power to send them all to the abode of the god of death within three days.  Shalya could end the war in two days and Aswasthama, in one day. Karna could do so in three praharas (three quarters of a day) and guru Drona, in two. He could do so in one prahara and Arjuna could do so in just a muhurta (moment).

When he fought, continued Bhishma, his hands and fist shook, when Drona fought, his chest would palpitate fast and likewise every great warrior present there had one such problem or the other. Only Arjuna was not troubled by any problem of that sort. This apart, Arjuna had defeated Lord Shiva and pleased with him, the greatest of the gods, had given him the infallible arrow, named Pashupata. He had defeated Indra, the king of the gods and the other gods in Khandava forest. He had defeated the incomparable Balarama and later, Krishna himself. Only the other day, he had defeated the entire Kaurava army in the war in the kingdom of Virata. His manavedi arrow was so powerful that everyone in the battle field fell unconscious. Arjuna was indeed unconquerable, said Bhishma.

Duryodhana understood the situation. He asked Bhishma if there was some way to contain Arjuna. Bhishma said there was one. A rule could be made with the consent of all the warriors to the effect that weapons received from the gods must not be used in the war. He suggested to Duryodhana that he must invite the Pandavas to Hastinapura. They all would persuade them to accept a war code. Both sides must work out the code together and both sides must commit themselves to it. Sakuni was entrusted with the task of bringing the Pandavas from Jayanta (pronounced as jayantaa), where they were staying, to Hastinapura.

Bhishma knew that wars are not always won or lost in the battlefields. That raises the question about the nature of the heroic acts on the battlefield and more importantly, of the meaning of victory or defeat there. How fettered, for instance, was the defeated - by a curse or a promise made to someone dear or revered, or to self or by a rule or a personal value and the like?

Sakuni went to Jayanta and told Yudhisthira that he had come at Duryodhana’s behest to invite them to Hastinapura where they and the other warriors would work out a war code. Bhima did not like the idea of going there. “Why didn’t the Kuru king come here?” asked Bhima. “Why should we go there? Are we in his service that we would be at his beck and call?” he asked Sakuni. Sakuni said that at Hastinapura, there were the Kuru elders, many kings from many kingdoms and many others; so there could be arguments and discussions while making the code. Besides, going there should not be viewed as a humiliation for them; after all, one day that place might be theirs, he said (kale tumbhakain prapata hoiba sehisthana). No one responded to the last part of what he said. Quite rightly, one might think – in a war one side would win. Might be the winner in that war would be the Pandavas, but that would hardly be something to talk about at that point in time, especially when it was Sakuni, who Yudhithira considered utterly dishonest, had said so and in the casual way he had said it.

So the Pandavas went to Hastinapura with Krishna. They were fondly welcomed at Hastinapura and there was bonhomie among the Kauravas and the Pandavas. In the presence of all, Yudhisthira asked Sahadeva when the war should start. Sahadeva said the very next day – Tuesday, the dwithiya tithi (the second day) of the month of Magh - would be good for the purpose. Everyone agreed.

Duryodhana said,” Listen, O son of Dharma, in the battlefield brothers will be fighting with brothers. Let us fight without any negative feelings towards each other– let there be no malice or hatred in our heart. Let there be no bitterness or hypocrisy. This will be the war of dharma and the witness will be the Supreme god Narayana Himself. Dharma will win the war”.

Now, would Duryodhana have said what he did if he did not believe that he had done nothing wrong with regard to sharing the kingdom of Hastinapura with the Pandavas, no matter who all had said things to the contrary? In Duryodhana’s tone there was no insincerity, no hypocrisy. And for him, giving half the kingdom would be sharing the kingdom, as would be giving one village. No one goes to war under the banner of adharma. Duryodhana had no doubt in his mind that he wasn’t.

Then he said, “Let no one use the divine weapons. Let no one use weapons the use of which one hasn’t learnt from one’s guru (preceptor). Let Arjuna not use manavedi arrow. Let warriors kill during the war but become loving friends once the fighting stopped for the day and then they must sit together and enjoy the togetherness.” Everyone agreed.  “No one must violate the code. Narayana would be the witness. The one who does, would suffer”, said Duryodhana. The Pandavas and the Kauravas took the oath to abide by the code.

Bhishma’s objective was to disempower Arjuna; it was just that it was not he but King Duryodhana who had articulated what he wanted. Pandavas surely did not fail to understand Duryodhana’s motive, but they did not say anything by way of exposing him.

No one, neither the Pandavas nor the Kauravas, mentioned the infallible weapon Karna had received from god Indra. Everyone knew that he had decided to use it against Arjuna alone. With that weapon, Karna could have effectively won the war for Duryodhana. Now, the code disempowered Karna too. There is nothing in the narrative that explains why that weapon did not figure in the deliberations. The following might give a clue.

After the war code was accepted, Bhishma spoke. “You have taken the vow”, he told Krishna, “that you would only be the charioteer of Arjuna and not wield a weapon. O, the One of infinite kindness, O, the One with boundless benevolence for His devotees, know that I am the servant of your servant. I know that you will break your oath. On my account, you will wield a weapon.”

“You have taken avatara to reduce the burden of the earth. You will be the witness in the war for both sides. We will fall in the battlefield, looking at you and will be rid of the burden of our sins of countless existences”. With that, the meeting ended. Those who had assembled there left for their respective places of stay. The Pandavas returned to Jayanta. They had to make preparations for the war to start on the following day.

Krishna did not say anything. On the sixth day of the battle, Bhishma attacked Arjuna with an infallible divine arrow and Arjuna had no arrow to neutralize it. Unseen by everyone in the battlefield except Hanuman on the top of Arjuna’s chariot, Krishna destroyed it with his Sudarshana chakra. And on the ninth day, Krishna rushed to Bhishma’s chariot with Sudarshana chakra in his hand, setting aside details, and everyone saw that. Everyone saw that Krishna had broken his vow. Bhishma had won. Narayana would never disappoint His devotee.

Returning to the non-mention of Indra-given weapon to Karna in the discussion, maybe Bhishma knew it would be ineffectual. He knew Krishna would intervene if there would be threat to Arjuna’s life. And when the Avatara had chosen to protect Arjuna, which weapon in all the brahmandas could harm him!

Thursday, November 7, 2024

READING "UDYOGA PARVA" of SARALA MAHABHARATA

(A summary of the main ideas. Written in the form of notes. Written for the purpose of discussion of this extremely important parva (chapter) at a Sarala Mahabharata Group Meeting.  The points for discussion are highlighted. Unedited)

 

Broadly speaking, this Parva is about the pre-War negotiations and preparations for the Great War at Kurukshetra. This is also about Krishna’s / Narayana’s mahima (greatness and glory) and about the many ways of being connected with the Supreme god Narayana and many shades of bhakti.

 

These cursory notes might give one a feel of how Sarala Mahabharata is creatively different from Vyasa Mahabharata – how Sarala Das, the poet, keeping the basic story unaltered, introduces innovations into the narrative to express his poetic vision and philosophical insights.

 

Initial negotiations

 

From King Virata’s kingdom, the Pandavas come to Indraprastha. The Kula guru, Dhaumya, come to Yudhisthira at Duryodhana’s behest to tell them that for the interest of the Kuru Kula (comprising the Kauravas and the Pandavas both), he should not ask for the Pandavas’ share of the kingdom. Yudhisthira sends him to Duryodhana with the message that he should consider the Pandavas’ needs. When Dhaumya says this to Duryodhana, he disagrees.

Then Vidura comes to Yudhisthira and asks him not to demand the Pandavas’ share of the kingdom. The same argument:  the Kula should be protected. For that the Pandavas should make a sacrifice. Yudhisthira disagrees. All he wants are five padas (villages). They had undergone great suffering during their vana vasa (forest dwelling) and ajnanta vasa (living incognito). Vidura asks him how he would face the mighty Kauravas in the battlefield. Yudhisthira tells him that military might does not win wars. Dharma does; it is the greatest power.

To go back to Virata’s palace. Arjuna brings Krishna from Dwarika at Yudhisthira’s behest. At Virata’s place, his queen Sudeshna tells them all what would happen in the war. Draupadi and Arjuna were devastated: Draupadi because she would lose all her children and Arjuna, his son, Abhimanyu. But they were pacified with explanations of these happenings from the cosmic perspective.

Yudhisthira requests Krishna to go to Hastinapura and plead with Duryodhana to give the Pandavas just five villages. If not that, then just one. If he rejects even that request, then there would remain no alternative to war. He genuinely wanted avoidance of the war. But Krishna did not have peace in mind. He was going there to ensure that war takes place. No one knew his mind, except Sahadeva. Krishna’s betrayal of Yudhisthira, but the Avatara had a cosmic objective.

Krishna met the other four Pandavas separately. His purpose was to find out how strongly they wanted war and what their level of self-confidence was in case there would be war.

Bhima – even he! - and Arjuna were inclined towards avoidance of the fratricidal war, if they get a village each. They were confident that Duryodhana would oblige since each of them had done him good. Krishna had to work on Bhima’s mind for war. He succeeded.  Bhima talked war. Arjuna had decided that if Duryodhana does not give him a village, he would fight. Nakula wanted two villages: one for him and the other for Sahadeva. Sahadeva did not aske fo anything: he knew Krishna’s mind. He assisted him by telling him that he should ask for those villages which Duryodhana would never give.  That would ensure that war would take place. He also told him that he would earn disrepute for not adhering to the dharma of an emissary.

Then Krishna met Draupadi and she desperately wanted war. Those who had humiliated her must perish. She must have her revenge. Later, in Hastinapura, when Krishna met Kuniti at Vidura’s place, she told him most emphatically that she wanted the war to take place and that he should ensure that.

Remarks:

Kula raksha (protection of the kula) should be the most important concern of the members of the kula. If sacrifice has to be made for that, then the wiser members should do that. Of the Pandavas and the Kauravas, who were on the side of dharma and who were not, was not the question. Although it is not explicitly mentioned that saving the kula is dharma, but it is absolutely clear from the exchanges that this is so. Contrast Srimad Bhagavad Gita’s stand in this respect.

The Pandavas did not disagree. But they too were the members of the kula. They had suffered a great deal and in consideration of that, those who are in a position to help them (their Kaurava cousins), should come forward to help.

The Pandavas wanted dignified living, which for the four Pandavas (barring Sahadeva) translated into five villages. Then they would not have to live on the doles from Duryodhana or beg, for instance. For Draupadi and Kunti, dignified living meant in effect the destruction of the Kauravas.

The negotiations were really about avoiding the war, not peace between the Kauravas and the Pandavas. These two are obviously not the same.

The negotiations were bound to fail. Krishna, Yudhisthira’s emissary had war in mind and Yudhisthira or anyone else barring Sahadeva, had absolutely no idea about that. Krishna had a cosmic purpose. Sahadeva knew it and assisted him in this.

He also said that at the laukika level, Krishna’s doings would be unethical.

This is the problem of the Avataras (two Avataras): they have a cosmic task to perform and they sometimes have to violate the human moral code to achieve that objective. The two Avataras are Krishna and Vamana. They both resort to deceit. In this Parva, the Vamana Avatara is brought into the ambit of discussion. It is natural.

One would see a little later that the issue here is giving, as it was in the case of King Bali and Vamana. Here Duryodhana was to “give” villages to the Pandavas. Sakuni transforms it into giving “Narayana”. Giving to the Pandavas was, for him, giving to Narayana. Both Duryodhana and Bhishma say on different occasions the Narayana should not return empty-handed, etc.

 

Krishna in the Kaurava court

The narrative is about the so-called negotiations and more importantly about the “mahima” of Narayana, seen as undifferentiated from Krishna. In the process the mahima of Shiva is also described, although somewhat peripherally. Shiva’s doings are seen as a contrast to Narayana’s doings, with respect to giving and receiving, etc. There is the view that Shiva is very easy to please, whereas Narayana can never be content (he is a-trupati) with bhakti, daana, etc. So, tells Sakuni to Duryodhana, “do not give him anything. One can never satisfy him by giving.”  This perspective provides the backdrop to the discussion about the Pandavas’ demand from Duryodhana.

Krishna reaches the Kaurava court when the court is in session. At Sakuni’s instance, Duryodhana does not invite Krishna to come to the court. He is kept standing, waiting to be offered a seat.

Sakuni says Krishna being a sinner, who had committed serious crimes like killing a woman (Putana) and killing a bull (the demon Arishtasura, in the form of a bull), could not be invited to the august assembly.  Besides, he was of low birth. In fact, King Jarasandha had not invited to his court on that account and both Balarama and Krishna had returned humiliated.

Sakuni in this Parva, uses the strategy of not telling the whole story and telling only that part which suited him (By the way, could one say by suppressing information, he was lying? Committing an unethical act? What he said was correct but what he left unsaid about the event was also correct). Bhishma said that he hadn’t told what happened next. At Krishna’s behest, Garuda flapped his wings and in the mighty wind, the courtiers became very unstable and the court dissolved.

Similarly, later when Sakuni told the court that King Bali perished because he gave daana (ritual gift) to Narayana, Bhishma said that was not the whole story. Narayana compensated him amply. What he received was a great deal more than what he had given. By the way, Bali knew that the dwarf asking for daana was Narayana himself.

When Sakuni could not counter Bhishma, he abused him to silence him. He told him that he was issueless and such persons bring ill-luck. Bhishma kept quiet. When Drona spoke about the mahima of Krishna, he too silenced him, resorting to abuse. He charged him of being responsible for his wife’s death.

Finally listening to Vidura, Duryodhana invited him to his court and offered him a seat. (He told Krishna that since he had forgiven so many persons, he must forgive him too. He thinks it is his right to be forgiven. This is the bhakta’s (devotee’s) right. There indeed are many shades of bhakti!) Krishna told him that his dispensation would meet the same end as did the kingdom, called Babarapuri. On being requested by Bhishma to tell them about this kingdom about which he had not hear before, Krishna told the court about it. Babarapuri is a depiction of a dystopia. The prosperous Babarapuri was destroyed not because of an external enemy but because of reasons internal to it – a society that practised adhama (sin) had to collapse on its own. The same would happen to the Kaurava dispensation, he told Duryodhana.

On being asked by Duryodhana why he had come, he said he was Yudhisthira’s emissary. He told him that all the eldest Pandava wanted was five villages. He told him that it was his moral duty to take care of his brothers.

Duryodhana said they did not belong to the Kuru family and as such he had no special duty for them. None of them was Pandu’s son; so they were outsiders to the family. It’s not the mother but the father who matters in determining who belongs to the family and who does not. Krishna told him tthat his ancestry was no different, a matter he explicated in great detail. He told him that he was the son of a widow.

Greatly upset, Duryodhana asked his brothers to attack him. What he had done was not expected of an emissary. As Duryodhana’s brothers attacked him with weapons, he transformed himself as a great fish, then a tortoise and then a boar and then a dwarf. When the Kauravas still attacked him, their attitude unchanged, he was wondering if they knew anything. He then assumed the form of Nrisingha and everybody ran away in fear.

That evening when the venerable sages who were present met at Vidura’s place, where Krishna was to have his food, they were wondering what punya (good deeds) the Kauravas had done to see the five Avataras of Narayana, which no one had seen before. The Kauravas thought that it was just Krishna’s magic performance. Later Duryodhana told (his father) that Krishna’s conduct in the court was disgraceful. He assumed different forms just as actors in an opera change their dress and appear differently each time they change their dress.  

What could be of interest is why the sages and the Kauravas understood what they had seen so very differently. Two different understandings. If understanding is the result of knowledge, then how does knowledge arise in the mind?  The age-old question of how do we know what we know. Ancient Indian thinkers were concerned with this question, as were the ancient Greeks.

Krishna and the sages were entertained by Vidura that night.

 

 

That night Bhishma, Drona, Karna and the other great warriors met Duryodhana and Bhishma told him that he should not displease Narayana. The consequences would be disastrous. He advised him to have bhakti towards Narayana and have a cordial relationship with the Pandavas (sodare hua priti), who were his brothers. This would turn out to be blissful for him, he said. In between he had said that half the kingdom was the Pandavas’ right. (This is the only mention of the Pandavas’ right to the kingdom, I think, in this Parva at least. The Pandavas had not asked for their right, if they thought they had a right, based on law. Krishna did not raise the question of the Pandavas’ right. In this Parva, the issue was Duryodhana’s duty towards his brothers, who were part of the Kuru kula.). Duryodhana did not say a word in response and left the place. Then he went to meet his father. Dhritarashtra asked him why he had got angry with Krishna in the court. Duryodhana told him how Krishna had berated him in the presence of kings of many kingdoms. Unable to bear the insult, he had asked his brothers to kill him. Then he said how Krishna changed appearances and assumed different forms as do the actors in operas. Dhritarashtra advised him not to be hostile towards the Pandavas, perhaps not so much because they were his cousins but because Krishna was with them. This angered Duryodhana and he left the place. His wife, the virtuous Bhanumati, advised him not to be inimical towards Krishna. If he wanted to save his vansa (family), she said, he must have devotion towards Narayana. If he would not do that, the Kauravas would perish. Duryodhana got very angry. He told her that he would have killed her if she were not a woman.  

In the morning, Bhanumati pleaded with her spouse to give Narayana two villages and take shelter under him. She had seen a very inauspicious dream, in which she saw her husband dying and she was very scared. Sakuni told Duryodhana not to get scared of the magician who had assumed different appearances. He told him not to opt for peace for fear of him. Krishna was alone in the court and he could be dealt with appropriately (i.e., be killed).

The court started. Krishna asked King Duryodhana if he would accept Yudhisthira’s request for five villages (This was not what Yudhisthira had wanted from Duryodhana.) Duryodhana told him that the Pandavas were not his enemies. But that was not a consideration for him. Because of fear for him he would give them villages. He asked him to express his wish and he promised to give them what he wanted (Recall Bali’s oath to Vamana. One can see how the narrative of the Kuru kula was being transformed into the narrative of the doings of Narayana.) Krishna said the Kuru elders, the kings of different kingdoms and the sages were his witness that Duryodhana had promised to give him what he wanted.  He was expressing his wish because Duryodhana had promised him that he would fulfil his wish.

He then named Indraprastha, Yama prastha, Hastina, Jayanta and Barunai. If Duryodhana gave him these, he would have nothing left for himself (This precisely became King Bali’s situation.) Sakuni laughed loudly, telling everyone that this was what he had anticipated and had warned Duryodhana about. (Sakuni here is the equivalent of guru Sukracharya in the Bali-Vamana narrative. This comparison is suggested although not explicitly stated.) No one said anything.

Duryodhana asked his brothers to attack Krishna and kill him. Bhishma, Drona and Bhurishrava rushed to protect Krishna. Krishna invoked Koumudi, his / Narayana’s mace and Sudarshana, his / Narayana’s discuss. He assumed his Virata rupa (Supremely Majestic form. I think a distinction should be made between his Virata rupa here and his Vishwa Rupa (Universal Form) in Srimad Bhagavad Gita.). The Kauravas ran away in fear. Bhishma offered his head to Krishna, as did some other virtuous warriors. They wanted moksa. Krishna assumed his normal form. The Kuru elders and other venerable persons then told Duryodhana that he had done many wrongs and that he must now make peace with the Pandavas. He would save the kula by doing so.

Duryodhana told Krishna that he would not give anything at all to the Pandavas. Let them fight, he said.

As he was leaving the court, Krishna told Karna that he should fight with the Pandavas, who, he, that is, Karna, knew, were his brothers. In Sarala Mahabharata Karna knew, right from their childhood, that the Pandavas were his brothers. But Karna did not listen to him. Instead, he told him that he would kill both Arjuna and him in the battlefield.

As he was on his way to Vidura’s place, he saw Lakshmana Kumara, Duryodhana’s son, running towards him from behind. With great humility, Lakshmana Kumar prayed to Krishna and Krishna told him that he wanted him to ask him for a boon. Lakshmana Kumara told him that all he wanted was that he severe his head with Sudarshana chakra. Krishna told him that he wanted him to live for the continuance of the Kaurava side of the vansha. Lakshmana Kumara said he did not seek anything else from him. He wanted him to severe his head with Sudarshana chakra. He wanted moksa. He knew Krishna could give him moksa.

Here ends the part of Udyoga Parva that deals with negotiations to avoid the war. In the remaining part of the Parva, we get to know about the preparations for the war

Remarks:

These couplets (involving Krishna and Lakshmana Kumara) are simply sublime. There is just one more narrative in Sarala Mahabharata that is sublime.

So many most honestly and most sincerely wanted moksa from Krishna (as Narayana) but none of them got it. The one who gets moksa in Sarala Mahabharata is Belalasena. I do not think he had asked him for moksa. So one gets moksa who he chooses to give moksa. It is not something one gets through his own efforts.

It is worth noting that all who wanted moksa were from the Kaurava side. No Pandava or no Pandava woman wanted moksa from Krishna. They wanted his protection, victory in the war, etc.

If Vyasa Mahabharata is about dharma, Sarala Mahabharata is about moksa.

 

Preparations for the war

Very briefly for the present. The following are important:

(a) Yudhisthira’s declaration of war. When he learns that Krishna was humiliated, he wanted to avenge Krishna’s humiliation. The idea of villages was not in his mind. The war had to be fought on the issue of Krishna’s having been insulted.

He was advised to restrain himself. He was told that the sins of a war accrues to the one who starts the war.

(b) Sakuni met Yudhisthira and told him that he should return to the forest with his brothers and leave the kingdom to Duryodhana. He told him that being a virtuous person, he should do that. Duryodhana was an ignoramus. He would suffer in his next birth whereas Yudhisthira would enjoy the consequences of his good deeds in this birth. Yudhisthira rejected his advice with disdain. He considered Sakuni a vicious person and his advice to him, insincere.

( c) Krishna and Sakuni met alone one night. Krishna asked him whether the war should take place. Sakuni told him that he is his servitor and he do whatever he wanted him to do. If Krishna did not want war, he (i.e., Sakuni) would make Pandavas and the Kauravas go for peace. He would ensure that this would happen. Krishna just had to ask him to do this. But before he asked him to work for peace, he should remember his avataric purpose – why he had taken avatara.

For him, commitment to Krishna transcends everything. He was oath-bound to his father to avenge his and brothers and relatives’ killing by Duryodhana, who used the vilest treachery for the purpose. His father had committed him to the task of ensuring the complete destruction of the Kauravas. But he was going to betray his oath to his father for the sake of Krishna.  His words to Krishna were not insincere, uttered just to please him. He was his devotee and Krishna knew that.

( e) The Pandavas and the Kauravas met to work out a war code. There is no parallel to this in the puranic literature, incidentally. It was a war between brothers, so it must not degrade into barbaric violence. The politics of it is interesting. But about that in another piece - for the next discussion. It was Duryodhana who said that both sides must observe the war code. It was worked out in the presence of Narayana and he would be the witness in the war. (This echoes the concept of Narayana as sakshi). For that reason, it would be dharma yuddha. It is to be noted that Yudhisthira does not use this term in this sense, neither in Sarala Mahabharata here nor in Vyasa Mahabharata. Duryodhana said that Narayana’s presence in the battlefield would make the entire battlefield a profoundly sacred space.

5.10.24

 

 

  

Saturday, April 6, 2024

THE TESTIMONY OF THE SEVERED HEAD IN SARALA MAHABHARATA (THE STORY OF BELALASENA)

 

Note: This is a revised version of the article “The Tale of Belalasena: A Unique Perspective in Sarala Mahabharata” published in Samachar Just Click on March 28, 2024.

 

Key words: Sarala Mahabharata, Krishna, Bhima, Belalasena, maya

 

 

The story of Belalasena occurs in Sarala Mahabharata. In Vyasa Mahabharata, there is no Belalasena story or an equivalent of it. Belalasena was Bhima’s son. Let us set aside details about his meeting Krishna on his way to the battlefield and about why he not just happily, but with great devotion too, gave his head to Krishna, when he asked for it (for some details, see “The Story of Belalsen” posted on August 15, 2017 in the blog: saralamahabharat.blogpost.com). Granting his request to witness the war, Krishna allowed the severed head to remain alive and witness it. His head was placed in a vantage position, from where he could see the war. He saw the happenings in the war from the beginning to the end.

 

In Vyasa Mahabharata, Sanjaya, the minister of the Kaurava king Dhritarashtra, was witnessing the war, sitting with the king and narrating to him what was happening on the battlefields of Kurukshetra, where his army was fighting with the army of the Pandavas. Sage Vyasa had given him the special vision because of which he could see the actions taking place at a distance. That was how the blind old king, without participating in the war physically, was experiencing it.

 

In Sarala Mahabharata, Sanjaya informed the blind, old father, who was no longer the king, having given the kingdom of Hastinapura to his eldest son Duryodhana, about the happenings in the war and he also commented on them. But he did not do so because of any special vision given to him by Vyasa or anyone else. He himself fought in the battlefield for the Kauravas and also obtained information about what had happened in different parts of the war field from others and used his experience, intelligence and insight to comment on the important events in the war and even make predictions about what was going to happen in the battlefield on the following day. In sum, there is no Belalasena in Vyasa’s version and there is no Sanjaya with special vision in Sarala’s version. It is certainly an interesting asymmetry between the source text in Sanskrit and its retold version in Odia.

 

The war ended and it was time for the Pandavas to claim credit for the victory. Present with the Pandava brothers at that time were Draupadi, Subhadra, Kunti and Krishna. Bhima said that the war was won solely because of him since he had killed all the Kaurava brothers (barring Durdaksha, who had changed sides and fought for the Pandavas). Arjuna said the war would never have been won but for him. Outraged, Nakula claimed credit for himself. Sahadeva said that he had told the death secrets of formidable warriors; so it was because of him that the Pandavas won the war. Yudhisthira said he was steadfast in dharma and it was indeed this that brought victory to them.

 

Draupadi said that she was an exceptionally virtuous woman (mahasati); it was this power of her that destroyed the Kauravas. Subhadra, Arjuna’s wife, told them that all of them were dead wrong. She was indeed the cause. The Kauravas killed Abhimanyu, her son, and her brother, Krishna, avenged his killing by having them wiped out. Finally Kunti spoke. She said that she had undergone great hardship for years and as she suffered, she prayed to Dharma (god of justice). The Pandavas’ victory was the god’s answer to her prayer. Soon they started fighting over the issue of credit.   

 

To settle the issue, Krishna brought them to the severed head and asked him what he had seen and who could be justly credited for the victory. The severed head told him what he had seen: no human or demon had killed anyone. A chakra (discuss), dazzling with the glare and the brilliance of a myriad suns, unceasingly moved to and fro - from one part of the war field to the other, killing the fighters.

 

This can be viewed as an embodiment of a very important idea in the eleventh chapter of Srimad Bhagavad Gita, namely that the Supreme Lord had already killed all those who were to fall in the war. The warriors would only act as the killer; such is His leela (play) and such is how the cosmic and the laukika (mundane / the level of sense experience) levels connect in the text. What is real, the truth, at the laukika level is not the truth at the cosmic level; in fact, at that transcendental level, the laukika-level reality does not exist. Under the power of maya (cosmic illusion), humans can perceive things only at the laukika level and therefore take illusion as real. This is the limitation humans have to live with and this could be why they consider themselves to be kartas (doers), agents, rather than instruments of the happenings. In Sarala Mahabharata, there is no Srimad Bhagavad Gita, but the above shows how it had unobtrusively entered Sarala’s narrative, where the Gita idea under reference here had taken the form of a story. Because of the grace of Krishna, Belalasena had seen the reality. The ability to see the reality is not the outcome of one’s karma. Arjuna witnessed the Vishvarupa (Universal Form) of Krishna because of Krishna’s grace. Belalasena saw his leela in the battlefields of Kurukshetra for the same reason. Freed from the bondage of maya by Krishna’s grace, he had not seen what Sanjaya had seen, namely things at the laukika level, where someone killed someone and someone else, some other. Krishna had granted him his wish to be able to witness the war. Only the one who is chosen by Him to see the transcendental reality, sees it.

 

To end the story of Belalasena. His story is short as was his life in the world. He came into Sarala’s narrative to be the witness of a catastrophic, yet transformative Event, and give a testimony, which would be the final word on the happenings in that Event. The testimony given to the Avatara in the presence of those who claimed credit for the victory in the Great War of Kurukshetra, he left the narrative. But his going was not ordinary; it was truly exceptional.

 

Listening to him, Bhima was agitated in the extreme. Here was his son betraying him, instead of supporting him. He condemned him as a thoroughly unworthy and disgraceful son; one, who did not take the side of his father in a situation of conflict and belittled him in front of others. Wild with anger, he hit the head of his son with all his might. From the top of the tree-trunk, which served as a pillar and from where the head had witnessed the war, it fell on the ground and died. The father killed the son, but not in the performance of a sacrifice.

 

Belalasena’s story ended when Krishna absorbed his soul into him. Merged into the Supreme god Narayana, he was no longer subject to the karmic cycle. No one in Sarala Mahabharata received moksha in this sense. This can be viewed as the Avatara’s “pratidana” (return dana) for the “dana” he had received from him.

 

30 March 2024