Sri Aurobindo
Early Cultural Writings
(1890 — 1910)
Part Two. On Literature. The Poetry of Kalidasa
On the Mahabharata
Notes on the Mahabharata
by Aurobind Ghose
dealing with the authenticity of each separate canto, i.e. whether it belongs or not to the original epic of 24,000 slokas on the great catastrophe of the Bharatas.
Udyogapurva1
Canto I.
1 कुरुप्रवीरा... स्वपक्षाः. This may mean in Vyasa’s elliptic manner the great Kurus (i.e. the Pandavas) and those of their side.
Otherwise “The Kuru heroes of his own side” i.e. Abhimanyu’s which is awkward
3 वृद्धौ this supplies the reason of their preeminence
5 प्रद्युम्नसाम्बौ च युधि प्रवीरौ. This establishes Pradyumna and Samba as historical sons of Krishna
विराटपुत्रैश्च Virata has therefore several sons, three at least.
7 The simile is strictly in the style of Vyasa who cares little for newness or ingenuity, so long as the image called up effects its2 purpose.
The assonance रराज सा राजवती is an epic assonance altogether uncommon in Vyasa and due evidently to the influence of Valmekie3.
8
strong brief and illumining strokes of description which add to the naturalness
of the scene e.g.4 ततः कथास्ते समवाययुक्ताः while also adding a touch that reveals the inwardness of the situation कृत्वा विचित्राः पुरुषप्रवीराः । तस्थुर्मुहूर्तं परिचिन्तयन्तः कृष्णं नृपास्ते समुदीक्षमाणाः ॥
9 संघट्टिताः surely means “assembled” and nothing else.
P. C. Roy in taking it as “drew their attention to” shows his usual slovenliness.
Lele also errs in his translation.
He interprets it 
“as soon as the talk was over Krishna assembled the kings for the affairs of the Pandavas.”
But the kings were already assembled and seated; not only so but they were waiting for Krishna to begin.
It is absurd to suppose that as soon as Krishna began speaking they left their seats and clustered round5 him like a pack of schoolboys.
Yet this is the only sense in which we can take Lele’s rendering.
I prefer to take the obvious sense of the words.
“As soon as they had reached an end of talk, those6 lion kings assembled by the Son7 of Modhou8 in the interests of the Pandava listened in a body to his high thoughted and fateful speech.”
सुमहोदयं having mighty consequences.
10 अयं here beside me.
See verse 4.
Yudhisthere9 is sitting just by Krishna, separated by him [from] Virata10.
अक्षवती not given by Apte.
11 तरसा. तरस् expresses any swift, violent and impetuous act; anything that has the momentum of strength and impulse or fire and energy11
सत्यरथैर् This is a word of doubtful import.
It may [mean] “of unerring chariots” i.e. skilful fighters, or else “honourable fighters”, रथः being used as in महारथः, अधिरथः = fighter in a chariot.
Cf. सत्यपराक्रमः.
In the first case the epithet would be otiose and ornamental and an epic assonance.
I cannot think however that Vyasa was capable of putting a purely decorative epic epithet in so emphatic a place.
It must surely mean either 2 [i.e. “honourable fighters”] or “making truth their chariot”; रथः being used as in मनोरथ etc.
The latter however is almost too much a flight of fancy for Vyasa.
12 त्रयोदशश्चैव — agreeing with संवत्सरः which the mind supplies from वर्षाणि in the last line; a verb also has to be supplied from चीर्णं.
This is the true Vyasa style.
निविष्ट. निविश् to abide.
This sense, though not given in Apte may be deduced from निवेशः Impersonal.
It has been dwelt [incomplete]
13 It will be seen from Krishna’s attitude here as elsewhere that he was very far from being the engineer and subtle contriver of war into which later ideas have deformed him.
That he came down to force on war and destroy the Kshatriya caste whether to open India to the world or for other cause, is an idea that was not present to the mind of Vyasa.
Later generations writing when the pure Kshatriya caste had almost disappeared, attributed this motive for God’s descent upon earth, just as a modern English Theosophist, perceiving British rule established in India, has added the corollary that he destroyed the Kshatriyas (five thousand years ago, according to her own belief) in order to make the line clear for the English.
What Vyasa on the other hand makes us feel is that Krishna, though fixed to support justice at every cost, was earnestly desirous to support it by peaceful means if possible.
His speech is an evident attempt to restrain the eagerness of the Mutsyas12 and Panchalas who were bent on war as the only means of overthrowing the Kuru domination.
14 Krishna’s testimony to Yudhisthere’s13 character is here of great importance.
अधर्मयुक्तं न च कामयेत राज्यं सुराणामपि धर्मराजः ।
धर्मार्थयुक्तं तु महीपतित्वं ग्रामेऽपि कस्मिंश्चिदयं बुभूषेत् ॥
adharmayuktaṃ na ca kāmayeta rājyaṃ surāṇāmapi dharmarājaḥ
dharmārthayuktaṃ tu mahīpatitvaṃ grāme`pi kasmiṃścidayaṃ bubhūṣet
That Yudhisthere14 has deserved this character to the letter so far anyone who has followed the story will admit.
If he acts in diametrical opposition to this character in any future passage we shall have some ground to pause before we admit the genuineness of the passage.
बुभूषेत् would wish to obtain, in the second sense of भू get, obtain.15
15 मिथ्योपचारेण by dishonest procedure; not in accordance with straightforward and chivalrous
rules of conduct16.
16 That is, if Duryodhana had taken the kingdom from the Pandavas in fair war by his own energy and genius (स्वतेजसा), 
he would not have transgressed the ordinary धर्म of the Kshatriya.
In that case the Pandavas might have accepted the verdict of Fate and refrained from plunging the country in farther bloodshed.
17 This seems to point to the “Digvijayapurva17”; but the reference is general and may apply to the Rajasuya generally.
प्रपीङ्य
[निपीड्य — another version] by force, pressure; as a result of conquest in open battle.
18 बालास्त्विमे An allusion to the early persecution of the Pandavas by Duryodhana.
If we accept this purva18 in its completeness, we must accept the genuineness in the main of the early narrative of the Adi Purva19 in so far as it [is] covered by this20 sloka.
Notice especially विविधैरुपायैः.
तु The force is “But you know what the Dhartarastras21 are, their fierceness, falseness and landhunger; how even in the childhood of the Pandavas these, their banded foemen, sought to slay them by various means.”
22 तथापि = for all their good will.
It is part of the inverted commas implied in इति
एव = at least.
यतेयुरेव would at least do their utmost.
23 यथावत् definitely; though they may form a shrewd guess.
24 राज्यार्धदानाय Krishna does not, at present at any rate suggest a compromise; let them first make their full claim to which they are entitled. (Notice Genitive).
पुरोहितयान This
title is evidently a misnomer; there is no mention of the Purohit, far less does he set out as yet nor need we suppose he is hinted at in the description of a suitable envoy.
It is doubtful whether Krishna would have singled out a Panchala Purohit as the best intermediary between the Kurus for he evidently desired to try conciliation first, before resorting to threats.
The choice of the Purohita was that of King
Drupada and the leaders of the Brahmavarta nations who desired to break the
supremacy among them of the Kurus.
*
This Canto is in the very finest and most characteristic style of Vyasa; precise, simple and hardy in phrasing, with a strong, curt, decisive movement and a pregnant mode of expression, in which a kernel of thought is expressed and its corollaries suggested so as to form a thought-atmosphere around it.
There is no superfluous or lost word or sentence, but each goes straight to its mark and says something which wanted to be said.
The speech of Krishna is admirably characteristic of the man as we have seen him in the Sabhapurva22; firm and precise in outlook and sure of its own drift, it is yet full of an admirably disinterested23 and statesmanlike broadmindedness.24
Canto 2.
11 [दीव्यमानः]25 प्रतिदीव्य Can this not mean “being challenged to dice played26 against Saubala or in acceptance of the challenge” or must it mean “gambled and that against Saubala”?