Gita 01.17: Don’t let minor grammatical disputes overshadow major narrational and philosophical thrust.
kāśyaś ca parameṣv-āsaḥ
śikhaṇḍī ca mahā-rathaḥ
dhṛṣṭadyumno virāṭaś ca
sātyakiś cāparājitaḥ
Word for word:
kāśyaḥ — the King of Kāśī (Vārāṇasī); ca — and; parama-iṣu-āsaḥ— the great archer; śikhaṇḍī — Śikhaṇḍī; ca — also; mahā-rathaḥ — one who can fight alone against thousands;dhṛṣṭadyumnaḥ — Dhṛṣṭadyumna (the son of King Drupada); virāṭaḥ — Virāṭa (the prince who gave shelter to the Pāṇḍavas while they were in disguise); ca — also; sātyakiḥ — Sātyaki (the same as Yuyudhāna, the charioteer of Lord Kṛṣṇa); ca — and; aparājitaḥ — who had never been vanquished
Translation:
That great archer the King of Kāśī, the great fighter Śikhaṇḍī, Dhṛṣṭadyumna, Virāṭa, the unconquerable Sātyaki all blew their respective conchshells.
Explanation:
Sañjaya continues to describe the warriors on the Pāṇḍavas’ side who are blowing their conches to signify their readiness to fight in the war.
“Kāśyaś ca parameṣv-āsaḥ”: The king of Kāśī, who was a great archer.
“Śikhaṇḍī ca mahā-rathaḥ”: Śikhaṇḍī, who was also a great warrior. Śikhaṇḍī’s greatness was primarily due to the divine blessing he had received, which would enable him to play a crucial role. He would be the lynchpin in the plan to bring down Bhīṣma. Although it was Arjuna’s arrows that caused the major damage, Śikhaṇḍī also played a significant role.
“Dhṛṣṭadyumno”: Dhṛṣṭadyumna is the one destined to bring down Droṇa. That was the fate, the expectation, and the higher powers involved.
“Virāṭaś ca”: Virāṭa is the king of Virat Desh.
“Sātyakiś cāparājitaḥ”: Here, we see the poetic nature of the Gītā’s description, illustrating how the same part of a verse can be written in multiple ways. “Sātyakiś cā aparājitaḥ” means Sātyaki, who was undefeatable. Alternatively, it can be written as “Sātyakiś cāpa rājitaḥ,” which means Sātyaki with a “cāpa,” referring to a bow, and “rājitaḥ,” meaning decorated by. In this interpretation, it describes Sātyaki as being decorated with a bow.
At one level, we can see that both meanings are valid. The important thing is not which meaning is valid, but whether the essential point is conveyed. Focusing too much on minor linguistic details can sometimes cause us to overlook major narrative or philosophical points.
The essence of poetry is that it can be interpreted in different ways. That’s the beauty of poetry; it speaks to different people at different times in various ways. Even a poet might find new meanings in their own work when reading it later. While this is possible for all written work, including prose, poetry is often said to contain more literary ornaments that make these interpretations easier to discern. It’s important to be careful not to let minor details distract us from the major points.
The essential point here is that the warriors on the Pāṇḍavas’ side are both competent and committed to fighting for the Pāṇḍavas. They are ready. This message is effectively conveyed regardless of the interpretation. Sātyaki is also one of the warriors who will blow his conch.
The Bhagavad-gītā mentions the conches of the main players, Kṛṣṇa and the Pāṇḍavas, but it does not mention the names of the conches of other warriors.
When an author writes a book, whether it is fiction or history, they must decide how much detail to include. Some level of detail enhances vividness, visual absorption, and imagery in the narration. However, too much detail can overwhelm the reader. Finding the right balance is crucial: if you want to describe characters, you should do so to a certain extent and build each character effectively. Deciding how deeply to explore each character is also an important decision for the author.
The Pāṇḍavas are the main characters in the Mahābhārata, and the story revolves largely around them. In that light, the Pāṇḍavas are likely the characters with whom readers have identified by now, and they are the ones readers will want to follow on this journey. Visualizing the Pāṇḍavas graphically can enhance our connection to the story. However, too many details can overwhelm our imagination and hinder our engagement.
Hence, while other characters are present, they don’t receive much attention. The focus is on the Pāṇḍavas, and thus, while describing the other warriors, their conches are not mentioned. These are literary decisions that must be made, even when a divinely revealed work is conveyed to a literary book or creation.
Now, as the Bhagavad-gītā’s narration progresses, it describes here ‘kāśyaś ca parameṣv-āsaḥ’ — the king of Kāśī. Although Duryodhana did not mention Kāśī when listing the warriors on the Pāṇḍavas’ side, Sañjaya includes him here when describing the warriors on the opposing side who were ready for battle, as indicated by their blowing of conches. While all the warriors did express their readiness, the emphasis is on highlighting the prominent figures. Sañjaya identifies these key warriors by naming them in the context of their conches being blown.
Thank you.
Leave A Comment