1-10: Arjuna’s further doubts and surrender

Arjuna has substantiate his reasoning with further point…

BG 2.5

gurun ahatva hi mahanubhavan

sreyo bhoktum bhaikshyam apiha loke

hatvartha-kamams tu gurun ihaiva

bhunjiya bhogan rudhira-pradigdhan

SYNONYMS

gurun — the superiors; ahatva — not killing; hi — certainly; maha-anubhavan — great souls; sreyah — it is better; bhoktum — to enjoy life; bhaikshyam — by begging; api — even; iha — in this life; loke — in this world; hatva — killing; artha — gain; kaman — desiring; tu — but; gurun — superiors; iha — in this world; eva — certainly; bhunjiya — one has to enjoy; bhogan — enjoyable things; rudhira — blood; pradigdhan — tainted with.

TRANSLATION

It would be better to live in this world by begging than to live at the cost of the lives of great souls who are my teachers. Even though desiring worldly gain, they are superiors. If they are killed, everything we enjoy will be tainted with blood.

gurun ahatva, hatva is to kill, ahatva is not to kill, without killing my relatives mahanubhavan, and they are mahanubhavan.

So somebody might say that, yes he might be a Guru, but he has not acted properly. So he is no longer a Guru. In Mahabharat also there is a verse that states, if a Guru acts in unworthy ways; then the Guru can be rejected. For example, Bali Maharaj acted against the will of Sukracharya, he is a priest but he is also acting like a spiritual master.

Since Drona & Bhisma didn’t say anything and allowed Draupadi vastra haran to happen, they were also contaminated by the sin of silence-allowing the reprehensible attempts of Duryodhana to oust the modesty of Draupadi in the royal assembly. Therefore, Drona & Bhisma are not worthy of being a Guru. As if gurus in the assembly have degraded themselves by playing the role of a mute spectator. They lost the character of being a Guru. For e.g. Bali Maharaj and Sukrachaya; wherein the latter tried to withhold his disciple from doing dharma by serving the Lord. But Arjuna’s point is, they are still Mahanubhava, great souls.

On a side note, this horrid incident in the royal palace shows us, it doesn’t matter how many protectors we have, but ultimately there is only one protector-Sri Krishna. Five powerful husbands and Gurus such as Bhisma, Drona were not able to protect the tender Draupadi from the hands of Dushashan. Until, the Lord swiftly came to her rescue.

Mahabharat offers understand of things at from two levels: devotional level and duty bound level:

Bhisma took a vow to protect the throne of Hastinapur; thus, obligated to defend the Kauravas. But that is an external reason/duty bound level. Internal level / devotional level reason was that Lord wanted to exhibit; however powerful somebody may be, if he is against Dharma he will not be protected.

When Draupadi asked her question from Karma kanda point of view, Bhisma Pitamah is acting as if he is caught in Niyamagrah -> which means caught in technicality of rule without understanding the essence of it, essential principles. The essence is all rules are there to prevent injustice. So in this case a blatant level of injustice was happening, dishonoring a virtuous cultured lady (even any lady) that is injustice. So what matters is essence not the technicality. When Draupadi was insulted, essence of scripture was not followed. Bhisma Pitamah and other elders were caught in technicality of the subject matter niamagraha.

In that assembly of dishonor where Draupadi was insulted: Vikarna said, “when a Kshetriya is under influence of wine, gambling, women they lose their intelligence, and their actions in these conditions should not be taken seriously. Hence the whole gambling match should be canceled and Pandavas should be given back their kingdom. And Draupadi should be restored to proper honor.” And when this is said everyone other than Kaurava started cheering, that is rightly said.

At that time Karna raised and said, “I have seen many improper things in this assembly, but most improper is what Vikarna spoke. So this is perverted logic of Vikarna, since Yudhisthira gambled by his will, so he has to bear the consequences. And as per the chastity is considered, what kind of chaste woman will marry five husbands, so we can do anything to her.”

Bhisma and Drona’s unprotecting silence allowed Draupadi to be disrobed. So they unwittingly descended from the position of Guru, as they failed to uphold the virtue of that position. They are not worthy to be guru. But Arjuna’s point is they have given me so much, they are worthy of being the Guru.

Gurun ahatva hi mahanubhavan, so he is saying, they are still mahanubhava, sreyo bhoktum bhaikshyam apiha loke. So he said, rather than trying to enjoy this world bhaikshyam, it is better for me if I become a beggar and live by begging. hatvartha-kamams tu gurun ihaiva, for my material desire, if I kill my worshipable superiors bhunjiya bhogan rudhira-pradigdhan, then the kingdom we will get by killing such superiors will be tainted by their blood. And what is the use of such a kingdom which is tainted by the blood of venerable elders? So he said, we will be contaminated by sin if it is tainted by blood. sreyo bhoktum bhaikshyam apiha loke, it is far better to live by begging.

So Arjuna is maintaining his respect towards his superiors even though they have acted in a gregariously wrong way. And he is saying, “I cannot kill them, I cannot kill them. Instead, I would prefer to live by begging.” Because for a Kshetriya there is no other way to live. Kshetriya is meant to rule, and that is how they get taxes and conduct their life.

Pandavas exile to forest was an exceptional situation, since they were sentenced, and similarly living in Virat’s kingdom was also temporary. But normally they have a place to administer, and that is how they live. Otherwise they are basically renunciates who live by begging. So he is saying it is better for us to live by begging