Book 7 edition notes 101–200

The correct reading is Valguvadinas, and not the form in the genitive plural.

In the Bombay edition some verses occur after the 3rd.

Literally "Having me for his sustainer."

Instead of Suna, the Bombay text gives Puru.

The Bengal text reads this verse differently.

The words in italics are names of Indian confectionery, prepared with wheat or barley, milk, and sugar or honey.

These are the methods by which he sought knowledge of the Vedas.

Nakshatra-dakshina is explained by Nilakantha as Nakshatra vihitro-Dakshina.

The Bengal reading of the second line of the second verse is vicious. At any rate, the Bombay reading is better.

Animals slain in sacrifices are believed to go to heaven.

Identified with the modern Chumbal.

A kind of vessel used by Brahmanas and others for begging.

Vaswoksara means made 'of gold.' It is a feminine adjective. The substantive is omitted. I think the passage may mean--'The city of Rantideva is made of gold.'

A Vyama is the space between the two arms extended at their furthest.

Literally, a Kshatriya is one that rescues another from wounds and injuries.

A raja is one who enjoys the affection of his people, and with whom they are delighted.

The bow of Siva, otherwise called Pinaka.

Aklishtakarman, literally, one who is never fatigued with work; hence one capable of obtaining the results of action by a mere fiat of the will. It may also mean, of unspotted acts.

Parthivas, i.e., relating to the earth.

The first line of the verse, I think, has been correctly explained by Nilakantha. The paraphrase is ya imam bhumim sukham kurvan adyam i.e. adyam yugam anuparyeti sma.

The Bombay text adds some verses here which do not occur in the Bengal texts.

K. P. Sinha makes a ludicrous blunder in reading this line.

Sannahikas, i.e., clad in mail.

The Bengal reading Dwijaidhitam is certainly better than the Bombay reading Dwijochitam although Nilakantha explains uchitam as abhimatam.

Twilight is herself the goddess who is supposed to be adored by certain prayers and on the occasion.

These slaps mark the cadences.

Literally, 'in crossing.'

The Bengal reading Satyavrataiv in the first line of 9 is vicious. I adopt the Bombay reading Satyaratas, qualifying tara. To suppose that Krishna paid such a complement to the Kauravas as is implied by the Bengal reading is an absurdity.

i.e. added his voice to that of Jayadratha, requesting Drona to protect the latter.

A kind of car or vehicle.

Nilakantha supposes that tasmai here refers to the Three-eyed and not to Krishna. This seems to be right.

The second note of the Hindu gamut.

Vasavamiva is a mistake for Vasavasyeva.

Apavrittam is explained by Nilakantha as endangered or made doubtful. What Sanjaya says is that if it is not so, thou shalt then have to undergo the bitterness of ruling over the whole world bestowed upon thee by the Pandavas. Either the Pandavas will snatch away thy kingdom or make thee ruler of the whole after slaying thy sons. Either of these alternatives would be bitter to thee.

The original is pleonastic.

This verse obviously needs correction. Instead of "golden coats of mail," I think some such correction is needed, viz. coats of mail, of black iron, decked with gold and dyed with blood, etc.

The original is pleonastic.

This Sloka occurs in all the texts. It would seem, therefore, that Sanjaya was not always a witness only of the battle for narrating what he saw to Dhritarashtra, but sometimes at least he took part in the battle.

The words tatsainyanyabhyapujayan seem to be unmeaning in this connection. The Bengali translators, unable to do anything with them, have left them out.

The celestial weapons were forces dependent on mantras. Ordinary shafts, inspired with these mantras, were converted into celestial weapons.

In other words. Arjuna's car shot as quickly through the enemy as the arrows themselves sped from it.

The Bengal reading of the first line is vicious. The Bombay reading is Vamatkum Vipathum, Vanan. The first word means the froth in the mouth of the steeds.

i.e., his funeral obsequies. The vernacular translators do not see the intended joke.

I give the sense of this verse, without giving a closely literal version.

Avabhritha is the final bath undergone, on completion of as sacrifice by the person performing the sacrifice. The slaughter of Duryodhana would according to Krishna, be the avabhritha of the sacrifice of battle.

Praviddham means fallen down or loosened from its usual place. Thus Nilakantha.

Tripura means the three cities constructed by the Asura artificer Maya. The Asura, however, who owned those cities is also called Tripura. It was Mahadeva who destroyed the three cities with all their population vide the close of the Harivansa.

The true reading is alohita and not lohita. Arka here is crystal and not the sun. It was a silvern boar, which could not, evidently, be like the sun.

Owners of golden cars.

Nidas were niches or drivers boxes.

Many of the opening slokas of this section are nearly the same as those of section 76 of Bhishma Parva, vide ante. In a few instances I have adopted the readings of the Bombay edition.

I prefer the reading Samakulam to Jhashakulam.

i.e., using cars and elephants as weapons for destroying cars and elephants.

The fear behind them was from the Pandava army. The fear before them was from the car-warriors who had succeeded in penetrating the Kuru host.

Many of the Bengal texts have Calabhairiva. This is a mistake, the word being Calada, and not Calabha which would be unmeaning here.

I render the second line of 4 too freely. The sense seems to be that when two persons fight, one cannot say beforehand who will succeed. Both have chances of success, as, indeed, both have chances of defeat.

The genius of the two languages being entirely different, I give the sense of the first line of 14 separately, without seeking to connect it, in the assertive form, with the second half of 13.

Literally, 'disregard of Krishna.'

The Bombay reading, which I adopt, seems to be better than the Bengal one.

I think that both Vrikodaram and nisitais in this verse as given in the Bombay text are incorrect. I read Vrikodaras and navavhis following the Bengal texts.

The sense seems to be that Karna and Bhima were like fire and wind.

Verse 28 is a triplet. The second line is obscure. It seems that a line has been omitted.

Literally, mustered all his rage.

In the first line of the 62 the Bengal reading Ayastam is better than the Bombay reading Ayastas.

Literally, 'a mountain overgrown with medicinal herbs of great efficacy.' Of course, the allusion is to Hanumat's removal of Gandhamadana for the cure of Lakshmana.

i.e., the little indent caused by a cow's hoof.

The sense is that he that will slay me will always be victorious in battle, will always slay the warriors with whom he may be engaged in battle. Defeat will never be his.

Do not render 55 literally. Satyaki is called 'Satyavikrama,' i.e., 'of true prowess' or 'of prowess incapable of being baffled.' If he sustains a defeat today at Bhurisrava's hand, that title of his will be falsified. This is all that Krishna means.

Verse 20 is incomplete. I supply the words,--'Why then should I not protect' in order to make the meaning intelligible. The first line of 21 is grammatically connected with 20. To avoid an ugly construction I render it separately.

Literally, 'who could witness with indifference Satyaki reduced to that plight?'

Generally, to die, abstaining from all food. It is a method of freeing the soul from the body by Yoga.

Literally, 'near the place assigned for the sacrificial butter.'

Nilakantha explains chakram as Pratapam.

The second line of 94 I render a little freely to make the sense clearer.

A Kavandha is a headless trunk moving about as if endued with life. Tales are told of these headless beings drinking the blood of victims falling within their grasp.

The second of the seven notes of the Hindu gamut.

The printed editions and the manuscripts do not agree with one another in respect of the order and numbering of the last dozen verses. The Bombay edition omits a few of the verses.

Everything even the inanimate creation, exists and adores the Supreme deity.

This is a triplet in the Calcutta edition.

Literally, 'the fact of the Dhartarashtras having sunk (into distress).'

Literally, 'of persons whose coronal locks have undergone the sacred bath.'

Praluvdhas is explained by Nilakantha differently. He supposes that Duryodhana here characterises Sikhandin to be a deceitful fowler or hunter in consequence of the deceit with which he caused Bhishma's fall. This is far-fetched.

I adopt the Bombay reading.

The Bombay edition reads this verse differently and introduces another after it which does not occur in the Bengal texts.

I am not sure whether I have rendered the 31st and the first half of 32nd correctly. The vernacular translators have made a mess of the passage. The difficulty lies with Surhittamais. I take it to mean that Duryodhana says, 'Karna, Sakuni, Duhsasana, with myself, had taken thee, O preceptor, for a friend, and had engaged thee in this battle. We did not, however, then know that thou art an enemy in disguise.'

i.e., 'he should, by every means in his power, avenge himself on the Somakas, those enemies of mine.'

This is a triplet in the Bengal texts.

I render the second line freely, following Nilakantha.

Literally, 'with shafts resembling his rays.'

Or, 'as a lake overgrown with lotuses is agitated on every side by an elephant.'

Sixteen lines, occurring after this in the Bombay edition, have been omitted in the Calcutta edition.

Drums of diverse kinds and sizes.

The Bombay reading is apalavam and not viplatam.

This is a triplet in all the editions.

The brother of the Kalinga prince.

Patanipam is explained by Nilakantha as something that causes the patana or downfall of a person hence sin. [There is no reference for this note in the body of this page, so I have placed it in a likely location.--JBH]

A nalwa measured four hundred cubits.

Nilakantha explains that there were Pisachas.

Aswatthaman and the Pandavas were like brothers, for both were disciples of Drona. Ghatotkacha, therefore, having been Bhima's son was Aswatthaman's brother's son.

i.e., the weapon endued with the force of the thunder.