Book 7 edition notes 201–274

Different species of Rakshasas.

Tripura, belonging to an Asura of the same.

Asani literally means the thunder. Probably, some kind of iron mace.

The Bengal texts read Utkrisha-vikramas. The correct reading seems to be Aklivhtavikramas. Then again Sahanujam seems to be inaccurate. I follow the Bombay reading Sahanugam.

Achyuta, when used as a proper noun, refers to Krishna. It means of unfading glory and 'the immortal.'

Slight differences are observable between the Bengal and the Bombay texts as regards the last three verses.

This is a triplet.

This is a triplet.

In the second line of 4, utsedha and not udvrita is the true reading. So also kanchit and not kinchit. The paraphrase, according to Nilakantha, in kanchit dhanurdharam na ganayan, etc.

147 is a triplet.

The Bengal reading sudakshinas at the end of 49 dose not seem to be correct. I adopt the Bombay reading sudarnnam.

The Bombay edition reads the first line of 3 differently. The Bengal reading is also defective. The correct reading seems to be Rathanaga instead of Naranaga.

This is a Triplet.

Instead of mattagaje, the Bombay edition reads tatragaje.

There seems to be a mistake in this sloka in its reference to the Pandavas. The reading, however, that occurs in all the printed edition, is the same. In one manuscript I find Kamrava-yodhavurgais (which I adopt) for Pandava-Kauraveyais.

The second line of 30, as it occurs in the Bengal texts, is adopted by me. A slight difference of reading occurs between the Bengal and the Bombay editions.

As regards almost every one of these slokas, differences of reading are observable between the Bengal texts and the Bombay edition. The readings of the Bombay edition are almost uniformly better. Then, again, many of those verses are disfigured with syntactical pleonasms and other grave errors. Abounding with tiresome repetitions that scarcely attract notice amid the variety of synonyms with which the language of the original abounds and amid also the melodious flow of the rhythm, the defects become glaring in translation. At the latter, however, of faithfulness, I have been obliged to sacrifice elegance, in rendering this section.

The Bengal reading tatha loka is incorrect. The Bombay text correctly reads tadaloka. Then also, instead of the Bengal reading rajasacaa samavrite (which is faulty), the true reading is raja tamasa vrite.

Lokanamabhave is explained by Nilakantha as pralaya-kale.

A different reading occurs in the Bombay edition.

Nalikas, as used here, appear to have been some species of shafts. In an earlier note, relying on other authorities, I took it to mean some kind of air-gun.

Vaikartana may also mean one who has peeled off his skin of natural armour. To preserve dramatic propriety, the Hindu commentators explain it in this sense when it occurs in any such passage, for the real origin of Karna, viz., his procreation by the deity of the sun, became known after his death.

The second line of 9 is read differently in the Calcutta edition. I adopt the Bombay reading.

In the second line of 13, Avyayatturnam instead of Maharaja is the correct reading.

This sloka seems to be a vicious one.

Yena and tena here are equal to yatra and tatra.

In the first line of 30 Vaganais and not Vanaganan is the true reading.

The second line of 30 is read differently in the Calcutta edition. In consequence also of some differences between two printed editions, 30 of the Calcutta text is 32 of the Bombay text.

In the Bengal texts this is a triplet.

It is for this that I see thee with this head as a tribute.

An arani is a cubit measuring from the elbow to the end of the little figure.

Both reading, viz., asaktam and asaktam are correct. The former means 'engaged', the latter, 'to the measure of his might!'

The second line of 85 is differently in the Bombay edition.

Rakshasas at certain hours were believed to be inspired with greater strength.

Mainaka the son of Himavat, has a hundred heads.

i.e., they thought they obtained a new lease of life.

Literally means, "united by Jara."

Nilakantha thinks that Sagadaya in one word, meaning 'deprived of the both Rakshasas and the mace.' This is far-fetched.

Fire being the mouth of the celestials, without fire, the celestials become mouthless. Thus Nilakantha.

This is a triplet in the Bengal texts.

66 is a triplet in the Bengal texts.

Triyama, literally, consisting of three Yamas, a Yama being a watch of three hours. The first hour and a half of the night and the last hour and a half, being regarded as twilight, the night, truly as such, with the ancient Hindoos, consisted of only nine hours.

Literally, 'of a thousand Yamas.'

The moon is called the lord of lilies because the water-lily is seen to bloom at moonrise, just as the sun is called the lord of the lotuses because the lotus blooms at sun-rise. The direction presided over by Indra means the East.

Dasatakasha-kkupa means the Kakup or direction presided by him of a thousand eyes; hence the East.

Instead of Vrishodara, the Bombay text reads Vrishottama, which I adopt.

In the first line of 31, the Bengal texts read Rajanam probably referring to Drupada. The correct reading, however, is Rujendra in the vocative case as in the Bombay edition.

I render this a little too freely. The form of the oath is, "Let that man lose, etc. whom Drona escapes today with life or whom Drona vanquishes today."

This, in the Bengal texts, is a triplet.

I adopt the Bombay reading of the first line of this verse.

All these arrows inflicted had wounds and could not be easily extracted. Shafts of crooked courses were condemned because the combatants could not easily baffle them, not knowing at whom they would fall.

This verse is omitted in the Bombay text. There can be no doubt, however, about its genuineness.

The celestial weapons were all living agents that appeared at the bidding of him who knew to invoke them. They abandoned, however, the person whose death was imminent, although invoked with the usual formulae.

I adopt the Bombay reading.

Deprived of both the worlds, having sustained a defeat, they lost this world, and flying away from the field, they committed a sin and lost the next world.

Celestial weapons were invoked with mantras, as explained in a previous note. They were forces which created all sorts of tangible weapons that the invoked desired. Here the Brahma weapon took the form of broad-headed arrows.

Dharmadhwajin literally means a person bearing the standard of virtue, hence, hypocrite, sanctimoniously talking only virtue and morality but acting differently.

I think the correct reading is aputrinas and not putrinas. If it is putrinas, literally rendered, the meaning is, 'Why should persons having children, feel any affection for the latter?' It the worthy of remark that the author of Venisamhara has bodily adopted this verse, putting it in the mouth of Aswatthaman when introduced in the third Act.

The last line of 37 is read differently in the Bombay edition. Nilakantha accepts that reading, and explains it in his gloss remarking that the grammatical solecism occuring in it is a license. The Bengal reading, however, is more apposite.

Literally, "the animals kept the Pandavas to their right."

Dasaratha's son Rama, during his exile, slew the monkey-chief Bali, the brother of Sugriva, while Bali was engaged with Sugriva in battle. Bali had not done any injury to Rama. That act has always been regarded as a stain on Rama.

I expand the original to make the sense clear.

The first line of the 23rd verse in the Bengal editions, is made the second line of that verse in the Bombay text. There seems to be a mistake, however, in both the texts. Vishnu slew Hiranyakasipu without allowing the latter to say anything unto him. Vide Vishnu Purana. If instead of Hiranyakasipu Harim, the rendering be Hiranyakasipu Haris, the line may then be connected with Bhima's speech, and the comparison would become more apposite.

The Nishadas were and to this day are the lowest caste in India.

The Bengal reading is vicious, I adopt the Bombay reading which is Surorgurunsha bhuyopi, meaning, "this preceptor again." The fact is, Arjuna was Satyaki's preceptor; Drona, therefore, was the latter's preceptor's preceptor.

Kimpurushas were fabled creatures, half men and steeds. Not a mountain but had its Kimpurushas, according to the Hindu belief. Yakshas were a sort of superhuman beings inhabiting inaccessible hills and mountains.

I adopt the Bombay reading of the 2nd line of 35 and think that Nilakantha explains it correctly.

I adopt the Bombay reading.

Nilakantha explains this to mean that when he became unconnected with the world, rising superior to everything connected with the world.

The terrible.

Amritasya yonim, literally, the origin or cause of immortality, i.e., he from whom immortality springs. Hence, as explained by Nilakantha, the phrase means the source of salvation, for those only that are emancipate became immortal as the Supreme Soul itself.

i.e., the five attributes perceivable by the five senses, with the five objects of Nature with which they are directly connected or in which they manifest themselves.

Having given it away to Rama, his disciple.

All these terms imply Death or the Destroyer.