The Mahabharata of Krishna-Dwaipayana Vyasa (4 vols., libros 1–18) · 2 · 54

310 (return) [ What Bhishma says is this: I am bound by the Kauravas and, therefore, I am not a free agent. Obliged I am to battle against you. Yet I am saying, “What do you ask of me?” as if I could really give you what you might ask. My words, therefore, are without meaning, or vain, like those of a eunuch. Klivavat is explained by Nilakantha as Kataravat. Even in that case, the sense would be the same.]

311 (return) [ The Bengal reading is evidently incorrect. The Bombay text reads Raja for Vacoa.]

312 (return) [ Nilakantha thinks that vigatakalmashas refers to Drona; the meaning he suggests is “Tell me with pure heart etc., etc.,” I think Nilakantha is not right.]

313 (return) [ The sense of the first line is that because I am bound by the Kauravas with their wealth, therefore, I am obliged to make this reservation in the matter of granting thee thy wishes. That reservation really nullifies my promise.]

314 (return) [ Paran is explained by Nilakantha as “superior” qualifying Ripun.]

315 (return) [ Vritosmi is the reading of the Bengal texts, better than Vaddhosmi of the Bombay edition, and bhristomi of the Burdwan text. Salya was not bound to the Kauravas like Bhishma or Drona or Kripa by pensions, but gratified by the reception granted to him by Duryodhana in secret, he, generously agreed to aid the latter even against his own sister’s sons and their step-brothers.]

316 (return) [ For Puskalan the Bombay text reads Pushkaran which means a kind of drum.]

317 (return) [ For rajan in the Bengal texts, in the first line of the 5th verse, the Bombay text reads hyasan which I adopt.]

318 (return) [ Maha samucchrave is explained by Nilakantha as Mahasamprahare.]

319 (return) [ Literally, “showing himself in an awful form.”]

320 (return) [ Subhadra’s son Abhimanyu.]

321 (return) [ These fences were made of iguana skins and cased the hands of the bowmen up to a few inches of the elbow-joint.]

322 (return) [ Nimitta is explained by Nilakantha as the mark of object aimed at. Drona was the preceptor in arms of almost all the Bharata princes.]

323 (return) [ With two Bhallas Abhimanyu cut off his adversary’s standard; with one, one of the protectors of his car-wheels: and with another, his charioteer. Thus Nilakantha. A Parshni is altogether a different person from a Sarathi. Hence Nilakantha is assuredly right.]

324 (return) [ ‘Angaraka’ is the planet Mars, and ‘Sukra’ i.e. Venus.]

325 (return) [ Prativindhya was Yudhishthira’s son by Draupadi.]

326 (return) [ Maghavat is Indra, the chief of the celestials.]

327 (return) [ The word used in the original is Viparitam lit. contrary. The sense seems to be that car men fought on foot, cavalry soldiers on elephants, warriors on elephants from horseback, &c. The very character of the forces was altered.]

328 (return) [ i.e., though repulsed, these frequently rallied, and occupied the same ground as before.]

329 (return) [ The last half of the 7th with the 8th forms one sentence. It is certainly pleonastic. Ranavaranais of the Bengal texts is preferable to the Bombay reading Varavaranais. Toranas are the wooden edifices placed on the backs of elephants for the protection and comfort of the riders. These are called in India Hawdas.]

330 (return) [ Many of the Bengal texts read Avinitas. The correct reading, as in the Bombay text, is Abhinitas. Aprabhinna is literally “unrent,” i.e. with the temporal juice not trickling down. This juice emanates from several parts of the elephant’s body when the season of rut comes. To avoid a cumbrous periphrasis, which again would be unintelligible to the European reader, I have given the sense only.]

331 (return) [ For the Bengal reading ‘Mahaprajna’ the Bombay text reads ‘Mahaprasas.’

332 (return) [ Rathat and not Rathan is the reading that I adopt.]

333 (return) [ The Bengal reading ‘narvarakshaye’ seems to be better than ‘Mahavirakshaye’ of the Bombay text.]

334 (return) [ Talaketu is lit. Palmyra-bannered. Without using such compounds, the ‘brevity’ of the sentences cannot be maintained.]

335 (return) [ Karshni is Krishna’s or Arjuna’s son Abhimanyu. Arjuna was sometimes called Krishna.]

336 (return) [ Laghavamargasya is a mis-reading for Laghavamargastham’; then again chapi is incorrect, the correct reading chapam as in the Bombay text.]

337 (return) [ The Bengal reading is ‘Suaris Vritascha Sainyena’. The Bombay reading (which I do not adopt) is ‘Vritastu Sarva Sainyena.’

338 (return) [ Nine slokas and a half, from the second half of the 43rd verse to the 52nd verse (as above), are omitted in the Bengal texts. These, however, occur subsequently in section 46 following. The fact is, the whole of the passage in this section and the 116 verses in the following section, and the first 24 verses in the section 49, are regarded as an interpolation. In those sections of the Udyoga Parvam where the Rathas and the Atirathas, &c, are counted by Bhishma, no mention is made of any warrior of the name of Sweta. The Burdwan Pundits omit these passages altogether. I myself believe them to be an interpolation. Occurring, however, as it does in both the Bengal and the Bombay texts, I cannot omit in the English version.]

339 (return) [ The Bombay text reads ‘Yavana nihatam,’ which is better.]