Bg 1.1-46

 (1.1)

Śrīdhara Svāmī; I venerate the wondrous Paramānanda Mādhava, who possesses the skill to explain with a single mouth what Śeṣa would need all his mouths to explain.

Having reverently bowed to Śrī Mādhava, the Lord of the Universe, I, constrained by devotion to him, compose this commentary on the Gītā called Subodhinī.

Having thoroughly considered the views of the commentator and the words of his interpreters, I begin this commentary on the Gītā to the best of my ability.

This commentary, the Subodhinī, which explains the Gītā with effort focused solely on the text, should always be contemplated by the wise.

Here indeed, the Supreme Compassionate Lord, the son of Devakī, who incarnated for the welfare of all worlds, rescued Arjuna - who had abandoned his own dharma and was inclined towards others' dharma due to his discernment being lost through sorrow and delusion born of ignorance of truth - from that ocean of sorrow and delusion by means of the boat of instruction in the secrets of dharma and knowledge. Kṛṣṇa Dvaipāyana (Vyāsa) composed that very meaning taught by the Lord in seven hundred verses. And therein, he mostly wrote down the verses that came from Śrī Kṛṣṇa's mouth. He himself composed some for coherence. As stated in the Gītā-māhātmya:

"The Gītā should be well sung (studied). What need is there for other extensive scriptures? For it has come forth from the lotus mouth of Padmanābha himself."

There, first, with "In the field of dharma" and ending with "spoke these words in dejection", the story is related to introduce the dialogue between Śrī Kṛṣṇa and Arjuna. Thereafter, until the end, their dialogue is about dharma and knowledge. There, with the verse beginning "In the field of dharma", when Dhṛtarāṣṭra, stationed in Hastināpura, asked his nearby charioteer Sañjaya about the events at Kurukṣetra, Sañjaya, though in Hastināpura, having obtained divine vision by Vyāsa's grace, reported to Dhṛtarāṣṭra the events at Kurukṣetra as if seeing them directly. "Having seen the Pāṇḍava army" and so on.

Dhṛtarāṣṭra said: "In the field of dharma". O Sañjaya, in the field of dharma, in the land of dharma, in Kurukṣetra. "Field of dharma" is an adjective for Kurukṣetra. There was a certain primeval person of these (Kauravas) named Kuru. In that dharma-place of Kuru, what did my sons and the sons of Pāṇḍu do when they assembled, desiring to fight?

Madhusūdana: Oṁ. Salutations to Śrīmad Rāmacandra, whose lotus feet are savored by the paramahaṁsa (great ascetics), whose nectar of consciousness resides in the minds of devotees.

Having carefully considered the meaning of the commentary by the venerable master, I compose the Gītā-gūḍhārtha-dīpikā (Lamp Illuminating the Hidden Meanings of the Gītā), mostly word by word.

The supreme goal of the Gītā scripture is stated to be the complete cessation of saṁsāra (cycle of rebirth) along with its causes.

That supreme abode of Viṣṇu, which is of the nature of sat-cit-ānanda (existence-consciousness-bliss), complete, for whose attainment the three-part Vedas were begun.

Karma (action), upāsti (worship), and jñāna (knowledge) are the three parts in order. The Gītā, consisting of eighteen chapters, embodies these three parts.

One should recognize each part here by six chapters. Karma-niṣṭhā (devotion to action) and jñāna-niṣṭhā (devotion to knowledge) are spoken of in the first and last parts.

Since there is no combination of these two due to their extreme opposition, devotion to the Lord is proclaimed in the middle part.

That devotion, following both, removes all obstacles. It is of three types: mixed with karma, pure, and mixed with jñāna.

In the first part, karma and the path of its renunciation, and the meaning of 'tvam' (you) as the pure Self, are expounded with reasoning.

In the second, through describing devotion to the Lord, the meaning of 'tat' (that) as the supreme blissful Lord is ascertained.

In the third, their unity, the meaning of the sentence, is clearly described. Thus, there is also a mutual connection of the parts here.

The particulars for each chapter will be explained in their respective places. This scripture is said to be about the means to liberation.

The practice of desireless action, renunciation of desired and prohibited actions, and among these, the highest dharma is chanting, praising, etc. of Hari (Viṣṇu).

When the mind of one whose sins are destroyed becomes fit for discrimination, then firm discrimination between the eternal and non-eternal arises.

Dispassion towards objects here and hereafter, called self-control, arises in order. Then, with the wealth of tranquility etc., renunciation becomes established.

Thus, from complete renunciation, strong desire for liberation arises. Then approaching a teacher, and receiving instruction.

Then, for removal of doubt, hearing of Vedānta etc. The entire Uttara-mīmāṁsā scripture is useful here.

Then, by its maturation, steadfastness in meditation. The entire Yoga scripture would be fully utilized here.

Then, when the mind is freed from faults, understanding of truth arises from the sentence. Direct realization without conceptualization arises from the word itself.

The cessation of ignorance occurs with the rise of knowledge of truth. Then, when the veiling is removed, delusion and doubt are destroyed.

Unbegun actions are completely destroyed. Future actions do not arise due to the power of knowledge of truth.

Due to the disturbance of prārabdha karma (karma that has begun to bear fruit), vāsanā (latent impression) is not destroyed. It is calmed by the most powerful restraint.

Restraint is the triad of concentration, meditation, and samādhi. The five beginning with yama (restraints) are used earlier for this purpose.

From surrender to the Lord, samādhi is quickly accomplished. Then destruction of mind and extinction of vāsanās occur.

Knowledge of truth, destruction of mind, and extinction of vāsanās - by practicing these three simultaneously, firm liberation while living is attained.

The description of renunciation for the wise in the śruti (revealed texts) is for this purpose. Effort should be made to accomplish whichever aspect is not yet accomplished.

When the mind is restrained earlier by savikalpa samādhi (samādhi with thought), then nirvikalpa samādhi (samādhi without thought) occurs here in three stages.

In the first, one emerges spontaneously; in the second, awakened by another; in the end, one does not emerge at all, always remaining absorbed in that.

Such a Brāhmaṇa would be the best among those who speak of Brahman. He is said to be beyond the guṇas (qualities of nature), of steady wisdom, and a devotee of Viṣṇu.

He is beyond varṇa (caste) and āśrama (life-stage), liberated while living, delighting in the Self. Because he has accomplished what is to be accomplished, the scripture ceases for him.

"For one who has the highest devotion to God, and as much devotion to the guru as to God, these meanings that have been told shine forth for that great soul."

By this and other śruti evidence, devotion to the Lord is useful in all states with body, mind, and speech.

Devotion practiced in a lower stage leads to a higher stage. Otherwise, due to abundance of obstacles, attainment of the fruit is very difficult.

By that previous practice alone, even against his will, he is drawn. This is also the word of Hari: "Perfected after many births" etc.

If due to the inconceivability of impressions from previous births, someone is already accomplished, it would be like fruit falling from the sky.

The scripture is not meant to begin for him, as he has already accomplished the purpose. The practice of means accomplished earlier and the grace of the Lord are difficult to know.

Even when earlier stages are accomplished, devotion to the Lord should be practiced for higher and higher stages. Without it, that is not accomplished.

In the state of liberation while living, there is no expectation of fruit from devotion. For them, worship of Hari is natural, like being free from hatred etc.

"Even sages who delight in the Self and are free from bondage engage in causeless devotion to Urukrama (Viṣṇu of mighty steps). Such are the qualities of Hari."

"Among them, the jñānī (knower) who is ever united and of single devotion is distinguished." From such statements, this devotee of love is said to be the chief.

All this has been revealed by the Lord in the Gītā scripture. Therefore, my mind is greatly enthusiastic to explain this.

The practice of desireless action is proclaimed as the root of liberation. Sorrow and other demonic sins are its obstacles.

From this comes deviation from one's dharma, engagement in the prohibited, or action with desire for results or with ego.

A person always possessed by such demonic sins, being unfit for attaining the goals of life, obtains a continuum of sorrow.

Sorrow is naturally detestable for all beings here. Therefore, its causes like sorrow, delusion, etc. should always be abandoned.

How can sorrow, delusion, etc., which are the cause of sorrow deeply rooted in the beginningless stream of existence and difficult to abandon, be given up?

To instruct a person thus possessed by longing and inclined towards the goals of life, the Lord spoke this supreme scripture. (1-47)

There, "You have grieved for those who should not be grieved for" [Gītā 2.11] and so on, by instructing on the means of removing all demonic sins such as grief and delusion, and by practicing one's own dharma, the goal of human life should be attained - this is the universal instruction of the Bhagavad. And the narrative in the form of a dialogue between the Bhagavad and Arjuna is for the praise of knowledge, like the dialogue between Janaka and Yājñavalkya in the Upaniṣads. How? Even the renowned and greatly influential Arjuna, overwhelmed by grief and delusion caused by affection due to the notion of "I" and "mine" in kingdom, teacher's son, friends, etc., with his discernment and wisdom overpowered, though naturally engaged in battle as per the warrior's duty, desisted from that battle. And he began to perform the duty of others, such as living on alms, which is prohibited for a kṣatriya (warrior). Thus he was immersed in great misfortune, but having received this knowledge from the Bhagavad's instruction, removing grief and delusion, he again engaged in his own duty and became fulfilled - thus this knowledge of great purpose is praised as most commendable.

Through the example of Arjuna, the one qualified for instruction is shown. Thus it will be explained. Even when engaged in one's own duty, the causes of deviation from it - grief and delusion - are shown by Arjuna saying "How shall I fight Bhīṣma in battle" [Gītā 2.4] and so on. Seeing Arjuna's engagement in battle, his own duty, without discernment, what was the cause, is explained by "Having seen the army of the Pāṇḍavas" [Gītā 1.2] and so on, describing the actions of the enemy's army as the cause. As an introduction to that, Dhṛtarāṣṭra's question to Sañjaya is with the verse beginning "In the field of dharma" and so on.

There, "Dhṛtarāṣṭra said" is Vaiśampāyana's statement to Janamejaya. Having previously heard many reasons for the Pāṇḍavas' victory, afraid of his sons losing the kingdom, Dhṛtarāṣṭra asked, hoping for a reason for his sons' victory. Previously desiring to fight, having assembled in Kurukṣetra, what did my people - Duryodhana and others - and the Pāṇḍavas - Yudhiṣṭhira and others - do? Did they fight according to their previous desire to fight, or due to some reason, abandoning the desire to fight, did they do something else? The visible fear due to heroic men like Bhīṣma and Arjuna as a reason for abandoning the desire to fight is well-known; to show the invisible fear as well, he says "In the field of dharma". Kurukṣetra, well-known in all śrutis (scriptures) and smṛtis (traditional texts), which is the field for the arising of dharma previously non-existent and the growth of existing dharma, like a field for crops. As Bṛhaspati said to Yājñavalkya, "That Kurukṣetra which is the sacrificial ground of the gods, the abode of Brahman for all beings," according to the Jābāla śruti, and "Kurukṣetra is indeed the sacrificial ground of the gods," according to the Śatapatha śruti. The Pāṇḍavas who went there, already righteous, if they would desist from the Gītā due to the adharma (unrighteousness) caused by violence to both sides, then my sons would retain the kingdom; or due to the greatness of the field of dharma, even my sinful sons might sometimes have a change of heart, and then repentant, if they would give back to the Pāṇḍavas the kingdom obtained earlier by deceit, then even without battle they would be as good as dead - thus not seeing a firmer means for his sons to gain the kingdom or for the Pāṇḍavas to gain the kingdom, great anxiety is the seed of the question.

The address "O Sañjaya" suggests that you have completely conquered faults like attachment and aversion, so you should speak without bias. Although the question could be completed with just "What did my people do?", by separately mentioning "and the Pāṇḍavas", he reveals his animosity towards the Pāṇḍavas by showing lack of possessiveness towards them. ||1||

Visvanatha: May Sri Krishna Chaitanya, the moon-like one wearing yellow garments, who delights the kumuda flowers (devotees), who by his own radiance destroys the darkness of ignorance, who is an ocean of nectar, dwelling in my mind, create his own love (in me).

Having carefully considered the ancient words, I, though ignorant, desiring even a drop of the nectar of the Gita, in accordance with the view of the ascetic master, O saints, please forgive this surrendered one.

Indeed, here the Lord Himself, whose lotus feet are desired by all scriptures, who has taken the form of a human, the Supreme Brahman, the son of Vasudeva, having descended in the city of Gopala, made Himself visible to all eyes in an incomprehensible material form, lifted the people of the world who were drowning in the ocean of material existence, and immersed them in the great ocean of His own love by letting them taste His own beauty and sweetness.

Although He is firmly established in His vow to protect the virtuous and subdue the wicked, on the pretext of removing the Earth's burden of sorrow, He performed the supreme protection characterized by giving liberation even to the wicked, even to those who hate Him, even to those who have been swallowed by great material existence. To deliver the living beings who would be born after His disappearance, who are also afflicted by sorrow and delusion due to the bondage of beginningless ignorance, and to uphold His fame sung by groups of sages who are the authors of scriptures, He made manifest the Bhagavad Gita scripture of eighteen chapters, which is adorned with jewels of meaning that are the culmination of the purport of all the Vedas in their three divisions, taking as His target His dear friend Arjuna, who was overcome by sorrow and delusion at the head of the battle, solely by such self-willed desire, as if making directly manifest the supreme goal of human life.

There, in the first set of six chapters, selfless karma yoga is shown. In the second, bhakti yoga. In the third, jnana yoga is shown. Among these, because bhakti yoga is most secret, most honored as giving life to both, and most rare, it is placed in the middle. Because karma and jnana are useless without bhakti, those two are approved only when mixed with bhakti.

Bhakti is of two types: pure and predominant. Among these, the first is supremely powerful on its own. Those two (karma and jnana) are of pure influence without bhakti, (while bhakti is) free from material possessions, and described by words like ananya (exclusive devotion). The second type is mixed with karma and jnana - all this will be explained in detail later.

Now, in expectation of (the question) "What kind of sorrow and delusion did Arjuna have?", the speaker of the Mahabharata, Sri Vaishampayana, introduces the story in the Bhishma Parva to Janamejaya (saying), "Dhritarashtra said". (Dhritarashtra asks:) What did my sons led by Duryodhana and the Pandavas led by Yudhishthira, who had gathered for battle in Kurukshetra, do? Tell me that. (The author explains:) You say "gathered for battle", so they were ready to fight, yet you ask "What did they do?" - with what intention do you ask this? Therefore he says "dharmakṣetre" (in the field of dharma). It is well-known that Kurukshetra is a place that promotes dharma, as it is said in scripture to be a place of sacrifice for the gods.

Therefore, by the power of association with that place, if even the unrighteous like Duryodhana were to have their anger subside and turn their minds to dharma; and the Pandavas are naturally righteous, so harming relatives is improper - if discernment arose in both parties, even a treaty is possible. Thus, "I will be happy" - this is the outward sentiment he wishes to convey to Sanjaya. But inwardly, if there is a treaty, the kingdom will remain full of thorns for my sons as before, so my despair is indeed irresistible. Therefore, our Bhishma is indeed difficult for Arjuna to conquer, so battle alone is better - may that indeed happen - this is his hidden desire, difficult to perceive, which supports his wish.

Here, by the word kṣetra (field) in "dharmakṣetre", it is indicated that dharma, or the incarnation of dharma, Yudhishthira with his associates, is like grain; Sri Krishna, who protects that, is like the strength of agriculture; the various kinds of help done by Krishna are like irrigation and building dams; and Duryodhana and others to be destroyed by Sri Krishna are like weeds in the form of grain that are hostile to the real grain - all this is conveyed by Sarasvati (the goddess of learning). ||1||

Baladeva: May my mind always dwell on Śrī Govinda, who is the truth, infinite, incomprehensible, possessing unique power, the overseer of all, extremely skilled in protecting devotees, the cause of creation and other cosmic activities, and full of bliss.

I bow down to the Gītā composed by the Lord himself, which is endowed with excellent qualities, by which the cloud of ignorance attains distinction, by which even the highest devotion achieves great nourishment, and by which the supreme truth, though difficult to comprehend, constantly manifests.

Now, the Supreme Lord, who is the condensed form of bliss and consciousness, possessing inconceivable power, the best among persons, whose feet are contemplated by Brahmā and others, and who controls the manifestation of the diverse universe by his own will, delighting his eternal associates who appeared along with him through his birth and other pastimes, desiring to uplift many souls from the mouth of the tigress of ignorance, and wishing to instruct others who would appear after his disappearance, made Arjuna, who is non-different from himself, appear bewildered by his inconceivable power on the battlefield. Under the pretext of removing Arjuna's delusion, he imparted the Gītopaniṣad, which uniquely describes the true nature of himself along with his associates.

In it, five topics are described: God, the individual soul, nature, time, and action. Among these, God is the all-pervading consciousness. The individual soul is the atomic consciousness. Nature is the substratum of the three qualities beginning with sattva (goodness). Time is the inert substance devoid of the three qualities. Action is that which is accomplished by human effort and is denoted by words such as adṛṣṭa (unseen potency).

Their characteristics are as follows: Among these, God and the other three are eternal. The individual soul and the others are under God's control. Action, however, is beginningless like its prior non-existence and is destructible. Although God and the individual soul are of the nature of consciousness, they are also the knowers and exist for their own sake - as stated in scriptures: "Brahman is consciousness and bliss", "He who is all-knowing and all-cognizant", "The thinker, knower, doer, the conscious self, the person". And from scriptures such as: "He desired, 'May I become many'", "I slept happily, I knew nothing". This is not the ego born of the mahat-tattva (great principle) in both cases.

Because at that time it had not arisen or was dissolved. And he is established as the doer, enjoyer, perfect, all-knowing, all-cognizant, doer, and knower from these words. Indeed, the state of being an experiencer, which is enjoyer-ship, is accepted by all. From the scripture "He enjoys all desires together with Brahman, the wise one", it is clearly stated for both. Although consciousness, knowing, etc. are not different from the nature of consciousness, just as the ability to illuminate is not different from the sun's nature of light, still, due to the power of distinction, there is the practical usage of their difference. And distinction is a substitute for difference, not difference itself. It is the cause of practical usage such as the relationship between substance and attribute, even in the absence of difference, which is the effect of difference. It is recognized by the learned in statements like "Existence exists", "Difference is different", "Time always exists". It is established by the impossibility of explaining these cognitions otherwise, and by the scripture "Seeing these attributes as separate, one follows them". Here, after mentioning the attributes of Brahman, their difference is negated.

Indeed, if there were no substitute for difference, it would not be possible to speak of the relationship between substance and attribute or the multiplicity of attributes, so these meanings should be accepted even by those who do not wish to. These topics should be investigated in their proper places in this scripture. Here, the true natures of the individual soul, the Supreme Soul, His abode, and the means to attain Him are properly described. Among these, the true nature of the Supreme Soul is taught for the sake of worshiping Him, while nature and the rest are taught as instruments of the Supreme Soul, the creator.

The means to attain Him are threefold, divided into action, knowledge, and devotion. Among these, prescribed action performed without attachment to its fruits as mentioned in the scriptures, and with abandonment of identification as the doer, is a means for attaining Him indirectly through purification of the heart, which aids knowledge and devotion. The non-violent action prescribed in the scriptures is primary here. From the dialogues between father and son, etc. in the Mokṣa-dharma section, violent action is secondary due to its remoteness. But knowledge and devotion are direct means.

One might ask: If liberation is attained through knowledge arising from purification of the heart by such performance of action, what is the distinction of devotion? It is said: Devotion is a certain kind of knowledge with some distinction. Contemplation of the form of consciousness with unblinking vision is knowledge, by which sālokya (residence in the same realm as the Lord) and other liberations are attained. But contemplation as the abode of various delightful pastimes is devotion, by which one attains the joy of serving the Lord, which includes sālokya and other liberations. The status of devotion as knowledge is established from the scriptural statement "He remains in the devotional yoga of the one essence of existence, consciousness, and bliss".

This is seen to be designated by words such as śravaṇa (hearing) and bhāva (emotion). We will explain that knowledge taking the form of hearing, etc. should be understood like the symbol of Viṣṇu's hair, etc. for consciousness-bliss. In this scripture of eighteen chapters, in the first six chapters, the vision of the true nature of the individual soul, which is a part of God, conducive to devotion to God, the whole, is described. This is accomplished through knowledge and desireless action contained within it. In the middle six, devotion, which is the means to attain the supreme goal, God the whole, is described, preceded by the conception of His greatness. In the last six, the true natures of God and the others mentioned earlier are further clarified. The designation of the three sets of six chapters as primarily concerned with action, devotion, and knowledge respectively is only due to their predominance. The mention of devotion and its attainment in the last part is like the writing indicating the contents written on top of a jewel box.

The qualified student of this scripture is a faithful person, devoted to righteous duty, with controlled senses. He is of three types, based on the distinctions of beginner, intermediate, and advanced. Among them, the first type performs his duties as worship of Hari, desiring to see heavenly realms. The second type performs duties out of compassion for the world, devoted to devotion to Hari. He follows the āśrama system. The third type, free from the āśrama system, has a mind purified by truthfulness, austerity, and chanting, and is solely devoted to Hari.

The relationship between the signifier and the signified is the connection. The signified is Śrī Kṛṣṇa with the characteristics described. The signifier is the scripture of His Gītā. That is the subject here. The purpose is direct realization of Him, preceded by the cessation of all miseries. These are the four preliminary topics.

Here, the word brahman (brahma) and imperishable (akṣara) refer to the three - Īśvara and others. The word perishable (kṣara) refers to the bound souls and their bodies. The word self (ātman) refers to Īśvara, the individual soul, body, mind, intellect, determination, and effort. The word nature (prakṛti) refers to the threefold tendencies, character, and essential form. The word state of being (bhāva) refers to existence, intention, nature, objects, birth, actions, and selves. The word yoga is used in reference to the three - karma and others, and the restraint of mental fluctuations.

This scripture is indeed the direct speech of the Lord Himself, supreme among all -

"The Gītā should be sung well. What need is there for other scriptural elaborations?
For it has emanated directly from the lotus mouth of Padmanābha Himself." - Thus from the Padma Purāṇa.

The words of Dhṛtarāṣṭra and others were composed by Dvaipāyana to provide context. And by the logic of salt falling into a salt mine, it becomes of the same nature. This is the introduction.

"To provide context for the dialogue
That occurred between Govinda and Pārtha
At the head of the battle,
The sage narrated the story in the first chapter of the Gītā."

Thus, to introduce the dialogue between the Lord and Arjuna, the story is described in twenty-seven verses beginning with "On the field of dharma". Dhṛtarāṣṭra, knowing the Lord's role as Pārtha's charioteer and doubting his own sons' victory, asks Sañjaya. Vaiśampāyana says to Janamejaya: "Dhṛtarāṣṭra said". "What did my sons and the Pāṇḍavas, assembled and desirous to fight, do on the field of Kuru?"

If one asks, "You yourself say they were assembled and desirous to fight, so what is the meaning of asking again what they did?", to this he says: "On the field of dharma". Kurukṣetra is well-known as a land that fosters dharma, as it is heard: "Because Kurukṣetra is the sacrificial ground of the gods, the abode of Brahman for all beings" and so on. Due to its influence, did my sons, their enmity destroyed, decide to give the kingdom to the Pāṇḍavas? Or did the always righteous Pāṇḍavas, in that field of dharma, consider it better to enter the forest, fearing the unrighteousness that would cause the destruction of the dynasty? "O Sañjaya" means "You, whose attachment and aversion have been destroyed by Vyāsa's grace, speak the truth." The non-mention of the Pāṇḍavas as "mine" reveals Dhṛtarāṣṭra's treachery towards them. Just as pseudo-grains opposing real grains are removed from a grain field, the goddess of speech hints through the word "field of dharma" that your sons, who oppose dharma like pseudo-dharma, will be removed. ||1||

(1.2)

Seeing the Pāṇḍava army arrayed,
Then Duryodhana the king,
Approaching the teacher,
Spoke these words.

Śrīdhara: Sañjaya said "Seeing" and so on. Seeing the army of the Pāṇḍavas arrayed in battle formation, the king Duryodhana, going near to the teacher Droṇa, spoke the following words. ||2||

Madhusūdana: Thus, to Dhṛtarāṣṭra's question - who, being greatly blind, lacking even the eyes of compassion and worldly dealings, was fixated solely on affection for his son - Vaiśampāyana introduces the reply of Sañjaya, who is very righteous and aware of the intention. There, the possibility of visible fear for the Pāṇḍavas does not exist, while the invisible fear that arose in Arjuna due to delusion was pacified by the Lord - thus the superiority of the Pāṇḍavas is implied by the word "tu" (but). To console the king, "Do not be dejected" with the suspicion of his son returning the kingdom, he first describes Duryodhana's wickedness - "Seeing". Having seen, made an object of visual perception, the army of Pāṇḍu's sons arrayed, positioned in battle formation by Dhṛṣṭadyumna and others, then, at the time of preparing for battle, approaching the teacher named Droṇa, the initiator of the tradition of archery, going near to him himself, not summoning him to his own presence. By this, fear generated by seeing the Pāṇḍava army is suggested. Even when going near him for self-protection out of fear, he conceals the fear under the pretext of respect for the teacher, due to being skilled in royal policy - thus he says "rājā" (the king). When "Duryodhana spoke to the teacher" would suffice, the word "vacana" (words) is used to transition to a specific speech endowed with many qualities such as being concise yet rich in meaning, or to indicate that he spoke mere words without any substance. ||2||

Viśvanātha: Knowing their intention, the battle they desired would indeed occur. But thinking that it was contrary to his wishes, he said "Having seen". vyūḍham (arranged) means positioned in battle formation. King Duryodhana spoke with inner fear. "Behold this" in nine verses. ||2||

Baladeva: Thus, understanding the state of mind of Dhṛtarāṣṭra, who was blind from birth but had the eye of wisdom, whose understanding of dharma was destroyed, who was blinded by delusion, and whose heart was dejected thinking "My son might someday give the kingdom to the Pāṇḍavas", the righteous Sañjaya, producing satisfaction in him that "Your son will never give the kingdom to them", said "Having seen". The anīkam (army) of the Pāṇḍavas was vyūḍham (arranged) in battle formation. Approaching the ācārya (teacher) Droṇa, who imparted knowledge of archery, having gone near him himself, the king, skilled in royal policy, spoke. The word vacanam (speech) indicates brevity of words, depth of meaning, and a particular transmitted utterance. Here, by personally approaching the teacher, it is suggested that he conceals his inner fear caused by seeing the power of the Pāṇḍava army, thinking "I have come here myself out of respect for the guru". This is indicated by his skill in royal policy, as shown by the word rāja (king). ||2||

(1.3)

Behold this great army of the sons of Pāṇḍu, O teacher,
Arrayed by the son of Drupada, your wise disciple.

Śrīdhara: He speaks those very words in the nine verses beginning with "Behold this" and so on. "Behold" and so on. O teacher, behold the great, extensive army (camū) of the Pāṇḍavas. It is arrayed, positioned in battle formation, by your disciple, the son of Drupada, Dhṛṣṭadyumna. ||3||

Madhusūdana: Furthermore, O teacher of the sons of Pāṇḍu, not mine, due to your excessive affection for them. By saying "by the son of Drupada, your disciple," he suggests that your foolishness is the cause of my misfortune, as you taught even him who was born to kill you. His being wise (dhīmatā) indicates that he obtained from you the knowledge that became the means of your destruction. Therefore, by seeing his army, you alone will feel joy due to your delusion, not anyone else. Showing that army to the teacher, saying "you alone behold this" as if it should be shown to him, he reveals his hidden hatred. Thus, the implication is: what remorse can be expected from one who, upon reaching the field of dharma, has such a hostile attitude even towards the teacher, being extremely wicked and suspicious of everyone? ||3||

Viśvanātha: "By Drupada's son Dhṛṣṭadyumna, your student, born for your destruction" - even knowing this, you taught him, showing your slow-wittedness. "O wise one" - the implication is that even your enemy has learned from you the means of your destruction, showing his great intelligence. "See" means observe even at the time of fruition. ||3||

Baladeva: He speaks such words beginning with "Behold this". Thinking that due to excessive affection for his dear students like Yudhiṣṭhira, the teacher might not fight, he suggests disrespect towards him to provoke his anger, saying "this". Seeing this (army) positioned very close, boldly disregarding you, the teacher who is very valiant - understand their disrespect from this. vyūḍhām (arranged) means positioned in battle formation. "By Drupada's son" - by your enemy Drupada, Dhṛṣṭadyumna was produced from the sacrificial fire pit for your destruction. "Your student" - even knowing he was your enemy, you taught him the science of archery, showing your slow-wittedness. "O wise one" - the enemy has learned from you the means of your destruction, showing his intelligence. The implication is that your excessive consideration for others is the cause of our misfortune. ||3||

(1.4-6)

Here are heroes, great archers, equal in battle to Bhīma and Arjuna:
Yuyudhāna, Virāṭa, and the great warrior Drupada,
Dhṛṣṭaketu, Cekitāna, and the valiant king of Kāśi,
Purujit, Kuntibhoja, and Śaibya, the bull among men,
The mighty Yudhāmanyu and the valiant Uttamauja,
The son of Subhadrā and the sons of Draupadī, all great warriors.

Śrīdhara: "Here" and so on. Here, in this army. Those who shoot arrows (iṣu) are called iṣvāsa, meaning bows. Those who have great bows are called maheṣvāsa. Bhīma and Arjuna are indeed the most famous warriors here. Equal to them are the heroes endowed with heroism and the warrior's duty. He specifies them by name: Yuyudhāna is Sātyaki. Also, Dhṛṣṭaketu and others. Yudhāmanyu is one named as mighty. Saubhadra is Abhimanyu, and the Draupadeyās are the five sons born to Draupadī from the five Pāṇḍavas, starting with Prativindhya. The definition of mahāratha and others:

"One who can fight ten thousand archers and is skilled in weapons and scriptures is called a mahāratha.
One who can fight countless enemies is called an atiratha.
One who fights with only one is inferior and called an ardha-ratha." ||4-6||

Madhusūdana: If you're worried that this army, led by one obscure son of Drupada, can be defeated by any of our men, why are you so distressed? To address this, he says "Here are heroes" and so on in three verses. Not only is Dhṛṣṭadyumna a hero here, which might make it negligible. But in this army, there are many other heroes, so effort must be made to defeat them. This is the intention. He specifies the heroes as "great archers" (maheṣvāsa). Those who have great, formidable bows. The implication is that they are skilled in routing the enemy's army from afar.

Anticipating a lack of battle skill despite having great bows, he says: in battle (yudhi) they are equal to Bhīma and Arjuna, whose prowess is universally acknowledged. He lists them from "Yuyudhāna" to "all great warriors". Yuyudhāna is Sātyaki. "Drupada, the great warrior" is one. Or, "great warrior" is an adjective for Yuyudhāna, Virāṭa, and Drupada. "Valiant" is an adjective for Dhṛṣṭaketu, Cekitāna, and the king of Kāśi. "Bull among men" is an adjective for Purujit, Kuntibhoja, and Śaibya. Yudhāmanyu is "mighty" and Uttamauja is "valiant" - these are two.

Alternatively, all adjectives can be applied collectively everywhere. Saubhadra is Abhimanyu. The Draupadeyās are Draupadī's five sons, starting with Prativindhya. The "and" (ca) includes others like the king of Pāṇḍya, Ghaṭotkaca, etc. The five Pāṇḍavas, being too well-known, are not counted. The seventeen others counted who are on their side are all great warriors. All are great warriors, not a single one is just a ratha or ardha-ratha. "Great warriors" also implies atiratha. Their definition is:

"One who can fight ten thousand archers and is skilled in weapons and scriptures is called a mahāratha.
One who can fight countless enemies is called an atiratha.
A ratha fights with one, and one inferior to that is called an ardha-ratha." ||4-6||

Viśvanātha: Here in the army. "Mahāntaḥ" (great ones) are those whose iṣvāsāḥ (bows) cannot be cut by enemies. Yuyudhāna is Sātyaki. Saubhadra is Abhimanyu. Draupadeyāḥ are Prativindhya and others, born to the five like Yudhiṣṭhira from Draupadī. The definition of mahāratha and others:

"He who can fight ten thousand archers,
And is skilled in weapons and scriptures, is called a mahāratha.

He who can fight countless opponents is called an atiratha.
One who fights with only one, inferior to that, is called an ardha-ratha." ||4-6||

Śrīdhara: If one thinks, "Surely a small army led by Dhṛṣṭadyumna alone can be easily conquered by just one of us, so you should not be afraid," to that he says "Here". Here in the army are mahāntaḥ (great ones) whose iṣvāsāḥ (bows) cannot be cut by enemies. Fearing their skill in battle, he says "Bhīma". Yuyudhāna is Sātyaki. "Mahāratha" refers to the three including Yuyudhāna. "Nara-puṅgava" (bull among men) refers to the three including Purujit. "Yudhi" (in battle) and "vikrānta" (valiant) are for Yudhāmanyu. "Vīryavān" (mighty) is the adjective for Uttamaujā. Saubhadra is Abhimanyu. Draupadeyāḥ are the five sons born to Draupadī from the five like Yudhiṣṭhira, named Prativindhya, Śrutasena, Śrutakīrti, Śatānīka, and Śrutakarma. The word "ca" (and) includes others like Ghaṭotkaca. The Pāṇḍavas are not counted due to their great fame. These seventeen who are counted, and others on their side, are all mahārathās. This also implies atirathās. Their definition is stated:

"He who can fight ten thousand archers,
And is skilled in weapons and scriptures, is called a mahāratha.

He who can fight countless opponents is called an atiratha.
One who fights with only one, inferior to that, is called an ardha-ratha." ||4-6||

(1.7)

Know those who are distinguished among us, O best of the twice-born.
I will name for you the leaders of my army, for the sake of identification.

Śrīdhara: "Among us" and so on. "Know" means understand. "Leaders" means commanders. "For the sake of identification" means for proper knowledge. ||7||

Madhusūdana: If you are frightened after seeing the enemy's extensive forces, then perhaps we should seek peace with the enemies. Why insist on war? Anticipating this intention of the teacher, he says "Among us" and so on.

Using the word "tu" (but), he conceals the fear arising within and shows his own boldness. "Among all of us, those who are distinguished," means those who are superior to all others. "Know them" as I speak of them, understand them with certainty from my words. This is the form of the parasmaipada verb "budh" from the bhvādi class.

"Those who are the leaders of my army," means the principal commanders. "For the sake of identification," I will name a few among the countless, to represent the rest for you. I'm not informing you of anything you don't know. By addressing him as "best of the twice-born," he flatters the teacher to gain his favor for his own purpose. From a negative perspective, "best of the twice-born" could imply: as a Brahmin, you're unskilled in warfare, so even if you're averse, we won't suffer great loss as long as we have preeminent warriors like Bhīṣma.

"For the sake of identification" implies: This statement of mine is to ensure that, seeing the army of your dear disciples, the Pāṇḍavas, you don't forget our own heroes in your excitement. ||7||

Viśvanātha: Nibodha (understand) means comprehend. Saṁjñārtham (for the purpose of recognition) means for the purpose of thorough knowledge. ||7||

Baladeva: Then, imagining that the teacher might think "Are you afraid of the Pāṇḍava army?", and concealing his inner fear, he speaks boldly: "Our". Among all of us, those who are distinguished, supremely excellent, endowed with strength of intellect and other powers, are the nāyakāḥ (leaders). "I tell you for saṁjñārtham (the purpose of recognition)", meaning for the purpose of thorough knowledge. The implication is to provoke his anger: "If you won't fight out of affection for the Pāṇḍavas, even then my victory will be achieved through Bhīṣma and others." ||7||

(1.8-9)

You, Bhīṣma, Karṇa, and Kṛpa, the conqueror of assemblies,
Aśvatthāmā, Vikarṇa, and Somadatta's son Jayadratha.
And many other heroes who have risked their lives for my sake,
Armed with various weapons, all skilled in warfare.

Śrīdhara: He enumerates them in these two verses starting with "You". "You" refers to Droṇa. "Conqueror of assemblies" means one who conquers in battle. Saumadatti is Somadatta's son, Bhūriśravā. "And others" means those who are determined to give up their lives for my sake. "Armed with various weapons" means those who have many different weapons as their means of attack. "Skilled in warfare" means they are experts in battle. ||8-9||

Madhusūdana: He enumerates the distinguished ones: "You" refers to Droṇa, Bhīṣma, Karṇa, and Kṛpa. "Conqueror of assemblies" (samitiṁjaya) is an adjective for Kṛpa, meaning one who conquers in battle. These four are listed as the most distinguished of all, to allay any anger Karṇa might feel at being listed after them. He lists the leaders: Aśvatthāmā, Droṇa's son. Just as the teacher is listed first before Bhīṣma, his son is listed first before Vikarṇa and others to please the teacher. Vikarṇa is his own younger brother. Saumadatti is Somadatta's son, Bhūriśravā, listed due to his excellence. Jayadratha is the king of Sindhu. Some texts read "and also the king of Sindhu." Are these the only leaders? No, he says: "And others" like Śalya, Kṛtavarman, and so on, who are "ready to give up their lives" for my sake, meaning they are determined to sacrifice even their lives for my purpose. This shows their extreme devotion to him. Thus, the multitude of his army, their devotion to him, their valor, their eagerness for battle, and their skill in warfare are shown by adjectives like "heroes" and so on. ||8-9||

Viśvanātha: Saumadatti is Bhūriśravā. "Tyakta-jīvitāḥ" (those who have abandoned their lives) means they are ready to even give up their lives if it would benefit me. In reality, however, Duryodhana's speech is true, as per the Lord's statement: "These have already been slain by Me; be merely an instrument, O Savyasācin" [Gītā 11.33]. ||8-9||

Baladeva: "Bhavān" (you) refers to Droṇa. Vikarṇa is my youngest brother. Saumadatti is Bhūriśravā. "Samitiñjayaḥ" (victorious in battle) is an adjective for the seven including Droṇa. Anticipating the thought "Are these the only distinguished ones in my army? There are countless," he says "Anye ca" (and others). Many others like Jayadratha, Kṛtavarman, Śalya, and so on. "Tyakta" and so on is a past participle meaning "resolved to give up their lives". Thus, it is implied that due to their excessive affection for me, their great valor, and their expertise in battle, my victory would surely be achieved. ||8-9||

(1.10)

Our army, protected by Bhishma, is inadequate.
However, their army, protected by Bhima, is adequate.

Sridhara: What then? Therefore he says - "aparyāptam" (inadequate) etc. That army of ours, even though equipped with such heroes and protected by Bhishma, appears inadequate, incapable of fighting against them. This army of the Pandavas, being protected by Bhima, appears adequate and capable. Due to Bhishma's impartiality towards both sides, our army is incapable against the Pandava army. Due to Bhima's partiality towards one side, the Pandavas' army is capable. ||10||

Madhusudana: The king, again suspecting the equality of both armies, declares the superiority of his own army - "aparyāptam" (inadequate) means endless, measured by eleven akshauhinis, and protected on all sides by Bhishma of renowned greatness and subtle intellect. That is our army, commanded by men of such qualities. But the army of these Pandavas is "paryāptam" (adequate), limited, being composed of only seven akshauhinis, thus inferior. And it is protected by Bhima of very impetuous intellect, therefore victory will surely be ours - this is the implied meaning.

Or, that army of the Pandavas is inadequate, not enough for us. How is that army? Bhishma is protected by us, for the purpose of averting which - this is the meaning. That Pandava army is protected by Bhishma, but this army of ours is adequate for the defeat of these Pandavas. Bhima, of very weak heart, is protected for which - that army of ours protected by Bhima, because Bhima is very unfit and is protected by them for the purpose of averting this, therefore there is no cause of fear for us at all - this is the implied meaning. If you are so fearless, then why do you talk so much? Therefore he says. The word 'tu' (but) indicates a specific duty to be performed. ||10||

Viśvanātha: Aparyāptam (unlimited) means incomplete. The meaning is that it is incapable of fighting against the Pāṇḍavas. Even though protected on all sides by Bhīṣma, who has an extremely subtle intellect and is skilled in weapons and scriptures, due to Bhīṣma's impartiality towards both sides. But for these Pāṇḍavas, though protected by Bhīma who has a coarse intellect and is unskilled in weapons and scriptures, it is paryāptam (limited) or complete. The meaning is that it is proficient in fighting against us. ||10||

Baladeva: Anticipating the doubt "How can you be victorious when both armies are equal?", he speaks of the superiority of his own army, saying "Aparyāptam". Aparyāptam (unlimited) means immeasurable is our strength. Moreover, it is protected by Bhīṣma, who has great intelligence and is an atiratha (great chariot warrior). But the strength of these Pāṇḍavas is paryāptam (limited) or measurable. Moreover, it is protected by Bhīma, who has a trivial intellect and is an ardharatha (half chariot warrior). Therefore, my victory is assured. ||10||

(1.11)

Stationed in all the entrances according to their respective divisions,
All of you indeed should protect Bhishma only.

Visvanatha: Therefore, you should be cautious, he says. In the "ayaneṣu" (entrances), the paths for entering the military formation, stationed according to their divisions, not abandoning their respective battlefields, you all should protect Bhishma in such a way that while he is fighting with others, he is not killed by anyone from behind. Our life depends on Bhishma's strength - this is the implied meaning. ||11||

Madhusudana: At the beginning of the battle, when the mood is even, the positions where the warriors are stationed in the battlefield according to their rank, divided by directions such as east, west, etc., are called "ayana" here. And the commander stands in the middle, overseeing the entire army. In this situation, stationed without abandoning their respective battlefields assigned according to their divisions, all of you, due to your focus on the battle, should protect only Bhishma, the commander, who is not looking in front, behind, or to the sides. For if Bhishma, the commander, is protected, by his grace everything will be well-protected - this is the implied meaning. ||11||

Baladeva: Now, if the teacher remains indifferent after understanding the meaning of my words, then there will be damage to my cause. Realizing this and entrusting the burden of his task to him, he says "ayaneṣu" etc. In the "ayaneṣu" (entrances), the paths for the army to enter, stationed without abandoning their respective battlefields assigned according to their divisions, you and others should protect Bhishma on all sides, so that due to his focus on the battle, not seeing to the sides or behind, no one else can harm him - this is the meaning. With the commander Bhishma unaware, my victory will be accomplished - this is the implied meaning.

This is the intention - Bhishma is our grandfather. You are the teacher. Both of you are known to be solely devoted to our welfare. In the assembly of Yaksha, although knowing my injustice, when asked about Draupadi's justice, you did not speak. But to make me give up the semblance of affection I had towards the Pandavas, it was reported to me in that way. ||11||

(1.12)

Generating joy for him, the elder of the Kurus, the grandfather,
Roaring loudly with a lion's roar, blew his conch shell, the mighty one.

Sridhara: Thus, after hearing the king's words full of respect, what did Bhishma do? He says that with "tasya" (his) etc. Generating joy for that king, the grandfather Bhishma, roaring loudly with a great lion's roar, blew his conch shell. ||12||

Madhusudana: With the intention that whether he praises or criticizes, this body will fall for this purpose, making him joyful, he roared with a lion's roar and caused the conch shell to be sounded - this is said with "tasya" (his). Thus, to remove the fear of the one who was extremely frightened by the sight of the Pandava army and who had deceitfully taken refuge in the teacher, and now thinking "this one is still deceiving me," due to dissatisfaction, not being respected even verbally by the teacher, understanding the teacher's indifference, and praising only Bhishma with "ayaneṣu" etc., generating fear-removing joy for that king, a special exultation in the mind indicating his own victory, roaring loudly with a great lion's roar. Or, "siṁhanādam" (lion's roar) is with ṇamul suffix. Therefore, like "raipoṣaṁ puṣyati", there is repeated use of the same root. He blew the conch shell. Being the elder of the Kurus, he understood the intentions of the teacher and Duryodhana; being the grandfather, he did not ignore it, unlike the teacher who ignored it; being mighty, he roared loudly like a lion and blew the conch shell to generate fear in the enemies. Here, although the lion's roar and conch shell sound are in different times as joy-generators, like in "abhicaran yajeta", "janayan" (generating) should be explained as being in the present tense in the form of certain future occurrence. ||12||

Visvanatha: Then, delighted by hearing his own praise, to generate joy for that Duryodhana by dispelling his fear, the elder of the Kurus, Bhishma, "siṁha-nādam" (lion's roar) - here ṇamul suffix is used in the sense of comparison in action as per the rule "upamāne karmaṇi ca", meaning roaring like a lion. ||12||

Baladeva: Thus, having ascertained Duryodhana's self-praise, Bhishma, delighted, to dispel the fear born in his heart, blew the conch shell - this is said. "siṁha-nādam" (lion's roar) - here ṇamul suffix is used in the sense of comparison in action as per Panini's rule "upamāne karmaṇi ca". The meaning is roaring like a lion. Without saying anything verbally, by merely making the sound of the conch shell, it is implied that victory and defeat are indeed dependent on God, and I will give up my body for your sake according to the duty of a Kshatriya. ||12||

(1.13)

Then conch shells, kettledrums, tabors, drums, and horns
Were suddenly sounded; that sound became tumultuous.

Sridhara: Thus, seeing the commander Bhishma's enthusiasm for battle, the excitement for battle arose everywhere - this is said with "tataḥ" (then) etc. "Paṇavāḥ" are small drums. "Ānakāḥ" and "gomukhāḥ" are types of musical instruments. Suddenly, at that very moment, they were sounded. And that sound of conch shells etc. became tumultuous, great. ||13||

Madhusudana: Then, immediately after the commander Bhishma's initiative, "paṇavāḥ", "ānakāḥ", and "gomukhāḥ", which are types of musical instruments, were suddenly sounded at that very moment. This is a passive construction. That sound was tumultuous, great, yet it did not cause any agitation to the Pandavas - this is the implied meaning. ||13||

Visvanatha: Then, enthusiasm for battle arose on both sides - this is said with "tataḥ" (then). "Paṇavāḥ" are small drums. "Ānakāḥ" are kettledrums. "Gomukhāḥ" are a type of musical instrument. ||13||

Baladeva: "Tataḥ" (then) means: When the commander Bhishma took initiative, in his army suddenly, at that very moment, conch shells etc. were sounded. This is a passive construction. "Paṇavāḥ" etc. are three types of musical instruments. That sound was tumultuous, great in its uniformity. ||13||

(1.14)

Then, stationed in a great chariot yoked with white horses,
Madhava and the son of Pandu blew their divine conch shells.

Sridhara: Then, the enthusiasm for battle that arose in the Pandava army is described with "tataḥ" (then) etc. in five verses. Then, after the uproar of musical instruments in the Kaurava army, stationed in a great chariot, Sri Krishna and Arjuna excellently blew their divine conch shells. ||14||

Madhusudana: Although others were also stationed in chariots, the description of being stationed in a chariot is mentioned with "śvetair hayair yukte" (yoked with white horses) etc., to indicate the superiority of this chariot. Thus, they were stationed in the chariot given by Agni, which was invincible. The meaning is that they were completely undefeatable. ||14||

Visvanatha: Not commented.

Baladeva: Now the battle enthusiasm that arose in the Pandava army is described with "tataḥ" (then). Even though others were also stationed in chariots, the mention of Krishna and Arjuna being stationed in a chariot implies that their chariot was given by Agni, was capable of conquering the three worlds, and was of great power. ||14||

(1.15-18)

Hrishikesha blew Pāñcajanya, Dhananjaya blew Devadatta,
Bhimakarma Vrikodara blew the great conch Paundra.
King Yudhishthira, son of Kunti, blew Anantavijaya,
Nakula and Sahadeva blew Sughosa and Manipushpaka.
The King of Kashi, excellent archer, and Shikhandi, the great chariot-warrior,
Dhrishtadyumna, Virata, and the invincible Satyaki,
Drupada and the sons of Draupadi, O Lord of the Earth, all around,
And the mighty-armed son of Subhadra, blew their conch shells separately.

Sridhara: Showing that in detail, he says "pāñcajanyam" etc. Pāñcajanya etc. are the names of the conch shells of Sri Krishna etc. Bhima is one whose deeds are terrible. Vrikodara is one whose belly is like that of a wolf; he blew the great conch Paundra. "Ananta" etc.: Nakula blew the conch named Sughosa. Sahadeva's was named Manipushpaka. "Kāśyaś ca" etc.: Kāśya is the king of Kashi. What kind? One whose bow is the best, excellent. "Drupada" etc.: O Lord of the Earth, Dhritarashtra. ||15-18||

Madhusudana: The naming of the conch shells as Pāñcajanya, Devadatta, Paundra, Anantavijaya, Sughosa, and Manipushpaka is to show the superiority of these, as they are well-known by their own names in the enemy army, while in your army not even one conch is famous by its own name. The word "Hṛṣīkeśa" (lord of the senses) is used to indicate that the Pandavas have the all-pervading, inner controller as their ally. The word "Dhanaṁjaya" (winner of wealth) is used to indicate that he is completely invincible, having conquered all kings in the conquest of directions and brought wealth. It is said that Bhimasena is one whose terrible deeds include the killing of Hidimba, and who is extremely strong due to his wolf-belly nature, able to digest much food. "Kuntīputra" (son of Kunti) indicates that he was obtained by Kunti through great penance to Dharma, and he himself is the chief king having performed the Rajasuya sacrifice, and in battle, he alone is destined for victory, not his opponents - this is hinted by the word "Yudhiṣṭhira". It is to be understood that Nakula blew Sughosa and Sahadeva blew Manipushpaka. "Parameṣvāsaḥ" (excellent archer) Kāśya is the great archer, the king of Kashi. Satyaki is one who is undefeated in great battles like the stealing of the Parijata and the battle with Bana. O Lord of the Earth, Dhritarashtra! The intention is to listen steadily. The rest is clear. ||15-18||

Visvanatha: Pāñcajanya etc. are the names of the conch shells. "Aparājitaḥ" (invincible) means impossible to be defeated by anyone. Or, "rājitaḥ" means shining with the bow. ||15-18||

Baladeva: "Pāñcajanyam" etc.: Pāñcajanya etc. are the names of the conch shells of Krishna etc. Here, the word "Hṛṣīkeśa" (lord of the senses) indicates having the support of the Supreme Lord. The words Pāñcajanya etc. indicate possession of many divine conch shells with well-known names. The words "rājā" (king), "bhīmakarmā" (of terrible deeds), "dhanaṁjaya" (winner of wealth) etc. suggest the superiority of the Pandava army by implying Yudhishthira's performance of the Rajasuya sacrifice, Bhima's slaying of Hidimba etc., and Arjuna's bringing of endless wealth from his conquests of directions. The inferiority of the opposing army is also implied due to the absence of these. "Kāśya" means the king of Kashi. "Parameṣvāsaḥ" means great archer. "Cāparājitaḥ" means shining with the bow. "Drupada" etc.: O Lord of the Earth, Dhritarashtra - this hints at the calamity characterized by the destruction of your lineage arising from your bad counsel. ||15-18||

(1.19)

That tumultuous sound, splitting the hearts of the sons of Dhṛtarāṣṭra,
Reverberating, filled both heaven and earth.

Śrīdhara: He speaks of that sound of conches causing great fear to your side with "That sound" and so on. It split, that is, tore apart the hearts of the sons of Dhṛtarāṣṭra, your side. Doing what? Filling both heaven and earth, reverberating with echoes. (19)

Madhusūdana: Although the extremely tumultuous sound of conches and other instruments in the army of the sons of Dhṛtarāṣṭra did not disturb the Pāṇḍavas, that conch sound produced in the army of the Pāṇḍavas split the hearts of the sons of Dhṛtarāṣṭra, that is, all your relatives including Bhīṣma, Droṇa, and others related to Dhṛtarāṣṭra. The meaning is that it caused pain equivalent to splitting their hearts. Because it was tumultuous, that is, intense. Filling both heaven and earth with echoes. (19)

Viśvanātha: Not comment.

Baladeva: "That" and so on. The conch sound made by the Pāṇḍavas split the hearts of all the sons of Dhṛtarāṣṭra, including Bhīṣma and others. The meaning is that it caused pain equivalent to splitting them. Tumultuous means extremely intense. "Reverberating" means filling with echoes. It should be understood that the tumultuous sound of conches and other instruments made by the sons of Dhṛtarāṣṭra did not cause any disturbance to them (the Pāṇḍavas), as it is not mentioned thus. (19)

(1.20)

Then, seeing the sons of Dhṛtarāṣṭra positioned, the one with the monkey banner,
The Pāṇḍava, raising his bow as the discharge of weapons commenced.

Śrīdhara: At this time, Arjuna addressed Śrī Kṛṣṇa, as stated in the next four verses beginning with "Then". "Then" means immediately after. "Positioned" means standing ready for battle. "The one with the monkey banner" is Arjuna.

Madhusūdana: Having shown the fear experienced by the sons of Dhṛtarāṣṭra, he now illustrates the opposite for the Pāṇḍavas, beginning with "Then".

Viśvanātha: Not explained.

Baladeva: Having thus shown the fear of the sons of Dhṛtarāṣṭra in battle, he now speaks of the Pāṇḍavas' enthusiasm for it in one and a half verses beginning with "Then". Then, immediately after the breaking of enthusiasm caused by the enemy's conch sound, Arjuna, the one with the monkey banner, saw the sons of Dhṛtarāṣṭra, including Bhīṣma and others, positioned with a desire to fight against that breaking. The meaning is that Arjuna, by whom great deeds of Śrī Rāma were previously accomplished, this great hero, blessed by Hanumān who sits on his banner, was devoid of even a trace of fear. O king, as the discharge commenced, that is, was beginning. He spoke these words to Hṛṣīkeśa (the master of senses), Kṛṣṇa, the controller of all senses. The implication is that there is not even a trace of doubt about the victory of the Pāṇḍavas, who are exclusive devotees of Hari, the Lord of all, who is their guide.

(1.21-23)

"O Acyuta, place my chariot between the two armies,
So that I may observe these warriors standing eager for battle,
With whom I must fight in this war effort.
I wish to see those who have assembled here,
Ready to fight, desiring to please the evil-minded son of Dhṛtarāṣṭra in battle."

Śrīdhara: He speaks those very words, starting with "Between both armies." "So that I may observe these" and so on. Now, you are a warrior, not a spectator of battle, so he says "With whom" and so on. With whom must I fight? "Those ready to fight" means I will see those who have assembled here wishing to please Dhārtarāṣṭra, that is, Duryodhana. The construction is: "Place my chariot between both armies until then." ||21-23||

Madhusūdana: After the onset of fear, even when flight would have been natural, seeing the enemies positioned contrary to that, ready for battle, then as the discharge of weapons was commencing - the present tense is used - Arjuna, the Pāṇḍava with the monkey banner, blessed by the great hero Hanumān in the form of his flag, completely fearless, raising his bow Gāṇḍīva for battle, spoke these following words to Hṛṣīkeśa, Śrī Kṛṣṇa, who as the controller of the senses knows all inner workings of the mind. He did not act thoughtlessly on his own, implying that while the enemies acted thoughtfully, skilled in policy and dharma, you thoughtlessly took their kingdom, lacking in policy and dharma, so you will not be victorious - this is hinted at by the address "O king."

He introduces Arjuna's words: Arjuna instructs the Lord of all to "Place, make steady, my chariot between both armies," one's own side and the opposing side present there. What indeed is impossible for devotees, that even the Lord follows their instruction? Thus the Pāṇḍavas' victory is certain.

Now, thinking "As I station the chariot, these enemies will dislodge me from it," anticipating the Lord's concern, he says "O Acyuta." The meaning is: Who is capable of dislodging you, who are unwavering in place, time and substance? By this, anger arising from being instructed is also avoided, as He is always unperturbed. ||21||

He states the purpose of stationing the chariot in the middle: "Eager to fight," not desiring peace with us. "Positioned," not fleeing in fear. "These" Bhīṣma, Droṇa, and others, "until" I am able to observe. The meaning is: Station the chariot at such a distance. Or "until" may refer to time.

Now, you are a warrior, not a battle-spectator, so what use is seeing them? To this he says "With whom" and so on. In this war effort, this readiness for battle between kinsmen themselves, with whom must I fight? Who are the opponents of the battle done by me? And of whose battle am I the opponent? This great curiosity, this knowledge itself, is the purpose of stationing the chariot in the middle. ||22||

Now, thinking "These kinsmen themselves will make peace between each other, so how can there be war?", he says: These Bhīṣma, Droṇa and others who are "desiring to please in battle" the evil-minded son of Dhṛtarāṣṭra, Duryodhana, who does not know the means of self-protection, not in removing his evil-mindedness, etc. - I observe them ready to fight, not desiring peace. Therefore, it is indeed appropriate to observe the opponents for battle. ||23||

Viśvanātha: Not explained.

Baladeva: He speaks Arjuna's words, beginning with "senayor". O Acyuta (unfallen one), you do not fall from your naturally established affection for devotees and from your supreme lordship. Thus, restrained by this and that, make the chariot of me, your devotee, stand there according to my words. He states the purpose of positioning the chariot there, saying "yāvad". Those who desire to fight, not those who wish to make peace with us. Standing firm, not retreating out of fear.

Now, if one asks, "You are a fighter, not a spectator of the battle, so what is the purpose of seeing that?", he answers with "kair". In this mutual eagerness for battle among relatives, I want to know with which relatives my battle will occur; it is for this knowledge alone that the chariot is to be positioned in the middle.

Now, if one argues that due to being relatives, they will surely make peace, he responds with "yotsyamānān", meaning those who will fight, not those who will make peace. Avekṣe (I observe), I understand. For the foolish, of poor intelligence, unaware of the means of their own livelihood, in battle, but not in removing foolishness. Therefore, it is appropriate for me to observe my battle opponents. ||21-23||

(1.24-25)

Thus addressed by Guḍākeśa (conqueror of sleep), O Bhārata,
Hṛṣīkeśa (master of senses), having placed the excellent chariot between both armies,
In front of Bhīṣma, Droṇa, and all the rulers of the earth,
Said, "O Pārtha (son of Pṛthā), behold these assembled Kurus."

Śrīdhara: Then what happened? Expecting this, Sañjaya said, "Thus addressed" and so on. Addressed thus by Arjuna, who is the master of sleep (guḍākā), having conquered sleep. O Bhārata, O Dhṛtarāṣṭra, Hṛṣīkeśa placed the best of chariots between the armies. Having placed the chariot in front of Bhīṣma and Droṇa, and in front of the rulers of the earth, the kings, the Lord said, "O Pārtha, behold these Kurus." ||24-25||

Madhusūdana: Thus prompted by Arjuna, the Lord, adhering to the dharma of non-violence, will mostly dissuade him from battle - perceiving this intention of Dhṛtarāṣṭra and wishing to refute it, Sañjaya spoke to Dhṛtarāṣṭra, says Vaiśampāyana. O Bhārata Dhṛtarāṣṭra, the intention of this address is: even considering the dignity of the Bharata lineage, abandon treachery towards relatives. The Lord, thus addressed by Arjuna, who is the master of sleep (guḍākā) and thus always vigilant, did not become angry thinking, "Though my servant, he appoints me as his charioteer," nor did he dissuade him from battle. Instead, between both armies, in front of Bhīṣma and Droṇa, and in front of all the rulers of the earth - the word "in front" is also applied to the compound by the word "ca" (and). Bhīṣma and Droṇa are mentioned separately to indicate their supreme importance. Having placed the excellent chariot - the divine chariot given by Agni, supreme among all as it was driven by the Lord himself - Hṛṣīkeśa, the Lord who knows everyone's hidden intentions, recognizing that sorrow and delusion had come upon Arjuna, spoke to him with a hint of mockery.

O Pārtha (son of Pṛthā), indicating that due to your connection with Pṛthā, who is overcome by sorrow and delusion due to her feminine nature, you too have become like that, he shows his own nature as Hṛṣīkeśa (master of senses). By mentioning the relationship "Pṛthā is my father's sister, you are her son," he also consoles him. The intention of the instruction to look is: Having become certain of my role as charioteer, look without hesitation at all the assembled Kurus who desire to fight. The Lord's speech extends only up to "behold," to instill courage in Arjuna, as if to say, "I am extremely careful in my role as charioteer, but you have only just now assumed the role of warrior, so what need is there for you to see the enemy army?" Otherwise, he would have said only this much: "He placed the chariot between the armies." ||24-25||

Viśvanātha: Hṛṣīkeśa (master of senses), though the controller of all senses, was thus instructed by Arjuna. The implication is: Oh, how the Lord is subject to love, as He became controllable by merely Arjuna's organ of speech. By Guḍākeśa (conqueror of sleep), whose akeśās (Viṣṇu, Brahmā, and Śiva) manifest only the sweetness of his own love, just as guḍā (jaggery) manifests only sweetness. Here, 'a' is Viṣṇu, 'ka' is Brahmā, and 'īśa' is Mahādeva. When the crest jewel of all avatāras, Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa himself, became obedient to commands, being subject to love, how can Viṣṇu, Brahmā, and Rudra, who are guṇa-avatāras and thus His parts, display their lordship? Rather, they consider themselves fulfilled by manifesting the love-sentiment created by Him. As stated by the Lord, the master of the spiritual world: "O twice-born one, I came here desiring to see you two" [Bhā.Pu. 10.89.59].

Alternatively, guḍāka means sleep, and its master is one who has conquered sleep. Even in this interpretation, the implication is: It's no wonder that poor sleep, a function of māyā, is conquered by Arjuna, by whose love Śrī Kṛṣṇa, the direct controller of māyā itself, is conquered and controlled. In front of Bhīṣma and Droṇa, and in front of all the rulers of the earth, the kings. The word "pramukhataḥ" (in front) is also applied to the compound. ||24-25||

Baladeva: When asked what happened then, Sañjaya said "evam" (thus). Guḍākā means sleep, its master is one who has conquered sleep by immersing himself in the memory of the beauty of his friend the Lord's qualities, that supreme devotee Arjuna. Thus instructed by him, Hṛṣīkeśa, the Lord who knows the workings of his mind, having placed the excellent chariot, the chariot given by Agni, between the armies, in front of Bhīṣma and Droṇa, and in front of all the rulers of the earth, the kings, said, "O Pārtha (son of Pṛthā), behold these assembled Kurus." By the words Pārtha and Hṛṣīkeśa, this is implied: Because you are the son of my father's sister, I will indeed act as your charioteer, but you will now abandon the desire to fight - so what's the point of looking at the enemy army? This is the mocking tone. ||24-25||

(1.26)

There Pārtha (son of Pṛthā) saw standing fathers and then grandfathers,
Teachers, maternal uncles, brothers, sons, grandsons, and also friends,
Fathers-in-law and well-wishers in both armies indeed.

Śrīdhara: Then what happened is described starting with "tatra" (there). "Pitṝn" means paternal uncles. "Putrān pautrān" refers to the sons and grandsons of Duryodhana and others. "Sakhīn" means friends. "Suhṛdaḥ" means those who have done favors, and he saw them. ||26||

Madhusūdana: When the Lord gave permission to view the army for the sake of starting the battle with equanimity, Pārtha (Arjuna) saw those standing in both armies - this is the sentence structure. The word "atha" is synonymous with "tathā" (also). In the enemy army, he saw fathers meaning paternal uncles like Bhūriśravas and others, grandfathers like Bhīṣma, Somadatta and others, teachers like Droṇa, Kṛpa and others, maternal uncles like Śalya, Śakuni and others, brothers like Duryodhana and others, sons like Lakṣmaṇa and others, grandsons meaning sons of Lakṣmaṇa and others, friends meaning companions like Aśvatthāmā, Jayadratha and others, fathers-in-law meaning fathers of wives, well-wishers or friends like Kṛtavarman, Bhagadatta and others. By "suhṛdaḥ", all those who have done favors including maternal grandfathers should be understood. Similarly, this should be applied to his own army as well. ||26||

Viśvanātha: The sons and grandsons of Duryodhana and others. ||26||

Baladeva: Thus instructed by the Lord, Arjuna saw the enemy army - this is described in one and a half verses starting with "tatra" (there). There in the enemy army, he saw fathers meaning paternal uncles like Bhūriśravas and others, grandfathers like Bhīṣma, Somadatta and others, teachers like Droṇa, Kṛpa and others, maternal uncles like Śalya, Śakuni and others, brothers like Duryodhana and others, sons like Lakṣmaṇa and others, grandsons meaning sons of Lakṣmaṇa and others, friends meaning companions like Droṇa's son (Aśvatthāmā), Saindhava (Jayadratha) and others, well-wishers like Kṛtavarman, Bhagadatta and others. Similarly, this should be applied to his own army as well. The sentence structure is: Having observed all those standing in both armies. ||26||

(1.27)

Seeing all those relatives standing there, the son of Kuntī,
Overwhelmed with great compassion, despondent, spoke thus.

Śrīdhara: Then what did he do? This is described starting with "tān" (them). Having thus observed both armies, overwhelmed with great compassion, being dejected, Arjuna spoke this. This is the meaning of the sentence in the latter half of the verse. "Āviṣṭo" means pervaded. ||27||

Madhusūdana: Thus situated, with the inverted understanding that "violence is a great unrighteousness", and with the obstruction to knowledge that it is righteousness as prescribed by scripture, and with mental distress rooted in the sense of "mine" known as grief and delusion, Arjuna's discrimination was overpowered. His desire to refrain from the previously begun duty of fighting, which would result in great calamity, is shown—"tān" (them).

The mention of "Kaunteya" (son of Kuntī), like "Pārtha", indicates his fundamental confusion. "Āviṣṭo" (overwhelmed) means pervaded by his own action, not that compassion pervaded him through some action, suggesting that this compassion was spontaneous for him. To reveal this, "parayā" (great) is used as an adjective. Or it could be read as "aparayā" (another). The meaning would be that there was compassion for his own army before, but at that time another compassion arose even for the Kaurava army. "Viṣīdan" (despondent) means experiencing despondency or distress. By saying he spoke while despondent, it indicates the simultaneity of speech and despondency, suggesting symptoms of distress like choked voice and shedding tears at the time of speaking. ||27||

Viśvanātha: Not commented upon.

Baladeva: Now the all-compassionate Lord Kṛṣṇa, desiring to uplift the world through instruction to his devotee, in order to make Arjuna a disciple, created delusion in him by making even his own duty of fighting appear unrighteous through a semblance of the Vedic injunction "do not harm any beings". This is described starting with "tān samīkṣya" (seeing them). "Kaunteya" (son of Kuntī), by mentioning his being the son of his father's sister, indicates that his confusion and grief were manifested then. From the use of "kṛpayā" (by compassion) as an agent, it is suggested that compassion was natural to him. Hence "parayā" (great) is its adjective. Or it could be read as "aparayā" (another). The meaning is that there was compassion for his own army before, but another compassion arose even for the enemy army. "Viṣīdan" means experiencing remorse. Here, by mentioning the simultaneity of speech and despondency, symptoms of distress like tears, trembling, and choked voice are indicated at the time of speaking. ||27||

(1.28-29)

Arjuna said:
Seeing these kinsmen, O Kṛṣṇa, assembled here, desiring to fight,
My limbs fail and my mouth becomes dry.
My body trembles and my hair stands on end,
Gāṇḍīva slips from my hand and my skin burns all over.

Śrīdhara: In response to "What did he say?", he states "Dṛṣṭvemān" (Seeing these) and so on until the end of the chapter. O Kṛṣṇa, seeing my own people, relatives, standing before me desiring to fight, my limbs - hands, feet, etc. - fail, they weaken. Moreover, "vepathuś ca" (and trembling) and so on. "Vepathuḥ" means trembling. "Romaharṣaḥ" means hair standing on end. "Sraṁsate" means falls. "Paridahyate" means burns all over. ||28-29||

Madhusūdana: Sañjaya introduces Arjuna's words to the Lord with "Arjuna uvāca" (Arjuna said) and so on, connecting with the previous text up to "evam uktvārjunaḥ saṁkhye" (Having thus spoken in the battle, Arjuna). There, he shows through the description of symptoms in three verses that Arjuna, who lacked self-knowledge and had ego and possessiveness towards his own and others' bodies, who saw the prospect of destruction of his own and others' bodies through war, had great grief which was an obstacle to the knowledge of truth that causes engagement in one's own duty.

Seeing these kinsmen, my own people, relatives, desiring to fight and present on the battlefield. The meaning is "as I see". My limbs fail and my mouth becomes dry. The use of the word "pari" (completely), which denotes totality, is to show the excess compared to grief caused by fatigue, etc. ||28||

"Vepathuḥ" means trembling. "Romaharṣaḥ" means hair standing on end. The slipping of Gāṇḍīva indicates weakness characterized by lack of steadiness. The burning of the skin shows inner anguish. ||29||

Viśvanātha: In "dṛṣṭvā" (seeing), "sthitasya" (standing) should be supplied. ||28-29||

Baladeva: He narrates what the son of Kuntī, overwhelmed with grief, said in "dṛṣṭvemam" (seeing these). "Svajanaṁ" (kinsmen) means one's own relatives; the singular is used for the class. Amara says: "Sa-gotra-bāndhava-jñāti-bandhu-sva-svajanāḥ samāḥ" (Clansmen, relatives, kinsmen, friends, and one's own people are synonyms). Seeing [them] standing, my limbs - hands, feet, etc. - fail, they weaken. "Pariśuṣyati" (becomes completely dry) indicates that this dryness is more intense than dryness caused by fatigue, etc. "Vepathuḥ" means trembling. "Romaharṣaḥ" means hair standing on end. The slipping of Gāṇḍīva shows lack of steadiness, and the burning of the skin indicates the burning of the heart. ||28-29||

(1.30)

And I am unable to stand steady, and my mind seems to whirl.
And I see adverse omens, O Keśava.

Śrīdhara: Moreover, "na ca śaknomi" (and I am unable) and so on. I see adverse omens, signs that foretell misfortune. ||30||

Madhusūdana: "I am unable to stand steady" indicates fainting. The reason for this is: "my mind seems to whirl" - this whirling, a similarity to the agent of whirling, is a specific alteration of the mind, a precursor to fainting. The word "ca" (and) indicates cause. Because it is so, therefore I am unable to stand steady - this is the meaning. Again, he states the reason for the inability to stand: "And I see adverse omens" - I experience inauspicious signs like the twitching of the left eye that indicate imminent sorrow. Therefore, I am unable to stand steady - this is the meaning. I, being ignorant of the self, experience sorrow and grief-born affliction, but you, being of the nature of eternal bliss, are untouched by grief - this is implied by the word "kṛṣṇa" (Kṛṣṇa). Thus, although the sight of kinsmen is the same, due to the distinction of being untouched by grief, you should make me free from sorrow - this is the idea.

The word "keśava" (Keśava) indicates the ability to do so. Ka is Brahmā the creator, Īśa is Rudra the destroyer, he surpasses them both in compassion - this is the etymology. Or, the word "kṛṣṇa" (Kṛṣṇa) indicates the drawing away of devotees' sorrow. And the word "keśava" (Keśava) implies that as you always protect devotees by destroying wicked demons like Keśi, you will protect me too by removing my sorrow. ||30||

Viśvanātha: "Adverse omens" - here the word "nimitta" means purpose, as in the phrase "This is my residence for the purpose of wealth." Thus, the meaning is: Victory in battle and gaining the kingdom will not bring me happiness, but rather its opposite - the sorrow of remorse. ||30||

Baladeva: "Api ca" (moreover) - "Unable to stand steady" and "my mind seems to whirl" indicate the arising of weakness and fainting. I see adverse results (nimitta) in this battle. Victory and obtaining the kingdom will not bring me joy, but rather its opposite - remorse. The word "nimitta" means result, as it is understood in phrases like "For what purpose do you reside here?" ||30||

(1.31)

And I do not see any good in killing my own people in battle.
I do not desire victory, O Kṛṣṇa, nor kingdom, nor pleasures.

Śrīdhara: Moreover, "na ca" (and not) and so on. I do not see any benefit in killing my own people in battle (āhave). If you ask, "Don't you see victory and other benefits?", to that he says "na kāṅkṣe" (I do not desire). ||31||

Madhusūdana: Having thus described sorrow, which through its symptoms becomes an obstacle to the knowledge of truth that is the cause of proper action, he now shows the contrary understanding caused by it, which is the cause of improper action - "na ca" (and not). After much consideration, I do not see any good (śreyaḥ), any aim of human life, whether visible or invisible. Even killing non-relatives in battle, I do not see any good.

"These two persons in the world pierce the solar orb:
The wandering ascetic united in yoga, and he who is slain facing the enemy in battle."

By such statements, special merit is declared only for the slain, but there is no virtue for the killer. Thus, to indicate that if there is no merit even in killing non-relatives, there is certainly none in killing relatives, the word "svajana" (own people) is used. Similarly, to avoid proving what is already established, that there is no merit in killing outside of battle, the word "āhave" (in battle) is used.

Now, if you say that even if there is no invisible benefit, there are undisputed visible benefits like victory, kingdom, and pleasures, he says "na kāṅkṣe" (I do not desire). Indeed, the desire for results is the cause of engaging in means. Therefore, due to the absence of that desire, my engagement in battle, which is the means for those results, is unreasonable, just like engaging in cooking for one who has no desire to eat. ||32||

Viśvanātha: "I do not see any good" -

"These two persons in the world pierce the solar orb:
The wandering ascetic united in yoga, and he who is slain facing the enemy in battle."

By such statements, merit is declared only for the slain, but there is no virtue at all for the killer. Now, if you say that there are visible results like fame and kingdom from battle, to that he says "na kāṅkṣe" (I do not desire). ||31||

Baladeva: Having thus described sorrow, which is unfavorable to the knowledge of truth, he now speaks of the contrary understanding that is unfavorable to it, saying "na ca" (and not). I do not see any good in killing my own people in battle (āhave).

"These two persons in the world pierce the solar orb:
The wandering ascetic united in yoga, and he who is slain facing the enemy in battle."

By such statements, merit is remembered for the slain, but there is no merit at all for me as the killer. Or, it can be split as "asvajana" (non-relatives), meaning that if there is no merit even in killing non-relatives, how much less so in killing relatives - this is the meaning.

Now, if you say that there are visible results like gaining fame and kingdom, to that he says "na kāṅkṣe" (I do not desire). Due to the absence of desire for kingdom and so on, my engagement in the means, victory, is not proper, just as one who has no desire to eat engaging in cooking. Therefore, living in the forest alone will be our praiseworthy life. ||31||

(1.32-35)

What use is kingdom to us, O Govinda, or pleasures, or even life?
Those for whose sake we desire kingdom, enjoyments, and pleasures,

They stand here in battle, having given up their lives and wealth:
Teachers, fathers, sons, and also grandfathers,

Maternal uncles, fathers-in-law, grandsons, brothers-in-law, and other relatives.
These I do not wish to kill, even if they kill me, O Madhusūdana,

Even for the sake of dominion over the three worlds, let alone for the earth.
What pleasure could we derive, O Janārdana, from killing the sons of Dhṛtarāṣṭra?

Śrīdhara: He elaborates on this with two and a half verses starting with "What use is kingdom to us". "They stand here" means those for whose sake we desire kingdom and so on, they have given up their lives and wealth, accepting sacrifice, and stand ready for battle. Therefore, what use are kingdom and other things to us? This is the meaning.

Now, if out of compassion you do not kill them, then they will surely kill you out of greed for the kingdom. Therefore, you should kill them and enjoy the kingdom. To this, he responds with one and a half verses starting with "These". "Even if they kill" means even if they slay us. The word "api" (even) implies: I do not wish to kill them even for the sake of dominion over the three worlds. How much less so for the sake of mere earth? This is the meaning. ||32-35||

Madhusūdana: Why then, when these are desired by other men, do you not wish for them? To this he says, "What use". By enjoyments, pleasures, and life, he means the means of living, victory. Without kingdom, enjoyments, and victory over the Kauravas, living in the forest, our life itself being praiseworthy in the world, what need do we have for these desired things? This is the idea. By addressing him as Govinda (whose name means "he who is known through words"), he indicates that he knows his own detachment from worldly results, as the senses, denoted by the word "go", are eternally attained as the substratum.

He states the reason for rejecting kingdom and so on: "Those for whose sake". By this, he dismisses the idea that even if one is detached, one should strive for the sake of one's own people. For a solitary person, kingdom and so on are indeed not needed. But those relatives for whose sake it was desired, they stand here in battle, having given up their lives, the hope of life, wealth, and the hope of wealth. So this effort is not for my own sake - this is the idea. The word "bhoga" (enjoyment), though previously used in the sense of pleasure, here refers to the objects that are means of pleasure, as pleasure is mentioned separately. The words "life" and "wealth" indicate the hope for these. Even when sacrificing one's own life, there might be hope for wealth for one's relatives to enjoy, so to prevent this, wealth is mentioned separately.

Anticipating the objection that those for whose sake kingdom and so on were desired have not come here, he specifies them: "Those". This is clear.

Now, if out of compassion you do not kill them, then they will surely kill you out of greed for the kingdom. Therefore, you should kill them and enjoy the kingdom. To this he responds: "These I do not". Even for the sake of dominion over the three worlds, even for obtaining that, even if they kill us, I do not wish to kill them. I would not even desire to do so, how much less would I actually kill them? And for obtaining mere earth, it goes without saying that I would not kill - this is the meaning. By addressing him as Madhusūdana, he indicates that the Lord is the promoter of the Vedic path.

Now, leaving aside others, shouldn't at least the sons of Dhṛtarāṣṭra be killed? There might be pleasure in killing them, who are extremely cruel and have given various sorrows. To this he says: "Having killed". What pleasure could we derive from remaining after killing the sons of Dhṛtarāṣṭra, our brothers like Duryodhana and others? None at all - this is the meaning. It is not proper for us to kill relatives out of greed for the semblance of pleasure lasting only a moment, as is typical of foolish people, which would be the cause of prolonged hellish torment - this is the idea. By addressing him as Janārdana, he suggests that if these are to be killed, then you yourself should kill them, as even though you harm all beings during dissolution, you are untouched by all sin. ||32-35||

Viśvanātha: Not explained.

Baladeva: "O Govinda" (he who obtains the senses): You alone understand what is in my mind, as you control all the functions of the senses - this is the meaning. He states the reason for not desiring kingdom and so on in "Those for whose sake". "Lives" should be understood figuratively as the hope for life, and "wealth" as the hope for wealth. Even if one's own life is sacrificed, there might be a desire for kingdom for the happiness of one's relatives, but since even they face destruction here, the engagement in battle is pointless - this is the idea.

Now, if you are compassionate and do not kill them, then they will kill you to make their kingdom free from thorns. To this he responds with "These". Even if they kill me, even if they harm me, I do not wish to kill them. Not even for obtaining dominion over the three worlds, let alone for mere earth.

Now, leaving aside relatives, shouldn't at least the sons of Dhṛtarāṣṭra be killed, as there might be happiness in killing them who have given much sorrow? To this he responds with "Having killed". What pleasure or satisfaction could we Pāṇḍavas have after killing the sons of Dhṛtarāṣṭra, like Duryodhana and others? None at all. The killing of brothers, which would be the cause of prolonged hell, is not appropriate out of desire for the semblance of momentary pleasure - this is the idea. By addressing him as "O Janārdana" (he who removes the burden of the earth), he implies that if these are to be killed, then you, who remove the burden of the earth, should kill them yourself, as you, being the supreme Lord, would not be associated with even a trace of sin. ||32-35||

(1.36)

Sin alone would take refuge in us after killing these aggressors.
Therefore, we should not kill the sons of Dhṛtarāṣṭra, our own relatives.
For how could we be happy, O Mādhava (Krishna), after killing our own people?

Śrīdhara: Now, according to the traditional saying:

"An arsonist, a poisoner, one who attacks with weapons, a thief,
One who seizes land or wife - these six are indeed aggressors."

Due to these six reasons like arson and so on, these are indeed aggressors. And killing aggressors is certainly justified, as per the statement:

"One should kill an approaching aggressor without hesitation.
No fault accrues to the killer in slaying an aggressor."

To this, he responds with "Sin alone" and the following one and a half verses. "One should kill an approaching aggressor" and so on is from political science (artha-śāstra). But that is weaker than religious law (dharma-śāstra). As Yājñavalkya said:

"When traditional texts conflict, reasoning is stronger in practice.
But religious law is established as stronger than political science."

Therefore, even in killing these aggressors who are teachers and others, sin alone would accrue to us. Due to the injustice and unrighteousness of this killing, there would be no happiness either here or hereafter, as he says in "own people". ||36||

Madhusūdana: Now, according to the traditional text:

"An arsonist, a poisoner, one who attacks with weapons, a thief,
One who seizes land or wife - these six are indeed aggressors."

And since these are aggressors in every way, according to the statement:

"One should kill an approaching aggressor without hesitation.
No fault accrues to the killer in slaying an aggressor."

Suspecting that Duryodhana and others, being aggressors, should indeed be killed due to the understanding of absence of fault, he says "Sin alone". The connection is: Even after killing these aggressors, sin alone would take refuge in us who remain. Or the meaning is: Sin alone would take refuge, not any other visible or invisible purpose. Because "One should not harm" from religious law is stronger than "One should kill an aggressor" from political science. As Yājñavalkya said:

"When traditional texts conflict, reasoning is stronger in practice.
But religious law is established as stronger than political science."

Another explanation: Now, even if you who kill the sons of Dhṛtarāṣṭra have no pleasure, the sons of Dhṛtarāṣṭra who kill you do have pleasure, so they would kill you - to this he says "Sin alone". The meaning is: These aggressive sons of Dhṛtarāṣṭra, who remain after killing us, previously sinful and now also, sin alone would take refuge in them, not any other happiness. Thus, the intention is: By killing us who are not fighting, they alone will become sinful, while we will suffer no loss due to non-association with sin.

He concludes what was said starting from "I do not see any good" with "Therefore", showing that harming others should not be done due to lack of result and possibility of misfortune. The lack of invisible result and possibility of misfortune are referred to by the word "that".

He states the absence of visible happiness with "For own people". By addressing him as "Mādhava" (husband of Lakṣmī, the goddess of fortune), the idea is that you should not engage in an inauspicious act. ||36||

Viśvanātha: However,

"An arsonist, a poisoner, one armed with a weapon, a thief,
A seizer of land or wife - these six are indeed ātatāyin (aggressors).
One should kill an approaching ātatāyin without hesitation.
There is no fault for the killer in slaying an ātatāyin."

Based on such statements, killing these is indeed appropriate. To this, he says "sin" in "Having killed these standing before us." The artha-śāstra (political science) statement beginning with "an approaching ātatāyin" is weaker than dharma-śāstra (religious law). As Yājñavalkya said, "dharma-śāstra is remembered to be stronger than artha-śāstra." Therefore, there would indeed be sin in killing teachers and others. And there would not even be worldly happiness, so he says "kinsmen." ||36||

Baladeva: However,

"An arsonist, a poisoner, one armed with a weapon, a thief,
A seizer of land or wife - these six are indeed ātatāyin (aggressors).
One should kill an approaching ātatāyin without hesitation.
There is no fault for the killer in slaying an ātatāyin."

If it is said that killing these six types of ātatāyin is appropriate according to this statement, to this he says "sin." "Having killed these standing before us" would incur sin caused by the destruction of kinsmen. The meaning is this: The artha-śāstra statement beginning with "an approaching ātatāyin" is weaker than the dharma-śāstra (injunction) "One should not harm any beings." The position is that "dharma-śāstra is stronger than artha-śāstra." According to this smṛti (traditional text). Therefore, killing venerable persons like Droṇa and Bhīṣma based on the force of the weaker artha-śāstra is indeed a cause of sin. And he concludes what was said beginning with "I do not see any good" with "therefore." Because of the possibility of sin. And also because of the absence of bodily happiness, is the meaning. For without teachers and kinsmen, our enjoyment of the kingdom will not lead to happiness, but only to remorse. By addressing "O Mādhava," the meaning is: You are the Lord of Fortune, how can you engage in this inauspicious war? ||36||

(1.37)

Even though these people, whose minds are overcome by greed, do not see the fault in destroying the family and the sin in betraying friends, how should we, who clearly see the fault in destroying the family, not know to turn away from this sin, O Janārdana (Krishna)? (37-38)

Śrīdhara: Now, even though the fault of killing relatives is the same for you and them, just as they engage in battle accepting the fault of killing relatives, you too should engage. Why this dejection? Thus he speaks with two verses beginning with "yadyapi". Although these people like Duryodhana, whose minds are corrupted and deprived of discrimination due to greed for the kingdom, do not see the fault, how should we, who clearly see the fault, not know to turn away from this sin? The meaning is that we should decide to refrain from it. (37-38)

Madhusūdana: How then do others engage in the destruction of families and killing of their own people? To this he says "yadyapi". The meaning is that their engagement is possible due to the absence of awareness of the fault caused by the destruction of families, etc., because their intellect is corrupted by greed. Therefore, the argument that others' engagement is proper because of the engagement of virtuous people like Bhīṣma in killing relatives, and because it is rooted in the Vedas as the conduct of the virtuous, is refuted by the principle "because of seeing the cause" (Jaimini Sūtra 1.3.4). For there, when greed and other causes are seen, it is established that it is not to be imagined as rooted in the Vedas. "Even though these do not see" is connected with "how should we not know" in the next verse. (37)

Now, even though these are engaged due to greed, still, because of the certainty in scripture that "A kṣatriya (warrior) should not turn back when challenged, even from gambling or battle" and "Victory is a kṣatriya's dharma", and that wealth earned through battle is righteous, and because you have been challenged by them, your engagement in battle is indeed proper - anticipating this objection, he says "from this sin", meaning the battle resulting in killing relatives. This is the meaning: Knowledge of it being a means to welfare is indeed the instigator, and welfare is that which is not followed by non-welfare. Otherwise, even rituals like the śyena (hawk) sacrifice would become dharma. As it is said:

"That action which is not followed by harm, even in its result,
is called dharma because it is the cause of mere joy."

Therefore, like in the śyena sacrifice and others taught in scripture but followed by non-welfare, our engagement in this battle too is not proper. (38)

Viśvanātha: Now then, how do these engage in battle? To this he says "yadyapi". (37-38)

Baladeva: Now, if it is said that your engagement in battle is proper because you have been challenged by them, remembering the kṣatriya dharma that "A kṣatriya should not turn back when challenged, even from gambling or battle", to this he speaks with two verses beginning with "yadyapi". Greed is their cause for engaging in sin, but due to our lack of greed, we do not engage in it. Indeed, knowledge of attentiveness to what is desired is the instigator. And the desired is to be understood as not followed by the undesired. As it is said:

"That action which is not followed by harm, even in its result,
is called dharma because it is the cause of mere joy."

Thus, like in the śyena sacrifice and others mentioned in scripture such as "One should perform the śyena sacrifice for harming", our engagement in this battle is not proper because it is followed by the undesired. The scripture "When challenged" etc. is to be understood as applying to future situations without the fault of family destruction. "O Janārdana" is as before. (37-38)

(1.39)

When the family is destroyed, the eternal family traditions perish. When dharma (righteousness) is lost, indeed adharma (unrighteousness) overtakes the entire family. (39)

Śrīdhara: He shows that very fault with "kula-kṣaye" (when the family is destroyed) and so on. Sanātanāḥ (eternal) means passed down through generations. Uta api (indeed) means that adharma (unrighteousness) overtakes, i.e., pervades even the entire remaining family. (39)

Madhusūdana: Thus, to strengthen the point that one should not engage for the sake of victory and so on, as they are not desirable being non-beneficial, he elaborates on their non-beneficialness as being followed by harm, saying: Sanātanāḥ (eternal) means passed down through generations. Kula-dharmāḥ (family traditions) means traditions appropriate for the family. They perish when the family is destroyed, due to the absence of performers. Uta api (indeed) means when dharma (righteousness) is lost due to the destruction of people who perform agnihotra (fire sacrifice) and other rituals. The singular is used with reference to the class. Adharma (unrighteousness) overtakes, i.e., pervades as its own, even the entire remaining family in the form of children and so on. The word uta (indeed) is connected with the word kṛtsnam (entire). (39)

Viśvanātha: In "kula-kṣaye" (when the family is destroyed), sanātanāḥ (eternal) means obtained over a long time through family succession. (39)

Baladeva: He elaborates on the fault itself with "kula-kṣaye" (when the family is destroyed). Kula-dharmāḥ (family traditions) means traditions appropriate for the family like agnihotra (fire sacrifice) and other rituals. Sanātanāḥ (eternal) means passed down through family succession. They perish due to the destruction of the performers. Uta (indeed) in the sense of api (also) is connected with kṛtsnam (entire). The meaning is that when dharma (righteousness) is lost, adharma (unrighteousness) indeed overtakes even the entire remaining family in the form of children and so on. (39)

(1.40)

Due to the prevalence of adharma (unrighteousness), O Kṛṣṇa, the women of the family become corrupted. When women are corrupted, O Vārṣṇeya (descendant of Vṛṣṇi), there arises varṇa-saṁkara (mixture of castes). (40)

Śrīdhara: Then, "due to the prevalence of adharma" and so on. (40)

Madhusūdana: The meaning is that the women of the family would become corrupted, thinking, "If our husbands have caused the destruction of the family by transgressing dharma (righteousness), what fault would there be if we too engage in adultery?" Or, the corruption of women follows from their connection with fallen husbands who cause the destruction of the family, according to the smṛti (traditional text): "Indeed, one defiled by a great sin is to be waited upon for purification." (40)

Viśvanātha: "Become corrupted" means that adharma (unrighteousness) itself incites them to adultery. (40)

Baladeva: Then, "due to the prevalence of adharma" and so on. The meaning is that the women of the family, afflicted by wrong thinking, would become corrupted, thinking, "Just as our husbands have engaged in the sin characterized by the destruction of the family by transgressing dharma (righteousness), so too should we engage in misconduct by disregarding marital fidelity." (40)

(1.41)

The mixture of castes leads to hell for the destroyers of the family and for the family. Indeed, their ancestors fall, deprived of the offerings of rice balls and water. (41)

Śrīdhara: In this situation, "mixture" and so on. The ancestors of these destroyers of the family fall. Hi (indeed) means because they are deprived of the offerings of rice balls and water. (41)

Madhusūdana: The construction is: The mixture of castes leads to hell for the destroyers of the family. Not only do the destroyers of the family fall to hell, but also their ancestors, thus he says "fall". The word hi (indeed) means "also" or indicates a reason. Those whose offerings of rice balls and water are lost due to the absence of sons and other performers. Thus, the ancestors of the destroyers of the family fall, indeed to hell, is to be supplied. (41)

Viśvanātha: Not explained.

Baladeva: The construction is: The mixture of castes leads to hell for the destroyers of the family. Not only do the destroyers of the family fall to hell, but also their ancestors, thus he says "fall". Hi (indeed) indicates a reason. Being deprived of the offerings of rice balls and so on due to the absence of sons and other givers, they fall indeed to hell. (41)

(1.42)

By these faults of the destroyers of families, which cause the mixing of castes, the eternal jāti-dharmāḥ (caste duties) and kula-dharmāḥ (family traditions) are destroyed. (42)

Śrīdhara: He concludes the mentioned fault with "doṣaiḥ" (by faults) in two verses. Utsādyante means they are destroyed. Jāti-dharmāḥ means caste duties, and kula-dharmāḥ means family traditions. By the word ca (and), āśrama-dharmāḥ (duties of life stages) and others are also included. (42)

Madhusūdana: Jāti-dharmāḥ are those based on being a kṣatriya (warrior) and so on, and kula-dharmāḥ are the specific ones. By these faults, they are utsādyante, meaning they are destroyed. The meaning is that they are annihilated. (42)

Viśvanātha: "By faults" means they are utsādyante, i.e., destroyed. (42)

Baladeva: He concludes the mentioned fault with "doṣaiḥ" (by faults) in two verses. Utsādyante means they are destroyed. Jāti-dharmāḥ are those based on being a kṣatriya (warrior) and so on. Kula-dharmāḥ are the specific ones. By the word ca (and), āśrama-dharmāḥ (duties of life stages) are to be understood. (42)

(1.43)

We have heard, O Janārdana (Kṛṣṇa), that for people whose family traditions are destroyed, there is certainly a permanent dwelling in hell. (43)

Śrīdhara: "Utsanna" (destroyed) is also indicative of those whose jāti-dharmāḥ (caste duties) are destroyed. Anuśuśruma means we have heard, from statements such as:

"Men who do not perform atonement, who are engaged in sins,
Who do not repent, go to terrible, dreadful hells." (43)

Madhusūdana: And thus, due to the absence of causes for turning away from the state of a preta (ghost), there is certainly only a continuous dwelling in hell. We have heard this from the mouths of teachers; we are not imagining it by our own conjecture. This is a confirmation of what was said earlier. (43)

Viśvanātha: Not explained.

Baladeva: "Utsanna" (destroyed) is indicative of jāti-dharmāḥ (caste duties) and others as well. Anuśuśruma means we have heard from the mouth of the guru (teacher), from statements such as:

"Men who do not perform atonement, who are engaged in sins,
Who do not repent, go to terrible, dreadful hells." (43)

(1.44)

Alas! We have resolved to commit a great sin, as we are prepared to kill our own kinsmen out of greed for the pleasures of kingdom. (44)

Śrīdhara: He speaks of the resolve to kill relatives as a comparison, saying "Alas!" etc. That we have resolved to commit this great sin of being prepared to kill our own kinsmen - the meaning is "Alas! What a great calamity!" (44)

Madhusūdana: The resolve to fight, which results in killing relatives, is the most sinful of all; how much more so the actual fighting? To express this, he laments his resolve, saying - If this is your understanding, then why have you come here with the determination to fight? This should not be asked. The implication is that I have acted rashly, without proper consideration. (44)

Viśvanātha: Not explained.

Baladeva: He speaks of the impossibility of sin even by resolving to kill relatives, saying "Alas!" etc. The word bata indicates doubt. (44)

(1.45)

If the sons of Dhṛtarāṣṭra, with weapons in hand, were to kill me unarmed and unresisting on the battlefield, that would be better for me. (45)

Śrīdhara: Thus distressed, desiring death itself, he says "If me" etc. If they kill me sitting silently, not retaliating, then that killing would be kṣemataram (better) for me, extremely beneficial, as no sin would result. (45)

Madhusūdana: But even if you renounce, due to Bhīmasena and others being eager for battle, the killing of relatives will happen anyway. Then what should you do? To this he says - For living beings, non-violence is dharma (duty) superior even to life, as no sin results. Therefore, death would be kṣemataram (better) for me, extremely beneficial, compared to living. Even with the reading "priyataram" (dearer), the meaning is the same. Apratīkāram means not making an effort to save one's own life, or without final atonement even by the mere resolve to kill relatives. Thus, the meaning is that purification will happen only through atonement ending in death. (45)

Viśvanātha: Not explained.

Baladeva: But even if you desist from killing relatives, Bhīṣma and others eager for battle would still kill you, so what should be done? To this he says "If me" etc. Apratīkāram means without having performed the atonement for the sin of resolving to kill me. Kṣemataram means extremely beneficial, as this sin would be cleansed only by atonement ending in death. The implication is that Bhīṣma and others will not obtain the result of that sin. (45)

(1.46)

Having spoken thus on the battlefield, Arjuna sat down on the chariot seat, casting aside his bow and arrows, his mind overwhelmed with sorrow.

Śrīdhara: In response to "What happened then?", Sañjaya said "Having spoken thus" etc. Saṅkhye means in battle. Rathopasthe means on top of the chariot. Upāviśat means he sat down. Śoka-saṁvigna-mānasaḥ means one whose mind (citta) is agitated by sorrow. (46)

Thus ends the first chapter named "Arjuna's Despair" in Śrīdhara Svāmī's commentary Subodhini on the Bhagavad Gītā. (1)

Madhusūdana: In response to "What happened then?", Saṅkhye means in battle. Rathopasthe means he sat down on top of the chariot. Previously standing up for battle and for observation, śoka-saṁvigna-mānasaḥ means one whose mind is afflicted with sorrow. (46)

Thus ends the first chapter in the Gūḍhārtha-dīpikā (Lamp Illuminating the Hidden Meaning) of the Bhagavad Gītā, composed by Madhusūdana Sarasvatī, disciple of the venerable wandering monk Viśveśvara Sarasvatī. (1)

Viśvanātha: Saṅkhye means in battle. Rathopasthe means on top of the chariot. (46)

Thus ends the first chapter in the Sārārtha-varṣiṇī (Shower of Essential Meanings), which delights the hearts of devotees, on the Gītā, coherently arranged for the virtuous. (1)

Baladeva: In response to "What happened then?", Sañjaya said "Having spoken thus" etc. Saṅkhye means in battle. Rathopasthe means he sat down on top of the chariot. Previously standing up for battle and to observe the opponents. (46)

For the non-violent and compassionate, self-inquiry arises;
For those opposed to this, it does not - this is understood from the first chapter. (1)