Pradip Bhattacharya

Indologist, Mahabharata scholar

Mahabharata

Duryodhan at Dvaipayan

By

By Jatindra Mohan Bagchi
Transcreated by Pradip Bhattacharya

[More than half-a-century ago Jatindra Mohan Bagchi, the Bengali poet, wrote a dramatic monologue depicting the dying Duryodhan at the end of the Battle of Kurukshetra on the shores of Dvaipayana lake. It is a daring creation, flying in the face of the general opprobrium heaped on the Kaurava prince and deserves to be more widely known. This is its first English rendering.] 

In the far horizon streaks of blood
merge into the black gloom;
Below, on the darkling solitary plain
whose form sprawls, alone?

“Know you not who I am? That name have I not
forgotten– king am I– Raja Duryodhan!
Kurukshetra, is it over?–
Where am I– is this Dvaipayan?
O Queen, queen Bhanumati–
where are you, my wife, in calamity?
–Chariot; my chariot, — driver, charioteer–
Where, where are the guards gone?
Oh! the pain– torment agonising–
who calls the royal surgeon?
Royal valour, hero’s fortitude–
will even they give way today?
–Yet, yet I do not fear,
alone will I fight undeterred;
Yet, in unfair battle defeat,
I spurn!–
Alas, my fate! even that I cannot,
shattered these thighs in dust lie;
Refuge-less my valour only
shouts out its impotence!
Vrikodar, wolf-waisted, Pandavas’ shame,
you blackened Pandu’s face–
like a thief in the night
dharma you burnt,
firing it with your own hands;
Un-Kshatriya in Kshatriya clan–
proof aright of Wind-god’s son–
On that tarnished Pandava name
of yours shame, shame,–
a thousand shames.
          *
Did none have eyes in this world?
Alas, who is left in this wide world?
Bhishma, Drona, Karna gone–
Who will punish whom?
All, that deceiving Krishna’s work,
cruel intriguer’s evil counsel–
“Dharma-rajya”, righteous rule,
confusing words ever on his lips.
With Krishna a band of rogues
call him “friend”, serve as slaves.
That shame of Yadava clan
manipulates them, smiling.
          *
Where’s Balarama, generous, valorous,
radiant-white Raivatak?
And where the clan’s shame, his brother,
partisan and cheat!
Oh– that pain, again, again!
Who’s there?
Come near, O Sanjay,
See your invincible Duryodhan’s
calamitous condition!
Kuru clan-is it uprooted then–
Kurukshetra– is it annihilation?
Speak, Counsellor, why silent?
What is left to realise!
–You muse, to Duryodhan you won’t
relate that inauspicious news,–
Alas! at death’s throes now
has that any worth?
              *
Today I recall in that assembly hall
Uncle’s folded hands-
Had then I known of today,
Would’ve I berated him so bitter?
Yet, considering royalty’s honour,
I repent not–
Who among his enemies is unaware
of Duryodhan’s sense of honour?
His morals, his acts, all,
all befit the King of kings–
The noble were honoured, genius welcomed,
bounty seeker returned with wealth.
          *
Oh! That incident?
Kshatriyas’ right to gamble’s well known–
Who calls it sin? No tearful remorse
touches these eyes!
If violence you regard a crime,
you’re a coward;– proof of it:
Perpetual strife of god and titan
though brothers-
What say you to that?
Violence’s natural to creatures,
violence-bred food nurtures life–
Time’s desire mirrored in violence
is figured forth in the dynasty.
                *
Panchali? Mention not, Counsellor!
Who marries five husbands,
as bride-price wins perpetual right
to mockery as fate’s boon!
King’s duties are grave, profound,
Desires, wishes, aren’t for him,
All life a one-pointed dedication,
you well know, O Sanjay.
Kunti’s sons, Draupadi’s husbands-
too harshly treated?
Kuru patriarch, in his kingdom,
is impartial, adamantine!
            *
Needlepoint’s land I refused
Pandavas? Because I was miserly?
Duryodhan’s munificent hand
who knows not on this earth?
It’s not that, Counsellor,–
Justice’s just an excuse
of enemies to demand rights!
Were it a prayer? Gifting kingdom away
the forest would receive Duryodhan.
          *
Only one thing I cannot forget,
Counsellor, which even today
pierces my heart,–
Abhimanyu’s heinous murder
by seven chariot-heroes!
              *
–Oh, that agony! Shooting up
from thigh to skull
blacks all out!
Blind eyes, frenzied mind,
doomsday roar drumming in ears!
No physician left? Send messages
summon, call them–
this necklace as prize.
        *
Dusk deepens in skies o’erhead
at plain’s end forest-skirted,
after lake waters grow black
in deepening darkness!
Hundreds of will-o’-wisp eyes light up
thronging Kurukshetra-plain;
Ravening carnivores roam roaring!
      *
Sanjay, tarry awhile,
perhaps my last night this!
Defeat, victory– not the issue,
they’re life’s partners I know.
Regrets have I none in this life,
by nature King is this Duryodhan;
above blame and fame
his all-ruling throne!
            *
Only, a hundred pranams convey
at my father’s feet, Counsellor,–
tell him– I am that great father’s
renowned dynast.
Death I own proudly, easily,
my constant servitor,–
Life he steals,
steal he cannot fame
that is eternal.
        *
What if father’s eyes are blind-
what can’t fate do?
Love for his son–I know,
is limitless. Yet not blind.
Desiring progeny’s welfare
shackling in chains of state-rule
in war he could’ve been party
following conventional advice;
–Of counsellors there was no shortage,
–Krishna, Vidura, heroic Bhishma,–
Yet with faith in his son
that head high-held bowed in respect.
–Better than cowardly peace
is even war eternal,–
In paternal love that kingly ethic
never forgot, that ruler of men.
–For proud son’s befitting father he,
supernal radiance in mind’s eyes;–
At his feet, hence, again and again
I bow today with body and soul.
          *
Night deepens,–farewell, friend,
return home with pranam;
May Duryodhan’s glorious fame
live, constant companion!
As nearby Dvaipayan ripples,
hallowed by Vyasa’s holy name;–
may Kshatriya valour’s radiant star
shine in the gloom– Duryodhan.”

Vyasa adapted Homer–or vice versa?

By

Fernando Wulff Alonso: Mahabharata and Greek Mythology, translated by Andrew Morrow, ed. Alf Hiltebeitel, Motilal Banarsidass, 523 pages, Rs. 1495/-

The Sir Asutosh Mukherjee collection in the National Library contains a rare book by an East India Company officer arguing that the Ramayana story was strongly influenced by the Iliad. Other than Megasthenes’ references to Indians carrying banners of Heracles and worshipping Dionysus, the Greek scholar Dios Chrysostom (40-120 AD) mentions translations of the Iliad in India. The Roman Claudius Aelianus (175-235 AD) reiterated this (e.g. the Trojan horse becoming Bhasa’s wooden elephant in Pratigya Yaugandharayana). In 1871 A.F.Weber, refuting M.H.Fauche’s proposition (supported by A.Lillie in 1912) that Homer had used the Ramayana as a guide, claimed that it was merely Buddhist legends grafted on to borrowings from Homer, an argument that W.T.Telang vigorously refuted. Weber cited Odysseus’ archery feat to win Penelope as having influenced the archery contests of Rama and Arjuna, ignoring that Rama breaks the bow and Arjuna does not shoot rivals dead. J.Lallemant argued in 1959 that the Mahabharata (MBH) influenced the Aeneid. In 1961 G.Duckworth argued that Turnus’ portrayal was based upon Duryodhana. In 1968 G.Dumezil put forward his theory of an Indo-European tri-functional ideology illustrated by the Pandavas (the dharma-king, the warrior, the grooms). Now, a Spanish professor in the University of Malaga has built up a strong case that the Homeric cycle and other Greek myths were adapted for the MBH.

Alonso’s proposes that, following the Greek invasion, the MBH composers used “an extensive index of Hellenistic materials” systematically, beginning with the Iliad’s framework of the massacre of heroes willed by gods. He brushes aside N.J.Allen’s suggestion that the similarities between Arjuna and Odysseus stem from an older Indo-European narrative tradition, yet cites over 40 close parallels in the archery contests for Draupadi and Penelope that suggest a common Indo-European paradigm.

Alonso sees the MBH embodying the formation of post-Vedic “Hinduism” as a reaction against Buddhism and Jainism, propagating Krisnaite worship (he overlooks Shiva). The “discovery” of Brahmi script in Ashoka’s time is a watershed in the oral Vedic tradition, with Vyasa-the-Arranger editing the Vedas into a final form. Bechert and Von Simon have situated the development of Sanskrit in c. 2nd century BC. This is also when sculpted images appear. The Greco-Roman world was interacting with India at least since the time of Darius-I. Ashoka’s Edict XIII mentions embassies to Syria, Egypt, Macedonia, Cyrene and Epirus. Bilingual (Greek and Aramaic) and Greek Edicts exist. “Yavana” signifies all Mediterranean people. The MBH mentions Rome in the Sabha Parva, and Roman coins have been found at several archaeological sites. Philostratus (early 3rd century AD) in his Life of Apollonius of Tyana writes of a voyage to India for philosophical debate. Yavanajataka, Romakasiddhanta prove the Greco-Roman influence on astrology. Terms like “yavanika” show the influence of Greek drama. A Greek inscription in Kandahar authored by an Indian name (Sophitos son of Naratos) uses the opening verses of the Odyssey for his own woeful adventures.

Alonso finds as many as 97 major points of interconnection between Greek myth and the MBH. In both the gods plan the holocaust of power-drunk rulers to relieve the earth’s burden and usher in a new age—that of the audience. Losses are exceptionally heavy on both sides from the very young to the ancient. However, Alonso ignores a major difference. In Homer and Hesiod, Zeus manipulates the gods to shift the balance of battle daily. In Vyasa, the gods do not intervene during the war. Krishna, the devious avatar, makes the decisive moves and engineers a massacre of his own too. Long before the Trojan War, Zeus destroyed almost all mankind by a flood (cf. Gilgamesh, Genesis). Before Kurukshetra, Kshatriyas were annihilated in 21 battles in the previous yuga by another avatar, Parashurama. The Theban War in which Diomedes and Sthenelus fought precedes the Trojan War. Similarly, the Kurukshetra fratricide precedes the internecine massacre at Prabhasa.

Alonso quotes (p. 158) Sanjaya speaking to Dhritarashtra of the gods driving a person mad first, whom they wish to defeat (Sabha Parva, section 72), which could as well have been spoken by Agamemnon. Parallel to gods espousing opposing camps in Homer we have in Vyasa the devas incarnating as the Pandavas, Krishna and their allies, while the Asuras take possession of Kaurava heroes who are simultaneously incarnations of deities. As Zeus favours now one side then the other in battle, so Shiva empowers both Arjuna and Asvatthama, is responsible for the births of Draupadi, Shikhandi, Gandhari’s 100 sons, and has five Indras reborn as the Pandavas. The avatar Parashurama gives weapons to the Kaurava heroes Bhishma, Drona and Karna. Homeric and Vyasan gods provide opponents with special armour and weapons.

In both epics, heroes are born of intercourse between devas and humans. But unlike Zeus, Indra plays no major role other than depriving Karna of his divine armour and earrings and gifting him the infallible missile. Alonso argues that Zeus’ role, and Athena’s, are paralleled by Krishna as “supernatural authority.” However, as Bankim Chatterjee showed, in the epic Krishna is overwhelmingly human, except in interpolated miraculous episodes. Further, there is no parallel in Homer to the “supernatural authority” being killed by a petty hunter. In both, exiled heroes gain allies through marriage, peace embassies fail and fratricidal war results.

A mighty female figure of supernatural birth is the cause of the wars: Helen, Zeus’ sole mortal daughter and fire-born Draupadi. Opposing them are half-god Achilles and Vasu-incarnate Bhishma. Just as Paris gazes on three naked goddesses with hubris, so does Mahabhisha on Ganga as the breeze uplifts her dress. Both face tragic consequences. Thetis, mother of Achilles, and Ganga, mother of Bhishma, are water goddesses who leave their husbands after delivering the hero and being stopped by the mortal spouse from drowning the child. Aeneas, son of Aphrodite and Anchises is taken away at birth and returned later like Achilles and Bhishma. Neither hero marries; both are the chief warriors of their armies, but subject to lesser mortals who are kings. The refusals of both exacerbate the war. Moreover, Karna abstains from fighting like Achilles. After a victory in daytime, Achilles and Bhishma receive a clandestine visitor at night from the opposite camp accompanied by a god (Hermes with Priam, Krishna with the Pandavas). The visit occurs at the end of the ninth year/ninth day. Both die in the tenth year/day. Just as Apollo stands behind Paris guiding his arrow to kill Achilles, so Arjuna shoots from behind Shikhandi to fell Bhishma. Both heroes are overshadowed by an awareness of their tragic destiny. Ganga’s lament at Bhishma’s death has exact parallels in the Iliad.

Both Agamemnon and Duryodhana insult their generals, defy supernatural powers and violate princesses (Briseis, Draupadi). In both cases, what the first messenger says is very similar and a god (Athena, Krishna) intervenes invisibly after interjection by an elder (Nestor, Vidura) fails. The commanders-in-chief of the victors (Agamemnon and Dhrishtadyumna) are murdered soon after victory, defenceless (drowned, suffocated). Both are closely linked to the heroine (Helen, Draupadi). Their fathers lose the kingdom to a brother (Atreus to Thyestes) or a close friend (Drupada to Drona). The child born for taking vengeance succeeds and is named after an animal (goat-Aegisthos, horse-Ashvatthama). Both Hector and Duryodhana wear impenetrable armour, flee, are killed because of a trick by a god (Athena, Krishna) and their bodies are abused by the victor. Achilles and Duryodhana are devastated by the deaths of their closest friends, Patroclus and Karna, both of whom initially withdraw from the battlefield. Both Patroclus and Karna are deprived of their birth-right and later regain royalty. Both lose the divine armour that protects them because of a god’s trick (Apollo, Indra) and die because, ignoring warnings, they target the chief warrior of the opposing army (Hector, Arjuna). They have problems with their chariots in battle and die defenceless, rebuking their slayer. Immediately after their death, the charioteer drives off. Both Achilles and Krishna die when shot in the foot. Both Patrocles and Krishna leave instructions about their obsequies with their closest friend (Achilles, Arjuna).

In the Thebaid, Diomedes’father Tydeus eats the brains of Melanippus, as Bhima drinks Duhshasana’s blood. Curses cause the deaths of the heroes in Thebes and Dvaraka. Both impregnable cities are demolished (so too are Troy and the Achaean encampment) and the women (of Troy and Dvaraka) looted. In both Thebes and Kurukshetra a group of 7 heroes are involved. With Krishna and Satyaki the Pandavas are 7, but Alonso is mistaken about Kritavarma leading a group of 7 kings on the Kaurava side. He merely leads the Yadava contingent.

The kings of Thebes and Hastinapura are blind, aged, do not fight, have numerous sons who pre-decease them. Their mothers are widows impregnated by a close relative of the husband. Both have a son who betrays them (Helenus, Yuyutsu) and is involved in their obsequies. Ominous portents attend the births of Paris and Duryodhana. Their wicked conduct is supported by their fathers. Dionysus blesses Apollo’s son Anius, king of Delos, with endless food through his daughters, which feeds the Achaeans. Surya gifts Yudhishthira an inexhaustible cooking pot for the exile. In both cases there is an ordained period before which the war cannot occur (9-10 years for Thebes and Troy; 13 for Kurukshetra; 36 for Dvaraka). Both wars end with massacres at night of sleeping soldiers and non-combatants. In the raid at night by Odysseus and Diomedes, Athena helps them. Ashvatthama, Kritavarma and Kripa are helped by Rudra. The killer has just one conversation with one of the victims who is immobilised, and then butchers the rest (Diomedes with Dolon, Ashvatthama with Dhrishtadyumna). In both the same character plays a critical role in the massacres: Diomedes at Thebes and Troy, along with Odysseus in the latter, and Kritavarma at Kurukshetra and at Prabhasa with Satyaki and Krishna. In Troy and Kurukshetra, the final massacre occurs through incursion by a “horse.” Just as the wooden horse bears within it the killers, so Ashvatthama is infused with Rudra and carries ghouls with him. In Dvaraka the cause is a similar ruse (feigned pregnancy) that births the mortal club.

Dhrishtadyumna and Athena are born fully grown, armoured, with chariots, roaring. Draupadi, Helen and Pandora are irresistible beauties, agents of the gods for destruction on earth. Helen has three husbands; Draupadi has five. Each very harshly berates one husband, who withdraws from battle and is then visited by a mightier brother who has left the field to enquire after him, who draws a weapon, violently criticises his withdrawing and being in bed, reconciles and returns to the battle. Both Menelaus and Yudhishthira are not notable warriors, are indecisive, not spiteful like their brothers who criticise them referring to violence against their wives. Agamemnon announces that they will return home if Menalaus is killed. Duryodhana plots the death/imprisonment of Yudhishthira for similar reasons.

Alonso brings in parallels between Heracles (half-divine, losing kingship as Eurystheus’ birth is pre-maturely induced) and Yudhishthira (half-divine, not winning initially though Duryodhana’s birth is delayed). During the father’s exile, the hero is born by a god’s intervention. The hero’s uncle and his son deprive him of his birth-right. His mother has to live for long in the kingdom of his rival. The hero suffers a temporary madness because of which he has to travel through wild places, having many adventures (12 labours; 12 years of exile), and undergoes humiliating servitude in disguise for one year, living like a woman in a palace subject to a queen/princess. This ends with defeating an enemy attacking that kingdom for cattle, restoration of true identity and weapons, and a marital union which propagates the dynasty, followed by vengeful extermination of the enemy in war. Heracles and Bhima are gourmands and cooks, prefer to fight with bare hands or primitive weapons and kill a tyrant who abuses a woman. Ovid’s version of the Faunus-Omphale-Heracles story yields numerous parallels with the Kichaka-Draupadi-Bhima episode. Both occur during a religious festival, there is reference to feasting, the violent ardour of the villain, the hero dressing as a woman and the encounter occurs in the dark.

Alonso makes a laboured attempt to equate Heracles’ killing Busiris and his attendants who shackled him for sacrifice with Bhima killing Kichaka’s henchmen who try to sacrifice Draupadi. He points out that she is described as standing embracing a column, which is peculiar unless one recalls Heracles being bound to an altar or pillar for sacrifice! Both Bhima and Heracles are sought to be poisoned as infants, tread dangerous territories, battle monsters and supernatural beings, are described as having flames bursting from them. Cacus, a monster, steals cattle guarded by Heracles, is betrayed by his sister to Heracles, just as Hidimba does with Bhima against her rakshasa brother. Bhima rescues a Brahmin’s daughter who is to be sent as Baka’s meal, just as Heracles does with Hesione, daughter of Laomedon, about to be sacrificed to a monster. Again, moved by the sobs of Alcestis, he brings Admetus back from death, as Kunti is moved by the cries of the Brahmin family to have Bhima succour them. Savitri and Alcestis are another parallel as wives loyal unto and beyond death.

Alonso notes parallels between Jamadagni and Heracles. Both threaten the sun with arrows and receive a gift in return (a golden cup; a parasol and sandals). Alonso then draws a far-fetched parallel between Heracles and Karttavirya-Arjuna as both threaten the sea with arrows. One wonders why he has not drawn the parallel with Rama threatening the sea!

In Heracles’ intimacy with his nephew and charioteer Iolaus Alonso sees a clear parallel with Arjuna and Krishna. Heracles wins princess Iole in an archery contest, but has to leave without her, returns to kill her father (who was his weapons-trainer) and brothers and carry her off. Alonso draws a laboured parallel with Arjuna killing Draupadi’s suitors at Kurkshetra, even though he does not kill Drona, his weapons-guru.

Parallels are seen between Dionysus and Krishna. Both gods have to find refuge from persecution (by Jarasandha, Lycurgus) in the sea (Dvaraka, in the lap of Thetis in the sea); their enemies insult them (Shishupala, Pentheus) and suffer death (dismemberment of Jarasandha-Lycurgus; beheading of Shishupala-Pentheus) after a dramatic revelation of divinity. Surprisingly, Alonso does not refer to Megasthenes’ record of Indians worshipping Heracles (Krishna/Balarama) and Dionysus (Shiva) to bolster his arguments.

Both epics stress a restoration of order on earth and in heaven after a long sequence of calamities culminating in a holocaust. The macrocosm and the microcosm are in harmony. Indra’s hubris vis-à-vis Shiva is ended, as is the reign of Asuras possessing mortals. Brahmins (Drona, Parashurama) who violate their dharma are reined in or slain along with their pupils. In both, the age of half-divine heroes and those born unnaturally (not womb-born) is brought to an end, as also direct interaction of gods with humans. Zeus specifically prohibits any child born of a god. Uma curses the devas to be childless.

In sum, the argument is that the MBH draws extensively on its authors’ “fervour for the Homeric epics and…very diverse Greek sources” using them in versatile ways in the Pandava-Kaurava story beginning from its outline for destruction and its formulation, with supernatural interventions ensuring its end. The sheer bulk of the Greek presence leads Alonso to propose that the MBH was composed largely at one time with Greek texts in its authors’ hands. The lack of archaeological evidence discounts the possibility of a real event providing the nucleus of the MBH. He calls for fresh research to map out, section by section, the Greco-Roman presence in the MBH. This will also identify components that stand outside this archive, e.g. incarnations, rebirth, the power of ascesis, the concept of sacrifice. Such a study can also lead to a re-look at lost Greek texts which seem to be embedded in the MBH (e.g. Cypria, Thebaid). Alonso claims to have discredited the hypothesis of Vyasa having influenced Homer. Yet, all the parallels he lists with masterly skill could easily argue that case. Incidentally, commenting on Romila Thapar, Alonso consistently refers to her as “he/his” (p.471, fn.35)! That apart, it is definitely a very important book for Indologists.

Pradip Bhattacharya retired as Additional Chief Secretary West Bengal. He specialises in comparative mythology.

The First Bengali Mahabharata in Verse and in Prose

By

Towards the end of the 13th century A.D. we notice a common literary feature emerging in eastern India that becomes very prominent by the 16th century not only in the east but also in the south. Vyasa’s Mahabharata was translated first into Bengali and then into Assamese, Oriya, Telegu and Kannada. The reasons for this remarkable synchronicity deserve further study. For the present, let us look at the picture in Bengal.

According to Dinesh Chandra Sen, the renowned historian of Bengali literature,  it was a Muslim ruler of Bengal, Sultan Nusrat Khan or Nasir Khan (1285?-1325) who commissioned the first translation of Mahabharata in Bengali entitled “Bharat Panchali.”[1] The work is not traceable but Kabindra Parameshwar states in his Bengali Mahabharata: “The glorious leader Nasrat Khan had the panchali[2] composed, the ultimate in merit.” However, history is ignorant of any sultan of Bengal by this name ruling for forty years at that time. After examining the evidence, Major General S.K. Sen suggests that the reference might actually be to Nasiruddin Nusrat Shah (1519-1531 AD) who succeeded his father Sultan Alauddin Hussain Shah of Bengal (1493-1519 AD). Nusrat Shah went to Chattagram (Chittagong) with general Paragal Khan as the king’s representative in 1515-1516. Paragal became governor there and got the Mahabharata translated by Kabindra Parameshwar, which came to be known as the Paragali Mahabharat. Hussain Shah was a distant ruler while Nusrat, the crown prince, was a powerful patron at hand in Chittagong as is evident from the verses of Shrikara. Kabindra would be referring to this Nusrat and to Srikara’s panchali, not to a distant ruler. Paragal’s son Chhuti Khan succeeded him as governor and got the Jaiminiya Ashvamedhaparva translated by Shrikara or Shrikaran Nandi which came to be known as Chhuti Khaner Mahabharat. Part of it was included in Kashiram Das’ Bengali Mahabharata (composed 1604-1610) and Krittibas’ Ramayana (c. 1st half of 15th century).

Kabi Sanjay is the first translator of the complete Mahabharata into Bangla for regaling rustic audiences, composed in payar metre in the first half of the 15th century, prior to the rule of Sultan Hussain Shah in Bengal. He precedes Chaitanya (1486-1533), unlike most other vernacular renderings of the epic, as there is no trace of Vaishnava bhakti in his work. His date is uncertain, but he might be a contemporary of Krittibas, the translator of the Ramayana (not later than the 15th century).[3] However, on the basis of language and style some scholars place him in the 17th century AD.[4] A resident of Laur in the Sunamganj subdivision of Shrihatta district in East Bengal, he belonged to the Bharadvaja gotra. An interesting point is that he praises Bhagadatta as the ruler of Laur and also calls him ruler of Bengal, although Vyasa’s Mahabharata does not do so, because Shrihatta was at one time part of Pragjyotishpura, the capital of Bhagadatta. While his version is almost unaffected by the devotional movement, it contains several unusual Shakta-influenced episodes. He departs quite freely from the Sanskrit epic’s contents, unlike Kashiram Das a later translator. The narration is interspersed with laachari to be sung and various ragas and raginis are indicated in the text such as Vasant, Kamod, Bhatiyal (not a raga, but the typical boatman’s song of Bengal), Shri, Barari, Pathamanjari.

Kabi Sanjay created a new genre, the Pauranik fairytale in his translation of the epic. The key elements are given below:-

  • Sanjay provides a novel start to the epic. Janamejaya (J) charges Vyasa with failure to prevent his ancestors from the fratricidal battle of Kurukshetra. Vyasa laughs and says that people do not listen to prohibitions. As an example he issues an injunction that to avoid misfortune J must not make Kantavati his chief queen, which is precisely what he proceeds to do. He also insults sage Rishyashringa who curses him to be afflicted with bhagapida, syphilitic sores, all over his body. Vyasa reappears and tells him that to be cured he should listen to the epic recited by Vaishampayana. That is why the recital begins. At the end of Svaragarohana parva, J is cured, rounding off the narrative.
  • In Astika parva he adds a new story of Takshaka, pursued by Garuda, marrying his daughter Sarada to Parikshit and thus escaping death. A folktale of the ojha (curer of snake-bite) of Shankhapura is added and a novel treatment of J’s serpent sacrifice.
  • The Shantanu-Ganga story is given a novel twist. Brahma curses Mahabhisha for his shameless ogling of Ganga’s nudity to be born a vanara. He worships Shiva who grants his wish to possess Ganga. Shiva commands Ganga who takes the vanara aside and tells him that first he must become hairless like her and can do so by entering fire. To persuade him she magically protects him when he tests a finger in a flame and remains unhurt. When he enters the fire she does not protect him and he dies. King Kuru is performing a sacrifice and finds a dry place overflowing with hot water which he and the sages cannot cross. The monkey’s corpse comes floating by and they use it as a bridge. Thereupon the vanara is liberated and is born as Kuru’s son, Shantanu. Shiva berates Ganga and forces her to wed Shantanu.
  • Amba’s love for Bhishma is a creation of Sanjay’s who makes of it a long love-story.
  • Chitrangad dies of TB. Vichitravirya violates Bhishma’s injunction against entering his palace in his absence and is crushed there by the elephant with which Bhishma used to wrestle daily to exercise.
  • Dhritarashtra plots with Duryodhana to build the house of lac.
  • In the Khandava conflagration the survivors are sage Lomasha, Surabhi the cow, Danavendra lord of demons and Vishvakarma.
  • The Rajasuya yagya is held because Pandu, insulted in Swarga, sends Narada to urge his sons to hold this sacrifice so that he can regain status. During the conquests, on his return from Lanka Arjuna encounters Hanuman. This becomes an interesting folk-tale.
  • Duryodhana and Drona send a band of fasting sages to Yudhishthira in exile but Krishna’s miracle saves the Pandavas.
  • In Udyoga parva a folktale is added about Kakalilasura.
  • In Bhishma parva the story of Brahmachandala is added and the beauty and valour of horses are elaborated at great length.
  • In Drona parva after Abhimanyu’s death Draupadi leads an army of women against the Kauravas. Karna refuses to fight them. Duryodhana is routed.
  • In Karna parva the story of Tarakaksha and Makaraksha is added.
  • Ashvamedhaparva mostly follows the composition of Jaimini, Vyasa’s disciple, omitting the retelling of the Rama story. Sanjay adds Yadava and Pandava women fighting the enemy when the Pandavas are defeated. He has Surya give Vrishaketu a chariot during the battle with Anushalva. Jaimini’s Jvala is turned into Jana and glorified in particular. She dies and turns into an arrow that lies in Babhruvahana’s quiver with which he kills Arjuna. Girish Chandra Ghosh, the father of Bengali theatre, wrote an extremely popular play, Jana, about her in 1894. The battle descriptions surpass Vyasa’s. The stories of Jana, Sudhanva, Babhruvahana, Chandi, Chandrahasa are magnificently related. Chandrahasa’s story has been substantially changed, especially Vishaya’s subterfuge in replacing the word visha (poison) with her name, Vishaya. Jayadratha’s son does not die of fear but fights bravely with Arjuna. Jaimini’s Bakadalbhya has become Bakradanta and he steals the horse so that he can see Krishna. Viravarma becomes Virabrahma and his daughter Malini becomes Ratnavati. Uddalaka is renamed Udyana in the story of Chandi and the curse is dispelled when both the horse and Arjuna touch the stone. The remarkable story of the many-faced Brahmas is absent. Sanjaya describes Chitrangada as a veshya, a prostitute, while in Jaimini Arjuna says that Babhruvahana must be a son of a vaishya. The description of the horse required for the sacrifice is different too and the parva ends with Krishna’s return to Dvaraka with the Yadavas which is a departure from Jaimini.
  • In Ashvamedhaparva Sanjay goes beyond Jaimini to invent the grand episode of Vivek, son of Sudhanva, who immediately after birth takes on Arjuna and Krishna to avenge his father’s death, routs Arjuna’s army, vanquishes Arjuna and Krishna, defeats Bhima, Nakula and Sahadeva and the combined army of Yadava and Pandava women. Finally, on his grandfather Hamsadhvaja’s request, Bibek surrenders to Krishna.
  • Certain incidents are taken from Vyasa: the Pandavas go to Kailasa with Krishna to obtain the wealth of Marutta, the story of Parikshita’s birth, Arjuna’s horse goes to Kirata and Yavana lands, Trigartya, Pragjyotisha, Chedi, Magadha, Kashipura, Deshartha, Nishada, Kirata again, the kingdoms of Ugrasena, Kuntibhoja, Panchala, Gandhara, etc.
  • Mausala parva has Arjuna accompany Krishna at the end and, as they rest together, Krishna is shot and killed.
  • Svargarohana parva has new tirthas come up where each Pandava falls. The route is along the Ganga. Meghanada Daitya tries to abduct Draupadi and is slain by Bhima.

In Bengal the influence Jaimini’s Ashvamedhaparva was felt most powerfully. According to Dinesh Chandra Sen, Sanjaya, Kabindra Parameshwar, Shrikara Nandi and almost all the later translators have recorded that they translated the Mahabharata following the Jaimini-Samhita. Little is taken from Vyasa, except a few references. Jaimini was a leader among the revivalists of Hinduism (Shankara came later). His disciple, Bhattapada, defeated the Buddhists in King Sudhanva’s court. Many ancient Bengali books contain references to the Jaimini Bharata.

In the early 16th century AD Kabindra Parameshwar translated the Mahabharata in brief (so that it could be heard in a single day) up to Stri Parva[5] under the patronage of Paragal Khan. This came to be known as the Paragali Mahabharata and also as Pandab Bijoy.[6] This includes basically the battle stories, especially in the Ashvamedhaparva which, as in Sanjaya, is taken from Jaimini. Most of the stories of the original epic are omitted.  

Dinesh Chandra Sen states that after this there are many translations of which the important ones are Dvija Abhirama’s Ashvamedhaparva, Ananta Mishra’s Ashvamedhaparva, Nityananda Ghosh’s Mahabharat, Dvija Ramchandra Khan’s Ashvamedhaparva, Kabichandra’s Mahabharat, Shashthibar Sen’s Bharat, Gangadas Sen’s Adi and Ashvamedhaparva, Rameshwar Nandi’s Mahabharata, Kashiram Das’s Mahabharat, Trilochan Chakravarty’s Mahabharat, Nimai Das’s Mahabharat, Dvija Krishnaram’s Ashvamedhaparva, Dvija Raghunath’s Ashvamedhaparva, Bhriguram Das’s Bharat, Dvija Ramkrishnadas’ Ashvamedhaparva and Bharat Pandit’s Ashvamedhaparva.[7] W.L. Smith[8] mentions complete Bengali versions of Ashvamedhaparva by Ghanashyam Das and Dvija Premananda and more recent versions by Rajaram Dutt (19th century), Kaliprasanna Vidyaratna (Jaiminibharata in verse, 1884). Chandranath Basu’s Ashvamedhaparva in free prose came out in 1317 B.S. i.e. 1910-11 AD.[9] Munindra Kumar Ghosh mentions Nandaram Das, Dvija Govardhan, Bhabani Das and Dvija Srinath among others. Asit Kumar Bandyopadhyay mentions the name of Dvija Haridas too. It is not clear whether these works are based on Vyasa or on Jaimini.

The most popular Bengali verse translation remains Kashiram Das’ Mahabharat which follows Jaimini’s Ashvamedhaparva. In him the influence of Chaitanya’s Vaishnavism is overwhelmingly perceptible. The work was a major influence on Bengali literature.

Kaliprasanna Singha (1840 or 1841 to 24 July 1870) authored the first prose translation of the Mahabharata. Educated in Sanskrit, Bengali and English, he left school in 1857 at the age of 16 and established the Vidyotsahini Theatre in his own house where he enacted Venisamhara. Encouraged by its success, in the same year he translated Kalidasa’s Vikramorvashiya. In 1858 he wrote the play Savitri-Satyavan and in 1859 Malati-Madhava. These plays were staged in his theatre with him in the main roles. Purana-sangraha, a collection of Puranic stories from the Mahabharata was published between1860-66. His greatest literary feat was translating the Mahabharata into Bangla in 17 volumes, for the first time in Bangla literature. The work was begun in 1858 with a team of seven pandits and completed in 1866, omitting and adding nothing. 3000 copies of each parva were printed, being unsure of the reception. He excluded Harivamsha as he found its composition to be plainly later than the epic. However, he had a plan to publish its translation along with those of the Puranas, as the title page indicates.

What the BORI editors of the critical text of the Mahabharata have done now, Kaliprasanna began at the age of 18 in 1858 all by himself, collating manuscripts from the Asiatic Society, Shobhabazar Palace, the collections of Asutosh Deb, Jatindramohon Thakur and his own great-grandfather Shantiram Singha’s collection in Kashi. He acknowledges with gratitude the help he received in resolving contradictions in the texts and making out the meaning of knotty Vyasakuta verses from Taranath Tarkavacaspati teacher at the Calcutta Sanskrit Vidyamandir. He records with profound gratitude that Ishvarchandra Vidyasagar began a translation of the epic and had published some parts of it in the Brahmo Samaj’s Tattavabodhini magazine, but stopped the work on hearing of Kaliprasanna’s project. Vidyasagar not only went through Kaliprasanna’s translation but supervised the printing and the work of translation in his absence. Kaliprasanna writes that he has no words to express the benefits Vidyasagar showered upon him. Apparently, Vidyasagar provided him seven pandits for the project.[10] Kaliprasanna gives special thanks to several friends viz. the famous poet Michael Madhusudan Dutt for promising to turn the best parts of the translation into Amritakshar metre and a play; the Purana expert Gangadhar Tarkabagish, Raja Kamalkrishna Bahadur, Jatindramohon Thakur, Rajendralal Mitra, Dvarkanath Vidyabhushan (editor of Somprakash), Rajkrishna Bandopadhyay (professor of Bengali literature in Presidency College), Nabinkrishna Bandopadhyay (former editor of Tattvabodhini), Dinabandhu Mitra (the playwright of Nil Darpan) and Kshetramohon Vidyaratan (editor of Bhaskar). Deploring the death of ten members of his team of translators, he thanks by name those engaged till the end and the proof readers (mentioning all their names).

Daily in the evening the translation, as it progressed, was read out to Raja Radhakanta Deb and other prominent leaders of Hindu society like Raja Kamalkrishna Bahadur and Rajkrishna Mitra. In villages, he writes, the translation is read out in important gatherings morning and evening. He pays a fulsome tribute to Kashiram Das’ translation in Bengali verse, regretting that details of his life and dates are not recorded anywhere. He leaves out discussion and summaries of Sanskrit literature based on Asiatic researches and Max Muller’s edition of texts to avoid any controversy that might harm the unrestricted acceptance of his translation.

The work took eight years to complete and was printed at his Tattvabodhini Press. It was provided to readers who wrote in, free of charge. Readers were advised not to send any postage stamps. In every district an agent was appointed to distribute the book so that it could be obtained without spending anything. It was and remains a unique project of making wisdom literature available without charging anything for it.

Many laughed his herculean effort to scorn, ascribing it to a quest for immortal fame by buying up pandits to translate. In response he merely stated that he had no craving for public fame, but only that should, by the grace of God, the Bengali language exist anywhere and this book fall into someone’s hands who might be able to make out its meaning and understand the pillar of glory of the Hindu race that was the Bharat, then all his labour would have been successful.[11]

Kaliprasanna dedicated his translation to Empress Victoria in gratitude for the British rescuing Bharatavarsha from the mortal clutches of the Mughals. He compared his offering to the gods offering the Parijat flower churned out of the ocean to Purandara-Indra. The intention behind the translation was a faith that it would redound to the country’s good. He hoped that Hindusthan would be lit up during her reign by hundreds of lamps of Sanskrit literature as it was during Vikramaditya’s reign by Kalidas etc. and in Queen Elizabeth’s reign by Shakespeare etc. to make her reign unforgettable.

Today one is surprised that there is no mention of the 1857 Mutiny although the translation was started the next year. The elite of Bengal were not enamoured of the aborted effort, preferring to proclaim their loyalty to the British Empress as vociferously as possible.

* This article draws heavily on the research by Maj.Gen. S.K.Sen VSM whose generous assistance is acknowledged with gratitude.

[1] Dinesh Chandra Sen, Bangabhasha O Sahitya, Gurudas Chattopadhyaya & Sons, Kolkata, 7th edn, 1st edn. 1896

[2] Rhyming verse that can be sung.

[3] Sen op.cit. and Munindra Kumar Ghosh, Kabi Sanjaya birachita Mahabharata, Calcutta University, 1969, p. 153

[4] Asit Kumar Bandyopadhyay, Bangla Sahityer Itivritta, Vol 1, Modern Book Agency, Kolkata, 2006, p. 462

[5] According to Munindra Kumar Ghosh up to Ashvamedhaparva, the later parvas being interpolations.

[6] Asit Kumar Bandyopadhyay, op. cit. p. 441-2

[7] Dinesh Chandra Sen, ibid, p. 455-456

[8] W.L. Smith, “The Jaiminibharata and Its Eastern Vernacular Versions,” Studia Orientalia, The Finnish Oriental Society, Vol 85, Helsinki, 1999, p. 402

[9] Asit Kumar Bandyopadhyay, op. cit. p. 434

[10] Binod Ghoshal, “Kaliprasannar Katha Amrita Saman,” Binodon supplement to Ananda Bazar Patrika, 20.8.2016, pp. 10-4.

[11] Binod Ghoshal, op.cit.