Makaranda Madhukar Anand Mahendale Festshrift

Author(s): M A Dhaky, Jitendra B Shah
Publisher: Shardaben Chimanbhai Educational Research Centre

Page 73

62
S. J. Noel Sheth
Makaranda
to the battle (yudhi) with saṁsāra and with the separation (viyoga) [from the prakața-līlā] (RR, VD, on 11.30.16).
The statement in 11.30.17, namely that, deluded by Krsna, the Yādavas attacked (āsādya) each other and struck or killed (jaghnuh) one another, is reinterpreted in the following way : The Yādavas are deluded (vimohitah) by Krsna, i.e., they are made to forget the separation from the prakata-līlā by their coming in contact with the light of the nitya-(i.e. aprakata-) līlā. That is, being blinded by the intoxication of exhilaration (madāndhakāritāḥ) generated by their experiencing the happiness of the nitya-lītā they met (āsadya=militvā) each other, and came to know (jaghnuḥ=jñātavantah) the secret of the nitya-līlā. The verb jaghnuh, which is derived from the verbal root han, does not mean they killed', but they came to know because, since the root han also means 'to go', it can mean 'to know? (RR, VD on 11.30.17). In 11.30.18 forgetting (visrjya) their friendship (sauhrdam), they fought (ayudhyan) with one another. This is interpreted differently: Having abandoned (visrjya) the empirical world (prapanca)36 they experienced? their mutual friendship in the state of nitya-līlā (RR, VD on 11.30.18). They as it were waged war (ayudhyan=yuddham iva) in order to destroy the enemy38 in the form of the separation from the prakața-līlā, and thus be connected with the aprakata-līlā. The fighting among relatives in 11.30.19 is given the following new meaning : Being mudhāh (v. 19), i.e., devoid of the contact with the separation from the prakata-līlā, the relatives (jñātayah) recognized (ahan=jñātavanaah) their relatives (jñātin) as the eternal attendants of Krsna in other words, they thus obtained inspiration. In connection with this unconventional meaning given to the root han, RR and VD remark that the claim that the root han does not mean 'to go 39 because it is not used in this sense, is a mere rash statement or temerity on the part of those who are confined to the narrow well of poetry and not immersed in the vast ocean of the Scriptures. The Mahābhāsya of Patañjali can be adduced in support of this remark (RR, VD on 11.30.19).
11.30.20. mentions that when their arrows were depleted, their bows broken, and their weapons exhausted, the Yādavas took hold of (jahruh) the erakā grass in their clenched fists (mustibhih) in order to use this grass as weapons. However, RR and VD bring to light the hidden and deeper