Bhagavad Gita - Chapter 1 - Shloka (Verse) 12

व्याख्या--'तस्य संजनयन् हर्षम्'-- यद्यपि दुर्योधनके हृदयमें हर्ष होना शंखध्वनिका कार्य है और शंखध्वनि कारण है, इसलिये यहाँ शंखध्वनिका वर्णन पहले और हर्ष होनेका वर्णन पीछे होना चाहिये अर्थात् यहाँ 'शंख बजाते हुए दुर्योधनको हर्षित किया'--ऐसा कहा जाना चाहिये। परन्तु यहाँ ऐसा न कहकर यही कहा है कि 'दुर्योधनको हर्षित करते हुये भीष्मजीने शंख बजाया'। कारण कि ऐसा कहकर सञ्जय यह भाव प्रकट कर रहे हैं कि पितामह भीष्मकी शंखवादन क्रियामात्रसे दुर्योधनके हृदयमें हर्ष उत्पन्न हो ही जायगा। भीष्मजीके इस प्रभावको द्योतन करनेके लिये ही सञ्जय आगे 'प्रतापवान्' विशेषण देते हैं।
'कुरुवृद्धः'-- यद्यपि कुरुवंशियोंमें आयुकी दृष्टिसे भीष्मजीसे भी अधिक वृद्ध बाह्लीक थे (जो कि भीष्मजीके पिता शान्तनुके छोटे भाई थे), तथापि कुरुवंशियोंमें जितने बड़े-बूढ़े थे, उन सबमें भीष्मजी धर्म और ईश्वरको विशेषतासे जाननेवाले थे। अतः ज्ञानवृद्ध होनेके कारण सञ्जय भीष्मजीके लिये 'कुरुवृद्धः' विशेषण देते हैं।
'प्रतापवान्'-- भीष्मजीके त्यागका बड़ा प्रभाव था। वे कनक-कामिनीके त्यागी थे अर्थात् उन्होंने राज्य भी स्वीकार नहीं किया और विवाह भी नहीं किया। भीष्मजी अस्त्र-शस्त्रको चलानेमें बड़े निपुण थे और शास्त्रके भी बड़े जानकार थे। उनके इन दोनों गुणोंका भी लोगोंपर बड़ा प्रभाव था।
जब अकेले भीष्म अपने भाई विचित्रवीर्यके लिये काशिराजकी कन्याओंको स्वयंवरसे हरकर ला रहे थे तब वहाँ स्वयंवरके लिये इकट्ठे हुए सब क्षत्रिय उनपर टूट पड़े। परन्तु अकेले भीष्मजीने उन सबको हरा दिया। जिनसे भीष्म अस्त्र-शस्त्रकी विद्या पढ़े थे, उन गुरु परशुरामजीके सामने भी उन्होंने अपनी हार स्वीकार नहीं की। इस प्रकार शस्त्रके विषयमें उनका क्षत्रियोंपर बड़ा प्रभाव था।
जब भीष्म शरशय्यापर सोये थे, तब भगवान् श्रीकृष्णने धर्मराजसे कहा कि 'आपको धर्मके विषयमें कोई शंका हो तो भीष्मजीसे पूछ लें; क्योंकि शास्त्रज्ञानका सूर्य अस्ताचलको जा रहा है अर्थात् भीष्मजी इस लोकसे जा रहे
हैं (टिप्पणी प0 11) ।' इस प्रकार शास्त्रके विषयमें उनका दूसरोंपर बड़ा प्रभाव था।
'पितामहः' इस पदका आशय यह मालूम देता है कि दुर्योधनके द्वारा चालाकीसे कही गयी बातोंका द्रोणाचार्यने कोई उत्तर नहीं दिया। उन्होंने यही समझा कि दुर्योधन चालाकीसे मेरेको ठगना चाहता है इसलिये वे चुप ही रहे। परन्तु पितामह (दादा) होनेके नाते भीष्मजीको दुर्योधनकी चालाकीमें उसका बचपना दीखता है। अतः पितामह भीष्म द्रोणाचार्यके समान चुप न रहकर वात्सल्यभावके कारण दुर्योधनको हर्षित करते हुए शंख बजाते हैं।
'सिंहनादं विनद्योच्चैः शङ्खं दध्मौ'-- जैसे सिंहके गर्जना करनेपर हाथी आदि बड़े-बड़े पशु भी भयभीत हो जाते हैं ऐसे ही गर्जना करनेमात्रसे सभी भयभीत हो जायँ और दुर्योधन प्रसन्न हो जाय--इसी भावसे भीष्मजीने सिंहके समान गरजकर जोरसे शंख बजाया।

सम्बन्ध-- पितामह भीष्मके द्वारा शंख बजानेका परिणाम क्या हुआ इसको सञ्जय आगेके श्लोकमें कहते हैं।

Seeing the King (Duryodhana) conversing thus with the Acharya and possessed by fear, the Grandfather (Bhishma) stationed nearby did this to accord with his (Duryodhana's) state of mind—he states this with "Tasya," etc.

Generating well the "joy" in King Duryodhana—a specific mental elation which comes through the defeat of the enemy and serves as a gateway to his own victory—and wishing to remove his fear, he roared loudly like a lion and blew (filled) his conch.

(Question:) Why does the Grandfather strive to generate joy in Duryodhana? (Answer:) Because he is the Elder of the Kurus, because he (Duryodhana) is the Kuru King, and because he is the Grandfather, his activity to remove Duryodhana's fear is appropriate. Also because he subsists on him and is under his control. And in his lion-roar and conch-sound, the heartache of the enemies is also probable, because of the 'Pratapa' (valor/majesty) characterized by generating fear towards the enemy host from afar; this is the meaning.

Having seen the Acharya (Drona) remaining silent upon hearing of his own lack of primacy (subordination to Bhishma), and observing Duryodhana who was dejected yet extremely devoted to himself (Bhishma), Bhishma proceeded to generate joy in him—he states this with "Tasya," etc.

Generating well the joy—a specific mental elation—in Duryodhana through the means of making the lion-roar and conch-sound, and to remove his distress, he roared a lion-roar loudly and blew his conch.

"Kuru-vriddha" (Kuru Elder) and "Pitamaha" (Grandfather)—Being the elder of the Kurus, being the Grandfather, and due to subsisting on him and being under his control, Bhishma's engagement in the stated purpose is indeed appropriate; this is the sentiment.

With the word "Pratapavan" (valorous/majestic), he wards off (any notion of) incapacity (due to age). Some say: Being the Kuru Elder, he understood the intentions of both the Acharya and Duryodhana; and being the Grandfather, he did not ignore (the situation), unlike the Acharya who ignored it (by staying silent).

"Tasya"—Regarding Duryodhana who was speaking thus—this is Sanjaya's speech.

"Simhanadam"—This word ends with the 'Namul' affix (absolutive). Therefore, the verb "vinadya" (roaring) is used in conjunction with it, because it belongs to the 'kashadi' group; similar to usages like "samulakasham kashati sma daityan" (he scraped the demons with a radical scraping).

"Kuru-vriddha"—meaning Bhishma. Having seen the power of the Pandavas previously in Viratanagara etc., lest the King have fear, he blew the conch.

"Harsham" (Joy)—meaning enthusiasm for war—"Janayan" (Generating). The 'Shatri' affix (present participle) is used here in the sense of 'hetu' (cause/purpose). The meaning is: (he blew the conch) for the purpose of generating joy.

Dhritarashtra spoke; Sanjaya replied. Duryodhana, having personally observed the army of the Pandavas protected by Bhima and his own army protected by Bhishma, communicated to the Teacher (Drona) the adequacy of that (Pandava) army for his own defeat and the inadequacy of his own army for victory, and thus became internally filled with despondency.

Seeing his despondency, Bhishma, wishing to generate joy in him, roared like a lion, blew his conch, and created a tumult indicative of victory using the sounds of conches and kettledrums.

Thereafter, hearing that tumult, the Lord of all Lords, Parthasarathi (Krishna), and the warrior son of Pandu (Arjuna)—seated on a magnificent chariot that served as an instrument for conquering the three worlds—blew their divine conches, the glorious 'Panchajanya' and 'Devadatta', causing the three worlds to tremble.

Then, Yudhishthira, Vrikodara (Bhima), and others blew their respective conches separately. That sound shattered the hearts of all your sons headed by Duryodhana. The sons of Dhritarashtra felt that the strength of the Kauravas was destroyed that very day. Thus, Sanjaya related this to Dhritarashtra, who was desirous of their victory.

Then, seeing the sons of Dhritarashtra—headed by Bhishma and Drona—positioned and eager to fight, the son of Pandu (Arjuna), bearing the flag of the monkey who burnt Lanka (Hanuman), addressed Hrishikesha (Krishna). Krishna is the repository of knowledge, power, strength, sovereignty, valor, and splendor, who enacts the play of the world's creation, sustenance, and dissolution by His mere will, and who resides as the controller of all internal and external faculties of all beings high and low, yet was situated as his charioteer, overcome by affection for one who had taken refuge in Him. Arjuna urged Him to position the chariot at a vantage point suitable for observing those eager to fight, so he could view them properly.

Having heard the words of King Duryodhana, thus filled with great respect, what Bhishma did is stated

in "Tasya," etc.

Generating (increasing) the joy of that King, the Grandfather Bhishma, having roared a great lion-roar loudly, blew (sounded) his conch.

Thus, it naturally appears that Duryodhana's despondency existed first, which had to be removed to generate joy; with this intention, it is stated (in the commentary) "He became internally despondent." Later, by the statement "That uproar shattered the hearts of the sons of Dhritarashtra" (1.19), only the agitation of the hearts of Dhritarashtra's sons is mentioned. Therefore, from the description of the enemy army, its commander, and all warriors in the beginning (upakrama); from the mention of heart-agitation merely by the sound of conches (of the Pandavas) in the conclusion (upasamhara); and from the indication of the arising of despondency and its removal by the phrase "to generate joy" in the middle; and from the natural flow (svarasya) of this verse—the meaning stated (by Ramanuja: Duryodhana's fear and Bhishma's attempt to cheer him) is the purport.

Thus, interpreting the word "Tat" (in 'Tasya') as "Tasmat" (Because of that [despondency]) as a causative sense is justified. By this, the objection regarding "remote reference" (viprakrishta-nirdesha) is also resolved. Nor can it be said that the enemy force is presently imperceptible to Duryodhana, because of direct references like "Having seen the Pandava army" (1.2), "Behold these" (1.3), "Of these" (1.10), etc.

As for the argument that "it is not appropriate for Duryodhana to perceive weakness in his own force protected by Bhishma, Drona, etc."—that is also incorrect; because the suspicion of the killing of Bhishma, Drona, etc., which is subject to conditions (upadhis), is plausible for Duryodhana who knows those conditions (causes of their potential fall). As for the argument that "in statements like 'One should not fear,' the strength of his own army is mentioned many times, and there is no cause for a contrary perception now"—that is also not valid. Just as Arjuna, even after proceeding to the point of lifting his bow and arrows with the desire to kill, becomes overwhelmed by intense affection, compassion, and fear of dharma/adharma upon seeing the assembly of kinsmen to be killed, and is then stabilized by the Lord; similarly here, what is improbable about Duryodhana being overwhelmed by intense fear and despondency upon directly witnessing the enemy force dense with great warriors in a tightly formed array, and being stabilized by Bhishma? Moreover, Duryodhana has directly witnessed the capability of the enemies compared to all his own warriors in events like the cattle-raid (Go-grahana) and his own capture (by Gandharvas). And it is not that he does not remember it now; for he himself speaks (in Mahabharata): "The names beginning with 'A' etc., of those whose minds are terrified of Arjuna..."

As for the argument that "the interpretation of words here should be like the interpretation of words spoken at the beginning of the second day"—that is also weak. For there is no rule that similarity in one part necessitates similarity in every way. If one says "a difference in intention between the first and second days is not plausible"—no, because the path of intention is variable due to considerations like the fickle nature of war's outcome. Moreover, here, since he is engaged in determining what is beneficial—such as stationing troops in their respective divisions in the inner paths of the array and protecting the army—with Acharya and Bhishma, such an intention (of fear/caution) is plausible. This is shown by "Having communicated to the Acharya, he became internally despondent." On the second day, however, since he is engaged in displaying his own courage and comforting his army before all the kings who are his allies, such behavior (of confidence) is adopted; so there is no fault. Considering all this entirely, the word "tu" (but/however) is used in "Drishtva tu."

And this statement of the insufficiency of his own force at the beginning, rooted in the unexpected despondency of the ill-fated Duryodhana, indicates his coming defeat. Therefore, since the meaning established by the natural flow of the universally read text is faultless, the views regarding variant readings etc. are discarded; because assuming variant readings, remote syntax connections (vyavahita-anvaya), sentence-splitting (vakya-bheda), and obscure meanings are potent faults. In the scheme of sentence-splitting (interpreting sufficiency/insufficiency differently), the respective connection of the two reasons to the two propositions does not hold. If one argues "He who is strong or weak and protects a force is the cause of its sufficiency or insufficiency, not that the opposing force is described as the result"—even then, there is a lack of natural flow (asvarasya). If one says "the connection of reasons is in reverse order"—then the fault of "remote connection" arises. If one says "the two reasons are combined and applied to each proposition"—even then, the remote connection and lack of natural flow are not avoided, and the absence of a conjunctive word (like 'and') is an additional fault. Similarly, other faults should also be considered. Therefore, the meaning is exactly as per the Bhashya (Ramanuja's commentary). [Explanation of Verse 1.12]:

He explains the meaning from "Tasya sanjanayan" up to "tumulo 'bhavat" (in Ramanuja's commentary)—with "Tasya," etc. "Janayan" (Generating)—Here the 'Shatri' suffix is used to indicate the sense of 'hetu' (cause/purpose) according to Panini 3.2.126 ("lakshana-hetvoh kriyaayaah"); therefore, it is stated as "Janayitum" (In order to generate). "Simhanadam vinadya" (Roaring a lion-roar)—To indicate that this usage is like "odanapakam pachati" (cooks a cooking of rice - cognate object), the word "Kritva" (having done/made) is used. To imply the rule "Roots 'kri', 'bhu', and 'as' express action in general," the example "Shankhadhmanam cha kritva" (And having made/done the blowing of the conch) is given. "Tatah shankhah" (Then conches...)—Here, by the word "tatah," to indicate the desire for victory, it is made known that this (sounding of conches) was caused to be done by the Commander-in-Chief Bhishma; with this intention, it is said "akarayat" (he caused to be done). "Shankha-bheri"—This implies Panava and other instruments. Thus, even in the verse, the mention of specific instruments implies others as well. The second "cha" (and) [in the commentary] is to combine the sound of conches and kettledrums with the lion-roar and conch-blowing. By "Kritva" (having done), the third "cha" connects it with "akarayat" (he caused to be done).

दुर्योधन की मूर्खतापूर्ण वाचालता के कारण उसकी सेना के योद्धाओं की स्थिति बड़ी विचित्र सी हो रही थी। उन पर भी उदासी का प्रभाव प्रकट होने लगा जिसे भीष्म वहीं निकट खड़े देख रहे थे। भीष्म पितामह ने कर्मशील द्रोणाचार्य के मौन में छिपे क्रोध को समझ लिया। उन्होंने यह जाना कि इन सबको इस मनस्थिति से बाहर निकालने की आवश्यकता है अन्यथा स्थिति को इसी प्रकार छोड़ देने पर आसन्न युद्ध के समय योद्धागण प्रभावहीन हो जायेंगे। योद्धाओं के इस मनोभाव को समझते हुये सेनापति भीष्म पितामह ने दुर्योधन के साथ सभी सैनिकों के मन में हर्ष और विश्वास की तरंगें उत्पन्न करने के लिये पूरी शक्ति से शंखनाद किया।यद्यपि भीष्माचार्य का यह शंखनाद दुर्योधन के प्रति करुणा से प्रेरित था तथापि उसका अर्थ युद्धारम्भ की घोषणा करने वाला सिद्ध हुआ जैसे कि आधुनिक युद्धों में पहली गोली चलाकर युद्ध प्ररम्भ होता है। शंख के इस सिंहनाद के साथ महाभारत के युद्ध का प्रारम्भ हुआ और इतिहास की दृष्टि से कौरव ही आक्रमणकारी सिद्ध होते हैं।

"Whether he (Duryodhana) praises or blames, the body will indeed fall for this purpose (war)"—with this intention, cheering him up, (Bhishma) roared a lion-roar and caused the conches to be blown—he states this.

Thus, regarding the King (Duryodhana)—who was terrified by seeing the Pandava army; who deceitfully sought refuge in the Acharya to remove his fear; who was ignored even verbally by the Acharya due to dissatisfaction thinking "Even now he is deceiving/mocking me"; who, realizing the Acharya's indifference, praised Bhishma alone with "Ayaneshu," etc.—(Bhishma), "Janayan" (generating) the joy which removes fear, is a specific mental elation, and indicates his own victory, roared a great "Simhanadam" (lion-roar) loudly ("vinadya" - having roared/made).

Or, "Simhanadam" ends with the 'Namul' affix. Therefore, like "raiposham pushyati," the same root is used again (vinadya).

"Shankham dadhmau"—he blew (sounded) the conch. Being "Kuru-vriddha," he had full knowledge of the intentions of the Acharya and Duryodhana; being "Pitamaha," he did not ignore (the situation), unlike the Acharya who did; being "Pratapavan," the blowing of the conch preceded by a loud lion-roar was to generate fear in the enemies.

Here, although the lion-roar/conch-blowing and the generating of joy stand in a cause-and-effect relationship (sequence), the present participle "Janayan" (generating) should be interpreted in the sense of inevitable present/future (avashyambhavitva), similar to "abhicharan yajeta" (one performing black magic should sacrifice - implying the sacrifice is for that purpose).

Hearing the King's words expressing great respect for him—"The Commander-in-Chief alone must be protected"—Bhishma, generating joy in the King, made a conch-sound proclaiming his own strength—he states this with "Tasya," etc.

"Janayan" (Generating) the joy of "Tasya" (that King) in a proper manner—in the form of "I will fight," etc. Since Bhishma is a devotee (of Krishna) and knows of his own (eventual) defeat, the blowing of the conch etc. was not out of spontaneous joy; but having heard Duryodhana's words and knowing the Lord's will, he did so to generate joy in that King—to indicate this, it is stated thus.

"Kuru-vriddha"—The Elder of/among the Kurus; possessing knowledge appropriate to time and place. "Pitamaha"—This is stated as the reason for generating joy. "Bhishma"—"Uchchaih" (with face upturned/loudly)—roaring a great "Simhanadam" (lion-roar)—making a roar indicating his own maturity/power, and indicating "There is no opposing warrior (who can match me)"—"dadhmau" (blew) the conch.

Objection: Even though the King showed respect, one should not make such roaring and conch-blowing etc. in front of the King (it might be disrespectful); so why did he do it? Answer: He answers with "Pratapavan" (Valorous/Majestic). By the sound alone, the conquest of the enemy is indicated (which serves the King, hence not improper).

Thereafter, seeing his despondency, Bhishma, wishing to generate joy in him, roared like a lion, blew his conch, and

created a tumult indicative of victory using the sounds of conches and kettledrums.

Dhrtarastra said - Sanjaya said Duryodhana, after viewing the forces of Pandavas protected by Bhima, and his own forces protected by Bhisma conveyed his views thus to Drona, his teacher, about the adeacy of Bhima's forces for conering the Kaurava forces and the inadeacy of his own forces for victory against the Pandava forces. He was grief-stricken within.
Observing his (Duryodhana's) despondecny, Bhisma, in order to cheer him, roared like a lion, and then blowing his conch, made his side sound their conchs and kettle-drums, which made an uproar as a sign of victory. Then, having heard that great tumult, Arjuna and Sri Krsna the Lord of all lords, who was acting as the charioteer of Arjuna, sitting in their great chariot which was powerful enough to coner the three worlds; blew their divine conchs Srimad Pancajanya and Devadatta. Then, both Yudhisthira and Bhima blew their respective conchs separately. That tumult rent asunder the hearts of your sons, led by Duryodhana. The sons of Dhrtarastra then thought, 'Our cause is almost lost now itself.' So said Sanjaya to Dhrtarastra who was longing for their victory.
Sanjaya said to Dhrtarastra: Then, seeing the Kauravas, who were ready for battle, Arjuna, who had Hanuman, noted for his exploit of burning Lanka, as the emblem on his flag on his chariot, directed his charioteer Sri Krsna, the Supreme Lord-who is overcome by parental love for those who take shelter in Him who is the treasure-house of knowledge, power, lordship, energy, potency and splendour, whose sportive delight brings about the origin, sustentation and dissolution of the entire cosmos at His will, who is the Lord of the senses, who controls in all ways the senses inner and outer of all, superior and inferior - by saying, 'Station my chariot in an appropriate place in order that I may see exactly my enemies who are eager for battle.'