Vālmiki in Vyāsa

 

The devil can cite Scripture for his purpose 

(The Bard, The Merchant of Venice)

Context

In the Drona Parva, Bhūriśravas is engaged in a battle with Sātyaki. He renders Sātyaki unconscious and almost beheads him. Arjuna - urged by Krishna - intervenes to dismember Bhūriśravas's arm, leading to one of those excellent exchanges about the fuzziness of morality in the battlefield, that Mahabharatham is replete with. The enervated Bhūriśravas sheds his arms and begins to fast to death on the battlefriend. 

But Satyaki regains consciousness and beheads him. The entire Kaurava army rails at him for his un-Kshatriya-like action. And Satyaki defends his actions elaborately.

As a final point when making his case he says:

M.N.Dutt translates the verses thus:

Kisari Mohan Ganguly, who translated the Mahabharatham chapter by chapter says thus:

In days of yore, Valmiki sang this verse on earth, viz., 'Thou sayest, O ape, that women should not be slain. In all ages, however, men should always, with resolute care, accomplish that which gives pain to enemies.'

Intertextuality

Now, this intertextuality made me pause for two reasons

1. Even with my chronically limited Sanskrit literacy I can see that line spoken by Satyaki does not have anything approaching "O ape you say women should not be slain" and all that. It only seems to say AFAI understand: the couplet sung by Vālmiki on this earth, one should inflict difficulties (pīdākāram) on enemies (amitrānam) and this should be done resolutely (kartavyam) 
2.  So, is Sātyaki then specifically quoting a line, which is uttered by someone in Valmiki Ramayana as response to an ape who must have said women should not be killed? (And that is what both Dutt and Ganguly have supplied context to in their translations, without explicit saying which Valmiki shlōka it is?)

I found the Vālmiki shloka that Sātyaki is quoting : Yuddha Kanda Sarga 81, Shloka 28

The second half of this verse is EXACTLY what is mentioned by Satyaki. i.e. Satyaki was not essentializing but he was indeed quoting Valmiki verbatim

pīḍākaram amitrāṇāṅ yat syāt kartavyam ēva tat

And the translators of the Mahabharatha (Dutt & Ganguly) were providing the context by giving the meaning of the first half of the shlōka also.

Says Who?

So where does this exchange between Indrajith and Hanuman take place?

It is during the Māya-Sītā padalam. Indrajith creates an illusory Sītā lookalike and kills her in the presence of Hanuman, in a bid to demoralise the vānara army.

So, Sātyaki is indeed quoting Vālmiki to make his case. But whose words are those? Those are the words of Indrajit defending the purported murder of Sita herself!

And that is what Satyaki is throwing back at the Kauravas to defend his killing of Bhūriśravas!

Appeal to Authority (btw you are NO authority, please sit down)

Whenever you feel the urge to reductively judge anything in the itihāsas (e.g. sophomoric owns like DrōNa X Ekalavya, Sita Agnipravésa, Shambuka vadha) - you would be best served to remind yourself that these tales were not discovered by the deconstructions of latter day bleeding heart literary archeologist; but presented as such by Vālmiki and Vyāsa. They urge a consideration of the complexities inherent therein. 

What a marvellous moment by Vyasa to show Satyaki  resorting to argumentum ab auctoritate, as a retort to the Kauravas who shame him of un-Kshatriya like behaviour. And he seems to be resting on the confidence that those at the receiving end would be ignorant of the fact that the lines were spoken by a malicious self-serving villain. His confidence that his misquotation would find purchase is timeless.

Vyāsa the Master

Now, Vyāsa didn't just throw in a misquotation with a poker-face. He did more.

Before they begin their battle, Bhūriśravas and Sātyaki taunt each other with threats of vanquishing the other in their upcoming battle - as is the standard in many many face-offs in The Great War.

However there is a specific assertion that Bhūriśravas makes wherein our grandsire's smile is discernible:

M.N.Dutt translates this verse as

Ganguly's translation too says the same:

Slain by me in battle, thou shalt today proceed to the abode of Yama, like Ravana's son (Indrajit) slain by Lakshmana, the younger brother of Rama.

Mind you, there is no invocation of Ramayana anywhere thereabouts in that exchange till then. It seems to come from nowhere

So, it is reasonable to infer, that this is a very specific aesthetic choice by Vyāsa.

Thus you have Bhūriśravas comparing himself to Lakshmana and Sātyaki to Indrajit.

It is for us to muse who he may considered to be his Rama and who he may have considered Sātyaki's RāvaNa.

And then when he is killed, Vyāsa has Sātyaki defending his actions by quoting  Vālmiki, completely shorn off context.

But, dear reader, Vyāsa has left the trail for us to read and enjoy.

Ars Longa, Vita Brevis

                                                                                  *****

Post Script: 

Much thanks to a typically prurient Dravideologue, I got to learn about the name Yūpakétu mentioned in this wonderful story in SkandapurāNa  

Pro tip: follow Dravida philistines who take the effort to read puranas to post excerpts which they think will provoke embarrassment

Then go read the puranas & get blown away by the peerless world they portray & the import of the stories

Today’s haul:https://t.co/AwxYxdeI5U

— dagalti (@dagalti) November 18, 2023

And then I came to know the Yūpakétu was another name of Bhūriśravas.

And that got me reading this whole episode

Aano bhadra krtavo yantu vishwatah

May noble thoughts approach us from all directions