[Y-Indology] kArSNeya and kRSNau

[Guest guest]

The 5 kArSNeya-s in Mahabharata 8.31.66 are obviously the 5 sons of

KrSNA=draupadI. zalya describes first arjuna (as karNa's main enemy)

(vs.58-61), then arjuna's brothers bhIma (62 f.), yudhiSThira (64), nakula

and sahadeva (65), then their 5 sons by draupadI (66), and finally

draupadI's brothers (67).

 

As to kRSNau = 'kRSNa and arjuna' cf. pitarau = father and mother. So I

would consider arjuna = kRSNa = black as a late interpretation that is

being based on a linguistic misunderstanding. How much weight you will

attribute to it depends on how interested you are in the later layers of

the epic.

 

Best regards,

Georg v. Simson

[Guest guest]

> The 5 kArSNeya-s in Mahabharata 8.31.66 are obviously the 5 sons of

> KrSNA=draupadI. zalya describes first arjuna (as karNa's main enemy)

> (vs.58-61), then arjuna's brothers bhIma (62 f.), yudhiSThira (64), nakula

> and sahadeva (65), then their 5 sons by draupadI (66), and finally

> draupadI's brothers (67).

 

You're clearly right about the 5 kArSNeyas here. If I had read the two

following zlokas I would have seen it did not refer to the Pandavas. But I

wanted a non-matronymic instance of an -eya suffix, so I stopped short,

taking 66 as a summation of the preceding and rejecting the idea that these

were the five draupadeyas. So, yes, it is a matronymic here.

 

>

> As to kRSNau = 'kRSNa and arjuna' cf. pitarau = father and mother. So I

> would consider arjuna = kRSNa = black as a late interpretation that is

> being based on a linguistic misunderstanding. How much weight you will

> attribute to it depends on how interested you are in the later layers of

> the epic.

>

 

As to early and late in the MBh: Some elements of the text are certainly

relatively early (most of the 'irregular' tristubhs), but they do not leave

us with much of a text when they are abstracted from the received text. We

are left with fragments, no BhArata. On the other hand, some things are

clearly rather late and relatively detachable; that is, if one reads the

text without them what remains seems little altered (the NArAyaNIya is

perhaps the easiest example). But most of the MBh lies somewhere between

"clearly early" and "clearly late."

 

I would tend to agree that any literary exploitation of the kRSNatva of

Arjuna is probably on the later rather than the earlier side, but the

kRSNatva of Draupadi and Vyasa seems earlier than that of Arjuna.

And the kRSNatva of VAsudeva? I do not follow Biardeau and

Hiltebeitel in seeing bhakti at the heart of the MBh--much of what that

interpretation depends upon is, I think, relatively later, including most of

the Bhagavad Gita--but even with that said there is, I think, a lot left of

Krishna in the MBh and a lot of that is "obscure,divinely mysterious."

Or would you rule out his occasioning the jihmopAya-s (Yudhisthira's lie to

Drona, etc.) too?

 

Even if we postulate that the first narrative interest and "core" of the

BhArata epic story is Yudhisthira's quest for "rule" (in some sense the

narrative is "most earnest" between Yudhisthira's RAjasUya and his

AbhiSeka/Azvamedha), I don't think we have much of that left without the

divinely fathered Pandavas. Likewise if we take away the elements of the

intervening narrative that seem deliberately composed after the paradigm

of the old Indra-VRtra battle--the see-sawing back and forth of the

narrative, with the heroes alternate waxing and waning, from

Yudhisthira's temporary waxing at his RAjasUya to his waning during the

exile, his disappearance during the incognito, and his re-emergence at the

end of VirATa, setting the stage for the see-sawing of the battle until the

slaying of Karna--what do we have left in the intervening narrative? I

bring this in to say that given these postulates, the idea that Visnu would

also

be there "early" as a fundamental supporter to the Indra figure/figures

seems

highly plausible (KRSNa VAsudeva), as does the assistance of "the brahmins,"

represented by KRSNa Dv. VyAsa. An oppposition of overt Pandavas and covert

Visnu

and brahmins seems a plausible early element in this and does not depend

upon any elements of the text that are easily excisable as later. I would

say that bringing ZrI into this constellation as a covert divine agency

(KRSNA

Draupadi) seems an innovation, in terms of the Indra-VRtra paradigm, and

may well come later than the other elements sketched here.

 

Best wishes,

Jim Fitzgerald

[Guest guest]

Jim Fitzgerald wrote:

 

(snip)

> But most of the MBh lies somewhere between "clearly early"

>and "clearly late."

 

Certainly. My only point was to claim that Arjuna's blackness probably does

not belong to the original plot of the epic.

 

> but the

>kRSNatva of Draupadi and Vyasa seems earlier than that of Arjuna.

 

Yes, most probably. But I am not convinced that the meaning (symbolic or

otherwise) of blackness has to be the same in each of the cases of

Draupadi, Vyasa, Krsna and (later) Arjuna. In the case of Draupadi, I would

see the blackness of the earth as background (in contrast with the light of

the sky - dyu). Another possibility would be the blackness of the burnt

spots of the vedI, from which she is born. In contrast, her brother

Dhrstadyumna is born from the sacrifical fire and thus seems to represent

Agni.

I am not so sure about Vyasa's blackness. In this case you might be right

suggesting obscurity or opacity (he is all the time lurking in the

background) or similar conceptions.

 

>And the kRSNatva of VAsudeva?

 

The dark moon, of course :-) (what did I say for the last 17 years?) I am

glad you mentioned that concept, too!

 

(snip)

> the elements of the

>intervening narrative that seem deliberately composed after the

> paradigm

>of the old Indra-VRtra battle--the see-sawing back and forth of the

>narrative, with the heroes alternate waxing and waning, from

>Yudhisthira's temporary waxing at his RAjasUya to his waning during the

>exile, his disappearance during the incognito, and his re-emergence at the

>end of VirATa, setting the stage for the see-sawing of the battle until the

>slaying of Karna--

 

I would see this as a reflection of an ancient year myth (see my article in

R. Sternemann (ed.), Bopp-Symposium 1992 ..., Heidelberg 1994. p. 230-247).

That means that in addition to the Indra-Vrtra paradigm you mention, other

mythical images may have been at work, too.

Thank you for communicating your interesting reflections on the Mbh. to us!

 

Best wishes,

Georg v. Simson

[Guest guest]

INDOLOGY, "James L. Fitzgerald" <jfitzge1@u...> wrote:

> [...] But I wanted a non-matronymic instance of an -eya suffix,

 

If I had bothered to think for a few minutes before my post that

started this particular thread, I would have remembered aagneya,

aatreya, maaNDukeya. Interestingly Panini's list of words in -eya

is as follows: matronymics, from two syllabled names ending in -i

as long as they are not patronymics in -i, and a long list of

specific words most of which don't seem to be common use. But in

Panini's presentation, kaarSNeya can (apparently) only be a

matronymic.

[Guest guest]

Strictly speaking the counterpart of "patronymic" is "metronymic" not

"matronymic"--it's from a Greek, not a Latin root.

 

Valerie J Roebuck

Manchester

 

>INDOLOGY, "James L. Fitzgerald" <jfitzge1@u...> wrote:

>> [...] But I wanted a non-matronymic instance of an -eya suffix,