Inconsistencies in Mahabharata

Why is the Mahabharata relevant even today. Even more than that, why is it discussed so ardently even today?

One of the things I realised was that each of us has our interpretation, our own 'headcanon', our own MBH in our heads.

Main reason for this are the numerous critical junctures in the story which have spawned various different versions in the text itself, probably as MBH was composed so long ago & there were so many different additions, interpolations over the years.

Let's discuss those.

Some of the critical junctures (from the top of my mind)

1. Draupadi's rejection of Karna at her swayamvar/ Karna's failure at swayamvar - This one has sparked so many debates on what really happened. Major versions say Karna failed. Some say Draupadi rejected him saying "Naaham varaami sutaputram".

2. Whether Draupadi's vastraharan really happened or she was only dragged by her hair?

3. Who killed Bhishma? Arjuna or Shikhandi?

Which are the others on which there's heavy debate and on which we can never agree on?

About the second part I am sure that the Vastraharan was at least attempted (whether they could proceed with it or not is a different thing)

All the versions are consistent on this part.

Another discrepancy which I feel is whether Bheeshm was actually willing for the Pandavas win? I read somewhere he said Karna to kill all the five Pandavas. I don't think he would have behaved that way had he actually willing of Pandavas victory

Arjuna's exile is 13 months in the summary given by Vaishampayana at the beginning of Adi Parva, then 12 years.

‘“Then, for some reason, Dharmaraja Yudhishthira sent his brother Dhananjaya21 to theforest. He lived in the forest for one year and one month. He once went to Hrishikesha22 inDvaravati and there obtained as his wife Subhadra, with eyes like the blue lotus, sweet ofspeech and Vasudeva’s younger sister. As Shachi23with the great Indra and Shri24 withKrishna, Subhadra was delighted to be united with Pandu’s son, Arjuna. O supreme amongkings! Kunti’s son and Vasudeva then satisfied Agni by giving him - CE, Book 1, Adi-vamshavatarana Parva, part 55

Amba's beau is called Shalya in one spot by Bheeshma and Salwa in the other, adding to my certainty the patriarch made up that story later to save face.

Polyandry is not mentioned at all in the summary given by Vaishampayana.

In the Panchali wedding scene, the priest performs only Yudhishtira-Panchali marriage rites. Then, he is specifically stated to leave. The remaining four brothers apparently took her hand in marriage. KMG adds the phrase "aided by the priest," but CE completely omits it.

‘Then the priest58 who knew the Vedas built and lit the sacrificial fire and pouredofferings, with mantras. He then called Yudhishthira and united him with Krishna. Then theVeda-knowing one married them, making them walk around the fire, hand in hand. Then thepriest took leave of that ornament of battle59 and went out of the palace. Then thosemaharathas, bringers of fame to the Kuru lineage, sons of a king among men, took the handof that supreme among women, in succession, one day after another.60 - CE, Book 1, Vaivahika Parva, part 190

In the dice hall scene, there is one sentence where Panchali first goes to court to stand before the king, then the very next sentences has Dusshasan dragging her to court. This is in CE, not KMG.

Panchali was going through her menses then. She was weeping and clad in a single garmenttied below the navel, she went to the sabha and stood before her father-in-law.195 Looking atthe faces of the assembly, King Duryodhana delightedly told the suta,196 “O Pratikamin!Bring her here. Let her be in front of us, so that the Kouravas can speak to her.” The suta wasin his197 servitude, but was scared of the wrath of Drupada’s daughter. Giving up his pride,he told the assembly, “How can I speak to Krishna?” Duryodhana said, “O Duhshasana! Thisson of a suta has limited intelligence. He is frightened of Vrikodara. Go and bring Yajnasenihere yourself. Our rivals are now under our control. They can do nothing.” Having heard hisbrother, the prince198 arose. His eyes were red with anger. He entered the house of thosemaharathas and told Princess Droupadi, “O Panchali! O Krishna! You have been won by us.Look upon Duryodhana without any shame. O one with eyes like long lotus petals! You willnow love the Kurus. You have been won in accordance with dharma. Come to the sabha.” - CE, Book 2, Dyuta Parva, part 285 (60)

(NOTE: Dusshasana says "you will now love the Kurus." If there was ever any doubt in anyone's mind she would've been a sex slave, this should dispel it).

Actually, prior dice hall scene, the only question Panchali asks is who Yudhishtira lost first? Himself or her? She doesn't put forth the argument at the time that she was not a slave. When she arrives in court, Bheeshma says she is unable to answer her question as to whether she is a slave when she hadn't even asked it yet! This could be considered a response to the natural extension of her original question, so it might not be a contradiction.

Srutakarma is variously called son of Arjuna, son of Bheema, and son of one of the twins (I forget who).

Abhimanyu is constantly called "son of Krishna" in war parvas although it could be to signify their emotional bond.

Krishna, in his conversation with Vasudeva later, calls Shikhandi the general of the Pandava army while it's Dhrishtadyumna in war parvas.

____________________________________

There are so many more. Whenever I think of them, I'll post. This should be a pinned thread IMO.

____________________________________

Karna's rejection, in the very few versions where present, is in just one scene. There is nothing to contradict it.

Also, there's nothing to contradict Panchali's vastraharan, either. It's only that it's hardly mentioned after. I think Bheema once talks about it after (I don't have citation and am not going looking for it😆).

Cheerharan was probably edited because it was too uncomfortable for them to imagine it and justify Yudi after it

Inconsistent is Yudi for me

Another one which I always wondered about:

Hearing the words of Draupadi, Krishna was deeply moved. And leaving his seat, the benevolent one from compassion, arrived there on foot.

This is during dice hall.

If he arrived, no one saw him. Also, Krishna says to Yudhishtira later on that he didn't know about the dice game, and he was busy fighting Salva.

ETA. Krishna arriving on foot was removed by CE.

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

Another one which I always wondered about:

Hearing the words of Draupadi, Krishna was deeply moved. And leaving his seat, the benevolent one from compassion, arrived there on foot.

This is during dice hall.

If he arrived, no one saw him. Also, Krishna says to Yudhishtira later on that he didn't know about the dice game, and he was busy fighting Salva.

ETA. Krishna arriving on foot was removed by CE.

Him arriving would definitely be an interpolation. Probably some one who didn't want to believe in divinity during early age of the common era mentioned his physical presence to account for the theories of Him saving Draupadi by some divine intervention

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

Him arriving would definitely be an interpolation. Probably some one who didn't want to believe in divinity during early age of the common era mentioned his physical presence to account for the theories of Him saving Draupadi by some divine intervention

If he heard Panchali from where he was, how could it be a non-divine interp? Also, the text doesn't say Krishna saved Panchali, in KMG or CE. I don't know where that interp came from from. KMG says Panchali's own dharma (small d) saved her. Southern recension says the women did, and my money is on Subhadra since she and Kunti and Karenumati were clearly with them as seen later. Or perhaps Kunti as she later calls Karna a wretch who wanted to eat her children; she might've seen first hand what her firstborn was like.

ETA. KMG says Dharma. So could be Vidura also as Vyasa later says Vidura is Dharma.

One thing purely from the KMG edition (I have not read BORI CE), is after the Raja suya yagna, when Duryodhana falls in the water in Indraprastha.

In the KMG version, Bhima Arjuna Nakula Sahadeva laugh at Duryodhana along with other people present there. Panchali ofcourse is no where present in that scene at all.

Later, when Duryodhana is recounting the events to Shakuni, he mentions that Bhima Arjuna the twins and Panchali also laughed at me.

This seems to me an interpolation as apparently it's not there in CE.

Here is shree Krishna chalisa

And chalisa always tell fact

And in Krishna chalisa there is verse cheer sahara it means draupdi cheer haran happen

https://hindi.webdunia.com/aarti-chalisa/krishna-chalisa-119082200044_1.html

It was said that Lord shiv behead ganesh head but that is not true. Lord shiv didn't not behead ganesh but it is written in ganesh chalisa when shani dev as soon he put eyes on ganesh ganesh head get behead

One can refer to chalisa too to clear confusion

Originally posted by: Eloquent

One thing purely from the KMG edition (I have not read BORI CE), is after the Raja suya yagna, when Duryodhana falls in the water in Indraprastha.

In the KMG version, Bhima Arjuna Nakula Sahadeva laugh at Duryodhana along with other people present there. Panchali ofcourse is no where present in that scene at all.

Later, when Duryodhana is recounting the events to Shakuni, he mentions that Bhima Arjuna the twins and Panchali also laughed at me.

This seems to me an interpolation as apparently it's not there in CE.

He could've lied.😆Uncharitable view, but considering what he did to her, accusation of lying is the least.