Query regarding Mahabharata--"Devadatta conch"

[Jay Nityananda Das]

Respected Scholars,

Namo Namah.

Mahabharata describes Maya Danava giving the Devadatta conch, which belonged to Varuna, to Arjuna after the burning of the Khandava forest [Ref:Mahabharata, Gitapress edition, Sabha-parva, chapter 3, verse 8 and 12].

Later, MB describes Lord Indra giving it to Arjuna when Arjuna visited Svarga.[Ref:Mahabharata, Gitapress edition, Vana-parva, chapter 174, verse 5]

How is this possible? Any answers with Shastra-Pramana will be highly appreciated. 

Thanks in advance, 

 

das,

Jaya Nityananda Dasa

("Nandagrama" Varnasrama Community Project)

[venkat veeraraghavan]

Dear Shri Nityananda ji

Firstly let me answer your question with a thought experiment:

If a person from 1900 were to stumble onto a time machine (left there conveniently by someone in the distant future) and travel to Jan 2017 (we will keep the date pre corona for academic purposes :) ) he/she will not be able to understand why people who possess an iphone buy another iphone ...now we have contextual knowledge and hence know that the buyer earlier had version x and is now buying x+1 with extra features and "benefits".

Without contextual knowledge understanding will not come.

You will also have to ask why did Arjuna perform tapasya towards Maheshvara for Brahmashiras when he already had received that astra with all attendant mantras from his Guru Drona. (there are too many references for this in the MB).

He had also previously received all the astras that he later received from the other devatas.

And as you mention the devadutta.

Is this a redundancy? 

It is not known in intimate detail how astras operate or what the other attendant "context" of the shankha is, because we as a society have given up most of those contextual roots/rituals and practices.

So what follows falls under the realm of "speculation" as you people would call it.

Indra is the presiding devata of the devadatta shankha and Arjuna himself is an amsha of Indra.

Just as Maheshvara is the presiding deity of the brahmashira /pAshupata Brahma for the brahmAstra and so on.

These astras/ shankha were sentient instruments and not pieces of antique that can be claimed by the likes of Indiana Jones. 

The potency of each is directly proportional to the tapasshakti invested in it.

If this were not the case Krishna would not have said: "brahmaNya satyavAdIca tapasvI niyatavrata ..." when describing the prowess of Karna to Arjuna.

Receiving something from the presiding deity is a few orders higher than receiving it from a human Guru.

Think of this as follows: If one approaches a river one can collect so much water (subject to season) if one approaches the ocean one can collect unlimited water (irrespective of season).

Also from the perspective of shakti a disciple cannot in a shaktipata receive more shakti than a Guru is capable of giving. Which makes the Guru and disciple's capacities roughly equal. (Shakti does not operate like water ie I have 10 litres of milk I give 2l to you 2l to X and am left with 6l.....)

Since Arjuna was to fight a battle with his own Gurus, he had to go directly to "source" in order to re-receive.

The effect is apparent in the war of virata where on a single chariot he defeated repeatedly (singly one on one and together when they all attacked him concertedly) all the maharathis of the Kaurava army that included Bhishma, Drona, Krpa, Ashwatthama and Karna...who were acknowledged as the best warriors of their time.

Kind Regards

[Jay Nityananda Das]

Dear Sri Venkat Veeraraghavan ji,

Namo Namah.

Thanks for spending time and sharing your valuable reflections on the issue. I very much appreciate the reasoning of Your good self, that is very much in line with the traditional reasoning, and I hope I will continue to be benefited by such thoughtful comments in future. 

By reading your comments, one more possibility comes to my mind that I would like to share here for everyone's consideration . It doesn't have any shastric support, however, I leave it up to the respected members of this forum for comment/correction.

Arjuna's receiving divine weapons or Devadatta conch two times in Mahabharata is not necessary a confusion.

In the case of divine weapons, even if they are sentient beings and have the same nomenclature due to particular function they are called for (e.g. any Agneyastra is meant for producing fire), and thus, have their own individuality different than the other divine weapons of the same nomenclature, they are different in terms of their penetrating power. i.e. the penetrating power of Agneyastra, which Arjuna received from Guru Dronacharya must be of lower rank than the Agneyastra, which he received from demigods. I take it as analogous to purchasing a steel chair of average quality from a local company and purchasing the same from the Salem steel plant (I am not marketing here, I am a monk). Both are still called steel chairs, however, the quality is different.

In the case of Devadatta conch, the one which Arjuna received from Maya Danava was originally belong to demigod Varuna, whereas the other one with the same nomenclature, which he received from the king of demigods, Lord Indra, was the personal conch of Lord Indra. My guess is that Arjuna had two conchs of the same nomenclature, and it should not be considered a sin to posses two conchs of the same name by any one let alone Arjuna, the son of Lord Indra.

I will be blessed to receive corrections for both the possibilities,

 

das,

Jaya Nityananda Dasa

("Nandagrama" Varnasrama Community Project)

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/08c80b90-00f3-418c-bd26-b7610a1465e8n%40googlegroups.com.

[Damodara Dasa]

Hare Krishna.

Respected Vidvaj-janas,

Nice to hear some explanations about the Devadatta conch's being
received twice by Arjuna -- one from Maya Danava and another from
Indra.

However, I am also curious to know if there still is some explanation
which is based on literatures like Puranas, itihasas or their
commentaries or in some literatures written by traditional acharyas
like Shankaracarya, Madhvacarya, etc.

Thankyou,
Hari Guru Vaisnava das,
damodara das