THE JAIMINIBHARATA AND ITS EASTERN

VERNACULAR VERSIONS
W. L. Smith

purãpa pabitra kathã prati ghare ghare I

jayadeba jaiminibhårata patha kare lll

The purã4as and holy stories [are heard] in every home,

and Jayadeva and the Jaiminibhãrata a¡e read.

In the above verse from an 18th century Bengali folk epic by

the Dharma mañgal,
Mãnikrãm Ganguli, the poet describes a village inhabited by religious people: it is one in
which the sacred texts a¡e read and the sacred stories are recited. Only two texts are
named. Though alliterative considerations played a role in the the poet's choice of titles,
those selected obviously must have ranked arnongst the most highly regarded religious
works of his day. Jayadeva's Gîtagovinda is not a surprising choice but the Jaimini-
bhãrata may seem to be one. The Jaiminibhãrata, which describes the horse sacrifice of
Yudhig$hira, however, enjoyed an impressive popularity in eastem India in Manik¡ãm's
day as can be seen by the large number of versions of it found in Assamese, Bengali and
Oriya. In Assam the poet Haribar Bipra, who is of uncertain date,2 rendered several of its
episodes into Old Assamese, namely the Lavakuíar yuddha3, the Babhruvãhanar
yuddhaa and, perhapss, úteTãmradhvajar yuddha. Another Assamese poet Gangadhar,
also of unknown date, treated the fhst subject again in his Si¿ära banabasí and the entire
Jaiminibhãrara was rendered in Assamese by three poets, Gangadãs, Bhavanidãs and
Subuddhi Ray between the l6th and lTth centuries and inserted into the Assamese Maha-
bharata where it replaces the fourteenth parvan.T The theme was equally popular in
Bengal. There is an early independent Bengali version of the Jaiminibhãrata by Srikara
Nandïs, and versions of it are included in the Mahabhãîatas of Kãiirãm Dãsg and Kabi
I
Datta & Da¡ta 1960: 223.
)
Some historians of Assamese literature identify the Haribar's patron with King Durlabhnãrãyan of
Kamatã who ruled at the end of the l3ù century, or King Durlebhendra of Kamatã who ruled at the
beginning of the l6th century; for a discussion of this see Barua ( 1964: l0) and Sarma ( 1972: 8l ).
Both the language and the subject matter of these works suggest, however, a much later date.
3
See bibliography: Lavakuóar yuddha 1959,
4 & Neog 1960.
See bibliography: Baruvã
5
lrs authorship is doubtful (Sarma 1972: 89-90),
6
See bibliography: Sîtãra hanabas 1975.
7
See bibliography: Dattabaruvã I 993.
I See bibliography: Kãbyatîrha & Sen 1912.
194 W. L. SMITH

Sañjaylo where, as in Assam, it takes the place of the Ãívamedhikapaman; the Lava KuSa
episode, in addition, appears in the Ramayapa of K¡ttibãsl | . Later Bengali versions of the
Jaiminibhã¡ata were made by Ananta Miira, Ghanaiyam Dãs and Dbija Premãnanda;
these still remain in manuscript (Sãstn l94l: $$ 4244). The popularity of the theme did
not abate with the coming of the British as there is a l9th century translation by Rãjaram
Dun, still in manuscript (ibid.: $ 46), a verse version by Kaliprasanna Bidyãratnal2 and a
free prose translation by Candranãth Basul3 Finally one can note Oriya versions by
Nilambara Dãsala and IndramaBi Sãhuls.

RESEARCH ON THE JAIMINIBHÃRATA

The Jaiminibhãrata, which is also referred to as the Jaimini-aívamedha, the Ãívamedhika-

paruan and even confused with the faiminiyasamhiñ,t6 has not excited a great deal of
interest amongst westem scholars. There even seems to be some confusion as to its con-
tents: some manuscripts of the Mairãva4acarita, an apocryphal Rãmãyaqa episode, claim
to be a pan of it (Raja 1973: 3ll) and Bengali manuscripts of the story of King Dandi,
absent from the Sanskrit original, claim the same (Sãstn l94l: g 46). There are a number
of printed editions of the Sanskrit text: Bombay editions from 1850, 1860, I 863 (which is
the one used here) 1885 and 1932, Calcutta 1870, and editions with Marathi (Wai l9l3),
Gujarati (Ahmedabad 1909¡tz and Hindi translations (Gorakhpur l96l).
The first westem scholar to comment on the Jaiminibhãra¡a was Albrecht Weber who
wrote an article on it in an obscure joumal in 1869. Not long thereafter H. Mögling
published portions of a Kannada translation n Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgen-
IöndischenGesellschaft between 1870 and 1873: this version by the poet LakçmlÉa is
said to be the most popular work in Kannada literature. In the following century Maurice
IWintemiø devoted a few pages to it in his history of lndian literature and in 1970 J.
Duncan M. Derrett wrote an article entitled Greece and India again: the Jaimini-
Aívamedha, the Alexander-romance and the Gospels where, because of the neglect it has
suffered, he calls the epic 'a Cinderella amongst Sanskrit compositions' (Denett 1970:
l9). As the title of his article announces, Denett believes the Jaiminibhãrata to be inspired
by various westem works. Also imponant is a summary of the contents of the
Jaiminibh-arata and a comparison of them to the ,4ivamedhikaparvan of the Mahãbhãrata
I See bibliography: Kõíîdãíí mahãbhãrata, s.a. The l{th parvan was not written by Kã5idãs bur by
Dbija Raghunãth.
l0 See bibliography: Ghoç 1966.
l¡ See bibliography: Datta 1901.
t2 See bibliography: Bidyãratna & Basãk 1884.
t3 See bibliography: Basu 1917.
l4 Noted by Duncan Denett (see below).
t5 See bibliography: Sãhu, s.a.
tó As is done by Sukumar Sen ( I 9? I : 75).
l7 Raja 1973:310.
 The Jaiminibhãrata and lts Eastern Vernacular Versions 195

Jaiminibhãrata and a comparison of them to the .4,ívamedhikaparvan of the Mahãbhãrata

by Raghunath Damodar Karmarkar in his critical edition of the fourteenth pa,nan
(Karmarkar 1960: xxiv-xliv).
Opinioni on the date of the Jaiminibhãrata, which seems to be connected with early
Pañcarãtra texts, especially the Nãrãyaryíyaparvan of the Mahãbharah,lS vary. Winter-
nitz writes that 'it is not earlier than the later sections of the Purã4a literature' and in any
case, later than the Bhãgavatapurõna which it quotes (Winterniu 1972: 586). Karmakar
(1960: xxiv) assigns it to the time around the beginning of the present era but gives no
reasons for doing so. Denett (1970:24,27) suggests 1100-1200, a date which seems
reasonable.

THE JAIMINIBHÃRATA AND THE ÃSVAMEDHIKAPARVAN

The Jaiminibhãrata has been called an upabhãrafa, a secondary Mahãbhãrata but if there
be such â genre of Indian literature, this seems to be the sole example of it. The naditional
account is that Vyãsa, the legendary author of the Mahãbhãrata, taught the Mahãbhãrata to
his five pupils Sumantu, Jaimini, Suka, Paila and Vaiiampãyana and each of them in thei¡
tum wrote his own version of the Mahãbhãrata; unfortunately these proved to be superior
to that of thei¡ mentor so the jealous Vyãsa ordered all of them to be destroyed. Only one
small fragment, tradition has it, managed to survive his envy: the ÃSvamedhikaparvan of
Jaimini.lg Jaimini's Bharata differs very much in its subject matter from the 14th parvan
of the Great Epic, which, as its editor, R. D. Karmarkar, points out, 'though named ,4sva-
medhikaþarvanl does not say much about the aévamedha' (Karmarkar 1960: xxiv); the
Jaiminibhãrata, on the other hand, does actually deal with the horse sacrifice, The
Mahãbhãrata version, after treating other matters, finally comes round to an account of the
horse sacrifice only in its sevenry-first adhyãya where it describes how Arjuna follows
the sacrificial st¡llion in its wanderings and encounters and defeats various kings, all of
whom are the sons of monarchs killed by the Pædavas and their allies in the great Bhãrata
war. These kings are never slain since Yudhislhi¡a has told Arjuna that enough blood has
been shed and orders that their lives be spared (14.75.20). These confrontations a¡e de-
scribed quite briefly with the exception of the dramatic confrontation between Arjuna and
his son Babhruvãhana, king of Ma4ipura. The entire Ãívamedhikaparvan is 96 adhyãyas
long, little more than a quârter of which are concemed with the horse sacrifice proper.
The Jaiminibhãrata is a different work with a different caste of characters. In the
Mahãbhã¡ata Arjuna acts alone. In the Jaiminibhãrata he is accompanied by Vrçaketu, the
son of his erstwhile foe Karna, Meghavar4a, son of the demon Ghaptkaca and grandson
of Bhima, neither of whom are mentioned in the Mahãbhã¡ata, and K¡94a's sons
Pradyumna and Aniruddha. Now and then K¡g4a tums up to lend a hand and Hanumãn,
18 This was pointed out ro me in a personal communication by Petteri Koskikallio whose study, Tåe
V{andering Horse: From Vedic Horse Sacrifice to Post-Vedic Rirual ldeology, is forthcoming. I am
also indebted to him for much of the other information here,
l9 The Mãrkar¡/eyapurã7a tells a story of how Jaimini has a conversation wi¡h four wise birds in the
Vindhyã Moun¡ains on points in the Mahãbhãrata which were unclear (Rocher 1986: 192).
t96 W. L. SMITH

princes n:rmed YauvanãSva,2o, Niladhva¡a, Haqrsadhvaja, Sudhanvâ, Suratha, T-amra-

dhvaja, Mayùradhvaja, Candrahãsa and Duh6ãla, with one exception,2l unmentioned in
and unrelated to the kings of the Mahãbhãrata. One episode and one episode only has
been taken from the Ãívamedhikaparvan: the story of Arjuna's encounter with his son
Babhruvâhana (JBh 22-24,3740} When Aduna discovers that the ruler of Ma4ipur is
Babhruvãhana, his son by Citrãngadã, and prepares to do battle with him, he asks whether
any other hero has found himself in such a situation. In response he is told the story of
Ku6a and Lava and the resulting story takes up chapters 25 to 36 of the Jaiminibhãraa
making it the longest single episode in it; thus just as the Mahãbhãrata contains a version
of the Rãmãya4a in form of the Rãmopakhyana.

THE KUSA LAVA EPISODE

The Ku6a Lava episode22 appears in a number of variants. According to the Valmlkian
Rãmãyaqa, Rãma exiles his wife Sitã to the forest and she gives birth to twin sons, Lava
and Kuéa, in the ashram of Vãlmiki. V/hen the two boys grow up, the sage teaches them
the Rãmãyana and their recitation of it brings about their recognition by ttreir father. This
story is a later addition of the epic as is the Uttarakãnda of which it is a part. The oldest
version of the Kuéa and Lava tale or Kuíalavopakhyanã, is found in the Paumacariyaryt
of the Jaina poet Vimalasüri and a very sirnilar version is included inthe Padmapurõpa of.
another Jaina poet, Ravise4a. 'Hindu' versions of the story can be found in the Katha-
saritsãgara and the ÍJrørarãmacarita of Bhavabhüti.23 The most influential version,
however, is that found in the rãmãivamedha section of
úte Padmapurã4a,z4 where,
unlike earlierrecountings (with the partial exception of Bhavabhúti's play), it is part of an
account of Rãma's horse sacrifice. I-ava and Ku6a steal the sacrificial horse and capture
the warriors protecting it only to leam from thei¡ shocked mother that they have been
fighting thei¡ uncle Satrughna and that the horse belongs to their father. The account of
Kuóa and Lava in Jaiminibh-a¡ata follows that in the Padmapurãna but extends it: there,
after Rãma's sons defeat Satrugna, the final episode The purörya account, Rãma reacts by
despatching a second army under his brother LakSmaqa and when it is defeated, he leads a
third army himself, only to realize too late that he has been fighting his own sons and
suffering the same fate.

20 Yauvanã(va is the king from whom the sacrificial horse is stolen; ¡he others arc encountered in
confrontations provoked by the hones's wanderings.
2l An exception is Dut¡Sãla, son ofJayadratha, who drops dead of frighr when he hears that the horse
is being protected by Arjuna, who had killed his father in the Bhãrata war,
22 b the Padmapurãna and the Jaiminibhârata they are referred to as Kuía Lava and in lhe vemacular
versions ofthe story as Lava Kuía.
?3 Kãmil Bulke (1962 1lO-713) gives a briefsurvey ofthis and the other versions of the Kuia lava
tale. For details on these versions see r¡V. L. Smith, forthcoming.
24 The version consulted here is the Ãnandã6rama edition of 1894. lr is translated by N. A. Deshpande
( leeo).
 The Jaiminibhãrata and lts Eastern Vernacular Versions t97

third army himself, only to realize too late that he has been fighting his own sons and
suffering the same fate.
These two versions of the Kuia Lava episode are so close that it is obvious that one
must be indebted to rhe other and that the borrower must be the Jaiminibh-æa¡a. In the
purãna the Kuia Lava episode is the climax which the other encounten in the Ramãíva-
medha lead up to, while in the Jaiminibbãrata it is no more than a lengthy digression
which could be omined without affecting the rest of the narrative; later poets such as
Srikara Nandl, Kaóírãm Dãs and Kabi Sañjay realized this and did not include it in thei¡
versions of Jaimini's Bhàrata.zS
The KuÉa Lava episode might well have been the core around which the other
episodes of the RãmöSvamedha of tbe Padmapurãna collected; it is the oldest of its
episodes and much different in that it is not devotional in spirit while the others are
devotional tales. These other episodes tell how different kings or princes - king Subãhu
and his sons Damana, Suken¡ and Citrãnga; king Vlrama4i and his son Rulmãngada; and
king Suratha and his sons Campaka, Mohaka and Ripuñjaya - seize the sacrificial stallion
and provoke a battle with its guardians. What is striking is that all these warriors are
fervent devotees of Rãma whose aívamedha they do their best to thwart. Subãhu only
fighs Satrughna because he is suffering under a curse; Satyavan, is so fervent a devotee
that he has those of his subjects who do not worship Rãma are beaten with rods;
Vîramar.ri fights because of a boon given him by Siva; and Suratha only desists when
Rãma himself appears on the battlefield to give him darian. The devotional character of
the Rãmãívamedha helps suggest a date; the first devotional work written in Sansk¡it is
ùe Bhagavatapurana (9th century?) and R-ama bhakti was a later development, conse-
quently this section of the Padmapurãna must have been composed at least several
cenfuries after the Bhãgavatapurarya and the Jaiminibhãrata which borrows in tum from
it, must be still later. This makes a date of 1200-1300 seem reasonable.

DEVOTED ENEMIES

Several of the warriors faced by Arjuna and his army in the Jaiminibhãrata were later
canonized. The most famous and important of the North Indian hagiographic compendia,
the Bhakt mãl of Nãbhãdãs (c. 1600) with its commentary by Priyadãs (c. 1712) lists
Sudhanvã and Suratha, both slain by Aduna in battle (JBh 17-20), Mayúradhvaja, and
his son Tãmradhvaja who defeats Arjuna and KfSna in battle, (JBh a2-46) and
Niladhvaja (JBh 15) among the saints of the devotional movement. Niladhvaja, whose
daughter is manied to the fire god Agni, intercepts the sacrificial stallion and only
opposes Arjuna at the insistence of his wife Jvãlã. As a result his sons are killed in battle.
NTladhvaja then surrenders the horse and his enraged wife, after failing to bully him into
continuing the fight, commits suicide and to be transformed into the arrow which
Babhruvãhana later uses to kill his father Arjuna (JBh l5).

25
tr is perhaps also significant that bolh ¡he Rãmàívamedha of the Padmapurã4a and the Jaimini-
bhãrata are exactly 68 adhyãyos in length.
198 W. L. SMITH

same name as the devout king in the Padmapurdna), are sons of king Har¡sadhvaja.
Haqrsadhvaja seizes the sacrificial horse and orders his sons to come to the battlefield for
the impending fight under pain of death.2ó Sudhanvã, however, stops to take farewell to
his wife, Prabhãvati, who is childless, and when he does so, she tells him it is time for
Itugamana as prescribed by the dharmaiãstras. Sudhanvã then fr¡lfills his ma¡itial
obligations and as a consequence is late for the muster. Ha4sadhvaja, enraged at his
tardiness2T, consults with his two purohitas, Sankha and Likhita and sentences him to
death for disobedience. Sesame oil is brought to the boil in a huge ka¡Aha (an Indian wok)
and Sudhanvã, whose only regret is that he will not be able to behold K$ua,leaps into the
bubbling liquid. As soon as he lands in it, the oil becomes as cool as the water in a forest
pond and the surprised purohitas stare at Sudhanvã's head bobbing on its surface
munering name of Ha¡i and looking like a lotus afloat in a lake. Sankha then throws a
coconut in the oil to test its temperature and it bursts into two pieces one of which strikes
him in the head and the other Likhita. Realizing his misøke Sanktra¡umps into the oil and
embraces Sudhanvã. Har.nsadhvaja then forgives Sudhanvã who marches off to banle
where he proves himself to be a redouøble warrior by felling V¡çaketu, Pradyumna,
Anuiilva in short order before confronting Arjuna who decapitates him with an arrow.
Sudhanvã's brother, Suratha then takes the field. He is another fierce fighter and
defeats various Pãrrdava heroes before coming face to face with Arjuna. V/hen Arjuna
cuts off his right arm with an arrow; Suratha attacks with a club in his left; Arjuna cuts off
his left arm, Suratha then attacks him with his teeth; Arjuna shoots off his legs, but this
doesn't discourage him either, for he wiggles towards Arjuna like a snake so Arjuna
decapitates him like he did his brother.2s Krçna summons Garu{a to transport his head to
the Prayãg tirtha.When Siva sees Garuda passing by, he commands his servant, Bh¡ngin,
to take the head from Garuda so that he can string it on his the necklace of skulls. After a
scuffle the skull falls into the waters at Prayãg, where Nandi fishes it out and delivers it to
Siva. The battle is over. KISna then asks Har.nsadhvaja to embrace him, and this he does,
forgetting his anger and the grief for his sons; for what do such things matter to one who
has attained Krçna?

VIRABHAKTI

It seems remarkable that the actors in the RãmãSvamedha and Jaiminibhãrata fight fiercely
and enthusiasúcally against the representatives of the deity they adore and even the deity
himself. This less conventional mode of devotion, which apparently is first given
expression inthe Padmapurãna, is reminicent of dvesabhakti, 'hate-devotion' described

26 King Vïrama4i decrees the same punishment for stragglers in the Padnapurã4a (5.40.30). He,
however, is obeyed.
27 Har¡sadhvaja assumes tha¡ his absence indicates hostility to Krgna and he accuses his son of being
k¡g4aparanmukhaq çBh l'1.601.
28 The same scenario is found inrhe Padmapurãfa (5.20'86ff).
 The Jaiminibhãrata and |ts Eastern Vernacular Versions t99

himself. This less conventional mode of

devotion, which apparently is first given
expression ntJlre Padmapurãna, is reminicent of dve.sabhakri, 'hate-devotion'described
intheVipr¡upurãqa and later developed in the Bhãgavatapurãr.ta.ze Here it is claimed that
K¡çqa's enemies were saved because of thei¡ intense hate for him. According to the
Vi¡7upura4a SiSupaa was so filled with the fear of and hate for Knqra that his mind was
totally concentrated on him; since it is the ment¿l concentration on the deiry which is
essential, regardless of the motives for that concentration, Siíupãla is granted liberation.
The same mode of bhakli is also referred lo as saqtrambhamãrga, 'the path of rage'.3o 'I
consider even those demons as devotees', the Bhagavatapurãna states, 'who had fixed
their minds on the Lord of the Triple World through rage and who saw Lord K¡¡tra on the
battlefield approaching them, wielding his discus mounted on the back of Garu{a'.31
A later variant of this mode of bhakti is found in devotional R-ama literature, where it
is said that Rãma's foe, Rãva{ra, was actually a secret devotee and intentionally provoked
the wrath of Rãma by kidnapping Sitã in order to be killed by him knowing that a death at
his hands meant immediate t¡anslation to heaven. This scenario can be found in several
recensions of Vãlmiki as well as the Adhyãtmarõmãyana3z Rãva4a's hostitity is thus a
shame, an act played out in order to goad Rãma into slaying him. One more variant is
discussed in the technical literature of. bhakti, Reviewing the various modes or r¿sas of
bhakti inhis Bhqktirasãm¡tasindhu, Rùpa Gosvãmi discusses vîrabhakti,'heroic devo-
tion', whose practioners he divides into four categories: yuddha, dana, dayã and dharma-
vírøs. The yuddhavíra, he explains, is eager to please Krçr.ta by challenging him in battle
and gives as an example of a mock-battle (keliyuddha) one fought between K¡gqa and the
gopa Dhãnñ on an island in the Yamunã which was witnessed by an audience of
cowherds: KfSna shoots arrows at Dhãmã who knocks them down by swirling a stick
(laSuCa); Rúpa also points out that according to the Harivaryia Kr$na wrestled with
Arjuna and defeated him while Kuntl watched.33
None of these descriptions seem to adequately describe the situations in the
Jaiminibhãrata where the battles cannot be called mock-battles since they result in fatali-
ties; nor are Kr,$la's opponents motivated by hate for or rage at him like SiSupãla or are
they acting out roles like Rãvana. One of the vemacular poets, lndrama4i Sãhu, however,
does draw parallels to the last example. According to him, as Sudhanvã is preparing to
enter the battlefield, his father encourages him with the following words:

29 Perhaps ¡he first allusion made to i¡ is that in Bhãsa's Bõlacarita, where the bull-demon Arign
decides to at¡ack Kr$na in order to be slain by him and thereby gain heaven (Hardy 1983: E5).
30 See Sheth 1984: 147-154 The term saryramhhamãrga is used in rhe Visnupurd4a and in the
Bhãgavotapurãna and by Räpa Gosvãmi.
3l manyc'surãnhhagatãrys tryadhÍíe sarVrambhamãrgtdbhinivistacittãn ye saqtyuge'calçtata
tãrksap utramamie unahhayaudhamãpata ntaqr (Bhãgavaupurãna 3.2.24),
32 See W. L. Smith 19921 262.
33 øthã ca harivamíe, rathã ga4/ivadhanvãnar vikrí/anmadhustidanaþ I jigãya hharutaí¡eç¡hary
kunryãþ pramukharo vibhuþ ll Rùpagosvãmin, Bhaktirasãmlasindhu 4.3.10 (Haridãs Dãs 1943:
415).
200 w. L. SMtrH

If one is killed by his hand, one's abode is the heaven of V-aiku¡þa.[...]

Do righteous battle with him and gain release from rebinh.Ja

This is, however, exceptional. Otherwise the motives given by the protagonists them-
selves are two: first, the desire to behold the object of their devotion with their own eyes.
They want to have darian of K¡çna, Har¡rsadhvaja steals th€ sacrificial horse and pro-
vokes the battle because he knows 'where Arjuna is there without a doubt stands K¡¡¡a
himself'3s and he is aware that if he checks Arjuna on the battlefield, Krçna will come to
his aid. This is the reason he is so angry at his son Sudhanvã: his absence threatens to
deprive him of the sight of Krçna. The opposite takes place in the confrontation between
T-amradhvaja and K¡çna. Tãmradhvaja fells Krçna and, leaving him lying on the battle-
field, takes the captured sacrificial horse to the city to display it to his father. In Haribar
Bipra's description of this event, Tãmradhavaja's father Mayürdhvaja is enraged. How,
he tells his son, could he be so wicked (du$a); he's a sinner (papiptha) and a bad son
(kuputra):

'You got to touch Mãdhava,

I didn't [even] see Hari, that's my ill fate. [...]'
He scolded his sons in many way
36
[sinceJ he had had Govinda in his hands and abandoned him.

The second motive is obedience to one's own dharma. Sudhanvã, for example,
might at first consideration seem an unlikely saint: he disobeys his father's orders to order
to please his wife, is condemned to death for doing so, is saved by K¡çna Qtrabhãvãt
keíavasya,JBh 18.20), and then, ordered into battle by his father, does his best to defeat
Arjuna before being killed by him. The modem commentator of the Bhakt rndl (Nãbhãdãs
l93l: 167\ refers to Sudhanvã as ek strívratadhãrI and as famous for his dharma-
karmanis¡ha; one who supports his wife in the performance of her vows and one
assiduous in the performance of his dharmic duties; in other words, Sudhanvã was a
person who followed without deviation the dictates of paüdharma, husbandly duty, and
fought at the command of his father as prescribed by putradharma,his obligations as a
son, and beyond these heeded the obligations of k¡atriyadharma or vlradharma.
Vallãbhãcãrya notes that every devotee comes to experience Kr$na is the particular mood
(rasa) which is most appropriate to him; thus Bhîçma (the example he cites) related to
Krç¡a in terms of the vira rasa (Redington 1983: 364). For warriors like Niladhvaja,
Sudhanvã or T-amradhvaja, then, the battlefield is the most appropriate place for them to
experience Kfçna. Sudhanvã's father, as has been seen in Indramaîi Sãhu's 8.råa¡
jaiminibhãrard, urges his son against Arjuna telling him to 'ñght righteous battle', nyãla
yuddha kara: the adjective nyãj,a'nghteous', i.e.'according to the rules of dharma' is
34 parikaja locana íyãma naba jaladhara I tanka sañge hhakti hhãhe karihu samara ll
tretãyuge rãhana ye rãma droha kari I yuddha kari mala mukti dele ta¡iku hari ll
tãhãnka dariane hue pöpã tõpa dhharysa I tã¡iku haste mrryu hele bekun¡hare hasa ll [.,.)
tõñka sañge nyãj,a yuddhe paa moþapadu I (Sãhu, s.a.: I 22).
35 yatrõrjunas tatra hariþ svayatp tiplhaty asamíaya (JBh 17.ó).
3ó mãdhavaka pãili lãga I mai nedekhilo hari i¡o se ahh,ãgya ll1...)
aneka prakãre nindã karilã putaka I hãte pâi eri deva govindala ll (Baruvã & Neog 1960: I l9).
 The Jaiminibhõrata and lts Eastern Vernacular Versions 20r

experience K¡çna. Sudhanvã's father, as has been seen in Indramani Sãhu's B¡åar
jaiminibhãrara, urges his son against Arjuna telling him to 'fight righteous batlle', nyãya
yuddha karai the adjective nyãy'nghteous', i.e. 'according to the rules of dharma' is
used by the poet repeatedly. In Kabi Sañjay's poem Sudhanvã's sister tells him that his
family will laugh at him (åds¡be) if he is defeated by Arjuna, and he promises his mother,
who is equally eager for his success, that 'Following ksatriyadharma I will meet Vi94u in
battle. I never rum my face (from a fight).'32 Great emphasis is put on the requirements of
duty, disinterested duty as described in the Bhagavadgitã, meaning ones duty as a
warrior, no maner who ones opponent may be: whether a blood relative as in the
Mahãbhãrata or a fellow devotees as in the Jaiminibhãrata.
The same consideration is a factor in the snange story of Arjuna's confrontation with
his son Babhruvãhana. When Arjuna's army approaches his kingdom, Babhruvãhana
asks his minister, Subuddhi, how he should react. Subuddhi replies that his paramount
duty, paramadharma, is to show respect to his father, pit.rpúianam (JBh 22.28), so
Babhruvãhana dismounts from his chariot, approaches Aduna on foot, throws himself on
the ground at his feet and offers himself, his kingdom and all his treasure to him. In reply
Arjuna kicks and insults him. S. N. Sarma, commenting on this scene, criticizes Arjuna's
'unchival¡ous' behavior which he se€s as unworthy of him (Sarma 1972: 87). lühat
Arjuna is doing, however, is acting from motives of chivalry: he is enraged because his
son is not behaving asa ksatriya should behave and this is why he abuses him, accusing
him of not being his true son but a coward and acting bke a vaiíya rather than a Pã¡dava.
These insults are calculated to make him act as he should, and, just as Arjuna intends,
Bahruvãhana finally loses patience with his father, picks up his arms and, after a five-day
battle, slays him with the arrow Nrladhvaja's wife Jvãlã had been transformed into. The
situation is resolved when K$pa arrives to bring Arjuna back to life.
This episode also higtrlights another feature which has aroused comment. Arjuna,
Pradyumna, Aniruddha, Vrçaketu, Meghavar4a and the other Pãndava heroes (as they are
called) are frequently felled or even killed by their foes. The inferiority of Aùuna and his
allis5 þ¿5 been seen in a very negative light by some scholars. S. N. Sarma (1972: ll)
writes that 'the old mafial spririt and heroic ideals were toned down to popular sentiment-
alism', while R. D. Karmarka¡ (1960: xxiv) notes that '[according to tradition] the
Pãndavas were there [in Jaimini's lost Bhãratal shown in an unfavorable light', and notes
that 'the Pãndavas and K¡çr.la do cut a sorry figure throughout.' The modem commentator
of the Bhakt mål, feeling obliged to explain Arjuna's defeat at the hands of T-amradhvaja,
claims rhat T-am¡adhvaja was permined by Krçna to defeat Arjuna in order to rid Arjuna
of the disease (rog) of pride (garba) (Nábhãdãs l93l: 172). But this does not explain
why Tãmradhvaja also managed to defeat Kr9na. It seems more likely that the reason for
the defeats of Arjuna and the others is their opponents' great devotional fervor.
Devotional intensity is reflected in martial prowess. In this tradition the victor is he who is
morally, that is, devotionally, superior and here Arjuna does not have that advantage.

37 k;etrî dharmma anusàrl hisnu sange raqe I kariha himukha ãhmi nahe kadacane ll
(Ghos 196ó:573).
202 W. L. SMITH

OTHER EPISODES

The story of Tlamradhvaja who defeated both Arjuna and Krçna even after K¡sna had
destroyed lQ} akçauhinis of his troops with his discus displays a different devotional
motiv. Realizing that he could not overcome Tãmradhvaja on the battlefield, K¡ç4a re-
sorted to different tactics: he and Arjuna disguised themselves as brahmans and went to
Mayäradhvaja, the father of their foe, who, as a good Hindu monarch should, immedi-
ately offered to grant them whatever they wanted. K¡.SDa introduced himself as a brahman
named K¡çna6armã and said that while he and his son were travelling through the forest, a
lion seized his son. When he offered himself in his son's stead, the lion declined, but
offered to release the boy in exchange for half the body of king Mayäradhvaja whose
flesh was tender from a lifetime of eating the most delicate foods. Without the slightest
hesitation Mayúradhvaja agreed to sacrifice himself; when he was about to be sawn in
twain, K¡çqa revealed himself. Mayüradhvaja and his son then retumed the horse (JBh
S2-S9), Here we see a different mode oî bhakti, and one ultimately derived from the self-
sacrificing saints of Buddhism, along with the Buddha himself, 'who made sacrifices with
the flesh of his own body'.38
Another elaborate tale (JBh 50-55) tells the story of king Candrahãsa of Sarasvatl-
pura. It wâs this episode which monopolized the attention of both Weber and Wimemiø
in their respective wrirings on the Jaiminibh-arata because of the folklore motifs it contains.
This story has little to do with the horse sacrifice being instead concerned with Candra-
hãsa's boyhood, during which an amazing good fortune allows him to repeatedly thwart
rhe attempts of an evil minister to murder him. The tale is given a devotional gloss:
Candrahãsa is described as reciting the name of Hari night and day and studying the
Vaiçqrava scriptures diligently, and thus it is the strength of his faith that saves him from
all perils.
A few minor episodes lack even this nod to bhøkti. One describes Arjuna's visit to
the land of women where he battles its Amazon queen, Pramilã; thei¡ duel is stopped by a
celestial voice ordering them to cease fighting and to marry (JBh 2I.83-92;22.1-26).
Later fujuna and his army are attacked by the demon Bhîçana who plans to offer Arjuna
as a human sacrifice and devour his soldiers (IBh 2232fÐ.39 There are also marvels and
wonders: the stallion enters a lake and is tranformed into a mare (JBh l6.l0fÐ while
another magical lake tums it into a tiger (JBh 2l.49ff). Touching an enchanted boulder
(íil.t), the horse is petrified Çafibhuta) (JBh 16.10); the cause of this, it is found, is the
curse of a sage.4o Another, more unusual feature of the Jaiminibhãrata is that it contains
humor, such as in the story Arjuna is told when he asks a hermit the story of the

38 yo'sau svamâqtsatanubhir yaianani krnã (Mukhopadhyaya l9ó3: l)'

39 Similarly inrhe Padmapurãqa (5.5.34) Satrughna is attacked by the demon Vidyunmãlin. In both
works it is only these two demons who are, in contrast to the kings, genuinely hostile.
40 Similarly in the Padmaparri4a (5.16.10fÐ the sacrificial horse becomes stiffened (stamhhayati)
when it trods ground enchanted by the curse ofa sage.
 The Jaíminibhdrata and lts Eastern Vernacular Versions 203

curse of a sage.4o Another, more unusual feature of the Jaiminibhãrata is that it contains
humor, such as in the story Arjuna is told when he asks a hermit the story of the
enchanted boulder. Once, the hermit says, there r¡/as a sage named Uddãlaka who married
a \ryoman named Caqdi who was the diametrical opposite of the good Hindu wife. She
absolutely refused to do what her husband asked her and even went so far as to say that
she had no need of sons, putaih kim me prayojanam (JBh 16.49). Poor Uddãlaka was in
despair. He was about to celebrate his father's íraddha ceremony and Candi refused to
cooperate in the ceremony. Uddãlaka then met a sage named Kaundinya who noticed how
agitared and thin he looked and when asked the reason for his frazzled appearance,
Uddälaka explained his situation. Kauqdinya then came up with an ingenious solution to
Uddãlaka's problem: íanakaiþ vipøritarp vaco vadai 'always say the opposite of what
you mean'. So Udd-alaka went home and told his wife that guests were coming and
ordered her not to greet them, not to feed them and said he was going out. Narurally the
contrary Caqdi did the opposite and insisted on feeding and enteÍaining the guests.
Uddãlaka also performedthe Sraddhd ceremony using the same trick to ensure his wife's
cooperation until the very end of the rite, when he slipped up and asked her to throw the
pi4/as in the river as prescribed by the scriptures. When she heard this, true to form, she
rhrew rhem on a dung heap instead. Uddãlaka then cursed his wife to become the rock
which petrified the horse. The curse will be ended, the sage tells Arjuna, when Arjuna
touches the boulder. He does and the horse and the brahman's disobedient wife are
freed.4l Car.rdi has leamed her lesson of course and now is prepared to be a model wife.

THE VERNACULAR RENDERINGS

The Jaiminibh-arata enjoyed an impressive popularity. The reasons for this seem clear.
One of the more important was its entertainment value. As the editor of ¡he Ãiva-
medhikaparran notes with disapproval, 'The Jaimini-ASvamedha [...] is intended in every
way to cater to the taste of the ordinary public for the bizarre and the miraculous'
(Karmarkar 1960: xlüi). It is a work replete with wonders, battles, humor and epic
prestige and all this is wrapped up in a religious package. It is interesting that the
Jaiminibhãraa is included in Assamese and Bengali versions of the Mahãbhãrata, even
though it is not a part of the original Mahãbhãrata, while the Bhagavadgitri, which is a
genuine part of the original Mahãbh-a¡ata, is omitted in the same vemacular renderings.
The first Bengali Mahãbhã¡ata was translated under Muslim patronage in the
fifteenth century and was the work of Kablndra Parame6bar, court poet to Laskar Parãgal
Khãn, a general who conquered Tripura and Chittagong for the Bengali Sultan Nusrat
Shãh (1519-32). Under his patronage Parame5bar composed a Mahãbhãrata which he
entitled Pãndaba B¡ja¿which was also known as the Paragali Mahabharata because of

40 Similarly in the Padmapura4a (5.l6.lÛfÐ the sacrificial horse becomes stiffened (stamhhayati)
when it trods ground enchanted by the curse of a sage,
4t This is reminiscent of a well-known story in the medieval Rãmãya4a tradition about how the
unfaithful Ahalyã was cursed to become a stone un¡il ¡ouched by the dust of Rãma's feet.
2M W, L. SMITH

One day the Khãn was sitting in coun with his friends and retainers. They heard lrhe recital]
of the holy bookþu4yaka¡¿dl, the Bhãrata. The sage Jaimini wrote a purã4a-saqhi¡a-, when
they heard the story of the aivamedha they were very pleased. The Khãn rhen gave a
command. We have heard the song [gíta] of Vyasa that of the sage Jâimini is [sweeter] than
it. Everyone does not understand the Sanskrit Bhàrata. Poets, listen to my request, sprcad
this story in the language of the country, let my fame will spread throughour the world.az

Srikara Nandi did as commanded and as a consequence his poem is sometimes called
the Chutikhãner mahãbharala.43 There are several later Bengali Mahãbhãratas, the most
widely circulated of which is that of KãóIrãm Dãs which was written before 1642;
Kãórrãm was responsible for the first fo:ur parvans of the work and the rest were
composed by sons, grandsons and others including one Dbija Raghunãth who wrote the
ÃSvamedhikaparuai{4 parts were also borrowed from other Bengali Mahãbh-aratas. Kabi
Sañjay, as noted earlier, also included Jaimini's poem in his version. The Assamese
Mahãbhãrata was a collective work commissioned by the Kuch king Naranãrãyaqa
(1540-84) who appointed Rãma Sarasvatl, the title of a brahman whose real name was
Aniruddha, as editor in chief. In the preface to his 'translation', Rãma Sarasvati relates
how the king sent a bullock ca¡t filled with manuscripts of the Mahãbhãrata to his home.
After Naranãrãya4a's death his successors continued to support the translation work.
R-ama Sarasvatl, aided by the poets Kamsã¡i Kãj'astha and Gopinãth Pã¡haka, never got
any farther than the first twelve parvans which take the story to the end of the war. The
Ãívamedhíkapattan was written by three later poets Gangadãsa, Bhavanrdãsa and
Subuddhi Rãi. It is a close rendering of Sanskrit original and, unlike the Bengali
versions, includes the Lava KuSa episode In these versions of the Jaiminibhãrata the story
is told at length. The original Ãivamedhikapanan occtrpies around 3Vo of the Sanskrit
Mahãbhãrata while those in Kaóidãs and the Assamese Mahãbhãrata are about three times
longer and the version in the Bengali Mahãbhãratâ of Kabi Sañjay occupies úmos¡ 207o
of the whole and this despite the fact that he, like Kãéirãm Dãs, omits the longest episode
in it, the story of Kuéa and Lava.
It is no¡ surprising that so many Assamese, Bengali and Oriya poets were interested
in the Jaiminibhã¡ata: numerous version of the two great epics are found in all th¡ee
languages. The vernacular Rãmãya4as, despite the fact that they are commonly referred to
as 'translation literature', are not primarily based on Vãlmîki but on a number of different
R-amãya¡a tradiúons oral as well as written, making each Old Assamese, Old Oriya and
Middle Bengali Rãmãyaqa unique. The authors of the vemacular Mahãbh-aratas had fewer
literary antecedants to draw from and hence tend to be more dependent on the Sanskrit
original, though here, too, one does find a considerable amount of variation. The Bana-

42 pa4/ite mandita sabha khana mahãmatil eka dina hasi ãche hãndhava samhati ll iunila bhãrata
potha ati pu4yakathã I mahãmuni jaiminira purã4a saryhita ll aíbamedha kathã suni
prasannah¡da;/a ll sabhãkharyde adeíila khana mahãíala I byaso gità íunila cãrutara ll tãhata
kahila jaimini munivara ll sarpsk¡ta hharøta na hujhe sarvajana I mora nihcdana kichu suna
kahiga4a ll deíî bhãse ehi kathã kari!,ã pracara I sañcarau kírtti m<tra jagata hhitara ll (After Sen
l97l:7ó,351).
43 The language of the only printed edition (Kãbyat¡nhak & Sen I 9 12) is, however, not at all old.
44 Bandyopadhyãy 19ó6:4ó6.
 The Jaiminibhãrata and lts Eastern Vernacular Versions 205

Middle Bengali Rãmãya4a unique. The authors of the vemacular Mahãbhã¡atas had fewer
literary antecedants to draw from and hence tend to be more dependent on the Sanskrit
original, though here, too, one does find a considerable amount of variation. The Bana-
parvan4í of the Assamese Mahãbh-arata, for example, is over one thousand pages long -
making it longer than the Sanskrit original - and overwhelmingly apocryphal. Kabi
Sañjay's Bengali Mahãbhãrata contains apocryphalpatnans, including an episode entitled
Draupadî yuddha which contains an account of Draupadi's martial intervenfion in the
Bhãrata war.
Renderings of the Jaiminibhãrata, in contrast, though they usually keep far closer to
the storyline of the original, are far from being true translations either. One can take for
example their tr,eatnent of the short episode describing Arjuna's visit to the kingdom of
women. None of the eastem vemacular versions referred to here follow the Sanskrit
original closely; all have different emphases, details and provide varying descriptions of
the strîrãjya and its inhabitants, Most are longer than the original and differ as much from
it they do from each other. Careful translations are not found at all; they seem to have
as
been incompatible with the poetic tempeftìment. Even relatively modem Bengali render-
ings by Kaliprasanna Bidyãratna (1884) and Candranãth Basu (1917), which claim to be
'from the original Sanskrit' (mul samskrta haite), add asides and poetic digressions. The
most obvious change in our vemacula¡ renderings is that poets drop episodes: Kaiirãm
Dãs, for example, omits the Candrahãsa episode, as does the Assamese Mahãbh-a¡ata and
the Bengali poets leave out the Lava KuSa episode as has been noted. These are sins of
omission and most of the changes made by the poets arc of this kind; literary embellish-
ments are, of course, added and some material, inevitably, is parochialized. Otherwise
they seem to have been made with an eye closely kept on the Sanskrit original and this
suggests that the matter of the Jaiminibhãrata had not been so thoroughly absorbed into
and transformed by the popular tradition as had that of the Mahãbhfuata and the
Rãmãya4a.

VERNACULAR APOCRYPHA

Though free from major intrusions, a few elaborate apocryphal episodes are found in
eastem vemacular versions of the Jaiminibh-arata. Two of the examples concem Su-
dhanvã. In the fi¡st, the Oriya poet Indramaqi Sãhu tells the story of Indumatî or
Indurekhã, the daughter of the king of Kamãla. Indumatî is meditating in the forests of
Campaka (Hamsadhvaja's kingdom) when she is attacked by a Ni¡ãda king intent on
raping her. Her screams are heard by Sudhanvã, who rescues her. The grateful Indumati
then vows to serve Sudhanvã the rest of her life, When the sacrificial horse enters the
kingdom, Indumatl realizes the danger and prays to the goddess Gangã who gives her an
amulet (lcabaca) which, when hung around one's neck, makes its wearcr invincible and an
inesistible arrow Qiangãíakti íara). Then, in male disguise (gupta beie), she gives both
to Sudhanvã, thereafter becoming his companion. It is with the help of these gifts that
45 ln eastem lndia the Ãra4yakaparvan or the Arc4yaparva¡¡ is called the Vanaparvan
206 w. L. sMtîH

Indumati in warrior (åira) guise sitting in front of Sudhanvã's tent, bow and arrow in
hand, he decides to outwit her by using his mayã. First he transforms himself into
Prabhãvatî, Sudhanvã's wife, but the ale¡t Indumatl tums 'her' away, telling her to go
back to the women's guafters where she belongs. K¡94a returns as Sudhanvã's mother,
fails again, and comes back in the form of his father only to be rebuffed a third time. He
finally succeeds by transforming himself into a duplicate of the goddess Gangã and in this
shape is finally admitted into Sudhanvã's tent.46 Once inside, þçla transforms himself
into a brahman and asks for the amulet and the alrow as alms and the good Vaig¡ava
Sudhanvã readily gives them, thus sealing his doom. This story is an obvious borrowing
from the Mahãbhãrata tate which tells how Karqa, who was bom with armor and
earrings, was Ficked into giving these as alms to Indra, Arjuna's father, in brahman
disguise.a? Indramar.ri makes his indebtedness to this source obvious by nrice using the
phrase kabaca o kundala,'amulet and earrings' rather than ltabaca o íara, 'amulet and
arrow'. He also refers to the Mahãbhãrata story. The next day at the conclusion of his
fight with Arjuna, Indumati reveals her true identity to Sudhanvã. At that moment Arjuna
fi¡es an a¡row which splits in two, decapitating the couple simultaneously. The story ends
on an odd advaitic note: Kçr¡a picks up the heads and 'two figures came out from the two
heads and merged with Snknna's body'.48
of Bibeka,
Another interesting innovation is found in Kabi Sañjay who tells the story
the apocryphal son of Sudhanvã and PrabhãvatL As has been seen, Sudhanvã fulfilled his
marital obligations as prescribed by the ícistras on the eve of battle. Bibeka was the result
of that union. When exactly three days a¡e left before the termination of Yudhisthira's
horse sacrifîce, Bibeka asks his mother about his father. logically Bibeka should be only
a few months old at most since, as the poet notes, the sacrifice had been underway for less
than a year. Nevertheless Bibeka, described as a child, íiia, (the same word used to
describe Kuéa and Lava in vemacula¡ works),49 is capable of battle, having been bom
with his body encased in armour (gãeta kabaca¡.so PrabhãvatI teaches her son the art of
weaponry (dhanurvidya) and supplies him some powerful mantras (mahõmantra). Thus
equipped Bibeka marches to the battlefield to confront a very surprised Arjuna and

46 This particular incident is obviously modeled on the Mahirãvârla tale in the regional Rãmãyaqa
tradition: Mahirãvaoa plans to kidnap the sleeping Rãma and Lakgmana and to get past Hanumãn,
who is guarding them, assumes differcnt shapes before finally taking one which fools ¡he monkey
hero. For this cycle see Smith 1982.
4'1 This story nor included in the text of critical edition of the Mahãbhãrata but a shon version of il is
found in appendix 60 of the Ãdiparvan and fuller accounts in the vulgate, as in ths Grtã Press
edition (Ãdiparvan, pp. 334-335).
48 dui íiraru dui múrui hoina bãhara I iriklsna dehe miíile (Sâhu, s.a': I 37).
49 Thisresemblesrhestoryof Ahirãvaça who, like Bibeka, goes to battle directly t'rom his molher's
womb in order lo avenge his slain fa¡her, Mahirãvana; see Smith 1982.
50 As was the new-born Karna as noted above. ln the previous ¡ale kabaca referrcd to an amulet hung
round the neck ratherthan body armor. Kar4a legends seem to have influenced these lales for two
reasons: firsr, Kar4a was Arju4a's most formidable enemy in the Mahãbhãrata, secondly, just like
Sudhanvã, he was considered a saint: in eastem India he is considered the epitome of generosity and
usually called Dfuã Karoa, 'Karqa the Giver'.
 The Jaiminibhãrata and lts Eastern Vernacular Versiotts 207

weaponry (dhanurvidyõ) and supplies him some powerful mantras (mahãmantra). Thus
equipped Bibeka marches to the battlefield to confront a very surprised Aduna and
proceeds to defeat V¡çaketu5t, Babhruvãhana, Candrahãsa, Pradyumna, Aniruddha'
Yauvanã6va, Suvega, Hanumãn and, finally, both Arjuna and K¡pna' ÏVhen a messenger
reports the news of this disaster to Yudhiçthira, he, like Rãma in rhe Kuíalavopakhyãna,
despatches another army, this one led by Bhima and it is crushed as well. Leaming of this
second defeat, Yudhiçthira bursts into tears and his weeping is heard by Rukminî,
Satyabh-amã and K¡çqa's other wives who decide to remedy the situation' They arm
themselves and ma¡ch off to the battlefield only to suffer the same fate as everyone else.52
trrVhen KSna regains consciousness, he realizes the difñculty of his situation and so goes
to Harnsadhvaja and tells him that his grandson has been obstructing Yudhi$thira's horse
sacrifice. Both then go to Bibeka. There, at the request of Halnsadhvaja, K¡ç4a assumes
his four-armed svarúpaor'essential form' a sight which causes Bibeka to fall at his feet
and submits. Knna then congratulates him for his battlefield prowess and everyone
retums to Hastinãpura where the horse sacrifice is completed. (Ghoç 1966: 64941.)
In medieval Assam, Bengal and Orissa the Jaiminibhãfata was, along with the
Bhàgavata purãna, the Rãmãya4a and the Mahãbhârata, one of a small number of
narrative works which, in vemacular garb, served as important instruments in the trans-
mission of Sanskritic values to the regional cultures. It must have played a similar role
elsewhere as well. Besides the Kannada retelling of the Jaiminibhãrata, there a¡e versions
in Telegu, Hindi, Marathi, Tamil, Maithiü and Newa¡i's3 The question of the number and
distribution of vemacularversions of Jaimini's bhãrata remains to be dealt with, as do the
details of the date, geographical origin and sectarian affinities of the Sanskrit original; it is
to be hoped that such problems will be addressed when more attention is finally given to
this very popular, very infiuential and much neglected religious epic'

REFERBNCES

BANDYOPADHYÂY, A. K. 1966. Bãt7rtã sãhitya ltihas,lll. calcutta: Modern Book Agency.

BARUA, Birinchi Kumar 1964. History of Assamese Literature. New Delhi: Sahitya Akademi'
BARUVÃ. Biriñcikumãr & Mahe.ivar NEOG (eds.) 1960. Babhruvãhanar yuddha ãru tãmradhvajar
yuddha lin Assamesel' Guwahati: Guvãhâ!i Bilvavidyãlay'
BASU, Candranãth (tr.) 1917. Jaiminihharata fin Bengalil' Calcutta'
BIDYÂRATNA, Kãliprasanna (tr.) & Baisnabacararr BASÃK (ed.) 18E4. ,laiminihharata [in Bengali]'
2nd edition, Calcutta.
BULKE. Kãmil 1962. Ram kathã, u¡patti aur vil<4. Allahabad: Prayãg Viívavidyãlay.
DATIA, Bijirkumãr & Sunandã DATTA (eds.) 1960. Mãnikrãm Ganguli, Dharma mañg,al. Calcutta:
University of Calcutta.

5l who according to the Sanskri¡ original had already been killed by Babhruvãhana.
<t
This interesring episode was probably suggested by an apocryphal parvan in Kabi Sañjay's
Mahãhhãrata entitled Draupadi yuddha in which Draupadi, along with the wives of other warriors.
similarly takes the field.
53 See Koskikallio, forthcoming, chapter 4. 1.2.
208 W. L. Sutru

DATTA, Hirendranãth (ed.) 1901. Krttibãs, Rãmãfana: Uuarakan/a. Calcuua (8.S. 1307).
DATIABARUVÃ, Harinarãian (ed.) 1993. A¡¡ad,ãs parha asamîla mahãhhãrata. Guwahari:
Harinãrã!a4 Dat¡abaruvã. (Reprint.)
DERRETI, J. Duncan M. 1970. Greece and India again. The Jaimini-Alvamedha, the Alexander-romance
and the Cospels. ZeitschriJi Jür Religions- und Geistesgeschichte 22: 1944.
DESHPANDE, N. A. (tr.) 1990. Thc Padma-Purã1a, V, (Ancient Indian Tradition & Mythology Series,
43.) Dethi: Motilal Banarsidass.
GHO$. Munîndrakumãr (ed.) 1966. Kabi Sañjaj,, Mahãbhõra¡a. Calcutta: Calcut¡a University.
HARDY, Friedhelm 1983.Viraha-Bhakti.The Early History oJ K¡¡4a Devotion in South India. Delhi:
Oxford University Press.
HARIDAS DÃS (ed.) 1943. Rüpagosvãmin, [SriJrÍ] Bhakrirasãm¡tasindhu. With the commentarics oJ
Jivagosvãmi et. al.2nd edition. Calcutra (Srigaurãbda 475).
KÃBYATIRTHAK, Binodbihãrí & Dînq{candra SEN (eds.) 1912. Srikara Nandi, Cår¡ilråãner mahã-
hhãrata (ãíbamedh parba). (Pariqad Cranthãbali, 8.) Calcuna.
KARMARKAR, R. D. (ed.) 1960. The Mahabh'ãrata, XYllL The Ãívamedhikapaman. Poona:
Bhandarkar Oriental Research lnstitute.
Kaildaíi mahãbhõrata, s.a. Calcutu: Tãracãd and Sens.
KOSKIKALLIO, Petteri, forthcoming. The Wandering Horse. From Vedfu Horse SauiJice to Post-Vedic
R ir ua I I deology. (Studia Orientalia. ) Helsinki.
Lavakuiar yuddha 1959. [n Assamese.] Guwhati: Assam Sãhitya Sabhã.
MAKHOPADHYAYA, Sujitkumar (ed.) l9ó3. The Aíokãvãda¿a. New Delhi: Sahitya Akademi.
NÃBHADÃS 1931. Bhakt mãl.W ith rhe commentary of Priyadas. Lakhnãu: Tejkumãr Press.
RAJA, K. Kunjunni 1973. New Catalogus Catalogorum, VII. Madras: University of Madras.
REDINGTON, James D. 1983. Vallahhacãrya on the Love Games o|Krs4¿. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.
ROCHER, Ludo 1986. The Pura4as. (A History of lndian literature, 2.3.) Wiesbaden: Otto
Harrassowitz.
SÃHU, lndramani, s.a. B¡hat jaiminîbhãrato (pratham o dvtiia bhãg ekatra). (tn Oriya.) KaFk:
Dharmagrantha $¡or.
SARMA, S. N. 1972. Epics and Pura4as in Early Assamese Literature. Guwahati: Pratima Devi.
SÃSTRI, Haraprasãda 1941. A Descriptive Catabgue oJ the Vernacular Manuscripts in ¡\rc Collection.ç
of the Royal Asiatic Sociery oJ' Bengal, lX. Calcutta.
SEN, Sukumar 1971. History oJ'Bengali Litera¡ure. Rcvised edition. New Delhi: Sahitya Akademi.
SHETH. Noel 1984. The Divinin of Krishna. New Delhi: Munishiram Manoharlal.
Sîtara hanahas 1975. [n Assamese.l Nalbãri Assam: Dattabaruvã e¡{ Kompãni.
SMITH, William. L. 1992. Tara¡isena: a parochialized devotional mofif, In: R. S. McGregor (ed.),
Devotional Literature in South Asia. Current reseorch, 1985-1988: 261-267. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
1982. Mahirãva4a and the Womb Demon. Indologica Taurinensia lO:215-225.
, fonhcoming. Variants of the Kuóalavopakhyãna.
WINTERN¡TZ, Maurice 1972. A History of Indian Lilerature,l. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass. (Reprint.)