Question – 108
If Vyasa didn’t
mean a permanent appearance of change in the position he could have written so,
but he didn’t - why?
Answer:
Vyasa did indicate
that it was not a permanent appearance by classifying it as a nimitta.
Moreover, the very
etymology of Arundhati is – one who never obstructs.
She is A-
rundhe – meaning, one who never obstructs.
Obstructs what?
Obstructs the path
of her husband, i.e., not going in front of her husband as to obstruct his
movement. She behaved so in real life. That
is why a close pair of stars with the companion star always towing the bigger
star was chosen as Vasishtha – Arundhati pair.
Vyasa planted a ‘Ganesh moment’ while talking
about their appearance.
He said, “Arundhati
who is famous over the three worlds and is celebrated by the righteous people
(seers), even that Arundhati (the star Alcor) moving towards Vasiṣṭha caused
him to be at pṛṣṭha” (MB: 6.9.9).
He could not have
meant that Arundhati went ahead of Vasishtha because then it violates the very
meaning of her name.
The verse sounds
like a riddle. In the first line of the verse, Vyasa describes the universal
truth about Arundhati as one praised by all in all the three worlds, obviously
for having never obstructed the path of Vasiṣṭha, by towing behind him.
But the second
line says that she had kept Vasiṣṭha at her back – which is not what the very
name Arundhati stands for.
Of these two
statements, if we accept the first one as true then the second statement is
absolutely false. Since Vyasa could not have mouthed something false, what he
reported must have been a momentary appearance – a nimitta, and he
characterized it so.
If we accept the
second statement as true appearance, then the first statement must be false
for, the one who had kept Vasiṣṭha at her back could not have been praised as
Arundhati in all the three worlds by the righteous people.
By keeping the
inherent incompatibility and contradiction between the two statements within
the same verse and by relating one with the other, Vyasa had delivered the
judgement at that time itself-on which of the two statements is eternally true.
If we fail to
grasp this clever trick of Vyasa, we will be getting nowhere. The text of the Mahabharata
gives no room for superficial understanding. It challenges our thinking power,
our knowledge of the symbolisms and the tradition, to even grasp that a trap
has been laid by Vyasa and the Ganesha moment he had thrown up at us.
