Did war between Arjuna and Kauravas really happen in Virata Parva?

 

According to my understanding, after going through Mahabharata, the war episode between Arjuna and Kauravas in the Virata Parva - Uttara Gograhana episode might be an interpolation, for the following reasons.

——-

a) When tormented by Kichaka, Draupadi approaches Bhima in the night and pleads with him to do something to avenge the cruel acts of Kichaka. Bhima then consoles her and says as follows:

मा दीर्घं क्षम कालं त्वं मासम् अध्यर्धसंमितम्

पूर्णे त्रयोदशे वर्षे राज्ञो राज्ञी भविष्यसि

You do spend a short while more that is measured by even a half month. And when the thirteenth year is complete, you will become again the Queen regnant of a king.

This indicates that by that time, the period of incognito of 1 year, had not yet been completed.

——-

b) We can find the following narration in Virata Parva, depicting the plan of Kauravas and Susarman.

Vaisampayana continued, 'Then, O Lord of earth, those warriors, the Trigartas, accompanied by their infantry of terrible prowess, marched towards the south-eastern direction, intending to wage hostilities with Virata from the desire of seizing his kine. And Susarman set out on the seventh day of the dark fortnight for seizing the kine. And then, O king, on the eighth day , the Kauravas also accompanied by all their troops, began to seize the kine by thousands."

This indicates that in a gap of 1 (one) day, Susarman and Kauravas seized the cows of Matsya Kingdom.

——

c)  Susarman, another king and enemy of King Virata, captured the cows of Matsya Kingdom. Virata, along with Yudhisthira, Bhima, Nakula and Sahadeva, and his army attacks Susarman. Susarman captures King Virata.

Yudhisthira orders Bhima to save the king. However, when Bhima wanted to use a big tree as a weapon, Yudhisthira stops him in doing so.

तं मत्तम् इव मातङ्गं वीक्षमाणं वनस्पतिम्

अब्रवीद् भ्रातरं वीरं धर्मराजो युधिष्ठिरः

मा भीम साहसं कार्षीस् तिष्ठत्व् एष वनस्पतिः

मा त्वा वृक्षेण कर्माणि कुर्वाणम् अति मानुषम्

जनाः समवबुध्येरन् भीमो ऽयम् इति भारत

अन्यद् एवायुधं किं चित् प्रतिपद्यस्व मानुषम्

चापं वा यदि वा शक्तिं निस्त्रिंशं वा परश्वधम्

यद् एव मानुषं भीम भवेद् अन्यैर् अलक्षितम्

तद् एवायुधम् आदाय मोक्षयाशु महीपतिम्

यमौ च चक्ररक्षौ ते भवितारौ महाबलौ

व्यूहतः समरे तात मत्स्यराजं परीप्सतः

“Do not, O Bhima, commit such a rash act. Let the tree stand there. Thou must not achieve such feats in a super-human manner by means of that tree, for if you do so, the people, O Bharata, will recognise you and say, This is Bhima. Take , therefore, some human weapon such as a bow (and arrows), or a dart, or a sword, or a battle-axe. And taking therefore, O Bhima, some weapon that is human, liberate the king without giving anybody the means of knowing you truly. The twins endued with great strength will defend your wheels. Fighting together, O child, liberate the king of the Matsyas!'

This also indicates that even at that point of time also, the period of incognito of 1 year, had not yet been completed.

——

d) After taking control of cows in Northern side of Matsya kingdom by Kauravas, Arjuna makes appearance, as per interpolated episode, after discarding the form of a eunuch, alongwith Uttara, the son of Virata.

At the appearance of Arjuna, Duryodhana claims that the 13 years' time period, which the Pandavas agreed upon (12 years in the Forest and 1 year incognito - ajnatavasa) is not completed.

However, Bhishma says as follows:

“The wheel of time revolves with its divisions, viz., with Kalas and Kasthas and Muhurtas and days and fortnights and months and constellations and planets and seasons and years. In consequence of their fractional excesses and the deviations of also of the heavenly bodies, there is an increase of two months in every five years. It seems to me that calculating this wise, there would be an excess of five months and twelve nights in thirteen years. Everything, therefore, that the sons of Pandu had promised, hath been exactly fulfilled by them.”

Thus, there was a contradiction between the statements of Yudhisthira, just 1 day before the occurrence of seize of cows by Kauravas in Northern parts of Matsya Kingdom, and that of Bhishma, who said that Pandavas already spend more than 5 months period, on the following day.

The apparent contradiction between Bhishma’s calculation of Pandava spending 5+ months beyond 13 years and that of Bhima’s asking for patience of Draupadi for ~15 days and that of Yudhisthira’s, can be solved, in my view, if we remove the episode of Uttara Go Grahana by Kauravas alongwith the war between Arjuna and Kauravas.

e) When the news of Kauravas being defeated (in the Uttara Gograhana war, reached King Virata, he praises his son Uttara, but Yudhisthira praises Brihannala. Angered by this, King Virata forcibly struck Yudhishthira in the face with a dice and blood starts oozing out. At this point, Draupadi, who was standing nearby causes the blood collected in the vessel of water, but did not allow it fall on ground.

Here lies main issue:

Sairandhri or Draupadi never entered into others buildings or Royal assembly (except when Kichaka harassed her) or never preferred to come before other males. She served only in the women residences. Then, why her presence was mentioned here?

It contradicts the behaviour of Draupadi, as mentioned in other chapters of Virata Parva and that in this interpolated section.

f) In Udyoga Parva, Shri Krishna comes to Hastinapura for reconciliation process. However, Duryodhana rejects that proposal on the following grounds.

प्रियाभ्युपगते द्यूते पाण्डवा मधुसूदन । जिताः शकुनिना राज्यं तत्र किं मम दुष्कृतम् ॥

यत्पुनर्द्रविणं किञ्चित्तत्राजीयन्त पाण्डवाः । तेभ्य एवाभ्यनुज्ञातं तत्तदा मधुसूदन ॥

अपराधो न चास्माकं यत्ते ह्यक्षपराजिताः । अजेया जयतां श्रेष्ठ पार्थाः प्रव्राजिता वनम् ॥

In the game at dice, O slayer of Madhu, that was joyfully accepted by them, the Pandavas were vanquished and their kingdom was won by Sakuni. What blame can be mine as regards that? On the other hand, O slayer of Madhu, the wealth that was won from the Pandavas then, was ordered by me, to be returned unto them. It cannot, again, O foremost of victors, be any fault of ours that the invincible Pandavas, were defeated once again at dice and had to go to the Woods. Imputing what fault to us, do they regard us as their enemies?

यावच्च राजा ध्रियते धृतराष्ट्रो जनार्दन । न्यस्तशस्त्रा वयं ते वाप्युपजीवाम माधव ॥

यद्यदेयं पुरा दत्तं राज्यं परवतो मम । अज्ञानाद्वा भयाद्वापि मयि बाले जनार्दन ॥

न तदद्य पुनर्लभ्यं पाण्डवैर्वृष्णिनन्दन । ध्रियमाणे महाबाहो मयि सम्प्रति केशव ॥

यावद्धि सूच्यास्तीक्ष्णाया विध्येदग्रेण माधव । तावदप्यपरित्याज्यं भूमेर्नः पाण्डवान्प्रति ॥

As long, O Janardana, as king Dhritarashtra liveth, both ourselves and they, sheathing our weapons, O Madhava, should live in dependence on him. Given away formerly from ignorance or fear, when I was a child and dependent on others, the kingdom, O Janardana, incapable of being given away again, shall not, O delighter of Vrishni's race, be obtainable by the Pandavas. At present, O Kesava of mighty arms, as long as I live, even that much of our land which may be covered by the point of a sharp needle shall not, O Madhava, be given by us unto the Pandavas.'"

——

So, Duryodhana rejects the reconciliation process, quoting the reasons of (i) Pandavas should not have been given their share in Kingdom of Indraprastha in the first instance, (ii) they lost their kingdom in the 2nd round of game dice and thus, they cannot claim their kingdom now.

However, he did not quote the reason of Arjuna being seen in Virata War.

 

——-

It appears to me that the episode of Uttara Go Grahana and the war between Arjuna and Kauravas might be an interpolated version.

Hence, no direct fight between Arjuna and Karna occurred till the 14th day of the Mahabharata war, when Arjuna was bent upon eliminating Jayadratha.