Despite the fact that duhshAsana was possibly more evil minded than Duryodhana, it is a funny fact that he stands for the tattva of the Vedas from a metaphysical aspect according to Karna in Udyoga Parva+
"duhshAsana" - the command or instruction that is difficult to understand or follow - represents the Vedas. Him torturing Draupadi is like the jIva subject to sorrow due to chasing after the alpa-phalans of the Vedas (traiguNya viShaya veda...gIta 2.45)+
bhIma tearing open his chest for blood - bhIma is meditation on Brahman. The Vedas are aparavidyA and by meditation which is paravidyA, they are "torn open" to reveal the nectar of auspicious attributes which is signified by duhshAsana's blood+
Blood is called "rudhiraM" in MB - anything red denotes passion or desire and the qualities of Brahman are such. That is why bhIma's act of drinking duhShAsana's blood is celebrated+
Both Duryodhana and duhShAsana had original names of "suyodhana" and "sushAsana". Likewise, neither the body nor the Vedas are enemies at first -- it is the vAsanAs signified by other kauravAs that make them cause distress to the jIva+
Typically our shAstra to hide such a tattva behind what seems a very graphic act of bhIma in killing duhshAsana//
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Here is the shloka from Udyoga Parva. Karna visualizes the war as bhakti yoga with kriShNa as the object of sacrifice. He summarizes the role of duhshAsana here+
Superficial meaning: When you see the son of Pandu (bhIma) with the blood of duhshAsana roaring in anger and making sounds of victory at the same time, then will the day of the extraction of Soma commence (in this sacrifice of war).+
The reason why this pAsuram is so enlightening is because it explains why worship of other gods independently is mentioned by Krishna as "avidhi pUrvakaM", in the light of sharIrAtma bhAva. Consider this+
The body is different from the self. A person who does not know this, does various actions to sustain the body. He gains some pleasure through enjoyment of sense objects through the body, but eventually it turns to sorrow, as they are perishable.+
Even these material enjoyments which last for a short time are only enjoyed by the self, but the person does not know it, as he has no knowledge of the self+
Hanuman makes it clear what upAya he follows in his conversation with bhIma in the MB. bhIma asks him, "Considering you are strong enough to defeat rAvaNa by yourself, why didn't you do so while scouting Lanka for Sita?"
mayA tu nihate tasminrAvaNe lokakaNTake . kIrtirnashyedrAghavasya tata etadupekShitam
[f I had eliminated rAvaNa who is a great obstruction for the worlds, then that fame of “being accessible to all” possessed by rAghava would have disappeared. Hence I spared rAvaNa.]+
"kIrti" means soushIlya or the quality of being accessible to all. If Hanuman had killed rAvaNa by himself, the world would think sIta was not significant enough for bhagavAn to come and kill rAvaNa, that he merely sent a servant to do the task+
"You are won back by me, after conquering the enemy in the battle-field, my dear lady! That which is to be done through human effort, has been accomplished by me."+
The enemy is the wicked mind (rAvaNa). samsAra is the battlefield. Note that Rama says, "that which is to be done by human endeavor (pauruShAt), has been done by me+
garuDa and Adi Seha again embody the two upAyAs. garuDa is "vedAtma" and thus he by being bhagavAn's vehicle signifies bhakti yoga. He uses his strength to carry bhagavAn. Adi Sesha however, like a prapanna, simply becomes whatever is comfortable for bhagavAn+
Since bhakti yoga is the more dominant upAya talked about in the Veda, it makes sense that there are entire sUktAs dedicated to Garuda who showcases his strength, but less mantras on Adi Sesha whose ability is more of a shadow of bhagavAn+
This doesn't mean garuDa is not a prapanna. Both are nitya sUrIs equally endowed with same knowledge and devotion. They merely exist in this way for the benefit of those following the 2 upAyAs+
In comparison to garuDa, praise of adi seSha is relatively less common in the veda.
But he is praised in the name of “Ahirbudhnya” here and there. Here is a mantra from Rg Veda that echoes mudal thiruvandhAdhi of poigai azhwar+
First, the etymology of "Ahirbudhnya" - “The serpent belonging to, ie, existing solely for the sake of bhagavAn who is the ground of all (budhna)”.
Thus, this term is a cognate of “Sesha”+
Shiva also has the name “Ahirbudhnya” – One who belongs to or comes from “Ahirbudhna” - SankarShaNa, the ground (support) of the serpent Adi Sesha. pAncharAtra speaks of Shiva as Ahirbudhnya.
But context determines which "Ahirbudhnya" is being referred to in the Vedas+