Shloka 2
त्रिदशानपि वा युक्तान् सर्वशस्त्रधरान् युधि । वारयेद् यो रणे कर्ण: सयक्षासुरमानुषान्,संजय! जो कर्ण रफक्षेत्रमें युद्धके लिये सम्पूर्ण अस्त्र-शस्त्रोंकोी धारण करके सुसज्जित हुए देवताओं तथा यक्षों, असुरों और मनुष्योंका भी निवारण कर सकता है, वह युद्धमें विजय-लक्ष्मीसे सुशोभित होते हुए-से पाण्डुनन्दन कुन्तीकुमार भीमसेनको कैसे नहीं लाँघ सका? इसका कारण मुझे बताओ
sañjaya uvāca | tridaśān api vā yuktān sarvaśastradharān yudhi | vārayet yo raṇe karṇaḥ sa-yakṣāsura-mānuṣān | sañjaya! yo karṇa raṇakṣetre yuddhāya sampūrṇa-astra-śastrāṇi dhārayitvā susajjitān devatān tathā yakṣān asurān ca mānuṣān api nivārayituṃ śaknoti, sa yuddhe vijaya-lakṣmyā suśobhita iva pāṇḍu-nandanaḥ kuntī-kumāraḥ bhīmasenaṃ kathaṃ na laṅghitum aśaknot? tasya kāraṇaṃ me brūhi ||
Sanjaya said: Even if the gods themselves—fully armed with every weapon—were arrayed in battle, Karna could hold them back in combat, along with yakshas, asuras, and men. O Sanjaya, if Karna is capable of checking such forces on the battlefield, then how was it that he could not overcome Bhimasena, the son of Pandu and Kunti, who seemed radiant with the fortune of victory? Tell me the reason for this.
संजय उवाच
Educational Q&A
The verse highlights a recurring epic tension between sheer martial capability and the actual outcome of battle: victory is not presented as a simple function of strength alone, but as something also shaped by circumstance, morale, divine favor/fortune (vijaya-lakshmi), and the complex web of causes in war.
Sanjaya frames a pointed question: Karna is portrayed as powerful enough to restrain even gods and other superhuman beings when fully armed, so why could he not overcome Bhima on the battlefield? The verse sets up an explanation for Karna’s failure to 'cross over' or defeat Bhima in that encounter.