Why does the Srimad Bhagavatam contradict the Mahabharata?

An attentive reader may notice a few contradictions between the descriptions of the Srimad Bhagavatam and the Mahabharata. Since scriptures are supposed to be infallible, how is it so?

In the first canto of Srimad Bhagavatam, it is described how the Pandavas renounced the world after the disappearance of Krsna.

After installing Pariksit on the throne, Yudhiṣṭhira Maharaja started towards the north, treading the path accepted by his forefathers and great men, to devote himself completely to the thought of the Supreme Personality of Godhead.

His younger brothers observed that the Age of Kali had already arrived throughout the world and that the citizens of the kingdom were already affected by irreligious practice. Therefore, they decided to follow in his footsteps.

In this way, the five Pandavas went to the Himalayas to practice devotional service, and thus they went back home, back to Godhead. It's mentioned that "This abode of the Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa, known as Goloka Vṛndāvana, cannot be attained by persons who are absorbed in the material conception of life. But the Pāṇḍavas, being completely washed of all material contamination, attained that abode in their very same bodies."

One may question how they could reach the spiritual world in the same bodies. Srila Jiva Goswami concludes in the Priti-Sandarbha that it is because their bodies were not material. Due to their advanced devotional service, the Pandavas were pure to such an extent that their bodies became completely spiritualized.

Kunti also heard when Arjuna spoke about the disappearance of Krsna and the Yadu dynasty, and thus she also prepared to go back to Godhead by engaging in devotional service. This is described in verse 33:

"Kuntī, after overhearing Arjuna’s telling of the end of the Yadu dynasty and disappearance of Lord Kṛṣṇa, engaged in the devotional service of the transcendental Personality of Godhead with full attention and thus gained release from the course of material existence."

After his talks with Maitreya, narrated in the 3rd and 4th cantos of Srimad Bhagavatam, Vidura resumed his pilgrimage and eventually left his body at Prabhāsa, in western India. He left in full Krsna Consciousness, but couldn't immediately go back to Godhead, because he still had a service to perform as Yamaraja. Thus, he was received by the inhabitants of Pitṛloka, and from there reinstated in his post.

Although Pitṛloka is a paradisiac place, where pious persons live in great opulence, it is geographically situated at the bottom of the universe, close to the hellish planets, because it is the court of Yamaraja. Pious people who are attached to their families have the opportunity to meet their ancestors there and enjoy with them while at the same time observing their descendants on Earth. They can remain there as long as their descendants honor them and offer them food and water (pinda) every year. In other words, pious people can extend their current identities and remain connected with their family members if they can perform their family duties properly and leave pious descendants who can continue the family tradition, remaining pious and honoring their ancestors according to the rules of the scriptures. That's why in Vedic culture, the offerings to the ancestors are considered so important. When this chain is broken, all the ancestors fall from Pitṛloka, and the lineage ends.

This is mentioned by Arjuna in the Bhagavad-Gita when he says:

"An increase of unwanted population certainly causes hellish life both for the family and for those who destroy the family tradition. The ancestors of such corrupt families fall down, because the performances for offering them food and water are entirely stopped." (Bg 1.41)

In SB 1.1550, it's described that Draupadī stayed in the palace with Subadra, and they practiced pure devotional service together by remembering Krsna's pastimes:

"Draupadī also saw that her husbands, without caring for her, were leaving home. She knew well about Lord Vāsudeva, Kṛṣṇa, the Personality of Godhead. Both she and Subhadrā became absorbed in thoughts of Kṛṣṇa and attained the same results as their husbands."

Srila Prabhupada gives a very powerful purport on 1.15.50:

"When flying an airplane, one cannot take care of other planes. Everyone has to take care of his own plane, and if there is any danger, no other plane can help another in that condition. Similarly, at the end of life, when one has to go back home, back to Godhead, everyone has to take care of himself without help rendered by another. The help is, however, offered on the ground before flying in space. Similarly, the spiritual master, the father, the mother, the relatives, the husband and others can all render help during one’s lifetime, but while crossing the sea one has to take care of himself and utilize the instructions formerly received. Draupadī had five husbands, and no one asked Draupadī to come; Draupadī had to take care of herself without waiting for her great husbands. And because she was already trained, she at once took to concentration upon the lotus feet of Lord Vāsudeva, Kṛṣṇa, the Personality of Godhead. The wives also got the same result as their husbands, in the same manner; that is to say, without changing their bodies they reached the destination of Godhead. Śrīla Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura suggests that both Draupadī and Subhadrā, although her name is not mentioned herein, got the same result. None of them had to quit the body."

An attentive reader may notice a contradiction between this description and the Mahabharata, where it's described that Draupadī went with the Pandavas to the Himalayas. Srila Jiva Goswami explains (in his Sat Sandarbhas) that the events described by Vyāsadeva in the Mahabharata are pastimes that happened in a different universe, that he could see in his meditation, while the events described in the Bhagavatam relate to the way it happened in this particular universe, 5000 years ago.

Vyāsadeva wrote the Mahabharata based on what he saw in his meditation, before the later pastimes of the Pandavas took place. Therefore, some descriptions of the Mahabharata are based in pastimes from other universes that Vyāsadeva accessed in his meditation. The Bhagavatam on the other hand was narrated by Suta Goswami decades later, when the events had factually happened. The pastimes of the Pandavas in the Mahabharata are eternal and are repeated unlimitedly in different universes. However, the pastimes don't happen in exactly the same way every time.

Another point is that the Mahabharata is destined for common people, who are not expected to understand advanced spiritual topics, while the Srimad Bhagavatam is a book destined for Paramahansas who are on their way back to Godhead. Is thus expected that the descriptions of both books may differ, as different passages and details are emphasized according to the public they are destined to.

---

Any questions? Post it in the comments, I will do my best to answer. If you think this post can be useful to others, feel free to share it: