Secondary Tales of the Two Great Epics

SR No.: 001566
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Rajendra I Nanavati
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad
Publication Year: 1982
Total Pages: 210
Language: English
Classification: Book_English, Literature, Mythology, & Story
File Size: 15 MB

Page 35

22
Secondary Tales of the two Great Épics ādi-kāņde anukramaņikā samāpatā/ Thus, both AdiP and BK agree in being named Adi' -- the former exclusively, the latter occasionally. They also agree in the nature of their contents which are narration of events in the life of the hero or heroes, prior to the events beginning the epic proper. They reveal the layman's complete indifference to, or rather ignorance of, the artistic usefulness of such incidents and his characterstic curiosity to know everything about the hero, right from the beginning. (Hence the name 'Adi'.) And, if Ādi-Kāņda is accepted by all to be a later addition, it is very probable, that Adi-parvan also must have been so.
The cumulative force of the foregoing considerations now seems to make the conclusion irresistible that everything of the AdiP, even the incidents connected with the lives of the heroes, must have been subsequent additions to the epic and is thus secondary.
ii. The End of the 'Original
We mentioned above that the folk-curiosity is very characteristically child-like and is fond of hearing everything about the hero, right from the beginning to the end. We have also seen that the entire AdiP is a later addition, that the events in the lives of the heroes, prior to the point of Rājasüya-deliberations, are the oldest addition prefaced to the nucleus epic. Can we say any such thing about some addition appended ? In other words, can we guess about the end of the nucleus epic, like we did about its beginning? Can we point out something added posterior to the nucleus in the earliest redaction ? Is there some sort of an Uttara-parvan ?
It is difficult to give a definite answer to this question. There are, however, some evidences which, when properly interpreted, would point to certain probabilities.
lo the epic itself, MBh has been called an Itihāsa named 'Jaya'.54 Even the benedictory stanza, recited in the beginning of every parvan, mentions the word, but rather ambiguously.55 Many scholars had believed that this 'Jaya' was the name of the original epic written by Vyāsa Pārāśarya, and had postulated three stages in the development of the epic to its present size viz. the Jaya' written by Vyāsa, the "Bhārata' revised by Vaišampāyana, and the Maha-bhārata' by Sauti. But in the notes to the critical edition of AdiP, Dr. Sukthankar has shown that “The introductory stanza nārāyaṇam namaskrtya etc. is missing in S; it is therefore surely not original."58 About the other hemistich jayo nāmeti etc., he notes that it "Recurs at B. 5.136.18, there applied to the episode Vidulāputrānuśāsana, which shows that Jaya' is a generic name applicable to different works, and not a specific name of the MBh at all, as 54 cf. jayo näm' etihăso 'yam śrotavyo vijigişuna/ | AdiP.56.19.ab.
(v.i, srotavyo bhutimicchata/SvP. 5.39.ab.) 55 cf. nārāyaṇam namaskrtya naram ca'iva narottamam/
devīm sarasvatim ca'iva tato jayamudīrayet || Adi,1.o. 56 AdiP p 983.