Secondary Tales of the Two Great Epics

Author(s): Rajendra I Nanavati
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad

Page 25

12
Secondary Tales of the two Great Epics
which, more often than not, hang rather too heavily, and at least in the case of the MBh come quite close to reminding us of the parable of the Arab and the Camel. The lack of a definite and uniform design in the inclusion of the secondary material in the epics is too obvious to need any elaboration. Similarly the reason also is obvious. While in the other collections, a single author is chalking out the pattern of the collection, the hands working upon the pattern, or rather patterns, of each of the epics are numerous. Where the epics are concerned, therefore, the uniformity of pattern is out of question. Even of the two epics, this is more obvious in the case of MBh where the framing principal narrative itself is again .framed by the story of Janamejaya's snake-sacrifice, and this story of snake-sacrifice is provided in its turn a frame of the episode of Saunaka's twelve-year-sacrifice.
We may remark here in passing that the author of the UK also has tried to provide a similar frame by utilising the event of Rāma's Aśvamedha sacrifice to frame the entire Rāma-story by a sort of flashback technique. But the author's hand is shaky. His suminary treatment of the episode in just one Adhyāya (BK, 4) has failed in creating the desired effect.
There is another important distinction of the epics from the other collections mentioned above. The formal and material nature of the tales included in the other collections is more or less homogeneous. Pañcatantra and Hitopadeśa collect mainly fables. KSS and SDv collect tales which are more or less romantic, rather like fairytales. AN comes close to this class. Boccaccio and Chaucer are convincingly realistic in their style and the satiric undertones of their tales are normally clear enough. The tales contained in the epics, on the other hand, are extremely heterogeneous in their form, content, function and style, and no uniform characteristic from any point of view can be found in the entire bulk of these secondary tales.
This is true even of the intentions of the authors in collecting the tales or of the functions these tales are expected to perform. The tales of the PañcatantraHitopadeśa edify, those of KSS merely entertain, those of SDv and AN mainly entertain and those of Boccaccio and Chaucer satirize. It cannot be said that such a uniformity of purpose exists behind all the secondary tales of the epics. At least, in the immediate purposes of the tales collected in the epics, no such uniformity can be found. Even when we concede that all the tales do at least entertain, we are not sure that even this function will hold good in the case of all the tales of the epics without exception.
There is some uniqueness even of the audience to which these tales are narrated. The fable-collections are for children - either in age or in intellect. The collections like KSS, SDV, AN are meant for an audience grown-up in age but with a lower level of taste. The audience of the epics would be heterogenous with regard to its age and intellect, but it is always supposed to be characterised by and to be inspired