Secondary Tales of the Two Great Epics

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

Page 43

30
Secondury Tales of the two Great Epics
been integrated into the central parts of the narrative, the difference in the style of these two portious becomes the cause of failure to achieve this artistic formal unity of the epic. However, even the grandness of the conception itself has been well rewarded by the great popularity attained even by these portions of the narrative. This flashback framing technique is taken to an extreme in Kādambari where the listener-narrator are shown to be the central characters of the narrative - in their third births ! Artistically, however, it is not superior to that in the RM.
A further consideration of the contents of these sargas reveals that they are also meant to be an introductory group of episodes. Thus, they give us (1) a noble life worth poetising, (2) a proper metre for and a sensitive composer of such a poem, (3) a list of events included in the poem, and (4) the proper singers or reciters for such a poem. It is, therefore, not incorrect to postulate that “The first four Sargas of the Bālakända which serve the purpose of an Introduction to the Rāmāyana are probably from a different hand that prefixed them to the Epic at a later stage."5
In making mention of Valmiki as the first poet and a contemporary of Rāma, these four Sargas have a point of affinity with the UK, As Dr. G. H. Bhat points out, “The Rāmāyaṇa gives a detailed account of the sage Vālmīki in the first four Sargas of the Bālakāņda and the Uttarakānda, both of which are evidently a later addition .... It is only the late Kāņdas (I and VII) that make Vālmīki a contemporary of Rāma." But it should be noted that even in BK, Vālmiki is not even mentioned anywhere except in these four Sargas.
This fact leads to a number of possibilities. In the first place, it makes the unity of authorship of these parts (i. e. Sargas 1-4 of BK, and the final portion of UK) almost certain. Equally certain is the unity of the age of their interpolation into the epic. It also reveals the purpose of this interpolation which is to establish the contemporaneity of the author of the poem with its hero, most probably to show that its sage-poet also belonged to the same reverentially hoary past as did its hero. Since these portions of the BK and UK are later than Rāmopākhyāna in the MBh, we can very well imagine that the author of these parts knew the MBh and was prompted to emulate the example of MBh where sage Vyāsa also is not only the author of the epic but is intimately related to the heroes and often plays an important part in furthering the story. He, therefore, tried to show the sage Valmiki playing an important role in the drama of his hero's life, even if only in the end.
The first and the third Sarags give two catalogues of events. The first catalogue does not mention the events of BK and UK, the second does. Again, the MBh often refers to RM, and more than once gives epitomes of it. But nowhere does it reveal
5 BK, p. 424 6 ibid. p. 425, 7 See Rāma-Katha, Bulcke, pp. 47 ff.