The Mahabharata-style, structure and narrative
technique.
The Mahabharata is one of the two oldest
literary masterpieces of India .
It is breathtaking in not only its length but also in its poetic and
intellectual quality. It is precisely because of this reason that scholars
differ on what genre does the Mahabharata belong to. In English, the genre
given to it is that of an epic. Epics are long tales developed through oral
culture, myths and legends. They areusually based on themes of love and war.
Epics are stories about princes and princesses; its diction is exalted and
dignified. In Indian context, the Mahabharata belongs to the genre of
‘itihasa’. The word breaks up into ‘iti’+’ha’+’asa’. In Hindi, the word simply
means history, but in Sanskrit, it means, “So indeed it was”.
Here,
the idea of history is connected to the idea of time. Time was perceived in two
different paradoxical ways in ancient India . One was that time is never
ending entity which never comes to a halt. The second concept is paradoxical to
the first. It says that time is continuously completed, that is, a single
moment is complete in itself. In the Mahabharata, time that has gone by is
critically analyzed to see its universal significance and also learn from it.
The Mahabharata has been accorded several names by various scholars. It is also
known as ‘Akhyan’, ‘purana’, ‘dharmashastra’,arthshastra’,‘nitish astra’ and
mokshashastra’. It is an ‘akhyana’ because it deals with many myths like those
of shakuntala, nala and damyanti,
vidula, prahlada and others. As a purana, it deals with creation and also with
genealogies and geographical lists. Dharma is extensively dealt with in the
text, making it a dharmashastra. Similarly artha, niti and moksha are also
dealt in detail. Therefore, the Mahabharata is all of these and not any one of
them. Sukhthankar abstains from giving it any genre, but discusses the three-
dimensional view of the Mahabharata—it’s an epic on the mundane, ethical and
metaphysical planes.
On
the mundane level, it’s a fratricidal war. On ethical level, it’s a war between
dharma and adharma. On the metaphysical, it is just a process of cosmic
evolution, of time being in its flow. The Vedas and the upanishads are the
major source of Indian philosophy, ethics and morality. However, they were
accessible only to the elite who knew sanskrit. Some critics say that the
Mahabharata was created to bridge the gap between the lower classes and the
Vedas. It simplified the meaning of artha, dharma, kama
and moksha through the story of a feuding family. It is profoundly clear and
scholars agree that it is a text beyond any one definition or a genre. Each
genre becomes partial when applied to a text of such magnitude. The
Mahabharata’s narrative technique matches its complexity and depth of
philosophy. The technique of narration is that of a story within a story. The
main account of the puru dynasty begins after several small stories. The
narration happens at many levels. Vaismpayananarrates the tale to janmajeya at
the snake ceremony. Another sage who heard the story at the ceremony narrates
it to the bhrigu brahmans whom he meets in the naimisha forest.
Finally, there is vyasa, the overarching
narrator, who is telling the tale to lord ganesha, the penman of the
Mahabharata. Such an intricate and elaborate narrative structure prepares the
readers for further framings. Hegarty says that the narrative structure of the
text is so complex because of the “dialogic relationship among voices” in the
Mahabharata. To illustrate, he says that the sage brihadasva narrated the story
of nala and damyanti to yuddhishthtira in the forest to console him for his
loss in the dicing match. It also serves the purpose of comparing the results
of dicing for yuddhishthira and nala. Such narratives are spread all over the
text and they all add to its encyclopedic quality. Various responses to a
particular vent of a specific problem add to the comprehensive dimension of the
text. Let’s discuss the embedded narrative in the dicing with the story of
prahalada. The tale gives comparative insight to the present happening of the
dicing sequence. It is ironical when compared to draupadi's question. Prahalada
always knew who the better man was-his son or
sudhanvan angirars. He was not able to decide
whom should he favour because of his parental love. This story does not
explicate the issues raised by draupadi, but emphasizes the breach of duty by
the elders who did not follow the dharma codes.
The backbone of the Mahabharata is its dialogues. These dialogues bring
out the various ideologies and view points to a particular situation.
Nonetheless, it is not necessary that they reach a conclusion. To any question
of dharma, several answers are given and no answer is adjudged supreme.
Everyone answers according to his dharma and the reader has to choose according
to his own dharma. That is why, the Mahabharata is considered to be a text of
debates. The most important function of the dialogues is that it provides a
meditative moment to characters to explore various moral options available to
them for a given situation. Therefore, we can see how complex is the style,
structure and narrative technique of the Mahabharata is. However its language
is so free flowing and rhythmic that the philosophies that are really hard to
understand are made easy to read.
No comments:
Post a Comment