Mahabharata: Dates, Editions, Narrators...

नारायणं नमस्कृत्य नरं चैव नरोत्तमम्

 देवीं सरस्वतीं चैव ततो जयम् उदीरयेत्

महाभरत

Mahābharata

As retold by

Michael Dolan, B.V. Mahāyogi

महाभरत

Mahābharata

As retold by

Michael Dolan, B.V. Mahāyogi

Notes on Mahabharata:

Dates, Editions, Narrators

Date of the Battle of Kurukshetra

There is some speculation as to the actual date of the war described in the Mahabharata. According to the ancient Hindu tradition since before the time of Alexander the Great, the Mahabharata war coincides with the beginning of the Iron Age, the Age of Kali, which marks a departure from the golden age of yore and a considerable moral downfall as well. Many episodes in Mahabharata, as for example Ashvatthama killing the sleeping sons of Draupadi, are concerned with a departure from the rules of war. These departures are a turning point in history which usher in the Kali age, the age of iron. Kali yuga is considered to have begun with the great war between the Pandavas and Kauravas which destroyed the old order.

Ruins of ancient hindu city in Mohenjo-Daro 3000? BC

The actual date of the war, along with so many other historical aspects of Mahabharata lore, is much disputed. According to the scholarship of no less than Bhaktivinoda Thakura, writing in 1880 in his Sri Krishna Samhita, “It may be understood that the battle of Kurukshetra took place 3,791 years from today. Dr. Bentley Sahib calculated the position of the stars and decided that the battle took place 1,824 years before Christ. 

Ruins at Mohenjo-Daro, India, 3000? BC

The future swanlike scholars can determine the correct figures after further research.” Dr. C.V. Vaidya of the University of Bombay writes in his 1905 publication, “The Mahabharata: A Criticism,” discusses a number of possible dates for the antiquity of the actual war described in Mahabharata.  

Harrapan Ceramic Vessel 2600-2400 BC

He writes,”the earliest date assigned to the Mahabharata war is that fixed by Mr. Modak on the basis of some astronomical data found in the Mahabharata. He thinks that the vernal equinox at the time of the war was in in Punarvasu and hence about 7,000 years must have elapsed since then. Some thinkers, following the opinion of Varaha Mihira, believe that the battle was fought in 2604 B.C. European scholars on the other hand believe in the authority of a shloka in the Vishnu Purana that the war took place in about 1500 B.C. Mr. Dutta gives 1250 B.C. as the date of the Kuru Panchal war on the basis of the Magadha annals which show that thirty-five kings reigned in Magadha between the Kuru-Panchal war and the time of Buddha. …The orthodox opinion, however, is that the war took place in 3101 B.C., calculating on the basis of the generally accepted belief in India that in 1899 A.D., five thousand years had elapsed since the beginning of the Kali-age. We agree with this orthodox opinion on the basis of both internal and external evidence.”

Ancient ruined city of Mohenjo-Daro

A modern consideration of astronomical proof gives the date that the Kurukshetra war ended and Kali-yuga as February 18, 3102 BCE at 2:27:30 am, based on the Surya siddhanta’s mention that during the change of Yugas, all 7 planets will line up along the elliptic of the Earth’s annual path in the constellation of Pisces, just before Aries on a Phalguni Amavasya day, the last day of the year. 

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/drishtikone/2010/09/astronomical-proof-mahabharata-war-shri-krishna/.

 As Bhaktivinoda Thakura put it, “The future swanlike scholars can determine the correct figures after further research.”

Whatever the actual date of the Mahabharata War, it seems clear that the epic Sanskrit poem, has gone through at least three major editions before coming down to us in its present form of about 100,000 Sanskrit shlokas.

Ancient version of Mahabharata

According to my best research on the subject, the epic Mahabharata has evolved from a core of about 8,000 verses to its present immense size of about 100,000 shlokas, between the time of the actual Mahabharata war, sometime between 3100 and 1000. B.C.  How did this evolution take place?

The Mahabharata is a vast work. According to the Mahabharata itself, its author is Vyasa.  The work was narrated in its entirety within an oral tradition by three great narrators: Vyasa himself, Vaishampayana, his pupil, and Sauti, another of his disciples.

 

Vyasa teaches the story to Vaishampayana who relates it to the King Janamejaya at his snake sacrifice. When Janamejaya asks questions to Vaishampayana, the narrative grows and changes. This amplified version was heard by Vyasa and taught to Sauti, or Suta Goswami.

In this way the work as edited by the original author Vyasa may be said to have given rise to a second edition. This second edition was again taught by Vyasa to his other disciple, Sauti, or Suta Goswami.

When again Sauti tells the story of Mahabharata to Shaunaka Rishi and the sages of Naimisharanya, many new questions arose which had not been answered by the second edition. In this way, through the narration of Suta Goswami, a third edition was developed. This third edition with a few minor corrections passed through the mind and heart of Vyasa to the transcendental tusk of Ganesh and was inked in Sanskrit some time ago in antiquity, between the 11^th and 4^th Century before the Common Era.

While the actual hard copy in Sanskrit that we refer to today was canonized sometime between the 11^th and 4^th Century, a living oral tradition was communicated by brahmanas from teacher to disciple as well.  The discrepancies between oral and written traditions were resolved by the final text which was inscribed on palm-leaves and distributed throughout India by the brahmanas determined to preserve this ancient history.

Since the brahminic tradition was challenged by the authority of the Guptian kings who promoted Buddhist thought, the historic records pertaining to the origins of Mahabharata were mostly destroyed. And so all historic scholarship as to the authentic dates of the Kurukshetra war are based to some degree in speculation and linguistic analysis. More on this later.

Different versions or "Editions" of the Mahabharata

the "Jaya" version: 8,800 verses

Based on some of this scholarship, we can say that the original Mahabharata was considered as an Itihasa or history. Its character was less didactic than the work we have today. The original name of the work was “Jaya!” or Victory!. This name is derived from the invocation,

नारायणं नमस्कृत्य नरं चैव नरोत्तमम् ।देवीं सरस्वतीं व्यासं ततो जयमुदीरयेत् ॥ (४)

nārāyaṇaṁ namaskṛtya naraṁ caiva narottamam |

devīṁ sarasvatīṁ vyāsaṁ tato jayamudīrayet || (4)

“As we first bow to Narayana, who is  Krishna, God Himself, and to Nara as well, the most exalted male being, to the goddess of learning Saraswati, and to Vyāsa, author of the work, before we utter the story of triumph, or Jaya.”

Here, the word Jaya, or “Triumph” refers to the work itself, and “Jaya” is considered to be the original name of the poem, penned by Vyasa himself. 

In the introduction to the work, the Adi Parva, the different editions of Mahabharata are described by Sauti, while mentioning that the Mahabharata may be delivered in different lengths without diminishing its value.

 At the beginning of the Adi Parva, while giving his own version, Sauti tells the sages at Naimisharanya,

 “The Rishi Vyasa published this mass of knowledge in both a detailed and an abridged form. It is the wish of the learned in the world to posess the details and the abridgement. Some read the Bharata beginning with the initial mantra (invocation), others with the story of Astik, others with Uparaichara, while some Brahmanas study the whole… I am aquainted with eight thousand and eight hundred verses, and so is Shukadeva and also perhaps Sanjaya….Vyasa executed the compliation of the Bharata, exclusive of the episodes originally in twenty-four thousand verses; and so much only is called by the learned as the Bharata.

 Afterwards, he composed an  an epitome in one hundred and fifty verses, consisting of the introduction with the chapter of contents. This he first taught to his son Shukadeva; and afterwards he gave it to others of his disciples who were possessed of the same qualifications. After that, he executed another compliation, consisting of sixty hundred thousand verses. Of those, thirty hundred thousand are known in the world of the Devas; fifteen hundred thousand in the world of the Pitris: fourteen hundred thousand among the Gandharvas, and one hundred thousand in the regions of mankind. Narada recited them to the Devas, Devala to the Pitris, and Suka published them to the Gandharvas, Yakshas and Rakshasas; and in this world they were recited by Vaishampayana, one of the disicples of Vyasa, a man of just principles and the first among all those acquainted with the Vedas. Know that I, Sauti, have also repeated one hundred thousand verses.

How did the original work of 8,800 verses become 100,000 verses? The very expansion of the Mahabharata from 8,800 to 100,000 verses defies a “fundamentalist” approach. How could it be possible for a disciple to expand his guru’s version from a terse 8,800 verses to a bulky 100,000 verses. The Mahabarata in translation runs to about 2 million words in English. Who authorized Sauti to create a longer version of the work?

The "Bharata" version: 24,000 verses

The 8,800 verse first edition of anusthab shlokas in Sanskrit composed by Vyasa and mentioned by Sauti becomes a second edition when it is narrated by Vaishampayana Rishi, a disciple of Vyasa. 

Vaishampayana had been taught the poem along with his godbrothers Sumantu, Jaimini, Paila, and Shukadeva Goswami, the son of Vyasa himself.  

According to the final edition of Mahabharata, each one of these five disciples published a different edition of the work. Vaishampayana’s edition of Mahbharata differs from the original work by some 16,000 Sanskrit verses. On the evidence of the Adi Parva quoted above, it seems that Vaishampayana’s “Bharata” version ran to about 24,000 verses. 

The "Mahabharata" of Sauti

So, the original version expands from 8,800 to 24,000 by the reckoning of Sauti. Sauti, our final narrator who gave the work its ultimate form of 100,000 verses as recited before the sages of Naimisharanya headed by Shaunaka somewhere after 1000 BC.  

Sauti says, “Know ye Rishis, that while Vaishampayana was the first reciter of Mahabharata in the human world,  I have recited the work of Vaishampayana in 100,000 shlokas.”  The current edition comes down to us in the form we know now it with a preface, and introduction and a table of contents. With Sauti, or Suta Goswami as he is known in the Bhagavat Purana, for he also narrates this poem of Vyasa, we arrive at the fixed form of Mahabharata which in fact contains about three thousand less shlokas than that given by Sauti (96,836 to be exact.) It was perhaps Sauti himself who gave the name “Mahabharata” to the work, changing it from “Bharata,” or “Jaya” as in the original version given by Vyasa.

In short, the present Mahabharata may be considered as an original composition of Vyasa called "Jaya" in 8,800 verses, edited in a 2^nd edition or Bharat edition by his disciple Vaishampayana in 24,000 verses and expanded, edited with table of contents, preface and introduction in 100,000 verses as Mahabharata by Sauti, or Suta Goswami as he is also known in a final 3^rd edition.

Whatever the contribution made by Vaishampayana and Sauti, the authorship of Mahabharata is generally attributed to Vyasadeva Himself. No reason exists to reject the authority of tradition. On the other hand, Vyasa is believed to have edited the Vedas which predate the Mahabharata considerably. The brahmanas mentioned in the Mahabharata are “well-versed in the Vedas.” Vyasa’s father Parashara was considered “well-versed in the Vedas.” How could the father of Vyasa be “well-versed” in a book that his son has yet to write?

That there really existed a Rishi named Vyasa who was the son of Parashara has been confirmed by a number of reliable scriptural sources outside the Mahabharata, as for example the Yajun Kathaka. There is no reason to doubt that this Vyasa wrote the epic poem and did so on the basis of his own personal knowledge. One of the remarkable features of the Mahabharata is the intimate detail of events, characters, and the quotidian life of the period. Only an eye-witness could have described the events and places of thousands of years ago with such an eye to detail. People and places are often mentioned as being so well-known as to have no need for introduction. As a result of Vyasa’s gift for description the reader feels the characters in Mahabharata must be living breathing souls of flesh and blood.

Often the descriptions in Vyasa’s narrative strike us as no less than fossils whose outline reveals the reality of a lost and forgotten ancient civilization.  An impartial reader concludes that this narrative was written from a personal acquaintance with the characters and an intimate relationship with the heroic deeds.  In fact, far from being a collection of mythological fairy stories, much of the Mahabharata reads like the realistic story of heroes struggling with historical problems, much like the Canto del Cid, the primordial epic in the Spanish language.

But if there was a historical Vyasa who wrote the Mahabharata, what is his relation with the original Vyasa who wrote the Vedas? Was there another Vyasa who compiled the edited version of Mahabharata given by Sauti and issued a fourth edition?

Bhaktivinoda Thakura’s point of view is well worth considering:

"When the one Veda became greatly expanded, then Vyasadeva, after duly considering the subjects, divided the Veda into four and wrote them in book form. This took place a few years before King Yudhisthira s reign. Then Vyasadeva s disciples divided those words among themselves…

"…It is said that the Mahabharata was composed by Vyasadeva, and there is no objection to this. But it cannot be accepted that the Vyasa who divided the Vedas and received the title Vedavyasa at the time of Yudhisthira was the same Vyasa. The reason for this is that in the Mahabharata there are descriptions of kings such as Janmejaya, who ruled after Yudhisthira. There are specific references about the Manu scriptures in the Mahabharata, therefore the present day Mahabharata must have been written some time after 1000 B.C.

" From this it appears that Vedavyasa first made a draft of the Mahabharata, and later on another Vyasa elaborated on it and presented that under the name of Mahabharata One learned scholar from the sudra community named Lomaharsana recited Mahabharata before the sages at Naimisaranya. Perhaps he created the present day Mahabharata, because during his time the original 24,00 verses that were written by Vyasadeva were expanded to 100,000 verses.

"Since there is no special mention of Buddha in the Mahabharata it is understood that Mahabharata was recited by Sauti before the reign of Ajatasatru and after the reign of Brhadratha's descendants. If we study the descriptions of Naimisaranya, then we come to know that when the peaceful rsis saw the end of the Candra and Surya dynasties, they felt unprotected due to the absence of ksatriyas. Therefore they went to the secluded Naimisaranya and passed their lives discussing the scriptures. There is one more belief about the assembly of Naimisaranya.

For some time after the battle of Kuruksetra and before the coronation of King Nandivardhana the Vaisnava religion was very prominent. The main conclusion of the Vaisnavas is that every living entity has a right to cultivate spiritual life.

"But according to the opinion of the brahmanas, persons of castes other than brahmana are ineligible for liberation. Sober persons of other castes may be born again as brahmanas to endeavor for liberation.

" Because of these two conflicting opinions, the Vaisnavas highly regarded the scholars of Suta Gosvami’s line and thus established them at Naimisaranya as superior to the brahmanas  Some of the brahmanas there who were less qualified and controlled by wealth also accepted the scholars of Suta s line as superior. Those less qualified brahmanas defied the doctrines of karma kanda and accepted Suta as their spiritual master.

"They took shelter of Vaisnava religious principles, which are the only means of crossing the influence of Kali, the abode of sin. Anyway, that assembly gathered long after the battle of Kuruksetra. There is no doubt about this. (Kedarnatha Dutta,, Bhaktivinoda Thakura Shri Krishna Samhita 1880, Calcutta)

Sauti’s narration of Mahabharata was heard by the sages of Naimisharanya forest at the twelve year sacrifice of Shaunaka. If Sauti and Suta are the same person, Suta Goswami is also the narrator of Bhagavat Purana and a disciple of Vyasa who narrated his conclusions to Shaunaka Rishi and the sages of Naimisharanya.

The Mahabharata narration of Sauti or Suta Goswami as heard by Shaunaka was later compiled by Vyasa as the final edition of Mahabharata. Sauti heard the story of Mahabharata from his guru Vyasa. Vyasa’s version as heard and narrated by Sauti includes the version of Vaishampayana Rishi as told to Janamejaya.