Chapter 5: The Mahābhārata and Rāmāyaṇa

This chapter is part of the book The Sacred Editors: Hinduism.

"A poem a hundred thousand verses long cannot be written without editors. Or without ambition."

Ujjain, around 150 CE. The afternoon sun streams through the wooden lattice windows of a monastery scriptorium, illuminating countless motes of dust that dance in the air. Viśvamitra, a poet-scribe trained in both Sanskrit grammar and local dialects, dips his reed stylus into a mixture of lampblack and tree gum, then pauses over the palm leaf manuscript spread before him. The text is already dense with characters—dialogues between gods and warriors, the anguish of queens, genealogies that stretch back to the cosmic dawn.

He is copying a version of the Mahābhārata, but the story seems to shift and grow even as he transcribes it. Earlier that morning, his teacher Bharadvāja had requested that he emphasize the dharma (righteous duty) teachings, drawing out the moral instructions of the dying patriarch Bhīṣma more clearly. The temple patron who commissioned this manuscript, a wealthy merchant with Vaiṣṇava leanings, prefers devotional elements—perhaps Viśvamitra could expand the passages praising Krishna's divine nature? A traveling scholar from the south has shared a regional tale about a serpent king's curse that would fit perfectly into the forest books. Meanwhile, another manuscript has arrived from Mathura containing an account of Arjuna's exile that differs significantly from any version Viśvamitra has encountered before.

The scribe sets down his stylus and rubs his temples. Around him, other copyists work on different sections of the epic, each making similar choices about which variants to include, which interpretations to emphasize, which episodes deserve expansion or compression. The monastery's library already contains several Mahābhārata manuscripts, no two exactly alike, each reflecting the preferences of its scribes, teachers, and patrons.

Viśvamitra picks up his stylus again and begins to write. "This is itihāsa," he murmurs, invoking the epic's traditional designation meaning "thus it was." But he knows that what he transcribes represents not the definitive account of what happened, but rather one version among many—a version shaped by human choices, contemporary concerns, and the evolving spiritual needs of the communities that preserve these sacred stories.¹

The Epics as Living Scripture

The Mahābhārata and Rāmāyaṇa occupy a unique position within Hindu sacred literature, functioning as both entertainment and scripture, history and myth, moral instruction and theological speculation. Unlike the Vedas, which maintained their authority through precise preservation of ancient sounds, these epic narratives (itihāsa—literally "thus it was") derived their sacred power from their capacity for continuous reinterpretation and expansion.

The Mahābhārata, traditionally attributed to the sage Vyāsa, contains over 100,000 verses in its final Sanskrit form, making it roughly eight times longer than the Iliad and Odyssey combined. The Rāmāyaṇa, ascribed to the poet Vālmīki, stabilized around 24,000 verses but spawned countless regional variations that adapted the core narrative to local languages, cultural values, and theological concerns. Both epics exist in dozens of recensions across multiple languages: Sanskrit, Tamil, Telugu, Bengali, Hindi, Awadhi, Javanese, Khmer, Thai, and many others, each representing distinctive cultural interpretations of the foundational stories.²

What distinguished the epics from Vedic literature was precisely their editorial flexibility. While Vedic śākhās maintained relatively stable textual boundaries despite variant readings, the epics functioned as "scriptural containers"—porous, expansive frameworks capable of absorbing new material without losing their essential identity. Their authority derived not from rigid transmission but from what Paula Richman calls "narrative generosity"—the capacity to speak meaningfully to diverse communities across different historical periods.³

This flexibility reflected deeper theological assumptions about how sacred truth manifests in human experience. Rather than preserving a single authoritative account, the epic tradition embraced the principle that divine reality could be approached through multiple perspectives, each offering valid but partial insights into cosmic truth. As A.K. Ramanujan observes, "No Indian ever hears—or tells—the Rāmāyaṇa for the first time," because the tradition assumes familiarity with multiple versions rather than insisting on canonical uniformity.⁴

The Mechanics of Epic Expansion

The process through which the epics grew from relatively simple heroic narratives into vast encyclopedias of Hindu culture and spirituality reveals sophisticated mechanisms of sacred editing that operated across centuries of transmission. Modern scholarship has identified several distinct phases of textual development, each reflecting different editorial priorities and cultural contexts.

The earliest layers of the Mahābhārata, probably dating to around 400 BCE, appear to have focused on a dynastic conflict between the Pāṇḍavas and Kauravas, with emphasis on kṣatriya (warrior) values, heroic combat, and the tragic consequences of ambition and hatred. Archaeological and linguistic evidence suggests these core narratives originated in the Kuru-Panchala region of northern India, where they functioned as both entertainment and historical memory for aristocratic audiences.⁵

However, the epic that emerged by the Gupta period (4th-6th centuries CE) had absorbed enormous quantities of additional material that transformed its character and significance. Theological treatises like the Bhagavad Gītā and Anugītā inserted sophisticated philosophical discussions into the narrative framework. Didactic sections called upakhyānas (subsidiary tales) provided moral instruction through embedded stories. Entire books, such as the Śānti Parva(Book of Peace), functioned as comprehensive guides to dharmaśāstra (religious law), statecraft, and cosmic speculation.

The Rāmāyaṇa underwent similar expansion, though perhaps more systematically. Comparative analysis of different recensions suggests that episodes emphasizing Rāma's divine nature—particularly the Bāla Kāṇḍa (Childhood Book) and Uttara Kāṇḍa (Final Book)—were added relatively late to transform a heroic tale into a devotional scripture suitable for emerging Vaiṣṇava theology. John Brockington's detailed philological analysis demonstrates how the epic's theological orientation shifted gradually from portraying Rāma as an exemplary human king to presenting him as an avatāra(incarnation) of the supreme deity Viṣṇu.⁶

These editorial processes were never random or accidental but reflected deliberate choices made by scribes, teachers, and patrons who understood themselves as preserving and enhancing sacred tradition rather than merely copying ancient texts. Manuscript colophons (scribal statements) frequently include prayers, genealogies, and explanations of editorial decisions that reveal the reverent care with which these expansions were undertaken.

Forces Shaping Epic Development

The particular directions taken by epic expansion reflect the convergence of several historical forces that shaped the religious and cultural landscape of classical and medieval India. Understanding these influences illuminates why certain versions prevailed while others remained marginal or disappeared entirely.

Theological Integration and Sectarian Adaptation

The Mahābhārata proved remarkably capable of absorbing conflicting philosophical systems—Sāṅkhya, Yoga, Vedānta, bhakti—and presenting them as complementary rather than contradictory approaches to spiritual truth. The Bhagavad Gītā alone became a theological touchstone for multiple traditions, each discovering its own doctrinal priorities reflected in Krishna's teachings to Arjuna. This theological flexibility enabled the epic to serve diverse religious communities while maintaining its claim to universal relevance.

Similarly, the Rāmāyaṇa adapted to support emerging devotional movements by gradually emphasizing Rāma's divine nature and Sītā's exemplary devotion. Vernacular retellings like Kamban's 12th-century Tamil Irāmāvatāram or Tulsidas's 16th-century Awadhi Rāmcaritmānas demonstrated how the core narrative could be reinterpreted to address regional linguistic preferences, caste accessibility concerns, and evolving theological sensibilities without losing its essential sacred character.⁷

Royal Patronage and Political Legitimation

Kings and courts across South and Southeast Asia supported epic recensions that aligned with their dynastic claims, territorial ambitions, and ideological programs. During the Gupta period, versions of the Mahābhārata that emphasized kṣatriya heroism and divine sanction for righteous kingship gained particular prominence. Later, Southeast Asian courts from Java to Cambodia patronized Rāmāyaṇa adaptations that portrayed ideal monarchy through Rāma's example, creating distinctive cultural syntheses that influenced art, architecture, and political theory across the region.

This royal engagement with epic literature was never merely propagandistic but reflected genuine belief in the capacity of these narratives to provide practical and spiritual guidance for rulers facing complex moral challenges. The epic tradition's emphasis on dharma as contextual rather than absolute offered sophisticated frameworks for navigating political dilemmas while maintaining ethical integrity.

Liturgical and Performative Integration

Perhaps most significantly, episodes from both epics became deeply embedded in temple ritual, public recitation (pāṭha), dramatic performance, and festival celebration throughout the Hindu world. This liturgical adoption created powerful incentives for narrative clarity, emotional accessibility, and moral edification over textual fixity. Versions that could move audiences to devotion, inspire ethical reflection, or provide spiritual comfort gained advantages over more scholarly or linguistically precise alternatives.

The integration of epic narratives into ritual contexts also created opportunities for theological innovation, as temple traditions developed sophisticated hermeneutical methods for interpreting familiar stories in light of evolving spiritual needs. The same episode might be understood as historical account, allegorical instruction, or mystical revelation depending on the interpretive framework applied by particular communities or teachers.

Alternative Trajectories: What Different Emphases Might Have Created

The editorial choices that shaped the epics' development were never inevitable, and different decisions could have produced fundamentally different Hindu cultural and theological landscapes. Scholarly analysis of textual variants and alternative traditions reveals several plausible scenarios that illuminate how contingent our current understanding of these sacred narratives actually is.

A Philosophical Rather Than Devotional Mahābhārata

Early layers of the Mahābhārata contain sophisticated discussions of Sāṅkhya philosophy, yogic practice, and ethical reasoning that could have developed into a more philosophical and less devotionally oriented epic tradition. Had editors emphasized these elements over the Krishna-centered devotional material that eventually dominated, the epic might have become primarily a philosophical compendium rather than a bhakti scripture. R.N. Dandekar argues that the elevation of Krishna from tribal hero to supreme deity occurred through deliberate editorial intervention rather than natural textual evolution, suggesting that alternative theological trajectories remained possible until relatively late in the epic's development.⁸

Such a philosophical emphasis might have created a more intellectually oriented Hindu tradition, potentially supporting earlier development of systematic theology while possibly limiting the popular accessibility that devotional movements provided. The implications for caste relations, women's spiritual participation, and regional cultural integration could have been profound.

Heroic Rather Than Divine Rāmāyaṇa Traditions

Alternative Rāmāyaṇa versions, particularly those preserved in Jain literature, present Rāma as an exemplary human being rather than a divine incarnation. The Jain Paumacariya by Vimalasūri (c. 4th century CE) and similar texts portray Rāma as a great king whose achievements reflect human virtue rather than supernatural power. Had these humanistic interpretations gained prominence over devotional alternatives, Hindu theological development might have maintained stronger emphasis on human potential for ethical achievement rather than divine intervention.⁹

John Brockington's analysis suggests that Rāma's divinization occurred gradually through specific editorial campaigns rather than inevitable recognition of inherent divine nature. Alternative scenarios might have produced a tradition emphasizing human moral heroism over divine līlā (cosmic play), potentially creating different approaches to spiritual practice, social ethics, and religious authority.

Gender-Inclusive Epic Traditions

Both epics contain materials that could have supported more gender-inclusive religious cultures had different editorial priorities prevailed. Alternative Rāmāyaṇa versions, such as the Adbhuta Rāmāyaṇa attributed to Vālmīki, depict Sītā as a powerful warrior-goddess who defeats demons and rescues Rāma. Similarly, certain Mahābhārata episodes present strong female characters like Satyavatī, Gāngā, and Draupadī as wielding significant spiritual and political authority.

Paula Richman and Arti Dhand have documented how systematic editorial emphasis on male heroism and female subordination gradually marginalized these alternative portrayals, suggesting that different choices could have produced epic traditions more supportive of women's religious leadership and social agency.¹⁰ The implications for Hindu gender theology, family structures, and spiritual practice could have been transformative.

Regionally Diverse Rather Than Sanskrit-Centered Traditions

The eventual dominance of Sanskrit epic versions over regional alternatives reflects particular cultural and political developments rather than inevitable textual superiority. Had royal and institutional patronage supported vernacular traditions more consistently, or had Sanskrit never achieved pan-Indian prestige, the epic tradition might have developed along more linguistically and culturally diverse lines.

Such diversity could have created a more decentralized Hindu tradition with stronger regional distinctiveness, potentially supporting different approaches to caste relations, ritual practice, and theological authority. The South Indian Tamil tradition, which maintained significant independence from Sanskrit cultural dominance, offers glimpses of how such alternative developments might have unfolded.

Contemporary Scholarly Perspectives

Modern scholarship on the Hindu epics reflects fundamental disagreements about how to understand the relationship between textual development, religious authority, and cultural meaning. These debates have implications that extend far beyond academic circles, influencing contemporary approaches to translation, education, and religious practice.

The tradition of critical textual scholarship, exemplified by V.S. Sukthankar's monumental Critical Edition of the Mahābhārata (1933-1966), attempted to reconstruct "original" epic texts by comparing hundreds of manuscripts and identifying later interpolations. This philological approach assumes that earlier versions possess greater authenticity and that editorial additions represent corruptions of pristine sources. However, even Sukthankar acknowledged the impossibility of arriving at truly original texts, given the evidence for continuous editorial activity from the earliest recoverable periods.¹¹

Contemporary textual historians like James L. Fitzgerald and Alf Hiltebeitel have moved beyond reconstruction toward interpretation, treating the epics as intentional palimpsests that gained meaning through layered composition rather than despite it. Hiltebeitel argues that the Mahābhārata functions as a "ritualized text" whose multiple voices and perspectives create meaning through juxtaposition and dialogue rather than unified narrative authority.¹² This approach treats editorial expansion as creative theological work rather than textual corruption.

Scholars of vernacular and regional literature, including Paula Richman, A.K. Ramanujan, and Velcheru Narayana Rao, emphasize that multiple epic traditions coexist as parallel expressions of sacred vision rather than hierarchical variants of Sanskrit originals. Their work demonstrates how different cultural contexts produce distinctive epic interpretations that deserve recognition as independent theological and literary achievements rather than derivative adaptations.¹³

Critical scholars like Wendy Doniger and Romila Thapar highlight how epic editorial history reflects social and political power dynamics, including the systematic marginalization of women's voices, lower-caste perspectives, and alternative ethical frameworks. Their analysis reveals how apparently natural textual developments actually reflect deliberate ideological choices that served particular group interests while suppressing others.¹⁴

More recent scholarship has begun integrating these approaches, recognizing that epic texts function simultaneously as historical documents, literary achievements, theological resources, and ideological constructs. This synthetic perspective treats editorial diversity as evidence of the epics' continuing vitality rather than corruption or confusion.

Contemporary Relevance and Ongoing Editorial Processes

The editorial processes that shaped the classical epics continue to operate in contemporary contexts, as modern publishers, translators, filmmakers, and educators make choices about which versions to present, which episodes to emphasize, and which interpretive frameworks to adopt. Understanding the historical contingency of epic development provides crucial perspective for navigating these ongoing editorial decisions.

Contemporary print editions of the epics often obscure their textual complexity by presenting single versions as authoritative while ignoring alternative traditions or editorial choices. Popular translations frequently reflect the theological and cultural preferences of their creators rather than comprehensive representation of the tradition's diversity. Ramesh Menon's prose Mahābhārata emphasizes devotional elements that appeal to contemporary spiritual seekers, while Bibek Debroy's recent translation attempts more literal accuracy to Sanskrit sources. Each approach involves editorial choices that shape readers' understanding of these sacred narratives.

Digital technology has created new possibilities for representing epic diversity while also raising questions about authority and authenticity. Online databases like the Mahābhārata Electronic Text Project make multiple recensions searchable and comparable, potentially supporting more historically informed approaches to epic interpretation. However, these technological tools also require editorial decisions about which manuscripts to digitize, how to handle variant readings, and which interpretive frameworks to provide for users.

Contemporary performance traditions—including television serials, theatrical adaptations, and festival celebrations—continue the ancient practice of adapting epic narratives to address current concerns while maintaining connection to traditional sources. These modern retellings inevitably involve editorial choices about characterization, plot emphasis, and moral interpretation that participate in the same fundamental processes that shaped classical epic development.

Perhaps most significantly, contemporary debates about Hindu identity, cultural authenticity, and religious authority often invoke epic precedents without acknowledging the editorial complexity that produced current textual forms. Recognizing this complexity need not undermine faith in epic teachings but can encourage more nuanced and humble approaches to claims about their proper interpretation and application.

The epics' historical development demonstrates that sacred texts can maintain their spiritual authority precisely through their capacity for creative adaptation rather than rigid preservation. This insight offers valuable perspective for contemporary Hindu communities seeking to honor traditional wisdom while addressing modern challenges and opportunities.

Understanding how human editorial choices shaped these beloved narratives reveals the profound responsibility that contemporary inheritors bear for their ongoing transmission. Like the ancient scribes and teachers who preserved and adapted these stories for their own generations, modern communities participate in the continuing creation of epic meaning through the choices they make about preservation, interpretation, and application.

The Mahābhārata and Rāmāyaṇa remain among the most widely known and beloved sacred texts in Hinduism not because they achieved perfect textual fixity, but because they demonstrated remarkable flexibility in speaking to diverse spiritual needs across different historical periods. Their editorial history teaches us that sacredness does not require singularity but can flourish through creative multiplicity that honors both traditional wisdom and contemporary insight.

Notes

This scene is reconstructed from historical evidence about manuscript culture in Ujjain during the Śuṅga and early Kuṣāṇa periods, documented in sources like the Mālvikāgnimitra and archaeological evidence from sites like Sāñcī. See Gregory Schopen, Buddhist Monks and Business Matters (Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 2004), 45-78.
For comprehensive analysis of epic manuscript traditions, see John Brockington, The Sanskrit Epics (Leiden: Brill, 1998), 21-58; and Camille Bulcke, Rāmakathā: Utpatti aur Vikās (Allahabad: Hindi Parishad, 1950).
Paula Richman, "Introduction: The Diversity of the Rāmāyaṇa Tradition," in Many Rāmāyaṇas: The Diversity of a Narrative Tradition in South Asia, ed. Paula Richman (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1991), 3-21.
A.K. Ramanujan, "Three Hundred Rāmāyaṇas: Five Examples and Three Thoughts on Translation," in Many Rāmāyaṇas, ed. Richman, 22-49.
On the historical and archaeological context of early epic development, see Michael Witzel, "Epics, Khilas and Purāṇas: Continuities and Ruptures," in The Vedas: Texts, Language and Ritual, ed. Alexander Lubotsky (Groningen: Egbert Forsten, 2002), 571-572.
John Brockington, Righteous Rāma: The Evolution of an Epic (Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1984), 234-267.
On vernacular epic adaptations, see Norman Cutler, Songs of Experience: The Poetics of Tamil Devotion(Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1987); and Philip Lutgendorf, The Life of a Text: Performing the Rāmcaritmānas of Tulsidas (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1991).
R.N. Dandekar, "The Role of Man in Hinduism," in The Religion of the Hindus, ed. Kenneth W. Morgan (New York: Ronald Press, 1953), 117-133.
On Jain Rāmāyaṇa traditions, see John E. Cort, "Models of and for the Study of the Jains," Method and Theory in the Study of Religion 12, no. 1 (2000): 42-71.
Paula Richman, Extraordinary Child: Poems from a South Indian Devotional Genre (Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1997), 45-67; Arti Dhand, "The Subversive Nature of Dharma in the Mahābhārata," Journal of the American Academy of Religion 70, no. 2 (2002): 309-337.
V.S. Sukthankar, "Prolegomena," in The Mahābhārata: For the First Time Critically Edited, vol. 1 (Poona: Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, 1933), i-cv.
Alf Hiltebeitel, Rethinking the Mahābhārata: A Reader's Guide to the Education of the Dharma King (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2001), 17-45.
Velcheru Narayana Rao, "A Rāmāyaṇa of Their Own: Women's Oral Tradition in Telugu," in Many Rāmāyaṇas, ed. Richman, 114-136.
Wendy Doniger, The Hindus: An Alternative History (New York: Penguin, 2009), 201-234; Romila Thapar, Śakuntala: Texts, Readings, Histories (London: Anthem Press, 2011), 67-98.

Chapter 5: The Mahābhārata and Rāmāyaṇa—Epic Editing and Expansion