J A Y A
This is a little known but very ancient poem, believed to be the precursor of the Mahabharat.
The poem, sung at bards at courts, recounting a king overcoming his rival kinsmen; wandering minstrels sung the tales far and wide for the
people, ala Luv Kush. The various
singers were banded under the name ‘Sutas’, often illegitimate offspring of
Kshtriyas who performed several courtly duties, including charioteers and
bards.
Jaya is believed to be the
forerunner of the Mahabharata and its wide ranging tales of the Kurus; along
with the Ramayana, it spawned the Puranas i.e. tales of the various dynasties
and everything to do with them. Dr. S V
Ketkar called this Sauta literature, composed, preserved and sung by the Sutas.
This literature had a more
ritualistic counterpart that Ketkar called the Mantra literature that focused
on hymns, rituals, sacrifices, philosophical and esoteric discourses; later even
grammar and philosophy, religious literature that was in the hands of the
priestly Brahmins.
Subsequently, Sauta
literature also passed into the hands of a Brahman Bhrigu clan, which is
believed to have interpolated their own valorous stories. But scholars of the
Mahabharata are able to identify those interpolations.
Our today’s Mahabharat was
recounted by several narrators. Where,
you would ask, is Ved Vyas, the Mahabharat’s creator, eye
witness and participant?
Dr. Irawati Karve reveals
that Vyas told his stories to his disciples, possibly on the basis of that
earlier Jaya. The Mahabharat backstory
reveals Vyas as Krishna (dark) Dvaipayana (born on an island); chiranjiv i.e. very long lived. He was also credited with editing and putting
into order the hymns of the Rigveda, Atharvavda and Yayurveda.
As a ‘Vyas’ i.e. an
‘arranger, a man who throws together’, could it be that he took the Jaya story
as told by different bands of Sutas with subsequent additions and rearranged
them into the wide-ranging epic we know today?
Vyas was also a participant of
that story, inducted by his mother, Satyavati, the wife of Shantanu to perform
niyoga with her childless daughter-in-laws to beget Kuru heirs, after Bhishma
refused to oblige. Heirs to the throne
were all important to stave off the greedy eyes of avaricious kings, eying both
the empty Kuru throne and widowed princesses.
The tragedy was that
Satyavati did not prepare her bahus for the Niyoga, not did Vyas make himself
less alarming. The young bhabhis were expecting their handsome jethji (Bhisma);
instead in walks a fearsome smelly man with fearful eyes and a long scraggly
beard.
Terrified out of their wits,
one closed her eyes to shut out the sight. Her child Drithrashtra was
sightless. The other paled in fright and her Pandu was born a pale impotent albino. Only the lusty maid produced
a healthy, wise Vidur, cursed to always be the Other, despite his mental
prowess.
Modern bards? Why, the advertising fraternity that sells
nonexistent qualities; British historians who rewrote histories to suit that
Nation of Shopkeepers; Rajput bards sung of valor, not repeated sellouts to settle internal quarrels!
Comments