The Pandavas' Five Journeys and the Structure of the Mahabharata
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1558/rosa.v1i2.165Keywords:
Hindu pilgrimage, horse sacrifice, incarnation, Indo-European ideology, Mahabharata, Pandavas, pentadic structureAbstract
A number of five-element structures occurring in the Mahabharata can be interpreted as expressing an early Indo European pentadic ideology. But in the main plot of the epic, five journeys, each made by one or more Pandavas, can also be viewed as forming a structure: the initial exile; Arjuna’s visit to the four quarters; the major Pandava exile (including the Great War); Arjuna’s journey during the horse sacrifice; and the Pandavas’ final journey to the Himalayas and Heaven. The Pandavas’ other journeys can be excluded for various reasons, but the fifth journey needs to be seen as reversing the descent from Heaven of the Pandavas’ divine genitors and the descent from the Himalayas made by the Pandavas as children. This pentad is examined in terms of the cause of each journey, its leading traveller, and its character and climax. It is argued that the five journeys manifest the pentadic ideology, albeit not in the standard hierarchical order. This has implications for the origin of the epic narrative.
References
All references in the form 1.2.3 are to the Mahabharata, and refer to the critical edition (Sukthankar et al. 1933-66).
Allen, N. J. 1996. ‘The Hero’s Five Relationships: A Proto-Indo-European Story.’ In Leslie, J., (ed.), Myth and Myth-making: Continuous Evolution in Indian Tradition: 1-20. London: Curzon.
—1999. ‘Arjuna and the Second Function: A Dumézilian Crux.’ Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, Series 3, 9(3): 403-18.
—2000. Categories and Classifications: Maussian Reflections on the Social. Oxford: Berghahn.
—2005a. ‘Romulus et Bhîshma: Structures entrecroisées.’ Anthropologie et sociétés 29(2): 21-44.
—2005b. ‘Thomas McEvilley: The Missing Dimension.’ International Journal of Hindu Studies 9: 59-75. doi:10.1007/s11407-005-0004-8
—2007a. ‘The Close and the Distant: A Long-term Perspective.’ In Pfeffer, Georg, (ed.), Periphery and Centre: Studies in Orissan History, Religion and Anthropology: 273-90. Delhi: Manohar.
—2007b. ‘The Shield of Achilles and Indo-European Tradition.’ Cuadernos de filología clásica: Estudios griegos e indoeuropeos 17: 33-44.
Killingley, Dermot. 2006. ‘Faculties, Breaths and Orifices: Some Vedic and Samkhya Notions of the Body and Personality.’ In King, Anna, (ed.), Indian Religions: Renaissance and Renewal: 73-108. London: Equinox.
Littleton, C. S. 3rd edn, 1981 [1966]. The New Comparative Mythology: An Anthropological Assessment of the Theories of Georges Dumézil. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Puhvel, J. 1987. Comparative Mythology. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Sukthankar, V. S. 1933. ‘Prolegomena.’ In Sukthankar et al. Mahabharata, 1: i-cx. Pune: Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute.
Sukthankar, V. S. et al. 1933–66. The Mahabharata for the First Time Critically Edited. 19 volumes. Pune: Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute.
Van Buitenen, J. A. B. 1973. The Mahabharata I: The Book of the Beginning. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
