It should be remembered that the two Epics belong to different periods and different localities. Not only was a large part of the Maha-bharata composed later than the Rāmāyaṇa, parts of it being comparatively modern, but the places which gave birth to the two poems are distinct (see p. 320). Moreover, in the Rāmāyaṇa the circle of territory represented as occupied by the Aryans is more restricted than that in the Maha-bhārata. It reaches to Videha or Mithila and Anga in the East, to Su-rashṭra in the South-west, to the Yamuna and great Daṇḍaka forest in the South. Whereas in the Mahā-bhārata (as pointed out by Professor Lassen) the Aryan settlers are described as having extended themselves to the mouths of the Ganges in the East, to the mouth of the Godavari on the Koromandel coast, and to the Malabar coast in the West; and even the inhabitants of Ceylon (Sinhala) bring tribute to the Northern kings. It is well known that in India different customs and opinions frequently prevail in districts almost adjacent; and it is certain that Brahmanism never gained the ascendancy in the more martial north which it acquired in the neighbourhood of Oude', so that in the Maha-bhārata we have far more allusions to Buddhistic scepticism than we have in the sister Epic. In fact, each poem, though often running parallel to the other, has yet a distinct point of departure; and the Mahā-bhārata, as it became current in various localities, diverged more into by-paths and cross-roads than its sister. Hence the Rāmāyaṇa is in some respects a more finished

1

Professor Weber (Ind. Stud. I. 220) remarks that the north-western tribes retained their ancient customs, which those who migrated to the east had at one time shared. The former (as represented in the Mahābharata) kept themselves free from those influences of hierarchy and caste, which arose among the inhabitants of Ayodhya (in the Rāmāyaṇa) as a consequence of their intermingling and coming more in contact with the aborigines.

composition than the Mahā-bhārata, and depicts a more polished state of society, and a more advanced civilization. In fact, the Maha-bharata presents a complete circle of post-Vedic mythology, including many myths which have their germ in the Veda, and continually enlarging its circumference to embrace the later phases of Hinduism, with its whole train of confused and conflicting legends'. From this storehouse are drawn much of the Purāņas, and many of the more recent heroic poems and dramas. Here we have repeated many of the legends of the Rāmāyaṇa, and even the history of Rāma himself (see p. 368). Here also we have long discourses on religion, politics, morality, and philosophy, introduced without any particular connexion with the plot. Here again are most of the narratives of the incarnation of Vishņu, numberless stories connected with the worship of Śiva, and various details of the life of Krishna. Those which especially bear on the modern worship of Krishna are contained in the supplement called Hari-vanśa, which is itself a long poem-consisting of 16,374 stanzas 2-longer than the Iliad and Odyssey combined 3. Hence the religious system of the Maha-bharata is far more popular, liberal, and comprehensive than that of the Rāmāyaṇa. It is true that the god Vishnu is connected. with Krishna in the Maha-bharata, as he is with Rāma

1 It should be noted, that the germs of many of the legends of Hindū epic poetry are found in the Rig-veda. Also that the same legend is sometimes repeated in different parts of the Mahā-bhārata, with considerable variations; as, for example, the story of the combat of Indra— god of air and thunder-with the demon Vritra, who represents enveloping clouds and vapour. See Vana-parvan 8690 &c.; and compare with Santi-parvan 10124 &c. Compare also the story of the 'Hawk and Pigeon,' Vana-parvan 10558, with Anusasana-parvan 2046.

2 The Hari-vansa bears to the Mahā-bhārata a relation very similar to that which the Uttara-kāṇḍa, or last Book of the Rāmāyaṇa, bears to the preceding Books of that poem.

3 The Iliad and Odyssey together contain about 30,000 lines.

E e

in the Rāmāyaṇa, but in the latter Rāma is everything; whereas in the Mahā-bhārata, Krishna is by no means the centre of the system. His divinity is even occasionally disputed'. The five Pandavas have also partially divine natures, and by turns become prominent. Sometimes Arjuna, sometimes Yudhi-shthira, at others Bhima, appears to be the principal orb round which the plot moves?. Moreover, in various passages Śiva is described as supreme, and receives worship from Krishna. In others, Krishna is exalted above all, and receives honour from Śiva3. In fact, while the Rāmāyaṇa generally represents one-sided and exclusive Brahmanism, the Maha-bharata reflects the multilateral character of Hinduism; its monotheism and polytheism, its spirituality and materialism, its strictness and laxity, its priestcraft and anti-priestcraft, its hierarchical intolerance and rationalistic philosophy, combined. Not that there was any intentional variety in the original design of the work, but that almost every shade of opinion found expression in a compilation formed by gradual accretion through a long period.

In unison with its more secular, popular, and human character, the Mahā-bhārata has, as a rule, less of mere mythical allegory, and more of historical probability in its

1 As by Siśu-pāla and others. See p. 392, with notes.

2 In this respect the Mahā-bhārata resembles the Iliad. Achilles is scarcely its hero. Other warriors too much divide the interest with him.

3 In the Bhagavad-gītā Krishna is not merely an incarnation of Vishnu; he is identified with Brahma, the Supreme Spirit, and is so in numerous other places. It is well known that in Homer the supremacy of one god (Jove), and due subordination of the other deities, is maintained.

* Some free thought, however, has found its way into the Rāmāyaṇa; see II. cviii (Schl.); VI. lxii. 15 (Gorr., Bomb. lxxxiii. 14); VI. lxxxiii. 14 (Calc.). It is remarkable that in the Rāmāyaṇa the same gods are appealed to by Rāma and Rāvaṇa, just as by Greeks and Trojans in the Iliad; and Hanumat, when in Lanka, heard the Brahma-ghosha in the morning. Rāmāy. V. xvi. 41. This has been noticed by Weber.

narratives than the Rāmāyaṇa. The reverse, however, sometimes holds good. For example, in Rāmāyaṇa IV. xl. we have a simple division of the world into four quarters or regions, whereas in Maha-bhārata VI. 236 &c. we have the fanciful division (afterwards adopted by the Puranas) into seven circular Dvipas or continents, viz. 1. Jambudvipa or the Earth, 2. Plaksha-dvipa, 3. Śālmali-dvīpa, 4. Kuśa-dvīpa, 5. Kraunća-dvīpa, 6. Šāka-dvīpa, 7. Pushkara-dvipa; surrounded respectively by seven oceans in concentric belts, viz. 1. the sea of salt-water (lavaṇa), 2. of sugar-cane juice (ikshu), 3. of wine (surā), 4. of clarified butter (sarpis), 5. of curdled milk (dadhi), 6. of milk (dugdha), 7. of fresh water (jala); the mountain Meru, or abode of the gods, being in the centre of Jambudvipa, which again is divided into nine Varshas or countries separated by eight ranges of mountains, the Varsha called Bharata (India) lying south of the Himavat range1.

Notwithstanding these wild ideas and absurd figments, the Mahā-bhārata contains many more illustrations of real life and of domestic and social habits and manners than the sister Epic. Its diction again is more varied than that of the Rāmāyaṇa. The bulk of the latter poem (notwithstanding interpolations and additions) being by one author, is written with uniform simplicity of style and metre (see p. 338, note); and the antiquity of the greater part is proved by the absence of any studied

1 The eight ranges are Nishadha, Hema-kūṭa, Nishadha on the south of Meru; Nila, Sveta, Sringin on the north; and Malyavat and Gandhamadana on the west and east. Beyond the sea of fresh water is a circle called the land of gold,' and beyond this the circle of the Lokāloka mountains, which form the limit of the sun's light, all the region on one side being illuminated, and all on the other side of them being in utter darkness. See Raghu-vansa I. 68. Below the seven Dvipas are the seven Pātālas (see p. 431), and below these are the twenty-one Hells (note 2, p. 66).

elaboration of diction. The Mahā-bhārata, on the other hand, though generally simple and natural in its language, and free from the conceits and artificial constructions of later writers, comprehends a greater diversity of composition, rising sometimes (especially when the Indra-vajrā metre is employed) to the higher style, and using not only loose and irregular, but also studiously complex grammatical forms', and from the mixture of ancient legends, occasional archaisms and Vedic formations.

In contrasting the two Indian poems with the Iliad and the Odyssey, we may observe many points of similarity. Some parallel passages have been already pointed out. We must expect to find the distinctive genius of two different people (though both of the Aryan race) in widely distant localities, colouring their epic poetry very differently, notwithstanding general features of resemblance. The Rāmāyaṇa and Mahā-bhārata are no less wonderful than the Homeric poems as monuments of the human mind, and no less interesting as pictures of human life and manners in ancient times, yet they bear in a remarkable degree the peculiar impress ever stamped on the productions of Asiatic nations, and separating them from European. On the side of art and harmony of proportion, they can no more compete with the Iliad and the Odyssey than the unnatural outline of the ten-headed and twenty-armed Rāvaṇa can bear comparison with the symmetry of a Grecian statue. While the simplicity of the one commends itself to the most refined classical taste, the exaggerations of the other only excite the wonder of Asiatic minds, or if attractive to European, can only please imaginations nursed in an Oriental school.

1 Thus, jivase (I. 732), kurmi (III. 10943, and Rāmāy. II. xii. 33), dhita for hita (Hari-vansa 7799), parinayāmāsa for pariṇāyayāmāsa, mā bhaiḥ for ma bhaishiḥ, vyavasishyāmi for vyavasāsyāmi. The use of irregular grammatical forms is sometimes due to the exigency of the metre.