TRANSLATIONS

In the court of the Mughal Emperor, Akbar (r. 1556-1605) numerous Sanskrit texts were translated
into Persian, the language of high culture and administration, from 1575 onwards. * These
included religious works such as the Atharveda, historical literature such as Rajatrangini, fables and
romances such as Nal Daman, and treatises on mathematics and astronomy such as Lilavati. The
objectives behind these translations were largely intellectual and social although the political
dimension, given undue emphasis, cannot entirely be ignored. The idea was to push the frontiers of
knowledge, close the distance between religious communities, and consolidate political
sovereignty by blending it with spiritual and intellectual prestige.

1. STRATEGY
The scriptorium (maktabkhana) was used as the place where translators could sit with their books and
writing material. Two types of Sanskrit works were selected: folk tales and scriptures. A third type
was a miscellaneous assemblage of texts on a variety of subjects.
The selection of texts for translation was based on- a) the inherited taste and personal preference of the
patron, b) the popularity and authority enjoyed by the text.

The first major work of art which Akbar commissioned was Hamzanama, an epic tale of the struggle
between good and evil saturated with plenty of magic, sorcery, and chivalry. An important work of
Indian provenance chosen for translation was Singhasan Battisi.

The second book of the genre of folk tales was Panchtantra, a collection of Sanskrit fables compiled
by Vishnuvarman of which two versions existed at the Mughal court. A notable aspect of the strategy
of the translation of Panchtantra into Persian at Akbar’s court, which needs to be argued, is a
self-conscious emphasis on intellect and wisdom, evident from the titles given to the works
(Wisdom Enhancing Book and Touchstone of Intellect). The Panchtantra was treated more as a
repository of ideas turning on intellect than pure morality. This particular character of the book was
diluted or perhaps lost in the translations done in the Islamic world where it was treated more as a
book of moral values and ethics (akhlaq or adab or ‘mirrors for princes’). Intellect and reason served
as powerful tools to critique traditionalism and oppose sectarian differences, represented by theologians
and traditional scholars. The attempt towards a literal rather than a rhetorical translation was a part
of the strategy to make the communication as original and direct as possible.

The second type of texts chosen for translation were scriptures. The translation of scriptures was
meant to showcase Hinduism to Muslims. At the same time, Hindus too were expected to read their
scriptures in Persian as only a very small minority could understand Sanskrit.

The best descriptions of the strategy of the translation come from Abul Fazl and Badauni, the
latter one of the translators of Mahabharata, and the former the writer of a preface to it.

The translation of Mahabharata was entitled Razmnama (Martial Epic). In modern scholarship the
term Razmnama is often rendered as Book of War—a phrase that is not entirely accurate. Literalism
was once again the guiding principle, and the translators were instructed to be as accurate as possible
with no loss of meaning. There was therefore no attempt to domesticate the text either in terms of its
language or content. The Razmnama begins with an invocation to Lord Ganesha rather than the
traditional Islamic formula of invoking Allah (bismillah).
Objective- the monopoly of the priestly class over scriptures should be lifted, and these should be
made directly accessible to the laity within the community, as well as outside it.

2. METHOD
The domains of Sanskrit and Persian in sixteenth-century India were largely separate and
self-contained. In the absence of a community of scholars who could express themselves in both
languages with felicity, the method used by the Mughal translation bureau had to be indirect. Luckily
there was a common language that served as a link between Sanskrit and Persian. It is described as
Hindi which, generally speaking, meant any Indian language written in Devanagari, but in this case it
was perhaps Khari Boli spoken around Delhi.
In the method that was employed, Sanskrit texts were first explained in ‘Hindi’ by brahmins, to
translators who know Persian. In all likelihood the transmission was oral since we do not have any
manuscript in ‘Hindi’ nor do we have firm evidence that all translators with knowledge of Persian
could read the Devanagiri script. Thereafter from the Hindi interpretation of the Sanskrit text, the
Persian translation was made. The terms used for interpretation and translation were ta‘bir and
tarjuma respectively.

Akbar ordered Razmnama to be transcribed in several copies of which one was kept in the library and
another was sent to Prince Murad. Copies were also given to some nobles. Numerous manuscripts of
Razmnama were also illustrated by Akbar’s painters.

The culturally-specific context, the authoritative status of the Sanskrit scripture and the strict
imperial injunction about the translation to be faithful took its toll on at least one of the translators,
Badauni. Akbar suspected the translator, a Muslim scholar, to have interpreted the concept in a different
(Islamic) cultural context. Whether or not the charge was valid, Badauni was able to provide a
convincing argument in his defense. But the incident does raise serious questions about the
feasibility of a faithful translation handicapped by an indirect method. It also suggests that the
patrons were interested in an objective and rational understanding of religion based on an
impartial reading of scriptures.

3. IMPLICATIONS
The movement was a monumental intellectual enterprise which left a deep imprint on the literary
culture of the time as well as an array of finely calligraphed and illustrated texts. It could not
successfully promote understanding between the two major religious systems of the day. It was limited
in its popularity or impact over a larger section of the Indian population insofar as the concept of
knowledge itself was elitist for the patron and project members. The movement petered out after
Akbar since there was no intellectual or social class outside the imperial circle which showed much
interest in it.
___________________________________________________________________________

In 1582 the Mughal emperor Akbar underwrote a Persian translation of the Sanskrit Mahabharata, thus
transforming the great Indian epic into a Mughal courtly text. The court poured many resources into
producing the translation, and the resulting text, called the Razmnamah (Book of War), remained a
seminal literary work in Mughal circles for decades. Some have tried to account for Akbar’s translation
project as an enlightened religious policy or an act of political legitimation.
Why Akbar’s court was interested in the Mahabharata and how the translators created a new Mughal
epic of deep relevance to the imperial court and polity?
TEXTUAL SOURCES
From the beginning, the Razmnamah was a collaborative effort that required interactions across
linguistic boundaries, drawing Sanskrit and Persian intellectuals into a common task. Nobody
involved in the project knew both languages (such bilingualism would not, it seems, be widespread for
another generation or two), and as a result, two teams of translators were assembled. On the Persian
side, Naqib Khan led the effort and was assisted by Mulla Shiri, Abd al-Qadir Bada’uni, and
Sultan Thanisari.
A colophon of a 1599 Razmnamah, now housed in the British Library, serves as the main source of
information on the Brahmans: “Naqib Khan, son of Abd al-Latif al-Husayni, translated [this work]
from Sanskrit into Persian in one and a half years. Several of the learned Brahmans, such as Deva
Misra, Satavadhana, Madhusudhana Misra, Caturbhuja, and Shaykh Bhavan . . . read this book
and explained it in Hindi to me, a poor wretched man, who wrote it in Persian.”

The Mughal and Brahman translators communicated orally via their shared tongue of Hindi.
Moreover, the Mughal translators actually write the Brahman narrators into the Razmnamah itself and
thereby frame the entire Persian Mahabharata in terms of a story being told across cultural lines.
The Razmnamah consistently repeats slight variations on the expressions “then the narrators of the
story said” and “then the Indian storytellers relayed.” The Razmnamah also preserves the various
other narrative frameworks of the Mahabharata. Therefore, the Indian storytellers who are
omnipresent throughout the Razmnamah are certainly the additional layer of Sanskrit pandits who
narrated the story to the late-sixteenth-century Mughal court.

The Persian text is not a line-by-line rendering of the Sanskrit original, but the Razmnamah contains all
eighteen books of the Sanskrit Mahabharata, plus the Harivamsa appendix, and the storyline is
largely unchanged.Mughal records contain no mention of what Sanskrit texts they used as the
basis for their translation.
By the late sixteenth century, the Sanskrit Mahabharata textual tradition consisted of at least a dozen
different versions that are typically defined by discrete scripts and associated with particular
regions. The versions can be loosely grouped into two grand recenions, the northern and the
southern, that differ from one another primarily in their inclusion or exclusion of particular
episodes and ordering of the stories..
The ordering of the stories and inclusion or exclusion of certain sections attests quite clearly that the
majority of the Razmnamah follows the northern recension of the Mahabharata. Further internal
evidence indicates the source regional version, primarily by faithfully reproducing the Mahabharata’s
long genealogical lists and names of various gods. This reveals that the Razmnamah consistently
corresponds most closely with the Devanagari version of the Mahabharata.The Devanagari version
had gained widespread currency across north and central India by the late sixteenth century, and so it
appears that the Mughals found the most easily available, popular redaction of the story to render into
Persian.

However, the fourteenth book is drawn from a separate text altogether. This book, the Asvamedha
Parvan (Horse Sacrifice Book), is based on the Jaimini Ashwamedha, an alternative and starkly
different Sanskrit retelling of this section of the epic. It is an anonymous work, likely composed in the
twelfth century, that proved popular both in Sanskrit and in vernacular translations. Most crucially for
 the Mughals, the Jaiminiyasvamedha is a much more exciting and vivid tale than its canonical
counterpart.
The penchant of the Mughals in particular for fantastical stories is demonstrated by the labor Akbar’s
court devoted to illustrating the Hamzanamah (Tales of Amir Hamza) for several years preceding the
Razmnamah illustrations. Akbar’s translators seem to have encountered Sanskrit texts through the
framework of ‘aja’ib elements from the very beginning. When the Mughals initially decided to engage
with the Sanskrit tradition, they selected the Atharva Veda as the first text to be translated, a work that
contained largely spells and charms as the Mughals understood it. ‘aja’ib features are likely what drew
the Mughals to the Jaiminiyasvamedha and even, in some ways, to the Mahabharata as a whole.

Regardless of who selected the Jaiminiyasvamedha, the decision highlights ‘aja’ib elements as an
important characteristic in Mughal courtly translations, by either their own choice or the perception of
their Sanskrit informants

TRANSLATION PRACTICES
The Mughals employ multiple translation strategies throughout the Razmnamah. Three types of literary
practices offer particularly valuable insight into how the Mughals fashioned their Mahabharata:
1. First, the transliteration instead of translation of Sanskrit words enabled the Mughals to
develop a Sanskrit-inflected linguistic register throughout the Razmnamah that highlights the foreign,
Indic nature of the Mahabharata.
2. Second, in attempting to make sense of the religious aspects of the Mahabharata, the translators
incorporate their own Islamic notions and a monotheistic God while simultaneously retaining Indic
gods and spiritual elements.
3. Last, the translators sprinkle hundreds of verses of Persian poetry throughout the Razmnamah.
These articulate the sentiments of the Mahabharata in a way culturally relevant to a Persian-speaking
elite and also particularly develop areas of the epic that address kingship and politics

I.An Indic Register

The Razmnamah preserves a wide range of transliterated Sanskrit words that lend a heavy Indic register
to the Persian text. Many such terms denote culturally specific concepts, such as gandharb
(gandharva), a class of mythical beings; narak (naraka), the underworld; and puran (purana), a genre of
Sanskrit literature. Other times, the translators invoke Sanskrit words even when there are readily
available Persian equivalents, such as cakra, naksatra, and pitr, meaning “discus,” “constellation,” and
“father,” respectively. Through the consistent and liberal use of Sanskrit vocabulary on nearly every
page of the Razmnamah, the Mughal translators actively cultivate a body of Indic knowledge in the
text’s readers. Moreover, the texture such foreign words add to the language of this work defines the
Razmnamah as a crosscultural epic.

In some instances, this process of outlining new vocabulary prompts the Mughals to replace or
translate Sanskrit words with other Sanskrit words that had long ago entered IndoPersian
parlance. Here the Mughals both draw on and simultaneously redefine the contours of
Indo-Persian culture through their encounter with the Mahabharata. For example, Agastya, a sage
in the epic whose name denotes the star Canopus, is appropriately renamed Suhayl, the Persian term
for the same star, in the Razmnamah, an equivalence that had been established as early as the fourteenth
century.
 The Razmnamah also contains a few more extended quotations of Sanskrit that seem to operate as
literary signals rather than linguistically meaningful text. The most noteworthy case occurs in the
Adi Parvan (Book of Beginnings), where the translators insert several full Sanskrit verses during a
strong ‘aja’ib moment.
Finally, the Razmnamah contains a number of lengthy lists of Sanskrit names and titles,o ften in
genealogies. Most books of the Persian translation contain several such lists, whether epithets of Surya,
names of learned sages, or the hundred sons of Dhritarastra. Such catalog-style information accurately
reflects the Sanskrit Mahabharata, but it had also long been crucial to the Islamicate tradition’s
encounter with India. Thus, cataloging Sanskrit names and retaining foreign, often ‘aja’ib qualities in
the text are essential aspects of the Mughal Mahabharata

II.A Crowded Divine Landscape

The Razmnamah translators keep much of the Mahabharata’s religious framework intact but
also frequently overlay it with Islamic concepts. The Mughal translators employ many Sanskrit terms
for divine beings, including div (deva), divat (devata), narayan (narayana), and bhagavan. They also
articulate the Sanskrit concept of avataras (incarnations of gods). Yet at other points the Mughal
translators interpolate Islamic phrases, often in Koranic Arabic, in praise of a monotheistic deity
that is no other than the Islamic Allah. For example, the opening of the Mahabharata tells of its own
recitation, which begins with the narrator praising the Hindu god Brahma. The Razmnamah retains this
meta-framework but recasts Brahma as khudavand (God).

Allah seems to comfortably coexist with his polytheistic counterparts in much of the Persian
Mahabharata, complete with the Hindu deities’ involvements in earthly affairs and devious
behaviors.
On occasion, however, the Razmnamah more drastically rewrites the religious framework of the
Mahabharata, such as when the work truncates the Bhagavad Gita and alters the nature of Krishna
and his message therein. The treatment of the Bhagavad Gita signals a strong Mughal interest in
avoiding theology in their retelling of the epic. In comparison to seven hundred or so verses in Sanskrit,
the Bhagavad Gita occupies a mere few pages of the Razmnamah. The Persian translation provides a
bare-bones sketch of the conversation between Krishna and Arjuna. The Razmnamah eliminates
abstract reflections on the different types of yoga and other concepts so that the focus remains on the
battle itself rather than providing an ethical climax of the epic. Thus it seems that the Mughals
wished to avoid the theological content of the Bhagavad Gita in particular.
The translators also rewrite the content of the shortened Bhagavad Gita to reflect a much stronger
Islamic framework than is present in the Razmnamah as a whole. The Razmnamah Krishna is the
teacher of truth but not a divine figure, and he speaks of God’s will as external to himself
throughout his discourse. In the Razmnamah, Krishna articulates the distinction between himself as a
messenger and God quite clearly at the close of the Bhagavad Gita.

The strong religious content of the Bhagavad Gita may have compelled the Mughals to rework this
section of the epic in particular, but they were not consistent in their vision of an Islamic, almost
prophet-like Krishna. Thus rather than accurately representing Indic beliefs or overwriting them with
Islamic ideas, the Mughals aim at a middle ground approach that accommodates multiple
positions while erasing any deep Hindu theology. In light of this varied approach, we can most
fruitfully understand the treatment of religious elements in the Razmnamah as part of a cultural
accommodation rather than tied to any specifically theological objectives
 Despite the fact that the Razmnamah expresses many basic Islamic ideas, the Mughals were aware of
the danger of writing their own theology into the Mahabharata and sought to avoid such practices.
Bada’uni, one of the translators of the text and an independent historian, describes Akbar’s vehement
accusation against him. The addition of Persian poetry to the Razmnamah was an established, accepted
practice, as detailed below, but one of his verses was singled out as problematic for its alleged covert
reference to Islamic beliefs. Bada’uni’ successfully convinced the emperor that the verse stands in
accordance with Indic ideas, and the line remains in the Razmnamah. This episode demonstrates the
deep problems of cultural comprehension that the Mughal translators faced, particularly regarding
religion, and also the strong imperial involvement in the translation project and insistence on avoiding
the theology in the Mahabharata where possible.

III.Poetry and Politics

While the Mughal translators and their patron may have been concerned about writing religious beliefs
into the Razmnamah, they show no hesitation in adding a decidedly Persianate, courtly context to the
Mahabharata by incorporating quotations of Persian poetry. These verses recast the literary framework
of the Mahabharata for an Indo-Persian audience in three distinct ways.
1. First, such quotations inlay the Razmnamah with a rich set of intertextual literary associations
within the Persian tradition.

2. The verses frame crucial moments in the Mahabharata in a quintessentially Persian aesthetic,
drawing on Persianate poetic tropes and particular modes of expression.

3. The poetic quotations specify another aspect of the Mughal interest in the Mahabharata, namely, its
political commentary, by highlighting certain passages on kingship.

The Razmnamah contains hundreds of lines of Persian poetry, largely quoted from the great masters of
Persian literature, such as Nizami, Hafiz, Sa‘di, Sana’i, Anvari, Rudaki, and Mu‘izzi.
In quoting from their rich literary heritage, the Mughal translators participate in a longstanding
Persianate method of using quoted poetry to enhance the weight and appeal of a new prose work.
This strategy is also seen in other Sanskrit-Persian translations patronized by Akbar, such as the
Panchakhyanah, a translation of the Sanskrit Pancatantra (Five Tales), which quotes from Hafiz and
Sa‘di.
In the Razmnamah, these poetic quotations also often serve to epitomize the core of particularly
emotional scenes according to Persian aesthetic sensibilities. Persian literature possesses a rich
imagery associated with the beloved and abandoned places that has no connection to Sanskrit. Yet these
lines constitute the most poignant expression of the Razmnamah Yudhisthira’s pain, which has become
an aestheticized emotion that emerges out of the Persian literary tradition.

Akbar’s kingship looms in the background throughout the Razmnamah translation project but is
rarely directly addressed. The Razmnamah alters the tale so that Kunti conceives via a ray of light. As
a result, as the text simply says, “She did not lose her virginity.” A conception via divine light featured
prominently in the story of Akbar’s ancestors and has been identified by modern scholars as a crucial
component of Mughal imperial identity.
The Razmnamah overtly references this Mughal legend in the modified story of Karna’s birth,
which links Akbar’s political identity with the Sanskrit epic story.
Temporal and narrative boundaries are broken to directly celebrate the great kingship of Akbar and to
immortalize him by including him in one of India’s great epics.
Conclusion
Akbar’s translators approach the Mahabharata as a mixture of imaginative history, political advice,
and a great story that deeply interacts with the Indo-Persian literary tradition while promoting
an imperial ideology. The translators approach religion pragmatically in the Razmnamah and avoid
both Hindu and Islamic theology.
The diverse translation strategies employed in the Razmnamah also suggest that intertwining
multiple understandings of the epic in complex ways was crucial to the Mughal encounter with
the Mahabharata.