The doctrine of time as the supreme sovereign of all beings—the omnipotent creator, sustainer, and annihilator of the universe—stands as a profoundly significant yet insufficiently examined concept within ancient Indian religious thought. This doctrine known as kālavāda, the doctrine of time, reaches its most sophisticated articulation in the epics, particularly in the Mahābhārata, and religious-philosophical epic compositions, such as the Yogavāsiṣṭharāmāyaṇa.
Within this cosmological framework, time emerges as the primordial causal principle underlying the creation, existence, and dissolution of all worlds and living beings. Time’s nature is characterized by a fundamental duality: it simultaneously exists as eternal, all-pervasive, immutable, and indivisible, while paradoxically manifesting as mutable, transient, and segmented into discrete units. The cosmological order unfolds through time’s orchestration of endless sequential cosmic cycles (kalpas, yugas, etc.). Each world age (yuga) intrinsically corresponds to a specific degree of righteousness (dharma), thereby establishing time as the arbiter that determines the prevailing moral order during each cosmic period and effectively predestines all sentient beings to operate within a particular equilibrium of virtuous and non-virtuous actions throughout a given yuga. At the conclusion of the most degenerate age (kaliyuga), time dismantles the universe and consumes all beings irrespective of their moral conduct. In its capacity as the universal devourer of living entities, time frequently becomes synonymous with death itself. All existence is proclaimed to reside within time’s dominion. As an inexorable force governing all activity, time determines human destiny and becomes conceptually equivalent to fate.
This deterministic cosmology coexists in tension with the evolving concept of karma or karmic retribution developed throughout the epics. According to this parallel paradigm, an individual’s ultimate fate—whether manifested as afterlife destination, rebirth circumstances, or liberation—is fundamentally determined by their own actions. The perpetual cycle of rebirth, saṃsāra, is conceptualized as the direct consequence of karmic activity: each sentient being experiences rebirth in precise accordance with the accumulated fruits of their karma. By this logic, humans possess agency over their ultimate destiny precisely to the extent that they exercise control over their own actions.
The Mahābhārata repeatedly contemplates the possibility of favorable posthumous existence and liberation: adherence to one’s prescribed dharma and the accumulation of meritorious actions ostensibly secure advantageous afterlife conditions or ultimate liberation. Yet this conception of human agency stands in stark philosophical contradiction to the kālavādic worldview: from the perspective of kālavāda, human beings possess neither ultimate authority over their destiny nor genuine decisional capacity. Time alone functions as the absolute arbiter. This explains Kṛṣṇa’s profound self-revelation to Arjuna in the Bhagavadgītā: “I am time, the maker of the world’s destruction. Having grown old, I am set out to destroy [all] the beings here. Even without you, all these warriors arrayed in opposing armies are not to be”. (BhG 11.32/MBh 6.33.32).
This contradiction extends further: do human beings genuinely control their actions and consequent karma? The karmic paradigm presupposes such agency, whereas the kālavāda perspective suggests that during “unrighteous” cosmic periods characterized by dharma’s decline, all beings are inexorably compelled by time to act in predetermined patterns. The Mahābhārata explicitly articulates this philosophical tension: “A person is never truly a maker of good and evil karma. A person is not self-willed [but] is made to perform actions like a wooden puppet [moved by strings]. Some are ordered by the Lord, some [happen] by accident, others are [due to] previous deeds.” (MBh 5.156.14-15)
In the proposed paper, I will engage with the conference’s presidential theme of ‘freedom’ by examining the multifaceted tensions between human agency and cosmic predetermination that permeate the Mahābhārata. This investigation interrogates several fundamental philosophical questions: To what extent can the epic heroes be understood to exercise authentic autonomy within a temporally determined cosmos? What metaphysical forces ultimately govern their actions and posthumous existence? Most critically, how might we conceptualize freedom itself within the distinctive cosmological architecture of the Mahābhārata?
The kālavāda doctrine presents time as both the supreme organizing principle of cosmic order and the irresistible force determining human destiny—a perspective that appears fundamentally incompatible with meaningful conceptions of freedom. Yet simultaneously, the epic’s elaboration of karmic principles suggests a causal relationship between individual action and ultimate destiny that presupposes a meaningful degree of agency. This philosophical tension between temporal determinism and karmic responsibility creates a complex dialectic regarding freedom’s very possibility.
This analysis seeks to elucidate not only the specific metaphysical architecture of the Indian epic tradition but also to contribute to broader cross-cultural philosophical discussions concerning determinism, free will, and the human condition within predetermined cosmic structures.
Kālavāda, a doctrine of time, emerges as one of the central themes in the Mahābhārata. Through this conceptual lens, time functions as a fundamental regulatory force governing the universe and determining varying manifestations of dharma (righteousness) across successive cosmic cycles (yugas). Crucially, within this system that Ya. Vassilkov calls “philosophy of heroic fatalism,” time transcends its conventional understanding and becomes a supreme arbiter of human destiny—an omnipotent force predetermining the outcomes of all actions.
This paper engages with the conference’s presidential theme of ‘freedom’ by examining multiple complex tensions between human agency and cosmic predetermination that permeate the Mahābhārata. The investigation centers on several fundamental questions: To what extent do epic heroes exercise genuine autonomy? What forces ultimately determine their actions and afterlife? And perhaps most critically, how might we understand the concept of freedom within the Mahābhārata’s distinctive cosmological framework?