“In his Life of Krishna, [Bunkim Chandra Chatterji]. . . perceived clearly enough that there were three different recognizable styles in the poem [Mahabharata], and he divided it into three layers: the original epic by a very great poet, a redaction of the original epic by a poet not quite so great and a mass of additions by very inferior hands.”
— Sri Aurobindo
When we identify with specific characters, we get involved in stories. To the point where, in the desire to protect those characters, we draw our own interpretations and present them as we perceive them.
Examples of this are the embellishments seen in the Ramayana and Mahabharata. People assume that like fan fiction (where fans create storylines out of sheer curiosity), they can offer their spin to events and characters. Not what happened, but what they think happened.
Such people “have not for their aim to speak usefully: they are simply trying to find reasons for their own likes and dislikes,” Sri Aurobindo writes. In other words, such an approach, whether dealing with itihāsa or science, causes confusion and dilutes the truth.
Do not fall into this trap. In any area of interest, start superficially, then go deeper and deeper until you reach the source. Hold your opinions weakly so that they have the space to change (rather, evolve) when you come across compelling evidence. This ensures you can regularly break yourself down and put yourself back together as a smarter, stronger, better person.
You don’t learn for the sake of entertainment but for the sake of understanding and putting what you learn into use.