Daasi-putra of Mahabharat – Yuyutsu

Last time we read about Vidur, who was mainly referred to as daasi-putra in the epic Mahabharat. However, besides Vidur, there was a lesser known character, who too was also a daasi-putra and that was Yuyutsu.

When Gandhaari could not deliver in spite of her pregnancy, Dhritarashtra was worried about his heir. In one of those moments of insecurity, he is supposed to have bedded Gandhari’s chief maid, Sukhada. The child of Dhritarashtra and Sukhada was Yuyutsu, who was born after Duryodhan, but before the other Kauravas. Since he was the child of Sukhada, a maid-servant, he too was a daasi-putra.

Yuyutsu grew up in the royal palace and spent a lot of time with the Kaurava’s, but was morally upright with a strong sense of right and wrong. He is supposed to have objected to the disrobing of Draupadi as immoral, besides Vikarna, the third Kaurava prince.

It is said, during the preparations of the war, he used to pass relevant information of the planning of the Kaurava’s to Yudhishtir. Prior to the war, with the two armies on either side, Yudhishtir announced to both the armies, that if there was anybody on either side, who felt that he belonged to the wrong side, then it was time to change sides then, and no offence would be taken by any side. It was at this stage that Yuyutsu changed sides, much to the anger of Duryodhan, who was stopped from taking any action by Bheeshma.

Later when the Pandavs depart for the Himalayas, Yuyutsu was appointed as the guardian to King Parikshit, the then King of Hastinapur. It was Yuyutsu who finally performed the last rites of Dhritarashtra, as all the hundred sons were killed in the war, proving that a daasi-putra might not have rights to the throne, but could be the only means to ones salvation. While this might seem a very depraved view of the then society or royalty, such opportunism was an accepted norm.

The noted Bengali writer, Mahashweta Devi, in one of her stories, “Sauvali” has discussed this episode. According to this version, Sauvali was a maid of Gandhari, who was sent to him for his physical gratification, during the pregnancy of Gandhaari. She brings out the irony of Yuyutsu not being a prince, but being the ‘liberator of Dhritarahstra’s soul’. She focuses on the illicit relationship of the royals with maids, as it was not possible to have females from outside the palace for sexual escapades and matters remained within the walls of the palace.

A number of parallels can be drawn between Vibhishan of the epic Ramayan and Yuyutsu. Both defected into the enemy camp, however, for the cause of what they perceived as right. While Vibhishan helped Ram with critical information of killing Ravan and directions of Lanka, Yuyutsu is accused of leaking information of Kaurava plans, prior to the defection. After the war, Vibhishan was made the King of Lanka, and Yuyutsu was made the guardian of Parikshit, the only surviving child of the Pandavs.

If anybody is aware of any daasi-putras, do send in details of such characters.

Gandhari and her Karma

In a previous article - Dhritarashtra of Modern Times (dated June 12, 2012), we read about the karmic destiny of Dhritarashtra. How it was destiny that made him blind and made him endure the death of a hundred sons. Mahabharata has numerous such examples which give similar reasons for ones suffering in the present life.

From Dhritarashtra, let’s move on to Gandhari. Why was she destined to live a life of blindness, when she was not naturally blind and why did she have to endure such tragedy?

Dhritarashtra and Gandhari

Gandhari was the daughter of Gandhar, the modern day Kandahar, in Afghanistan. She tied a cloth on her eyes when she came to know that her would-be husband was born blind and vowed never to see what he couldn’t. Many say that she made a mistake and if she had not done this, she would have been a great help to her blind husband, and the course of Mahabharata would have been different. Gandhari’s logic however, was that she did not want to seem superior in any way from her husband and make him feel small, and this act of hers had made her his equal. Some even say that she did this as a silent protest to the high-handed behaviour of Bhishma, who despite Dhirtarashtra’s disability had nearly forced the King of Gandhar to agree to the alliance. In the modern world, her act could be questioned, but in Mhabharata, she was hailed as an ideal woman.

Her blindfold is supposed to have given her an inner view to the world around her and though she missed a lot, she never lost ‘sight’ of the fact that the Pandavas were not treated justly. On many occasions she is known to have advised her husband and chastised her son Duryodhan. At the end of the war of Kurukshetra, she is supposed to have asked Lord Krishna, whom she blamed for the war and the death of her hundred sons, especially Duryodhan, as to what had been the reason for such a tragic life.

According to Lord Krishna, long back, while cooking rice, she had poured hot water of the boiled rice on the ground outside her kitchen. This hot water killed all the hundred eggs laid by an insect. This act of hers had earned the wrath of the mother insect who is supposed to have cursed her that she too would have to endure the deaths of her sons, as she had. (In many villages women are advised not to pour hot water from the rice on the ground; they should pour it after it has cooled down or mix cold water before draining it off!). According another local rendition of Mahabharata from the East, she was cursed by the mother turtle whose eggs, Gandhari had once crushed one by one.

The above is a classic case of karmic destiny which has been illustrated time and again through various characters of Mahabharata. Rather, it seems to be an underlying theme of Mahabharata. This might have been done by the authors of the times to ensure that one takes care of one’s actions in the present life. Even if this is done out of a fear for the results in the next life, one will ensure that he or she does little or no harm. How would one react to ones shortcomings in this life? Well, one school of thought would feel that if the karmic theory is to be subscribed to, then people would stop making efforts to change the hardship and simply live with it. Contrary to this, one can say that one would accept it as destiny and not be unnecessarily self-critical. Accept and move on to face the new challenges that have been in store!

I guess this theory of Karmic destiny is a case of glass half full!

There are a number of such characters in Mahabharata, who were what they were, due to the theory of karma. All but one, who was a tragic character for no theory of karma.

We will discuss this character next time! Keep reading….

Dhritarashtra of Modern Times

Ms. Kiran Bedi has compared our Prime Minister, Dr. Manmohan Singh with Dhritarashtra of Mahabharata. [Ms. Bedi tweeted – “PMO clears PM. Did Dhritarashtra in Mahabharata not support Kauravas even after they attempted to disrobe Draupadi? Indian genes/culture? Or?”]

Dhritarashtra was the blind king of Hastinapur who was put on the throne after his younger brother, Pandu, had to go to the forest to atone for his sins and his subsequent death. He was also the father of the hundred Kauravas.

Is the comparison valid? Let’s see.

• Dhritarashtra was blind and thus could not see; our PM is not blind (at least physically), but he still cannot see; else he would have done something about all the wrongs that are happening in his PM-dom.
• Dhritarashtra was blind to the aspirations of (his son) Duryodhan and despite knowing about the wrongs done by him, said nothing. Our PM was also well aware of the wrongdoings of some of his ministers (thankfully not his sons), take Raja for instance, but allowed him to continue, till the ant became an elephant, and it could not be hidden under the carpet.
• Dhritarashtra did not say anything when Draupadi was being disrobed in public in the court just as our PM is keeping mum when the country is being robbed off its pride and being abused by many known to him.
• Dhritarashtra did not have any friends who could guide him, but had many who would mislead him. PM too has no friends who can guide him, but is surrounded by allies who actually misguide him and have their way, as and when required. This lack of ‘good and true’ friends has been the bane of both Dhritarashtra and the PM.

Some differences though –

• Dhritarashtra did have some voices of sanity which used to try to dissuade him from following the wrong path, like Vidura, PM has none. There is not a single guide in his cabinet whose sane voice he can follow.
• Dhritarashtra always aspired to be the King, in spite of his disability, i.e. his blindness, but our PM is a reluctant politician, who knew well about his disability, i.e. lack of knowledge of politics, but went on to take the position of leadership. Needless to say, that both have proven to be poor leaders.

To conclude, let me tell you a small story which many might not know. 

At the end of the war of Kurukshetra and on the death of his hundred sons, Dhritarashtra asked Lord Krishna as to why was he destined for such a tragic life, of blindness and bereavement of hundred sons during his life time? Lord Krishna asked him to close his eyes and Dhritarashtra saw, that in his previous life, he was a tyrant king. Once he was passing by the sea and saw a swan surrounded by a hundred cygnets (baby swans). On a moment of sadistic pleasure, he ordered that the eyes of the swan be gorged out and all the cygnets be killed. This cruelty had led him to be blind in this birth and was made to bear the death of his hundred sons, just as he had done to the swan. Dhritarashtra realised that this was his karma and none were to be blamed for this.

Dhritarashtra’s behaviour was due to his karma, but what is the cause of your behaviour Mr. PM?