Satyavati

Launching my second book, "Satyavati" the much forgotten and often sidelined woman from the epic Mahabharata who was responsible for changing the course of destiny of many a character in the epic!

Check it out on the Readify app

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=in.readify

Sexual Misdemeanors by the High and Mighty

Seeing the recent spates of sexual misdemeanors, someone wondered aloud, “Is sex really that strong a lure? And if it is, why not go and ‘buy’ it, instead of behaving like an animal, or just risking some innocent’s life and reputation?”

A very valid question and I wonder, what makes men behave the way they do, especially those that are in a slightly elevated strata of the society. The news is when the predator is a respected, senior and well-to-do person of the society, who is more of an icon, but turns out to be no different from a lout.

Sex has been behind many an episode of misdemeanor and sex outside a legal relationship has always dominated the headlines. Going back to where I seek my answers, forceful sex has dominated many mythologies. Be it by Zeus in Greek mythology, who spared none, be it women or men, or the forced sex by Shiva on Mohini, the gods would always have their way.

But let me take a case here, which is not forced in the physical sense of the word, but forced, in the sense of-not-leaving-any-choice, but to comply. This is also a case of sex outside the ‘socially acceptable framework’ of society. Or was it forced? Decide after you read the story….

According to the epic Mahabharata, Satyavati was the adopted daughter of a fisherman. The story of her birth is as interesting as it can be and you can read about it in an earlier article “The Unwanted Girl Child” http://www.utkarshspeak.blogspot.in/search/label/Satyavati . For the present, it should suffice to say that she was found inside a fish and was adopted by the fisherman who found her. Since she was found inside a fish, a terrible odour emanated from her, due to which she was also known as Matsyagandha, ‘smell of a fish’.

It was due to this problem of hers, that she didn’t have many friends and spent most of the time alone ferrying people from across the Kalindi river. Once her passenger happened to be sage Parashar, a powerful and well-known ascetic. He was smitten by her looks, despite the odour and insisted on making love to her then and there.

Satyavati, a virgin till then, was taken aback, but was unable to decline. She reasoned with the sage, that the terrible smell emanating from her was something that even she detested and under such circumstances, she would not be able to comply with his request. The sage then through his powers, removed her fishy odour and made her smell of musk, and named her Yojanagandha, one whose fragrance can be smelt from yojanas (1 yojana was about 9 miles). Satyavati was still reluctant and said that if they did make love, she would lose her virginity, and he being an ascetic, would not marry her either, then how would she face the world? To this sage Parashar promised her, she would regain her virginity after the act and none would know. Satyavati tried again, saying that she was in the fertile period and if he made love to her, then she would conceive. In such a situation how she would face the world with a child. Sage Parashar, who was determined to have his way, promised that as soon as they were done, she would give birth to a child who would grow up immediately and go his own way, with none knowing about it! Satyavati made one last effort and said that all that was fine, but it was broad daylight and there was a possibility of someone seeing them, which would be bad for her reputation, besides the risk of the boat capsizing. Sage Parashar was beginning to lose his cool and suggested that she take the boat to the centre of the river, close to an island. Through his powers, he created a dense mist and made the boat and them invisible in the dense mist.

All this left no choice form Satyavati, but to give in.

Soon after, they make love, Satyavati gives birth to a child who grows up immediately to be a man, and comes to be known as Krishna (dark) Dwaipanya, one who is born in an island, who goes on to be better known as sage Ved Vyasa. Vyasa goes away with sage Parashar and Satyavati goes back home and when asked about her changed odour, she says that it was the blessings of the sage.

This is an interesting myth, which has two facets to it.

First, is the helplessness of a woman, who makes all efforts to ward off the advances of a man, who as in this case was probably fit to be her father. A powerful man, insists on making love to a virgin, but is clear that he would not marry, and goes out of his way to use his powers to fulfill his desires, is not something that is different from many of the recent instances that we have seen. The girl, who is helpless, makes all efforts to escape, but is unable, as she is in a precarious situation, of being alone, in the middle of a river, which seems quite allegorical in itself. She has no witness to stand by her, as the powerful sage had created an envelope of mist, for none to see, which is the case in many instances, even in modern times – no witness against the high and mighty.

The second aspect is the clever usage of the advances made by a powerful person, as done by Satyavati. She ensures that her odour is removed, her virginity restored and her reputation intact. Some versions even say that she negotiated eternal youth and beauty with the sage. Many might see this as opportunism, or simply put smart usage of the situation by the victim.  Mythical times were different from present times, so I am not sure, how this could be utilized today, if at all.

How should the world see this? Was this forced? Was it rape or was it consensual-sex? If one asks sage Parashar, it was consensual, since he did not force himself on her and she had agreed to her advances. If one asked Satyavati, she would say, it was forced as she had no choice and she had no option. The world then never raised a finger on sage Parashar for his act and nor has the world ever bothered to debate this from his angle. Sage Parashar never had to bring this to the public notice, but Satyavati had to bring Sage Vyasya in the picture when her son died without an heir. She had to relate the incident to Bhishma, who supposedly kept quiet about it, but one can imagine Satyavati’s embarrassment in talking about her pre-marital sex and the resultant child.

Have times changed much? Just as sage Parashar went his way after the act, the high and mighty of the present day society too go scot free. The only change if at all is that they do get maligned for a while, if the woman musters guts and courage, but then its business as usual. Court visits, mud-singling on the women’s character, unwanted media-glare, and when all fails; there still is the option of out-of-court settlement.

What do you say?

The Unwanted Girl Child

Distraught mother of Baby Ameena

First it was Baby Falak and now Baby Ameena, all in the heart of the metros of India. Thousands of girls are killed every day in what is made to appear as natural deaths, but these two names have shocked the nation recently due to the way the babies were battered. Many more don’t even get to see the light of the day, in what is better known as female-infanticide.

Why is there such a dire need for a male child? Is it because girls are expenses personified in a poor man’s world? Or is it because a girl does not carry on the name of the father?

Is it at all necessary to find reasons as to why people kill the girl child, except for the fact that this is done by inhuman and uncaring blot of a human being, who is misguided in his thinking and bestial (with due apologies to the animals!) to say the least?

Isn’t it ironic that such things should happen in a country where a girl is referred to as Goddess Lakshmi (goddess of wealth) and where the worship of Mother Goddess is prevalent in every nook and corner of the country? A country that celebrates the nine-day Navratri festival which heralds the arrival of the daughter to her parental home should see spates of men killing their infant goddesses is a shame in itself.

Has this a precedence of sorts, though we have seen many cultural practices, or malpractices to be precise? None that I know of; though I don’t claim myself to be someone who knows a lot on such issues. But it has now become a practice to rummage in the past, however, the same is not to justify the happening, but could help understand the age of such customs and its prevalence as a thought-process.

I am reminded of a tale from the epic Mahabharata. This pertains to the birth of Satyavati. Let me begin from the start! Once upon a time, King Uparichara was on a hunting expedition and while resting under a tree, the thought of his wife got him excited and this led to the ejection of his reproductive fluids. The king wrapped this body-fluid as it was an auspicious period when such fluids were not to be wasted and gave it to a parrot to take it to his wife. The parrot was attacked on its way by a falcon and the leaf fell into a river and the fluid was swallowed by a fish. This fist was actually an apsara who was cursed by Lord Brahma to be a fish till she gave birth to human children. Sometime later the fist was caught by the fishermen and they found a boy and a girl when they cut open the fish. The head of the fishermen took the babies to the King of the land, who was none other than King Uparichara himself. The King decided to keep the boy and gave the girl the head of the fishermen! This girl was brought up as Satyavati who later went on to marry King Shantanu and was responsible for Bhishma’s vow. She was also the mother of Sage Vyasa, the author of the epic Mahabharata, and grand-mother of the Pandavas and Kauravas.

In this tale, there is a very clear case of rejection of the girl child, though the rejection has not been discussed in details. The King accepted the boy, who then grew up to be the king of the region and founded the region of Matsya, but the girl was left to be brought up by the head of the fisher-folk. Could this discrimination be the reason for Satyavati’s condition that her sons be rightful heir to the royal throne? Till her presence in the epic, she does take a number of strange steps which bring out her contempt for the men in the epic, but that is a  topic for another day.

To reiterate, the above is not being related to the present day killings of infants. The above was just a case of an unwanted child. However, we do have other instances where an abandoned girl child was given all the love and care a child would need. The case of Sita in the epic Ramayana is a good example. She was found by King Janak in the fields and took her as her daughter. Or the case of the birth of Draupadi who got an equal status along with her brother Dhrishtadyumna, both of who were born out of fire to King Drupada.

Mythology is a mirror of the past and a thought-process of what went through the minds of the people then. Even there, when there was a difference in the status of a woman, such acts of bestiality cannot be found. I think that the modern man is more archaic than the men of the past and no explanation or justification is enough for such cruel methods of eliminating girl child for a boy. To say that poverty drives one to do so, is probably just an excuse for ones inherent desire for a boy child. Hypocrisy and such acts of bestiality should be condoned and punished in the severest way possible.

Social ostracism should be an obvious by-product.