Draupadi and Polyandry

Yesterday we read about the cause of Draupadi’s marriage to the Pandavs. The main cause of it seemed to be a casual remark by Kunti. Let us understand this in slight detail.
 

Pandavas with Draupadi Deogarh, Dasavatar temple

After Arjun won Draupadi in the swayamvar, the Pandavs returned to their hut with Draupadi (the Pandavs and Kunti were in disguise and hiding after the Lakshagraha episode). When they arrived, Kunti was doing something and had her back towards them. On arriving one of them is supposed to have said, “Look mother what we have got” (which should have been, ‘who’ and not ‘what’, but let’s overlook this rather convenient slip-of-tongue). Without turning, Kunti is supposed to have said, “Please share it amongst the five of you” and the rest is history, of epic proportions! 

Was this such an innocent statement made by Kunti? Didn’t she not know that the Pandavs had gone to Panchal to attend the swayamvar of the princess of Panchal, Draupadi? Panchal and Drupad were known to the Pandavs very well from the past events, so statement “Look….” couldn’t have been a shareable object. Also the Pandavs were not children that everything needed to be shared! So was this a deliberate act?

Draupadi was born out of the flames of a yagna, and thus also called ‘Yagnaseni’. She was dark (Krishnee) and beautiful. She was fiery and strong. Some versions say that the jealousy towards Arjun by the other brothers was visible to the mother and this could have been the only way to keep them bound. Kunti was the glue that bound the bothers, but she also knew that beyond a point (and age), she would be ineffective. Besides youth needed something else to bind!

On realizing what she had done, she could have undone the same, but by then Yudhishtir had announced that Kunti’s words were sacrosanct and all five of them would marry Draupadi! When Drupad and Dhrishtidyumna raised objections, Yudhishtir is supposed to have given some examples of polyandry in knowledge then.

Yudhishtir gives the examples of Jatila who was supposed to have married seven sages. Then the example of Marisha marrying the Prachetas was cited. Further, the marriage of the Maruts with Rodasi was cited. But these were all divine and not mortals, said Drupad. It was then that Sage Vyasya was brought in to ‘support’ Yudhishtir’s opinion.

Vyasa telling the the tale to Drupad

The idea of polyandry was pushed through even when it was not a norm and this we see later when Draupadi was referred to as a prostitute by many and in public. So was this decision of marrying Draupadi to the five brothers a ploy by Kunti to ensure that the five brothers remain together in times of trials? Was she aware of the weaknesses of her sons and how much they needed a feminine force to keep them united, the way she was doing till then? 

If the idea of polyandry was out of place, then why was it not objected to by Draupadi’s father and brother? Draupadi was born out of fire which was conducted to beget Drupad a son who could kill his enemy Dronacharya. Along with a son, Drupad got a daughter too, so she was a bonus. These were not natural born children, but children who were ‘created’ for a cause, modern day robots, if I may add! Drupad was more concerned about his son achieving his objective and possibly Draupadi getting married to the heirs of Hastinapur could just be an added advantage or immaterial. Who knows?

In short, except Draupadi, it was a win-win for all. Kunti was happy, the Pandavs were ecstatic and the father and brother couldn’t care much. And Draupadi? Well she was born out of fire and lived a life of hell! She had five husbands but none were hers. All husbands had exclusive wives separately, but she didn’t have a single husband of her own. As Saonli Mitra, the eminent Bengali theater actress calls Draupadi in one of her plays – nathboti anathbot – the one with husbands, but yet unprotected. 

Polyandry has been effectively used in this epic. Nalayani (Draupadi in her previous birth) learns about Shiva granting her a boon of five husbands in her next life, wonders if she would not be seen as a fallen woman. An elaborate conversation takes place where Nalayani explains that as per the norms a man can have many wives, but a woman only one. She can take another husband to beget children after her first husband has consented to it (niyoga). If she takes a third husband, then she has to atone for the same as per the societal norms. A fourth husband would imply that she is a fallen woman and a fifth meant she was a prostitute. Shiva is supposed to have said, that in the days of yore, this was not unheard of and that it was boon from him, and so no sin would be levied on her. Satisfied, Nalayani goes her way to her next birth and endures her status of being nathboti anathbot.  

Polyandry was not in vogue during the times of Mahabharata and thus some sharp reactions from many of the characters of the epic itself. However, it is said that this was a practice in some tribal areas of the Himalayan range, which too had given up the practice around the same time. Yudhishtir is supposed to have referred to the clan of Northern-Kurus who followed the practice of polyandry, where they had grown up as children before they came to Hastinapur.

Well for good or for bad, for right or for wrong, for duty to ones mother or for giving vent to ones lust – call it what you will, polyandry was not widely accepted, and only Draupadi paid a price for it, none else did and the question remains – Just why did Draupadi have to suffer polyandry?

Why did Draupadi have to ‘suffer’ Polyandry?

A common answer to this is – well she asked for it!

Maharani Draupadi - Raja Ravi Varma

A typical response to a complicated question, which was the need of the hour (read ‘plot’ of the epic) as seen by author. But there is an elaborate myth behind it, which by itself, is the cause of Draupadi giving in to five husbands, but has deeper meaning.

But first the myth.

Once upon a time, there lived a sage Maudgalya, who was married to Nalayani. For some strange and unexplained reason, the sage decided to test his wife. He developed a debilitating disease (supposedly leprosy) due to which he remained diseased and unable to do anything and would get angry for no reason. In all this, Nalayani took great care of her husband and would bear all his tantrums. Nalayani would always eat after the sage had partaken his food from the same plate and the leftovers left by him. Once when the sage was having his food, one of his fingers fell in the food. True to her habit, she took the finger out of the food and ate the food as if nothing had happened. The sage was impressed but was still not done.

One day, he expressed his desire to have sex with another woman, who sold sex for gold. Nalayani sold her gold chain and bundled him in a basket and carried him on her head through the market place, much to the amusement and taunts of the onlookers. After, he was done, to avoid the comments which might be hurting her husband, she was hurrying back home. In the hurry, she did not notice a learned sage hanging from the tree for some crime and brushed her husband against him. In anger, the sage cursed her that by dawn next day, she would lose her husband and become a widow.

When Nalayani reached home, she was angry. She let her husband to rest for the night and cried out loud for the gods to hear that if she had been chaste and if she had never failed in her duties towards her husband, and if the sages curse be true, that she would lose her husband at dawn, then let the power of her chastity not let the sun to rise. Then she went about with her work.

The next day at dawn Lord Indra noticed that the Sun was not at the horizon. He went out in search to find the Sun hiding behind a mountain, trying to curtail his rays from spreading. On being asked, the Sun said that he did not have the power to go against the chastity of a woman, and he was restricted by the words of Nalayani. To cut short the story, the gods approached the sage who was hanging and got him to withdraw his curse and thus Nalayani’s husband was saved from death. 

Nalayani’s husband, sage Maudgalya was also impressed and came back to his young self and asked his wife Nalayani to ask for any boon she desired. Nalayani then asked that the sage take five different forms and enjoy her. For many years the two enjoyed sexual pleasures, but Nalayani could just not have enough. A time came when the sage had had enough and decided to go to the forest. But Nalayani was not agreeable to the idea of a life without sex and wanted to know, how she could live without him (or sex). Sage Maudgalya was angry at this insatiable lust and cursed her, that since she has not had enough, in her next life she can continue the same with five husbands. 

Saying so, Maudgalya retired to the forest and Nalayani too went to the forest and did penance to appease Lord Shiva. Lord Shiva appeared to her and asked her to seek a boon. Nalayani asked for a husband, but in her anxiety, she asked for the same boon five times and Shiva accepted it every time she said so. Later when Nalayani realised it, she was worried, that wouldn’t the world see this as odd, since she had never heard about a woman having more than one husband and that too all together? Lord Shiva assured her that it is not unheard of, and anyways, it’s a boon from him so the world would not see this as odd. Later, Nalayani was born to Drupad and as we all know, Draupadi was married to the five brothers, the Pandavs.

While the subject of polyandry is a matter we will delve in, next time, the myth of Nalayani and Maudgalya seem to have a larger relevance. Besides the fact that it goes on to become the ‘cause’ of Draupadi’s marriage to the Pandavs in the form of a justification, it probably also had another larger objective. The uncomplaining and the dutiful service rendered by a wife to her husband, no matter how he was and what his demands be, is the case in point here. Such stories were used to reinforce the sense of service a society expected from a wife. Her ordeals were eulogized as something that elevated her to a status, where she could stop the order of nature. Her chastity could stop the Sun from rising and have gods intervene if need be. If that by itself was not good enough, then she could end up with a life of abundant sex! The former was the said advantage and the latter was the unsaid advantage of remaining true to ones husband and a life of servitude towards him, no matter how he was. 

I guess the patriarchy of its times, had its own ways of controlling their women, this being one of them – what say you?

The above myth is told by Sage Vyasya to Drupad and his son Drishtidyumna when they wanted to know as to why Draupadi had to marry five brothers. This is the background that is used to justify, an otherwise ‘innocent’ remark by Kunti that the brothers should share what they got. 

More about this next time. Keep reading....

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?

Shakuntala – by Sage Vyasa

Shakuntala is one of childhoods most cherished and widely read romantic stories (or novels, depending on what one read). A sweet romance of a king who meets a damsel, express love, get married and part to return later. Enter an angry sage, who curses the lovely lady as a result of which the king forgets his lady love. Later Shakuntala goes to the court of the King, but loses the ring on the way, which finds itself inside a fish. The King is unable to remember his love, due to the curse of the angry sage, turns her away. The ring later finds its way to the King and he remembers everything and accepts Shakuntala and their child and all ends well.

Such a lovely story, which has its moments of love, separation, pathos and ends with ‘…..and they lived happily ever after’.

We get to read Shakuntala in two versions, first by Sage Vyasa in Mahabharata (Mb) and then later in the Sanskrit romance recreated by Kalidasa, in Abhigyana-Shakuntalam. The version mentioned above was a summary from Kalidasa’s version. Vyasa did not quite write the story this way. True to his nature, his Shakuntala was a smart, fire-brand woman, much like the later ladies of the epic Mb. It is important to understand Vyasa’s Shakuntala, as she happens to be the first major female character of Mb.

Vishwamitra and Menaka

Shakuntala was the daughter of Sage Vishwamitra and apsara Menaka. Vishwamitra was a Kshatriya, who had undertaken severe penance to become a sage and Menaka was sent by Lord Indra, to disturb his penance, by seducing him. Post seduction, Menaka gave birth to a baby, but both Menaka and Vishwamitra deserted the baby, who was a symbol of victory for Menaka, and that of defeat for Vishwamitra. It is said that Sage Kanva found the deserted baby under the care of peacocks, and thus named her Shakunta-lalita, ‘shakunta’ meaning peacock and ‘lalita’ meaning in the loving care of, which was later shortened to Shakuntala.

Shakuntala was brought up by Sage Kanva, in his ashram, and soon grew up to be a beautiful lady with the looks of her mother, Menaka. Once Dushyant, the prince of Hastinapur came to the ashram to meet Sage Kanva and was immediately smitten by Shakuntala’s beauty. When he came to know that the Sage was away on a pilgrimage with some other sages and would return only after a few days, he expressed his desire to marry Shakuntala. The lady suggested that they wait for her foster-father’s arrival, but Dushyant expressed his inability to wait and suggested the option of gandharva-vivaha (a custom where the elders were not required as long as the two had decided to get married). At this, Shakuntala agreed with a condition, that the child born of her would be the heir to the kingdom of Hastinapur. Dhushyant agreed and the two got married and after consummating the marriage, Dushyant left without bothering to wait for Sage Kanva’s return. He left with a promise that he would send for her soon.

Shakuntala writes to Dushyanta

When Sage Kanva returned, he was apprised of the wedding. Soon Shakuntala gave birth to a son, who was named Sarvadaman, the subduer of all. When after twelve years there was no sign of Dushyant, despite the numerous missives sent by Shakuntala, Sage Kanva suggested that Sarvadaman be taken to the King as it was time for him to learn the ways of a Kshatriya. When Shakuntala and Sarvadaman reached the palace of Dushyanta, and introduced themselves to him, he had no recollection of any marriage.

There follows an extensive dialogue, where Shakuntala stands her ground. Dushyanta makes some derogatory remarks about her and Shakuntala retorts back that her only objective was to get her son the rightful place and not to lead the life of luxury. She reminds him of the true role of a king and how his acts would leave a wrong impression on his subjects. Her speech impresses the courtiers. To cut short the story, after a strong dialogue between the two, where Shakuntala berates the King and looks down on him as a King, the gods from the heavens intervened and came to the rescue of Shakuntala and assured Dushyant about the truth of the wedding. Dushyant then accepted both and it is said that Dushyant is supposed to have told Shakuntala that he had recognised her immediately, but did not give in as his subjects would not have been able to accept her so easily. The approval from the gods had made things easy and better.

Some interesting observations.

According to the Vysya’s version, Shakuntala was brought up with the full knowledge of the fact that she was deserted by her parents at birth. Her agreement to Dushyant’s proposal did not need parental approval, she took her own decision. She even made a condition, which goes on to show that she wanted to ensure that her child was not neglected as she was once and got his rightful due. At the court of Dushyant, she is not seen fighting for her right, but for the right of her son, as is evident in the elaborate speech, which has the courtier’s spell-bound and at one stage they begin to believe her. She is depicted as an extremely confident and determined woman, out to get justice without breaking down.

Kalidasa used the angle of the curse and the lost ring to justify the ‘forgetfulness’ of Dushyant, while Vyasa simply went ahead and exposed Dushyant’s lustful rendezvous. Vyasa’s Shakuntala was not the damsel in distress shedding copious tears. She fought for her right and got her way, and did not succumb to the man, irrespective of his position and stature. She was amongst the first women in Mb, who fights for her rights in a man’s world and gets her due.

Just why did the nature of Shakuntala undergo such a drastic change from the fiery to the abalaa-naari? Does this also show the change in the perception of people? The status of women in the Vedic times was much elevated as evident in many of the leading ladies of Mb, who were in a position of some authority like Shakuntala, Satyavati, Kunti, etc. But by the Puranic times, her position had fallen and she became more of an appendage or a mere shadow of man.  

While Kalidasa’s Shakuntala made good romantic, fairy-tale tear-jerker, Vyasa’s Shakuntala was more heroic and what a modern woman should be. The fire-brand version envisioned by Vyasa gives way to the tragic distressed woman of Kalidasa and unfortunately, the image has stuck on.

On this International Women’s Day, I hope the status of women is restored to the Vedic standards where we have seen the likes of Shakuntala who fought for her right and set the record straight with none less than a King.

Do I hear ‘Amen’???

The above paintings are from Raja Ravi Varma’s series titled Shakuntala sourced from Internet.