Gender, Identity and the "Mahābhārata" PDF

Preview

Summary

Belting 1 Kevin Belting Hist 370 Turner-Rahman 6/20/2011 Gender, Identity and the Mahābhārata Studying gender, particularly gender in a historical text, can be a tricky endeavor. One must always be aware of historical and cultural context in the texts they are analyzing, and keep in mind the social ...

Description

Belting 1 Kevin Belting Hist 370 Turner-Rahman 6/20/2011 Gender, Identity and the Mahābhārata

Studying gender, particularly gender in a historical text, can be a tricky endeavor. One must always be aware of historical and cultural context in the texts they are analyzing, and keep in mind the social and political factors behind the text itself. A layer of difficulty is added by the fact that you are often dealing with a translation of a translation of a translation, such as Homer's The Odyssey, The Bible, or indeed the Mahābhārata. As a historical text, the Mahābhārata is an amazing resource for analyzing ancient India's socio-political intricacies, and to get an idea of what their culture is like. The Mahābhārata, being one of the longest and oldest epics of all time, allows us to pick and choose which topics to explore in the context of the larger work and history. After careful analysis of the Mahābhārata, we can see that it's possible to take away many varied conclusions on the nature of gender identity in the work. However, one major commonality is present in all scholarly work on the subject: while the Mahābhārata often reinforces traditional gender roles in society, there are a few key examples of breaking away from these roles. Ultimately, we will find that identity itself is not reliant on gender, and that this ancient Indian text in many ways bucks established gender roles, but more importantly challenges the very notion of gender itself, such as in the debate between Sulabha and Janaka, covered heavily in this essay. Note carefully that the idea of gender and sexual identity in ancient Indian texts and histories is an incredibly broad topic, far beyond the scope of this paper, so we

Belting 2 will instead be focusing on these ideas in a modern context, comparing contemporary themes to ancient notions. Our primary focus will be on the female characters of the Mahābhārata, relying on their point of view, feelings, and narratives to get an idea of how women are treated within the narrative context of the Mahābhārata. Not every character will be covered in intimate detail, some will be grouped together in order to more cohesively show a point or theme present in the Mahābhārata. These themes will begin to form together as they reach the overarching point of the narrative as a whole, about the idea of gender and identity in the context of the work. The first character we will be analyzing is that of Sulabha, a character written about extensively in Vanita's work “The Self is Not Gendered”. Not sure who Sulabha is? Not to worry, Vanita writes: “Who is Sulabha? Not many people, not even many Sanskrit scholars, recognize the name at once. She is a single woman, a learned renunciant, who... wins a debate with philosopher-king Janaka in the presence of the eminent Brahman scholars.” (Vanita, p. 76) So why is Sulabha important in the analysis of gender and identity in the Mahābhārata? Sulabha is an oft-forgotten character in the sweeping epic of the narrative as a whole, but she accomplishes something key, something that resonates with ancient Indian ideas of identity: she successfully “defeats” Janaka in a debate and she “...logically establishes that there is no essential difference between a man and a woman; she also demonstrates by her own example that a woman may achieve liberation by the same means as a man.” (Vanita, p. 76) This was certainly a fairly radical notion, even in the context of the rest of the Mahābhārata. Most other female characters in the book are married women in subservient roles to their husband. Sulabha demonstrating definitively that men and women are inherently equal is a major stride in the narrative.

Belting 3 Sulabha is different from most of the other female characters in the Mahābhārata in that she is not only unwed, she is single by choice. She is an ascetic and as such has renounced the worldly pleasures that life provides, including marriage. As Vanita notes: “Sulabha's victory in the debate... justifies her own choices in life (not to marry, to wander the world alone, to seek emancipation by the same path as men)... and her actions...” (Vanita, p. 90) It's worth noting that Sulabha is actually a recurring character throughout Vedic and other ancient Indian texts, appearing several times as largely the same character, an independent, scholarly woman, depicted in slightly different ways depending on the text. Her debate partner in the Mahābhārata, the philosopher-king Janaka, also appears frequently throughout these works, sometimes as a sort of royal advice vending machine, other times as an arrogant man who happens to be king (Dhant, loc. 7987). Sulabha is a unique character in the Mahābhārata being as independent as she is, the other female characters in the work are universally married, even when referencing the cosmology as Brodbeck notes. Brodbeck writes in his work: “In the Vedic and epic traditions traced here, cosmos and person have gendered parents.” (Brodbeck, loc. 5032) noting that even the gods themselves are intimately connected to notions of marriage and sex, making the quasimythical Sulabha an even more noteworthy character as a singular woman, challenging the notions of sex and identity present in other areas of the Mahābhārata. Let us turn away for now from Sulabha and focus more on the idea of gender as a construction in the Mahābhārata. The Mahābhārata, at its heart, is a dialogue on the nature of dharma, the duties one must uphold in life as befits one's station. One's dharma is also affected by gender, there are wifely duties just as there are husbandly duties. These duties are in addition

Belting 4 to one's overall social station (queen, farmer, housekeeper, etc.). However, as Patton points out in “How Do You Conduct Yourself?”: “...we are perfectly willing to admit Yudhisthira's multiple dharmas as a king and a husband, or Arjuna's as a warrior and a beloved cousin, we frequently still choose the singular theme, rather than the plural, when we conduct our studies.” (Patton, loc. 3026) All too often it is easy to read a work and presume that it carries a singular, thrusting theme. However, such a view tends to be faulty, and to read a work as completely singular in its focus is to do it discredit, particularly in an epic such as the Mahābhārata. Patton uses this idea of multiple dharmas as a way of looking at the construction of identity in the Mahābhārata, particularly among women. We have already seen Sulabha breaking away from the traditional gender roles of ancient India, but Patton points out to us examples wherein even women ensconced in the traditional roles show a more modern idea of feminism, adopting multiple roles as individuals, not cardboard cutouts slotted into a wife-shaped hole. Draupadi is a prominent character in the Mahābhārata, featured throughout the narrative. Draupadi is the daughter of King Drupada, wife to the five Pandavas. Draupadi is a strong, passionate woman, but is often framed in the context of her husbands and father. One of her more well-known passages in the Mahābhārata is when she and her friend Satyabhama sit down to have a quiet conversation in the forest. Satyabhama asks Draupadi how she makes the Pandavas obedient to her, why they are never angry or displeased. Satyabhama jokes that Draupadi must be using some form of witchcraft in order to keep them in line. Draupadi then lectures Satyabhama on wifely duties and the tasks that wives must perform. As Patton puts it: “...Draupadi happily speaks of servitude, of treating one's husband like a god... she serves her husbands without regard for her own likes and dislikes... she never bathes nor eats nor sleeps

Belting 5 until her husband has; she renounces what he renounces, eats and drinks what he does, and so on.” (Patton, loc. 3093) These character traits would serve to point to a more traditional understanding of gender roles, where the wife is subservient to the husband. However, with a closer reading of Draupadi's story we can see that the two women are not just talking about husbands and wives, but the very notion of control and power itself. As Patton notes, Draupadi is aware of the power balance between her and her husbands, and she manipulates that expertly to make herself equal in many ways to her husbands. She is also well aware that men hold the ultimate power in society as a whole, and is smart enough to acknowledge this fact with regard to herself. Patton puts it best:

Draupadi states, 'The husband is a god, he is a path, and nothing else. What woman then would do injury?'... Draupadi may not simply be articulating the norm here, as a simpler, univocal reading might suggest. Rather, she could be articulating the actual state of affairs: a woman has no other option in life, so why would she act against her own self-interest in this regard?” (Patton, loc. 3132)

While Draupadi is subservient to her husbands, she shows an awareness of the power balance between men and women. Draupadi, while well aware of the power of her husbands and other men, is also well aware of the power that she wields. Here, Patton's article reaches an understanding with Black's article “Eavesdropping on the Epic”, depicting the power of female characters in the Mahābhārata: “Draupadi does show keen understanding of where her actual power does lie... her supervision of household affairs and her singlehanded financial mastery over the treasuries of the palace.” (Patton, loc. 3185) This notion of the women as listeners and users of cunning power agrees with Black's conclusion that “...the female listeners, although sometimes silent in the background, emerge as primary characters in shaping the story and giving

Belting 6 it direction.” (Black, loc. 2297) It plays to this same idea of women as more critical thinkers and players in the background, rather than at the forefront like their male counterparts. This idea of women being major players, yet still ultimately subservient to men is a fairly common theme that crops up fairly frequently in ancient and medieval literature. Everything from Homer's The Odyssey to the legends of King Arthur feature women in these “background” roles. So what makes the women of the Mahābhārata different? They use this “feminine power” to assert themselves and their dharma, to enhance their roles as queens and matriarchs. Black describes the Mahābhārata's “...orientation towards men, its focus on war, and the way it characterizes the ideals of heroism, honour and courage as specifically masculine traits...” (Black, loc. 1765) However, Vanita points out:

The representation of a female figure winning a debate, which is a battle of words, arguably works as a more imitable model than the representation of a female winning a battle with weapons. Both in texts and in life, many more females engage in debate and conversation than in warfare... Sulabha's logical victory in debate has the potential to make the oppressor see the folly of his thinking. (Vanita, p. 91)

The women of the Mahābhārata, as Vanita notes, win battles of words, not swords. This same idea can be seen in the writings of Black and Patton. This hearkens back to Patton's point, that women were almost inherently subservient by the nature of dharma and the caste system, and of course the social and political norms of the time. However, it is through these debates particularly the debate between Sulabha and Janaka, since Sulabha was ascetic and not as intimately involved in the idea of wifely duties and dharma – that we can see the debates about gender and identity of the time.

Belting 7 So what does it all mean? All of the debates, the themes of women as observers and background players, what point about gender and identity in the Mahābhārata is made? Well, the point is, there is no point. In attempting to analyze gender in the Mahābhārata, we've struck upon the central theme of the work as a whole. In the Mahābhārata, the central conflicts revolve around the dharma of the characters. Dharma is, inherently, a black-and-white, cut-and-dry notion. Your dharma is dictated by your station in life, and is a (relatively) simple moral code to adhere to. However, the Mahābhārata deals with what happens when real life and dharma collide, when real people struggle to meet their moral duties, and when their dharma puts their lives or the livelihood of those they love in jeopardy. The Mahābhārata is so focused on that idea that multiple other books have been written just about the theme of conflicting morality in the Mahābhārata, such as Matilal's “Moral Dilemmas in the Mahābhārata”. Take, for example, the story of Bhisma, a warrior featured in the Mahābhārata. His dharma collided with what actually happened in such a way that it cost him his life. Being a warrior, Bhisma was bound by dharma to fight according to the rules of warfare, to fight honorably and with valor. One of the tenets of the dharmasutra is that Bhima was never allowed to kill a woman, under any circumstances. Bhima's dedication to his dharma came to a head when he was forced to face a woman in battle. This, of course, presented a conundrum: would he put his own life above his moral code? How many could honestly say that, put in this situation, they would honor their morality over their own life? Well, Bhima was killed by that woman, falling in battle to her blade. (Rukmani, p. 29) The bulk of the Mahābhārata is built upon these dharmic dilemmas, to illustrate the point that life and morality are not always one and the same, that inevitably dharma and reality will find themselves at odds with each other.

Belting 8 In much the same way, we find that the nature of gender and identity is not a cut-and-dry thing. As Vanita notes: “When we focus on the dynamic debates regarding gender that flourish in ancient Hindu texts we help combat the stereotype of these texts as either monolithically justifying the subordination of women or as monolithically honoring women.” (Vanita, p. 91) Patton too pointed out to us that too often we focus on the singular theme rather than a more complicated lesson; that we want the single, clean truth rather than the more honest, obtuse moral (Patton, loc. 3026). And that is the ultimate point to take away from analysis of the Mahābhārata: life, unlike dharma, is not black-and-white. In the same way, gender and identity are not black-and-white, but rather constructions of society and one's life, to be broken or adhered to as the situation warrants.

Belting 9 Works Cited and Consulted Black, Brian. "Eavesdropping on the Epic" Gender and Narrative in the Mahabharata. Ed. Brian Black. New York, NY: Routledge, 2007. Digital. Brodbeck, Simon. "Gendered Soteriology: Marriage and the Karmayoga" Gender and Narrative in the Mahabharata. Ed. Brian Black. New York, NY: Routledge, 2007. Digital. Dhant, Arti. "Paradignms of the Good in the Mahābhārata" Gender and Narrative in the Mahabharata. Ed. Brian Black. New York, NY: Routledge, 2007. Digital. Hiltebeitel, Alf. Rethinking the Mahābhārata. 1st ed. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press, 2001. Print. Patton, Laurie. "How Do You Conduct Yourself?" Gender and Narrative in the Mahabharata. Ed. Brian Black. New York, NY: Routledge, 2007. Digital. Rukmani, T.S. “Moral Dilemmas in the Mahābhārata” . Moral Dilemmas in the Mahābhārata. Ed. Bimal Matilal. Rashtrapati Nivas, Shimla: Indian Institute of Advanced Study, 1989. Print. Vanita, Ruth. "The Self Is Not Gendered: Sulabha's Debate with King Janaka." NWSA Journal 15.2 (2003): 76. Academic Search Complete. EBSCO. Web. 3 June 2011....