Episode 23

Jaratkaru (a rishi) married Jaratkaru (a serpent lady)[i]

(This is an interesting episode in Maha Bharata discussing tenets of ‘pātivratya - code of conduct for women’ and the nature of democratic debates for solving common problems. The necessity of perpetuating a family lineage and the importance of following dharma in the face of adversities etc are also the themes that run through the story)

The Story

Diti and Aditi were the two wives of Kasyapa. Out of anger, Diti cursed her thousand sons to get caught in Janamejaya’s Sarpa yaga (a sacrificial ritual to kill all serpents)[ii].

All the serpents were in the grip of fear. The imminent sacrifice of serpents was a Damocles’ sword hanging upon their heads. What was the way out? Vasuki, a senior and sober serpent called for a discussion with all his brothers and relations to mitigate the risk of being killed in the yaga. Can they all prevent Janamejaya from performing the yaga?

All serpents assembled at the appointed place to discuss the issue. Some serpents suggested, ‘Let us go in the guise of brahmins and seek ‘biksha’ (alms) and ask him to stop the ritual’. A few suggested, ‘Let us now join as his ministers disguising ourselves as brahmins and advise him not to perform the ritual’. A few suggested, ‘Let us bite the purohits bitterly and stop the ritual’. A few others suggested, ‘Why all this fuss? Let us bite Janamejaya and ensure that the ritual is never performed’.

In the assembly, there were a few kind-hearted and righteous serpents also. They disapproved the ideas. ‘When danger beacons us, we need to ponder over the issue with equanimity of heart. For avoiding a difficulty, if we tread on the path of adharma, it will lead to destruction of the world’, they suggested[iii].

Vasuki heard the arguments, and being a person on the path of dharma, he suggested that they all should go and seek the suggestion of their father, Kasyapa only. At this point, one little serpent by name Elaputra raised his hood and narrated a secret conversation that he heard between the gods and Brahma. ‘Brahma was telling that the curse of Kadruva was for social good, that the serpents were venomous and that the good serpents survive the holocaust. A pious rishi, Astika will born to Jaratkaru (a rishi) and Jaratkaru, the sister of all serpents and stop the sarpa yaga’.

There was a big relief. The faces of all serpents at once blushed and the joy of Vasuki knew no bounds. They started searching for the saviour, the rishi Jaratkaru.

‘Jaraa’ means old age or degressed stage of life. ‘Karu’ means fearful. Since the body was reduced to fearful frailty, he was known as Jaratkaru[iv]. From childhood, he dwelt in tapas; and the pleasures of sensual nature never stared at him. He was thriving on just air and becoming physically weaker and weaker every day.

One day he saw human like creatures hung from a thread of a tree branch, about to fall into a ditch.  He enquired as to who they were! They replied, ‘We are forefathers of a rishi by name Jaratkaru who had forsaken marriage and doing a rigorous penance. The souls of forefathers satisfy when the progeny perpetuates down the line and when it gets stopped the souls suffer the despicable danger of destitution from the heavens. Oh, rishi! Any amount of tapas, yagna, or any other ritual is not greater than having sons’[v]. They also enquired, ‘Have you seen Jaratkaru in your itinerary?’

Jaratkaru bent his head down in shame and owed on the same day to marry for the sake of progeny. He felt bad at the plight of his fore-fathers and he promised them that he would marry a lady by same name, and after seeking their blessings he left the place in search of the bride.

Who will give their daughter in marriage for a fragile old man? He wandered and wandered but in vain. At last, he reached a forest and addressing the Panch- bhutas[vi] he called aloud, ‘I want to marry a lady of my name to have a son’. Somewhere yonder, a few serpents heard him and reported the news to Vasuki.

Vasuki rushed to the place with his sister, Jaratkaru. Since the rishi wanted a bride with same name, Vasuki requested him to take his sister’s hand and marry her. ‘But I cannot bear her expenses. I also cannot live with her the moment she does anything which is not liked by me’, insisted Jaratkaru.

It was Vasuki’s requirement and he had to prevent the holocaust of the imminent ‘sarpa yagaa’. He agreed to the conditions and the marriage of Jaratkarus took place immediately. ‘Don’t do anything of my disliking. Don’t tell anything against my wish’, insisted Jaratkaru with his wife. She was pained but promised to adhere to his words[vii]. From then she served him as careful as a dog, as fearful as a deer and as intelligent as a crow and served like a loving wife (47.11). A few months passed by and she became pregnant.

One afternoon the rishi was sleeping on the lap of his wife and as he was tired, he did not wake up even by evening. The sun was about to set and dharma dictates that one should perform ‘sandhyavandan’. But how to wake him up? Will he feel bad and angry for disturbing the sleep? Or if not woken up, will he shout at her for transgressing dharma? Should she invite sin of commission or attract the sin of omission? A big ethical dilemma for a dutiful wife!

She chose to stand by dharma and slowly woke him up. ‘Oh Mahatma! The sun is about to set and it is time to perform the evening ritual (sandhyavandan) of pleasing the sun god. Jaratkaru woke up but he was very angry. ‘How dare the sun set when I was sleeping? You have insulted my power of penance. I can no more live with you. Right now I will leave you and go for tapas’. All the pleas of the wife fell on deaf years. ‘Swami, I have now become pregnant, but the birth of the baby is yet to happen. The fate of the clan of all serpents is dependent on the boy that is to be born out of our conjugal life. This is a critical phase and is it dharma to renounce me at this stage?’

Jaratkaru understood the anxiety of his wife. ‘A boy of resplendence shall be born and become an exemplary rishi and bring fame and name in your clan. You can go to your brother for your caretaking’, thus saying Jaratkaru left the place.

The lady Jaratkaru reached her brother Vasuki and narrated the turn of events. She assured her beleaguered brother that a boy would be born as per the words of her husband. In due course of time, a boy was delivered and the joy of serpents knew no bounds. They named him Astika and he learned all vedic knowledge and when he became young, he became instrumental in stopping the Sarpayaaga.

Story- an analysis

Indian culture, since immemorial, encouraged discussion and dissent for deciding any issue concerning the community at large. The democratic nature of religion perhaps encouraged this trend. This is precisely the reason for accepting nāstika system of thought as integral part of Hinduism[viii]. Coming to the story, it starts with an imminent tragedy that is going to knock the fortunes of the serpents. We see Vasuki encouraging all types of ideas from all his brothers before spelling out his own views. Allowing people to ventilate their views is a major step in taking their confidence for any decision that is going to be taken at the end. Vasuki precisely did the same and ultimately sought spiritual solace of seeking the advice of their father, a typical Hindu traditional behaviour.

The discussion of serpents also ended up in stressing the need of adhering to dharma only. The story stresses that ends and means are two sides of the same coin. For attaining a noble objective (preventing the sarpayaga), only noble means are to be employed. Biting the purohits or biting Janamejaya to death are not considered noble means by the sober thinking Vasuki.

The second aspect of the story is that of Jaratkaru’s intention of marrying a person. Is it for pleasure? No, it is for progeny. The perpetuation of family lineage is the central theme of ancient Indian thought. The belief that our forefathers will be liberated on the continuous perpetuation of family linkage is repeatedly told in many occasions in Maha Bharata. We saw in previous episodes the systems of niyoga, devaranyaya etc to obviate the disintegration of the family line. It was believed in ancient times that marriage was a means to have children and for performing yagnas. Marriage was not meant for sensual pleasures and ‘kama’ has to fit in the grid and go in tune with other three objectives of human life, viz, ‘dharma’, ‘artha’ and ‘moksha’.

The story indirectly indicates the presence of the system of ‘Pativrata’ concept in India. Pati means husband and vrata means observance. A married woman who is in the path of protecting the husband, adhering his words and deeds and of course loyal and virtuous is supposed to be a pativrata. A dutiful chaste married lady is pativrata. Manu dharma sastra prescribes ‘stri dharma’ (code of conduct for women) in great elaboration[ix]. Even in the current story we witness the lady Jaratkaru ‘serving her husband as careful as a dog, as fearful as a deer and as intelligent as a crow and served like a loving wife’. There is always a debate that our ancient literature degrades women and did not allow them the liberties that men enjoyed.

This aspect must be read in the overall context of the times in which the books were written. The story of Maha Bharata dates back to around 5100 BC and there may be two chief reasons for restricting the liberties of women in those days.

a.   The days were witnessing Varna Sankara (intermingling of varnas and the associated problem of unwanted children). In Gita we witness Arjuna apprehending Varna Sankara[x]in case of death of male community in the war. In those days people were anxious to prevent it. The relevant sloka apprehension of varna-sankara goes like this:

अधर्माभिभवात्कृष्ण प्रदुष्यन्ति कुलस्त्रिय:

स्त्रीषु दुष्टासु वार्ष्णेय जायते वर्णसङ्कर: Gita 1.41

(adharmābhibhavāt kṛiṣhṇa praduṣhyanti kula-striyaḥ

strīṣhu duṣhṭāsu vārṣhṇeya jāyate varṇa-saṅkaraḥ- With the preponderance of vice, the women of the family become immoral; and from the immorality of women, unwanted progeny are born.)

b.   There was a tendency on insisting the necessity of preserving the chastity and purity of the race. So the literature relating to law codes prescribed certain restrictions for women in general.

Secondly morals of those days were not encouraging openness for women - for that matter by any religion. Even Christianity downplayed the role of women. We can see it from the following passage from quoted in New York Times:

“The New Testament quotes St. Paul (I Timothy 2) as saying that women “must be silent.” Deuteronomy declares that if a woman does not bleed on her wedding night, “the men of her town shall stone her to death.” An Orthodox Jewish prayer thanks God, “who hast not made me a woman.” The Koran stipulates that a woman shall inherit less than a man, and that a woman’s testimony counts for half a man’s” (Nicholas Kristof, 2019)[xi].

The author is not interested in elaborating religious restrictions at length since the objective is not to point out the fault lines of any religion; but to impress the realities of those times and morals prevailing in ancient societies.

In the current story, though Jaratkaru served her husband, she did it out of necessity (preserving the clan of Nagas). In fact, when her husband puts a condition for his continuous stay, she felt miserable but agreed to the demands of her husband. In Management parlance, the Resource Dependence theory[xii] was favourably inclined towards Jaratkaru, the rishi.

In Hindu way of life, the code of conduct is prescribed, but we can see that not all women practiced it in toto. In fact, we cannot talk of female sexuality in uniform, homogeneous, or classifiable codes[xiii]. We see Devayani quarrelling with her husband for his infidelity and Shakuntala openly criticising her husband (see the previous episodes). Pativratya, though prescribed for all, was practiced by a few in the sense in which it was drafted.

One greatness we witness in Hinduism is that it bestowed enormous spiritual powers to the lady who strictly followed the code of conduct. Anasuya could turn the trinity of gods into small kids and Savitri defied the lord of death and brought back the life of her husband. Kannaki could able to burn the city of Madurai. Bestowing of special powers to a dutiful and faithful wife is not found in other religions. Hinduism also put women of this nature (ladies adhering code of conduct) on high esteem and the concept of Ardha Nareeswara illustrates it as best example.

Thus the common argument that men suppressed women may not be true. In Apastambha Sutra, the author, in his concluding remarks says, ‘I have not dealt with all duties. There are so many dharmas still to be learned. Know them from women and from the fouth varna’ (Voice of the Guru Pujyasri Chandrasekhara Saraswathi, “Hindu Dharma”, 2018, a book by Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, page 496) which signifies importance given to women as knowledgeable persons.

The story thus encapsulates the concepts of democratic practices of discussion and dissent, the need of adhering to noble means for attaining noble ends, the concept pativratya, and lastly makes us understand the morals prevailing in ancient societies across the spectrums of major religions.

Points to ponder

1.    Discuss the democratic discourse prevailing in ancient Indian society. Has religion influenced democratic debate or the other way round?

2.   When there is a clash between two aspects of dharma, what do you suggest to resolve the ethical dilemma?

3.   Do you feel that morals change over a period of times? If so, can we question morals of our forefathers? How do you react if your future generations criticise your moral credentials?

4.   What is ‘pativratya’? How was it justified a few thousand years back? Can we now justify in the current century?

5.   Discuss the practices of different religions with reference to code of conduct for women in ancient societies.

Foot notes

---

[i] This story of Jaratkaru is taken from Adi Parva of Maha Bharata written by sage Vyasa (Gita Press, Gorakhpur)

[ii] See Episode 22 in the same blog.

[iii] सम्यक्सद्धर्म मूला वै  व्यसने शांन्तिरुत्तमा |

अधर्मोत्तरता नाम कृत्स्नं व्यापादयेज्जगत् || - Adi parva, 37.20.

[iv] जरेति क्षयमाहुर्वै दारुणं कारु संज्ञितम् |

शरीरं कारु तस्यासीत् तत् स धीमान् शनै: शनै:  || - Adi Parva 40.3

[v] Adi Parva 45.31.

[vi] Panch Bhutas- The five elements of nature- the earth, the water, the fire, the air and the Akasa (sky)

[vii] ततः परम संविज्ञास्वपा  नागपतेस्तदा |

अति दुःखान्विता  वाक्यं समुवाचैवमस्त्विति || - Adi parva 47.10.

[viii] Āstika, in Indian philosophy, is one that accepts the authority of the Vedas. Anyone who opposes the authority of Vedas is nāstika.

[ix] Manu Dharma Sastra devoted a mini chapter for the duties of women. These will be discussed elaborately in the forthcoming book.

[x] Gita 1.41

[xi] Nicholas Kristof, “Religion and Women”, New York Times, 9^th January, 2010.

[xii] Resource Dependence Theory- it underscores the relative power of buyer and seller- (Supplier’s resources are more but not highly important to buyer or buyer’s resources scarce and highly dependent on supplier- this situation leads to dictating terms against the other party). Here in the story, the lady Jaratkaru and the clan of serpents have the necessity of preventing sarpayaga which is possible by the son born to Jaratkaru couple. The rishi Jaratkaru was never interested in marriage but he was forced by moral obligations of his forefathers. Since his services were more important, he could dictate terms for the continued existence of conjugal married life.

[xiii] Helene Cixous et al,(1973), Laugh of the Medusa , Chikago journals, page 875-893.

Copy