Episode-25

Death of Pandu Maharaj- Madri’s Sahagamana[i]

This is an interested story of the demise of Pandu Maharaj and the consequent immolation of his wife on his pyre. This story is frequently referred by some scholars and the British historians for demeaning the ancient Hindu society as a society of superstitions. Is this practice of Sati is permitted by sastras? For details, please read the story written by sage Ved Vyasa.

The story

Pandu Maharaj was the younger brother of Dhritarashtra, the king of Hastinapura (the present-day Delhi). Since Dhritarashtra was blind, he was ruling the country as a de facto king and expanded the frontiers of his empire. He was fond of hunting and always loved to go about into forests and jungles.

One day he was in the forest chasing all wild animals. To his misfortune he saw two deer mating in a bush and he aimed arrows at them instantaneously. The lady deer succumbed to death but the male deer, before dying, looked up and told, ‘Maharaj, you are the king of Hastinapur and supposed to uphold and protect dharma. I agree that as a king you can kill forest animals. But no king is supposed to kill those that cannot run, those that are in sensuous pleasure, those that are suffering from disease, and those that are giving birth to their kids. I am a rishi by name Kindama and I am enjoying pleasure with my wife in the form of deer. Having known the bliss of sensual pleasures, you aimed an arrow when I am in intoxicated sensual pleasures[ii] Since you have transgressed the path of dharma, you and your wife also shall die when you are indulged in sensuous pleasures.

Pandu Maharaj was depressed. No way can he have the pleasures with his two wives- Kunti and Madri. He decided to take up Vanaprastha ashrama leaving the kingdom permanently. But tradition says that no one can attain higher worlds after death without sons. He expressed his anguish to his first wife Kunti and asked her to have children through Niyoga. Thus he got three sons through Kunti and two sons from Madri (Readers who want to know about Vanaprastha, Niyoga way of begetting children and the details of the birth of Pandavas, may see Episode 7 or click the link http://unclekatha.com/?p=109).

Even after having five mighty children, Pandu Maharaj was not happy and wanted to have more children and told his intention to Kunti. But Kunti refused to oblige the words of her husband. “Sastras won’t permit a lady to have more than three children even in distress. If a lady aspires a fourth child, she is a ‘Svairini’ and if she aspires a fifth child, she is none other than Bandhaki”[iii]  ‘You are a king and you need to uphold dharma. Why are you asking me to deviate the path of dharma?’, she added. Pandu Maharaj agreed that Kunti was right in her argument.

Years rolled by and the children reached adolescence. On the fourteenth birthday of Arjuna, Kunti was fully involved in ‘Santarpana’ (mass annadana program), Pandu Maharaj took out Madri to a nearby garden. It is difficult for anyone to control senses and Pandu Maharaj was not an exception to the rule. He grasped the gracious queen, Madri by force and the curse of the rishi struck him with a deadly effect. The Maharaj collapsed and his past karma chased him to death.

यथा धेनु सहस्रेषु वत्सो विन्दति मातरम, ।

तथा पूर्वकृतं कर्म कर्तारमनुगच्छति ।। 

   (yathā dhenu sahasreṣu vatso vindati mātarama, tathā pūrvakṛtaṃ karma kartāramanugacchati) (In the midst of thousands of cows, the calf recognizes and reaches its mother. So also, a person’s deeds follow him, and he must experience its effects).

Pandu Maharaj could not escape his fault and he had to suffer its effect. Madri fell on his feet and was crying bitterly. All Pandavas, Kunti and other elders immediately rushed to the spot. ‘Leave the children there at a distance and you come alone’, Madri’s shrill voice pierced the ears of Kunti. Kunti rushed towards Madri and realized what had happened. She wept bitterly. ‘All these years, I was protecting the king and how did he sleep with you in spite of both of you knowing the curse of the rishi. Why did you incite him? How could the Maharaj who had been depressed all these years got exited in your presence? O! Madri, anyway you are the lucky person. You could able to see the resplendent happy face of the king’[iv].

‘The king could not control himself and did not heed my protest’, was all that Madri could talk. All Pandavas and the elderly sages were mute witness to the tragedy that had taken place. Kunti asked Madri to take care of all the five children and that she wished to follow the king who was dead. ‘I am the eldest queen and I enjoy greater share in the fruits of dharma. So, I shall accompany him’.

“No, my dear Kunti! I should go along with Pandu Maharaj. He died while in pleasure and it is my duty to follow him and fulfill his wish’. By that time, sages interfered and suggested, ‘O ladies! Both of you should not follow the king leaving the young children behind you. We can take them to Dhritarashtra but he is an unrighteous person. He may not take care of the children properly. It may be good for pativratas to follow the husband, but we feel that you should not do at this stage. When husband dies it is enough if the widow follows ‘yama’ and ‘niyama’[v] and indulge in frequent fasting to facilitate conquering the sense organs. Such a kind of lady shall be in the path of dharma and attain higher worlds after death. So we strongly advise both of you to live and that would auger well for both of you[vi].

‘Just as I followed the advice of my husband, I should now follow the advice of noble sages and take care of the welfare of the children’, Kunti said. But Madri told, ‘Let Kunti stays back and take care of children. Neither the king nor I enjoyed the bliss and I must follow him to satiate his thirst. O, Kunti, please permit me’. Then with a heavy heart, Kunti permitted the last wish of Madri. Without any anxiety, Madri entered into the pyre of Pandu Maharaj.

The story – an analysis

A part of this story was discussed in Episode 7 wherein it was explained different methods of begetting children when there was no husband in ancient Indian society. Coming to the present story, there are many issues of dharma inherent here. Now we have Animal Protection Organizations which will look serious at the issue of shooting of animals. But when Maha Bharata took place, the land and man ratio was not what it is today. It was the duty of the king to protect people from wild animals and Pandu Maharaj could not be blamed for his hunting spree in the forests. But there was a dharma that no animal should be shot at if it was indulging in sexual act, or immobile or suffering from disease or giving birth to kids’. Pandu Maharaj was a known person of righteous virtues; and transgression of dharma by him was not tolerated by the rishi.

Secondly, it is a general belief that Hindu society promoted umpteen number of children. Kunti emphatically answers this question by saying that only three children are permitted as per dharma and if any lady aspires fourth or fifth she is no less that a lecherous harlot. Hindu society in those days was aware of the health of the female gender and restricted the births to three. We must also notice that the society was also liberal and never punished if a lady has more than three children. They had set the ideal size and never frowned if the rule is violated. A noted scholar on Maha Bharata, Acharya Salaka Raghunatha Sarma opines that the intention of Pandu Maharaj was to have children to redeem the debt of forefathers. When that was accomplished through Apaddharma, where is the necessity of wishing few more children? Apaddharma is for a special purpose and cannot be a general rule for all times.

We find the assertiveness of Kunti throughout the story. She politely refused to accommodate the request of Pandu Maharaj to have more children as it was against dharma and Pandu Maharaj obliged. She also refused to accede to his request to teach the mantra to Madri for the second time - again invoking dharma. Her firmness of character can be gauged from the fact that she obliged the request of sages and wanted to live for taking care of children. The role of mother is not only to give birth but to nurture the children and Kunti rightly decided to live the life. Since no sastra or dharma promoted Sati as the prerequisite to claim as Pativrata, she wanted to live the life. Even while in grief, she did not directly scold Madri but indirectly castigated her misdemeanor.

Sati Sahagamana

The most important aspect of this story is ‘Sati Sahagamana’. Madri’s death on the pyre of Pandu Maharaj was one of the earliest incidents of the practice of Sati sahagamana frequently quoted by the British before it was abolished by the Governor General Lord Bentinck in 1829.

First let us understand the story part before understanding the historical perspectives of abolishing ‘Sati’. In the story, we witness the noble sages advising both Kunti and Madri to desist from the thought of dying.  Ved Vyasa emphatically writes that if the both queens could not withstand the bereavement of Pandu Maharaj, they could follow the strict regime of austerity and desist from sensual pleasures. But they should not die leaving the children to the evil intentions of Dhritarashtra. Then Kunti agreed to the arguments of noble sages. Why did then Madri die? She must be feeling guilty of her misdemeanor and wanted to follow the king. We must also carefully read the curse of Kindama which ordained that the queen with whom he mates would also die along with the king. The curse cannot go wrong.

We also see that the Madri was not forced by anyone including Kunti for following the king (sahagamana). No one can blame that Sati was a forceful practice in Maha Bharata times. Thousands of kings and warriors perished in the battle of Maha Bharata and none of their ladies followed them. There was no practice of Sati even in Dwapara Yuga and we don’t see Dasaratha’s wives immolating themselves on the pyre of Dasaratha. All wives of Krishna did not do ‘Sahagamana’ when Krishna left his mortal breath. Madri’s death was a stray incident and was out of her own volition. It was not forced by anybody and she died out of her own intentions. The freedom to do a karma depends on karta and the person can do, cannot do, or can modify doing in a particular fashion.  

Then why did the British blame Hindu society as a society riddled with obnoxious practices? Towards the end of eighteenth century, the British Missionaries were desperately trying to legitimize their rule in India, and they started preaching that Hindus was race with no distinct morals or ethical practices. The very existence of British, according to them, was to civilize Hindus and it was ‘White Man’s burden’. They found the practice of Sati to expose Hindu society. 

For understanding the supposed practice of Sati, one should read the book of Prof Meenakshi Jain, “Sati: Evangelicals, Baptist Missionaries, and the Changing Colonial Discourse”, available at Amazon India. She had done an extraordinary research on all recorded incidents of ‘Sati’ and came to a conclusion that in the total history of 6000 years, the recorded incidents were only in hundreds (that too, many were during Muslim invasions) whereas the Britishers exaggerated the figures, created an impression of Hindu superstitions and wanted to save the race from ‘inglorious social institutions’. 

The media-created narratives that we witness in the current century have their origins in the eighteenth century India ruled by the British. (For understanding history behind the abolition of Sati by Willium Bentick, please listen to the ten minute YouTube conversation of Prof Meenakshi Jain with Rajiv Malhotra by clicking https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=apTNtSWjsQk )

Nowhere in Smriti and Sruti literature we find any support for the system of Sati, though there are codes of conduct for widows. What our dharma sastras talk about the practice of those codes? What is the subtle difference between Sahagamana and Anugamana? The author proposes to discuss these aspects in his forthcoming book since they do not fall under the ambit of this story.

Points to ponder

1. Our scriptures talk of dharma in all deeds including things like hunting animals. What is the dharma behind hunting animals?
2. Indian society was labelled as superstitious and the British claimed to save this race as part of their duty- White man’s burden. How far it is true?
3. Should we believe media-created narratives before jumping into conclusions? What precautions are required to understand our nation’s pride and our society?
4. Do you feel that reading original scriptures can dispel many myths concocted by foreign historians?
5. Do you feel that women of ancient India were not confined to kitchens but they were experts in the knowledge of dharma? Explain with Kunti’s character.

 Footnotes

---

[i] This Story is taken from Adi Parva of Maha Bharata written by sage Vyasa.

[ii] Adiparva 95.60.

[iii] नातश्चतुर्थं प्रसवं आपत्स्यसि वदंत्युत ।

अतः परं स्वैरिणी स्याद्बन्धकी पञ्चमे भवेत् - Adi Parva 122.77

nātaścaturthaṃ prasavaṃ āpatsyasi vadaṃtyuta ।

ataḥ paraṃ svairiṇī syādbandhakī pañcame bhavet – 122.77

[iv] धन्यात्मसि बाह्लीकी मत्तो भाग्यतदा तथा

दृष्टवत्यपि यद् वक्त्रं प्रहृष्टस्य महीपते:  - Adi Parva -124.21

dhanyātmasi bāhlīkī matto bhāgyatadā tathā

dṛṣṭavatyapi yad vaktraṃ prahṛṣṭasya mahīpate:  - 124.21

[v] Yama and Niyama- We come across these principles in Patanjali Yoga. Yama talks about what not to do. Niyama talks of what to do. Yama principles include ahimsa (non-violence), satya (truth), asteya (non-stealing), brahmacharya (celibacy), and aparigraha (non-greed). The five niyamas include shaucha (self-purification), santhosha (contentment), tapas (self-discipline), svadhyaya (self-study) and Iswara Pranidhana (surrendering to Iswara).

[vi] Adi Parva 124.36

Copy