Episode 27
The Might of Bhima and the death of Bakasura[i]
This is a
simple story of the death of Bakasura (a demon) in the hands of Bhima. The
story is interwoven by many discussions as to who should sacrifice life for the
sake of demon before Bhima was sent by Kunti to kill him. Can guest be
sacrificed for the sake of protecting the self? Is the purpose of marriage for
dharma and not for carnal pleasures? Is listening Vedas by shudras a taboo?
What is the definition of shudra and what controversies? Let us read and analyze
the story.
The Story
In the
last episode we saw the duel between Bhima and Hidimbasara. After the death of
Hidimbasura, Pandavas moved to Ekachakrapura (currently it is a small village
in Birbhum district of West Bengal). They stayed in a house of a Brahmin as
guests. They were still in exile disguising themselves as Brahmins and thriving
on alms bestowed by the villagers. All the brothers used to go out to beg food
and half of it was consumed by Bhima and the rest by all other brothers including
Kunti.
Ekachakrapura
was in the grip of a deadly demon by name Bakasura. The dastardly demon used to
delight in devouring human flesh. To save the prowl of
the carnivorous beast, the villagers entered into a gentle-man agreement with
Bakasura. Each day one household had to send a cartful of food, two buffalos
and a human being as part of his menu and the demon agreed not to disturb the
peace of villagers. Pandavas were not aware of this arrangement and no
one had told them also.
One day
Bhima and Kunti were sitting in the corridor of the Brahmin’s house discussing
something and the remaining four Pandavas had left to fetch food. Pandavas were
not aware that it was the turn of their host on that day. Suddenly they heard
the people of the household weeping bitterly. Kunti rushed to the spot and
found all people gloomy and despondent.
The
Brahmana was crying, ‘Oh I was anticipating this day from the beginning and
advising to leave this place. But you did not heed my advice. See, the imminent
danger is knocking our door right now. You are a pious and a patient lady
following my dharmic path. Like a mother you are
nourishing and nurturing me. The very gods have sent you as my friend,
philosopher and guide. How can I now desert you and go there?’[ii], the Brahmin
was talking to his wife.
He
continued, ‘See our cute small son. He has not yet grown and still a child. How
can I leave him? This is our beloved daughter. The gods
have given her to perform ‘Kanyādāna’[iii] and I
and my forefathers attain divine abodes by virtue of children born to her. A
few may say that the father loves son and a few others say that he loves
daughter. But I love both of them equally[iv].
Now what can I do? I can’t leave them, and death for all of us is the only
alternative’, the Brahmin lamented.
‘Oh,
Swamy! Don’t lament over this issue. Today I will go and sacrifice my life. A
wife is supposed to protect her husband and that is dharma. You married for progeny and I got relieved from the debt by
giving children to you. The purpose of my life is fulfilled. If you die
and I outlive your death, I can’t rear up these two children. I can’t even
protect this girl from the evil eyes of envious men. Further
a lady without husband would be akin to the fallen flesh ready to be picked up
by all men around. I can’t protect myself and tread on the dharmic path
and I will be despised and demeaned’, the Brahmin’s wife argued.
She
continued, ‘If you die and I live, I will become
helpless and our daughter shall be coveted by ignominious people just as
shudras covet to listen the resonance of vedas[v].
“Further a woman is not to be killed as per dharma and the demon may
leave me because I am a woman[vi].
A man is certain to be killed and woman has the chances of being relieved.
Hence, I only will go and do my duty as a wife. You may
think that you cannot perform rituals without me. I can tell you that you can
always marry one more lady and it is as per dharma. If a woman transgresses her
husband, it is unrighteousness, but it is righteous for a man to take the hand
of second lady as his wife’.
Kunti was
carefully listening to the conversation. By that time the Bramhin’s daughter
came forward and offered to sacrifice her life. ‘Listen to me. I am your
daughter and one day you must leave me. Son helps in
relieving the forefathers from the pangs of Punnama Naraka[vii]. My
sons (dauhitras) also help but I will save my parents now itself by sacrificing
my life.
People say:
आत्मा पुत्रः सखा भार्या क्रुच्चं तु दुहिता किल (ātmā putraḥ sakhā bhāryā kruccaṃ tu duhitā kila)- Adi Parva 158-
11 (Son is the very image of father and wife a friend
and daughter an impediment). I am of no use to the family unless I help
the family at this critical stage. Oh father, for the sake of dharma, for the
sake of all of us and for the sake of progeny you need to live on this planet.
Let me die for a noble cause’.
Then the
small boy came up with a hay stick and told childishly that he would kill the
demon with a hay stick and that he would go to the demon on that day. Everyone
hugged him for his innocence. It looked as though a
gloomy garb has girdled the very atmosphere and wrapped their tears in its
chest lest a flow of tears should engulf the entire village.
Bhima and
Kunti were unaware the demon that was destroying the peace of the village.
Kunti came forward and asked the reason for their grief. The Brahmin narrated
the understanding of the villagers with Bakasura and that their king left them
to their fate. Now it was his turn to send anyone in the family for the feast
of the demon.
‘What
happened to your king?’, Kunti enquired. Brahmin told, ‘he has left all of us
to our fate. We have none to protect from the clutches of Bakasura’.
The
Brahmin continued, ‘An intelligent person should strive
for a good king first and later aspire for wife and wealth before thinking of
the up-lift of relations[viii].
I achieved all these except the king, and I am to be blamed for my misfortune
now’. ‘We are suffering by our association with a weak king’, he added.
Kunti had
pity towards the family. The Brahmin family had provided shelter to them, and
she felt that she should do some service to the Brahmin’s family. ‘Oh, great
Brahmin! There is no need to grieve now. You have one son, but I have five
sons. One of my sons shall go to the beast’
The
Brahmin was aghast. He was not willing to send his guest for protecting his own
life. He was not aware that he was talking to Kunti and that her son was none
other than great Bhima. He was under the impression that his guests were
Brahmins only. He told, ‘Oh lady! If your son is killed by the demon, I attain
the sin of Brahma hatya[ix] , If I
go and allow myself to be killed by the demon, it may be atma hatya[x]. I cannot extricate myself from the sin of Brahma hatya. Since
the atma hatya is not intentional I may not attain sin at all. I prefer atma
hatya to brahma hatya’.
‘It is heinous crime to kill the guest. Even the apad dharma does
not envisage the killing of guest to save one’s own life’. Kunti
understood the sensitivities of the Brahmin host. She assured, ‘Oh great
Brahmin, please allow me to send my son. He is a mighty warrior and he had
killed many demons earlier. He can save you and the village from the barbarian
demon’. Reluctantly, the Brahmin agreed.
Kunti
went inside to reach his son. Bhima was
not the person to fear any person in fighting. He accepted it a challenge. By
that time all other Pandavas arrived and surprised by the decision of Kunti.
‘Oh, mother! You have decided to send Bhima for a duel with an unknown demon. For protecting a Brahmin, you prefer to sacrifice your son!
Is it in tune with the tenets of dharma?[xi] Dharmaraja
lamented.
But Kunti
knew the strength of her son and stood by her word. She told, ‘You all don’t
know his strength. When he was a child, he had fallen to the ground from my lap
and the stony rock had crushed into powder. In a fight, the lord Indra cannot
match him’. Then Dharmaraja also consented.
The great
duel was about to happen on the day and Bhima was exited. He took the cartful
of food and set out to design his destiny. He ate all the food and challenged
Bakasura. The ferocious demon fell upon Bhima with all his might. The duel was
fearful. They fought with trees and rocks, and fists of fury. Each tried to crush the other to the dust but each rose up to
fight to the finish. Slowly the power of the demon began to wane, and
Bhima caught hold of him by neck and broke his spine to pieces. Bakasura fell
dead on the same field where he had heaped hundreds of human skulls. All the
followers of Baka ran helter skelter. Bhima called back all those and pacified
them with pleasing words. He also threatened all of them not to kill humans
from thereafter and all of them agreed.
Bhima
returned back to his place without any pomp or pageantry. Pandavas did not want
to reveal their identity to anybody. People flocked the place of Brahmin to
know the warrior who killed Bakasura. No clue came forth from the Brahmin and
all left the spot –each imagining in his own way.
Short Analysis of the story
This is
very simple story for narrating to children but when the story is read with the
discussions of the family members, we come across several insights in
understanding the society of Maha Bharata days. Every member of the family comes
forward to sacrifice his/ her life – each one invoking dharma (dharma of the head
of the family, the dharma of wife, dharma of daughter, and the dharma of taking
care of guest etc).
The society of the period was such that everyone in the society knew
the nuances of ethical values that normally regulated the society.
We observe that there were certainly no laws; and ethical values form the
bedrock for each decision. Everyone tries to justify his/her decision on
certain values. Father says that he cannot die leaving the members of the
family to their fate. His wife says the futility of her existence since she has
redeemed her duties as wife. Daughter says that she can do what the dauhitris
(daughter’s sons) would do in future. Kunti feels apathy and try to redeem what
they owe to the family members. The Brahmin invokes atithi dharma to take care
of guests and again says that even apad-dharma does not allow the sacrifice of
guest for preserving one’s own life.
The
arguments of wife are worth reading. She says that she has given birth to
children and her necessity is futile to the family. The
dharma of Hindu way of life never gave prominence for sensual pleasures and the
purpose of marriage is for progeny.
Here I quote a passage of Pujyasri
Chandrasekhara Saraswathi of Kanchi Pitham as follows:
“Marrige or vivāha is known as sahadharmacāriṇī saṃprayoga. It means (roughly) union with a wife together with whom a
man practices dharma. The clear implication is that carnal pleasure is not its
chief purpose, but the pursuit of dharma. The sastras do not ask a man to
pursue dharma all by himself but require him to take a helpmate for it. The
wife is called dharma-patni, sahadharmacāriṇī, thus underlining her connection with dharma, and not with kāma or
sensual pleasure. Here is proof of the high esteem in which the sastras hold
women” –
-Voice
of the Pujyasri Chandrasekhara Saraswathi, the Hindu Dharma, page 560 published
by Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan.
Manu
Smruthi says like this:
प्रजनार्थं स्त्रियः सृष्टाः सन्तानार्थं च मानवः ।
तस्मात् साधारणो धर्मः श्रुतौ पत्न्या सहोदितः ॥ मनुस्मृतिः 9-96-
prajanārthaṃ striyaḥ sṛṣṭāḥ santānārthaṃ ca mānavaḥ ।
tasmāt sādhāraṇo dharmaḥ śrutau patnyā sahoditaḥ
(Women are created for the purpose of childbearing, and men for the purpose
of procreation. Hence the Religious Rites have been ordained both for the man
and his wife). While commenting on this Medhatithi writes
that since religious rites cannot be done by man alone, he cannot abandon his
wife even if she is hostile. Thus, divorce was never
envisaged in ancient Hindu society.
In this
story, the arguments of the wife of the Brahmin resonates with the reasoning
embedded in sastras.
The story
highlights the vulnerability of woman in general in the absence of protective
mechanism which we witness even today, may not in the same degree. The woman
without husband has been compared to flesh fallen to the ground ready to be
picked up by so many men. The status of woman cannot be judged by this single
passage that they lacked security. There is argument in this same story that
woman is one who should not be killed, and even demons may not resort to
killing women. We come across lot of discussion in Ramayana before Tataka was
put to death by the arrows of Lord Rama (The story of Tataka will be discussed
when Ramayana stories are taken up for discussion). Similarly, wife is looked
upon as mother (नित्यं मातृ समां मम - nityaṃ mātṛ samāṃ mama) bestowing prestige to a devoted wife.
The story highlights the pre-eminence enjoyed by men in the matters
of marriage over women. While a man can marry many, the
wife’s choosing a man other than husband was frowned at and not permitted.
The other
important aspect of the story is the general tendency of the society to give less
importance to girl child. The daughter in the family says-
‘son is the very image of father and wife a friend and daughter an impediment’
to anyone. This general tendency is again not uniform and common since dharmic people with equanimous character do not distinguish a
girl from that of a boy. In this same story we come across the Brahmin’s
emphatic words that both the son and daughter were equal to him.
Can the
guest be sacrificed for the sake of preserving one’s own life? The answer is an
emphatic no. If the guest happened to be Brahmin and if he is sacrificed, it is
akin to sin associated with Brahma hatya. The Brahmin invokes dharma and says
that suicide (ātma hatya) is better than brahma hatya (killing
a Brahmin). In Maha Bharatat times varna system was in vogue and the
definition of Brahmin is the one who possesses intellect of vedas and who was
of satva character. Killing of such a person is Brahma
hatya.
One
important factor from the sociological perspective can be gleaned by a reference
that shudras listening to vedas is a taboo. To understand this passage in the
right perspective one should read the famous sloka of Gita which says:
चातुर्वर्ण्यं मया सृष्टं गुणकर्मविभागश:
(chātur-varṇyaṁ mayā sṛiṣhṭaṁ guṇa-karma-vibhāgaśhaḥ) - Gita
4.13
It means
that God created the four varnas based on the person’s qualities (satva, rajas,
and tamas) and nature of duties (reading of vedas, protecting people, business and
servant work) respectively. Thus, a sudra was one who
by quality is tamas and by nature of work is menial. Here the caste shudra is
not referred. By this definition, a servant of tamas nature was not required to
learn vedas.
But these
type of statements in our smritis are subjected to lot of criticism by western scholars
and a few Indian scholars interpreting shudras as ‘caste sudras’ as we define
in the current century. Prohibiting the hearing of
vedas to Varna sudras may not be wrong; but prohibiting learning of vedas to
caste sudras cannot be justified. Many traditional
scholars interpret the sudra from the perspective of varna since Gita from
which this definition is derived is part of Maha Bharata only.
Role of
citizens in choosing the king is also highlighted in the story. People should
not cling to weak and useless king. A strong king is to be preferred always.
The
story, thus, highlights many critical aspects of dharma and is useful to
understand the grand narrative of Hindu society.
Points to ponder
1.
Is marriage just for procreation
of children? Can this moral be sacrosanct for the current society? Can dharma
undergo change?
2.
Each decision in ancient society was
tested on the fulcrum of dharma and everyone tried to justify his/ her
viewpoint based on certain dharma. Have we imbibed the tradition now?
3.
How should we treat a guest? Can
we sacrifice the cause of the guest for protecting our own cause?
4.
What precautions the citizens
should take in selecting a king?
Footnotes
[ii] सहधर्मचरीं दान्तां नित्यं मातृ समां मम |
सखायं विहितां देवै: नित्यं परमिकां गतिम् - Adi Parva 156-31
sahadharmacarīṃ dāntāṃ nityaṃ mātṛ samāṃ mama |
सखायं विहितां देवै: नित्यं परमिकां गतिम् - Adi Parva 156-31
sahadharmacarīṃ dāntāṃ nityaṃ mātṛ samāṃ mama |
sakhāyaṃ vihitāṃ devai: nityaṃ paramikāṃ gatim – Adi Parva
156.31
[iii] Kanyādāna – The gift of daughter to the bride-groom by the bride’s father
in her marriage. In Hindu tradition, this ritual is performed with great
sanctity amidst the chanting of vedic verses.
कन्यायां केचिदपरे
मम तुल्या उभौ स्मृतौ
|| Adi
Parva 156.37
manyante
kecidadhikaṃ snehaṃ putre piturnarāḥ |
kanyāyāṃ
kecidapare mama tulyā ubhau smṛtau ||
अनर्हा: प्रार्थयिष्यन्ति शूद्रा वेद श्रुतिं यथा ||
Adi
Parva-157.16
imāmapi cate bālāṃ anāthāṃ paribhūya mām |
anarhā: prārthayiṣyanti śūdrā veda śrutiṃ
yathā ||
धर्मज्ञान् राक्षसानाहु: न हन्यात्
स च मानुषि || Adi Parva-157.31
āvadhyāṃ striyamityāhu:
dharmajñā dharma niścaye |
dharmajñān rākṣasānāhu: na hanyāt sa ca mānuṣi ||
[vii] punnāma naraka –
a hell postulated in Hindu thought. This hell can be crossed by each person, if
he has a son.
[viii] Adi Parva
159.12
[ix] Brahma hatya – killing of a Brahmin
[x] ātma hatya – killing of own self or suicide.
[xi] Adi Parva
161.6
