I believe that mythology is the sub-conscious of a culture. Having said that, I'd like to focus on a particular fantasy which, I think, we as Hindus have. Why is polygamy not uncommon among our gods? Be it Siva, or Vishnu, or Krishna, or Vinayaka, or Karthikeya, or Surya, or Chandra, and many other insignificant gods. This pattern is also seen in most of the prominent male characters of the Mahabharata. We have many of our heroes in a polygamous relationship because, we (males) have a desire of being in one. However, this is hardly seen anywhere in the female characters (except Draupadi).
Interestingly, all the female characters, except Panchaali, seem to be contended with just one. Is it really! Let's go through this in detail, shall we? The polyandrous situation in which Draupadi was in, was not a normal one in the existing culture also. Polygamy was allowed because it served a purpose and polyandry was discouraged because it posed a danger to society. Ancient India was characterized by frequent wars. Men were regularly killed in battle, and hence the women outnumbered men. Polygamy was hence essential because it provided safety for the extra number of women, whereas polyandry would only make the situation worse. Most of the cultures in India at that time were patrilineal and it was essential to know who the child's father was for the continuation of the family. This would be possible in polygamy, unlike polyandry. It is basically to ensure the link between the father and the child.
And hence, the idea of woman having multiple partners has been sub-consciously being eliminated from their minds whereas the 'fetish' of a man having more than one (female) partner remained. Subsequently, this is reflected in our mythological characters. This is ironical, considering women being capable of enjoying multiple orgasms and we (men) incapable of that. Going by that, polyandry should also come into existence along with polygamy (since, there are no more wars that kill only men). Now, that's up to the contemporary 'feminists' to decide whether they want equal grounds in this aspect.
[Note: Draupadi was not exactly in an polyandrous situation. All her husbands except Yudhistir are married to other women (Arjuna having the record of maintaining most number of wives at the same time - according to my knowledge, 7). So, the situation in the palace of Indraprastha would have been like a celestial orgy.]
Coming back to my point, my concern is whether I'm on the right lines with respect to this sub-conscious (or unconscious?) fetish of ours? I'm not sure of this. All this is a result of a few observations I've made and some application of my reasoning. Google and Wikipedia failed to give me any sort of clues on this subject. Any comments or flaws or pointers on this is highly entertained.
Interestingly, all the female characters, except Panchaali, seem to be contended with just one. Is it really! Let's go through this in detail, shall we? The polyandrous situation in which Draupadi was in, was not a normal one in the existing culture also. Polygamy was allowed because it served a purpose and polyandry was discouraged because it posed a danger to society. Ancient India was characterized by frequent wars. Men were regularly killed in battle, and hence the women outnumbered men. Polygamy was hence essential because it provided safety for the extra number of women, whereas polyandry would only make the situation worse. Most of the cultures in India at that time were patrilineal and it was essential to know who the child's father was for the continuation of the family. This would be possible in polygamy, unlike polyandry. It is basically to ensure the link between the father and the child.
And hence, the idea of woman having multiple partners has been sub-consciously being eliminated from their minds whereas the 'fetish' of a man having more than one (female) partner remained. Subsequently, this is reflected in our mythological characters. This is ironical, considering women being capable of enjoying multiple orgasms and we (men) incapable of that. Going by that, polyandry should also come into existence along with polygamy (since, there are no more wars that kill only men). Now, that's up to the contemporary 'feminists' to decide whether they want equal grounds in this aspect.
[Note: Draupadi was not exactly in an polyandrous situation. All her husbands except Yudhistir are married to other women (Arjuna having the record of maintaining most number of wives at the same time - according to my knowledge, 7). So, the situation in the palace of Indraprastha would have been like a celestial orgy.]
No comments:
Post a Comment