In my eagerness to move past Book 12, I almost missed one of
the most important dialogues in this book (section 321). Some would say it is one of the most
important discussions in the entire Maha Bharata.
This is a remarkable dialogue between Sulabha an unmarried,
female ascetic and Janaka (not the same as the Janaka of Ramayana), a
philosopher-king and a ruler-saint who had broken all attachments and still
performing his duties. Janaka was a male, a king (therefore must
be a kshatriya) and a husband. He is considered to have attained liberation by
pursuing Vedic teachings such as controlling the senses and desires and
pursuing ultimate philosophical truth. Sulabha, on the other hand was a female,
leading an ascetic life, defying all conventions by not marrying and thus not
under “the guidance and protection” of a male. She was also pursuing
philosophical truth although she was a kshatriya (not a brahmin).
It is amazing that very few commentators elaborate on this
conversation. Some even pass her off as “a maverick and nothing more” although
Sulabha is one of the very few women philosophers mentioned and documented in the Vedic literature. Amazingly the only
elaborate analysis of this dialogue is by an American academic scholar from the
University of Montana. (May be, because of the influence of Dr. Diana Eck and
Dr. Wendy Doniger. Both of them had lived in India and are great scholars in
Sanskrit and Indian philosophy)*
As the story goes, Sulabha was an ascetic mendicant
practicing yoga and was wandering all over the earth. She heard about the
philosopher King Janaka, well versed in the Vedas and scriptures devoted to
moksha and was practicing the religion of renunciation. This suggests that
Sulabha represents the school of Patanjali Yoga and Janaka represents Samkhya
yoga. She wanted to personally meet with Janaka. Using her yogic powers she
took the “form” of a beautiful maiden AND of a mendicant and arrived at the
presence of the king. The king was in his court with his ministers and several
scholars, all obviously males.
The king was puzzled to see this young beautiful lady as a
mendicant. So, he asked her: “Who are you? Who do you belong to? Where did you
come from?” She said that she wanted to know why he was following the nivritti doctrine of moksha
(emancipation). She doubted that he had indeed attained the state of
emancipation he professed. Therefore, by her yogic powers, Sulabha entered the
mind of Janaka. That hurt the pride of the monarch and he in turn entered the
mind of Sulabha.
Now, something symbolic happens. Janaka loses his royal
umbrella and the scepter and Sulabha loses her triple staff of a mendicant. The
conversation starts taking place in the “gross” (stula) plane and not
the mental plane, in the presence of the court where everyone can hear the
conversation. This is an important point as you will see later.
Janaka asks: “Who are you? What is the nature of your
business? Where did you come from? Where will you go after this visit?”. The
implications, according to some scholars, are that the king doubts the sincerity of Sulabha. He thinks that a woman
cannot be an ascetic and a mendicant and that she belongs to some man (as a
virtuous woman has to, according to Manu dharma). He suspects that she is a spy
from another king as he reveals it himself later in the discussion.
Janaka goes on to say (boast?) that he is free from all
vanity as can be seen by his not having a scepter and umbrella. He says that he
can reveal the secrets of moksha dharma to her like no one else can. He had
learn it from Panchashika of the Parasara lineage. He says that Panchsika
taught him the Samkhya system and several ways of attaining moksha without
giving up his kingdom. Instead he was taught to be free of all attachments and
to fix his atman on the supreme Brahman and not be moved by any other.
Janaka continues and says that renunciation is the highest
means for moksha and that renunciation has to come from knowledge. Knowledge
leads to effort and through effort one reaches a knowledge of the supreme
self. This in turn leads to a state that
is beyond joy and sorrow. Nay, one transcends death itself. “I have acquired
knowledge of self and transcend all pair of opposites. I have no attachment to
objects of senses. I do not experience love for my wife; nor do I feel hatred
towards an enemy. A lump of clay and bag of gold are same to me. Although I am
ruling a kingdom I am free from attachment of any kind. Therefore, I am more
distinguished than an ascetic”.
He then almost justifies his status by saying that the
external marks do not indicate who is a truly liberated soul. One can carry an
umbrella and scepter and be still a liberated soul, whereas someone carrying
the three sticks of a mendicant be too attached to worldly desires. The insinuation
is clear.He then starts accusing Sulabha of unworthy behavior.
Janaka says: “O rishika, I do like you. But your behavior
does not match the life of an ascetic you have taken upon yourself. You are
young and beautiful; yet you follow the niyama (control of senses). I
doubt you can. (We can see the chauvinism in this remark. Women are not
supposed to be capable of control of senses and therefore are loose!) Using
your yogic power, you have “entered” me to ascertain for yourself whether I am
truly emancipated. By doing so you have
shown a desire and therefore you are not fit to carry the triple stick of an
ascetic. Besides how can you a brahmin woman enter a kshatriya? You have
committed a sin of mixture of varnas.
(An assumption on the part of the king) I am a householder and you are an
ascetic. That is another vile thing you have done. Besides we do not know each
other’s gotra. Therefore, by entering my body you have produced another evil.
If your husband is alive, you have added one more evil. Are you doing all this
out of ignorance or out of perverted intelligence? Or, are you spying for a
rival king?”
He adds even more: “You have shown your wickedness by trying
to show your superiority over me with the use of your yogic powers. By
asserting victory over me you are also trying to show you are superior to all
those wise men in my court. Do not continue to touch me. Know that I am
righteous. Now, tell me why you are here and what your motives are.”. There is
one set of statements here which is intriguing. “The power of king is in their
sovereignty. The power of Brahmins is in their knowledge of the Vedas. The
power of women is in their beauty and youth”.
Now it is time for Sulabha to respond. Boy, did she respond!
You will see.
1 comment:
What an interesting dialogue, waiting eagerly for Sulabha's repartee!
Post a Comment