Sunteți pe pagina 1din 5

The Bhishma Pitaamaha Syndrome: Gerontocracys Metaphor in India A Srinivas Rao 13th June 2013

Few would have suppressed their smiles at the unseemly drama when LK Advani blogged about the slights that Bhishma Pitaamaha suffered apart from the entire bed of arrows he was lain on by Arjuna. While Mr Advani enjoyed the embalmed self description and the episode does invite some deeper understanding of the Indian reluctance to part with power and the gerontocracys justification for perpetuation of its rule. (It is not that the Congress party exactly covers itself with glory, with its first family and their inheritance of the Party chair and the sycophancy it entails; but thats a different story. Besides the BJPs genuflection while not at 10 Janpath is certainly at the RSS Sarsanghchalak at Nagpur). I shall examine in this article the Bhishma Ptitaamahas life critically, drawing entirely from the brilliant analysis of the noted sociologist Iravati Karve in her compelling portrait Yugant. The reason I also wish to direct attention to this note is the enormous leadership blockages in Indian institutional infrastructure that is really headed by an inept gerontocracy filled with retired judges, bureaucrats, of all hues and to occupy positions of authority in exchange for political favors that mirrors the Jajamani patronage system. Having been also personally witness to my own octogenarian dean at SP Jain Institute as his subordinate or minion and his steadfast refusal to step down and enable a smooth succession, I thought this article was ringing in my mind at many levels.

While we might examine the enduring metaphors of the epic Mahabharata we must not be dismissive of it as just a myth but as a guide to generations of Indians who have used the two great epics as a meta- language that unites the disparate Hindu mind. However I would hasten to add that Indian history is rife with instances of succession conflicts. It would sound unseemly that Indian recorded history of rulers commences with an oedipal conflict, a king who was an enemy to his own family (ajatashatru), having imprisoned his own father on suspicion that he might not allow for a smooth succession. That king was Ajatashatru (492-460 BCE). Legend states that his mother felt like eating the flesh of her husband, king Bimbisara when she was pregnant, foretelling his doom; and despite abandoning the baby in the dump, was picked up by his father and nursed (his sore finger that gave him his nickname Kunika) and raised as his own . When Kunika was insecure about the succession to his fathers throne, he usurps the same and is cursed by his mother Kosala devi to be called Ajatashatru. Ajatashatru imprisoned his father Bimbisara and is also reputed to have tortured his father in prison by starvation, (not even permitting his mother to smear honey over her body to feed the king) and by cutting his fathers soles and filling them with salt. In a mirrored irony Ajatashatru was killed by his own son Udayabhadra to claim his throne. It is unclear in Buddhist texts whether Bimbisara was reluctant to part with his throne until very late.

While the Ajatashatru episode is an extreme and violent example of succession turning sour, it has been the leitmotif of Indian power struggles. Other masked under the garb of conservatism and respect to ones elders and tradition, the Indian mind has always resisted the institutionalization of the process of succession. Why is it that our octogenarian politicians and institutional heads invoke the Bhishma example? Few realize that it is not an unsullied example. We shall examine Bhishmas life to see what it holds and what his complex motivations were.

Bhishma stands as the solitary lone suffering and tragic figure in the entire Mahabharata and looms large long after his prolonged departure. We overlook the fact that the tragedy of all the dramatis personae in the epic are foreshadowed in Bhishma. If we were to discard the mythical origins of Bhishma as one of the eight Vasus that Ganga drowns with Shantanu helpless about it; we find that he was a smart lad of sixteen when she returns him as crown prince Devavrata to his father. Shantanu infatuated by a fisherwoman Satyavati was persuaded into marriage by Devavrata after he swore to remain celibate and renounce his claim to the throne. This earned Devavrata the title Bhishma and blessed with volitional death. His entire life was one of futile self sacrifice as he took it upon himself to ensure the perpetuation of the Kuru race into eternity. Indeed he was the second in the race of the Kurus to hold his fathers sexual desires above his own, after Purus similar renunciation to Yayati. Shantanu dies leaving behind two sons the eldest of who dies soon after, leaving little Vichitravirya for the throne. Bhishma is the regent who oversees the kingdom, a task he does for almost 40 years. At his mothers behest he when asked to find brides for the young Vichitravirya, abducts the three daughters of the King of Kashi (not an entirely chivalrous act even for those times). Of the three Amba declares her love for the

King of Shalva and is sent to him who refuses this gratuitous gift leaving a distraught Amba to return to Bhishma and asking him to marry her. Amba is spurned because of Bhishmas vow and commits suicide, not before cursing him. Vichitravirya soon dies without leaving an heir to the Kuru dynasty. With Bhishmas vow becoming a millstone for the dynasty, Satyavati and Bhishma decide to invite Vyasa (his brother in law) to beget children on Vichitraviryas wives. The two women were so appalled by the dark and unkempt Vyasa that one swooned and the other shut her eyes and conceived Dhritarashtra who was blind and an albino child Pandu. The next time Vyasa visited the womens quarters the queens substituted a maid who begat Vidura.

Bhishma continued to rule as regent until Dhritarashtra and Pandu come of age and the task of bride hunting again falls on Bhishmas shoulders. He gets the princess Gandhari who blindfolds herself when she marries Dhritarashtra and the stout Kunti and the lovely Madri as wives of Pandu. Pandu goes on a campaign to expand territory and holds a dark secret that he is impotent. Pandu agrees to niyoga a practice prevalent in those times, to beget children with his wives through men of their own caste; begetting the five Pandavas. Pandu soon dies and Madri burns herself on his funeral pyre leaving Kunti widowed. I n a peculiar way Bhishma had done much injustice to all the women in his life, his mother and two generations of brides who would have secretly cursed his apathy to their plight. Mercifully no one asked him to get brides neither for Duryodhana nor for the Pandavas. However he did little to stop the public disrobing of Draupadi, the Pandava polyandrous wife, choosing instead to dwell upon a debate on what was right and wrong (while Vidura was the only one who even tried). It was only Shishupala who roundly tells the truth to Bhishmas face at a sacrifice where the Pandavas decided to honor Krishna. When Shishupala told the Pandavas that it was only appropriate that the eldest in ones own family receive such honour rather than some one outside, even Krishna had no answer to that poser. When Bhishma deferred it to Krishna as an accommodation, Shishupala railed that Bhishma was a blot on all Kshatriyas, that he was not a celibate but impotent and had delusions of wisdom (prajamanin), he denounced the injustice done to the daughters of Kashi, and the arrangement (niyoga) that he made for the wives of Vichitravirya with the Brahmin Vyasa rather than choose a Kshatriya from the kingdom. This was an interesting accusation since it meant that rather than having the power slip out of Bhishmas hands as the regent he chose to have a Brahmin who would never contest the throne.

Bhishmas claims to be a great warrior were suspect. The only two instances outside the great war of his prowess was the abduction of the princesses of Kashi which was not much of a struggle and that of a cattle raiding party at the little kingdom of Virata, that too when he was an old man! That hardly makes him stand out as an exemplar of Kshatriya dharma (the gloss on how he fought Parashuram was a later interpolation by the Bhrigu clan). By the time of the Mahabharata war Bhishma was almost 90 years old. The calculation is that Bhishma would have been 16 when he saw his father being married, then with Vichitraviryas marriage would have been another 18 years, with his death, birth of Dhiritarashtra and Pandu and Pandus ascension to the throne another 18 years , Given Arjunas order of birth after Dharma and Bhima, and another 18 years at least for Arjuna to marry Draupadi at a swayamvara Bhishma would have been at

least 71, The burning of Khandwaprastha, building the Mayasabha, and the dice game (at least 4 years) and a 12 year exile, Bhishma is already over 85 now given that Abhimanyu was born towards the end of the exile and that he would have been at least 16 when he marries, Bhishma was well into his nineties. Even if the exile were discounted to just twelve months instead of twelve years, Bhishma was a 90 year old nonagenarian who would ironically be the generalissimo for the entire Kaurava army.

This was gerontocracy at its unabashed best. When he had renounced the throne and did not have children of his own why did he go to such great lengths to steer the children of three generations (with the fourth already at his knees) around the corridors of power. Was that his dharma or was it an elaborate ruse to continue surrogate power despite his tremendous sacrifice. Were his sacrifices a mask to cover his unwillingness to part with power? ; An ultimate weapon to silence the generations than retire unto the wilderness. At the commencement of the war when this nonagenarian was preparing for battle, Vyasa comes and requests his mother Satyavati to take the daughters in law and retire to the forest as he foresaw great destruction. Satyavati and the womenfolk followed which would have also been opportune for the 90 year old to go. But Bhishma prevails and awaits the generalship to be conferred upon him by a very reluctant Duryodhana as the eldest of the Kurus. What was a formal request by Duryodhana was seized by Bhishma and he wasted 10 out of the 18 days war with no major victories. Bhishma abuses Karna on his low birth who in turn swore not to enter the battle till the generalissimo was lain low. How could Arjuna who once sat on Bhishmas knee as a child and called him father and was lovingly corrected as grandfather be shot at? This question perplexed both the Pandavas and the Kauravas. On the third day of the Great War the Kaurava army is in disarray and Duryodhana censures Bhishma for the conduct of the war. On the fourth day Duryodhana again berates Bhishma for slackness who in turn gives his usual excuse that Arjuna was invincible. On the seventh day again he is questioned for his conduct of the war. On the night of the eighth day of battle an emergency council is called in the Kaurava camp to discuss the mounting losses including Shakuni and Bhishma is given an ultimatum at Karnas behest perform or step aside. On the ninth day Krishna is exasperated with Arjunas great reluctance to kill his grandfather and leaps out of the chariot, whip in hand heading to Bhishma with Arjuna dragging him back. This time Dharma (Yudhishtira) assails Shikhandi (twin to Drishtadymna) why he had not killed Bhishma (Bhishma had sworn not to kill a woman or a transgender). Bringing Shikhandi was a ruse to cover Arjunas deference which finally worked as already 10 days were lost with the ageing patriarch refusing to cede his power. Finally sense prevails on Arjuna who lays him down in a shower of arrows that seemed to cushion the ageing patriarchs great fall. Some would quibble that he did not stop there, for he continued to speak and utter his great banalities not on a blog but in his lengthy discourse on statecraft to Yudhishtira forming the whole section called the Shantiparva also giving devout Hindus the thousand names of Vishnu (recited by many, including myself). After his great fall the battle quickened and by means fair and foul (saama, dama, danda bheda as my ex-boss used to recite) the great dynasty meets a bloody end and the Pandavas a Pyrrhic victory.

A great and long life lived in self sacrifice often did not heed the sensitivities of those around himself. The sacrifice turned out to be an inflexible position even when it threatened to extinguish the very things Bhishma dedicated his life unto. This rendered him ruthless to his own kin and intransigent to the extent of imposing a heavy cost upon his family. This tragic figure exemplified a life in futility even when it was principled and often hinted to being plain ineffective and irrelevant to his succeeding generations. Such is the weak metaphor that Indian gerontocracy whether in politics, bureaucracy or institutions invokes, with the irony lost upon them. Hosting the largest youth population in India few if any of our institutions address this profound age divide and the elderly yield not.

S-ar putea să vă placă și