Concerning the Paradigm of Gender and Sexuality in the Mahabharata https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13684236

Concerning the Paradigm of Gender and Sexuality in the
Mahabharata

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13684236

Author(s): Bhim Nath Regmi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13684236

PDF: Download Full Text

Volume 15 | Issue 4 | August 2024

Pages: 230-242

The Criterion: An International Journal in English Vol. 15, Issue-IV, August 2024 ISSN: 0976-8165
www.the-criterion.com
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10448030
Concerning the Paradigm of Gender and Sexuality in the Mahabharata
Bhim Nath Regmi
Associate Professor in English,
Padmakanya Multiple Campus,
Tribhuvan University.
Article History: Submitted-05/08/2024, Revised-17/08/2024, Accepted-20/08/2024, Published-31/08/2024.
Abstract:
From the Paleolithic era to modern times, the paradigms of gender have always been a
significant deliberation in human history. The Mahabharata, an ancient Sanskrit epic, is still a
substantial source for understanding the political, social, cultural, and gender interactions of
eastern society. For this purpose, this paper concentrates on how the epic has been characterized
by a string of binary oppositions that limit the social structure to the heteronormative ideal of
having a clear understanding of what it means to be a man or a woman, as well as their shared
social behaviors and fixed identities. To address these complex difficulties, more purposeful
interventions are needed. Queerness, as an old notion of heterosexual society, is necessary to
address the problems. This primary concern links with the interpretation of how the epic represents
queerness and what it tells us about the discourse about gender and sexuality. In order to examine
normative and non-normative gender relations, Butler’s concepts of gender difficulty, gender
performative acts, and gender constitution might be useful. The paper thematically distinguishes
between the subjectivity and the objectification of the characters, who exhibit a variety of queer
traits that are now seen as static, inflexible, consistent, and only seen in terms of binary categories.
Finally, it observes that the contemporary concept of sexuality shows a paradigm shift in attitudes
toward gender behavior.
Keywords: Binary, gender, heterosexual, Mahabharata, performative, queer, sexuality.
230
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13684236

Concerning the Paradigm of Gender and Sexuality in the Mahabharata
www.the-criterion.com
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10448030
Introduction
The Vedas include a record of human civilization in human history. They are the oldest
literary monuments composed in Sanskrit, and are the foundational writings of Hindu philosophy.
The Mahabharata, an epic, is about the dynastic and successional struggle between the Pandavas
and the Kauravas in Kurukshetra. It is a stunning yet intricate web of intertwined events, and
characters are associated with the overarching anecdote of the conflict. It holds substantial
significance for Hindus and it is crucial for its political, social, cultural, and gender relationships.
The epic, a patriarchal world view, focuses on normative gender relation as well as non-normative
rules. Benedict Anderson’s model of imagined communities analyzes the concept of nationalism,
and the characters in the epic are the members of a socio-cultural construct imagined by the
political power of the then society, which has perceived the people as a part of a different group.
Avishek Ray envisions, “… the “Indians” as “imagined community”; and was guided by a
historicist impression that the nation’s past is embodied in its literary repertoire” (2). The
relationship between gender and sexuality, and politics and culture is clear since a substantial
number of religious beliefs place an emphasis on moral, ethical, and even sexual behavior and
etiquette.
Human conviction is a mechanism used to manage sexuality and compel people to engage
in sexual conduct under social norms within predetermined bounds. The epic, a collection of plural
anecdotes, is about betrayal, rage, and revenge and moves around the heroism and valor of the
characters. Draupadi, a non-normative and unforgettable heroine, has high strength, spirit, and
virtues, yet is frequently oppressed by Kauravas. Draupadi. Devdutt Pattanaik remarks, “[Karna]
you have been with five husbands. That makes you a whore, public property, to be treated as your
master’s will” (146). The characters undergo various forms of sexual transformation and gender
metamorphosis, challenging the strict heteronormativity binary and demonstrating the capacity to
switch between various sexualities and genders. The depiction of multiple aspects of life represents
miscellaneous relationships and the standing of women in society. Religion bears a significant
system of ethical values connecting every human being to a broader association with the existing
world. It offers a sense of tenacity of action, meaning, and cultural direction to human activity,
leading to peace, justice, and dignity. However, such activities contribute to the violation of
rational norms over and after a long period of time. The epic has expressed the individuality and
231

The Criterion: An International Journal in English Vol. 15, Issue-IV, August 2024 ISSN: 0976-8165

www.the-criterion.com
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10448030
attractiveness of women in a deeper way, and Stephen Ellingson remarks that in many religions,
“sexual unions between male and female deities extend a theme that constructs certain sexual
relationships as normative and thus repetitive of the original moment of creation, and others as
transgressive and potentially threatening to the cosmological order” (3). Similarly, motherhood in
Sanskrit literature has always taken a consecrated place in a woman’s life. Women’s roles as
mothers and wives seem patriarchal, ironically exalted, and coexist with their poor social standing,
as Wendy Doniger and Brian Smith state in The Laws of Manu, “of the seed and the womb, the
seed is superior” (10). Gender and socio-political systems transform the anatomy into complex
social and sexual relations. It links to cultural relationships beyond the individual periphery,
including families, groups, and societies.
We observe that while being tough and competent in their own right, the female characters
always end up being limited to gender roles. Their capacity for selflessness or nurturing is
frequently a sign of their strength. Although these traits are undoubtedly admirable, they do not
seem to contribute much to these women’s potential realizations in the absence of free autonomy.
It employs the queer feminist theory—the concept of social and cultural phenomena—as a critical
practice to read the depictions of sexualities in relation to heteronormativity, which accepts sex,
gender, and sexuality as social constructs. Judith Butler remarks, “Gender is an identity tenuously
made up in time and is instituted through a stylized repetition of acts” (519). Her idea of gender
performativity is not a fixed identity; as Lois Tyson observes, “For queer theory, our sexuality is
constructed” (336). Therefore, the idea of queer sexuality, which challenges the inflexible binaries
of male and female within the discourse of the epic, is the queer manifestation of Tritiya
Prakriti (Nature).
Sexuality has connections with human relationships as natural or unnatural, and existing
ideology, ritual, human activities, and power relations interpret it as licit and illicit. Butler outlines
that gender and sexual binaries are socio-cultural constructs, not natural, that are perceived by
human societies. The characters who deviate from the script rigidly uphold heteronormativity and
violate these socially prescribed standards are labeled as other, non-normative, queer, or someone
who is unfit for society. Thus, queer theory is a critical observation that accepts plurality in terms
of gender and sexuality. In line with Butler’s outline, Susan Mann states, “Gender and sexuality
are composed of acts of striving to achieve a seemingly natural and universal idea that has never
232

Concerning the Paradigm of Gender and Sexuality in the Mahabharata
www.the-criterion.com
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10448030
actually existed in the pure form to which we aspire” (242). In order to link the idea of queer
theory, it focuses on the issues of abducting the Kashi princesses Amba, Ambalika, and Ambika
for marriage to Vichitravirya, the birth of the Pandava brothers, Draupadi’s marriage to five
brothers, and the being of Brihannala and Shikhandi.
The epic relates to polyandry, premarital sex and motherhood, femininity, homoeroticism
and homosexuality, transsexuality, gender ambiguity and fluidity, sexual transformation, and
gender metamorphosis within the text. Simone de Beauvoir claims, “one is not born, but, rather,
becomes a woman” (172), and Butler reinterprets this guideline of establishing the ideas from the
phenomenological convention. In this sense, gender is not a fixed and a stable identity, and it is
established through the practice of acts and creates the illusion of self. Butler claims, “This
formation moves the conception of gender off the ground of a substantial model of identity to one
that requires a conception of a constituted social temporality” (519-20). The cyclical nature of
gender emphasizes how it is a product of socio-political reality and becomes part of culture. The
stylized repetitions of deeds actually create the appearance of a real or natural-gender self. “If the
ground of gender identity is the stylized repetition of acts through time and not a seemingly
seamless identity, then the possibilities of gender transformation are to be found in the possibility
of a different sort of repeating, in the breaking of subversive repetition of that style” (Butler, 520).
As a result, the Mahabharata has explored different gender categories, such as traditional and
nontraditional ones, transsexuality, and demon-human relationships, within the narratives of the
epic. Gender and sexuality in the epic have played a fundamental role in shaping society and
creating new social values in order to run society, which establishes the meaning and stimulates
cosmogenic myths and the human world.
Marriage in the Mahabharata
The epic Mahabharata confronts the heteronormativity that is currently present to
recognize the prevailing social hegemonies and hierarchies of that time. The plural anecdotes of
fluid sexualities, gender, and sexual and sexual transitions are in the epic. The scholars have
examined queer sexualities, which do not have a connection between the religious discourse on
queer sexualities and practices and modern queer discourse and practice. Pattanaik observes,
“Within the Mahabharata, there are stories of men who become women and women who become
233

The Criterion: An International Journal in English Vol. 15, Issue-IV, August 2024 ISSN: 0976-8165

www.the-criterion.com
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10448030
men, of men who create children without women and women who create children without men,
and of creatures who are neither this nor that, but a bit of both” (12). In Anusasana Parva, the
thirteenth book of the epic, Bhisma’s treatise to Yudhishthira on the position of women in a family
reflects the ideas, “the lineage is destroyed if the daughters and daughter-in-laws are upset due to
the ill treatment of their family, and daughters should be regarded the same as the son” (Vyasa,
5046). It reminds us that in ancient society, women’s position was ‘high’ and equal to that of men.
Unlike this, the grand self-choice ceremonies organized for the marriage of Kashi and Panchala
princess had undeclared restrictions, which is a tacit example of restricted freedom. As Bhisma
captured Amba, Ambika, and Ambalika to marry Vichitravirya, the prince of Hastinapur, the first
daughter of Kashi King Amba told Bhisma that she had promised to marry the king of Salya in the
ceremony, but he rebuffed to accept her on certain terms, as Bhisma made her the controlled goods.
Ramesh Menon writes, “Salva said coldly, “Go back to Bhisma. Perhaps he will break his oath for
you. Beg him and see if he will marry you” (33). The vulnerable lady stood in front of Bhisma and
uttered, “I cannot go back to my father’s house. I have nowhere to turn except to you”. He states,
“My oath is not for myself. My dharma is far beyond my own selfishness and more important than
your life” (34). During the self-choice ceremony of three princesses, Bhisma stated, “Sages have
said that that wife is dearly to be prized who is taken away by force, after the slaughter of
opponents, from amidst the concourse of princes and kings invited to a self-choice ceremony”
(Sambhava Parva, 219). Religion as a tool of power shapes human fate, sexual identity, and gender
selves. The assumption of reproductive ideology accepts sexuality and human behavior in terms
of anatomy and gender relations.
The polarized social life in terms of power relations into male and female, or husband and
wife, fertile and barren, represents human culture. Sharada Bhanu (1997) views that as
Vichitravirya was in a manhood period, Bhisma marries him to Ambika and Ambalika. The ill-
fated husband faces a crisis to secure the position of Hastinapur, and Satyavati spoke to Bhisma to
execute her advice to beget sons, mothering Ambika and Ambalika. Krishna Dharma (2015) notes
Bhisma denied in enragement, as he was committed for his celibacy, “Mother, please do not ask
me to stray from the path of truth. I can never be as you suggest” (7). Dhritarashtra, Pandu, and
Vidura were born through Niyoga between the Sage Vyasa and Ambika, Ambalika, and
Parishrami, respectively. Bhisma assumed marriage was the only significant matter to secure the
234

Concerning the Paradigm of Gender and Sexuality in the Mahabharata
www.the-criterion.com
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10448030
position of the Kuru dynasty. In addition, Gandhari was not in favor of marriage with Dhritarashtra,
and after marriage, she blindfolded her eyes to respect the blindness of her husband. She fulfilled
a woman’s tradition to protect her husband’s body and health, which was itself a sacrifice for his
happiness. Kayanov interprets, “silent but a strong protest in opposition to the power games and
the forced marriage” (532). The protagonist, Gandhari is forced to accept that Dhritarashtra reflects
the patriarchal norms of her father. Nrisinghaprasad Bhaduri criticizes, “The youth league girl is
never confirmed about her future husband’s blindness and even she is not asked about her objection
to this wedding” (169). Her stereotypical relationship with her husband stems from her father’s
attitude, which symbolizes her submissiveness to patriarchal power. “Gandhari was a faithful and
the most devoted wife confronting the patriarchal mindset of the people” (Kalyanov 532). It
suggests her devotion to regulate the system in unconditional and obedient.
Kunti’s relationship with male authority before and after her marriage is complex. Her
husband Pandu’s incapability of being together with his wives Kunti and Madri indicates his
disability in childbearing. Pattanaik claims, “Kunti consoled her husband. There was a time when
women were free to go to any man they pleased. This alarmed the sage Shvetaketu who saw his
father, Uddalaka, unfazed by his mother’s association with other sages” (47). Kunti uses a boon,
which she got from Sage Durvasa, to obtain sons, and he further writes, “[Shvetaketu introduced]
if their husbands were unable to give their children, they could go to men chosen by their
husbands” (47). It suggests that Kunti got a mantra (religious discourse) by making Sage Dhurvasa
happy, and Kunti and Madri had five sons. Krishna Dharma writes, “Pandu was overwhelmed with
happiness at seeing his sons’ extraordinary strength, beauty, energy, and wisdom” (24), which
necessarily addresses the socio-political problems of that society. Erik Zuercher stated, “The
paramount role of filial piety, the subordination of the individual to the interests of the family, and
the importance of marriage as a means to ensure the continuation of the paternal lineage are
axiomatic…” (281), which constructs certain sexual relationships as normative gender roles.
Another prominent self-choice ceremony of Panchala daughter Draupadi, the self-choice,
was granted not to Draupadi but to the king Drupad. The first archer, Karna, an illegitimate child
of Kunti, was rejected by her by being charged with being of an inferior caste, as reared by Suta
caste Vasusena, husband of Radha, who had proved his ability. The narrative of Draupadi’s action
of spurning Karna to accept Karna as husband marked the power of the king himself, not the
235

The Criterion: An International Journal in English Vol. 15, Issue-IV, August 2024 ISSN: 0976-8165

www.the-criterion.com
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10448030
daughter. Bhim Nath Regmi states, “The triumph over Drupadi as their common wife in one way
for Pandavas is a sign of great victory, and in the next, her saying to Karna is a component of
cultural rejection that humiliates him publicly” (148). Disappointed Karna concluded to stand on
the opposing side of Pandavas, and Arjuna possessed great archery skill to sting the bow, and she
became his wife and married five brothers as family duty. Motswapong points out, “Draupadi…
presented herself not only as an unsung heroine in the Hindu epic Mahabharata but also as a
paragon of gender and resistance in the wake of the injustices meted out to her” (477). The
narrative about Draupadi emphasizes the mistreatment of women, particularly within the family.
In heterosexual society, the marriage bond between Draupadi and Arjuna is a heteronormative
ideal view, with a clear understanding of what it means to be a man or a woman. The shared
behavior as Draupadi becomes the part of five husbands is non-normative and goes beyond the
fixed identities of society. To address these complex difficulties, more purposeful interventions
are needed.
The abduction of Kashi princes and the non-denial right of accepting the husband-to-be to
Draupadi demonstrate the patriarchal power and force to dominate a different sex and confirm
making a submissive wife in the epic. Kate Millett, in her observation in Sexual Politics, reflects,
“Patriarchal society relies heavily on ‘force’ in order to establish male dominance” (23). However,
the epic ensures the sexual freedom of the women, leading to the conclusion that having
polygamous husbands or sexual partners outside marriage and within marriage is a family duty.
The Mahabharata remarks, “Any connection between a man and a woman without lust or during
the menstrual season is not wrong or forbidden” (Adivansavatarana Parva, 130). In the
Mahabharata, both Satyavati and Kunti fulfilled the desires of Sage Parasara and the Sun,
respectively, before marriage, and even after that, their virginity was an integral part of the body—
as a part of ‘male-ego’ to satisfy the manhood, and power is flexible in the epic. Beauvoir views,
“[the] myth of virginity as reflecting a male’s hesitation between the fear of being in the power of
uncontrollable forces and to wish to win them over. The very powers that are frightening in wild
beasts or in unconquered elements became qualities valuable to the owner able to domesticate
them” (184–186). The prominent example of using men’s force and power to control females to
fulfill sexual desire is reflected in the relationship between Pandu, Kunti, and Madri. To justify it,
Krishna Dharma (2015) states, “Kunti recited to her husband an ancient history… a powerful king
236

Concerning the Paradigm of Gender and Sexuality in the Mahabharata
www.the-criterion.com
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10448030
who had died without issue. His lamenting wife had embraced his dead body, and by the
arrangement of the gods, she conceived three qualified sons. …asked Pandu to emulate that king”
(20). He, then, embraced Brahmanacharya; he did not possess that power, as Kunti stated, and
Kunti, knowing the incantation mantra, had perceived a power from the sage and bore him heirs
from different men. Pandu was delighted by it and said to his wife, “…you should call the great
Dharma, god of justice. He will never pollute us with sin, and his son will undoubtedly be qualified
in every way” (Krishna Dharma, 20). She agreed with Pandu on his determination to have
polygamous sexual relations and have babies. She mothered Yudhisthira, Bhima, and Arjuna and
denied having many children. Her rejection of it says, “The woman having intercourse with four
different men is called a Swairini (heanton), while she having intercourse with five becomes a
harlot” (Sambhava Parva 259). Pandu, Kunti, and Madri begot two sons, Nakula and Sahadeva.
Here, it seems sarcastic, as Draupadi married five sons of Kunti and Madri and could not be a
harlot.
Objectification of Female Characters
This paper focuses on normative relationships in the epic that are recognized by the
political power relations of the Kuru dynasty. The societal norms for male and female characters
are reinterpreted by the mother, father, and sages. The central character Draupadi and her
husbands, the polyandrous marriage is acknowledged by Kunti. Pattanaik states, “Without turning
around, Kunti said, ‘Whatever it is, share it equally with your brothers” (91). The Karna-Kunti
relationship as son and mother has been possible due to the boon of the sage Durvasa. Gandhari’s
self-sacrifice for patriarchal power is a normative gender relationship. The son-mother-husband
associations of the Kunti-Madri male body are signified in the relationships between women and
identified males. The Sage Shvetaketu defines it and legitimizes how characters are formed to
represent societal roles. Subversion is against a man-centric worldview. The exposed incidents
serve as an example of how such a discussion has evolved and been put into practice. It raises the
prospect that male authority institutions may function in a woman’s body. Spivak observes, “The
Mahabharata contains cases of various kinds of kinship structure… Draupadi, who provides the
only example of polyandry… She is married to the five sons of the impotent Pandu… exceptional
in the sense of odd, unpaired, uncoupled… Her husbands… legitimately pluralized” (387). In the
epic, she legitimized pluralization of family structure as a wife of five husbands; Spivak remarks,
237

The Criterion: An International Journal in English Vol. 15, Issue-IV, August 2024 ISSN: 0976-8165

www.the-criterion.com
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10448030
“in singularity (as a possible mother or harlot) is used to demonstrate male glory” (387). Her elder
husband lost her in a game of dice as an object, which is non-normative gender practice. Bhishma’s
decision to abduct Amba, Ambika, and Ambalika as objects and marry them to Vichitravirya was
a non-normative practice. The self-choice ceremony was seized, and Hastinapura’s monarch,
Vichitravirya, was crowned and reigned for a short time. He was childless, and Satyavati failed to
convince Bhishma to wed Vichitravirya’s widows, so she finally contacted her premarital son,
Vyasa. Bhisma coordinated Dhritarashtra’s nuptial to Gandhari; he wed Vidura to the daughter of
Devaka and brought Madri to Pandu.
The dice game was objectified in the royal hall to legitimize Kauravas’ power over
Pandavas. In Merleau-Ponty’s understanding, the female body, like the body of Draupadi, is a part
of a sexual being, and Butler claims, “…with such accounts of bodily experience and claims that
the body… comes to bear cultural meanings” (520). Draupadi, the common wife of five brothers,
comprises her polyandrous marriage. Pattanaik states that in the assembly, the Kauravas attempted
to strip her and perceived her as a prostitute, and Karna blames her as “you a whore” (146). Her
silence in radical polyandrous relationships is fascinating, and she plays a stereotypical role in
shaping society. Her lascivious look challenges the vulgarity of Duryodhana and rages if
Yudhishitira has lost him first and how he could stake in the dice game. To her, it was an illegal
matter, and beautifying her as an object is a problem of gender freedom. Her subjective status
seems to be denied and offers grounds for a predicament. Draupadi is the dependent wife of
Pandavas as an object. The clothed or unclothed people in the assembly remind us how a woman
is playing the traditional role in patriarchal society.
The non-normative gender relations of the transgender prince of Panchala, Shikhandi, and
the pregnant king, Yuvanashwa, oscillated between gendered identities and contested the dominant
heteronormative sexual framework, which challenged the symbolic gender binary and outlined a
range of potential outcomes. It evaluates the influence and result of the gender queer community’s
rejection of the prescriptive order of subjectivities. It emphasizes the pain and struggle of
marginalized people by drawing on queer and deconstructive ideology—a significant conversation
in the queer space. Butler expresses, “gender was a parody, a choice, or a role, or rather a
construction; drag suggested a conflict between sex and performance” (21). It blurred the
boundaries between sex and gender in several stories, myths, and legends found in Sanskrit
238

Concerning the Paradigm of Gender and Sexuality in the Mahabharata
www.the-criterion.com
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10448030
literature. The Mahabharata, as a remark of Sanskrit society, reflects the tradition of sex and the
binary approach. One such story, Arjuna’s transformation into Brihannala, is a eunuch. Arjuna is
‘cursed’ to spend his final thirteenth year as a transgender person, and the Pandavas were banished
to spend their thirteen years in the jungle away from their realm, causing Arjuna to change into
Brihannala, a third-sex identity that symbolizes his transformation from a male physical being to
an eunuch body. The marriage between Hidimba-Bhima is a disregarded relationships.
The Pandavas were seeking sanctuary with King Virata of Matsya, and the princess Uttara
enjoyed dance and music from Brihannala, a trainer of classical culture. Brihannala lived in the
palace throughout the final year, along with the princess and other females. Sara Ahmed discusses
“compulsory heterosexuality” (23) and how it manifests in the dominant discourse, whereby
human bodies, their gender, and their sexuality are forced to conform to a heteronormative
framework and express queer desires by deviating from straight lines in particular. The illusion of
real into transformed identity highlights new natural sex to establish pre-discursive knowledge of
new reality. Krishna Dharma states that Brihinnala utters, “I sing, dance, and play musical
instruments. Am skilled in all these arts…Please do not ask me how I acquired this form, for that
would only add to my pain. Know me to Brihinnala, a son or daughter without parents” (361). As
the queer feminist world views, sexuality, gender, and sex are social constructs rather than
biological traits. Butler’s ideas of gender performativity state that gender is not a fixed identity;
rather, it is flexible. It is the outcome of repeated acting that creates the appearance of a static,
genuine gender. Her observation is “gender is an identity tenuously constituted in time and is
instituted through a stylized repetition of acts” (519). The epic embodies queerness, and it reveals
multiple treatises about gender and sexuality.
Queer theory defines heteronormativity as an oppressive system. It relies on feminist
critiques of binary gender concepts like male/female and masculine/feminine. It explores how
gendered and sexual identities and behaviors are socially created, and it theorizes about how sexual
behaviors and gender identities fall into categories of deviance and normal conduct according to
prevailing social norms. The sexual norms at the focus are opposed to the conventional and
essentialist ideas of gender, sex, and gendered identity. Butler draws attention to the performative
aspects of gender and sexuality that have become normalized via recurrent adherence to the
privilege of heteronormativity as norms, signals, and customs. She contends that sexual and gender
239

The Criterion: An International Journal in English Vol. 15, Issue-IV, August 2024 ISSN: 0976-8165

www.the-criterion.com
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10448030
boundaries are not innate traits of people but a sociocultural construct created and upheld by
human cultures. Susan Archer Mann states in the same way, “gender and sexuality are composed
of acts of striving to achieve a seemingly natural and universal idea that has never actually existed
in the pure form to which we aspire” (242). By means of queer theory as a critical lens, it is
significant to break down the rigidity that exists in the form of male/female binaries and realize
the existing diversity in terms of gender and sexuality. The wider social discourse and social norms
are identified and analyzed by queer theory as an oppressive system that normalizes and supports
heterosexism in the discourse on gender and sexuality. It recognizes that identities are constructed
in society through the deployment of the socio-political power of sexual discourse.
Conclusion
From the Paleolithic era to modern times, the notion of gender has been a significant part
of academic debate. The Mahabharata is still a considerable source for linking with political,
social, cultural, and gender interactions and incorporating plural ideas to understand modern and
post-modern realities. The representation of fluid sexuality and the existence of gender-variant
deities in some ways praise, legitimize, and normalize the debate on queerness and sexualities
being performed in the epic. In it, heterosexuality was not the norm and has long embraced fluid
ideas of sexuality and gender roles. The characters exhibit the aforementioned examples of
queerness, demonstrating how gender and sexuality are not static, inflexible, consistent, or
regarded primarily in terms of binary categories, as they are today considered to be. Contrary to
Hindu discourse, especially texts and myths represent gender and sexuality, which appear to be
fixed and viewed only within the binary of male and female. Since the beginning of time, the epic
has enlightened the culture with its countless identity-relevant themes. The Mahabharata has
survived for so long because of its ability to be modified, adopted, and refashioned, which provides
countless opportunities to start lengthy discussions. As such, contemporary notions of sexuality
and heteronormativity demonstrate a paradigm shift in attitudes toward gender and sexual
behavior. The practice of alternative types of sexuality is frowned upon, ostracized, and suppressed
because heterosexuality has become the norm. The acceptance of non-normative sexual behaviors
within the mainstream socio-cultural discourse and the myriad queer themes prevalent in Hinduism
are ignored. Any person who deviates from the script that rigidly upholds heteronormativity and
violates these socially prescribed standards is quickly labeled as other, non-normative, queer, or
240

Concerning the Paradigm of Gender and Sexuality in the Mahabharata
www.the-criterion.com
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10448030
someone who is unfit for society. Additionally, everything that is oppressively normal is subject
to criticism in queer theory. In order to challenge normalized notions of sex, gender, and sexuality
and to challenge oppressive regimes of normality, it is helpful to approach theory from a queer
viewpoint. Such criticisms of ‘normativity’ are essential for opposing the ingrained
heteronormativity in the epic and establishing the room for alternative manifestations in sexuality-
related narratives.

Works Cited:
Ahmed, Sara. Queer Phenomenology: Orientations, Objects, Others. Duke University Press, 2009.
Bhaduri, Nrisinghaprasad. MahabharaterAstadashi. Ananda Publishers, 2013.
Beauvoir, Simone de. The Second Sex. Vintage Books, 2009.
Bhanu, Sharada. Myths and Legends from India – Great Women. Macmillan India Limited, 1997.
Butler, Judith. “Performative Acts and Gender Constitution: An Essay in Phenomenology and
Feminist Theory.” Theatre Journal, vol. 40, no. 4, 1998, pp. 519-531.
Doniger, Wendy and Brian K. Smith. The Laws of Manu. Penguin Books, 1991.
Ellingson, Stephen. “Introduction” Religion and Sexuality in Cross-cultural Perspective,
Ed. Stephen Ellingson & M. Christian Green. Routledge, 2002, pp. 1-18.
Ellingson, Stephen and Green, M. Christian. Religion and Sexuality in Cross-cultural Perspective.
Routledge, 2002.
Hoydis, Julia. “A Palace of Her Own: Feminine Identity in the Great Indian Story.” Gender
Forum, vol. 38, 2012. Web. July 21, 2024.
Kahlon, Maneeta. “Women in Mahabharata: Fighting patriarchy.” Language in India, vol. 11, pp.
529-537. Web. June 19, 2024.
Kalyanov, V.I. The Image of Indian Women in Mahabharata. Bhandarkar Oriental Research
Institute, 58, 1977, pp. 161-172.
Krishna Dharma. Mahabharata. Om Books International, 2015.
Mann, Susan Archer. Doing Feminist Theory: From Modernity to Postmodernity. Oxford
University Press, 2012.
Menon, Ramesh. The Mahabharata. Rupa Publication, 2004.
241

The Criterion: An International Journal in English Vol. 15, Issue-IV, August 2024 ISSN: 0976-8165

www.the-criterion.com
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10448030
Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. “The Body in its Sexual Being.” The Phenomenology of Perception.
Translated by Colin Smith. Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1962.
Milette, Kate. Sexual Politics. Granada Publishing, 1969.
Motswapong, Pulane Elizabeth. “Understanding Draupadi as a Paragon of Gender and
Resistance”, Stellenbosch Theological Journal, vol. 3, no. 2, 2017, pp. 477–492.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.17570/stj.2017.v3n2.a22.
Pattanaik, D. An Illustrating Reflecting of the Mahabharata. Penguin Books, 2010.
—. The Man Who Was a Woman and Other Queer Tales from Hindu Lore. Routledge, 2014.
Ray, Avishek. Vicissitudes of Reading the Mahabharata as History: Problems Concerning
Historicism and Textualism.” Journal of Literary Studies, vol. 35, no. 2, pp. 1-19. DOI:
10.1080/02564718.2019.1627103
Regmi,
Bhim
Nath.
“Draupadi’s
Political
Imagination
in
the
Dice
Game
of
the Mahabharata” The Criterion: An International Journal in English, vol. 11, vi, 2010, pp.
147-54.
Spivak, Gayatri Chakravorty. “Draupadi” by Mahasweta Devi.” Critical Inquiry, vol. 8, no. 2,
31981, pp. 81-402.
Tyson, Lois. Critical Theory Today. Routledge, 1998.
Vyasa. The Mahabharata. Trans. Kishori Mohon Ganguly. Sacred Text, 2003.
Zuercher, Erik. The Buddhist Conquest of China: The Spread and Adaptation of Buddhism in Early
Medieval China, Brill Publication, 1972.

242