In search of multiple Hidimbas: Lies and lores of the Mahabharata
A good many stories from our childhood counsel us about the demoness waiting near the tree. Upon growing up, this same demoness is represented differently across popular media. For instance, her name, make-up, accent would change, but the tree would remain her permanent home.
Recall any proverbs and idioms about trees that are damned in your own cultural milieu? It will most certainly contain some silly "once upon a time" story about a demon family living in that tree. Tales telling the truth about trees are rare (I wish trees had their own epics to narrate).
However, we have a rich variety of myths and folklore around the topic of demons and demonesses. Epics like The Mahabharata denote a specific category to the demons (Rakshashas in Hindi).
While on one hand they are known as the monstrous cannibals/disruptive forces, their geographies would regard them as the protectors/saviours (perhaps a variant of the Sanskrit word, Raksha).
But is there only one story, one dominant language in our country? No. Hence, what's true for the teller in the epic may be a devastating lie for the listeners.
But, these lies and their liars are all important. We cannot ignore them any long. They tell us something much more than the truths are willing to accept and accommodate. Wendy Doniger had formerly written that Bheema's pacification of the Rakshashas (his marriage to Hidimba, the demoness) was a more Brahmanical way of justifying the matrimonial "exchange".
From the days of the 1988 BR Chopra's show to the 2013 Star Plus show created by Siddarth Kumar Tewary, I have closely observed the popular depictions of the other races in the epic. And it is Hidimba, among many others, whose unkind portrayal hit me hard.
Was Hidimba really lusting for the queen's throne? Was she that naïve to desire a home which is far more turbulent than her own forest? What was she like before the Pandavas entered the hills? Folklore is the space to look for more of these questions, though I cannot guarantee that there are easy answers.
The tyranny of having one epic is best felt when the epic stories that you have been listening to in the oral medium are considered imaginary figments, to be kept aside from interrupting the main epic. In the case of Hidimba, the beautiful forest-dwelling demoness, I have similar observations.
Since little agency is allowed to her foibles, victories, desires, tears and secrets, I decided to look for places where her story is dynamic, rounded and equally entertaining.
My first valuable find was the book titled Cult of Draupadi, where rarely performed/unpublished plays like Matapiman-Malaiyukacuran addresses Hidimba as Mumulaikanni, the maiden with three breasts.
To redeem her of this supposed ugliness, she has to meditate to Lord Shiva whose boon was that she would lose her third breast upon meeting the "ideal" spouse. (Hidimba is called Hudka in some parts of the Himalayas, which is Shiva's musical instrument.)
Study this carefully and it points out towards the Holy pantheon's inability to accommodate any deviations from the standard female body.
In Finnish folklore, there is a water-spirit shape-shifter called Nakki who can transform into a voluptuous woman with three breasts. His ugliness and prey-hunting is rebuked, though I see him as a protector of water.
Some Tamil myths also share the story of the many-breasted woman.
My own interpretation of the three-breasted woman who is a resident of the forests would be from an eco-feminist angle, something that is difficult to find in "mainland" readings of the epic. Hidimba's "maiden" body was controlled by her demon-brother, who was actually depleting forest cover and inhabitants (out of fetish, not hunger).
Her anger towards him was driven and justified by her love for the greenery (Hidimba-vana).
In Sheikhpura, Bihar, a hillock by the name "Girihanda" owes its name to her. Furthermore, the Kachari tribe in Assam was known as Haidambas in Cachar and the Brahmaputra valley. They took immense pride in their lineage from a powerful forest dweller, before the Hindu-isation process even began.
In Karthika Nair's Until the Lions, a compelling reading of the tale, we are introduced to Kirmira, a Rakshasa friend of Hidimba, and a surrogate brother (in my opinion) who plays the role of a listener (documenter) of her side of the Kurukshetra story.
She confides in him about how her identity (spatial and sexual) was perceived by the royal queen with five sons. She painfully recalls that it was she who taught Bheema to master warrior skills, smell, speed, accuracy (much like Ulupi, who granted a boon to Arjun). "We rakshasas labeled blood thirsty, savage, take fewer lives than royals, I proved, time after time…"
In the Kinnara myths, Hidimba, the village goddess is not married to Bheema at all. The rulers of Kullu and Chamba, as evidenced by the number of temples dedicated to Hidimba, hints at the fact that her worship is superior to local deities as well.
In all my visits to Himachal Pradesh, I found several places dedicated to Maa Hidimba and there are striking differences in the way she has been domesticated to become a sanskritised/Aryan deity.
 |
| Hidimba Devi Temple in Manali, Himachal Pradesh. |
Apart from the fact that she mothered Ghatotkoch for the Pandavas, her other creative roles are overlooked. The narrative of the Rakshashi as a fearless, old woman whom the village folks welcome without any hesitance and mingle together is difficult to find, except in one or two places.
The other problem about not allowing Hidimba to occupy the major narrative is related to our idea of race. Arjun, in the same epic romances "non-Aryan" women in what may be called as sex vacations. But we are told, they and "their kind" were continuously throwing themselves on him, note the extremely exaggerated references to Arjun and Bhima's physical adornments.
These representations conjure up an idea of a race that is not Aryan enough, in other words, not "Indian" enough. Utilitarian kings from Hastinapura arrived in these places later argued as present day Manipur, Nagaland in order to produce progeny strong enough for the war.
In the Star Plus rendition of the Mahabharata, this location is tactfully hidden, not to mention Hidimbi and Ulupi, are shown to have sharp Aryan features (because ofcourse, national TV is scared of differences, that unity in diversity is just a sham).
It is assumed that the presence of subterranean geography is not important, hence, time and space are regarded as fixed. It is also tragic that 1988's Mahabharata had shown Hidimba (through a dream sequence) disguising in a lehenga-ghagra from her own traditional attire (resembling tribal motifs from the Northeast) in order to be worthy of a Pandava, a noble prince.
That Hidimba was also capable of metamorphosis and this makes her powerful, not pathetic, is not the focus of the show.
Karthika Nair rightly pens Hidimba's feelings "…I can morph into earth, into insect, into ocean, crone, enchantress. I could have transformed into a goddess to entice him-but I didn't need to (Never mind the lore-as often, it lies)…"
Like I articulated before, lies and liars of the epic stories utter more about our culture than the "true" tellers. As my quest for more Hidimba tales continue, I am increasingly convinced that itihasa doesn't testify for everyone, as often it claims to do (recall DD epic serials where "Itihasa gawa hain"(History bears witness) is a catch-phrase.
In such a situation, you are your own itihasa, your own witness, and you have to tread the forested path to reclaim your own story.