The history of queerness in India

Part IV: An examination of mythical queer narratives

The first thing we have to remember when we are going to look for queer characters in ancient stories or historical records and try to understand what their attitudes towards queer people were, is that we have to ask separate and specific questions for each letter of the acronym LGBTQA+ or QUILTBAG.

Dr Pattanaik (like a lot of people), of course, fails to do this on many counts.

And then there is the problem with applying queer theory to Indic mythology.

Two types of sources are usually cited in respect of queerness in Indian history:

1. Mythological — Vedic literature, Epics, Puranas, Buddhist, Jain, Sikh and Sufi literature, Folklore; also Sculpture, Paintings, Music and Theatre with mythological erotic themes
2. Historical — Texts on Anatomy, Surgery and Medicine, Manuals of Law and Conduct (including sex manuals), Court Records and Censuses

Medical texts of the time are limited to talking about anatomy, and manuals of law and conduct are limited to talking about behaviour, and in any case they talk about only 5 kinds of queer people, but at least their references are direct. With mythology and artistic depictions thereof we have a few specific problems.

Firstly, in mythology the narrative itself is supernatural. And supernatural is not natural. This means

1. We cannot properly confirm whether characters depicted or implied to be queer in these stories are fanciful inventions or stand-ins for real queer people
2. Because supernatural is not natural, acceptance of supernatural queer characters does not necessarily translate into acceptance of real queer people.
   This applies to all fictional characters BTW e.g. Robin Hood and his story is celebrated, but real people who try imitating him usually end up in jail

Secondly mythology is hyperbolic: it is meant to describe the lives of extraordinary people with supernatural powers/intervention, and is not representative of the lives of common people.

e.g., the whole theme of the Mahābhārata is the ability of a privileged few to legally subvert the norm/morality while still upholding Dharma

Thirdly many common stories and characters that are claimed as being examples of queerness, are not direct, but are supposedly symbolic. Dr Pattanaik says as much in at least two places.

Now it is true that sometimes an author or artist implies that a particular character is queer while not explicitly admitting such a thing. This kind of indirect reference to queerness is called Queer Coding in literary criticism.

Proving queer coding

Such a method is frequently adopted by queer artists who want to get their message across while not drawing the anger of the moral guardians.

But claiming that something is queer coded is very different from proving it.

In older British literature, certain character archetypes are explicitly recognised as being queer coded, e.g. the confirmed bachelor, the pipe-smoking butch games mistress in a public school for girls. We can say this with certainty because the recurrence of these tropes has been properly documented and studied, by openly queer authors themselves.

In contrast, citing temple sculptures of armed women as being examples of butch/masculine presenting women is just unfounded speculation, not queer coding. Citing a sculpture of women dancing in a circle and claiming that one or more of them is lesbian by virtue of probability is also not queer coding. It is merely an exercise in challenging the audience’s heteronormativity.

Besides, such a claim goes both ways. Just because a sculpture or story shows two people of the same gender having sex, doesn’t mean that they are homosexual, only that they are performing homosexual acts.

Queer coding as a tool of oppression

Furthermore, queer coding is also (mis)used by bigots in hateful literature, particularly in two ways.

First, a method called queer baiting, where authors pretend to write a queer character to capture the attention (and money!) of queer audiences and then end up writing them as cis-het people. One of the most famous contemporary examples of this is Steven Moffat’s treatment of Sherlock and John’s relationship in the BBC series Sherlock.

Now, Dr Pattanaik says that

Hindu society, however, with its foundations in patriarchy and heterosexuality, deems non-conventional gender identities and sexual behaviors inappropriate for social stability. They are tolerated only in fringes, especially if they express themselves through patriarchal and heterosexual vocabulary.

Source: https://devdutt.com/books/man-who-was-a-woman.html

What he’s describing is essentially queer coding, but when we actually look at the examples in mythology, they are clearly queer baiting.

Take the common examples of gender bending followed by sexual intercourse, for instance. The typical scenario is this: there is a person A of one gender, totally okay with being as their current gender. Then something happens, and they need to have sex with person B of the same gender. Then the Gods or some powerful supernatural beings intervene, and person A’s gender is magically changed. They then proceed to have sex with person B, and are totally happy with their new gender.

Dr Pattanaik (and others) claim that this is meant to be queer coding for gay sex.

But really what does this kind of story actually say? It says that the only dharmic way to have sex with someone of the same gender is to change your own gender.

This is like saying that the only way for a woman to fight in the army is for her to change her gender (a claim also made in the Mahābhārata).

Especially when you combine such stories with a real-life situation in which only femme-presenting gay men are recognised, and that too as a separate gender, it spreads the toxic idea that a gay man has no option but to either give up his masculinity or have sex exclusively with prostitutes (or rape other men who are subordinate to him).

Where even the Gods have to perform and conform to heteronormativity, what choice has the common gay man have?

The second form of misuse is when villainous characters are queer coded in order to exploit the public fear and hatred of queer people, and to further propagate hatred of queer people. A lot of the older Disney Villains are examples of these.

And we do have queer coded villains in Indic mythology.

If we are indeed looking for queer-coded characters, we should also include more obscure stories like that of the Kings Haṃsa and Ḍibhaka, narrated by Kṛṣṇa Vāsudeva himself in the Mahābhārata.

भये तु समुपक्रान्ते जरासन्धे समुद्यते | मन्त्रोऽयं मन्त्रितो राजन्कुलैरष्टादशावरैः ||३४||अनारमन्तो निघ्नन्तो महास्त्रैः शतघातिभिः | न हन्याम वयं तस्य त्रिभिर्वर्षशतैर्बलम् ||३५||
तस्य ह्यमरसङ्काशौ बलेन बलिनां वरौ | नामभ्यां हंसडिभकावित्यास्तां योधसत्तमौ ||३६||
तावुभौ सहितौ वीरौ जरासन्धश्च वीर्यवान् | त्रयस्त्रयाणां लोकानां पर्याप्ता इति मे मतिः ||३७||
न हि केवलमस्माकं यावन्तोऽन्ये च पार्थिवाः | तथैव तेषामासीच्च बुद्धिर्बुद्धिमतां वर ||३८||
अथ हंस इति ख्यातः कश्चिदासीन्महान्नृपः | स चान्यैः सहितो राजन्सङ्ग्रामेऽष्टादशावरैः ||३९||
हतो हंस इति प्रोक्तमथ केनापि भारत |तच्छ्रुत्वा डिभको राजन्यमुनाम्भस्यमज्जत ||४०||
विना हंसेन लोकेऽस्मिन्नाहं जीवितुमुत्सहे | इत्येतां मतिमास्थाय डिभको निधनं गतः ||४१||
तथा तु डिभकं श्रुत्वा हंसः परपुरञ्जयः | प्रपेदे यमुनामेव सोऽपि तस्यां न्यमज्जत ||४२||
तौ स राजा जरासन्धः श्रुत्वाप्सु निधनं गतौ | स्वपुरं शूरसेनानां प्रययौ भरतर्षभ ||४३||
ततो वयममित्रघ्न तस्मिन्प्रतिगते नृपे | पुनरानन्दिताः सर्वे मथुरायां वसामहे ||४४||

Chapter 12, Mantraparva, Sabhāparva, Mahābhārata

But after the immediate cause of fear was removed (by the death of Kaṃsa), Jarāsandha (Kaṃsa’s father-in-law), took up arms. Ourselves consisting of the eighteen younger branches of the Yādavas arrived at the conclusion that even if we struck our enemies continually with excellent weapons capable of taking the lives of the foes, we should still be unable to do anything unto him even in three hundred years. He hath two friends that are like unto the immortals, and in point of strength the foremost of all men endued with might. They are called Haṃsa and Ḍibhaka who are both incapable of being slain by weapons. The mighty Jarāsandha, being united with them, becomes incapable, I think, of being vanquished by even the three worlds. O thou foremost of all intelligent men, this was not our opinion alone but all other kings also were of the same mind. There lived, O monarch, a different king of the name of Haṃsa, who was slain by Rāma (aka Balarāma) after a battle of eighteen days. But, O Bhārata, hearing people say that Haṃsa had been killed, Ḍibhaka, O king, decided that he could not live without Haṃsa. He accordingly jumped into the waters of the Yamunā and killed himself. Afterwards when Haṃsa, the subjugator of hostile heroes, heard that Ḍibhaka had killed himself, he went to the Yamunā and jumped into its waters. Then, O bull of the Bharata race, king Jarāsandha, hearing that both Haṃsa and Ḍibhaka had been killed, returned to his kingdom with an empty heart. After Jarāsandha had returned, O slayer of all foes, we were filled with joy and continued to live at Mathurā.

Source: Edited from Kisari Mohan Ganguli’s translation. Emphasis mine

This story not only bears a striking resemblance to the death of Droṇācārya during the Mahābhārata war, but also to the climax of Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet. It is really difficult not to notice the ‘star-crossed lovers’ trope here.

What really clinches this narrative is that Haṃsa and Ḍibhaka are neither described as either being friends nor family, deliberately leaving wiggle room for speculation. The fact that they were driven to suicide through a deception planned by God himself has extra unfortunate implications.

Ignoring such stories creates a skewed impression of ancient Indic attitudes towards queer people. Therefore I implore all people to choose their heroes carefully, and avoid looking up to mythology for empowerment — be they women, LGBTQ+ people, avarṇas or any other oppressed class — truly, you will find only disappointment, not heroes. Look instead into real history, and to our present accomplishments — through these alone we will make progress and find justice.

This is Part IV of a series of articles on the history of queerness in India.

Part I | Part II | Part III | Part IV | Part V | Appendix I