Page 1 of 12
Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal – Vol. 10, No. 4
Publication Date: April 25, 2023
DOI:10.14738/assrj.104.14419.
Sahgal, S., & Malik, V. (2023). Making Dents in the Paradigm of a Perfect Wife: Parvati’s Negotiations with Patriarchy in Indian
Mythology. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, 10(4). 221-232.
Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom
Making Dents in the Paradigm of a Perfect Wife: Parvati’s
Negotiations with Patriarchy in Indian Mythology1
Smita Sahgal
Lady Shri Ram College, University of Delhi
Vinita Malik
Kamala Nehru College, University of Delhi
INTRODUCTION
Pārvatī is a fascinating figure in Indian mythology and generally what stands out is her absolute
love for Śiva who, too, could not ignore her. Popular folklore reiterates the notion of their
timeless love and rituals concretize it. Purāṇas do mention her as a goddess of mountains in her
own right, but her character gets principally demarcated by her closeness to her husband, Śiva,
for whom she could die to avenge humiliation meted out to him by her father in her Satī form.
Subsequently, she was reborn as Pārvatī to seek that proximity again. Historically if she was a
mother goddess in her own right, we are curious to know how her cult got amalgamated within
that of Śiva. Purāṇas give us clues about this process of assimilation and in the course raise a
litany of issues that we would attempt to answer in our paper.
ISSUES OF CONCERN
Our study would include mulling over certain issues that would help streamline our
research. How has an ideal household been constructed in ancient texts? Who really had
control in such a household? Was a divine household different from a mundane one? What was
the pativratā model? Did a divine household allow the subversion of this model and if so, what
mechanisms were adopted by the wife? What did wifehood really mean to Pārvatī? Was it an
egalitarian relationship between husband and wife or a hierarchical one that is often
understood in a common patriarchal setup? If Pārvatī subverted the model of perfect wifehood,
how did she do so and what are the instances?
The paper would dwell on two episodes; the Dice -Game and the birth of Gaṇeśa where her
individuality comes out strongly. In the first case, she played the game of dice with her husband
without her gender coming in the way. In the second, she made her gender all-powerful. She
decided to create a child of her own from her sweat and dirt without the participation of her
husband and subverted the ‘normal’ model of birth hinging on the union of husband and wife.
We shall study both these myths and investigate if these can give us pointers to the construction
of the personhood of Pārvatī and the creation of a distinct identity, Did Pārvatī threaten to
rupture the frame of the divine household that could be restored only with Śiva and Pārvatī
giving enough space to each other and subtly recognizing each other’s worth?
1 This is a modified version of the paper Ruptures in the Divine Household: Pārvatī's ‘playful’ subversion of Perfect
Wifehood presented at the 6th International Conference on Future of Women 2023“Empowering Women, Powering
the Future” on 24th February 2023.
Page 2 of 12
222
Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal (ASSRJ) Vol. 10, Issue 4, April-2023
Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom
METHODOLOGY
Sources: Texts, Locale and Time Frame
The study is based on purāṇas with the conviction that they will yield historically relevant
material on women. The purāṇas constitute a large corpus of texts and are dated from c.3rd –
16th century CE. They had bardic origin but rearranged and translated in Sanskrit by Brahmans.
These were to be recited in popular gatherings and also had a popular base as against the Vedas
and the normative texts. Our study is based on textual research, principally of Śaiva Purāṇas;
Skanda, and Śiva.
The khandas (sections) of Skanda Purāṇa have a date between the 8th to 12th centuries and
apparently, the bulk of the text was composed in medieval south India.2 It is estimated that the
oldest chapters in the surviving manuscript of Śiva Purāṇa were likely composed around the
10- to 11th centuries. This also seems to be located in South India though later versions could
have come up in the Bengal region. Both texts reflect conditions prevailing during these
centuries and give us an opportunity to unravel gender relations between Śiva and the divine
spouse Pārvatī. We also look into Bṛhaddharma Purāņa, a Bengal Purana of the 13th century
that elaborates on issues around Ganesa’s birth and motherhood of Pārvatī. Even as most of the
texts we study are Purāṇas, the comparison of myths with those in the Mahābhārta becomes
inevitable at times. The Śāntīparva of the Mahābhārta is a didactic text and is given a rough date
around the fifth century. Further, we need to clarify some concepts that we would use
frequently. So, our study starts with a historical understanding of three concepts;
Brahmanization, Household and Pativratā (the devout wife).
CONCEPT CLARIFICATION
Brahmanization
During the early medieval period, there was political expansion of terrains already under
brahmanic sway. The need of ruling elite, now, was to extend the process of Brahmanization3 in
the new regions. For the spread of brahmanic ideas what was needed was a strong popular base.
The element of violence could not have sustained assimilation process for too long. Therefore,
the mechanism often chosen was selection of some folklore/practices of the vanquished and
assimilate those into the dominant narrative, without unsettling hegemony of the political
aggressor. Purāṇ ic literature can be analysed from this vantage: a vehicle for the spread of
Brahmanism through accommodation, assimilation, and amalgamation of tribal/non- brahmanic beliefs. This would have facilitated the introduction of complex brahmanic ideas,
including caste and class differences, without creating apparent disruptions, while ensuring
popular support too. However, we cannot overrule that the process of Brahmanization could
have been contested too and we would unravel whether it happened in our period of study.
House Hold: Mundane and Divine
Many texts of early India give us a clue as to how a household was envisaged. The households
were varied as we gather from the reading of distinct texts. For convenience’s sake, we can term
them as ‘Brahmanical’, ‘Buddhist’, ‘Royal’ household or that of courtesans often referred to as
2 R.C. Hazra. Studies in the Purāṇic records on Hindu rites and customs.
3 Brahmanization is referred to the process of assimilation of newer tribes, people and cultures within those where
brahmanic ideals pervade. This allows a degree of accommodation of the new cultures but the hegemony of the
brahmanic, upper caste, traditions and processes is retained.
Page 3 of 12
223
Sahgal, S., & Malik, V. (2023). Making Dents in the Paradigm of a Perfect Wife: Parvati’s Negotiations with Patriarchy in Indian Mythology. Advances
in Social Sciences Research Journal, 10(4). 221-232.
URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.14738/assrj.104.14419
Veśyāvāsa. A household was meticulously defined by the norm-setters or mythographers of the
day as it became the most fundamental unit of both production and reproduction. However, it
was perhaps more than that; it was also a context for the transmission of ideas, ideologies, and
resources. Generally, a household was marked by a physical space with a house and land for
cultivation, worked upon by family labour or hired one. Further, it was envisaged as an
extended setup where generations could live together along with domestic help which
constituted an essential aspect of the household. The patriarch, gṛhapati or kartā invariably
headed it even when women folk played a fairly vital role in its running. It was within the frame
of the household that the children were socialized in the societal mores: girls were made aware
of their roles as future mothers and productive hands within its confines and boys were trained
to become potential breadwinners and care-givers to ageing parents. The social norms that they
were supposed to adopt in future transactions were unfolded here and passages of rites worked
out for easy adoption of these. The caste system of earlier times was practiced and nurtured
here and class distinctions became obvious. The state invariably supported its existence for
vital reasons. The household was tax-generating units and colluded in the maintenance of the
sanctioned social fabric.
Most of the households were very patriarchal in nature where the patriarch ruled through his
final word on any significant decision-making. Very often women themselves became the
colluders in the sustenance of patriarchal structures of the household in return for promised
protection and comfortable sustenance. Most of the Gṛhyasūtras and Dharmaśāstras inform us
how the ideas of virginity for young girls and chastity for married women were honed in the
confines of the household by mothers and wives, making it easy for the norm-setters to ensure
‘pure family lineages’ without resorting to force of any other kind. One such conceptual tool of
subservience, almost a master stroke by Brahmanical norm setters, was the notion of ‘pativratā’
couching within itself the idea of ‘maryādā’.
Growing Concept of pativratā within the Household
Who was a pativratā? In common parlance, the term denotes a devout wife. If we were to trace
the history of the concept, we find that in the Vedic texts, the term is not really taken up for
explanation. Instead, we get a reference to the wife, patnī. A wife’s principal distinctiveness
sprang from being a patnī, i.e., a mistress who was the wife of the master of the house. But there
were other appellations for her as well which included jāyā, the wife who gave birth to
children4, patijustā (wife loved by husband), parivṛktā (forsaken wife), patyānuttā (expelled
wife), patidviṣ(hated by husband), patirip (wife who cheats on her husband) and patighnī (who
is the death of her husband)5. Interestingly, patnī was never expected to stay obedient to the
husband even though in the Gṛhyasūtra6 wife as pativatī (one with a husband), and jīvapatnī
(with a living husband) was respected. It is to be noted that discord in marital life was
highlighted by reference to the identity of types of wives as patyānuttā and patighnī. But
growing patriarchy might have led to the discarding or marginalization of these categories and
their replacement by the benign pativatsalā (Mbh XII.30.3). Shalini Shah points out that the
4 Irawati Karve. Kinship terminology and kinship usage in the Rgveda and Atharva- veda . pp. 130-31.
5 Irawati Karve. Kinship terminology and kinship usage in the Rgveda and Atharva- veda 133-34.
6 Jaya Tyagi. Engendering the Early Household: Brahmanical Precepts in the Early Gṛhyasūtras, Middle of the First
Millenium BCE. p. 111
Page 4 of 12
224
Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal (ASSRJ) Vol. 10, Issue 4, April-2023
Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom
Vedic texts do not refer to the ideal figure of the pativratā7. It is only in the epics that a
methodical philosophy of pativratā dharma was articulated. The shift of wife from patnī to a
simple pativratā- a development that Shah terms as 'pativratisation', was most ostensible in the
depiction of Draupadī, the central female protagonist of the Mahābhārata. The text introduced
Draupadī as a wise woman who demanded the respect of many and could question anyone who
would violate her sense of dignity but the same text also co-opted her in the ‘esoteric
community of great pativratās’ when she would engage in an uninspiring, inane dialogue with
Satyabhāmā enlisting her chores as one (Mbh III.222.25) that included serving her mother-in- law with dedication. In the process, she is made to elaborate on the concept of pativratādharma,
the duties of a devout wife. This appears to be an ingenious strategy on the part of the
mythographers and compilers of the day to domesticate one of the most rebellious characters
of the text who could challenge their patriarchal resolutions. Otherwise, Sāvitrī was the
pativratā unparalleled within the Mahābhārata. The Pativratā Māhātmya Akhyāna (Mbh III
279.19-21) of the Āraņyaka Parva informs us of Sāvitrī’s manyfold virtues; affection, self- control, and good services to all, something that pleased everyone and based on which she won
over Yama, the God of death also. This process of pativratization of the patnī continued in the
Rāmāyaṇa and reached its apogee in the agniparīkṣā episode where Sītā had to prove her
chastity by going through a fire ordeal. Without a doubt, this showed the hold of exacting
patriarchal social norms and makes it clear that the individual identity of a patnī was getting
completely overrun.
A devout wife or the pativratā, who worshipped the husband as her god and who knew how to
remain within her maryādā; social limits, became a recurring theme of Purāṇ ic literature too.
The Purāṇas brought women centre-stage, unlike the Vedic corpus, and gave them greater
visibility than their Vedic counterparts, but Purāṇas also propagated the idea of pativratā as no
other genre of literature did. It was expected of the pativratā wife not just to render service to
her husband but to his entire household, which included his parents as also other wives.
Interestingly the devout wife was expected to remain sexually committed to only her husband
even if the husband was allowed, multiple sexual partners. The gender relations in the ancient
household were clearly skewed up in favour ofthe man ofthe household and all others including
wife/wives, children, and domestic help were required to remain subservient to him. However,
challenges to this model would also surface and sometimes within the divine household.
DIVINE HOUSEHOLD
A divine household was bound to be distinct and yet remained a matter of interest for the
followers as it might set an example or might be considered beyond the human pale. The divine
household of Śiva and Pārvatī was also a little different from the mundane one, even as some
similarities occurred. It differed first of all in the physicality of space. The duo lived in nature’s
lap on the mountain without the context of a physical home. When Pārvatī would complain of
rain, Śiva would miraculously take her above the clouds. As the tradition informs us Pārvatī did
get gradually used to both her husband’s unusual appearance and attire and his living setup
too. However, the interesting part of their mythology was the existence of rather unusual
gender relations in the household. What do we mean by unusual? As we would show the
expectations of the wife were at times shown to be in line with the wife of a mundane
householder but responses to that were rather uncommon. Pārvatī was able to subvert the
7 Shalini Shah. On Gender, Wives and "Pativratās". Social Scientist.p.79
Page 5 of 12
225
Sahgal, S., & Malik, V. (2023). Making Dents in the Paradigm of a Perfect Wife: Parvati’s Negotiations with Patriarchy in Indian Mythology. Advances
in Social Sciences Research Journal, 10(4). 221-232.
URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.14738/assrj.104.14419
paradigm of ideal wifehood. In their conflicts as a couple, she was not easily silenced all the
times. Many a times she ensured that she was also heard. We come across instances when she
clearly dented patriarchy and made many men very uncomfortable by refusing to submit to the
notions of a perfect devout wife. Let us examine two instances where Pārvatī came out on her
own.
Relishing Dyūtakriḍa: Disrupting Conventional Frames
The game of Dice was largely a male sport; whether played out as a fun-game, a masculine
challenge or as a memetic battle. Women were conspicuous by their absence as players, even
though the outcome affected them profoundly. However, for Pārvatī and Śiva it was a fun sport
where the two participated as equals. There is at least one case in their mythology where the
game of dice played as a fun-sport eventually tested their gender equations. We are referring
to the game of dice played between Śiva and Pārvatī (also referred to as Śivaśaktī), explained in
detail in the Skanda Purāṇa (SkPI.1. 34). The episode is thought-provoking as it has manifold
implications. The story goes on as this: Nārada visited Śiva and Pārvatī to disrupt their enduring
amorous intimacy and provoked them to play a game of dice which would be open to an
interested audience. Pārvatī as a smart contestant instantly agreed to the suggestion along with
her husband. In the first round, we are told that despite Pārvatī’s playing the game dishonestly
(SkP I.1.34.69), Śiva won the round, much to the applause of Nārada, Bhringī, and others. This
incited Pārvatī as she saw Śiva’s supporters mocking at her unabashedly. In the next round both
pledged all they possessed as a wager. Pārvatī won this round, and insisted that Śiva removed
all that adorned his body. Bringī was bewildered and Śiva laughed, taking it to be a joke. But
Pārvatī was serious and further insisted on his removing the loin cloth too. But when he did not,
Pārvatī removed the loincloth with force, much to his horror and shame of all the onlookers.
She looked ruthless in her assertion as the winner; one without regrets.
On hearing these words by Śiva, Pārvatī, laughed and reminded him of when he wandered
naked through Dāruvana. Under the pretext of begging for alms, he had seduced the wives of
the sages who were enchanted and adored him. At that time his loin cloth fell down there. She
appeared to be a player who had evened out the score as she reminded him of the other instance
and its outcome. It is through the game of dice that it is evident that she is neither submissive
nor subservient and cannot be silenced as she says that, “Hence what you have lost in the
gambling game, should be abandoned by you" (SkP I.1.34.123-130).
It is true that Pārvatī was playing for fun; to show her husband his place in the divine household.
However, there also appears a deeper rationale to her ruthlessness. Śiva had been reluctant to
perform his assigned divine duty. Her game would incite him to ‘emerge into activity’. Śiva
became so infuriated that he was pushed into action. His masculinity was hurt and he drove
away to the forest to spend time meditating as an ascetic to invoke the ātman. Here her victory
and consequent actions become a part of a theological discourse (We shall discuss this
dimension a little later). Pārvatī soon regretted her action and egged on by her attendant Vijayā,
sought to remedy the situation at the earliest. She took the form of a beautiful Śabri woman to
ensnare him. Śiva was duped once again: he showed his desire for her and Pārvatī chose the
moment to reveal her true self and once again mocked at him subtly. Nārada laughingly said,
‘Contact with women always makes men ridiculous (SkP I.1.35). Śiva was, however, persuaded
to return to Pārvatī.
Page 6 of 12
226
Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal (ASSRJ) Vol. 10, Issue 4, April-2023
Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom
Not only does the episode enlighten us to the fact that women could be as deft as men in the
dice-game, but that they too could resort to cheating as and when required. Pārvatī could stand
up to incitement and insults coming her way from Śiva supporters and exhibited her fierce side
that humbled her husband too. She was clearly no pativratā, subservient to the patriarchal
norm of submission to her husband’s will. And yet in conclusion she was shown to be a woman
who made use of guile to fool her husband. Nārada came up with a misogynist conclusion that
contact with women was the doom of a man. Mythographers of the day were resolved on
showing Pārvatī, (and by that logic all women) her place, despite the fact that she had won the
dice-game. Her apparent fickleness was highlighted time and again as a natural trait of any
woman. It appears that Nārada was trying to mollify Śiva’s bruised masculinity. As an objective
observer, we would have expected a different response from Nārada. After all, Pārvatī did what
a winning gambler does. Later, too, she easily succeeded in duping Śiva into a passionate
submission. Nārada could have questioned his master as to why he let his self-control dwindle.
Clearly, Pārvatī subverted the paradigm of a pativratā, the model of perfect wifehood and this
did not go down well with the mythographers. The character of Nārada was only putting forth
the discomfort men experienced with the situation. From our perspective, the episode becomes
significant as it showed that the dice-game brought in fissures in the context of a divine
household.
We ask ourselves a question from the vantage of a student of History. What propelled the
mythographers to both retain Pārvatī’s intervention in this fun sport and also attempt to show
her in a negative light? How do we interpret this negative approach from a gender lens? Why
did the mythographers not delete the episode altogether when their discomfort with her
superior moves were so evident? This could be because of the fact that before the
Brahmanization of the tale happened, it might have already become as a part of floating oral
tradition, well known amongst groups where egalitarian gender equations were not unknown.
The absorption of these stories in the larger Sanskritic compositions must have been a political
move, that we referred to earlier. The rationale must have been the production of an
assimilative amalgam where the stories of newly integrated tribes/people would find space in
the new culture but not at the expense of the core philosophy of the dominant people. Pārvatī
must have been worshipped as a goddess in her own right amongst newly absorbed tribes and
her popularity would have spread amongst other people too. So, stories around her would have
gained a cult status. The Sanskritic mythographers would have found it difficult to dismiss these
altogether. An easier move would have been to attempt to domesticate Pārvatī’s character.
Interestingly they did not succeed completely here too, as her stories where she remained
untrammelled and a clever wife continued to pilfer the main text.
However, the episode has also been interpreted in a different way by some scholars. As
mentioned above a theological interpretation of the episode is also quite popular. Handelman
and David Shulman 8 argue that this notion of the god at play, and that too, at dice has
metaphysical dimensions. It was a projection of an inner division within S iva (as androgynous
Ardhnārīśvara) who was pushed into playing the game and then separate into masculine and
feminine parts that temporarily moved away from each other. It was Pārvatī̄(Prakṛti) who
forced S iva (Puruṣa)into the process of bifurcation and as Handelman and Shulman say she also
identified herself with the power of playing and with the implicit devolution. S iva was reluctant
8 Don Handelman and David Shulman. God Inside Out: Shiva’s Game of Dice.
Page 7 of 12
227
Sahgal, S., & Malik, V. (2023). Making Dents in the Paradigm of a Perfect Wife: Parvati’s Negotiations with Patriarchy in Indian Mythology. Advances
in Social Sciences Research Journal, 10(4). 221-232.
URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.14738/assrj.104.14419
to undergo the process that the game entailed.
Within the Sāṁkhya philosophy, Puruṣa has no attributes; they all belong to Prakṛti. Gradually
Puruṣa and Prakṛti came to be identified with Śiva and Pārvatī. Śiva’s loss in dice-game and
giving up of his attributes to Pārvatī, then, become theologically explicable. For spiritual
activation at a supramundane level, Puruṣa had to distance himself from Prakṛti. When Puruṣa
(Śiva) went off (to the forest) there was bliss but Prakṛti got him back. However, the union, this
time, did not overpower Puruṣa. He had understood the reality of Prakṛti at a metaphysical level
but at a mundane level there was renewed entrapment. Interestingly, this philosophy once
again reiterated what Nārada had said jokingly; that contact with women amounted to self-loss
and self-diminution. From our perspective, once again, Pārvatī held the reign, though this time
in a distant way, to the running of the universe as well. She had catapulted Śiva into action.
Pārvatī’s Control of The Birthing Process
This case study refers to Pārvatī’s insistence on establishing her right to be a mother, with or
without the consent and participation of her spouse. Śiva was always reluctant to get tied into
matrimony after Satī’s death. His ascetic dedication, after her demise, scared gods who sent
Kāma to invigorate desire (pierce the arrow of love and eroticism) in him and also created the
same desire in Pārvatī, to win him over. Pārvatī was anyway Satī in her previous birth with her
love for him remained intact. She initially failed in distracting Śiva. So, she went into an
expansive meditation and tapas/penance to win him over through her devotional fervour. The
combination of Pārvatī’s tapas and Kāma’s arrow resulted in Śiva’s developing intense desire
for Pārvatī and he finally set to marry Pārvatī. Seeing the beauty of full-breasted sensuous girl,
Śiva the great yogi could not desist. (ŚivP 2.3.12). Kāma’s arrow worked and Pārvatī finally
succeeded in her plan of marrying him. The next logical step was an earnestness to have a son
whom she could call her own, fondle him and look upon him as an extension of her being. When
she approached Śiva with the idea of having a progeny, he was brusque; he did not need a son
to extend his lineage as he was immortal. She had, however wanted to be a mother and that had
made her uneasy with his decision.
The Bṛhaddharma Purāņa gives us a version: "Daughter of the mountain, I am not a
householder, and I have no need for a son. This wicked group of gods gave you to me as a wife,
but a wife is surely the greatest fetter for a man who is without passion. Besides, progeny are a
noose and a stake. House-holders need sons and wealth, and a wife is necessary to obtain a son,
and sons are necessary for making offerings to the ancestors. But I do not die, goddess, and so
why do I need a son? Where there is no disease, what is the need for medicine? Come, you are
a woman and I am a man. Let us enjoy being the causes from which children arise and rejoice
in the pleasures between men and women, without progeny." (BDP 2.60.10-140).
The issue was entangled in the dynamics of becoming a family-man and Śiva was obviously
reluctant to take over that responsibility. His argument was typical: sons were for the
householders who needed them to extricate the father from the cycle of birth and death, a
process accomplished through offerings to the manes in the shrāddha ritual. Śiva, however,
was the Puruṣa, the primeval being: so, there was no necessity for him to have a lineage-maker
son. But Pārvatī, was Prakṛti, the mother of the world, and how could she give up her role to
seek to fill the world with forms. Interestingly, in this myth, while he refused to give Pārvatī his
seed in order that she might conceive a son, he continued to yearn for the amatory sport with
Page 8 of 12
228
Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal (ASSRJ) Vol. 10, Issue 4, April-2023
Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom
her. According to Paul Courtright, Śiva was not an ‘ordinary ascetic misogynist; he valued highly
his erotic play but did not wish to transform it into instrumental activity by placing it under the
goal of conceiving progeny’9. So,Śiva resolved to remain desirous of lovemaking but would hold
his semen and not let the sexual union with Pārvatī end in natural progeny. His resolution
remained self-centric and did not take into cognizance his wife’s perspective.
We are also told that S iva’s reluctance of not becoming a father was somewhere tied up with
Deva’s desire too. As per Skanda Purāṇa informs us that(1.1.28. 31-68), once when S iva decided
to intermingle with Pārvatī̄, it was not liked by Devas as they felt their union could result in the
reproduction of a very powerful offspring who could threaten them. Devas asked Agni to disrupt
their sexual intercourse. Pārvatī̄was not happy with this interruption and gave S iva 's semen in
the joined palms of Agni and made him drink it and cursed him to be omnivorous. Agni became
pregnant and even the Devas being recipients of food through the medium of Agni(in sacrifices)
received S iva’s semen and became pregnant. In another story, Gods had warned Indra that if
S iva- Pārvatī̄ love making continued then the child born of the union would be born
imperishable and remove Indra of his position as king of the gods. (Vām P 28.31-35). The love
making, therefore, had to be disturbed. What becomes obvious through these instances was that
disruptions were deliberately worked out and that interruptions in sexual pleasure and in
possibility of becoming a mother infuriated Pārvatī̄and made her vindictive. How could she,
then, accept Siva’s denial of progeny creation?
Pārvatī felt terribly hurt and possibly lonely too, more so as Śiva would frequently take off to
the mountains to meditate. However, being almost as powerful as her husband, she decided to
take the matter into her own hands. Courtright had summarized numerous versions around the
story and we get this account:
‘Once when Śiva had left his wife Pārvatī for a long time in order to meditate on the mount
Kailasa, she became lonely and longed to have a son who would give her love and protection.
She rubbed [the] unguents on the surface of her limbs and out of this material she rubbed forth
a being in the shape of a young man. She breathed him to life and placed him at the doorway of
her bath, instructing him to admit no one. Meanwhile, Śiva returned from his long meditations
and arrived at Pārvati's private chamber. But the young man blocked his way and refused to let
him in. Not knowing the guard was Pārvatī 's creation Śiva became angry and after a battle cut
off the guard's head. Overhearing the commotion outside, Pārvatī came out. When she saw what
[had] happened she was overcome with grief and anger at what Siva had done. She told him
that unless he restored her son with a new head, she would bring the universe to destruction.
So, Śiva sent his servants in search of a new head. As they travelled north, in the auspicious
direction, they found an elephant and cut off its head, and returned to place it on the vacant
shoulders of Pārvatī 's guardian son. As the son revived, Śiva praised him and gave him the
name of Gaṇeśa, made him lord of his group of devotees (gajas) and adopted him as his own
son. Śiva then told all the gods and goddesses who had assembled there that Gaṇeśa must be
worshipped before all undertakings or these will come to ruin. Gaṇeśa thus became the lord of
obstacles and placed barriers before all who neglected to worship him, he became the lord of
beginnings and brought success to all who remembered him’.10
9 Paul B. Courtright, Gaṇeśa: Lord of Obstacles, Lord of Beginnings.p.43
10 Paul B. Courtright, Gaṇeśa: Lord of Obstacles, Lord of Beginnings. p. 5.
Page 9 of 12
229
Sahgal, S., & Malik, V. (2023). Making Dents in the Paradigm of a Perfect Wife: Parvati’s Negotiations with Patriarchy in Indian Mythology. Advances
in Social Sciences Research Journal, 10(4). 221-232.
URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.14738/assrj.104.14419
Here Pārvatī became a creator (not the reproducer) and almost imitated the mythical male
creator, the Puruṣa, who had created the entire Universe without using a female collaboration.
More important she pushed the reluctant family man to adopt Gaṇeśa as his son, possibly the
way she had recognised his son Virāka as her own. She did not have the option of giving birth
to Gaṇeśa in the normal manner but still went ahead and produced her offspring through an
alternative method outside the womb [ayonija]. In doing so she subverted the model of an ideal
wife and made the patriarch accept her decision about extending the divine family.
There is yet another version of the birth of Gaṇeśa where Pārvatī’s decision to create Gaṇeśa
was more than a mother’s yearning for a son; it was a direct challenge to Śiva who set his rules
on her movements. This version which shows parthenogenic birth of Gaṇeśa, for a different
rationale. It was not merely Pārvatī 's maternal desire to bear a child but insistence from her
friends to create someone of her own to protect her from Śiva that pushed Pārvatī into creating
Gaṇeśa. ‘I should have a servant of my own, a man of accomplishment who will be favourable
to me and obey me and no other; one who will not wander even a hair's breadth from my side’.
As she was thinking in this way, she rubbed out of the dirt of her body a young man who
possessed all good qualities: handsome, well-bodied, sturdy, well-adorned, and most valorous
and strong to guard her inner apartments. She gave him many garments, ornaments, and
blessings. ‘You are my very own son. There is no one else here who belongs only to me,’ she said
(ŚP 2.4.13.9-39).
This myth redefined Pārvatī 's equation with Śiva. Instead of attempting to convince Śiva to help
her conceive a son with him, she became alert to the need of keeping him away, to guard her
independence and agency. This version highlights that it was she who rejected his inviting
gestures, whereas in the other myths, Śiva had stalled hers. However, in both cases the
fundamental structure remained the same: the couple was to have a son without having a
biological one. What stands out is a depiction of Pārvatī as the stronger of the partners in the
divine household context. She had wilfully negated the need for her husband’s seed to create a
child.
A query that bothers the readers: What role does parthenogenic birth play in this myth?
Parthenogenesis among females refers to fertility taking place where male semen is substituted
for other substances like the rubbings of the body. The female seed is thus equated with dirt
that is used against the male seed.11 O’Flaherty reiterates that this unilateral nature of Gaṇes a's
creation was something well accepted by the populace at large. This is made evident also by the
other title ascribed to Gaṇes a in folk tales: Vināyaka or the one created ‘without a husband’(vina
nāyakena) (VāmP 28. 71-72).
Is this not a reference to powerful female imagery that precluded the need of a male, well
accepted at least in tribal narratives? Dirt by itself should not be understood as belittling of
male semen though. O’Flaherty seems to have understood unilateral male births as superior to
unilateral female births.12 Ruth Vanita critiques the argument and states that residues from any
divine body are considered purifying in Hindu beliefs as in the case of cow's dung or even the
11 Wendy O' Flaherty, Women, Androgynes and Other MythicalBeasts.pp.37-38
12 Wendy O' Flaherty, Women, Androgynes and Other Mythical Beasts. p.50.
Page 10 of 12
230
Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal (ASSRJ) Vol. 10, Issue 4, April-2023
Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom
water used to wash idols, which is often consumed by the devotees.
13 This only goes to restate
our point that any remainder of Pārvatī’s body was sufficient to create a powerful deity as
Gaṇeśa, something that she could achieve when her husband refused to make progeny in a
traditional way.
What are the historical and gender implications of the episodes that we have recounted? The
Purāṇas that we have taken into account are from south India and particularly from the eastern
region of the subcontinent. These regions did experience the pervasion of patriarchy but had
also witnessed the flourishing of tāntric traditions in early medieval and medieval times. Here
the mother-element could not be completely subdued. In her Devī avatar, Pārvatī was shown to
be the protector of her followers. But she was also a demanding mother, aware of her cosmic
powers and the one who had to be placated and propitiated with sacrifice. In her Pārvatī form,
she might have been a little more benign but was equally powerful and not really willing to get
subdued. In historical terms, we are referring to the fact that the mythmakers of the day, despite
the process of Brahmanization of oral traditions in marginalized/newly vanquished areas,
could not completely manipulate gender equations in favour of patriarchy. They must have
been compelled to recognize the social power of the divine feminine and the somewhat
egalitarian status of women in tribal/hilly setup and had to accommodate the idea within the
myths as well. The name Pārvatī itself indicates that she was the deity of mountainous, rugged
topography where limited resources would necessitate labour participation of all for survival.
Despite patriarchy making its way into this kind of setup, the subordination of women might
not have been thorough. Purāṇic texts, which otherwise, laud the pativratā model for women,
now exhibited flexibility in recognizing the privilege of the female element, though often in a
grudging tone. Pārvatī decided to have her own child in one case to prove it to Śiva that she
could be on her own without him and in another actually to keep him at bay. Śiva had to finally
give in within both the myths and recognize Gaṇeśa as his own son. In a normal mundane
household, this would have been blasphemous. The divine household could stand up to these
ruptures. Śiva’s extension of the family is also understood by the historians as the merging of
diverse cultic traditions but what becomes interesting from a gender perspective is the way the
cult of Pārvatī entered the mythographer’s literary imagination on a somewhat equal footing.
This was a subtle recognition by the mythmakers of the day that patriarchal processes that they
sought to make more commonplace were contested by different people and different cultic
followers.
CONCLUSION
Pārvatī as depicted in the above instances comes out as a complex person. She was a passionate
woman who could go to any length to win over the love of her life or engage in enduring
lovemaking with her husband. However, she was not a mute-suffering spouse. She had the
potential to destabilize the mundane ‘normal’ model of the pativratā whenever she sensed a
threat to the egalitarian equation of her partnership with Śiva. Pārvatī was not subservient to
the spouse Śiva who was otherwise the dominant deity in the Purāṇas. On the other hand, she
was clearly a threat to the patriarchal idea of a subservient wife, creating ruptures in the divine
household. The mythmakers of the day attempted to domesticate her now and then. But even
13 Ruth Vanita. Shiva Purana: The Birth of Ganesha (Sanskrit). In: Vanita, R., Kidwai, S. (eds) Same-Sex Love in
India.p.81.
Page 11 of 12
231
Sahgal, S., & Malik, V. (2023). Making Dents in the Paradigm of a Perfect Wife: Parvati’s Negotiations with Patriarchy in Indian Mythology. Advances
in Social Sciences Research Journal, 10(4). 221-232.
URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.14738/assrj.104.14419
then, she could show her resilience in critiquing male dominance, at times in a playful way that
did not dent her relationship with her spouse forever.
Historically this can be understood as a compromise formula on the part of the mythmakers to
work out a scenario where the dominant divine feminine of certain locales could be
accommodated in traditional brahmanic patriarchal frames without threatening each other’s
narratives with dire consequences. The enduring quality of these instances, that might have
been narrated on many ritual occasions, within many groups in some regions at least, suggests
something deeper; that women of these groups had mythological fodder to represent their
dissent whenever they felt admonished by patriarchal practices.
Abbreviation
BDP Bṛhaddharma Purāņa
BVP Brahmavaivarta Purāṇa
ŚivP Śiva Purāṇa
SkP Skanda Purāṇa
SP Śānti Parva
Mbh Mahābhārata
VamP Vāmana Purāṇa
Bibliography
Primary Sources:
Brahmavaivarta Purāṇa. (2001).Ed. with introduction by A. R. Chaturvedi, part I-IV (trans.) Shanti Lal Nagar.
New Delhi: Parimal Publications.
Bṛhaddharma Purāņa,(1907).Ed.Panchanana Tarakratna, partI-III. Calcutta: Vagnavasi Press.
The Mahabharata. ( 1933-66). V.S.Sukthankar critical edition published by Bhandarkar Oriental Research
Institute, 19 Vols. Poona: Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute.
Śiva Purāṇa,(1950). Ed. By J.L.Shastri, Ancient Indian Tradition and Mythology. parts I-IV. Delhi : Motilal
Banarasidass
Skanda Purāṇa.( 1992). ). Ed. By J.L.Shastri, Ancient Indian Tradition and Mythology. parts.Vol.49. Delhi: Motilal
Banarasidass. Reprint.
Vāmana Purāṇa.(1968).Ed. Anand Swarup Gupta, Ramnagar. Varanasi: All India Kashi Raj Trust.
Secondary Sources:
Chakrabarti, K.(1999).Divine Family and World Maintenance: Gaṇeśa in the Bengal Puranas in From Myths to
Markets: Essays on Gender, ed. Kumkum Sangari and Uma Chakravarti. New Delhi: Manohar, pp.56-84.
Courtright, P. B. (1985). Gaṇeśa: Lord of obstacles, lord of beginnings. New York:Oxford University Press, p.43.
Handelman, D. and Shulman, D. D. (1997). God Inside Out: Shiva’s Game of Dice. New York: OUP.
Hazra, R. C. (1975). Studies in the Purāṇic records on Hindu rites and customs. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.
Karve, I. (1938-39). Kinship terminology and kinship usage in the Ṛgveda and Atharva- veda. Poona: Annals of
the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Vol.20(1-4). pp.130-131.
Page 12 of 12
232
Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal (ASSRJ) Vol. 10, Issue 4, April-2023
Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom
O’Flaherty, W. D. (1984). The Shifting Balance of Power in the Marriage of Siva and Parvati. The Divine Consort:
Radha and the Goddesses of India, Eds.John Stratton Hawley and Donna Marie Wulff, Delhi, Motilal Banarsidass.
pp.133-134.
_______________ (1982). Women, androgynes, and other mythical beasts. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. pp.37-
38 and 50.
Shah, S. (2012). On Gender, Wives and" Pativratās". Social Scientist, vol.40, No.( 5/6), p.77-90.
Tyagi, J. (2008). Engendering the early household: Brahmanical precepts in the early Gṛhyasūtras, middle of the
first millenium BCE. Delhi: Orient Longman. p. 111
Vanita, R.and Roy, K. (2000). Shiva Purana: The Birth of Ganesha (Sanskrit). Same-Sex Love in India: Readings
from Literature and History.New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Pp. 81-84