Mr.

Bijaya Ghimire

Masculinity

28 February 2014

Individual Masculinity of Arjuna in Bhagavad Geeta: A Contrast with

Hegemonic Masculinity

Essentialist theorists take masculinity as unchangeable, pre-determined and common to

all men but I argue that there are limitations. In Bhagavad Geeta; the masculinity of Krishna in

general and Arjuna in Particular gets changed in its role over time. The study of masculinity of

Arjuna and Krishna shows that masculinity is not only attribute of physical body but rather a

acquired behavioral set under social circumstances. I argue that the crisis of masculinity comes

when the difference of personal masculinity performance and hegemonic masculinity is taken

into account. I will use the concept of hegemonic masculinity to study the personal masculinities

in Bhagavad Geeta. The main attempt of this project is to examine how masculinities of Arjuna

and Krishna is exercised in a situation of crisis. The project focuses on struggle of Arjuna which

goes on crisis when he denies fighting and surrenders to Krishna playing a submissive role. The

crisis model works on the premise that individual masculinity is always measured against the

hegemonic masculinities. We can claim a masculinity in crisis looked from hegemonic

masculinity notion otherwise it is only the accepting of masculinities(s). In the words of Walker,

crisis of masculinity comes in a situation where; “(A) crisis in masculinity is characterized by

instability and uncertainty over social roles and identity, sexuality, work and personal

relationship”(Walker,161).
 Morrell puts his view that “Masculinity is a collective gender identity and not a natural

attribute. It is socially constructed and fluid. There is not one Universal masculinity but many

masculinity” (607). This indicates that the ways in which a situation is responded, masculinities

are differently performed. Butler also argues in the same line of per formative theory that gender

is a performance but not just a social construct as sociologist argue (Butler, 140). Connell

emphasizes that masculinities are “not fixed character types but configuration of practices

generated in a particular situation in a changing structure of relationships.” (Connell,81).

Bhagavad Geeta is one of the famous scripture which deals not only Vedanta philosophy

but with practical problems of life concerning how man could work on his duty. When Arjuna

sees the battle field of Kurukshetra , by notion of hegemonic masculinity he is to fulfill his

historic mission as a true Chhetriya (warrior), but when he understands the war at the critical

moment as a fratricidal war; a worldly weariness comes upon him by which impact he tries to

escape obligations and wants to live a life of an ascetic. This is crisis of masculinity of Arjuna as

Whitehead and Barret makes such comments on the masculine crisis as “(m)asculinities are not

fixed, they change over time, space and not least, during lives of men themselves. Having

accepted this premise, it is clear that for there to be a crisis of masculinity, there would have to

be single masculinity, something solid, fixed, immovable, brittle, even” (Whitehead and

Barrett,8).

When a person is unable to adept the moment of crisis, the resistance is displayed. In

general hegemonic masculine notion beliefs to be dominant but personal masculinity comes

under crisis when the person accepts the need of change. Society does not automatically allows

rather forces them to redefine and rethink as Reid states that “Masculinity is in a state of flux,
reconfiguration and change” (Reid, 2). This is the point where Arjuna’s masculinity is perceived

differently as he says

dr ̣sṭ vemam
̣ ́ sva-janaḿ kr ̣sṇ ̣ayuyutsuḿ samupasthitam

sīdanti mama gātrān ̣i mukhaḿ ca pariśus ̣yati

vepathuś ca śarīre me roma-hars ̣aś ca jāyate

(Translation: My dear Kr ̣sṇ ̣a, seeing my friends and relatives present before me in such a

fighting spirit, I feel the limbs of my body quivering and my mouth drying up. My whole body is

trembling, my hair is standing on end, my bow Gān ̣d ̣īva is slipping from my hand, and my skin is

burning. 1.28-29)

Arjunas shift in thinking concerning him brings flux in his masculinity. A hero of the war

who ordered to place his chariot at a place between two armies changes his masculine

performance and talks philosophically as if he is a ascetic. When a person seems unable to fulfil

the desired masculine role with in a context, he is seen depressed. The mental as well as

physically depression of Arjun can be noted here.

Doubt and knowledge help to form different kinds of masculinities. The same scene of

the war does not bring any change in the masculine performance of Krishna but Arjuna goes

under state of crisis. When masculinity is under crisis, person seems seeking guidance and here

Arjuna does with Krishna. As Messner in his essay ‘Friendship, Intimacy and sexuality argues

that women usually have “deep, intimate, meaningful and lasting friendship where as men have a

number of shallow, superficial and unsatisfying acquaintences” (Messner, 253) which I find it

just a generalization which does not seem applicable in the relation between Arjuna and Krishna.
Arjuna is making inquiry as a intimate as he addresses Krishna in about 42 words like Madava,

Janardana, Madhusudana, Achuta , Partha etc. The names are very meaningful from masculine

perspective too; like the word Achyuta means “One who never falls from his position”. In

despondency of Arjuna, Krishna advices as

kutas tvā kaśmalam idaḿ visame

̣ samupasthitam

anārya-jusṭ am
̣ asvargyam akīrti-karam arjuna

(Translation: The Supreme Personality of Godhead said: My dear Arjuna, how have these

impurities come upon you? They are not at all befitting a man who knows the value of life. They

lead not to higher planets but to infamy.) ( 2.2)

Here Arjuna does no longer represent the norms attributed to hegemonic masculinity. He

is unable to hide his weaknesses which are unmanliness and unfitting to a hero like Arjuna in the

notion of hegemonic masculinity. As Krishna talks of Arjuna his manhood does not fit in

hegemonic definition of men as Kimmel also says; “a man in power, a man with power and a

man of power’’ (Kimmel, 272).

Arjunas masculine pride is made up in a sense with his possession of Gandiva Bow. The

Gandiva Bow can be taken as phallus like symbol associated with identity of Arjuna, his heroic

masculine identity; but when Arjuna says to Krishna

gān ̣d ̣īvaḿ sraḿsate hastāt

[(Translation: my bow Gān ̣d ̣īva is slipping from my hand) (1-29)]

When symbol of power and aggression becomes useless for a frontier man like Arjuna, it

brings change in masculine performance. Here the slipping of the bow can be taken as
Effeminacy. Here the relationship of Krishna and Arjuna is not in equal in status as Krishna

takes Arjuna as a innocent student who makes mistakes and Arjuna is acting in the same line and

surrendering to Krishna as a student believes that teacher knows all the answers of his questions.

Arjuna suddenly changed his masculine performance one from a masculinity of a war

hero to a man of confusion who is in utter dilemma of his duty. While persuading Arjuna;

Krishna says that

aśocyān anvaśocas tvaḿ prajñā-vādāḿś ca bhās ̣ase

gatāsūn agatāsūḿś ca nānuśocanti pan ̣d ̣itāh ̣

[Translation: While speaking learned words, you are mourning for what is not worthy of

grief. Those who are wise lament neither for the living nor for the dead. (2-11)]

Here Krishna questions the masculinity of Arjuna when he does not perform as he was

expected to do so. The masculinity of Krishna is very different than that of Arjuna. The

Masculinity of Arjuna is selfmade and unstable as Krishna claims himself the Universal Teacher,

creator, preserver etcetera, his masculinity is fixed and unchanging as he says to Arjuna about

himself

na tv evāhaḿ jātu nāsaḿ na tvaḿ neme janādhipāh ̣

na caiva na bhavis ̣yāmah ̣ sarve vayam atah ̣ param

[Translation: Never was there a time when I did not exist, nor you, nor all these kings;

nor in the future shall any of us cease to be. (2-12)]

 During the Bhagavad Geeta, the masculine personality of Arjuna keeps on changing and

changes a lot when he is counseled by Krishna. Reaching to the last part of the conversation, the

effeminate masculinity of Arjuna not only gets restored but is further strengthened. While

responding to the question of Krishna asked to Arjuna; has the delusion born of ignorance been

displaced, he answers

nas ̣tọ mohah ̣ smr ̣tir labdhā tvat-prasādān mayācyuta

sthito 'smi gata-sandehah ̣ karis ̣ye vacanaḿ tava

[Translation: My dear Kr ̣isṇ ̣a, O infallible one, my illusion is now gone. I have regained

my memory by your mercy. I am now firm and free from doubt and am prepared to act according

to your instructions. (18-73)]

Up to coming here, Arjunas masculinity gets evolved in different dimension. His

masculinity is now that of a military man who is ready to fight in the war following commands.

The dialogue in Bhagavad Geeta between Krishna and Arjuna starts when Krishna is on the role

of a charioteer and Arjuna seems commanding when he says

senayor ubhayor madhye rathaḿ sthāpaya me 'cyuta

[Translation: O infallible one, please draw my chariot between the two armies. (1-21)]

In Bhagavad Geeta it is described that person who possesses complete prosperity, yasa

(fame), Jnana (Knowledge), and Vairagya (detachment) the attributes of a perfect masculine

persona. Krishna’s personality and description is that of a director. When he sees bisworupa

(universal form) of Krishna he begs pardon

sakheti matvā prasabhaḿ yad uktaḿ he kr ̣s ̣n ̣a he yādava he sakheti

 ajānatā mahimānaḿ tavedaḿ mayā pramādāt pran ̣ayena vāpi

yac cāvahāsārtham asat-kr ̣to 'si vihāra-śayyāsana-bhojanes ̣u

eko 'tha vāpy acyuta tat-samaksam

̣ ́ tat ks ̣āmaye tvām aham aprameyam

[Translation: Thinking of you as my friend, I have rashly addressed You "O Kr ̣s ̣n ̣a," "O

Yādava," "O my friend," not knowing Your glories. Please forgive whatever I may have done in

madness or in love. I have dishonored You many times, jesting as we relaxed, lay on the same

bed, or sat or ate together, sometimes alone and sometimes in front of many friends. O infallible

one, please excuse me for all those offenses. (11-41)]

The main masculine identity Arjuna underwent is from state of hero that challenges the

world to a anti hero that he found himself in a changed world different from the norms he grew

under which shaped his idea of war, death, truth and righteousness. The power has role of

changing masculine identities. Arjuna in the last again changes when he realizes the power of

knowledge as he listened from Krishna.

 Citation

Butler, Judith. Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. New York:

Routledge; 1999.

Connell, R. W. Masculinities. Cambridge: Polity Press, 1995.

CONNELL, R.W. The social organization of masculinity, In Whitehead, Stephen M. & Barrett

Frank J. The masculinities reader. Cambridge, 2001

KIMMEL, MICHAEL S. Masculinity as homophobia, In Whitehead, Stephen & Barrett, Frank J.

The masculinities reader. Cambridge,2001.

Mascaro, Juan (tr.) The Bhagavadgeeta; translated from the Sanskrit with an introduction.

London: Penguin Classics, 1965.

Morrell. Foreword. Men Behaving Differently: South African Men Since 1994. Double Storey

Books: Cape Town, 2004.

Whitehead, Stephen. M. Men and Masculinities: Key Themes and New Directions . Cambridge:

Polity Press,2002.