सखाराम बाइंडर [Sakharam Binder]

by Vijay Tendulkar, विजय तेंदुलकर, Sarojini Verma (Translator)

श्रीमती सरोजिनी वर्मा द्वारा मराठी के वर्चस्वी नाटककार श्री विजय तेंडुलकर की अत्यंत विवादस्पद और बहुचर्चित कृति 'सखाराम बाइंडर' का सशक्त और प्राणवान अनुवाद, जिसने रंगमंच पर दांपत्य जीवन की गोपनीय नैतिकता का साहसपूर्ण ढंग से पर्दाफाश किया है! सरकारी नियंत्रण को चुनौती देकर उच्चतम न्यायालय से लेखकीय अभिव्यक्ति के आधार पर मान्यता पाने वाला अपने ढंग का अकेला और अनूठा नाटक है! 'सखाराम बाइंडर' को इस तरह प्रस्तुत किया गया है कि वह गलाजत से भरी दिखावटी संभ्रांतता को पहली बार इतने सक्षम ढंग से चुनौती देता है! रटे-रटाये मूल्यों को सखाराम ही नहीं इस नाटक के सारे पात्र अपनी पात्रता की खोज में ध्वस्त करते चले जाते हैं! जिन नकली मूल्यों को हम अपने ऊपर आडम्बर की तरह थोप कर चिकने-चुपड़े बने रहना चाहते है, उसे सही-सही इस आइने में निर्ममता से उघडता हुआ देखते हैं! 'सखाराम बाइंडर' वही आइना है! भाषा के स्तर पर सारे पत्र बड़ी खुली और ऐसी बाजारुपन से संयुक्त भाषा का प्रयोग करते हैं जिन्हें हमने अकेले-दुकेले कभी सुना जरुर होगा! किन्तु उसे अपने संस्कारिता का अंश मानने में सदैव कतराते रहे हैं! पुरे नाटक में कथावस्तु की विलक्षणता न होते हुए भी पात्रों का आपसी संयोजन भाषा के जिस स्तर पर नाटककार ने किया है, वही नाटकीयता को उभारने में अदभुत रूप से सफल हुआ!

Genres: Marathi, Drama, Plays, Classics, India

158 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1972

About the author

Vijay Tendulkar (Marathi: विजय तेंडुलकर) (7 January 1928 – 19 May 2008) was a leading Indian playwright, movie and television writer, literary essayist, political journalist, and social commentator primarily in Marāthi. He is best known for his plays, Shantata! Court Chalu Aahe (1967), Ghāshirām Kotwāl (1972), and Sakhārām Binder (1972).Many of Tendulkar’s plays derived inspiration from real-life incidents or social upheavals, which provides clear light on harsh realities. He provided his guidance to students studying “Playwright writing” in US universities. For over five decades, Tendulkar had been a highly influential dramatist and theater personality in Mahārāshtra.
Early life
Vijay Dhondopant Tendulkar was born on 7 January 1928 in a Bhalavalikar Saraswat brahmin family in Kolhapur, Maharashtra, where his father held a clerical job and ran a small publishing business. The literary environment at home prompted young Vijay to take up writing. He wrote his first story at age six.
He grew up watching western plays, and felt inspired to write plays himself. At age eleven, he wrote, directed, and acted in his first play.
At age 14, he participated in the 1942 Indian freedom movement , leaving his studies. The latter alienated him from his family and friends. Writing then became his outlet, though most of his early writings were of a personal nature, and not intended for publication.
Early career
Tendulkar began his career writing for newspapers. He had already written a play, “Āmchyāvar Kon Prem Karnār” (Who will Love us?), and he wrote the play, “Gruhastha” (The Householder), in his early 20s. The latter did not receive much recognition from the audience, and he vowed never to write again . Breaking the vow, in 1956 he wrote “‘Shrimant”, which established him as a good writer. “Shrimant” jolted the conservative audience of the times with its radical storyline, wherein an unmarried young woman decides to keep her unborn child while her rich father tries to “buy” her a husband in an attempt to save his social prestige.
Tendulkar’s early struggle for survival and living for some time in tenements (“chāwls”) in Mumbai provided him first-hand experience about the life of urban lower middle class. He thus brought new authenticity to their depiction in Marathi theater. Tendulkar’s writings rapidly changed the storyline of modern Marathi theater in the 1950s and the 60s, with experimental presentations by theater groups like “Rangāyan”. Actors in these theater groups like Shreerām Lāgoo, Mohan Agāshe, and Sulabhā Deshpānde brought new authenticity and power to Tendulkar’s stories while introducing new sensibilities in Marathi theater.
Tendulkar wrote the play, “Gidhāde” (The Vultures) in 1961, but it was not produced until 1970. The play was set in a morally collapsed family structure and explored the theme of violence. In his following creations, Tendulkar explored violence in its various forms: domestic, sexual, communal, and political. Thus, “Gidhāde” proved to be a turning point in Tendulkar’s writings with regard to establishment of his own unique writing style.
Based on a 1956 short story, “Die Panne” (“Traps”) by Friedrich Dürrenmatt, Tendulkar wrote the play, “Shāntatā! Court Chālu Aahe” (“Silence! The Court Is In Session”). It was presented on the stage for the first time in 1967, and proved as one of his finest works. Satyadev Dubey presented it in movie form in 1971 with Tendulkar’s collaboration as the screenplay writer.
1970s and ’80s
In his 1972 play, Sakhārām Binder (Sakhārām, the Binder), Tendulkar dealt with the topic of domination of the male gender over the female gender. The main character, Sakhārām, is a man devoid of ethics and morality, and professes not to believe in “outdated” social codes and conventional marriage. He accordingly uses the society for his own pleasure. He regularly gives “shelter” to abandoned wives, and uses them f

Reviews

[Girija (thesacredwhispers) · Rating 4 out of 5]

Sakharam Binder by Vijay Tendulkar is a 3 act play that was written and performed way back in 1972. The play as the name suggests is about a person who is self made and knows he does wrong things but takes pride in saying that he accepts that. And because of this he is a self proclaimed true man.

Sakharam Binder doesn't believe in societal values and lives life as per his terms. He brings home women that are outcaste or thrown away by their husbands and gives them food, shelter and clothes but in exchange he wants them to do all the wifely duties of housework, have sex with him, respect him, not deny him anything and never utter a word against him. The only thing different in this relationship is they are free to leave whenever they feel. He considers 'husband' as the most heinous person as husbands are fake, they use their wives as per their need and then throw them away. Whereas Sakharam is the person who gives shelter to such women who would've otherwise been forced to roam on the roads, could be murdered or worse sell their bodies in order to survive. But how different is Sakharam from his definition of husband if he too abuses the women he keeps, hits them whenever he feels like and have sex even if they are not interested?

The story starts with Laxmi, the 7th woman brought by Sakharam. Lakshmi, a docile, innocent woman who couldn't even harm a small any is full of gratitude for giving her permission to stay and complies to everything that Sakharam says or does.

On the contrary, Champa who Sakharam gets after Lakshmi leaves has a voice. She not only shows Sakharam his right place but also has the heart to call a spade spade in front of Sakharam who has always had women agreeing to him. The only reason she is willing to stay with Sakharam is because she feels it's better to deal with one monster than hundred that she will meet on the road if she decides to leave the house.

Each character considers themselves right at their own place. But is Sakharam right to take advantage of the women just because he has given them the basic needs? Or is Lakhsmi right to suffer at the hands of Sakharam just because he has provided her with a place to stay? Or is Champa right who though having a voice is still ready to deal with Sakharam because she doesn't want to face the outside world?
🌷
Through these multidimensional characters a gut wrenching play that makes your head spin with rage, Vijay Tendulkar brings to light the true face of the hypocritical society.
🌷
This play was written almost 50 years back was surely much ahead of its time and thus faced criticism largely so much so that it was banned after having performed for about 2 years. The sad state however is the play seems real even today for not much has changed in the hypocrisy of the society, the way a woman is objectified and the things she has to deal with just to keep herself safe from the outside world.
⭐⭐⭐⭐/5.

[Ravina P · Rating 3 out of 5]

There's no good or bad here, what remains is 'harmless' actions and 'harmful' actions.

[Srishti · Rating 5 out of 5]

तेंदुलकर के लेखन ने मुझे हमेशा ही प्रभावित किया है। सखाराम बाइंडर भी लेखक के कईं नाटकों की तरह एक छाप छोड़ देता है, करारी छाप। हर पात्र अपने स्थान पर सही सा मालूम होता है, जायज़ नाजायज़ जैसा भ्रम पैदा नहीं करता। हर व्यक्ति में एक सखाराम है जो अपने को हमेशा सबसे अलग मानता है, जिसे अपने चींटी मार देने पर भी गुरूर है। तेंदुलकर ने कुछ साबित करने की कोशिश नहीं की, सखाराम जो है सो है।

[Yajnaseni Roy · Rating 5 out of 5]

One of the most depressing books that I have read in recent times. The characters were multidimensional, which made the drama all the more realistic.

[Amit Kamble · Rating 5 out of 5]

Vijay Tendulkar’s Sakharam Binder struck me as a play that refuses to let the reader remain a mere spectator. It is unsettling, raw, and deeply human. At first glance, Sakharam appears to be an honest, no-nonsense man—someone who prides himself on not being a hypocrite. Yet the more I read, the more I felt the weight of his contradictions. He rails against the falseness of marriage, but in his own home he recreates the very structures of dominance and submission that he claims to despise. That irony stayed with me.

What disturbed me further was how Sakharam takes in deserted women not out of compassion but to assert his authority over them. His “honesty” feels like another mask of control. He seemed, to me, both pitiable and detestable at once—pitiable because of his loneliness, detestable because of the cruelty with which he hides it.

Among the women, Laxmi touched me the most. Her timid, devout, and religious nature reminded me of many women I’ve known—silent, enduring, and carrying an almost limitless capacity for sacrifice. I admired her compassion, yet I also found myself uneasy with her submission. Was it strength in disguise, or simply a surrender she had been taught to accept? And then, when her survival is at stake, her transformation is chilling. In that moment, I saw how endurance can turn into a weapon—quiet suffering can erupt as cold, unflinching realism.

Champa, on the other hand, unsettled me in a different way. She is bold, sensual, and unapologetically self-centered. I found myself admiring her defiance—her refusal to bow to Sakharam’s authority. At times, her sharp tongue even made me smile, as if she were mocking not just Sakharam but the entire hypocrisy of male dominance. Yet I also sensed her vulnerability. In a world stacked against outspoken women, Champa’s boldness carried within it the seed of tragedy. Reading her, I felt both admiration and dread, as though Tendulkar were warning me that society punishes women who dare to speak too loudly.

Together, Sakharam, Laxmi, and Champa do not just create a story—they create a mirror. As I moved through the play, I felt myself pulled into uncomfortable questions: How much of Sakharam lives in all of us? How often do we, like Laxmi, suffer in silence? And how many Champas are silenced because they refused to accept their place?

For me, Sakharam Binder is not merely a play about flawed characters. It is a study of the human condition where sex, power, violence, and morality collide. More importantly, it is a reminder that behind every mask of honesty or devotion lies a struggle for survival. That realization stayed with me long after I closed the book—and perhaps that is Tendulkar’s greatest triumph.

[Deepak Kashyap · Rating 4 out of 5]

एक पहाड़ी, नागवारा, बहुत ही छोटे शायद लेखक के पिता जी का नाम भी लगभग राम ही था। उस परिवार में साधारण, मामूली नामों की कोई किल्लत तो जान नहीं पड़ती है। अब वे सखे किस किस के थे इसका संज्ञान पुलसी पृष्ठभूमि के कुछ चुनिंदा व्यक्तिओं को ही हों। मर्यादा पुरूषोत्तम। कथानुसर लेकिन किसी धोबी के कहने पर अपनी परम पूजनीय देवी को घर से भी निकाले थे, अगर नाचीज़ की याददाश्त खराब ना हो।

कभी कभी उनकी स्त्री सीता होती। कभी सहमी हुई, पतिवृत्ता, पांव के धूल में मरने की इच्छा रखने वाली लक्ष्मी, किंतु चम्पा जैसी निडर और कुलक्षणी कभी ना हो सकी। हो जाती शायद, चाही नहीं की हों। ना भी हुई तो हुई तो स्वंय ही। अपना ही जीवन जिया जाता है, किसी और का नहीं। ना कोई लक्ष्मी चंपा होनी चाहिए, ना दोनों में से कोई सीता, और रौशनी तो कत्तई नहीं।

सार्त्र का कहना कि जहन्नुम बाकी वय्क्ति हैं, इस बात का चंपा को संपूर्ण संज्ञान है - "बाहर दस तरा के जानवर और खसोटेंगे, मरें। उससे तो एक अकेला कुत्ता भला।" इस हौब्ब्सी संसार में शायद मौहब्बत सबसे साहसिक राजनैतिक ऐलान ही है कि तमाम असहनीय अन्यों में मैं किसी एक बेहद महत्तवकांक्षी मेरी अन्य के प्रति समर्पित हो जाऊं, गवारा तो उन्हें भी मैं नहीं हूँ।

१९४३ में काम्यू जो एक मालांतादू लिखें हैं उसकी समृतियां इसमें हैं, लेकिन ये उस से परे है। बड़ा शायद नहीं। हिंसा, उसके सभी स्वरूपों में गलत ही होती है, लेकिन इंसां पैदा होने की हिंसा पे, इस विचित्र, अर्थहीन संसार में फेक दिए जाने, भ्रमण करने की हिंसा को भी तो हिंसा ही कहा जाना चाहिए। कुदाल को कुदाल ही कहिए।

"नूर"/०३.११.२०२४

[Mahipal]

Are bhai padhu kaise

[Rajat Narula · Rating 2 out of 5]

A play that focuses on the life of lower-caste downtrodden. Sakhraram Binder has no sense of guilt despite his many sins.

[Hri · Rating 4 out of 5]

i'm just so so glad i got to read this as part of my literature degree. vijay tendulkar was the 'angry young man' of indian literature

[Binish Fatima · Rating 4 out of 5]

Crude words, lasting impact.

[Ritika Jakhotiya · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.5/5

[Prateik · Rating 5 out of 5]

Mind-blowing act

[Aditya Deshpande · Rating 5 out of 5]

Sakharam Binder is one character that the reader would love to hate. The way he objectifies women is cringeworthy. It seems unbelievable that this controversial play was written almost 50 years ago! Even today the hard-hitting content is difficult to digest. Highly recommended for readers who don't mind being shaken off their reverie.