Studying Draupadi - Page 2 | Mythological Masti

First Previous

Page

Next Last

Frequent Posters

Eloquent

@Eloquent

IF-Sizzlerz

+ 2

Posted: 11 years ago

Originally posted by: shubhika124
Thank you for responding!

I shall paste the extract here for the better understanding , I hope its allowed.

But what was Draupadi's biggest mistake?

When Dharma lost the dice game and Duryodhana sent a slave to bring her into the

assembly, she sent the slave back, saying, "Go into the assembly and ask if Dharma-raja

had become a slave before he staked me." Duryodhana replied, "Come into the assembly,

you will get your answer." When she refused to come, Duhshasana dragged her into the

hall. There she stood weeping, but with fury she asked the question again. With shouts

that talking was useless, the Kaurava men started pulling off Draupadi's sari. As each sari

was pulled off another appeared in its place. Meanwhile the discussion continued.

The question Draupadi asked rested on a difficult and complicated legal point. Even

Bhishma, who had often taken the part of the Pandavas in quarrels with Dhrita-rashtra

and Duryodhana, was unable to give an answer, perhaps for fear of compromising

Draupadi. What Draupadi was contending was that once Dharma had become a slave he

had lost his freedom and had no right to claim anything as his own; a slave has nothing he

can stake. Then how could Dharma stake her freedom? Although her argument seems

plausible from one point of view, even a slave has a wife, and the fact of his slavery does

not destroy his authority over her. Moreover, from the most ancient times a slave had the

right to accumulate certain property that was entirely his own. The question was thus a

tangled one, involving the rights of a master over a slave and a slave over his wife.

Draupadi's question was not only foolish; it was terrible No matter what answer was

given her position was desperate. If Bhishma told her that her husband's rights over her

did not cease, that even though he became a slave, she was in his power and he had the

right to stake her, her slavery would have been confirmed. If Bhishma had argued that

because of his slavery her husband had no more rights over her, then her plight would

have been truly pitiable. Draupadi was described as

nathavati anathavat '

"with husbands, but like a widow", and if her relation with her husband was destroyed she

would have been truly widowed. From Rigvedic times there are references to abandoned

wives living wretchedly in the house of their father. But there is not a single case in

which a woman, of her own accord, had denied her husband. For such a woman, getting

even a lowly position in her father's house would have been impossible, to say nothing of

an honorable one.

Draupadi's question had put all of them in a dilemma. Bhishma hung his head.

Dharma was ready to die of shame. Draupadi was standing there arguing about legal

technicalities like a lady pundit when what was happening to her was so hideous that she

should only have cried out for decency and pity in the name of the Kshatriya code. Had

she done so perhaps things would not have gone so far. Allowing their own daughter-in-

law to be dragged before a full assembly, dishonouring a bride of their own clan in the

hall of the men, was so against all human, unwritten law that quibbling about legal

distinctions at that point was the height of pretension.

Draupadi's last words to Bheem after recalling her marital life in her last minutes. When she was denied heaven , Bhim asked Yudishatra for the reason & he said that Draupadi throughout her life loved Arjuna more than her other husbands. Draupadi felt guilty when she heard that.

But in what sense was it a sin? Wasn't he the one who had won her.

Bringing Bhima's face close to hers, she said with her last

breath, "In our next birth be the eldest, Bhima; under your shelter we can all live in safety

and joy."

By this logic, if a slave has no freedom of his own and lost all to their masters, and yet the slave also had a wife and property. A contradiction? A paradox?

Draupadi's question was neither stupid nor mistimed. Not stupid because no one could answer the question till the end of the epic. If most of the "learned and respected" men at that time and especially at that assembly of Hastinapur couldn't answer the question, doesn't that by itself prove the 'intelligence' of the question? The practicality of it?

The second part is: no, the question was also not mistimed, in the sense that Draupadi was very cleverly buying time for herself by speaking. She bought herself time (from the immediate danger of Dusshasan on her person) by first saluting all the elders (which was the social custom of those days) in an elaborate manner which also dripped with sarcasm and irony since she reminded them that she was doing her duty by respecting her elders and by that same ritual reminding them of theirs.

When she realised that no one was willing to even stir (the less said about her husbands the better), she went to technicality in law, by her question. While people like Bhishma, Drona, Kripa and that damned fool of a King were pondering over her question, everyone was was still, especially Dusshasan, the immediate danger. So, she was buying time.

"Draupadi's question had put all of them in a dilemma. Bhishma hung his head."

Also, this Draupadi Vastraharan episode is the very middle of the Mahabharat epic. Yes, there were MANY reasons for the Kurukshetra war and yet THIS incident was the chief reason for it. So it was an important turning point or the main event over which the fate of so many hung.

Also, in a way, Krishna, used this incident to test the morality of all the people in that assembly. This incident was the main "test" of God, I feel. And also, as has been gone over and again, he set down the path of dharma (doing right at all costs, in any and all situation, no matter what stands opposing you).

Going by technicality, Duryodhan was the master and blah blah. But the main issue of morality is higher than this mere technicality. On a mere technicality you CANNOT justify wrong.

Lets see the case with Bhishma Pitamah. He was on oath, beholden to the Throne of Hastinapur. Whoever sat on the throne, he considered himself oath-bound to follow. So, Bhishma's dilemma was that, unless the King (self, blind bat) didn't object, he couldn't do anything. He couldn't oppose the King's decree or oppose the King.
So according to the Kshatriya dharma of honouring oaths, he was bound by his oath.

But what Krishna as God expected from him, was to go above this "oath" and do right, which in this situation, was rescuing the helpless. Even his "great, terrible, sacred, larger than life" oath which had become his very life, was nothing in front of doing right, doing dharma.
Plus, as a Kshatriya, he had another dharma or duty to protect the weak and helpless. Wasn't he ignoring that duty? Wasn't he ignoring the right and noble duty in favour of the duty which was, in that situation, redundant? (Since, his original oath was to sacrifice himself for Satyavati's sons, who were already dead).

In fact, in one place I read that when Bhishma was lying on his bed of arrows, waiting to die, he asked Krishna, "Why does it hurt so much? For what, this pain?"
And Krishna answered "For your silence and non-action in the Vastraharan where it was your duty as the eldest to do right, follow dharma."

Originally posted by: visrom
But in what sense was it a sin? Wasn't he the one who had won her.

This is sort of true...he won her and in her eyes he was the hero. Any woman would have fallen for him. BUT...someone like Draupadi is supposed to behave in a perfect manner. She married 5 men and she was supposed to treat them all equally. But even when while she spent time with other husbands, she would have Arjun at the back of her mind. That was like being unfaithful and unfair to other husbands.

Lol, in that case shouldn't the other Pandavas, like Arjun and Bhim be denied heaven on those very same points? Arjun had many wives and preferred Subhadra over all of them. Bhim also had multiple wives and loved Draupadi above them all. By this logic, shouldn't they too be denided heaven? Why the discrimination between males and females?

They were denied heaven, but not for these reasons. Other reasons like Arjun's pride were given by Yudhisthir.

I just read somewhere that these were the reasons Yudhisthir gave, according to his understanding. Ved vyas said it was his interpretation. But not sure of this as I read it very fleetingly.

But, in a way, I haven't yet understood why Yudhisthir was given heaven with his human body intact? He too had made many mistakes. (Perhaps too many, in my book)

Anyways, since this is a topic about analysing Draupadi: She was supposed to be in her previous lives, successively: Vedavati, Maya-Sita (Shadow-Sita of the Agnipariksha episode), Nalayini (daughter of Nala and Damayanti) and finally Draupadi fire-born.

I find it interesting that in almost all of her births, she has faced molestation in one form or another. Vedavati: Molested by Ravana, Maya-Sita, again by Ravana (though not exactly molested but surely it was not a cake walk in Ashoka Vatika) and finally again molested as Draupadi by D & D.
Edited by Eloquent - 11 years ago

Quote

Vrish

@Vr15h

Viewbie

+ 4

Posted: 11 years ago

Lol, in that case shouldn't the other Pandavas, like Arjun and Bhim be denied heaven on those very same points? Arjun had many wives and preferred Subhadra over all of them. Bhim also had multiple wives and loved Draupadi above them all. By this logic, shouldn't they too be denided heaven? Why the discrimination between males and females?

They were denied heaven, but not for these reasons. Other reasons like Arjun's pride were given by Yudhisthir.

I just read somewhere that these were the reasons Yudhisthir gave, according to his understanding. Ved vyas said it was his interpretation. But not sure of this as I read it very fleetingly.

But, in a way, I haven't yet understood why Yudhisthir was given heaven with his human body intact? He too had made many mistakes. (Perhaps too many, in my book)

Good point. Although I think that Arjun's favorite was Chitrangada, who was the only one for whom he approached her father for him. He won Draupadi, Uloopi pretty much arm twisted him into marrying her, while Krishna instigated him to abduct Subhadra so that she didn't end up marrying Duryodhan (which would have forced Krishna to be a Kaurava vassal).

But I do think that the reasons Arjun or Bhima were denied heaven may have been the reasons of vanity or voraciousness, in addition to having favorites among their spouses.

As for Yudhisthir, he did get the option of being in heaven, but w/ the likes of Duryodhan & Dushashan. He had to spend some time in hell if he wanted to be w/ his brothers, and only after he cast off his body i.e. died did he re-unite w/ his family and allies in heaven.

Anyways, since this is a topic about analysing Draupadi: She was supposed to be in her previous lives, successively: Vedavati, Maya-Sita (Shadow-Sita of the Agnipariksha episode), Nalayini (daughter of Nala and Damayanti) and finally Draupadi fire-born.

But Draupadi was born to be the cause of the destruction of the Kuru race, which was curious. Drupada wanted a son who'd kill Drona, and got Dhrishtadyumna for that. However, he was defeated and captured in battle by Arjun, not by the Kauravas: in fact, he had defeated that Kauravas and had little reason to resent them. OTOH, he had every reason to resent Arjun, yet he targeted Arjun as the husband he wanted for Draupadi. But Arjun would have been under no obligation to take his side against Drona, and indeed, had there not been the enmity b/w the Kauravas and the Pandavas, Drupada could never have realized his ambition of getting his revenge on Drona.

Edited by .Vrish. - 11 years ago

Quote

visrom

@visrom

IF-Stunnerz

+ 4

Posted: 11 years ago

Originally posted by: eloquent
Originally posted by visrom

But in what sense was it a sin? Wasn't he the one who had won her.

This is sort of true...he won her and in her eyes he was the hero. Any woman would have fallen for him. BUT...someone like Draupadi is supposed to behave in a perfect manner. She married 5 men and she was supposed to treat them all equally. But even when while she spent time with other husbands, she would have Arjun at the back of her mind. That was like being unfaithful and unfair to other husbands.

Lol, in that case shouldn't the other Pandavas, like Arjun and Bhim be denied heaven on those very same points? Arjun had many wives and preferred Subhadra over all of them. Bhim also had multiple wives and loved Draupadi above them all. By this logic, shouldn't they too be denided heaven? Why the discrimination between males and females?

Everyone has a favourite, but when in the company of one they shouldn't think of others. Arjun may have had his favourites, but he was not thinking of Subhadra when he was with Draupadi. You know what I mean...

I don't like to discriminate between male snd female...mythology does. Theres the concept of pativratas, but not patnivratas...(Ram maybe an exception) The sins for which Bheem and Arjun were denied heaven rank higher than their 'disloyalty' to other wives, not that they were not guilty of the offence.Edited by visrom - 11 years ago

Quote

Eloquent

@Eloquent

IF-Sizzlerz

+ 2

Posted: 11 years ago

Originally posted by: .Vrish.

As for Yudhisthir, he did get the option of being in heaven, but w/ the likes of Duryodhan & Dushashan. He had to spend some time in hell if he wanted to be w/ his brothers, and only after he cast off his body i.e. died did he re-unite w/ his family and allies in heaven.

Who would want a heaven with those two demons in it?! 😆🥱 Rather enjoy hell :P

I agree w/ the rest of what you wrote, but Vedavati was Sita, who later was reborn as Rukmini, not Draupadi. The Maya-Sita was a Tulsidas invention, and not there in Valmiki. I'm not sure about Adhyatma Ramayan.

Lol, can't argue there as there are several different interpretations and always confused about which is the actual one! Hmm...but wasn't an 'amsha' of MahaLakshmi supposed to be in each of his chielf 8 Queens? And one 'amsha' was supposed to be in Draupadi as well. In one version, Draupadi was composite avatar of eight different Goddesses! Wonder she didn't go mad or had multiple personality disorder :P

But Draupadi was born to be the cause of the destruction of the Kuru race, which was curious.

Lol, not just the Kuru race, but the entire Kshatriya i.e warrior class 😆 There was an article on the net which described it as "wholesale destruction of the warrior class" 😆

They had all grown too evil, arrogant, blah blah blah. From the Kurukshetra war, only 10 people survived, 5 of them the Pandavas. Wonder who the other 5 were (not counting Krishna as he didn't exactly fight). Quite a heavy responsibility for someone who has never set foot on a battle-field nor had any intention to do so. 😆 Infact, Draupadi was used or an instrument of the Krishna avatar. Krishna didn't directly bring about the destruction of the Kshatriyas, unlike Parashurama who went about it like a bull. Quite interesting and I wonder why.

Drupada wanted a son who'd kill Drona, and got Dhrishtadyumna for that. However, he was defeated and captured in battle by Arjun, not by the Kauravas: in fact, he had defeated that Kauravas and had little reason to resent them. OTOH, he had every reason to resent Arjun, yet he targeted Arjun as the husband he wanted for Draupadi. But Arjun would have been under no obligation to take his side against Drona, and indeed, had there not been the enmity b/w the Kauravas and the Pandavas, Drupada could never have realized his ambition of getting his revenge on Drona.

This, because we know and understand Arjun's character and know how he would have great qualms about warring with his favourite guru. Drupad probably didn't exactly analyse Arjun or got much opportunity to do so. From his POV, Arjun is the one who is able to defeat and drag him to Drona. Apart from this, there is Arjun's fame as the best archer and warrior at that time. So, from his POV, it was a brilliant political move. Even if Arjun didn't go against Drona, he couldn't also be used by Drona against Drupad, once he was married.

The other curious thing is that even though Draupadi caused the destruction of the Kauravas, she pretty much caused the destruction of the Pandavas as well. After the war, she lost not only her own sons, but also all her husbands' other sons - Ghatotkacha, Iravana, Abhimanyu.

Yes, a rather unintended and unfortunate effect of her great Curse. Can't exactly blame her though as the Curse was done at a very tragic moment in her life. I don't think after all the perversity she was put through, she was entirely thinking straight. Also, the fact that she was meant to give that Curse. And in a way, as I see it, I think what she said was as much a curse, as foresight. Could also be a result of the very close touch she had with the Divine only moments earlier.

What is interesting is that her curse affected all the Kshatriyas who were alive at that point, which I guess included all the sons of the extended Pandava clan. Parikshit is not born at that point, so survives, even though barely and that too via Krishna's intervention.

But one thing I absolutely hate is the blame she gets for the war. Yes, I get all the "she was born to destroy" etc. But IMO, the blame for the war rests chiefly at the feet of people like Dhritarashtra, Duryodhan, Dussashan, Karna and their perverse lusts. No, don't blame your lust, blame the woman 🤢

Both Draupadi and Dhrishtadyumna came in weird packages. Draupadi came & was the cause of the deaths of her own sons as well, and her own maayka got wiped out in the war. Dhrishtadyumna was created to be the cause of Drona's death, but never won any battle against him, and always had to be rescued by the likes of Satyaki, Bhima & Arjun whenever he fought Drona or Ashwatthama. Indeed, the yagna Drupada did was really half baked, since what he got out of it hardly met what he must have wished for.

Lol, Drupada wanted to kill/defeat Drona and so get back his half-Kingdom. 😆 The problem was that to defeat Drona you had to kill him since he wouldn't back down otherwise. Also, as George RR Martin loves to say: Prophecies are tricky. Could say one thing, could mean quite another. 😆
But whatever Drupada thought about it, the prophecy was fulfilled, if just not in the way Drupada or Dhristadyumna himself thought it would. They probably thought Dhristadyumna (what a tongue twister!) would gain some magical powers and kill Drona in a heroic, one-of-its-kind, one-on-one duel to death 😆

The yagna thing just tells us one thing: You don't know how the Gods play with you. Drupada wanted a son/warrior to kill Drona. Got him through the Gods, yet they pushed in the other D through the fire as well, as a bonus package. They used Drupada's revenge-directed yagna to do their own will. In reality, Dhristadyumna was the side show, Draupadi was the main deal, the reason they even indulged Drupada's little fire-show.

Quote

Eloquent

@Eloquent

IF-Sizzlerz

+ 2

Posted: 11 years ago

Originally posted by: visrom

Everyone has a favourite, but when in the company of one they shouldn't think of others. Arjun may have had his favourites, but he was not thinking of Subhadra when he was with Draupadi. You know what I mean...

Hahaha, I'm just giggling at what that insinuated. 😆 Hmmm...still don't get the partiality bit. Read articles claim she wasn't partial, too. There is also the interpretation by some people (who have written novels on this) that this was just Yudi-bhai being highly jealous at a time when D was in no position to defend herself.

I don't like to discriminate between male snd female...mythology does. Theres the concept of pativratas, but not patnivratas...(Ram maybe an exception) The sins for which Bheem and Arjun were denied heaven rank higher than their 'disloyalty' to other wives, not that they were not guilty of the offence.

The more I delve deeper into this mythology business, the more I think, the shastras were more just and equal between the sexes. It was the later society which twisted them to suit themselves.
Once everyone, even females, were allowed so be with who they wished, however many people they wished with. Was reading Ramesh Menon's "modern" rendering of Mahabharat, so don't know if its true though. Something about Satyaketu and his curse.

One thing to be noted is: Draupadi is included in the Panchakanyas, the five virgins, even though she's had 5 husbands and has been derided as a veshya, etc over time.
Similarly, the others in the 5 virgin list are Ahalya (who was forced/ was willing with Indra), Tara (married the killer of her husband), Mandodari, Sita, etc.. Even Kunti is on the list in some versions. Makes me think, the shastras or the ancients probably meant a different kind of virginity/chastity than the meaning, the later patriarchal society drew from it. One thing in common to all those on the list was that they all suffered quite a lot. 😳

Another issue on Draupadi, is what all the current lot of writers seemed to be obsessed about: Draupadi/Karna. 😆

Thoughts?

Quote

Shubhika

@shubhika124

IF-Sizzlerz

+ 5

Posted: 11 years ago

Originally posted by: Eloquent

One thing to be noted is: Draupadi is included in the Panchakanyas, the five virgins, even though she's had 5 husbands and has been derided as a veshya, etc over time.
Similarly, the others in the 5 virgin list are Ahalya (who was forced/ was willing with Indra), Tara (married the killer of her husband), Mandodari, Sita, etc.. Even Kunti is on the list in some versions. Makes me think, the shastras or the ancients probably meant a different kind of virginity/chastity than the meaning, the later patriarchal society drew from it. One thing in common to all those on the list was that they all suffered quite a lot. 😳

Draupadi is regarded as a virging , isn't it because of the boon she got from Shiv ji as a compensation for having 5 husbands? He had granted her this boon that everyday she'll wake up as a virgin...

I think I've read this somewhere 🤔

Quote

Vrish

@Vr15h

Viewbie

+ 4

Posted: 11 years ago

My comments in blue again

I agree w/ the rest of what you wrote, but Vedavati was Sita, who later was reborn as Rukmini, not Draupadi. The Maya-Sita was a Tulsidas invention, and not there in Valmiki. I'm not sure about Adhyatma Ramayan.

Lol, can't argue there as there are several different interpretations and always confused about which is the actual one! Hmm...but wasn't an 'amsha' of MahaLakshmi supposed to be in each of his chielf 8 Queens? And one 'amsha' was supposed to be in Draupadi as well. In one version, Draupadi was composite avatar of eight different Goddesses! Wonder she didn't go mad or had multiple personality disorder :P

Problem w/ that school of thought is that Draupadi is Krishna's wife in original form, but cousin-in-law here. Also, Lakshmi getting split up into 8 defies belief - why not then 16,108? All mainline accounts I've read - before people started spinning their own - was that Rukmini was Lakshmi's avatar in Vishnu's Krishna avatar.

But Draupadi was born to be the cause of the destruction of the Kuru race, which was curious.

Lol, not just the Kuru race, but the entire Kshatriya i.e warrior class 😆 There was an article on the net which described it as "wholesale destruction of the warrior class" 😆

They had all grown too evil, arrogant, blah blah blah. From the Kurukshetra war, only 10 people survived, 5 of them the Pandavas. Wonder who the other 5 were (not counting Krishna as he didn't exactly fight). Quite a heavy responsibility for someone who has never set foot on a battle-field nor had any intention to do so. 😆 Infact, Draupadi was used or an instrument of the Krishna avatar. Krishna didn't directly bring about the destruction of the Kshatriyas, unlike Parashurama who went about it like a bull. Quite interesting and I wonder why.

On the Pandava side, there were the 5 Pandavas and Satyaki. On the Kaurava side, there was Ashwathama, Kripa & Kritavarma. One could throw in Yuyutsu as well - that would make 10.

If one goes by the other accounts, one could toss in Vrishaketu as well. I agree that Krishna should not be counted here, b'cos if he is, why not Dhrishtadyumna's charioteer? It was he who escaped from Kritavarma and managed to make it to Yudhisthir and tell him about the massacre by Ashwathama.

Drupada wanted a son who'd kill Drona, and got Dhrishtadyumna for that. However, he was defeated and captured in battle by Arjun, not by the Kauravas: in fact, he had defeated that Kauravas and had little reason to resent them. OTOH, he had every reason to resent Arjun, yet he targeted Arjun as the husband he wanted for Draupadi. But Arjun would have been under no obligation to take his side against Drona, and indeed, had there not been the enmity b/w the Kauravas and the Pandavas, Drupada could never have realized his ambition of getting his revenge on Drona.

This, because we know and understand Arjun's character and know how he would have great qualms about warring with his favourite guru. Drupad probably didn't exactly analyse Arjun or got much opportunity to do so. From his POV, Arjun is the one who is able to defeat and drag him to Drona. Apart from this, there is Arjun's fame as the best archer and warrior at that time. So, from his POV, it was a brilliant political move. Even if Arjun didn't go against Drona, he couldn't also be used by Drona against Drupad, once he was married.

Good point, but is that for sure? On a different front, Samba's abduction & marriage to Duryodhan's daughter Lakshmanaaa made sure that Duryodhan too had matrimonial grounds to ask Krishna for support, just like he asked Jayadrath

The other curious thing is that even though Draupadi caused the destruction of the Kauravas, she pretty much caused the destruction of the Pandavas as well. After the war, she lost not only her own sons, but also all her husbands' other sons - Ghatotkacha, Iravana, Abhimanyu.

Yes, a rather unintended and unfortunate effect of her great Curse. Can't exactly blame her though as the Curse was done at a very tragic moment in her life. I don't think after all the perversity she was put through, she was entirely thinking straight. Also, the fact that she was meant to give that Curse. And in a way, as I see it, I think what she said was as much a curse, as foresight. Could also be a result of the very close touch she had with the Divine only moments earlier.

What is interesting is that her curse affected all the Kshatriyas who were alive at that point, which I guess included all the sons of the extended Pandava clan. Parikshit is not born at that point, so survives, even though barely and that too via Krishna's intervention.

But one thing I absolutely hate is the blame she gets for the war. Yes, I get all the "she was born to destroy" etc. But IMO, the blame for the war rests chiefly at the feet of people like Dhritarashtra, Duryodhan, Dussashan, Karna and their perverse lusts. No, don't blame your lust, blame the woman 🤢

I agree that Dhritarashtra, Gandhari, Duryodhan, Bheeshma, Drona, Karna and so on are to blame. I also blame Kunti for concealing Karna's details from everyone. But did Draupadi curse anybody? Why would she take it out on Kshatriyas who were not there, instead of punishing her wimpy husbands, starting w/ Yudhisthir?

Both Draupadi and Dhrishtadyumna came in weird packages. Draupadi came & was the cause of the deaths of her own sons as well, and her own maayka got wiped out in the war. Dhrishtadyumna was created to be the cause of Drona's death, but never won any battle against him, and always had to be rescued by the likes of Satyaki, Bhima & Arjun whenever he fought Drona or Ashwatthama. Indeed, the yagna Drupada did was really half baked, since what he got out of it hardly met what he must have wished for.

Lol, Drupada wanted to kill/defeat Drona and so get back his half-Kingdom. 😆 The problem was that to defeat Drona you had to kill him since he wouldn't back down otherwise. Also, as George RR Martin loves to say: Prophecies are tricky. Could say one thing, could mean quite another. 😆
But whatever Drupada thought about it, the prophecy was fulfilled, if just not in the way Drupada or Dhristadyumna himself thought it would. They probably thought Dhristadyumna (what a tongue twister!) would gain some magical powers and kill Drona in a heroic, one-of-its-kind, one-on-one duel to death 😆

The yagna thing just tells us one thing: You don't know how the Gods play with you. Drupada wanted a son/warrior to kill Drona. Got him through the Gods, yet they pushed in the other D through the fire as well, as a bonus package. They used Drupada's revenge-directed yagna to do their own will. In reality, Dhristadyumna was the side show, Draupadi was the main deal, the reason they even indulged Drupada's little fire-show.

Interesting! 🤓

Quote

Vrish

@Vr15h

Viewbie

+ 4

Posted: 11 years ago

Originally posted by: Eloquent
Another issue on Draupadi, is what all the current lot of writers seemed to be obsessed about: Draupadi/Karna. 😆

Thoughts?

In the Mahabharata, I've never read about Draupadi having a secret attraction for Karna, which Krishna pried out of her mind. That's a really perverted twist that authors came up w/.

But as a side note, each of the Pandavas had only one son per wife, whereas Karna had at least 4, if not more sons, but is known to have had only 1 or 2 wives. Did the Pandavas have some unwritten rule that each marriage would give only 1 son?

Quote

Janaki

@RamKiSeeta

IF-Addictz

+ 6

Posted: 11 years ago

Originally posted by: Eloquent

One thing to be noted is: Draupadi is included in the Panchakanyas, the five virgins, even though she's had 5 husbands and has been derided as a veshya, etc over time.
Similarly, the others in the 5 virgin list are Ahalya (who was forced/ was willing with Indra), Tara (married the killer of her husband), Mandodari, Sita, etc.. Even Kunti is on the list in some versions. Makes me think, the shastras or the ancients probably meant a different kind of virginity/chastity than the meaning, the later patriarchal society drew from it. One thing in common to all those on the list was that they all suffered quite a lot. 😳

Sita was not a part of the Pancha Maha Kanyas. There are actually two lists of ten great women: Pancha Maha Kanyas (the five virgins) and Pancha Maha Satis (the five ideal wives).

The Pancha Maha Kanyas were five misunderstood women whom society viewed as "unchaste" but they are considered virgins in symbolism, since in their heart they were always dedicated to one man.

They include: Draupadi, Kunti, Tara, Mandodari, and Ahalya.

On the other hand, the Pancha Maha Satis were a step higher, because they were the ideal wives who were always chaste and stood firm in their virtue, even during difficult times.

They include Sita (wife of Rama), Sati (wife of Shiva), Savitri, (wife of Satyavan), Arundhati (wife of Vasishta), and Damayanthi (wife of Nala).

Edited by JanakiRaghunath - 11 years ago

Quote

Eloquent

@Eloquent

IF-Sizzlerz

+ 2

Posted: 11 years ago

@vrish : sorry posting from le tablet so can't quote you directly without a messed up screen.
anyway, I thought those 16,000 wives of his were supposedly rishi munis from the time of Ram-avatar, who wished for vishnu as their spouse. Ram told them that their wish would be fulfilled in dwapar yug as Krishna avatar.

Hmm...Shri Lakshmi split into many parts/manifestations makes some sort of sense if you take Parashuram avatar which co existed along with Ram avatar, Krishna avatar and will live till Kalki avatar. So Maha Vishnu is capable of having multiple avatars at the same time and yet also exist as Vishnu himself. That is awesome power but why wouldn't he have it? If so, why wouldn't Maha Lakshmi be able to do the same?

About Draupadi punishing her husbands specifically rather than whole Kshatriya race: I agreeq. At the most Yudhisthir should have been punished/cursed. But she didn't cause of destiny, I suppose. No other reason. Because on the fate if it, the vastraharan was just a 2 perverse men molesting their sister in law, with a third who instigated them and egged them on. Where does Kshatriyas as a class/race come into picture? I guess during the justice dispensing part. No Kshatriya performed his first duty, none in that assembly gave her justice or protected her. So the curse oqn the Kshatriyas. Parashurama would quite approve I guess. Still no reason to curse the whole class of them, but she got caught in the revenge/fury mood and destiny would also not be denied.

As for Draupadi/Karna, its the greatest what if of mahabharat, so I guess authors have not been able of resist writing it. 3 books I have come across have indulged in it. Palace of Illusions, Yagnaseni and I think also Mrityunjay. Im not sure of last two, saying just on the basis of reviews.

I don't buy the theme coz of Draupadi's character itself. She was so proud in the first place and having her pride, dignity, honour shamed all at the same time in front of the entire royal court, being called a prostitute by a man. I can never undeundersand how such a strong, proud woman would ever forgive him this trespass, let alone being in love with him.

Under different circumstances maybe, but def. not after Sabha Parva.

About pandavas having one kid per wife: with Draupadi they couldn't ask for more than one as after each kid was born, I guess shqe already would rotate to the next husband. And after the first cycle, she must have already given birth to five kids, which may have exhausted her. Plus later on they were in the forest n all and had greater worries.

For the other wives, the pandava bros never visited them much. So after initial contact and marriage, they had a kid, but they never got time to visit them much. Plus the other wives, except Subhadra, never stayed at Indraprastha coz of the Queen bee Draupadi.Edited by Eloquent - 11 years ago

Quote

1 2 3