I don't know why this competition is but I seriously don't think Seeta was week
Just because she was dedicated to her husband doesn't make her week.
She remained in the custody of an abductor for months who might have tried multiple ways to lure her and yet she didn't even look at him properly. I don't think a week woman can do that
Originally posted by: deepikagupta9
Where did she punished Yudi for this crime .
What is your definition of punishment? Her assassinating Yudhishtira? It was about the only thing possible she could do to him since he was the king. It would've simply gotten her killed.
Brainless revenge is not punishment.
Panchali did what she set out to do which was destroy the elite (as mentioned at her fire birth. I don't think it was prophecy as much as her aim). Yudhishtira couldn't be unless she wanted to die herself after as punishment for murder.
Sita vs. Panchali is usually an apples vs. Oranges argument.
Sita was a wife and a queen. Her exile was one long honeymoon until the abduction. She didn't lose anyone in the war. Her biggest peeve was her husband deciding he needed to prove her chastity in public for which of course she left him. Because he was her sole reason for staying. She had no other responsibilities in Ayodhya.
Panchali was a working queen. She had huge responsibilities. Her exile was part of the contract with the enemy BECAUSE she was a part of the kingdom's hierarchy. Her exile was a series of attempted assassinations on her, attempts to build the war chest, negotiations to build allies, arrange weapons supplies, and of course, Yudhishtira constantly asking munis to lecture her on good wives from history who didn't leave their husbands after bad behavior. After the war, Yudhishtira wanted to leave the royal life and responsibilities, but Panchali didn't. That's when she called him a lunatic. She was very aware of what she owed the citizens.
There is no comparing the 2 women because one was a wife who was insulted by her husband's demands and chose to leave, and the other was a queen, a ruler who chose to continue with her work in spite of her idiot husband. Both are admirable in their own circumstances. I personally relate more to Panchali is all.
I am not saying one can't have a preference. Definitely majority girls of today will prefer Draupadi. She is more relatable to us.
But we can't judge Seeta as someone week. She was a housewife and not a working woman. Her life was different from Draupadi but she sustained herself in front of an abductor for months. She in open court rejected her husband's request to stay with him and opted for return otherwise
Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism
I am not saying one can't have a preference. Definitely majority girls of today will prefer Draupadi. She is more relatable to us.
But we can't judge Seeta as someone week. She was a housewife and not a working woman. Her life was different from Draupadi but she sustained herself in front of an abductor for months. She in open court rejected her husband's request to stay with him and opted for return otherwise
Yes
Mata Seeta wasn't a weak woman, She put her foot down when it was about her self respect and her life decisions, Ravana couldn't break her mental strength. She chose a difficult life of Van over a comfortable life in her In Law House or her maternal home. We never get to know her as Queen because Lord Rama wasn't a King throughout Ramayana
There's huge difference between Lord Rama and Yudhistir
Mata Seeta wasnt meek, she had absolutely no reason to be rude towards Lord Rama for most of her life but she did speak her mind in front of him.
https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/rama/ry489.htm
Struck down with overwhelming shame
She shrank within her trembling frame.
Each word of Ráma's like a dart
Had pierced the lady to the heart;
And from her sweet eyes unrestrained
The torrent of her sorrows, rained.
Her weeping eyes at length she dried,
And thus mid choking sobs replied:
'Canst thou, a high-born prince, dismiss
A hign-born dame with speech like this?
Such words befit the meanest hind,
Not princely birth and generous mind,
By all my virtuous life I swear
I am not what thy words declare.
If some are faithless, wilt thou find
No love and truth in womankind?
Doubt others if thou wilt, but own
The truth which all my life has shown
Why when Hanúmán sent by thee
Sought Lanká's town across the sea,
Couldst thou not give, O lord of men,
Thy sentence of rejection then?
The point I was making was Sita's problems were personal while Panchali's was that of the empire and its needs. Sita could afford to leave, and Panchali couldn't. Both made the right decision for their individual circumstance. Sita's sense of self-worth was admirable as was Panchali's readiness to sacrifice. They were 2 different women, dealing with 2 different problems. What sense does it make to compare?
Yeah, popular culture depicts Sita as submissive, and Panchali was anything but. The conversation with Satyabhama therefore has to be sarcasm or interpolation. I'm sorry, but being sarcastic to elders who clearly are in the wrong is not wrong in itself no matter what culture dictates. Panchali showed respect where it was deserved: Kunti, Vidura, mostly. She treated Krishna as an equal.
Originally posted by: HearMeRoar
The point I was making was Sita's problems were personal while Panchali's was that of the empire and its needs. Sita could afford to leave, and Panchali couldn't. Both made the right decision for their individual circumstance. Sita's sense of self-worth was admirable as was Panchali's readiness to sacrifice. They were 2 different women, dealing with 2 different problems. What sense does it make to compare?
Yeah, popular culture depicts Sita as submissive, and Panchali was anything but. The conversation with Satyabhama therefore has to be sarcasm or interpolation. I'm sorry, but being sarcastic to elders who clearly are in the wrong is not wrong in itself no matter what culture dictates. Panchali showed respect where it was deserved: Kunti, Vidura, mostly. She treated Krishna as an equal.
Agreed!
There shouldn't be any comparison between two women, who were reacting to their situations
We can see Mata Sita had Lord Rama and Draupadi had Yudhistir
I have love and respect for Lord Rama and I wanna hit Yudi with a brick
Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism
Sorry for mistyping your name
I don't think it has to do with Dwapar Yug standards. The family needs to work that way, everyone serves or thinks for other members before themselves (remember the famous dialogue by SRK in Chak de India? Har player pehle team k liye khelega, fir Apne saathiyon k liye fir agar thoda time bach Gaya to khud k liye- do you think he was teaching the girls some Dwapar Yug standards? No he was teaching team work and family is a team) there was nothing wrong in expecting women to think for others before self, wrong was to expect this only from females. The modern days equality has both thinking for self before others, although it should have the reverse both thinking for others before self
Husband as God and Wife as Devi is another thing to uplift the position of your spouse so high that you can go to any extent for each other. Isn't that exactly any person wants from their spouses?
Not attending nature's call is definitely an exaggeration
People say that Kaliyug is worst, but according to me Dwapar was worst for the ladies. The rules which uptil Treta were both for males and females became selectively for females in Dwapar giving men undue advantage. Kaliyug maybe bad for males because now even females are leaving those rules(men getting devoid of that undue advantage)
The problem is these rules are never imposed on the husband. While Shah's rules were for everyone in the hockey team, these rules were for the women only. Never seen a conversation where husband is taught to serve the wife or consider her godly 😆
Agreed!
There shouldn't be any comparison between two women, who were reacting to their situations
We can see Mata Sita had Lord Rama and Draupadi had Yudhistir
I have love and respect for Lord Rama and I wanna hit Yudi with a brick
Absolutely no comparison between Ram and Yudhishthir. I don't agree with his decision of having his wife prove his chastity but FlauntPessimism explained and gave reasons that Uttar Ramayan is most probably interpolation and also why the circumstance was so.
Absolutely no comparison with Yudhishthir. Agreed. 😆
Originally posted by: CaptainSpark
Absolutely no comparison between Ram and Yudhishthir. I don't agree with his decision of having his wife prove his chastity but FlauntPessimism explained and gave reasons that Uttar Ramayan is most probably interpolation and also why the circumstance was so.
Absolutely no comparison with Yudhishthir. Agreed. 😆
Yeah, Valmiki Ramayana ends with Lord Rama ruling with Sita ma
comment:
p_commentcount