Sleet of Emotional Quivers on RadhaKrishn Eternal Love CC # 9 - Page 95

Originally posted by: vyapti

But suppose Karna wins.

Now if Draupadi opens her mouth she will be abducted.

If she does not open her mouth she has to garland Karna then and there.

What is the difference?

That's exactly what Chhilli said, there would have been absolutely no way Draupadi could have saved herself from getting married to Karna, had he won it. She had to marry him.

Most of the Swayamwar those days weren't actually Swayamwar in literal sense like the girls had the right to chose the man she liked, it was mostly like the kings testing the best possible n most powerful alliance they could get through their daughters. She would have married Karna, if he was the one

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

That's exactly what Chhilli said, there would have been absolutely no way Draupadi could have saved herself from getting married to Karna, had he won it. She had to marry him.

Most of the Swayamwar those days weren't actually Swayamwar in literal sense like the girls had the right to chose the man she liked, it was mostly like the kings testing the best possible n most powerful alliance they could get through their daughters. She would have married Karna, if he was the one

My point is even if she rejected Karna she had nothing to lose.

Yes Draupadi Swayamvara was not actually a Swayamvara. She was being Viryashulkaa I think.

Originally posted by: vyapti

My point is even if she rejected Karna she had nothing to lose.

Yes Draupadi Swayamvara was not actually a Swayamvara. She was being Viryashulkaa I think.

If she rejected Karna she would have been probably burned alive, even if not there was a Chance of all the invited Kshatriyas team against the Swayamwar and boycott it, which would mean she being deemed as not worth marriage a very bad abuse against a woman of those days. Why else you think Duryodhan married Lakshmana to her molester

They all might have started an attack against Pakistan

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

If she rejected Karna she would have been probably burned alive, even if not there was a Chance of all the invited Kshatriyas team against the Swayamwar and boycott it, which would mean she being deemed as not worth marriage a very bad abuse against a woman of those days. Why else you think Duryodhan married Lakshmana to her molester

They all might have started an attack against Pakistan

I did not know that Shamb molested Lakshmana. I am intrigued.

Can you provide the link?

sorry but even the thought of drapaudi marrying karna is pueworthy 🤢 . plus the swamyvaar was special designed so that only arjuna could have done since he was the best among archers there s no way either vyasa or krishna would have made such a huge mistake in a plan that was so important

Sad fact of history, whatever anyone believes India was deeply patriarchal starting round the time of Parshuram till even today.

Which means that women were property and not Humans with independence.

A woman could not decide for herself if she wanted to study, choose an occupation for herself, decide whom she wanted to marry. Where she wanted to live, and how she wanted to die.

Those decisions were made for her by her father before marriage, by her husband after her marriage and by son if husband died.

When you bring this point up people will try saying no you are wrong, women were allowed to study Vedas, women were allowed to be trained in martial arts even charioteering like Kaikeyi, they were allowed to marry men of their choice in the swayamavar.

Notice the word allowed in above sentences.

Someone had to give them permission to do what they wanted.

So when Kunti chooses Pandu in her swayamavar she is able to because her father Kuntibhoj allowed her to.

Term used for Draupadi marriage is Swayamavar, but she was only allowed to marry the man who won the contest. If multiple men won it she may have had the choice of picking one among them provided he is physically well and from a glorious family. That is the announcement of Dhrishtadyumn. If someone lost she had no permission to marry him even if She loved him

But Karna failed And only Arjun won so the choice ended there itself.

She could have protested, refused, rejected. But that would make her situation worse where she will be abandoned.

Just like in case of Karna. If she had rejected him her situation would have become worst. All Kshatriya would have taken his side and she may be abandoned or kidnapped and handed over to his charioteer saying that is the punishment for your temerity and no one would say a word to Karna, unless there was someone stronger than Karna amongst them who would take her as his prize after defeating Karna and other kings

Like Duryodhan himself does to Kalinga princess

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

Can't agree more. Balram was lucky to have Krishna as his brother else he would have had been like a Shakuni being blamed for every right n wrong things he has done. People had started worshipping Krishna, hence his family members should be some great souls, not just this also his enemies automatically become villian. The biggest example which I think of is Paundrik. Considering that he really thought himself to be God only shows he suffered from some kind of mental ailment or hallucinations, was that big enough a reason to attack his kingdom and kill him? Kansa too hadn't done a single crime till that supposed Akshaswani which stated that Devaki's son will kill him, any earthly being will try to eliminate the cause of his death, aside he didn't kill his sister or brother in law, and was ready to spare their kids too unless Narada (whom as we know from further events was a well wisher n probably trusted henchman of Vasudev) brainwashed him. He didn't kill Ekhamansa/Nand's daughter and ensured a proper upbringing for her. But all he gets is hatred.

To be honest even Jarasandh was a good king and not someone villianous. But they all pay for being anti Krishna and Balram n Samb become greats (avtar of shesgnag n rudra of Shiv) just because they were brother n son respectively of Krishna

The whitewashing of Karna I guess started with Rashmirathi by MSG, because my grandmother always condemned him

Kamsa sent multiple assassins after Krishna. What was Krishna supposed to do? He killed the one trying to kill him. He didn't accept the crown after.

Jarasandha attacked 17 times before the events of Mahabharata. One again, what was Krishna supposed to have done? Also, he was trying to do human sacrifice.

Paundrak, IIRC, also attacked first.

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

Kamsa sent multiple assassins after Krishna. What was Krishna supposed to do? He killed the one trying to kill him. He didn't accept the crown after.

Jarasandha attacked 17 times before the events of Mahabharata. One again, what was Krishna supposed to have done? Also, he was trying to do human sacrifice.

Paundrak, IIRC, also attacked first.

I am not saying Krishna reacted to Kansa and Jarasandh without provocation. Ofcourse, Krishna did what was necessary for his survival. But that was the trend of those days, people avenged, people worked to ensure their claim on the throne.

They however become demonish n the biggest villians of their times just they were anti Krishna.

Else wouldn't Janamejay himself be considered a villian? Not

Paundrik didn't attack, he had just made an announcement that everyone should consider him God and those who won't could be attacked

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

I am not saying Krishna reacted to Kansa and Jarasandh without provocation. Ofcourse, Krishna did what was necessary for his survival. But that was the trend of those days, people avenged, people worked to ensure their claim on the throne.

They however become demonish n the biggest villians of their times just they were anti Krishna.

Else wouldn't Janamejay himself be considered a villian? Not

Paundrik didn't attack, he had just made an announcement that everyone should consider him God and those who won't could be attacked

Kamsa's akashvani was likely a worry Devaki's son would have claim on the throne, not be cause of death. He then sent assassins after a child.

Point is Krishna did what he did not merely after provocations, but after multiple assassination attempts.

And unlike Kamsa and Jarasandha, Krishna didn't do it for power, either. Else, he'd have accepted the crown after.

It was about stating alive, not power.

I just looked up Paundraka. After the death of Naraka, Paudraka started collecting allies to attack Krishna. One of them did attack and killed many of Krishna's clan. That was what led to the declaration of war on Krishna's part.

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

Kamsa's akashvani was likely a worry Devaki's son would have claim on the throne, not be cause of death. He then sent assassins after a child.

Point is Krishna did what he did not merely after provocations, but after multiple assassination attempts.

And unlike Kamsa and Jarasandha, Krishna didn't do it for power, either. Else, he'd have accepted the crown after.

It was about stating alive, not power.

I just looked up Paundraka. After the death of Naraka, Paudraka started collecting allies to attack Krishna. One of them did attack and killed many of Krishna's clan. That was what led to the declaration of war on Krishna's part.

Ok thankyou I guess I didn't read that part about Paundrik's allies killing Vrishnis

About the actions of Kansa n Jarasandh, I am not saying they were better when compared to Krishna, obviously not, Krishna was the best person back then

But Kansa or Jarasandh were not that bad people as the texts made them, they were ordinary people of their era who killed for throne n revenge. The texts make them the biggest villians of all time. Akrura on the other hand was actually a sly, he attacked from back and maintained a very supportive element in front, probably that's why he gets a very respectable mention

By the way could you tell me why Kansa only had doubts from Krishna n not Balram? Wouldn't being Vasudhev's elder son, he too have a claim on throne especially once the people got to know that Kansa wasn't a Yadav by bloody?

Plus most probably Balram wasn't even Rohini's son. He would have been a son of Devaki or one of the other daughters of Devaka Vasudev married, since it is stated that Devaki conceived him and he was womb transported to Rohini. Now that isn't possible humanly, so probably he was simply a son of Vasudev n one of Devaka's daughter who was somehow sent to Rohini immediately after birth