duryodhana/ VB's Nt pg 3 - Page 3

Ummm, excuse me, but where did you read all this negative stuff about Draupadi? In Veda Vyasa's Mahabharata, it is written that Draupadi was initially jealous of Subhadra, but when on the advise of Arjun, Subhadra dressed up as a gopi and went to Draupadi in humility, Draupadi recognized her as the sister of her beloved Krishna and embraced her. From then on, Draupadi and Subhadra shared a very close relationship. They loved each other so much that when the Pandavas went on vanvaas, Subhadra raised Draupadi's five sons for her, and when Abhimanyu was killed in battle, Draupadi was as heartbroken as Subhadra was.

Neither of the Pandavas' wives came to Hastinapura because of different reasons. Bhima's wife Hidimbi was a rakshasi so she could not reside happily in a kingdom full of humans. She preferred to live in the forests raising Ghatotkacha. Ulupi was a naga kanya who had no desire of leaving her home to live with Arjuna. After Iravan was born, she raised him in her own region until he could be of help to his father. Chitrangada was the only child of her father, so when Arjuna requested her hand in marriage, her father put forth the condition that Chitrangada and her son would remain with him only. Arjuna agreed, and once Babruvahana was born, he left Manipura for Dwaraka, where he married Subhadra.

Draupadi is not involved in any of this. Yes, Arjuna was her favorite husband so she was more possessive of him than the others, but she was also kind and caring once her anger wore off. Draupadi's anger was never permanent. Once someone made her see reason, she became quite amiable, which is evident in the change of heart she underwent with Subhadra.

I never called you degraded. I used that word for anyone who puts the blame of the vastra haran on Draupadi, because the whole thing was nothing more than sexual harassment and I hate it when people do victim blaming in such cases, saying she is responsible for it because she "dressed' a certain way, "behaved" a certain way, etc. But if you felt offended, then I apologize.

However...

Draupadi never called Duryodhan "andhe ke putra andha". This is one of the big bloopers which BR Chopra created in his show. In the actual epic, she laughed at him when he fell in the maya sabha. It was not only she who laughed. Bhima, Arjuna, Nakula, and Sahadeva also laughed. Yudhisthira told them to stop laughing and help Duryodhan. In fact, Vyasa writes that even Draupadi did not laugh at Duryodhana in the Maya Sabha. It was only four of the Pandavas. The story of Draupadi laughing is from another version, so let alone not respecting her elders, Draupadi is not even guilty of insulting her guest as per Vyasa's Mahabharata. So how is she even responsible for the vastra haran. In the epic, Duryodhan orders her to be stripped (on the suggestion of Karna) because it would be an insult to the Pandavas, not because he had any personal vengeance against her.

Section XLVI

Vaisampayana said,--"That bull among men, Duryodhana, continued to dwell in that, assembly house (of the Pandavas). And with Sakuni, the Kuru prince slowly examined the whole of that mansion, and the Kuru prince beheld in it many celestial designs, which he had never seen before in the city called after the elephant (Hastinapore). And one day king Duryodhana in going round that mansion came upon a crystal surface. And the king, from ignorance, mistaking it for a pool of water, drew up his clothes. And afterwards finding out his mistake the king wandered about the mansion in great sorrow. And sometime after, the king, mistaking a lake of crystal water adorned with lotuses of crystal petals for land, fell into it with all his clothes on. Beholding Duryodhana fallen into the lake, the mighty Bhima laughed aloud as also the menials of the palace. And the servants, at the command of the king, soon brought him dry and handsome clothes. Beholding the plight of Duryodhana, the mighty Bhima and Arjuna and both the twins--all laughed aloud. Being unused to putting up with insults, Duryodhana could not bear that laugh of theirs. Concealing his emotions he even did not cast his looks on them. And beholding the monarch once more draw up his clothes to cross a piece of dry land which he had mistaken for water, they all laughed again. And the king sometime after mistook a closed door made of crystal as open. And as he was about to pass through it his head struck against it, and he stood with his brain reeling. And mistaking as closed another door made of crystal that was really open, the king in attempting to open it with stretched hands, tumbled down. And coming upon another door that was really open, the king thinking it as closed, went away from it. And, O monarch, king Duryodhana beholding that vast wealth in the Rajasuya sacrifice and having become the victim of those numerous errors within the assembly house at last returned, with the leave of the Pandavas, to Hastinapore.

http://www.bharatadesam.com/spiritual/mahabharata/mahabharata_02046.php

Thanks, I was trying to remember which version had her laughing, but it certainly wasn't from Mahabharata. Draupadi was not even involved in that whole scene.

Even if one takes Shrimad Bhagavatam, Draupadi never called Duryodhan "andhe ke putra andha". She burst into laughter when Duryodhan fell but then corrected herself on the orders of Yudhisthira. Her "crime" hardly warranted her to be stripped in front of everyone.

Always mention the source, while posting, to make your view authentic & avoide misunderstanding.

Yes janaki same was on my mind

Was the crime so big it warranted such ghastly reaction?

The link I provided is not just any Internet site. It's a portion from Veda Vyasa's Mahabharata itself, which is the original and most trusted source of the epic. If you can prove it that Draupadi's vastra haran never happened in Veda Vyasa's Mahabharat, then I will believe you. 😊 But I'm afraid you'd find that a tad bit difficult, since the vastra haran is mentioned in clear words in the epic. If you want to reference Internet sites or other versions of the epic, that's your choice, but I follow only one source for the Mahabharat, and that's the original one by Veda Vyasa.

"Hearing these words, a loud uproar rose from among those present in that assembly. And they all applauded Vikarna and censured the son of Suvala. And at that sound, the son of Radha, deprived of his senses by anger, waving his well-shaped arms, said these words,--'O Vikarna, many opposite and inconsistent conditions are noticeable in this assembly. Like fire produced from a faggot, consuming the faggot itself, this thy ire will consume thee. These personages here, though urged by Krishna, have not uttered a word. They all regard the daughter of Drupada to have been properly won. Thou alone, O son of Dhritarashtra in consequence of thy immature years, art bursting with wrath, for though but a boy thou speakest in the assembly as if thou wert old. O younger brother of Duryodhana, thou dost not know what morality truly is, for thou sayest like a fool that this Krishna who hath been (justly) won as not won at all. O son of Dhritarashtra, how dost thou regard Krishna as not won, when the eldest of the Pandavas before this assembly staked all his possessions? O bull of the Bharata race, Draupadi is included in all the possessions (of Yudhishthira). Therefore, why regardest thou Krishna who hath been justly won as not won? Draupadi had been mentioned (by Suvala) and approved of as a stake by the Pandavas. For what reason then dost thou yet regard her as not won? Or, if thou thinkest that bringing her hither attired in a single piece of cloth, is an action of impropriety, listen to certain excellent reasons I will give. O son of the Kuru race, the gods have ordained only one husband for one woman. This Draupadi, however, hath many husbands. Therefore, certain it is that she is an unchaste woman. To bring her, therefore, into this assembly attired though she be in one piece of cloth--even to uncover her is not at all an act that may cause surprise. Whatever wealth the Pandavas had--she herself and these Pandavas themselves,--have all been justly won by the son of Suvala. O Dussasana, this Vikarna speaking words of (apparent) wisdom is but a boy. Take off the robes of the Pandavas

p. 132

as also the attire of Draupadi. Hearing these words the Pandavas, O Bharata, took of their upper garments and throwing them down sat in that assembly. Then Dussasana, O king, forcibly seizing Draupadi's attire before the eyes of all, began to drag it off her person."

Vaisampayana continued,--"When the attire of Draupadi was being thus dragged, the thought of Hari, (And she herself cried aloud, saying), 'O Govinda, O thou who dwellest in Dwaraka, O Krishna, O thou who art fond of cow-herdesses (of Vrindavana). O Kesava, seest thou not that the Kauravas are humiliating me. O Lord, O husband of Lakshmi, O Lord of Vraja (Vrindavana), O destroyer of all afflictions, O Janarddana, rescue me who am sinking in the Kaurava Ocean. O Krishna, O Krishna, O thou great yogin, thou soul of the universe, Thou creator of all things, O Govinda, save me who am distressed,--who am losing my senses in the midst of the Kurus.' Thus did that afflicted lady resplendent still in her beauty, O king covering her face cried aloud, thinking of Krishna, of Hari, of the lord of the three worlds. Hearing the words of Draupadi, Krishna was deeply moved. And leaving his seat, the benevolent one from compassion, arrived there on foot. And while Yajnaseni was crying aloud to Krishna, also called Vishnu and Hari and Nara for protection, the illustrious Dharma, remaining unseen, covered her with excellent clothes of many hues. And, O monarch as the attire of Draupadi was being dragged, after one was taken off, another of the same kind, appeared covering her. And thus did it continue till many clothes were seen. And, O exalted on, owing to the protection of Dharma, hundreds upon hundreds of robes of many hues came off Draupadi's person. And there arose then a deep uproar of many many voices. And the kings present in that assembly beholding that most extraordinary of all sights in the world, began to applaud Draupadi and censure the son of Dhritarashtra. And Bhima then, squeezing his hands, with lips quivering in rage, swore in the midst of all those kings a terrible oath in a loud voice.

"And Bhima said,--Hear these words of mine, ye Kshatriyas of the world. Words such as these were never before uttered by other men, nor will anybody in the future ever utter them. Ye lords of earth, if having spoken these words I do not accomplish them hereafter, let me not obtain the region of my deceased ancestors. Tearing open in battle, by sheer force, the breast of this wretch, this wicked-minded scoundrel of the Bharata race, if I do not drink his life-blood, let me not obtain the region of my ancestors."

Vaisampayana continued,--"Hearing these terrible words of Bhima that made the down of the auditors to stand on end, everybody present there applauded him and censured the son of Dhritarashtra. And when a mass of clothes had been gathered in that assembly, all dragged from the person of Draupadi, Dussasana, tired and ashamed, sat down.

Here's the entire Mahabharata by Krishna Dwaipayana Vyasa. http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/maha/index.htm If you can find the reference of Draupadi's condition in marriage, I will accept it to be true. It's not that I don't trust Internet sources, but we need to know where they came from. There are people who make things up and post them on the Internet, so Internet sites can never be considered 100% accurate unless we can confirm them with the sacred texts. If you find this reference even in Shirmad Bhagavatham, I will accept it, because I also trust that source.

As for the other wives you mentioned, Devika was Yudhisthira's wife, Balandhara was Bhima's wife, Karenumati was Nakula's wife, and Vijaya was Sahadeva's wife. As far as I know, they all lived at Indraprastha with their husbands until vanvaas. I don't know where they went during the Pandavas' vanvaas, but it's possible that they stayed in Hastinapura or went back to their fathers' house.

I wonder if Vyasa's Mahabharat mentions them at all. I will cross reference it and let you know what Vyasa says happened to them.

You're welcome. :)

When it comes to the Mahabharat, I trust Vyasa's version most. It's not that I don't trust Shrimad Bhagavatham, but I take that version for the stories of Shri Krishna's personal life. From Shri Krishna's birth - marriage - the end of his life, Shrimad Bhagavatham covered it all pretty well, but the stories of Mahabharat involving the Pandavas conflicts with Vyasa's version, so for Mahabharat I take Vyasa's.

You're right that BR Chopra took some creative liberty in the storyline too. He made Draupadi's "offense" seem worse, whereas in Vyasa, she was not even present when Duryodhan fell in the maya sabha. 😕 It's important for us to find out what's real and not real.