Why didn't Arjun protect Draupadi?

I have not read anything related to Mahabharata, except for a few chapters in school, my knowledge is limited to television and hearsay.

The post is pretty much about the title, why didn't Arjun protect Draupadi when she was being dragged to a hall to be stripped in front of the gathering? How can 'Dharma' allow anyone to sit through this?

None of Draupadi's husbands protected her, but I am asking about Arjun because it was his decision to participate in her swayamvar, she was his responsibility and he failed her from the get go

Arjun didn't protect Draupadi b'cos... Yudhisthir!

Originally posted by: .Vrish.

Arjun didn't protect Draupadi b'cos... Yudhisthir!

Arjun would watch his wife on the verge of getting raped b'cos.... Yudhishtira!?

It was Dwapara yuga. So, the moral codes were a little different. Arjun, in his version of dharma, considered loyalty and obedience to his elder brother to be the ultimate.

Also, he was already won at that point, and had been forced to surrender everything he had including weapons and even clothes, so he did not have the means by which he could have saved her na.

Simply because Arjun would never go against what Yudhishthir says, yes, even when his wife is in the verge of rape. Your question is something which is being asked since centuries but from whatever I have read of the epic (quite a bit), I feel Arjun didn't care much about Draupadi. I love and admire Arjun, yet what I gather is this. However you're making a mistake, as per my knowledge, Arjun didnt participate in the Swayamvar in his own free will. Vyasa instructed them first and then they went, as per Yudhi's orders. Arjun simply went because the competition was of archery, and only Arjun could have won her. For Arjun, his brothers and mother was always more important than Draupadi i feel. And also, he was a pacifist and he knew protesting meant war then and there. So he remained quiet. Besides, he didn't do much without Yudhi's orders.

Originally posted by: proteeti

It was Dwapara yuga. So, the moral codes were a little different. Arjun, in his version of dharma, considered loyalty and obedience to his elder brother to be the ultimate.

Also, he was already won at that point, and had been forced to surrender everything he had including weapons and even clothes, so he did not have the means by which he could have saved her na.

I have thought about this, I am watching Ramayana too and there was a scene a few days ago between Kumbhkarana and Vibhishan. The moral codes were according to the people who adapted them, Kumbh said supporting his brother, even if he is wrong, is dharma and Vibhishan went against his brother to be with what is right. Ultimately, Kumbh was defeated and Vibhishan was crowned the King of Lanka

In Mahabharata, there are Krushna and Balarama too, Balaram is elder brother of Krushna but Krushna didn't support him when it was about Duryodhana, how can defying elder brother be right for Krushna and wrong for Arjun?

Witnessing a woman in that condition and the woman is his wife, he did not do anything to protect her, and still be known as the greatest man is something I can't stomach

Originally posted by: CaptainSpark

Simply because Arjun would never go against what Yudhishthir says, yes, even when his wife is in the verge of rape. Your question is something which is being asked since centuries but from whatever I have read of the epic (quite a bit), I feel Arjun didn't care much about Draupadi. I love and admire Arjun, yet what I gather is this. However you're making a mistake, as per my knowledge, Arjun didnt participate in the Swayamvar in his own free will. Vyasa instructed them first and then they went, as per Yudhi's orders. Arjun simply went because the competition was of archery, and only Arjun could have won her. For Arjun, his brothers and mother was always more important than Draupadi i feel. And also, he was a pacifist and he knew protesting meant war then and there. So he remained quiet. Besides, he didn't do much without Yudhi's orders.

How does one let people rape a woman? If he couldn't protect Draupadi, his queen, his elder brother's wife, his younger brother's wife, daughter in law of their house, his wife, mother of his child, how was he chosen for establishing the rule of Dharma? Arjun's idea of Dharma was a faulty one, Krushna didn't always follow his elder brother, he manipulated and arm twisted him, he defied his elder brother, in this scenario it wasn't difficult to guess which side is right, Arjun supported wrong

I don't know how reluctant Arjuna was to go on Swayamvar, Any man would 'man up' and stop a woman from getting raped

Originally posted by: NoraSM

I have thought about this, I am watching Ramayana too and there was a scene a few days ago between Kumbhkarana and Vibhishan. The moral codes were according to the people who adapted them, Kumbh said supporting his brother, even if he is wrong, is dharma and Vibhishan went against his brother to be with what is right. Ultimately, Kumbh was defeated and Vibhishan was crowned the King of Lanka

In Mahabharata, there are Krushna and Balarama too, Balaram is elder brother of Krushna but Krushna didn't support him when it was about Duryodhana, how can defying elder brother be right for Krushna and wrong for Arjun?

Witnessing a woman in that condition and the woman is his wife, he did not do anything to protect her, and still be known as the greatest man is something I can't stomach

Krishna never defied Balaram. He simply ignored his friendship with Dury. 😆

Also, we must remember that the epics were written so that we, the ones reading them, would note the mistakes of the characters, and avoid them in our lives. Yes, Arjun made a mistake there, but it is up to us to remember his mistakes and not repeat it. Also Arjun was never the greatest man, that one is reserved for Krishna, the poorna-avatar. He was known for his archery and warriorship more than his moral code.

Also, in the Dyuta-sabha, I feel it was an intentional set-up, where every character present acted against their character arc up until that point.

Yudi was the emblem of dharma, he forgot where to draw a line.

Bheem was the strongest, he stood there like a common man.

Arjun, the best archer in a world, stayed mum throughout.

Nakul&Sahadeva both had dialogues, for a change.

All the usually vocal elders were shocked beyond words.

And Draupadi's change I believe here was the most drastic. Up until that point, I can remember only 3 dialogues of Drau in total (I'll not marry Karna, I accept my division, and Yep Subhadra can stay here). She wasn't even in the forefront of the story, and it was all about her husbands. From being a quiet, demure bride/queen who did everything that was expected of her, she suddenly becomes this jwalamukhi.

Kunti and Gandhari, both being these slightly-out-but-still-ordinary housewives open their mouths for the first time, and pretty strongly.

Also, Krishna who is always there for everything, is absent (I'm not considering the divine aspect).

This dyuta sabha, was an anomaly in the lives of every character. Otherwise toh, even Dury and Karna hadn't even done so much as talk down a woman, how on earth they become such monsters in one day? It was a cursed day, and that one fire in everybody's lives changed all of their character arcs in one go.

Originally posted by: proteeti

Krishna never defied Balaram. He simply ignored his friendship with Dury. 😆

Also, we must remember that the epics were written so that we, the ones reading them, would note the mistakes of the characters, and avoid them in our lives. Yes, Arjun made a mistake there, but it is up to us to remember his mistakes and not repeat it. Also Arjun was never the greatest man, that one is reserved for Krishna, the poorna-avatar. He was known for his archery and warriorship more than his moral code.

Also, in the Dyuta-sabha, I feel it was an intentional set-up, where every character present acted against their character arc up until that point.

Yudi was the emblem of dharma, he forgot where to draw a line.

Bheem was the strongest, he stood there like a common man.

Arjun, the best archer in a world, stayed mum throughout.

Nakul&Sahadeva both had dialogues, for a change.

All the usually vocal elders were shocked beyond words.

And Draupadi's change I believe here was the most drastic. Up until that point, I can remember only 3 dialogues of Drau in total (I'll not marry Karna, I accept my division, and Yep Subhadra can stay here). She wasn't even in the forefront of the story, and it was all about her husbands. From being a quiet, demure bride/queen who did everything that was expected of her, she suddenly becomes this jwalamukhi.

Kunti and Gandhari, both being these slightly-out-but-still-ordinary housewives open their mouths for the first time, and pretty strongly.

Also, Krishna who is always there for everything, is absent (I'm not considering the divine aspect).

This dyuta sabha, was an anomaly in the lives of every character. Otherwise toh, even Dury and Karna hadn't even done so much as talk down a woman, how on earth they become such monsters in one day? It was a cursed day, and that one fire in everybody's lives changed all of their character arcs in one go.

Krushna always manipulated or moved things in a certain way when he thought his brother was going wrong, like Krushna asking Arjun to abduct his sister so she doesn't marry Duryodhana or they would have to support Duryodhana in the final battle as his sister was married to him.

Krushna didn't defy Balaram openly but he did everything he could to stop him from doing 'wrong', this perception is what I am talking about, Krushna knew his brother wants Subhadra's marriage with Duryodhana, why didn't he just follow what his brother wanted, like Arjun did?

What I am trying to say is that supporting what's 'right' is more important than supporting one's brother, that's what I got from Ramayana and from Krushna.

I never understood Krushna's support for Pandavas for a man who can bet his Kingdom, brother and wife for a game is certainly not a good King or Ruler, The only way for them to win the war was through Krushna's support. What I understand is that feminism changed the perception of this story otherwise they treated women like meh

I asked my mother and her reply was intriguing, I don't know how true but she said that Arjun didn't do anything as he, Krushna and Draupadi were looking for a legit reason to start a war, the war was fought because Kaurvas insulted Draupadi. She said that Draupadi and Arjun are Krushna too (Which I don't understand, how?), It's just opens up many dimensions of the story for me

Originally posted by: NoraSM

Krushna always manipulated or moved things in a certain way when he thought his brother was going wrong, like Krushna asking Arjun to abduct his sister so she doesn't marry Duryodhana or they would have to support Duryodhana in the final battle as his sister was married to him.

That's true. Arjun wasn't really the manipulating kind though. There is also another dimension to the Subhadra story, will post that later when we're covering Subhadra in particular (just that, it wasn't only to prevent Yadavas from taking a side). Balarama's daughter was married to Dury's son, so they did technically have a ladki-wala-rishta at the end.

Krushna didn't defy Balaram openly but he did everything he could to stop him from doing 'wrong', this perception is what I am talking about, Krushna knew his brother wants Subhadra's marriage with Duryodhana, why didn't he just follow what his brother wanted, like Arjun did?

What I am trying to say is that supporting what's 'right' is more important than supporting one's brother, that's what I got from Ramayana and from Krushna

You're absolutely correct in your analysis. It's simply that the characters are human. Some of them have the courage to stand up to injustice, and some do not. Thus, the pairs: Krishna vs Arjun, Gandhari vs Draupadi. That's just how life is.

I asked my mother and her reply was intriguing, I don't know how true but she said that Arjun didn't do anything as he, Krushna and Draupadi were looking for a legit reason to start a war, the war was fought because Kaurvas insulted Draupadi. She said that Draupadi and Arjun are Krushna too (Which I don't understand, how?), It's just opens up many dimensions of the story for me

Auntie is soo right, that's one crucial point I forgot about. 😃

About the Krishnas, there were not just 3 but 4 in total:

1. Krishna - the Yadava guy, and the King of my Heart. ☺️

2. Krishna - Arjun at birth was first named Krishna (due to his dark complexion), and later everyone just went along with Arjun (because of the tree he was born under)

3. Krishnaa- the real name of Draupadi, again, complexion.

4. Krishna Dwaipayana Vyasa - the author and creator of Mahabharata. He too was very dark in complexion; notice how he intervenes every time right as the story tries to move away (no heir problem of Satyavati, the Ps weren't actually going to attend Drau's swayamvar).

There's a theory, that symbolically, the 4 Krishnas represent the same entity- Dharma. Krishna is said to be an epithet, a title which manifests as the Karta (Doer, #2), the Kaaran (Cause, #3), the Karma (manifestation of Dharma, #1) and the Sootra-dhaar (Narrator/Recorder, #4) and thus creates Mahabharata. This also, supports Krishna's description of himself (in the vishwa-roopa) as the supreme entity encompassing the universe.

Word Count: 0