Mahakavya Manthan#1:Did Bhima/Arjuna value Yudhisthira over Draupadi?

Vichaar vimarsh

Quantum-Dot thumbnail

Yajnaseni's Yodhhas

Posted: 2 months ago
#1

Image

Hello all,

This is the first Mahakavya Mathan in our "Mahabharat Katha" forum. Here I'll post a topic (in the form of a question?) from our Mahabharat Mahakavya every month, to have some insightful discussions.

So, our first Mahakavya Mathan topic is,

Did Bhima and Arjuna's love and dedication towards their elder brother, Yudhisthira, surpass their loyalty to their wife Draupadi? If not, why couldn't they disobey Yudhisthira and prevent Draupadi's Vastraharan?

As we all know, in the Mahabharat, the bond between the Pandavas, particularly Bhima and Arjuna, with their elder brother Yudhisthira, is portrayed as incredibly strong. Both the characters are known for their unwavering loyalty and dedication. This brings us to a critical moment in the story: the Vastraharan (disrobing) of Draupadi where she is publicly humiliated in the Kaurava court.This incident raises significant questions about the loyalty and priorities of Bhima and Arjun. Many wonder about the dynamics of their relationships during this event.

Why do you think Bhima and Arjuna did not act to prevent Draupadi's humiliation, despite their evident love and respect for her? What does this tell us about the complexities of duty, loyalty, and familial bonds in the Mahabharat?

Share your interpretations and insights on this pivotal moment in the epic.

1000085748.png

Tags Credit : ExoticDisaster

Edited by Quantum-Dot - 1 months ago

Created

Last reply

Replies

9

Views

1.2k

Users

8

Likes

56

Frequent Posters

Bhavisweet03 thumbnail
Posted: 2 months ago
#2

The Vastraharan of Draupadi is a testament to the intricate and often conflicting nature of duty, loyalty, and familial bonds in the Mahabharata. Bhima and Arjuna's inaction is not a reflection of their lack of love or respect for Draupadi but rather an illustration of the profound moral and ethical dilemmas they faced. Their ultimate loyalty to Yudhishthira, despite the harrowing circumstances, underscores the epic's portrayal of dharma as a deeply complex and often ambiguous concept.

1169321 thumbnail
Posted: 2 months ago
#3

I see it from a different perspective, it was more political and tactical than emotional.

Political - Yudhisthira was their King who lost them and they didn't object, they were slaves of Kauravas before Draupadi was brought into the dyut sabha, they didn't have autonomy or any kind of authority to speak up. They were essentially tied to their King and by him to the Hastinapur Kingdom


Tactical - There was a discussion between Karna and Duryodhana before Dyut that Draupadi has tied all brothers in a relationship much closer than before, the Dyut was a way to make brothers fight, even if one of them had gone against Yudhishthira, it would mean Yudhishthira had lost his authority as a King. These brothers were fighting for his right to be the King, If they can fight for him now then why not later?

The question here was how low could they go? I don't think anyone was counting on the daughter in law of Kuru vansh being disrobed in front of all elders of Kuru vansh

When they crossed all their limits of decency and humanity, Draupadi questioned everyone regarding Yudhishthira's right to stake her and it was then that Arjuna spoke up against Yudhishthira in favour of Draupadi and jackal's started howling which led to Dhritarashtra giving her boons

So, I believe they didn't think that Kauravas would stoop as low as to do that and even if they do then elders will stop them.

It wasn't for Yudi or Draupadi, all brothers since birth were fighting for survival.

Edited by NoraSM - 2 months ago
Posted: 2 months ago
#4

Actually if you observe, the bond between MEN in any era is more EASY, effortless and strong. I mean even now, men friendships aren't as complicated as girls friendship or two opposite gender friendship, men are effortlessly very comfortable around each other irrespective of their relationship be it friends or brothers or even random strangers. So obviously Pandavas had that kind of man to man relation and on top of it they were family so naturally their priorities were each other however they loved and respected Draupadi too, I won't defend Pandavas regarding the whole VH thing but it was natural for them to surrender before Yudhishtir because he was the King and their elder brother, they couldn't afford to go against him as it would've amounted to a rebel against their own king and difference among brothers exactly what the opposite side wanted so it was more of a political silence than personal however I repeat I am not defending the silence at all.

Edited by A_for_Arpita - 2 months ago
Life_Is_Dutiful thumbnail
Posted: 2 months ago
#5

Interesting topic as usual. Thanks for the tag.

Actually while listening to Mahabharata or watching the serials based on the great epic, I never really thought why all 4 brothers, not just Bheem and Arjun were silent and let everything happen.

Now that I think of it, I feel it has more to do with human psychology. I guess after the humiliation and embarrassment they suffered, maybe they developed the inferiority complex within them. They felt helpless, nobody supported them, nobody stood for them. Even Bhishma and Dhrona were helplessly watching everything. I can't explain how they must have felt that. Probably a psychologist can explain it in a better way. Just imagine you're in a place where there are hundreds of people and you're getting terribly humiliated in front of the crowd. How will you feel? It can affect anyone psychologically and I guess that could be the reason they couldn't stop the disrobing.

It was only Draupadi who stood up for herself when she questioned everyone and somehow her words again affected them positively. If I am not wrong, it was Bheem who gave a vow in the court that he will chop Dhushasan's that hand which touched his Panchali and also will break Duryodhan's thigh.

Quantum-Dot thumbnail

Yajnaseni's Yodhhas

Posted: 2 months ago
#6

Thank you Bhavna, Nora, Arpita and Subha for sharing your insightful analysis on this complex topic. Your perspectives have greatly enriched both this thread and our understanding.

Basically in Mahabharat, the bond between the Pandavas (Yudhishthira, Bhima, Arjuna, Nakula, and Sahadeva) is profound and multifaceted. Bhima and Arjuna's love and dedication to their elder brother Yudhishthira often intersect with their loyalty to their wife, Draupadi, highlighting the intricate web of dharma or duty, loyalty, and familial obligations. Yudhishthira, as the eldest, commands profound respect due to the social and familial norms of that time, as Duryodhana for the Kauravas. Bhima and Arjuna’s loyalty to their elder brother Yudhisthira is driven by their duty to uphold the familial hierarchy and respect his decisions, even when they are painful. During the dice game, where Yudhishthira gambles away everything, including Draupadi, Bhima and Arjuna are bound by their loyalty to Yudhishthira and the rules of the game, constraining their ability to act.

The Mahabharat presents a nuanced portrayal of duty and loyalty. Bhima and Arjuna's dedication to Yudhishthira does not necessarily surpass their loyalty to Draupadi; rather, it reflects the complex interplay of familial duty, societal norms, and personal loyalty. Their inability to prevent Draupadi's Vastraharan stems from their entanglement in these duties and their respect for Yudhishthira's authority, illustrating the tragic dilemmas that the characters face in their adherence to dharma. Bhima’s anger and Arjuna’s distress during this episode indicate their profound love and loyalty towards Draupadi, with Bhima vowing to avenge her humiliation, demonstrating their deep sense of protection and commitment.

Edited by Quantum-Dot - 2 months ago
FlauntPessimism thumbnail
ICC T20 CWC 2024 Match Winner 0 Thumbnail Anniversary 11 Thumbnail + 6

Epic Explorers

Posted: 2 months ago
#7

I don't think it was any kind of submission or love for brother that played here(they obviously had this love but talking about specifically this episode)

Before staking Draupadi, Yudhisthir had staked all the brothers and they didn't say a word. It was like they always had the understanding that Yudhisthir is their superior and have rights on them.

Funnily they didn't even question him on why he didn't stake Prativindhya and said that he has nothing to stake..

To be honest, we need to see the upbringing of Pandavas here, they were always under attack from their cousins. The reason they survived was because they were together. Had even for a moment Arjun or Bheem said that the decision of Yudhisthir was wrong then that would have meant that Yudhisthir isn't anywhere having the right on throne..

Please remember this wasn't some random game, but an actual game after Rajasuya,. which is meant to establish that the king performing it is the best suited on throne among brothers/cousins. And here they couldn't have claimed that Yudhisthir is wrong or they are right thereby making it clear that Rajasuya was a failure.

I don't think they were assuming (or rather should have assumed) that Kauravas would be just to them once they become slaves, however they definitely had some faith in elders that they will stop if things go out of hand. But as we saw, they cared the least.

Even when Draupadi stated the point of Shakuni having cheated, they kept mum(false or true this point could have been taken for stopping the heinous activities happening there)

Draupadi then brought the second point of Yudhisthir having no rights on her after he lost himself. This was a very technical point which probably no one had thought by then, but even then except Vidur and Vikarna no one supported her.

I think now the support of Vikarna angered Karna realising that she is bringing up genuine points that is convincing even their side of people so he chided Vikarana asking him to stop (off topic but for anyone who claims about Karna always having suffered this shall be the final point. The guy had the right and courage to scold and put off the royal prince of his overlord state in an official assembly and no one batted an eye. I don't think anyone normally have so much of rights). Now the only way to stop Draupadi was to humiliate her so Karna ordered Dusshasan to disrobe her. I doubt this was ever originally their plan, it's just that things escalated when Draupadi showed a restraint unlike her husbands, a thing they never expected.

Now seeing this Duryodhan foolishly brought the statement that he would free her if any Pandava says Yudhisthir didn't have this right. Here Arjun does support Draupadi. I think the point was only to either establish that Draupadi's points has no takers or bring some differences between brothers. Even if post that Draupadi would have been released, the Pandavas would be his slaves. But then jackals started hounding and Dhritrashtra gave Draupadi the two boons, so the entire thing was lost..

Saying that I personally feel that back then, preferring wife over brother was considered wrong. Ramji had lamented that he shouldn't have fought this war for Seeta else Lakshman would have been safe. And that losing brother was much more wrong than losing wife

Edited by FlauntPessimism - 2 months ago
devashree_h thumbnail
Posted: 2 months ago
#8

Dyut was a ploy to break the Pandava brothers. They all knew this.

Duryodhana responded, “I am willing to abide by Bhima’s words, Arjuna’s words and the words of the twins. O Yanjanseni! If they say that Yudhishthira wasn’t their lord, then you will be freed from slavery.” ‘


Arjuna said, “This great-souled King Dharmaraja, Kunti’s son, was certainly our master when he first played with us as stake. But whose lord was he, once he had lost himself? O assembled Kurus! All of you should decide that

Before this, Vidur also argued the same, and Draupadi also argued the same thing. That Yudhisthir had no right to stake Draupadi once he lost himself in the gamble.

On seeing that the sons and grandsons of the kings were silent, Dhritarashtra’s son smiled and spoke these words to the daughter of the king of Panchala, “O Yajnaseni! Let the question now be placed before the immensely powerful Bhima, Arjuna, Sahadeva and your husband Nakula. Let them reply to your words. O Panchali! Let them declare before all these aryas that Yudhishthira is not your lord. They must establish Dharmaraja as a liar. You will then be freed from servitude. The great-souled son of Dharma is always established in dharma. He is the equal of Indra. Let him himself declare whether he is your lord or not. When he has spoken, you must quickly decide whom to love. All the Kouravas who are in this sabha are immersed in your affliction. Though they are aryas at heart, they cannot appropriately resolve the issue. They therefore look to your husbands for an answer.”

This is how Bhim responds,

“Had Dharmaraja Yudhishthira not been our superior and had he not been our lord of our lineage, we would not have tolerated this. He owns the merit of our austerities and he is even the lord of our lives. If he considers himself to have been won, then all of us have been won. But for that, no one who walks the ground of the earth with his feet would have escaped with his life after touching Panchali’s hair. Look at my long and round arms, like iron clubs. Once inside them, not even Shatakratu can escape. But bound in the noose of dharma, out of respect for him and restrained by Arjuna, I am not doing anything dreadful. If I am once freed by Dharmaraja, I will make my arms perform the act of swords and kill these evil sons of Dhritarashtra, the way a lion kills small animals."

And what Arjuna had told him earlier,

‘Arjuna said, “O Bhimasena! Never before have you uttered words like these. The cruel enemies have destroyed your pride in dharma. You should not make the desires of the enemy come true. Observe the supreme dharma. According to dharma, one should never cross one’s elder brother. The king was challenged and he followed the dharma of the kshatriyas. He gambled because of the desires of the enemy. That is our great deed.”

‘Bhimasena replied, “O Dhananjaya! Had I not known that he has not done it for himself, I would forcibly have grasped his hands and burnt them in the blazing fire.”’

In the end, they were all trapped. The other four brothers could not have gone against Yudhisthir because they knew he was forced into it. The only escape was that he wagered Draupadi after he lost himself, so he technically was not in position to gamble anything. So in a way, Draupadi was not won by the Kauravas.

sambhavami thumbnail
Anniversary 13 Thumbnail Group Promotion 7 Thumbnail + 8
Posted: 2 months ago
#9

I am late for this one! All the points mentioned already have covered this issue so beautifully!

My two cents would be more lighthearted though. Even if Arjun and Bheem never went completely against Yudhishthir in the sabha, they did squeak a little then and voiced their opinions later.

Bheem literally had a weekly appointment to go scream at Yudhishthir with Draupadi in the forest. Arjun, due to his introvert nature, kept things bottled up nice and pretty, until he exploded nuclear-style on Yudhishthir in the middle of the war.

Since we are discussing some basic psychology here (not that I am even an L1 level expert at this)...we can also consider Yudhishthir's untimely parentification. Although Kunti had no choice in this matter, and she tried to shield all the kids from that mega-mess after Pandu's passing, and still Yudhishtir ended up as the 'man-of-the-house'.

I find it a plausible consequence of this changed dynamic that Arjun and the twins see Yudi more as a father-figure than an older brother.

Bheem, on the other hand, is closer in age to Yudi, and had comparatively more time with Yudi-the-big-bro than Yudi-the-family-protector, and is therefore more at ease with criticizing him from time to time.

More in-depth personal interpretation...I'll be back in some time!

sambhavami thumbnail
Anniversary 13 Thumbnail Group Promotion 7 Thumbnail + 8
Posted: 2 months ago
#10

Now, welcome to my personal conspiracy-headcanon mashup.

To understand Arjun/Bheem's reactions we need to understand Yudi first, right?

During the Dyuta Sabha, the Ps had a lot of things going on. To blame what happened entirely on Yudi's gambling would probably not be fair. As others here have pointed out, they were cornered both physically and politically (especially with Krishna very perfectly, for the Ks, locked in a deadly war).

Many people think (me included, up until a few months back) that Yudi's a weaker character, controlled entirely by Krishna, and that he sort of falls apart when Krishna isn't around. But, that isn't true. Yudhishthir is remarkable smart. His only problem in this regard is that he associates the greatest with Krishna, the record-smashing, powerhouse of a politician, who dwarfs everyone else simply by being in the room.

Hence, the only times we get to see Yudi's strategies playing out independently are during Varnavart, and Dyuta Sabha (Vana Parva shows his standalone intelligence, and Udyoga Parva features his farsightedness).

During Varnavart, when they are leaving...this is a small detail, but Yudhishthir creates a proper ruckus before they leave. He's crying and sobbing, he's falling on everyone's feet- solidly weirding out at least half of the extended family elders...as one writer so eloquently put it: like 'a bride on her bidai'.

Point is, Yudi smells out that something's wrong with this sudden all-expenses-paid trip, even before Vidur gets to him with his hints and stuff. What Yudi is doing here is that he is acting weird (and loud) to the point that even a commoner seeing their chariots from afar would notice something's fishy.

Yudi's style is always to play the long con. And he values the common man. Rather, he knows the value of public support. This is something even Dury values, but his method of securing said support is just to throw money at them mostly.

Yudi always wants to make a more permanent impact in this department.

You remember how in Varnavart, Kunti leaves a nishada mother and her 5 sons to die in the fire? I was thinking, did Yudi not inherit even 1% of that steadfast (cruel?) determination? (I mean Krishna is Kunti's suyogya nephew in this regard!). Yudi sure didn't object to his mother's plan then.

Then, after Draupadi's swayamvar, Yudi is the one to recognize the seeds of discord b/w the brothers, and nips it in the bud by using Kunti's words. Once Krishna is in the picture, we see Yudi kinda sorta let up, he lets Krishna make some executive decisions regarding Indraprastha, and the rajasuya. Obviously, he trusts Krishna fully, and even Krishna gets the time to really recognize Yudi's subtle undercurrent-ish strategies.

So, it's not totally weird that the younglings trust him so much. The dice game might have activated Yudi's gambling issues exacerbated by his somewhat compulsive desire to be polite at all costs, but he wasn't rendered completely senseless.

On IF only I saw one member theorizing about how Yudhishthir is phrasing sentences when the guard is sent to Draupadi at first. It's like he's almost sending a message to Draupadi.

Combining the above, with my own little theory here...Yudi realised pretty much immediately that he is walking into a trap, and so walk he did. He had faith that even if his brothers (and wife) were furious with him, they would still not react, and let Yudi play it out first.

The seeds of Kurukshetra were sown generations back. If we want to push it, we can push the origins of this conflict to the very first Deva-Asur war itself!

Even in their generation they had Krishna and Jarasandha, Drupada and Drona, the growing intra-Yadav complications, their own family matter, and so many other such conflicts. The world was already barrelling towards the mega-war at record speed. With Krishna and Drupada aligning themselves with the Ps, and Duryodhana rapidly filling the vacuum left by Jarasandha, Yudhishthira would also have guess that the war would happen in their lifetime. And in this uber-polarized situation, situated right between Krishna and Duryodhana, Yudhishthira would definitely end up in the middle of all of it.

When Yudi found the war to be inevitable, he gave up trying to really stop it and instead focused on how they could come out of this smelling like roses.

In case of war, Yudi was never getting Dury's loyal vassal kingdoms. Obviously! And Krishna had antagonized more that half of the subcontinent while fighting Jarasandha (none of whom would fight on the side of Krishna's friends!), so Yudi wasn't getting them either! Then, the only remaining option was to somehow drag the sort-of neutral kingdoms into this mess.

The neutral kingdoms had remained neutral for a reason. These people never really got involved in anything. The only thing that would drag them in, would have to be something outrageous. Something, that no conscientious person/kingdom could ignore. Something like a royal woman being assaulted mid-sabha. Something that would hit two birds...force the neutral kingdoms to choose a side, and irrevocably tip the public opinion in the Pandavas' favour.

If Yudi pushed Draupadi into this intentionally, then he was also ensuring that the Kaurava soldiers would fight against, but with a broken heart all that time, just like the elders of the family (and consequently will be about half as effective).

Now obviously, this is just a theory, and I'd be a lot more afraid of Yudi if this were indeed true. However, it is still fun to imagine, and I can't resist that!

But then, when Draupadi asks Yudi directly if what he did was legal or not, he stays silent. See, normally, Yudi LOVES a good debate. If he had genuinely thought he was right (or at least legally in the clear) in doing what he did, we would argue with Drau to the end of the world, but he doesn't!

Again, Draupadi is a legal genius herself, there's no doubt about that. So when Draupadi is asking that question, she isn't actually asking the question. Draupadi is only further appalled when nobody acknowledges that she's right in saying that Yudi had no right to stake her. A law after all, is only a law if the wider society agrees that it is. In Drau's case, no one had the guts (except Vidur and Vikarna) to stand with her and support the law that she cited.

Maybe, Yudi had anticipated this would happen? That the Ks would let their animalistic side win over the logical one, and dig themselves a hole they can't really climb out of? But then again, I would be very scared of the man, then.

Coming to the brothers' loyalty. Obviously, they've (and Draupadi) lived with the intelligent Yudi for a long time. Long enough to know how he plays his game, and even if they don't like his approaches, they know that it will still help them achieve their final goal, which is to obtain and then stay on the throne of Hastinapura (the staying part they can't do without solid public support in the long run).

As for how much they value Draupadi, the brothers have proven themselves several times after that. Bheem a little louder, Arjun a little quieter, but they have.

Top