The Print Article - Indians ignore what was done to Subhadra - Page 10

Originally posted by: CaptainSpark

Because Arjun's marriage hurt her more than Bheem or Yudhishthir's but you aren't ready to accept that so let that go.

I don't think a nice happy woman would say this to Arjuna, and she clearly refers to Subhadra here btw. If what happened before is the reason for apology, I don't see why she needs to taunt Subhadra.

At last the hero went unto Draupadi. Draupadi, from jealousy, spoke unto him, saying, 'Why tarriest thou here, O son of Kunti? Go where the daughter of the Satwata race is! A second tie always relaxeth the first one upon a faggot!' And Krishna lamented much in this strain. But Dhananjaya pacified her repeatedly and asked for her forgiveness. And returning soon unto where Subhadra, attired in red silk, was staying, Arjuna, sent her into the inner apartments dressed not as a queen but in the simple garb of a cowherd woman.

Lastly, well you should know well why she accepted Subhadra well. Firstly because she was Krishna's sister and she knew Krishna would not do anything to hurt her. Secondly, she is a woman and Subhadra was a woman who was abducted and was into a place where she doesn't even know her husband (no love story was there). And she knew very well this was Krishna's doing, not Subhadra's fault. She is not some monster to yell at Subhadra. Could Subhadra stop this? No. Also did this happen because she fell in love? No.

What's the reason to not accept her? She was upset with her husband, not a lady who was ABDUCTED.

That quote is mistranslated in actual she asks him to go back to subdhara out of love not jealousy probably because she did not wanted to keep a new bride alone or in midst of strangers just because of their unresolved issues

Krishna and drapaudi were friends for long i am sure she already knew about subdhara so she should not have been upset in the first place hence her accepting subdhara because of krishna is out of question instead i think she forgave arjuna for his actual mistake because subdhara s presence calmed her down that finally Arjuna had someone else to shower his love and attention on.

Why should i believe something which is not true based on some mistranslated verses

Originally posted by: CaptainSpark

Where is it said that it is mistranslated? We only have Drau's words, we cannot hear her tone. Also, Vyasa is not present in front of Drau when she says these so he can't give live account either.

I can say "go away" now. You can read my words, you don't know whether I am being rude or teasing you unless u see context. Here she also says another line which is there in the citation. I refuse to accept her tone was mistranslated. Out of love or jealousy is second person's opinion. Unless you hear her, you don't know. What I see his she was hurt. Not jealous, but hurt and upset.

I can know about something for long yet be upset. Also hearing of it and having to meet your husband after one year are two different things. She is a human being for God sake. She has feelings too, and why is it so important to prove she was 100% neutral and can't ever think of any special feelings for Arjun and feel bad about his marriage? It doesn't make her any less of a wondorous woman.

Drapaudi had many other human emotions she does not has to be in love or partial to mahanayak arjuna to prove that she was a "human" there are many other human qualities like her love for abhimanyu and ghatokch

She was neither hurt nor upset about the marriage

Will we be in trouble for discussing this? I read a few tweets and people are not taking it lightly

Originally posted by: CaptainSpark

There's a difference between partiality and basic human emotions such as feeling bad about ANYONE who is your husband but is also having another wife. Polygyny was an accepted practice, not a cherished one.. Infact, it only brought misfortune and bad times for women.

Also, you might want to stop talking like you know her personally and anyone saying anything about Drau's feelings apart from Krisna Udayshankar and you are wrong. Draupadi never told you she was hurt or angry or whatever she felt - so neither me not you know for sure. This is not a fact we prove with citations. (And citations are apparently mistranslated)

It is only assumption. You make your mind up that it's mistranslated and anything she feels pro Arjun has to be either wrong translation or someway having another meaning. 😂😂

At the end, we all will believe what we want to believe. Drau fans will want to believe it was men who were dying for her while she was never in love with either of her husbands. (Which is rubbish.) Arjun fans will want to think the same about Arjun that all from Drau to Subhi was dying for him. (Again utter nonsense). Same for Yudhishthir, Duryodhana, Karna bla bla bla.

She is not an asexual woman. She had enough feelings for men and there's no reason to think she was ancient India's Peter Baelish who only had feelings for Madhav, Abhimanyu and Ghatothkach.

what diff does it make to draupadis greatness weather she had feelings for her husbands or not. Anyone living with anyone for a long time will develop feelings right. Also arjun was the most loved friend of krishna with whom draupadi too had a very good friendship. So it could be possible she expected more from arjun or knew him more better or was more closer to him

😆Well its actually nice to know people actually know about the 3rd sexuality that exists. otherwise its almost invisible for most people.

Originally posted by: CaptainSpark

There's a difference between partiality and basic human emotions such as feeling bad about ANYONE who is your husband but is also having another wife. Polygyny was an accepted practice, not a cherished one.. Infact, it only brought misfortune and bad times for women.

Also, you might want to stop talking like you know her personally and anyone saying anything about Drau's feelings apart from Krisna Udayshankar and you are wrong. Draupadi never told you she was hurt or angry or whatever she felt - so neither me not you know for sure. This is not a fact we prove with citations. (And citations are apparently mistranslated)

It is only assumption. You make your mind up that it's mistranslated and anything she feels pro Arjun has to be either wrong translation or someway having another meaning. 😂😂

At the end, we all will believe what we want to believe. Drau fans will want to believe it was men who were dying for her while she was never in love with either of her husbands. (Which is rubbish.) Arjun fans will want to think the same about Arjun that all from Drau to Subhi was dying for him. (Again utter nonsense). Same for Yudhishthir, Duryodhana, Karna bla bla bla.

She is not an asexual woman. She had enough feelings for men and there's no reason to think she was ancient India's Peter Baelish who only had feelings for Madhav, Abhimanyu and Ghatothkach.

I thought we were having a objective discussion here. From where did Krishna udayshnakar came in between. ??.

Why should i believe something which is clearly mistranslated and not this many and many versed are mistranslated debate on which have happened before also.

Talking about mistranslation here is the verse -

abhigamya sa rājānaṃ vinayena samāhitaḥ

abhyarcya brāhmaṇān pārtho draupadīm abhijagmivān

15 taṃ draupadī pratyuvāca praṇayāt kurunandanam

tatraiva gaccha kaunteya yatra sā sātvatātmajā

subaddhasyāpi bhārasya pūrvabandhaḥ ślathāyate

https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/mbs/mbs01213.htm

The word used is pranayat. Ie, out of love not jealousy. It is mistranslated.

Drapaudi asked arjuna to go back to subdhara not because of any jealousy but because she did not want a newly wed bride to be alone just because of their issues. It was taken out of context mistranslated and misinterpreted exaggerated like people are doing it now

There is no feeling of hurt or jealousy or abhimaan here.

Originally posted by: CaptainSpark

Look Draupadi has no reason to be jealous of Subhadra. She knew what her position was and nobody could threaten that.

It only clears that she has no hard feelings (which I am saying from Post 1- there's no reason why Drau will be upset with Subhadra) and I never believed she was jealous (she has no reason to).

What I said is- her words clearly indicate she was upset. Sorry, I can't believe a woman will be happy about a husband sharing his bed with another woman and be jolly. She understood this was needed to expand her kingdom so she won't protest. Doesn't mean she is "happy" about it. Her words (i am not referring to "out of jealousy") which she said, as per my understanding is not something a happy chappy woman would say. And nothing in the shloka counters that, in only negates the fact that she was jealous, which is a given.

She was very much upset with the marriage though her intelligence made her accept that it was needed. This is what I gather from the text. And I still feel she had special feelings for Arjun. I have my reasons to think that just like you have your reasons otherwise.

That's it.

Again let is not reduce her to a 21st century weeping wife. That was dwarpar yug polygamy was very common plus Pandavas also had their fair shares of prostitutes i am sure Arjuna shared his bed with many of them. Plus all the pandavas had other wives living in ip so she was not hurt unhappy upset or jealous of anything or anyone because nothing happened out of the norm. At best she was indifferent to the marriage. The apology was for something that happened prior to the exile. She asks Arjuna to go his new bride since didn't wanted to make her uncomfortable on her very first day because of their personal matters. Drapaudi accepted not this marriage or subdhara when the latter goes to her but forgave arjuna for his past blunder because of subdhara.

And drapaudi didn't had any special feelings for arjuna as proved from above just a case of taken of context mistranslated and exaggerated beyond limit. And no this does not reduce or robot. She was very much s human with all the human emotions. And drapaudi and arjun were friends good friend but just Friends. But still i guess that just my pov

But since we are going around in circles about this let us agree to disagree. 😆

Originally posted by: .Vrish.

Major questions here:

• Did Subhadra have anybody that she longed for in secret, different from Arjun? OR
• Was she a feminist who wanted to go thru life unmarried? OR
• Did she want a grand swayamvara of her own where princes and kings would line up and she'd get to choose?

I've seen nothing to suggest any of the above, so how is Subhadra a victim here? I didn't get that. In the case of Amba, the story is open & shut. Similarly, there was the princess of Kalinga that Duryodhan abducted and married against her will. There was Duryodhan's daughter Lakshmanaa who was abducted by Samba and therefore forced to marry him.

But which of these scenarios was applicable to Subhadra?

How does any of this relevant ?? All that matters is whether or not she wanted to marry arjuna

Though the kind of person that krishna was i doubt he would do any kind of injustice to his own sister

Originally posted by: .Vrish.

Major questions here:

• Did Subhadra have anybody that she longed for in secret, different from Arjun? OR
• Was she a feminist who wanted to go thru life unmarried? OR
• Did she want a grand swayamvara of her own where princes and kings would line up and she'd get to choose?

I've seen nothing to suggest any of the above, so how is Subhadra a victim here? I didn't get that. In the case of Amba, the story is open & shut. Similarly, there was the princess of Kalinga that Duryodhan abducted and married against her will. There was Duryodhan's daughter Lakshmanaa who was abducted by Samba and therefore forced to marry him.

But which of these scenarios was applicable to Subhadra?

We don't know about Subhadra. He was abducted even without getting a chance to decide

About the one year theory. This is an expert from kmg about picnic that govind and parth planned after arjuna s return from 12 months of exile. Drapaudi and subdhara accompanied. Them

Here-

After a few days, Vibhatsu, addressing Krishna, said, 'The summer days have set in, O Krishna! Therefore, let us go to the banks of the Yamuna. O slayer of Madhu, sporting there in the company of friends, we will, O Janardana, return in the evening'. Thereupon Vasudeva said, 'O son of Kunti, this is also my wish. Let us, O Partha, sport in the waters as we please, in the company of friends.' "Vaisampayana continued, 'Then, O Bharata, having consulted thus with each other, Partha and Govinda, with Yudhishthira's leave, set out, surrounded by friends. Reaching a fine spot (on the banks he Yamuna) suitable for purposes of pleasure, overgrown with numerous tall trees and covered with several high mansions that made the place look like the celestial city and within which had been collected for Krishna and Partha numerous costly and well-flavoured viands and drinks and other articles of enjoyment and floral wreaths and various perfumes, the party entered without delay the inner apartments adorned with many precious gems of pure rays. Entering those apartments, everybody, O Bharata, began to sport, according to his pleasure. The women of the party, all of full rotund hips and deep bosoms and handsome eyes, and gait unsteady with wine began to sport there at the command of Krishna and Partha. Some amongst the women sported as they liked in the woods, some in the waters, and some within the mansions, as directed by Partha and Govinda. Draupadi and Subhadra, exhilarated with wine, began to give away unto the women so sporting, their costly robes and ornaments. And some amongst those women p. 434 began to dance in joy, and some began to sing; and some amongst them began to laugh and jest, and some to drink excellent wines. Some began to obstruct one another's progress and some to fight with one another, and to discourse with one another in private. Those mansions and the woods, filled with the charming music of flutes and guitars and kettledrums, became the scene of Prosperity personified

Note that here drapaudi os found in arjuna s company so probably it was his year .

And immediately after the khandav dahan after they came back to ip it is said that yudhishtra dismissed everyone to spent some lone time with drapaudi how come yudhishtra got to spend quality time with drapaudi in arjuna or at most nakula s year

Meanwhile king Yudhishthira of unfading glory, accompanied by his brothers and surrounded by friends, entered his excellent capital. And that tiger among men, dismissing all his relatives, brothers, and sons, sought to make himself happy in the company of Draupadi. And Kesava also, worshipped by the principal Yadavas including Ugrasena, entered with a happy heart his own excellent city. And worshipping his old father and his illustrious mother, and saluting (his brother) Valadeva, he of eyes like lotus-petals took his seat. Embracing Pradyumna, Shamva, Nishatha, Charudeshna, Gada, Aniruddha and Bhanu, and obtaining the leave of all the elderly men, Janardana entered the apartments of Rukmini."

This kind of dismisses that one year rule once for all. And further strengthen that only yudhishtra was married to Krishnaa

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

^^^ This dismisses the one year rule point which anyway wasn't in Mahabharata

This doesn't anyhow fix the point that Draupadi was only married to Yudhishtir

Let me get this. There was no one year rule. Then why was arjuna exiled ?? Because he walked on yudhishtra and drapaudi in weapon chamber how is that a fault. ?? And if the weapon was in drapaudi s chamber. Plus there is no one year rule then he had every right to go to her. Plus if yudhishtra and drapaudi were really busy in doing it how come there was no dasi to stop any intruder??? And again how is arjuna supposed to know that yudhishtra was with panchali ?? That s way too unfair to Arjuna

Plus if we consider hearmeroar s theory that arjuna was exiled because he made a move on Krishnaa how is that wrong ?? He was her husband and plus there is no one year. So arjuna had every right to spend some quality time with his wife.

The only way this exile make sense if arjuna tried to make a move on Krishnaa out of his attraction but came back to his senses before anything happened and went onto exile to get over his attraction for panchali who is his brother s wife.

And later when he comes back he apologizes for this and then panchali ask him to go back to subdhara out of love because she didn't wanted subdhara to feel lonely on her very first day in ip (citation on previous page )