Polyandry in Mahabharata - Page 13

And I forgot to add another one Subhadra thoghts regarding her abduction.

Originally posted by: swathi90

The rule was definitely there don’t know what sort of but arrangement was there especially to avoid confusion regarding paternity.

i think they were there in weapons room I don’t y they went there but arjun made a move in time he should not( not his turn that time probably), so to set an example he was exiled , inthonk he already tasted marital bliss because I panchal rule was not there it was added later, maybe he couldn’t control, got exiled for this, this s just human reaction as he won her. And might want to be with her more, ulupi it’s mostly like one night stand, and s naga kanya, he didn’t accept her fully untill last, because he didn’t like that she kidnapped him, and chitra according manipura rule she has to stay there and rise future heir, this s her father condition, with subhadra the problem s solved.

The one year rule is not mentioned in any texts.. That's why the confusion. But yes I do understand it was necessary. Thanks for the answer!

Originally posted by: CaptainSpark

What I mean is, if Vaishampayana's intention was to glorify Arjun and put attention on him (as you said), then he would concentrate on Arjun-Subhadra and their interactions. It only shows he was neutral in this case because he only shows what is important to story- Draupadi is important, not Subhadra. Hence her relationship with the rest is described, as someone pointed out her marriage was a turning point.

Whether Arjun loved Subhadra or Draupadi more is something that cannot be equated as we hardly know anything about Arjun with his other wives. However, Draupadi is an important character whose relationship with Pandavas is important for the story. YBANS and other wives is not important. So, we maybe able to understand whom Drau preferred among the five. It's difficult to say the same for Arjun, but we can say Arjun had strong feelings for her (several evidences are there).

See the thing is very simple had prativindhya succeeded yudhishtra then while narrating story to one of his progeny vaishampanya would have concentrate more on drapaudi and yudhishtra s equation and drapaudi s equation with yudhishtra s wives. Even exaggerating some of the interaction that would have made people think that drapaudi preferred yudhishtra.

Had sutasoma succeeded yudhishtra people would have thought drapaudi preferred bheema

In both these cases and in cases of other pandava kid succeeding yudhishtra their respective parents would have been focused and in these cases subdhara would have been just a name

The reason her abduction story, her coming to ip story or drapaudi s missing arjuna s story is mentioned and highlighted because the listener is arjuna s grandson

Vaishampanya narrates drapaudi missing arjuna only when janemya asks him too and not because he wanted to indicate in any way that drapaudi preferred arjuna.

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

I don't think anyone said there was no rule, rather no one year rule was discussed

Coming to your point, the place this happened could not be the Armoury if we consider the "weapon" to be that one. It probably then was Draupadi's chamber, where YuDrau were having their time when Arjun entered exposing his weapon

I think he had no other wife till then hence to satisfy his requirements Draupadi was the only source. Hence getting another wife was necessary which he ensured in the exile so that such situation doesn't reoccur

However if the things we are discussing are even 10% true, the Pandavas were not inseparable brothers like we think. They just remained together, it was very easy for them to break away

I am sorry about @bold. It was in the other thread. I confused. 🙈

@underlined - isn't this too far fetched 😂😂 How could he suddenly enter Drau's chamber exposing his weapon if it is THAT. At least he could go in and then proceed. Most probably he just entered with such intentions, the weapon thing is probably just an addition to clear Arjun's desires by later poets. 🤣

Not quoting.

Vaishampayana is just narrating what Vyasa told him. Vyasa told Vaishampayana. It is by chance that Vaishampayana ends up telling it to Janamejaya. Also, several Sautis (bards) go on to tell this tale to generation after generation. So I don't think it was absolutely biased.

Arjun was important to the story, I am not going to hell bent to claim something subjective such as Draupadi's feelings because none of us can say for sure. But I don't believe Arjun was shown to he "more important" because of Janamejaya. Vyasa didn't narrate it thinking who will listen. Vaishampayana was actually trying to convince Janamejaya that his father (Parikshit) died because of what HIS ANCESTORS did. Does it paint a good picture? Don't think so. At least I would not be so pleased to hear it. The story was told to convince him to stop his genocidal yagya for the Nagas.

Arjun was not made to be more important (in general I mean) for Janamejaya. He was important, infact Yudhi, Drau, Bheem, Krishna, Dury etc werw equally important.

It is US TODAY who consider him as more heroic than others.

Originally posted by: CaptainSpark

Not quoting.

Vaishampayana is just narrating what Vyasa told him. Vyasa told Vaishampayana. It is by chance that Vaishampayana ends up telling it to Janamejaya. Also, several Sautis (bards) go on to tell this tale to generation after generation. So I don't think it was absolutely biased.

Arjun was important to the story, I am not going to hell bent to claim something subjective such as Draupadi's feelings because none of us can say for sure. But I don't believe Arjun was shown to he "more important" because of Janamejaya. Vyasa didn't narrate it thinking who will listen. Vaishampayana was actually trying to convince Janamejaya that his father (Parikshit) died because of what HIS ANCESTORS did. Does it paint a good picture? Don't think so. At least I would not be so pleased to hear it. The story was told to convince him to stop his genocidal yagya for the Nagas.

Arjun was not made to be more important (in general I mean) for Janamejaya. He was important, infact Yudhi, Drau, Bheem, Krishna, Dury etc werw equally important.

It is US TODAY who consider him as more heroic than others.

I am not saying that arjuna was not important ofcourse he was as important just that tilt was a tiny bit more in arjuna s court because of janemya

But i think we are going around in circles here so let's just agree to disagree and move on to another topic

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

I don't think anyone said there was no rule, rather no one year rule was discussed

Coming to your point, the place this happened could not be the Armoury if we consider the "weapon" to be that one. It probably then was Draupadi's chamber, where YuDrau were having their time when Arjun entered exposing his weapon

I think he had no other wife till then hence to satisfy his requirements Draupadi was the only source. Hence getting another wife was necessary which he ensured in the exile so that such situation doesn't reoccur

However if the things we are discussing are even 10% true, the Pandavas were not inseparable brothers like we think. They just remained together, it was very easy for them to break away

Exactly pandavas r not ram, laxman , bharath , shatrughn😆

it’s easy to break any bothers especially over beautiful woman, and Draupadi was every men desire back then. Kunti saw this clearly Draupadi with only one brother means dangerous alarms, she made sure it didn’t happen.

she s the one who held them till end, this marriage to her bonded them forever. That’s y I said polyandry s important here and she held them together, all desired her, it wouldn’t sit well with others if only one married her, so when they got the chance they grabbed it happily.

For polygamy nobody bats an eyelid but for polyandry there are nunerous discussions probably also cause it is very rare

Indian mythology gives a number of examples of polyandry.

In fact there have been practices of polyandry till the very recent times in some of the tribal regions near the Himalayas. This was done to safeguard the property of the land so that there is no fighting between the brothers

Draupadi and the Pandavas accepted it and so did everyone.

There are various citations that Draupadi treated all her husbands equally. To be honest I think the only reason she had a soft corner for Arjun was because he won her in the swayamvar and till the journey to Kunti, she would have imagined herself as his wife.

Draupadi was not an abla naari, she was a princess and became a queen , there was much more than romance at that time she had a kingdom to rule and let's be honest handling one husband is tough imagine 5 husband's who were strong, egoistic, arrogant a king and princes.

There was a Mahabharata discussion on Draupadi in a literary forum which I thought was very interesting Below were the points

1) Draupadi never said no to the sharing. Someone who is very opinionated and strong is quiet.

2) The rules were done (the 1 year with each and nobody else to come in) only to establish the paternity of the 5 sons.

After each kid was born there was nothing that indicated that the rules continued.

3) There are quite a few romantic and physical mentions between Draupadi and the Pandavas. In fact a lot of physicality is mentioned ,but a lot of tv shows and pravachana avoid it. India historical ly was very evolved on sex.

4) An incident where Satyabhama asks how she manages the 5 husbands and she herself and the wives have a hard time in understanding Krishna. Here she talks about her queenly duties and a wife of the 5 Pandavas in detail.

5) Duryodhana thinks about sending a woman to seduce and create a rift between the brothers and Karna reminds him that they already have a beautiful and strong queen that they share.

Originally posted by: Poorabhforever

I am not saying that arjuna was not important ofcourse he was as important just that tilt was a tiny bit more in arjuna s court because of janemya

But i think we are going around in circles here so let's just agree to disagree and move on to another topic

Yeah.

Another reason for Arjun's importance could also be his alliance with Krishna btw. I mean Arjun-Krishna friendship. And as we know Krishna is painted divine.. Also he is recipent of Geeta too (again part of divinity). So this reason is also pivotal in increasing his importance.

Originally posted by: swathi90

Exactly pandavas r not ram, laxman , bharath , shatrughn😆

it’s easy to break any bothers especially over beautiful woman, and Draupadi was every men desire back then. Kunti saw this clearly Draupadi with only one brother means dangerous alarms, she made sure it didn’t happen.

she s the one who held them till end, this marriage to her bonded them forever. That’s y I said polyandry s important here and she held them together, all desired her, it wouldn’t sit well with others if only one married her, so when they got the chance they grabbed it happily.

Even I opine that the Polyandry was true. Although I can't say that Draupadi really loved all of them equally, love isn't some commodity that you could weigh and share equally, even parents have a slight bias towards one of their kids.

Anyhow slight interpolations are definitely possible but addition of a completely new angle to the story which majority of the population consider it's own is definitely not possible.

I meant if at all we have to believe that polyandry wasn't there then the only possibility is that Islamic Invaders or British got a major portion of the epic rewritten to give us a very bad name