Did they seriously end Ghatochkat in one episode - Page 3

Originally posted by: .Vrish.

Why, isn't possession a commutative property? If Yudhi owned Bhima, and Bhima owned Hidimbi, didn't Yudhi as a result own Hidimbi?

No younger brothers(in the absence of father) are property but their wives and children are solely the property of their husband/father (one point Draupadi raised about how could Yudhishtir stake her when there were her other husbands too)

This is pretty clear in Manusmriti (although it doesn't use the word Property)

Originally posted by: .Vrish.

Under ancient shastric law, if a man had sex w/ another woman, and that woman was unmarried, then that act itself was an act of marriage. It was known as a Rakshasha vivaha. Didn't mean that the participants were rakshashas: it meant that they followed a certain process of marrying, and therefore ended up married. That's what happened to Uloopi, and to Hidimbi. If Uloopi could trick Arjun into sexually consuming her, then what she did was effectively trick him into marrying her. Regardless of whether or not he took her to her sasural

The fact that Uloopi was accepted into Arjun's household - along w/ Chitrangada - after the Ashwamedha yagna further butresses that they were married

Now I am confused, but as far as I have read Rakshas Vivah is either the har Vivah method, i.e. something like Duryodhan did to Bhanumati or the same under which Amba claimed her right over Bheeshm or else a forced relationship (r**e) onto a unmarried girl

I don't think any consensual relation between a man and an unmarried girl would constitute to be Rakshas Vivah, else Satyavati would have been considered married to Parashar muni and Kunti to Suryadev

No, a forced marriage - the r word - is what is known as a pisach vivaha. Gandharva vivaha is when there are no witnesses, and the man and woman just garland each other. Rakshasha vivah is when they have voluntary sex w/ each other, and the woman ain't married. An abduction may precede them having sex, but is not a must

Originally posted by: .Vrish.

No, a forced marriage - the r word - is what is known as a pisach vivaha. Gandharva vivaha is when there are no witnesses, and the man and woman just garland each other. Rakshasha vivah is when they have voluntary sex w/ each other, and the woman ain't married. An abduction may precede them having sex, but is not a must

Gandharva Vivah is pretty clear. That might be just for a day. Shakuntala and Dushyant had Gandharva Vivah

Pishacha marriage is when someone tricks the girl into having it or the abduct the girl from seclusion. Rakshas Vivah needs abduction with might and power.

Just one voluntary relation doesn't make two people married. Those days physical Sewa(you got what right) by unmarried girls to the saints or guests was common, that didn't make one the wife.

Had just one relation resulted in marriage, there would have been absolutely no concept of Kaneen children