Not calling name of husband? - Page 3

Originally posted by: surabhi01

How about wife calling to husband like

Sunte ho?

Sunniye ji?

No these things surely came much later. Some insecure women haters ruined the world for women.

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

Panchali calls all Pandavas by name many times in text. Only TV shows have otherwise.

Probably b'cos she's one of the rare women who had multiple husbands. If it were just, say, 3, it might have been bade-arya, majhle-arya and chote-arya, but w/ 5, she just addressed them by name. Incidentally, did she ever address Yudhisthir too by name? That would have been unusual.

If you think about it, BANS were all her devars as well, as a result of her being Yudhisthir's wife, so using that relationship, she could use their respective name, while also attaching arya in the front to show that she still respects them as a husband. Like Arya-Bhima would give Bhima the same respect as her husband, but she'd have the right to use Bhima's name by virtue of being his bhabi as well.

W/ Yudhisthir, she may have just used Arya-maharaj and neatly sidestepped that issue 😆

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

I guess even today many women don't call their husbands by names. That's personal choice not anything regressive if you ask me

I think it's a generational divide. My parents and all didn't, but when I was married, my wife addressed me by name. My sister addresses her husband by name, in fact everyone I know in my generation and below does.

Originally posted by: Chiillii

In public, both husband and wife was addressed by their formal patronym.

Sita would call Rama as Raghava. While Rama would call her Vaidehi/Janaki. This rule was for everyone not just husband and wife. In public every one was addressed formally to show respect.

Yudhishtir and his brothers would be addressed as Pandava or Bharatha or Partha. Krishna would be addressed as Draupadi

However for women since they left their maternal home and entered a new kingdom post marriage, they would also be sometimes formally addressed by name of the kingdom they came from

Kousalya from Kosala, Kaikeyi from kekeya. Gandhari's from Gandhar and Krishna as Panchali

In private conversations given names were used. By both husbands and wives.

So which kingdoms would Sumitra, Urmila, Shrutakirti, Subhadra, Uloopi, Chitrangada... be from, going by their names?

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

Panchali calls all Pandavas by name in public and private.

"Draupadi said,--'O bull of the Bharata race, if thou will grant me a boon, I ask the handsome Yudhishthira, obedient to every duty, be freed from slavery.

https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m02/m02070.htm

Fie on that Gandiva which none else can string save Arjuna and Bhima and thyself, O slayer of Madhu! Fie on the strength of Bhima, and fie on the prowess of Arjuna, since, O Krishna, Duryodhana (after what he had done) hath drawn breath even for a moment!

https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m03/m03012.htm

The person that doth not act, certainly succumbeth, O Yudhishthira.

https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m03/m03032.htm

, 'Behold, O Bhima, this most beautiful unearthly flower having within it the very source of fragrance.

https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m03/m03145.htm

. In hoping to vanquish king Yudhishthira the just, thou really hopest to separate, stick in hand, from a herd roaming in Himalayan valleys, its leader, huge as a mountain peak and with the temporal juice trickling down its rent temples.

...

Thou shalt, however, have to run away when thou seest Bhimasena in wrath!

...

Even Indra himself cannot abduct her for whose protection Krishna and Arjuna would together follow,

...

And when thou wilt behold Arjuna shooting from the Gandiva

https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m03/m03266.htm

'Arise, arise! Why dost thou, O Bhimasena, lie down as one dead?

https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m04/m04017.htm

Draupadi said, 'What grief hath she not who hath Yudhishthira for her husband?

...

Alas, that Yudhishthira, who was daily waited upon by a thousand sages of ascetic merit, versed in the Vedas and having every desire gratified, as his courtiers,--that Yudhishthira who maintained eighty-eight thousands of domestic Snatakas with thirty maid-servants assigned unto each, as also ten thousand yatis not accepting anything in gift and with vital seed drawn up,--alas, even that mighty king now liveth in such guise. That Yudhishthira who is without malice, who is full of kindness, and who giveth every creature his due, who hath all these excellent attributes, alas--even he now liveth in such guise.

https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m04/m04018.htm

. O Bhima, that Arjuna the clatter of whose car-wheels caused the entire earth with her mountains and forests, her mobile and immobile things to tremble, and whose birth dispelled all the sorrows of Kunti, that exalted hero, that younger brother of thine, O Bhimasena, now maketh me weep for him.

...

Always thinking of Sahadeva's plight, I cannot, O Bhimasena, obtain sleep

https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m04/m04019.htm

Morally, O Krishna, I am the daughter-in-law of both Bhishma and Dhritarashtra. Though such, I was yet forcibly made a slave. Fie to Partha's bowmanship, oh, fie to Bhimasena's might since Duryodhana, O Krishna, liveth for even a moment. I

https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m05/m05082.htm

---------

There are others wherever she is given dialogue. At no point does Panchali address Yudhishtira as swami or nath or arya. She does call him king frequently. But she calls him "that gambler," "that crafty one," and "that desperate gambler," also.😆

When Vyasa wrote such long winded descriptions, he probably did that to force Ganesh to stop writing and ponder who he was referring to, so that he'd get the chance to stop and compose newer verses. Nobody in real life would go thru such long-winded addresses, or address someone by any one of his 57 random names

Originally posted by: .Vrish.

I think it's a generational divide. My parents and all didn't, but when I was married, my wife addressed me by name. My sister addresses her husband by name, in fact everyone I know in my generation and below does.

That's true. I address my husband by name, although I use "aap" instead of "tum". My cousin addresses her husband as "tum". My sister in law though avoids taking her husbands name but then her husband shares the name with my husband (her younger brother) so she has to sometimes take the name of her husband while talking about her brother

my mother doesn't name my father but at least his number is stored in her phone by name

My aunt(Mami) doesn't take the name of my mama and not even addresses anyone else with the same name by his name. Funny thing is that she carries her ID card everywhere and shows it if the husbands name is asked (to avoid either saying or writing his name)

Different people different limits

In text, both Panchali and Subhadra use first names for husbands, brothers, friends. Publicly and privately.

Satyabhama also refers to Krishna by name with Panchali.

Do any of the other female characters do so in epics?

It may be that these three were more independent than average.

------

Lemme take my usual dig at Yudhishtira here😆: Panchali's haughty attitude to him was remarked on by Vyasa himself.

Kunti might've also had a lot to do with it. When Krishna visits, she sends a message to her sons, asking Arjuna and Nakula to follow in Panchali's footsteps.

Bheema already did, and I guess Kunti believed Sahdev was smart enough on his own. Yudhishtira was hopeless case 😆.

If so, Kunti ran a female-friendly household.

Originally posted by: .Vrish.

Probably b'cos she's one of the rare women who had multiple husbands. If it were just, say, 3, it might have been bade-arya, majhle-arya and chote-arya, but w/ 5, she just addressed them by name. Incidentally, did she ever address Yudhisthir too by name? That would have been unusual.

If you think about it, BANS were all her devars as well, as a result of her being Yudhisthir's wife, so using that relationship, she could use their respective name, while also attaching arya in the front to show that she still respects them as a husband. Like Arya-Bhima would give Bhima the same respect as her husband, but she'd have the right to use Bhima's name by virtue of being his bhabi as well.

W/ Yudhisthir, she may have just used Arya-maharaj and neatly sidestepped that issue 😆

@Bold. Yes, she did. Some of it is cited in that long post I made. She also calls him some choice names, one of which was lunatic.😆 That one was said to his face. Actually, she calls all the Pandavas loonies in that paragraph. I got so much satisfaction out of reading it.😆

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

@Bold. Yes, she did. Some of it is cited in that long post I made. She also calls him some choice names, one of which was lunatic.😆 That one was said to his face. Actually, she calls all the Pandavas loonies in that paragraph. I got so much satisfaction out of reading it.😆

We were not personally there then to know what all she said. The writers at that or anytime won't write every personal things. Just like we call our siblings, friends and husbands(who are married here) different names when angry same way Draupadi or any other women calling her husbands names is not surprisingly. Imagine if years later someone writes a book on any great leader of modern time the writer won't write every details or what his wife called him. Its just that our movies and serials don't show mytho-history couples like normal couples but show them as if they were the most perfect and God-like when even Gods do mistakes. Even if they show wives calling names to husbands then people will do hungama saying they are hurting their religious sentiments by showing her so and so. On twitter, there was 1 or 2 people having problem with Drau asking a servant whether Yudi drank alcohol before gambling. They were like how can she say this. And she being called names like psycho and vamp for washing her hair with Dushy's blood. Imagine makers showing Sita in bikini blouse and tiny skirt like real Sita wore(actually Sita wore no blouse and was topless). People will eat the makers. Ramanand Sagar researched about Ramayan's clothings and did not shown Sita without a blouse fearing people's reactions because people have gone more regressive and narrow-minded now.