Dharmakshetra :) - Page 26

Anu, answers to which questions are related to Draupadi's past? There was also Dhrishtadyumna whose past was wiped off & also Krishna if we consider only MB. Your thoughts on two Krishnas is something I would agree.

Dhrisht's main claim to fame is as her brother. Not interested too much in him.

Post dwarka submersion

Thank you Adishakthi. I had some confusion about where Vajra was based.

Sorry Anu. Dhrisht's claim to fame was that he was born to kill Drona & he did it, not that he was Draupadi's brother. From what I percieved, you are only painting every character just as a shadow of Draupadi (very sorry to say that & extremely sorry if I m wrong) which is probably the biggest injustice to that character. I do not mean that Draupadi was inferior to anyone or less important or need not to be considered; but every character, however small it may be it's existance in the story, has an existance of its own, has an identity of its own. We don't need always to look only from Draupadi's side. On the other side, you are indireclty proving Draupadi deserves to be called Kritya which is something I don't agree with.
Vajra was nowhere the greatgrandson of Draupadi, he was the son of Anirudha, son of Pradyumna, son of Krishna.
As Draupadi is mostly unknown to me, I would go with IB's boloji article about why Draupadi's past was hidden. He had pointed out that she was the daughter of Drupada & grew up like every other princess in his palace. As long as I don't come across anything that disproves it, I wil believe it.
There are already many questions which I asked, left unanswered, since we have been discussing this yadava domination theory. Just an addition to them. Why is it necessary that G direct DS if he had wanted Yadava domination?
I agree Draupadi was intelligent. But here you are forgetting who Krishna was. It was not impossible for Krishna to act a little (which he always did) so that he could make the feel that he actually was following the other person. It was never the other way like you said because he was getting what he wanted without going the other way. And all that he needed for it was acting a little.

Originally posted by: Brahmaputra

So I go with your choices 2 & 3.
Well, I am not a fan of Kunti. But for me, she is a tough puzzle (I love puzzles) & the most blood-thirsty villain of MB. There is a section where she INDIRECTLY requests Vyasa not to reveal truths about her beyond a limit & he agrees to do the same. I forgot where exactly it is, but it is there. And I love Karna, really do love him for reasons I can't reveal in public. Krishna, I respect him for his intelligence & I am neutral about others but a little more leaning towards Arjuna.

U are not fond of Draupadi?
I thought u were a Karna fan followed by Draupadi n Arjun... 😭


This is my reaction... 🥺

Amrita, I am not a fan of any character. And I never mean I am not fond of Draupadi. Of course I am fond of her. But when we discuss, we will have to keep our fondness away so that it doesn't affect the quality of our thoughts. That is what I meant by being neutral. I speak for Draupadi because she is a positive character in my eyes & she had nothing to prove her bad/wrong, to me. That is very important to me because I respect her not as her fan, but only because of what she actually was as a person. Fans obviuosly do respect their favourites which is very difficult for someone who is not a fan at all. And that makes me fond of her which was clear in my previous posts.

Ohkay...I have a question...

Why are we treating Mahabharat from one character's perspective?
I have seen this in many places where people consider Karna as the 'real hero' or Arjun as the 'real hero'...
Mahabharat is a story of a generation...a slice of life...
If our lives are chronicled by anyone...who will be the hero?
Is there any hero or heroine in our real lives?
Wat we have is protagonists...
The way Vaisampayana narrates the story...the Pandavas are the protagonists, along with Lord Krishna as the mediator...
But if we see the Inversion theory, then the Ks can be considered as the protagonists...
Draupadi is called the heroine not bcoz she was some superwoman...but bcoz she plays a very important part in the whole story...Her marriage changes he lives of the Pandavas...her humiliation made the already existing enmity irreversible...
She was not the sole reason for war...but she did play a very important part in the lives of everyone she knew...

So I guess...judging the story from one character's perspective...be it Draupadi or Karna is unfair.
Every character played their part...some small...some big.
And everyone in their own ways contributed to the war...

And everyone had something to gain or lose from the war.
For Draupadi it was justice...for the Ps...it was their birthright.
For Karna it was glory...for the Ks, it was the throne.
For some kings, it was their enmity...for the Brahmins...it was war for the gotras...
We need not always place coordinates on one character to judge the whole epic...coz every character had a point to make...and unless we are in their places, we will never know how they felt...

Originally posted by: Adishakti

Vajra became the chief of yaadavas, he was coronated at indraprasta, but because he was homeless. After being crowned as chief of yadavas, he went back to reestablish mathura as yadavas stronghold.

Thanks for mentioning the actual event. In this case, with the sources known to me, (keeping the unknown aside) I think right now I must consider Krishna did not intend Yadava domination through war...but still these unanswered questions confuse me a lot...

Am not un-fond of Dhrisht. But he killed Drona an important event in the war definitely. But for the story as a whole, he just didn't have Panchali's importance. In fact that if we go by the pre-ordination theory, then Drona had actually given up his life before Dhrisht beheaded him.