Most Favourite Character from MB and Why? - Page 13

Originally posted by: supermaverick

Now calling Draupadi a who*e is not really a big issue as per the traditional Hindu definition a who*e is one who had slept with four or more men.You can browse through any traditional hindi dictionary to find this. Nowadays you cannot call anybody a who*e even if she has had 100 partners before. But you cannot apply modern standards to judge Mahabharata.

Originally posted by: supermaverick

I find no mention in Mahabharat that it was implied that Dhritarashtra commanded Yudhisthir to gamble Draupadi or even Indraprastha. When Draupadi questioned Dhritarashtra he answered her that Yudhisthir didnot ask for his permission to do so, hence was himself answerable. Yudhisthir was a known Juwari himself and couldnot leave the dyutkrida to save his own pride and obsession more than anything.
You can't hide this fact under the guise of dharma. There is no bigger dharma than to protect your wife.

Originally posted by: godisone

Insulting anyone is a sin, even insulting those who are sinners. One should see God in everyone. This is what it says in the Bhagavat-Gita, and that is why I am not going to speak insultingly to you, or else, I would have called you some pretty interesting words.

Do you know our Hindu scriptures? Where in the world is it written that Draupadi was a whore? And Lord Krishna never ever reprimanded Draupadi for whatever you said. She was a pure woman, a pativrata. Anyway, I've been through this soooo many times with other people that I'm honestly bored of explaining.

Bhishma was the son of Ganga Devi, the purest river in the world. No child of Ganga's can ever be a sinner. And why are you making up stuff that Shri Krishna said? Shri Krishna said after the Mahabharata war that while Bhishma was standing, there was no place for unethics or rule-breaking, because that's how sinless and pure he was. Without Bhishma, it was possible for the Pandavas to defeat the Kauravas, but with Bhishma, it was impossible. Bhishma was a great pure valiant warrior, and you are honestly the only person who thinks he is sunful. Bhishma was never sinful, even by Shri Krishna's standards. And kidnapping a woman from a swayamvara did not make someone sinful. Swayamvara's generally ended in battles, and as Bhishma fairly defeated all the kings in Amba, Ambika, and Ambalika's Swayamvara, he attained victory, not sin. Sheesh, understand the actions of MB characters before making judgments!

No matter how much discussions go on or how many times people explain to people like you, you will always call the Pandavas weak or stupid, or Draupadi a whore. After all, in this Kali-Yug age, good people appear weak and stupid to people like you and sinful people appear strong and virtuous. Tis' the mahima of the age, and no one, not even God, can change your minds. Why should we try then? People will bear the fruits of the actions sooner or later, so it will only be a time waste trying to explain to people like you.

I have one message for everyone else. Please ignore posts like this. Don't respond to them. People like this person don't understand that Dharma is the highest strength a person has. People like this think that outward strength is what makes someone a sinner or virtuous. People like this think it is alright to wag their tongues the way they want against Supreme beings such as Shri Krishna or Shri Rama, which is a grave sin. It is due to people like this that the images of people in our puranas are changing. During my parents and grandparents times, it was thought scandalous and extremely sinful to say anything against the Dharma people in puranas, but now it is perfectly okay in our society. In the future, I suppose Duryodhana and Shakuni will be called virtuous while the Pandavas and Draupadi will be labelled sinful.

When it comes to analyzing characters in puranas, a certain form of respect should be maintained, and one should not be allowed to let their tongue fly the way they want to. Have some self control when talking about Puranic characters. The words of Shri Rama and Shri Krishna in the Ramayana and Mahabharata should be taken as final command, and that's it. Dont' try to find fault with them, as they are Gods who came to Earth to set an example for us. Learn from them. Stop being rebels.

Originally posted by: coolpurvi

u asked me to be objective. u must have heard a saying that there is exception to every general rule.
Being Sati means being being honest towards the institution of marriage n being pure from both body n mind. Draupadi's marrage with 5 pandavs was predestined. i hve doubt if u have read Mahabharat throughly or not. If u have read then u must be knowing that it was beyond her will n her marriage with 5 pandavs was predestined. if u dont know that story do tell me. for the time being I dont want to lenghten my post

A wh*** is one who has relation with more that one man for lust. She didn't married them for lust. she did'nt stepped out of marital relationship. They were lawfully married to her. Purity of mind is most important to be sati n she had that

When pandavs were exiled she cud have easily to choose to live in Lord Krishna's palace as Subhadra did. But she was dutiful wife she followed pandavs to live the tough life of forest. Lord Surya(sun) gave akshay paatra to Yudhistir when they were exiled on the condition that th Akshay paatra will yield food cooked in it to unlimited extent but when female head of the family (ie draupadi) will take out of it fodd for herself it wud yeild no more for that particular day. Draupadi used to cook food in it every day during exile n used to eat last at night after feeding everyone including guests, sages, nearby village kids. She use to eat only once a day after giving food to everyone. its tough for a queen to led such tough life of sacrifice. if she were a whore she wud have accepted the offer o Duuryodhan n karna to be their wife to lead a luxorious life. But she always followed her Dharma n was truthful n dutiful towards her husbands

if u still cant differntiate between a whore n Draupadi I hav nothing to say. U r entilted to have ur opinion

Originally posted by: supermaverick

I find no mention in Mahabharat that it was implied that Dhritarashtra commanded Yudhisthir to gamble Draupadi or even Indraprastha. When Draupadi questioned Dhritarashtra he answered her that Yudhisthir didnot ask for his permission to do so, hence was himself answerable. Yudhisthir was a known Juwari himself and couldnot leave the dyutkrida to save his own pride and obsession more than anything.
You can't hide this fact under the guise of dharma. There is no bigger dharma than to protect your wife.

Originally posted by: supermaverick

I would never say that Draupadi was lustful or had a loose character. However I was only defending Karna as the word that he used might be arguably right on a technicality.

I agree that Draupadi suffered a lot than other women of her time. Vastraharan, Vanavas, Keechaka, Jayadrath, being a slave(Shairandri) during Agyatvaas, killing of all her sons by Ashwathama etc. etc.
But it is also true that she was arrogant, willing to insult others, unwilling to forgive and seeking bloody revenge. That is not ideal characteristic.

Originally posted by: coolpurvi

u asked me to be objective. u must have heard a saying that there is exception to every general rule.
Being Sati means being being honest towards the institution of marriage n being pure from both body n mind. Draupadi's marrage with 5 pandavs was predestined. i hve doubt if u have read Mahabharat throughly or not. If u have read then u must be knowing that it was beyond her will n her marriage with 5 pandavs was predestined. if u dont know that story do tell me. for the time being I dont want to lenghten my post

A wh*** is one who has relation with more that one man for lust. She didn't married them for lust. she did'nt stepped out of marital relationship. They were lawfully married to her. Purity of mind is most important to be sati n she had that

When pandavs were exiled she cud have easily to choose to live in Lord Krishna's palace as Subhadra did. But she was dutiful wife she followed pandavs to live the tough life of forest. Lord Surya(sun) gave akshay paatra to Yudhistir when they were exiled on the condition that th Akshay paatra will yield food cooked in it to unlimited extent but when female head of the family (ie draupadi) will take out of it fodd for herself it wud yeild no more for that particular day. Draupadi used to cook food in it every day during exile n used to eat last at night after feeding everyone including guests, sages, nearby village kids. She use to eat only once a day after giving food to everyone. its tough for a queen to led such tough life of sacrifice. if she were a whore she wud have accepted the offer o Duuryodhan n karna to be their wife to lead a luxorious life. But she always followed her Dharma n was truthful n dutiful towards her husbands

if u still cant differntiate between a whore n Draupadi I hav nothing to say. U r entilted to have ur opinion