Mahabharat- The Epic: Sources, Variations, Discuss Here Only - Page 22

Created

Last reply

Replies

292

Views

30.4k

Users

17

Likes

715

Frequent Posters

amritat thumbnail
14th Anniversary Thumbnail Sparkler Thumbnail Engager Level 1 Thumbnail
Posted: 6 years ago

Originally posted by: Poorabhforever

@amrita why do you think disrobing is later interplotation?


Long story. 😆
Google "Was Draupadi ever disrobed?" by Satya Chaitanya on boloji.com. The explanation is quite crisp. 😊
Edited by amritat - 6 years ago
Agni_Jytsona thumbnail
Posted: 6 years ago
i have read that article i am actually confused tbh 😆
what i feel is disrobing was stopped by vidura even before it took place like the idea was given but opposed strongly by vidura and dhrit gave in
probably thats y its said dharma(vidur) came to drau s rescue dharma was probably misintrepted here as krishna



but then another part of me feels that it is not a later addition it did happened as written in text the reason disrobing is never mentioned is it includes bit of krishna leela 😉 what happens in dice hole stays in dice hall
but duri does mentions it in one of his conversation in shyla parva


Edited by Poorabhforever - 6 years ago
Brahmaputra thumbnail
13th Anniversary Thumbnail Sparkler Thumbnail + 2
Posted: 6 years ago

Originally posted by: amritat

@Brahmaputra

I would disagree with your line of argument. Not bcoz of any feminism or favouritism, but bcoz of what is stated in the epic. And note, I do believe that the disrobing and sari extension was most likely interpolation.

1.) IIRC, Draupadi does not blame Dushasana singularly many times either. Does that imply that that she had understood the "POV of Dushasana" of why he must have molested her? Or that she was in "deep love" with Dushy?

Draupadi is found to blame Duryodhan the most. Whenever, she speaks of her anguish, she mentions Karna and Dushasana fleetingly (maybe once or twice), but always accuses Duryodhan. Other times, she speaks about her perpetrators collectively and describes what was done to her in a collective manner: "I was dragged to the Sabha in a single garment" (done by Dushasana), "They wanted to forcefully make me a slave, and enjoy me as a slave" (Suggested by Karna and Dushasana). But her point of blame is mainly directed towards Duryodhan, even though he had practically done much less at the dice-game.

The reason is simple. Duryodhan was the crown prince/King. He was the head of the gang. The rest - no matter how tragic or how great - were mere sidekicks to Duryodhan in the eyes of Pandavas and Draupadi.

It is generally perceived that Draupadi wanted war only bcoz of her own insult, but that is only partially true. Yes, for sure her own insult is the tipping point. But she also recollects how the Pandavas were continuously deceived by their cousins from childhood. She seemed to have wanted justice not just for herself, but for all the crimes she believed had been inflicted upon her family. The dice-game was the last nail on the coffin.

In light of this, Draupadi was pragmatic enough to see that irrespective of what Karna said or Dushy did, it was Duryodhan who was behind everything, being the Crown Prince and the leader of the gang. So, does Draupadi not blaming Karna singularly again and again necessarily imply that she forgave him or that his words were completely interpolation? I doubt. The fact that she mentioned his laughter once singularly right after the incident is telling of his role in the fiasco. Coz, even Shakuni was laughing at her IIRC, but he never gets blamed for that.

2.) Now, coming to judging characters with sensibilities based on era.

What Yudisthir did was wrong. What DDSK was also wrong. By 21st Century standards, both parties would be jailed.

But was it the same in Mahabharata era?
Forget about Arthashastra, Manu Smriti and other theoritical rule books, and let's focus on what actually happened as per the text.

Not only Draupadi, none of the Pandavas or Kunti or Krishna ever accused Yudisthir of human staking (only Bhima fleetingly gets angry at Yudi during dice game, but he too reverts back to his patriarchal self soon after). But IIRC, everybody acknowledged that the treatment meted out to Draupadi by DDSK was wrong even in that era. Not bcoz they were feminists or anything. Not just bcoz she was a "Queen" either. But bcoz she was a relative and the "brother's wife" (as pointed out by Krishna).

Going by this, either human staking was complete interpolation and that is why nobody blamed him. Or it was considered wrong but not a big crime in those days. Or, everybody agreed that Yudi was cheated into it, and thus deemed him innocent.

-------------
At the last point, a question comes to my mind.
You say that Duryodhan would have never done something like this to a woman in public for the sake of his image. That makes me wonder, how come Yudi was not concerned about the same!

Going by this logic, the whole human staking itself must have been entirely interpolation too. Otherwise, which man would sell his citizens, brothers, wife and even himself so publicly to gain kingdom!



I am pretty aware of that you do think disrobing is interpolation. But if that is, then everything associated with it also should be, given the fact that there are at least two statements of Draupadi herself coming to the Sabha. And these are interconnected events. If one part is broken, the entire chain breaks loose. I have read enough to observe that Draupadi knew who to forgive and when to forgive. Especially the TED talk in vana parva. That only shows how efficient was she in controlling herself and doing what is needed at each moment, than fretting over what happened. To me, she appeared the most resourceful and intelligent of all on the pandava side. She tackles the situation like no one else does. And that is why it is difficult for me to believe many a lot of things said about her in the book. But this post will be too long if I begin.😆

@red - Not stating as a part of the discussion, but yeah, I personally believe that Yudhi never gambled any of those. Because he was no fool. The original gambling, what I believe was the second one. Otherwise, I don't see how an intelligent king would be so stupid to do gambling again, after having seen what already had befallen him and his family. Also, I don't think Draupadi or Bhima or Arjuna too would easily have accepted that, how-much-ever they loved and respected him, because they already witnessed where it all could go wrong. Neither was Yudhi so heartless, I believe. Any one of the gambling match should be a later addition, if we closely observe the arc events and consider the characters of these people. It was like everyone was inside a moh-maya for some time and behaved like total idiots. What I am saying is it was uncharacteristic of not just Dury, Gandhaari or anyone on their side, but of Yudhi, Drau etc also. And a war was there, that was because of the land.

And I do think human gambling was practised. When Nala was asked to stake Damayanti, he threw away everything and left the country with her. So it was not unheard of. And there were two kings in old Bengal region, I forgot their names, who always gambled on their villages, and now these villages are spread over India and Bengladesh and the people are facing identity issues.
Edited by Brahmaputra - 6 years ago
amritat thumbnail
14th Anniversary Thumbnail Sparkler Thumbnail Engager Level 1 Thumbnail
Posted: 6 years ago
@Brahmaputra -
That takes us to a completely different direction. Bibek Debroy, for instance, opines in the Preface of Critical Edition that the Mbh war may have been only for cattle issue that took place during Virat War. Rest were added later - as per him.
Edited by amritat - 6 years ago
Brahmaputra thumbnail
13th Anniversary Thumbnail Sparkler Thumbnail + 2
Posted: 6 years ago
@amritat
Yes. I read that. Most importantly, he reduced my Arjuna only into a flickering imagination.😕 But I am too lazy to read the original and find out why.😆 Lack of time also is a reason.
amritat thumbnail
14th Anniversary Thumbnail Sparkler Thumbnail Engager Level 1 Thumbnail
Posted: 6 years ago
I have come to realize that going in search for the origin and source of Mahabharat takes us to a place, where all fandom and beliefs disintegrate. I won't be surprised with myself if sometime in the future I dismiss the whole epic as a mere work of fiction.
Brahmaputra thumbnail
13th Anniversary Thumbnail Sparkler Thumbnail + 2
Posted: 6 years ago

Originally posted by: amritat

I have come to realize that going in search for the origin and source of Mahabharat takes us to a place, where all fandom and beliefs disintegrate. I won't be surprised with myself if sometime in the future I dismiss the whole epic as a mere work of fiction.



Rightly said. Adi Shankaracharya already said the same. So I am half minded these days when I discuss Mahabharata. But I also believe at least 1 % of this was true, or it is at least an FF based on some real people.
Agni_Jytsona thumbnail
Posted: 6 years ago
aise toh puri mb is later addition people were actually fighting for cattles 😲 imagine if that turns out to be true 🤣
can anybody elaborate that drau coming to sabha herself part ?? isnt it mentioned severval times in mb that drau was dragged by dushi ?? that is a latter addition too
amritat thumbnail
14th Anniversary Thumbnail Sparkler Thumbnail Engager Level 1 Thumbnail
Posted: 6 years ago
Bibek Debroy also gives a similar hint with the example of Kripacharya's wife. That 100% of the epic may not have been fiction, because there are some details that are too specific and at the same time, irrelevant for the story. These details need not have been there had the story been completely fictional.
God knows what is true! As of now, I go by the "oldest" manuscripts aka CE as claimed by qualified scholars.
Brahmaputra thumbnail
13th Anniversary Thumbnail Sparkler Thumbnail + 2
Posted: 6 years ago

Originally posted by: Poorabhforever

aise toh puri mb is later addition people were actually fighting for cattles 😲 imagine if that turns out to be true 🤣

can anybody elaborate that drau coming to sabha herself part ?? isnt it mentioned severval times in mb that drau was dragged by dushi ?? that is a latter addition too



Well, I am someone who believes the first gambling never happened at all.

As for your question, there is a reference in Sabha parva, that she came herself before Dhritarashtra when Yudhi sent his messenger. Again, when she speaks to Krishna before his peace mission, she repeats the same, though Debroy translated it wrongly. Both these references are found only in Critical Edition, AFAIK.

It IS mentioned again and again that Drau was dragged by Dushy.
But as someone who considers the first gambling as later addition, I consider this one also as a later addition.

@bold - that is actually quite possible. Just think of the public killing that happen these days in the name of cow. Those days, cattle were an integral part of everything, from wealth to belief, to god and dignity. So a war was possible. In fact, many wars happened in Europen countries for cattle is what I read.

Related Topics

Top

Stay Connected with IndiaForums!

Be the first to know about the latest news, updates, and exclusive content.

Add to Home Screen!

Install this web app on your iPhone for the best experience. It's easy, just tap and then "Add to Home Screen".