Originally posted by: Poorabhforever
@amrita why do you think disrobing is later interplotation?
MAIRAs REJECTION 4.9
Yeh Rishta Kya Kehlata Hai - 05 Sep 2025 EDT
Yeh Rishta Kya Kehlata Hai - 04 Sep 2025 EDT
GEETU vs MAIRA 5.9
Bigg Boss 19 Daily Discussion Thread ~ 5th Sept, 2025
Maira Armaan Poddar
Akshara’s karma
Writers: Mad Dreamers or Silent Sages?
Kyunki Saas Bhi Kabhi Bahu Thi 2: EDT # 2
🏆ANUPAMA WINS dance contest !!🏆
The Soul Remembers - PraShiv SS
Should Janhvi Kapoor Get Married And Quit Acting
Alia is new global brand ambassador of Levis
My Box Office Predictions for Baaghi 4
The most successful jodi in history of BW!
Agree or not?
A clean-shaven Ranveer spotted at the airport
Alia recent clicks
Varun Vs Sonu - who danced better on Bijuriya
SRKs looks for King
Originally posted by: Poorabhforever
@amrita why do you think disrobing is later interplotation?
@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 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.
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