Originally posted by: luv_sakshi
Thank You Sangeeta for this Wonderfully Written Post!👏👏👏
This topic has been one of the most commonly debated and talked about, whenever one picks up the subject of Mahabharata. I guess anyone writing on this topic will be prepared for some kind of onslaught or even total disagreement of the argument put in favour of the topic. However, I firmly believe in what I'm putting forth here. No offence meant to anyone..😳
Draupadi was unique right from her birth. She was not conceived in a mother's womb. She was born from fire and it is said that she was born young not infant. Just imagine all the genetic qualities that she might have inherited! Imagine how she would have developed any filial feelings towards her parents. Yet she was very respectful, caring towards her father.
She was the darling princess of one of most prominent and powerful kingdoms of that time. She was the daughter of a mighty king whose life's mission was only to defeat Guru Drona. She was also the sister of a man who was, like her, born out of fire. She was sister to Shikhandini as well, who once was a girl and later changed her gender to a boy. Draupadi had such a complex childhood unlike any other princess..
Draupadi then became the wife of Pandavas. She got divided between 5 husbands, which was very unconventional for any time-period. As she entered her in-laws' house, she came to know of her husbands being under constant threat. Finally, when she became the queen, she was given a piece of land that was almost barren! Panchali bore a son to every husband and became mother to 5 sons. However, in her duty towards her husbands, and bearing the dictates of her destiny, she got away from all of them and lived in exile for 12 years. And yet in the end, all of her sons were killed mercilessly by Ashwatthama. She never really enjoyed the beauty of motherhood completely.
She was a dear friend of Lord Krishna. In fact, her name was also Krishnaa. She earned the grace of the Lord with her devotion and steadfastness to righteousness. Yet, Draupadi is the one who is accused most, for bringing about the war..
We all know that she refused to marry Karna during the Swayamvara. Let's acknowledge that she spoke harsh words, in respect of Karna's Lower Birth. But were they wrong? Till then, nobody (in public sense) knew who Karna really was. So, actually, she had blurted out nothing but the truth..very frankly at that! Even if those words were hurting, were they enough to cause a war in which all warriors of a country would fight to death? Are all men fools that they would fight over mere words of a woman? Does Karna's insult call for death of everybody..the Kuru Vansh at large? Isn't that totally illogical an idea?
Later, Draupadi was accused of calling Duryodhna, son of the blind. This was a fact, yet it hurt. Duryodhna was vengeful. But does this call for war again?? If yes, who would participate? All great warriors and kings of the country? Why would they do so for personal insult of some king? There definitely needs to be a bigger reason for war as Magnanimous as the Kurukshetra!!.
There is nothing more humiliating for a woman than losing her modesty. Draupadi was humiliated..worse, disrobed in an open court where ladies simply did not go. Duryodhna had his day and left no stone unturned to insult Draupadi in whatever way possible. Similarly, Karna did not desist from calling her a wh**e and prompting Duryodhna to denude her. Dusshasana did not take a minute after Duryodhna's command, to disrobe her in public & none of the Elders present therein intervened to stop the insulting act! Wasn't that act Gory in Nature? Was it acceptable to Society?
Indian psyche is highly male-dominant and they quickly come to a point where they can declare a female, the kingpin of everything evil. In India, the still existant male-dominant society wants to accuse women (the so called weaker sex) as they are easy targets. That's exactly what happened with Draupadi as well!
What then was the actual cause of the Mahabharata? Why did everyone have to die in order to restore Dharma?
Krishna had gone to Hastinapur as an emissary of peace way before the war was decided upon. He had told the entire court that Pandavas will not reject whatever Krishna promises here. He asked for just 5 villages to be given to them. There was no demand of war or reinstatement of Draupadi's honor. So Draupadi has nothing to do with the war!! The offer was rejected outright. Duryodhna was eager to have war & didn't want to part with even 5 villages, leave alone a part of his kingdom as promised. He was amply supported by Karna, & never stopped or questioned by his father. But the Pandavas had submitted their will, to the will of Krishna..so nobody had sought for war from the end of the Pandavas..
In the capital of Kingdom Virata named Upaplavaya, where the allies of Pandavas sat and discussed all the possibilities, Krishna had rejected all claims of war. He declared that for personal revenges, one can't ask every other person to die.
The reason for war was the greed of Duryodhna...The unmindful support of Karna...The blind act played by Dhritrashtra in support of his son, irrespective of whether it was Dharma or Adharma. The reason for the Kurukshetra war was the poisonous role of Shakuni..the Incapability of Stalwarts like Bhishma & Drona to stop Duryodhna's Adharmi actions right from the start. They were probably too bound by Promises & Indecisiveness. Draupadi's words only bore insult, (which again was situational), & definitely not war!!
I strongly feel that Draupadi didn't have any role to play in this Big & Destructive war. Her Humiliation was reminisced by the Pandavas during the war as that was a part of the Adharma that was done by the Kauravas.
Very sad that people term Draupadi as the main cause of the war, which is totally illogical and without any consideration of the bigger picture on what had actually happened, which eventually led to the war!
Real Estate
