A few things about Draupadi, How true are they? - Page 12

Originally posted by: NoraSM

That's not my logic, You wrote in one of your posts -

"If Arjun was so in love with Draupadi, he would not have gone around marrying other women. Yes, maybe all were not advanced by him, but he was definitely interested. "

Arjun marrying other women doesn't mean he didn't love Draupadi, Just like Arjun sleeping with Draupadi after marrying Subhadra doesn't mean that he didn't love Subhadra.

In his time polygamy was way of life, his father had two wives, Krushna had multiple wives, his brothers had multiple wives. The concept of monogamous relationship is prevalent now because polygamy is illegal in India, We think we should feel for only one person, we should love only one person because that's what we have seen in our lives, Arjun didn't have this upbringing to think about "The One"

I was replying to your comment on Arjun not loving Draupadi as he married other women

I didn't exactly mean that. I mean, he didn't exactly seem heartbroken because he had to leave Drau. He was having his fun like any other cis man would is what I implied. 😆

Originally posted by: CaptainSpark

That is why I said, let's talk about men in general in case of this argument. Look the story is being narrated to Janamejaya by Vaishampayana at a Yagya. I don't see why he would elaborate on (or even know what was on Arjun's mind) on seeing a woman. I think Vyasa didn't have that in his priorities while narrating the story of the Kurukshetra war. XD

Hence, understandingly there was hardly anything that romantic or elaboration of romantic feelings. It is for us to analyse by virtue of the ACTIONS more than words. I just feel it's natural for Arjun to feel more attraction towards Krishna's sister for obvious reasons. I am simply against Arjun Draupadi shippers claiming their romance to be unparallel undying DDLJ of Dwapar Yug. That's all. I don't mind if someone says Subhadra was for political reasons. Yes it was, but I don't see how Krishna can throw his sister to Arjun and ALSO do so knowing Draupadi would be upset about this (since Krishna did care for his Sakhi). I don't see how this can happen unless Arjun was desirous and lusty of her.

By love, I mean first sight attraction here. Because we obviously cannot expect a Yeh Jawaani Hai Deewani here where the boy gets a whole trip to fall in love with the girl. XD

If you analyze by virtue of actions, Arjuna actually showed more affection for Panchali than for any other woman. 1. Breaking ranks in dice hall 2. Jewelry from Indraloka which he gifted exclusively to Panchali. 3. Carrying Panchali to Virat 4. The sadness he expresses at her taunting during incognito stay 5. The comment to Yudhishtira about Panchali's bed.

Except for that one admission of attraction the beginning, there is nothing at all from him toward Subhadra.

Which might be because the poem was already 1.5 MILLION words long. Vaishampayana likely did not want to elaborate on Arjuna's romances.

Re: Krishna. Of course he recognized attraction from Arjuna. Of course he also recognized the political possibilities as he himself explains to Balram. Why not? It was a two for one Arjuna being good husband material AND the commander of the Pandava army. Krishna's actions as brother were terrible, though, even by Aryavarta standards. No loving brother would've instigated what he did no matter how great the potential groom. Krishna was a better friend than brother.

Originally posted by: Eloquent

@ red - Arjuna could have cited numerous other instances wherein Yudhisthira was NOT a warrior and got things for granted (e.g. Chakravarti title was based on military efforts of other four brothers). But the first thing he says is about Yudi n Drau. I feel there are 2-3 issues underlined in this exchange: Arjuna's latent bitterness about Drau being taken away as his sole wife and impact of that on Arjuna/Drau relationship, the Arjuna-Yudi dynamics, his vanity (Yudi's taunts), his insecurity etc.

For me it proved that Arjuna is still a human character (his silence during sharing of Draupadi scene is strange to digest).

One question is: If Draupadi had not been married to all five bros, and had only been married to Arjuna alone, would he have married multiple other women?

I think he would, from what I interpret of his character. Sexual desires and attraction was a part of any man's psyche and also he was quite interested in women xD

Seriously i think we can agree on this simple fact that Mahabharata is not ddlj. These people had a kingdom to rule and wars to fight. I am sure martial bliss was last thing on their minds ofcourse everyone likes some affectionate moments but that was it. Nothing beyond that. Marriage in that era were based on attraction/lust + political alliance . Neither arjun or drapaudi or even subdhara or bheem or rest of the pandavas were waiting for their "soulmates" to wisk them to some garden for a song segment .

I am sure they did a build a beautiful relationship over the years but that was after marriage

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

If you analyze by virtue of actions, Arjuna actually showed more affection for Panchali than for any other woman. 1. Breaking ranks in dice hall 2. Jewelry from Indraloka which he gifted exclusively to Panchali. 3. Carrying Panchali to Virat 4. The sadness he expresses at her taunting during incognito stay 5. The comment to Yudhishtira about Panchali's bed.

Except for that one admission of attraction the beginning, there is nothing at all from him toward Subhadra.

Which might be because the poem was already 1.5 MILLION words long. Vaishampayana likely did not want to elaborate on Arjuna's romances.

Re: Krishna. Of course he recognized attraction from Arjuna. Of course he also recognized the political possibilities as he himself explains to Balram. Why not? It was a two for one Arjuna being good husband material AND the commander of the Pandava army. Krishna's actions as brother were terrible, though, even by Aryavarta standards. No loving brother would've instigated what he did no matter how great the potential groom. Krishna was a better friend than brother.

Subhadra doesn't have much of a role in the epic. I don't think Vyasa bothered to talk about Arjun Subhadra romance even if there was anything about it. Draupadi was the main female character of the epic, and her actions, intentions have a big role to play in the epic. It is only natural that Panchali and her husbands would have more to do with the story than Subhadra, Chitrangada or any other wives of any other Pandavas right?

Arjun was the one who had to win the contest for Drau, it is natural he would feel bitter about Yudhishthir and others getting the fruits of it. Similarly, any gifts, any kind of affection or any words of respect towards Panchali had more to do in the epic than with Subhadra. Subhadra and Arjun's relationship doesn't contribute much to the story. She was Krishna's sister, hence her and Arjun's marriage is more popular than others. All Pandavas had other wives who ain't even mentioned more than just the name.

By actions, I was just saying that words here are mostly not too indicative of emotions as it is being narrated by someone else, who is not a character in the epic ie Vaishampayana. That's all.

Originally posted by: Poorabhforever

Seriously i think we can agree on this simple fact that Mahabharata is not ddlj. These people had a kingdom to rule and wars to fight. I am sure martial bliss was last thing on their minds ofcourse everyone likes some affectionate moments but that was it. Nothing beyond that. Marriage in that era were based on attraction/lust + political alliance . Neither arjun or drapaudi or even subdhara or bheem or rest of the pandavas were waiting for their "soulmates" to wisk them to some garden for a song segment .

I am sure they did a build a beautiful relationship over the years but that was after marriage

I personally feel Draupadi was also not much interested in men but she knew who loved her and would do things when needed so she asked help to Bheem, who she knew would care more and would take strict actions.

Similarly, though I personally believe Swargyarohan as an interpolation and the reasons stated for the downfall unjustified, even if we consider it true, it is natural for Draupadi to have a soft corner for Arjun because he is the one who won the contest and she was not aware that she would be divided. That's my take.

Also I agree. We need to stop arguing about romances. Arjun had a big heart, he loved everyone. 😆

Originally posted by: CaptainSpark

Subhadra doesn't have much of a role in the epic. I don't think Vyasa bothered to talk about Arjun Subhadra romance even if there was anything about it. Draupadi was the main female character of the epic, and her actions, intentions have a big role to play in the epic. It is only natural that Panchali and her husbands would have more to do with the story than Subhadra, Chitrangada or any other wives of any other Pandavas right?

Arjun was the one who had to win the contest for Drau, it is natural he would feel bitter about Yudhishthir and others getting the fruits of it. Similarly, any gifts, any kind of affection or any words of respect towards Panchali had more to do in the epic than with Subhadra. Subhadra and Arjun's relationship doesn't contribute much to the story. She was Krishna's sister, hence her and Arjun's marriage is more popular than others. All Pandavas had other wives who ain't even mentioned more than just the name.

By actions, I was just saying that words here are mostly not too indicative of emotions as it is being narrated by someone else, who is not a character in the epic ie Vaishampayana. That's all.

I actually like Subhadra a lot. There is only one speaking portion given her character. She is nothing at all like the ditz Star portrayed her to be. Epic actually outright states she and Panchali and Kunti were a team. Unfortunately, shows prefer to pit women against women. That, too, over men.

Originally posted by: CaptainSpark

I personally feel Draupadi was also not much interested in men but she knew who loved her and would do things when needed so she asked help to Bheem, who she knew would care more and would take strict actions.

Similarly, though I personally believe Swargyarohan as an interpolation and the reasons stated for the downfall unjustified, even if we consider it true, it is natural for Draupadi to have a soft corner for Arjun because he is the one who won the contest and she was not aware that she would be divided. That's my take.

Also I agree. We need to stop arguing about romances. Arjun had a big heart, he loved everyone. 😆

Swarghoran was later interpolation and if its not it was yudhishtra s delusional a test conducted which ultimately ends when he sees all his family members in hell . He was not thinking straight 😆

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

I actually like Subhadra a lot. There is only one speaking portion given her character. She is nothing at all like the ditz Star portrayed her to be. Epic actually outright states she and Panchali and Kunti were a team. Unfortunately, shows prefer to pit women against women. That, too, over men.

Star Plus is crazy. In reality, Subhadra didn't even know Arjun and here they meet like a day after Arjun arrives in Hastinapur from Gurukul 😆

Technically the abduction isn't really romantic at all considering nobody asked for Subhadra's opinion about this, not even her brother who treated her more like an object. I agree with u on the point of Krishna's brother side not being very commendable. Well said.

Unfortunately shows justify these actions and turn it into Krishna's natkhat leela.

Originally posted by: Poorabhforever

Swarghoran was later interpolation and if its not it was yudhishtra s delusional a test conducted which ultimately ends when he sees all his family members in hell . He was not thinking straight 😆

I cannot in my sane mind accept Yudhishthir's only mistake was bribing Dronacharya with his son's death when he gambled away his empire brothers and wife and showed little repent to stop. I won't continue more but I am not exactly a fan and I believe he did quite some wrong in life.