~| Whatever you want to argue about - 2 |~ - Page 54

O supreme among the Bharata lineage! I am the worst of all women in the

world. Though I have been oppressed by the enemy, I still wish to remain alive.

CE VOL 8, 1342 (14)

This was much after the death of the Upapandavas.

She was described as middle-aged by then and past childbearing age. She clearly didn't believe her life was tied to her womb.

She also came out and stated all Pandavas were mad. They were not the reason for her living, either.

A woman to emulate for sure. She had her own sense of self-worth, not tied to anyone else.

------

I believe the only time she actually threatened self harm is after the massacre. That, too, because the Pandavas were not planning to go after Ashwatthama.

---

CE VOL 8, 1294 (11)

At that time, when it was morning, Nakula brought Krishna

9

there, on a chariot that was as radiant

as the sun. She was extremely distressed and he brought her with him. She had gone to Upaplavya and

had heard the extremely unpleasant news there, that all her sons had been destroyed. She was

miserable. She trembled like a plantain tree stirred by the wind. Having approached the king, Krishna

was afflicted by grief and fell down on the ground. Her face, with eyes like full-blown lotuses, was

afflicted by misery, as if the sun had been covered by darkness. On seeing that she was falling down,

the angry Vrikodara, for whom truth was his valour, approached her and grasped her in his arms. The

beautiful one was comforted by Bhimasena. Krishna wept and addressed Pandava, together with his

brothers. “O king! It is through good fortune that you will now enjoy the entire earth. Following the

dharma of kshatriyas, you have offered your sons to Yama. O Partha! It is through good fortune that

you have obtained the entire earth and do not remember Subhadra’s son,

10 who was skilled and whose

gait was like that of a maddened elephant. While residing in Upaplavya, I heard that my brave sons

had been brought down, in accordance with dharma. It is good fortune that you do not remember this

with me. I have heard that they were slain while they were sleeping, by Drona’s son, who acted

wickedly. O Partha! That sorrow is tormenting me, as if I am in the midst of a fire. Drona’s son acted

in a wicked way. O Pandavas! Listen to me. If, in an encounter today, you do not exhibit your valour

and destroy him and his followers, and he remains alive in the encounter, I will resort to praya

11 here.

Drona’s son must be made to reap the fruits of his wicked deed.” Having spoken these words to

Pandava Dharmaraja Yudhishthira, the illustrious Krishna sat down there.

‘On seeing that his beloved queen had sat down there, rajarshi Pandava, with dharma in his soul,

replied to the beautiful Droupadi. “O beautiful one! O one who knows about dharma! Your sons and

your brothers have followed dharma and have attained their ends in accordance with dharma. You

should not grieve. O fortunate one! Drona’s son has gone to a forest that is far away. O beautiful one!

How do you think that he can then be brought down in a battle?” Droupadi replied, “I have heard that

Drona’s son possesses a natural jewel on his head. I wish to see that jewel brought to me, after the

wicked one has been slain in an encounter. O king! I have formed a resolution that I will live only if

that is placed on your head.” Having spoken these

---

Imagine that! Yudhishtira says it's not possible to get Ashwatthama.

Now, Panchali somehow reacts to the statement before it's made 😆. Since that's not possible, I imagine that part was placed before to fit anustubh metre.

Basically, Yudhishtira said, "no, it's impossible to get Ashwatthama."

Panchali says, "You'd better do it, or I'll fast to death."

And guess what: BHEEMA takes off after Ashwatthama. No one else tries to follow until KRISHNA tells them. Pandavas were something else, man!

Originally posted by: Chiillii

Gandhari was the mother. There is a difference between mother and wife.

Mother had a lot of power over son. Wife had absolutely none.

Even if Duryodhan would never listen to her advice all she had to do was cover Draupadi with her own shawl.

In that era no son would dare insult mother or mother's shawl.

She had the power to stop Drau from being humiliated and as a woman she should have.

When she didn't she became as much a culprit as Bhishma Drona and others.

A lot of women committed suicide by drowning at the advice of Vyasa. These were most likely widows who had passed childbearing age and were left with no sons either. Women in child bearing age would have been married to survivors. The ones who had sons, would live on to raise them.

That was how it was.

@Bold you are right that was probably the option which Gandhari didn't entertain.

Ok so don't kill me for this? But if Duryodhan's wife did the same thing, could Dusshashan dare to remove it? I know they didn't have the mentality like that of Bhabhi ma Hoti hai, but still she was the Yuvragyi and definitely Duryodhan's respect as per those days'standards. Could Dusshashan dare to remove it in the royal court?

Thank you for the clarification on Sati thing. In that case I think Duryodhan's wife would have committed suicide

Actually, sati thing was not always the path. Half of Krishna's wives did, and the others didn't. Satyabhama didn't do sati even though her husband and children were dead.

That scene in MBh was likely about author wrapping things up without leaving lose ends as it involved the ladies seeing their dead husbands and sons which is realistically not possible.

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

Actually, sati thing was not always the path. Half of Krishna's wives did, and the others didn't. Satyabhama didn't do sati even though her husband and children were dead.

That scene in MBh was likely about author wrapping things up without leaving lose ends as it involved the ladies seeing their dead husbands and sons which is realistically not possible.

To be fare, Satyabhama lost her husband and son at the age of late seventies, she had a grandson alive, some reason to continue.

To think of Bhanumati, she would have been in her forties, with nearly half life yet to spend, her husband and son were dead, I doubt she had any grandson/daughter to live for, and now she was completely under the pity of her opponents. Pandavas were definitely good people, and Bheem too, but for Bhanumati, they would always remain the people who killed her husband, so even if not for love, at least for self respect commiting Sati was a good option

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

.

@Bold you are right that was probably the option which Gandhari didn't entertain.

Ok so don't kill me for this? But if Duryodhan's wife did the same thing, could Dusshashan dare to remove it? I know they didn't have the mentality like that of Bhabhi ma Hoti hai, but still she was the Yuvragyi and definitely Duryodhan's respect as per those days'standards. Could Dusshashan dare to remove it in the royal court?

Yeah he wouldn't dare but Duryodhan would kill Bhanumati if she dared.Gandhari had a lot of power not just because she was the mother. She was also the propaganda Sati. For blindfolding her eyes. We have her mere glance burning Yudhi's toe nails. And of course the fake story of turning Duryodhan into Vajra. She had reached the position at the time where even Bhishma or Dhritrashtra wouldnt dare go against her anger.

Thank you for the clarification on Sati thing. In that case I think Duryodhan's wife would have committed suicide

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

To be fare, Satyabhama lost her husband and son at the age of late seventies, she had a grandson alive, some reason to continue.

To think of Bhanumati, she would have been in her forties, with nearly half life yet to spend, her husband and son were dead, I doubt she had any grandson/daughter to live for, and now she was completely under the pity of her opponents. Pandavas were definitely good people, and Bheem too, but for Bhanumati, they would always remain the people who killed her husband, so even if not for love, at least for self respect commiting Sati was a good option

I know text says 36 years after war, the Pandavas abdicated. But Krishna's death/disappearance was not at the time.

In any case, none of their actions or other evidence surrounding suggests it was 36 years. rather months.

Satyabhama even sits on Krishna's lap to persuade him to kill the rival clans. I can't state it here, but imagine why a woman would think sitting on a man's lap would persuade him to do things her way. Doesn't really sound like a woman in her 70s - in private perhaps, but not in public.

To Krishna's credit, he doesn't do a single thing and reacts only when Pradyumna is killed.

My point was when we say this is how things were for women, it is such a general statement. There were women who found their way around it. I detest Gandhari, but she used her passive-aggressive nastiness to rule. Kunti played politics through her sons; she didn't commit sati, and she'd have been older than Satyabhama after war. Satyabhama TRIED to do so through Krishna. Panchali did what she had to directly.

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

I know text says 36 years after war, the Pandavas abdicated. But Krishna's death/disappearance was not at the time.

In any case, none of their actions or other evidence surrounding suggests it was 36 years. rather months.

Satyabhama even sits on Krishna's lap to persuade him to kill the rival clans. I can't state it here, but imagine why a woman would think sitting on a man's lap would persuade him to do things her way. Doesn't really sound like a woman in her 70s - in private perhaps, but not in public.

To Krishna's credit, he doesn't do a single thing and reacts only when Pradyumna is killed.

My point was when we say this is how things were for women, it is such a general statement. There were women who found their way around it. I detest Gandhari, but she used her passive-aggressive nastiness to rule. Kunti played politics through her sons; she didn't commit sati, and she'd have been older than Satyabhama after war. Satyabhama TRIED to do so through Krishna. Panchali did what she had to directly.

@Bold excluding Gandhaari, all of them had reasons to continue.

Kunti had her sons, both she n Madri Couldn't have committed Sati leaving the children to wander

Satyabhama was a strong lady, who knew how to get things done, she tried to sort out the things, unfortunately she couldn't, but even after the deaths, she had her grandson, she had some relatives (Pandavas) who were close to her and would welcome her.

Gandhari seems a very shrewd woman to me, although to her credit, blindfolding yourself for ages isn't a small commitment, (could she be opening it during night when no one excluding her husband was around😒) she knew how to tackle things.

I think she understood that even though she has lost Yudhishtir wouldn't stop her from anything to continue his Dharmaraj image, she used this to create some sympathies for her sons, she was treated royally with utmost respect plus she had her husband and some reason to live

But for Bhanumati what exactly would her life be? She wasn't ever active in politics so couldn't work for herself, she doesn't seem intelligent enough to get things her way, her husband and son were both dead, had no grandson, what exactly was she supposed to do?? I mean what purpose in life? And that too a life which was completely depended on the goodwill and pity of her husband's opponent.

To think of it a life with no propose just because your opponents are benevolent enough to let you live doesn't seem a very good thing to continue

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

@Bold excluding Gandhaari, all of them had reasons to continue.

Kunti had her sons, both she n Madri Couldn't have committed Sati leaving the children to wander

Satyabhama was a strong lady, who knew how to get things done, she tried to sort out the things, unfortunately she couldn't, but even after the deaths, she had her grandson, she had some relatives (Pandavas) who were close to her and would welcome her.

Gandhari seems a very shrewd woman to me, although to her credit, blindfolding yourself for ages isn't a small commitment, (could she be opening it during night when no one excluding her husband was around😒) she knew how to tackle things.

I think she understood that even though she has lost Yudhishtir wouldn't stop her from anything to continue his Dharmaraj image, she used this to create some sympathies for her sons, she was treated royally with utmost respect plus she had her husband and some reason to live

But for Bhanumati what exactly would her life be? She wasn't ever active in politics so couldn't work for herself, she doesn't seem intelligent enough to get things her way, her husband and son were both dead, had no grandson, what exactly was she supposed to do?? I mean what purpose in life? And that too a life which was completely depended on the goodwill and pity of her husband's opponent.

To think of it a life with no propose just because your opponents are benevolent enough to let you live doesn't seem a very good thing to continue

I'm talking about AFTER war - Kunti's sons were grown, she still didn't commit Sati. She chose to care for her enemies.

I disagree vehemently that Satyabhama was strong. Having temper tantrums is not a sign of strength. Nor is trying to seduce your husband into doing what you want. Satyabhama didn't actually go to the Pandavas. She retired to the forest IIRC.

Purpose in life is what you make itThere were so many widows and orphans in the land. Like Kunti did, Bhanumati could also have found things to do. Pandavas actually opened up the treasury such as it was to care for the needy. If she considered being a wife and mother her only purposes, of course she didn't have other reasons to live. Kunti certainly didn't think so, and she was quite old. Nor did Panchali.

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

I'm talking about AFTER war - Kunti's sons were grown, she still didn't commit Sati. She chose to care for her enemies.

I disagree vehemently that Satyabhama was strong. Having temper tantrums is not a sign of strength. Nor is trying to seduce your husband into doing what you want. Satyabhama didn't actually go to the Pandavas. She retired to the forest IIRC.

Purpose in life is what you make itThere were so many widows and orphans in the land. Like Kunti did, Bhanumati could also have found things to do. Pandavas actually opened up the treasury such as it was to care for the needy. If she considered being a wife and mother her only purposes, of course she didn't have other reasons to live. Kunti certainly didn't think so, and she was quite old. Nor did Panchali.

The Lord married Satyabhāmā in proper religious fashion. Possessed of excellent behavior, along with beauty, broad-mindedness and all other good qualities, she had been sought by many men.

This is an excerpt from the shrimad Bhagvatam where she is described to be of excellent behaviour and a lot of stories of the temper tantrums are folk tales.

Besides the only time I have read of satyabhama sitting on lord Krishna's lap and crying was during satrajit's death when she was in genuine grief and wanted justice for her father.

Originally posted by: davis56

The Lord married Satyabhāmā in proper religious fashion. Possessed of excellent behavior, along with beauty, broad-mindedness and all other good qualities, she had been sought by many men.

This is an excerpt from the shrimad Bhagvatam where she is described to be of excellent behaviour and a lot of stories of the temper tantrums are folk tales.

Besides the only time I have read of satyabhama sitting on lord Krishna's lap and crying was during satrajit's death when she was in genuine grief and wanted justice for her father.

@Red. Satyabhama is called childish many times in texts. Her behavior with Rukmini and later with Panchali in Vana Parva is also part of the texts. Neither is indicative of any excellence in behavior, but that's clearly an opinion.

@ Bold. No, it was many years after her father's death. After Kurukshetra war. Everyone knew who killed Satrajit by then. The Yadavas were arguing. Satyabhama wanted the rivals dead. Krishna wasn't reacting to anything. So she went and sat on his lap to persuade him to kill those people.

______________________________

Then Yuyudhana, inebriated with wine, derisively laughing at and insulting Kritavarma in the midst of that assembly, said, ‘What Kshatriya is there who, armed with weapons, will slay men locked in the embraces of sleep and, therefore, already dead? Hence, O son of Hridika, the Yadavas will never tolerate what thou hast done.’ When Yuyudhana had said these words, Pradyumna, that foremost of car-warriors, applauded them, expressing his disregard for the son of Hridika.

"Highly incensed at this, Kritavarma, emphasising his disregard for Satyaki, by pointing to him with his left hand, said these words: ‘Professing thyself to be a hero, how couldst thou so cruelly slay the armless Bhurishrava who, on the field of battle, ( gave up all hostile intentions and) sat in praya?’

"Hearing these words of his, Keshava, that slayer of hostile heroes, giving way to wrath, cast an angry glance at Kritavarma. Then Satyaki informed the slayer of Madhu as to how Kritavarma had behaved towards Satrajit for taking away from him the celebrated gem Syamantaka. Hearing the narrative, Satyabhama, giving way to wrath and tears, approached Keshava and sitting on his lap enhanced his anger (for Kritavarma). Then rising up in a rage, Satyaki said, ‘I swear to thee by Truth that I shall soon cause this one to follow in the wake of the five sons of Draupadi, and of Dhrishtadyumna and Shikhandi—they that were slain by this sinful wretch, while they were asleep, with the assistance of Drona’s son. O thou of slender waist, Kritavarma’s period of life and fame have come to their end.’

"Having said these words, Satyaki rushed at Kritavarma and severed his head with a sword in the very sight of Keshava. Yuyudhana, having achieved this feat, began to strike down others there present. Hrishikesa ran to prevent him from doing further mischief. At that time, however, O monarch, the Bhojas and Andhakas, impelled by the perverseness of the hour that had come upon them, all became as one man and surrounded the son of Sini. Janardana of mighty energy, knowing the character of the hour, stood unmoved without giving way to anger at the sight of those heroes rushing in wrath at Satyaki from every side. Urged by fate and inebriated with drink, they began to strike Yuyudhana with the pots from which they had been eating. When the son of Sini was being thus assaulted, Rukmini’s son became highly enraged. He rushed forward for rescuing Satyaki who was engaged with the Bhojas and the Andhakas. Endued with might of arms and wealth of energy, those two heroes exerted themselves with great courage. But as the odds were overwhelming, both of them were slain in the very sight of Krishna. The delighter of the Yadus, beholding his own son, and the son of Sini too, slain, took up, in wrath, a handful of the Eraka grass that grew there.

https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m16/m16003.htm

______________________________

Satyaki was drunk and started a fight. Kritavarma mocked right back. Satyabhama got mad and wanted Krishna to kill Kritavarma, so she went and sat on his lap. Krishna tried to prevent the slaughter but didn't do anything to kill Kritavarma until Pradyumna was killed.