Was Draupadi really disrobed in the Dice Hall? - Page 12

Created

Last reply

Replies

117

Views

80.9k

Users

36

Likes

425

Frequent Posters

TheWatcher thumbnail
13th Anniversary Thumbnail Voyager Thumbnail Engager Level 1 Thumbnail
Posted: 11 years ago
Thanks for providing the Para, this will surely help in lessening the argument of why it was not mentioned in the later incidents.
RatiG thumbnail
17th Anniversary Thumbnail Rocker Thumbnail + 4
Posted: 11 years ago
no one knows that.. if she was actually stripped then also i dont think that would be mentioned anywhere.. as that would be the ultimate dishonor of a women as if it wasnt enough..
history is being written by people who write to teach good lessons to they child, grandchild and so on ..


by her story what actually is the lesson .. God helps even if u call him 2 times

what actually happened no one knows...
srishtisingh thumbnail
14th Anniversary Thumbnail Voyager Thumbnail
Posted: 11 years ago
I know I kind of will sound saddist but I often wonder whether its not mentioned because disrobing did happen and it was removed or labled as failed attempt because that would have been much more disgusting and a much more bigger blot on everyone character.
ps:its just a theory. and if it offends anyone I will edit my post.but this thought was haunting me since few days.hence I wrote it
...Diala... thumbnail
11th Anniversary Thumbnail Sparkler Thumbnail + 2
Posted: 11 years ago
Srishti.. same with me here.. seeing the word 'disrobed' in past tense as if it were successful 😲 or it should mean the slip of uppergarment.. whatever 😕
Ashwini_D thumbnail
11th Anniversary Thumbnail Navigator Thumbnail
Posted: 11 years ago

Originally posted by: Medha.S

Why is everyone so obsessed with the word DISROBED?

If the word has not been mentioned meaning it did not happen?

Anyways, here is the word "Disrobed"

Section 59, Shalya Parva

Having struck Duryodhana down, the valiant Bhimasena, approaching the Kuru chief, addressed him, saying, "O wretch, formerly laughing at the disrobed Draupadi in the midst of the assembly, thou hadst, O fool, addressed us as 'Cow, Cow!' Bear now the fruit of that insult!"


"They that had dragged Draupadi, while ill, into the assembly and had disrobed her there, behold those Dhartarashtras slain in battle by the Pandavas through the ascetic penances of Yajnasena's daughter!



This is new to me. Thanks for citing this. Makes the theory with which this thread was opened quite weak I guess.
Ashwini_D thumbnail
11th Anniversary Thumbnail Navigator Thumbnail
Posted: 11 years ago
I have highlighted the passage that refers to one of the portions in the text posted by Medha which refers to the disrobing.

Was Draupadi Ever Disrobed?
by Dr. Pradip Bhattacharya

Cherchez la femme could well describe the mainspring of action of the world's greatest epics: the topless towers of Ilium burnt because of the abduction of Helen; golden Lanka went up in flames because of the abduction of Sita; millions of women were widowed because Draupadi was molested. The gambling match episode in the Sabha Parva of the Mahabharata is stamped indelibly on public memory not so much because Shakuni, playing for Duryodhana, cheated the Pandavas of their entire possessions but because of a horripilating incident that remains unique in literature: their common wife, Queen Draupadi, being dragged into public view by Duryodhana's orders and sought to be stripped by Duhsasana at Karna's behest (Sabha Parva 61). The logic Karna advances is that the gods ordained only one husband for a woman while Draupadi is bound to many and is, therefore, a bandhaki(prostitute). Therefore, there is nothing wrong in bringing a public woman, whether clad in a single cloth or naked, into the assembly hall. It is Karna who asks Duhsasana to strip the Pandavas and Draupadi of their garments. Hearing this, the Pandavas cast off their uttariya (upper garments). Duhsasana began to pull at Draupadi's single cloth in the midst of the assembly hall, with everyone watching. She was saved in this perilous extremity when Krishna covered her with an unending stream of cloth.

This is an important issue because the Critical Edition rejects the celebrated passage as an interpolation. The editor, F. Edgerton, feels that "cosmic justice" is implied. The text, as presented here, has neither any prayer by Draupadi to Krishna, nor any explanation of the miracle of endless replacement of garments. This is how the text reads (II.61):

"40. Then Duhsasana, O king, forcibly pulled off Draupadi's garment in the middle of the assembly, and began to strip her.
41. But whenever one of Draupadi's garments was removed, O king, another similar garment repeatedly appeared.
42. Then there rose a mighty roar of approval"a terrible roar from all the kings watching the greatest wonder in the world."

In the variant recensions, Draupadi calls out to Govinda, Krishna and "Gopijanapriya", the last epithet being an indication of a post-Harivamsa addition by a poet familiar with Krishna's childhood dalliance with the milkmaids of Vrindavana. In the vulgate, Krishna springs up from his bed in Dvaraka and rushes on foot, deeply moved by Draupadi's appeal. This recurs when she, faced with Durvasa's demand for food in the forest, invokes Krishna. Referring to these passages, Sukthankar comments: "They undoubtedly represent a later phase of Krishna worship."[1]

The first question is about what Draupadi was wearing. When she was dragged from the inner apartments, Draupadi appealed to Duhsasana (II.60.25) to refrain as she was draped in just a single cloth (ekaco vaso) and was menstruating. Duhsasana's responded that whether she be menstruating, wearing a single cloth (ekambara) or none (vivasana), she was their prize and their slave, so her dress would have be that befitting a slave (60.27). She urges him not to undress her (vivastra, 60.30). There is a reference to half of her cloth slipping (patitardhavastra 60.28) but also specifically of her upper cloth (uttariya) slipping when she is dragged into the assembly hall (60.47).

There is a hint about how Draupadi is saved in verse 544* in the appendices of the Critical Edition, which might be the oldest interpolation: "Yajaseni cried out for rescue to Krishna, Vishnu, Hari and Nara. Then Dharma, hidden, the magnanimous, covered her with a multitude of garments." This is repeated in 553*: "Thereupon hundreds of garments of many colours and whites appeared, O lord, due to the protection of Dharma." This refers back to II.60.13 where, when summoned to the assembly hall, Draupadi reflects, "In this world dharma is alone supreme. Protecting, he will provide peace."

The enigmatic statement gives rise to many speculations, one of which possibly led to the interpolated passage bringing in Krishna. However, we recall that the god Dharma is reincarnated as Vidura, who is the first to protest against the dice-game and the summoning of Draupadi. Does he clothe her? Or shall we imagine dharma' as referring to the outraged sensibilities of the assembled audience who throw off their upper garments to cover Draupadi? Finally, as Duhsasana tires, evil omens erupt as jackals howl and asses bray, moving Dhritarashtra to intervene.

In the course of his examination of this episode, Hiltebeitel[2] devotes considerable energy to establish that Krishna's intervention to protect Draupadi's modesty is part of the original text. Hiltebeitel marshals circumstantial evidence by way of two later references from the Udyoga Parva in which both Draupadi (V.80.26) and Krishna (V.58.21) refer to her appeal, "O Govinda", for rescue. However, while doing so he admits that neither mentions the stripping. Why, then, should Krishna have intervened with the miraculous provision of garments if Draupadi was not being stripped?

Moreover, when they meet for the first time in exile, Draupadi specifically mentions being dragged by her hair, but does not mention any pulling at her garment (III.12.61-63, 121). Krishna responds that had he been present he would have prevented the fraudulent dice game. There is no mention of any appeal from Draupadi regarding the stripping reaching him"telepathically or otherwise. Whenever Yudhishthira recounts the sufferings they have undergone, it is always Draupadi being pulled by her hair that he mentions, never any attempt to strip her. When Krishna and Yudhishthira mention to Sanjaya the atrocities suffered, it is not mentioned (V.29.40 and 31.16), nor when Krishna speaks to Yudhishthira before the peace-embassy (V.73.18-19). Even when Draupadi herself, furious at everyone favouring peace, lists her sufferings, she does not mention what should have been the climactic outrage of stripping (V.82.25-26). Kunti, listing her sorrows to Krishna, mentions five times Draupadi being dragged into the court in a single garment, but does not mention any stripping (V.90.50-51, 57, 82, 86 and V.137). Krishna, in his embassy to the Kauravas, mentions Draupadi being dragged into court, but there is no reference to disrobing (V.95.59). When Duhsasana boastfully displays to Bhima the arm by which he dragged Draupadi by the hair, neither he nor Bhima, who rips it off, refers to the grosser offence by far. When Krishna criticises Karna, facing death for his misdeeds, he refers to menstruating, single-cloth-clad Draupadi being summoned to the assembly hall, but does not refer to any stripping and his instigating it, which ought to have been counted as the most heinous offence he had to answer for. Even at the end, when Yudhishthira provokes Duryodhana to emerge from Dvaipayana lake, he refers to Draupadi being verbally abused and dragged (karshanena), but says not a word about her being stripped (IX.30.187*).

Professor Satya Chaitanya points out that in the Sabha Parva 72.20 Dhritarashtra tells Sajaya that the Brahmins did not perform the sandhya rituals on the day of the dice game, furious at Draupadi being pulled about (parikarshane). Later, in the Vana parva, Sajaya repeats his master's word parikarsha to describe the outrage suffered by Draupadi with no reference to disrobing.

There is, however, a solitary confirmation of Hiltebeitel's stance, which he has missed out. This occurs in IX.58.10. Dr. John D. Smith has pointed out[3] that as "Bhima is gloating after fulfilling his vow to overthrow Duryodhana and tread on his head" he says,

"Those who brought the menstruating Draupadi and who made her naked (avastram) in the assembly"see those Dhartarashtras slain in battle by the Pandavas because of the torture on Yajaseni."

Smith admits that, "it is strange that Bhima says this at this point and does not say anything similar after fulfilling the more relevant vow against Duhshasana. But again, this is what the text actually says." Yet, in the earlier verse (58.4) Bhima only refers to Draupadi being brought into the assembly hall clad in a single cloth (Draupadimekavasasam) and mocked. A good instance of the editors of the Critical Edition nodding?

Besides this, earlier on in the same parva (IX.4.16-17), Duryodhana tells Kripacharya that there is no point seeking peace because, "Wearing a single cloth and covered in dust, dark Draupadi was wronged by Duhshasana in the middle of assembly hall under the eyes of the entire world. Even today the Pandavas still remember how she was naked (vivasanam) and wretched (dinam); those enemy-destroyers cannot be turned from war."[4] This is the only instance of Duryodhana referring to Draupadi being stripped. However, other manuscripts have vimanasa instead of vivasana.

None of the Puranas"not even the bhakti-cult's Bhagavata, nor Harivamsa"refer to the stripping. In the Devi Bhagavata Purana, which adds significant material to the Pandava story, Janamejaya only refers to Draupadi being dragged by her hair by Duhsasana twice (IV.1.36 and 17.38) while using the word dharshita, violated (IV.1.38), to describe what Kichaka did to her"an interesting sidelight that warrants study.

If we look to the earliest post-Mahabharata evidence, we find that in Bhasa's playsDutavakyam and Dutaghatotkacam[5] (c. 4th century B.C.) there is no reference to the stripping. In the former, Duryodhana displays to Krishna a vivid painting of the dice-game showing Draupadi keshambarakarshanam (Draupadi dragged by the hair and garment" (I.7), while in sloka 18 Krishna says, "it is the scene of Draupadi's hair being violated (keshadharshanam)". In the latter, Ghatotkacha upbraids Duryodhana saying, "Nor do Rakshasas ever touch the brother's wife on the head" (I.43).

The Shiva Purana (III.19.63-66) presents a later concoction regarding the episode: the stream of garments was the result of a boon given, once again, by Durvasa because Draupadi had torn a portion of her garment to cover the sage when his loin-cloth was carried away in the Gaga.[6] Satya Chaitanya[7] has pointed out that theJaiminiya Ashvamedhaparva, again a late work (c. 10th century A.D.), carries a reference to the disrobing:

"Around midnight one day, in Hastinapura, Yudhishthira thinks of Krishna who is in Dvaraka at that time and Krishna instantly reaches Hastinapura. Draupadi, who comes and greets Krishna after the others have received him, says his coming like this should not surprise anyone"he has come to them like this (in their hours of need) earlier too. She mentions here two occasions when this has happened. One, when he came and saved them from Durvasa. And the other, when he appeared in the form of clothes in the assembly' (vastrarupi sabhamadhye).""2.62

The internal and external evidence, therefore, indicate that the incident of stripping that has so powerfully ruled the popular imagination and featured on stage, paintings, films and television, was not part of the original text but was added by one or more highly competent redactors.

Link to the article: http://www.boloji.com/index.cfm?md=Content&sd=Articles&ArticleID=1769

Edited by ashwi_d - 11 years ago
Ashwini_D thumbnail
11th Anniversary Thumbnail Navigator Thumbnail
Posted: 11 years ago

Originally posted by: ...Diala...

Srishti.. same with me here.. seeing the word 'disrobed' in past tense as if it were successful 😲 or it should mean the slip of uppergarment.. whatever 😕


Exactly. However unlikely, the word 'disrobed' might also refer to the slipping of her uppergarment which is mentioned while she is being dragged by Dushasan. I know the actual deliberate attempt at disrobing by Dushy would make more sense here, but just thought of putting the other possibility out there.

chirpy_life19 thumbnail
12th Anniversary Thumbnail Rocker Thumbnail + 2
Posted: 11 years ago

Originally posted by: varaali


I would like to analyze this contextually and literally- keeping faith / emotions aside.


Let us forget KMG's translation for a moment and take a look at the two texts we have today- Neelkanth's and the Southern Recession.


Neelkanth's version is here http://asi.nic.in/asi_books/8995.pdf.

Draupadi's VH is described on page 263 / 264. Type this number in the task bar to reach the relevant page



Draupadi's VH is on page 499.


In both the versions, when Dushasana begins to pull her clothes forcibly, Draupadi cries to Krishna for help. In the Neelkanth version Draupadi's prayer is in 8 slokas, in the SR her prayer is in 4 slokas, along with a description by Vaishampayana.


Now, my question is if Krishna was indeed the saviour, why would Vyasa not use this opportunity to sing a stuti of his favourite Lord- that too, at a time when he has performed such a stunning miracle?


In the whole epic, we see two Vyasa trademarks- One- to sing a stuti at a drop of the hat and Two - to launch into a rambling story / narrative from the past.


The second trademark is observed here. After the attempted disrobing, Vidura launches into a long winded story of Prahalaad. This is typical of Vyasa's writing.


But the first trademark is missing here. Why would Vyasa not make Draupadi or Yudhishthira or even Bhishma sing Krishna's stuti at such an emotional moment.


Moreover, the words used in these verses are very inconsistent. In the Neelkant version, when Drauapdi is crying to Krishna "Krishnam cha Visnum cha Hareem...etc etc", there is another line
"Tyaktva shyaasanam Kripalu Kripaya abhyagaat .


This is the only line which may have some indication that Krishna (or his Presence) arrived there. But this crucial line is missing in the Southern recession- thus raising doubts whether this line was a later day interpolation.


And immediately after this comes the much debated line "Tatah astu Dharmaha tarito Mahatma samavarno dvai vividhaihi suvasraihi"


In the Southern Recession, instead of Dharmaha Tarito, we have, Dharmo antarito- which is what KMG used for his translation to mean "Dharma remaining hidden..."


Now the key word here is Mahatma (see red above). KMG uses this word to mean 'illustrious Dharma' With all due respect to KMG, I don't think this word refers to Dhrama at all. Mahatma here refers to Draupadi.


And now, with this one word, Vyasa clears all our confusion. Because Draupadi is a Mahatma, the Dharma that she had been following (her pativrata) saved her. Dharmaha tarito Mahatma. Dharma saved the great soul.


The other very vital clue we get is from the Southern Recension. Here the same line reads "Tatah astu Dharmah antarito" The Dharma that was inside her saved her.


The Dharma that was "inside"- not, as KMG writes "Dharma that was hidden"


Hence, the Dharma that is being referred to here is the 'Dharma' that Draupadi had been following i.e her pativrata dharma. "Dharma" does not refer to Yudi's Dad or any other external person.


This is my understanding and analysis of this particular section.


This interpretation is really good!

Read this...(copy-pasted from the article)

verse in Chapter 2 of the Jaiminiya Ashwamedha Parva, the surviving section of the Mahabharata by Jaimini, which does refer to the disrobing of Draupadi in the assembly, and which also refers to Krishna personally saving Draupadi's honour. Jaimini tells us that around midnight one day, in Hastinapura, Yudhishthira thinks of Krishna who is in Dwaraka at that time and Krishna instantly reaches Hastinapura. Draupadi who comes and greets Krishna after the others have received him says his coming like this should not surprise anyone - he has come to them like this earlier too. She mentions here two occasions when this has happened. One, when he came and saved the Pandavas from Durvasa. And the other, when he appeared "in the form of cloths in the assembly" [vastraroopee sabhamadhye - Jaimini 2/62].
Edited by Cool-n-Fresh - 11 years ago

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".