Why didn't Arjun protect Draupadi? - Page 2

Originally posted by: proteeti

Subhadra was Krushna's sister, I remember someone told me about her spreading Krushna's Maya, Arjun and Her son played a crucial role in history. Krushna couldn't let her marry Duryodhana as her role in the epic was limited to being Abhimanyu's mother, Abhimanyu's son was important too. Abhimanyu was amalgamation of Nar and Narayana from my understanding of this

If the plan was orchestrated by 4 Krushna, then everything went smoothly and they started and won the war, also explains why Draupadi was married to 5 brothers, if she was only married to one of them, then they would have pacified that brother instead of going for a war for her

Originally posted by: NoraSM

How does one let people rape a woman? If he couldn't protect Draupadi, his queen, his elder brother's wife, his younger brother's wife, daughter in law of their house, his wife, mother of his child, how was he chosen for establishing the rule of Dharma? Arjun's idea of Dharma was a faulty one, Krushna didn't always follow his elder brother, he manipulated and arm twisted him, he defied his elder brother, in this scenario it wasn't difficult to guess which side is right, Arjun supported wrong

I don't know how reluctant Arjuna was to go on Swayamvar, Any man would 'man up' and stop a woman from getting raped

I am not supporting Arjun or the Pandavas. It's an established fact that all of them were wrong there. But using rape here is a strong word. Rape in today's context has an important connotation. The concept of consent was manipulated back then, now we are all more aware of it. They could not have raped her in the middle of the court. Yes, that does not in anyway justify what they did which was clear molestation, humiliation and a crime.

Arjun and his brothers keeping quiet here is also wrong. I don't feel he was the flagbearer of Dharma at all. These are all later analysis and interpretations. I consider all Mahabharata characters as humans with big, bigger or smaller flaws. So I do not believe he was godsend or anything. I was only trying to answer your question and yes you are right. Arjun was wrong, so was everyone else on court to be watching it. I was giving my interpretation of why Arjun was silent. Now a reason is not equal to a justification. He may have reasons, but the reasons do not justify his deeds.

I hope I was able to put my point.

Originally posted by: CaptainSpark

I am not supporting Arjun or the Pandavas. It's an established fact that all of them were wrong there. But using rape here is a strong word. Rape in today's context has an important connotation. The concept of consent was manipulated back then, now we are all more aware of it. They could not have raped her in the middle of the court. Yes, that does not in anyway justify what they did which was clear molestation, humiliation and a crime.

Arjun and his brothers keeping quiet here is also wrong. I don't feel he was the flagbearer of Dharma at all. These are all later analysis and interpretations. I consider all Mahabharata characters as humans with big, bigger or smaller flaws. So I do not believe he was godsend or anything. I was only trying to answer your question and yes you are right. Arjun was wrong, so was everyone else on court to be watching it. I was giving my interpretation of why Arjun was silent. Now a reason is not equal to a justification. He may have reasons, but the reasons do not justify his deeds.

I hope I was able to put my point.

Mahabharata is always associated with establishment of rule of Dharma and Arjun was key player as Krushna chose to support him

Even a weak man whether he cares about his wife or not would not let someone assault her and remove her clothes in a hall full of people so I do not agree with your reasoning of Arjun not caring about Draupadi as 'care' is not a factor in something like this, one would protect a stranger too. I just feel your reason is not correct and too one dimensional for something like Mahabharata

I won't use the word 'rape' hereafter

Originally posted by: NoraSM

Subhadra was Krushna's sister, I remember someone told me about her spreading Krushna's Maya, Arjun and Her son played a crucial role in history. Krushna couldn't let her marry Duryodhana as her role in the epic was limited to being Abhimanyu's mother, Abhimanyu's son was important too. Abhimanyu was amalgamation of Nar and Narayana from my understanding of this

If the plan was orchestrated by 4 Krushna, then everything went smoothly and they started and won the war, also explains why Draupadi was married to 5 brothers, if she was only married to one of them, then they would have pacified that brother instead of going for a war for her

Yep, that's true. But yes she had a role after the Maha-prasthan when she acted as regent for little Parikshit up until her death after which Uttara took over, till Parikshit became an adult.

Abhimanyu is generally attributed as Chandra-deva's incarnation. Chandra didn't want to stay for long on Earth, so he took his way out through the Chakra-vyuh.

And in case you're really interested, just think about it and tell me how much % of Kuru blood was in Parikshit's veins? (this will give you an idea of why Arjun-Subhi's marriage was that important to Krishna) 😉

Originally posted by: proteeti

Yep, that's true. But yes she had a role after the Maha-prasthan when she acted as regent for little Parikshit up until her death after which Uttara took over, till Parikshit became an adult.

Abhimanyu is generally attributed as Chandra-deva's incarnation. Chandra didn't want to stay for long on Earth, so he took his way out through the Chakra-vyuh.

And in case you're really interested, just think about it and tell me how much % of Kuru blood was in Parikshit's veins? (this will give you an idea of why Arjun-Subhi's marriage was that important to Krishna) 😉

50% Chromosomes from Arjun?

Originally posted by: NoraSM

50% Chromosomes from Arjun?

That's Abhimanyu. What about Parikshit?

Another point: Is Kuru blood = Arjun's blood? 😉

Originally posted by: proteeti

That's Abhimanyu. What about Parikshit?

Another point: Is Kuru blood = Arjun's blood? 😉

25% genes from Arjun

I don't really know the backdrop of every character 😂

Originally posted by: NoraSM

25% genes from Arjun

I don't really know the backdrop of every character 😂

Okay, that's my bad. Sorry. 😆

So, biologically if you see, the Kuru lineage is over with the death of Shantanu and Satyavati's bachcha Vichitraveerya. Dhrity and Pandu are the sons of Vyasa and the princesses of Kashi, and were by no means Kuru family members (because, they were never formally adopted by a male member of the previous generation).

Now, come to Pandavas, they aren't even the biological kids of Pandu. But, their mom Kunti (only bio-mom of Yudi, Bheema and Arjun) was a Yadava princess.

When Krishna got Subhi married to Arjun, Abhimanu was already 0% Kaurava, and 75% Yadava. He was brought up entirely in Dwarka, without the presence of Arjun, his only tie to Hastinapura. After the Pandavas, the kid of Abhimanyu, Parikshit took over.

Parikshit was brought up by Subhadra, in the absence of any Kuru elders. And so he turned out to be so much more Yadava than Kuru. So ab batao who won the last round and why Krishna wanted his sis to get inside Indraprastha so bad, eh? 😎

Originally posted by: proteeti

Okay, that's my bad. Sorry. 😆

So, biologically if you see, the Kuru lineage is over with the death of Shantanu and Satyavati's bachcha Vichitraveerya. Dhrity and Pandu are the sons of Vyasa and the princesses of Kashi, and were by no means Kuru family members (because, they were never formally adopted by a male member of the previous generation).

Now, come to Pandavas, they aren't even the biological kids of Pandu. But, their mom Kunti (only bio-mom of Yudi, Bheema and Arjun) was a Yadava princess.

When Krishna got Subhi married to Arjun, Abhimanu was already 0% Kaurava, and 75% Yadava. He was brought up entirely in Dwarka, without the presence of Arjun, his only tie to Hastinapura. After the Pandavas, the kid of Abhimanyu, Parikshit took over.

Parikshit was brought up by Subhadra, in the absence of any Kuru elders. And so he turned out to be so much more Yadava than Kuru. So ab batao who won the last round and why Krishna wanted his sis to get inside Indraprastha so bad, eh? 😎

None had Kuru blood, it seems. The catch was Kunti being a Yadav (Its so Lalu Yadav and Mulayam Singh Yadav). Abhimanyu was 75% Yadav, did Abhimanyu marry a Yadava? If yes, then Parikshit was 87.5% Yadava

If we let go of Krushna being the Lord aside then he was a remarkable King who put person of his choice and lineage on the throne of Hastinapur/Indraprashth. I recall during Norman rule, The Norman King had married his brother to the Princess of Scotland so her child or a Norman can be legitimate heir to the throne of Scotland. Krushna played his game nicely

Originally posted by: NoraSM

None had Kuru blood, it seems. The catch was Kunti being a Yadav (Its so Lalu Yadav and Mulayam Singh Yadav). Abhimanyu was 75% Yadav, did Abhimanyu marry a Yadava? If yes, then Parikshit was 87.5% Yadava

If we let go of Krushna being the Lord aside then he was a remarkable King who put person of his choice and lineage on the throne of Hastinapur/Indraprashth. I recall during Norman rule, The Norman King had married his brother to the Princess of Scotland so her child or a Norman can be legitimate heir to the throne of Scotland. Krushna played his game nicely

Nope Abhi's wife Uttara was a Matsya princess (however, her ancestor King Matsya was the twin brother of Satyavathi). But wouldn't it be soo neat if he had married a Yadava?!

It is said he did this because the ancient King Yayati had disowned his eldest son Yadu and made his yougest son Puru the King of the Kuru clan.