Blaming Draupadi for everything : Isn't it victim blaming? - Page 4

Originally posted by: Wistfulness

@Bold - That's true. Duryodhan refused to return the kingdom that rightfully belonged to the Pandavas. Even after being requested to give them 5 villages in place of the kingdom, he infamously said that he wouldn't give them land equal to the tip of a pin.

Liberals stoop to the same level they pretend to loathe. 😅

Maybe I am thinking from 21st century POV but Pandavas lost the Kingdom because their King was a Juari (Gambler). Duryodhana's claim on Throne wasn't wrong as his father was the King. They went for the war, One side won and one lost, Pandavas acquired the Kingdom, Rightfully.

What I wanted to say was that Pandavas or their King who lost his Kingdom in Jua, wasn't dying to avenge Draupadi, they were ready to take 5 villages and forget everything which happened to Draupadi, Draupadi's vengeance or her pain or her Jidd was not responsible for the great war

Originally posted by: NoraSM

Maybe I am thinking from 21st century POV but Pandavas lost the Kingdom because their King was a Juari (Gambler). Duryodhana's claim on Throne wasn't wrong as his father was the King. They went for the war, One side won and one lost, Pandavas acquired the Kingdom, Rightfully.

What I wanted to say was that Pandavas or their King who lost his Kingdom in Jua, wasn't dying to avenge Draupadi, they were ready to take 5 villages and forget everything which happened to Draupadi, Draupadi's vengeance or her pain or her Jidd was not responsible for the great war

Regarding the legitimacy of Duryodhan's claim, that will require another topic. 😅

Originally posted by: Wistfulness

Your POV isn't wrong because clearly the king was at fault. I wanted to convey that they had complete right to stake claim over the kingdom after completing the conditions of the exile. So it was Duryodhan's refusal that ultimately led them all to the Kurukshetra.

Regarding the legitimacy of Duryodhan's claim, that will require another topic. 😅

Yeah. Yudhishtira was right in his claim for the Throne too

I would have liked Pandavas more if they had actually fought the war for the insult meted out to them and what Draupadi had to go through but Pandava's King was meh

Can you make a thread to discuss the claim of Duryodhana and Yudhishtira?

Originally posted by: AnkitaPurka66

Yes, agree that he was very influenced by the British and tried to completely replicate British culture and even converted to Christianity during his youth.

He composed in English for years

However, he didn't get the recognition that he desired.

Then he returned to writing in Bengali.

His contribution to Bengali literature in just 5 years is massive. He introduced a completely new form of rhythm in Bengali poetry.

At the end, he returned to his roots and directed to write his epitaph in pure Bengali.

I agree with your points about him identifying himself as an Englishman, but he did return to his mother tongue eventually.

I think Meghnad Vadh is the one of the first pieces that tried to look at a known story from a different angle.

I am definitely not arguing, just sharing my thoughts. Hope you don't mind.

Liked interacting with you. 🤗

And yes, we went way off topic.😆

😆Where we had started and where have we reached? When did this happen, my friend? 😆

I agree with you. Also, I got carried away in emotions and wrote certain words which I feel I shouldn't have. So, I have edited that post as I didn't like it after a re-read. It looks more civilized now. 😆

His shift was ironic in many aspects. However, it is noteworthy that the shift happened in the 2nd half of the 19th century when the spirit of nationalism was rising in India. Also, back then, the English would never value enough an Indian writing in English in relation to their own writers. As for Indians, hardly anybody knew the language during that period.

He discovered the hidden treasure of his native tongue Bengali and it is reflected in his Bengali sonnet 'Bangabhasa'. I respect his contributions.

In the initial years, he got carried away(just like I did in one of my previous post😆) and interpreted the Indian classics using European ones as models. Later, his perspective broadened as also the air of India was beginning to be filled by a renewed consciousness.

For me also, it is a pleasure interacting with you. 😊

P. S. I don't dislike the writer as such but only his interpretation. That was my hurt Indian-pride self😆

Originally posted by: AnjuRish

Draupadi was born with the sole intention of war.

Dron,a as a guru dakshina had asked for defeat of king of panchala . Arjuna defeated him and took away half his kingdom and gave it to drona. To take revenge king of panchala did a yagna. So dristadyumna and panchali were born out of the yagna fire.

Let me tell my pov

It all started due to promise to satyavathi that her son vichitra virya would be king instead of the able bhisma. Dtitarastra dispite being the first born could not be king since he was blind and then his son duryodhana also since yudi was born before him. This resentment remained with dtitarastra. Bhisma forced ghandari to marry drita and sakuni vowed to destroy kuru clan and made the dice from bones of his father and bro which listen to him. He always swayed Duryodhana and bro towards destruction.

Most imp Draupadi did question the legality of how she could be gambled away without her consent. She also said since yudi was a slave who lost her freedom he had no legal right to stake her. That was when duryo asked her to be disrobed except bheema no one tried to help her . But bheema had promised hi is mom never to go against yudi. So Draupadi had no one but her saka her well wisher so she prayed to him.

Since no one in the court stood for her she was well within her right to curse and destroy the people who humiliated her.

Actually she never cursed anybody. Not part of the epic

Originally posted by: Wistfulness

The source is Dharamveer Bharti's Andha Yug I think. BRC included that bit in the show and popularized it.

Even if we disregard the fact that it's not in the authentic texts, the comment doesn't justify the shameful treatment Draupadi received. It only displays Duryodhan's bloated ego and envy.

Also, given how the conspiracy was pre planned, Draupadi wouldn't have received a better treatment for sure.

Not only duryodhan this particular sequence goes on to show how terrible the system itself that existed in that era was that led people stake humans. Cab you imagine human being were stake under the pretext of "dharma"