The Print Article - Indians ignore what was done to Subhadra - Page 3

Originally posted by: Swetha-Sai

@NoraSM

Thanks much for the article link! 👍🏼

I find it difficult to stomach the fact that Lord Krishna gave his approval for his sister Subhadra's abduction by Arjun..

All my life, I have grown up reading / listening to the love story of A and S.. 😒

For me, it just makes Krushna all more human than God. I liked him to an extent, now I am inclided to feel a little squeamish about this whole ordeal. We have to see that abduction was a normal practice back in that time, there are many examples of it, what separates this particular incident from other is that Krushna acknowledged his sister might say 'No' to marrying Arjun, I mean if my brother knows that there are chances of me saying no to a man, he would at least ask, but him advising someone to force himself on me so I don't have a choice, is 🤢

Originally posted by: CaptainSpark

Why didn't Subhadra protest is another question because she didn't even know Arjun, it's natural for her to feel shocked, which is why I more so feel Subhadra already had a hint about it.

And I already said that Krishna told Arjun to do the abduction - forceful meaning abduction.

Also I don't understand what out of this makes abduction justified. If we do question the practice of abduction itself, it doesn't give those who have practiced it a clean chit.

Abduction is wrong now, Abduction wasn't wrong back then, Krushna stated abduction as one of the methods through which Kshatriya marry the women they desire, according to their rules it wasn't wrong, what makes it wrong is Krushna's acknowledgement of Subhadra’s protest

That's why I quoted that part of the article, we are putting the blame on her and romanticizing it by asking 'Why didn't she protest?' when her brother himself said that he does not know what she will do, if told about it.

It is entirely possible that she would have agreed to marry Arjun on her Swyamvar that was her right as stated by Krushna himself and if she was to say no to Arjun, what's wrong in it? He didn't give her a chance to say 'Yes' or 'No'

How can she protest in front of weapons? She was taken away by force, The thing is that she didn't know

Balram and Duryodhana thing is false, This narrative was built to tell us that Subhadra would have been married to the villain of this story if Krushna and Arjun didn't take away the right of consent from her

If I talk about this whole ordeal in today's time then obviously forced marriage is nothing but human rights violation, assault and rape so each one of them was a criminal to practice it. None gets a clean chit

Originally posted by: CaptainSpark

Oh all that is folktales honestly. It's the same as how Karna has been changed into a folk hero, how Draupadi's andhe ka putra andha has come in. All these Subhadra abducting Arjun and Arjun Subhadra love story come from tales and anyone who has read the MB will not fall for all this.

About women, yeah I agree women was losing their rights already. However I just want to say it is important to question abduction in general just like we question the practice of child marriage, Sati etc.

Translators and writers have done Draupadi and other women from Mahabharata dirty, They created false stories to make it look like Draupadi was responsible for Karna and Duryodhana's actions during Dyut Sabha, They took away the hero moment from her which led to these heroes living their lives as individuals rather than slaves and handed it to Krushna saving her.

Originally posted by: CaptainSpark

It's not mentioned in KMG but I think Krishna instructed abduction because Balaram would not accept Arjun and also Duryodhan was supposed to marry Subhadra. Or is this also a story created to justify their actions?

As per this article that was a story later added. Anyhow this is clearly mentioned in the epic that the Yaduvanshis were planning for a Swayamwar for Subhadra, and Krishna wasn't sure if Subhadra would accept him

Abduction is wrong but it wasn't considered so in those days. Even Vedas permit Har Vivah as a form of marriage, so what Arjun did (or what Bheeshm or Duryodhan did) wasn't illegal or wrong.

The point here is that Krishna having his doubts over his sister's intention asked Arjun to abduct.

Originally posted by: NoraSM

Abduction is wrong now, Abduction wasn't wrong back then, Krushna stated abduction as one of the methods through which Kshatriya marry the women they desire, according to their rules it wasn't wrong, what makes it wrong is Krushna's acknowledgement of Subhadra’s protest

That's why I quoted that part of the article, we are putting the blame on her and romanticizing it by asking 'Why didn't she protest?' when her brother himself said that he does not know what she will do, if told about it.

It is entirely possible that she would have agreed to marry Arjun on her Swyamvar that was her right as stated by Krushna himself and if she was to say no to Arjun, what's wrong in it? He didn't give her a chance to say 'Yes' or 'No'

How can she protest in front of weapons? She was taken away by force, The thing is that she didn't know

Balram and Duryodhana thing is false, This narrative was built to tell us that Subhadra would have been married to the villain of this story if Krushna and Arjun didn't take away the right of consent from her

If I talk about this whole ordeal in today's time then obviously forced marriage is nothing but human rights violation, assault and rape so each one of them was a criminal to practice it. None gets a clean chit

I am not putting any blame on her. I am only wondering if she ever protested. If she did, nobody would listen to her because Kshatriya Dharma or whatever. But at least, we would know she tried. It's natural for her to be scared or also, if she gets to know her brother is a part of this then naturally even if she disliked it she would lose the ability to protest. However, there's no blame on her for NOT protesting. I was just wondering if she tried to stop it.

If there was a Swayamvar, I am sure Krishna could instruct or manipulate his sister into saying Yes or choosing only Arjun. I am just trying to find out why the method of abduction was chosen unless there is some reason. Krishna need not have done this, he could have easily asked Balaram for it and if Dury-Balram thing is false then there's no reason for Balaram to not accept this. So he had so many ways to do it. Why choose abduction where his own sister's rights are violated?

This is the only question I am raising.

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

Abduction is wrong but it wasn't considered so in those days. Even Vedas permit Har Vivah as a form of marriage, so what Arjun did (or what Bheeshm or Duryodhan did) wasn't illegal or wrong.

The point here is that Krishna having his doubts over his sister's intention asked Arjun to abduct.

Yes this is something completely wrong. And I feel Krishna is to be blamed more than Arjun. Also, this is an instance which clearly shows he is human.

Originally posted by: CaptainSpark

I am not putting any blame on her. I am only wondering if she ever protested. If she did, nobody would listen to her because Kshatriya Dharma or whatever. But at least, we would know she tried. It's natural for her to be scared or also, if she gets to know her brother is a part of this then naturally even if she disliked it she would lose the ability to protest. However, there's no blame on her for NOT protesting. I was just wondering if she tried to stop it.

If there was a Swayamvar, I am sure Krishna could instruct or manipulate his sister into saying Yes or choosing only Arjun. I am just trying to find out why the method of abduction was chosen unless there is some reason. Krishna need not have done this, he could have easily asked Balaram for it and if Dury-Balram thing is false then there's no reason for Balaram to not accept this. So he had so many ways to do it. Why choose abduction where his own sister's rights are violated?

This is the only question I am raising.

The answer is clear, he couldn't manipulate or instruct her to marry Arjun, that's what he said -

""Vasudeva answered, 'O bull amongst men, self-choice hath been ordained for the marriage of Kshatriyas. But that is doubtful (in its consequences), O Partha, as we do not know this girl's temper and disposition."

According to this part, Krushna knows that it is Subhadra’s right to choose her husband for marriage (Talking about Swayamvar) but he doesn't know if she will pick Arjun or not so

"In the case of Kshatriyas that are brave, a forcible abduction for purposes of marriage is applauded, as the learned have said. Therefore O Arjuna, carry away this my beautiful sister by force, for who knows what she may do at a self-choice.'

If he could manipulate her then Swayamvar was a better option as he didn't have to pacify Balram

Originally posted by: NoraSM

Translators and writers have done Draupadi and other women from Mahabharata dirty, They created false stories to make it look like Draupadi was responsible for Karna and Duryodhana's actions during Dyut Sabha, They took away the hero moment from her which led to these heroes living their lives as individuals rather than slaves and handed it to Krushna saving her.

This I completely agree with. As patriarchy evolved, women heroines, women characters have been repeatedly destroyed in order to give all their moments to male protagonists.

Originally posted by: NoraSM

The answer is clear, he couldn't manipulate or instruct her to marry Arjun, that's what he said -

""Vasudeva answered, 'O bull amongst men, self-choice hath been ordained for the marriage of Kshatriyas. But that is doubtful (in its consequences), O Partha, as we do not know this girl's temper and disposition."

According to this part, Krushna knows that it is Subhadra’s right to choose her husband for marriage (Talking about Swayamvar) but he doesn't know if she will pick Arjun or not so

"In the case of Kshatriyas that are brave, a forcible abduction for purposes of marriage is applauded, as the learned have said. Therefore O Arjuna, carry away this my beautiful sister by force, for who knows what she may do at a self-choice.'

If he could manipulate her then Swayamvar was a better option as he didn't have to pacify Balram

There is a difference between manipulation anf convincing. Manipulation is something Krishna excels in. This means to convince Subhadra that Arjun is the right choice. Also, unless Subhadra was a rebel like Amba I don't see any reason how she could say no to something her brothers decided for her.