Polyandry in Mahabharata - Page 3

I think u can refer to BORI critical edition as it collected rare book about mahabharat by manu script and it had removed many interpolation

ThisBORI Institute doing PhD in mahabharat

And even br chopra mahabharat mostly based on BORi crictical edition

Originally posted by: Poorabhforever

1 Red

If she thought she had only one boon then she would have saved everyone, it wasn't like she could save only one person as she saved 4 people in her next boon, so why not 5 in first boon when she did not know if there will be a 2nd boon or not, why risk it? Risk is in Arjun and Bhima being slaves of Duryodhana which leaves their Kingdom without protection

They would have achieved their plan of breaking Pandavas with this as Yudhishtira would have gone home leaving his other brothers as slaves because of his addiction to gambling. Arjun and Bhima would have gone mad too because they spoke for Draupadi and she didn't think about them choosing the selfish route to save her husband only who staked her and caused her humiliation.

2 Red -

Some women just conceive late, my grandmother had her first child after 12 years of her marriage and my aunt after 7 years of her marriage, my mom delivered me in exact 9 months of her marriage 😋😂

Yudhishtira couldn't choose Abhimanyu as his heir, If Abhimanyu wasn't the eldest child of Pandavas, Even if adopted if older than Abhimanyu, Prativindhya had every right on the Throne because his father Yudhishtira's only claim was him being older and he wasn't biological son too

If Draupadi was married to Yudhishtira only then isn't it possible that Yudhishtira was the one who couldn't have kids? I mean polygamy was allowed for political purposes and even allowed today, if wife can't conceive, Yudhishtira could have had his heir from some other woman

Double post 😆

Originally posted by: NoraSM

1 Red

If she thought she had only one boon then she would have saved everyone, it wasn't like she could save only one person as she saved 4 people in her next boon, so why not 5 in first boon when she did not know if there will be a 2nd boon or not, why risk it? Risk is in Arjun and Bhima being slaves of Duryodhana which leaves their Kingdom without protection

They would have achieved their plan of breaking Pandavas with this as Yudhishtira would have gone home leaving his other brothers as slaves because of his addiction to gambling. Arjun and Bhima would have gone mad too because they spoke for Draupadi and she didn't think about them choosing the selfish route to save her husband only who staked her and caused her humiliation.

2 Red -

Some women just conceive late, my grandmother had her first child after 12 years of her marriage and my aunt after 7 years of her marriage, my mom delivered me in exact 9 months of her marriage 😋😂

Going by that logic some couples dont conceive either so. And then they go for adoption

Plus conceiving right an year after abhimanyu way too precise .

Originally posted by: NoraSM

1 Red

If she thought she had only one boon then she would have saved everyone, it wasn't like she could save only one person as she saved 4 people in her next boon, so why not 5 in first boon when she did not know if there will be a 2nd boon or not, why risk it? Risk is in Arjun and Bhima being slaves of Duryodhana which leaves their Kingdom without protection

They would have achieved their plan of breaking Pandavas with this as Yudhishtira would have gone home leaving his other brothers as slaves because of his addiction to gambling. Arjun and Bhima would have gone mad too because they spoke for Draupadi and she didn't think about them choosing the selfish route to save her husband only who staked her and caused her humiliation.

2 Red -

Some women just conceive late, my grandmother had her first child after 12 years of her marriage and my aunt after 7 years of her marriage, my mom delivered me in exact 9 months of her marriage 😋😂

Yudhishtira couldn't choose Abhimanyu as his heir, If Abhimanyu wasn't the eldest child of Pandavas, Even if adopted if older than Abhimanyu, Prativindhya had every right on the Throne because his father Yudhishtira's only claim was him being older and he wasn't biological son too

If Draupadi was married to Yudhishtira only then isn't it possible that Yudhishtira was the one who couldn't have kids? I mean polygamy was allowed for political purposes and even allowed today, if wife can't conceive, Yudhishtira could have had his heir from some other woman

Yes possible yudhishtra can be the one with fault too

I am saying that prativindhya was krishnaa s adopted son born to another of yudhishtra s wife whom he married after arjun and subdhara s marriage.

Abhimanyu being the son of younger brother can in no case have more claims over the throne even if Prativindhya was elder to him even if he was adopted, because as we have discussed multiple times adopted sons have complete rights to inherit.

Only possibly could be that Prativindhya and the Uppandavas were later additions and didn't actually exist, maybe Draupadi couldn't conceive at all(to be frank the Vanwas in itself seems to be a proof for it if it was only for Yudhishtir and Draupadi, then BANS would have been fools to accompany them while leaving their sons as orphans in the house of their maternal grandparents. Brotherly duty is important but not taking care of children while the mother is away seems all the more of Adharma). It could be a possibility that Draupadi didn't have any child of her own (including Suthanu and Uppandavas), in the later ages when the status of women in society further diminished and women became child producing machines, the fact that a woman with no kids has been such important figure in history didn't go well with the general public and hence the entire narrative of Uppandavas and daughters was included

Coming to her not knowing that she would get another chance, well I am sure she knew, Manusmriti clearly mentions that a Dasi can not be forced upon else she gets free immidiately and has the right to ask for two boons as compensation. Also a Dasi can not be humiliated in public (remember Bharat ji had stopped Shatrughan ji on hitting Manthara in public although she was a culprit) else she gets freedom with one boon. All these things had happened to her, it seems highly improbable that a learned lady like her, didn't know the basics of Dharma. She definitely knew that there are three boons to be given to her

Originally posted by: Poorabhforever

Yes possible yudhishtra can be the one with fault too

I am saying that prativindhya was krishnaa s adopted son born to another of yudhishtra s wife whom he married after arjun and subdhara s marriage.

Could she really adopt son of 2nd queen?

Mahabharata is full of coincidences, Gandhari was married before but Duryodhana was born right after Yudhishtira. If not through normal means Draupadi could have had a child through Niyog like everyone in Mahabharata did.

Anyway, I read somewhere Bheema referred to Draupadi as his Bhabhi which is a damning evidence to refute polyandry, Do you have any idea if it is true?

Bheem called draupdi bhabhi. ? I use think all pandav use to. Address her as panchali only

Originally posted by: NoraSM

I am inclined to believe in existence of polyandry because of the importance given to Draupadi - Bheem and Draupadi - Arjun, There are just too many incidents to support it

However, Draupadi obviously had feelings and emotions but women back in those days were groomed to run a Kingdom or a household, I mean one would any day marry a King than settle for King's younger brother. Their duty was to produce an heir and a spare. Arjun is a hero now with him being friends with Lord Krushna but he was just someone from Yudhishtira's kingdom who won Swayamvar.

But, Why would Yudhishtira marry Draupadi after Arjun participated in her Swayamvar? I mean, if I am going to see a ladka, my sister won't marry him unless they both like each other (🙄) which makes me think Yudhishtira Boi was a bit... Ehm

That's why I once said Duryodhana is better option for Subhadra than Arjun

@bold - How? Bhanumati and his love story is fiction so we really cannot assume he was a great husband. Also, Pandavas maybe terrible but they're all better than Duryodhan, especially Bheem and Arjun. Yudhishthir maybe debatable.

The duty of a woman was to produce an heir, yes. But that does not mean she was a cold blooded politician like it is claimed to today. Neither was she a bloodthirsty woman, nor a lovesick chicken, nor a politician completely devoid of emotions. I am not okay with accepting either of these, but I think she was human, who had her pains and emotions and also knew how to love. I also believe she is the most intelligent woman in the text.

Hey adhya🤗, thanks for suggesting this thread i read everyone’s theory here and everyone put their thoughts very nicely and I totally respect them, but i ll put mine also.

first I believe polyandry did existed, the points that explained here Panchali being only yudi wife didn’t satisfy me because ther r more than one instancces that expains she was married to all, if we start believing in modern versions and scholar theories there’s also one where it says she was married to arjuna only. Now I don’t think it’s true, that means he staked his younger brother wife, that means it’s pretty much character assassination of both arjun and yudi .One for staking another one for keeping quiet.

now her marriage to 5 r another major point in mahabharat, it’s arjun who won her yudi alone marrying her don’t do well with arjun , and her marriage to 5 s to unite all 5 , there’s a fear of division here, it was clearly mentioned when vyasa mentioned about her and described her beauty kunti saw how all her sons desiired her, the woman s intelligent and major reason y she unknowingly ( should i say knowingly ) divided her, epic mentioned about her marriage, it was vysa himself who arranged it. If only yudhi r arjun marries her because all brothers clearly attracted to her there’s a fear of division, kunti can’t afford this that’s y she did what she had to, her beauty attracted so many men pandavas r no exception. And weather it’s only kunti weather arjun r pandavas also involed in it I can’t say particularly , but i heard Draupadi might have volunteered herself for this but i beg to differ here, no woman willingly want to go through this pain willingly ( polyandry s not unheard of it i ll also explain this later). Just imagine she had to marry 5 stay with them , and move on every time, imagine the emotional pain here, she might want to stay with one husband longer as she already got attached to him but couldn’t because she had to move on, who would want to go through this pain in their right mind, I don’t think she’s some seer to know she’s going to be divided, ( I didn’t particularly mentioned any husband name because she might want to be with any) , i think here there’s definitely a particular arrangement was there, obviously there’s no DNA test back then rt, to avoid this confusion they might had some arrangement. And about arjun weather he knows r not I cannot say but I would like to believe neither pandavas r arjun plotted all this, if they wanted alliances they could have got her married directly to Yudhishtir all this wasn’t necessary, with panchaL help they’ would have become king and queen, but here arjun participated in it and won her and exitedly told kunti look mother what i got in the form of bhiksha today, i think kunti already know arjun won panchali, because not all pandavas r with arjun that time some already went before and might have told kunti what happened, she might have seen that jealousy and desire there and feared of division and we know what she did there, when other pandavas got this chance they grabbed it, arjun who understood everything kept quiet, as he loved his elder brothers who took care of him like fathers, i think with all their flaws pandavas doesn’t seem like a persons who plot something like this hey lets win her and divide her among us, I cannot see them talking like this, this comes acorss so cruel, they desired her and grabbed the chance when they got one, and neither Draupadi participated in it willingly, no woman in the right mind want to go through this willingly, and about arjun Draupadi reaction regarding this division vyasa nicely omitted their feelings about this, because there was nothing at all, maybe he don’t want to, if only we know about their feelings many things would have been clear. I feel this s what might have happened, this s my knowledge of whatever I heard r read r discussed.

Many might asks y a woman like Panchali was quite about this, panchali might be a strong and vocal woman but she’s also a woman back then, yes she’s known for her intelligence and presence of mind but she was never arrogant and knows when to talk and back off, what she would have done in that situation for example let’s say she opposes it then what s her fate then her fate would have ended up like amba, we know amba story and what her end, when bheeshma let her go then what happened her prince didn’t accept her saying bheesma won her I cannot take u anymore this s what exactly he said, then she cursed bheesma and took her life , this s exactly panchalli fate would have been if she opposed it, because whole Aryavarta saw arjun won her and she went with him, this s end of her in society that’s it, instead Panchali took the challenge and lived her life and made best of what she was offered, now I admire her for this, a true warrior back in those days. That’s y she backed off here because she knows what her would be if she opposes it, but she talked in dyut sabha because she knows that’s where she can win.

There was this long debate between drupad and vyasa that’s when vyasa explians polyandry wasn’t uncommon it seems like the practice became forbidden by dwapar yug, here he explains all the woman who married more than one, in satya yug one woman marries 10 rishis and the other examples here even yudi participates in conversation. After long debate drupad agrees , and after marriage they stayed in panchal for a while, he explained here pandavas we’re enjoying all the luxuries and gifts and marital bliss with Draupadi , it says here they already had intimate relationship with her, it seems there’s no rule that time , later it was narada who made that one he says story how brothers married one woman
And fought for their turns, that’s when the arrangement was made there’s definitely one, i mean to avold any paternal confusion they might have done this DNA test option was not back then. Exile s definitely fishy it seems arjun made move on her in a time he shouldn’t to make an example he might have got exiled. Otherwise I don’t think arjun ll make a move on his bhabhi get away with this if Draupadi only married to yudi, karna who hates arjun passionately and would have definitely used this in dyut sabha that would have showed arjuna in poor light, but he never said anything like this, arjun s also her husband that’s y he got away with only exile.

draupadi has more moments with bheem and arjun than alone with yudi to be frankly, her fondness and love for both of them s quiet clearly stated in many instances, like when arjun came after exile marrying subhadra she lashes out on him saying when new ones came u forgot old ones, y would she lashes out on her devar for getting devrani, it’s because he got her sautan she didn’t like that, in vana parva she misses him so much and openly states about that infront her husband’s, y would she misses her devar when her husband s present there if not for he s also her husband, if somethings r exaggeration but still she missed him and so other pandavas, and when arjun returned from indralok vysa explains saying he directly goes to his love mother of sutasoma and gifts all the divine jewellery that he got, and y would vysa mention Draupadi as arjun love if he s devar, and during exile when Draupadi gets tired arjun carries her in her arms all the way, and y would Draupadi goes to her devar arms when her husband pretty much present there and that devar who also made move on her inappropriately once if he s not her husband. And in virat parva when keechak harasses her she directly goes to bheem at night, and now y would she go to her other devar at night if not he s also her husband, yudi was already there, we can say yudi cannot defeat keechak that’s y went to bheem, buy y in night that to meet devar such familiarity exists only between wife and husband s there between them, and there r also so many instances with bheem also wheere it shows he s also her husband.

how can we dismiss such a intimate interaction between Draupadi and arjun and bheem, this s not bhabhi and devar Type of relationships. And about what u said about dyut sabha i ll tell points here but it’s already lengthy so i ll continue in another post