Balaram on Dice Game - Page 9

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

I am not saying that Draupadi could have done anything better, but from Karma view point too Yudhishtir went scott free. In fact he got the max

Someone who was the king of Indraprasth (Samrat having vassals across the country) became the direct king of both Indraprasth and Hastinapur (still the Samrat having vassal states across the country).

He was called the "Dharmaraj" and got mentioned so in history

He went to the Swarga with his earthly body something even the biggest saints could not attain (I really hope that point isn't true)

He lost one son in the war but that was all he lost from his direct familyline(I know that by the standards of those days the brothers family were considered as your own but still the deaths of other kids would affect their respective fathers more). His brothers remained intact.

Considering that there was the maximum level of divine intervention possible, he never got punished at all. Even the mute spectators of the Sabha like Bheeshm n Drona had to pay the price by their lives. Vikarna despite having been the supporter of truth saw the deaths of his 90+ brothers, nephews before dying a horrific death (we all know how brutal Bheem was)

Again saying that Draupadi couldn't have done anything better, but overall turn of events did result in punishment of everyone but him.

The ending was not a happy one for me

The original MBh was thought to be a secular document with no divinity conferred on Krishna. Everything from the mongoose incident in Ashwamedha onwards is thought to be later addition as well.

This is supported by the fact different versions have different endings. In one of the Nepali versions (thought to be more authentic as there were fewer invaders), Panchali actually walks out on Pandavas after the war, and Bheema helps her. She goes on an agni pilgrimage which I take to mean she returned to her biological family, Even Krishna's endings, while similar, have varying versions. In some, he simply vanishes from Aryavarta, and only Arjuna witnesses the event. Bhagavatham says Pandavas simply left Hastinapuri after Krishna's death (I don't usually count Bhagavatham as it is a later text).

So a lot of what Yudhishtira did "not lose" is actually later interpolation.

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

The alternative was to let the Kaurava side go. She had no other way to do at least that except through Yudhishtira.

Also note: they probably ruled for 36 MONTHS after war, not years. After this, the empire was split into small pieces, thus making sure no one man could wreak havoc on the entire land.

So yeah... I'd say she achieved what she aimed for.

In her own words... if she did nothing, failure was certain. ie, Kauravas would remain in power, empire would remain intact, and Yudhishtira would still go unpunished.

The way it came about, she made sure of 2 out of 3.

I wouldn't diss a good outcome because it wasn't perfect.

@bold

That's the discussion of what one 'should' do vs what one 'had' to do

None here said she or pandavas had any other option, the war was result of too many characters doing too many things, we are pointing out that what Draupadi and Pandava had to do, involved them supporting someone who was responsible for everything.

The point remains that they didn't try to stop the criminal from committing the same crime again, they could have stopped Yudi from accepting 2nd invitation

It wasn't only Yudi, who had claim to the throne, he was emperor of his own nation, not of Hastinapur where 2nd in line was Duty

The other outcome was suggested by Satyaki, Abhimanyu had claim to the throne too, they had their crown prince when Yudi went to Dice game, even if he had killed himself, duryodhan wouldn't rule IP, it goes to Abhimanyu

Yudi wasn't the only option

But again, what we do here is give ultimate power to one person and think he or she is controlling everything, going on Vanvas wasn't her plan

How was she planning on getting revenge if there was no 2nd dice game and subsequent Vanvas with Duryodhan finding out about them and refusing to return kingdom, the peace offering which followed, the rejection by Duryodhan?

If war was her plan then There were sequence of events which led to war, which had nothing to do with Draupadi

Not dissing the outcome, just don't like that the culprit of Dyut was the winner, and there's no alternative as both sides had culprits as their leaders

Originally posted by: NoraSM

@bold

That's the discussion of what one 'should' do vs what one 'had' to do

None here said she or pandavas had any other option, the war was result of too many characters doing too many things, we are pointing out that what Draupadi and Pandava had to do, involved them supporting someone who was responsible for everything.

The point remains that they didn't try to stop the criminal from committing the same crime again, they could have stopped Yudi from accepting 2nd invitation

It wasn't only Yudi, who had claim to the throne, he was emperor of his own nation, not of Hastinapur where 2nd in line was Duty

The other outcome was suggested by Satyaki, Abhimanyu had claim to the throne too, they had their crown prince when Yudi went to Dice game, even if he had killed himself, duryodhan wouldn't rule IP, it goes to Abhimanyu

Yudi wasn't the only option

But again, what we do here is give ultimate power to one person and think he or she is controlling everything, going on Vanvas wasn't her plan

How was she planning on getting revenge if there was no 2nd dice game and subsequent Vanvas with Duryodhan finding out about them and refusing to return kingdom, the peace offering which followed, the rejection by Duryodhan?

If war was her plan then There were sequence of events which led to war, which had nothing to do with Draupadi

Not dissing the outcome, just don't like that the culprit of Dyut was the winner, and there's no alternative as both sides had culprits as their leaders

The issue I have with above argument is 2-fold. Actually, 3-fold, the third being the phrasing of how the situations should be viewed.

1. Suyodhana was the CRIMINAL of dice hall. Yudhishtira was an egotistical idiot. Neither was a prize, but Suyodhana was much worse than Yudhishtira who was definitely not a criminal.

2. Their society, much like ours, had sets of rules they needed to follow. The emperor wasn't simply whoever could snatch the throne by force. If that were the case, KRISHNA could've been the emperor. he could've married Panchali, probably😆, and lived happy ever after. There would have been no Mahabharata.

Only Kurus and Panchalas supposedly had the right to the imperial throne. Jarasandha was occupying it, but he was considered an usurper because he was neither a Kuru nor a Panchala.

Under the circumstances, only four people could be emperor: Yudhishtira, Suyodhana, Shikhandi, and Dhrishtadyumna.

Out of these four, Shikhandi would not have been accepted as he was gay/trans. We hear that Dhrishtadyumna was adopted by Drupada specifically to kill Drona, but no moves are made in that direction. My assumption is that with Shikhandi being out of the running, Drupada wanted to make sure there was an heir so as to avoid Panchal being annexed by Hastinapuri after his death. To note: one of the prior Panchal kings made precisely that move (via marriage) after the death of Shanthanu though Satyavati had 2 young children. Bheeshma defeated Panchal at the time. With Gurudakshina war, Drupada must've gotten more worried about the inheritance question as he saw Arjuna in action. So Dhrishtadyumna was adopted by Drupada, and Panchali came with her brother. Now, Dhrishtadyumna was not simply the Panchal heir; he was another claimant to the imperial throne, but if Panchal opted to go that route instead of joining hands with the Kurus, there would've been war afterward with the Kurus which Panchal would've likely lost. Which was probably why Drupada wanted Arjuna in his corner. The scales were balanced that way. And to get Arjuna in their corner, Panchali was needed to marry into the family. Now, among the three men remaining who could claim the imperial throne, Yudhishtira got the upper hand as the Kuru married to a Panchal princess. This way, Drupada secured his line AND got a say in who was overlord of all the kings.

With me thus far?

Jarasandha, rajasuya, then dice hall happened.

Dice game, as Chiliii (I forget how many 'i's were there) mentioned, was part of rajasuya. They didn't have it at the celebration, but once invited, Yudhishtira COULDN'T refuse. Yes, I know there are parts about him having a vow or some such, but that vow was either part of the whole rajasuya thing or an interpolation to whitewash the man. There was no need to whitewash him AT THAT POINT because those were the rules of winning emperorship. Yudhishtira does mention he had nefarious intentions of winning Hastinapuri, so that's a black mark against him.

NOTE: none of the people who would've had the will and the power to stop the game were notified by either party. Yudhishtira notified neither Krishna nor Vyasa. Even if the emperor was a fool, his wife wasn't. She would've notified Krishna or Panchal if she thought it was a trick. Likely, the Pandava side believed it to be a ritual game though Yudhishtira wanted Hastinapuri in his mind. The Kaurava side wouldn't notify for obvious reasons. Bheeshma not doing so in spite of him having had to know there was something amiss (he admits he had spies everywhere) tells me his involvement in what happened was no accident.

Once Yudhishtira started getting deeper into the game and lost everything, Suyodhana/Dhritharashtra was legitimately the emperor. There were only a few ways of winning it back as per rules of society. 1) Dice 2) War 3) The opposing party could give it up.

Then, the Kauravas made one stupid move. They asked Panchali to come to court. She refused and sent the attendant back with questions as to whether SHE was lost. It wasn't merely a question as a woman, wife, and queen, though personal safety would likely have been paramount at that time. It was also a political question as leaving her free would mean leaving the Panchal part of the marriage free. If she were free, Panchal would no longer be bound to Yudhishtira and would be free to challenge Kurus. Now, the Kaurava side did have military superiority, but they were likely worried about Krishna.

Notice that the attack on Krishna happened almost simultaneously? Coincidence? Not likely. He was a wild card. Without him, the Yadavas under Balram were sure to support Suyodhana.

To get back to the point, Suyodhana/Karna/Dusshasana made the stupid move of physically assaulting Panchali. More importantly, Suyodhana made that dumb announcement that he would consider her free if any of the Pandavas agreed. He probably didn't imagine any of them would. Well... Arjuna stood up and announced he did.

Once again, legitimacy question came into play. After Suyodhana made that announcement in full court, with other kings looking on as is clearly started, there was no going back. I'm sure other jackals howled in Hastinapuri at other times. To note: jackal is used in many scenes where there was likely a spy delivering news. I won't elaborate on it as I don't want us to go off on a tangent.

At this point let's pause and note that Panchali was arguing 2 different things in court. 1) The concept of dharma, and did Yudhushtira have the right to stake her? 2) The letter of the law... loopholes which could get her and the Pandavas free. The philosopher in her argued #1. The politician argued #2.

Yudhishtira got the empire back. Then, he was challenged to a second dice game. The rest of his family, including Panchali, COULDN'T stop him. Those were the laws. They didn't write the rules, but they did have to live under said rules. None of them could force the emperor, because yes, he was their emperor, too, family or not. The exile contract used the plural word for "you" in Sanskrit, not singular or dual (I checked after someone else told me the younger Pandavas were not included), which means all five brothers were included. It also specified Panchali was part of it. NONE of the other wives were included because they weren't politically important. Notice at the time she was given the choice of marrying one of the Kauravas. it could be considered mockery, but there would be obvious political benefit if she did.

Fast forward to Kamyaka, Krishna and Dhrishtadyumna offered to go to war immediately, but Yudhishtira stopped them. No one could declare war against the Kauravas except him. This time, Panchali was also part of the contract. Forget the status of women in society at the time... the pesky legitimacy question meant she couldn't simply walk out of a contract and declare war with Krishna and Panchal as support. It had to be through Yudhishtira.

Satyaki mentioned later the possibility of going to war, then installing Abhimanyu as regent-in-name while Pandavas and Panchali finished out the contract. Even with Abhimanyu as next-in-line, Yudhishtira was the only one who could declare war. Also, if they won, why would they need to finish the exile? The legitimacy issue, again.

Once Yudhishtira died, I'm not sure anyone could have simply declared war under Abhimanyu's banner. Arranging that death would've alienated the rest of the Pandavas, thus stopping any Abhimanyu plans since Arjuna would never have cooperated. All in all, even if Panchali had any plans of assassinating Yudhishtira (which she didn't), it would have had to wait until they won back the empire.

After the war, why would she? She wasn't a murderer. The empire was reformed, then split into several small kingdoms anyway. Here is where I state the 36 YEARS was likely 36 MONTHS.

So yes, Yudhishtira WAS the only option. Let me repeat: he was NOT a criminal, merely an incompetent idiot. Suyodhana was a CRIMINAL, as were his brother and best friend. Which made Yudhishtira the lesser of the two evils. It all boiled down to him escaping punishment, but the CRIMINALS got punished, and the empire being divided meant no one man could create as much problem, again.

Which brings me to the phrasing problem. SHOULD'VE DONE vs. NEEDED TO DO implies both were somehow possible when that was definitely not the case. IDEAL vs. PRACTICAL can be considered. But perfection wasn't possible if she wanted to be successful at what she aimed to do.

__________________________________________

Re: Panchali's revenge which I would call punishment handed out by the empress to criminals. We can only guess with what she would've done if there was no second dice game. Given what she said about Jayadratha and what she did with Keechaka, we may safely assume Suyodhana and gang would've found themselves in Bheema's death grip.

NoraSM.

What kind of punishment were you expecting for Yudhishtir

1. His brothers to imprison him or kill him. They wouldn't even disobey him when their wife was at the verge of rape.. Do you think they would do that... That was never going to happen. Kunti had raised them to be dumb robots for Yudhishtir and that is how they would remain. Yeah in exile Bhima made a lot of noise, before the war Sahadev did and before killing Karna Arjun also made a lot of noise. But that is the maximum they would ever do. Under no circumstances ever would they cross Yudhishtir's words. They just wouldn't.. Because since child hood their mother, their gurus the society had drilled this into their heads.. Never disobey your elder. Why do you think Yudhishtir accepted Indraprasth when he was the rightful heir of Hastinapur. Why do you think he accepted invitation to first and second dice game... He could not disobey his elders either. Why do you think Arjun did not kill Bhishma Drona Kripacharya

2. Draupadi should leave him/ divorce him...... This option was not available to women in Dwapar Yuga. Only way a woman could leave her husband was death. She could have committed suicide to leave Yudhishtir but should she..

3. She could atleast call out and blame Yudhishtir in Dyut Sabha or later in Public......This option was not available to Draupadi either. Bhima tells Drauapadi when she cries to him before Keechaka vadh that all her misfortune is because of Yudhishtir, he says don't ever say that again, if Yudhishtir heard you, he will kill hinself and if he does we will have to follow him.

A public complaint by Draupadi on Yudhishtir's behavior will be more humiliating for him than Duryodhan disrobing his wife. That's how it was then, we call it toxic masculinity. It's still prevalent.

So if Draupadi blamed him publicly either he would kill himself or leave Draupadi. And his spineless brothers would follow Yudhishtir. What would happen to Draupadi then do you think..

So Draupadi committing suicide or leaving Yudhishtir or blaming him and he doing either would still punish Draupadi not Yudhishtir.

It was a patriarchal society. There was never going to be a situation where Yudhishtir could be blamed or punished for what happened to Draupadi. In any scenario which Yudhishtir was tried it will be always Draupadi who would end up with punishment. Even in war....

Draupadi was smart enough to understand that, so she focussed on punishment for her assaulters Durydodhan Dusshasan Shakuni and Karna.

We sitting today in our homes with a smart phone can keep writing whatever we want, it wouldn't change the patriarchal society prevalent then...

To understand the gravity of the situation that Draupadi faced, remember the story of Parshuram, his father Jamadagni and mother Renuka. Once Renuka while fetching water from the river saw a Gandharva, she looked at him a little more because he was very handsome..... Jamadagni found about it and was angry and he asked his sons to behead her. Her other sons refused but Parshuram promptly beheaded her. Jamadagni was very pleased and blessed Parshuram and told him to ask for boons. He asked him to forgive his mother and revive her....

That Draupadi could get her assaulters punished was only possible because she asked Krishna for help. If it had not been for Krishna, her humiliation would have been forgotten by everyone.

In that era Yudhishtir could never be punished. Because he was husband of Draupadi and elder brother of Bhima Arjun Nakul and Sahadev and king of Indraprasth.

The people who suffered because of him had no right to punish him. And if they even thought of punishing him they would become a sinner.

That was how that era was... You can crib about it all you want. But that was how it was.

I'll give you an analogy if you still don't get it.

You do know right that there is no concept of Marital rape.

We know it is wrong but as per law and as per society a husband forcing his wife for sex is not a crime. If it is not a crime how can he be punished for it

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

The issue I have with above argument is 2-fold. Actually, 3-fold, the third being the phrasing of how the situations should be viewed.

1. Suyodhana was the CRIMINAL of dice hall. Yudhishtira was an egotistical idiot. Neither was a prize, but Suyodhana was much worse than Yudhishtira who was definitely not a criminal.

2. Their society, much like ours, had sets of rules they needed to follow. The emperor wasn't simply whoever could snatch the throne by force. If that were the case, KRISHNA could've been the emperor. he could've married Panchali, probably😆, and lived happy ever after. There would have been no Mahabharata.

Only Kurus and Panchalas supposedly had the right to the imperial throne. Jarasandha was occupying it, but he was considered an usurper because he was neither a Kuru nor a Panchala.

Under the circumstances, only four people could be emperor: Yudhishtira, Suyodhana, Shikhandi, and Dhrishtadyumna.

Out of these four, Shikhandi would not have been accepted as he was gay/trans. We hear that Dhrishtadyumna was adopted by Drupada specifically to kill Drona, but no moves are made in that direction. My assumption is that with Shikhandi being out of the running, Drupada wanted to make sure there was an heir so as to avoid Panchal being annexed by Hastinapuri after his death. To note: one of the prior Panchal kings made precisely that move (via marriage) after the death of Shanthanu though Satyavati had 2 young children. Bheeshma defeated Panchal at the time. With Gurudakshina war, Drupada must've gotten more worried about the inheritance question as he saw Arjuna in action. So Dhrishtadyumna was adopted by Drupada, and Panchali came with her brother. Now, Dhrishtadyumna was not simply the Panchal heir; he was another claimant to the imperial throne, but if Panchal opted to go that route instead of joining hands with the Kurus, there would've been war afterward with the Kurus which Panchal would've likely lost. Which was probably why Drupada wanted Arjuna in his corner. The scales were balanced that way. And to get Arjuna in their corner, Panchali was needed to marry into the family. Now, among the three men remaining who could claim the imperial throne, Yudhishtira got the upper hand as the Kuru married to a Panchal princess. This way, Drupada secured his line AND got a say in who was overlord of all the kings.

With me thus far?

Jarasandha, rajasuya, then dice hall happened.

Dice game, as Chiliii (I forget how many 'i's were there) mentioned, was part of rajasuya. They didn't have it at the celebration, but once invited, Yudhishtira COULDN'T refuse. Yes, I know there are parts about him having a vow or some such, but that vow was either part of the whole rajasuya thing or an interpolation to whitewash the man. There was no need to whitewash him AT THAT POINT because those were the rules of winning emperorship. Yudhishtira does mention he had nefarious intentions of winning Hastinapuri, so that's a black mark against him.

NOTE: none of the people who would've had the will and the power to stop the game were notified by either party. Yudhishtira notified neither Krishna nor Vyasa. Even if the emperor was a fool, his wife wasn't. She would've notified Krishna or Panchal if she thought it was a trick. Likely, the Pandava side believed it to be a ritual game though Yudhishtira wanted Hastinapuri in his mind. The Kaurava side wouldn't notify for obvious reasons. Bheeshma not doing so in spite of him having had to know there was something amiss (he admits he had spies everywhere) tells me his involvement in what happened was no accident.

Once Yudhishtira started getting deeper into the game and lost everything, Suyodhana/Dhritharashtra was legitimately the emperor. There were only a few ways of winning it back as per rules of society. 1) Dice 2) War 3) The opposing party could give it up.

Then, the Kauravas made one stupid move. They asked Panchali to come to court. She refused and sent the attendant back with questions as to whether SHE was lost. It wasn't merely a question as a woman, wife, and queen, though personal safety would likely have been paramount at that time. It was also a political question as leaving her free would mean leaving the Panchal part of the marriage free. If she were free, Panchal would no longer be bound to Yudhishtira and would be free to challenge Kurus. Now, the Kaurava side did have military superiority, but they were likely worried about Krishna.

Notice that the attack on Krishna happened almost simultaneously? Coincidence? Not likely. He was a wild card. Without him, the Yadavas under Balram were sure to support Suyodhana.

To get back to the point, Suyodhana/Karna/Dusshasana made the stupid move of physically assaulting Panchali. More importantly, Suyodhana made that dumb announcement that he would consider her free if any of the Pandavas agreed. He probably didn't imagine any of them would. Well... Arjuna stood up and announced he did.

Once again, legitimacy question came into play. After Suyodhana made that announcement in full court, with other kings looking on as is clearly started, there was no going back. I'm sure other jackals howled in Hastinapuri at other times. To note: jackal is used in many scenes where there was likely a spy delivering news. I won't elaborate on it as I don't want us to go off on a tangent.

At this point let's pause and note that Panchali was arguing 2 different things in court. 1) The concept of dharma, and did Yudhushtira have the right to stake her? 2) The letter of the law... loopholes which could get her and the Pandavas free. The philosopher in her argued #1. The politician argued #2.

Yudhishtira got the empire back. Then, he was challenged to a second dice game. The rest of his family, including Panchali, COULDN'T stop him. Those were the laws. They didn't write the rules, but they did have to live under said rules. None of them could force the emperor, because yes, he was their emperor, too, family or not. The exile contract used the plural word for "you" in Sanskrit, not singular or dual (I checked after someone else told me the younger Pandavas were not included), which means all five brothers were included. It also specified Panchali was part of it. NONE of the other wives were included because they weren't politically important. Notice at the time she was given the choice of marrying one of the Kauravas. it could be considered mockery, but there would be obvious political benefit if she did.

Fast forward to Kamyaka, Krishna and Dhrishtadyumna offered to go to war immediately, but Yudhishtira stopped them. No one could declare war against the Kauravas except him. This time, Panchali was also part of the contract. Forget the status of women in society at the time... the pesky legitimacy question meant she couldn't simply walk out of a contract and declare war with Krishna and Panchal as support. It had to be through Yudhishtira.

Satyaki mentioned later the possibility of going to war, then installing Abhimanyu as regent-in-name while Pandavas and Panchali finished out the contract. Even with Abhimanyu as next-in-line, Yudhishtira was the only one who could declare war. Also, if they won, why would they need to finish the exile? The legitimacy issue, again.

Once Yudhishtira died, I'm not sure anyone could have simply declared war under Abhimanyu's banner. Arranging that death would've alienated the rest of the Pandavas, thus stopping any Abhimanyu plans since Arjuna would never have cooperated. All in all, even if Panchali had any plans of assassinating Yudhishtira (which she didn't), it would have had to wait until they won back the empire.

After the war, why would she? She wasn't a murderer. The empire was reformed, then split into several small kingdoms anyway. Here is where I state the 36 YEARS was likely 36 MONTHS.

So yes, Yudhishtira WAS the only option. Let me repeat: he was NOT a criminal, merely an incompetent idiot. Suyodhana was a CRIMINAL, as were his brother and best friend. Which made Yudhishtira the lesser of the two evils. It all boiled down to him escaping punishment, but the CRIMINALS got punished, and the empire being divided meant no one man could create as much problem, again.

Which brings me to the phrasing problem. SHOULD'VE DONE vs. NEEDED TO DO implies both were somehow possible when that was definitely not the case. IDEAL vs. PRACTICAL can be considered. But perfection wasn't possible if she wanted to be successful at what she aimed to do.

__________________________________________

Re: Panchali's revenge which I would call punishment handed out by the empress to criminals. We can only guess with what she would've done if there was no second dice game. Given what she said about Jayadratha and what she did with Keechaka, we may safely assume Suyodhana and gang would've found themselves in Bheema's death grip.

Makes a lot of sense as to how the events folded.

But wait was a there a 2nd dice game after the VH sequence or was that before it😕 im confused

Originally posted by: naq5

Makes a lot of sense as to how the events folded.

But wait was a there a 2nd dice game after the VH sequence or was that before it😕 im confused

Second dice game was after Vastraharan when Pandavas n Draupadi were freed and they had got back all they had lost in the game

Second game was necessary for the Kauravas side, because else they would have had attacked Hastinapur immidiately after returning home. At least this gave the Kauravas at least 13 more years to live

Saying that I am not ready to believe Yudhishtir was any less than Duryodhan+crony gang at least here. If Yudhishtir was in his ego so were Dury+crony and if Duty+crony were criminals so was Yudhishtir. However you all are right letting him go Scott free and punish others was the lesser evil, at least 80% of the culprits were punished

@Hearmeroar can you elaborate on kingdom being divided part ??

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

The issue I have with above argument is 2-fold. Actually, 3-fold, the third being the phrasing of how the situations should be viewed.

1. Suyodhana was the CRIMINAL of dice hall. Yudhishtira was an egotistical idiot. Neither was a prize, but Suyodhana was much worse than Yudhishtira who was definitely not a criminal.

2. Their society, much like ours, had sets of rules they needed to follow. The emperor wasn't simply whoever could snatch the throne by force. If that were the case, KRISHNA could've been the emperor. he could've married Panchali, probably😆, and lived happy ever after. There would have been no Mahabharata.

Only Kurus and Panchalas supposedly had the right to the imperial throne. Jarasandha was occupying it, but he was considered an usurper because he was neither a Kuru nor a Panchala.

Under the circumstances, only four people could be emperor: Yudhishtira, Suyodhana, Shikhandi, and Dhrishtadyumna.

Out of these four, Shikhandi would not have been accepted as he was gay/trans. We hear that Dhrishtadyumna was adopted by Drupada specifically to kill Drona, but no moves are made in that direction. My assumption is that with Shikhandi being out of the running, Drupada wanted to make sure there was an heir so as to avoid Panchal being annexed by Hastinapuri after his death. To note: one of the prior Panchal kings made precisely that move (via marriage) after the death of Shanthanu though Satyavati had 2 young children. Bheeshma defeated Panchal at the time. With Gurudakshina war, Drupada must've gotten more worried about the inheritance question as he saw Arjuna in action. So Dhrishtadyumna was adopted by Drupada, and Panchali came with her brother. Now, Dhrishtadyumna was not simply the Panchal heir; he was another claimant to the imperial throne, but if Panchal opted to go that route instead of joining hands with the Kurus, there would've been war afterward with the Kurus which Panchal would've likely lost. Which was probably why Drupada wanted Arjuna in his corner. The scales were balanced that way. And to get Arjuna in their corner, Panchali was needed to marry into the family. Now, among the three men remaining who could claim the imperial throne, Yudhishtira got the upper hand as the Kuru married to a Panchal princess. This way, Drupada secured his line AND got a say in who was overlord of all the kings.

With me thus far?

Jarasandha, rajasuya, then dice hall happened.

Dice game, as Chiliii (I forget how many 'i's were there) mentioned, was part of rajasuya. They didn't have it at the celebration, but once invited, Yudhishtira COULDN'T refuse. Yes, I know there are parts about him having a vow or some such, but that vow was either part of the whole rajasuya thing or an interpolation to whitewash the man. There was no need to whitewash him AT THAT POINT because those were the rules of winning emperorship. Yudhishtira does mention he had nefarious intentions of winning Hastinapuri, so that's a black mark against him.

NOTE: none of the people who would've had the will and the power to stop the game were notified by either party. Yudhishtira notified neither Krishna nor Vyasa. Even if the emperor was a fool, his wife wasn't. She would've notified Krishna or Panchal if she thought it was a trick. Likely, the Pandava side believed it to be a ritual game though Yudhishtira wanted Hastinapuri in his mind. The Kaurava side wouldn't notify for obvious reasons. Bheeshma not doing so in spite of him having had to know there was something amiss (he admits he had spies everywhere) tells me his involvement in what happened was no accident.

Once Yudhishtira started getting deeper into the game and lost everything, Suyodhana/Dhritharashtra was legitimately the emperor. There were only a few ways of winning it back as per rules of society. 1) Dice 2) War 3) The opposing party could give it up.

Then, the Kauravas made one stupid move. They asked Panchali to come to court. She refused and sent the attendant back with questions as to whether SHE was lost. It wasn't merely a question as a woman, wife, and queen, though personal safety would likely have been paramount at that time. It was also a political question as leaving her free would mean leaving the Panchal part of the marriage free. If she were free, Panchal would no longer be bound to Yudhishtira and would be free to challenge Kurus. Now, the Kaurava side did have military superiority, but they were likely worried about Krishna.

Notice that the attack on Krishna happened almost simultaneously? Coincidence? Not likely. He was a wild card. Without him, the Yadavas under Balram were sure to support Suyodhana.

To get back to the point, Suyodhana/Karna/Dusshasana made the stupid move of physically assaulting Panchali. More importantly, Suyodhana made that dumb announcement that he would consider her free if any of the Pandavas agreed. He probably didn't imagine any of them would. Well... Arjuna stood up and announced he did.

Once again, legitimacy question came into play. After Suyodhana made that announcement in full court, with other kings looking on as is clearly started, there was no going back. I'm sure other jackals howled in Hastinapuri at other times. To note: jackal is used in many scenes where there was likely a spy delivering news. I won't elaborate on it as I don't want us to go off on a tangent.

At this point let's pause and note that Panchali was arguing 2 different things in court. 1) The concept of dharma, and did Yudhushtira have the right to stake her? 2) The letter of the law... loopholes which could get her and the Pandavas free. The philosopher in her argued #1. The politician argued #2.

Yudhishtira got the empire back. Then, he was challenged to a second dice game. The rest of his family, including Panchali, COULDN'T stop him. Those were the laws. They didn't write the rules, but they did have to live under said rules. None of them could force the emperor, because yes, he was their emperor, too, family or not. The exile contract used the plural word for "you" in Sanskrit, not singular or dual (I checked after someone else told me the younger Pandavas were not included), which means all five brothers were included. It also specified Panchali was part of it. NONE of the other wives were included because they weren't politically important. Notice at the time she was given the choice of marrying one of the Kauravas. it could be considered mockery, but there would be obvious political benefit if she did.

Fast forward to Kamyaka, Krishna and Dhrishtadyumna offered to go to war immediately, but Yudhishtira stopped them. No one could declare war against the Kauravas except him. This time, Panchali was also part of the contract. Forget the status of women in society at the time... the pesky legitimacy question meant she couldn't simply walk out of a contract and declare war with Krishna and Panchal as support. It had to be through Yudhishtira.

Satyaki mentioned later the possibility of going to war, then installing Abhimanyu as regent-in-name while Pandavas and Panchali finished out the contract. Even with Abhimanyu as next-in-line, Yudhishtira was the only one who could declare war. Also, if they won, why would they need to finish the exile? The legitimacy issue, again.

Once Yudhishtira died, I'm not sure anyone could have simply declared war under Abhimanyu's banner. Arranging that death would've alienated the rest of the Pandavas, thus stopping any Abhimanyu plans since Arjuna would never have cooperated. All in all, even if Panchali had any plans of assassinating Yudhishtira (which she didn't), it would have had to wait until they won back the empire.

After the war, why would she? She wasn't a murderer. The empire was reform ined, then split into several small kingdoms anyway. Here is where I state the 36 YEARS was likely 36 MONTHS.

So yes, Yudhishtira WAS the only option. Let me repeat: he was NOT a criminal, merely an incompetent idiot. Suyodhana was a CRIMINAL, as were his brother and best friend. Which made Yudhishtira the lesser of the two evils. It all boiled down to him escaping punishment, but the CRIMINALS got punished, and the empire being divided meant no one man could create as much problem, again.

Which brings me to the phrasing problem. SHOULD'VE DONE vs. NEEDED TO DO implies both were somehow possible when that was definitely not the case. IDEAL vs. PRACTICAL can be considered. But perfection wasn't possible if she wanted to be successful at what she aimed to do.

__________________________________________

Re: Panchali's revenge which I would call punishment handed out by the empress to criminals. We can only guess with what she would've done if there was no second dice game. Given what she said about Jayadratha and what she did with Keechaka, we may safely assume Suyodhana and gang would've found themselves in Bheema's death grip.

If you don't think Yudhishtira was a criminal as well then the whole discussion is meaningless

Originally posted by: Chiillii

In that era Yudhishtir could never be punished. Because he was husband of Draupadi and elder brother of Bhima Arjun Nakul and Sahadev and king of Indraprasth.

The people who suffered because of him had no right to punish him. And if they even thought of punishing him they would become a sinner.

That was how that era was... You can crib about it all you want. But that was how it was.

That's why I am saying that they had to go with Yudhishtira, I have written multiple times that Draupadi was limited by rules of society and time, this limitation wasn't her fault therefore doesn't lessen her intelligence and political prowess

They couldn't punish their husband/brother so they shouldn't really talk big about justice etc as when it comes to their own family they can't do it. The powerful one won the war, one can believe that they did it for respect of women and Draupadi, I don't believe it as the one who did it was the winner, he did not get punishment because he was related to Draupadi and Pandavas

So, I am saying it again Dhruti was blind in Dury's love and Pandavas were blind in Yudi's love