Draupadi- Satyabhama Conversation

A few excerpts from the conversation-

https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m03/m03231.htm

Women have sometimes caused dropsy and leprosy, decrepitude and impotence and idiocy and blindness and deafness in men. These wicked women, ever treading in the path of sin, do sometimes (by these means) injure their husbands. But the wife should never do the least injury to her lord. Hear now, O illustrious lady, of the behaviour I adopt towards the high-souled sons of Pandu. Keeping aside vanity, and controlling desire and wrath, I always serve with devotion the sons of Pandu with their wives. Restraining jealousy, with deep devotion of heart, without a sense of degradation at the services I perform, I wait upon my husbands. Ever fearing to utter what is evil or false, or to look or sit or walk with impropriety, or cast glances indicative of the feelings of the heart, do I serve the sons of Pritha--those mighty warriors blazing like the sun or fire, and handsome as the moon, those endued with fierce energy and prowess, and capable of slaying their foes by a glance of the eye. Celestial, or man, or Gandharva, young or decked with ornaments, wealthy or comely of person, none else my heart liketh. I never bathe or eat or sleep till he that is my husband hath bathed or eaten or slept,--till, in fact, our attendants have bathed, eaten, or slept. Whether returning from the field, the forest, or the town, hastily rising up I always salute my husband with water and a seat. I always keep the house and all household articles and the food that is to be taken well-ordered and clean. Carefully do I keep the rice, and serve the food at the proper time. I never indulge in angry and fretful speech, and never imitate women that are wicked. Keeping idleness at distance I always do what is agreeable. I never laugh except at a jest, and never stay for any length of time at the house-gate. I never stay long in places for answering calls of nature, nor in pleasure-gardens attached to the house. I always refrain from laughing loudly and indulging in high passion, an from everything that may give offence. Indeed, O Satyabhama, I always am engaged in waiting upon my lords. A separation from my lords is never agreeable to me. When my husband leaveth home for the sake of any relative, then renouncing flowers and fragrant paste of every kind, I begin to undergo penances. Whatever my husband drinketh not, whatever my husband eateth not, whatever my husband enjoyeth not, I ever renounce. O beautiful lady, decked in ornaments and ever controlled by the instruction imparted to me, I always devotedly seek the good of my lord. Those duties that my mother-in-law had told me of in respect of relatives, as also the duties of alms-giving, of offering worship to the gods, of oblations to the diseased, of boiling food in pots on auspicious days for offer to ancestors and guests of reverence and service to those that deserve our regards, and all else that is known to me, I always discharge day and night, without idleness of any kind. Having with my whole heart recourse to humility and approved rules I serve my meek and truthful lords ever observant of virtue, regarding them as poisonous snakes capable of being excited at a trifle. I think that to be eternal virtue for women which is based upon a regard for the husband. The husband is the wife's god, and he is her refuge. Indeed, there is no other refuge for her.

This I feel do not go with Draupadi's character. In this full conversation she literally tells Satyabhama the best way to serve your husband well is to agree to what he says, etc etc. Typically patriarchal misogynist words .

I have a great deal to say about this but will start by agreeing with what you said. The advice Panchali gave is something she never followed herself😆 since she outright mocked Yudhishtira, manipulated Bheema, taunted Arjuna , and ignored the twins. She for sure adored Subhadra and Kunti and Vidura but mocked the heck out of Bheeshma in dice hall. I think Panchali judged each person on his or her own merit which really is how it should be.

Two possibilities:

1) The whole conversation between Draupadi and Satyabhama is interpolation by someone whose idea of ideal wife was put up.

2) More likely:

Satyabhama's questions in this portion often get ignored.

By what behavior is it, O daughter of Drupada, that thou art able to rule the sons of Pandu--those heroes endued with strength and beauty and like unto the Lokapalas themselves? Beautiful lady, how is it that they are so obedient to thee and are never angry with thee? Without doubt the sons of Pandu, O thou of lovely features, are ever submissive to thee and watchful to do thy bidding!

p. 473

[paragraph continues] Tell me, O lady, the reason of this. Is it practice of vows, or asceticism, or incantation or drug at the time of the bath (in season) or the efficacy of science, or the influence of youthful appearance, or the recitation of particular formulae, or Homa, or collyrium and other medicaments? Tell me now, O princess of Panchala, of that blessed and auspicious thing by which, O Krishna, Krishna may ever be obedient to me."

Imagine the scenario. Yudhishtira staked Panchali on dice, and none of the Pandavas objected. She was sexually assaulted and stripped naked in public, and none of the Pandavas intervened. They lost all the wealth and power and were living in the jungle.

Satyabhama came with Krishna and in this scenario, asked Panchali how she got Pandavas to treat her with respect.😆 If this isn't mockery, what is? On top of it, Satyabhama asked Panchali if she used drugs or black magic (that's what the recitation of formulae means). If this isn't an insult, what is?

Panchali gave as good as she got. THIS part about being a perfect wife who didn't even stay in the bathroom extra long to answer calls of nature😆 should tell you she was mocking right back. She did add some of the stuff she actually did in the kingdom, something verified separately by Yudhishtira, Vidura, and Suyodhana.

Best part is the next page: where Panchali advised Satyabhama how to deal with Krishna. Any woman would tell you this fact: if my husband's supposed female friend came and advised me how to deal with my husband, I'd see red. Not only that, Satyabhama was likely senior to Panchali in age. Panchali knew damned well what she was doing😆.

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

I have a great deal to say about this but will start by agreeing with what you said. The advice Panchali gave is something she never followed herself😆 since she outright mocked Yudhishtira, manipulated Bheema, taunted Arjuna , and ignored the twins. She for sure adored Subhadra and Kunti and Vidura but mocked the heck out of Bheeshma in dice hall. I think Panchali judged each person on his or her own merit which really is how it should be.

1) The whole thing is interpolation by someone whose idea of ideal wife was put up.

2) More likely:

Satyabhama's questions in this portion often get ignored.

By what behavior is it, O daughter of Drupada, that thou art able to rule the sons of Pandu--those heroes endued with strength and beauty and like unto the Lokapalas themselves? Beautiful lady, how is it that they are so obedient to thee and are never angry with thee? Without doubt the sons of Pandu, O thou of lovely features, are ever submissive to thee and watchful to do thy bidding!

p. 473

[paragraph continues] Tell me, O lady, the reason of this. Is it practice of vows, or asceticism, or incantation or drug at the time of the bath (in season) or the efficacy of science, or the influence of youthful appearance, or the recitation of particular formulae, or Homa, or collyrium and other medicaments? Tell me now, O princess of Panchala, of that blessed and auspicious thing by which, O Krishna, Krishna may ever be obedient to me."

Imagine the scenario. Yudhishtira staked Panchali on dice, and none of the Pandavas objected, she was sexually assaulted in public, and none of the Pandavas intervened, they lost all the wealth and power and were living in the jungle.

Satyabhama came with Krishna and in this scenario, asked Panchali how she got Pandavas to treat her with respect.😆 If this isn't mockery, what is? On top of it, Satyabhama asked Panchali if she used drugs or black magic (that's what the recitation of formulae means)? If this isn't an insult, what is?

Panchali gave as good as she got. THIS part about being a perfect wife who didn't even stay in the bathroom extra long to answer calls of nature😆, should tell you she was mocking right back. She did add some of the stuff she actually did in the kingdom, something verified separately by Yudhishtira, Vidura, and Suyodhana.

Best part is the next page: where Panchali advised Satyabhama how to deal with Krishna. Any woman would tell you this fact: if my husband's supposed female friend came and advised me how to deal with my husband, I'd see red. Not only that, Satyabhama was likely senior to Panchali in age. Panchali knew damned well what she was doing😆.

I did read her question. Satyabhama is so rude it shows, like accusing someone of black magic because her husbands listened to her.

But she only asked her how Krishna will listen to me, so why in the first place do you go ask your husband's female friend about how to make Krishna listen to me.

The part 2 where Panchali says how she took care of the wealth and income etc is good and so contradictory to her first part.

This whole first part makes her look like some dopperganger of Sita who devoted her life to serving her husbands. Panchali was ANYTHING but that

Originally posted by: CaptainSpark

I did read her question. Satyabhama is so rude it shows, like accusing someone of black magic because her husbands listened to her.

But she only asked her how Krishna will listen to me, so why in the first place do you go ask your husband's female friend about how to make Krishna listen to me.

The part 2 where Panchali says how she took care of the wealth and income etc is good and so contradictory to her first part.

This whole first part makes her look like some dopperganger of Sita who devoted her life to serving her husbands. Panchali was ANYTHING but that

That's what. First, Satyabhama knew Pandavas DIDN'T listen to Panchali to the point they were all right with her being made a sex slave.

Secondly, Satyabhama slyly said Panchali was using drugs and black magic.

The third bit about Krishna frankly made Satyabhama sound like an insecure teenager seeking reassurance her man was all hers.

I have a hard time believing they were friends. Subhadra and Panchali give off better friendship vibes than Satyabhama and Panchali.

I think Part 1 of Panchali's answer was sarcasm just like she mocked the Kuru elders in dice hall by wanting to pay respects after she was dragged there by her hair. She also mocks Yudhishtira for his use of destiny as the cause of his actions to the point he accuses her of being an atheist. Panchali was very sharp-tongued.

No she does not.

She says, remain true to your husband and be completely devoted to him

She says, dont use wicked ways to try and control him

She says dont let ego or jealousy get in your heart.

She says remain humble in your behaviour with your husbands and co wives.

She says dont be rude to your husband, speak politely

She says take complete responsibility of your home, and make sure you follow the family traditions properly.

She says keep your husbands needs a priority before yours

She says, dont gallivant around any place where you only need to spend a moment. [gates, and ablutions]

She says avoid being lazy

She says make sure your behaviour in front of others is not inappropriate or offensive.

She says I dont find any enjoyement without my husbands and in things they dont enjoy

Finally she says tip toe around your husbands ego, he is your refuge.

There is no where written agree with whatever your husband says. She does not say that. She does not do that either

During the entire Vanaparva, she has at several places disagreed with yudhishtir.

She also disagreed with Pandavas in the war council in front of everyone.

She was a woman of patriarchal society. Her and every other woman's role and status was defined by what their husbands gave them.

All women were conditioned and brainwashed since birth that this how a good woman behaved.

You are presuming her to be a woman of 21st century to take on Dwapar Yuga patriarchy and stand against it.

She was a Dwapar Yuga woman. She believed that this is how a good woman should be. She preached her beliefs and she practiced them as well. This was her charachter

A polite humble dutiful devoted wife, who served all her five husbands faithfully and fulfilled all her responsibilites in the best possible way. As well as a knowledgeable woman who whenever found her husbands making wrong decisions, adviced them against it. A woman with courage and conviction on her morals who when assaulted refused to cower like a victim, but used her presence of mind to save herself and her husbands.

A woman who stood for justice at all costs, but also forgave those who repented or were punished.

That is who Draupadi was.

What charachter are you ascribing to Draupadi

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

That's what. First, Satyabhama knew Pandavas DIDN'T listen to Panchali to the point they were all right with her being made a sex slave.

Secondly, Satyabhama slyly said Panchali was using drugs and black magic.

The third bit about Krishna frankly made Satyabhama sound like an insecure teenager seeking reassurance her man was all hers.

I have a hard time believing they were friends. Subhadra and Panchali give off better friendship vibes than Satyabhama and Panchali.

I think Part 1 of Panchali's answer was sarcasm just like she mocked the Kuru elders in dice hall by wanting to pay respects after she was dragged there by her hair. She also mocks Yudhishtira for his use of destiny as the cause of his actions to the point he accuses her of being an atheist. Panchali was very sharp-tongued.

Wasn't she laughing at Bhishma when he was in his arrow bed? I read this somewhere. Don't recall if it is mentioned in epic. 😆

I do not think Panchali and Satyabhama were friends. However I wonder why Satyabhama suddenly decided to target PANCHALI. The only probable reason could be her friendship with Krishna 😆 DOn't you think XD

Originally posted by: CaptainSpark

Wasn't she laughing at Bhishma when he was in his arrow bed? I read this somewhere. Don't recall if it is mentioned in epic. 😆

I do not think Panchali and Satyabhama were friends. However I wonder why Satyabhama suddenly decided to target PANCHALI. The only probable reason could be her friendship with Krishna 😆 DOn't you think XD

@Bold. I have never seen this in text. Maybe in a retelling? TBH, I would've if I were in her place. But then, I'm very petty.😆

@Red. Yeah, probably because of that. Satyabhama is stated to be childish, jealous, and possessive. Her husband vowed in everyone's hearing:

Then Krishna spoke to her in that assembly of warriors, “O beautiful one! The wives of thosewho have angered you will weep like this. They will see the dead bodies lying on the ground,bereft of life. Their bodies will be covered with Bibhatsu’s arrows and will be drenched withblood. Do not sorrow. I will do whatever the Pandavas can do. I will make you a promise.You will be the queen of kings. The heavens may fall, the Himalayas may be rent asunder, theearth may splinter and the ocean may dry up. O Krishna! But my words will not be falsified.”

To be fair to Satyabhama, that was a bit much for any wife to take.

Originally posted by: Chiillii

No she does not.

She says, remain true to your husband and be completely devoted to him

She says, dont use wicked ways to try and control him

She says dont let ego or jealousy get in your heart.

She says remain humble in your behaviour with your husbands and co wives.

She says dont be rude to your husband, speak politely

Why will I be polite to someone who openly sat and enjoyed drama while I come NAVAL EXPOSED to court and people call me names and sexually harrass me? Also she was not particularly kind to Yudhishthir and that is what I respect her for, not for saying 'oh never be kind always listen to your husband". This is bullshit,

She says take complete responsibility of your home, and make sure you follow the family traditions properly.

She says keep your husbands needs a priority before yours

Why? Panchali is not someone who believed in misogynistic dharma and patriarchy. Why should she teach others to keep HUSBAND's need before her own. Did her husbands follow this? Why should she.

She says, dont gallivant around any place where you only need to spend a moment. [gates, and ablutions]

She says avoid being lazy

She says make sure your behaviour in front of others is not inappropriate or offensive.

She says I dont find any enjoyement without my husbands and in things they dont enjoy

Finally she says tip toe around your husbands ego, he is your refuge.

There is no where written agree with whatever your husband says. She does not say that. She does not do that either

During the entire Vanaparva, she has at several places disagreed with yudhishtir.

She also disagreed with Pandavas in the war council in front of everyone.

Well she contradicts herself. And no, whatever advice she gives in regard to husbands is utter exaggeration and relegates the status of a woman to someone who is born to serve men no matter how the men are. And no, this does not show her in good light at all and does not go with her character of a woman who stood against all the wrong doings and unlike Yudhishthir and company she did not use dharma as an excuse.

She was a woman of patriarchal society. Her and every other woman's role and status was defined by what their husbands gave them.

All women were conditioned and brainwashed since birth that this how a good woman behaved.

You are presuming her to be a woman of 21st century to take on Dwapar Yuga patriarchy and stand against it.

She was a Dwapar Yuga woman. She believed that this is how a good woman should be. She preached her beliefs and she practiced them as well. This was her charachter

Agreeing to disagree. 😆

A polite humble dutiful devoted wife, who served all her five husbands faithfully and fulfilled all her responsibilites in the best possible way. As well as a knowledgeable woman who whenever found her husbands making wrong decisions, adviced them against it. A woman with courage and conviction on her morals who when assaulted refused to cower like a victim, but used her presence of mind to save herself and her husbands.

A woman who stood for justice at all costs, but also forgave those who repented or were punished.

That is who Draupadi was.

What charachter are you ascribing to Draupadi

Her behavior in Dyut Sabha was an exceptional reaction in an extreme circumstance.

Her advice to Yudhishtir in vanaparva and speech to Krishna in war council was her sense of justice and her anguish expressed appropriately as the situation demanded.

That is not the way she behaved with everyone and all the time.

Epithets given to her by everybody were Sati, chaste, Sweet speeched, humble, dutiful and devoted. Examples praising her by Duryodhan, Vidur, Yudhishtir etc are same as what she tells Satyabhama.

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

@Bold. I have never seen this in text. Maybe in a retelling? TBH, I would've if I were in her place. But then, I'm very petty.😆

@ Red. Yeah, probably because of that. Satyabhama is stated to be childish, jealous, and possessive. Her husband vowed in everyone's hearing:

Then Krishna spoke to her in that assembly of warriors, “O beautiful one! The wives of thosewho have angered you will weep like this. They will see the dead bodies lying on the ground,bereft of life. Their bodies will be covered with Bibhatsu’s arrows and will be drenched withblood. Do not sorrow. I will do whatever the Pandavas can do. I will make you a promise.You will be the queen of kings. The heavens may fall, the Himalayas may be rent asunder, theearth may splinter and the ocean may dry up. O Krishna! But my words will not be falsified.”

To be fair to Satyabhama, that was a bit much for any wife to take.

😆 So either she was being sarcastic or this is actually an interpolation. This does seem and could be an interpolation as well, I guess.

I just would not want to believe this is something she believed in and followed because that is definitely not going with her character and I say this in a good way. It should not either