Draupadi- Satyabhama Conversation - Page 4

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

Hi and welcome to this crazy forum. Everyone here is opinionated and has their own theories, so be prepared to encounter some unusual interpretations.😆

@Bold. There is really no textual evidence of this friendship prior to this scene. The pre-war scene is there. I personally think Satyabhama was added on in the scene because of perceived impropriety of Panchali drinking with Krishna and Arjuna. Because Satyabhama was never seen in the rest of the war or post-war scenes, not even when Abhimanyu died, not when Parikshit was still-born. When Krishna finally left for Dwaraka, Subhadra is mentioned as going with him for a visit but not Satyabhama. So if she was there, why wasn't she mentioned going back, either?

I have tried to post a hyperlink from where this conversation has been taken but I am unable to because I am a newbie. But you can see the exact conversation at www. Sacred texts.com

Here Satyabhama and draupadi are mentioned as meeting after a long time and are described as women who always spoke sweetly to each other which hints at the pre existing friendship. Maybe the pre war part is a folklore. 

The conversation posted here is only a part of the conversation. Later satyabhama asks for forgiveness and says that such jokes or jest happens between friends. She later comforts her by telling about upapandavas and how they are well taken care of and also assures her that her honour will be avenged.

Satyabhama was a good friend to draupadi and is often portrayed in bad light due to folklores.

I hope I didn't offend anyone.

Originally posted by: NoraSM

If I am from today's time and someone asks me what I do at home, How I keep my husband happy, am I using a charm or anything

I am not gonna tell this person about fights with my husband, In this particular question she wasn't going to say anything against Yudi, she just told Satyabhama that she follows every rule of a dutiful wife according to people in Dwaparyug. 

This is when you read it in English

In Hindi, it is draupadi telling women how to be a good wife

My point was that the God bit would have been added to support the religious nature of Mahabharata

See if someone tells me do u use black magic I will take it as an insult and especially after my husbands saw me getting harrassed if someone mocks me with a question that is "how do ur husbands listen to u and love u so much" when they watched me getting humiliated I will reply  sarcastically, not going to be explaining nicely how I get my husband to listen to me. I think that is what she did. My point was what she says does not go with her actions and hence we came to the conclusion that she was pretty annoyed with the way Satyabhama asked her this and she did seem to be sarcastic, Satya even apologizes understanding her sharp mockery.

The tone seems to be like :

S: Yaar sab tumahre bat kaise maante hai. Kya kala jadu kiya?

P: yeah yeah i sit and do puja of them and XYZABC to them etc etc. this seems like black magic to u??

I hope I am able to convey 😆

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

It's against IF rules to use the actual word Krishna meant😆. I hope you got it.

Krishna was mocking Yudhishtira for the stupid and snarky question against Arjuna. Panchali got angry for the non-veg comment. She and Krishna were laughing at Yudhishtira.

I remembering reading this part as a school kid and I thought Yudhishthir was so upset to see Arjun sad. XD Then I read Krishna's replies and Draupadi's reactions and understood Yudhishthir was exactly like - what's with arjun why is he always sad kinda tone. XD

Originally posted by: davis56

I have tried to post a hyperlink from where this conversation has been taken but I am unable to because I am a newbie. But you can see the exact conversation at www. Sacred texts.com

Here Satyabhama and draupadi are mentioned as meeting after a long time and are described as women who always spoke sweetly to each other which hints at the pre existing friendship. Maybe the pre war part is a folklore. 

The conversation posted here is only a part of the conversation. Later satyabhama asks for forgiveness and says that such jokes or jest happens between friends. She later comforts her by telling about upapandavas and how they are well taken care of and also assures her that her honour will be avenged.

Satyabhama was a good friend to draupadi and is often portrayed in bad light due to folklores.

I hope I didn't offend anyone.

Even if they were friends I think she should have asked the question in a better way.  Satya asks for forgiveness because she knew Draupadi was offended. I have posted that too in later posts. That means her tone must have been mockery, if she was speaking sweetly in this case why did Satya had to confirm "i am joking" 😆

Originally posted by: CaptainSpark

See if someone tells me do u use black magic I will take it as an insult and especially after my husbands saw me getting harrassed if someone mocks me with a question that is "how do ur husbands listen to u and love u so much" when they watched me getting humiliated I will reply  sarcastically, not going to be explaining nicely how I get my husband to listen to me. I think that is what she did. My point was what she says does not go with her actions and hence we came to the conclusion that she was pretty annoyed with the way Satyabhama asked her this and she did seem to be sarcastic, Satya even apologizes understanding her sharp mockery.

The tone seems to be like :

S: Yaar sab tumahre bat kaise maante hai. Kya kala jadu kiya?

P: yeah yeah i sit and do puja of them and XYZABC to them etc etc. this seems like black magic to u??

I hope I am able to convey 😆

Yes, You are.

Originally posted by: CaptainSpark

Even if they were friends I think she should have asked the question in a better way.  Satya asks for forgiveness because she knew Draupadi was offended. I have posted that too in later posts. That means her tone must have been mockery, if she was speaking sweetly in this case why did Satya had to confirm "i am joking" 😆

I don't think satyabhama was mocking her cause she starts her question by saying:

Without doubt the son of pandus, O thou of lovely features , are ever submissive to thee and watchful to do thy bidding.

Which shows that satyabhama was actually admiring how all the pandavas were listening to draupadi and was curious to know how. I am pretty sure she was not mocking her about the dyut Sabha incident cause if she did draupadi would have never talked to her again, this would have even enraged Krishna. And here Satyabhama is mentioned as Krishna's favourite wife if satyabhama was so rude why would she be his favourite. 

And I genuinely think satyabhama meant the black magic part as a joke but draupadi just wanted to clear her that wasn't how she managed her household but rather the practices of evil woman which is why satyabhama clarified that it was a joke.

And to me this entire conversation shows how cleverly draupadi managed her household and knew all the details about her household.

But some parts of the conversation does seem out of character for draupadi . 

I think the reason draupadi did all this for the pandavas was because the women of that time had to follow some norm and conditions and had to behave in a particular way to be considered as virtuous woman. And let's be honest if draupadi really had freedom in that era she would have never stayed with the pandavas after the dice game and would have rather divorced them but since that wasn't a option and she knew she had a whole life ahead of her with them she did all this for them so that they know she still held a great position in their lives that other wives don't and also she mentions that some of these practices were taught to her by her mother in law kunti.

Originally posted by: davis56

I think the reason draupadi did all this for the pandavas was because the women of that time had to follow some norm and conditions and had to behave in a particular way to be considered as virtuous woman. And let's be honest if draupadi really had freedom in that era she would have never stayed with the pandavas after the dice game and would have rather divorced them but since that wasn't a option and she knew she had a whole life ahead of her with them she did all this for them so that they know she still held a great position in their lives that other wives don't and also she mentions that some of these practices were taught to her by her mother in law kunti.

The point is that Panchali NEVER behaved the way she claimed in the conversation. She knew it, the Pandavas knew it, Satyabhama knew it, Kunti knew it, Vyasa knew it.

She contradicted Yudshtira quite frequently and a couple of times in public though not in front of the enemy. To the point she called him a drunk and an addict to a servant (dice hall) and lunatic (after war).

She frequently derided the rest of the Pandavas and called them lunatic also.

All that stuff about taking care of husbands? She actually took good care of the empire as per other characters in the text (Vidura, Yudishtira, Suyodhana). Pandavas' personal comforts were not something she had much hand in in. Case in point: after obtaining akshaya patra, Yudhishitra was the one who cooked for the whole entourage. She simply stood at the door and watched. Not that I'm saying she should've cooked. The point is she really didn't pay much attention to them according to rest of text. 

Kunti's message to Pandavas via Krishna actually included instructions for Arjuna and Nakula to follow Panchali's path, not the other way around. Bheema already did, and Sahdev had own brain. Yudhishtira was called a coward by Kunti. So Kunti definitely didn't teach Panchali to be subservient. Even today, which MIL do we know who will tell her grown sons to follow in DIL's path?

Vyasa bluntly called her haughty toward Yudhishtira.

Also, she didn't stay with Pandavas out of wifely obligation. She stayed because the exile contract of the 2nd dice game was for Pandavas AND Panchali. Afterward, she said SHE would go to war regardless of what the rest decided. And she probably could because almost the entirety of Pandava army was made up of Panchal and its allies. Even Krishna might have gone along if that actually happened. 

After war, she taunted the heck out of Yudhishtira and actually said no matter what happened, SHE had decided to live. 

In fact, according to a version of Nepali Mahabharata, she did leave them after war. Even BORI considers Nepali and Kashmiri versions more authentic than the rest.

To call her a woman of her times is to dismiss what she was, I feel. 

Originally posted by: NoraSM

Yes, You are.

Sarcasm? 😆

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

The point is that Panchali NEVER behaved the way she claimed in the conversation. She knew it, the Pandavas knew it, Satyabhama knew it, Kunti knew it, Vyasa knew it.

She contradicted Yudshtira quite frequently and a couple of times in public though not in front of the enemy. To the point she called him a drunk and an addict to a servant (dice hall) and lunatic (after war).

She frequently derided the rest of the Pandavas and called them lunatic also.

All that stuff about taking care of husbands? She actually took good care of the empire as per other characters in the text (Vidura, Yudishtira, Suyodhana). Pandavas' personal comforts were not something she had much hand in in. Case in point: after obtaining akshaya patra, Yudhishitra was the one who cooked for the whole entourage. She simply stood at the door and watched. Not that I'm saying she should've cooked. The point is she really didn't pay much attention to them according to rest of text. 

Kunti's message to Pandavas via Krishna actually included instructions for Arjuna and Nakula to follow Panchali's path, not the other way around. Bheema already did, and Sahdev had own brain. Yudhishtira was called a coward by Kunti. So Kunti definitely didn't teach Panchali to be subservient. Even today, which MIL do we know who will tell her grown sons to follow in DIL's path?

Vyasa bluntly called her haughty toward Yudhishtira.

Also, she didn't stay with Pandavas out of wifely obligation. She stayed because the exile contract of the 2nd dice game was for Pandavas AND Panchali. Afterward, she said SHE would go to war regardless of what the rest decided. And she probably could because almost the entirety of Pandava army was made up of Panchal and its allies. Even Krishna might have gone along if that actually happened. 

After war, she taunted the heck out of Yudhishtira and actually said no matter what happened, SHE had decided to live. 

In fact, according to a version of Nepali Mahabharata, she did leave them after war. Even BORI considers Nepali and Kashmiri versions more authentic than the rest.

To call her a woman of her times is to dismiss what she was, I feel. 

Absolutely. 

To confirm, I think many of you (referring to all those who replied) felt I am trying to say Panchali is a bad woman by writing the post. That is not the intention. I was pointing out that what she says here is contradicting to what she is by character so this conversation and what she preaches feel out of place. 

Panchali was not a person who abided by Dwapar Yuga rules. HearMeRoar gave enough explanation above. The problem is the notion of the ideal wife portrayed here through Panchali's words is not what she followed (and rightly so). And that's the reason I respect her.

If you go by Dwapar Yuga rules, honestly there's nothing to debate about because Yudhishthir never did any wrong as per Dwapar Yuga standards. Panchali was adharmi woman as per that having spoken against her husbands and openly pointed out their misdeeds. Heck, even Krishna is adharmi as per Dwapar Yuga standards. 😆

So I have a problem and agree here that saying she is a woman of Dwapar Yuga is actually disregarding what she was. 

Krishna and she were the CHANGES which society needed at that time, they pointed out what was wrong and how this flawed dharma enables people to do alot of wrong. That's the difference between her and Yudhishthir, her and Bhishma, her and Drona, Duryodhana, Bheem, Arjun who all fell prey to the loopholes of Dharma.