Draupadi's Question

[KRN]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp Email Share Link

When King Yudhishtira has staked himself in a game of dice, and lost, does he have the right to stake another?

Bhishma's answer: Dharma is very subtle. But in this world, whatever the strong man says, is considered the highest dharma, while the words of the weak are not considered at all. It is Yudhishtira alone who can answer this question. He has to say whether he considers himself won or not.

Vidura's answer: A great calamity has been sent to us by destiny. This gambling was done without due consideration. Even now, they are disputing in the open assembly about a lady! If Yudhishthira had staked her before he was won, we can regard him as her master. But if a person stakes anything when he himself is penniless, to win it is similar to winning wealth in a dream.

Duryodhana's answer: Let us hear what Bhima, Arjuna, Nakula and Sahadeva say. If they say that Yudhishtira is not their lord, and he committed an indiscretion by staking them, then Draupadi will be set free. We will also follow what Yudhishtira says. Let Yudhishtira say whether he is Draupadi's husband or not. If he declares that he is not her husband, she will be set free.

Karna's answer: Irrespective of what Yudhishtira will say, Draupadi has been following the path of adharma by living with 5 husbands. She deserves the life of a servant only.

Yudhishtira's answer: (silence)

Bhima's answer: Yudhishtira is the lord of our lives. If he considers himself a slave, then we are also slaves. But it is highly improper to stake a woman, that too one's own wife. Draupadi does not deserve such treatment. Professional gamblers have in their houses women of loose character. Even they don't stake such women.

Arjuna's answer: Dharma insists that one should follow the dictates of one's virtuous elder brother. Yudhishtira is not guilty of the vice of gambling, as against his own will he was forced to play at dice with Shakuni, after being summoned by King Dhritarashtra. Kshatriya code of conduct demands that he should follow such summons. The rest of the incidents merely followed course due to the immorality of our foes. Yudhishtira was certainly our master, before he began to play. But once he lost himself, whose master could he be? Let the assembly judge.

Vikarna's answer: Due to these 4 reasons, I consider Draupadi a free woman
1) Gambling itself is a vice. The acts of a man addicted to gambling (Yudhishtira here) and thereby loses his sense and reason, cannot be considered to have any authority.
2) Draupadi is the common wife of all 5 Pandavas, not of Yudhishtira alone.
3) The moment Yudhishtira lost himself, he immediately loses the right to stake anyone else.
4) It is upon the prompting of Shakuni, that Yudhishtira staked Draupadi.

Krishna's answer: Had I been there, I would have prevented the game of dice itself. What happened was the gross adharma. Unfortunately I was at the time engrossed in the war with Salva.

Balarama's answer: It is all Yudhishtira's fault. He should now seek to placate Duryodhana with nice words, and seek to live with whatever Duryodhana in his magnanimity gives.

 

[KRN]

For an insight into the mind of the gambler I would recommend the book "The Gambler" by Dostoyevsky who himself had a serious gambling addiction.

 

[prasad1]

Mr. KRN, your post#1 is thought provoking.
I liked

Vikarna's answer: Due to these 4 reasons, I consider Draupadi a free woman
1) Gambling itself is a vice. The acts of a man addicted to gambling (Yudhishtira here) and thereby loses his sense and reason, cannot be considered to have any authority.
2) Draupadi is the common wife of all 5 Pandavas, not of Yudhishtira alone.
3) The moment Yudhishtira lost himself, he immediately loses the right to stake anyone else.
4) It is upon the prompting of Shakuni, that Yudhishtira staked Draupadi.

Your post#2 in the thread does not make any sense in religion section.

 

[guruvayurappan]

post 1
dear KRN !
very nice debate and i am moved by the explanation by sri vikarna since his answer to the situation occured and the others answer are why it happened, could not have happened,could have been stopped etc.
cheers,
guruvayurappan

 

[renuka]

Draupadi's question is very valid.

First and foremost how can anyone put their loved one as a pawn in a game of dice?
What happened to respect for a spouse?

And when she was going to be disrobed that was gross Adharma and any of the 5 Pandavas could have stood up and stopped this but they did not.
It is the Dharma of a husband to protect his wife at any condition..that too in a situation where one's wife's honour is at stake.
So the Pandavas didnt honour their own Dharma as husbands to Draupadi.

Just imagine if it was Kunti that was going to be disrobed I am 100% sure the Pandavas would have killed the Kauravas there itself.

 

[mahakavi]

>>

Just imagine if it was Kunti that was going to be disrobed I am 100% sure the Pandavas would have killed the Kauravas there itself.<<

Very true! Let us dwell on this a little bit. You are a part of your mother, physiologically speaking. Motherhood is sacred, come what may (ku mAtA na cAvatu---mother is blemishless). But with the wife it is a later acquisition and hence sanctity takes a second place. I am not condoning the disrobing of Draupati. But the laws of that time permitted such injustice. Let us look at the exchange between Bhishma and Draupati (source: pAnchAli sabhadam of Bharathi)

Bhishma: Your husband lost you in gambling. You are arguing vainly to deny that deed. According to the code of ancient sages men and women are equal but that is not valid now. Now women are not equal to men. A man can sell his wife, and he can donate her. Although Yudhistran lost himself first he still has the right over you. Those who are not aware of such practice might feel it is unjust but tradition holds the sway. Despite the injustice done to you I am helpless.

Draupati: Well said, my esteemed lord. When Ravana took away SItA, summoned his counselors and sought their advice on his action they replied, "What you did is just and in accordance with righteous conduct". These are the folks who dictate what is right and wrong! When the devil rules, the sAstrAs will eat the corpse! You tricked my husband into gambling. Weren't you born with women? Why are you committing this sin? I pray that you reconsider.

Bhishma bows his head and does nothing. People justify his action by saying Bhishma was sworn to protect asthinApuram at any cost and hence he was being loyal to duryOdhanan who was the legal heir to the throne of asthinapuram. Strange interpretation, indeed!

When duccAdhanan grabs the hair of Draupati, Bheeman rises and castigates Yudhistran for his action and tells arjun to "bring fire, my brother, let us burn the hand of our elder brother who lost our gem". It was arjun who counsels patience again "kaTTuNDOm poRuttiruppOm, kAlam mARum" (we got trapped, let us be patient, time will change in our favor)​

 

[guruvayurappan]

in war as well as in puranas ,taking away wife of the enemy is a sort of vengeance. we can not think any justice in comparing with common citizen. when draupathy herself felt that her husbands lost the control over her & helpless, on what basis she expected pandavas help.she was paying for her foolish act of teasing dhuriyothana during her swayamvaram.If it is the duty of a husband to protect his wife in happiness and sorrow ,it applies to the wife also.
guruvayurappan

 

[renuka]

in war as well as in puranas ,taking away wife of the enemy is a sort of vengeance. we can not think any justice in comparing with common citizen. when draupathy herself felt that her husbands lost the control over her & helpless, on what basis she expected pandavas help.she was paying for her foolish act of teasing dhuriyothana during her swayamvaram.If it is the duty of a husband to protect his wife in happiness and sorrow ,it applies to the wife also.
guruvayurappan

I do agree that Draupadi too had a habit of insulting people in the past but even then this insult to her was too much.
All I could say that the Pandavas had NO BAL*S to stand up and defend their wife.

Anyway Lord Krishna showed to Draupadi that in the time of distress we can only 100% depend on God and not anyone else.

 

[KRN]

And when she was going to be disrobed that was gross Adharma and any of the 5 Pandavas could have stood up and stopped this but they did not.
It is the Dharma of a husband to protect his wife at any condition..that too in a situation where one's wife's honour is at stake.
So the Pandavas didnt honour their own Dharma as husbands to Draupadi.

Just imagine if it was Kunti that was going to be disrobed I am 100% sure the Pandavas would have killed the Kauravas there itself.

Renukaji and others,
There are very good reasons to believe that the 'disrobing of Draupadi' part in the Mahabharata is a much later addition to the story. If you go thru the Mbh, the "dishonouring" of Draupadi has been referred to, umpteen times, especially during the great war. Sometimes whenever any of the Pandavas was at the peak of anger while fighting with their mortal foes. But the maximum extent it is referred to is that of "dragging Draupadi to the Assembly hall while she was in her menses", but not beyond that. There is repeated reference of Duryodhana insulting Draupadi by revealing his thigh and slapping it (obliquely asking her to sit on it). In Udyoga Parvam at a time when Bhima, an unlikely candidate, starts speaking about peace, Krishna chides him and starts listing out the various wrongs meted out by the Kauravas to Bhima himself as well as the rest of the Pandavas, a very appropriate situation to mention about this grievous wrong but Krishna only mentions "bringing Draupadi to the open Assembly". It is a reasonable guess that the disrobing part could have been included much later by someone/some group to glorify Krishna in the whole disreputable episode.

Of course the dragging of the Queen to the assembly, that too the wife of the emperor who had only recently conducted the Rajasooya yajnam, is also an act of great dishonour and rightly it is considered a most provocative act that led to the great war.

 

[sarang]

Whether the disrobing is later addition or not cannot be established by discussion; we have to rely on critical editions published by reputed institutions like Bhandarkar oriental research institute.

But these issues stand out loud and clear. As renukaji said, when draupadi earnestly sought the help of krishna, she got it. And secondly, we are trained by our scriptures to face and accept contradictions.

 

[KRN]

Dear Sarang,
The critical Edition of BORI actually rejects this passage as an intepolation, partly due to the reasons I have mentioned above.

Whether the disrobing is later addition or not cannot be established by discussion; we have to rely on critical editions published by reputed institutions like Bhandarkar oriental research institute.

 

[KRN]

But these issues stand out loud and clear. As renukaji said, when draupadi earnestly sought the help of krishna, she got it. And secondly, we are trained by our scriptures to face and accept contradictions.

Dear Sarangji,
It is a very interesting point you raise. I had some notes on it from which I write below.

This passage appears very corrupted and variously in different versions of the MBH, unlike the rest of the chapter. In some versions, Krishna is not mentioned at all - rather Dharma is referred to

"hundreds of dresses of many colours appeared, O lord, due to Dharma's protection"

"she cried out for rescue to Krishna, Nara, Hari, Vishnu. Then Dharma, the magnanimous, covered her with a number of dresses"

It may be worthwhile to remember that Vidura, the son & incarnation of Dharma is often referred to as Dharma in the text. Vidura was a witness to the proceedings.

During a later meeting with the Pandavas in the forest, Krishna emphatically mentions "I would have prevented the dice game". But no mention from either Krishna or the Pandavas, of the miraculous saving of modesty of Draupadi. Yudhishtira, normally so full of Gratitude for Krishna in other occasions, says not a word about this to Krishna, although he bewails the games played by destiny.

 

[S.Ramanathan]

If we hear suki sivam regarding Bhagavat geetha, Initially Arjuna wants to meet the gauvarava's to know whom he has to kill at war and Krishna driven the chariot before tham. After the geetopadesam Arjuna surrendered to Krishna and asked him what he has to do now? Hence it means that initially we drive ourserlves to our wishes but ultimately we have to follow the path of Krishna and we have no other go to surrender at his feet. Udhistra has done it as per his wish but ultimately it is god's wish otherwise there would not been any war and bhagavat geethai.

What ever has happend has happened well....

 

[KRN]

Learned members,


I give below my thoughts on the respective answers by the characters, also based on my readings of the MBH...

First of all, the Pandavas were devamsa-jaathas as their fathers were Gods. All 5 Pandavas were endowed with tremendous divine strength and they proved it by conquering all other countries except Mahishmati, Hastinapuram and Dwaraka (the latter two excluded out of friendship) and anointed Yudhishtira as the Emperor of the world. It was certainly not out of fear of anyone, nor lack of ba**s, that they behaved that way in the assembly. Nor were they stone hearted as not to be moved by the insults and suffering of their beloved wife. However, the Pandavas were self controlled, able to sacrifice a lot, and sworn to adhere to Dharma at all costs. They also placed an extraordinary reliance on the gambling rules!

In my analysis, KRISHNA & Vikarna were most penetrating & dharmic of them all. The dice game itself was adharma, as Vikarna says clearly. Gambling in any way you look at it, is a sin because it corrupts the minds of both parties and the loser quickly loses his reason also. It quickly gives rise to enmity and bad feelings. It is like rust corroding pure iron. At the end Arjuna tries to support Yudhishtira by quoting the Kshatriya code of conduct. But that was satisfied once the call for playing the game is accepted. At most it can be played as an entertainment. But both parties should be very clear on it. In this situation, it cannot be expected of the Kauravas. That they are playing with an ulterior motive is evident from the introduction of Shakuni who was notorious of sharp practice, at the last moment. Until then it was assumed that Yudhishtira was playing Duryodhana. Anyway, when something was patently adharma, the most important thing was to prevent it from happening. Much ado was made by Bhishma et al related to the rules. The gambling rules are not sacrosanct. Because, the foundation of the game itself was on adharma. When the foundation is staggering, what is the point in following the nitty gritty of such rules? I think this is the mistake that Yudhishtira, Bhishma, Vidura & the rest made. Even Draupadi, although hapless, made this mistake by not pointing it out.

The moment a game of adharma stops becoming a 'game', the rules have no value. What value do we give to the rules set by mad men in a lunatic asylum? People following adharma are waywards, they are akin to mad men or ignorant babies, right thinking men will always decide so.

There is criticism from certain quarters that in certain situations Krishna went against the set rules in the great war. They miss the above aspect. There is a Big adharma done by one party, and they are blaming the other party for not following the secondary rules.

Rules, once set, have to be followed. To a large extent one is bound by one's word given at the time of setting the rule mutually. But the foundation of it all, has to be right also. The Pandavas had fulfilled their word by spending 12 years in intolerable hardship in the forest and the 13th year incognito. Any way you look at it, their kingdom was due. But Duryodhana at the last moment, went against the rules set earlier by refusing to give even 5 villages. This is gross adharma. The root cause of the war was Adharma followed by one party. As for the rules set for the war, they were set by one party steeped in Adharma. When this is the case, one is not expected to act like a machine and follow the nitty gritty of each rule in every instant. So Krishna's acts were praiseworthy as they were aimed at looking at the bigger picture, that of preventing the gross Adharma of the Kauravas from winning, eventhough the Pandavas at great cost to their side, followed the rules to a large extent.

Even in their meeting in the forest, Krishna does not support the machine-like acts of Pandavas in the dice game, their following the gambling rules literally. He says that the dice game should have been prevented and stops there. Similar was his policy before the great war. He tried his best to mediate and avert the battle. But when battle was inevitable, the cause of dharma has to win..

 

[KRN]

Another example of the misquoting of rules is the response of Karna.

Karna's answer: Irrespective of what Yudhishtira will say, Draupadi has been following the path of adharma by living with 5 husbands. She deserves the life of a servant only.


[KRN] Karna always had a sour grapes mindset vis-a-vis Draupadi. He reveals a narrow part of his nature by mentioning the rulebook, a precept of Dharma Sastra that a woman can have only one husband, without paying attention to the fact that Draupadi's marriage had the concurrence and blessings of the great Rishis and God Mahadeva himself. Karna is an example of what disregard of the Guru & elders can do to one. He was endowed with great accomplishments but gains notoriety in the Mahabharatha due to the Guru-shapam & Brahmana Shapam he incurs. Without the blessings of the Guru, no man can achieve things beyond a limit. It is due to the absence of Guru's & elders' blessings that Karna becomes unable to make use of the divine astras he learnt. He even runs away from war in several occasions, like in the battle with the Gandharvas. It is said that Karna is actually even better skilled than Arjuna. Certainly Yudhishtira feared Karna and never slept well, fearing his prowess. However Arjuna never ran away from any battle, but always emerged victorious except in the one instant after the destruction of Dwaraka. Arjuna vs Karna is the best illustration no matter how well endowed we are, the blessings of Guru is most essential to become truly great.

 

[KRN]

Yudhishtira's answer: (silence)


Yudhishtira was the son of Dharma and also Dharma incarnate. He was the most magnanimous, hence the most unfortunate in the whole episode. Some time before the gambling incident Veda Vyasa secretly visits Yudhishtira and tells him that, in 13 yrs time, he will become direct cause of a great battle with the Kauravas, resulting in wholesale destruction of Kshatriyas. Deeply aggrieved, Yudhishtira takes a solemn vow never to disagree with anyone else, and especially with the Kauravas. That was why, despite a lot of misgivings, he accepted the invitation for gambling and also controlled his anger in the most provocative circumstances, carefully trying, not to become, in word or deed, a cause of enmity to the Kauravas! He carried his circumspection well and remained silent throughout the episode. But being a dharmic person, he placed trust in the Assembly consisting of veterans like Bhishma etc. He secretly messages to Draupadi to come to the assembly in a single dress, and to attract the sympathy of the leaders of the Assembly like Bhishma Drona Kripa. While trying not to become a direct cause of confrontation, he was all along hoping that the grandsires would intervene in the right time and halt the proceedings before they become worse. As destiny would have it, his very silence becomes his downfall...

 

[KRN]

Bhima's answer: Yudhishtira is the lord of our lives. If he considers himself a slave, then we are also slaves. But it is highly improper to stake a woman, that too one's own wife. Draupadi does not deserve such treatment. Professional gamblers have in their houses women of loose character. Even they don't stake such women.


[KRN] Bhima reveals his dharmic nature. He could with a single blow erase the Kauravas and he openly declares it in the assembly and Bhishma and Drona also agrees. But true to his Dharma he behaves subservient to his elder brother Yudhishtira and humbly agrees to servitude under the Kauravas. But momentarily, the staking of Draupadi arouses his anger against Yudhishtira even. He asks Sahadeva to bring fire so as to burn those hands of Yudhishtira that did the crime of staking Draupadi. But Arjuna dissuades him by pointing out that any such act would only result in falling in the net laid by their enemies.


Arjuna's answer: Dharma insists that one should follow the dictates of one's virtuous elder brother. Yudhishtira is not guilty of the vice of gambling, as against his own will he was forced to play at dice with Shakuni, after being summoned by King Dhritarashtra. Kshatriya code of conduct demands that he should follow such summons. The rest of the incidents merely followed course due to the immorality of our foes. Yudhishtira was certainly our master, before he began to play. But once he lost himself, whose master could he be? Let the assembly judge.


[KRN] Arjuna knows the tenets of Dharma, he too points out the key thing, that the dice game itself was adharma. Then absolves Yudhishtira by giving the reasons that forced him to play the game. But Arjuna also places too much reliance on the gambling rules. However, contrary to Karna, Arjuna was Guru-bhakti incarnate. He has implicit faith in the assembly consisting of Sires and Grandsires like Bhishma, Drona et al. He gives his answer but puts faith on the learned members of the assembly and awaits their conclusion. This is very true to Arjuna's nature & his great successes. It is due to his Guru-bhakti that he becomes depressed at having to fight them in battle but at the right moment, Krishna becomes his new Guru to show him the right way. Ashwattama was unable to retract his Brahmastra since he sent it out of hatred, while Arjuna sent his in self protection. In obedience to the words of Rishis he unquestioningly retracts his weapon. He does not argue with the Rishis that the weapon unleashed by Ashwattama is still at large. He knew that where the Rishi's blessings are, there Krishna would be, and where Krishna is, there victory would be..

 

[sarang]

This sloka is from the mahabharata saram published by ramakrishna mutt. It contains select slokas and translation. sloka 68.47

आकृष्यमाणे वसने द्रौपद्यास्तु विशाम्पते
तद्रूपमपरं वस्त्रं प्रादुरसिदनेकशः

Another version from the condensed version published by kuppuswami sastri research institute:

तस्य प्रसादात् द्रौपद्याः कृष्यमाणेअम्बरे तदा
तद्रूपमपरं वस्त्रं प्रादुरसिदनेकशः

By his grace, there appeared at that time when draupadi's garment was pulled off, a similar garment many times over.

The vastrams appeared from nowhere, krishna is not in the picture. His grace is present.

Dear Sarangji,
It is a very interesting point you raise. I had some notes on it from which I write below.

This passage appears very corrupted and variously in different versions of the MBH, unlike the rest of the chapter. In some versions, Krishna is not mentioned at all - rather Dharma is referred to

"hundreds of dresses of many colours appeared, O lord, due to Dharma's protection"

"she cried out for rescue to Krishna, Nara, Hari, Vishnu. Then Dharma, the magnanimous, covered her with a number of dresses"

It may be worthwhile to remember that Vidura, the son & incarnation of Dharma is often referred to as Dharma in the text. Vidura was a witness to the proceedings.

During a later meeting with the Pandavas in the forest, Krishna emphatically mentions "I would have prevented the dice game". But no mention from either Krishna or the Pandavas, of the miraculous saving of modesty of Draupadi. Yudhishtira, normally so full of Gratitude for Krishna in other occasions, says not a word about this to Krishna, although he bewails the games played by destiny.

 

[KRN]

I don't deny that such slokas appear in some rescensions. What I am stating is, the critical edition of BORI examines various rescensions of the MBH obtained from different parts of India, and this tale with all it's variations has been thoroughly examined and rejected as an interpolation.

In fact this "disrobing of Draupadi" is a very prevalent misconception, yet will not stand even the basic tests. The critical edition additionally removes a few much cleverer, although not as popular, interpolations than this one. I remember reading additional reasons for rejecting it than the ones I cited above, but that tale is not what I want to focus on in this thread. Obviously that tale had attained great popularity in retellings in regional languages and Sanskrit & gained ascendance once Krishna worship gained strength.

But if we are to accept each and every sloka without critical evaluation or comparison with other rescensions, we may not be able to perceive the underlying truths in the text, as the contradictions would be quite overwhelming.

 

[KRN]

When I go thru the Mbh, Krishna appears a truly magnificent highly dharmic personality, endowed with great attributes of Dharma, Tapas and Jnanam. But he is not seen to easily manifest such superhuman traits as is seen in the later Puranas (although he is very well capable of manifesting superhuman abilities, and even to create or destroy the whole world, he does not do so but allows things to follow the natural course of action). That doesn't in any way retract from his greatness. Rather it would further endear us to him, the way I see it. From the beginning, Krishna in his wisdom realises that Dharma resides in Pandavas - and right from the marriage of Panchali when he perceives the Pandavas garbed in the dress of Brahmanas, he tries to assist them in all ways he can. But when he, Balarama and Satyaki meets the beleagured Pandavas in the forest, Satyaki in the enthusiasm talks about immediately attacking the Kauravas, win from them Pandavas' kingdom, and offer it to Yudhishtira. Krishna immediately negates this idea. He points out that the Pandavas will not like such 'offerings', they would rather win it through their own efforts. But true to their word and their dharma, they would wait till the 13 years are elapsed, and fight only afterwards. Krishna's words are consistent with his estimation of the Pandavas as well as of Draupadi.

 

[mahakavi]

We have to keep one thing in mind while analyzing the various events that took place in the entire episode. Originally it was all recited and transmitted via oral-->aural --->oral--->aural etc. Long time must have passed before anything was put down in writing. During all this transmission so many distortions must have occurred. In addition, even during copying of the original writing different transcribers may have introduced slokhas to suit their taste of virtue/morality. Hence, although we are told the MB was authored by Vyasa, it is a composite of the thoughts of many folks. They all agreed on the main point of the dynasty splitting and warring with each other. The denouement was that dharma must come victorious at the end. The means could take a meandering course. Who knows what Vyasa's unadulterated version contained?