Mother’s Love: Gandhari’s First Night

[london swaminathan]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

(Mothers! Choose anyone: work or child; childminder or you).

From the book SITA MUST LIVE: THE ROLE OF WOMEN IN SOCIETY written by Dr M Lakshmikumari:

“ An episode from the Mahabharata comes to mind which has some bearing in this context. After the war, the blind king Dritharashtra is consoling his much bereaved queen. He says, “Devi, there is no way out of this tragedy for which you are also responsible. Can you recall the words I spoke on our first wedding night when I entered into our bed chamber and saw you sitting mute and blind? I had hoped to see the world through your eyes but you decided to blindfold yourself without caring for me. No doubt, you earned for yourself the great distinction of being a pathivrata (chaste woman, loyal to husband). When our first child Duryodhana was brought to us, I put him on your lap and begged you to remove your blindfold and look at our first born and drench him with mother’s love, pouring through your eyes. But you cared not. Preserving your unique Pathivratya was more important for you than the well being of your child. Your children were brought up without tasting the rare elixir of mother’s love and no wonder, they grew up rebellious, selfish, non caring as embodiments of adharma. On the other side, Queen Kunti magnanimously gave way for Madri to accompany King Pandu to heaven, nurtured her own and Madri’s children with rare maternal love and care. They grew up to become embodiments of Dharma, and today they stand victorious.

Our present day world is getting filled with blind men and blindfolded women who have no time to take out of their selfish pursuits to care and nurture their children. Children losing their childhood could be the first warning signal--- that humanity is about to lose its ‘human hood’.

The above write up was from the book Sita must live.
(I want to add one more episode: swami)

Picture of blind Dhritarashtra and blindfolded Gandhari

Mother’s power

A mother’s loving look can do miracles- is illustrated by another episode in the epic. Gandhari was given a boon for his lifelong pathivratya. Whatever or whoever she looks at will become indestructible. When she remembered theboon, she thought of using it to make her son Duryodhana invincible. She asked him to come naked before her so that her look will make him completely indestructible. When he was going all naked, Krishna came and ridiculed him for going naked. Having heard Krishna he covered his groin area with a cloth and appeared before his mum. She looked at him but the groin area did not get the magical protection. Krishna knowing this weakness, reminded Bhima when he had one to one mace fight with Duryodhana. As per Krishna’s signal, Bhima struck Duryodhana in the thigh area and eventually he was killed. A mother can save her child by her love is the moral of the story. Unfortunately the child was not ready to receive it fully in this story. That is the fate of people who follow adharma.

 

[prasad1]

Sir,
Do you realize that by posting such mumbo-jumbo you are portraying yourself as a sexiest man. Explain how do you condone such insult on a women.
and when you are on the subject of children explain how one women was able to conceive 100 children all of same age?

 

[renuka]

I sometimes wonder why only a woman needs to be Pati Vrata and no such rules are imposed on a man.

There is even a Sanskrit stanza that goes that a woman was sitting near the fire place and her husband was sleeping with his head on her lap and her child was crawling near by and was going to fall into the fire.
Being a Pati Vrata types...she did not get up to save the child cos she wad afraid that her husband's sleep would get disturbed.
The child fell into the fire but the fire turned into cool sandal paste for the child and did not burn the child becos the lady was Pati Vrata.

I have no problems if someone loves their spouses as to share their pain and pleasures but when only men are always almost equated with God and logic goes out of the door..that sometimes becomes irritating!LOL

I read before that Gandhari's children became totally out of control becos she never saw what they did owing to the fact she blindfolded herself.

She should have been more responsible and been the eyes of her husband and lead her children in the right way.

In Ramayan Sita is always praised for going to the forest along with Rama.
But what is so surprising about that?

Any newly wed would prefer to stay with husband even if it was in a forest than to stay 14 years with Inlaws!

So I feel any right thinking female would have followed her husband even if it was to the North Pole or Timbuktu.

 

[london swaminathan]

Dear Renuka

When we read Ramayan and Mahabharata, we must remember the rules and principles that existed at least 3000 years ago.

If any one asks you to accompany your near and dear to Timbuktu then you will argue with the latest law book of the land.
That is why Manu said that his book is valid only for the Aryavarta and not to every one. He also said that in the very first chapter that when in doubt ,consult the elders, because Dharma changes according to KALA,DESA and VARTHAMANA.

Bhutapandyan Devi jumped into her husband's pyre (sati) inspite of Pandyan ministers request not to do. This is in Purananuru (Sangam Tamil Literature). Adi Manthi, daughter of Karikal chola, followed the river cauvery like a mad woman till he was rescued. This is also in 2000 year old Purananuru.

Last but not the least read about the women's conditions in Western countries and Muslim countries, particularly, just 200 years ago.

Dear Prasad

Wait and see. There will be more Mumbo jumbos, because my hits have increased to 1500 + hits a day in my two blogs.
I did not count the Tamilbrahmin hits and Speaking tree hits.

 

[renuka]

Dear Renuka

When we read Ramayan and Mahabharata, we must remember the rules and principles that existed at least 3000 years ago.

If any one asks you to accompany your near and dear to Timbuktu then you will argue with the latest law book of the land.
That is why Manu said that his book is valid only for the Aryavarta and not to every one. He also said that in the very first chapter that when in doubt ,consult the elders, because Dharma changes according to KALA,DESA and VARTHAMANA.

Bhutapandyan Devi jumped into her husband's pyre (sati) inspite of Pandyan ministers request not to do. This is in Purananuru (Sangam Tamil Literature). Adi Manthi, daughter of Karikal chola, followed the river cauvery like a mad woman till he was rescued. This is also in 2000 year old Purananuru.

Last but not the least read about the women's conditions in Western countries and Muslim countries, particularly, just 200 years ago.

Dear Sir,

What I was trying to say is any woman would have followed her husband instead of staying with in laws.
So I don't feel Sita did anything extra ordinary that other woman would not have done.

Reasons:

1)Who wants to stay with inlaws for 14 years when husband is exiled!

2)It will be too boring..no one to pay us attention and no one to show us love and affection.

3)God knows what husband will be doing alone in jungle so better follow him!LOL

4)In case in absence of husband for 14 years what if wife falls in love with another person when husband is away?
So prevention is better than cure..better follow husband so that no such situations will happen.

That is what I am saying sir...any other woman also would have done the same and followed husband just like how Sita is described to follow Rama as how Rohini follows Sashi.

 

[tbs]

God knows what husband will be doing alone in jungle so better follow him!LOL

hi renu,
why jungle...now a days in same town/same street.....lol

 

[renuka]

God knows what husband will be doing alone in jungle so better follow him!LOL

hi renu,
why jungle...now a days in same town/same street.....lol

You forgot one more point: ONLINE !

 

[renuka]

So far only one male had given up his life after his wife died.

King Aja went into a depression after his wife Indumathi died and he committed suicide.

So at least there was one male who loved his wife till he did not want to live anymore but surprisingly Aja was an ancestor of Lord Rama but Rama seemed fine when he left Sita.

 

[P.J.]

Renukaji

IF Valmiki had any idea that one Renuka in Kaliyuga will be posting so many questions about Ma Sita Leaving to forest with Sri Rama, he would have changed the course of the Epic!!!

 

[prasad1]

Dear Prasad

Wait and see. There will be more Mumbo jumbos, because my hits have increased to 1500 + hits a day in my two blogs.
I did not count the Tamilbrahmin hits and Speaking tree hits.

Swami,
Again you skirted the issue. If you are posting fictions, it is not knowledge. If it is knowledge it better have some proof, or some teaching moments.
Just because it was "written" thousands of years ago, it need not be posted today. I know you admire 14th century, but we are living in 21st century. Just because you had hits, does not make it worth of reading. Some silly things gets millions of hits on youtube.
I read your post because sometimes there is interesting facts, but generally you write unvarnished XXXXXXX, without any proof or rationale. It might be appropriate to write in Chandamama. LOL

 

[P.J.]

Dear Sir,

What I was trying to say is any woman would have followed her husband instead of staying with in laws.
So I don't feel Sita did anything extra ordinary that other woman would not have done.

Reasons:

1)Who wants to stay with inlaws for 14 years when husband is exiled!

2)It will be too boring..no one to pay us attention and no one to show us love and affection.

3)God knows what husband will be doing alone in jungle so better follow him!LOL

4)In case in absence of husband for 14 years what if wife falls in love with another person when husband is away?
So prevention is better than cure..better follow husband so that no such situations will happen.

That is what I am saying sir...any other woman also would have done the same and followed husband just like how Sita is described to follow Rama as how Rohini follows Sashi.

Renukaji

Nowadays married women stay maximum with their parents only in the absence of their husband; Sita Ma would have moved to Mithila Puri , in case she could not accompany Sri Rama to forest.
Staying in Forest is also not easy leaving the comfort of the Palace; it is just like staying without Electricity, Internet,TV, Etc
Also without modern Rest rooms!!!
And then, if Sita ma is not going to forest, there is no Villian and the purpose of Rama Avatar is not going to be fulfilled

 

[P.J.]

I sometimes wonder why only a woman needs to be Pati Vrata and no such rules are imposed on a man.



I read before that Gandhari's children became totally out of control becos she never saw what they did owing to the fact she blindfolded herself.

She should have been more responsible and been the eyes of her husband and lead her children in the right way.

Renukaji

Gandhari’s Spontaneous Decision:

The chaste Gandhari hearing that Dhritarashtra was blind and that her parents had consented to marry her to him, from love and respect for her future husband, blindfolded her own eyes.
The act of Gandhari is to be appreciated from the period in which she had lived. She was affectionate to her husband and did not want to create a complex in him that his wife was better in vision than himself. It was a sort of sacrifice on her part. In spite of her covering her eyes; she never failed in service to her husband.


Gandhari could have behaved like an ordinary woman without blindfold by becoming eye to her husband. “From now onwards, my world is the one which my husband’s lives in! If the visual delights exist not for him, they exist not for me either!!” Normally the eyes, ever in constant touch with the outside world, turn to the inner realms of dreams and slumber only when tired. In Gandhari, those very eyesturned inwards, in a fully live, active state, spontaneously initiating the esoteric and intricate sadhana of unveiling and bonding with the mystic vitality within.

Unfortunately she was not in the list of Pancha Kanyas

By virtue of this blindfold and with Pativrata Dharma she became an extraordinary woman. She was able to even curse Sri Krishna!

 

[P.J.]

About 100 sons to Gandhari
The birth of Gandhari’s hundred sons, in brief – After Gandhari had conceived it was close to two years and she had not delivered. When she heard the news of Kunti’s children being born in the jungles, she was frustrated and angry and in her state of rage, she started beating her stomach. Soon she delivered a mass of flesh. Vyas had once blessed her with a hundred sons (a common blessing in those days) and when she saw the mass of flesh, he was called. He immediately instructed her to assemble a hundred jars with ghee (oil) in it. Gandhari at this stage expressed her desire to have a daughter too. As soon as the jars were assembled, Vyas divided the ball of flesh into a hundred and one parts and distributed each into the jars. He asked her to cover them and leave them, and soon she was the mother of hundred sons and one daughter. Many later day thinkers hint at the concept which is better known to us today as ‘in-vitro fertilisation’. Today we know of such methods of IVF and cloning whereby births can be ‘made’ through artificial methods.

This is Utkarsh Speaking: Gandhari’s Hundred Sons

 

[london swaminathan]

Dear Prasad
Thanks for reading and commenting.
One more from Dr Lakshmikumari's book is shared today.
Enjoy reading.

 

[renuka]

Renukaji

IF Valmiki had any idea that one Renuka in Kaliyuga will be posting so many questions about Ma Sita Leaving to forest with Sri Rama, he would have changed the course of the Epic!!!

LOL!

I can't stop laughing!

 

[renuka]

Renukaji

Nowadays married women stay maximum with their parents only in the absence of their husband; Sita Ma would have moved to Mithila Puri , in case she could not accompany Sri Rama to forest.
Staying in Forest is also not easy leaving the comfort of the Palace; it is just like staying without Electricity, Internet,TV, Etc
Also without modern Rest rooms!!!
And then, if Sita ma is not going to forest, there is no Villian and the purpose of Rama Avatar is not going to be fulfilled

Dear Sir,

But you see once we love our husband we surely want to spend some close time with him too.

What to do in parents house all alone without him?

 

[renuka]

Unfortunately she was not in the list of Pancha Kanyas

Dear PJ sir,

I have analysed the Pancha Kanya list and have come to this diagnosis.
I feel there is a reason why Gandhari was not listed as Pancha Kanyas:

I feel all the fantastic 5 Kanyas have some link with some controversial situation or dealt with some controversial male.


1)Ahalya..she was involved in a scandal with Indra which some authors say she was tricked by Indra and some authors say that she knew halfway that it was Indra but felt elated that she was desired by the King of the Devas.
Whatever the reason it was a scandal no doubt.
So her Pancha Kanya status conferred to her is to show the world that we should not judge anyone by her actions cos we have no idea what is the real situation is.


2)Sita...the ever pure Sita was kidnapped by the powerful Ravan and held captive by him.
Conservative individuals might consider a woman impure if held captive by another male for so long.
So here again the message is not to judge anyone cos a woman's purity is based on her inner self and true feelings which was shown by Sita.


3)Draupadi...married 5 men.
Till today many might not like the idea of a woman having more than 1 husband and people might tend to judge a person who is polyandrous.
So here again ...the message is for us in not to judge anyone cos Draupadi was pure at heart and served her 5 husbands till death.


4)Tara..here again there is a polyandrous relationship controversy.
According to some versions of the Ramayan..first Tara was wed to Vaali..the when Vaali was presumed to be dead..Sugriva marries Tara.
Then like tamil movie style..Vaali shows up to reclaim his kingdom and wife Tara and all hell breaks lose.

So same message..don't judge anyone..Tara was a victim of circumstances to be involved with 2 males.


5)Mandodari..She is the wife of a most controversial male of Treta Yuga..the mighty Ravana.
Mostly people feel that the wife of a anti hero should be an anti heroine herself too but that was not the case with Mandodari.

So here again..never judge a woman solely based on her husband's character.




So Dear PJ sir..I feel now it is clear why Gandhari never made it into the top 5 Pancha Kanya lists.
She was not linked with any controversial situation and never dealt with any controversial male.
She was married to the rather passive Dhritarasthra.

 

[london swaminathan]

Good analysis.
Never judge a book by its cover.

 

[P.J.]

Dear PJ sir,

I have analysed the Pancha Kanya list and have come to this diagnosis.
I feel there is a reason why Gandhari was not listed as Pancha Kanyas:

I feel all the fantastic 5 Kanyas have some link with some controversial situation or dealt with some controversial male.


1)Ahalya..she was involved in a scandal with Indra which some authors say she was tricked by Indra and some authors say that she knew halfway that it was Indra but felt elated that she was desired by the King of the Devas.
Whatever the reason it was a scandal no doubt.
So her Pancha Kanya status conferred to her is to show the world that we should not judge anyone by her actions cos we have no idea what is the real situation is.


2)Sita...the ever pure Sita was kidnapped by the powerful Ravan and held captive by him.
Conservative individuals might consider a woman impure if held captive by another male for so long.
So here again the message is not to judge anyone cos a woman's purity is based on her inner self and true feelings which was shown by Sita.


3)Draupadi...married 5 men.
Till today many might not like the idea of a woman having more than 1 husband and people might tend to judge a person who is polyandrous.
So here again ...the message is for us in not to judge anyone cos Draupadi was pure at heart and served her 5 husbands till death.


4)Tara..here again there is a polyandrous relationship controversy.
According to some versions of the Ramayan..first Tara was wed to Vaali..the when Vaali was presumed to be dead..Sugriva marries Tara.
Then like tamil movie style..Vaali shows up to reclaim his kingdom and wife Tara and all hell breaks lose.

So same message..don't judge anyone..Tara was a victim of circumstances to be involved with 2 males.


5)Mandodari..She is the wife of a most controversial male of Treta Yuga..the mighty Ravana.
Mostly people feel that the wife of a anti hero should be an anti heroine herself too but that was not the case with Mandodari.

So here again..never judge a woman solely based on her husband's character.




So Dear PJ sir..I feel now it is clear why Gandhari never made it into the top 5 Pancha Kanya lists.
She was not linked with any controversial situation and never dealt with any controversial male.
She was married to the rather passive Dhritarasthra.

Renukaji

" passive Dhritarasthra" ? are you sure? he had an affair with a servant maid and got a Child!!!

Sauvali was a maid servant in the royal household and she used to attend on Dhitrarastra. The king fell for the maid’s charm she gave birth to Yuyutsu. This was the time when Gandhari was having problems delivering her children.

Falling for the 'maid servant' is inherent in male DNA it seems
Even Vidhura was born to a maid only.
He was conceived by Vyasadeva in the womb of the maidservant of Ambika, mother of Maharaja Pandu.

Reg Panch Kanya, none of them except MA Sita deserves a place there.
If you post a topic on that, you will get very interesting answers.

 

[P.J.]

Dear Sir,

But you see once we love our husband we surely want to spend some close time with him too.

What to do in parents house all alone without him?

Renukaji

Urmila, the noble wife of Lakshmana spent her entire of absence from Lakshmana in the palace only.

From Sai Discourses:
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]Urmila was a great painter. She was in her room, painting the scene of Rama and Sita's wedding, which she wanted to send to her father. At that moment, Lakshmana entered. He was in a very angry mood. Rama was not agreeing to his pleas and was going ahead with obeying Kaikeyi's orders. He called out to Urmila and informed her that he was proceeding to the forests. Startled at the dramatic turn of events, Urmila got up in a hurry and in the process, accidentally toppled the canvas and spilled colours on it. She lamented, " Alas! This beautiful picture of Sri Rama's wedding scene is totally spoilt now". Lakshmana said, " Urmila! I am responsible for spoiling your painting. Kaikeyi is responsible for ruining Rama's coronation as the emperor. Today, both of us have caused only damage to others. I am leaving now." Urmila's courage and strength of character now came to the fore. Lakshmana had already informed her that Sita too was accompanying Rama to the forest. Urmila was thrilled that her sister would accompany Rama and serve him. But she did not insist on following Lakshmana. On the contrary she told Lakshmana, "Lord! I know that you are proceeding to the forest with the sole objective of serving Sita and Rama. May you succeed without any obstacles. You must spend your days and nights in steadfast service to Rama and Sita. You need not worry about my welfare or even think about me. Never be concerned that you are not present by my side at Ayodhya to look after me. Forget Ayodhya itself because henceforth, the forest is your Ayodhya. This Ayodhya without you is the forest. Hence, do not give any scope for concerns about me. On my part I shall happily contemplate on you and spend my time here."[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]Urmila thus gave tremendous courage to her husband. She also foresaw the possibility of Lakshmana's service to Rama and Sita being disturbed whenever he thought of her. Hence she extracted a promise from her husband that he would not even think about her during the course of exile for fourteen years. She supposed," In the forest, Rama will be your father and Sita, your mother. Your primary concern should be to serve them faithfully. Hence, forget all of us here." This was the promise she took from Lakshmana and cheerfully sent Lakshmana to the forest. Kausalya might have grieved a little, but not Urmila.

This is the attribute of an ideal daughter-in-law. She must always encourage her husband by giving him strength and courage appropriately. A housewife is also called 'Grihalakshmi'and 'Dharmapatni'. Urmila discharged her duty as a Dharmapathni by encouraging Lakshmana to tread the path of righteousness.

Divine Discourse, May 18 2002, Summer Course - Ramayana - II
[/SIZE][/FONT]

 

[P.J.]

Dear PJ sir,

I have analysed the Pancha Kanya list and have come to this diagnosis.
I feel there is a reason why Gandhari was not listed as Pancha Kanyas:

I feel all the fantastic 5 Kanyas have some link with some controversial situation or dealt with some controversial male.


1)Ahalya..she was involved in a scandal with Indra which some authors say she was tricked by Indra and some authors say that she knew halfway that it was Indra but felt elated that she was desired by the King of the Devas.
Whatever the reason it was a scandal no doubt.
So her Pancha Kanya status conferred to her is to show the world that we should not judge anyone by her actions cos we have no idea what is the real situation is.


2)Sita...the ever pure Sita was kidnapped by the powerful Ravan and held captive by him.
Conservative individuals might consider a woman impure if held captive by another male for so long.
So here again the message is not to judge anyone cos a woman's purity is based on her inner self and true feelings which was shown by Sita.


3)Draupadi...married 5 men.
Till today many might not like the idea of a woman having more than 1 husband and people might tend to judge a person who is polyandrous.
So here again ...the message is for us in not to judge anyone cos Draupadi was pure at heart and served her 5 husbands till death.


4)Tara..here again there is a polyandrous relationship controversy.
According to some versions of the Ramayan..first Tara was wed to Vaali..the when Vaali was presumed to be dead..Sugriva marries Tara.
Then like tamil movie style..Vaali shows up to reclaim his kingdom and wife Tara and all hell breaks lose.

So same message..don't judge anyone..Tara was a victim of circumstances to be involved with 2 males.


5)Mandodari..She is the wife of a most controversial male of Treta Yuga..the mighty Ravana.
Mostly people feel that the wife of a anti hero should be an anti heroine herself too but that was not the case with Mandodari.

So here again..never judge a woman solely based on her husband's character.




So Dear PJ sir..I feel now it is clear why Gandhari never made it into the top 5 Pancha Kanya lists.
She was not linked with any controversial situation and never dealt with any controversial male.
She was married to the rather passive Dhritarasthra.

Renukaji

This is only an exchange of views.

Ahalya Draupadi Sita,Tara Mandodari tatha l
Pancha kanya smarenityam, maha pataka nashanam ll
Meditating upon the names of the five holiest women,
Ahalya, Draupadi, Sita, Tara and Mandodari
Verily destroys the greatest of sins
To club Ma Sita with other females ( except Mandodari) seems illogical.
Ahalya, Tara and Draupati all had relationship with more than one male.

Although Ma Sita was abducted by Ravan, He could not even touch her due to a curse.

Reg Mandodari, what is special about her to be named as one among the Panch Kanyas?

 

[renuka]

Renukaji

" passive Dhritarasthra" ? are you sure? he had an affair with a servant maid and got a Child!!!

Sauvali was a maid servant in the royal household and she used to attend on Dhitrarastra. The king fell for the maid’s charm she gave birth to Yuyutsu. This was the time when Gandhari was having problems delivering her children.

Falling for the 'maid servant' is inherent in male DNA it seems
Even Vidhura was born to a maid only.
He was conceived by Vyasadeva in the womb of the maidservant of Ambika, mother of Maharaja Pandu.

Reg Panch Kanya, none of them except MA Sita deserves a place there.
If you post a topic on that, you will get very interesting answers.

Dear Sir,

I am not surprised with Dhiratarasthra and the servant maid cos you see Kings always had harems and side kicks.
So that was nothing really outstanding and extra ordinary about his affair with his maid.

BTW why do you feel that only Sita deserves to be in the Panchakanya list and not the rest?

Draupadi was a shining example of a person who stayed with 5 husbands who never stood up for her at the time of need..if she still stayed with them..she deserves to be worshiped.
If I were her I would have stripped all the 5 guys...taken their nude pics..uploaded in You tube and walked off!

Mandodari had to put up with all the escapades of Ravan being so in love with Sita.
She still stayed..she could have run off with Vibheshana if she wanted!LOL
So here again..she was patient enough to tolerate everthing.

Ahalya....poor thing..suffered the most..being turned into stone when she was technically innocent.
She still went back to Gautam..she could have left Gautam for Indra if she wanted knowing very well Indra was so attracted to her.
So she is Pati Vrata.

Tara..well she too had to stand her 2 monkey males in her life.
Not easy to handle even 1 monkey...imagine 2?

So all of them deserve to be in the fantastic 5 list.

 

[renuka]

Renukaji

This is only an exchange of views.

Ahalya Draupadi Sita,Tara Mandodari tatha l
Pancha kanya smarenityam, maha pataka nashanam ll
Meditating upon the names of the five holiest women,
Ahalya, Draupadi, Sita, Tara and Mandodari
Verily destroys the greatest of sins
To club Ma Sita with other females ( except Mandodari) seems illogical.
Ahalya, Tara and Draupati all had relationship with more than one male.

Although Ma Sita was abducted by Ravan, He could not even touch her due to a curse.

Reg Mandodari, what is special about her to be named as one among the Panch Kanyas?

Dear Sir,

You are being judgmental...I think since you are a Sai Devotee like me..you must be aware of Sathya Sai Baba's discourse about Draupadi.
Sathya Sai Baba is all praises for her stating her pure heart that made God always stand by her.

Now coming back to our exchange of thoughts...you are basing purity on the number of males in a person's life.

Draupadi was married to all 5 men by vedic rights.
She was the Dharma patni of the Pandavas..so technically she is a pure woman cos all are her husbands.

Ahalya...she was cheated by Indra..so that equals to rape.

Tara..she married Sugriva after Vaali was presumed dead..so it was widow remarriage monkey style.

Mandodari..she was always giving good advise to Ravan..her words where pregnant with wisdom.

So this Pancha Kanya list makes us see purity beyond the body.

 

[renuka]

[TABLE="width: 100%"]
[TR]
[TD]The Forbearance of Draupadi

Summmer Showers in the Blue Mountains, 1976



Preamble

The following is an extract from Summer Showers in the Blue Mountains, 1976 where Swami gave the Summer Course in Spirituality and Indian Culture to College Students in Ootacamund (Ooty). It is said that these talks revealed hitherto unknown human aspects of Lord Krishna, and worthy of reading if one wishes to understand some of the human acts of this avatara.


Chapter 8, entitled 'Man should promote inner vision', it is inner vision that enables man and woman to handle the vissicitudes of life with nobility. The following account is an extract of this chapter, when Ashwatthama (who had slain all Draupadi's children) was brought before Draupadi. Draupadi sets an admirable example of nobility for modern women to emulate.

---

When Ashwatthama, who killed the Upapandavas, (Pandava children) was brought before Droupadi, in spite of her great grief at the loss of her children, she moved forward and touched his feet and paid respects to him. It is such great qualities of truth and forbearance that we should observe in the Pandavas and respect them for such qualities.

If the mothers of today were in such a state of suffering as Droupadi was, they would have pounced on Ashwatthama and strangled him to death, even if they did not have the strength to do that. But Droupadi had such sterling character that in her great suffering she only asked, "These Upapandavas who were killed by you did not come to you in any emotion or excitement. They did not have any weapons in their hands. How did you bring yourself to cut their throats and kill them when they were sleeping?"

In spite of the fact that all her sons were killed by Ashwatthama, she was telling him with great forbearance and equanimity of mind, "My husbands were the disciples of your father, Dronacharya. They learnt all aspects of weaponry from him; and you, who are the son of Dronacharya, killed my sons who should be like your disciples." This was the way in which she was pleading with Ashwatthama.

Bheema was unable to bear such sorrow; and because of this, he was in great emotion which drove him to the point of exhibiting his physical prowess to the world. In fact, he was looking at this quality of forbearance of Droupadi as a laughing matter. Bheema was greatly surprised at the peaceful attitude of Droupadi. He thought that the suffering of having lost all her children had driven her to insanity, for, otherwise he was not able to understand how a true mother could show such forbearance when the person who had killed all her children was standing before her. He said, "If you do not kill Ashwatthama, I will kill him with my fists."

Trikarana Suddhi (Purity of thought, word and deed) gives strength

Droupadi was a great woman with exemplary character. If only the women of today take her as an example and follow her qualities of forbearance and calmness, our country will improve very much. When Bheema, the strong person, was preparing to kill Ashwatthama with his fists, would it be possible for a weakling like Droupadi to go and stop Bheema? It was only the purity of her thought that was her strength.

She had no physical strength. Then she told Bheema, "It is not right for you to kill a person who is afraid, who comes to you asking for shelter, a person who is asleep, or a person who is drunk and has forgotten himself. It is not right to kill such helpless people."

Droupadi was such a great woman that in order to protect right conduct, she would even oppose her husbands. She was not a woman who would bring disrepute, by any of her acts, either to her husbands, or to her father, or to her sons. She did not want anyone to get hurt by her acts.

When Pandavas were preparing to go to the forest, Dharmaraja sent for Droupadi and asked her to sit by his side. Dharmaraja told her, "Owing to certain personal differences between the Pandavas and the Kauravas, a situation has come about by which we will have to go to the forest." He told Droupadi that these troubles and tribulations were something which they could not avoid, and that it was a very hard thing to be living in a forest for twelve years and follow it up with one year in which they had to remain incognito.

Dharmaraja told her that the men will somehow bear the difficulties and that it was not an occasion for women to go into the forest, and he advised her to remain back and take care of the old Dhritharashtra and Gandhari.

The Pandavas had asked Droupadi to take care of Dhritharashtra and Gandhari, the two main people who were cruel and responsible for their having to go to the forest. This is a very great quality in the Pandavas, and we must learn a lesson from this conduct. If the Pandavas really hated the Kauravas, is there any meaning in this act; and can we justify the fact that the Pandavas asked Droupadi to stay back and serve the Kauravas? The moral of this is that whatever has to happen in one's life will happen, but to take such inevitable events and use them to promote hatred is not the correct thing to do, and it is not a good human character.
The pain which we have to experience, the misfortunes which come to us and the troubles which we have, are not things which arise externally, nor are they God given. They are simply things which are the result of our own actions. It is only as a result of one's own weakness, that man blames someone else for the troubles and misfortunes that he gets. This is not a right attitude. Mahabharatha teaches us that it is not right to blame others for our troubles.

Download Chapter 8, Summer Showers in Blue Mountains, 1976 (PDF)

---

Top of Page[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

 

[P.J.]

Dear Sir,

I am not surprised with Dhiratarasthra and the servant maid cos you see Kings always had harems and side kicks.
So that was nothing really outstanding and extra ordinary about his affair with his maid.

BTW why do you feel that only Sita deserves to be in the Panchakanya list and not the rest?

Draupadi was a shining example of a person who stayed with 5 husbands who never stood up for her at the time of need..if she still stayed with them..she deserves to be worshiped.
If I were her I would have stripped all the 5 guys...taken their nude pics..uploaded in You tube and walked off!

Mandodari had to put up with all the escapades of Ravan being so in love with Sita.
She still stayed..she could have run off with Vibheshana if she wanted!LOL
So here again..she was patient enough to tolerate everthing.

Ahalya....poor thing..suffered the most..being turned into stone when she was technically innocent.
She still went back to Gautam..she could have left Gautam for Indra if she wanted knowing very well Indra was so attracted to her.
So she is Pati Vrata.

Tara..well she too had to stand her 2 monkey males in her life.
Not easy to handle even 1 monkey...imagine 2?

So all of them deserve to be in the fantastic 5 list.

Renukaji
I appreciate your knowledge on these; it is very interesting to exchange views with knowledgeable persons;

You say Ahalya ...poor thing..suffered the most..being turned into stone when she was technically innocent.

Being a Patni of a great Rishi she would definitely recognised an alien.

Here you see:

Ahalya is not innocent



Ahalya knew who was before her, she understood it was Lord Indra; she was happy to be seduced by Indra


This is in VALMIKI RAMAYANA.

Valmiki Ramayana, Balakanda, 1-48-19:

'muni vesam sahasraaksam vijnaaya raghunandana |
matim cakaara durmedhaa deva raaja kutuuhalaat ||

"Oh, Rama, the legatee of Raghu, though knowing him as the Thousand-eyed Indra in the guise of her husband Gautama, she is inclined to have union ill-advisedly, only to satisfy the impassion of the King of Gods.

(Her thinking is: 'This is none but Indra in the guise of my husband, for my husband never asks me like this nor he violates times... I heard that Indra is seeking me for a long time... and when King of Gods expresses such a desire, it cannot be refused... let him have it…)

Valmiki Ramayana, Balakanda, 1-48-20, 21a:
"She felt fulfilled in her heart of hearts and then she said this to that best god Indra, 'I am gratified in complying with your wish, oh, best of gods, get going oh, lord, from here quickly, oh, ruler of gods, always safeguard yourself and me from Sage Gautama.' Thus, Ahalya said to Indra.

I will come back to counter your views about Draupati also.
Please take this as an exchange of views only.