Mother’s Love: Gandhari’s First Night

[renuka]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp Email Share Link

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.

Dear Sir,

I am aware that Ahalya's case is controversial..in the sense was she aware that it was Indra and not her husband?

Ok let's look at this case at a different angle.

Sages are well known of neglecting their wives otherwise there would have not been the rule made that "one should not violate the bed of the Guru..meaning one should not copulate with the Guru's wife"

The age difference between sages and their wives used to be quite a difference too.
The wives were much younger and would have needed more attention which their sage husbands would often neglect.

So I feel may be Ahalya was experimenting with her sexuality if at all she was found to be guilty in this case..but should we not blame Gautam also in this case cos why was his wife attracted to someone else if he had payed her attention?

Now there is another version that Ahalya was a piece of Barren Land..and not really a woman to start with.

read this:Another interpretation for Ahalya

According to the story of Ahalya (in the Ramayana), sage Gautama’s wife supposedly had turned into a pillar of salt because of her liaison with Indra (the giver of rain) and Rama restored her back to life. Ahalya basically could represent the un-plow-able (a-hal-ya) and infertile land belonging to Gautama near his hermitage. It probably had turned barren through over-use and excessive rains. The excess water from Indra’s rains could have inundated this land (belonging to Gautama) -- churning and bringing up the chemicals in the soil to the surface as salt -- making it completely infertile. This perhaps explains the symbolism behind story of Ahalya being cursed into a pillar of salt because of her association with Indra (or his rainwater). Note that, only later, when Rama (during his exile) would visit the dead (barren) Ahalya and touch her with his feet (or work on the barren land), Ahalya (or a-hal-ya) would be restored to life (making the land fertile again). Moreover, according to some Ramayana versions, restoration of ahalya to life by Rama was so complete and successful as if the previously barren ‘lady’ (land) underwent thousands of ‘vaginal birthings’ (vegetation sproutings). Needless to say, this story also shows prince Rama’s preparedness to perform any task (high, low or even manual) and adhere to his duty.

 

[P.J.]

Dear Sir,

I am aware that Ahalya's case is controversial..in the sense was she aware that it was Indra and not her husband?

Ok let's look at this case at a different angle.

Sages are well known of neglecting their wives otherwise there would have not been the rule made that "one should not violate the bed of the Guru..meaning one should not copulate with the Guru's wife"

The age difference between sages and their wives used to be quite a difference too.
The wives were much younger and would have needed more attention which their sage husbands would often neglect.

So I feel may be Ahalya was experimenting with her sexuality if at all she was found to be guilty in this case..but should we not blame Gautam also in this case cos why was his wife attracted to someone else if he had payed her attention?

Now there is another version that Ahalya was a piece of Barren Land..and not really a woman to start with.

read this:Another interpretation for Ahalya

According to the story of Ahalya (in the Ramayana), sage Gautama’s wife supposedly had turned into a pillar of salt because of her liaison with Indra (the giver of rain) and Rama restored her back to life. Ahalya basically could represent the un-plow-able (a-hal-ya) and infertile land belonging to Gautama near his hermitage. It probably had turned barren through over-use and excessive rains. The excess water from Indra’s rains could have inundated this land (belonging to Gautama) -- churning and bringing up the chemicals in the soil to the surface as salt -- making it completely infertile. This perhaps explains the symbolism behind story of Ahalya being cursed into a pillar of salt because of her association with Indra (or his rainwater). Note that, only later, when Rama (during his exile) would visit the dead (barren) Ahalya and touch her with his feet (or work on the barren land), Ahalya (or a-hal-ya) would be restored to life (making the land fertile again). Moreover, according to some Ramayana versions, restoration of ahalya to life by Rama was so complete and successful as if the previously barren ‘lady’ (land) underwent thousands of ‘vaginal birthings’ (vegetation sproutings). Needless to say, this story also shows prince Rama’s preparedness to perform any task (high, low or even manual) and adhere to his duty.

Renukaji

There are so many write ups about Ahalya's episode;
We have to depend up on only Valmiki Ramayan for any reference.

 

[P.J.]

Renukaji
Reg Draupati :

The ref which you gave is not justifying Drupati as maha sati


Here is what is said by Baba about Draupati


“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.”


Draupadi was not referred to as a Mahasati, because she was a little jealous of Subhadra, who was Arjuna's favorite wife.

There's one list of Pativratas which Sita herself mentions in Sundarkand, 24th chapt,verses 10,11,12 (Valmiki Ramayana)

"Like the highly fortunate Sachi who waits upon Indra, like Arundhati on Vasishta, like Rohini on the Moon God, like Lopamudra on Agastya, like Sukanya on Chyavana, like Savitri on Satyavanta, like Srimati on Kapila, like Madayanti on Saudasa, like Kesini on Sagara, like Damayanti the daughter of Bhima, devoted to husband Nala, in the same way I am devoted to my husband Rama, the best in Ikshvaku dynasty."

Although Ramayan happened before Mahabarata, this verse gives us some guidance about ‘pati vitratas’

Draupati was Nalayani in her earlier birth; It is stated that in an earlier birth as Nalayani (also named Indrasena), she was married to Maudgalya, an irascible sage afflicted with leprosy. She was so utterly devoted to her abusive husband that when a finger of his, dropped into their meal, she took it out and calmly ate the rice without revulsion. Pleased by this, Maudgalya offered her a boon, and she asked him to make love to her in five lovely forms. As she was insatiable, Maudgalya got fed up and became an ascetic. When she remonstrated and insisted that he continue their love-life, he cursed her to be reborn and have five husbands to satisfy her lust.

Thereupon she practiced severe penance and pleased Lord Shiva with her prayers. He granted a boon to her. Nalayani said that she wanted a husband and to ensure that her request was heard, she repeated it five times in all. Shiva then said that in her next life she would have five husbands. She obtained the boon of regaining virginity after being with each husband.

Do you think that such a woman be listed with Ma Sita ?
Although she regains her virginity after being with each husband , can she be called as real Virgin?

 

[renuka]

Shiva then said that in her next life she would have five husbands. She obtained the boon of regaining virginity after being with each husband.

Do you think that such a woman be listed with Ma Sita ?
Although she regains her virginity after being with each husband , can she be called as real Virgin?

Dear Sir,

Virginity is a state of mind and not just a physical state alone.

Virginity means purity and not merely absence of sexual intercourse.

Sexuality of a woman is often portrayed in a negative manner when technically it is not so.

As Nalayani in her previous birth she had a flight of fantasy with her own husband..I do not see anything wrong with that.
It is Halal I feel.
It was not lust but a desire which was still very much in the wed lock.

The mind is the greatest sexual organ...after all the same Ramayan says that "The Mind is the Cause of all Activities of the Sense Organs"

So Nalayani was just exploring the mazes of her mind but it was her husband who could not understand her.

So God blessed her in her next life so that her desire could be carried out.

After all she wanted only 1 husband with all the 5 qualities and so happened she repeated it 5 times she got 5 husbands..what do you expect too coming from Lord Shiva.. cos after all Om Namah Shivaya itself is a Panchaakshari Mantra.

So it was case of to obtain 5 mangoes with one stone.

I still feel you are only looking at the sexual aspect of Draupadi that she had 5 husbands and over looking her true nature and virtue.

 

[P.J.]

I still feel you are only looking at the sexual aspect of Draupadi that she had 5 husbands and over looking her true nature and virtue.[/QUOTE]

Renukaji

I still feel Draupati is not fit to be in the company of Ma Sita.

 

[P.J.]

Renukaji

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

Really a tough job.

About Tara

Though Valmiki Ramayana doesn’t speak about Vanara customs, the fact that it suggestively refers to the intimate moments between Sugriva and Tara and the fact that Lakshmana mentions ‘your husband’ referring to Sugriva when speaking to Tara, shows for certain that it was the accepted practice for a Vanara to marry his brother’s wife after the death of the brother.
“Intent upon the gratification of his senses, this husband of yours has lost sight of the acquisition of religious merit and worldly riches, O lady charged with the duty of looking of the interests of your husband!” (Ibid, Sloka 43)

Do you think that she should be clubbed with MA Sita as Pancha Kanya?

 

[renuka]

Renukaji

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

Really a tough job.

About Tara

Though Valmiki Ramayana doesn’t speak about Vanara customs, the fact that it suggestively refers to the intimate moments between Sugriva and Tara and the fact that Lakshmana mentions ‘your husband’ referring to Sugriva when speaking to Tara, shows for certain that it was the accepted practice for a Vanara to marry his brother’s wife after the death of the brother.
“Intent upon the gratification of his senses, this husband of yours has lost sight of the acquisition of religious merit and worldly riches, O lady charged with the duty of looking of the interests of your husband!” (Ibid, Sloka 43)

Do you think that she should be clubbed with MA Sita as Pancha Kanya?

Dear Sir,

When a custom is accepted and practiced by a community be it humans or monkeys they are still within Dharma.

So I don't see any reason why Tara should not be in the Fantastic 5.

 

[renuka]

Renukaji

I still feel Draupati is not fit to be in the company of Ma Sita.

Dear Sir,

Well Lord Krishna surely did not think that way..We can be really sure.

He was always to her rescue in the time of need.

God always rescues the pure at heart..do we need to say more?

 

[renuka]

Ok sir..here goes..Sita did have an impure thought at least once in Ramayan.

She falsely accused Lakshmana of the worst possible crime of having an eye on her...when Lakshman had always looked at her only a mother to the point that he could only recognize her anklets and not any other jewelery.

 

[P.J.]

Renukaji

I appreciate your wisdom, very rarely found.
You are also quick to respond and hold your point.
The same quality i find in Raji Ram madam also.

Please do not take my arguments as against you.
It is only for the sake of gaining knowledge.

 

[P.J.]

Renukaji
Lord Krishna helping Draupati has nothing to do with her Virginity.

 

[london swaminathan]

Urmila's story is very interesting.
Both Lakshmana and Urmila have sacrificed their family life for at least 14 years.
We have heard about 48 year Brahmacharya in Tirumiurukatruppadai and other scriptures.
But here is a case of Kalyanam panniyum Brahmachari= even when you are married you have to lead a bachelor's life!!
We must include Urmila in Pancha kanya list, dropping Ahalya.

 

[P.J.]

Urmila's story is very interesting.
Both Lakshmana and Urmila have sacrificed their family life for at least 14 years.
We have heard about 48 year Brahmacharya in Tirumiurukatruppadai and other scriptures.
But here is a case of Kalyanam panniyum Brahmachari= even when you are married you have to lead a bachelor's life!!
We must include Urmila in Pancha kanya list, dropping Ahalya.

Sir

Yes; Ahalya is not a worthy in the punch of Puncha Kanya.
Urmila lived a life of Sanyasi the entire period of 14 years not leaving from the same room!!

 

[prasad1]

None of them did anything for humanity.
They all lived selfish life.
I would rather include Mother Theresa in any women to be celebrated.

 

[prasad1]

In a race the judge the best car:
There is no point in introducing Bullock cart, ox cart, horse, or steam engines.
So to judge the best women, all the entries posted do not measure up.

 

[renuka]

Renukaji

I appreciate your wisdom, very rarely found.
You are also quick to respond and hold your point.
The same quality i find in Raji Ram madam also.

Please do not take my arguments as against you.
It is only for the sake of gaining knowledge.

Dear Sir,

I like exchanging views like this..it really stimulates the mind.
Don't worry I am not misunderstanding any post.

Regards
Renu

 

[renuka]

Renukaji
Lord Krishna helping Draupati has nothing to do with her Virginity.

Dear Sir,

Is physical virginity the only factor for a woman's existence?

After all both men and women lose it eventually to some one they are comfortable with to have a relationship.

Physical Virginity for a woman is just a barrier formed by a tissue that blocks some amount of entry of invading organisms in a pre pubertal person.

Draupadi is a woman who lived within her code of Dharma which was sanctioned at that time.

I feel you are not too comfortable with the fact that she had multiple husbands.

Does that make her lesser of a woman in anyway?

 

[renuka]

Urmila's story is very interesting.
Both Lakshmana and Urmila have sacrificed their family life for at least 14 years.
We have heard about 48 year Brahmacharya in Tirumiurukatruppadai and other scriptures.
But here is a case of Kalyanam panniyum Brahmachari= even when you are married you have to lead a bachelor's life!!
We must include Urmila in Pancha kanya list, dropping Ahalya.

Dear Sir,

Why do we have to drop Ahalya?

We can add on Urmila but why drop Ahalya?

 

[renuka]

None of them did anything for humanity.
They all lived selfish life.
I would rather include Mother Theresa in any women to be celebrated.

Dear Prasad ji,

No doubt Mother Theresa did a lot for society but she always made everyone she helped a Christian.

For me I feel a true selfless person would let people retain their original religion when rendering help.

 

[renuka]

BTW Draupadi is the ultimate obedient Daughter In Law..she never went against her Mother In Laws wishes of wanting her to be equally shared with all the brothers and be their wife.

So she is still the best I feel.

 

[biswa]

Why the obsession about virginity in this thread? I like Mr. Prasad's suggestion actually. In fact the kanya suggested by him may also have been a virgin herself.

 

[renuka]

I was just wondering...many sages and rishis spent all their time doing Yagnas for the Devas especially to please Indra the Devendra.
Satisfaction of the Devas were of utmost importance.

So why can't we just view the whole Ahalya episode as Ahalya doing a Yagna to please Indra.

After all sages/rishis had to take all the trouble to do Yagnas not even sure of the actual outcome but here Devendra himself came looking for her on his own accord.

So I feel we just should view this whole episode as a Yagna and nothing more or less.

 

[Raji Ram]

Dear Prasad Sir,

Swaminathan Sir is not posting these for you to read! :lol:

 

[zebra16]

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:


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.

Is this Tara (wife of Vali) a pancha kanya?. I thought the other Tara, who left Guru Bruhaspathi and went on to live with Chandra for a while and who was brought back to Bruhaspathi was the pancha kanya.

 

[renuka]

Is this Tara (wife of Vali) a pancha kanya?. I thought the other Tara, who left Guru Bruhaspathi and went on to live with Chandra for a while and who was brought back to Bruhaspathi was the pancha kanya.

Dear Sir,

As far as I know it is Tara of Ramayan fame.