A few thoughts on Smt. Subha Narayan's "Question on Draupadi" - Part 4(concluded)

[Guest guest]

Dear members,

 

We are continuing from Part-3 posted earlier.

 

***********

 

Two significant incidents in the Mahabharatha reveal

to us thus two different and contrasting facets of

Draupadi's character. They throw up interesting

questions too.

 

In the first instance she swore vengeance against the

Kauravas for a wrong done unto her by them. In the

second, surprisingly, she forsook vengeance against

Aswatthama, who again did great wrong unto her on

behalf of the Kauravas. It was the same person,

Draupadi, however, who acted one way at one point of

time and in a diametrically opposite way at another.

We should ask 'Why?'

 

The Mahabharatha further tells us that the cause for

vengeance in one case was morally no less compelling

than in the other. So if Draupadi was acting out of a

certain vicious self-interest in the first situation,

what was her real motive for action in the second? Was

it not entirely self-less? If it was, in fact,

selfless, how to explain the wide difference in the

nature of her responses? It seems almost magical, is

it not, that Draupadi could act so differently?

 

These are helpful questions to ponder about, long and

hard. It is in the pondering indeed that one really

profits from and enjoys studying the Mahabharatha, not

by being impatient for pat, off-the-shelf answers and

slick, ready-to-eat explanations.

 

What do the two incidents really convey to us?

 

Firstly, Draupadi's character is by no means a static

one in the Mahabharatha. Like all human beings, and

like all great epic characters, Draupadi too was

evolving as a personality through all the the

ups-and-downs, highs-&-lows, agony and ecstasy, griefs

and joys of her pretty turbulent life throughout the

Mahabharatha. From swearing Vengeance to completely

forsaking it, Draupadi travelled a great distance

indeed in the journey of life. How was that long

arduous journey enabled? Surely, it was her act of

"saraNagati".

 

Secondly, the act of "sharaNagati" in Hastinapur did

leave a lasting if not immediate impact upon

Draupadi's character. It took its time indeed to work

its magic, but magic it certainly did work upon her

soul. From a rather baleful personality she might once

have been when she undertook the first terrible vow,

we see how she went on eventually to transform herself

into a benign, saintly soul by the time the

Kurukshetra War ended and when she chose, in that

moment of climactic glory, to grant absolute pardon to

the killer of her sons, the dreaded Aswathamma.

 

Thirdly, "saraNagathi" is really not so much God's

magic-wand as it is His garden-tool. Through it, God

brings about gradual but everlasting change -- call it

the flowering of personality and the ripening of

wisdom -- God brings about such a change within a

devotee's heart. Such personality-change can begin

manifesting in outward behaviour in a relatively short

period of time, as say, in the case of the 'rAkshasa',

Vibheeshana in the Ramayana, or else it can be that

the pace of change is plodding but sure, as in the

case of Draupadi.

 

(This was the point of "prArabdha karma", a rather

heavy technical term, that Sri Anbil Ramaswamy was

making in his own comments).

 

************

 

"The quality of Mercy", wrote an old poet, "is twice

blest. It blesseth him that gives and him that takes".

 

Draupadi's "saraNagati" in the Mahabharatha is a

unique illustration of the above adage.

 

All of us, without exception, yearn hard and long

indeed to 'receive' the divine compassion of God. But

how many of us, if the earthly situation or

circumstance were to so arise, how many of us would be

ready to gladly 'give' unconditional compassion to

those around us , especially to those whom we might

have good reason to regard inimically?

 

We go to a temple, stand before the deity and ask, "O

Lord, I have long completely surrendered to You! But

you have not yet showered the blessing of Compassion

upon me! When shall that day come?" To that question

the Almighty, we might well imagine, may respond

smilingly with a telling counter-question, "You shall

'receive' my own Compassion one day, of course, but

only when I see that you are ready and capable of

whole-heartedly 'giving' such compassion yourself!

Until then must you wait".

 

In the moment when Draupadi was faced with a choice

--either to 'take' rightful Vengeance in seeking

Aswatthma's death or to 'give' him the compassion of

her whole heart and grant the killer of her children

eternal pardon -- in that precise moment indeed did

Draupadi's earlier act of 'saraNagati', we should say,

get consummated and finally bear fruit. It was in that

latter moment indeed, and not so much in the earlier

and more popular scene of her 'disrobement' at the

royal court of Hastinapur, that the Grace of the

Almighty fall in full and ultimate measure upon

Draupadi.

 

It is such moments indeed as Draupadi's, such glorious

scenes in our ítihAsas and 'purAnAs', which reveal to

us the hallmark of genuine 'saraNagati'...

 

*************

 

Trust, the above postings of mine will go some way in

dispelling the doubts Smt.Subha Narayan had regarding

the true character of Draupadi and provide some

insight into Draupadi's act of 'saraNagati'.

 

Thanks and regards,

 

dAsan,

 

Sudarshan

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Regards,

 

dAsan,

Sudarshan

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

______________________

India Matrimony: Find your life partner online

Go to: http://.shaadi.com/india-matrimony

[Guest guest]

In the first instance she swore vengeance against theKauravas for a

wrong done unto her by them. In thesecond, surprisingly, she forsook

vengeance againstAswatthama, who again did great wrong unto her

onbehalf of the Kauravas. It was the same person,Draupadi, however,

who acted one way at one point oftime and in a diametrically opposite

way at another.We should ask 'Why?'

Dear Sri Sudarshan and other bhagavathas -

Please forgive this cashew-nut for intrusion. I cannot agree that she

was a vengeful person who transformed in to a saintly character. She

was always saintly. Even in the court of Hastinapur she did not take

any vow against Drona, Bhishma etc., who were worshippable. It is for

the same reason that she did not want to kill Asvattama because she

considered a representative of Drona, their brahmana guru and hence a

dvia bandhu. Srimad Bhagavatham clearly enumerates the reasons why she

did not want to punish him : Ashvattama is a brahmana, guru, his

death will cause grievous death of krpi, wife of dronacharya and will

bring grief to the royal family. The reference is given below :

 

1) uvaca casahanty asya bandhananayanam sati mucyatam ucyatam esha

brahmano nitaram guruh (SB 1.7.43)

 

She could not tolerate Asvatthama's being bound by ropes, and being a

devoted lady, she said: Release him, for he is a brahmana, our guru.

 

2) sarahasyo dhanur-vedah savisargopasamyamah astra-gramas ca bhavata

sikshito yad-anugrahat SB (1.7.44)

 

It was by Dronacarya's mercy that you learned the military art of

throwing arrows and the confidential art of controlling weapons.

 

3) sa esha bhagavan dronah praja-rupena vartate tasyatmano 'rdham patny aste nanvagad virasuh

kripi (SB 1.7.45)

 

He [Dronacarya] is certainly still existing, being represented by his

son. His wife Kripi did not undergo a sati with him because she had a

son.

 

4) tad dharmajna maha-bhaga bhavadbhir gauravam kulam vrijinam narhati

praptum pujyam vandyam abhikshnasah (SB 1.7.46)

 

O most fortunate one who knows the principles of religion, it is not

good for you to cause grief to glorious family members who are always

respectable and worshipful.

 

5) ma rodid asya janani gautami pati-devata yathaham mrita-vatsarta

rodimy asru-mukhi muhuh (SB 1.7.47)

 

My lord, do not make the wife of Dronacarya cry like me. I am

aggrieved for the death of my sons. She need not cry constantly like

me.

 

6) yaih kopitam brahma-kulam rajanyair ajitatmabhih tat kulam

pradahaty asu sanubandham sucarpitam (SB 1.7.48)

 

If the kingly administrative order, being unrestricted in sense

control, offends the brahmana order and enrages them, then the fire

of that rage burns up the whole body of the royal family and brings

grief upon all.

----------------------------

How can he not be punished ? Even Drona was killed. Drona had to be

killed because he was arrayed in the battlefield. So a kshatriya was

dharma-bound to kill his enemies on the battlefield. But Asvattama

was not on the battlefield directly arrayed. Also, it is not that he

was not punished. Based on Lord Krishna's orders, Arjuna cut his hair

and removed his jewel before driving him away. Srimad Bhagavatham says

:

 

7) vapanam dravinadanam sthanan niryapanam tatha esha hi brahma-bandhunam vadho nanyo 'sti daihikah

Cutting the hair from his head, depriving him of his wealth and

driving him from his residence are the prescribed punishments for the

relative of a brahmana. There is no injunction for killing the body.

 

Once again, forgive me for my intrusion.

 

Best RegardsRajaram V.

[Guest guest]

Oppiliappan, Rajaram Venkataramani

<v_raja_ram> wrote:

 

>

> Dear Sri Sudarshan and other bhagavathas -

>

> Please forgive this cashew-nut for intrusion. I cannot agree that

she was a vengeful person who transformed in to a saintly character.

She was always saintly.

 

 

Dear friend,

Very good "pramANam" indeed that you have culled to support your

views. Thank you.

 

Rgds,

dAsan,

Sudarshan