Many people were asking for it so here it is.
PS - Yaha gyaani vyaktiyo ko chhod ke kisi ka maan nahi rakha jata. Bas gali nahi denge, lekin baki sab boldenge.
□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□
Many people like to think that Pandavas didn't love Draupadi, never respected her, she was the cause of war, she only loved Arjun and also secretly loved Karn.
Draupadi was one of the Panchakanyas, that is 5 Satis whose chanting of names can free you from one sin.
And do you even know what a Sati woman is !?
I am not the ones who die on their husband's pyre, but those who dedicated their entire lives to their husband and would die to save their husband's honor.
The Panchkanyas were - Ahilya, Tara, Mandodari, Draupadi, Kunti (sometimes Sita)
Now you can understand that its not about who is your husband or how many husbands you have. But its about your dedication to him.
Listen to one thing very clearly !
Draupadi wouldn't have been a Sati if she didn't love all the Pandavas equally !
Draupadi wouldn't have been a Sati if she loved Karn !
Draupadi always wanted Arjun to be her husband and that's why the swayamvar was designed in such a way that only Arjun could win.
Karn wasn't insulted by Draupadi, he failed to string the Shiv Dhanush Kindhura, like most of the contenders.
And Draupadi never even liked him in the first place, so Karn fans don't get delusional in the 'greatness' of your Bhagveer yoddha.
The marriage of Draupadi and Pandavas was a successful one, yes successful. And a marriage can only succeed when there is mutual trust, love and respect.
So yes PANDAVAS DID LOVE AND RESPECT DRAUPADI !!!!!!
Draupadi never said "Andhe ka Putra Anda" nor did she laugh ! She wasn't present in the Mayasabha !!! So she never insulted Duryodhan.
Just like I said in the previous chapter about Yudhishtir, Krishna wouldn't have chosen anyone to become Samragyi of Bharatvarsh.
Draupadi was a pious woman, her life was full of struggles yet she didn't lose her austerity and composure. That's why Krishna chose her to be Samragyi.
He could've also chosen Arjun and Subhadra because he recieved eternal brahmagyan and she was Yogmaya but no he chose Yuddhishtir and Draupadi.
And if you think the war happened because of Draupadi, then darling you're just stupid.
I've said it before and I'll say it again -
Ramayan aur Mahabharat ka yudh Mata Sita aur Draupadi ke karan nahi huya, yudh huya kyuki kuch purush mariyada mei na reh sake aur nari ka apmaan kiya.
But its a sad reality that society blames everything on women, and never hold men accountable for anything.
What was Draupadi's fault that she was dragged like an animal in the court of men ? What was her fault that she was disrobed ?
Some say that Draupadi deserved it because she insulted Duryodhan, which she never did, but even if had happened then still there is a difference between a man being verbally insulted and a woman being disrobed in front of all the men.
And what the Pandavas did was fine, the Kauravas deserved their death like that. This also shows how much the Pandavas loved Panchali that to avenge her honor they waged war against their own family.
Sympathizing with Gandhari and foul mouthing Draupadi ? You forget that she too lost all her sons. 100 children or 5, it will hurt the same, when you lose all of them.
Draupadi's situation was actually worse than Gandhari, for Draupadi never got to love and raise her sons, never got to see their childhood, never got to see them grow up. What did she see ? Their funeral pyres.
So to all the Draupadi haters who call her names, and show their maturity and morals I have only one thing to say.
Tum kaise uss Draupadi ka apmaan karoge jiski laaj swayam Narayan ne bachayi hai ?
Pandavo aur Panchali ke sambandh ko Paramaatma ne samman diya,
Unn par laalchan lagate ho ? Tumhe itna kisne gyaan diya ?□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□
A/NBOLO YAGYASENI SATI DRAUPADI KI JAI !
Seriously there are increasing amounts of people who side with Kauravas and hate Pandavas....plain stupidity and misguidance.
YOU ARE READING
BHARATVARSH
De TodoA book of our glorious history, facts and myths. What we have been told vs what actually happened.