A few thoughts on Smt. Subha Narayan's Question on Draupadi

[Guest guest]

SrI:

 

PranAmam,

 

My humble opinion on this matter for what it is worth:

 

Instead of looking at Draupadi as a literal woman caught in a grave

situation, I feel it is more insightful to look at the symbolism of

the situation .

 

The Kauravas represent the many evils and dangers of the external

world and the Pandavas represent the five senses with which a person

deals with the external world. Draupadi I feel represents the Jivan,

that undergoes trials and tribulations in the external world.

 

At the moment of her disrobing the Jivan "Draupadi" gets Bhagavat

Satshatkaram not unlike that of Gajendra Azhwar, I suppose. She

realizes that her husbands (the five senses), her relatives, her

friends etc are no use in any fight against the many dangers of the

evil world (meaning sense desires, greed etc).

 

When Draupadi (the jeevan) realizes that the ultimate refuge and only

savior is Sriman Narayanan alone, she feels overwhelmed and promises

to "kill Duschachana and the Kauravas and splatter their blood on her

hair", which I think means that the Jeevan vows to kill all worldly

desires and evils and only be an instrument of God and His Love.

 

Seeing in this context I feel that there is no conflict or

contradiction in Draupadi's vows to destroy the Kauravas after her

"Saranagathi".

 

I seek all the learned members's apologies for any erroneous assumptions on my behalf.

 

Srimad Azhagiya Singar Thiruvadi

Muralidharan Desikachari

 

 

-

sudarshan madabushi

tiruvenkatam

Cc: ; oppiliappan

Monday, March 07, 2005 2:34 AM

A few thoughts on Smt. Subha Narayan's

"Question on Draupadi" - Part Dear members,Many of you posted your

views on the subject. Manyposted it on other lists like SriRangasri

&Oppiliappan too. Many thanks for insights and inputs.I am sure

Smt.Subha Narayan, the originalcorrespondent in this thread of

discussion, would behappy with the variety of scholarly and

interestingresponses received. *************My own

comment on the subject matter is as follows.Smt.Subha Narayan can

choose to ponder over it too:To my mind, Smt.Subha's question cannot

be adequatelyanswered with reference to the doctrine of"saraNagati"

alone, as many members have seen it fitto do. Her question was with

specific reference to theportrayal of Draupadi's CHARACTER -- most

notably herseemingly vengeful behaviour which to anyone readingthe

Mahabharatha does appear to be terribly at oddswith the personality

of one who has undergone"saraNagati", witnessed first-hand the

miracle of Godand, as one would rightly expect, emerged from

theexperience as a profoundly transformed being.Draupadi's

experience, after all, was no ordinaryexperience... it was surely a

sort of "punar-janma"(re-birth, resurrection), and hence it is in

thatlight that we must examine the nature of her severevow of

vengeance. *************It would be, in my opinion,

rather too facile if notuncharitable an explanation to say that the

purpose ofDraupadi's "saraNagati" was far more to save her

skin(pardon the pun) than to seek "mOksha". Was

Draupadi'sself-surrender merely for the sake of endless yards ofsilk?

The dramatic setting of the Mahabharatha may seem tosuperficially

suggest that Draupadi's "saraNAgati" wassolely for the sake of

"mAna-sammrakshaNam" (theprotection of womanly dignity) but I don't

think wehave really any firm grounds on that score on which toassert

conclusively that Draupadi was not a true"mumUkshu". (For that

matter, who in this world canindeed sit in judgment over another and

say with anycertainty that he/she is, or is not, a

genuine"mumUkshu"?) Again, who can say what exactly went on inside

poorDraupadi's mind in that terrible moment of her crisis?Can one

really disprove it if it were stated thathaving lost everything in

life -- womanly honour,royal dignity, husband(s), palace, queenhood

-- havinglost everything, Draupadi had no other earthly purposeor

meaning left in life, and hence, under thecircumsances, she cried out

to the Almighty not somuch for divine intervention to protect her

frombodily outrage as, perhaps, actually for spiritualdeliverance

from earthly bondage? *******************Even from a

doctrinal point of view, it is not easy tobelieve that life after

"saraNAgati" might well remainin the 'back to business-as-usual'

mode. It isdifficult to believe that, "saraNAgati" or no"saraNAgati",

we all may actually be compelled tocontinue behaving quite as ever

before thanks to theoperation of our "prArabdha" or some such

residual"karma". It makes us suspect that perhaps, in theultimate

analysis, the outcome of "saraNagati" isafter all only a moral

neuter. If an experience such as Draupadi's "saraNAgathi" didnot

bring about profound personality transformation inher -- making her,

for example, a kinder, morecompassionate, more patient, more

forgiving, moreforbearing person and hence a much stronger personthan

ever before -- if an experience such as hers didnot really succeed in

leaving a deep and lastingimpact on Draupadi's innermost self, and

failed, infact, to cleanse out the evil of human vengeanceharboured

inside her heart, we may be actuallypardoned for thinking then that

the "tattva" ofabsolute "saraNAgati" at the feet of the Almighty

haslittle significance for mankind. If "saraNagati" merely provided

Draupadi a wardrobejust in the nick of time, and did nothing by way

oftransforming her inner being, we should ask, was ittrue

"saraNAgati"? And again, if an act of"saraNAgati" cannot really

overwhelm or overcome thedeepest of evil passions residing within us

-- i.e. if"prArabdha" does indeed in the end always prevail

andtriumph over individual destiny, no matter what --then of what use

or value is such "saraNAgati" toMan's spiritual aspiration or progress

in this life?A contemplation of questions as above lands us in aheap

of many such theological issues and moral doubts.

**************In my opinion, we should not seek an

overlydoctrinaire explanation for Draupadi's conduct.Instead we

should seek our answers elsewhere.We should seek answers, I would

say, in the storylineof the Mahabharatha itself where a far

betterexplanation and account of Draupadi's character isreadily

available. The great epic of Sage Vyasa is a vast and

complexmasterpiece on human psychology. Vyasa would have donea great

injustice to Draupadi's character if he hadtruly meant to have the

evil passion of Vengeancestill ruling Draupadi's heart even after the

momentousexperience of her "saraNAgati" occured. But evidentlyVyasa

actually meant no such thing. He in fact meantto celebrate Draupadi's

character that actuallyattained a towering, saintly dimension

after"saraNAgati". It would be folly to think Draupadi's "saraNAgati"

wasabout fabric alone. It was about faith, aboutspiritual growth and

progress too. The events of theMahabharatha, as I understand them,

certainly seem tosuggest so. They clearly reveal there was no place

atall in Draupadi's heart for Vengeance -- Vengeance aswe normally

understand it. ***************** Let us

recollect the story of the Mahabharatha in thenext posting.

Hopefully, we will be able to draw someexplanations from it. And the

explanations may perhapsthen shed some light on the really

interesting andintriguing question Smt.Subha Narayan has placedbefore

us all.Thanks and regards,dAsan,Sudarshan