Justice in the Hands of Torture - Swami Bhoomananda Tirtha

son of Dharma. In response to this demand of his opponents in thegame, Yudhishthira chose to pledge his wife. In the very course ofevents it so happened that this demand and its compliance, bothtook place after Yudhishthira was sought to be pledged and as aresult he lost himself.So the whole instance revolves round three parties:Shakuni and Duryodhana on the one side, who sought and insistedupon staking Draupadi and planned their move to this effect, arethe first. The second is Yudhishthira, who in response to the demandof Duryodhana, went ahead to pledge his wife and therebylost her to the opponents. The third is Draupadi herself, whose enslavementis the issue at question. But Draupadi, not satisfiedabout the propriety of the whole move, is not prepared to accepther fate as claimed by Duryodhana. If Duryodhana’s claim is onthe basis of the developments in the game and the power he hasgained over her by virtue of his success, Draupadi contends thatthe entire claim is baseless. If instead of contending thus she herselfwas prepared to accept her fate right from the time the news of herhaving been won by Duryodhana was broken to her, then therewould have been no discussion on the whole problem at all nor thepresent indecision. Being the party most concerned in the issue, shehad all the right to disprove what the others claimed about her fate.If Duryodhana claims ownership of her on the basis of moral propriety,namely Yudhishthira's staking and losing her, about whichYudhishthira himself had nothing further to say, Draupadi opposesthe very basis of that code of propriety. She has strong reason tosubstantiate her stand.Duryodhana, on his part, has become responsive to the dispute to alarge measure. That is why the whole development has suffered a24