Things which made you uncomfortable in Mahabharata - Page 5

Originally posted by: NoraSM

Shikhandi was on his chariot, Not on Arjuna's chariot, Shikhandi did no major damage to Bheeshma, it is written Bheeshma didn't even feel pain from Shikhandi's arrows

Shikhandi definitely wasn't a match for Bheeshm, yet Satyaki said that he deserves the credit for Bheeshm Vadh n not Arjun. This clearly indicates that he played a major role.

From the extract you gave it is pretty clear that Shikhandi was in Arjun's chariot and other Pandavas were behind.

There was no reason to get him if he didn't serve any purpose. Shikhandi was simply acting as barrier that Bheeshm doesn't get a way to hit Arjun without hurting Shikhandi

Originally posted by: NoraSM

I have replied there

If he could fight with Arjuna and died fighting with Arjuna then how was it unfair?

Consider this. X is our enemy. Now I am standing in front of you and X can't fight me, he will only fight you. X can TRY to hit back at you AVOIDING me, but I am a proper shield on your rath. You have 7-8 people on your side and X can't remove the person in front of you. Also, X's arrows have to be such that it can't harm me (mind you Shikhandi continued firing).

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

Shikhandi definitely wasn't a match for Bheeshm, yet Satyaki said that he deserves the credit for Bheeshm Vadh n not Arjun. This clearly indicates that he played a major role.

From the extract you gave it is pretty clear that Shikhandi was in Arjun's chariot and other Pandavas were behind.

There was no reason to get him if he didn't serve any purpose. Shikhandi was simply acting as barrier that Bheeshm doesn't get a way to hit Arjun without hurting Shikhandi

'Those mighty shafts, whetted on stone and furnished with golden wings, which the great car-warrior Sikhandin shot, quickly penetrated into Bhishma's body.

'Sikhandin, however, that foremost of car-warriors, protected in the battle by the diadem-decked (Arjuna), pierced Bhishma, in that encounter, with ten shafts after the latter's bow had been cut off.'

'Those arrows, however, endued with wings of gold and whetted on stone, which the mighty car-warrior Sikhandin shot in that battle, scarcely caused Bhishma any pain'

Shikhandi had his own chariot, I think his importance is when you take the divinity angle, a man fighting after being pierced by 1000s of arrows is not a possibility

Originally posted by: CaptainSpark

Consider this. X is our enemy. Now I am standing in front of you and X can't fight me, he will only fight you. X can TRY to hit back at you AVOIDING me, but I am a proper shield on your rath. You have 7-8 people on your side and X can't remove the person in front of you. Also, X's arrows have to be such that it can't harm me (mind you Shikhandi continued firing).

This is understandable but Shikhandi wasn't on Arjuna's Chariot

The way it is written, it clearly states Shikhandi's arrows didn't hurt him and then it was Arjuna whose arrows made him tremble and surrender

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

Krishna lists 4 kinds of lies which are not immoral. A lie to an enemy and lie to save life are both included.

So it wasn't considered immoral to lie.

When his granddaughter-in-law was being assaulted and he could've stopped it by saying Shakuni cheated, and he turned around and insisted otherwise, the most charitable view the world can take is Bheeshma was selfish to the point of letting someone die so he could protect his reputation.

As for lamenting, that's a charitable view. But it was coming from a man who had the power to stop Dhritharashtra from being king, power to partition the kingdom, and later, power to dictate terms to Suyodhana re: war. Bheeshma was not a helpless man.

Dhritharashtra can be blamed, too. One doesn't preclude the other. But the king IS usually considered a villain, and Bheeshma gets away with the helpless old man act.

His talk with Yudhishtira in Anushasana Parva is eye-popping, esp the recommendation tonpunish wayward women by having them eaten by dogs. Dwapar Yuga Kim Jong Un.

I don't think anyone considers him helpless apart from TV shows - who say his oath was loyalty to throne while there isn't anything of such sort (his oath was no throne and no marriage/sexual relationship)

He was controlling it for Dhrit because at that time there was no Vichitraveer to choose his heir, the throne was technically empty after Shantanu (Dhrit or Pandu can't be a King as a baby). And even if Pandu was proclaimed king as a child, it had to be Bhishma and Vidur running the kingdom. But I guess he was crowned as a grown up.

But after Pandu and Dhrit have grown up, why will Bhishma take decisions over the King? He was only working when there was no heir to the throne ready to take over. After Pandu's death, Dhrit was the King, Bhishma can only advise him, how can he rule at this point?

Nobody was helpless in the dice hall, all of them could do something to stop it and I don't accept any excuse of anyone not saying things.

About lies- If you are not seeing Krishna in divine light, there's no need to believe his words are gospel truth. Also what's moral and what not is subjective. IMO, saying Shakuni cheated (idk why anyone would accept this nonsense as Bhishma was not playing and there's no way he could know, this isn't football or cricket) would do absolutely no good except Chandal Chaukdi gang yelling partiality partiality. Also I don't think after everything they did, DDSK will listen to Bhishma that too with the logic that "u cheated" without a single proof. No matter how powerful he is, it seems fairy tale that Duryodhan would at all accept that too for an unfair reason.

Originally posted by: NoraSM

This is understandable but Shikhandi wasn't on Arjuna's Chariot

The way it is written, it clearly states Shikhandi's arrows didn't hurt him and then it was Arjuna whose arrows made him tremble and surrender

How is it saying Shikhandi had his own chariot? "Foremost of car warriors"? It's a way of description, doesn't necessarily mean he was in a separate Chariot I think. Idk, i am confused.

And yeah Shikhandi was no match.

But what's the need for Shikhandi if Arjun defeated him without any problem?

Feeling uncomfortable first all seven break rule and killed abhimanyu and now after killing abhimanyu by unelithical means they are doing drama showing tribute to abhimanyu by putting flowers on body of abhimanyu

Originally posted by: CaptainSpark

How is it saying Shikhandi had his own chariot? "Foremost of car warriors"? It's a way of description, doesn't necessarily mean he was in a separate Chariot I think. Idk, i am confused.

And yeah Shikhandi was no match.

But what's the need for Shikhandi if Arjun defeated him without any problem?

Every car warrior is described as a car warrior in it, I had to use 'Find in page:' 😂😂😂 foremost of car warriors maybe meant he was ahead of everyone as placed by Arjuna

How much room is there in a chariot? Arjuna and Shikhandi both are firing from a single one, it takes different angles and body postures to shoot an arrow, if Shikhandi was a human shield he wouldn't shoot arrows endangering Arjuna and it will be difficult for Arjuna to see everyone as Bheeshma wasn't fighting alone

One interesting thing I found, turns out Bheeshma did attack Shikhandi on day 7 -

'King Yudhishthira then, beholding Sikhandin flying away, having had his weapon cut off by Santanu's son became filled with anger. The high-souled Ajatasatru, angrily addressing Sikhandin in that battle, said these words, 'Thou saidst at that time, in the presence of thy sire, unto me--Even I shall slay Bhishma of high vows with my shafts of the hue of the effulgent sun.

Originally posted by: CaptainSpark

I don't think anyone considers him helpless apart from TV shows - who say his oath was loyalty to throne while there isn't anything of such sort (his oath was no throne and no marriage/sexual relationship)

He was controlling it for Dhrit because at that time there was no Vichitraveer to choose his heir, the throne was technically empty after Shantanu (Dhrit or Pandu can't be a King as a baby). And even if Pandu was proclaimed king as a child, it had to be Bhishma and Vidur running the kingdom. But I guess he was crowned as a grown up.

But after Pandu and Dhrit have grown up, why will Bhishma take decisions over the King? He was only working when there was no heir to the throne ready to take over. After Pandu's death, Dhrit was the King, Bhishma can only advise him, how can he rule at this point?

Nobody was helpless in the dice hall, all of them could do something to stop it and I don't accept any excuse of anyone not saying things.

About lies- If you are not seeing Krishna in divine light, there's no need to believe his words are gospel truth. Also what's moral and what not is subjective. IMO, saying Shakuni cheated (idk why anyone would accept this nonsense as Bhishma was not playing and there's no way he could know, this isn't football or cricket) would do absolutely no good except Chandal Chaukdi gang yelling partiality partiality. Also I don't think after everything they did, DDSK will listen to Bhishma that too with the logic that "u cheated" without a single proof. No matter how powerful he is, it seems fairy tale that Duryodhan would at all accept that too for an unfair reason.

It doesn't matter whether Krishna was divine or not. Point is it wasn't considered immoral to lie under some circumstances.

The coronation of Yudhishtira as yuvraj and the division of the kingdom were done after Pandu's death, when Dhritharashtra was already sitting in the throne. So Bheeshma did have power to force his will if he so felt like it even after the Pandavas and Kauravas were adults.

In the dice hall, not only didn't he do it, he actively argued that Panchali WAS a slave, that Shakuni didn't cheat

It is immaterial whether Suyodhana wouldve listened or not. We will never know because Bheeshma never tried to stop any of it.

In fact, there is more. After the dice hall events, Vyasa comes to Kuru court and asks if the elders were all right with what went on. Narada simply comes to court and shouts at the Kurus. Bheeshma wasn't caught by surprise by the appearance of Pandavas in court. He knew they were invited and for what purpose. How come none of them thought to inform Vyasa or Krishna there was a trick being planned?

Too, too many questions with no answers for the Kuru elders to be innocent.

Originally posted by: NoraSM

Every car warrior is described as a car warrior in it, I had to use 'Find in page:' 😂😂😂 foremost of car warriors maybe meant he was ahead of everyone as placed by Arjuna

How much room is there in a chariot? Arjuna and Shikhandi both are firing from a single one, it takes different angles and body postures to shoot an arrow, if Shikhandi was a human shield he wouldn't shoot arrows endangering Arjuna and it will be difficult for Arjuna to see everyone as Bheeshma wasn't fighting alone

One interesting thing I found, turns out Bheeshma did attack Shikhandi on day 7 -

'King Yudhishthira then, beholding Sikhandin flying away, having had his weapon cut off by Santanu's son became filled with anger. The high-souled Ajatasatru, angrily addressing Sikhandin in that battle, said these words, 'Thou saidst at that time, in the presence of thy sire, unto me--Even I shall slay Bhishma of high vows with my shafts of the hue of the effulgent sun.

Probably Shikhandi being Amba's reincarnation is an Interpolation then. I don't see any other reason why Shikhandi was needed there for no reason, isn't it?