Balaram on Dice Game - Page 20

But i don't think that mattered or should i say motivated him. The relationship that krishna built up with krishnaa was deep. Hence he was the only one to understand her pov. He was the only to carry that pain of utter helplessness for letting her down. And that was one if his motives of her or rather she was - PANCHALI . Their relationship wad not guarded by societal norms. Plus krishna krishnaa relationship started way before their individual relationship with either pandavas or kauravas. The proof of which spread all over the epic specially vana parva when he visits her after the dice hall. She clearly singles him out accepts his right over her and demand how she deserved to be protected by him. This was no ordinary friendship. It was deep very deep

Originally posted by: naq5

was there was a condition that indraprastha would be returned after successful completion of 13 years vanvas? then maybe duryodhan would have heeded to elders advice and returned it as per agreement. He could have also returned it not wanting to go to war and risk himself his brothers and the kingdom he already had. that wouldnt absolve him of what he did with panchali though & his other crimes

That exactly was the condition. After 12 years Vanwaas n one year Agyatwaas the kingdom of Indraprasth would be returned to Yudhishtir. However in case if they are caught or recognised during Agyatwaas, they will need to repeat the 12+1 years cycle in the same way that

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

Vows weren't important to Krishna. Nor were rules. He was not Bheeshma or Yudhishtira, thank God😆. Krishna was quite prepared to break vows, break rules, cheat... all in the name of dharma.

Well we all know that, he was the one who did enable all the wrongdoings that happened on war field. But his words here and trying to kill Bhishma in front of Arjun were only done so that he could provoke the Pandavas to actually do something and not let Bhishma go on and on. It was the job of the Pandavas to defeat the Kurus and reclaim their land. Krishna could do anything to make that happen.

I am aware he is ready to break rules for dharma that's his main characteristic. I just said his motive behind these were to provoke the Pandavas. Obviously had that not worked he had to do it himself. But it did work.

Originally posted by: Poorabhforever

Here from Yana-sandhi parva, CE-

‘“Vasudeva said, ‘O Sanjaya! In the presence of the foremost among the Kurus and in Drona’s hearing, speak these words to the intelligent Dhritarashtra. “Offer a large number of sacrifices and donate stipends to the brahmanas. Enjoy yourselves with your sons and wives. A great danger confronts you. Distribute your riches among deserving ones. Have sons born out of love. Do good deeds towards those you love. The king132 will soon be victorious. That old debt is still impaled in my heart, because I have not repaid it. When I was far away, Krishna cried out, ‘Govinda!’133

Doesn't this makes it amply Clear one of the reason krishna went to war was PANCHALI. None of her husbands carried this pain utter helplessness of letting her down when she needed them most. Krishna did

How do quotes of Krishna saying what happened to Panchali HURT him prove his main reason was Panchali? We are discussing whether the main aim was Draupadi or not. HearMeRoar said that the immediate cause of war was that ie the event that finally sealed the fate and that's accepted.

There are numerous instances of Krishna showing such love for Arjun, for even Yudhishthir and others too. Krishna was Panchali's best friend so of course yes he was upset. Nobody here is saying they are not soulmates they are not close etc. We all know they were special.

Krishna had important reasons to go for war. Yes the dice hall incidents sealed the fate and made war inevitable. That doesn't prove his main reason was Panchali.

Originally posted by: CaptainSpark

How do quotes of Krishna saying what happened to Panchali HURT him prove his main reason was Panchali? We are discussing whether the main aim was Draupadi or not. HearMeRoar said that the immediate cause of war was that ie the event that finally sealed the fate and that's accepted.

There are numerous instances of Krishna showing such love for Arjun, for even Yudhishthir and others too. Krishna was Panchali's best friend so of course yes he was upset. Nobody here is saying they are not soulmates they are not close etc. We all know they were special.

Krishna had important reasons to go for war. Yes the dice hall incidents sealed the fate and made war inevitable. That doesn't prove his main reason was Panchali.

Read the citation carefully brishti krishna is clearly asking sanjaya to tell dritrashtra that be prepared for the inevitable since he will make sure that his sons get what they deserve and the reason is the amount of pain he carries in his hurt for letting panchali down. How clear can it get. For 13 years he has carried this pain and guilt in his heart for letting down. Their relationship was not ordinary it ran deep very deep

What I fail to understand here is Krishna's son abducting Dury's daughter right before the war, why an alliance with Kauravas right before the war, if the motive was their destruction moreover Krishna could have fought himself, why did he vow not to use weapons in first place?

Originally posted by: NoraSM

What I fail to understand here is Krishna's son abducting Dury's daughter right before the war, why an alliance with Kauravas right before the war, if the motive was their destruction moreover Krishna could have fought himself, why did he vow not to use weapons in first place?

1. Where does it say it happened right before war?

2. Krishna doesn't bother to rescue Samba when Kauravas imprison him. Balram does.

3. Balram wanted Krishna to fight for Kauravas multiple times. Krishna repeatedly offers to fight. No, I do not believe it was to provoke Pandavas. 😆 I think Krishna orginally thought Arjuna would be able to take care of it. Like with Shalya's death when Krishna specifically asks Yudhishtira to fight, there are psychological and legitimacy reasons for the Pandavas to win the war on their own might. Then, Krishna saw that Arjuna wasn't fighting and was ready to get involved. But Yudhishtira refused.

The Yadava supremacy theory is total bunkus once someone reads the fact after war, KRISHNA slaughters the Yadavas himself.

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

1. Where does it say it happened right before war?

2. Krishna doesn't bother to rescue Samba when Kauravas imprison him. Balram does.

3. Balram wanted Krishna to fight for Kauravas multiple times. Krishna repeatedly offers to fight. No, I do not believe it was to provoke Pandavas. 😆 I think Krishna orginally thought Arjuna would be able to take care of it. Like with Shalya's death when Krishna specifically asks Yudhishtira to fight, there are psychological and legitimacy reasons for the Pandavas to win the war on their own might. Then, Krishna saw that Arjuna wasn't fighting and was ready to get involved. But Yudhishtira refused.

The Yadava supremacy theory is total bunkus once someone reads the fact after war, KRISHNA slaughters the Yadavas himself.

I read somewhere that it happened around Abhi's wedding, even if not around Abhi's wedding, did it happen before Dyut?

Balram rescued him because isn't it obvious that Dury dared to imprison Krishna's son, he wasn't looking for an alliance between himself and Krishna, he wasn't fond of Krishna but he admired Balram

Till yesterday I thought Dury's son abducted Krishna's daughter to bind him in an alliance with him but it was the opposite

Why did he take a vow in first place? I am not able to find answers as most people who answer this question say that Krishna could have ended the war in seconds, to say he was God

I didn't mention or believe in Yadava theory, what I do suspect is that Krishna secured his future from both sides

Originally posted by: NoraSM

I read somewhere that it happened around Abhi's wedding, even if not around Abhi's wedding, did it happen before Dyut?

Balram rescued him because isn't it obvious that Dury dared to imprison Krishna's son, he wasn't looking for an alliance between himself and Krishna, he wasn't fond of Krishna but he admired Balram

Till yesterday I thought Dury's son abducted Krishna's daughter to bind him in an alliance with him but it was the opposite

Why did he take a vow in first place? I am not able to find answers as most people who answer this question say that Krishna could have ended the war in seconds, to say he was God

I didn't mention or believe in Yadava theory, what I do suspect is that Krishna secured his future from both sides

Understanding that Samba incident is NOT part of Mbh:

If Krishna wanted to secure his future, he could've let Subhadra marry Suyodhana. Or any of his other sisters since he had plenty.

Krishna had no involvement at all in the Samba incident. If he wanted to have that connection to Kauravas, he could've gone himself. Suyodhana at that point would've KILLED to have an alliance with Krishna. It was Krishna who wasn't fond of Suyodhana.

I have not seen anywhere at all that it happened before war.

Moreover, Samba also slept with Krishna's other wives and ended up with a curse from Krishna. Highly doubt Samba was the way Krishna would keep control over both sides.

From MBh:

Moreover, if that were the case, as Samba's father, his attachment to Kauravas should've been higher as Balram pointed out. After all, Abhimanyu was a nephew. Samba was a son. Not only that both Samba and Pradyumna were present in Pandava camp during war.

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

Understanding that Samba incident is NOT part of Mbh:

If Krishna wanted to secure his future, he could've let Subhadra marry Suyodhana. Or any of his other sisters since he had plenty.

Krishna had no involvement at all in the Samba incident. If he wanted to have that connection to Kauravas, he could've gone himself. Suyodhana at that point would've KILLED to have an alliance with Krishna. It was Krishna who wasn't fond of Suyodhana.

I have not seen anywhere at all that it happened before war.

Moreover, Samba also slept with Krishna's other wives and ended up with a curse from Krishna. Highly doubt Samba was the way Krishna would keep control over both sides.

From MBh:

Moreover, if that were the case, as Samba's father, his attachment to Kauravas should've been higher as Balram pointed out. After all, Abhimanyu was a nephew. Samba was a son. Not only that both Samba and Pradyumna were present in Pandava camp during war.

They didn't know the war will happen when Arjun married Subhdra, did they? Dury was never a contender for Subhadra

The question is, Did Krishna's son abduct Duryodhan's daughter before or after the dyut? There was no reason for war before Dyut, Was Laxmanaa way older than Abhimanyu to be abducted before Dyut?

Duryodhana would have killed to have an alliance with Krishna yet he is the one who captured Krishna's son and Krishna's brother had to pacify him into releasing Krishna's son, the incident doesn't really shows Duryodhan very fond of the idea of his daughter's marriage with Krishna's son

Why would Samba's father have an attachment with Kauravas? As you said samba, himself was present in pandava side, Duryodhan's daughter was with Krishna, Krishna's son didn't live with Duryodhan

Why didn't Krishna fight in the war? Why didn't his sons fight in war?