Why Parikshit? - Page 12

Originally posted by: .Vrish.

I am assuming that this question is addressed to me, despite the arrows, since the previous post did not assert such a thing: I did.

FIrst, there was a rule among kshatriyas that there had to be 7 degrees of separation b/w groom and bride, so forget first cousins, but even sixth-degree separated cousins couldn't marry. Anyway, since Arjun married Subhadra, Krishna married Bhadra and Mitravindya, it's clear that this rule wasn't applicable to Yayati's descendants, for whatever reason.

However, there was also a rule that if a man belonging to family A married a woman belonging to family B, then after that, a man from family B couldn't take a woman from family A as his wife, since family B was considered 'subservient' to family A, and that couldn't be reversed by marriage. So, take the Ramayan. Sita's sisters could marry Rama's brothers, but had Sita had any brothers and had Rama had more sisters (other than Shanta), Sita's brother couldn't have married Rama's sister: that was against the rules.

Yet, the above discussion of Yudhisthir's daughter marrying Krishna's son violated that very rule: since Subhadra married Arjun, no son of Krishna could have married a daughter of a Pandava. However, any daughter of Krishna could have married another son of a Pandava.

But since suthanu did married bhanu and there are many texts including harivasma vayu puran to mention this fact so i think the rule was not applicable to yayati s descendants either

Originally posted by: .Vrish.

I am assuming that this question is addressed to me, despite the arrows, since the previous post did not assert such a thing: I did.

FIrst, there was a rule among kshatriyas that there had to be 7 degrees of separation b/w groom and bride, so forget first cousins, but even sixth-degree separated cousins couldn't marry. Anyway, since Arjun married Subhadra, Krishna married Bhadra and Mitravindya, it's clear that this rule wasn't applicable to Yayati's descendants, for whatever reason.

However, there was also a rule that if a man belonging to family A married a woman belonging to family B, then after that, a man from family B couldn't take a woman from family A as his wife, since family B was considered 'subservient' to family A, and that couldn't be reversed by marriage. So, take the Ramayan. Sita's sisters could marry Rama's brothers, but had Sita had any brothers and had Rama had more sisters (other than Shanta), Sita's brother couldn't have married Rama's sister: that was against the rules.

Yet, the above discussion of Yudhisthir's daughter marrying Krishna's son violated that very rule: since Subhadra married Arjun, no son of Krishna could have married a daughter of a Pandava. However, any daughter of Krishna could have married another son of a Pandava.

This was not directed to you, your message came while I was responding to the comment I wished to

Anyhow Kshatriyas were of many clans and different clans did have different rules. Cousin marriage for example was completely forbidden in Suryavanshis but so wasn't the rule in Yadavs. Chandravanshis did take daughters from first cousins but avoided sending their daughters to first cousins. Different clans different types

Even the Lichhavis are called Kshatriyas the father in law of Buddha was her mother's brother while his wife I.e. hiw mother in law was the sister of his father. Hence that rule which you said isn't valid here

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

Not everything needs to be accurate as mentioned in the texts

As per Mahabharata Vyas ji was present at the Janmayey Yagya. He asked Vaishampayan to narrate the story

This would mean that he was alive till the time his grandson,'s grandson's son became the king. If we assume Janamejay was at least 16 at this time (and 16 years time for each generation) Parikshit should have been born at least 32 years ago, Abhimanyu 48 years ago, Arjun 64 years ago, Pandu at least 85 years ago (since Arjun was third child and was born after sometime from marriage so assuming Yudhishtir was born when he was 19 not going by 16 rule here), Vichitraveer 102 (again assuming he died at 16 and then Niyog happened) Vyasji was at least 3 years elder to Vichitraveer since he was born before Satyavati's marriage and the Vichitraveer was her second child so he was at least 105 years at the time of Yagya. Even this seems impossible to me

1. Vyasa was a title. It didn't need to be Krishna Dwaipayana.

2. Krishna Dwaipayana Vyasa could have been 105, but he wasn't fighting like Bheeshma supposedly was at 130.

3. Even if marriages were not acc to rules, a teenager winning swayamvara might be possible, but it would again have the backtracking problem. Arjuna would have had to be ten or so at gurudakshina war. A ten-year-old could not have possibly won against Panchal's army.

There is no rational way to make Abhimanyu older than early 20s. Which is why people start saying oh, back in the day, life span etc. etc. Not true. Back in the day, lifespan was shorter, not longer.

The divine angle would need no explanation clearly.

Abhimanyu was definitely not 33 but he wasn't either 16. Him being 16 would mean he got married at 15( considering they took one year between Agyatwaas completion and the start of the war. Marriage at 15 doesn't match any narrative

Assuming Uttara was of the same age and Uttar Kumar was her twin he was 15 at the time of Kaurav attack

I don't think Virat would have left the kingdom on the custody of a 15 year old age went

Aside this would mean that he was only 2 at the time of Agyatwaas so he should not have had any education from Arjun, yet he had studied basics of Vedas from him

If we assume that he was elder to the Uppandavas, then this is not possible since all were born before Agyatwaas

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

Because you're using the 33-year timeframe to assert Abhimanyu was 33.

52 year old Arjuna during war would mean he was 52 - 33, ie 19, at Khandava and Abhimayu's birth. ie 18 by exile if we take it as 13 months. ie, mid teens during Panchali swayamvara.

Take a look at the following link. This gives age of marriage. Panchali was kumaari chaapi, which means she was at least 13 (girls had to be 13 to be called kumaari even then). Bheeshma says once puberty sets in, parents had to wait 3 years. Which means she was 16 AT LEAST at swayamvara.

https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m13/m13b009.htm

https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/manu/manu09.htm

The MINIMUM age a man can marry is given as 24.

That means the 33-year timeframe is wrong.

When you're calculating Abhimanyu's age as 33 based on that "33-years have passed" statement PLUS Drona's age, Arjuna would necessarily have had to be in mid teens at the OLDEST t swayamvar. If we are to believe the 12-year exile, he would have been an infant.

_____________________________________________

Now if you insist 33-year timeframe is correct and Drona being 85 is wrong, let's calculate forward. let's say all Pandavas were at least 24 at swayamvara since that was the rule. Say Arjuna was same age as twins at 24. They stayed in Panchal for a year, took a couple of years to build a city, then Arjuna's exile happened. This would leave him in late 20s by Subhadra haran plus a year for Abhimanyu to be born if exile was 13 months. It would leave him in early 40s by haran if exile was 12 years. Say 30-42 by then.

Then Khandava

Add 33 years. Arjuna would be 63 to 75 during kurkshetra.

Here is where we will ignore Drona being 85 since that is the assumption for this calculation😆. Arjuna's father didn't have him until later in his young life. He would also have to have been a minimum of 24 at marriage. he went on imperial campaign also. Then, he found out he couldn't have kids. So Pandu was at least 30 by the time Arjuna was born. Vyasa's age doesn't count since it was Niyoga. Vichitraveerya was at least 24 at marriage, and he was born when Bheeshma was a teen. Say Bheeshma was 13. So there will be 30+24+13 year age gap at a MINIMUM between Arjuna and Bheeshma. So the age of Bheeshma at Kurukshetra will be 130 to 142.

Under no rules of logic did a 130-year old man fight like that.

__________________________________

Either way, it's simply not possible without bringing in a divine angle.

__________________________________

Anyway, my aim is not to convince anyone arguing otherwise. I simply want this calculation to be on this thread for anyone who might be reading through it.

I've seen this argument Kauravas didn't kill a child because Abhimanyu was 33 before. No, Kauravas - Suyodhana, Dusshasana, their sons, - Drona, Karna, et al were child murderers. No getting around the fact.

Okay, I understand what you are saying now let me explain, I didn't add 33 year's time line, I added 30 years, in 33 year's timelines

Arjun - 55 - Abhimanyu - 33

55 - 33 = Arjuna was 22

If we consider Abhimanyu 23 then the time frame is 23

45 Arjuna - 23 Abhimanyu (Your calculation)

45-23 = Arjuna was 22 when Abhimanyu was born

In both 33 years and 23 years timeline Arjuna is 22

But 24 years old rule makes Arjuna older

33 Year's time frame is wrong because minimum age for marriage was 24 then Abhimanyu was older than 24

What was the age gap between Subhadra and Arjuna?

We have to increase Arjun's age with Abhimanyu as opposed to decreasing it.

Now Subhadra and Arjun's age difference means Arjuna definitely wasn't 22 when Abhimanyu was born, which is the case with 23 years timeline as well

Drona being 85 Is not correct

Bheema had grandson, Arjuna taught Abhimanyu and These kids were old enough to work in Rajasuya yagya

Even if 33 is removed, Abhimanyu is not a teenager by any means

---------------------------—---

Nothing justifies an attack on anyone which was done by breaking rules, rules weren't age specific

____________________

Weren't Drupad and Drona classmates? How is Drona from Bheeshma's age?

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

Abhimanyu was definitely not 33 but he wasn't either 16. Him being 16 would mean he got married at 15( considering they took one year between Agyatwaas completion and the start of the war. Marriage at 15 doesn't match any narrative

Assuming Uttara was of the same age and Uttar Kumar was her twin he was 15 at the time of Kaurav attack

I don't think Virat would have left the kingdom on the custody of a 15 year old age went

Aside this would mean that he was only 2 at the time of Agyatwaas so he should not have had any education from Arjun, yet he had studied basics of Vedas from him

If we assume that he was elder to the Uppandavas, then this is not possible since all were born before Agyatwaas

Also they are clearly mentioned working in Rajsuya yagya -

'The powerful Dhrishtadyumna followed without loss of time king Virata: and Dhananjaya followed the illustrious and mighty charioteer Yajnasena; and the mighty Bhimasena followed Bhishma and Dhritarashtra: and Sahadeva, that master of battle, followed the brave Drona and his son; and Nakula, O king, followed Suvala with his son; and the sons of Draupadi with the son of Subhadra followed those mighty warriors--the kings of the mountainous countries.

Note that Upapandavas are not mentioned during wedding celebration of Subhadra and Arjuna, so maybe they were born after Arjuna's exile or were too Young to participate in celebration

Ghatothkach had a son who fought in the war

Even If 33 is wrong, Its just difficult for me to believe that Abhimanyu and Upapandavas were teenager

Anyway, I concede this here

My point was that Arjuna was definitely a part of Abhimanyu's childhood, even if for 10 years, he did teach him and Upapandavas, so he wasn't a father only in 'name'

We should also remember that after the war Pandavas were hoping that Uttara has a son so that they have someone to carry the name. Else the entire Vansh is over. At the same time Ashwathama while attacking the female arena had similar intentions (to finish progeny)

This clearly indicates that the senior generation by then had crossed the age of progeny else they would have thought of reproduction and would have not seen Uttara's child as their last hope

If Arjun was 43 then then Subhadra would have been at most 33. 43 for men and 33 for women is very much a age or reproduction. Even considering that Pandavas didn't want to marry any younger girl, at least the time Subhadra could reproduce would have definitely crossed by then.

Subhadra would have been at least around 38-39 then and Arjun at least 50, no where he could have been younger than 50

When discussing any event or character in the epic, everyone needs to make one choice and stick with it. Either follow faith to understand the story or follow logic.

Both do not work together, specially in case of our epics Ramayana and Mahabharata.

For eg if you believe in faith you can accept that Rama had a life span of 10040 years because Valmiki in Ramayana writes at the end of the coronation that Rama ruled for 10000 years and live with that.

But if you believe in logic then you have to discard that statement because Rama gets married after his tour with Vishwamitra as young boy most likely at the age between 16 - 20 spends time after marriage in Ayodhya then goes for exile and kills Ravana and returns 14 years later and becomes King so within 40 years of his life he becomes a king. After that his children are born assuming within next 2 - 10 years.

Even if we ignore Uttarakanda as interpolation it defies logic that Rama became King at 40 but his son Lava becomes King at the age of 10030, because Rama rules for 10000 years and Because then Lava's lifespan would become 10030 ± at least few years of rule for himself.

Why would Rama even do that to his son.

Similarly when someone says in Draupadi Swayamavr Krishna was present with his son Pradyumna and Grandson Aniruddh's. But Krishna was a young man I ask them please tell me are you using faith here or logic.

If they say faith. I say great and good for you and keep my mouth shut. But if they say logic. I say you are being stupid.

I say most likely Krishna was indeed a young man in his twenties but either Pradyumna was a little toddler and aniruddh not present at all. Or Krishna was in his 40s, Pradyumna in his 20s and Aniruddh a toddler.

Which makes Arjun and Pradyumna same age and Krishna 20 plus years older. What happens to subhadra then, whom Arjun marries atleast 15 years later, a toddler at the time like Aniruddh's....

So people when arguing about the charachter's age in the epic please decide are you using faith or are you using logic.

If it is faith this discussion is not needed Abhimanyu was indeed 16 because Soma did not wish for his son incarnate to live beyond 16 years on earth and Drona was 85 because text says so and Then Bhishma will have to be two generations prior around 150 years old because he had recieved IcchaMrityu from his father.

But if you guys are using logic then we'll......

Because yaudheya did not fight on behalf of pandav. He fight on behalf of kaurav in mahabharat war

More over parikshit and yaudheya are not brother . Yaudheya was uncle of parikshit

Parikshit was bhatija of yaudheya as abhimanyu was brother of yaudheya

So when parikshit become king then at that time it was time for yaudheya to retire to forest