{| Doubts and Discussions about Mahabharata |}

First Previous

Page

119

Next Last

Frequent Posters

angelic8219

@angelic8219

Dazzler

Posted: 11 years ago

#111

If dhritarastra was made king in the first place instead of Pandu would the same problems have occurred later on?

Quote

varaali

@varaali

Dazzler

+ 2

Posted: 11 years ago

#112

Originally posted by: angelic8219
If dhritarastra was made king in the first place instead of Pandu would the same problems have occurred later on?

No. Naturally not (if Dritarashtra had not been blind, in the first place).

Since Dritarashtra was born blind, the kingship naturally went to his younger brother, Pandu. So far, so good. Now, all the problems began to arise when Pandu, on being cursed by sage Kidamba, abdicated the throne and retired to the forests.

Since a kingdom cannot be without a ruler, Dritarashtra was appointed as the de facto king. Not ceremoniously anointed with the rajya abhiskek and the raj tilak- but just a namesake king.

The situation got a little more complicated when the next generation (Yudhishthira & Duryodhana) staked their claim to the throne.

Who was the legitimate heir to the throne? Yudhishthira ? But his father had already abdicated the throne before he was born, so was his claim to the throne valid?

Then was Duryodhana the legal yuvaraj? But his father was never really anointed as king, so he, Duryodhana, could never really be in contention for the kingship.

This was the holy mess Bhishma found himself and hence his decision to partition the kingdom into Hastinapur and Indraprastha.

Edited by varaali - 11 years ago

Quote

Looks like you are new here. Register for free, learn and contribute.

Vrish

@Vr15h

Stunner

+ 6

Posted: 11 years ago

#113

One thing I don't understand - if Dhritarashtra was never crowned king, how was Bhishma oath bound to fight on Duryodhan's side? He wouldn't even have been beholden to Dhritarashtra, much less Duryodhan.

Also, Pandu abdicating didn't mean that his lineage forsook all claims to succession or the throne. In fact, at that time, kings, when they abdicated, usually crowned their sons the ruler and retired. Only reason Pandu couldn't do it was that Yudhisthir wasn't born as yet, and Pandu had no idea about Karna's existence.

Quote

Cherry

@chirpy_life19

Inactive

+ 2

Posted: 11 years ago

#114

Did King Pandu have another name?I'm asking this coz Pandu means Pale.Why a person born in the warrior class be named after a disease?😕

Quote

Kankshita

@thegameison

Stunner

+ 4

Posted: 11 years ago

#115

Originally posted by: Cool-n-Fresh

Did King Pandu have another name?I'm asking this coz Pandu means Pale.Why a person born in the warrior class be named after a disease?😕

Pandu's mother, Ambalika had gone pale with fear on seeing Ved Vyasa. Satyawati had sent him to her after Vichitravirya's death as they still didn't have the heir they needed. He was born pale and weak, I believe. That's got to be the root of his name.

Quote

Cherry

@chirpy_life19

Inactive

+ 2

Posted: 11 years ago

#116

Originally posted by: epiphany.

Pandu's mother, Ambalika had gone pale with fear on seeing Ved Vyasa. Satyawati had sent him to her after Vichitravirya's death as they still didn't have the heir they needed. He was born pale and weak, I believe. That's got to be the root of his name.

Ok.But still no one will give their child a disease name.Esp. a warrior.They used to perform a Namkaran Sanskaar under the guidance of their Kulaguru.

Look Dhritarashtra was blind but he wasn't named something like 'Andha' or 'Netraheen'!

Edited by Cool-n-Fresh - 11 years ago

Quote

Kankshita

@thegameison

Stunner

+ 4

Posted: 11 years ago

#117

Originally posted by: Cool-n-Fresh

Ok.But still no one will give their child a disease name.Esp. a warrior.They used to perform a Namkaran Sanskaar under the guidance of their Kulaguru.
Look Dhritarashtra was blind but he wasn't named something like 'Andha' or 'Netraheen'!

As a matter of fact, Dhritarashtra's name does have something to do with his being blind. I have been searching the internet but I can't confirm. 🤓

Quote

Cherry

@chirpy_life19

Inactive

+ 2

Posted: 11 years ago

#118

Dhrita=Hold,Rashtra=State/Kingdom

It is an epithet for the Head of a Confederate.

Quote

Manan

@Proud-India

Rocker

+ 5

Posted: 11 years ago

#119

Thanks to clarify to all ...specially To Vrish...You are really Wikipedia. 😛

And I just read that Yudhisthira had 1 another wife named DEVIKA ...!!

what is story behind this. i have never read on this.

So...Arjun had 4 wives.

Bhima had 3 wives

Youdhisthira had 2 wives

And What about nakul - Sahdev's wives? Was only Draupadi ...theirs wife or also any another?

Quote

Bhaskari

@bhas1066

Navigator

Posted: 11 years ago

#120

hello,
i know this ques has been asked before .but there was no satisfactory reply so am asking again:

why didnt shantanu just kidnap satyavati or order her father to agree as he was king!?? if the wishes of girl and her father were so important , why didint bheesma follow the rule with amba,ambalika and ambika? why kidnap them from their swayamvara?

please answer

thank you

Quote

1 ... 10 11 12 13 14 ... 119

{| Doubts and Discussions about Mahabharata |} - Page 12

Related Topics

Explore Topics