Posted:
Originally posted by: spatel23
of course that's true. Lord Krishna was behind everything, so obviously he gets the credit for everything. But my point was that Arjuna was the best of the Pandavas and the Kauravas (Duryodhana and his brothers) in that his martial warfare knowledge exceeded everyone. He alone had divyastras, he was the only one who could match Bhishma, Karna, and Drona's arrows.But there is one point I respectfully disagree with. Krishna, being God, extends his relationship with his devotees in many ways. Krishna, in fact, tells Arjuna that he is his friend numerous times in the Gita. He became a charioteer for his friend and it's the reason why he spoke the Gita to Arjun.But there are different ways of surrendering associated with different moods. All the Pandavas were dear to Krishna, but Arjun is best remembered as Krishna's sakha, his friend, because that was their relationship.But of course, Krishna was behind everything. Without Krishna, the Pandavas had no chance of winning at all.
Yep my only contention was that Krishna's best friend was not Arjuna. And he wasn't a friend anyways... Krishna was his cousin. Also if you want to talk about somebody being Krishna's best friend then that has to be Sudama.
Krishna choosing Arjuna to tell the Gita was by chance. The reason he told Arjuna the Gita and not any of the other Pandavas was because Arjuna asks Krishna to be his charioteer while Duryodhana asks Krishna for his Narayani Sena.
Also you are making it seem like divyastras make a warrior better than other warriors. That is not so. Each and every warrior was great in his own weapon and if Arjuna was pitted against Bhima in a mace fight it would be obvious who would lose. Arjuna being a devotee of Krishna did not know how to avoid the Narayanastra launched by Ashwatthama. If it wasn't for Krishna, Arjuna would have been killed by Ashwatthama's Narayanastra.
CID
