'Mahabharat- Different Versions -Perspectives' - Page 69

anu, i guess yudhisthir was a exelent follower of the outdated traditional rules, and that's what made him great in the dwapar yug. but, actualy, his dharmagyan, by which he answered the yakshaprashna made him dharmaraj.

Originally posted by: Ashwini_D

First, all of us are extremely fortunate to have experts on Mahabharata amongst us. Welcome to the forum Krishna ma'am. I have not read the Aryavarta chronicles, but I am going to do so soon. It's interesting to see a Greek connection in the books. Indian history has quite a few instances about the cross cultural, political and intellectual exchange between the Greek and Indian civilizations. There are some uncanny similarities between the mythologies of the two as well, from what I've read so far.

Originally posted by: bheegi

I kinda agree with your POV @Krishna. Even if Yudhishtra wagered himself, his brothers and his wife, did he really have any right to wager his whole kingdom and the trust of all his subjects? Didn't these subjects help him build Indraprastha into the glorious empire that it was? These people left their homes in HP to establish homes in IP and their king just wagered them away - in fact even before he staked his own family. One would think that a good king puts the interests of his kingdom before his own personal interests. We all criticize Rama for banishing Sita to appease one of his subjects but what Dharma did was even more deplorable in my eyes.

Ashwini

Originally posted by: AnuMP

Ashwini

I believe there is also a part where it is explicitly stated that Yudhishtir was also driven by the hope that he could win HP from the Kauravas.

Here you go.

"Vaisampayana said, "Thus addressed by Bhimasena, the high-souled king Ajatasatru firmly devoted to truth, mustering his patience, after a few moments said these words, 'No doubt, O Bharata, all this is true. I cannot reproach thee for thy torturing me thus by piercing me with thy arrowy words. From my folly alone hath this calamity come against you. I sought to cast the dice desiring to snatch from Dhritarashtra's son his kingdom with the sovereignty.."

Originally posted by: AnuMP

IMO a great ruler can see potential in the citizenry and designs his rule accordingly. Yudhishtir instead memorized the outdated rules and used them to HIS advantage with Panchali Swayamvar and then he tried to do the same in DS. He treated his family and people as property. And even if we use Dwapar Yug ethics as the benchmark, then that makes his a run-of-the-mill dictator like every other king in Aryavarta. I could never see what makes him so great. Admittedly, part of that is because I thought Arjun was robbed

And now that I am older and not any wiser, I still dont find Yudhishtir to be an admirable character. I look at what they did in Dwarka. Democracy was unheard of at the time but they had something of the sort. That is Vision.

EDIT - 😆 I just realized that this post must seem strange standing on its own. I made it after an off-thread discussion with another IF-er

Actually, there is one guy who pisses me off a little more than Dharma Yudhisthir does. I know I'm being provocative here, but just curious how many of us have a bone to pick with Bhisma Devavrata - Kashi, Gandhara - all his conquests in the name of finding wives for his brother/nephews sowed some pretty bitter seeds, no? Or is the wife-finding merely an excuse for what probably were political conquests/annexations - after all these were pretty prosperous nations, and the did put up a fight...

Originally posted by: KrisUdayasankar

Actually, there is one guy who pisses me off a little more than Dharma Yudhisthir does. I know I'm being provocative here, but just curious how many of us have a bone to pick with Bhisma Devavrata - Kashi, Gandhara - all his conquests in the name of finding wives for his brother/nephews sowed some pretty bitter seeds, no? Or is the wife-finding merely an excuse for what probably were political conquests/annexations - after all these were pretty prosperous nations, and the did put up a fight...

Your thoughts, folks?

Originally posted by: KrisUdayasankar

Actually, there is one guy who pisses me off a little more than Dharma Yudhisthir does. I know I'm being provocative here, but just curious how many of us have a bone to pick with Bhisma Devavrata - Kashi, Gandhara - all his conquests in the name of finding wives for his brother/nephews sowed some pretty bitter seeds, no? Or is the wife-finding merely an excuse for what probably were political conquests/annexations - after all these were pretty prosperous nations, and the did put up a fight...

Your thoughts, folks?

I agree Amba was Bhishma's fault but Gandhari wasn't. He did not personally go there to threaten King Subala, he sent a messenger for her hand, Subala only hesitated for the blindless of Dhritashtra, Subala very well knew the blood of Kuru's and their fame. He did not feel threatened as far as translations are considered. As far as I know, Hastinapura was a major power those days and having them as a relative would have been a thing to boast of.

"Vaisampayana continued, 'Soon after Bhishma heard from the Brahmanas that Gandhari, the amiable daughter of Suvala, having worshipped Hara (Siva) had obtained from the deity the boon that she should have a century of sons. Bhishma, the grandfather of the Kurus, having heard this, sent messengers unto the king of Gandhara. King Suvala at first hesitated on account of the blindness of the bridegroom, but taking into consideration the blood of the Kurus, their fame and behaviour, he gave his virtuous daughter unto Dhritarashtra.."

For the bold part - I think both of the reasons viz., finding suitable bride and annexing kingdoms are valid, we cannot blame Bhishma for that, for example Abhimanyu was always considered the heir of Indraprastha/Hastinapur because his mother was a Yadava, Yadava alliance was very important since they were a major power thanks to Balram and Krishna. After all making your kingdom stronger was one of the reasons the kings in those times lived.

One of the reasons cited for the great war is the blurring of the kshatriya vs brahmin dharma. Bhishma, although a kshatriya lived like a brahmin but in that process created a messy situation for HP. If he had stepped in and taken responsibility for bearing the successor to the HP throne, Ved Vyas (who was a brahmin) and coerced by Satyavati to impregnate two unwilling daughter in laws, perhaps the Dhrit-Pandu equation and then subsequent animosity between the cousins might not have happened. His forceful conquests of women for his half brother and then nephew definitely sowed the seeds for the war. Having said that, he can't be blamed for the actions of his father who got carried away by lust in his old age. Essentially it was a domino effect with kings and brahmins not following their dharma that started with Shantanu and just escalated with each generation. Drona and Ashwathma were culprits too- they were brahmins but acted like kshatriyas.