~| Whatever you want to argue about |~ - Page 29

^^^^ not quoting the entire thing

1) Dhritrashtra was never crowned because Pandu never retired as a king, he said he wants to repent for his crimes in the Van. In such situation how could there be another king crowned? Plus none of the children were born by then, there was no way Bheeshm could have anticipated how future dynamics would go. Dhritrashtra was therefore simply put on the throne as the caretaker because the king was alive and out only for penance, no one would have even accepted his decision to make someone else a king

2) Now this is very clear that Pandu wanted his son ro ascend onto the throne, that exactly is the reason why he asked for Kunti to go for Niyog (this is clearly mentioned that the intent was only to keep the stake on the throne) yet once Yudhishtir, Bheem and Duryodhan were born, Pandu didn't return, he didn't even send Yudhishtir back, what could be his reason? Anyone who is trying to ensure his child becomes a king will try to get him involved in politics and princely affairs since the beginning , but Pandu didn't do that, it clearly means that the Pandu his wives and children were not welcomed in the kingdom. Pandu in himself was a warrior its pretty sure that he had ensured the safety of his children in the forest where Bheeshm had limited influence owing to the area being under Brahmin control(such areas are not under the rights of the king, hence while staking Indraprasth, Yudhishtir clearly mentions Indraprasth excluding the areas of Brahmins). It was an unwritten agreement between the two, you stay away and your family is safe

3) Once Pandu was dead, Kunti realized that she needs to be in Hastinapur to ensure that her kids' rights are saved, she therefore gained sages support and came up with the Divine birth theory so make her children special and better suited than Dhratrashtras. Once she returns with such support and accepted story, Bheeshm has no option but to accept her. Not just this, by now Yadavs were also slowly gaining predominance and Bheeshm wouldn't have wanted to get a new enemy. So he let her in. Kunti had her goals clear, she took Vidur in her support. (If Yudhishtir was Vidurji's biological child then all the best, even if not, Vidur definitely wasn't happy there at being nothing more than a glorified servant in Hastinapur despite his talents and closest relation to the royal family). Bheeshm could not have done any direct attack of Pandavas that would have been suicidal to the image of the royal family (this is the reason I feel he had no idea about the Varnavrat conspiracy). Now they did plan internal attacks, but Vidurji anticipated and neutralised it

4) About the point why involve the kid, if he will blurt. We are talking of the princes who are taught secrecy, diplomacy etc. since childhood. There was no reason why Bheeshm would have feared this. He couldn't come to forefront. The major people designated to ensure the murders were Karna and Shakuni(,check KMG there is a full stop between Duryodhan n other two names), just that Duryodhan also gets involved since the matter affected him the most. Also he got exposed at the end. The narration was complied at the end of the war, by then Duryodhan was the official villian but Bheeshm was not exposed, he was still a respected figure, do you think Ved Vyas could have dared mentioned his participation without proof, forget civilians, even the other sages would have got against them. Yet his mentality and shrewdness is very much highlighted

5) The Pandavas had already lost their goodwill in the Rajsuya Yagya where a cousin, a friendly king who supported Pandavas campaign was killed by a non king. The Dharma wasn't followed in the Rajsuya by not making the eldest of the family the Pratham Poojya and instead giving the position to someone non deserving (at least public saw it that way) Pandavas didn't have that public and sages support post Rajsuya closing ceremony. So Sages didn't do much after what happened in Dice Hall, that is the reason Yudhishtir did his negotiations while at exile to ensure some support onto their side

Aside it was Yudhishtir who lost a fair game and whatever was done there was within law.

Kauravas did not lose their respect in front of sages. They freed Draupadi, gifted her more than she deserved or could have demanded for. For what exactly would the sages object? We find it wrong it is wrong but for people then, the act would have been taken as completely a benevolent one.

6)Your only assumption about Bheeshm not knowing about Karna is based on the fact that why didn't Dhritrashtra tell this to Duryodhan. Now I have two points regarding this

a) Dhritrashtra could never guess that it would help him, he would have rather taken it as a risk of Duryodhan losing trust on Karna and thereby probably his self confidence. I read your point about why Yudhishtir was not told since he might have gone into back foot, but that is how human psychology behaves they anticipate how would a thing affect him. While Krishnaji n Kunti would have thought that this would weaken Yudhishtir, Dhritrashtra would have taken it like it would shake Duryodhan. It's all preassumption they have to make, nothing could actually be a straight truth

b) If you think that Bheeshm Karna convo never happened because Dhritrashtra didn't say this to Duryodhan, then it is much more possible that Dhritrashtra got the news after the battle was over. Unlike what TV shows have, Sanjay wasn't having a live war Telecasted in front of him for which he was giving a running commentary. Instead he used to visit Dhritrashtra at the death of every CIC, tell him that Bheeshm, Drona, Karna, Shalya etc. are dead. Dhritrashtra used to cry at the state of affairs and then asked who all are dead/alive. Sanjay would give a brief of it, and then Dhritrashtra asks tell me in detail, and that's how he began. Dhritrashtra was definitely not at the war arena else he would have got the news of at least the death of the CIC. Now it's impossible without divinity for Sanjay to travel to Dhritrashtra after the death of every CIC and then return before the start of the next day war. It's pretty clear that this fragmented narration is a poetic liberty by Vyas, either Sanjay returned at the end of the war and gave all the details or Vyas revealed to us all the facts in form of Sanjay Dhritrashtra convo to make it interesting.

Dhritrashtra not informing Duryodhan (at a time when they were separated by miles) is no indication (forget proof) that the convo didn't happen at all.

@Chiilli could you please give some links, books etc. which throws light on the nature and outcomes of each Yagya? And please also answer Adhya(PoorabhForever)

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

@Chiilli could you please give some links, books etc. which throws light on the nature and outcomes of each Yagya? And please also answer Adhya(PoorabhForever)

Yagyas and dharmic rituals are explained in Yajurveda, Shatapata Brahmana and Grihyasutras. I dont have grihyasutra. But have shatapata brahmana and only shukla yajurveda in hard copy. I am looking for online copies. Once I find them.i'll post the links

Bharat as India's emperor and his conquest and yagya is mentioned in Srimad Bhagvatham canto 5 chapter 7.

The chaturmasa Yagya is Rajasuya. Pasuyagya is Ahswamdha and somayagya is Vajpeya.

The order mentioned for yagyas is the one that is always followed. Lower to higher. Once somayagya / vajpeya is done then emperor cannot perform any other yagya or homa ever, Because it will be a demotion in status

About upapandavas.

Disclaimer first: Mahabharat and Puranas are not mythology for me. They are real history of India for me. These charachters Kashyapa Manu or Rama or Krishna Pandavas even Suyodhan etc existed as extraordinary humans of the time for me.

And I really dont believe in their divinity or miracles or boons and curses. I just dont. So if anyone wants to talk to me about magic, I really cannot discuss anything with them. But if interested in discussing the epic logically, I am game.

Uppandavas definetly existed as humans. I dont believe that they were visvedevas cursed for an untimely and unmarried life and hence died in the war without children.

Uppandavss and their stories are in buddhist and jain texts as well as shaivite purana like Skanda and Ganga purana. While they are completely absent from Vaishnava puranas.

Battles were not only going on between royal families for supremacy. They were also going on between Brahmana/Rishi clans for supremacy.

During the pauranic period a major group of these Brahmanas and rishis started Vishnu worship as a counter to Shaiva and shaktas.

They forged political alliances with prominent Royal families and deified their most popular Kings as Vishnu Avatars. Parshuram and Vyasa were Part of this group.

The ones against them were demonised. So we have Bhauma and Bhagadutta or Ghatothkach who were devi devotees or Bali, his son Bana etc who were shiv devotees classified as Asura or Raskhasa.

Rama became a Vishnu avatar but his enemy who was actually a brahmin but not a vaishnava rather shaiva becomes a Rakshas.

All were humans, there were no devas or asuras. All Vishnu worshippers become devas and shiva and devi worshippers become Asura and Rakshas.

This was a massive political propaganda of the time.

Coming to Uppandavas children. Why were they marginalised. Like I mentioned above they existed and we have their genealogy in bits and pieces in all non vaishnava literature.

The Politics of the time and the precarious situation Yudhishtir and Draupadi were in, it makes sense that uppandavas whether her sons or adopted will definetly be married to daughter of their allies. Prativindhya naturally will have one Panchal wife. And children as well.

They were killed in the war but their children lived with their mothers family. They never were brought back to Hastinapur. Their mentions erased from all Vaishnava puranas to avoid any counter claims against Parikshit and Janmejaya. who threw their entire might in popularising the main vaishnava text Srimad Bhagvatham and Vishnu Purana.

Yudhishtir and Draupadi specially lost all interest in the world due to dyut sabha exile and war which killed their children so they just went with the flow probably to avoid another war that could even get their grand children killed. Throne was not worth it anymore. As long as the kids were safe, had a family to care for them and place to live, they let it be.

Yadaavs had become very powerful in the 13 years Pandavas were in exile. Jarasandh was gone. Pandavas and Kurus not in general favor meant kingdoms diverting towards Dwarka. It was also a port and trading centre. Bulk of the yadava including Vasudev had picked up Vaishya varna, trading as profession. So they had money and army and political clout.

Arjun was fully under the control of Krishna and with Abhi Uttara Marriage Matsya also aligned with yadava. Matsya was the most richest kingdom of the time. Parikshit married his matsya cousin, she was Uttars daughter.

By the time war ended Panchals, Chedi, Magadha, Kuru all were practically on alms. Yadavas and Krishna ensured Parikshit becomes King.

They got enough time to marginalise Prativindhya and other Uppandavas sons. Also do note that all the kings who attended the war left their successors behind as Yuvaraj and so their descendents continued ruling. Homeless orphans that uppandavas children had become found a refugee status in wives kingdoms and ruled small teritories as vassals of bigger kings. They couldnt become independent king in their own rights.

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

^^^^ not quoting the entire thing

1) Dhritrashtra was never crowned because Pandu never retired as a king, he said he wants to repent for his crimes in the Van. In such situation how could there be another king crowned? Plus none of the children were born by then, there was no way Bheeshm could have anticipated how future dynamics would go. Dhritrashtra was therefore simply put on the throne as the caretaker because the king was alive and out only for penance, no one would have even accepted his decision to make someone else a king

2) Now this is very clear that Pandu wanted his son ro ascend onto the throne, that exactly is the reason why he asked for Kunti to go for Niyog (this is clearly mentioned that the intent was only to keep the stake on the throne) yet once Yudhishtir, Bheem and Duryodhan were born, Pandu didn't return, he didn't even send Yudhishtir back, what could be his reason? Anyone who is trying to ensure his child becomes a king will try to get him involved in politics and princely affairs since the beginning , but Pandu didn't do that, it clearly means that the Pandu his wives and children were not welcomed in the kingdom. Pandu in himself was a warrior its pretty sure that he had ensured the safety of his children in the forest where Bheeshm had limited influence owing to the area being under Brahmin control(such areas are not under the rights of the king, hence while staking Hastinapur, Yudhishtir clearly mentions Hastinapur excluding the areas of Brahmins). It was an unwritten agreement between the two, you stay away and your family is safe

3) Once Pandu was dead, Kunti realized that she needs to be in Hastinapur to ensure that her kids' rights are saved, she therefore gained sages support and came up with the Divine birth theory so make her children special and better suited than Dhratrashtras. Once she returns with such support and accepted story, Bheeshm has no option but to accept her. Not just this, by now Yadavs were also slowly gaining predominance and Bheeshm wouldn't have wanted to get a new enemy. So he let her in. Kunti had her goals clear, she took Vidur in her support. (If Yudhishtir was Vidurji's biological child then all the best, even if not, Vidur was nothing more than a glorified servant in Hastinapur despite his talents). Bheeshm could not have done any direct attack of Pandavas that would have been suicidal to the image of the royal family (this is the reason I feel he had no idea about the Varnavrat conspiracy). Now they did plan internal attacks, but Vidurji anticipated and neutralised it

4) About the point why involve the kid, if he will blurt. We are talking of the princes who are taught secrecy, diplomacy etc. since childhood. There was no reason why Bheeshm would have feared this. He couldn't come to forefront. The major people designated to ensure the murders were Karna and Shakuni(,check KMG there is a full stop between Duryodhan n other two names), just that Duryodhan also gets involved since the matter affected him the most. Also he got exposed at the end. The narration was complied at the end of the war, by then Duryodhan was the official villian but Bheeshm was not exposed, he was still a respected figure, do you think Ved Vyas could have dared mentioned his participation without proof, forget civilians, even the other sages would have got against them. Yet his mentality and shrewdness is very much highlighted

5) The Pandavas had already lost their goodwill in the Rajsuya Yagya where a cousin, a friendly king who supported Pandavas campaign was killed by a non king. The Dharma wasn't followed in the Rajsuya by not making the eldest of the family the Pratham Poojya and instead giving the position to someone non deserving (at least public saw it that way) Pandavas didn't have that public and sages support post Rajsuya closing ceremony. So Sages didn't do much after what happened in Dice Hall, aside it was Yudhishtir who lost a fair game and whatever was done there was within law.

Kauravas did not lose their respect in front of sages. They freed Draupadi, gifted her more than she deserved or could have demanded for. For what exactly would the sages object? We find it wrong it is wrong but for people then, the act would have been taken as completely a benevolent one.

6)Your only assumption about Bheeshm not knowing about Karna is based on the fact that why didn't Dhritrashtra tell this to Duryodhan. Now I have two points regarding this

a) Dhritrashtra could never guess that it would help him, he would have rather taken it as a risk of Duryodhan losing trust on Karna and thereby probably his self confidence. I read your point about why Yudhishtir was not told since he might have gone into back foot, but that is how human psychology behaves they anticipate how would a thing affect him. While Krishnaji n Kunti would have thought that this would weaken Yudhishtir, Dhritrashtra would have taken it like it would shake Duryodhan. It's all preassumption they have to make, nothing could actually be a straight truth

b) If you think that Bheeshm Karna convo never happened because Dhritrashtra didn't say this to Duryodhan, then it is much more possible that Dhritrashtra got the news after the battle was over. Unlike what TV shows have, Sanjay wasn't having a live war Telecasted in front of him for which he was giving a running commentary. Instead he used to visit Dhritrashtra at the death of every CIC, tell him that Bheeshm, Drona, Karna, Shalya etc. are dead. Dhritrashtra used to cry at the state of affairs and then asked who all are dead/alive. Sanjay would give a brief of it, and then Dhritrashtra asks tell me in detail, and that's how he began. Dhritrashtra was definitely not at the war arena else he would have got the news of at least the death of the CIC. Now it's impossible without divinity for Sanjay to travel to Dhritrashtra after the death of every CIC and then return before the start of the next day war. It's pretty clear that this fragmented narration is a poetic liberty by Vyas, either Sanjay returned at the end of the war and gave all the details or Vyas revealed to us all the facts in form of Sanjay Dhritrashtra convo to make it interesting.

Dhritrashtra not informing Duryodhan (at a time when they were separated by miles) is no indication (forget proof) that the convo didn't happen at all.

Point 1 and 2 - I was saying if Bhishma can go to length of killing Pandavas and plotting everything to make Duryodhana the King then they could have found a loophole to declare Dhritarashtra The King after Pandu's death

Wasn't Bhima, Yuvraj when Yudi was ruling?

They could have simply killed Pandavas in Van, its very easy to kill people in their sleep when they are not expecting an attack, take Ass killing Upa-Pandavas, Shikhandi and Drishtdumya for example, Pandu couldn't have protected his kids and wives from an unexpected attack, then declare that they died from Bandit attack or robbery, people will cry for 2 days then forget everything.

Point 3 - Where is it mentioned that Bhishma rejected Kunti and Pandavas? According to text they returned to Hastinapur within 17 days of Pandu's death and from the reaction of Pandu's mother, it seems they didn't know about his death -

Steadily adhering to the path of the virtuous and the wise, and leaving behind him these children, Pandu departed hence seventeen days ago. His wife Madri, beholding him placed in the funeral pyre and about to be consumed, herself ascended the same pyre, and sacrificing her life thus, hath gone with her lord to the region reserved for chaste wives.

Then seeing the bodies aflame, Kausalya burst out, 'O my son, my son!'--and fell down senseless on the ground. And seeing her down the citizens and the inhabitants of the provinces began to wail from grief and affection for their king. And the birds of the air and the beasts of the field were touched by the lamentations of Kunti. And Bhishma, the son of Santanu, and the wise Vidura, and the others also that were there, became disconsolate

https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m01/m01128.htm

Point 4 - Are we really saying that a state head will involve a 10-12 years old in an assassination attempt? Duryodhana was such a smarty pants that Yuyutsu was able to warn Pandavas, I don't think anyone with a brain would involve a child in assassination of future King. These attempts require precision, none will leave it upto a child.

Don't you hear news of IPS officer's death/murder? Read assassination done by people in power, it requires precision, none would trust a child with it and Duryodhana was someone whose education was yet to commence

Someone like Bhishma could have ordered people to kill Yudhishtir, it wouldn't take him much. I mean the lesser people know about it, the better, Bhishma looks like an idiot to me if he actually thought Duryodhana, Sakuni and Karna can carry out assassination of Bhima/Yudhishtira

Point 5 - That goes for Bhishma too, It was Yudi who lost the game, and Bhishma didn't really have the power he did before Dhritarashtra became King of Hastinapur after bifurcation of Kingdom

About Karna's information -

There's no evidence for anything we are discussing, is there?

We got a conversation between Bhishma and Karna through a conversation between Sanjay and Dhritarashtra. If I accept everything you are saying still do we know when Bhishma got to know about Karna being Kunti's son to assume that he hated Pandavas because of Kunti? All we know is that he knew about it and in the same conversation he asks Karna to side with Pandavas and end the war, He doesn't show hostility or bad will towards Kunti, Karna or Pandavas in this particular conversation, does he?

I am not saying he was a good individual but I don't believe he was a mastermind, He couldn't kill 5 kids 🤦‍

When it comes to Mahabharata, I don't consider anyone a mastermind who could control people, Bhishma didn't know Yudi will ask him or Krishna will kill Shishupal, Bhishma stopped Bhima from killing Shishupal, would anything be different for Pandavas if Bhima had killed a King who was supporting them?

I am not disagreeing with you, I just need more evidence to look at Mahabharata from a completely different perspective

Edit -

One more thing is that if Bhishma knew about Karna and hated Kunti with her sons for this reason then he could have told everyone the truth about Karna being Kunti's son, who would have supported Pandavas and Kunti after this, in a time like that

Originally posted by: Chiillii

About upapandavas.

Disclaimer first: Mahabharat and Puranas are not mythology for me. They are real history of India for me. These charachters Kashyapa Manu or Rama or Krishna Pandavas even Suyodhan etc existed as extraordinary humans of the time for me.

And I really dont believe in their divinity or miracles or boons and curses. I just dont. So if anyone wants to talk to me about magic, I really cannot discuss anything with them. But if interested in discussing the epic logically, I am game.

Uppandavas definetly existed as humans. I dont believe that they were visvedevas cursed for an untimely and unmarried life and hence died in the war without children.

Uppandavss and their stories are in buddhist and jain texts as well as shaivite purana like Skanda and Ganga purana. While they are completely absent from Vaishnava puranas.

Battles were not only going on between royal families for supremacy. They were also going on between Brahmana/Rishi clans for supremacy.

During the pauranic period a major group of these Brahmanas and rishis started Vishnu worship as a counter to Shaiva and shaktas.

They forged political alliances with prominent Royal families and deified their most popular Kings as Vishnu Avatars. Parshuram and Vyasa were Part of this group.

The ones against them were demonised. So we have Bhauma and Bhagadutta or Ghatothkach who were devi devotees or Bali, his son Bana etc who were shiv devotees classified as Asura or Raskhasa.

Rama became a Vishnu avatar but his enemy who was actually a brahmin but not a vaishnava rather shaiva becomes a Rakshas.

All were humans, there were no devas or asuras. All Vishnu worshippers become devas and shiva and devi worshippers become Asura and Rakshas.

This was a massive political propaganda of the time.

Coming to Uppandavas children. Why were they marginalised. Like I mentioned above they existed and we have their genealogy in bits and pieces in all non vaishnava literature.

The Politics of the time and the precarious situation Yudhishtir and Draupadi were in, it makes sense that uppandavas whether her sons or adopted will definetly be married to daughter of their allies. Prativindhya naturally will have one Panchal wife. And children as well.

They were killed in the war but their children lived with their mothers family. They never were brought back to Hastinapur. Their mentions erased from all Vaishnava puranas to avoid any counter claims against Parikshit and Janmejaya. who threw their entire might in popularising the main vaishnava text Srimad Bhagvatham and Vishnu Purana.

Yudhishtir and Draupadi specially lost all interest in the world due to dyut sabha exile and war which killed their children so they just went with the flow probably to avoid another war that could even get their grand children killed. Throne was not worth it anymore. As long as the kids were safe, had a family to care for them and place to live, they let it be.

Yadaavs had become very powerful in the 13 years Pandavas were in exile. Jarasandh was gone. Pandavas and Kurus not in general favor meant kingdoms diverting towards Dwarka. It was also a port and trading centre. Bulk of the yadava including Vasudev had picked up Vaishya varna, trading as profession. So they had money and army and political clout.

Arjun was fully under the control of Krishna and with Abhi Uttara Marriage Matsya also aligned with yadava. Matsya was the most richest kingdom of the time. Parikshit married his matsya cousin, she was Uttars daughter.

By the time war ended Panchals, Chedi, Magadha, Kuru all were practically on alms. Yadavas and Krishna ensured Parikshit becomes King.

They got enough time to marginalise Prativindhya and other Uppandavas sons. Also do note that all the kings who attended the war left their successors behind as Yuvaraj and so their descendents continued ruling. Homeless orphans that uppandavas children had become found a refugee status in wives kingdoms and ruled small teritories as vassals of bigger kings. They couldnt become independent king in their own rights.

What about vajra then he was pandava+yadava progeny how does he fits in this equation ??

Plus i can understand yadava aiming for dominance post war but will krishna deliberately plot against upandavas considering they were brought up in dwaraka. And pradymun was their teacher as he was for abhimanyu. ? What do you think about this?

Yadava dominance theory loses its logic when you see that Krishna actually killed most Yadavas. They didn't simply die fighting each other. KRISHNA killed them.

Let's take things one by one.

1. Krishna couldn't have known Arjuna would show up in Dwaraka at the end of his first exile.

2. Krishna couldn't have known Subhadra's child would be a boy.

3. He couldn't have known there would be a dice game.

4. Dwaraka was left practically in ruins by Salwa's attack and was no longer the power it once was.

5. Krishna actually wanted to go on the attack twice. Once, immediately after dice game and second, after Arjuna returned from Indra's kingdom. Yudhishtira was the one who refused.

6. When the actual war game, Balram wanted to fight for Suyodhana. He only left because Krishna refused. Krishna never stopped the Yadavas who did fight on Kaurava side. Just like most other kingdoms in the land, the Yadavas also had people fighting on both sides.

7. If Krishna wanted Yadava dominance, one of the first things to ensure would've been to keep Abhimanyu safe. He could've asked Satyaki.

8. Upapandavas were actually alive at the end of war. For all Krishna knew at the time, Prativindhya COULD have been crowned king.

9. Since Satyaki previously stated Abhimanyu as heir, we can assume it would've been Uttara's child. Problem is even if anyone knew at the time Uttara was pregnant, Krishna had no way of telling her child would be a boy.

10. Ashwatthama wasn't acting on orders of Krishna when he killed upapandavas. Until that point, for all Krishna knew, Prativindhya would still have been heir.

11. KRISHNA REFUSED TO GO ON ASHWAMEDHA WITH ARJUNA. Far from being under control of Krishna, Arjuna did the rest on his own on YUDHISHTIRA'S orders. There would've been only a small piece of land to split if not for Yudhishtira and Panchali.

12. As I said in the beginning, Krishna slaughtered the Yadavas himself and other disappeared (Bhagavatham) or died (Mahabharata).

13. The post war period was 36 MONTHS, not years. As Parikshit was still clearly a baby for Subhadra to be left in care and Kripa to be appointed teacher.

14. At that point, there was no one left to threaten Yudhishtira or Panchali if they even chose to invite the Cinas (Chinese) in. Krishna was dead, Yadavas were dead, Pariskhit was a toddler.

15. Yuyutsu was left as regent. He owed nothing to the Yadavas.

------

The Yadava dominance theory fails on the logical front at almost every level.

Edited to add: Harivamsa and Bhagavatham were much later books, not composed during the lifetimes of Mahabharata characters. Vaishnava dominance in the texts therefore couldn't have prompted Yudhishtira and Panchali to give up the empire.

@HearMeRoar - this is completely out of topic but since you like to make sense of things by removing divine things I wanted to ask have you read Amish's books? What do you think of his perspective or the way he justified it ? 😊

I already gave the reasons for 1 and 2.

Kids were not born when Pandu left, so he wouldn't know what would happen, and Bheeshm did find a loophole and made Dhritrashtra sit on the throne wear the crown and have all the practical powers of a king -this includes deciding the next Yuvraj too. These rights are given to no-one but a king. Excluding a formal Rajyabhishek there was nothing that separated Dhritrashtra from a king. He had his loophole. But working with loopholes you wouldn't get 100% results

As I already said post the birth of kids, Pandu would have been extra cautious to ensure kids are saved. Bheeshm couldn't have just sent his men to Brahmin lands and Van, at max he could send some small time spies, killers and Pandu could ensure safety from those

I didn't say that Bheeshm rejected Kunti, I said after Pandu's death Bheeshm had no option but to accept them so he officially welcomed them whole heartedly

The10-12 year old was a part of the plan not the mastermind. The fact that Yuyutsu could spoil them is in a fact a proof that all the royal kids were trained for secretary, spying right from the beginning. The IAS officers of today is not like the princes of those days

Bheeshm not saying anything in Dwit Sabha was never something I added in my list of reasons to believe that he secretly wanted Kaurav king, I just said why sages didn't react. In fact I opined that Bheeshm became anti Duryodhan post this event while Chhiillli thinks otherwise but her point isn't wrong, he could have at least stopped Karna, after all even if she was, she was the slave of his family, Karna had no rights

And no Bheeshm couldn't have guessed what Yudhishtir would do, but when it was done he felt it on his ego and selected someone who would find maximum objections. He stopped Bheem to show himself as someone great and things that followed actually took things worse from bad

We know about the entire war by Sanjay Dhritrashtra conversation, but the way the conversation happened isn't possible at all. I am saying that the convo happened at the end of the war/the convo was a poetic liberty

And Karna's point isn't the only one in my original post there are other reasons for his antifavouritism to.

He couldn't kill because his opponents were equal masterminds be it Pandu or Vidur

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

Yadava dominance theory loses its logic when you see that Krishna actually killed most Yadavas. They didn't simply die fighting each other. KRISHNA killed them.

Let's take things one by one.

1. Krishna couldn't have known Arjuna would show up in Dwaraka at the end of his first exile.

2. Krishna couldn't have known Subhadra's child would be a boy.

3. He couldn't have known there would be a dice game.

4. Dwaraka was left practically in ruins by Salwa's attack and was no longer the power it once was.

5. Krishna actually wanted to go on the attack twice. Once, immediately after dice game and second, after Arjuna returned from Indra's kingdom. Yudhishtira was the one who refused.

6. When the actual war game, Balram wanted to fight for Suyodhana. He only left because Krishna refused. Krishna never stopped the Yadavas who did fight on Kaurava side. Just like most other kingdoms in the land, the Yadavas also had people fighting on both sides.

7. If Krishna wanted Yadava dominance, one of the first things to ensure would've been to keep Abhimanyu safe. He could've asked Satyaki.

8. Upapandavas were actually alive at the end of war. For all Krishna knew at the time, Prativindhya COULD have been crowned king.

9. Since Satyaki previously stated Abhimanyu as heir, we can assume it would've been Uttara's child. Problem is even if anyone knew at the time Uttara was pregnant, Krishna had no way of telling her child would be a boy.

10. Ashwatthama wasn't acting on orders of Krishna when he killed upapandavas. Until that point, for all Krishna knew, Prativindhya would still have been heir.

11. KRISHNA REFUSED TO GO ON ASHWAMEDHA WITH ARJUNA. Far from being under control of Krishna, Arjuna did the rest on his own on YUDHISHTIRA'S orders. There would've been only a small piece of land to split if not for Yudhishtira and Panchali.

12. As I said in the beginning, Krishna slaughtered the Yadavas himself and other disappeared (Bhagavatham) or died (Mahabharata).

13. The post war period was 36 MONTHS, not years. As Parikshit was still clearly a baby for Subhadra to be left in care and Kripa to be appointed teacher.

14. At that point, there was no one left to threaten Yudhishtira or Panchali if they even chose to invite the Cinas (Chinese) in. Krishna was dead, Yadavas were dead, Pariskhit was a toddler.

15. Yuyutsu was left as regent. He owed nothing to the Yadavas.

------

The Yadava dominance theory fails on the logical front at almost every level.

What do you think of kingdom being divided theory?? Upandavas leaving their progeny? Which version is bhasa bharata ?? Is it Nepali one??