~| Whatever you want to argue about - 2 |~ - Page 10

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

Story says Iravan was a virgin

Virgin doesn't necessarily mean underage Yaar

I married at 30, was Virgin till then doesn't mean I was underage though

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

Virgin doesn't necessarily mean underage Yaar

I married at 30, was Virgin till then doesn't mean I was underage though

Well I assume he'd have married. If Abhimanyu was 16, Iravan may have been 17

Originally posted by: Chiillii

Thanks Poorabh

Hi dear waiting for your inputs. Lot's of confusions here

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

I'm amazed at the claims of folk tales suggesting Krishna Arjuna romance. Nothing wrong in it.

But if we chase after folk tales, also consider the fact folk tales say Krishna married Arjuna's underaged son, Iravan, spent a night with him, then killed him with the help of daddy dearest. Wonder what prompts peeps to imagine this was a healthy relationship in THAT context?

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

Well I assume he'd have married. If Abhimanyu was 16, Iravan may have been 17

He could have or couldn't have married.

16-17 is still the time for Brahmcharya Ashram.

Abhimanyu married because Uttara marriage was necessary, no such thing with Iravan

I guess story is something Sahdev who was good in astrology suggested they need a human sacrifice to please goddess kali who is considered war goddess 4 their great win.

There was some signs which should be on d person who should be sacrificed , Krishna, arjun , iravan only had those signs .

Krishna arjun can't be sacrificed , so iravan volunteer.

Iravan desired to marry so Krishna took Mohini form & married him , spent a night with him , later she cried like iravan's widow.

In South I guess some festival is celebrated 4 iravan

I will try to post d story by tomorrow

Originally posted by: naq5

folktakes? i thought arjun krishna romance were recent fanfictions. folktales wuldnt make a person worshiped like krishna involved into a homosexual relationship

Bhai/behen, why are you getting drawn into my clearly troll posts?😆

Like I said in my prior response, I adore Arjuna and consider him a better human than Krishna. Arjuna was generally a straight arrow guy (pun intended). Krishna had a lot of darkness that he hid under the smiles. I find Krishna more interesting, not better.

If they were a romantic pair, more power to them. I don't care. If they were friends, also great.

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

He could have or couldn't have married.

16-17 is still the time for Brahmcharya Ashram.

Abhimanyu married because Uttara marriage was necessary, no such thing with Iravan

Ok.

Story is still the same, na? Krishna had a physical relationship with Arjuna's son with daddy's consent. Then daddy and spouse killed Iravan.

My point was that chasing folktales leads to stupidities like the Iravan story which clearly wasn't true.

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

Attacking and not winning is a thing but performing a Yagya and failing would have actually made them a laughing stock

This could be the reason

I think it needed a big army big kingdom and goodwill with other kingdoms to support them. Not many would be in that position though.

Originally posted by: deepikagupta9

I guess story is something Sahdev who was good in astrology suggested they need a human sacrifice to please goddess kali who is considered war goddess 4 their great win.

There was some signs which should be on d person who should be sacrificed , Krishna, arjun , iravan only had those signs .

Krishna arjun can't be sacrificed , so iravan volunteer.

Iravan desired to marry so Krishna took Mohini form & married him , spent a night with him

I will try to post d story by tomorrow

Yes that is exactly the folklore, which is clearly wrong since epic states that Iravan was killed by Amblush the son of Bakasur