~| Whatever you want to argue about - 2 |~ - Page 52

When we say that the andhaka women had no option, let us also note here that Krishna killed the man who sent multiple assassins after him and the people who assisted the tyrant. He didn't initiate the conflict. He ended it as best as he could. What was the expectation from him? That he kill Kamsa and let everyone else continue the same attempts to kill?

Krishna was then offered the crown and didn't take it.

Nor did he abuse the women like so many other conquerors.

Indeed, he offered the title of on many of them only to protect them.

People can we discuss about Ramayana characters in Mahabharata?

How do we see Hanuman ji in Mahabharata repeatedly. Are all those verses interpolations

Another question I just read on Quora that the descandants of Krishna converted to Islam after being defeated by the invaders, so his current descandents are Muslims, any clue on that.

Also why people call Virat war an interpolation

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

Another question I just read on Quora that the descandants of Krishna converted to Islam after being defeated by the invaders, so his current descandents are Muslims, any clue on that.

Also why people call Virat war an interpolation

Islam came with Mohammad who came several centuries later. Who makes these claims?😕

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

People can we discuss about Ramayana characters in Mahabharata?

How do we see Hanuman ji in Mahabharata repeatedly. Are all those verses interpolations

Has to be. Or maybe they were descendants or titles. Like Takshak cannot be a contemporary of both Pandavas and Janmejaya.

I've heard the Virat war interpolation bit.

Logically speaking, I can see why. Problem is no textual evidence as in it being absent in multiple versions.

Logically speaking, Virat and Pandavas would have to foolish in the extreme to leave the palace and the women unguarded while they went off after cattle raiders. Unless of course, Virat knew who they were and had left Arjuna in charge with a battalion or two to help.

No Krishna didn't abuse the women. I meant option as in they had no where else to go. Jarasandh took away only his daughters. The other women and children had no guardian other than Ugrasen. They lived with him.

Same as Kuru women and orphaned children after the war.

Just like it was Duryodhan who was responsible for his family so was Kansa and after his death at the hands of his enemy they were at the mercy of his enemies.

Krishna was not responsible for what happened, but Vasudev was to an extent. He was the one who started the vicious campaign against Kansa through Narada.

A justified option for Kansa would have been to get Vasudev killed instead of going after Krishna. I wonder why he never did that.

Originally posted by: Chiillii

No Krishna didn't abuse the women. I meant option as in they had no where else to go. Jarasandh took away only his daughters. The other women and children had no guardian other than Ugrasen. They lived with him.

Same as Kuru women and orphaned children after the war.

Just like it was Duryodhan who was responsible for his family so was Kansa and after his death at the hands of his enemy they were at the mercy of his enemies.

Krishna was not responsible for what happened, but Vasudev was to an extent. He was the one who started the vicious campaign against Kansa through Narada.

A justified option for Kansa would have been to get Vasudev killed instead of going after Krishna. I wonder why he never did that.

@Bold I guess because that would have actually confirmed the rumours against him. Kansa was definitely not evil as serials show

@Underlined that's the worst thing about it, what Bheem did to Dhritrashtra and Gandhari are known after they were victors, just can't imagine what he would have done to the Kaurav wives. They should have at least aimed to return to their parents house. By the way considering they were 100, they should have had at least 100 in laws Seems they couldn't gather support from their in laws family too

Bheem had a genuine grouse against Dhritrashtra and Gandhari. Not only did they never stop Duryodhan they actually encouraged and enjoyed his evil deeds. Dhritrashtra was as much a culprit as Duryodhan and no all their sons being killed doesnt cut them any slack

Also Dhritrashtra was emptying the treasury donating in his sons name. That would have not only caused financial distress for Pandavas but also created an undeserved sympathy wave for Kouravas

The wives and children were innocent, why would they be mistreated by Bhima. He was not evil.

Dhritrashtra specifically deserved every humiliation and insult that he got, inspite of his sons' death. Wasn't he enjoying Draupadi's and Pandavas humiliation in Dyut Sabha

Originally posted by: Chiillii

Bheem had a genuine grouse against Dhritrashtra and Gandhari. Not only did they never stop Duryodhan they actually encouraged and enjoyed his evil deeds. Dhritrashtra was as much a culprit as Duryodhan and no all their sons being killed doesnt cut them any slack

Also Dhritrashtra was emptying the treasury donating in his sons name. That would have not only caused financial distress for Pandavas but also created an undeserved sympathy wave for Kouravas

The wives and children were innocent, why would they be mistreated by Bhima. He was not evil.

Dhritrashtra specifically deserved every humiliation and insult that he got, inspite of his sons' death. Wasn't he enjoying Draupadi's and Pandavas humiliation in Dyut Sabha

And Gandhari was very much present in dice hall and never spoke a word against the assault on Panchali until appeared things were going against her sons.