Why is Bhabruwahan not mentioned

FlauntPessimism thumbnail
Screen Detective Participant Thumbnail ICC T20 CWC 2024 Match Winner Thumbnail + 9
Posted: 5 years ago
#1

Babhruwahan was undoubtedly a great warrior. Although he killed Arjuna due to the curse, still he was otherwise too a very dreaded warrior to face

So why only Balram and Rukmi are mentioned as the ones who didn't participate in the war. Shouldn't Babhruwahan too be added in this list and also Vidurji

Created

Last reply

Replies

5

Views

580

Users

3

Likes

2

Frequent Posters

sambhavami thumbnail
Posted: 5 years ago
#2

He wasn't a main character na. He's only mentioned in Arjun's vijay yatra after he war. And as for Manipur remaining neutral, that agreement was made way back around Arjun's marriage to Chitrangada.


The main condition for that marriage was, Arjun's kid wouldn't have a place in the Pandava succession line, and instead would be treated as Manipur's native prince and then King. And, that Manipur would never participate in the Kuru politics (whether P or K).


And Vidur wasn't a warrior, he wouldn't have fought anyway. 😆


And by chance, if Parikshit hadn't survived, they might have had to break this pact and handover Hastinapur+IP+whatever-kingdoms over to Babhruvahana (read: Manipur) just for the blood-relations sake.

Edited by proteeti - 5 years ago
FlauntPessimism thumbnail
Screen Detective Participant Thumbnail ICC T20 CWC 2024 Match Winner Thumbnail + 9
Posted: 5 years ago
#3

Even Rukmi was not so important in Mahabharata sake (he was important in Krishna Leela but in Mahabharata per se, there wasn't much importance of him, yet he is mentioned as someone not participating, so I think Babhruwahan should have been mentioned among the warriors who weren't participating in the war

sambhavami thumbnail
Posted: 5 years ago
#4

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

Even Rukmi was not so important in Mahabharata sake (he was important in Krishna Leela but in Mahabharata per se, there wasn't much importance of him, yet he is mentioned as someone not participating, so I think Babhruwahan should have been mentioned among the warriors who weren't participating in the war


I should think that was because he was genuinely interested in the war and actually visited Kurukshetra. As far as I remember he approached both sides and got rejected both ways.

Babhru wasn't in the scene, and maybe that's why he wasn't mentioned?

Vr15h thumbnail
16th Anniversary Thumbnail IPL 2024 Participants Thumbnail + 6
Posted: 5 years ago
#5

Babruvahana is a pretty peripheral character: one can easily read the MB w/o reading anything about him, and the story wouldn't change much. His kingdom wasn't a participant in the war, his mother's marriage was important to Manipura but not to Indraprastha/Hastinapur (the way Subhadra's was), and even the Ashwamedha yagna can easily be shown w/o showing Arjun's battle w/ him.


I didn't like this serial ending w/ Bheeshma's death, but even had it continued, it needn't have included Babruvahana


A bigger omission in this serial was Satyaki: even though he was peripherally shown early in the serial and on day 14, he was never again shown. But he was the #2 or #3 warrior on the Pandava side, after Bhima and Arjun

FlauntPessimism thumbnail
Screen Detective Participant Thumbnail ICC T20 CWC 2024 Match Winner Thumbnail + 9
Posted: 5 years ago
#6

Originally posted by: .Vrish.

Babruvahana is a pretty peripheral character: one can easily read the MB w/o reading anything about him, and the story wouldn't change much. His kingdom wasn't a participant in the war, his mother's marriage was important to Manipura but not to Indraprastha/Hastinapur (the way Subhadra's was), and even the Ashwamedha yagna can easily be shown w/o showing Arjun's battle w/ him.


I didn't like this serial ending w/ Bheeshma's death, but even had it continued, it needn't have included Babruvahana


A bigger omission in this serial was Satyaki: even though he was peripherally shown early in the serial and on day 14, he was never again shown. But he was the #2 or #3 warrior on the Pandava side, after Bhima and Arjun

Not just in the serial. I meant overall. It's always said that all excluding Balram and Rukmi participated in the war. Rukmi wasn't much important in Mahabharata either but he too is mentioned specifically. Why only Babhruwahan is excluded in this mention


Sometimes I believe the Devdutt Patnaik theory is correct. The Dwarkadheesh Krishna and the Mathura Raj Krishna are different people of different times. Since both of them later merged, hence the major relatives of Mathura Raj Krishna were specifically mentioned as non participant in the war

Related Topics

Top

Stay Connected with IndiaForums!

Be the first to know about the latest news, updates, and exclusive content.

Add to Home Screen!

Install this web app on your iPhone for the best experience. It's easy, just tap and then "Add to Home Screen".