Things which made you uncomfortable in Mahabharata - Page 6

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

It doesn't matter whether Krishna was divine or not. Point is it wasn't considered immoral to lie under some circumstances.

The coronation of Yudhishtira as yuvraj and the division of the kingdom were done after Pandu's death, when Dhritharashtra was already sitting in the throne. So Bheeshma did have power to force his will if he so felt like it even after the Pandavas and Kauravas were adults.

In the dice hall, not only didn't he do it, he actively argued that Panchali WAS a slave, that Shakuni didn't cheat

It is immaterial whether Suyodhana wouldve listened or not. We will never know because Bheeshma never tried to stop any of it.

In fact, there is more. After the dice hall events, Vyasa comes to Kuru court and asks if the elders were all right with what went on. Narada simply comes to court and shouts at the Kurus. Bheeshma wasn't caught by surprise by the appearance of Pandavas in court. He knew they were invited and for what purpose. How come none of them thought to inform Vyasa or Krishna there was a trick being planned?

Too, too many questions with no answers for the Kuru elders to be innocent.

Even if I accept everything else, I will have to disagree with Bhishma being at fault in dice hall.

There was no trick. It was a consensual dice game which Yudhishthir accepted and we don't need Bhishma to tell him Duryodhan is not fond of him. Anyone with more than one brain cell will know he is not calling them for a fun game of Ludo. Yudhi was the one who staked human beings one by one, he knew what can happen once they are slaves. There was again, no trick since Shakuni's dice being magical is not something I believe.

And second, Shakuni cheated is WRONG unless you accept the story of his dice being made of bones of his father. I have no idea how you cheat in Ludo (I guess it was somewhat similar), it is completely a game based on luck - the numbers of the dice. It IS important to judge what will be fruitful in such a case, accusing someone of cheating will only infuriate them and that will be right for DDS because Bhishma might be the patriarch in administrative decisions but he doesn't decide being a third person as to who cheated or not. Did Yudhi say he was cheated? No. How can Bhishma who is not even a part claim that they cheated and DDSK be quiet about it when this would be foolishness on Bhishma's part.

So I am not convinced this is a fault in Bhishma's part. In fact doing this would be foolishness IMO, agreeing to disagree.

During the first 10 days of the battle, Bhishma tried to persuade Duryodhana against the war. Even after his fall on the bed of arrows, he requested him to end all conflicts with his death. But the man never paid heed. 🤷‍♀️

IMO his influence waned to a significant extent when Duryodhana grew up.

Originally posted by: CaptainSpark

Probably Shikhandi being Amba's reincarnation is an Interpolation then. I don't see any other reason why Shikhandi was needed there for no reason, isn't it?

Exactly in this case Shikhandi was not at relevant. Unless it was between 7th and 10th day, Bheeshm realized that Shikhandi was feminine.

Or maybe he needed a reason to lose from Arjun. He thought of a plan that Shikhandi being an effeminate/transgender could be taken as a female. So he just did it

Originally posted by: Wistfulness

During the first 10 days of the battle, Bhishma tried to persuade Duryodhana against the war. Even after his fall on the bed of arrows, he requested him to end all conflicts with his death. But the man never paid heed. 🤷‍♀️

IMO his influence waned to a significant extent when Duryodhana grew up.

Had he agreed, then we wouldn't have known either Krishna or Arjun or Draupadi or Duryodhan or Dusshashan or Karna or Bheeshm or any of the Pandavas, Kauravas ko to waise bhi we hardly know excluding Duryodhan Dusshashan and Vikarna (I know names of 9 more)

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

Exactly in this case Shikhandi was not at relevant. Unless it was between 7th and 10th day, Bheeshm realized that Shikhandi was feminine.

Or maybe he needed a reason to lose from Arjun. He thought of a plan that Shikhandi being an effeminate/transgender could be taken as a female. So he just did it

Very strange. 😂😂 Poor Duryodhan I am convinced he is most unfortunate😂

Originally posted by: CaptainSpark

Probably Shikhandi being Amba's reincarnation is an Interpolation then. I don't see any other reason why Shikhandi was needed there for no reason, isn't it?

My theory is that Shikhandi wasn't needed to kill Bheeshma because Bheeshma 1 Attacked her 2 Attacked Arjun and other Pandavas

What purpose did Shikhandi being there serve? If Bheeshma had dropped his weapon like Drona did when he heard about death of his son, I would understand Shikhandi's importance

Shikhandi and Arjun were battling with Bheeshma for days, it's not like it happened only on day 10, day 10 is remarkable as Bheeshma died on Day 10, if you read the whole battle you'll find exaggeration of Bheeshma's power First Pandavas attacked him with every weapon available surrounding him from all sides keeping Shikhandi before them (He didn't die), Bheeshma had a one on one with Arjuna where it is mentioned that Arjun pierced him with 100 arrows, All this is possible if you believe that Bheeshma was immortal

What I think happened is that it was Shikhandi's vow to kill Bheeshma as Yudhishtira says that Shikhandi told him that he will kill Bheeshma, he can't run away and bring shame on himself, his king and family. Yudhishtira assured him that Arjun will be there to protect him, he doesn't have to worry about anything

It is also mentioned Shikhandi was ahead and Arjun was protecting him, at first Arjun was not trying to hurt Bheeshma, Arjun cut off his bow that's when Shikhandi attacked Bheeshma with arrows but apparently it didn't hurt Bheeshma and he got multiple bow which were broken by Arjuna (Arjun's aim was protecting Shikhandi as this point, he wasn't trying to kill Bheeshma), Then Bheeshma threw that dart on Arjun and it was after that Arjun went berserk and started piercing Bheeshma with arrows. Shikhandi wasn't able to kill him so Arjun had to step up and do it, their ultimate goal for the day as decided by Krushna was elimination of Bheeshma

It would have been a different story if Bheeshma had succeeded on killing Arjun, War is unpredictable.

One more important point here is that it was on day 9 that Krushna was about to break his vow of not using his weapon because Arjun wasn't fighting with his complete strength against Bheeshma, Arjun stopped him from using it and next day on day 10, He killed Bheeshma, Shikhandi was always there, the only difference was Arjun started attacking Bheeshma with full strength

Originally posted by: CaptainSpark

Very strange. 😂😂 Poor Duryodhan I am convinced he is most unfortunate😂

He is unfortunate in a funny way though

Originally posted by: CaptainSpark

Even if I accept everything else, I will have to disagree with Bhishma being at fault in dice hall.

There was no trick. It was a consensual dice game which Yudhishthir accepted and we don't need Bhishma to tell him Duryodhan is not fond of him. Anyone with more than one brain cell will know he is not calling them for a fun game of Ludo. Yudhi was the one who staked human beings one by one, he knew what can happen once they are slaves. There was again, no trick since Shakuni's dice being magical is not something I believe.

And second, Shakuni cheated is WRONG unless you accept the story of his dice being made of bones of his father. I have no idea how you cheat in Ludo (I guess it was somewhat similar), it is completely a game based on luck - the numbers of the dice. It IS important to judge what will be fruitful in such a case, accusing someone of cheating will only infuriate them and that will be right for DDS because Bhishma might be the patriarch in administrative decisions but he doesn't decide being a third person as to who cheated or not. Did Yudhi say he was cheated? No. How can Bhishma who is not even a part claim that they cheated and DDSK be quiet about it when this would be foolishness on Bhishma's part.

So I am not convinced this is a fault in Bhishma's part. In fact doing this would be foolishness IMO, agreeing to disagree.

The most disturbing part for me wrt Bhishma:

"Vaisampayana continued,--"With hair dishevelled and half her attire loosened, all the while dragged by Dussasana, the modest Krishna consumed with anger, faintly said--"In this assembly are persons conversant with all the branches of learning devoted to the performance of sacrifices and other rites, and all equal unto Indra, persons some of whom are really my superiors and others who deserve to be respected as such. I can not stay before them in this state. O wretch! O thou of cruel deeds, drag me not so. Uncover me not so. The princes (my lords) will not pardon thee, even if thou hast the gods themselves with Indra as thy allies. The illustrious son of Dharma is now bound by the obligations of morality. Morality, however, is subtle. Those only that are possessed of great clearness of vision can ascertain it. In speech even I am unwilling to admit an atom of fault in my lord forgetting his virtues. Thou draggest me who am in my season before these Kuru heroes. This is truly an unworthy act. But no one here rebuketh thee. Assuredly, all these are of the same mind with thee. O fie! Truly hath the virtue of the Bharata gone! Truly also hath the usage of those acquainted with the Kshatriya practice disappeared! Else these Kurus in this assembly would never have looked silently on this act that transgresseth the limits of their practices. Oh! both Drona and Bhishma have lost their energy, and so also hath the high-souled Kshatta, and so also this king. Else, why do these foremost of the Kuru elders look silently on this great crime?"

Vaisampayana continued,--"Thus did Krishna of slender waist cry in

p. 129distress in that assembly.

And Dussasana, beholding Krishna looking at her helpless lords, dragging her still more forcibly, and addressed her, 'Slave, Slave' and laughed aloud. And at those words Karna became very glad and approved of them by laughing aloud. And Sakuni, the son of Suvala, the Gandhara king, similarly applauded Dussasana. And amongst all those that were in the assembly except these three and Duryodhana, every one was filled with sorrow at beholding Krishna thus dragged in sight of that assembly. And beholding it all, Bhishma said, 'O blessed one, morality is subtle. I therefore am unable to duly decide this point that thou hast put, beholding that on the one hand one that hath no wealth cannot stake the wealth belonging to others, while on the other hand wives are always under the orders and at the disposal of their lords. Yudhishthira can abandon the whole world full of wealth, but he will never sacrifice morality. The son of Pandu hath said--'I am won.' Therefore, I am unable to decide this matter. Sakuni hath not his equal among men at dice-play. The son of Kunti still voluntarily staked with him. The illustrious Yudhishthira doth not himself regard that Sakuni hath played with him deceitfully. Therefore, I can not decide this point."

Look at the condition of your kul-vadhu. And look what useless lines you are debating on. This is why I have zero sympathy for the great Bhishma 🥱 He was too stuck to his redundant oath (though how having an oath of celibacy and not vying for the throne translates to blindly following a blind king & rapist son, is anyone's guess). He couldn't let go of his prestige & oath for fighting against adharma. He could have stopped it if he had said one strong word to Dhritarashtra & Duryodhana.

After reading the conversation here and inputs about Shikhandi I accept my loss, Bheeshm fall has been highlighted unduly probably because the Pandavas loved him.

He wasn't killed by any kind of treachery. He wasn't that great of a soldier as it's claimed to be (at least wasn't so at the age he was fighting). Shikhandi or no Shikhandi is completely irrelevant here.

Arjun killed him in a proper warfare, he took time just because he didn't want to harm Bheeshm

If at all we have to consider the relevance of Shikhandi then it's just that Bheeshm and Arjun came up to a consensus that instead of killing/targeting him directly, he would do so behind Shikhandi so that a message might be propagated that Arjun couldn't have defeated Bheeshm, he could do so only because Bheeshm couldn't attack someone he considered a female (Shikhandi)

Shikhandi basically was nothing but just a face saving for Bheeshm

Originally posted by: Eloquent

The most disturbing part for me wrt Bhishma:

Look at the condition of your kul-vadhu. And look what useless lines you are debating on. This is why I have zero sympathy for the great Bhishma 🥱 He was too stuck to his redundant oath (though how having an oath of celibacy and not vying for the throne translates to blindly following a blind king & rapist son, is anyone's guess). He couldn't let go of his prestige & oath for fighting against adharma. He could have stopped it if he had said one strong word to Dhritarashtra & Duryodhana.

What's more... it's not as if Bheeshma was unaware of his authority in court. It would've even been more understandable if he stayed silent. But he actively argued for the other side.

His words during Shishupal vadh episode are even more astounding. In the same speech, he manages to praise and deride Krishna.

I think Bheeshma was playing both sides. I forget which author now... there is a theory out there he was so outraged by what Satyavati pulled he simply decided to sit back and let her progeny kill each other.