Balaram on Dice Game - Page 12

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

@ Bold. I am not supporting Yudhishtira at all. My ideal for Panchali will always be she got to rule on her own. As far as romantic partner is concerned, my preference would be Krishna though I consider even him slightly less than her. Next would be Sahdev, then Arjuna.

@Blue. Yes, one definitely can. Especially if one is in danger of being made a slave and sexually assaulted. I wouldn't expect anyone to go into tragedy just to keep themselves free from the sin of lying. Dharma/morality does not exist in vacuum. It has to be applied to the real word, considering real consequences. Which is what Panchali argued, and Bheeshma immediately claimed dharma was whatever the powerful said it was. He was prepared to let his granddaughter-in-law be assaulted rather than commit the "sin" of lying. None of them understood dharma like she did, and Bheeshma at the very least was culpable of putting his ego before preventing a crime (same as Yudhishtira). At worst, Bheeshma was complicit with the criminals.

@Red. I blame Bheeshma mostly for above reasons, but yes, Yudhishtira, too. He SAW what the Kauravas planned for Panchali and still chose to stay silent. But I won't give Bheeshma any credit for giving Yudhishtira an out. They all lived in the same era, and Bheeshma knew his grandson. They all knew the emperor wouldn't take the out. Arjuna was the unexpected element in the scene.

@Blue -

Bheeshma wasn't Bheeshma the human, he was answerable to the throne, How could he accuse an innocent of cheating? Wasn't there any punishment for cheating? Its just wrong that Bheeshma lied and punished an innocent man, how can a judge give death sentence to an innocent for saving another?

Even If he had lied how would he prove it?

Bheeshma - Sakuni cheated

King - How?

Bheeshma - So and so

Sakuni to Yudi - Did I cheat?

Yudi - No

Bheeshma tried for lying to the throne

When the player is saying that Sakuni didn't cheat how could bheeshma say it?

Originally posted by: NoraSM

@Blue -

Bheeshma wasn't Bheeshma the human, he was answerable to the throne, How could he accuse an innocent of cheating? Wasn't there any punishment for cheating? Its just wrong that Bheeshma lied and punished an innocent man, how can a judge give death sentence to an innocent for saving another?

Even If he had lied how would he prove it?

Bheeshma - Sakuni cheated

King - How?

Bheeshma - So and so

Sakuni to Yudi - Did I cheat?

Yudi - No

Bheeshma tried for lying to the throne

When the player is saying that Sakuni didn't cheat how could bheeshma say it?

Oh God. Not sure why but I suddenly imagined that scene and am unable to control my laughter

Husband is giving me weird look

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

Panchali says she wants the same thing😆. For the younger 4 to lock up Yudhishtira and rule the empire. She also adds they wouldn't.

Bheema would lack legitimacy because none of his family would support him.

Panchali's statement of what she wished would happen should make clear what she wanted in ideal situation. It simply wasn't possible because 1) per rules, there was no crime and 2) none of the Pandavas would support the move.

Ok. So much I hope this was possible

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

Oh God. Not sure why but I suddenly imagined that scene and am unable to control my laughter

Husband is giving me weird look

🤣

Originally posted by: NoraSM

@Blue -

Bheeshma wasn't Bheeshma the human, he was answerable to the throne, How could he accuse an innocent of cheating? Wasn't there any punishment for cheating? Its just wrong that Bheeshma lied and punished an innocent man, how can a judge give death sentence to an innocent for saving another?

Even If he had lied how would he prove it?

Bheeshma - Sakuni cheated

King - How?

Bheeshma - So and so

Sakuni to Yudi - Did I cheat?

Yudi - No

Bheeshma tried for lying to the throne

When the player is saying that Sakuni didn't cheat how could bheeshma say it?

One thing that is forgotten is Dhritharashtra was never crowned king. SO yes, Bheeshma did have the power.

Bheeshma: Shakuni didn't cheat (which is what he actually said)

Panchali: (becomes sex slave)

_________________________

Bheeshma: Shakuni cheated

Panchali: (goes free)

Shakuni: (goes to prison). Considering the fact Shakuni was helping criminals, it would've been just punishment, if for a different crime.

Bheeshma: (gets blamed by society)

Panchali: not sexually assualted.

_________________________

Bheeshma was no fool not to know this. At best, he put his ego first. At worst, he was colluding with the criminals.

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

Ok. So much I hope this was possible

You and Panchali both😆.

Don't get me wrong. I loathe Yudhishtira. I'm just explaining why she likely HAD to do what she did.

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

One thing that is forgotten is Dhritharashtra was never crowned king. SO yes, Bheeshma did have the power.

Bheeshma: Shakuni didn't cheat (which is what he actually said)

Panchali: (becomes sex slave)

_________________________

Bheeshma: Shakuni cheated

Panchali: (goes free)

Shakuni: (goes to prison). Considering the fact Shakuni was helping criminals, it would've been just punishment, if for a different crime.

Bheeshma: (gets blamed by society)

Panchali: not sexually assualted.

_________________________

Bheeshma was no fool not to know this. At best, he put his ego first. At worst, he was colluding with the criminals.

A judge can not punish someone for a crime they did not commit, If they don't follow the rules, who will? He gave them an alternative which was Yudi accepting that Sakuni cheated, He gave them the loophole, a way out

It was on Yudi, its not about ego or anything, he couldn't prove Sakuni lied because Yudi, the one who played the game was proof of Sakuni's innocence, that's why he asked Yudi to say that Sakuni cheated, the man himself is saying that Sakuni didn't cheat with him then how can a 3rd person say that Sakuni cheated?

Are we considering them criminals or not? I am just confused now, didn't everyone say that whatever they did wasn't a crime, so how was Bheeshma colluding with criminals?

Originally posted by: NoraSM

A judge can not punish someone for a crime they did not commit, If they don't follow the rules, who will? He gave them an alternative which was Yudi accepting that Sakuni cheated, He gave them the loophole, a way out

It was on Yudi, its not about ego or anything, he couldn't prove Sakuni lied because Yudi, the one who played the game was proof of Sakuni's innocence, that's why he asked Yudi to say that Sakuni cheated, the man himself is saying that Sakuni didn't cheat with him then how can a 3rd person say that Sakuni cheated?

Are we considering them criminals or not? I am just confused now, didn't everyone say that whatever they did wasn't a crime, so how was Bheeshma colluding with criminals?

Saying Bheeshma had to follow the letter of the law is exactly what Bheeshma and (later) Yudhishtira argued, isn't it? He was the one who called the shots. He divided the country. He spoke up during rajasuya. He decided on who did what during war. He did have the power and/or supported those who did.

Panchali asked him to make the right decision. He said law was with the powerful. In his own words, he sided with the powerful.

As I said before, assault on a sister-in-law WAS a crime. So yes, Bheeshma was either putting himself first by ignoring a crime or colluding with criminals.

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

Saying Bheeshma had to follow the letter of the law is exactly what Bheeshma and (later) Yudhishtira argued, isn't it? He was the one who called the shots. He divided the country. He spoke up during rajasuya. He decided on who did what during war. He did have the power and/or supported those who did.

Panchali asked him to make the right decision. He said law was with the powerful. In his own words, he sided with the powerful.

As I said before, assault on a sister-in-law WAS a crime. So yes, Bheeshma was either putting himself first by ignoring a crime or colluding with criminals.

Sakuni didn't cheat, The law wasn't with powerful, the law was correct in not punishing someone for something they didn't do

When the player is saying that there was no cheating,how can bheeshma say there was cheating? Bheeshma, in fact, told him twice to say that Sakuni cheated and He didn't lose Draupadi but Yudi didn't say it

@bold - Yudi decided if She was a slave or not, Yudi decided If Sakuni was a cheater or not, how was she not a slave when Yudi didn't say that she wasn't? We are going on again and again blaming every one but Yudi, it was for him to decide, not Bheeshma

Assault was on sister in law wasn't proven in the court, Draupadi said it but they couldn't prove it

Originally posted by: NoraSM

Sakuni didn't cheat, The law wasn't with powerful, the law was correct in not punishing someone for something they didn't do

@bold - Yudi decided if She was a slave or not, Yudi decided If Sakuni was a cheated or not, how was she not a slave when Yudi didn't say that she wasn't? We are going on again and again blaming every one but Yudi, it was for him to decide, not Bheeshma

Assault was on sister in law wasn't proven in the court, Draupadi said it but they couldn't prove it

@Blue. This is exactly what she was talking about with dharma is subtle statement. How can anyone let a crime happen by rigidly sticking to the letter of the law?

Krishna, too, says the same thing when he asks Arjuna to kill Karna.

When from the apartment reserved for the females innocent Krishna was dragged, thou didst not interfere. Whither, O son of Radha, had this virtue of thine gone?

https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m08/m08091.htm

NOTE: not interfering to stop a crime was listed by Krishna as ONE of the reasons for death penalty.

So yeah, Bheeshma not put his ego aside and helping Panchali, albeit by punishing Shakuni under a different pretext, is/was a crime. Don't forget, Bheeshma knew Shakuni was part of Suyodhana's prior crimes of lac house.

Bheeshma says it is up to Yudhishtira to decide, and HE kept silent. For his silence he needed to pay. For all his ego/stupidity, he needed to pay. He didn't. But life isn't always fair.

That doesn't mean Bheeshma didn't know what Yudhishtira was like. All the Kauravas knew very well. Bheeshma let it happen. The charitable view is that it was to protect his reputation. The uncharitable view is that he was on the criminal side.

@Red. Assault was in full view of the public. AND she was their sister-in-law. How is either not proven? If they argued she was not their sister-in-law, then she wasn't Yudhishtira's wife to stake either, was she? Then, she wasn't their slave. Then, the assault was still a crime.

Panchali really tied them into a legal conundrum.

But Bheeshma countered by saying law is what the powerful say it is. ie, it didn't matter what her status was... she was a slave, and the Kauravas had every right to do whatever.