Mahabharat Retelecast Discussion Thread 2 - Page 130

Originally posted by: deepikagupta9

Actually Draupadi is also considered as chaya seeta vedvati. In treta yug there was lady known as vedvati who wanted lord Vishnu as a husband , so she was doing penance for it but sadly her penance was interrupted by raavan who tried to moleste her , vedvati cursed raavan that she will become d reason of his death.

Before seeta haran lord Ram send goddess sita to agnidev , sita place was taken by chaaya seeta , raavan abducted chaaya seeta not original seeta.

Later during agnipariksha original sita came back .

Originally posted by: deepikagupta9

2 be true if anyone krishna truly loved was arjun more than anyone else , in one of mahabharat parva he has said 2 his charioteer daruk also.

Even balram was jealous of arjun 4 his closeness with krishna

No where it is written krishna participated war coz of Draupadi , he was there 4 dharma partially 4 arjun.

Balram accused him that reason of him supporting Pandava is arjun

i completely agree with this . he was there with them for dharma because he felt they were more on the right side

@ bold where & how is this mentioned in the book?

Originally posted by: NoraSM

@bold

I read that part couple of days ago

My wives, my kinsmen, my relatives, non amongst these is dearer to me than Arjuna. O Daruka, I shall not be able to cast my eyes, even for a single moment, on the earth bereft of Arjuna. I tell thee, the earth shall not be reft to Arjuna. Myself vanquishing them all with their steeds and elephants by putting forth my strength for the sake of Arjuna, I will slay them with Karna and Suyodhana.

Tomorrow the (three) worlds with the gods, the Gandharvas, the Pisachas, the Snakes, and the Rakshasas, will know me as a (true) friend of Savyasachin. He that hateth him, hateth me. He that followeth him, followeth me. Thou hast intelligence. Know that Arjuna is half of myself.

https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m07/m07076.htm

@red - Krishna said that he is in the war for Draupadi

I had read this when MB aired earlier. they should have shown this scene 😳. Instead they concentrated more on the sakha sakhi friendship. Did BRC show this though?

Originally posted by: naq5

I had read this when MB aired earlier. they should have shown this scene 😳. Instead they concentrated more on the sakha sakhi friendship. Did BRC show this though?

Lol what do you even mean by that. Sakha sakhi s friendship was concentrated because that was important SHE was important to him

Here from Yana-sandhi parva, CE-

‘“Vasudeva said, ‘O Sanjaya! In the presence of the foremost among the Kurus and in Drona’s hearing, speak these words to the intelligent Dhritarashtra. “Offer a large number of sacrifices and donate stipends to the brahmanas. Enjoy yourselves with your sons and wives. A great danger confronts you. Distribute your riches among deserving ones. Have sons born out of love. Do good deeds towards those you love. The king132 will soon be victorious. That old debt is still impaled in my heart, because I have not repaid it. When I was far away, Krishna cried out, ‘Govinda!’133.

Sakha makes it very clear what his reason for is. His sakhi And when vyasa himself calls him Narayan and her sri. Then no doubt is left of how important their relationship is and deserved all the attention it got

This thread has already reached the page limit. Please move onto the new thread.

Stop commenting here.

Originally posted by: deepikagupta9

Radha & Draupadi r not one , radha is ansh avtar of goddess Mahalakshmi.

There is different story why radha got married to ayan.

There was great devotee of lord Vishnu who was ayan did a very hard penance to please lord Vishnu , when lord Vishnu came & asked him 2 ask 4 a boon , ayan said he wanted 2 have goddess Mahalakshmi as his wife, little does ayan knew he is trying 2 act smart with lord Vishnu .

Lord Vishnu granted him d boon , so in result mahalakshmi ansh avtar took form as radha but ayan was born as transgender , who don't have any relationship with radha.

This story also prove no-one can be husband of mahalakshmi or even her ansh avtar other than lord Vishnu.

Draupadi was from every mean wife of Pandavas, she has five sons from her five husbands.

Mahalakshmi already took birth as Rukmini & radha , other wives of lord krishna , so she will not take birth has Draupadi.

Makes sense that a an avtaar of goddess Laxmi cannot marry anyone else than a Form of Vishnu.

If we consider Nar(Arjun) to be a part of Vishnu and that Draupadi an ansh of Laxmi married an ansh of Vishnu then also she was married to all 4 other brothers too, so that looks kind of impossible.

BTW why does draupadi have to be an avataar or ansh of MahaLaxmi for her importance to lord krishna. The only time Krishna gets agitated/emotional in the epic is with regard to his love for Arjun & draupadis humiliation. So he was bonded to these two a lot & maybe moreto Arjun considering they were nar & narayana

Btw i have a question. Who was Lord vishnu's Nar during his Ram avataar

Originally posted by: Poorabhforever

No 😆 krishna s reason for supporting pandavas was his krishnaa

Here you go -

Vasudeva said, ‘O Sanjaya! In the presence of the foremost among the Kurus and in Drona’s hearing, speak these words to the intelligent Dhritarashtra. “Offer a large number of sacrifices and donate stipends to the brahmanas. Enjoy yourselves with your sons and wives. A great danger confronts you. Distribute your riches among deserving ones. Have sons born out of love. Do good deeds towards those you love. The king132 will soon be victorious. That old debt is still impaled in my heart, because I have not repaid it. When I was far away, Krishna cried out, ‘Govinda!’133

He clearly mention the helplessness he felt for 13 long years for letting his krishnaa down

Firstly Arjun- Krishna bonding is not because of Draupadi, nor did Krishna make friends with Arjun because Draupadi was married to him.

supporting pandavas reason was not krishnaa but krishnaas humiliation for which he wanted justice. Also he wanted to give the pandavas their land back. It was majorly a war for a land. Had kauravas agreed to give indraprastha back do you think there would have been a war going on. In what way is it right to kill thousands of innocent soldiers on both sides for justice which was to be supposed to be taken from the 100 or so kauravas, karna & shakuni. Krishna would have never done that. Who would pay for the justice of many innocent lives lost in war

And it was not that pandavas and draupadi were on opposite sides that he had to choose draupadi over arjun or pandavas. Had draupadi and Arjun been on opposite sides then Krishna would have had to choose. but here he dint have to choose.

Originally posted by: naq5

Firstly Arjun- Krishna bonding is not because of Draupadi, nor did Krishna make friends with Arjun because Draupadi was married to him.

supporting pandavas reason was not krishnaa but krishnaas humiliation for which he wanted justice. Also he wanted to give the pandavas their land back. It was majorly a war for a land. Had kauravas agreed to give indraprastha back do you think there would have been a war going on. In what way is it right to kill thousands of innocent soldiers on both sides for justice which was to be supposed to be taken from the 100 or so kauravas, karna & shakuni. Krishna would have never done that. Who would pay for the justice of many innocent lives lost in war

And it was not that pandavas and draupadi were on opposite sides that he had to choose draupadi over arjun or pandavas. Had draupadi and Arjun been on opposite sides then Krishna would have had to choose. but here he dint have to choose.

Krishna entered Pandavas lives during drapaudi s Swamyvaar and with a kind of bond krishna Krishnaa had i will like to believe that they knew eachother before either of them knew pandavas. Plus drapaud invites krishna to spend time with newly weds and krishna provides gifts to pandavas during their wedding to drapaudi all this proves that in pandava panchali marriage krishna was from drapaudi s side as her best friend.

When krishna says krishnaa is his reason for war i will like to believe that plus the krishnaa and krishna duo who wanted to establish a just system drapaudi makes her intentions clear in her conversation with yudhishtra that as an empress she wanted a just system in place and krishna is someone who delivered gita so i would like to believe that his reason for war was a mere piece of land only pandavas were selfish to fight for a piece of land my krishnaa krishna duo had better purposes to serve

Also arjuna and drapaudi s thought process often clashed and in those cases krishna always picked krishnaa.

Don't post here anymore this thread has reached its limit let us move this discussion to new thread

Moreover if people really wants to turn a blind eye to a bond which is so obvious despite so many evidences throughout the text i have nothing to say lage raho. 😆

Zor zor se chillane se sach thodi badal hi jayega 🤪

Originally posted by: Poorabhforever

Lol what do you even mean by that. Sakha sakhi s friendship was concentrated because that was important SHE was important to him

Here from Yana-sandhi parva, CE-

‘“Vasudeva said, ‘O Sanjaya! In the presence of the foremost among the Kurus and in Drona’s hearing, speak these words to the intelligent Dhritarashtra. “Offer a large number of sacrifices and donate stipends to the brahmanas. Enjoy yourselves with your sons and wives. A great danger confronts you. Distribute your riches among deserving ones. Have sons born out of love. Do good deeds towards those you love. The king132 will soon be victorious. That old debt is still impaled in my heart, because I have not repaid it. When I was far away, Krishna cried out, ‘Govinda!’133.

Sakha makes it very clear what his reason for is. His sakhi And when vyasa himself calls him Narayan and her sri. Then no doubt is left of how important their relationship is and deserved all the attention it got

So who is undermining that she was important to him. But that dosent mean ONLY she was important to him. Arjun was equally important to him & all i am telling is that SP MB dint show many of Arjun-Krishna scenes which are there in text & concentrated more on sakha sakhi scenes IN COMPARISION. Even after the war the early morning conversation between Krishna Draupadi was actually between Krishna- Arjun.

you cannot lessen one relationship which was important to show another relationship which was equally important.

The text shows that both Draupadi and Arjun were very important to Krishna. Arjun a little more in my opinion & Draupadi more in your opinion. But SP MB did to justice to Krishna Draupadi bond whereas it dint to complete justice to Arjun -Krishna bond