~| Whatever you want to argue about |~ - Page 66

Mbh says Krishna did the rites of infancy for Abhimanyu. Is that the norm? For mother's brother to do it?

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

Mbh says Krishna did the rites of infancy for Abhimanyu. Is that the norm? For mother's brother to do it?

I think that is done by the Mama. There are multiple activities, some are done parents, some by grandparents, some by Bua(although I doubt Dusshala would have reached out for that) and some by Mama ( but why Krishna by the way not Balram he was the elder brother afterall)

Originally posted by: deepikagupta9

See I don't think arjun r***d subhadra coz I trust krishna on this , he never had been said a bad brother thou he suggested or planned abduction. R**e is something very big . Krishna really can't be a part of such things . Alli story acc 2 me is truly made up frictional story with no head & tail by someone who is anti krishna & arjun , same goes r**e of Subhadra.

I don't know much about Bhanumati , so I guess r**e was not in this case. As u told preet dury hold a good husband rapport in oriya mb😆

I guess bheesam did made it clear why he & 4 whom he is taking d 3 princess ( I can be wrong) I guess everyone knew about bheesam vow of celibacy . He got name bheesam by his bheesam vow only Varna his original name was devrat.

@Bold yes all knew about the vow, but doubts always supercede the rationale

Coming to Krishna even I don't think he would ask Arjun to r**e Subhadra, that's way too much for a brother.

Dury-Bhanumati again I can't be sure, but going by Oriya Mahabharata narrative we could take no r**e here

Lakshmana however was definitely either r***d or saved by Duryodhan at the very last moment, I want to believe on the latter.

Each person reacts to trauma in a very different way.

I believe most of us interacting on this thread are women.

Can you be honest and tell me if you have never heard of in your own social circle of some girl being groped or molested specially in public transport.

And she simply froze and did not react.

Never raised a voice or even squirmed. Because she was shocked that this was happening to her.

Its easy to say she would have protested for someone who has never faced assault themselves. Only the people who have gone through it know the pain.

And this is 21st century....

Arjuna was the best warrior of the time, even an akshauni of battle trained warriors lost their lives at his hands do you all really feel a few bodyguards would be able to stop him.

But yes Subhadra did not protest, she did not scream like Draupadi. She gave up and resigned herself to her destiny unlike Draupadi who refused to be cowed down and was willing to pay any price for justice

And because she did that Arjunas descendents and Krishnas devotees got the opportunity to whitewash the incident

Based on all the above posts.... Are you all able to see how easy it is for you to believe that Duryodhan may have done it, Samba would have done it.

But Arjun cant.... He is the good guy....

A groping in a public bus has shocked me into immobility.

I'm amazed at how Panchali was able to think on her feet. I'm amazed at her willingness to bear social ostracism and go to war with the culprits. I'm amazed at her strength, period.

I disagree that she was seeking justice only for herself because she goes on and on about duties of rulers, and she was one. Yes, part of it was for herself, but her words make me think she had a bigger aim in mind. Star Plus MBh gave her words of duty and responsibility to Krishna. In Vyasa's epic, it was Panchali who wanted dharma raj.

Subhadraharan is translated as abduction. But by definition, it involves an unwilling woman who is forced to marry the abductor. I can understand why southern recension calls it rape.

No, Krishna didn't tell Arjuna to assault his sister into marriage. But Krishna had plenty of emotional IQ with re: women to understand what she must've gone through. Look at what he did for Jambavati, Yamuna, Naraka's concubines... married all of them. Why if he didn't understand their plight? Look at how absolutely nuts he goes each times Panchali mentions her trauma. Krishna understood. Only, it was politically important for him to have Subhadra marry Arjuna. That Arjuna was generally a decent guy and that was accepted in the era were no excuses for a BROTHER to behave that way.

Funny thing is I see so many articles comparing Krishna's affection for Panchali vs Subhadra. My God, he behaved despicably as a brother. He was a much better friend.

Now that the topic is moved to Arjun and Krishna

Let me write about their two unforgivable crimes as per me

Khandavadahan....

Arjun and Krishna surround the khandava forest from two sides by lighting it with fire. Third side was a river in spate and they stood on the fourth side to hack down any one who tried to escape.

They kill many including Takshak's wife. Infact Arjun beheads her while she is trying to help her small son ashwasen escape.

This was slaughter of innocent animals and tribals of the forest and burning down of trees to clear space for cultivation.

The forest was under control of Takshak.

Arjun didnt kill Takshak or his army. He killed his wife and tried to kill his young son and every other person he came across, man or woman or animals,

So what are the excuses I get for this genocide...

1. Oh but it was Agni who asked for it. They could not refuse a brahman who asks for genocide

2.You know what Brahma sanctioned it. Citation says grandsire told agni to go to Krishna and Arjuna. Brahma is the god of creation. If he wants them dead its not genocide

3. They must be collateral damage, Takshak pushed them forward so he can escape. Takshak was an evil guy who had to be killed

4. All those people who got killed were evil nagas and rakshas. Nagas were poisoning people, rakshas were killing brahmanas. They deserved to die

5. It was a political necessity, Arjun got gandiv and his chariot and krishna got his sudarshan, and if they hadnt agreed these weapons would not be there to help them win their dharmic battles

6. It was the price for progress, citizens of IP needed fertile land for agriculture, the forest had to be cleared. We do this even now dont we

7. All those who burned to death in hands of Krishna and Arjun got heaven and moksha.

Why so many excuses, each more ridiculous than the previous

Because Arjun and Krishna represent Dharma. They are avatars of Nara and Narayana. They can never do anything wrong

Now use the above example as analogy for subhadra haran... Let me list down the excuses that I have got to know so far, from here as well as other places.

1. Haran means kidnapping it does not mean rape.

Marital rape is still rape, unfortunately even now in India marriage is a license to have sex. Does marriage make this consummation an act of love. Or it still remains a forced one for Subhadra.

2. Women were not asked consent in that era. We should not use 21st century feministic lens to see this event.

A man who asks for consent in any era is a gentleman and a man who does not is @$!!?"$)?

3. Subhadra did not protest. That means she consented.

A lot of victims are too numb with shock to protest.

4. She was happy later. She went as cowgirl to please draupadi, she raised abhimanyu and uppandavas, she went on picnic with arjun and krishna and draupadi.

Was she happy or simply resigned to her destiny. By the way many people who say subhadra whose consent was not asked was happy, say Draupadi whose consent was not asked was victim of Yudhishtir and his brothers lust.

5. Arjuna didnt have to. He was the most admired hero of that era.

If he was why not wait for her swayamvar and let her choose

6. Krishna sanctioned it. Krishna will never let his sister raped.

If he loved his sister and he preferred Arjun as her husband. He would have formally arranged the marriage through Vasudev and Yudhishtir. All those praises he sings of Arjun and reasons he gives to convince balram after the kidnapping he would have done it before

7. There are versions where she is in love and infact becomes charioteer.

So why does this version exist where it is kidnapping with out consent. Why does BORI have it as kidnapping.

8. It was a political necessity otherwise she would be married to duryodhan by balram....

This one isnt even worth replying to.

Again, Why so many excuses, each more ridiculous than the previous

Because Arjun and Krishna represent Dharma. They are avatars of Nara and Narayana. They can never do anything wrong

KHANDAVA

Khandava was occupied by Takshak, an ally of Jarasandh.

Krishna and Arjuna did not initially want to do the evacuation. Agni (I assume one of the Angirasas) asked them to. Vyasa and Bhishma also asked for the same. Arjuna and Krishna receive special weapons for the purpose.

Now, this is all supposed to have happened during the picnic but no way can a mission this size be spur of the moment. My best guess would be that the planning happened first, and picnic was cover for the actual mission.

Now take a look at Jijith Nedumuri’s great maps of the region (see below). Khandava is surrounded by water on 3 sides. There is rivulet separating the forest from Khandavaprastha. At the border of this forest is the picnic camp where Panchali and Subhadra and their maids are. I think Daruka was also around with the women (not sure). The other edge is bordered by Yamuna with lots of crocodiles. The third tip is also bordered by water. On the 4th side is Salwa’s kingdom.

On a close reading of the episode, Krishna and Arjuna set fire from the picnic edge of the forest and from the tip. The Nagas presumably wouldn’t jump into Yamuna and risk being eaten by crocodiles, but they could escape to Salwa’s kingdom – THAT border was not set on fire.

The problem came when Indra attacked. Big question is how did he get there so fast with such a big contingent. Jarasandh was Takshak’s ally and was a lot closer. Remember, Indra was Krishna’s enemy. I’m assuming here someone informed Indra this would be his chance to get Krishna.

(I have my own conspiracy theories about who informed Indra, but you will not like hearing them)

Regardless, Indra arrived with his army and focused on Krishna. What Indra likely didn’t expect was how hard Arjuna fought to save Krishna. Yes, Arjuna saved Krishna, not the other way around. This, I believe, as the beginning of their great friendship because it is not mentioned anywhere else prior, not even in the Subhadraharan episode.

Problem now became that Indra was keeping both men occupied. Remember, Panchali and Subhadra and other women are still in the camp. Nagas started escaping that way. If they encountered the ladies, you can imagine what would happen. Krishna started fighting like a mad man. He basically slaughtered everyone who escaped that route. Now, argument can be made the lives of two women were not worth all the Naga deaths. But to Arjuna and Krishna, they were worth it.

Afterward, Yudhishtira does ask Krishna (very nicely) to go home to Dwaraka. I’m assuming the king was not pleased at the events.

------

None of this means what they did was dharma. I'm only attempting to explain how it ended up being a slaughter.

Can anyone tell me something about kripacharya ? I want 2 know why he is a Chiranjeevi ?

As I see his life journey then he was involved in many crimes like.

1 ) witness & not objecting draupadi's humiliation.

2) member in Abhimanyu vadh

3) he was member in killing of upandavas & drishtdumya with ashwatthama & kritvarma.

Then why he is Chiranjeevi ?

He not a great devotee of lord Vishnu/Ram like hanuman, mahabali & vibhishan

Nor he was cursed like ashwathama

Nor he is sage like vyas

Nor he is divine birth like parshuram

What suggests that Arjuna had raped Subhadra?

I don't see Krishna supporting abduction, if it means rape

Originally posted by: NoraSM

What suggests that Arjuna had raped Subhadra?

I don't see Krishna supporting abduction, if it means rape

I have explained this in my post. Specially point no. 1 to 7