~| Whatever you want to argue about |~ - Page 92

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

Parikshit was crowned as successor quite early if I am not mistaken.

Parikshit over Prativindhya's son is something that bothers me as well though.

Could it be that Prativindhya's son was given some other land bigger than Hastinapur

Yudhishthira made over the kingdom to the son of his uncle by his Vaisya wife. Installing Parikshit also on their throne, as king, the eldest brother of the Pandavas, filled with sorrow, addressed Subhadra, saying,

https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m17/m17001.htm

This is after Krishna's death. Even if Parikshit were announced to be heir before, Yadavas and Krishna were dead by the time Yudhishtira abdicated. What stopped Pandavas and Panchali from changing their minds? If you think about it, it would've been the perfect opportunity to take revenge if they indeed feared Krishna. Unless the argument is that they simply didn't understand which I don't believe of a woman of Panchali's intelligence.

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

Yudhishthira made over the kingdom to the son of his uncle by his Vaisya wife. Installing Parikshit also on their throne, as king, the eldest brother of the Pandavas, filled with sorrow, addressed Subhadra, saying,

https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m17/m17001.htm

This is after Krishna's death. Even if Parikshit were announced to be heir before, Yadavas and Krishna were dead by the time Yudhishtira abdicated. What stopped Pandavas and Panchali from changing their minds? If you think about it, it would've been the perfect opportunity to take revenge if they indeed feared Krishna. Unless the argument is that they simply didn't understand which I don't believe of a woman of Panchali's intelligence.

Parikshit was Arjun's grandson (although I don't believe in Chiillii's theory, but even if it's true, still the world knew the kid as Arjun's grandson- so at least legally he was) if Parikshit was declared as the heir and was raised to become one, do you really think Arjun would have allowed the change in decision at the last moment?

We all know he was the most powerful Pandav, CIC of Hastinapur+Indraprasth army, Yudhishtir's might heavily depended on Arjun now (actually always) going against Arjun I don't think would have been an option

Although I think that Arjun was decent enough to have not insisted for his heir on throne immidiately after the war, it doesn't make much sense that he wouldn't have raised his voice for his grandson after years of the latter being declared the heir.

Else why isn't there any mention of Uppandavas sons? When Vajra is mentioned, Yuyutsu is mentioned. I guess Uppandavas sons especially Prativindhya's son was more important than these both

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

Parikshit was Arjun's grandson (although I don't believe in Chiillii's theory, but even if it's true, still the world knew the kid as Arjun's grandson- so at least legally he was) if Parikshit was declared as the heir and was raised to become one, do you really think Arjun would have allowed the change in decision at the last moment?

We all know he was the most powerful Pandav, CIC of Hastinapur+Indraprasth army, Yudhishtir's might heavily depended on Arjun now (actually always) going against Arjun I don't think would have been an option

Although I think that Arjun was decent enough to have not insisted for his heir on throne immidiately after the war, it doesn't make much sense that he wouldn't have raised his voice for his grandson after years of the latter being declared the heir.

Else why isn't there any mention of Uppandavas sons? When Vajra is mentioned, Yuyutsu is mentioned. I guess Uppandavas sons especially Prativindhya's son was more important than these both

He wasn't. He mutely followed Yudhishtira in whatever he did. His allies were gone (Krishna, Satyaki, Drona, Bheeshma). His physical prowess was also gone (robbers et al). Bheema would've stood by Yudhishtira. So would the Madreyas. Actually, Panchali was the only person who might've sided with him, but Yudhishtira actually stripped her of her portfolios after he won back the kingdom (nice guy).

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

He wasn't. He mutely followed Yudhishtira in whatever he did. His allies were gone (Krishna, Satyaki, Drona, Bheeshma). His physical prowess was also gone (robbers et al). Bheema would've stood by Yudhishtira. So would the Madreyas. Actually, Panchali was the only person who might've sided with him, but Yudhishtira actually stripped her of her portfolios after he won back the kingdom (nice guy).

But then why Parikshit. Can't find a single reason or rationale for it

Although to be very honest I think ArjunBheem bond was much stronger than Yudi-Bheem, so you might not be sure

There is a time gap between kurukshetra war and yadava fratricide.

It was not 36 months. It may not have been 36 years. But it was enough for Parikshit to become an adult. Vajra and Asanga to become adults as well.

Placing under Yuyutsu or Subhadra's care doesnt mean they were regents and Pandavas left babies at the mercy of neighbouring kings

Its just not possible.

What it meant was their roles as advisor and matriarch of the family. A guide that is all.

To be on the throne the kids specially Parikshit had to be 20 to 24 yrs atleast.

So for these 20 yrs Yadavs were the most formidable kingdom. Such that they got so arrogant as to openly mock the most eminent of Rishis, with whom even Jarasandh or Duryodhan wouldnt dare cross.

Krishna had truly raised a frankenstein.

Pandavas since the time they were born had been persecuted. They lived all their lives under the shadow of death. And when Duryodhan died, did they finally found safety. No they didnt their sons and every single supporter was murdered right behind their back.

I dont think Pandavas were so callous as to presume that the throne of HP was worth painting a target on their grandkids back.

With the exception of Draupadi and Sahdev all the other Pandaavs always preferred peace, even if it meant giving up the throne and walking away. And Sahdev was also pro war for the sake of Draupadi.

After losing her children and entire panchala family I dont think even Draupadi would have cared anymore for the throne, other than as duty towards the citizens of the HP and IP.

I want to presume that Krishna did not plan the massacre, but I am also sure that he found out about it, and did not try to prevent it.

And queitly imposed Parikshit on Pandavas in exchange for letting the grandkids live in obscurity but in peace.

By the time.of Yadava fratricide, two decades had passed, Pandaavs were resigned to the destiny. And moved on quietly. One solace for Yudhishtir was that Vajra was his grandson too.

Krishna didn't know at the time of massacre Parikshit would be a boy.

Even if I buy that Pandavas were disheartened, I will not buy that Panchali, the one who said she'd go to war on her own, did nothing in the realization her friend organized/condoned killing her brothers and children.

Even if she saw the prudence of doing nothing at the time, she was the one who cared for a pregnant Uttara since Subhadra went to Dwaraka. Panchali was the one who demanded Parikshit be saved.

Parikshit couldn't have been 24 or 25 and have Yuyutsu as regent and Kripa as teacher. He was a child.

Even if we imagine Panchali put up with all of it, there was nothing stopping any of them at the time from installing Yaudheya on Hastinapuri throne if they so wished.

It goes against everything Panchali was throughout. Remember, at this time we are talking about a mother who lost her children to the chicanery of the one man she trusted above all. No way was she so disheartened that even after the death of that man she was willing to give the throne to the same nephew. She would've had to have a personality transplant for that. Or she was dead.

Another thing to remember is the fact that Parikshit only got one small and impoverished kingdom. He didn't become emperor or the most powerful king. He was simply one among many. Krishna knew there would be no empire. He actually refused to go on even the Ashwamedha. Then, the idea that he organized the massacre to get the penniless throne (before Ashwamedha which he refused to go on) for his nephew doesn't hold. I'd have to believe Abhimanyu Karshni literally meant Krishna's biological son for that.😈 Remains to be seen who was the mother.

@Hearmeroar can you details about krishna s child bride?? What happened to her when krishna left?? Did she followed him to Mathura??

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

.

Yes that makes sense.

On the topic what do you think the eternal wound to Ashwathama could be.

I am sure it wasn't some physical wound because that would be healed, I think he was either made a slave or was kept in captivity to be beaten/wounded regularly

Else probably they made him do menial jobs(taking away from him the gem of Brahmintva and making him a Shudra) and stopped admitting him a Brahmin

Anyone on Ashwathama

Sorry. Wrong thread

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

Anyone on Ashwathama

No one's born with a gem in their head, so they prob marked him in some way. Ashwatthama is actually said to be living in Vyasa's hermitage after.