~| Whatever you want to argue about - 2 |~ - Page 9

^^^ if that was the case, why did he do the Rajsuya Yagya and not Ashwamedh?? In fact as per KMG after the Digvijay, even Karna says to Duryodhan that the entire country is under you, although we know that wasn't possible (I know it's an interpolation but still there Seems some wordly differences)

Aside if all the kings were actually under Yudhishtir's suzarainty how could they speak against their decision on Pratham Pujya to nearly destroy it.

We need to check the actual word in Sanskrit that would make it clearer

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

Krishna I believe said Arjuna was more important than his wives and kids. Nowhere did Krishna include Panchali in the list of people less important, did he?😈😆

Words are very, very cheap. Actions show the truth of feelings.

Push came to shove, Krishna took Panchali's side. Krishna never said anything about moving mountains or destroying stars for Arjuna, did he?😆 Krishna said Arjuna was important IN THE CONTEXT OF KURUKSHETRA WAR. Arjuna was needed there. AND Krishna fulfilled what he promised Panchali OVER ARJUNA'S OBJECTIONS. So who was more important? Judge by actions, not by words which have no impact.

---

P.S. for everyone else: I'm only posting this because of the deliberate snark at Panchali 😆. I do think Krishna was fond of his little buddy.

well krishna supported panchali because she was right. he made a promise to her to get justice and he was also guilty about not being there for her when she needed him. And we cant deny the fact that panchali got idiot husbands who could do nothing for her

Krishna also did say that he could not cast a eye on this earth without Arjun and that was not related to kurukshetra war.

well there have been deliberate snarks at arjuns importance in krishnas life too

why cant both be important to him. I feel he was intellectually more attracted to panchali. Liked her for her thoughts for her righteousness for her intelligence . Arjun was someone who was more like a buddy. He was an idiot sometimes (we have instances of how krishna lost patience with him & bailed him out of trouble many times) yet he couldnt stop loving him.

One more question

Why didn’t Bhima/Yudi get Jarasandh’s kingdom after killing him?

I'm amazed at the claims of folk tales suggesting Krishna Arjuna romance. Nothing wrong in it.

But if we chase after folk tales, also consider the fact folk tales say Krishna married Arjuna's underaged son, Iravan, spent a night with him, then killed him with the help of daddy dearest. Wonder what prompts peeps to imagine this was a healthy relationship in THAT context?

Originally posted by: NoraSM

What do you think was the reason of less people performing this? I understand they couldn’t win every kingdom but chances of losing has never stopped people from attacking each other

If we look at it from a different perspective, the announcement would have alerted other kingdoms which made it difficult for kings to conquer them, is it a possibility? Surprise attack has more chances of victory also failure after announcement would have resulted in people not taking the King seriously

Attacking and not winning is a thing but performing a Yagya and failing would have actually made them a laughing stock

This could be the reason

Originally posted by: NoraSM

One more question

Why didn’t Bhima/Yudi get Jarasandh’s kingdom after killing him?

They installed Jarasandha's son as king

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

I'm amazed at the claims of folk tales suggesting Krishna Arjuna romance. Nothing wrong in it.

But if we chase after folk tales, also consider the fact folk tales say Krishna married Arjuna's underaged son, Iravan, spent a night with him, then killed him with the help of daddy dearest. Wonder what prompts peeps to imagine this was a healthy relationship in THAT context?

How could Iravan be underaged even in that folklore? He was elder to Abhimanyu and Abhimanyu was of marriageable age.

Originally posted by: naq5

well krishna supported panchali because she was right. he made a promise to her to get justice and he was also guilty about not being there for her when she needed him. And we cant deny the fact that panchali got idiot husbands who could do nothing for her

Krishna also did say that he could not cast a eye on this earth without Arjun and that was not related to kurukshetra war.

well there have been deliberate snarks at arjuns importance in krishnas life too

why cant both be important to him. I feel he was intellectually more attracted to panchali. Liked her for her thoughts for her righteousness for her intelligence . Arjun was someone who was more like a buddy. He was an idiot sometimes (we have instances of how krishna lost patience with him & bailed him out of trouble many times) yet he couldnt stop loving him.

I completely agree with bold.

The post wasn't directed at you. I see snark in posts about Panchali and am stooping to retaliate in kind. I'm extremely petty 😆

FYI. I adore Arjuna and think he was any day a better man than Krishna. Not as clever, but better human.

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

How could Iravan be underaged even in that folklore? He was elder to Abhimanyu and Abhimanyu was of marriageable age.

Story says Iravan was a virgin

Originally posted by: NoraSM

One more question

Why didn’t Bhima/Yudi get Jarasandh’s kingdom after killing him?

I don't think killing the king makes you eligible for throne. They hadn't won over the kingdom

The Magadh army was strong and could have actually attested them.

They played if safe, made Sahdev the king and established marital relations with Magadh