~| Whatever you want to argue about - 2 |~ - Page 44

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

Please someone tell me how did Bheem marry Shishupal's sister. She would be his first cousin and that too parallel cousin.

I always thought that only cross cousin marriages were allowed in ancient India, so how come they had parallel cousin marriage. Or was she born from some other mother?

Someone answer this ? Even I heard bheem married some kaali who was jarasandh"s sister.

Nakul married shishupal"s karenumati

Originally posted by: deepikagupta9

Someone answer this ? Even I heard bheem married some kaali who was jarasandh"s sister.

Nakul married shishupal"s karenumati

Jarasangh's sister? Was she unmarried till then!

I mean Jarasangh was the father in law of Krishnaji's uncle, shouldn't he be two generations above Krishna Balram

Best part is Karenumati was daughter of Shishupala who was supposed to be more than 10 years younger than Krishna 😆.

For her to be marriageable age, Nakula would need to be in 60s. But this was done during the pre rajasuya time, so even if we take Arjuna's exile as 12 years, Nakula would at the most have been 40ish. More likely 30ish.

Which, since Shishupala was a decade younger than Krishna, would mean he was 20ish. And his daughter would've been an infant🤢

I guess Nakula COULD have married an infant 🤢 or the entire Shishupala timeline given by Bheeshma was a lie.

About the plan. I don't think everything has to be written down/spoonfed. Something are to be understood. Drapaudi pandava alliance was set from get go rest everything was a facade. The potter house thing the previous birth thing its for everyone else. A sort of declaration of coming together of powerful kingdoms. Plus it was poetry for heaven sake with lot of metaphors and similes.

9 citation from BORI CE are metaphors or poetry because people don't want to believe what is actually written in the epic

Funny, how the part from KMG with Sutaputra comment from Draupadi, which was removed from BORI CE, is being believed over the BORI CE version of it, to support a theory

I want to understand what exactly was a metaphor in those 9 citations? Why isn't there is hint of plan between the metaphor? Its not like I wrote it, it is from BORI CE, now BORI CE is wrong too, so there's no scope for discussion

Originally posted by: NoraSM

9 citation from BORI CE are metaphors or poetry because people don't want to believe what is actually written in the epic

Funny, how the part from KMG with Sutaputra comment from Draupadi, which was removed from BORI CE, is being believed over the BORI CE version of it, to support a theory

I want to understand what exactly was a metaphor in those 9 citations? Why isn't there is hint of plan between the metaphor? Its not like I wrote it, it is from BORI CE, now BORI CE is wrong too, so there's no scope for discussion

Who is saying BORI is wrong nora?? Its true every bit of it A plan was made krishna was part of it vyasa was part of it panchali was part of it drishtdyum was part of it and so were Pandavas along with kunti. Its just that Pandavas didn't knew the entire plan. They were informed by vyasa what they are supposed to do to get drapaud s alliance. And they did it potter house drama happened. What they didn't knew that the plan was bigger than that. All the other members knew. Drapaud knew Pandavas were unaware of the entire thing hence he cannot just accept the polyandry just like. He has to play his part. Moreover the previous birth thing mothers order was just a facade. All that is mentioned in BORI happened as it was planned. Thay is reason panchali remains silent because she knews she was part of the plan.

And FYI there are many things in kmg that BORI version does not mention. Reason for bringing only the sutputra comment here??? If you want to believe that then you free to do so .

Originally posted by: Krishnapanchali

And FYI there are many things in kmg that BORI version does not mention. Reason for bringing only the sutputra comment here??? If you want to believe that then you free to do so .

As I said I don't see any scope of discussion on that topic as now Mahabharata by BORI CE is not believed here

The reason for bringing the Sutaputra comment is, it was quoted here yesterday and reiterated as "FACT" which is not in BORI CE

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

None of the Yadavas present were kings . They didn't try.

In case you wanted, there is a list of people who tried in KMG:

Then those princes--Karna, Duryodhana, Salwa, Salya, Aswatthaman, Kratha, Sunitha, Vakra, the ruler of Kalinga and Banga, Pandya, Paundra, the ruler of Videha, the chief of the Yavanas, and many other sons and grandsons of kings,--sovereigns of territories with eyes like lotus-petals,--one after another began to exhibit prowess for (winning) that maiden of unrivalled beauty. Adorned with crowns, garlands, bracelets, and other ornaments, endued with mighty arms, possessed of prowess and vigour and bursting with strength and energy, those princes could not, even in imagination, string that bow of extraordinary stiffness.

"And (some amongst) those kings in exerting with swelling lips each according to his strength, education, skill, and energy,--to string that bow, were tossed on the ground and lay perfectly motionless for some time. Their strength spent and their crowns and garlands loosened from their persons, they began to pant for breath and their ambition of winning that fair maiden was cooled. Tossed by that tough bow, and their garlands and bracelets and other ornaments disordered, they began to utter exclamations of woe. And that assemblage of monarchs, their hope of obtaining Krishna gone, looked sad and woeful. And beholding the plight of those monarchs, Karna that foremost of all wielders of the bow went to where the bow was, and quickly raising it strung it and placed the arrows on the string. And beholding the son of Surya--Karna of the Suta tribe--like unto fire, or Soma, or Surya himself, resolved to shoot the mark, those foremost of bowmen--the sons of Pandu--regarded the mark as already shot and brought down upon the ground. But seeing Karna, Draupadi loudly said, 'I will not select a Suta for my lord.' Then Karna, laughing in vexation and casting glance at the Sun, threw aside the bow already drawn to a circle.

Then when all those Kshatriyas gave up the task, the heroic king of the

p. 375

[paragraph continues] Chedis--mighty as Yama (Pluto) himself--the illustrious and determined Sisupala, the son of Damaghosa, in endeavouring to string the bow, himself fell upon his knees on the ground. Then king Jarasandha endued with great strength and powers, approaching the bow stood there for some moment, fixed and motionless like a mountain. Tossed by the bow, he too fell upon his knees on the ground, and rising up, the monarch left the amphitheatre for (returning to) his kingdom. Then the great hero Salya, the king of Madra, endued with great strength, in endeavouring to string the bow fell upon his knees on the ground. At last when in that assemblage consisting of highly respectable people, all the monarchs had become subjects of derisive talk that foremost of heroes--Jishnu, the son of Kunti--desired to string the bow and placed the arrows on the bow-string.'"

-----

https://www.indiaforums.com/forum/mahabharat/5168003/whatever-you-want-to-argue-about-2?pn=41

I believe in the BORI CE version of it, I don't have any reason to believe this one over BORI CE

Originally posted by: Krishnapanchali

Who is saying BORI is wrong nora?? Its true every bit of it A plan was made krishna was part of it vyasa was part of it panchali was part of it drishtdyum was part of it and so were Pandavas along with kunti. Its just that Pandavas didn't knew the entire plan. They were informed by vyasa what they are supposed to do to get drapaud s alliance. And they did it potter house drama happened. What they didn't knew that the plan was bigger than that. All the other members knew. Drapaud knew Pandavas were unaware of the entire thing hence he cannot just accept the polyandry just like. He has to play his part. Moreover the previous birth thing mothers order was just a facade. All that is mentioned in BORI happened as it was planned. Thay is reason panchali remains silent because she knews she was part of the plan.

And FYI there are many things in kmg that BORI version does not mention. Reason for bringing only the sutputra comment here??? If you want to believe that then you free to do so .

The Suta putra comment is exactly in the same paragraph where the list of people who participated in the competition is mentioned. The entire paragraph iw removed by BORI. If we need to believe that the list is true then definitely the SutaPutra comment needs to be deemed true as well something we all consider an interpolation

@Nora Vyas himself was a part of the plan as we could understand, why do you feel he would openly admit and document some sort of foul play from his end? He would definitely try to hide it.

History is written by the winners, the losers have to bear the burnt of even the things they didn't do.

Do you really feel Pandavas wouldn't have ever plotted against Kauravas? Do you really feel Hidimba was actually happy getting into relationship with the murderer of her brother? These things are just hidden for the winners.

Had Duryodhan won, the Gandharva instance would have been called consensual one and Bheem Hidimba forced.

And here the winner is actually the author of text

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

The Suta putra comment is exactly in the same paragraph where the list of people who participated in the competition is mentioned. The entire paragraph iw removed by BORI. If we need to believe that the list is true then definitely the SutaPutra comment needs to be deemed true as well something we all consider an interpolation

@Nora Vyas himself was a part of the plan as we could understand, why do you feel he would openly admit and document some sort of foul play from his end? He would definitely try to hide it.

History is written by the winners, the losers have to bear the burnt of even the things they didn't do.

Do you really feel Pandavas wouldn't have ever plotted against Kauravas? Do you really feel Hidimba was actually happy getting into relationship with the murderer of her brother? These things are just hidden for the winners.

Had Duryodhan won, the Gandharva instance would have been called consensual one and Bheem Hidimba forced.

And here the winner is actually the author of text

Actually one of the main reason that the sutputra comment is not believe is that in the very next paragraph vyasa says that "radha s son along with other kings failed to string the bow "

And walking round that bow, and bending his head unto that giver of boons--the lord Isana--and remembering Krishna also, he took it up. And that bow which Rukma, Sunitha, Vakra, Radha's son, Duryodhana, Salya, and many other kings accomplished in the science and practice of arms, could not even with great exertion, string

https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m01/m01191.htm

Rest everything in the two paragraphs are same names of people who participated are same only thing differs is karna s point. So we can still beileve the paragraph without taking in the sutputra comment as kmg itself is confused about that part but not about the rest. Karna failed to string the bow along with others.

🤣I think it's the 1st time in my LIFE someone's accused me of supporting suthaputhra comment.

All right, let's go by CE.

It says KINGS tried their luck. NONE of the Yadavas present were kings.

Ie, Yadavas didn't try.

😆 I hope that's better.

_________________

There is enough evidence to show the adoption, swayamvara, and alliance were part of a plan.

I've listed all of them before. I gave my analysis as well.