Mahabharat Retelecast Discussion Thread 6 - Page 91

Originally posted by: Andy3456

Well that's my mother say and I believe too. His strategies are not so easy to understand.

No I agree he was a great politician, but greatest in world ever waala statement ko Kaha zyada ho gaya

Originally posted by: Armu4eva

Maybe he knew the Yadav vansh was going to end with Gandharis curse and he ensured to safeguard the bloodline. There would be reason for Krishnas decision. I think MB is the best lesson in politics & management.

well uppandavas being alive woulnt be a threat to parikshit as such. they dint need to die to safeguard yadava bloodline

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

Uppandavas actually are always a mystery for me.

During Dyut Sabha, Yudhishtir says after losing himself that he isn't left with anything to stake, he however has definitely not staked Prativindhya.

Why did he feel he could stake his brothers but not his son?

The confusion about the parentage? And coz Drau was still left among the common things to stake?

Originally posted by: Armu4eva

She lost her sons, her father, brother. It was her maternal wealth that was used to build Indraprastha.

She was humiliated at the Kuru sabha.

Subhadra had her lineage safe. Krishna saved him.

Subhadra's lineage was destinated to carry forward Pandavas linage , it suffered nearby death . Krishna dint favoured subhadra . If he was biased then he would have saved Abhimanyu which he dint saved coz he was destinated 2 die.

I said it's destiny rule , nothing comes 4 free who have to pay d cost & god can't change anyone destiny as he 2 suffer according to his destiny.

krishna 2 has no fault in all this still he got cursed & witness his entire clan destruction in front of his eyes .

Originally posted by: Andy3456

Bold : I too read the same that in a village near Himalayan foothills, they follow Polyandry because they believe in One house, One kitchen, One bride formula to maintain unity.

more than unity its because they have less women and also less finances to feed another extra person. So its feasible fort hem to share 1 wife

Originally posted by: Armu4eva

The confusion about the parentage? And coz Drau was still left among the common things to stake?

Yudhishtir was playing not all of them. He could have staked things he had rights on, common things staking wasn't needed.

Confusion on parentage could be an issue

Originally posted by: naq5

well uppandavas being alive woulnt be a threat to parikshit as such. they dint need to die to safeguard yadava bloodline

No no am not saying he planned anything about their death but he didn't intervene. Am saying he may have strategised to have his clan continue after Yadav are wiped out. It's difficult to understand the way the Lord's mind works

Upandavas were incarnation of vishwadevas , who were destinated to die unmarried , this is divinity angle .

Maybe unka bhi kuch age limited angle ho , like chandra"s son varchas as Abhimanyu had time limit of 16 yrs.

Originally posted by: deepikagupta9

Subhadra's lineage was destinated to carry forward Pandavas linage , it suffered nearby death . Krishna dint favoured subhadra . If he was biased then he would have saved Abhimanyu which he dint saved coz he was destinated 2 die.

I said it's destiny rule , nothing comes 4 free who have to pay d cost & god can't change anyone destiny as he 2 suffer according to his destiny.

krishna 2 has no fault in all this still he got cursed & witness his entire clan destruction in front of his eyes .

I doubt he wouldn't have saved Abhimanyu if he could.

This Destiny thing is completely logic less even if you consider Divinity

That would mean Duryodhan was destined to be bad n cruel.

Chandal Chaukdi were destined to plan Lakshagriha

DyutSabha was destined to happen and go bad

Duryodhan was destined not to return Indraprasth

Bheem was destined to be poisoned.

In that case everyone were playing their role as per destiny then why should someone be punished

Originally posted by: naq5

well if it was her decicion then it was actually more of a test for the brothers to be able to stay together. wouldnt her choosing one over another create more fights between them .if the purpose of draupadi married to all 5 was to keep brothers together.

makes me wonder if they actually shared draupadi because it was more feasible. i read an article where it was mentioned that in a village brothers shared wifes because that would make a lesser person to feed. And the pandavas dint have anything with them so it was more feasible financially

But didn't people here post that Drau maternal side was rich and the Pandav actually lived off her for quite some time and even built Indraprastha from it?