Mahabharat Retelecast Discussion Thread 7 - Page 31

Originally posted by: Armu4eva

He looks so divineAs Krishna from DKDM

https://www.instagram.com/p/CC-XzT6pVyd/?igshid=1bfmhssqp244u

Amu who played Pandavas & draupadi in DKDM ?

Originally posted by: deepikagupta9

Amu who played Pandavas & draupadi in DKDM ?

They didn't show MB portion. They showed SRJ as Krishna in Banasur episodes for Aniruddh and Usha marriage where Krishna battles with Banasur and Shiv.

Aniruddh is grandson of Krishna & Usha is divine boon of Shiv-Parvati.

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

.

I think I made a wrong statement, I meant there were many queens in those days whose children never ascended the throne(owing to polygyny) but rarely were there kings whose children couldn't

I wanted 2 share something with u , I had communication with someone regarding satyaki calling Abhimanyu heir.

The person told amoung second generation Abhimanyu's birth is most celebrated & vyas has cleared about his parentage , if he was adopted by Yudi or draupadi then it would also be highlighted which vyas never pointed out . As Abhimanyu's grandson janmey was listening.

Yadav were wanting 2 make Abhimanyu as an acting king 4 time being in absence of Yudi , like when pandu left 4 exile , drishrastra was made an acting king 4 time being . Abhimanyu was never d heir of Yudi.

Omg🤣🤣🤣

https://www.instagram.com/p/CC5d2_OhohJ/?igshid=x4nj0y0o9ly9

Originally posted by: Armu4eva

She isn't lying and nor is it stupid. It's her interpretation of Draupadi's relationship I guess.

Her exact answer is...That choosing one husband over another would be a sin for Draupadi. It's like 5 fingers, each has it's own importance and you can't do without one. She referred to SP MB line of Drau in cheer haran sequence that "aapke parivar ke liye apne jeevan ko tapasya banaya hai maine". So she didn't prefer one over the other.

I dislike what Yudi did but I dislike more that the all knowing Lord let HIM, who bet his wife and family and watch his wife getting stripped, sit on the throne. The problem is with the epic. It didn't show Yudi facing any consequence of his adharm.

Later only he was able to ascend swarg , kitni partiality hai.

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

I don't think he had arrows stuck all over his body.

He was most probably only stuck by 2-3 arrows which didn't hit him on any vital organ, but the blood loss caused his death

His entire death including the Shikhandi angle is a big coverup to give him a dignified death

No he was not stuck by 2 or 3 arrow , it is correctly shown arjun filled bheesam's body with arrow .

I read somewhere arjun pierced bheesam's forehead with Arrow so that he can have a support as his head was falling down .

Bheesam actually had a very painful death.

Originally posted by: Armu4eva

BTW can someone explain why it was so imperative that Yudi sit on the throne? Isn't Bheem elder to Dury? With Drau who was believed to be quite politically astute by his side, Sahdev to guide with his foresight, and Arjun to protect and grow the kingdom, why Bheem couldn't be made a contender for throne?

Bheem was yuvraj

Originally posted by: deepikagupta9

I wanted 2 share something with u , I had communication with someone regarding satyaki calling Abhimanyu heir.

The person told amoung second generation Abhimanyu's birth is most celebrated & vyas has cleared about his parentage , if he was adopted by Yudi or draupadi then it would also be highlighted which vyas never pointed out . As Abhimanyu's grandson janmey was listening.

Yadav were wanting 2 make Abhimanyu as an acting king 4 time being in absence of Yudi , like when pandu left 4 exile , drishrastra was made an acting king 4 time being . Abhimanyu was never d heir of Yudi.

Janmayey was listening yet Vaishampayan never named the person who killed Abhimanyu😉

Anyhow I am not claiming about the adoption, maybe it wasn't, but him being called the heir does raise eyes

@I understand Yadavs were making Abhi acting king, but the same question why Abhi n not Prativindhya

Originally posted by: Armu4eva

The terrible 4 lost their lives and actually I think most had been defeated quite emphatically on the battle field.

I read the Pandavas ruled for 30+ years and would have been in their 90s when they ascended? Wasn't life expectancy longer for those who had survived war those days?

Losing life in a battlefield was never considered something bad in those days (even today if you ask me.). Forget it being a punishment, death in battlefield was something Kshtriyas dreamt of and considered to be the biggest boon.

In the battlefield if you ask, Karna has defeated Yudhishtir in such a humiliating way that he left the battlefield for the day.

Duryodhan was defeated by Bheem by treachery else he was actually scoring above him

Dushy n Shakuni are less to be blamed for that day

They ruled for 36 years after the war

They should be around 87-90 at the time of death(although I doubt it would have been actually 36 years but going by book)

Yes Yudhishtir had a long life, but the death in battlefield was always considered bigger than long life.

Originally posted by: Armu4eva

Why? Coz he stressed for war while others wanted peace? His role seems quite passive overall in the epic.

His Shanti Prastav made Kauravas look wrong, else definitely Pandavas were wrong in demanding land despite having lost the bet

He definitely was the only one always at Draupadi's side