Mahabharat Retelecast Discussion Thread 7 - Page 32

Originally posted by: deepikagupta9

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

No he doesn't ascend to Swarg with humanly body. He reached just below the Swarg when Dharma came took him out of his humanly body and took only the soul to Swarga

One thing I definitely loved in Star plus Mahabharat that they used the character bgms, directly from the original Mahabharat where the characters were described 😍

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

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.

But to rule as a King was definitely matter of respect. Obviously for warriors to die in battle field would be a matter for honor but suppose there is no war and a king lives a 100 years, it doesn't mean it somehow reduced the significance so I will disagree with you on that.

Had his kingship been taken from him, had his younger brother been made a king, had his wife & family forsaken him, that would have been a punishment and a lesson.

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

So you think he dint die after war but died a day or two after he went down? or was he being treated for those days till the war got over. IDK how a person would survive if he was left to die like that

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

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

Problem is then there are only a few explanations.

1. Abhimanyu was not legit heir. It would then seem like Arjuna was taking advantage of the situation which would make him a bad guy. SATYAKI made the suggestion, not Krishna. Satyaki was Arjuna's most loyal friend, even more than Krishna.

But then, it wouldn't explain the later reluctance to go to war. If Arjuna wanted Abhimanyu to rule, he should've been pushing war. Satyaki was, but not Arjuna. Krishna was, too, but at Panchali's insistence.

2. Abhimanyu was legit heir. In which, it would mean either that Upapandavas were born later or Yudhishtira/Panchali allowed Prativindhya to be sidelined.

If Yudhishtira/Panchali allowed Prativindhya to be sidelined just to keep Yadavas happy, question then becomes why did Yudhishtira then not want war? After all, the man had been willing to sideline his own children. Also, why did Panchal cooperate when it was time for war? Almost the entire army on Pandava side belong to Panchal.

For Upapandavas to be born later, it would have to mean Panchali remained childless for several years. Bheema at least could reproduce. We believe Yudhishtira produced Yaudheya. In the presence OR absence of polyandry, you'd have to believe Panchali was infertile for her not to reproduce at least once. In which case, the Upapandavas were adopted. In which case, there was no reason for Abhimanyu not to be adopted as well. But again, then why not Prativindhya/Yaudheya as heir? This leads to the next obvious extrapolation (not interpolation): perhaps Panchali had some say in who was heir after all, and her choice was Abhimanyu. Which doesn't sit well with a certain kind of reader.😆

3. Abhimanyu taught Upapandavas. There are enough clues in text without announcing names as to who was heir.

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

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

Can u cite some example for this? I am aware of only the shanti prastav/ war thing.

Hey HRH great to see you here after a while. How you been🤗

Originally posted by: deepikagupta9

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.

@bold no he didn't pierce the head, he had pierced the Arrows just below the head/neck so that it is at rest (like they showed in BRC)

About Bheeshm's body being filled by arrow, even you agreed it isn't possible to live for so many days after bring pierced like that.

I know it's written that Arjun had completely pierced it, but multiple times they have also mentioned that Shikhandi killed Bheeshm

And we all know (have discussed here itself) that the Bheeshm not attacking Shikhandi story was added to give Bheeshm a respectable death, so it's not impossible that the full body being pierced was a lie written by Vyas too. Since they wanted to give Bheeshm a very respectable parting

Originally posted by: Armu4eva

Can u cite some example for this? I am aware of only the shanti prastav/ war thing.

Actually Vyas had completely ignored the twins, so we don't know much about them.

Explicitly it's only the two things you mentioned. But this shows that Sahdev was ready to go against his brothers too for Draupadi something others didn't

When Krishna Satyabhama visited the Pandavas during VanParva, Kunti had sent them the message that Arjun n Nakul should follow Draupadi. That means she felt that Bheem n Sahdev would follow otherwise too

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

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

they did name right dushasans son , Laxman i think.

yes why not prativindhya. And as they dint have 1 year rule would they know who yudis son actually was? or Was abhimanyu actually older to the uppandavas?