WU: - 13.10.2011: Pitamaha introduced

Just to elaborate slightly - in the mace duel b/w Bhima & Duryodhan, Duryodhan hit Bhima on the thigh, which is what got Arjun restless. That was when Dronacharya intervened and gave Duryodhan a major scolding for hitting below the belt. The thing that surprised me about it was Arjun going and threateningly warning Duryodhan to obey Drona - I thought it would have been a more appropriate role for Ashwatthama.

This serial really likes to insert masala - both the Shakuni taunting Kunti, and Duryodhan taunting the Pandavas. I didn't get why all 5 Pandavas had to be there - if Yudhisthir wants to take Duryodhan's sledging, let him, but why would Arjun have to hear that he'd be made defense minister, or Bhima the gatekeeper, or Yudhisthir the Prime Minister? They introduced Dushashan as well. Incidentally, which of Duryodhan's other brothers were closest to him - anybody?

Another thing - did Kunti have the habit of praying to Krishna, when he was her nephew and touched her feet whenever he met her? As I said above, Shakuni coming to her chamber and taunting her was unseemly. Also, when did Kunti lose her father - Kuntibhoj was alive and in fact fought and died on the Pandava side in the Kurukshetra war. He and his son Purujit sided w/ the Pandavas, unlike Shalya, who was tricked into joining the Kauravas.

Bheeshma looked exactly like Mukesh Khanna's avatar from 20 years ago - no telling them apart - silver crown, silver armor and white clothes. One thing I didn't agree w/ Krishna here - Bheeshma was not the person to whom justice meant everything: Bheeshma was someone to whom his own vows meant everything. Yeah, he was divinely born and all that, but what was fair and just always took a back seat to what the king wanted, although he did freely offer his opinions. Had Bheeshma been someone for whom dharam and nyaya meant everything, his position would have been identical to Vidura's, and in the war, he'd either have been a non-combatant, or fought on the Pandava side.

Thanks for the update Preet😊

Actually, Satyabhama was asking Krishna whether there was nobody in Hastinapur who would stand up for what's right & just? The correct answer to that was Vidura, not Bheeshma. Moreover, Satyabhama was asking about the future, which Krishna's describing as being closer than it really was.

Anyway, as you point out, Bheeshma would have been neutral (or on the Pandava side) had he been on the side of dharma, but the thing that trumped everything in his case was his loyalty to the throne of Hastinapur. Vidura, otoh, had no such blinders, so Krishna should have told Satyabhama that Vidura was the one destined to be the voice of justice and reason, albeit w/o any enforcement power.

Krishna knew that Vidura was the only one in Hastinapur who had dharam in mind when he made his calls. It's therefore strange to see him hail Bheeshma instead.

Thanks for the update.