Sleet of Emotional Quivers on RadhaKrishn Love CC#11 - Page 48

Originally posted by: Chiillii

Sorry took time to catch up. Suddenly this forum has come alive.

My. Replies.

1. Incase of Rukmini, Bhishmaka actually did want Krishna as son in law and says so, but Rukmi refuses. Rukmini in Bhagvatham sends a letter asking to be rescued from the marriage. Pradyumna Rukmavati marriage was a proper swayamavar. She garlands him wilingly and Rukmi though displeased accepts it.

2. Subhadra Arjuna marriage has to be seen incontext of two things.

Krishna Balraam were not Ram Lakshmana. The very same texts that have them together also speak of syamantak incident where Balram calls Krishna theif leave Dwarka to settle in Mithila for atleast 2 years. This is where Duryodhan meets him and becomes his disciple. Duryodhan's effect on Balram is visible in war council where Balram openly criticised Yudhi's gambling and loss, blaming him sqaurely for the situation.

He also says to Duryodhan when he goes to meet him after Krishna gives him Narayani sena that the only reason I can't fight for you is because Krishna is on the other. He still doesn't fight for pandavas and stays neutral than fight against Duryodhan. So it was him not fighting at all for the sake of Dury. So subhadra Dury marriage was a real possibility.

2.All five pandavas was important for Krishna to protect Dwarka. I am not talking in terms of war. I am talking in terms of economic blockade.

Dwarka had no agriculture, it was a trading port. There was a limit to Krishna abducting princesses. Marriage of Pandavas to Sivi, Kashi, Manipur, Naga, Chedi, Madra, Mahishmati and Pandya princesses opened trade routes for Dwarka.

Yes he married Avanti and Vidarbha princesses himself but since he kidnapped the brides the families never gave their support or opened borders for Krishna..

Balrama was not to intelligent to understand the merit of marital alliance with Pandavas vis a vis Kouravas.

It wouldn't have happened to be as beneficial with Kurus. Because they were stronger and Krishna's charm wouldn't work much with Bhishma and Shakuni around. The leeway that Krishna got at IP he would never get at Hastinapur. Remember the first honor at Rajasuya. If Dury did Rajasuya he would never offer it to Krishna. He Would give it to Bhishma. Also brides family has to fight of needed for the groom's family. It is not the other way round. So Dury would use Subhadra to neutralise any Dwarka support to IP but he himself wouldn't do anything in favour of Dwarka as he was not obliged to them unlike Pandavas who had already given him a mentor ship place and authority to dictate policies

3. Subhadra was not the only Dwarka princess married to Indraprasth. Krishna's daughter (text says granddaughter, but it shud be a mistake) Bhanumati marries Sahadev. Just prior to the war in my opinion. That was a pity marriage as she was abducted by Nikumbha. From whom Arjuna saves her. Kshatriyas would refuse an unmarried taken by another man. Remember Amba, Lakshmana etc yet Krishna's clout is such that Sahadev marries her.

Alliance with Pandavas was hugely beneficial to Krishna because Krishna could use them for his benefit. Subhadra just cemented his position in the family.

But Krishna gave Duryodhan Narayani Sena, why would he do that if not for Lakshmana's sake. Aside Duryodhan literally ordered Jaidrath at a few occasions.

Jaidrath was his sister's husband so it should have been other way round, aside Lakshmana being in daughter in law of Krishna didn't cause Duryodhan to mellow against Vrishnis nor did the Subhadra (and Balram's daughter according to folklores) marriage into Pandavas family didn't make Balram fight for them

Aside Kashi Bahlik etc. were allies to Kurus too.

I don't think daughter side was always obligated to fight for her in laws

Originally posted by: Chiillii

About Karna

He says even if she is brought naked to assembly it's fair as she has five husband's so she is in-charge (whorE)

He specifically asks Draupadi to be disrobed

He asks her to choose a lord amongst Kouravas now that pandavas are slaves and serve them (implying sexual servitude)

That is sexual assault. Physical assault was perpetuated by Dussasan

Also do note at the time of childhood murder attempts Karna was same age as Shakuni an adult, while Pandavas and Kouravas were boys.

There is atleast a good 10 to 12 year gap between Karna and Yudhi's birth. Duryodhan and Bhima were further 1.5 to 2 years younger

So pramanakoti poisoning if was done by a 10 year old Duryodhan he was being helped by a 24 year old Karna and almost same age Shakuni. And at this point he has no personal issues with Pandavas because their education had not even started yet, Drona had not yet come to HP.

Look at the conspiracy with this perspective to understand Karna's evil nature.

Abhimanyu's vadh is irrelevant as it was a war. Only rule.of war is kill the enemy as quickly as possible to minimize loss of lives on your side.

So everything is fair in war

Actually what Karna fans were saying is that entire line of Vastraharan and the preceeding lines (which Karna said after Vikarna's intervention was an interpolation. They were quoting a few indologists who view so. There was nothing similar to Vastraharan according to them

About Bheem poisoning I think BORI CE has removed that portion. He wasn't involved in it

That's why I said if Vastraharan speech is an interpolation then karna is excusable

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

No I meant obviously her entire Sari was not draped off it was increasing in length and the blood stain would be in the same Sari

Karna clearly ordered Dusshan to disrobe Draupadi and also the Pandavas. And he didn't mention only the upper garments (as people like to say in justification since upper garment weren't allowed to the slaves) the upper garment of Draupadi had already slipped off while being dragged into the court according to many versions. The Pandavas removed the upper garment on themselves (before Dusshashan could have forced them) Dusshashan was anyway more interested in Draupadi

If Vastraharan happened it was only Karna's order

Okk. Thanks.

A confusion. If her upper garment slipped off while being dragged then why is she called ekvastra from the very beginning?

Originally posted by: Chiillii

About Karna

He says even if she is brought naked to assembly it's fair as she has five husband's so she is in-charge (whorE)

He specifically asks Draupadi to be disrobed

He asks her to choose a lord amongst Kouravas now that pandavas are slaves and serve them (implying sexual servitude)

That is sexual assault. Physical assault was perpetuated by Dussasan

Also do note at the time of childhood murder attempts Karna was same age as Shakuni an adult, while Pandavas and Kouravas were boys.

There is atleast a good 10 to 12 year gap between Karna and Yudhi's birth. Duryodhan and Bhima were further 1.5 to 2 years younger

So pramanakoti poisoning if was done by a 10 year old Duryodhan he was being helped by a 24 year old Karna and almost same age Shakuni. And at this point he has no personal issues with Pandavas because their education had not even started yet, Drona had not yet come to HP.

Look at the conspiracy with this perspective to understand Karna's evil nature.

Abhimanyu's vadh is irrelevant as it was a war. Only rule.of war is kill the enemy as quickly as possible to minimize loss of lives on your side.

So everything is fair in war

Did not Pandu die during Arjuna's 14th birthday celebration?

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

I won't go for the second point. This was a time when Jarasandha was still an emperor, Yudhisthir was yet to conduct even Rajasuya and Hastinapur power was no less, even they could have become emperor. Aside after the partition of kingdom there was no apparent enmity between the two groups. I mean Krishna would have certainly seen that Yudhisthir accepted the worse portion of the kingdom without any fight. And they had been visiting each other since then.

He might have planned something big from the Pandavas but just his planning didn't mean success. In fact he had it easier to enter Pandavas clan since they were his cousins and their wives was his BFF, Subhadra marriage to Duryodhan would have got him access to the Kauravas clan too. It would actually have been a win win for him. And definitely the Emperor wouldn't have had any problem to it because certainly till now Duryodhan wasn't an enemy of the ever forgiving Yudhisthir

I do believe in Duryodhan Subhadra alliance angle but I think he didn't want it because of the character of Duryodhan. Arjun's entry just gave him an option to save his sister from Duryodhan.

The marriage only strengthened the bond with the team he felt had more potential and got him an entry into their inner chambers.

IMO he wanted his sister married to Pandavas to strengthen his support and the entry of Arjun made it easy for him

Or might be he knew the feelings of Subhadra towards Arjun. But didn't want to go directly against Balram and hence made this plan

Even if Subhadra was 14, I think that too is not mature enough to accept the act of abduction

Agreed on your part of parents. If girl and parents agreed there was no reason for abduction. This makes me often feel, could Subhadra like someone else

Krishna might not have been sure of the success, but he already set plans, right?

Why would he then want to divide the loyalties and have Subhadra married to Suyodhan?

I do agree re: Suyodhana's character, too.

Then entered Arjin. And Krishna saw his chance to stop the betrothal and further his political plans.

With the rest, even if Subhadra liked someone else, once parents were involved, she would've had to obey. Parental involvement in the abduction makes absolutely no sense.

Originally posted by: vyapti

Okk. Thanks.

A confusion. If her upper garment slipped off while being dragged then why is she called ekvastra from the very beginning?

By upper garment I meant the portion of her Sari which was covering her upper part. That had slipped off

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

But Krishna gave Duryodhan Narayani Sena, why would he do that if not for Lakshmana's sake. Aside Duryodhan literally ordered Jaidrath at a few occasions.

Jaidrath was his sister's husband so it should have been other way round, aside Lakshmana being in daughter in law of Krishna didn't cause Duryodhan to mellow against Vrishnis nor did the Subhadra (and Balram's daughter according to folklores) marriage into Pandavas family didn't make Balram fight for them

Aside Kashi Bahlik etc. were allies to Kurus too.

I don't think daughter side was always obligated to fight for her in laws

I believe that Krishna sleeping, then S and A asking for blessing is an interpolation.

1) Krishna was not stupid.

2) Balram actually says later that he asked Krishna not to fight, but Krishna insisted on going to Pandavas

3) The people who fought for Kauravas were specific to certain Yadava tribes. It wasn't that the entire force went to fight for them.

Also, daughters side was obligated, but money speaks as well. Hastinapuri was powerful.

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

Krishna might not have been sure of the success, but he already set plans, right?

Why would he then want to divide the loyalties and have Subhadra married to Suyodhan?

I do agree re: Suyodhana's character, too.

Then entered Arjin. And Krishna saw his chance to stop the betrothal and further his political plans.

With the rest, even if Subhadra liked someone else, once parents were involved, she would've had to obey. Parental involvement in the abduction makes absolutely no sense.

SB was written much later. It has 8 yr old Krishna doing Rasa. So probably the parental involvement was interpolated in SB.

In MB times abduction marriage was perfectly legal hence did not need justification. But SB audience would not be able to digest it probably, hence the interpolation.

There is a weak justification for parental involvement though. Probably Krishna didn't want Balarama to be angry with them. He staged the abduction drama so that Balram willingly gives his consent.

Originally posted by: vyapti

Did not Pandu die during Arjuna's 14th birthday celebration?

Text doesnt mention age of Arjun. But if we take Arjun as 14 then Bhima and Dury would be 15/16 during poisoning in which case Karna would be 27/28

At 28 years a man if he is part of a conspiracy to murder someone who has done him no harm he is pure evil. Not some misguided tragic hero

I doubt Arjun was 14 at Pandu's death.

Because it would mean Pandavas and Kauravas didn't get an education until then.

Impossible for royal princes.