+* Pandava parivar *+ - Page 4

Tan Edited by .Vrish. - 12 years ago

One doubt. Did any of the Pandavas or Kauravas have daugters? It seems odd that the whole lot of them (105 or 107?) had only sons o was it that only the sons were mentioned? 

I even heard that Nakul had a wife who was a princess of Madra and even Yudhishtir had a another wife. I dont remember her name. About Yudhishtir's wife I read in Srimadbhagwat Mahapuran

Thank you for these lovely stories, Its amazing how vertuas Karna was and still was in the camp which was opposite camp. I really respect Karna for his generosity and loyalty

Vibs Edited by .Vrish. - 12 years ago

Originally posted by: .Vrish.

Vibs

I think only the sons are mentioned.  The Pandavas, for sure, didn't have any daughters.  Among the Kauravas, in Shrimad Bhagvatam, Duryodhan had a daughter Lakshmanaa, whose abduction by Jambavati's son Samba was discussed some more in the MM thread Duryodhan- A Misunderstood Character Or Not? on pg 7 (all the discussions are on that page)  This story surprisingly is not there in the Mahabharata.

Nandini

Sahadev's wife was the princess of Madra, but her father's name was given as Dyutimat.  Read vaarali's first post on this page.

I had forgotten that story.

Does that mean Duryodhan named both his son and daughter Lakshmana? I never thought of this before.

I had been thinking as I read the arguments on why Karna's son was not given the throne.

Karna was accepted as a bother by the Pandavas after the battle. It did not matter how Karna was born - he was accepted as one of the royal family. Vrishketu was also adopted as a son by the Pandavas. It was just like Bheeshma accepted the sons of Vyasa as heirs.


So that makes Vrishketu an heir to the throne - if he was the eldest. I think Vrishketu was not the eldest of his generation.


Also, (Karna,) Yudhishtr, Bheem and Arjun were Kunti's sons and she was a Yadava (Vasudev's sister makes her Yadava, right?) These three were more Yadava than Kaurava. And Yadavas belonging to Chandravanshi as the Kauravas did, were the closest kin to Kauravas. When there was no direct heir to the Kaurava clan, won't the Yadhavas be the natural heirs to the throne?

By this argument, Karna could have been the emperor if the Yadhav and Kaurav elders agreed. I wonder why Bheesma did not do so but perhaps it was to protect Kuni's dignity. No saying what the commoners would say - perhaps the people wouldn't have accepted.

I was wondering if maybe that's why Bheeshma accepted Kunti and her sons as a part of the royal family even after Pandu gave up his rights to the throne.

What say?

Also, I do not know which clan Madri belonged to though I know Shalya was her brother. Weren't they Bahlikas?
Edited by Vibhishna - 12 years ago

Vibs

Originally posted by: .Vrish.

Vibs

Yeah, Duryodhan named both his children Lakshman(a). 



I never understood why he was obsessed with the name. The only possible explanation I can think of is this. It is perhaps his devotion to his teacher Balram, Krishna's older brother. Some legends say that Lakshman was the incarnation of Adisesha, though Valmiki Ramyan says otherwise. In that case, Balram was Lakshman's reincarnation. Also, Duryodhan's flag emblem is a snake. Long winded and crazy but I can't think of anything else.

I think vaarali's explanation may have been valid.  However, in the thread about Duryodhan that I linked to, in the earlier pages where we discussed the circumstances under which Krishna could support Arjun w/o violating any protocols, it was suggested that since Kunti was adopted out to Kuntibhoj (who along w/ his son Purujit fought & died on the Pandava side), she was not legally recognized as a part of the Yadava family, and so Vasudev & others were under no obligation to protect her or her children.  If that were true, then Kunti's sons wouldn't be maternally Yadavas either - they'd be the descendants of Kuntibhoj from that side.  Especially Karna, who was born in Kuntibhoj's kingdom (incidentally, any idea which kingdom Kuntibhoj ruled?)

I thought Purujit was Kuntibhoj's brother. I thought he adopted Kunti as he had no children of his own. Maybe he desired a daughter and adopted here - not sure. I'm much worse in Mahabharath than I thought. Ouch!

I was thinking if there was no one in direct line those who were given away or their heirs can still be considered if the elders of the clan agree.

I once read Kuntibhoj was the king of Kasi - but not sure. I am most probably mistaken.

Krishna taking care of the Pandavas clearly meant Kunti was not forgotten by the Yadhavas and when neither Bheeshma nor any others objected to Krishna helping the Pandavas could suggest that the Kauravas did not mind this link, doesn't it?

Actually, in the Mahabharata, it's explicitly stated that Bheeshma approached Shalya or his father for Madri's hand for Pandu, and one reason for that has been the speculation that he was dissatisfied w/ Kunti's pre-marital birth to Karna, and therefore didn't want her to be the sole queen of Hastinapur.  Beyond that, however, he decided to leave it up to her on whether to confess or not.  Coming to think of it now, had she confessed, Duryodhan, Shakuni and even Dhritarashtra would have smeared both her and now all her sons - including Karna.  Although that would have changed the equation against the Kauravas completely.



Bheeshma may not have known till Karna made his appearance at the tournament. I think Bheeshma found out who Karna really was after he participated in the tournament.

I have read that Bheeshma was the one who arranged for the wedding between Shalya's sister and Pandu. I too wondered why hadn't Bheeshma chosen Dhridrashtra as the groom. But then disposed it off thinking that he did not want to disturb Gandhari's rights as the queen when she scaffolded herself to become Dhridrashtra's bride. Some say that Madri chose Pandu through swyamvar but the sources are not trustworthy enough for me to pursue them.

However, although I think that vaarali is legally correct, I think that her assumption and yours - that Karna would have been the emperor - is correct.  In one case, Duryodhan, having befriended him, might have been okay w/ Karna, instead of Yudhisthir being the king, but on the other, he may well have used this revelation to try and disqualify the Pandavas on the basis of Kunti's character flaws.  On the Yadava side, had Karna been accepted by Kunti on the day of the tournament, then I don't think there would have been any opposition - Krishna would have supported him, and so would Yudhisthir, and if Krishna supported him, he'd have automatically gotten the wholehearted support of Bhima & Arjun as well.



It may have been so but I don't think Shakuni would have let Duryodhan accept it - at least not for long.

Also, did Pandu give up his rights to the throne for good, or did he take a break to do penance, and intended to return, except that he died b4 he could complete his austerities and return.  If it was the former, I don't see what claims Yudhisthir or any of his sons would have had to the throne.

Yes, Pandu did give up all rights to the throne after he was cursed. He never planned to return. He told his brothers and mothers and Bheeshma why he was leaving and told them he was of no use as he cannot produce an heir. He did not even tell his wives what was wrong but gave up his position and rights and went to the forest, his wives following him. It was only when he was so morose in the forest too and Kunti and Madri pestered him did he tell them what happened and about his curse. It was then Kunti told him of the boon she got from Sage Durvasa. Pandu was delighted and immediately said he would accept her sons as his own and they would be called Pandavas. It was after she had Yudhishtr, Bheema and Arjun that she said that a person cannot create children through Niyoga more than 3 times during his/her lifetime (she hid everything about Karna) and refused to bear more children and I think she bore the 3 of them because Pandu asked her to. It was the same reason, Vyasa refused to sire more children after Dhridrashtra, Pandu and Vidhur were born. Then, Pandu asked Kunti to share the mantra with Madri which she did.

Also I don't know if Kunti asked help to raise all 5 sons or Bheeshma found them and brought them back but I read somewhere it was the former. Bheeshma accepted Kunti and Madri's sons as royal heirs as they were acknowledged by Pandu.

I too don't think that Vrishaketu was the eldest of his brothers & cousins.  He was certainly the youngest of Karna's 5 or 7 sons, and younger than Abhimanyu, Iravana and Draupadi's sons.  Question is whether he was younger than the potential survivors of the Pandava sons (assuming they survived) - Yaudheya, Sarvaga, Nirmitra & Suhotra.  But even they weren't made successors to Yudhisthir.  I'm assuming that Meghavarna, being a rakshasha, was ineligible to even live in Hastinapur, let alone rule.

I too think Vrishketu was not the youngest. But I think if he was the eldest, he would have been given the throne. Pandavas remorse after learning of their brother was true and they wholeheartedly accepted him as one of their own. I don't know if Draupadi did having been insulted so much by Karna but I think after the war, she too must have been pacified and maybe she held no grudges against Vrishketu. He perhaps was not the youngest of his generation all but I don't think he was the eldest either. I wonder why Meghavarna was rejected - Bheema's son and grandson proved their loyalty and good character throughout their lives.

Once, a friend told me "Ramyan tells you how to live and Mahabharath tells you how not to"

I can even interpret it as Ramyan tells you how to uphold rules and Mahabharath how to find loopholes and break them - not say we should.

In my opinion, Bheeshma had the whole future in his hands and it was his choices that led to all this. Not blaming him - he chose what he felt was right but he was a brilliant strategist as well.

Edited by Vibhishna - 12 years ago

Originally posted by: Vibhishna

Once, a friend told me "Ramyan tells you how to live and Mahabharath tells you how not to"

I can even interpret it as Ramyan tells you how to uphold rules and Mahabharath how to find loopholes and break them - not say we should.

In my opinion, Bheeshma had the whole future in his hands and it was his choices that led to all this. Not blaming him - he chose what he felt was right but he was a brilliant strategist as well.