Ques on MahaBhrarta. Peep in/ DT Nt pg 25 - Page 2

Hello folks...












Edited by Ketakee - 6 years ago

Originally posted by: Y12345

KalyaniPanchali : 

(paragraphwise)

You are right, God aka Lord Krishna gave everyone a brain and a mind and a life and sent them on earth . It's really up to people to decide how to live them. Because, even if god controlled us, then we would be merely puppets at the hand of someone else, and there would be no point in calling us humans.

Yes, maybe Drapuadi & P's was indeed born for Krishna. As I told you earlier, the P's were for me demigod ( because their mum was human and dad god) so they had divine powers. Drapuadi, was born from agni, as a boon because her dad wanted a son, to kill Drona.

Another reason for Draupadi's birth was Drupada's secret desire to have one of the Pandavas as his son in law. Yes, I agree that they had divine powers, but I think they were more like qualities. In front of Krishna, they were humans only though, because Krishna was God of Gods (Narayana/Vishnu).

Thanks for taking the time to write this. When you mean that, that Dharma allows the sun to rise. Could you elaborate please?

Is that in line with what Krishna said to Arjun to convince him for war. Please elaborate since the concept of dharma isnt it subjective as Krishna explains it?

It is. This is one of Dharmaraja's answers to the Yaksha. Dharma is duty, but again, Dharma is what is right and just. It is truth. It is love. It is compassion. It is forgiveness. Krishna is Dharma himself. The universal and eternal powers are Dharma and Prema (love), and Lord is both. Sun stands for Dharma, burning himself to give us light. Moon stands for Prema, spreading bliss, but he is nothing without Dharma (Sun). 😊

To be honest, there is a thin line between ego and pride, and I am unable to decide who has what. But yes, one thing I would like to add is that, the way they portrayed Arjun, many people would think he has ego, esp when he used to faced Karna and both used to sing how the other is superior. 

Yes, there is a thin line. As far as I studied the characters, I can certainly tell you that Arjuna and Bhima had pride, and not ego.

I too feel that it was fought for women' honour ( or Drapaudi's honor if you will)

@underline:  Just because they did misdeeds they deserved to die? we dont know the magnitude of their deeds either. Plus, we all sin, but differently.

@italicYou mean Lord in its human form because Lord. in itself cannot feel pain?

--

Draupadi represents not just herself, but many women who suffered such fate. There is a symbolism to everything in Sanatana Dharma. Draupadi represents a feminine fire of purity, strength, and courage. While many suffered like Draupadi, their voices were unheard. Draupadi's was heard. The war in itself was symbolic. Okay, I don't want to bore you with my tattva shaastra knowledge. 😆

They did. Actually, Sanatana Dharma perceives death in a different way. Death means emancipation and moksha (ultimate bliss). Death on a battlefield as a brave warrior is consisted a very honourable one. Death is the way Lord forgave those mistakes of people. If not, if he gets angry on you or you make any drastic sin, then he will never grant death to you. Like in the case of Ashwatthama who is alone even now in a miserable state somewhere as cursed by Lord for trying to kill an unborn baby. 

Lord can feel pain. Our every misery and every joy, he experiences simultaneously. Lord has feelings. He Is beyond all, yes, but still he's bound by love. 😃

About Drapaudi marriyng 5 Pandavs, if men could marry many times, then people insult drapaudi when she did the same the thing - because she is a woman. 

If it was the norm of the time, then okay. I can't understand why so much hate to Draupadi.

This is exactly my problem. If men can marry and love more than one woman, why can't women do the same? That is why I strongly believe that Draupadi fell in love with all the five and married them, loved them equally as well. Yes it was against general norms, but Lord himself approved so what's the need of that illogical norm? 🥱

It's nice to interact with you. Sorry for the abbreviations. I'm from abroad and it's great learning from you. Btw, as per your last line, do you think a new MB is coming soon? Kindly let me know your views

Thank you. 😳

@red- What does that mean? 😕

The upcoming destruction will be far more terrible than the Mahabharata. It Is called pralaya. The Lord destroys the world which is immersed in adharma as Bhumi Devi (Goddess Earth) will not bear the sinful creatures anymore at a stage. 

Edited by KalyaniPanchali - 6 years ago

Originally posted by: Ketakee

Hello folks...

Well there is a novel in Marathi (non fiction) called " Mahabharat : Ek Sudacha Pravas" , means  "Mahabharat: A journey of revenge".

There are many points to Mahabharata,each and every single character have some kind of unrest about something inside them. From Ganga cursing the Kuru vansh ..to Ashwatthama...everything. Everything is well linked.

Getting back to original question, why Krishna did not interven ??

 

I think everyone participating in the war had their own reasons to fight, it was not just Kaurava's and Pandava's right??

E.g, Karna, good man at wrong side of the battle field but he had his own reasons to stand against Pandavas. 

Everyone was playing the role decided by their destiny. They took decision like any other comman human being.

Why Krishna didnt interven is because, his avatar as Krishna on the earth was not merely for the Mahabharata War. Before Mahabharata he had did many things which was expected from his avatar,i.e kalia mardan, kansa vadha, war against Jarsandha, and vadha of many  "Daanavas".

After Mahabharata war also he was there rulling Dwaraka, he was cursed by Gandhari at the last day of the war.

So basically Krishna's role in Kurukshetra and Hastinapur politics was that he was the guide, guardian to Pandava's. 

He himself never interfere between the right or wrong decisions taken by Pandavas and Kauravas.

The destruction of those who were on the side of bad was unevitiable..they all died as per their destiny...though Pandavas won..they were also mortal ..never lived happy life..their descendants ruled the hastinapur till the end of Dwapar Yuga...

We say Krishna was god then why ??

Because he was born as mortal human being, though everyone had the idea of him being avatar of Lord Vishnu but that does not mean he was exceptoion to the earthly law the "Vidhata" himself have created.

He was cursed by Gandhari , and her curse did worked on him at the end of his life. So as his avatara was mortal , he himself was not allowed to intervene what was necessary to happened for well being of the earth.

Hence. 

😊

Someone pointed that the war was fought for the pride of women.

Originally posted by: KalyaniPanchali

@italics- None can curse the God himself, even if he's in a mortal body. If he wanted, Krishna would have rejected the curse. But, respecting Gandhari's agony, he accepted it. God is always accepting. He allowed the curse to work, instead of curse itself working on him. 😊

Originally posted by: Ketakee

Someone pointed that the war was fought for the pride of women.

I dont feel myself agreeing to this. 

1. If so then why was Pandavas were silent at the moment of "Draupadi vastraharan" ?? Where was the pride of her at that very moment?  They fought war to take revenge of that incident, is this thought convincing ?? I dont think so.The action at that particular moment was needed to save her pride.

In the case of "Vastraharan" none of the noted name came to save the pride of Draupadi. From her own husbands to the great pitamah.

2. Also the honour of Draupadi was afficted by the decision of her marrying 5 of them and each one of them also married other women.How cruel thing was that. As much as i know she was not initially happy when asked to get married to 5 brothers.After making such a sacrifice also she was never happy with them.

3. When Bhishma abducted Amba, Ambika and Ambalika for marrying them to his brothers, how right thing was that ?? Just because he was Bhishma Pitamah later, does not mean he fought the war for the pride of anyone. I think he fought just because he was pitamah of Hastinapur kingdom and he needed to stand by the sons of King Dhritrashtra.

I think the pride of Women in Mahabharata got afficted time to time. 

I will say that injured pride of women was one of the reason of Mahabharata.

But they did not fought for one, because fighting for pride means, one of the party involved in the war is very honouring it...and i dont find any of the parties doing so. Nor Kauravas neither Pandavas, because intentionally or unintentionally the Pandavs did hurt the pride of a woman.

@Ketakee-

Originally posted by: Ketakee

Someone pointed that the war was fought for the pride of women.

I dont feel myself agreeing to this. 

1. If so then why was Pandavas were silent at the moment of "Draupadi vastraharan" ?? Where was the pride of her at that very moment?  They fought war to take revenge of that incident, is this thought convincing ?? I dont think so.The action at that particular moment was needed to save her pride.

In the case of "Vastraharan" none of the noted name came to save the pride of Draupadi. From her own husbands to the great pitamah.

2. Also the honour of Draupadi was afficted by the decision of her marrying 5 of them and each one of them also married other women.How cruel thing was that. As much as i know she was not initially happy when asked to get married to 5 brothers.After making such a sacrifice also she was never happy with them.

3. When Bhishma abducted Amba, Ambika and Ambalika for marrying them to his brothers, how right thing was that ?? Just because he was Bhishma Pitamah later, does not mean he fought the war for the pride of anyone. I think he fought just because he was pitamah of Hastinapur kingdom and he needed to stand by the sons of King Dhritrashtra.

I think the pride of Women in Mahabharata got afficted time to time. 

I will say that injured pride of women was one of the reason of Mahabharata.

But they did not fought for one, because fighting for pride means, one of the party involved in the war is very honouring it...and i dont find any of the parties doing so. Nor Kauravas neither Pandavas, because intentionally or unintentionally the Pandavs did hurt the pride of a woman.

Edited by Y12345 - 6 years ago

Are we Lord Krishna to decide whether it's right or wrong to use treachery in the war? Was it right for Suyodhana to poison a child? Was it right for Kauravas to try to murder their own family members? Was it right for them to throw towards them a waste and barren land? Was it right to use treachery in the dice game? Was it right to humiliate Draupadi? We should understand why Krishna used treachery in the war. We should understand how much Pandavas suffered starting from their childhood. Bhima cried while killing Vikarna because Vikarna must be killed. He was in the adharma's side, though he was good. Bhima did not kill them mercilessly for his pride. We cannot know how hard was it for him to do so. He did it for dharma and Draupadi, and nothing else. They did not fight for revenge, but justice. I view the epic in more of a spiritual sense, and I cannot agree that Draupadi loved Arjuna more. She was divine, who knew her previous birth. In fact she knew she was going to marry the five Pandavas long before she met them. She suddenly did not split her love, it was splitted long ago. Also, I must mention that Pandavas had same soul but five bodies. She only married one person in actuality. All these was mere drama which created a situation for them to marry. As a devotee, I will not agree that he'll force Draupadi to marry five men even for Dharma. I believe Draupadi herself wanted to. Cause Krishna respected women's feelings. He eloped with Rukmini because she didn't wanted to marry Sishupala. He made Subhadra elope with Arjuna. He gave love more importance and that is why I believe Draupadi loved all of them. And if we go to tattva shaastra, it will not make sense that Draupadi loved Arjuna more. Because Pandavas and Draupadi represent Chakras and Kundalini, body and pranas, shivanshas and parvatiamsha, etc.

@KP: "When Bhishma abducted Amba, Ambika and Ambalika for marrying them to his brothers " 


Btw, is Karna decided to go Pandavas, would he be automatically married to Drapuadi too?Edited by Y12345 - 6 years ago