Uloopi and the mystery of Naagmani
The question raised as far as I understand is Wyy didn't Uloopi use the mani to revive Iravan?.
She would not have, even if she knew of Iravan's death beforehand.
Dying a warrior's death on the battlefield was something every kshatriya (and the mothers who brought them up) was prepared for. In fact, it was said (by Vyasa) that one should not grieve for those who had died on the battlefield since they were sure to attain Swarga.
Uloopi was a brave princess who had singlehandedly raised both Iravan and Babruvahan and she would have been proud of the way Iravan achieved veergati (is there an english equivalent?) rather than go through the hassle of bringing him back to life. (That is why I voted for her in the poll above)
Reviving Iravan with the mani (even if it had been possible) just didn't make sense. Then next, Draupadi would be requesting Uloopi to revive her five sons, then Abhimanyu would have to brought back from dead, then why not Karna- at the end of it all, every one would have come to life and we would be back to square one- and maybe a third dice game.
No it didn't work like that. The mani was in the custody of a fierce snake (incidentally called Dritarashtra) and his sons- Dustabuddhi and Durswabhava. Babruvahan had to battle with them before acquiring the mani. Moreover the circumstances of Arjuna's death were as a influence of a curse from Ganga. As Ganga pronounced the curse on Arjuna (when Bhishma lay dying), Uloopi's father (Sesha) overheard the curse and requested some way out. GAnga then offered that after Arjuna had been shot at by his son, and after he knew what it means to be killed by his own blood, he could be revived usng the Mani. (This is what is given in Jaimineya Mahabharata)
When we encounter Vrishketu in JMB, he is an adult who is married and who has participated in the MB war. Most likely, post the War, he would have been granted kingship of Anga. So we can infer that Vrishketu doesn't need any further " raising up".
Radha and Adhirath may have lived with him in their old age (they had lost their biological sons as well), He was with the Pandavas for two reasons- (1) to hone his archery skills under Arjuna (Arjuna mentions with a tinge of regret that while he did not have the oppurtunity to teach Abhimanyu, he wanted to recompense by teaching Vrishketu) and
(2) to participate in the military campaigns related to the ashwamedha yagna.
Oh yes, the Pandavs, especially Arjuna did cherish him a lot. When Vrishketu was felled down by Babruvahan, Arjuna's sorrow is truly heart rending . But they did not molly coddle him or dissuade him from joining in their battles. That would have been against what kshatriyahood stood for.
So, in Kali yuga, Vibhishna is a woman. Why is it Vibhishna and not Vibhishana?
Edited by varaali - 14 November 2011 at 6:19am