Mythological Masti

Ques on MahaBhrarta. Peep in/ DT Nt pg 25

Y12345 thumbnail
Anniversary 9 Thumbnail Group Promotion 5 Thumbnail
Posted: 6 years ago

NOW DISCUSSING EGO DEATH 



Controversial topic: 

If Krishna was there himself, why didnt he fight the war himself or prevent the monopoly of good or bad instead of letting so many innocents die?

He did fought when his parents were imprisoned. I feel he manipulated, a lot of situations, and let innocents die when he had the power to save them. 

NOTE: We started dissecting version aspects as well, and build up our discussions from that question,to navigate through other questions. Feel free to join if you are interested in MB and check last pages for ongoing topic of conversations 

Feel free to disagree however kindly be polite while debating. Thanks.

Disclaimer: This thread is purely for discussions, all the points discussed in this thread are solely the opinions of the participants. This thread is not intended to hurt the feelings of anyone, and the accuracy vary, and interpretations are based on how someone view the events, you may or not believe what has been said.

Edited by Y12345 - 3 years ago

Created

Last reply

Replies

291

Views

30648

Users

13

Likes

636

Frequent Posters

PandavPranayini thumbnail
Anniversary 6 Thumbnail Group Promotion 3 Thumbnail
Posted: 6 years ago
Originally posted by: Y12345

Controversial topic: 

If Krishna was there himself, why didnt he fight the war himself or prevent the monopoly of good or bad instead of letting so many innocents die?
He did fought when his parents were imprisoned. I feel he manipulated, a lot of situations, and let innocents die when he had the power to save them. 


Feel free to disagree however kindly be polite while debating. Thanks


Cause it was for the greater good, that is loka kalyana. It was the end of Dwapara yuga, and the people were greatly immersed in adharma. It was for a fresh start to the most worst yuga, which gradually became the world which is now. 
paartha thumbnail
Anniversary 6 Thumbnail Group Promotion 2 Thumbnail
Posted: 6 years ago
It is always good to have healthy debates and discussions and clarify our doubts. Of course, all this should be done in the sphere of civility.

Since, I believe Lord Krishna to be almighty, so I will not be using terms like manipulation. I simply believe myself to be incapable of understanding his ways, so I cannot question his intentions or integrity. 

First, we have to be clear what is our base of argument here, are we judging Mahabharat merely to be a war fought over land by group of cousins and devoid of any divine characters/ and any sort of divinity OR if we believe Mahabharat to be of divine characters and of divinity. If we believe it is the former, then there is absolutely no way to understand many aspects of the Mahabharat, because almost all critical aspects relate to something which is divine or superhuman, for example: many births such as that of Drona, Draupadi, Dhristadyumna, Pandavas, Kauravas and so on cannot be explained logically and everything in it is open for question and debate. If we believe it is the latter, then actions performed by the Lord are always necessary and we human beings with limited intellect will not be able to decipher the ways of the Lord.

I too have many unanswered questions regarding several aspects of the Mahabharat, and I try to be open to all characters with regards to debate and try to understand various viewpoints, as I believe all characters to have certain flaws and also certain merits and will be able to teach us and inspire us in various ways. But, when it comes to the actions of Lord Krishna, somehow feel that his actions were necessary. May be the 'Cycle of Karma' has to go on and even the Lord has to follow it and sometimes adhering to that may result in actions which in our eyes is not proper. 

For me, a person who has taught philosophy such as Bhagwad Gita, cannot be a manipulator or schemer or a selfish person. The teachings of the Gita such as, doing your work without expecting any fruit of such action, perfection of character and so on, they are so revolutionary that anyone teaching such philosophy is worthy of veneration. 

Y12345 thumbnail
Anniversary 9 Thumbnail Group Promotion 5 Thumbnail
Posted: 6 years ago
Originally posted by: KalyaniPanchali


Cause it was for the greater good, that is loka kalyana. It was the end of Dwapara yuga, and the people were greatly immersed in adharma. It was for a fresh start to the most worst yuga, which gradually became the world which is now. 


Yeah it totally agree but my question, why didnt he fight it himself?
Like he killed Kamsa himself right?
Edited by Y12345 - 6 years ago
PandavPranayini thumbnail
Anniversary 6 Thumbnail Group Promotion 3 Thumbnail
Posted: 6 years ago
Originally posted by: Y12345


Yeah it totally agree but my question, why didnt he fight it himself?
Like he killed Kamsa himself right?


He is Narayana, the supreme God himself. When it came to Kamsa, it was for his parents, so he had to fight with him. But when it came to Mahabharata, the base of the war is Kuruvansh. He can't intervene in the struggle because he possessed strength and valour beyond estimation and the war is fought by mere humans and he is not related to the Kuruvansh directly. Thus he only chose to guide his devotees/ cousins (Pandavas) in the battle. In fact it's he, who fought. Pandavas are his just his medium. ðŸ˜Š
Y12345 thumbnail
Anniversary 9 Thumbnail Group Promotion 5 Thumbnail
Posted: 6 years ago
Originally posted by: KalyaniPanchali


He is Narayana, the supreme God himself. When it came to Kamsa, it was for his parents, so he had to fight with him. But when it came to Mahabharata, the base of the war is Kuruvansh. He can't intervene in the struggle because he possessed strength and valour beyond estimation and the war is fought by mere humans and he is not related to the Kuruvansh directly. Thus he only chose to guide his devotees/ cousins (Pandavas) in the battle. In fact it's he, who fought. Pandavas are his just his medium. ðŸ˜Š


Hey. Just a few points I disagree. Otherwise, I appreciate your ans.

@underline: Bit tricky. Mere humans? The 5 pandavs and Karna were demi-god right? Even Bhima was demi gods( They had god- parents)
I don't understand your logic though. You said that he is the Supreme God first, then you said he had to intervene because of his parents. You mean mortal parents?


Love your last line. That's what I wanted to say, and I really apologize to Paartna as well for using the word manipulation. But he/she said, he is god, difficult to understand what he wanted. 
That's what I wanted to say, what were the need to use them as medium? People died. Warriors like Abhimayu died, which Krishna could have saved. Innocent were killed.
He had the power to stop war, just like he had the power to make drapuadi sari longer. So he had the power, to stop adharma too,
As you said, he guided his cousins, so he could have guided the Karavs too. He could influence/insppire/enlighten the way to many people. Like some texts say he appeared before bhima and made him realize his divine powers before he was doomed to the bed of arrows. 
I somewhere feel he could but he didnt. 
He also knew who would die in the war too, he knew all the way. Gandhari cursed him too regarding this. 
It's hard to see why he did what he did. Were other people his devotee too? At that time, everyone believed in god, so he could have done something, yet choose to make people shed blood.

In this process of Kuruvansh, or whatever his motive for the war so, he in a way 'forced'( in a mild way) them to fight. Draupadi & Arjun were reluctant, but they accepted war at Krishna's request.In this process, he indirectly made Pandavs commit treachery in a dsguised way, just to wipe off the bad from the generation. 
Instead of intervening, he left them fight till death.

Edited by Y12345 - 6 years ago
PandavPranayini thumbnail
Anniversary 6 Thumbnail Group Promotion 3 Thumbnail
Posted: 6 years ago
They had demigods as their parents, otherwise they were humans only. Though I believe the Pandavas to be Lord Shiva's anshs, still they were humans. Ansh means atom. So, they were not demi-gods. They had divine qualities, not powers. ðŸ˜Š
Yes, his mortal parents. Sorry for the confusion. ðŸ˜›
Actually they were the parents of demigods (Kashyapa-Aditi) who got the boon to beget Vishnu as their son. They were Dasharatha-Kausalya in their previous birth. 

Because Pandavas exist. ðŸ˜†
See, the foremost reason for the birth of Pandavas and Draupadi was to assist Krishna in his dharmasthapana. They were born for him and only him. They were ansh/atoms of Panchanan Shiva and Goddess Parvati (Reference: Skanda Purana), but they were humans, who are flawed. And Draupadi did not oppose the war. She, Sahadeva and Krishna always wanted a war. He convinced Bhima, Dharmaraja and at last, Arjuna (who needed the Gita to understand). When we have a to eliminate the larger number of adharma, a bit of dharma dies to. That is why Innocents (as in soldiers) were killed. Compared to them, the adharma was 100 times more and the loka kalyana was necessary. Abhimanyu, Ghatotkacha and the other sons of Pandavas were killed because, they did not call Krishna for help like Draupadi did. God is not against destiny. He only comes when we wholeheartedly surrender to him, like in the case of Draupadi. Abhimanyu and the others, willingly accepted their death for the sake of greater good. They sacrificed their lives in the dharma yagya. 

Why will he guide Kauravas when they did not want to? Pandavas accepted their faults and surrendered at the feet of the Lord. So he guided them. Kauravas did not. Even though, he gave them a chance. But they chose his army, not him. But the Pandavas chose him. That is why he guided the Pandavas. He had the power to stop the adharma, but not dharma. Abhimanyu and the others were performing their dharma and their sacrifices will make the dharma stronger and stronger. Their deaths were what made the power of dharma increase. The righteous reign of King Yudhisthira, where people lived blissfully had the past of selfless sacrifices. That made it more powerful, if not. 
Yes, he made people shed blood. Such destruction was necessary. If a woman, who is the empress of the entire Bharatavarsha, can be abused and humiliated in front of a sabha full of elders like Bhishma, Drona, Dhritarashtra and Kripa, how do you think the common society would have manifested in to? If dharma itself made such people to strip off her honour and elders to sit mum, how much do you think "dharma' would have been butchered? No, it was not Draupadi's case alone. Her being the samragyi, was highlighted but many women suffered a fate as such. In fact adharma was rampant even in the "innocent" society. There were rarely the people who were completely innocent because it was near the end of Dwapara yuga. That is why he made people shed blood, but whenever a person's blood flowed on the battle field, his heart itself bled. ðŸ¥º

Gandhari's curse is not a just one. Yes, Krishna didn't stop the war but her sons committed crimes! And they deserved that fate. She was the one who had to bring up her children in a right way, and Dhritarashtra. But both were blind to their children's misdeeds. That's why everything happened

To establish Dharma and to save Dharma, using treachery is not wrong. That is what he teaches us. Killing Bhishma by bringing in Shikhandi, was that treachery? Bhishma abducted Amba from her swayamwara, and you know the tragic consequences. Her life was destroyed. Thus, his sin returned to him. It was not a treachery. Killing Drona with a lie, yes it was wrong. But what about Drona who was involved in killing of a young boy with unethical means? Who, despite being a brahmin, had an abundant amount of ego? Vengeful nature? His death was necessary. But he was a great warrior. But he had to be killed. Thus, that wasn't wrong. Like that, every treachery they used turned about to be right because it was for Dharma, not just eliminating the bad. But establishing good in the society. He is the God, thus his actions are hard to understand yes, but nothing is impossible with true devotion. 

Om Namo Narayanayah! 

Y12345 thumbnail
Anniversary 9 Thumbnail Group Promotion 5 Thumbnail
Posted: 6 years ago
KalyaniPanchali
Thanks for explaining. So you said that it was destiny and pre-written. Every action leads to a reaction. So Krishna knew what would happened. If he could prevent the actions leading to war, he could have prevented war.
Totally agree with you though that Pandavs and Drapuadi were born for him only. So they become his medium used for the Dharma war.
About last paragraph, hard to digest that, that one can go through a adharma route just for dharma. I mean if we apply to today's society, it's not tolerated, just because you have good intentions, doesn't give you the right to get the work done by crook or hook.
The thing that bothers me, is that Krishna himself didn't use treachery, he made them used treachery. He didnt do anything wrong himself directly but he made others commit adharma. 

PS: I feel that not just Guru Drona, but almost all of them had a big ego. Arjuna, Bheem, Duryodhana, Shakuni,


If we start to dissect, there is a lot of room for interpretation because MB is complex. I completely agree that Draupadi being the queen faced such abuse, now imagine common women. Though it is important to note that if common women would go through this, no war would have been fought for them. The war was (partly) fought for Draupaudi's honor, who was of higher status, which also led to thousands of women losing their hubby, because Drapudi was the queen and the war was necessary,
See, Kunti abused Drapaudi too, Pandavs too. Pandavs always ask permission from Kunti, and somewhere I feel she knew they were going to Draupadi Swayamb.. and when she said " divide what you have" cracked me. But they all got their share of pain, Pandavs stayed quiet all their sons died too.

Guys, you were right. Krishna is god so it is impossible to understand him. Though, the heart of MB, lies in understanding him. You asked me about the common world, and this is difficult to answer,. MB was fought years ago partly because, they tried to disrobe a woman, however years after, woman are still getting raped, and rape is justified and women are blamed. It;s sad that people didnt learn a bit from MB. Evil is prevailing ðŸ˜’
PandavPranayini thumbnail
Anniversary 6 Thumbnail Group Promotion 3 Thumbnail
Posted: 6 years ago
Originally posted by: Y12345

KalyaniPanchali

Thanks for explaining. So you said that it was destiny and pre-written. Every action leads to a reaction. So Krishna knew what would happened. If he could prevent the actions leading to war, he could have prevented war.

He wouldn't have done that, because he gave freewill to every human being. He gave them a mind to differentiate between what is right and what is wrong. If a person committed a sin, it's only his sin and God can't do anything in that case. 


Totally agree with you though that Pandavs and Drapuadi were born for him only. So they become his medium used for the Dharma war.
About last paragraph, hard to digest that, that one can go through a adharma route just for dharma. I mean if we apply to today's society, it's not tolerated, just because you have good intentions, doesn't give you the right to get the work done by crook or hook.
The thing that bothers me, is that Krishna himself didn't use treachery, he made them used treachery. He didnt do anything wrong himself directly but he made others commit adharma. 

You agreed that the Pandavas and Draupadi are born for him only, right?
They were not "others" at all. If Pandavas used treachery in the war, then he himself used it. Pandavas are the jivatmas who surrendered to the Paramatma Krishna at that time. He was making them perform their duty and nothing else. 

Just for Dharma? Dharma is the way we have to live. It is righteousness. It is Dharma which enables the Sun to rise in the morning and set In the evening. Without Dharma, there is no life. Thus, if he used treachery to reestablish the Dharma, then that is no more a treachery. That is what Dharma is. Why is it not tolerated in today's society? For me, intentions  matter. Yes, actions do matter too, but intentions matter more. For example, you are standing behind a murderer who is going to kill innocent children. You are holding a knife in your hand and he doesn't know you are present in the situation. You have stabbed him from the back to save the children. So, you used deciet. But, did you commit any adharma? No. He was going to kill those children and you killed him. Now, this will be termed as Dharma. The definitions of Dharma and Adharma are complicated. 

PS: I feel that not just Guru Drona, but almost all of them had a big ego. Arjuna, Bheem, Duryodhana, Shakuni,

I mentioned that Dronacharya was a brahmin. Brahmins are not supposed to have ego nor vengeful nature. But, he did. About Suyodhana and Shakuni, It's from Shakuni that Suyodhana learnt how to live after all. So, Shakuni might have been egoistic as well, cause Suyodhana was. Arjuna had pride, but not ego. Ego is different. It will not tolerate insults rendered to our own talent and character. But, Arjuna was described as in control of his senses all the time, (except few incidents, where he was extremely angry like any other.). Pride is considering ourself unique, but not getting angry when insulted nor insulting others. Bhima had no ego. He also had pride. He got angry only when dear ones were insulted (Arjuna too, in fact). But, even while not having any ego, their prides had been major flaws for both, including other Pandavas (minus Dharmaraj) and Draupadi.

If we start to dissect, there is a lot of room for interpretation because MB is complex. I completely agree that Draupadi being the queen faced such abuse, now imagine common women. Though it is important to note that if common women would go through this, no war would have been fought for them. The war was (partly) fought for Draupaudi's honor, who was of higher status, which also led to thousands of women losing their hubby, because Drapudi was the queen and the war was necessary,
See, Kunti abused Drapaudi too, Pandavs too. Pandavs always ask permission from Kunti, and somewhere I feel she knew they were going to Draupadi Swayamb.. and when she said " divide what you have" cracked me. But they all got their share of pain, Pandavs stayed quiet all their sons died too.

Mahabharata is actually badly diluted, interpolated, and butchered to be honest. There are many contradictions and illogical things to prove that it has been butchered by many, important ones being: Mughal rulers. We really need to study it carefully and understand it well to interpret it correctly. I follow my devotion to Lord Krishna and he guides me towards the truth. Yes, it was partly fought for Draupadi's honour, widowing many women. But I feel it was fought for women's honour nonetheless, cause we don't know the list of good deeds and misdeeds of the soldiers who died. But, one point to be noted: Lord gave moksha to every person who breathed their last on the Kurukshetra battlefield, experiencing pain beyond our thinking. He had done it cause he had to, but he suffered the pain more than any of the women or men suffered. 

This is another modern interpretation that Kunti and the Pandavas "abused" Draupadi. If that is so, then Krishna too "abused" her? Cause, he was the one who approved this marriage and in fact convinced everyone including Kunti.  

Yes, Pandavas always ask permission from Kunti. But, they didn't ask while going to the swayamwar. She thought they were going to get alms. They actually hid from her the fact that they were going to participate / have the intention to participate. Cause, when they were staying in Ekachakrapura, Vyasa once came to them when Kunti was not there. He informed them that a woman named Krishnaa is waiting for them at Panchala as it's princess to marry them. He told a story of her past and ordered them to go and marry her. As the order is complicated as he told them all five to marry the same woman, they didn't tell this to Kunti. It's only after they returned to the hut with the princess, that she voiced the order unknowingly and then after seeing Draupadi she was utterly shocked. But, Vyasa and Krishna intervened and told them their past and their divine identities. Draupadi and Pandavas themselves had fallen in love with each other. All the five loved her and Draupadi too loved all the five. Thus, Lord approved this marriage. Lord never approves loveless marriages after all! And about their sons' death, they suffered for the mistake them made in the dyutasabha by not being able to stand for Draupadi's honour. 


Guys, you were right. Krishna is god so it is impossible to understand him. Though, the heart of MB, lies in understanding him. You asked me about the common world, and this is difficult to answer,. MB was fought years ago partly because, they tried to disrobe a woman, however years after, woman are still getting raped, and rape is justified and women are blamed. It;s sad that people didnt learn a bit from MB. Evil is prevailing
 ðŸ˜’

Yes, it is difficult to understand him. But, it is definitely possible if we try. This is the Kaliyuga. When the fresh start for this yuga happened (After Mahabharata), everything was good. But as the time gradually passed, the darkness grew. We're on the verge of destruction. People judge and blame God, both men and women are trapped in the clutches of male chauvinism or pseudo feminism. The modern science is destroying the nature. Everything is mess in the world. I pray to Lord Kalki to destroy this horrible world as soon as possible and recreate a fresh and beautiful world. ðŸ¤”

Y12345 thumbnail
Anniversary 9 Thumbnail Group Promotion 5 Thumbnail
Posted: 6 years ago
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.

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?

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. 

But I feel it was fought for women's honour nonetheless, cause we don't know the list of good deeds and misdeeds of the soldiers who died. But, one point to be noted: Lord gave moksha to every person who breathed their last on the Kurukshetra battlefield, experiencing pain beyond our thinking. He had done it cause he had to, but he suffered the pain more than any of the women or men suffered.


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?
--
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.

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



 
Edited by Y12345 - 6 years ago