~| Whatever you want to argue about - 2 |~ - Page 5

Originally posted by: deepikagupta9

I definitely know what is happening on this forum from past few days , coz I keep reading d post , sadly I read those posts also which get edited later .

After reading those rubbish post only I today posted or tried to give hint how would be panchali's life by marry krishna.

I not pointing at u definitely thou r thoughts dont match but u had always been clear in ur thoughts .

Regarding arjun , he was d only reason Panchali's entry , no arjun no Panchali no mahabharat.

If someone else could was able 2 defeat drupad arjun was needed only . Duryodhana & his brothers tried first.

Drona can but he dint wanted himself

😆 Buddy, I'm quite certain in my thought processes and in no way tempted hide them. If I don't come out and say it, mostly it's to avoid hurting other people, not because I fear their reaction.

Since you made that comment:

I believe Krishna had a thing for Panchali. Nobody talks like that to the wife of a friend/cousin or even a personal friend.

In addition, the word "pranaya" is used twice in their interactions.

Re: Arjuna.

His role in Mahabharata and Krishna's plans is minuscule until dice hall, then Kurukshetra war. That fact is made evident by Vyasa in text.

Yes, he defeated Drupada, which led to the adoption of Panchali. But if he didn't defeat Drupada, Vyasa would've made that adoption happen because he makes it clear in text what his plan is. Panchali needed to be married to Yudhishtira.

Arjuna wasn't needed for Khandava or for Jarsandh vadh. Subhadraharan also becomes important only with the war. The first time Arjuna and him alone directly impacted the story was in dice hall.

Originally posted by: Chiillii

I dont believe in boons and curses or divinity. Krishna and Arjun were flesh and blood humans like us. I dont believe they were any Nara or Narayana.

But I believe their friendship and bonding was real. Krishna had a loving childhood with Yashoda and Nanda and his cowherd friends. But from the moment he landed in Dwarka he was all alone. Even Balram got greedy and power hungry and went to the darkside.

Ofcourse he had his wives. Who were great women. But they could never take that position of friend and brother that Arjun did.

At the end of the day, the smartest man of the time, the shrewd politician was still human at heart who needed a genuine friend and that friend was Arjun.

Thnks a lot , I know he valued a lot arjun , I will share what today u told about krishna arjun , same thing some other person also told me few years before , thou I dint believe it that time coz I was behind nar narayan theory.

I think he used to miss balram of gokul , which made him more close to arjun .

Even balram was jealous of arjun , he even accused krishna about it .

Even satyabhama 2 was jealous of arjun .

U won't believe my frnd told me Krishna did something special 4 arjun to make get rid of his pain 4 Abhimanyu. That was some tender scene 🤣

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

Why wouldn't Ashwathama attack others though? I am sorry I had missed that point, but it was Very stupid of them to believe that they wouldn't attack others

Regardless, ALL of them assumed it. Vyasa, Pandavas, Gandhari, Dhritharashtra, Krishna. Unless we're prepared to believe every single one was plotting against Panchali and her family, they all made the same mistake. So why attribute evil intent only to Krishna?

Also, IIRC, Ashwatthama didn't intend to kill others, just Dhrishtadyumna and the Pandavas. He thought he was killing them.

Originally posted by: Krishnapanchali

What rubbish post are we talking about here?? Can you tell directly.

She's taunting me about what she imagines is my hang up about talking directly about my beliefs😆. Basically saying: yeah, yeah, I know what you really think 😆

Sometimes, people mistake an unwillingness to hurt other people's feelings for fear.

Do I believe Krishna had tender feelings for Panchali? Yes, I do. 😆

Does that make it sordid? No. Both did what they had to do regardless of personal wishes.

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

She's taunting me about what she imagines is my hang up about talking directly about my beliefs😆. Basically saying: yeah, yeah, I know what you really think 😆

Sometimes, people mistake an unwillingness to hurt other people's feelings for fear.

Do I believe Krishna had tender feelings for Panchali? Yes, I do. 😆

Does that make it sordid? No. Both did what they had to do regardless of personal wishes.

No I m not taunting u as I cleared it my earlier post

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

Regardless, ALL of them assumed it. Vyasa, Pandavas, Gandhari, Dhritharashtra, Krishna. Unless we're prepared to believe every single one was plotting against Panchali and her family, they all made the same mistake. So why attribute evil intent only to Krishna?

Also, IIRC, Ashwatthama didn't intend to kill others, just Dhrishtadyumna and the Pandavas. He thought he was killing them.

Others were killed by Kritvarma and even by Kripacharya. Aside Dhristhdhyum, Shikhandi did need to be taken away

My point is that since they all knew what would happen, wouldn't it be advisable to at least warn them to be cautious?

Prativindhya was actually killed while he was sleeping, others resisted but were just out of bed

I myself doubt Krishna's intentions in the massacre on night 18, but such a stupid resistance mechanism after having known the evil intentions is just sheer stupidity. Something they didn't exhibit any other time.

Anyhow my points still hold valid. Krishna wanted strong Pandavas and needed their support, but was definitely not looking for Yudhishtir becoming the Samrat, he wanted Yudhishtir/Pandavas as a strong ally not as an overlord

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

Others were killed by Kritvarma and even by Kripacharya. Aside Dhristhdhyum, Shikhandi did need to be taken away

My point is that since they all knew what would happen, wouldn't it be advisable to at least warn them to be cautious?

Prativindhya was actually killed while he was sleeping, others resisted but were just out of bed

I myself doubt Krishna's intentions in the massacre on night 18, but such a stupid resistance mechanism after having known the evil intentions is just sheer stupidity. Something they didn't exhibit any other time.

Anyhow my points still hold valid. Krishna wanted strong Pandavas and needed their support, but was definitely not looking for Yudhishtir becoming the Samrat, he wanted Yudhishtir/Pandavas as a strong ally not as an overlord

I agree with @bold.

Problem is Yudhishtira as king was factored into Pandava support. There was no having Arjuna or Bheema alone.

My point was mainly about the massacre upon which the entirety of Chili's theory hangs. It wasn't only Krishna who knew. Vyasa, Pandavas, and the old couple knew. To blame Krishna of orchestrating the massacre is ludicrous under the circumstances. In fact, it would've been better for him if Panchalas were left alive as a counter to Yudhishtira and the rest.

Yes, it would've been better to warn the rest. But warning wasn't just Krishna's responsibility, was it? Why didn't Vyasa? Why didn't Pandavas? They all made the same mistake.

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

I agree with @bold.

Problem is Yudhishtira as king was factored into Pandava support. There was no having Arjuna or Bheema alone.

My point was mainly about the massacre upon which the entirety of Chili's theory hangs. It wasn't only Krishna who knew. Vyasa,

, and the old couple knew. To blame Krishna of orchestrating the massacre is ludicrous under the circumstances. In fact, it would've been better for him if Panchalas were left alive as a counter to Yudhishtira and the rest.

Yes, it would've been better to warn the rest. But warning wasn't just Krishna's responsibility, was it? Why didn't Vyasa? Why didn't Pandavas? They all made the same mistake.

I haven't studied even half of the level you or Chiilli have so I rarely intervene in your discussions. I just try to learn through it

If I am not mistaken this is the first time you are disagreeing on a point..😆

Anyhow Krishna being planner of the massacre or not, he certainly wasn't as innocent and as selfless as people think him to be.

He definitely wanted his personal goals also to be fulfilled by the war, and wasn't just there to get Panchali and YBANS justice.

He didn't want an enimity from Kaurav side either if in case they win the war

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

I haven't studied even half of the level you or Chiilli have so I rarely intervene in your discussions. I just try to learn through it

If I am not mistaken this is the first time you are disagreeing on a point..😆

Anyhow Krishna being planner of the massacre or not, he certainly wasn't as innocent and as selfless as people think him to be.

He definitely wanted his personal goals also to be fulfilled by the war, and wasn't just there to get Panchali and YBANS justice.

He didn't want an enimity from Kaurav side either if in case they win the war

I agree he didn't want enmity from the Kauravas. But Samba incident was not on Krishna. He was actually quite willing to let Samba die at Suyodhana's hands. Only Balram went to the rescue.

Krishna also worked damned hard on behalf of Pandavas.

Under the circumstances, I don't know how it's possible for there to have been no enmity.

So yes, I do think he was after dharma. No, he, like any other human being, didn't want problems for himself, but he didn't let that stand in the way of the greater good.

😆 @Chili and I happen to know each other. I have a deep suspicion she's half trolling me.

Gak. And I talked about when I didn't mean to anymore.😆

I'm done with Krishna as Avengers Supervillain theory.

Kick me if I make posts about it again, pls.