Using your phone's internet browser
go to:  qna.rediff.com
Click and drag this link to
the Home icon in your browser.
Q.

Lord Krishna, Balaram & Purshuram were invincible on battlefield but didnt fight da 18 day war of Mahabharat.

So with these 3 top seed out, next in the line were, Bhisma, Dronn, Arjun & Karna in that order, who were drawn in the war, willingly or unwillingly. Dronn was on a pay scale of Kaurav so had no say.

My Q is had Bhisma & Karna changed sides or ATLEAST REMAINED NEUTRAL, Duryodhan wud hv called off the war immdtly, averting a total destruction that followed. Why then these 2 most powerful men gave more importance to their own principles & ego, rather than to general interest ?

Tags: line, didnt, arjun
Asked by Cocktail, 01 Apr '08 12:34 pm
  Invite a friend  |  
  Save  |  
 Earn 10 points for answering
Answer this question  Earn 10 points for answering    
4000 characters remaining  
  
    
Keep me signed inNew User? Sign up

Answers (32)

1.

Bhisma did not stay neutral becuase he was head of the Kaurav dynasty.. and so he had to stick by them as part of his duty.
Karna had a debt to pay to Duryodhan.. remember Duryodhan gave him recognition when Karna could not prove his legitimacy..? Read the Mahabharata.. it is there the whole episode.
Answered by joyoti sen, 01 Apr '08 01:01 pm

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (1)
Not Useful
 (1)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
2.

Sai Ram. Things happen as per destiny. Countries and empires have their own destiny just as individuals have. The destruction was part of the cleansing process.
Answered by Venkateswaraswamy Swarna, 03 Apr '08 11:05 am

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (1)
Not Useful
 (0)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
3.

The name 'Bhishma' itself means 'He of the terrible oath'. In the great battle at Kurukshetra, Bhishma was bound by his oath to serve the ruler of Hastinapura. Therefore, neither he could have changed sides nor he could have remained neutral. He fought very reluctantly on the side of the Kauravas; nevertheless, he gave it his best effort.

Karna similarly neither could not change sides, nor remained neutral. He was obligated to Duryodhana for he had offered Karna the throne of Anga (today's Bhagalpur in Bihar), so that Karna would be a king and thus be more than eligible to duel his cousin. When Karna, who is emotionally overcome at this, asks him what he can do to repay him, Duryodhana tells him all he wants is his friendship. "I want your heart" he tells Karna, to which Karna says it is already his.

This event establishes key relationships in the Mahābhārata, namely, the strong bond between Duryodhana and Karna, the intense rivalry between Karna and Arjuna, and the enm ...more
Answered by Jack Johnson, 01 Apr '08 05:52 pm

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (1)
Not Useful
 (0)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
 
4.

Answer to your q is given in the Mahabharatha:
Bhishma fought for Duryodhan bcos he was living on the food and shelter provided to him by Duryodhan, and it was his Dharma to stand by him and fight for him when required by him to do so.
Dharma is not principle or ego, it was the way of life for those greats.
(He was fighting for Duryodhan only physically as he was duty bound to do so. Just before the great war started, when both the troups were facing each other, Yudhishtir went for blessings from Bhishma who blessed him saying that Victory will be yours....)
After his peace mission to Hastinapura, on his return, Lord Krishna took Karna with him in Dhritaraashtra's charriot (Sanjaya was the charrioteer) and stopped litl away frm the palace and told Karna that he is the eldest Pandava and he shud change sides and that the Pandavas will accept him as the eldest, and as the king.
Karna replies that he knew that he is the eldest son of Kunti and that the whole of Kauravas are destined ...more
Answered by serpentine, 02 Apr '08 07:12 pm

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (2)
Not Useful
 (0)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
5.

The answer is very Simple
Let me begin from what you had left or started-

Lord Krishna, Balaram & Purshuram were invincible on battlefield but didnt fight . Krishna did lift the weapon for Bhishma at one occasion.

Now i come to the real question;, why did Bhisham Pitamah and Karna not refused or change sides. If this happened the WAR was not even started. There were no ifs and Buts left when Duryodhana denied even an inch of land or the 5 Villages Krishana had asked for,

Bishma Pitameh could not reject the proposal like what Vidur did. Pitamah was the man or Words sinch his Childhood. And after Pandu was passed, he was totally responsible for the Safety of Hastanpur. So how could he deny to fight for his Motherland which was his Karma and Dharma. Though he tried his best to avert WAR. He describe it clearly when he laid on the arrow bed when asked the question by Draupadi. He told that he was indebt by Duryodhanas Ann
(bhojan)
Now lets come to Karnas; case. He was helped ...more
Answered by ankit shivam, 01 Apr '08 01:24 pm

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (6)
Not Useful
 (1)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
6.

Lord Krishna did not take part in the war but sided the righteous side and although he didnt use any weapons to strike the enemy.....his very presence ensured victory for the pandavas...making the war one-sided right from the beginning.

As for Bhishma......although he was against Duryodhan he was bound by his duty towards hastinapur. His dharma was to protect the interests of hastinapur and not allow or bring his personal bias interfere with his duty. He was only the Dhrithrashtra's employee..... Bhisma was ready for blood shed if it secured hastinapur's best interests in the long run. But he gave up when confronted with shikandi because in his heart of hearts he knew hastinapur is safe with pandavas....but after the war...he admits that it was indeed wrong of him to take side with duryodhan instead of the righteous side...the pandav.

Karna, again had righteous anger against pandav..and also he was bound by his loyalty towards his friend and mentor...duryodhan. But for his cu ...more
Answered by sumitha, 01 Apr '08 02:38 pm

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (3)
Not Useful
 (0)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
7.

A very logical question Raj. But Duryodhan wouldnt have called off the war as he is stubborned. If he is like dat, he may withdraw in between the Mahabarata.
The War of Kurukshetra is known as War of Dharma.

The Mahabharata is written in the favour of Pandavas and Krishna. If we will go to the side of Kauravas they may justify the reason of war. They may say none of the pandavas have right to get the Sinhaasan as none of them was born from the King Pandu. :)

Bhishma was the President of the kingdom. How he can withdraw, when once war is declared. Karna is more loyal to Duryodhana...and always he got support and favours from his dear friend. Pandavas always taunted him and try to disgrace him. Even his mother Kunti devi deserted him for the sake of society and her life. She only came for her rest of the children. So the selfishness is clear. In this way how Karna can withdraw from a war which is declared by his most affectionate friend ?

War is War Raj. It is not their duty ...more
Answered by peekay first, 01 Apr '08 01:06 pm

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (2)
Not Useful
 (0)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
8.

Such characters are present in our society and, may be, always remain.Had they not done what they did,how Vyasa would have succeeded in teaching us that aspect of our society?
Answered by Ramsingh Sachan, 01 Apr '08 12:41 pm

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (1)
Not Useful
 (1)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
9.

The principle was the same then as it is now.

a soldier's duty is not to follow his heart and mind but to follow the order of their generals.

By his vow bhishma was bound to protect histinapur come what may and to his last breath so he did.

Karna was so indebted to Duryodhan and also a partner in his crime.( I may be wrong but did he not also have a hand in Draupadi's vastra haran).Then, how could he change face on the battlefield and say sorry boss but you are wrong.
Answered by EmM, 03 Apr '08 03:49 pm

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (1)
Not Useful
 (0)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
10.

Karna supported with Duryodhana and had to be faithfull to him since HE only saved Karma when he was insulted by Everybody when there was a Competition between Arjuna and Karna(Though Karna was the Eldest Son of Kunti and had the power of Surya he was invincible,but, since Kunti was a Virgin when Karna was born she was kept in a Box and put on Flowing River, later the Charitor of Hastinapura retreived and brought up Karna as his own son, he was insulted agains and again as the Son of a Charitor though he was a Kshatriya). So Karna is Right in his own way.

Regarding Bhishma in order to please his father( Who fell in love with Satyavati or Matsyagandhi, daughter of a Fiserman Head) remained a Bachelor so that Son/s of Santanu Maharaja(Father of Bhishma- in fact Gaga was the Mother of Bhishma whose original name of Devabrata) would become King. He told the Heaven that he would protect the Throne of Hastinapura at any cost whosoever rules it. So he was also binded by his Words.
Hope t ...more
Answered by sriraam, 03 Apr '08 12:29 pm

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (1)
Not Useful
 (0)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
Previous

Ask a Question

Get answers from the community

600 characters remaining