5

Krishna ordered Arjuna to kill Jayadratha and make his head fall in the lap of Jayadratha's father, Vridakshatra. When Vridakshatra put Jayadratha’s head on the Earth, Vridakshatra's head burst into 100 pieces.

Why was the punishment of Jayadratha's sins given to his father?

When Vridhakshatra gave a boon to Jayadratha, he didn't know that his son will commit so many sins. So why did Vridakshatra get punished when he just gave a boon to his child, as many Gods have gave boons to Demons in the Past.

Isn't Krishna committed Adharma in the above case?

Adiyarkku
  • 11,038
  • 3
  • 42
  • 89
Mohit Patil
  • 67
  • 3
  • Krishna never commits any adharma, because the very definition of Dharma is that which is done by Bhagavan. Whatever he does, that is called dharma. – ram Jun 10 '20 at 19:11
  • 1
    The boon of having one's head into 100 pieces when one fells his son is wrong in its entirety and asuric so that you do whatever crimes if they are getting punished for crimes the punisher head should be blown so he is a Asura – Prasanna R Jun 12 '20 at 07:42
  • His father was destined to die through this method only. He wasn't punished. He just met his death at right time. – sbharti May 13 '22 at 22:13

2 Answers2

1

I do agree the fact that, Technically Vridhakshatra did not commit any sin but virtually he did, The greatest Sin of any father is not bringing up his son with good culture and values. I could list several such mistakes of him for which he deserves such a punishment of killing his own son.

  1. If I remember Vridhakshatra did not put any effort to advice his son for trying to abduct Draupadi.

  2. Jayadratha was married to Dushala who was the only sister of pandavas as well as kauravas if the son is having an interest to abduct wife's brother's wife ( sister in law ) then I personally would blame the Father that he has not done anything good other than blessing his son for being invincible.

In Mahabharat Guru Vedavyasa did not gave many clarifications like this, because there are many situations in Mahabharath and Bhagavadgita ( which comes with in Mahabharath ) where Vedavyasa explains duties of a Father, King, Mother etc ....

One such example is you might also get a question saying what mistake did Dritharashtra did for loosing all his 100 kids, because in the entire story of Mahabharath I could maximum see the names of some 12 or 15 Kaurava names not all 100. Also not all 100 were bad to Pandavas and were not unfair . But the only mistake they all 100 did was supporting bad desires of Duryodhan.

Dritharashtra too did similar mistakes like Vridhakshatra, he allowed his son's Dhusyasana and Dhuryodhana to disrob Droupadi . That's a biggest sin ever, So he lost all his sons, infact in few versions of Mahabharath Vikarna and Yuyutsu who are brothers of Dhuryodhana objected for this act. But Dritharashtra did'nt so he deserved to loose all his children and lead the most sorrowful life after the war .

So to conclude my explaination according to our heritage Father plays a very serious role in bringing up the children ( this too comes in Mahabharath look out for Yaksha Prashna scenario in Aranya parva ). If Father ignorant of son's growth he deserves to be punished.

Aravind.HU
  • 119
  • 4
  • 1
    Welcome to Hinduism Stack Exchange! In order to maintain some quality standards we insist on citing some sources while answering questions. Here you can find some useful resources to Shastras :) Visit [help] for more information about this site. – Pandya May 10 '20 at 06:03
  • The names of all the 100 sons are clearly mentioned in Mahabharata multiple times, it is just that only a few of them were referred to in the story itself. – V.Aggarwal May 12 '20 at 05:08
  • @V.Aggarwal I am not sure which version of Mahabharath you have read. I have read three versions of Mahabharath 1. Vachana Bharatha Of A.R Krishna Shastry 2. Jaya Mahabharatha written by Devdutt patnaik 3. Kumaravyasa Mahabharata ( english version ) in none of these versions they quote the 100 names. There is Harivamsha in which I have read that it is mentioned but Harivamsha is not Mahabharatha and it is also a myth to consider it as a suppliment of mahabharatha . We should go with Vyasa Mahabharatha and in that he never quotes these names – Aravind.HU May 12 '20 at 11:37
  • @Pandya Hindhuism and Mythology are open for opinions that is the reason why you can find lots of versions of each Veda and lots of version of each Upanishads and lots of versions of Mahabharatha and Ramayan and Bhagavag gita Translations. You can't actualy find a reference for opinions, opinions are originated from cognitive thinking discussing like this etc ... So some are documented and some are not but End of the day its up to the individual to decide . What I shared above is the personal understanding of Facts by reading versions . – Aravind.HU May 12 '20 at 11:44
  • @aravind.udayashankara Looks like the website https://www.sacred-texts.com/, is down right now, So I cant place a reference for that, But I have a downloaded copy, and in the SECTION CXVII, of book m01 (https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m01), all the names are mentioned, as follows: "Vaisampayana said, 'Their names, O king, according to the order of birth, are Duryodhana, Yuyutsu, Duhsasana, Duhsaha, Duhsala, Jalasandha, Sama, Saha, Vinda and Anuvinda, Durdharsha, Suvahu, Dushpradharshana, Durmarshana and Durmukha, Dushkarna, and Karna; Vivinsati and Vikarna, Sala, Satwa, Sulochana.... – V.Aggarwal May 13 '20 at 07:30
  • @V.Aggarwal Thanks for sharing the reference, Can you share the Sanskrit version from which this guy has translated. Usually Translators take from multiple suppliments and put it in one place . – Aravind.HU May 17 '20 at 12:53
  • Such information can be taken from the site only, and it is down for some reasons. – V.Aggarwal May 18 '20 at 11:20
1

Isn't Krishna committed Adharma in the above case?

to me this looks like an Adharmic act which cannot be justified by the rules of Mahabharata war.

Debroy translation:

https://archive.org/details/the-mahabharata-set-of-10-volumes/page/n1231/mode/2up

Bhishma Parva

CHAPTER 1

Then the Kurus, Pandavas and Somakas had an agreement and established rules of dharma that would be followed in the war.

Those who had withdrawn from the midst of battle should not be killed under any circumstances.

One who was without a weapon or without armour should never be killed.

Vriddhakshatra was without a weapon or armor and had never been part of the battlefield.

S K
  • 1
  • 4
  • 22
  • 79