=
Intro; this post will deal with a lesser known dynasty of warriors and character's in mahabharat that were not very important or relevant. One (bhurishravas) is given footage in the 85th episode of Chopra's fake serial but he was never shown before or after that episode. When he is killed then none of the actors in the serial talk to bhurishravas like he was a relative or not, so even the viewer's/audience would not know that bhurishravas had a family connection to the kauravas, pandavas & karna.
The closest any other tv serial got in mentioning these character's was in episode 162 of the Shri Krishna serial, their Sanjaya mentioned that Srikandi fought with king Bahleek (vahika) but no scene was shown, like karna losing to chitrasena in that serial was not shown just only mentioned by bhishma (sunil nagar).
I guess not much blame can be accorded to tv serial writer's, directors and cast members for the crime of not showing vahika, somadatta, bhurishravas etc. Because they are like special appearance characters who have cameo roles, they have very minor additions to the story. Its like the appearance of amitabh bachchan in the film 'Dost' (1974) or SlumDog Millionaire. So it wasnt worth showing, the budget also exists, so why hire more actors and have to pay the salary for another one that isnt going to have more than 2 relevant scenes.
Somadatta had a scene where he fought Sini for the hand of Vasudeva's wife & another where he basically died fighting Satyaki during the war. One fact which makes little sense is that Somadatta had no children before Bhurishravas (he was the first born) so he chose to remain child-less for a certain length of time despite the fact that he was in the same age generation as bhishma.
Even if its presumed that Somadatta was in the age range of Satyavati's sons (Chitrangad/Vichitravirya) then still he should have been a father before his fight with Sini based on the pressure of continuing his family blood line & gene pool. The fight with Sini happened in a time when Vasudeva got married and Vasudeva was in the same generation of Kamsa/Dhritrashtra (men that are at minimum 1 generation youger to Somadatta).
Credit to MRINAL RAI for the first picture in this post.
=
Besides Bhurishravas their were other sons of Somadatta.
1st Bhuri.
[quote]
"Having pierced the Satwata hero with three shafts, O monarch, Bhuri, then, smiling the while, cut off his foe's bow with a sharp and broad-headed shaft. His bow being cut off, Satyaki, O king, maddened with rage, hurled an impetuous dart at the broad chest of Bhuri. Pierced with that dart, Bhuri fell down from his excellent car, covered with blood, like the sun dropping down from the firmament. Beholding him thus slain, the mighty car-warrior Aswatthaman, O Bharata, rushed impetuously against grandson of Sini."
[complete]
Logic - it was impressive that he was able to cut off Satyaki's dhanush/bow.
Bhuri was among the group which attacked Abhimanyu;
"Bhuri, and Bhurisravas, and Sala"
Sala is mentioned as being alive on night 14:
Duryodhana, on that night, O king, addressing his obedient brothers, Vikarna and Chitrasena and Suparsva and Durdharsha and Dirghavahu, and all those that followed them, said those words "Ye heroes of great valour, struggling with resolution, all of you protect Drona from the rear. The son of Hridika will protect his right and Sala his left."
Comment: so is vikarna so this quote cant be deemed as a genuine one, its a retcon or translation error/mistake.
=
Killed by Upa pandav's;
[quotE]
"The illustrious son of Somadatta pierced each of the sons of Draupadi, those great bowmen, with five arrows, and once more with seven arrows. Much afflicted, O lord, by that fierce warrior, they were stupefied and knew not for some time what to do. Then that crusher of foes, Satanika, the son of Nakula, piercing Somadatta's son, that bull among men, with a couple of arrows, uttered in joy a loud roar. The other brothers then, struggling vigorously, quickly pierced the wrathful son of Somadatta, each with three straight shafts. Then the illustrious son of Somadatta, O monarch, sped at them five shafts, piercing each of them in the chest with one shaft."
"Then those five brothers, thus pierced by that high-souled warrior with his shafts, surrounded that hero on every side and began to pierce him deeply with their shafts. Then the son of Arjuna despatched with keen shafts, the four steeds of Saumadatti to the region of Yama. And the son of Bhimasena, cutting off the bow of the illustrious son of Somadatta, uttered a loud shout and pierced his foe with many sharp arrows. The son of Yudhishthira then, cutting off Saumadatti's standard, while the son of Nakula felled the enemy's charioteer from his niche in the car."
"Then the son of Sahadeva, ascertaining the foe to be on the point of leaving the field in consequence of the brothers, cut off, with a razor-faced arrow, the head of that illustrious warrior. That head, decked with ear-rings of gold, fell on the earth and adorned the field like the sun of brilliant effulgence that rises at the end of the Yuga. Beholding the head of the high-souled son of Somadatta thus fallen on the ground, thy troops, O king, overcome with fear, fled in all directions."
[enD]
Note - in the MB of madhvacharya it is mentioned that Sala was the one who these upa pandavas murdered. But before anyone labels them cowards for doing a group attack, hindus need to remember that laxman/hanutati always engaged in group attacks and cheated in battles during the yuddh kanda chapter's of Ramayana.
=
SALA was a son of Somadatta not a brother.
[Quote]
"Somadatta of the Kuru race with his three sons, all mighty chariot-fighters and heroes, Bhuri, Bhurisrava & Sala."
[Ending]
Confirmed by bhagvan Arjuna;
"O eldest brother of Sala, equal to what I bear to king Yudhishthira the Just, or Bhima, that foremost of all mighty persons, or Nakula, or Sahadeva, is the love I bear to thee. Commanded by me as also by the illustrious Krishna, repair thou to the region of the righteous, even where Sivi, the son of Usinara, is."
Comment - though i doubt arjuna was entirely honest, cause if he loved bhurishravas then he would not let Satyaki Jee murder him like that. The quote does basically mean though that Somadatta had no son before bhurishravas birth.
Regarding how he died i see no reason to deny that the character who the upa pandavas murder on day fourteen is clearly SALA not any other person.
=
Somadatta had 2 sons alive after bhurishravas died;
"I swear, O Satwata, by my two sons, by what is dear to me, and by all my meritorious acts."
Logic - i do not know if somadatta was mentioning two dead sons or two alive sons.
After Somadatta spoke those word's then Satyaki claimed that he already ended Salas life;
[1st quote]
"Thy son, the mighty car-warrior Bhurisravas, O king, had been slain. Sala also, and Vrishasena, have been crushed by me."
"I swear by Krishna's feet and by all my good acts that, filled with rage, I shall, with my shafts, slay thee with thy sons in battle."
Comment - But since the word 'son's' is stated by Satyaki that means after sala/bhurishravas both were already dead then two more sons were alive, that means besides bhuri their was another son of somadatta.
=
Despite abdicating the throne and any of his rights to it Vahika remained involved in the politic's of Hastinapura during the reign of Dhritrashtra too.
Quote;
"O thou of great wisdom, Bhishma and thy father and Vahlika (formerly) gave unto the Pandavas their share (of the kingdom) from fear. O chastiser of foes, never think of disunion with them. Thou beholdest today the fruit of that (peaceful) cession in the fact of thy sovereignty over the whole earth, with all its thorns removed by those heroes."
=
Stri Parva;
"Behold, Pratipa’s son Bahlika, that mighty bowman possessed of great energy, slain with a broad-headed shaft, is now lying on the ground like a sleeping tiger. Though deprived of life, the colour of his face is still exceedingly bright, like that of the moon at full, risen on the fifteenth day of the lighted fortnight!"
Santanu was a vassal ruler that was only in charge of hastinapur cause his older brother let him control that region;
"With Vahlika's permission, O prince, Santanu of world-wide fame, on the death of his father (Pratipa), became king and ruled the kingdom."
Logic - dhritrashtra was the incarnation of a gandharva, he was knowledgeable & well informed on the personal relationship and history that his family members had with eachother, so theirs no reason to dismiss this quote.
Respect Bhishma had for Vahika.
QUOTE;
My uncle of Kuru's race king Valhika, said that the maiden so brought away and not wedded with due rites should be set free. That maiden, therefore, was recommended to Vichitravirya for being married by him according to due rites. Doubting my father's words I repaired to others for asking their opinion. I thought that my sire was exceedingly punctilious in matters of morality. I then went to my sire himself, O king, and addressed him these words from desire of knowing something about the practices of righteous people in respect of marriage. Bhishma speaks "I desire, O sire, to know what in truth the practices are of righteous people." I repeated the expression of my wish several times, so great was my eagerness and curiosity.
After I had uttered those words, that foremost of righteous men my sire, Valhika answered me, saying, "If in your opinion the status of husband & wife be taken to attach on account of the gift & acceptance of dowry and not from the actual taking of the maiden's hand with due rites, the father of the maiden (by permitting his daughter to go away with the giver of the dowry) would so himself to be the follower of a creed other than that which is derivable from the ordinary scriptures. Even this is what the accepted scriptures declare. Persons conversant with morality and duty do not allow that their words are at all authoritative who say that the status of husband and wife arises from the gift and acceptance of dowry, and not from the actual taking of the hand with due rites. The saying is well-known that the status of husband and wife is created by actual bestowal of the daughter by the sire (and her acceptance by the husband with due rites).
The status of wife cannot attach to maidens through sale and purchase. They who regard such status to be due to sale and the gift of dowry are persons that are certainly unacquainted with the scriptures. No one should bestow his daughter upon such persons. In fact, they are not men to whom one may marry his daughter. A wife should never be purchased. Nor should a father sell his daughter. Only those persons of sinful soul who are possessed, besides, by cupidity, and who sell and purchase female slaves for making serving women, regard the status of wife as capable of arising from the gift and acceptance of a dowry. On this subject some people on one occasion had asked prince Satyavat the following question, 'If the giver of a dowry unto the kinsmen of a maiden happens to die before marriage, can another person take the hand of that maiden in marriage? We have doubts on this matter. Do thou remove these doubts of ours, for thou art endued with great wisdom and art honoured by the wise. Be thou the organ of vision unto ourselves that are desirous of learning the truth.'
Note; he constantly referred to Vahika as his sire instead of Santanu. But the whole chapter is hard to read as the mention of a prince named Satyavat basically was a ending to the conversation Vahika had with Bhishma.
Later mention of vahika vadha:
"Thy grandsire Bahlika, possessed of great might and prowess, hath, with all his followers, been slain by Bhimasena."
Comment; not just him but even his follower's were killed.
I think the real reason that people of hastinapore (pandu, dhritrashtra, bhishma etc) never interfered with plans of Jarasandha or Kamsa, or tried freeing the prisoners in mathura (Devaki/Vasudeva) was because Vahika was the true ruler of Hastinapore and Vahika basically is a friend/ally of Jarasandha, so through vahika basically Jarasandha controlled hastinapore too.
=
Who was bhurishravas in his former life?
[Quote]
"Go thou then, without delay, into those pure, regions of mine that incessantly blaze forth with splendour and that are desired by the foremost of deities with Brahma as their head, and becoming equal to myself, be thou borne on the back to Garuda."
Logic - their exists a very minor possibility of him being Garuda.
Bonus; Since Jayadratha was mentioned as censuring Satyaki for killing bhurishravas i think its possible that though the death of bhurishravas was an adharma still it was also a strategy to lure out Jayadratha from his hiding spot, so the pandavas could draw him out and he would become vulnerable to arjuna's attack.
According to Maharaj Suyodhan this was the reality;
"Somadatta's son does not resist the Parthas."
Logic - you know what this means? It means that the same bhurishravas (who is praised and wanked by karna bhakts) was also pro pandava & partial for them instead of the righteous kaurava brothers.
More proof Bhurishravas was pro pandava.
Quote;
Bhurisravas, and Kripa, and Drona's son, and the ruler of the Madras, and Uttamaujas and Yudhamanyu, and Kesava, and Arjuna these great car-warriors among both the Kurus and the Pandavas loudly cheered Bhima, saying "Excellent, Excellent" and uttered leonine roars. When that fierce uproar, making the hair stand on end rose, thy son Duryodhana, O king, quickly said unto all the kings and princes and particularly his uterine brothers, these words "Blessed be ye, proceed towards Karna for rescuing him from Vrikodara, else the shafts shot from Bhima's bow will slay the son of Radha. Ye mighty bowmen, strive ye to protect the Suta's son." Thus commanded by Duryodhana, seven of his uterine brothers, O sire, rushing in wrath towards Bhimasena, encompassed him on all sides.
Logic - surely if he liked karna then he would not have praised Bheem here, do not bring up shalya, because its a fact Shalya only became pro karna during the 17th day after bhargavastra was released by him.
A man that praises Bhima (the guy that murders brothers of duryodhana) can't be considered respectable in eyes of true karna fans especially when bhurishrava fought from the same team those dead princes/brothers were in.
=
Who did Dresthadyumna kill?
"Then the son of Samyamani pierced the Panchala prince incapable of defeat in the battle with ten shafts, and his charioteer also with ten shafts. Then that mighty bowman severely pierced, licked with his tongue the corners of his mouth, and cut off his enemy's bow with a broad-headed shaft of excessive sharpness. And soon the prince of Panchala afflicted his foe with five and twenty arrows, and then slew his steeds, O king, and then both the protectors of his wings. Then, O bull of Bharata's race, Samyamani's son, standing on that car whose steeds were slain, looked at the son of the renowned king of the Panchalas. Then taking up a terrible scimitar of the best kind, made of steel, Samyamani's son walking on foot, approached Drupada's son staying on his car."
"And the Pandavas, soldiers and Dhrishtadyumna also of Prishata's race beheld him coming like a wave and resembling a snake fallen from the skies. And he whirled his sword and looked like the sun and advanced with the tread of an infuriate elephant. The prince of Panchala then, excited with rage, quickly taking up a mace, smashed the head of Samyamani's son thus advancing towards him, sharp-edged scimitar in grasp and shield in hand, as soon as the latter, having crossed the shooting distance, was near enough to his adversary's car."
"And then, O king, while falling down deprived of life, his blazing scimitar and shield, loosened from his grasp, fell down with his body on the ground. And the high-souled son of the Panchala king, of terrible prowess, having slain his foe with his mace, won great renown. And when that prince, that mighty car-warrior and great bowman, was slain, loud cries of oh and alas arose among thy troops, O sire. Then Samyamani, excited with rage upon beholding his own son slain, impetuously rushed towards the prince of Panchala who was incapable of defeat in battle."
Point's; The character named 'Samyamani' is never mentioned before or after this chapter. So it is not known whether Samyamani was a epithet/nickname for Somadatta or Sala. Therefore it is not possible to determine the identity of the individual that Dresthadyumna kills here.
=
Impressive military ACHIEVEMENTS of Somadatta/Vahika, i will not include the nepotism factor (bhurishrava) cause he is overrated & was defeated by many people and was not relevant in my outlook at all so he wont recieve attention now. Both Vahika and his son (Somadatta) fought during night time but Bhishma never did.
Vahika killed a monarch named Senavindu.
Quote.
That foremost of Sutas Senavindu, having consumed many foes in battle, hath, at last, O king been slain by Bahlika.
King Senavindu was a person that opposed Arjuna in the Rajasuya War so he was deported from his own borders by Arjuna after losing a war to him. It is a possibility that due to the similarity of their names maybe Sasavindu was the father of Senavindu or a ancestor to him.
[Quote]
"Arjuna snatched out the kingdom from Vrihanta, but having made peace with him marched, accompanied by that king, against Senavindu whom he soon expelled from his kingdom."
Vahika KOED Bhima on the 14th night.
"Beholding his son fallen into a swoon, Valhika rushed at Satyaki scattering showers of arrows like a cloud in season. Then Bhima, for Satyaki's sake, afflicted the illustrious Valhika with nine shafts and pierced him therewith at the van of battle. Then the mighty-armed son of Pratipa, Valhika, filled with great fury, hurled a dart at the chest of Bhima, like Purandara himself hurling the thunder. Struck therewith, Bhima trembled (on his car) and swooned away. The mighty warrior then, recovering his senses, hurled a mace at his opponent. That mace snatched away the head of Valhika, who, thereupon, fell down lifeless on the earth, like a tree struck down by lightning."
Analysis - unfortunately though this character Vahika was the longest living among every other warrior he still did not have much besides these 2 achievements, cause his life was not explored well in MB, ved vyaas and vaisampayan/souti refused to give him attention.
Satyaki vs Somadatta (1st round).
{QuotE}
"Having thus addressed each other, with eyes red in wrath, those foremost of men began to shoot their shafts at each other. Then with a thousand cars and ten thousand horses, Duryodhana took his station, encompassing Somadatta, Sakuni also, filled with rage, and armed with every weapon and surrounded by his sons and grandsons as also by his brothers, that were equal to Indra himself in prowess (did the same). Thy brother-in-law, O king, young in years and of body hard as the thunder-bolt and possessed of wisdom, had a hundred thousand horses of the foremost valour with him. With these he encompassed the mighty bowman Somadatta. Protected by those mighty warriors, Somadatta covered Satyaki (with clouds of shafts). Beholding Satyaki thus covered with clouds of straight shafts, Dhrishtadyumna proceeded towards him in rage and accompanied by a mighty force."
"Then, O king, the sound that arose there of those two large hosts striking each other, resembled that of many oceans lashed into fury by frightful hurricanes. Then Somadatta pierced Satyaki, with nine arrows. Satyaki, in return, struck that foremost of Kuru warriors with nine arrows. Deeply pierced in that battle by the mighty and firm bowman (Satyaki), Somadatta sat down on the terrace of his car and lost his senses in a swoon, Beholding him deprived of his senses, his driver, with great speed, bore away from the battle that great car-warrior, the heroic Somadatta. Seeing that Somadatta, afflicted with Yuyudhana's shafts, had lost his senses Drona rushed with speed, desiring to slay the Yadu hero. Beholding the Preceptor advance, many Pandava warriors headed by Yudhishthira surrounded that illustrious perpetuator of Yadu's race from desire of rescuing him."
Analysis; clearly the man lost but the important thing is duryodhan/sakuni believed somadatta was worthy enough to deserve their protection so they tried helping him.
Somadatta vs 2 champion warrior's
[Quote]
Then Somadatta, once more filled with rage upon beholding Satyaki in that battle, covered the latter, O Bharata, with a dense shower of arrows. Then took place a battle, fierce and exceedingly wonderful to behold, between thy warriors and those of the foe, both parties being solicitous of victory. Fighting on behalf of Satyaki, Bhima pierced the Katirava hero with ten shafts. Somadatta, however, in return, pierced that hero with a hundred arrows. Then Satwata, filled with rage, pierced with ten keen shafts endued with the force of the thunder, that old warrior afflicted with grief on account of the death of his son, and who was, besides, endued with every estimable virtue like Yayati, the son of Nahusha. Having pierced him with great force, he struck him once more with seven arrows. Then, fighting for the sake of Satyaki, Bhimasena hurled at the head of Somadatta a new, hard and terrible Parigha. Satyaki also filled with rage, shot at Somadatta's chest, in that battle, an excellent shaft, keen and equipped with goodly wings and resembling fire itself in splendour. The Parigha and the shaft, both terrible, fell simultaneously upon the body of the heroic Somadatta. That mighty car-warrior, thereupon, fell down.
Logic; him being able to survive this can be seen as a praiseworthy achievement. And he did fight back against bheem injuring him with 1 hundred arrows.
3rd times the charm;
"Beholding Somadatta shaking his large bow, Satyaki, addressing his driver."
"Beholding the Satwata hero thus advancing quickly in battle Somadatta, O king, fearlessly turned towards him. Scattering showers of shafts like the clouds pouring torrents of rain, he covered the grandson of Sini like the clouds covering the sun. Satyaki also in that encounter fearlessly covered that bull amongst the Kurus with showers of shafts. Then Somadatta pierced that hero of Madhu's race with sixty shafts in the chest. Satyaki, in turn, O king, pierced Somadatta with many whetted arrows."
"Mangled by each other with each-other's shafts, those two warriors looked resplendent like a couple of flowering Kinsukas in the season of spring. Dyed all over with blood, those illustrious warriors of the Kuru and the Vrishni races looked at each other with their glances. Riding on their cars that coursed in circles, those grinders of foes, of terrible countenances, resembled two clouds pouring torrents of rain. Their bodies mangled and pierced all over with arrows, they looked, O king, like two porcupines. Pierced with countless shafts, equipped with wings of gold, the two warriors looked resplendent, O monarch, like a couple of tall trees covered with fire-flies."
"Their bodies looking bright with the blazing arrows sticking to them, those two mighty car-warriors looked in that battle like two angry elephants decked with burning torches. Then, O monarch, the mighty car-warrior, Somadatta, in that battle, cut off with a crescent-shaped arrow the large bow of Madhava. With great speed also, at a time when speed was of the utmost consequence, the Kuru hero then pierced Satyaki with five and twenty shafts, and once again with ten. Then Satyaki, taking up a tougher bow, quickly pierced Somadatta with five shafts. With another broad-headed arrow, Satyaki also, O king, smiling the while, cut off the golden standard of Valhika's son. Somadatta, however, beholding his standard cut down, fearlessly pierced the grandson of Sini with five and twenty arrows. Satwata also, excited with rage, cut off with a razor-faced arrow the bow of Somadatta, in that encounter. And he also pierced Somadatta who then resembled a snake without fangs, with a hundred straight arrows, equipped with wings of gold."
"The mighty car-warrior Somadatta, then, who was endued with great strength taking up another bow, began to cover Satyaki (with showers of shafts). Satyaki too, inflamed with rage, pierced Somadatta with many shafts. Somadatta, in return, afflicted Satyaki with his arrowy showers. Then Bhima coming to the encounter, and fighting on behalf of Satyaki, struck Valhika's son with ten shafts. Somadatta, however, fearlessly struck Bhimasena with many whetted arrows. Then Satyaki, inflamed with rage, aiming at Somadatta's chest, shot a new and terrible Parigha equipped with a golden staff and hard as the thunder. The Kuru warrior, however, smiling the while, cut off that terrible Parigha advancing with speed against him in two parts. That formidable Parigha of iron, then, thus cut off into two fragments, fell down like so many crests of a mountain riven by thunder."
"Then Satyaki, O king, with a broad-headed arrow, cut off in that encounter Somadatta's bow, and then with five arrows, the leathern fence that cased his fingers. Then, O Bharata, with four other shafts he speedily despatched the four excellent steeds of the Kuru warrior to Yama's presence. And then that tiger among car-warriors with another straight shaft, smiling the while, cut off from his trunk the head of Somadatta's driver. Then he sought at Somadatta himself a terrible shaft of fiery effulgence, whetted on stone, steeped in oil, and equipped with wings of gold. That excellent and fierce shaft, shot by the mighty grandson of Sini, quickly fell like a hawk, O Lord, upon the chest of Somadatta. Deeply pierced by the mighty Satwata, the great car-warrior Somadatta, O monarch, fell down (from his car) and expired. Beholding the great car-warrior Somadatta slain there, thy warriors with a large throng of cars rushed against Yuyudhana."
In his old age Somadatta used a large bow, it can be inferred that it had a massive weight, so he must have been physically fit. Here somadatta put up a good resistance against Satyaki, outperforming anything vahika did against satyaki.
Bhima tried to interfere here again but Somadatta beat him back, atleast somadatta did not rely on boons like hanuman, bhurishravas etc.
=
Reasons why i believe Somadatta was elder to Bhishma.
Reason 1 - bhishma's father Santanu was younger than Vahika (father to lord Somadatta).
Quote;
"Unto that lion among kings, who ruled his kingdom virtuously were born three sons of great fame and resembling three gods. Of them, Devapi was the eldest, Vahlika the next and Santanu of great intelligence, who, O sire, was my grandfather, was the youngest. Devapi, endued with great energy, was virtuous, truthful in speech, and ever engaged in waiting upon his father."
[End]
Reason 2 - bhishma's father Santanu impregnated Ganga for the 8th time, meaning that at least 72 months passed after their first meeting (9 multiplied by eight).
Quote;
"The monarch was so enraptured with his beautiful wife that months, seasons, and years rolled on without his being conscious of them. And the king, while thus enjoying himself with his wife, had eight children born unto him who in beauty were like the very celestials themselves."
[End]
Logic: so if bhishma is child number 8 born after 6 years of a couple's married life/intercourse then clearly that was alot of time for Vahika (a man older to Santanu) to get his bride and spouse and start impregnating her.
Reason 3 - Somadatta's baahoos (daughter in laws) were mothers, so he had biological grandsons.
Quote;
There the mother of Bhurishrava, that faultless lady, overcome with grief, is addressing her lord Somadatta, saying "By good luck, O king, thou seest not this terrible carnage of the Bharatas, this extermination of the Kurus, this sight that resembles the scenes occurring at the end of the yuga. By good luck, thou seest not thy heroic son, who bore the device of the sacrificial stake on his banner and who performed numerous sacrifices with profuse presents to all, slain on the field of battle. By good luck, thou hearest not those frightful wails of woe uttered amidst this carnage by thy daughters-in-law like the screams of a flight of cranes on the bosom of the sea. Thy daughters-in-law, bereaved of both husbands and sons, are running hither and thither, each clad in a single piece of raiment and each with her black tresses all dishevelled."
Conclusion - not just Shri Vahika but even Lord Somadatta were older members of the kuru family, so the clown bhishma does not deserve his title of "eldest kuru" when Br Chopra's Mahabharat tv serial actor (the man in kripa's role) said "jyesth kuru putra toh ganga putra bhishma hai yuvraaj.." then he was clearly making a huge mistake.
If starplus mahabharat was so keen on creating saas bahu crap then that would have been the perfect excuse to give more screentime to members of the Vahika family.
=
No comments:
Post a Comment
?