AT THE FEET OF THE MOTHER
Ask Alok da

Krishna agreeing not to fight in the battle? Why so? He was God himself so why he agreed not to lift any weapon 🙄?

The Mahabharata war was primarily a war between the two Kuru families. Since Sri Krishna was related to both the Kauravas and the Pandavas. Sri Krishna’s father Vasudeva was brother of Kunti making Sri Krishna a first cousin to the Pandavas. On the other hand Sri Krishna’s son Samba (born through Jambvati daughter of Jambvan) was married to Duryodhana’s daughter Lakshmana making the two closely related to each other.  His active participation on either side would have created further family rift. But chieftains from his army stood rank on both sides, especially Satyaki and Kritvarma. 

Secondly he had in a way foreseen or rather forewilled the result of the war in which the main instrument was Arjuna, chosen as the man of destiny. It was important that the Pandava brothers especially Arjuna is kept safe from the devious designs of the Kauravas. Driving the chariot of Arjuna ensured that they were always together thereby ensuring the victory. His spiritual force constantly accompanying the main hero Arjuna was a much better way to ensure victory especially given the role of charioteer in the battle (see how Salya as charioteer helped in Karna’s defeat) than if they were split and fighting independently. 

Finally as we all know that wars are first won in the mind and then on the battlefield. Planning and strategy are the most important elements in the war and Sri Krishna kept this role to himself.  

Of course I am not bringing in the spiritual dimension wherein Sri Krishna and Arjuna had fought together the battle of the Ages as Nar Narayan. Their coming together was the occult condition of victory against the forces of darkness embodied by the Dhritrastrians. This occult truth of the Divine Force and the human instrument ensuring victory is declared to be one of the profound secrets of all battles, ‘yatra yogeshwar Krishna, yatra partho dhanurdhara, tatra srivijayo…..’. Sri Krishna, during the war was in a Superconscient state as the yogeshwar and not a warrior. This was needed to ensure the victory as indeed it did.

Krishna fighting the war would have risked the life of Arjuna whereas Sri Krishna playing the charioteer of dear Arjuna would ensure his safety (as is evidenced by a number of events such as Jaidratha vadh, saving him from Takshaka Astra of Karna, ensuring death of karna, restraining him from leaping at Dhristdyumna to save Dronachaya, saving him from Bheesma’s wrath etc) and with Arjuna alive and Krishna by his side, the victory was inevitable. 

Affectionately,

Alok Da

Share this…

Related Posts

Are the processes of Purification and Transformation the same thing? I have a little confusion. In the process of Purification, we face some adverse forces that are mentioned by Sri Aurobindo in the chapter ‘The difficulties of Transformation’. Are they the same? 🔥🌄[…]

Purification is the indispensable basis for liberation. It means removing the covering and coating of ignorance and falsehood that veils the true self. In the yoga seeking for mukti, the purification has to be less thorough. It is enough to bring some sattwic rectitude in nature, satwasanshuddhi. Transformation proper..

Read More >

Can we understand Sri Aurobindo and His yoga with the physical mind, as you say physical mind never grasps the Truth in its highest sense. So if we feel good by reading Sri Aurobindo or The Mother, even that is from the physical plane, wanting a good, perfect physical life. 😅❤️‍🔥🦋 […]

Yes, it is difficult for the physical mind to shift its fixed position and comfort zones..It feels lost and insecure. But once it accepts the New Idea then it gets firmly established there. It is somewhat like…

Read More >

The talk sounded like you were putting down Marriage as a concept! True, some regions do this horse ride/wasting money, which is in bad taste. However, Marriage as a concept gives the monkey minds a framework. 🥸💍💒[…]

Yes, I agree that for the average human being, these outer frameworks and social institutions do serve a purpose of holding people together. Of course, as I mentioned, marriage or not, love and togetherness can be beautiful and ought to be so. But for that, man needs to evolve beyond the present frameworks, which operate as long as one accepts the limits of dos and don’ts. …

Read More >