1. Bhishma kept Karna with his Vasavi Shakti out of the war for 10 days by his insulting ways. (If Karna had killed Arjuna, the war would have been over. Even if he wouldn't kill the Pandavas he could have killed some "name" warriors like Satyaki or Chekitana.)

2. It looks like all he did was to kill low-level warriors on the Pandava side making sure that the outcome of the war wasn't affected.

3. The most horrific attack in the war was the attack on Bhurishravas to deprive him of his fair victory over Satyaki - surely word must have reached Bhishma about this and he said nothing. He was constantly undermining Duryodhana for being adharmic, whereas Krishna constantly egged the Pandavas on to acts of adharma and even says so at the end of the war.

IMO, all of the above suggests Bhishma was more loyal to the Pandava side than Duryodhana.

Are there any instances where Bhishma proved his worthiness to Duryodhana?

Did Duryodhana ever acknowledge Bhishma's loyalty towards him and the side he was representing?

  • 5
    You are asking question in the title and giving answer in the body. We do not refute or debate the arguments made made by you. We are not a discussion forum to debate or discuss things. We only answer the questions asked properly. You should ask your questions properly. This is opinion based question as you are trying to establish your thoughts regarding this topic. – Sarvabhouma Mar 2 '18 at 5:40
  • @Sarvabhouma I don't know. It's up to OP to accept my edits so the question can be re-opened and answered objectively. If no response from OP, I assume they are ok with my edits. – sv. Mar 2 '18 at 17:20
  • 3
    @Sarvabhouma Since these are extraordinary situations we need extraordinary measures :D – sv. Mar 2 '18 at 17:23
  • 4
    @Pandya It's unmoderator-like behavior to rollback edits without leaving a comment or having a discussion. – sv. Mar 3 '18 at 5:47
  • 4
    @Sarvabhouma, Let's assume the OP's intent was bad. Yet, there was a good question lying inside the previous edits. The Qn looked better with the latest edits from sv. and 4 other people reopened this Qn, seeing the latest edits. Now, with the new rollback, you have voided the reopening of the Qn. This Qn is now again vulnerable for closure. – iammilind Mar 3 '18 at 16:02

Bhishma allowed atrocities to happen under his watch which resulted in war. He chose loyalty to the King than service to the people, a violation of Dharma.

When a General sees his own side is violating the law what should he do ? Should he continue to serve that government ? Should he compromise with it for his personal comfort and status (vow to his father's father-in-law) ?

Bhishma chose his comfort and status over Dharma. It doesn't indicate his loyalty to Kauravas or Pandavas or Dharma but his own sense of "grandeur".

I personally thing story of Bhishma is a lesson in "ego" not stopping is doing the right thing.

| improve this answer | |

In the US Army, a soldier is government property. If he hurts himself, he is damaging US Government property.

By telling Duryodhnana's enemies how to eliminate him as a military asset of Duryodhana, Bhishma clearly committed treachery.


Replying to Yudhisthira's inquiry, Ganga's son said, "As long as I am alive, O son of Pandu, you will not have victory. O possessor of great wisdom, this is the fact of the matter. After I am slain, you will be triumphant. If you, therefore, desire victory, then kill me without delay. I give you permission to do so. You are fortunate to know my position, for if you had not solicited my advice, then there would have been days of misfortune ahead. Listen to my words, and act upon what I say. With my large bow and other weapons, I fight very carefully in battle. No one, not even the demigods headed by Indra, can defeat me. If, however, I lay aside my weapons, then you may defeat me. It is known that I will never fight with a woman or one who was once a woman. The son of Drupada, Shikhandi, was once a woman in his youth and has since attained manhood. Keep Shikhandi before Arjuna, and let Arjuna release his arrows and pierce my body. I will not fight with Shikhandi. At that time I will lay down my weapons, and taking this opportunity, Arjuna may strike me on all sides and gain victory. Except for Devaki's divine son, Lord Krishna, or Arjuna, there is no one who can defeat me. After I am vanquished, you will be able to defeat Dhritarastra's sons and their allies."

| improve this answer | |
  • 5
    Why should Bhishma abide by the laws of US army? – Sarvabhouma Apr 3 '18 at 16:54
  • 1
    In question you are asking Are there any instances where Bhishma carried out Senapati duties towards Duryodhana faithfully? while in answer you have not admitted anything either in support or in oppose. Btw US army is not relevant here. – Triyugi Narayan Mani Apr 3 '18 at 17:56
  • If he had been serving in the US Army - he would have been summarily executed on the bed of arrows for collaborating with the enemy to put himself out of commission. But we don't know which would have triumphed - his "Iccha-mrtyu" boon or the US Army. – S K Apr 3 '18 at 18:04
  • 3
    Why would he serve in US Army? – Triyugi Narayan Mani Apr 4 '18 at 6:12
  • 3
    Not an answer. US Army standards do not apply here. Yuddha Neeti of Mahabharata era is the measuring rod. – user1195 Apr 6 '18 at 8:32

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .