11

Lord Krishna was a representative of Dharma during Mahabharata. He said that the war between Pandavas and Kauravas was dharmayudhdha. He also said that everyone must participate in dharmayudhdha. He said the same thing to his elder brother Balarāma after the battle between Bhima and Duryodhana.

He indirectly helped the Pandavas a lot—and they won the war because of his help. So, why doesn't Krishna participate directly in the war?

I read he made the decision because,

He said that both the Kauravas and the Pandavas were equally dear to Him. It pained His heart that both are going to war.

Quora

But, I don't believe this is the reason because He never supported the Kauravas even after Duryodhana asked first for him instead of Narayani Sena.

  • 1
    as we know Dhuryodhana's daughter Reshmana was the wife of lord shree krishna's son Samban and Lord shree Krishna was the mathuli of kuntidevi too. So he cannot be on both sides and not only that he supports dharma ,so the king of yadhukula Balram,decided not to participate in the war ,so lord Shree Krishna cannot reject the orders of his big brother .But Balram allowed Lord Shree Krishna to participate in the war based on one condition that he should not use any sort of weapons. As he support dharma he joined Pandavas side – Akash. B May 10 '18 at 13:14
  • There were relatives of Lord Shree Krishna on both sides – Akash. B May 10 '18 at 13:21
  • As I know, Krishna took that decision himself. No one can force him to do something against his will. Not even Balarama. Balarama wanted to marry Subhadra with Duryodhana but Krishna did opposite as per his will. His every action was meaningful. – Ravi Hirani May 10 '18 at 14:20
5

Lord Sri Krishna decided against using weapons in the battlefield. It was his decision keeping in line with a Divine Plan(which was known only to Lord Sri Krishna).

This "divine plan" was the very cause of the Mahabharata War—and the aim of the plan was "to cleanse all Kshatriyas with weapons and send them to Swarga". This is explained clearly in the Mahabharata (Book 12, Shanti Parva, Section II),

Narada said, 'It is even so, O mighty armed one, as thou sayest, O Bharata! Nothing could resist Karna and Arjuna in battle. This, O sinless one, that I am about to tell thee is unknown to the very gods. Listen to me, O mighty-armed one, as it befell in former days. How all the Kshatriyas, cleansed by weapons should attain to regions of bliss, was the question'


I have the question that why he(Lord Sri Krishna) does not participate directly in the war

Lord Sri Krishna did not participate directly in the war because of the divine plan explained above.Wars, infact, originate in the "hearts and minds" of people.The outwardly manifestation of the "war within" was the deadly Mahabharata War, which left few survivors—the Pandava brothers, Ashwattama, and a few others. The Srimad Bhagavad Gita,it is believed, - can accelerate the process of inner transformation—transformation of hearts and minds.

He never supported the Kauravas even after Duryodhana asked first for him instead of Narayani Sena.

With regard to the above statement in the Q - It was Arjuna who was given the privilege of asking first.Duryodhana was petrified that Arjuna would ask for the mighty Narayani Sena.But...Arjuna did not do that.Arjuna asked for Sri Krishna.

Reference-The Mahabharata Book 12:Santi Parva,Rajadharmanusasana Parva

  • 1
    I'm not sure what I had in mind when I made that comment. It looks fine. 😄 I went ahead and made some small edits, though. – Rubellite Yakṣī May 18 '18 at 13:39
4

I don't believe it either. As far as I know Bhishma Pitamah said that.

Krishna did not participated because if he had participated then the war would be finished quickly (of course because he is god). Nobody stand a chance in front of him and because it would be unfair for a god to participate.


In my opinion, the Mahabharata War was never a fair fight; 5 against more than 100.


If Krishna would have participated we wouldn't have received the learning of Srimad Bhagavad Gita. God has his way of teaching. "He will only show you the way, you have to walk it on your own" - That's the first lesson, if I remember correctly. How could he have given this lesson if he would have actively participated in the war?

  • 1
    no, we cannot say that kurushethra war was a dharmayudh – Akash. B May 10 '18 at 13:15
  • I updated my answer. You were correct, I apologize. – Devang May 10 '18 at 13:18
  • 1
    no need to apologize we will make some mistakes ,it is the laws of nature – Akash. B May 10 '18 at 13:24
  • 1
    Kurukshetra war was a Dharmayudhdha because Krishna indirectly participated in it. What if he actively participated in it? – Ravi Hirani May 10 '18 at 14:24
  • @RaviHirani, Whether "Kurukshetra war was a Dharmayudhdha" is different question. I am not sure if it has exact answer. "What if he actively participated in it?" - War would have completed on its first day or rather in a second. Nobody stand a chance in front of god. I have update my answer. please update your question as well. It looks good if answer and question are with correct details. – Devang May 10 '18 at 14:50

You must log in to answer this question.

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