12

I have read the Mahabharata and it seems that unrighteous behaviour or adharma is followed by Krishna in many places, but most people do not care about Krishna's character/behaviour and righteousness, because he is a god. I know that Duryodhana and his colleagues should have been killed because of their character plot, but how can people say that Krishna is good-God (one with righteous behaviour), and follows dharma? Shouldn't He be called 'adharma' God?

EDIT:

I have listed below few instances of inappropriate behaviour of Krishna.

The characters mentioned below were killed not as per rule/tradition/dharma, and all of it was planned by Krishna.

  1. Killing of Jarasandha
  2. Killing of Drona
  3. Killing of Karna
  4. Killing of Bhisma
  5. Killing of Duryodhana
13
  • 11
    what 'adharma' are you talking about? sometimes when you don't read the entire story, and watch TV serials and movies, you get a wrong opinion about a person. Upon reading the entire Mahabharata it should be better to understand about the various leelas of Lord Sri Krishna
    – Sai
    Jul 6 '15 at 14:32
  • 1
    @Sai No, i wouldn't accept that, a good person is always a good person whether you read entire story or a part of story, for eg: take Yudhisthira, you read any part of his character i see most(99%) of the times he is good, but not in case of krishna.
    – Arasu
    Jul 13 '15 at 4:34
  • 7
    Here is an example, suppose a man kills another man in front of your eyes. You would conclude that that man is a villain. isn't it? But then later on you learn that the first man is a military officer and the second man is a terrorist. You learn that the second man was about to kill you, the first man stopped the terrorist and killed him in the process. After learning about that story you would now conclude that the first man is a real Army Hero! Similarly read the entire story to understand about the God Lord Krishna. All the best
    – Sai
    Jul 13 '15 at 14:09
  • 1
    Ok I understand your feeling, there is an explanation for every action of Sri Krishna. if you want to know the truth, then please list down in your question, what all incidents that you want explanation, and you may get it.
    – Sai
    Jul 14 '15 at 16:39
  • 4
    @AnshumanChandel Rama was fully justified in killing Vali the way he did, and even Vali ultimately agreed with that; see my answer here: hinduism.stackexchange.com/a/246/36 And the reason Lakshmana cut off Surpanakha's nose is that Surpanakha threatened to eat Sita. Also, Surpanakha's motivation for telling Ravana about Sita was revenge, but Ravana wasn't motivated by revenge, he was motivated by the fact that Sita was a beautiful woman. Also, see my answer here for why he never tried to touch her: hinduism.stackexchange.com/a/939/36 It was purely out of self-interest. Jul 17 '15 at 15:06
3

Cheating and Deception by lord krishna

Main aim of lord Krishna birth on earth was to remove evil, destroy evil souls and restore peace and Dharma (Virtue). He also wanted to give a message to the world that “Those who are on the path of truth and dharma will achieve victory”. He also said he wouldn’t hesitate or even flicker to do anything to save dharma (virtue). So, he may even resort to deception or trickery if there is no other choice to win over the evil souls. Lord Krishna clearly states in the Mahabharata that committing a sin for the purpose of Dharma is not a sin at all. So let us see the various events where he backed trickery and deception, to win over his evil enemy.

Killing jarasandh by inviting him in malla-yudha Jarasandh was so powerful and he had so many boons that killing him was not possible without his body being teared apart into two pieces and thrown in opposite direction. So, lord Krishna along with bhima and arjuna disguised themselves as a Brahmin and challenged jarasandh for malla-yudha. Jarasandh unaware of their real identity accepted the challenge and later, was defeated and killed by Bhima( the strongest person of that time) who teared his body vertically in to two pieces and threw it in opposite direction

Arjuna used shikandi as a bait to injure bhisma heavily. It was impossible for anyone to kill bhisma pitamah in war.Bhisma pitamah has taken the oath of not attacking any women. So, lord Krishna advised arjuna to use shikandi (Originally female, Converted to male) as a bait to kill bhisma. Using Sikhandhi as a protective shield, Arjuna shot many arrows at Bhishma pitamah, piercing all parts of his body. Finally, Bhishma gave up, focusing his entire strength and breath in sealing the injury, and holding on his life till the right time comes to give up his material body. By killing bhisma through arjuna, Krishna was trying to send a message that to protect dharma, there is no sin in going against our family or friend, either by hook or by crook.

Using ghatotkach as a trap to save arjuna Lord Krishna knew that arjuna rival karna, has the powerful weapon (Vasava Shakti) to kill arjuna. To save arjuna, he asked ghatotkach to attack duryodhana so severly that karna is forced to use that powerful weapon on him and hence, arjuna is saved from that powerful weapon. Ghatotkach did as lord Krishna requested and gave up his life to save arjuna life...

Death of dronacharya krishna comprehended that It was impossible to defeat Dronacharya as long as he stand in the battle with bow and powerful arrows in his hands. Krishna knew that Ashwatthama is very dear to Drona. So, Krishna advised Yudistra and other Pandavas to deceptively convince dronarcharya that his son Ashwatthama died on the battlefield. This will deject Dronacharya so much that he would give up fighting laying down all his weapons and this would be the time to kill him easily. So,Krishna ordered Bhima to kill an elephant named Ashwatthama and start shouting that he decapitated Drona's son Ashwatthama. Bhima did exactly as lord Krishna advised and then started proclaiming loudly that he had killed Ashwathama. Not believing bhima words, drona approached yudhistra since he knew that Yudhisthira being a strict follower of dharma would never lie.So he came towards Yudhisthira and asked him if the news of his son by bhima is trueYudhisthira replied with the cryptic Sanskrit statement "Ashwathama hataha ithi, narovaa kunjarovaa" (Sanskrit: "अश्वत्थामा हतः इति, नरोवा कुंजरोवा..." meaning 'Ashwatthama is dead. But, I am not sure if it was a elephant or an human'). Krishna knew that being a dharmic person, Yudhisthira will not lie straightly. So on his order,warriors of Pandavas army blew conches and trumpets, raising such a tumultuous sound that Drona heard only "Ashwatthama is dead", and was unable to hear the latter part of Yudhishthira words. on hearing yudhistra words, drona believe his son is dead. So, he laid down his arms after descending from his chariot. Slosing his eyes, he sat in meditation to search Ashwathamma's soul in heaven. Seeing the opportunity to kill rival drona, Drupada's son Dhristadyumna beheaded the unarmed Drona who was unaware of all the deceptive plot laid against him.

Death of jayadratha Jayadrath was given the boon by his father that the one who be head his head, will burn into ashes when his head falls on earth. To take revenge of his son death, arjuna took the oath of killing jayadrath before sunset and if he is unable to kill jayadrath then he will burn himself in fire. Hearing this oath, Dronacharya created combination of 3 layers (vyoohas) to protect Jayadratha from Arjuna. At a moment when the sun was about to set and still thousands of warriors were standing on the path or Arjuna and Jayadratha. Krishna realised that Arjuna would not be able to defeat Jayadratha before sunset. So, he secretly ordered his Sudarshana Chakra to mask the sun to create an false illusion of sunset by artificially creating a solar eclipse. Seeing sunset, all Kaurava warriors started enjoying over Arjuna's defeat and were waiting to see arjuna committing suicide. Jayadratha started laughing at arjuna's situation and came towards him to mock him. When jayadrath reached within the grasp of arjuna arrow, Krishna revoked the illusive sunset by bringing back his sudharshan chakra. When sun was unmasked, lord krishna informed arjuna that sun has not set and pointing his finger towards Jayadratha, krishna asked arjuna to kill him immediately. Arjuna release a powerful arrow in such a way that the beheaded head of Jayadrath fell on Vridakshatra(Jayadrath father) lap who was meditating under the tree close to the battlefield. In shock of what fell on his lap, Vridhakshtra got up which made the head fall on the ground which resulted in bursting his head into 100 pieces.

Death of karna It was impossible to defeat karna as long as he is standing on his chariot and he has weapon on his hands. During the war, arjuna fired a bow on karna chariot which caused his chariot to stuck deep inside the earth. Not able to fight war, Karna went down to remove his chariot out of the earth. Seeing karna weaponless and out of his chariot, lord krishna ordered arjuna to kill him instantly. Arjuna beheaded karna by firing a powerful arrow on karna neck, thus killing him. Although arjuna managed to killed karna , he was later termed as a coward because attacking a weaponless warrior was against the rule of the war.

Death of duryodhan When almost all the warriors of kaurava army were dead, Yudhisthira challenged duryodhan to fight one-to-one against any of the pandavas with a option of selecting any weapon of his like. He further says that if he defeats any of his Pandava brother, then Duryodhana shall be declared as the winner of the war. Duryodhana selects his biggest rival 'bhima' over other pandavas whom he would have defeated very easily because of his magnificient mace fighting skills. Both were trained in mace fighting and wrestling by lord krishna brother 'balaram' and had exceptional physical and mental strength. After a long fiercing battle extending for many hours, Duryodhana starts to exhaust Bhima. Seeing the plight of bhima, Krishna signals Bhima to attack duryodhana thigh, by slapping his own hand on his thigh repeatedly. Bhima followed lord krishna suggestion and attacked Duryodhana thigh repeatedly with a mace thus causing duryodhana severly wounded and hence defeated. Here, bhima was also called as a cheater since attacking on areas below one’s stomach is against the ruleof mace fight.

Why did Krishna use deceptive technique to kill kaurava warriors?


  1. We can’t blame Krishna, Arjuna for using lame technicalities to win battles. Karna, Bheeshma, Drona - each of these warriors was more than enough to beat Arjuna and the rest of the Pandavas single handedly. But since Dharma had to be upheld, Krishna had to resort to certain tactics to ensure Pandavas victory. Without Krishna and his tactics, Bheeshma himself would have destroyed the entire Pandava army
  2. krishna in gita says to arjuna. All these warriors are already dead. Their heads are already cut off by me. Your job is to only get the fame. If not you then someone else will do that because there is no choice, as they all r already dead. Many times he reminds arjuna ''you fight & leave the result on me, your duty is to fight, leave the result for me ''.Mahabharata war was fought by krishna alone, pandavas were just like pawns of chess
  3. Krishna was accountable for the death of all warriors. Actually, lord krishna wanted this war to happen so that he can end a Yuga with his death and start the new yuga i.e Kali Yuga.
  4. He wanted to show that karma(Actions) should be higher significance than janma (Birth). During the last rituals of pandavas brother Karna, he supported Duryodhan instead of Pandavas. Karna the Pandavas brother, yet Lord Krishna suggested that Duryodhan should perform the last rites since Karna was more dearer to duryodhan than his brothers. According to janma(birth), Pandavas should perform the final rites but according to karma, Duryodhan's, being the dear friend of karna, had to perform the final rites.
  5. Gandhari(Duryodhan's mother) cursed krishna that his whole clan will be destroyed. Actually, this curse was the will of lord Krishna because he wanted to free the earth from too much burden of ksatriyas out of which his clan (Yadavas) were almost 56 crores. Source
1
  • I think Karna had only once to use Vasava Shakti weapon that's why even if Duryodhana asked to use this weapon he did not later Duryodhana asked he need Arjuna's death or Duryodhana's death since he couldn't bear this he had to use this weapon. So he used it to kill Ghatotkach. That's why he could not use again. This Krishna also knew this.
    – Nagarjun
    Jul 11 '16 at 12:25
9

God is both good and bad. Swami Vivekananda says (Complete Works V6 pp 116-117):

In the same man the mother sees a son, while the wife at the same time sees differently with different results. The wicked see in God wickedness. The virtuous see in Him virtue. He admits of all forms. He can be moulded according to the imagination of each person. Water assumes various shapes in various vessels. But water is in all of them. Hence all religions are true.

God is cruel and not cruel. He is all being and not being at the same time. Hence He is all contradictions. Nature also is nothing but a mass of contradictions.

We see our own self when we look at our visions of God. Pray that you no longer see wickedness and only virtue.

8
  • 2
    Hi @Swami, What i learnt is see bad as bad, virtue as virtue it should not be corrupted with other things, When i see Yudhisthira i see truth but when i see krishna i myself cannot accept him, i don't want to picture him as god and accept it whatever he does. He cannot even be compared with Yudhisthira, how could i say/accept him as god. What i am expecting is, there should be solid reason for all the betrayals of what krishna did. Moreover, if accept him without knowing the reason, then it is wickedness, isn't it?
    – Arasu
    Jul 14 '15 at 4:12
  • 3
    @Arasu- You have a already pre determined thought about Lord Krishna. So, any amount of proofs and validations will not help until you are flexible enough to accept the facts. How do you reconcile the fact Duryodhana, Dushyasana, Shakuni and Karna who outraged the modesty of an Women as virtuous? How is Karna great? Instead of stopping a war, duryodhana wanted a war and he wasnt interested giving 5 small villages to pamdavas and Lord Krishna pleaded with Duryodhana to stop the blood thristy war. Now, instead you choose to criticize Lord Krishna.
    – user808
    Jul 16 '15 at 11:03
  • @Krishna I never wanted to criticize Duriyodhana or karna because they are not god and they did bad and they got what they should (bad name), that is fact, and i accept it, but why i am criticizing krishna is because he is god and is a god of saver, but not upto his name(god of saver). If you say that i have determined thought about krishna, then whats wrong if i say, you have determined thought about krishna as god.
    – Arasu
    Jul 24 '15 at 3:59
  • @Arasu - Then i would say you neither have read nor understood Vyasa Mahabharata and Srimad Bhagavatham properly. That is the only conclusion from your childish reasoning which are surely pre concocted, pre determined. So, What do you want some thing similar to the myth of Jesus, who is portrayed by his followers as someone, who sacrificed his life. Because, your question is pre assuming that you are interested in portraying Lord Krishna in bad light?
    – user808
    Jul 24 '15 at 5:42
  • @Arasu -Request you please read Srimad Bhagavatham,( dasama skandha/tenth chapter) or Vishnu Purana to know more about Krishna, if you cannot read Mahabharata original. Please dont depend or base your views on some foolish serials and movies.
    – user808
    Jul 24 '15 at 5:43
6

The planning that went into and the actions of killing Bhishma, Jayadratha, Drona and others you've listed, may although seem unfair at times, they are in fact perfectly dhārmic actions. Speaking on the topic of truth, keeping one's promises, dharma and adharma, Sri Krishna says the following to Arjuna in Karna Parva of the Mahabharata:

One who speaks truth is righteous. There is nothing higher than truth.

Behold, however, truth as practised is exceedingly difficult to be understood as regards its essential attributes.

Truth may be unutterable, and even falsehood may be utterable where falsehood would become truth and truth would become falsehood.

In a situation of peril to life and in marriage, falsehood becomes utterable.

In a situation involving the loss of one's entire property, falsehood becomes utterable.

...

He is a fool that practices truth without knowing the difference between truth and falsehood.

One is said to be conversant with morality when one is able to distinguish between truth and falsehood.

When Drona and Bhishma were fighting to their fullest extent, and there was no way to beat them in combat, it was imperative for the Pandavas to save themselves and their armies at any cost. So even if Krishna were to break his own vow and take up arms in the Kurukshetra war, that would've been fine as well!

To illustrate what he just said, Krishna goes on to tell Arjuna the stories of Valāka, the hunter and Kaushika, the ever truth-speaking ascetic.

  1. Valāka hunts deer and other animals for the sole purpose of feeding his family. He's always truthful, duty-bound and serves his family well. It so happens that one day he fails to make even a single hunt, but at last finds a blind animal drinking water by the river. Showing no mercy to the blind creature, Valāka slays it. The animal is actually a beast that preys on other animals using its smell. The beast was meant to be killed and the Gods reward Valāka by sending a celestial chariot so that he can ascend to heaven.

    That beast of prey, having undergone ascetic austerities, had obtained a boon and had become the cause of the destruction of all creatures. For this reason he was made blind by the Self-born [Brahma]. Having slain that animal which had resolved to slay all creatures, Valāka went to heaven. Morality is even so difficult of being understood.

  2. The second story is that of Kaushika, an ascetic who has taken the vow to always speak the truth. He quickly became famous due to that fact. However, he isn't one with expertise in scriptures. One day, a group of people, being chased by robbers, ran from the front of his house into the woods. When robbers inquired the whereabouts of those people, Kaushika being very truthful, points them exactly which way the people went. The robbers then proceed in that direction, search out all those people and end up robbing and killing them. Since Kaushika was partly responsible for the death of innocent people at the hands of cruel robbers, he goes to hell.

    In consequence of that great sin consisting in the words spoken, Kausika, ignorant of the subtilities of morality, fell into a grievous hell, even as a foolish man, of little knowledge, and unacquainted with the distinctions of morality, falleth into painful hell by not having asked persons of age for the solution of his doubts.

Krishna concludes his lecture to Arjuna with the following:

...the scriptures indicate morality. I do not contradict this. The scriptures, however, do not provide for every case. For the growth of creatures have precepts of morality been declared. That which is connected with inoffensiveness is religion. Dharma protects and preserves the people. So it is the conclusion of the Pandits that what maintains is Dharma. O Partha, I have narrated to you the signs and indications of Dharma.

2
  • Fantastic!! Why is this answer not yet upvoted? For me, it's so easy to upvote any Q&A, but I feel this answer deserves every upvote from all those self appointed perfectionist who hardly vote. :-)
    – iammilind
    Mar 4 '16 at 1:37
  • This is really a very great answer. I upvoted
    – user17294
    Mar 12 '19 at 14:51
4

What I think on this is reason behind the birth of Krishna is due to sadness about the Karma. Let's consider for some moment that Krishna is not God. But I strongly think that he needs to be come on Earth. Because of Dharma? No! If you see around Mahabharata then you find that there are many people who strongly follow Dharma like Bhisma, Yudhisthira, and many others. Plus they were pillar of dharma at that time, then why we need Krishna? We need Krishna because these all are just talking about what Dharma say and so on but they were step-back from Karma.

Krishna is consider as god because he give priority to Karma than Dharma which is more important. If Krishna also live based on Dharma then there were rule of Kauravas and we never know about Pandvas. Karma Is more important than Dharma.

I also want to include one small story from Swami Dayanandji's life:

One person asked to Swami: If mosquito bite me then should I have to hit it? Swami: Definitely! Person: What you say! You are telling me to hurt Jiva and this is seen. Swami: I Hate this type of dumb people who wear clothes of non-violence because they are not brave enough to challenge it.

Plus just want mention that, Krishna knew 16 type of sadhna for samdhi. If person know only one way and get to the point of samadhi he come to the place god, then what you say about the person who know 16 ways!

3

When you are in the fight/war with someone, you do not have have to only protect Dharma but you also have to protect people who you feel are righteous. I agree carrying out Dharma is is important but you also have to see the cost of it. If Lord Krishna haven't helped Pandavas in unusual ways then they couldn't have won. May be they all could have been killed and then unrighteous people like Duryodhana would have ruled. So, instead of letting this happen Lord choose to getting things done even by Adharma.

Also, if you know that your enemy has got special powers, so he is no way equal to the other one and has definitely got an upper hand. Now, how will you defeat/kill the one who has got special powers. There are only 2 ways either you increase your power or you decrease other's powers. If we take the 1st case then Pandavas did that already, they were God's sons, Bheem and Arjuna were extra-ordinary talents in case or power or archery, on top of that they even had got several boons and divine weapons, etc. but even after having it all they couldn't kill their opponents as they had special boons with them like in case of Jarasandha, Jayadratha, Karna, Bheeshma or even Duryodhana in the end. If they remain alive then Pandavas could not win and and Dharma cannot be established. So, the latter approach was taken, ie, to reduce the powers of the opponent. Now, a power cannot be directly taken away, so some sort of faking things was necessary.

Also, please bear in mind, Jarasandha attacked Mathura 17 times and was defeated by Lord Krishna and everytime he was forgiven. He could have been killed but Lord gave him chances so that he can change but he didn't. Karna was told that by killing Ghatotkatcha, he has fulfilled his duties towards Duryodhana's friendship and he do not owe anything now but still he fought again for Duryodhana. Bheeshma has got the boon of 'Ichchamrityu' and also Amba had got boon of being the reason for Bheeshma's death, so by bringing in Shikhandi(rebirth of Amba), both of these boons can be settled. Similarly, fate of Drona was also predecided, that he will be killed by Drishtadyumna, who was born with the same reason. (ie, Drupad did a yagna for getting a son who could kill Drona and Drishtadyumna was born out of the Yagna fire). Finally, Duryodhana was about to get the boon of having a harmless body and Lord Krishna tricked him to cover his thighs and genital area. Just compare this to the incident of Ramayana, where Kumbhakarna was about to ask for Indrasan and Gods tricked him to say that he wanted to sleep. Hadn't it be wrong if Kumbhakarna had asked correctly and he would got that. Similar is the case here, if Duryodhana cannot be killed battle couldn't have been won, and if Duryodhana had won then Dharma wouldn't be established.

Also, one thing I wanted to ask, what personal profit had Lord Krishna got out of doing all this. Nothing. Whatever, he did the profit of that was for Pandavas not Him. On the contrary, he lost his own army which he had given to Kauravas and more important than that he got a curse from Gandhari, about the destruction of his clan.

So, if you see on higher level, all this mainly happened in order to settle the boons and curses and mainly for establishment of Dharma.

Note: Sorry I couldn't cite any sources here as I don't know where the exact text is written.

1
  • Good answer. But Jarasandha story doesn't seem right. He was not defeated, rather he was prevented from winning Mathura. Allowing Jarasandha to attack Mathura multiple times was to kill his armymen to reduce bad people from earth. His army was so powerful that it couldn't have been defeated by Mathura+Pandava army. That's why Lord Krishna took back door entry along with Bheema and Arjuna.
    – iammilind
    Aug 5 '15 at 16:54
1

Krishna is normal human with great powers.

I respect him. I see that when i asked, Krishna is good or bad. Everyone seems to tell that i have a bad thought, i am criticzing krishna, why dont you take the good things of krishna and all. I don't accepted those because i believe if he is god(escpecially god of life saver), then he should save people, even he can kill people(to save people) in a right manner, which i don't see in Mahabharatha.

For all the bad things done by krishna, he has been punished. not just krishna but everyone.

From Ramayana Lord Krishna said to have died because of the unintentional action of a hunter, who stuck an arrow in his toe, mistaking it to be a rabbit, as a consequences of his own act of killing Vaali from behind a tree in a deceptive manner in his previous incarnation as Lord Rama. Ref: Mausala Parva and here.

I consider that being Venkateswara, is the punishment for his behaviour in Mahabharatha. I think it should be.

That is KARMA, which never forgets your good and bad deeds, and everyone will reep of their own behaviour. There is no escape, Everyone has to go through KARMA, lord himself.

Knowing this, Should i consider Krishna good or bad?, He is both good and bad. whatever he is, KARMA which drives things. People don't cares about Krishna misthings but KARMA does.

For this question Vishwanandha said God is both good and bad but this just not withstand the point, since i described krishna followed adharma and there is not cross verification on adharma.

3
  • 1
    @Arasu -You say "From Ramayana Lord Krishna himself said to have died because of the unintentional action of a hunter..". Which Ramayana it is mentioned. Could you shed some light on this new Ramayana you are talking about. Read the Mahabharata of Vyasa wherein Krushna says that he can repulse the curse of Gandhari, but out of his own voilition Krishna accepts the destruction of Yadavas. Also, read that after being hit by arrow of Jara, Krishna doesnt die like mortals. Mahabharata and Srimad Bhagavatham explains clearly who he concluded his avatara.
    – user808
    Jul 24 '15 at 13:06
  • @Arasu - For analogy, this is like someone advocating a theory that people who sentence rapists, terrorists, womanisers for capital punishment as bad, on the pretext that because someone is in high position should protect lives and not advocate killing. By, giving punishments to these incorrible offenders, God is saving lakhs of other innocent people.
    – user808
    Jul 24 '15 at 13:12
  • You should cite sources. Answers on this site should be backed up with sources (preferably scripture); they shouldn't just be your own opinion or speculation. Jul 24 '15 at 14:30
0

What is good or bad??

In life when we deal with a situation efficiently we call it good handling, if we fail to do so we call it bad. For e.g. Yudhisthira's behaviour was forgetful and selfless he was efficient in handling situations like with Yaksha. While Duryodhana's Behaviour was full of greed and selfishness he had no respsect for his elder brother Yudhisthira nor even for Lord Krishna(his only intrest was his narayani Sena of 100 million solders).

Lord Krishna is known as Yogeshwara the god of yoga, because he re-propagated the Veda Sara (essence of Vedic Knowledge/Yoga) in the form of Shrimad Bhagwad-Gita.

Now As he is God of Yoga himself and as a yogi, he must follow path of yoga at every point of his life, in every decision of his life.

The question arises

1) What is Yoga?

2) What is Path of Yoga?

What is Yoga

According to Lord Maharishi Patanjali Yoga is as follows

योगशचित्तव्रुत्तिनिरोध:

Quietning of mind is yoga When we stop (ignore/pause/remove) Vritti's forming in our chitta it is called Yoga/Quitening of mind.

Vrittis ignored,paused stopped removed depend on the amount of practice done and the state in which you are placed, when you attain Samadhi the vrittis are stopped from chitta.

More on Chitta

So In other words when we stop disturbances inside us we see our true self i.e atman or soul, as manifestation of Bramhan krishna naturally possessed such qualities.So Krishna Did everything that was appropriate in his situation without getting influenced by either his mind or external aspects, So before questioning Krishna we have to become a yogi with cessation of vritti's and then get the answers to the question.

But as for now while you are asking specifically for some points I will highlight some situations for you to analyse.

Jarasandha was killed by bhima because that was his prarabdha no one not even Krishna could kill although he had all the powers because he had respect Divine law of Karma and followed like a normal Human Being. If you say killing of Jarasandha was unrighteous, then he killed so many people in war 17 times with yadava's just to take revenge of kansa's killing. He also abducted 95 kings forcibly for a sacrifice/Yagna that could disturb a massive population at that time to avoid this krishna had no choice but to kill him.
Death of Jarasandha

Dronacharya was killed because he was alongside Duryodhana and was one of the biggest obstacle in killing of Duryodhana or ending the unrighteous side, and it is said that one who is on unrighteous side is equally unrighteous, so killing was mandatory and in favour of Dharma or righteousness. [Also due to Eklavya episode dronacharya had grown bad karma for him]. Most Importantly he was nearly immortal and to avoid breaking of natural laws his death was very important. More on Dronacharya Karana was similar obstacle as Dronacharya was because he was standing alongside Duryodhana knowing that he was on wrong or unrighteous side.

Bhishma was similar to Dronacharya as he was immortal, and due to his vow he had to stand in the way of Dharma.

Duryodhana had done so much Adharma that due to him and shakuni even good people like Karna, Bhishma, etc were killed, and sparing him would mean allowing the torture to pandavas and other people. Also Duryodhana Wanted Throne of Hastinapur and Indraprastha as well which would mean giving the power in hands of undeserving one while Yudhishtira was more than eligible he was Ideal for throne.

Although Duryodhana was dying Lord Krishna didn't hate him he answered all his questions pleasantly when no one can understand him, this tells us he was unaffected by the external factors and was helpful to even duryodhana until his time to death

More on Duryodhana

14
  • Yes, Duryodhana and others were bad and they should be killed. Thanks for taking time to a brief the understanding.
    – Arasu
    Aug 6 '15 at 4:10
  • 1
    @Yogi - Ekalavya himself was killed by krishna. Moreover, though dronacharya asked ekalavya to provide his thumb as gurudakshina, i remember reading in one of mahabharata editions that drona gave astras to ekalavya after testing him. So, no bad karma etc was accrued by drona.
    – user808
    Aug 6 '15 at 9:33
  • @Krishna - Why was eklavya killed by krishna?? and moreover Dronacharya had bad karma when he rejected Karna due to his caste irrespective of his hidden talent.
    – Yogi
    Aug 6 '15 at 10:20
  • @Yogi The story that I've always heard is that since the Nishada's were loyal to Jaradandha, when Jarasandha died Ekalavya went to attack Dwaraka in order to take revenge on Krishna, and Krishna killed him. But I'm not sure what scripture describes it. The Udyoga Parva of the Mahabharta mentions Krishna killing him: sacred-texts.com/hin/m05/m05048.htm "Ekalavya, the king of the Nishadas, always used to challenge this one to battle; but slain by Krishna he lay dead like the Asura Jambha violently thrashed on a hillock." Aug 6 '15 at 23:46
  • 1
    @Yogi - Also, how do you say that Ekalavya and Karna were qualified? Also, remember both Ekalavya and Karna merely out of competition wanted to defeat Arjuna. It is due this hatred and competition and not genuine interest in gainimg knowledge that these two were worsted in battles
    – user808
    Aug 7 '15 at 12:07
0

Krishna is good.

In Shalya Parva,Yudhisthira was in grief as to how he will behold the wives of Kauravas.

https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m09/m09059.htm

"It is we that deserve to be pitied in every respect, O Kaurava! We shall have to drag on a miserable existence, bereft of all our dear friends and kinsmen. Alas, how shall I behold the widows, overwhelmed with grief and deprived of their senses by sorrow, of my brothers and sons and grandsons! ..... We, on the other hand, shall be reckoned as creatures of hell, and shall continue to suffer the most poignant grief! The grief-afflicted wives of Dhritarashtra's sons and grandsons, those widows crushed with sorrow, will without doubt, curse us all!"

Duryodhana also abused Krishna about his actions during Mahabharat.

Sitting on his haunches and supporting himself on his two arms, he contracted his eyebrows and cast angry glances at Vasudeva. The form then of Duryodhana whose body was half raised looked like that of a poisonous snake, O Bharata, shorn of its tail. Disregarding his poignant and unbearable pains, Duryodhana began to afflict Vasudeva with keen and bitter words, "O son of Kansa's slave, thou hast, it seems, no shame, for hast thou forgotten that I have been struck down most unfairly, judged by the rules that prevail in encounters with the mace? It was thou who unfairly caused this act by reminding Bhima with a hint about the breaking of my thighs! Dost thou think I did not mark it when Arjuna (acting under thy advice) hinted it to Bhima? Having caused thousands of kings, who always fought fairly, to be slain through diverse kinds of unfair means, feelest thou no shame or no abhorrence for those acts? Day after day having caused a great carnage of heroic warriors, thou causedst the grandsire to be slain by placing Shikhandi to the fore! Having again caused an elephant of the name of Ashvatthama to be slain, O thou of wicked understanding, thou causedst the preceptor to lay aside his weapons. Thinkest thou that this is not known to me! While again that valiant hero was about to be slain this cruel Dhrishtadyumna, thou didst not dissuade the latter! The dart that had been begged (of Shakra as a boon) by Karna for the slaughter of Arjuna was baffled by thee through Ghatotkacha! Who is there that is more sinful than thou? Similarly, the mighty Bhurishrava, with one of his arms lopped off and while observant of the Praya vow, was caused to be slain by thee through the agency of the high-souled Satyaki. Karna had done a great feat for vanquishing Partha. Thou, however, causedst Aswasena, the son of that prince of snakes (Takshaka), to be baffled in achieving his purpose! When again the wheel of Karna's car sank in mire and Karna was afflicted with calamity and almost vanquished on that account, when, indeed, that foremost of men became anxious to liberate his wheel, thou causedst that Karna to be then slain!

Duryodhana said that if his opponents fought himself, Karna, Bhishma, and Drona, victor would never have been his.

If ye had fought me and Karna and Bhishma and Drona by fair means, victory then, without doubt, would never have been yours. By adopting the most crooked and unrighteous of means thou hast caused many kings observant of the duties of their order and ourselves also to be slain!'

Krishna then told Duryodhana who is actually responsible so he defended himself.

"'Vasudeva said, "Thou, O son of Gandhari, hast been slain with thy brothers, sons, kinsmen, friends, and followers, only in consequence of the sinful path in which thou hast trod! Through thy evil acts those two heroes, Bhishma and Drona, have been slain! Karna too hath been slain for having imitated thy behaviour! Solicited by me, O fool, thou didst not, from avarice, give the Pandavas their paternal share, acting according to the counsels of Shakuni! Thou gavest poison to Bhimasena! Thou hadst, also, O thou of wicked understanding, endeavoured to burn all the Pandavas with their mother at the palace of lac! On the occasion also of the gambling, thou hadst persecuted the daughter of Yajnasena, while in her season, in the midst of the assembly! Shameless as thou art, even then thou becamest worthy of being slain! Thou hadst, through Subala's son well-versed in dice, unfairly vanquished the virtuous Yudhishthira who was unskilled in gambling! For that art thou slain! Through the sinful Jayadratha again, Krishna was on another occasion persecuted when the Pandavas, her lords, had gone out hunting towards the hermitage of Trinavindu! Causing Abhimanyu, who was a child and alone, to be surrounded by many, thou didst slay that hero. It is in consequence of that fault, O sinful wretch, that thou art slain! All those unrighteous acts that thou sayest have been perpetrated by us, have in reality been perpetrated by thee in consequence of thy sinful nature! Thou didst never listen to the counsels of Brihaspati and Usanas! Thou didst never wait upon the old! Thou didst never hear beneficial words! Enslaved by ungovernable covetousness and thirst of gain, thou didst perpetrate many unrighteous acts! Bear now the consequences of those acts of thine!"

Duryodhana later boasts himself and how he enjoyed earth.

"Duryodhana said, "I have studied, made presents according to the ordinance, governed the wide Earth with her seas, and stood over the heads of my foes! Who is there so fortunate as myself! That end again which is courted by Kshatriyas observant of the duties of their own order, death in battle, hath become mine. Who, therefore, is so fortunate as myself? Human enjoyments such as were worthy of the very gods and such as could with difficulty be obtained by other kings, had been mine. Prosperity of the very highest kind had been attained by me! Who then is so fortunate as myself? With all my well-wishers, and my younger brothers, I am going to heaven, O thou of unfading glory! As regards yourselves, with your purposes unachieved and torn by grief, live ye in this unhappy world!"'

A shower of flowers fell on Duryodhana which made Pandavas become sad.

Sanjaya continued, 'Upon the conclusion of these words of the intelligent king of the Kurus, a thick shower of fragrant flowers fell from the sky. The Gandharvas played upon many charming musical instruments. The Apsaras in a chorus sang the glory of king Duryodhana. The Siddhas uttered loud sound to the effect, "Praise be to king Duryodhana!" Fragrant and delicious breezes mildly blew on every side. All the quarters became clear and the firmament looked blue as the lapis lazuli. Beholding these exceedingly wonderful things and this worship offered to Duryodhana, the Pandavas headed by Vasudeva became ashamed. Hearing (invisible beings cry out) that Bhishma and Drona and Karna and Bhurishrava were slain unrighteously, they became afflicted with grief and wept in sorrow.

This is where Krishna, in a deep voice defends himself.

Beholding the Pandavas filled with anxiety and grief, Krishna addressed them in a voice deep as that of the clouds or the drum, saying, "All of them were great car-warriors and exceedingly quick in the use of weapons! If ye had put forth all your prowess, even then ye could never have slain them in battle by fighting fairly! King Duryodhana also could never be slain in a fair encounter! The same is the case with all those mighty car-warriors headed by Bhishma! From desire of doing good to you, I repeatedly applied my powers of illusion and caused them to be slain by diverse means in battle. If I had not adopted such deceitful ways in battle, victory would never have been yours, nor kingdom, nor wealth! Those four were very high-souled warriors and regarded as Atirathas in the world. The very Regents of the Earth could not slay them in fair fight! Similarly, the son of Dhritarashtra, though fatigued when armed with the mace, could not be slain in fair fight by Yama himself armed with his bludgeon!

He later consoles them and told how even the gods trod in the same way.

You should not take it to heart that this foe of yours hath been slain deceitfully. When the number of one's foes becomes great, then destruction should be effected by contrivances and means. The gods themselves, in slaying the Asuras, have trod the same way. That way, therefore, that hath been trod by the gods, may be trod by all. We have been crowned with success.

Krishna also, adviced Duryodhana for peace.

https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m05/m05128.htm

Having, like a heartless fellow, done innumerable wrongs to the Pandavas and behaved so deceitfully towards them, thou seekest now to appear in a different garb. Though repeatedly solicited by thy parents, by Bhishma, Drona, and Vidura, to make peace, thou dost not yet, O king, make peace. Great is the advantage in peace, O king, both to thyself and Yudhishthira. Peace, however, does not recommend itself to thee. To what else can it be due, but to thy loss of understanding? Transgressing the words of thy friends, thou canst never attain to what is for thy benefit. Sinful and disreputable is that act, which thou, O king, art about to do.'

Krishna blamed the elders of Kurus for not binding Duryodhana which is true.

Hearing these words of Bhishma, the lotus-eyed hero of Dasarha's race, possessed of great powers, addressing all those (that were still there) headed by Bhishma and Drona, said, 'Even this is great transgression, of which all the elders of the Kuru race are becoming guilty, for they do not forcibly seize and bind this wicked king in the enjoyment of sovereignty. Ye chastiser of foes, I think the time hath come for doing this. If this is done, it may still be productive of good. Listen to me, ye sinless ones. The words I will speak will soon lead to beneficial results, if, indeed, ye Bharatas, ye accept what I say in consequence of its recommending itself to you. The wicked son, of ill-regulated soul, of the old Bhoja king, having usurped his father's sovereignty during the latter's life-time, subjected himself to death. Indeed, Kansa, the son of Ugrasena, abandoned by his relatives, was slain by me in a great encounter, from desire of benefiting my kinsmen. Ourselves with our kinsmen then, having paid due honours to Ugrasena, the son of Ahuka, installed that extender of Bhoja's kingdom on the throne. And all the Yadavas and Andhakas and the Vrishnis, abandoning a single person, viz., Kansa for the sake of their whole race, have prospered and obtained happiness.

Gandhari also thought that it was Krishna"s fault and cursed him.

https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m11/m11024.htm

"Gandhari said ... Since deliberately, O slayer of Madhu, thou wert indifferent to this universal carnage, therefore, O mighty-armed one, thou shouldst reap the fruit of this act. By the little merit I have acquired through waiting dutifully on my husband, by that merit so difficult to attain, I shall curse thee, O wielder of the discus and the mace! Since thou wert indifferent to the Kurus and the Pandavas whilst they slew each other, therefore, O Govinda, thou shalt be the slayer of thy own kinsmen! In the thirty-sixth year from this, O slayer of Madhu, thou shalt, after causing the slaughter of thy kinsmen and friends and sons, perish by disgusting means in the wilderness. The ladies of thy race, deprived of sons, kinsmen, and friends, shall weep and cry even as these ladies of the Bharata race!’"

Krishna said that it was Gandhari"s fault, not his fault.

"The holy one said, ‘Arise, arise, O Gandhari, do not set thy heart on grief! Through thy fault, this vast carnage has taken place! Thy son Duryodhana was wicked-souled, envious, and exceedingly arrogant. Applauding his wicked acts, thou regardest them to be good. Exceedingly cruel, he was the embodiment of hostilities, and disobedient to the injunctions of the old. Why dost thou wish to ascribe thy own faults to me? Dead or lost, the person that grieves for what has already occurred, obtaineth more grief. By indulging in grief, one increases it two-fold.

You must log in to answer this question.

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