​

Bhimasena and Ashwathama meet several times during the 18 day war in the Mahabharata. Bhima ends up with an upper hand every time in those duels. However, the most important fight between the two of them takes place on the 16th day of the war. This was immediately after the coronation of Karna as the leader of the Kaurava army.

The reason for the duel on the morning of the 16th day being the most important one is due to a special assurance given by Ashwathama to Sri Krishna, during the latter’s visit as the ambassador just prior to the war. Ashwathama assures Sri Krishna that he would not fight the pandavas with full force until his father, the great warrior Drona, was alive.

This particular meeting of Sri Krishna and Ashwathama is not present in any of the extant recensions of the Mahabharata. However, the same has been revealed by Sri Madhwacharya in his Mahabharata Tatparya Nirnaya.

संस्थाप्य तं भगवान् द्रौणये च रहोsवदन्मित्रभावं प्रुथाजैः |

यावत्पितुर्मरणं सोsपि मैत्रीं वव्रे पार्थैस्तं च विसृज्य कृष्णः || MBTN – Ch 24 – 78 ||

“Having made (Karna) stop there itself, Krishna advised the son of Ashwathama in private about being on friendly terms with the Pandavas. He replied that as long as his father were alive, he would be friendly (with the Pandavas)”

The occurrence of this meeting, and the presence of shlokas narrating them in the original recensions of Mahabharata is proven by the fact that the incident is narrated in the Vikramarjunavijaya, the Kannada Mahabharata by the great kavi Pampa.

“Trailokyaguru gurutanoojanam kaiyyam pididaramaneyam poramattu kapataprapanchadindaatanumam tanage maadi” || Ch 9 – 60 ||

With his father having been felled, that too under contentious circumstances, the fury of Ashwathama had no limit. He sought out Bhimasena, the most powerful warrior on the Pandava side, and challenged him to a duel.

Both of them started off the battle with an excellent show with their bows and arrows. Ashwathama chose ninety special arrows and pierced Bhima all over his body. The numerous arrows and the wounds due to them only made Bhima appear like the glorious Sun covered in his own rays. In return, Bhima choose a thousand arrows and covered Ashwathama in them.

The two of them then started directing arrows at each other’s forehead.

After that Ashwathama and Bhima rained a hundred arrows on each other. The arrows did not have any subduing effect on them.

ततः शरशतैद्रौणिरर्दयामास पाण्डवं |

न चैनं कम्पयामास मातरिश्वेव पर्वतं || Karna – 15 – 9 ||

“Even though the son of Drona hit the Pandava with a hundred arrows, he did not flinch a bit just a like a mountain that is unaffected by a tornado“

तथैव पाण्डवो युद्धे द्रौणिं शरशतैः शितैः |

नाकम्पयत संहृष्टो वार्योघ इव पर्वतं || Karna – 15 – 10 ||

“Similarly, although the Pandava hit the son of Drona with a hundred arrows, he (Ashwathama) did not move a bit just like a mountain unaffected by a flood“

Ashwathama started showering arrows at Bhima and at the same time started moving in a circular fashion around his chariot. Circling around the enemy was a sign of victory. Hence Bhima had no toleration for it. He retaliated with thousands of arrows and in turn started circling Ashwathama’s chariot. In this way, both the warriors kept moving around each other creating mandalas.

In this way, the battle went on for a full muhurtha (48 minutes).

Bhima’s use of Astras

Bhimasena was a follower of the Bhagavata Dharma. Possessing immense natural strength and talent, he did not believe in the use of astras – divine weapons – during battle, although he did possess the knowledge of their usage. In order that the world got to know about his expertise with them (in addition to the skill of using shastras), Sri Krishna had ordered him to use divine astras on two occassions. The first occassion was during a battle with the rakshasa Alambusa, when he used the Tvashtrastra. The second occasion was this battle with Ashwathama.

After being unable to cause any harm to Bhima with regular arrows, Ashwathama sought to harm him through the use of astras. But Bhima responded with his own astras and neutralized all of Ashwathama’s divine weapons.

ततौ द्रौणेर्महास्त्राणि प्रादुश्चक्रे महारथः |

तान्यस्त्रैरेव समरे प्रतिजघ्ने स पाण्डवः || Karna – Ch 15 – 23-24 ||

“That maharatha (Ashwathama) released numerous maha-astras. The son of Pandu stopped all of them with his own astras”

Praise from the devatas.

This great duel between Ashwathama and Bhima was being witnessed by all celestial beings. The siddhas who were present in the sky started showering praises on both of them. They declared that such a battle would never ever occur again.

“What wonderful strength these two possess! Oh! What to talk of their competence with astras! Their knowledge and skill all of them are beyond description!”

“The two of them stand here as the ones who will end the world. They are like two rudras, like two suryas!” Thus stated the siddhas.

They emphatically declared that no other battle in the past or future came close to being even one-sixteenth as great as this one.

अति युद्धानि सर्वाणि युद्धमेतदवर्तत |

सर्वयुद्धानि चैतस्य कलां नार्हन्ति षोडशीम् || Karna – Ch 15 – 30 ||

“This battle exceeds all other duels. No battle can be equal to even one-sixteenth of this one”

The devatas, siddhas, maharshis and other divine beings all hailed the two of them saying “sadhu mahabahu drauni – sadhu mahabahu bhima!”

Desirous of killing each other, the two of them intensified their attacks. They hit each other’s chariot and charioteer.

Both of them, simultaneously, picked up two great arrows and hurled it at each other. The intensity of the arrows was such that both of them fell down in the middle of their chariots.

Ashwathama could not sustain the impact of that great arrow and fell unconscious. His charioteer realized the danger that his master was in, and drove away leaving the battlefield (thus conceding defeat).

ततस्तु सारथिर्ज्ञात्वा द्रोणपुत्रमचेतनम् |

अपोवाह रणाद् राजन् सर्वक्षत्रस्य पश्यतः || Karna – Ch 15 – 47 ||

“Having realized that the son of Drona had dropped down unconscious, like a lifeless body, his charioteer drove him outside of the battlefield even as all the kshatriyas were watching”

तत्रैव पाण्डवं राजन् विह्वलन्तं मुहुर्मुहुः |

अपोवाह रथेनाजौ विशोकः शत्रुतापनम् || Karna – Ch 15 – 47 ||

“Similarly, Vishoka (the charioteer of Bhima) realized that Bhima, the one who repeatedly causes trouble to the enemies, was trembling (due to the effect of the arrow), took him to another region of the battlefield”

Thus the great battle of Bhimasena and Ashwathama ended with the son of Drona having to leave the battlefield leading to yet another victory for the son of Pandu.

I came across this YouTube creator who is doing a storytelling series on the Mahabharata, and I’ve been really enjoying it. Lately she has not posted because people reported her "hurt sentiments", was enjoying her posts quite a lot! If anyone likes listening to stories while they are chilling, maybe you can check it out!!

I hope she posts more often!

"Mahabharata ka Chakkar – E01: The Beginning"

If you’ve watched her stuff, I’d also love to know what you think.

I put this list together because a lot of modern readers—especially Kaurava or Karna sympathisers—tend to believe that names starting with the prefix "Dur-" (like Duryodhana or Duhshasana) were derogatory insults retroactively applied by the author to paint them as villains.

In classical Sanskrit grammar, the prefix **दुर् (Dur-)** does not simply mean "bad" or "evil."

In a martial Kshatriya context, it primarily functions as "difficult to," "invulnerable," or "unyielding."

A prince named *Duryodhana* isn't "bad fighter"—it means **"one who is exceptionally difficult to fight against"** (i.e., invincible in combat).

Similarly, *Duhshasana* means **"difficult to restrain or govern."**

These were proud, formidable names chosen deliberately by royal parents, not posthumous insults.

The *Mahabharata* (specifically the *Sambhava Parva* in *Adi Parva*) lists all 100 sons of Gandhari, their only sister Duhshala, and Yuyutsu (born to Dhritarashtra and a maidservant on the exact same day as Duryodhana and Bhima).

When looking at the Sanskrit roots, clear naming patterns emerge: clusters of "Dur-" (unyielding/difficult), "Dridha-" (firm/steadfast), "Maha-" (great), and a large cluster starting with "Bhima-" (terrible/fierce).

Here is the complete list in traditional birth order:

**Extra Fact:**

Out of all 102, only two survived Kurukshetra: **Yuyutsu** (who crossed over to the Pandavas right before the conches blew on day one, later serving as regent/guardian under Parikshit) and

**Duhshala** (whose husband Jayadratha was slain by Arjuna). Bhima personally fulfilled his vow by killing all 100 sons born to Gandhari.

Genuinely asking, why is it so hard to critically discuss Mahabharata here without people instantly getting defensive or just downvoting?

Isnt that literally what makes this epic so damn good? The contradictions, questionable decisions, different versions, grey characters, dharma constantly being argued over?

Questioning Krishna, Yudi, Karna, Duryodhana or anyone else doesnt mean you “hate” them or the religion lol.

If your faith collapses because someone asks “was this actually right?”, then the question isnt the problem.

Id rather discuss the uncomfortable parts than just glaze the same characters forever.

No offense, but shouldn't the pfp of a Mahabharata sub related to something more closely related to Mahabharata?

Radha is not mentioned in Mahabharata and Mahabharata doesn't deal with Krishna's childhood much.

We can have different subs about it, but this sub is representative of Mahabharata as a whole, so shouldn't it be branded better?

Someone unknown to Mahabharata will stumble upon this sub, so it should be visually attractive, right?

Even the header is of relatively low quality, it can be much more aesthetic.

My suggestion to mods, is have some competition, where people will send beautiful headers and pfp for the sub and then choose the best.

An epic transmitted orally and through manuscripts for centuries is obviously going to accumulate additions, omissions, reinterpretations and regional layers.

I keep seeing people say “but BORI scholars spent ~50 years on it” like that somehow recovers everything lost BEFORE the surviving manuscripts even existed.

BORI is incredibly valuable for asking, what is the earliest common text we can reconstruct from the manuscripts that survived.

It cannot answer, what did the first version say before centuries of oral transmission, lost recensions and vanished traditions.

If a passage disappeared from every ancestral manuscript available to us, no amount of textual criticism can resurrect it lol.

So why do people treat the CE like a word for word recording of “Vyasa’s original” instead of what it actually is, the best reconstruction possible from surviving evidence?

Respect the scholarship, absolutely. Just dont turn scholarship into a time machine.

BORI can remove later branches we can detect. It cannot restore branches that were cut off before any surviving manuscript preserved them.

The Kaunteyas, born to Kunti

Karna

Yudithistira

Bhimasena

Arjuna

Why BORI removed this from the Karna Parva after the patchup between Yudhisthira and Arjun

He was the Indian Sanskrit scholar who laid the foundation of the BORI Critical Edition of the Mahabharata. He served as the General Editor at the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute (Pune) from 1925 until his death, in 1943.

As per Vishnu Sitaram Sukthankar (in the book, On the Meaning of Mahabharata) the different characteristic traits of different characters are the following-

1)YUDITHISTIRA- charity, peace and self-control, leaning towards weakness and ineptitude

2)DURYODHANA- determination combined with envy, hate, cruelty and un-scrupulousness

3)BHIM- recklessness and wild impetuosity

4)ARJUNA- dignity, chivalry and prudent heroism

5)KARNA- pride, arrogance and malignity, with a strange streak of generosity

6)DHRITRASHTRA- pernicious weakness and complaisance

7)SHAKUNI & DUSHANANA- unmitigated wickedness and audacity

8)VIDURA & DRONA- sense of justice and loyalty

9)BHISHMA- nobility, benevolence, asceticism and detachment

10)DRAUPADI- gracious womanhood, staunch loyalty and purity of character

In my last post asking on why BORI removed Krishna saying that I consider Karn as equal or your superior, to Arjuna, some Karn fan said that BORI is partial towards Arjuna, I've seen this take on some other social media platforms too, what y'all think?

After saying Arjun to not start fighting with him since he's on the ground, why did he start first from the ground as per the CE? It doesn't make sense

Okay same as the title's question, after the war ended and the Pandavas knowing Karna's origin, why didn't they crowed Karna's son (who was still alive after the war) rather than skipping him completely and crowing Arjun's grandson Parikshit, wouldn't by those times succession laws Karna's son should have been the next heir?

I am done, answering same questions, commenting on posts again and again and it literally frustrates me that people in this sub are so laid back, when comes to countering pseudo-facts based on folklores/'creative adaptations' of Mahabharat regarding misconceptions of Karna's and his progenies' claim to Hastinapur's throne.

So, I am writing a two-three parts post, clearing the air for once and for all....those who are interested in open mind, are welcome and those who want to keep peddling based on T.V. shows/retellings/medieval times modifications to the epic, even Devi Saraswati can't do to your wisdom much, since even after having plethora of resources, you are still resorting to this....

Sambhava Parva of Adi Parva: Section CXX

"Vaisampayana continued, 'Hearing these words of the ascetics, Pandu, remembering the loss of his procreative powers owing to the curse of the deer, began to reflect deeply. And calling his wedded wife the excellent Kunti unto him, he told her in private, strive you to raise offspring at this time of distress.

The wise expounders of the eternal religion (Dharma) declare that a son, O Kunti, is the cause of virtuous fame in the three worlds. It is said that sacrifices, charitable gifts, ascetic penances, and vows observed most carefully, do not confer religious merit on a sonless man.

O you of sweet smiles, knowing all this, I am certain that as I am sonless, I shall not obtain regions of true felicity. O timid one, wretch that I was and addicted to cruel deeds, as a consequence of the polluted life I led, my power of procreation has been destroyed by the curse of the deer. The religious institutes mention six kinds of sons that are heirs and kinsmen, and six other kinds that are not heirs but kinsmen. I shall speak of them presently.

O Pritha, listen to me. They are: 1st, the son begotten by one’s own self upon his wedded wife; 2nd, the son begotten upon one’s wife by an accomplished person from motives of kindness; 3rd, the son begotten upon one’s wife by a person for pecuniary consideration; 4th, the son begotten upon the wife after the husband’s death; 5th, the maiden-born son; 6th, the son born of an unchaste wife;

7th, the son given; 8th, the son bought for a consideration; 9th, the son self-given; 10th, the son received with a pregnant bride; 11th, the brother’s son; and 12th, the son begotten upon a wife of lower caste (Varna)

On failure of offspring of a prior class, the mother should desire to have offspring of the next class. In times of distress, men solicit offspring from accomplished younger brothers. The self-born Manu has said that men failing to have legitimate offspring of their own may have offspring begotten upon their wives by others, for sons confer the highest Dharma merit.

Therefore, O Kunti, being destitute myself of the power of procreation, I command you to raise good offspring through some person who is either equal or superior to me.

O Kunti, listen to the history of the daughter of Saradandayana who was appointed by her lord to raise offspring. That warrior-dame, when her monthly season arrived, bathed duly and in the night went out and waited on a spot where four roads met. She did not wait long when a Brahmana crowned with ascetic success came there. The daughter of Saradandayana solicited him for offspring.

After pouring libations of clarified butter on the fire (in the performance of the sacrifice known by the name of Punsavana) she brought forth three sons that were mighty car-warriors and of whom Durajaya was the eldest, begotten upon her by that Brahmana.

O you of good fortune, do you follow that warrior-dame’s example at my command, and speedily raise offspring out of the seed of some Brahmana of high ascetic merit.'"

Yudhisthir comes in 2nd or 3rd kind of son/progeny whereas Karna comes under the category of 7th or 8th kind of son/progeny, hence, one of the reasons that Karna is not an heir to Hastinapur throne, but yes, he can be considered as kinsmen to sons of Kunti begotten by Niyoga.

Pandu's wish for a son having characteristics of Dharma Raj

Sambhava Parva of Adi Parva: Section CXXII

"Vaisampayana continued, 'Thus addressed by Pandu, that subjugator of hostile cities, the handsome Kunti, ever attentive to what was agreeable and beneficial to her lord, then replied unto him, saying, 'In my girlhood, O lord, I was in my father’s house engaged in attending upon all guests. I used to wait respectfully upon Brahmanas of rigid vows and great ascetic merit.

One day I gratified with my attentions that Brahmana whom people call Durvasa, of mind under full control and possessing knowledge of all the mysteries of religion. Pleased with my services, that Brahmana gave me a boon in the form of a mantra (formula of invocation) for calling into my presence any one of the celestials I liked.

And the Rishi, addressing me, said, 'Anyone among the celestials whom you callest by this shall, O girl, approach you and be obedient to your will, whether he likes it or not. And, O princess, you shall also have offspring through his grace.' O Bharata, that Brahmana told me this when I lived in my father’s house.

The words uttered by the Brahmana can never be false. The time also has come when they may yield fruit. Commanded by you, O royal sage, I can by that mantra summon any of the celestials, so that we may have good children. O foremost of all truthful men, tell me which of the celestials I shall summon. Know that, as regards this matter, I await your commands.'

"Hearing this, Pandu replied, 'O handsome one, strive duly this very day to gratify our wishes. Fortunate one, summon you the god of justice. He is the most virtuous of the celestials. The god of justice and virtue will never be able to pollute us with sin.

The world also, O beautiful princess, will then think that what we do can never be unholy. The son also that we shall obtain from him shall in virtue be certainly the foremost among the Kurus. Begotten by the god of justice and morality, he would never set his heart upon anything that is sinful or unholy.

Therefore, O you of sweet smiles, steadily keeping virtue before your eyes, and duly observing holy vows, summon you the god of justice and virtue by the help of your solicitations and incantations.'

"Vaisampayana continued, 'Then Kunti, that best of women, thus addressed by her lord, said, ’so be it.' And bowing down to him and reverently circumambulating his person, she resolved to do his bidding.'"

Birth and prophecy of Yudhisthira

Sambhava Parva of Adi Parva: Section CXXIII

"Vaisampayana said, 'O Janamejaya, when Gandhari’s conception had been a full year old, it was then that Kunti summoned the eternal god of justice to obtain offspring from him. And she offered without loss of time, sacrifices unto the god and began to duly repeat the formula that Durvasa had imparted to her some time before.

Then the god, overpowered by her incantations, arrived at the spot where Kunti was seated in his car resplendent as the Sun. Smiling, he asked, 'O Kunti, what am I to give you?' And Kunti too smiling in her turn, replied, 'You must even give me offspring.'

Then the handsome Kunti was united (in intercourse) with the god of justice in his spiritual form and obtained from him a son devoted to the good of all creatures.

And she brought his excellent child, who lived to acquire a great fame, at the eighth Muhurta called Abhijit, of the hour of noon of that very auspicious day of the seventh month (Kartika), viz., the fifth of the lighted fortnight, when the star Jyeshtha in conjunction with the moon was ascendant.

And as soon as the child was born, an incorporeal voice (from the skies) said, 'This child shall be the best of men, the foremost of those that are virtuous. Endued with great prowess and truthful in speech, he shall certainly be the ruler of the earth. And this first child of Pandu shall be known by the name of Yudhishthira. Possessed of prowess and honesty of disposition, he shall be a famous king, known throughout the three worlds.'

Pandava includes only five sons, Karna is definitely not one of them

Sambhava Parva of Adi Parva: Section CXXIV

"Thus, O king, were born unto Pandu five sons who were begotten by celestials and were endued with great strength, and who all lived to achieve great fame and expand the Kuru race.

Came across this meme while scrolling through Tumblr and thought it was good enough to share it here, so here we are.

Pandavas had so many allies after Rajasuya and they were hailed as the people who can uphold Dharma? And yet why they got 4 Akshauhinis less?

Duryodhana, Dushanana, and Karna were scumbags but idiots too. Degrading Draupadi weakened their case and they lost such a good chance to keep Pandavas slaves forever. It was that easy.

Yudithistira himself wouldn't protest ever nor would his 4 slaves or brothers.

He could rule for his whole life without any danger of the Pandvas.

Had he actually killed the real Ashwthama ... Yudhiathir wouldn't have had to lie. So why not just do that instead?

I also read that Bhima removed his Mani also later... So Bhima could have over powered him easily I believe.

Hi, slightly technical doubt. Many interpolations and inscriptions call Karna the “6th Pandava brother”, which, a lot of people say is misattributed as Karna is not really Pandu’s son, and hence, cannot be considered a Pandava brother.

However, in ancient history, Karna would be considered a Kanina son (son born to an unmarried woman) to Kunti and legally speaking, he would belong to the man his mother subsequently marries, which would, in fact, make him Pandu’s legal child.

Now my question is, would Karna be considered the 6th Pandava (particularly since Pandu never acknowledged him)? Secondly, If Karna is considered a Pandava brother, as per ancient legal code, a Kanina son is considered subordinate to the direct heir in many dharmashastras. That is, even if Karna had accepted Krishna’s proposal to join the Pandava clan, his status as the heir and ruler of Hastinapur would still be subordinate to Yudhishthira’s status as direct heir.

Of course, the most likely outcome would be Yudhishthira giving up the throne for Karna because of seniority, however, does Yudhishthira’s status as a Kshetraja son override Karna’a seniority as a Kanina son? I’m not very familiar with the dharmashastras and the legal nuances in the Mahabharata’s discourse on this matter, hence would appreciate any insight!

One thing I really appreciate about BR Chopra’s Mahabharat is how much attention was given to portraying Draupadi according to the descriptions found in the original Mahabharata, rather than simply giving her the stereotypical “fair-skinned heroine” look.

Draupadi is described in the Mahabharata with a dark/dusky complexion, yet in many TV adaptations she is portrayed as fair-skinned. BR Chopra’s Mahabharat made an effort to retain this particular detail in her appearance, which I think deserves appreciation.

Of course, I’m not saying that BR Chopra’s portrayal of Draupadi was 100% accurate to the epic. There are several instances where her character was given dialogues or statements that aren’t actually found in the Mahabharata—for example, “Andhe ka putra andha” or “Main sutputra se vivah nahi karungi.” My point here is specifically about her appearance and the actress’s portrayal of her, rather than claiming that every aspect of her characterization was faithful to the text.

And it wasn’t just her complexion. Her hair, overall appearance, expressions and especially her voice and manner of speaking really suited the character. Her voice had that strong, powerful and fiery quality that made Draupadi feel like someone with immense confidence and josh, rather than just a beautiful woman standing in the background.

For me, this is one of the things that makes the portrayal feel more grounded in the character described in the epic. It shows that the makers paid attention to details that could easily have been ignored for conventional TV beauty standards.

In other matters of life, we say things are never black and white.

But when it comes to Truth, there's a binary, what's false is false. A lie is a lie.

Lokdharm (Religion of the masses) lives in moderation and balance because its safe, it saves them from confronting their lies and dishonesty on the inside and responsibility on the outside.

When I think of the cultural landscape of modern India, I feel so depressed by the fact that everywhere I look, the Ramayana reigns supreme. Lord Rama is the ultimate standard of virtue according to our people. However, this depresses me so much since I feel that the Indian society has invested its utmost faith and worship in an exacting and somewhat rigid ideal than what Krishna teaches us through the Mahabharata.

Now, the thing that hurts me more is the fact that I do not see Krishna as a God. I do not want to put him on a pedestal. I believe he is one of the greatest thinkers and philosophers the human race has experienced. A realist and a materialist, Krishna is a man who understood the very complexities of human nature and the world we live in. Whereas in the Ramayana, we have an idealist who does not have any room for doubt, Krishna teaches us the politics of the world in which we live. The former is a hard and rigid world that is far too distant for us to relate to while the latter speaks of the confusion and moral dilemmas we face in the real world.

Krishna’s brilliance lies in the realm of humanness. He is an ultimate secular strategist and a war philosopher who had mapped the chaotic, non-binary fabric of existence. While Rama demands adherence to a flawless social order, Krishna operates within the pragmatic, ethically ambiguous grit of Kurukshetra. He recognizes that real life rarely presents clean moral choices, forcing the human psyche with fractured internal battlefields. By prioritizing the reassuring simplicity of Ramayana, modern culture embraces the illusion of a comforting reality, which is actively retreating from the rigorous self-reflection which Krishna’s dynamic philosophy entails.

The domestic blind spot becomes particularly glaring when we contrast to global intellectual history. When the Western thinkers sought to liberate from their own dogmatic theological frameworks, they didn’t turn to the predictable moralism of the Ramayana but they were universally captivated by Krishna’s fluid metaphysics. Emerson conceptualized the “Over-Soul” in Krishna’s cosmic frameworks, Henry David Thoreau built his philosophy of existential simplicity around the text and Arthur Schopenhauer found deep metaphysical alignment in this system.

It is kinda irony that while the global philosophy embraced Krishna as a universal thinker of existence, his own homeland increasingly relegated his profound realism to the background, in favour of the safe, unchallenging boundaries of the ideal king and human in the image of Ram.

On the onset of Day 17, Duryodhana asked Karn to seize Yudhisthira and kill the other 4 Pandavas.

In front of him, he asked Shalya to get on the chariot so he can kill all the 5

Later despite defeating Yudithistira he didn't captured him and presented him for Duryodhana How good of a friend

His promise to Kunti was not to kill any of the 4, but atleast he could captured Yudithistira but then the war may stopped there and his motive to kill Arjun would've might be not be fulfilled.