Discussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Locked
Nilesh Oak
BRFite
Posts: 1670
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Discussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Post by Nilesh Oak »

sudarshan wrote:
Then there is one point where God says "nava-dvare pure dehi," referring to the body, which has nine openings. But this is only the *male* body, right? What about women, then? Does God consciously exclude them from whatever he's saying in this verse? Interpretations vary, and I've always assumed that God was specifically referring to Arjuna at this point, that he was countering whatever prejudice Arjuna might have against women or shudras.
Comments...

Sudarshan ji,

Your point being? You mean to say Men = 9 apertures, Women = 10 apertures?

If so, practically speaking.. 10 ~ 9. In fact directionally, that would tell us (evolutionary speaking that is) woman's body is more evolved than man's.
-----------------
IMO, Krishna (and Vyasa- author of MBH) are offering advice (Gita) in the context of prevailing prejudice of contemporary society.. not just limited to Arjuna.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20844
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Discussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Post by Karan M »

Nilesh Oak wrote:
Karan M wrote:
But in contrast, Karna is constantly hampered by his lineage of being a suta putra amongst a bunch of kings who count their Kshatriya heritage as being paramount. That makes him the outsider, and he does not even get the chance to demonstrate his skills. That would rankle a human, let alone a son sired by a God.
Every chance Karna had to demonstrate his skills, he has ended up demonstrating what a poor warrior he was. I can even give him a benefit of doubt, if you so desire, that his inferiority complex might have played the part in his consistent failures in most of the fights/war he participated. In fact one has to toothcomb Mahabharata text for his victories (there were few).
That poor warrior has to sit out a huge chunk of the war, pretty much, based on specious reasoning from the "elder" who is leading the conflict. That is yet another instance of how he is sidelined thanks to issues beyond his control.

Once he does take to the field, whilst his brothers had been practising their craft from a long time, and devastating armies, he gets upto speed so much so, that he manages to disarm two of his brothers & spare their lives. He does so after being initially defeated by Bhima, and returns to the fight. This is as much a demonstration of his skill as his persistence, since Bhima (and Arjuna) are the strongest on the Pandava side, and both are forces of nature in their own right, with Bhima being the son of Vayu, as is Hanuman whose standard he bears (and which in the books, actually leaps to Karna's standard and engages in its own fight!)

He is also the one person who matches Arjun divine weapon to weapon and demonstrates it as such.

Similarly, in his final fight with Arjun, he demonstrates high skill and earns praise from Krishna himself. If he was as incompetent as you allege, Krishna would neither care for him or urge Radheya to beware of him. He would merely sit back & wait for Karna to repair back to his chariot & continue the fight.

At the end of the conflict, when Arjuna alights from his chariot, along with Krishna, the chariot crumbles to dust, Arjun then realizes what Krishna had told him about the shafts moving his chariot, and that it was the Lord on the chariot which had allowed him to fight unmolested.

Like it or not, Krishna realizes early on that the one man who can and most probably would stop Arjuna, his protege and even the other Pandavas, would be Karna. Hence the significance of Kunti getting her promise, Ghatotkacha being killed (yet the fight with Arjuna continues brutally so the loss of that 1 weapon by itself was not sufficient) and so forth.
Nilesh Oak
BRFite
Posts: 1670
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Discussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Post by Nilesh Oak »

Karan M wrote:
abhishek_sharma wrote:>> He defeats the latter in battle

When did that happen?
During his last battle with Arjuna. He defeats bhima as well but after bhima due to pure rage actually knocks him unconscious in the initial battle and the rest of the kauravas come to his aid, which finally spurs him on. As an archer karna is probably the best amongst the pandavas, which makes one wonder how good eklavya would have been if he had not had his thumb snipped off.
Karan M ji,

You are quoting selectively from Mahabharata text. That is an inductive error.

If you are a game, how about you enumerate victories (either by himself or with team) by Karna (do quote specific Mahabharata references), and I will do my part by quoting all the defeats of Karna (with specific Mahabharata references). It will provide an interesting comparison for all seekers of this forum.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60273
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Discussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Post by ramana »

Its interesting the Karna has many single use weapons: Shakti, nagastra so on and so forth.
As to his sitting out the first ten days it was his ego when Bhisma nominates him as an athirathi due to his past performance against Chitrangadha and in Uttara go grahana. He decides not to participate while Bhisma is the commander.
sudarshan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3041
Joined: 09 Aug 2008 08:56

Re: Discussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Post by sudarshan »

Nilesh Oak wrote:
sudarshan wrote:
Then there is one point where God says "nava-dvare pure dehi," referring to the body, which has nine openings. But this is only the *male* body, right? What about women, then? Does God consciously exclude them from whatever he's saying in this verse? Interpretations vary, and I've always assumed that God was specifically referring to Arjuna at this point, that he was countering whatever prejudice Arjuna might have against women or shudras.
Comments...

Sudarshan ji,

Your point being? You mean to say Men = 9 apertures, Women = 10 apertures?

If so, practically speaking.. 10 ~ 9. In fact directionally, that would tell us (evolutionary speaking that is) woman's body is more evolved than man's.
-----------------
IMO, Krishna (and Vyasa- author of MBH) are offering advice (Gita) in the context of prevailing prejudice of contemporary society.. not just limited to Arjuna.
My point was, that Krishna's specific utterance of "nava-dvare pure dehi" can be interpreted to mean that his teachings are specific to men, not women. That's not the way I interpret it, I'm talking about people who have an agenda in proving that ancient India was discriminatory against women, "low castes," and whatever.

Regarding your previous statement that Karna lost every battle he was in. I remember reading that Shalya, when he first became Karna's charioteer, was determined to trash-talk Karna and demoralize him, but very shortly he became full of admiration for Karna's prowess, and by the time Karna came up against Arjuna, Shalya was praising him to high heavens. That seems to suggest the opposite of what you say...?
member_22872
BRFite
Posts: 1873
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Discussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Post by member_22872 »

Is there a source for this? Because if my memory is right, Karna is beheaded by Arjuna's arrow, so the chance to have a talk with the Lord wouldnt really arise?
Karan ji,
I will try to find source, but the following I thought is well known, I can't readily substantiate it. But I think Karna didn't die immediately. When Arjuna starts to rejoice that Karna finally fell to his arrows and lays on the ground dying, Krishna cautions Arjuna that he shouldn't rejoice the passing of a great soul as Karna. To show surprised Arjuna what he meant, Krishna takes the form of a brahmin and approaches Karna and asks him to donate something before he dies. And Karna obliges by breaking his golden tooth and donating it. So it appears Karna didn't die immediately.
negi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13112
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: Ban se dar nahin lagta , chootiyon se lagta hai .

Re: Discussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Post by negi »

Karana had all the daiveeya astras and shastras which Arjuna had the only difference was he had acquired the Amogha shakti from Indra in exchange of his Kavacha and kundal where as Arjuna had acquired the Pashupta-astra from mahadev .

Karna was taught by the great Parushrama himself so in terms of art of archery and skill he was second to none. Whether he was a better archer than Arjuna or not can never be established , it is us readers who make someone our hero and then idolize him.

The very manner in which he was killed is a testimony to fact that he could go toe to toe with Arjuna , in fact it was because of his guru Parushurma's shaap and Krishna's instruction to Arjuna to sieze the opportunity and take a shot while Karna was unarmed that lead to Karna's death.
Last edited by negi on 12 Jun 2013 02:07, edited 2 times in total.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20844
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Discussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Post by Karan M »

sudarshan wrote:Karan ji, you say caste ossification was well apace in MB times, and that is also one way of interpreting the data we have today. I don't entirely agree, but that's fine. We don't have to thrash that out here and now. But the fact is, that this view plays right into the AIT proponents' game. Now, even if what you say is the correct view, what do you suggest should be the response to the AITers? Mea culpa, which is the honorable thing to do? Or something else?
My point is understand the texts as they are, don't get into what the AIT game is or is not. You will always then struggle to interpret yourself for a bunch of jerks, who will pick up everything you do, to interpret in the worst of ways!!

Take the Greco-Roman mythos for instance. Its cool nowadays. Has anyone compared it to Indian epics? Ours have elements that make us sit up and go "not done", theres are pages and pages of the stuff on the other side and thats all ok and fine. Try explaining to somebody who goes on and on about Troy, that Achilles was probably the gay lover of Patroclus.

My point is that our story should sell, and it should sell despite what is in the books and as long as we define it as amazing.

These AITers will constantly keep harping on varna, this that.

Our job is to define it in a way that they cannot keep attacking.

Yes varna existed, was complex, people switched functions, Gods could be incarnated across varnas etc.
Certainly, many of the statements in the Gita would sound very suspicious to modern sensibilities. When God says "even shudras and women can gain liberation," that sounds very condescending. Then there is one point where God says "nava-dvare pure dehi," referring to the body, which has nine openings. But this is only the *male* body, right? What about women, then? Does God consciously exclude them from whatever he's saying in this verse? Interpretations vary, and I've always assumed that God was specifically referring to Arjuna at this point, that he was countering whatever prejudice Arjuna might have against women or shudras.
Exactly context matters... people who want to see an insult will see one everywhere. I am reminded of some phrase which Pagalika Ghose was raging on in Twitter saying some text says Shudras are the feet in the human body...I was like ok, farmers/people doing manual labor are the strong foundation on which the body walks.

She chose to interpret it as an insult. Its interpreted as an insult by the assorted dalit groups. Now, if they had been told that the hair was x group, it too would be an insult.

Basically, we have to go on the offensive and call them hate purveyors and deliberate liars. Because otherwise, they will keep spinning stories and we will keep responding.
Fact is, the Indic world view is very different from the Abrahamic one. The Abrahamic view seeks to perform a binary separation of the universe into "good" and "evil." So killing is evil and forbidden, loving is good, God is the epitome of good, and there is an antithesis, the devil, who is "pure evil." Therefore, the nations which follow Abrahamic religions also fall into this trap of demonizing everything they don't agree with. The USSR was the "evil empire," currently Iran is the "enemy number one," whereas the USA and UK are the embodiments of freedom and democracy. A nice black-and-white view, which also forms the basis of their foreign policy.
Yeah, yeah, thats the current view...Old Testamant & what happened to the pagans in Europe pretty much tell us what is good and what is evil...killing in the name of the (right) God is good etc.
The Indic view sees God as everything. Destruction, paranoia, schizophrenia, delusion, pedophilia, cannibalism, carnal frenzy, stupidity and idiocy and sophistry, everything is God incarnate. But, unlike us material beings, God does not desire the fruits of actions. So He's beyond all this, beyond good and evil, beyond death and disease, etc. etc. We material beings do perform actions based on desires, so we're subjected to the consequences.

Why do I say all this right now? Because you brought in the "glorification of killing of thousands of elephants and humans, focusing on the arms daubed in sandal-paste even as those arms caused untold destruction." All this destruction is God incarnate, dealing out the consequences of the actions of the beings whose material selves are subjected to that destruction. The beings themselves are eternal, unaffected by this material destruction, though they may not know it.
Yes, but please remember the view may be all this, but its different to reach that stage of enlightenment where you are so beyond the mundane that you can engage in all these acts and yet think you are performing your dharma.

If you think that you can- for instance, wage nuclear war and kill millions - and stand amongst the ashes and call it beautiful as corpses fly by in the wind - then you are a stronger individual than I, because I cannot do this.

That is the level of the war described in the Mahabharata hence my urging to a poster, who was bringing up - I would do this, I would do that....to realize that he (and us) are not demi Gods like those mentioned in the Mahabharata.

A human being, even a berserker, cannot engage in that level of brutal, no holds barred conflict, displayed in the epic. They use weapons at industrial scale - I remember one time, Karna or Arjuna or Bhima asking for a weapons check and being told there are 20,000 arrows left, 4000 maces, 6000 etc so you are good to go. Then that character spends the next dozen pages slaughtering entire armies.

Now please think, is that something you or I could do? If not, then you are not that warrior, and hence you will never ever experience what such a warrior feels or will feel when going through his life, or making decisions when he feels that he is not getting his due to be what he is meant to be - i.e. a complete representation of war in every form.
So while you might say that "admitting that ancient India was casteist is a bitter pill to swallow," I say that the pill that's really hard to swallow is getting beyond the "modern" notions that we've been brought up in, and truly understanding the world-view of ancient India.
Could be, but the Sudama story is definitely a warning of sorts. It shows some people were discriminating and it was not a good thing. And God did not like that. My point is this positive point will be twisted into a negative, so you will never win if you fight it on their terms.
Now, is this something which you can really use against an AIT proponent in a debate? Is an AIT proponent really interested in the "facts," or just in proving the inferiority of the Indic way? Would you use hi-funda terms like "God is everything, the world-view was different then" and open the way for the AITer to make a laughing-stock of you, or would you stalemate the argument using canned talking-points, win over the fence-sitters, and then talk sense into them?

That's what I really want to know at this point.
My point is you own the Mahabharata, dont let the AIT guys or anyone else define it for you and stop your self realization or enjoyment or whatever. If everything we own culturally becomes something we have to debate within the artificial constraints of those idiots, then we are lost.
Last edited by Karan M on 12 Jun 2013 03:05, edited 1 time in total.
Nilesh Oak
BRFite
Posts: 1670
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Discussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Post by Nilesh Oak »

sudarshan wrote: My point was, that Krishna's specific utterance of "nava-dvare pure dehi" can be interpreted to mean that his teachings are specific to men, not women. That's not the way I interpret it, I'm talking about people who have an agenda in proving that ancient India was discriminatory against women, "low castes," and whatever.

Regarding your previous statement that Karna lost every battle he was in. I remember reading that Shalya, when he first became Karna's charioteer, was determined to trash-talk Karna and demoralize him, but very shortly he became full of admiration for Karna's prowess, and by the time Karna came up against Arjuna, Shalya was praising him to high heavens. That seems to suggest the opposite of what you say...?
(1) My point of asking'...."nava dware pure dehi'....the reason you interpret this to mean ..only referring to 'MEN' because it says '9' and NOT 10'. Am I right? My point was for practical purposes 'dasham dware pure dehi' can be approximated to 'nava dware pure dehi' as it is a reasonable approximation, two of those 10 'dwar (technically and physiologically speaking) in practically same place.

(2) Reading of Mahabharata left me with the feel that Karna's was an unfortunate life. In many ways, his circumstances did not favor him. However, this is not good enough reason to speculate so much that simply does not exists ( at least we don't know ....based on what is Mahabharata text) that contributes to Karna's greatness.

(3) So, one may have long list of excuses (and even rightfully so....just to give those defenders of Karna.. benefit of doubt) for Karna's failures. However my point is one looks at records of Karna's fight with others, Karna has lost many many more battles (and this is not limited to 18 day MBH War) than he has won. In addition, the quality of these battles (who was fighting against how, context of the battle, etc.) can be analyzed further (MBH text, fortunately, does provide additional details) and this additional analysis does not help Karna either.
negi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13112
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: Ban se dar nahin lagta , chootiyon se lagta hai .

Re: Discussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Post by negi »

If one would actually put oneself in Karna's shoes then he/she would definetely empathize with what Karna went through and did. Yes he was complicit in Abhimanyu's vadha in the chakravyooha but you see Chakravyooha in those days was a legitimate tactic to encircle a tricky opponent and it was taught to both Pandavas and Kauravas by Dronacharya and why should one talk about honor selectively the manner in which Bheeshma and Dronacharya were killed was not much honourable either. As for being on side of Dharma , well if you ask me what Karna did was his Dharma i.e. to support his friend in time of need his blood brothers never accepted him and treated him with contempt.

As for Karan's skills at archery he was going toe to toe with Arjuna until his chariot got stuck in a puddle and it required the great Arjuna to shoot at an unarmed Karna to kill him.
Last edited by negi on 12 Jun 2013 02:19, edited 1 time in total.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20844
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Discussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Post by Karan M »

Nilesh Oak wrote:Karan M ji,

You are quoting selectively from Mahabharata text. That is an inductive error.

If you are a game, how about you enumerate victories (either by himself or with team) by Karna (do quote specific Mahabharata references), and I will do my part by quoting all the defeats of Karna (with specific Mahabharata references). It will provide an interesting comparison for all seekers of this forum.
Oak ji, that is not an inductive error or otherwise. Everyone here is welcome to read the Mahabharata themselves and come to their own conclusions.

What you are asking me to do, is a classic contest", which will then have me come up with quotes from a 96 odd chapters of Karna in his final fight, and then you'll end up countering those, and I have to sit and counter those etc etc.

Sir - don't have the time.

I have spent a fair amount of time reading the text & coming to my conclusions & I dont begrudge others their either. For instance, if I were to be asked who is the one full blown avatar of war in the conflict - its Bhima, pure and simple. On ground, with a mace, without weapons, with his bare hands, with a bow...he is just death. That Karna finally manages to face this man down, shows that he has matured. But before he does so, he has to be given a fighting chance by others, the first time around.

Besides which as I said before, I find this stuff of calling demi Gods who slaughtered entire armies poor warriors etc, by those who have never aspired to the profession of arms, and are merely mortals, moot.

I don't think anybody of the frontline commanders in the Mahabharata slaughter that happened, was a poor warrior.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20844
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Discussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Post by Karan M »

negi wrote:If one would actually put oneself in Karna's shoes then he/she would definetely empathize with what Karna went through and did. Yes he was complicit in Abhimanyu's vadha in the chakravyooha but you see Chakravyooha in those days was a legitimate tactic to encircle a tricky opponent and it was taught to both Pandavas and Kauravas by Dronacharya and why should one talk about honor selectively the manner in which Bheeshma and Dronacharya were killed was not much honourable either.
Another thing is that there are several many-on-one fights in the Mahabharata, people like Arjuna/Bhima/Karna end up slaughtering several opponents. What makes Abhimanyu issue emotive for people is the age factor i think, that the "lad" went up against the whole bunch of seasoned warriors and was slain ruthlessly.
Anyways, during the war, everyone is killing each others kids. All of Karna's sons, bar one die in the conflict. The last one as I recall survives and is later taught by Arjuna and becomes a good archer in his own right.
As for being on side of Dharma , well if you ask me what Karna did was his Dharma i.e. to support his friend in time of need his blood brothers never accepted him and treated him with contempt.
Dharma in Mahabharata is a mystery wrapped in a puzzle wrapped in an enigma.. lol. Yeah, but serioulsy everyone has their motivations to do the right thing. Oppenheimer is said to have been deeply influenced by the Gita/Mahabharata when deciding whether it was his duty to work on the Manhattan Project.
SwamyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16271
Joined: 11 Apr 2007 09:22

Re: Discussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Post by SwamyG »

Nilesh Oak wrote:
SwamyG wrote:There is no truth saar ji. It is an epic and over time different versions have come to exist. We associate/resonate with a version for various reasons. As we know the core epic has changed over years. I do not attach any historicity and I do not care much about it too. MB is giant enough to offer us countless hours of discussions enriching us about dharma and adharma.
If this is about individual opinion, then you should be good with whatever works for you.

On the other hand, if you are willing to look at Mahabharata (and Ramayana and other stuff), there is enough evidence for them being factual incidents. It is reasonable to expect epics to have embellishments, but then that is trivially true statement which does not need elaboration.

There are many ways one may approach the subject.. genealogies, archeology, anthropology, astronomy and so on. I have attempted via Astronomy. Check out my book - When did the Mahabharata War happen? The mystery of Arundhati. Happy Reading.
With respect, I have read RN Iyengar's papers on Mahabharata dating and other similar papers. I am an agnostic at this point, and it does not bother if if the events in Mahabharata are proved to be false or true. The immense value of these epics will not diminish if they had no historical basis. Rajiv Malhotra addresses some of the ideas in his charges against Christianity which hinges on historicity. We move heaven and earth to prove the historicity of the Sethu Samudaram. I am a big fan of connecting different dots from different sources. But I have no interest, per se, to prove anything one way or the other.

Sure there might be a kernel of reality, but then rest is ......whatever we want it to be.
abhishek_sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9664
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27

Re: Discussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Post by abhishek_sharma »

Karan M wrote:He is considered the incarnation of justice. His nature is to seek justice and provide good counsel.
Who decides what his "nature" is? Did Vidur say that he really wants to provide counsel and nothing else? How do we know what he really wanted?
he pretty much ran the kingdom.
Sorry, that is nonsense. He "ran" the kingdom? :roll: Dhritrashtra and Duryodhana ran the kingdom. Period. Vidur merely advised. Some of his advice was accepted, some were not.
In other words, the discrimination of him not being a king, was in no way comparable to what (say) a Karna faces or even an Eklavya, when they seek to move up a power structure dominated by kings and princes who only allow their own to rise to that level and even compete amongst themselves.
Ironically Vidur faced the same discrimination from a power structure dominated by kings. I did not buy your "it is his nature" theory.
If Karna had fought Arjuna at the beginning itself and showed his mastery or was at least allowed to rise purely on merit, things may have been different.
He had the opportunity to fight Arjuna in Draupadi's swyambar. How did that end?
sudarshan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3041
Joined: 09 Aug 2008 08:56

Re: Discussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Post by sudarshan »

Nilesh Oak wrote: (1) My point of asking'...."nava dware pure dehi'....the reason you interpret this to mean ..only referring to 'MEN' because it says '9' and NOT 10'. Am I right? My point was for practical purposes 'dasham dware pure dehi' can be approximated to 'nava dware pure dehi' as it is a reasonable approximation, two of those 10 'dwar (technically and physiologically speaking) in practically same place.
One interpretation is as good as the other here, sir. No real problems with what you say. I know people who *would* have problems, though. I've been in situations, arguing against X-tist types who literally interpret everything in Hindu scripture and use it to prove that Hindus were/are whatever. Not that I didn't give back by literally interpreting the Bible, much to their discomfiture, but I also realized then that there are a lot of confused Hindus who do fall for these X-tist tactics. That's where a lot of my concerns come from.
Nilesh Oak wrote: (2) Reading of Mahabharata left me with the feel that Karna's was an unfortunate life. In many ways, his circumstances did not favor him. However, this is not good enough reason to speculate so much that simply does not exists ( at least we don't know ....based on what is Mahabharata text) that contributes to Karna's greatness.

(3) So, one may have long list of excuses (and even rightfully so....just to give those defenders of Karna.. benefit of doubt) for Karna's failures. However my point is one looks at records of Karna's fight with others, Karna has lost many many more battles (and this is not limited to 18 day MBH War) than he has won. In addition, the quality of these battles (who was fighting against how, context of the battle, etc.) can be analyzed further (MBH text, fortunately, does provide additional details) and this additional analysis does not help Karna either.
I don't know enough to argue against that right now :). I did want to take you up on something you said in another thread, though. You mentioned that the Draupadi disrobing incident may not have been in the Vyasa Bharata at all. Did I get that right? Does this mean that in the chapter and section which describes the dice game and the aftermath, there is no mention of the attempted disrobing? How come no acharya has pointed this out before, if that is the case? This is a question, not necessarily a challenge.

Karan saab, no, I can't stand amidst carnage and rejoice either. I'm of the view that that is a good thing, especially since it is not my dharma in this life to participate in battle. The modern view of course is that one can fight, but one doesn't have to revel in it. Whereas the MB descriptions, I agree, very much revel in the destructive capacity of the warriors. Demi-gods at a higher level of realization, it is then.

WRT the AIT thingy, the whole problem was that India was down on her knees and unable to counter any of the malicious propaganda of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. When India was hale and healthy, diverse peoples from far-away lands whole-heartedly drank down Hindu culture. I've seen some Thai texts which claim that the Ramayana happened in Thailand, that Lanka (Ravana's kingdom) was really in the neighborhood of Thailand, that Rama was a Thai prince, etc. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, what? If India were to regain her place, AIT would be dead-meat on its own. The problem right now is with the Indians who buy into AIT, since the western culture is currently "cooler" than the Indic one.
abhishek_sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9664
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27

Re: Discussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Post by abhishek_sharma »

Karan M wrote: If Karna is constantly denied an outlet to prove that he is a warrior, despite a burning desire even if he does not know it flows from his divine heritage etc- and he is told it is because he is a suta, constantly mocked, and Duryodhana turns out to be the one person on his side.. that does count.
So Karna had the burning desire to prove that he is a warrior. Okay. How about doing something about it? Maybe he could have helped Duryodhana perform a rajsuya yagya? Maybe he could have performed that yagya himself when Duryodhana made him Anga-naresh?

It appears that this desire to prove his bravery and courage vanished when he finally got the opportunity to prove himself. Maybe it was just a ruse to justify his bad decisions.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20844
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Discussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Post by Karan M »

abhishek_sharma wrote:[?
Abhishek Sharma, you seem to be taking this discussion way too personally. Chill out. A snarky icon, "nonsense" this, that - are not going to contribute to the discussion. I'll end up replying in the same vein, you'll respond too, and it will not end up anywhere.

My point is that Vidur was not a warrior, was related by kinship to the Pandus in a round about way and was hence treated with some grace by the clan and accepted by the pater familias - Bhishma. Karna was not. And he did run the Govt since Dhritashtra was blind till Duryodhana came of age, at least those are the accounts I remember. You can choose to not accept this. That's fine.

But the Mahabharata does keep dwelling on nature. I consider this a key aspect, because a lot of the characters are just what they are. They are not humans or at best, they are considered embodiments of a divine force in human form.

About the swayamwar, as I remember, Karna was not even given the chance to take the target. It just adds to the entire narrative of being the perennial outsider. Something similar happened the first time around when he challenged Arjun and that's when Duryodhana stepped up to his side..

Lets end this discussion & a good day to you (its night here & I really don't wish to have a late morning on the account of this..)
Last edited by Karan M on 12 Jun 2013 03:02, edited 1 time in total.
Nilesh Oak
BRFite
Posts: 1670
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Discussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Post by Nilesh Oak »

SwamyG wrote: With respect, I have read RN Iyengar's papers on Mahabharata dating and other similar papers. I am an agnostic at this point, and it does not bother if if the events in Mahabharata are proved to be false or true. The immense value of these epics will not diminish if they had no historical basis. Rajiv Malhotra addresses some of the ideas in his charges against Christianity which hinges on historicity. We move heaven and earth to prove the historicity of the Sethu Samudaram. I am a big fan of connecting different dots from different sources. But I have no interest, per se, to prove anything one way or the other.

Sure there might be a kernel of reality, but then rest is ......whatever we want it to be.
SwamyG,

With respect.....

My stance on ..if the events in Mahabharata are proved to be false or true...and they not bothering me.....is exactly same as you. On the other hand, my point was that reading of Mahabharata and researching statements of the text leads one to the understanding (at least it led me to that understanding) that they incidents were factual.

This fact has nothing to do with 'immense value these epics provide'. In fact they are two different subjects altogether. Again, my point was in recognizing the historicity of Mahabharata (or Ramayana and other ancient events) has immense value in themselves. It is true that it is not recognized by all and certainly you are not alone.

Rajiv Malhotra's criticism of 'historicity' and its importance of Christianity (Nicene creed) is not to be confused with determining and understanding history of ancient India (in particular) or ancient civilizations (in general). Just because Christianity confuses historicity and its religion, does not mean we have to stop studying/understanding/researching our history (Gandhi- Tilak, Shivaji, -Rana Pratap, Akabar- Vikramditya, Gupta, Maurya, Puru and Ambhi, Ashoka, and Satvahan, Panchal, and Yadavas, Ikshavku and others....).

Certainly, efforts by some to move heaven and earth to prove historicity of 'Setu' have flavor of Christian attempt (or need) to prove historicity of Jesus. But most of it is due to unwillingness (or inability) of these researchers (or common folks with emotions) to read original Valmiki Ramayana.

And finally....as to interest in desire to 'prove' something.....all I can say is..

It is next to impossible to 'disprove' something... who has courage to go after 'PROVING' something. At least I don't know of any method to prove anything.

Regards.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20844
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Discussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Post by Karan M »

abhishek_sharma wrote: So Karna had the burning desire to prove that he is a warrior. Okay. How about doing something about it? Maybe he could have helped Duryodhana perform a rajsuya yagya? Maybe he could have performed that yagya himself when Duryodhana made him Anga-naresh?

It appears that this desire to prove his bravery and courage vanished when he finally got the opportunity to prove himself. Maybe it was just a ruse to justify his bad decisions.
I can only go by what the Mahabharata says, and really since I was not there to question why Karna or Duryodhana did not wish to do aforesaid yagya, I really will stop here.

However, I do think that his desire to prove his bravery and courage were satisfied when he did get the chance in battle and he made enough of an account of himself, so much so that he is being still discussed today. I think he'd be ok with that.
abhishek_sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9664
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27

Re: Discussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Post by abhishek_sharma »

Karan M wrote:Abhishek Sharma, you seem to be taking this discussion way too personally. Chill out. A snarky icon, "nonsense" this, that - are not going to contribute to the discussion.
Right, and false claims are also not going to contribute to this discussion. You claimed that Vidur was "petty much running" the kingdom. That, in my opinion, is nonsense. Why don't you provide evidence for your claims?
But the Mahabharata does keep dwelling on nature. I consider this a key aspect, ...
It might be important. But it is not sufficient to infer that Vidur was perfectly happy with his role as an advisor who was ignored repeatedly.
About the swayamwar, as I remember, Karna was not even given the chance to take the target.
Right, but after that swyambar there was a war between Arjuna/Bheem and others. Many kings participated. Karna had the opportunity to test the skills of Arjuna if he had wanted. What happened?
negi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13112
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: Ban se dar nahin lagta , chootiyon se lagta hai .

Re: Discussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Post by negi »

abhishek_sharma wrote: Right, but after that swyambar there was a war between Arjuna/Bheem and others. Many kings participated. Karna had the opportunity to test the skills of Arjuna if he had wanted. What happened?
Why would he ? Draupadi had already declined to marry him even if he would have won her in Swayamwar .
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60273
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Discussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Post by ramana »

negi wrote: ..As for Karan's skills at archery he was going toe to toe with Arjuna until his chariot got stuck in a puddle and it required the great Arjuna to shoot at an unarmed Karna to kill him.

As KaranM says read the MB as it is and dont use modern adjectives.

Arjuna is reminded by Krishna of the atrocities that Karna had a role in and unleashes the arrow that kills Karna.


http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m08/m08091.htm
"Sanjaya said, 'Then Vasudeva, stationed on the car, addressed Karna, saying, "By good luck it is, O son of Radha, that thou rememberest virtue! It is generally seen that they that are mean, when they sink into distress, rail at Providence but never at their own misdeeds. Thyself and Suyodhana and Duhshasana and Shakuni, the son of Subala, had caused Draupadi, clad in a single piece of raiment, to be brought into the midst of the assembly. On that occasion, O Karna, this virtue of thine did not manifest itself. When at the assembly Shakuni, an adept in dice, vanquished Kunti's son Yudhishthira who was unacquainted with it, whither had this virtue of thine gone? When the Kuru king (Duryodhana), acting under thy counsels, treated Bhimasena in that way with the aid of snakes and poisoned food, whither had this virtue of thine then gone? When the period of exile into the woods was over as also the thirteenth year, thou didst not make over to the Pandavas their kingdom. Whither had this virtue of thine then gone? Thou didst set fire to the house of lac at Varanavata for burning to death the sleeping Pandavas. Whither then, O son of Radha, had this virtue of thine gone? Thou laughedest at Krishna while she stood in the midst of the assembly, scantily dressed because in her season and obedient to Duhshasana's will, whither, then, O Karna, had this virtue of thine gone? When from the apartment reserved for the females innocent Krishna was dragged, thou didst not interfere. Whither, O son of Radha, had this virtue of thine gone? Thyself addressing the princess Draupadi, that lady whose tread is as dignified as that of the elephant, in these words, viz., 'The Pandavas, O Krishna, are lost. They have sunk into eternal hell. Do thou choose another husband!' thou lookedest on the scene with delight. Whither then, O Karna, had this virtue of thine gone? Covetous of kingdom and relying on the ruler of the Gandharvas, thou summonedest the Pandavas (to a match of dice). Whither then had this virtue of thine gone? When many mighty car-warriors, encompassing the boy Abhimanyu in battle, slew him, whither had this virtue of thine then gone? If this virtue that thou now invokest was nowhere on those occasions, what is the use then of parching thy palate now, by uttering that word? Thou art now for the practice of virtue, O Suta, but thou shalt not escape with life. Like Nala who was defeated by Pushkara with the aid of dice but who regained his kingdom by prowess, the Pandavas, who are free from cupidity, will recover their kingdom by the prowess of their arms, aided with all their friends. Having slain in battle their powerful foes, they, with the Somakas, will recover their kingdom. The Dhartarashtras will meet with destruction at the hands of those lions among men (viz., the sons of Pandu), that are always protected by virtue!'"

"Sanjaya continued, 'Thus addressed, O Bharata, by Vasudeva, Karna hung down his head in shame and gave no answer. With lips quivering in rage, he raised his bow, O Bharata, and, being endued with great energy and prowess, he continued to fight with Partha. Then Vasudeva, addressing Phalguna, that bull among men, said, "O thou of great might, piercing Karna with a celestial weapon, throw him down." Thus addressed by the holy one, Arjuna became filled with rage. Indeed, remembering the incidents alluded to by Krishna, Dhananjaya blazed up with fury. Then, O king, blazing flames of fire seemed to emanate from all the pores of the angry Partha's body. The sight seemed to be exceedingly wonderful. Beholding it, Karna, invoking the brahmastra, showered his shafts upon Dhananjaya, and once more made an effort to extricate his car. Partha also, by the aid of the brahmastra, poured arrowy downpours upon Karna. Baffling with his own weapon the weapon of his foe, the son of Pandu continued to strike him. The son of Kunti then, aiming at Karna sped another favourite weapon of his that was inspired with the energy of Agni. Sped by Arjuna, that weapon blazed up with its own energy. Karna, however, quenched that conflagration with the Varuna weapon. The Suta's son also, by the clouds he created, caused all the points of the compass to be shrouded with a darkness such as may be seen on a rainy day. The son of Pandu, endued with great energy, fearlessly dispelled those clouds by means of the Vayavya weapon in the very sight of Karna. The Suta's son then, for slaying the son of Pandu, took up a terrible arrow blazing like fire. When that adored shaft was fixed on the bow-string, the earth, O king, trembled with her mountains and waters and forests. Violent winds began to blow, bearing hard pebbles. All the points of the compass became enveloped with dust. Wails of grief, O Bharata, arose among the gods in the welkin. Beholding that shaft aimed by the Suta's son, O sire, the Pandavas, with cheerless hearts, gave themselves up to great sorrow. That shaft of keen point and endued with the effulgence of Sakra's thunder, sped from Karna's arms, fell upon Dhananjaya's chest and penetrated it like a mighty snake penetrating an ant-hill. That grinder of foes, viz., the high-souled Vibhatsu, thus deeply pierced in that encounter, began to reel. His grasp became loosened, at which his bow Gandiva dropped from his hand. He trembled like the prince of mountains in an earthquake. Availing himself of that opportunity, the mighty car-warrior Vrisha, desirous of extricating his car-wheel that had been swallowed up by the earth, jumped down from his vehicle. Seizing the wheel with his two arms he endeavoured to drag it up, but though possessed of great strength, he failed in his efforts, as destiny would have it. Meanwhile the diadem-decked and high-souled Arjuna, recovering his senses, took up a shaft, fatal as the rod of Death, and called anjalika. Then Vasudeva, addressing Partha, said, "Cut off with thy arrow the head of this enemy of thine, viz., Vrisha, before he succeeds in getting upon his car." Applauding those words of the lord Vasudeva, and while the wheel of his enemy was still sunk, the mighty car-warrior Arjuna took up a razor-headed arrow of blazing effulgence and struck the standard (of Karna) bearing the elephant's rope and bright as the spotless sun. That standard bearing the device of the costly elephant's rope, was adorned with gold and pearls and gems and diamonds, and forged with care by foremost of artists excelling in knowledge, and possessed of great beauty, and variegated with pure gold. That standard always used to fill thy troops with high courage and the enemy with fear. Its form commanded applause. Celebrated over the whole world, it resembled the sun in splendour. Indeed, its effulgence was like that of fire or the sun or the moon. The diadem-decked Arjuna, with that razor-headed shaft, exceedingly sharp, equipped with wings of gold, possessed of the splendour of fire when fed with libations of clarified butter, and blazing with beauty, cut off that standard of Adhiratha's son, that great car-warrior. With that standard, as it fell, the fame, pride, hope of victory, and everything dear, as also the hearts of the Kurus, fell, and loud wails of "Oh!" and "Alas!" arose (from the Kuru army). Beholding that standard cut off and thrown down by that hero of Kuru's race possessed of great lightness of hand, thy troops, O Bharata, were no longer hopeful of Karna's victory. Hastening then for Karna's destruction, Partha took out from his quiver an excellent Anjalika weapon that resembled the thunder of Indra or the rod of fire and that was possessed of the effulgence of the thousand-rayed Sun. Capable of penetrating the very vitals, besmeared with blood and flesh, resembling fire or the sun, made of costly materials, destructive of men, steeds, and elephants, of straight course and fierce impetuosity, it measured three cubits and six feet. Endued with the force of the thousand-eyed Indra's thunder, irresistible as Rakshasas in the night, resembling Pinaka or Narayana's discus, it was exceedingly terrible and destructive of all living creatures. Partha cheerfully took up that great weapon, in the shape of an arrow, which could not be resisted by the very gods, that high-souled being which was always adored by the son of Pandu, and which was capable of vanquishing the very gods and the Asuras. Beholding that shaft grasped by Partha in that battle, the entire universe shook with its mobile and immobile creatures. Indeed, seeing that weapon raised (for being sped) in that dreadful battle, the Rishis loudly cried out, "Peace be to the universe!" The wielder of Gandiva then fixed on his bow that unrivalled arrow, uniting it with a high and mighty weapon. Drawing his bow Gandiva, he quickly said, "Let this shaft of mine be like a mighty weapon capable of quickly destroying the body and heart of my enemy, if I have ever practised ascetic austerities, gratified my superiors, and listened to the counsels of well-wishers. Let this shaft, worshipped by me and possessed of great sharpness, slay my enemy Karna by that Truth." Having said these words Dhananjaya let off that terrible shaft for the destruction of Karna, that arrow fierce and efficacious as a rite prescribed in the Atharvan of Angiras, blazing with effulgence, and incapable of being endured by Death himself in battle. And the diadem-decked Partha, desirous of slaying Karna, with great cheerfulness, said, "Let this shaft conduce to my victory. Shot by me, let this arrow possessed of the splendour of fire or the sun take Karna to the presence of Yama." Saying these words, Arjuna, decked with diadem and garlands, cherishing feelings of hostility towards Karna and desirous of slaying him, cheerfully struck his foe with that foremost of shafts which was possessed of the splendour of the sun or the moon and capable of bestowing victory. Thus sped by that mighty warrior, that shaft endued with the energy of the sun caused all the points of the compass to blaze up with light. With that weapon Arjuna struck off his enemy's head like Indra striking off the head of Vritra with his thunder. Indeed, O king, with that excellent Anjalika weapon inspired with mantras into a mighty weapon, the son of Indra cut off the head of Vaikartana in the afternoon. Thus cut off with that Anjalika, the trunk of Karna fell down on the earth. The head also of that commander of the (Kaurava) army, endued with splendour equal to that of the risen sun and resembling the meridian sun of autumn, fell down on the earth like the sun of bloody disc dropped down from the Asta hills. Indeed, that head abandoned with great unwillingness the body, exceedingly beautiful and always nursed in luxury, of Karna of noble deeds, like an owner abandoning with great unwillingness his commodious mansion filled with great wealth. Cut off with Arjuna's arrow, and deprived of life, the tall trunk of Karna endued with great splendour, with blood issuing from every wound, fell down like the thunder-riven summit of a mountain of red chalk with crimson streams running down its sides after a shower. Then from that body of the fallen Karna a light passing through the welkin penetrated the sun. This wonderful sight, O king, was beheld by the human warriors after the fall of Karna. Then the Pandavas, beholding Karna slain by Phalguna, loudly blew their conchs. Similarly, Krishna and Dhananjaya also, filled with delight, and losing no time, blew their conchs. The Somakas beholding Karna slain and lying on the field, were filled with joy and uttered loud shouts with the other troops (of the Pandava army). In great delight they blew their trumpets and waved their arms and garments. All the warriors, O king, approaching Partha, began to applaud him joyfully. Others, possessed of might, danced, embracing each other, and uttering loud shouts, said, "By good luck, Karna hath been stretched on the earth and mangled with arrows." Indeed, the severed head of Karna looked beautiful like a mountain summit loosened by a tempest, or a quenched fire after the sacrifice is over, or the image of the sun after it has reached the Asta hills. The Karna-sun, with arrows for its rays, after having scorched the hostile army, was at last caused to be set by the mighty Arjuna-time. As the Sun, while proceeding towards the Asta hills, retires taking away with him all his rays, even so that shaft (of Arjuna) passed out, taking with it Karna's life breaths. The death hour of the Suta's son, O sire, was the afternoon of that day. Cut off with the Anjalika weapon in that battle, the head of Karna fell down along with his body. Indeed, that arrow of Arjuna, in the very sight of the Kaurava troops, quickly took away the head and the body of Karna. Beholding the heroic Karna thrown down stretched on the earth, pierced with arrows and bathed in blood, the king of the Madras, went away on that car deprived of its standard. After the fall of Karna, the Kauravas, deeply pierced with shafts in that battle, and afflicted with fear, fled away from the field, frequently casting their eyes on that lofty standard of Arjuna that blazed with splendour. The beautiful head, graced with a face that resembled a lotus of a 1,000 petals, of Karna whose feats were like those of the thousand-eyed Indra, fell down on the earth like the thousand-rayed sun as he looks at the close of day.'"
venug, The story of Krishna seeking alms form Karna is a movie interpolation.
abhishek_sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9664
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27

Re: Discussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Post by abhishek_sharma »

negi wrote:If one would actually put oneself in Karna's shoes then he/she would definetely empathize with what Karna went through and did.
Similar arguments are also provided by Dawood Ibrahim and Hafeez Sayeed. You know, they all had bad childhood, their family members were killed in partition, and they had no option to lead a more honorable life. Due to some reasons we don't have time for their arguments, but we "empathize" for Karna.
abhishek_sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9664
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27

Re: Discussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Post by abhishek_sharma »

negi wrote: Why would he ? Draupadi had already declined to marry him even if he would have won her in Swayamwar .
Well, he was itching to prove his "bravery" and "courage". You know, he needed an "outlet" to show his skills.
Muppalla
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7115
Joined: 12 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: Discussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Post by Muppalla »

Karan M wrote: But the Mahabharata does keep dwelling on nature. I consider this a key aspect, because a lot of the characters are just what they are. They are not humans or at best, they are considered embodiments of a divine force in human form.
To me Mahabharata is a history encrypted so that the next evolution/yuga take the good and also not do the same bad again. It is like a massively encrypted in the form of stories with characters and with huge riddles. The civilization's science and tech had reached a phase where even the war to establish right over wrong could bring the entire humanity/civilization to end. What they show is duty of the king to not giveup to establish right even when the end-of-humanity in staring in front. Based on this era's advances in science and tech some riddles can be dechiphered such as:

* Arjun's usage of pasupatastra after completion o 14years on behalf of Uttara kumar - A clear chemical weapon that makes everyone faint. The description is gaseous spread after the weapon is launched
* Mayashabha where Duryodhana goes through a series of mirages - Virtual reality
* Kunti's children - A bunck of IUI based IVFs
* Difficulties in concieving children for generations - due to extensive reaserch (encrypted as rishis doing this and that) of chemical warfare, the genetics and the atmosphere got people to fire zeros.
* Pandu having skin condition and Duryodhana having blindness - NKorea, Pakis, Iran and Taliban getting hands on chemical research and effects of it on population
* Draupadi's children, 100 peices in pots - pots is exactly what is used to create first cloned goat. Extrapolate the future of baby creation
* Arjun's willow's sound is Mach 5 - Basically Arjun is a warfare system like some Airforce's multiple squadron with force multiplier and missiles.
* Ashwadhama's brahmastra on pandavas after duryodhana's death, Krishna's saving child of Abhimanu to save future generation king - Saving the baby in the woumb from the chemical attack that happened.
* Final states of Krishna and yadavas - radiactivity spread and description of how is spread through water and also how it affected plants that grow after the radioactive leak
* The most striking weapon description is of Shakti-weapons with Gatochgacha's brother(I guess) - The weapon that can split the earth into two. - Basically earthquake creator for which reasearch is going on.

These are what we know based on new civilization's science and tech evolution otherwise it is all maya and mith. Miths of MB are falling as we progess. The fall of value system, increase of sofisticated weaponry, changing food due to chemicals and the affects on reproduction is all written in encrypted fashion so that the readers will not repeat the same mistakes and take corrective action way ahead before you reach armegeddon.

MB is real history but it was encrypted by Ganesha while being narrated by Vyasa Maharshi to strenthen and lengthen the future civilization from getting to faster destruction too early in the civilization.
abhishek_sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9664
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27

Re: Discussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Post by abhishek_sharma »

negi wrote:As for Karan's skills at archery he was going toe to toe with Arjuna until his chariot got stuck in a puddle and it required the great Arjuna to shoot at an unarmed Karna to kill him.
I mentioned that Karna and Kauravs lost to Panchals, who were defeated by Arjuna and Bheem pretty easily. However, that data point was not found relevant. Maybe Karna was sick that day.
abhishek_sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9664
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27

Re: Discussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Post by abhishek_sharma »

Did Duryodhana and Karna fight against gandharvas/Chitrasena? What was the result?
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60273
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Discussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Post by ramana »

abhishek, Why be combative. We are all learning here.
abhishek_sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9664
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27

Re: Discussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Post by abhishek_sharma »

Sorry if I was combative. Actually this is not the first discussion on Karna. About a year ago, there was a similar discussion with viv. Basically, the people who support Karna argue as follows:

a. Bad things happened to Karna.
b. Since (a) is true, normal rules of ethics do not apply. Therefore, Karna is justified in doing whatever he wants.
c. Moreover, he cannot be punished for his bad actions. Why? Because (a) is true.

An example of (b): Karna was justified in that episode with Parsuram.
An example of (c): Parusram should not have cursed him.

---

People like me argue like the following:

a. Bad things happened to Karna.
b. The people who were responsible for (a) should offer an apology. Probably they should be punished.
c. Anyone not responsible for (a) should not be punished.
d. The punishment for (a) should be proportional to the magnitude of injustice.
e. The fact that (a) happened does not give any right to Karna to engage in unjust/bad acts.

As you can guess, I believe that my approach is more nuanced. For example, (d) implies that you should not disrobe a woman because she insulted you. Rule (c) implies that Kunti's children and daughter-in-law should not pay for her mistakes.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60273
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Discussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Post by ramana »

Glorifying Karna as a victim is a recent say last hundred year phenomenon. If you see old Sanskrit commentaries of MB he is not commented on.

As SwamyG posted the 1964 Tamil movie Karnan which was dubbed in Telugu and Hindi set the pace. In 1978(?) NTR made Dhana, Veera Shoora Karna aka DVS Karna which furthered made him into an OBC icon.

Iravati Karve in her book "Yuganta" portrays Karna as a victim.

BTW the pravachanam guru said Draupadi hardly had the time to laugh at guests while being in charge of the rajasuya yaga arrangements. He categorically says that Bhima and Arjuna were the ones who laughed when Duryodhana slipped and fell. Yudhistir rushed Nakula to get dry clothes.

And as an aside, its basic human nature to laugh when there is a slip. Thats the basis of slap-stick humor.
And when its the mighty Duryodhana wouldnt the Pandavas whom he humiliated and conspired to kill many times be excused for laughing?

The real takleef is Duryodhana was jealous of the Pandavas prosperity and imagined insults and induced his father to command them to a game of dice which he was going to fix.
In fact Dhritrastra says he will build a better bhavan/sabha but Duryodhana says its the Pandavas possessing the Maya Sabha that he is jealous of.


If you note in Nala Damyanti story, Nala gets a repeat chance to defeat the other guy at dice and win backs his kingdom.

But the Kauravas dont want a repeat of the game as they know Yudhistir learnt to play dice while in Aranyavas.
abhishek_sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9664
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27

Re: Discussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Post by abhishek_sharma »

I will back off from this discussion. Before I do that, this is what I think about Karna:

1. His early life was certainly unfair to him.

2. He made many bad choices in his life. I do not believe that he had no opportunity to lead a more honorable life. Saying that I am going to ally with Dawood Ibrahim because my local MLA slapped, kicked and abused me is not a good argument. That is the kind of argument Naxalites have given for a long time. And it is not surprising that Karna is popular among them.

3. He was a good warrior. I don't think he was better than Arjuna.

4. He had a dual personality. On the one hand, he gave away his kavach and kundal, which was great. On the other hand, he participated in that disrobing incident (and other conspiracies with Duryodhana). I don't think (1) is sufficient to justify his paaps. Overall, he made a negative contribution to the society.

5. The circumstances in which he was killed can be seen as tragic. However, given that he was hunting with wolves all his life, I am not shedding too many tears.

6. Ideally, it would have been great if he had joined his brothers and fought Kauravs. That would be a fairy tale. :)
Last edited by abhishek_sharma on 12 Jun 2013 04:17, edited 1 time in total.
negi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13112
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: Ban se dar nahin lagta , chootiyon se lagta hai .

Re: Discussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Post by negi »

Abhishek your points prove nothing; loosing a battle or war does not imply that a soldier from loosing side is an inferior marksman . It is like saying that an Indian soldier is inferior to Chinese because we lost in 1962. Karna's duel with Arjuna on his last day is well described in texts if he were inferior to Arjuna skill wise then Krishna wouldn't have insisted on Arjuna to take a shot while the former was unarmed and busy taking his chariot out of the puddle. My point being one being better than the other in archery is an argument 8 year olds would like to have on the lines of my daddy strongest.
Nilesh Oak
BRFite
Posts: 1670
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Discussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Post by Nilesh Oak »

sudarshan wrote:I did want to take you up on something you said in another thread, though. You mentioned that the Draupadi disrobing incident may not have been in the Vyasa Bharata at all. Did I get that right? Does this mean that in the chapter and section which describes the dice game and the aftermath, there is no mention of the attempted disrobing? How come no acharya has pointed this out before, if that is the case? This is a question, not necessarily a challenge.
Correct. I did say that 'Draupaid disrobing incident and subsequent supply of Sarees by Krishna' may not have been in the Vyasa Bharata.

What follows is my arguments in brief, in support of above assertion...

(1) Remember, in a long epic (longest epic of humankind), it is relatively easy to insert a chapter, but very difficult (at least in old days) to correct/change/modify all relevant references from rest of the corpus.

(2) I assert that while chapter on 'Draupadi vastraharan' exists in many of MBH texts versions (BORI Critical edition team have done mixed job.. but more on that some other time), however if one reads it carefully, it is not difficult at all to recognize/notice artificial nature of this Draupadi vastraharan. I will post the relevant verses sometime (or may be send you in private email).

(3) Draupadi is pulled into the court (ekavastra and rajaswala) by Dushasan. By this time, all Pandavas have lost with each round of Dyuta (game of dice) and now it is turn of Draupadi. Draupadi asks all those present in the court..."If Yudhishthir has lost himself first, does he have right to wage Draupadi for the next round of game of dice?". All the members of the court become silent. ................At this point..text/verses related to Draupadi Vastraharan begin.. with Duryodhana asking Dushasan to make her nude and she praying to Govinda...etc." After this incident the text of MBH resumes.. with Vidura asking the court members ....to answer Draupadi's question. Vidur or any of the members (including Pandava) ...none of them refer to the mysterious/amazing/magical incident that took place right in front of them all.

(4) There are numerous places in MBH text, after this incident where unfortunate incident of Draupadi being pulled into the court is recalled, however the language used always refers to her being brought into the court, or being insulted, but with exception of 2 references (I think in Shalya parva) , no reference to 'Vastra-haran" is made.

(5) On the other hand, Draupadi has accused even Krishna for her being pulled into the court. and Krishna has only mustered a lame response such as (If I would have been there, I would not have allowed the game of dice or that he would have killed Duryodhan/Dushasan right on the spot (BTW, Bhima was desiring to do just that but was stopped by Yudhi). In addition, Krishna tells her that he only came to know of this incident when he returned to Dwarka. He has gone on fight.

I will post more details in future.. but will stop here for now.
abhishek_sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9664
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27

Re: Discussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Post by abhishek_sharma »

>> Abhishek your points prove nothing;

:D

>> It is like saying that an Indian soldier is inferior to Chinese because we lost in 1962.

It would be an apples to oranges comparison because the armies were mismatched. There is no reason is believe that Pandavs' had a better army than the Kauravs. Actually, Kauravs had more soldiers. So how is your analogy relevant?

>> if he were inferior to Arjuna skill wise then Krishna wouldn't have insisted on Arjuna to take a shot

Not good enough. Maybe there were other reasons? Maybe Krishna wanted to end the war as soon as possible? There might be other reasons too. Unless Krishna explicitly said so, we cannot make an unsound abductive leap. However, I accept that it is one of many possible explanations for Krishna's advice.
Nilesh Oak
BRFite
Posts: 1670
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Discussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Post by Nilesh Oak »

negi wrote:Abhishek your points prove nothing; loosing a battle or war does not imply that a soldier from loosing side is an inferior marksman . It is like saying that an Indian soldier is inferior to Chinese because we lost in 1962. Karna's duel with Arjuna on his last day is well described in texts if he were inferior to Arjuna skill wise then Krishna wouldn't have insisted on Arjuna to take a shot while the former was unarmed and busy taking his chariot out of the puddle. My point being one being better than the other in archery is an argument 8 year olds would like to have on the lines of my daddy strongest.
Negi ji,

"Losing a battle or war does not imply that a soldier from losing side in an inferior marksman"

FAIR.

What criteria do you suggest, we employ then, in determining who was superior/inferior?
-----------------
I recall Ramesh Krishnan (Tennis player) beating John McEnroe in Japan open Tennis final. I also know of John McEnroe beating Ramesh Krishnan, or those who beat Ramesh Krishnan, numerous times. While still the jury may be out, based on this limited data (detail data between Ramesh Krishnan, McEnroe and their contemporaries do exist) I can say that John McEnroe was a superior tennis player to Ramesh Krishnan.

Similar data set (fortunately) exist in Mahabharata text.. in the context of Karna, Bhima, Arjuna and other warriors (Bhishma, Drona, Kripa.....etc.) and it is indeed easy to reach conclusions similar to my 'Tennis' analogy.

I am not saying this is the only criteria. What I will say is I don't know of any other criteria (based on availability of data from Mahabhartata) in the context of Karna and in determining his merit (as a warrior, but also as General of the army, moral human being, etc.) vis a vis Arjuna, Bhima etc.
abhishek_sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9664
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27

Re: Discussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Post by abhishek_sharma »

^^ I would be grateful if you can post the details of Karna-Arjuna battles.
Nilesh Oak
BRFite
Posts: 1670
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Discussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Post by Nilesh Oak »

abhishek_sharma wrote:^^ I would be grateful if you can post the details of Karna-Arjuna battles.
Abhishek Sharma ji,

Give me some time. I will indeed post all battles.. not just Karna-Arjuna. but all battles that are relevant to Karna and Arjuna (and not to forget Bhima)

In fact, Bhima has beaten Karna -endlessly-and mind you.. not with club...but in Dhanur-Yuddha, so called forte of Karna.
SwamyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16271
Joined: 11 Apr 2007 09:22

Re: Discussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Post by SwamyG »

MB has a southern recension. If I am correct the Tamil movie uses one version called Villi Bharatam written by an Alwar. I don't remember which century he lived in....will provide a link to the SR discussion. I remember my vaishnava Sanskrit teacher calling out that no parents would name their son as Duryodhana.
SwamyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16271
Joined: 11 Apr 2007 09:22

Re: Discussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Post by SwamyG »

Karan:
On the flip side it is vogue to dismiss everything as coming from a secular mind, AIT mind, Marxist mind, Macualite ityadi. I have no interest proving it one way or another. I approach these epics as if they never happened. I will point out if somebody streches their imagination to prove :-) And I do not take these epics literally. My belief in Krisna's advice does not stem from the fact of Krisna's historicity. My take on the conduct of Lakshmana or Karna does not hinge if they ever lived. The values Hanuman is not conditional if he was a monkey/ape with a tail or if really somebody could fly.

However I do share your expectation that there will be scholars who will come and research more about our history - from an Indic perspective.
SwamyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16271
Joined: 11 Apr 2007 09:22

Re: Discussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Post by SwamyG »

Nilesh: Sometimes in order to prove something which is incredulous to begin with, one just has to continue to stretch the incredulity. A good example is the support of LKA in the political dhaaga. As long as events can be proved with a reasonable assumptions, I am fine. When I questioned my grandmother on some animal talking in purana, she would retort that in those days animals and birds could talk. When I question the "divine" birth of Jesus from Virgin Mary, I have to equally question the "divine" birth of the Pandavas from Kunti (outside wedlock).

Through out history, ham log thoda bahut bada chada ke bol dete hain. All civilizations.
Locked