Discussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Vayutuvan · Post by **Vayutuvan** » 29 Jun 2013 02:37

Ramana garu, in case of Shanatanu, Ganga kills the first 7 children. Shantanu objects when she tries to kill Bhishma the 8th one and as per her prenuptial condition she leaves Shanatanu. Then only Shantanu goes for Satyavati.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 29 Jun 2013 06:40

I know but still he breaks his word to his wife!
I reflected that all the above cases were violating Charms and thus led to instability. Not bad on a long drive home.

Vayutuvan · Post by **Vayutuvan** » 29 Jun 2013 07:22

But when he broke the word, Yojanagandhi was not known to exist. So, breaking the word is not an act steeped in kAma, but more of a humane reaction to a base deed of infanticide.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 29 Jun 2013 08:27

I know. Am kind of non-plussed at so many instabilities in the narrative.

However from pati dharma he had to agree to whatever she did as per their initial understanding. Its free will kicking in that leads to instabilities.
If Devavrata was also drowndead who knows how the story would turn?
But then we wouldnt have the Bhagvat Gita nor the Vishnu Sahasranamam.

BTW, While being the saradhi for Karna, Salya narratives a story : Hamsakakopakyanam. In modern times it fits India-Pakistan to a tee.

I think you will like the irony.

Vayutuvan · Post by **Vayutuvan** » 29 Jun 2013 08:49

Ramana garu, I am not aware of that story. I am going to discuss it with my dad's shishya (my elder whose judgement I trust a lot) who is going to be here tomorrow. shalya sArathyam is a very interesting part of MB.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 29 Jun 2013 09:46

matrimc wrote:Ramana garu, in case of Shanatanu, Ganga kills the first 7 children. Shantanu objects when she tries to kill Bhishma the 8th one and as per her prenuptial condition she leaves Shanatanu. Then only Shantanu goes for Satyavati.

I think the expression merely says "offered up to Ganga/river". If we understand that in older motifs a river was often == woman == civilization based around the river, or a human civilization on its banks was deemed a "child" of the river==mother==goddess : then all "Ganga" - both the river as well as civilization, was doing was perhaps referring to a matriarchal law in that civilization, where the children went to the mother's clan. If Shantanu had really allied with a woman from the riverine civilization - then as per their custom and agreement before marriage, the children belonged to her clan and were "offered" to them.

When Shantanu objected - he broke this contract, and obviously either he was not powerful enough or he was prudent enough not to try and enforce his patriarchal custom.

That all these marriages were with powerful local societies is obvious, because the next choice was from another river-bank society - and could very well be "political" marriages.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 29 Jun 2013 10:00

Bji, You are offering an Alf Hiltebetel/George Dumzel type of explanation.

What I ken is MB needs to be read with Bhagavatam and the Puranas to get the full story.

Murugan · Post by **Murugan** » 29 Jun 2013 10:03

ramana wrote:Bji, You are offering an Alf Hilbetel/George Dzumel type of explanation.

What I ken is MB needs to be read with Bhagavatam and the Puranas to get the full story.

+1

+ More, little knowledge of Ramayana will help comparative study between yugas, prevailing social systems, education systems etc.

Everything is networked ! Lord Krishna also quote Shri Rama when he speaks about various vibhutis, he speaks about various manus, sanaks, nagas etc.

***

Similary if knowledge of 11 principal upanishads and brahm sutra help understand BG well.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 29 Jun 2013 10:06

murugan, Have you read Naishadiyam by Sri Harsha?

Its Nala Damayanti story in Sanskrit.

It was translated into Telugu by Srinatha.

Murugan · Post by **Murugan** » 29 Jun 2013 10:07

No I have not read. But will soon find out. Thx.

Murugan · Post by **Murugan** » 29 Jun 2013 10:26

Samskrit Literature, collection of many samskrit works

http://sanskrit-books.blogspot.in/

Vetal Pachisi

http://sanskrit-books.blogspot.in/2012/ ... atika.html

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 29 Jun 2013 19:25

ramana wrote:Bji, You are offering an Alf Hiltebetel/George Dumzel type of explanation.

What I ken is MB needs to be read with Bhagavatam and the Puranas to get the full story.

There is a danger of taking MB early passages too literally. Once a symbolism takes hold in the popular perception, that symbolism will be repeated by other texts and narratives - without elaborating the root encoding map. There are two layers in all the early texts, and we need to search for repetitive symbolism to get the common real scenario being encoded.

The river == civilization, or civilization == child of mother == river, seems to explain a lot of the early stories. You yourself have noted the interpretation of Sara-Hagar-Saraswati-Gharghara-(A)bRahma. The matriarchal claim over children could very well be encoded in the shantanu - Ganga story, given that the lady - goddess- and river all bear the same name.

The second layer we need to keep in mind is that numbers might indicate a code that associates important astronomical phenomena or historical observations. There is always this repeated motif of "ashtama garva" - the previous 7 being somehow "destroyed/absorbed/returned/sacrificed". The 8th is a departure. I am not sure that this is trying to say something about the saptarshi as an early constellation motif vis-a-vis the milky way - which appears to be associated also in some passages with Ganga.

Sacrificing the first born is understandable as an agreement between assumed divine and the parent, but it could not have been as likely to be repeated child after child. Unless this had to do with ritual prevalence of child sacrifice to keep the river flowing sort of belief - possible in a very dry period of history. But that would push the date to at least 11 to 13 kya.

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 29 Jun 2013 22:24

In "Parva", a kannada novel by SL Bhyrappa, where he looks at MB realistically, he says that Ganga throwing her baby in the river to mean Ganga giving the children to her matrimonial home. And Shantanu wanted a male heir, so he begged her to leave the 8th with him.

member_20317 · Post by **member_20317** » 29 Jun 2013 23:27

SaiK wrote:thanks for the reflections, ramana.

shakuni must have been a probability master, as he knows the outcomes already from his moves.

Popular narrative today show how the Mama-Bhanja team wanted a particular outcome of the dice. Betting on one particular outcome would progressively carry lesser chances and higher pay offs. This Mama-Bhanja team needed a big big big pay off. And the opposing Pandavas had to be convinced somehow of the good rationale in betting against that particular outcome. Perhaps more learned members can help by confirming if the Mama-bhanja team won with a particular winning strategy that works for all or any of the possible outcomes or were they betting only on one particular type of outcome.

Shakuni may have been a doctor-er of dice instead of being a Ganitagya.

Regarding dice and chances here is some of what I have gathered from the net searches. So the credit goes to the anonymous Bharatiyas on the net. Shows how exactly ancient Indians approached the issue and what was tops on their minds.

.................

At the end of the war, Duryodhana accuses Krishna of unfair conduct, but Krishna responds with two defenses: that it was his own deceit at dice that began this conflict, and it was in order to defeat a greater evil: "The gods have destroyed demons in the past in this way." (Arjuna's father Indra defeated Vritra by trickery, a myth retold in the epic).

After the dice game, Draupadi challenges the men by asking, if Yudhishthira lost himself first, then by what right did he wager her freedom, being a slave himself? When even the wise Bhishma cannot resolve the question, she says, "I think time is out of joint. The ancient eternal dharma is lost among the Kauravas."

Some of the famous instances of games I've gathered include:

1) Shakuni's game w/ Yudhisthir
2) Nla's games w/ Pushkar (they played 2, Pushkar won the first time & sent Nala to exile, Nala won the next w/ Rituparna's training. But Pushkar didn't cheat or ill-treat Damayanti)
3) Balarama's game w/ Rukmi (which ended w/ Balarama killing Rukmi due to the latter's incessant insults to him)
4) Krishna's game w/ Rukmini (while his sudarshan chakra was sent against an ally of Paundra Vasudeva)
5) Satyabhama playing a Dice game w/ Jambavati.

So it was pretty well enjoyed a practice.

http://www.cosmicplay.net/Cosmic/Shiva/ ... tone1.html

http://nitaaiveda.com/All_Scriptures_By ... _Puran.htm

Being very pleased, Lord Shiva inquired, "O brahmana, are you quite happy and satisfied? What shall I do for you?Narada Muni replied, "Of course, I am happy just to have the chance of seeing you here, today! Actually, I have come here with a desire to see you engaged in some type of sport or game.Parvati asked, "What kind of play would you like to see? Just tell me.Narada laughingly replied, "I enjoy playing the game of dice in its many varieties. O Mahadevi, two can have much fun playing with dice.Being a little annoyed with Narada, Parvati asked, "How is it that you are familiar with the game of dice, which is liked by learned men? You are the son of Brahma and a sage of great repute. You instruct others to conform to the rules of various disciplines. You always wander about within the three worlds. There is no other noble-minded person like you.e from me in Narada again laughed and said, "I do not know how to gamble, nor do I wish to play such a game of risk. I am an ascetic, and a devotee of Lord Shiva. O princess, why do you i this way Parvati laughed while replying, "You are the knower of everything. y0u can watch as I play dice with Mahesha.'teafter, the daughter of the Himalayas played dice with her husbar^j wnile Narada Muni stood to the side and watched.rarvati waSj surrounded by her friends and attendants. Once, Parvati cheated and won and so Lord Shiva wagered a larger bet and then won. Togetther with Lord Shiva, Narada Muni laughed at Parvati,displaying tneir great pleasure tbat she had lost. Indeed, Narada also made some derogatory remarks and this made Parvati furious.laking Nairada tne nec]C) tbe goddess wanted to throw him out while offering him a suitable reply.In that angry mood, Parvati appeared extremely beautiful and so, Lord Siva delighted in looking at her. At his behest, the game resumed. Parvati asked her husband, "I lost but now, what are you willing to sitake?1 Shiva replied, "For your sake, I will offer my famous crest-jewel, the crescent moon, as well as my necklace and earrings. You of slender waist, may you win the throw of the dice and take these ornaments i were experts at gambling with dice. In the next round, Bhavani deefeated Mahadeva. She laughed and said, "O Shankara, you have loost and so give me the wager.his, Mahadeva replied with a laugh, "I have not actually been defeated by you. Let us ponder over my truthful statement. i am invinciljkjg in all respects. Gamble as much as you like—let us continue. I j wiU win_watch and see!Ambbika said to her husband, "You have been defeated by me just now. W^hat is astonishing about this?akiring him by the hand, Parvati continued, "You have been defeated bulUt you do not realize.J£ja laughed gracefully and looked at her husband in a most rascinnat^ng manner while saying, "Give me now what you had promised."

Lord Shiva replied, "You have spoken arrogantly. Actually, I am invincible. You should carefully consider this.Parvati argued, "It is true that you are invincible for everyone but by me alone you have been defeated at the game of dice. Actually, you don't know what you are saying.In this way, as the couple continued arguing, Narada Muni said, "O lady with large eyes, kindly listen to a statement that is conducive to the welfare of the universe. Was Lord Shiva actually defeated by you? Why do you tell this lie! Mahadeva, the lord of the demigods, is unconquerable. He is the lord of the three worlds and the soul of the universe."O goddess, how could he be defeated by you? Truthfully, he cannot be defeated by anyone. You do not actually know the truth about Lord Shiva because of your womanly nature.While hearing this, Parvati became extremely angry and jealous. Being highly incited by these base qualities, she replied, "O son of Brahma, you should not speak so foolishly! Of course, I have great respect for you but now, you should just be quiet! Why do you speak so highly of Lord Shiva alone? It was by my grace that he was born!Upon hearing this, Narada Muni remained silent. An associate of Lord Shiva, named Bhringi, then said, "O beautiful lady, you should not talk too much! My master is invincible. Due to your feminine nature, you do not realize that your husband is greater than the greatest. Remember how, previously, you had approached your lord, keeping Kamadeva in front of you. Don't you remember how Cupid had been burned to ashes by Mahadeva? Remember how the great lord of the devas had thereafter become gratified by your penance.While listening to Bhringi's talk, Parvati became even more enraged. She replied, "You have spoken due to partiality, being a favorite of Lord Shiva, O stupid one. There is actually no difference between Mahadeva and me. Only due to ignorance do you differentiate between us!"Bhringi retorted, "You have love for your husband but devotion and love together is what pleases the lord. It is your position to render service to Lord Shiva and so you should not argue with him."Parvati retorted, "O Bhringi, shut up or else go away! You do not know what you are talking about! Why do you babble like a ghost? You talk too much! Be careful or I will curse you!"In fact, after saying this, Parvati cursed Bhringi as follows: "O stupid one, favorite of Shankara, become devoid of flesh!"After uttering this curse, Parvati took Lord Shiva by the hand and removed Vasuki from his neck. She then took away many other ornaments from her husband, including his crescent moon and elephant hide. She even took away his loincloth while speaking in a clever way. At that time, the associates of Lord Shiva felt very embarrassed and so turned their faces away.Seeing how his associates had become miserable, Lord Shiva became angry and said to Parvati, "All of the sages, and even Lord Brahma and Lord Vishnu, are laughing at me! What are you doing? You were born in a good family—why are you behaving like this? If you are convinced that you have won then take everything but at least, leave me my loincloth!Parvati laughed and replied, "Why do you need a loincloth? After all, you are a great renunciate! Previously, you wandered through Daruvana, naked. When you approached them on the pretext of begging alms, the wives of the sages became enchanted. In fact, as a result of this, your penis fell to the ground! Considering all this, you should willingly give me what has been lost by you while gambling with me today.

While hearing this, Lord Shiva became more and more angry, staring at Parvati with his third eye. Upon witnessing Lord Shiva's rage, everyone became terrified. They said to one another, "Formerly, Kamadeva was burnt to ashes by Lord Shiva's anger and now, Parvati may face a similar fate.Parvati said to Lord Shiva, "What is the use of your staring at me with your dreadful eye? I am not Kamadeva or the sacrifice of Daksha! What do you think will happen to me? After hearing such words, Lord Shiva became inclined toward going away and living in seclusion. He thought, "A forest is the best place of residence. One who lives alone, whose mind and senses are under control, and who has renounced all possessions is truly happy. Such a person is actually a learned man. He is the knower of the highest truth! The person who has given up lust and attachment becomes liberated and self-satisfied."Thus it came to be that Lord Shiva left Parvati and went to reside within a forest called Siddhavata, where many paramahamsas (yogis of the highest realization) had their ashrams. As Lord Shiva departed from Kailasa, all of his associates, headed by Virabhadra, followed him. Parvati went to her room in a dejected mood. Surrounded by her friends and servants, she sat down in a contemplative mood.After some time, Lord Shiva bid his associates farewell and continued deeper into the forest, alone. When Mahadeva reached Siddhavata, the earth provided him a nice seat. He sat down in the padmasana, closed his eyes, and began meditation upon the Supreme Soul, Lord Vishnu.Without her husband, Parvati became dejected and so she could not take pleasure in anything around her. Seeing her like this, her friend, Vijaya, said, "O splendid lady, it was by means of great patience and austerity that you attained Lord Shiva. It was foolish for you to play dice with him. There are many faults with gambling. Don't you know this? You should just try to attain your lord's forgiveness. Let us go to the forest and seek his pardon. If you do not take my advice, your misery will continue."With a laugh, Parvati replied, "Without me, Mahadeva will never find happiness. Actually, this world has been created by me simply for his pleasure. It is he that is dependent upon me. Come now and witness the nature of my pastimes."After saying this, Parvati assumed the form of a female shabara huntress, desiring to go to the forest to see her husband. The tribal woman had a dark complexion, rosy-red lips aiyl heavy ce buttocks and shapely thighs. She decorated herself with peacock feathers. In her hand, she held a bow and a quiver hung on her back.As she entered the forest, the shabara woman was accompanied by many attendants. In this way, she approached the place where Lord Shiva was absorbed in the trance of meditation. Upon her arrival,Mahadeva came out of his trance and upon seeing the sabari, he immediately became afflicted with love. Indeed, he got up and approached Parvati, intending to seize her hand, but she suddenlydisappeared.

At this, Shambhu could understand that it was his wife who had approached him. He wandered around but could not find her and so he experienced the pangs of separation. In fact, he became greatly oppressed by feelings of longing for love and in this way, he came under the sway of delusion.In this condition, Lord Shiva saw Parvati once again. He said to the huntress, "O lady of slender waist, who are you? To whom do you belong?"Parvati replied, "I am searching for my husband, who is omniscient, independent, free from illusion, and the lord of all these worlds.Lord Shiva said, "O gentle lady, I am the most suitable husband for you. and no one else. O beautiful lady, think about what I have said.Parvati smilingly replied, "You say that you are the one I am searching for but the beautiful lady that had sought you by means of severe austerities has been abandoned by you. It appears that you are very difficult to please. Anyway, whatever you said to me should not be spoken of again.Lord Shiva said, "O lady with large eyes, do not speak like this. That woman has not been abandoned by me. By seeing my wretched condition, you should be inclined to carry out my wishes.Girisha laughed and replied, "You are an ascetic, free from attachment. You take pleasure in the self alone. You are the vanquisher of Madana (Cupid). Therefore, it is impossible for me to attain you. In fact, no one can conquer you. Still, what was said to me before should not be repeated.Lord Shiva said, "Be my wife. Nothing else should be said by you.After saying this, Lord Shiva seized the huntress by the hand. With a smile, she respectfully said, "Let me go. This is not proper, especially for an ascetic. Do not force me. Instead, go and make your desire known to my father.Mahadeva asked, "Where is your father residing? I shall go and see him.Thereafter, the shabari brought Lord Shiva to see her father, the lord of the Himalayas. The huntress pointed him out to Shankara and said, "Give up all shyness. Go and ask him for my hand in marriage. Do not delay.Lord Shiva bowed down to Himavan and said, "O best of mountains, please give me your magnificent daughter, for I am exceedingly distressed."
Upon hearing this, Himavan stood up, took Lord Shiva by the hand, and said, "What are you saying? This is most improper! Why are you asking for something when you yourself are the creator of the three worlds?"At that moment, Narada Muni arrived there. Laughing, he said to Lord Shiva, "O bearer of the trident, listen to my words because they convey the essence of truth. Associating with young women only adds to one's distress. You are the master, the lord of the worlds, and greater than the greatest. Ponder over this and then tell me what you truthfully feel.Lord Shiva laughed and replied, "O Narada, you have certainly spoken the truth. The downfall of men is surely caused by the association of young women. There is no doubt about this. I was fascinated with this lady and brought here. This is all the mysterious effect of the illusory energy of the Lord. Now, I shall return to the forest."

After the departure of Lord Shiva, Narada Muni said to Parvati, "Lord Shiva should be approached for the purpose of begging for his forgiveness. Only this course of action will bestow happiness upon you.After hearing this, everyone present bowed down to offer obeisances to Lord Shiva. They then stood up to offer him prayers in glorification. In response, Mahadeva returned to receive the worship of his associates and admirers, beginning with Brahma. He then sat on a divine throne, along with Parvati and in this way, everything was reconciled.

member_20317 · Post by **member_20317** » 29 Jun 2013 23:36

brihaspati wrote: Sacrificing the first born is understandable as an agreement between assumed divine and the parent, but it could not have been as likely to be repeated child after child. Unless this had to do with ritual prevalence of child sacrifice to keep the river flowing sort of belief - possible in a very dry period of history. But that would push the date to at least 11 to 13 kya.

Gurudev my comments here:

http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 0#p1477039

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 30 Jun 2013 01:25

RaviG, There is another dice game between Karna and Duryodhana's wife Princess Bhanumati. She bets a necklace and refuses to give it up on losing. Karna grabs it and it breaks all over the floor. And Duryodhana enters just then and sees nothing wrong in his wife and best friend wagering.
Its told as sign of extreme friendship between D&K.

------
In case of Pushkar winning the game with Nala it is told in the story that Kala purusha entered Nala's body after some apacharam and induced him to play the dice game. At same time Dwapara purusha entered the dice and made Pushkar win.

Both Kala and Dwapara purush were late for Damayanti's swyamavara and wanted to inflict problems on Nala. Damayanti was collateral sufferer.

Ref: Naishidiyam by Sri Harsha and Telugu version by Srinatha Kavi.

Nilesh Oak · Post by **Nilesh Oak** » 30 Jun 2013 04:24

ramana wrote:
In case of Pushkar winning the game with Nala it is told in the story that Kala purusha entered Nala's body after some apacharam and induced him to play the dice game. At same time Dwapara purusha entered the dice and made Pushkar win.

Both Kala and Dwapara purush were late for Damayanti's swyamavara and wanted to inflict problems on Nala. Damayanti was collateral sufferer.

Ref: Naishidiyam by Sri Harsha and Telugu version by Srinatha Kavi.

Is this allegorical way of stating that time of Nala Damayanti was that of Treta or Krita (Satya) yuga. (i.e. before Kali and Dwapara Yugas?). Of course Kali and Dwapara (and even Krita) are used in the sense of certain combination in the game of dice.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 30 Jun 2013 04:44

No allegory. We first hear the story in Aranyaparvam being narrated to Dharamraja that it occurs in an earlier yuga. One commentator says its a bhimba pratibhimba(mirror) story. As Nala story has many aspects similar to Dharma even wrt to five suitors and one bride, Dice game, losses, living incognito, recovery of fortunes. Only war is missing.

member_20317 · Post by **member_20317** » 30 Jun 2013 08:42

A wordsmithery of that, is what I wanted to but failed to put across.

Indians seem to be very well aware of the game of chances and of the link between odds and life or of the link between odds in life and odds in divine. It is a one single whole. And it probably was in the light of these well understood principles that Yudhistir decided to play. But then it takes a kamina to spot a kamina. Howsoever high the confidence in the reality a confidence-trickster will always be able to devise a way around your confidence on the reality. Reality I admit cannot be tricked with but a man's confidence/understanding in it can always be subjected to trickery.

General picture:

1) Shakuni brings his own dice. Probability lessons in 12th standard kept mentioning a true coin, true dice etc. The first and basic requirement gets undermined.

2) Shakuni throws the dice always. For everybody else it is a pre-assumption that the dice is true and logically it follows that standard rules of odds and chances apply.

3) Shakuni was the prime instigator both of the game and subsequently of getting Yudhistir to suspend his better judgement. Sentences like the following show the extent of Shakuni's deviousness. Note what he says and what he leaves unsaid.

"Shakuni says to Yudhishthir, “Sire! To wager yourself and to lose is an act of extreme impiety (adharma). It’s a great sin to wager yourself while you still possess wealth. Sire! Your dearest Draupadi is such a hand that you have not yet lost. Thus wager Krishnā and by her, win yourself back."

4) Both the Mama and Bhanja have not clarified what they are betting of their own even though Yudhistir asks Duryodhan what he is betting from his belongings.

5) All Pandavas are angry by the end even though not one (except Draupadi acting post facto) protests them being wagered. The anger can only be explained if they understand that the normal rules of a game of chance are not working and something is amiss. Here is what Narender Kohli ji has to say about the inference drawn by Yudhistir just after the first hand.

Narender Kohli -

As soon as he loses the first hand, Yudhishthir says to Shakuni, “Shakuni! Shakuni!! You defeated me in this hand by cheating.”[12] It has not been explained though how Shakuni cheated.

6) Following exchange again highlighted by Narender Kohli ji clearly bring out the vantage point from which Yudhistir thought on the subject of games of chances.

Narender Kohli -

After reaching Hastinapur, an entire chapter is dedicated to Yudhishthir’s argument with Shakuni, where Shakuni defends gambling and Yudhisthir opposes it.

1. “Gambling causes quarrels and brawls. No intelligent person would like to gamble…”[2]

2. “I have no desire to gamble.”[3]

3. “Gambling is a form of deception and a cause for sin. One can neither demonstrate valiance suitable to a kshatriya, nor are there any set rules for it.”[4]

My submission is that it was Yudhistir who was better aware of the discipline of probability and displayed his confidence by actually acting on that understanding. Shakuni on the other hand had a confidence on himself and on his dice and despite that he never had the confidence to actually bet any material of his own or of his Bhanja. Which implies that Shakuni's confidence in his trickery is actually even less then Yudhistir's confidence in his mathematics. The kind of confidence that Shakuni has can only arise from an untrue dice. One that is designed with UnRelaxed Static Stability and is designed to fall in a particular manner. That is why I requested the more learned to reveal/confirm, if the Mama Bhanja team were betting on Paav-Bara

as was shown in BR Chopra's series. This could additionally also show how the folklore even if not technically accurate carries more truthfulness and collective wisdom then one or two smart guys with scientific training working alone in an unrelated area.

What if I hollow out about half the dice. I would expect the lighter side to show up more often like those 'hit me inflatables'.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 30 Jun 2013 09:20

RaviG, The dice used is called pachika. It is four sided long rectangle which is tapered at the ends. Each of the sides has dots: one, two, three and four.
Now two of them are thrown together.

Rules are complicated.

Am not sure how it works.

RamaY had described it based on hearing a pravachanam guru.

Here is an amusement by Pradip Bhattacharya, IAS 1980 batch

Third Dice Game

Also for Nilesh Oak:

Two eclipses in thirteen days

Murugan · Post by **Murugan** » 30 Jun 2013 11:33

chopat with pachika

I have played this game in my childhood. But this may not be the same in Mahabharat times

Murugan · Post by **Murugan** » 30 Jun 2013 11:51

People of our desh never stop to amuse.

Our next door neighbour is a couple staying there for last 9 years. We used to talk a lot about politics and economics. The guy looked totally materialistic and only interested in money matters.

The other day I told him about this book of Nilesh-ji and he started sharing his knowledge about Ramayana, Purana etc which was pleasant shock to me. He has by-hearted many verses of Tulsikrut Ramayana.

He tole me two very important thing

1) The avatar of lord Rama is Anukaraniya अनुकरणीय (that one can follow easily)

2) Avatar of Lord Krishna is Chintaniya चिन्तनीय (one can think a lot over it but anukaran is not possible, e.g., it is very difficult to eliminate an Uncle and an Aunt at a very young age, looking at a small snake we start shivering, but he killed dreaded kaliya naga, he ran away from Mathura, started a new life in dwarka and still worshipped as Ranachhod Raya - one who did downhill skiing for good of people and many things that humans cannot emulate easily)

Another fact he told me is that in whole of the universe only taking birth as human is the best thing that can happen to any jiva. Not even Devas because Moksha मोक्ष is possible in Manushya Yoni Onlee.

***

Few days later, his wife came and she quoted Tulsikrut ramayana telling that we take birth as a trustee, we come empty handed, we acquire lot of things and money and we go empty handed. We have a responsibility to wisely use resources given to us by god. Dont accumulate too much for your children, let them also earn their livelihood by reasonable efforts.

Now they are not just neighbours!

Nilesh Oak · Post by **Nilesh Oak** » 30 Jun 2013 22:00

Ramana Garu wrote..

Also for Nilesh Oak:

Two eclipses in thirteen days

Thanks Ramana Garu.

I have addressed and incorporated work of S Balakrishna in my book and have shown that my timeline (and specifically lunar and solar eclipses) corroborate well with logic of gap of 13 days between lunar and solar eclipses, as proposed by Shri S Balakrishna. (Pages 101, 187 and 198 in my book)

arindam · Post by **arindam** » 01 Jul 2013 02:16

ramana wrote: Rules are complicated.

Am not sure how it works.

The rules explained in depth.

http://kreedaakaushalya.blogspot.in/200 ... agade.html

Pagade is the national board game of India. This race game is known by numerous names in different part of the vast country. It is called as Pagade (Kannada), Chaupar (Hindi), Chausar (Hindi), Chopat (Hindi), Pachisi (Hindi), Parcheesi (English - USA), Sokkattan (Tamil), Dayakattam (Tamil), Pagdi Pat (Marathi).

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 01 Jul 2013 02:21

Pradip Bhattacharya's

Curious Story of Barbareek

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 01 Jul 2013 02:30

I am not sure if it was a board game or just roll the four sided dice.

Anyway here is Pradip Bhattacharya

Lalitha Devi

It is a short description of Devi Bhagavatam.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 01 Jul 2013 05:17

It may not be the French mathematicians then who were the originators of probability theory. It could be very well undocumented from MB days, via shakuni theories. Generations ahead, of course human brains flourished better towards science and techniques, and the world sees more of it rather. Or Am I co-relating, in that discoveries are different and actualities are different.. why co-relate perhaps.. but JMT from the story points alone.
?

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 01 Jul 2013 06:34

SaiK, King Rituparna in the Nala Damayanti story counts the number of leaves on a large tree just by counting the leaves on a small branch. Nala does not beleive him and stops the chariot and counts the leaves.

CRR Rao the great statistician says that is an excellent example of sampling estimation.

Nilesh Oak · Post by **Nilesh Oak** » 01 Jul 2013 20:42

ramana wrote:SaiK, King Rituparna in the Nala Damayanti story counts the number of leaves on a large tree just by counting the leaves on a small branch. Nala does not beleive him and stops the chariot and counts the leaves.

CRR Rao the great statistician says that is an excellent example of sampling estimation.

And of course Grihastmad (the Vinakar- weaver) of Rigveda...can be considered known originator of Multiplication tables.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 03 Jul 2013 06:32

Just suggesting : people with the knowledge can explore the possibility of emphasizing the two cases that have recently struck me in my model of MB as a dual layered narrative - at one deeper level encoding astronomical observations too. In any case these two for the moment are

(a) the pancha Pandava and Draupadi could be a five-star group centred around a prominent axial star
(b) the repeated theme of ashtama garva - as in Devabrata : and Ganga - is it any seven star grouping crossing into Milky Way?

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 05 Jul 2013 08:15

venug ji,

fyi:
http://www.thehindu.com/features/friday ... epage=true
Of the 33,000 books on Tamil literature and grammar, 60 per cent were collected by Dr. U.V.S., and 1,363 were published between 1812 and 1899.

The library has 33 volumes of Dr. U.V.S.’s diaries, the first of which he wrote in 1893. The palm-leaf manuscripts are the discoveries of a life-time of toil of U.V. Swaminatha Iyer, who was born at Uthamadanapuram, near Thanjavur, on February 19, 1855. He was a student of the great Tamil scholar, Meenakshi Sundaram Pillai. Dr. U.V.S. traversed the length and breadth of Tamil Nadu, retrieved the palm-leaf manuscripts from individual owners, wealthy landlords and Saiva mutts, meticulously transcribed and published them.

Murugan · Post by **Murugan** » 05 Jul 2013 11:52

Rajiv Malhotra

Keynote talk at U of Mass July 11 on my new book: Defending Vivekananda's Hinduism against "neo-Hinduism" thesis.

http://www.umassd.edu/media/umassdartmo ... ngress.pdf …

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 06 Jul 2013 21:18

Beautiful story of Shwetketu:

In the UPANISHADS there is a story about a young man, Shwetketu. He studied in the nearby forest university, graduated with honors, came back home with a very great ego because he had come first in the university. His father looked out from the window as he was returning.

And he told his wife, "He has gained knowledge; one can see even in his walk his ego, pride. But we have not sent him for that. I will have to send him again. So don't come in between, don't start weeping and crying, 'You are sending our son away again.'"

Shwetketu came. The father said, "Don't enter the house! I know that you have learned all the scriptures. But do you know who you are?"

Shwetketu said, "It was not part of the course. I have learned the four VEDAS, all the UPANISHADS.

But the question 'Who am I?' was not part of the syllabus in the university."

The father said, "Then go back to the old seer who is the head of the forest university and ask him the question. And unless you learn it don't come back; because there is no point in coming back.

I'm living just to see that you have known yourself."

He was turned back from the outside of the door. Shwetketu was very much disturbed, shocked. He was hoping to be received with a great welcome and this was a strange welcome. He went to his master and told him, "My father says what you have taught me is absolutely useless. You have not taught me the real thing, 'Who am I?'"

The master said, "That is true, but it is a difficult task, very difficult."

He said, "Whatever - I have to do it because without doing it I cannot enter into my house!"

So the master said, "You do one thing: take these one hundred cows, and when they have become one thousand by giving birth to new calves... Remain in the deepest forest where nobody comes.

Even if you see somebody, hide! Don't speak human language, just remain with the cows. And when they have become one thousand, bring them back."

Strange idea, Shwetketu thought. "When will they become one thousand? It may take half of my life."

But the master was telling him, so he took those one hundred cows and went into the forest as deep as possible where there was no question of anybody coming. For a few days, ideas continued in his mind. But how can you continue to think the same things every day? And there was nobody to talk to.

Finally he became silent. Years passed, he became almost like a cow. Just living with the cows, sleeping with the cows, taking care of the cows, the cow world was his world. He forgot humanity completely.

The story is so beautiful, that he has forgotten even the idea that when they become one thousand he has to return, because an idea is language. And he had forgotten even to count. And things were going beautifully into utter silence.

The story says that finally one cow had to say, "I cannot resist the temptation to speak because we are now one thousand. And you seem to have forgotten everything. Now it is time to take us back to the master."

Shwetketu brought the one thousand cows. The disciples saw from far away one thousand cows and they told the master, "Shwetketu is coming after many, many years. And he is bringing one thousand cows."

The master said, "Don't use the word 'Shwetketu' anymore. Say one thousand and one cows are coming back!"

And that's how it was. Shwetketu came and stood there just as other cows were standing. He didn't say a single word. And his eyes had become so pure, so silent, that the master shook him, "Now, get out of your cowhood! You are capable now of facing your father. Go back."

So without saying anything he simply went to his father. His father looked again from the window.

He said, "My God! He has really known. And I myself don't know who I am!"

So he jumped out of the backdoor telling his wife, "It does not look right because he will touch my feet. It does not look right that a man who knows should touch the feet of a man who is ignorant.

It is very embarrassing. I'm going. You take care of your son. It may take a few years for me, I am old, but I will try and I will not come back again until I know who I am. I cannot face my son; he's approaching so beautifully, so humble, so not-knowing, with no pride, with no ego - just a pure silence, a cool breeze."

http://oshosearch.net/Convert/Articles_ ... 00006.html

Murugan · Post by **Murugan** » 06 Jul 2013 21:35

^ Super

Yagnasri · Post by **Yagnasri** » 07 Jul 2013 19:13

ramana wrote:murugan, Have you read Naishadiyam by Sri Harsha?

Its Nala Damayanti story in Sanskrit.

It was translated into Telugu by Srinatha.

Not by Sri Harsha sir. It is written by Maagha and also called as Maahga Kavyam. Magha said to be the best sanskrit writer.

Upama Kaalidasasya, BharaviArtha gowravam,
Dandi na padalalithya maaghesanthi thryovedhaah.

Maagha has all the 3 best features of the other three greats.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 10 Jul 2013 02:26

Always wondered about ViraShaivas and Lingayats.

http://www.esamskriti.com/essay-chapter ... ent-1.aspx

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 11 Jul 2013 01:11

It struck me today that there were two gambles in the Mahabharata.

The first gamble is the well known dice game between the Kauravas and the Pandavas.

The second gamble is between Yudhisthir and Duryodhana on the 18th day. After Shalya is killed, Duryodhana hides in a lake.

Y realizes that D has to be defeated and killed. However D was unwilling to fight and even gives away the kingdowm which is not his in the first place.

Hence Y makes 'deep play' (gamble of high stakes) and offer D the choice of fighting any of the five with D's weapon of choice and that winner of the combat will rule Hastinapur.
Even Krishna admonishes Y of the hazards of this play.
But Y is confident that D will choose to fight only Bhima as winning or losing against any other Pandava would be demeaning to the vain Duryodhana.

So this is the second gamble of Yushistir and this time he wins.
Because no dice are involved people don't recognize this as a gamble.

Vikas · Post by **Vikas** » 11 Jul 2013 12:45

Actually asking for 5 villages after 13 long years too can be construed as a gamble. What if D would have agreed or Dhrithrashtra forced him to agree to 5 villages. Pandav then could not go back fighting Hastinapur because they would have gotten what they asked for.
It was fraught with Risk and they were counting on D's inherent desire to not give an inch to 5 brothers which would bring war and eventual destruction of the house of Puru.

prahaar · Post by **prahaar** » 11 Jul 2013 12:56

There is one more instance of gamble in Mahabharata, the one between Jarasandha and Krishna. Jarasandha is challenged to choose the opponent of his choice, and again he chooses Bheema for the dwandha-yuddha.

I believe, like a true shishya Yudhishthira had learnt from Krishna that the best way to defeat an opponent is to utilize his weakness (false ego of Jarasandha and Duryodhana lead to their downfall).

Nilesh Oak · Post by **Nilesh Oak** » 12 Jul 2013 04:11

VikasRaina wrote:Actually asking for 5 villages after 13 long years too can be construed as a gamble. What if D would have agreed or Dhrithrashtra forced him to agree to 5 villages. Pandav then could not go back fighting Hastinapur because they would have gotten what they asked for.
It was fraught with Risk and they were counting on D's inherent desire to not give an inch to 5 brothers which would bring war and eventual destruction of the house of Puru.

I remember reading somewhere (no details unfortunately handy + the identification of those 5 villages could always be disputed) that the five villages Pandavas demanded were of strategic importance, and thus, assuming D had accepted the offer, Pandavas felt comfortable building their empire from there.

Other than 5 villages and possibly their names, none of this 'intent' alluded to (by me.. aka writer of original article I refer to) is part of Mahabharata text. This is rather interpretation of it in our times.

Still your point of gambling (by asking for 5 villages) is valid and remains unaffected.