Discussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

[RamaY]

Why is this human compass intact for Pandvas, especially Yudhishtara, who put up his wife as an object to be given away?

Excellent question. Will write what I read, heard and could understand.

[ManuT]

RamaY

Sir, it has been a while, hence I asked.

I am asking only this as a favour, as I would have thought that Duryodhan meets Karna for the first time when he takes his side in the argument and crowns him king of anga, so that Karna can challenge Arjun in front of hastinapur.

Do you imply Karna goes to Parshuram after that.

Little confused.

Thanks


-------
initial query was

Starting from his formative years, Karna’s emphasis always was on proving his power and being recognized as the most powerful archer. He joined Drona’s gurukula along with Pandavas, Kauravas and many other princes. His competition with Arjuna started here and it led him to Duryodhana’s camp. His ultimate goal is to defeat Arjuna and remain the most power warrior on earth. In this process he didn’t mind approaching his gurus thru deception (lies to Parasurama that he was a Brahmin).

RamaY ji
from what I thought I knew, Drona declines Karna be his teacher as he has been hired for the educating the princes, and in that filling in for Kripacharya who was the Kul-Guru, but was being requested more at more at the court.

I didn't think Duryodhan and Karna met before the public graduation ceremony.

Karna then goes to Parshuram and on being asked only clarifies that he is not a khastriya, with whom Pashuram had a feud, so the story goes...

[Yayavar]

Whatever impression (the victim) we got is from the (sic) secular historians and movies like (in Telugu) Dana Veera Sura Karna.

It is in popular culture. That dont make it p-sec. My source in recent times is Ramadhari Sinh Dinakar's Rashmirathi. I dont view him as psec.

I'll look into the original that Putanaja has referenced earlier.

Drona teaching Karna is not known in popular telling. What is known is that Drona stops him from competing with Arjuna, and it is then that Duryodhana crowns him Anga-naresh.

Drona/whoever stopped Karna was for a reason. That day's demonstration was for Kuru-princes only (Pandavas and Kauravas). Not a duel to check who is the best in the world. The objective was to demonstrate the people that the next generation is ready to rule; not to prove that they are better than so and so.

Again the popular telling is that he challenges and replicates the feats of Arjuna. Drona intervenes and states that the demo is for princes only and not for a suta-putra. That is where the story unfolds - he wants to be the best and beat Arjuna.

Certainly his under-priviliged days ended with the crowning but his hurt stayed. It is the hurt that is required for the story to build up and have some content in it. Otherwise it would be insipid story telling.

How could he be hurt when he didn't know about his birth until Kunti/Krishna told him, just before the war?

It is the desire to best the prince and the hurt of rejection from the top table. It has nothing to do with the birth. It is a faulty ambition if you want to consider it that.

Actually, it is to his credit that he does not reject his friend just because the story of his birth is revealed to him. He is not willing walk over to the other side after having lived a certain life and now being shown a possible positive outcome, maybe even the kingdom (being the eldest son?).

The flawed heroes are called villains, sir. It is like calling Arjuna a arisen villain

Beyond a point, the language itself becomes a tool/hurdle

. You say a villain since you view him as evil. If one alters the view to the character striving for something good and falling short of it due to circumstances or personal limitations then he is a flawed-hero. Beyond that is ones preference to be pedantic or imbue the words with certain subtleness.

[ManuT]

Viv, the idea of a hero with a flaw (hamartia) is a Greek construct. All Greek heroes have fatal flaws. This idea made its way into West via Greco-Roman inculturation.

In India we have matchless ideals like Maryada Rama and Arjuna the matchless warrior.
Karna with his fatal flwas is not the ideal to pursue for it leads to eventual defeat.

Sir
Were Karna's flaws his fault though? Doesn't he facilitate Dharma in a way, by not switching sides over to Pandav after discussions with Krishna & Kunti? (because by switching sides, he being the eldest of both sides, would have beeen crowned, to which he would have gifted it to Duryodhan to pay off his debt)

Arjun needed Krishna to egg him to fight, Karna fought with the burden of birth, debt, 2-curses & Shalya.
All he wanted to be was to accepted as a great archer equal to Arjun.

I just find it interesting.

[Yayavar]

^^exactly. See my comment above on the same.

[brihaspati]

MB was written up by people who judged people's dharma or adharma - at least partly by what they thought were entitlements. These entitlements were determined by their social positions, and people's expectations were supposed to be cut according to that. This often leads to contradiction within the narrative.

If inheritance was decided by patriarchal primogeniture only, then Karna was not entitled to royalty and privileges. So if the deshachar was dharma, Karna was committing adharma. But then any offer made to him that he could take precedence over his Kaunteya brothers - as part of a war bargain, was then adharma.

Obviously when the war actually took place, dharma stood for something else. We often confuse prevalent social custom or claimed social norm with dharma. By doing so we land up into strange contradictions by which dharma seems to become conditional and contextual on place, time and individual.

[krisna]

^^^^
This is my story/understanding from various sources- dont remember-
1) Drona had observed Arjuna as a student. Arjuna was dedicated and gifted archer. Drona promised him to be the best archer in the world. In the gathering Karna equals Arjuna in his archery skills. Other issue was the fight among equals- in this case Arjuna was a prince but whereabouts about Karna were not known. His father Radha the charioteer was present in the gathering. The princely crowd laughed at Karna. He felt hurt. Kunti fainted on recognising him. . Drona intervenes and says fight can be between equals only. Hence the fight was stopped.
In this melee, Duryodhan who had enimity with pandavas realised the importance of Karna on his side and immediately proclaimed as AngaRaja.
But the contest did not occur.
2) Interestingly Drona also learnt his skills at the able hands of Parashurama.
3) About the insect/scorpion bite on Karna when Parashurama was sleeping was a story to inform the readers that Parashurama somehow came to know about his kshatriya lineage. Hence the curse which proved fatal in the 13 th day of Mahabharath war.
4) During various stages in Karna's life he was mocked by supporters of pandavas. Here Duryodhan was always there to support him for obvious reasons. Note - none of the other 3 pandava princes mocked him except perhaps Bhima and Arjuna. Somehow intense rivalry was between Arjuna and Karna.
5) Indra Arjuna's godfather knew that there will be a great battle between the two, henc ehe came under the guise of an ascetic and asked for alms during the morning prayers. Despite Surya the god father of Karna asking him not to give away his kavach and kundala he gives them away. In fact Karna says to the ascetic that he is Indra. Indra felt humbled and ashamed. He asks for any boon to be given to Karna who asks for Indrastra. Karna thought of using it against Arjuna but fate(Ghatotkacha) intervened.
6) when war clouds were immiment, Kunti similarly goes to Karna during his morning prayers, she informs him of his birth. But Karna was unmoved. Kunti said that being the eldest of pandavas he will be the king and all his brothers will be by his side. He rebukes her for this. He says he will fight with kauravas as he feels it is his duty to do so whetever the world thinks of him. Karna it is said will not leave any almsseeker without anything- hence he promised that Kunti will have 5 sons at the end of the war (prophetic of him to say). he mentions either Arjuna or himself will be alive.
It is believed since this event a curse has been on them- that wimmin have been unable to keep secrets. - Hence the popular saying never reveal a secret to wimmin.
7) For all is principles and brilliance he also mocked and ridiculed Lord Krishna proving he is not a righteous person.
7) During the war, Karna had the measure of the pandava princes but he allowed them to go scot free.
8 ) Ultimately Karna met his death with the help of the Lord at the hands of Arjuna.
Proving whatever you do if you dont have Lord's support you are nothing in the end.
Lord always supports the righteous people.
In the story of Karna, it reveals whatever one says about Karna about his principles, he had fatal flaws to be a real hero.
One should also remember that he did not respect Bhishma and others. He refused to enter the war as long as Bhishma was present. He wanted to be the comandeer in chief. He doubted many of his own team members. He also refused to listen to Duryodhan. He was not a team member to the core. He wanted Bhishma to die so that he can enter the war and win single handedly for Duryodhan.

[nachiket]

He refused to enter the war as long as Bhishma was present. He wanted to be the comandeer in chief. He doubted many of his own team members. He also refused to listen to Duryodhan. He was not a team member to the core. He wanted Bhishma to die so that he can enter the war and win single handedly for Duryodhan.

Hmmm. I always thought it was Bhishma who refused to have Karna in the army because he had deceived his guru Parshurama.

[nachiket]

Obviously when the war actually took place, dharma stood for something else. We often confuse prevalent social custom or claimed social norm with dharma. By doing so we land up into strange contradictions by which dharma seems to become conditional and contextual on place, time and individual.

I agree. For example, if we are going to judge people in the MB objectively, then Yudhishtir should deserve as much contempt and blame for what happened to Draupadi as Duryodhan, Dushasan and Karna. What kind of a man would put up his own brothers and wife at stake in a game of dice?

[brihaspati]

I think we take MB as a lesson in dharma and that we must take sides on the side of the chosen ones. The chosen ones were simply tools of the supreme manipulator of events as per the narrative. However MB was perhaps not intended as a lesson in dharma - but rather as an exploration by multiple contesting voices over what dharma should be. Its the search for dharma in the Indic, rather than fixing it in stone.

Note that deep underlying everything - there is consciousness of even the "lord" in his manifestation on earth, being flawed too - and has to suffer [which is spinned as he having decided to suffer] the penalty - through the arrow through the feet [ one key for me in that Christians started out from a Vaishnavite interpretation rather than pure Buddhism].

[Yayavar]

It is deliberately ambiguous in many details- hall mark of an enduring story. On the broader level it tells te story of (mostly)right+god vs (mostly)wrong.

[abhishek_sharma]

putnaja: thanks, will read.

It though spoils my view - it is a much better if the heroes and their opposition are equally matches with some flaws here or there. When one side is so overwhelmingly better it takes away from the story. I did search the net a bit and as per some tellings, in the battle of Virata, Arjuna shoots an arrow which puts everyone to sleep. Well, at least it is not a direct battle then.

People have different skills. What kind of battle where people fighting when one of them could live as long as he wanted (Bheesma)?

I still like Karna's story as a flawed hero who has to overcome odds, is conflicted by various ties, and makes some choices and then sticks to them.

To put it mildly, you are suffering from selective amnesia. What odds was he suffering when he wanted Draupadi to disrobe? What odds was he suffering when he was involved in a plot to poison Bheema? And what kind of "hero" calls a woman a prostitute? Flawed hero indeed!

Maybe he could have been less involved in Duryodhan's conspiracies like Bheesma, Drona and Vidur? Did he stop/dissuade them from their conspiracies? Hardly. In fact, he was most actively involved in them.

Try to think more carefully in future.

[abhishek_sharma]

And the same analysis can be applied to Karna. The Mahabharata or Ramayana have the ideal heroes and a lot of flawed heroes. These latter have reasons, personal flaws that limit them and illustrate why they eventually fail like you have described above. And in many ways they are more instructive in their contrast from the ideal hero perhaps.

This is really the worst kind of analysis. It is like saying that there is an IQ test which could be used to study the relative intelligence of Einstein and monkeys. Can I say that Einstein is an "ideal genius" and monkeys are "geniuses with a few flaws"?

Why do you call Karna a "flawed hero"? Why don't you call him a "daan-veer paapi"?

[putnanja]

...
...
4) During various stages in Karna's life he was mocked by supporters of pandavas. Here Duryodhan was always there to support him for obvious reasons. Note - none of the other 3 pandava princes mocked him except perhaps Bhima and Arjuna. Somehow intense rivalry was between Arjuna and Karna.
5) Indra Arjuna's godfather knew that there will be a great battle between the two, henc ehe came under the guise of an ascetic and asked for alms during the morning prayers. Despite Surya the god father of Karna asking him not to give away his kavach and kundala he gives them away. In fact Karna says to the ascetic that he is Indra. Indra felt humbled and ashamed. He asks for any boon to be given to Karna who asks for Indrastra. Karna thought of using it against Arjuna but fate(Ghatotkacha) intervened.
6) when war clouds were immiment, Kunti similarly goes to Karna during his morning prayers, she informs him of his birth. But Karna was unmoved. Kunti said that being the eldest of pandavas he will be the king and all his brothers will be by his side. He rebukes her for this. He says he will fight with kauravas as he feels it is his duty to do so whetever the world thinks of him. Karna it is said will not leave any almsseeker without anything- hence he promised that Kunti will have 5 sons at the end of the war (prophetic of him to say). he mentions either Arjuna or himself will be alive.
It is believed since this event a curse has been on them- that wimmin have been unable to keep secrets. - Hence the popular saying never reveal a secret to wimmin.
7) For all is principles and brilliance he also mocked and ridiculed Lord Krishna proving he is not a righteous person.
7) During the war, Karna had the measure of the pandava princes but he allowed them to go scot free.
8 ) Ultimately Karna met his death with the help of the Lord at the hands of Arjuna.
Proving whatever you do if you dont have Lord's support you are nothing in the end.
Lord always supports the righteous people.
In the story of Karna, it reveals whatever one says about Karna about his principles, he had fatal flaws to be a real hero.
One should also remember that he did not respect Bhishma and others. He refused to enter the war as long as Bhishma was present. He wanted to be the comandeer in chief. He doubted many of his own team members. He also refused to listen to Duryodhan. He was not a team member to the core. He wanted Bhishma to die so that he can enter the war and win single handedly for Duryodhan.

Karna was jealous of Arjuna and felt that he was better than Arjuna. Also, he egged on Duryodhana to kill pandavas by hook or crook. He participated in Vanavrata burning episode, in disrobing Draupadi, to go to the forest to humiliate pandavas, in stealing the cows from Virata , in the fight with Abhimanyu where he shot him from behind etc.

When Drona asked the kuru princes to defeat King Drupada as part of his guru dakshina, Duryodhana, even with Karna's help couldn't defeat Drupada. The pandavas later defeated Drupada and brought him to Drona. Similar is the case against Gandharvas when they captured Duryodhana. For all his prowess, Karna couldn't defeat the gandharvas.

While Karna's promise to Kunti to not kill any of the other pandavas apart from Arjuna is well known, what is not known is that when Bhima tried to follow Arjuna when Arjuna was trying to kill Jarasandha, he defeats Karna but doesn't kill him, as Arjuna had taken an oath to kill Karna. Later, Karna defeats Bhima and keeps his promise to his mother.

[JwalaMukhi]

I agree. For example, if we are going to judge people in the MB objectively, then Yudhishtir should deserve as much contempt and blame for what happened to Draupadi as Duryodhan, Dushasan and Karna. What kind of a man would put up his own brothers and wife at stake in a game of dice?

JMT. It is a very real illustration of the human foibles, that one could be addicted, that even a character as Yudhistir succumbs. The take home lesson would be that mere mortals have to be extra cautious and be on consistent guard so as not to fall prey to the lure of enticements.

[abhishek_sharma]

I agree. For example, if we are going to judge people in the MB objectively, then Yudhishtir should deserve as much contempt and blame for what happened to Draupadi as Duryodhan, Dushasan and Karna. What kind of a man would put up his own brothers and wife at stake in a game of dice?

Really? Do people generally disrobe/dishonor a woman in a game of dice? It is like saying that a woman was raped because she was outside her house at 11pm. Mistake of woman's family members == Mistake of rapist.

Yudhistira did make a mistake, but doing a grand == between two sides is just third-rate logic.

[abhishek_sharma]

Again the popular telling is that he challenges and replicates the feats of Arjuna. Drona intervenes and states that the demo is for princes only and not for a suta-putra. That is where the story unfolds - he wants to be the best and beat Arjuna.

...

It is the desire to best the prince and the hurt of rejection from the top table.

There were a few events in which he was beaten by Arjuna. I thought he should have got a good assessment of his capabilities from those events.

It is a faulty ambition if you want to consider it that.

Faulty ambition onlee. I am sure Dawood Ibrahim's activities could be explained by "bad circumstances" and "faulty ambition".

Actually, it is to his credit that he does not reject his friend just because the story of his birth is revealed to him. He is not willing walk over to the other side after having lived a certain life and now being shown a possible positive outcome, maybe even the kingdom (being the eldest son?).

Sorry, this argument is beyond the pale. He was hardly living in discomfort with Duryodhana. Why would he reject the luxuries of royal life when the result of war was unknown? Living with the immoral king of the land is hardly creditworthy.

How many bad arguments can you post in a single day? There should be an upper limit.

[Yayavar]

I still like Karna's story as a flawed hero who has to overcome odds, is conflicted by various ties, and makes some choices and then sticks to them.

To put it mildly, you are suffering from selective amnesia. What odds was he suffering when he wanted Draupadi to disrobe? What odds was he suffering when he was involved in a plot to poison Bheema? And what kind of "hero" calls a woman a prostitute? Flawed hero indeed!

Maybe he could have been less involved in Duryodhan's conspiracies like Bheesma, Drona and Vidur? Did he stop/dissuade them from their conspiracies? Hardly. In fact, he was most actively involved in them.

Try to think more carefully in future.

Itna gussa kyun Abhishekji? The point is to understand the epic - and to me it is at two levels. As a superb story with varied characters and good development of each character, warts and all; and as a guide to right and wrong.

Is the amnesia only attached to Karna's behaviour and not to Yudhishtra who thought nothing of putting up Draupadi as an object?

[abhishek_sharma]

No amnesia sir, if you can read, the answer is posted above. Let me repeat in case your eyes are not working properly:

Yudhistira did make a mistake, but one should not do a grand ==.

samjhe? Can you read now?

[niran]

if you read MB carefully, at least twice Arjun lost his patience and was ready to kill Yudhistir
once while Yudhistir put up Duoropadi as a bet(was forcefully stopped by Bheem)
secound during MB one day Arjun/Lord Shree Krishn were fighting far away Karna took advantage
and was about to kill Yudhistir when Yudhistir fled the field (first time in his life) later Arjun found Yudhistir
lying on a huge bed fussed over by countless wimins and Yudhistir bad mouthed Arjun for being useless etc.
Lord Krishna had to pull Arjun out of the tent and there is 39 shlokas devoted as to how Lord pacified Arjun.

[Yayavar]

And the same analysis can be applied to Karna. The Mahabharata or Ramayana have the ideal heroes and a lot of flawed heroes. These latter have reasons, personal flaws that limit them and illustrate why they eventually fail like you have described above. And in many ways they are more instructive in their contrast from the ideal hero perhaps.

This is really the worst kind of analysis. It is like saying that there is an IQ test which could be used to study the relative intelligence of Einstein and monkeys. Can I say that Einstein is an "ideal genius" and monkeys are "geniuses with a few flaws"?

that is an extreme example and a funny one but it misses the point. What I am referring to is the contrast from the ideal better illustrates the flaws and the path take or not taken. Please see my note above expanding on Ramana's point about the 'flawed' hero concept. It is not to defend Karna and make him superior to others in MB.

Why do you call Karna a "flawed hero"? Why don't you call him a "daan-veer paapi"?

Sure you can call him, like Bheem in Janane bhi do yaron " thehar paapi, main teri jaban kheench loong' . Joking aside isn't Vikarna still 'bad' though he did oppose the disrobing? Same goes for good and bad in the story for all. No one is completely right or wrong at an individual level. Though I do find your, RamaY's analysis insightful as I've mostly looked at it as a beautifully crafted story with some elements of learning but missed some of the aspects you have brought up.

Karna was insulted and stopped at Daruapadi's swayamavar - that is part of the his character development. The author is sowing the seeds for future events as the story unfolds. No one else stopped Draupadis cheer-haran other than Krishna (and some objection from Bheeshma, Vikarna, Vidur). Not even Arjuna who was now a 'dasa'; but he was one when he won Draupadi in swayamwar too, was he not?

It is not a question of claiming KArna is a bad guy or paapi but discussing his progression and where and how he fails as he tries to attain what is important to him.

[abhishek_sharma]

No one else stopped Draupadis cheer-haran other than Krishna (and some objection from Bheeshma, Vikarna, Vidur). Not even Arjuna who was now a 'dasa'; but he was one when he won Draupadi in swayamwar too, was he not?

So? Are you suggesting that Pandavas did not care for Draupadi? Let me just remind you that Pandavas were ready to live without any territory. Mahabharat war was held because they wanted to take revenge for Draupadi's insult. Now who is suffering from selective amnesia?

[Yayavar]

No amnesia sir, if you can read, the answer is posted above. Let me repeat in case your eyes are not working properly:

Yudhistira did make a mistake, but one should not do a grand ==.

samjhe? Can you read now?

I read but dont 'samjhe'. Yudhishtra has his faults and so is relegated to a corner in popular mind - he can only advice while doing the worst, giving up his brothers and his wife. Karna has his faults too and he does different bad things. Needn't be an equal equal but in that episode aren't both Yudhishtra and the Kauravs/Karna doing the same thing? both have used Draupadi as an object.

So, yes I like the story of Karna - his efforts to get to be the best, his insults, the effect on him, his ego, his effort to rise above his 'station', his successes and his eventual loss. I also appreciate the view RamaY has presented above. Am looking forward to his analysis of Yudhistra.

[abhishek_sharma]

It is not a question of claiming KArna is a bad guy or paapi but discussing his progression and where and how he fails as he tries to attain what is important to him.

Why not? On balance, Karna's sins significantly outweighed his very few positive points. Therefore, he was a paapi. Simple. And this formula is applied in all cases. Yudhistira and Kunti did make mistakes, but they were few and far between. Other Pandavas made more mistakes. That is why they did not go to heaven. Discussing the progression is important, but there should be a report card at the end.

[Yayavar]

if you read MB carefully, at least twice Arjun lost his patience and was ready to kill Yudhistir
once while Yudhistir put up Duoropadi as a bet(was forcefully stopped by Bheem)
secound during MB one day Arjun/Lord Shree Krishn were fighting far away Karna took advantage
and was about to kill Yudhistir when Yudhistir fled the field (first time in his life) later Arjun found Yudhistir
lying on a huge bed fussed over by countless wimins and Yudhistir bad mouthed Arjun for being useless etc.
Lord Krishna had to pull Arjun out of the tent and there is 39 shlokas devoted as to how Lord pacified Arjun.

thanks..was not aware of the former and the latter Arjun-Yudhishtra 'vaak-yudha'. Shows Yudhistir as a flawed person too, not much of hero though .

btw, (asking yet again) is it Duryodhana in the original or Suyodhana? or, does Duryodhana mean anything positive?

[RamaY]

Viv & Putnanja,

Will post my understanding and source on the following tomorrow
- Karna attending Drona's school
- Karna and Parasurama episode
- Draupadi swayamvara
- Draupadi vastrapaharana

I agree that one is free to make one's opinion based on their reading and comprehension, and there is no right or wrong on it.

It just proves one of my points on this forum, Just because two people present two different PoVs it doesn't mean there need to be two different sources. A single source of info can be interpreted in multiple ways by just few people. Explains the 300 Ramayana syndrome.

Thank you for the interesting debate. I am glad we are discussing something Indic than some non-sensical political statement by a nonsensical politician Irrespective of what we learn and unlearn, it is a good to think differently.

Bji - I slightly disagree on some of the points you make. While it is true that Dharma changes by context, it cannot become A/Dharma due to the inference. That said, I know little so cannot prove it beyond a point.

[abhishek_sharma]

Needn't be an equal equal but in that episode aren't both Yudhishtra and the Kauravs/Karna doing the same thing? both have used Draupadi as an object.

prabhu....so there is no difference between disrobing and betting Draupadi? You will get a Hafeez Sayeed Medal for this Lahori Logic gem. Maha-prabhu, those actions have consequences of different severity. Slapping a person is different from killing a person. In both cases, the affected person is a "patient" of the event. As I mentioned above, generally women are not dishonored in a gambling session. Yudhistira could not have known that his wife would be dishonored. No sir, they are not doing the same thing.

Think for a few seconds before you barf here.

So, yes I like the story of Karna - his efforts to get to be the best, his insults, the effect on him, his ego, his effort to rise above his 'station', his successes and his eventual loss. I also appreciate the view RamaY has presented above. Am looking forward to his analysis of Yudhistra.

It is clear that you like him. I will note that you mentioned "insults" but did not talk about his sins. Those were wrapped in an euphemistic "the effect on him". This asymmetry is very interesting. And I mean that in the worst possible way.

[abhishek_sharma]

that is an extreme example and a funny one but it misses the point. What I am referring to is the contrast from the ideal better illustrates the flaws and the path take or not taken

No, it does not miss the point. By using qualitative terms, you are massaging Karna's records. Why don't you quantify how far Karna was from the ideal? And remember to back it with sufficient evidence.

[Yayavar]

Needn't be an equal equal but in that episode aren't both Yudhishtra and the Kauravs/Karna doing the same thing? both have used Draupadi as an object.

prabhu....so there is no difference between disrobing and betting Draupadi? You will get a Hafeez Sayeed Medal for this Lahori Logic gem. Maha-prabhu, those actions have consequences of different severity. Slapping a person is different from killing a person. In both cases, the affected person is a "patient" of the event. As I mentioned above, generally women are not dishonored in a gambling session. Yudhistira could not have known that his wife would be dishonored. No sir, they are not doing the same thing.

Think for a few seconds before you barf here.

Look how many times you have used terms to goad or insult . Those are sins too . Maybe need to count till 100

Ishwara! was she still his wife if he is giving her away in a game of dice? It is a sin. not a 'mistake'

That Dusashana or Duryodhana committed another sin does neither absolve nor enhance Yudhishtra's doing. Karna does not suggest disrobing. He does not stop it, nor do all the others including Bhim and Arjuna (niran above indicates he wanted to but did not). So sure Karna has sins or 'mistakes' , but in this particular episode 'hamam mein sab nange hain'. None of them has a place to hide behind some 'virtuous' behaviour wrt this event.

So, yes I like the story of Karna - his efforts to get to be the best, his insults, the effect on him, his ego, his effort to rise above his 'station', his successes and his eventual loss. I also appreciate the view RamaY has presented above. Am looking forward to his analysis of Yudhistra.

It is clear that you like him. I will note that you mentioned "insults" but did not talk about his sins. Those were wrapped in an euphemistic "the effect on him". This asymmetry is very interesting. And I mean that in the worst possible way.

[/quote]

The very term 'eventual loss' is related to his actions and failures - sins or mistakes as you may choose to call them. RamaY's analysis and post above lists Karrna's wrongdoings and failings.

For a positive telling read this (iirc you reference text in Hindi earlier so am assuming you can read Hindi) : http://www.kavitakosh.org/kk/index.php? ... E0%A4%97_6

[ManuT]

Lord Krishna had to pull Arjun out of the tent and there is 39 shlokas devoted as to how Lord pacified Arjun.

It might not be a bad idea for some of those to be recited here, too.

RamaY ji/ Niran ji
There is an episode where Krishna rides with Karna to convince him to cross over, if it is there, and not too much trouble, maybe that needs to be looked at.

[Yayavar]

RamaY: ^^thanks. Looking forward to it.

[Yayavar]

Lord Krishna had to pull Arjun out of the tent and there is 39 shlokas devoted as to how Lord pacified Arjun.

It might not be a bad idea for some of those to be recited here, too.

RamaY ji/ Niran ji
There is an episode where Krishna rides with Karna to convince him to cross over, if it is there, and not too much trouble, maybe that needs to be looked at.

ManuT: that is exactly what I was referring to when I said that he rejected the crown when Krishna presented the option to him. The link to Rashmirathi above (in my comment to Abhishek) is exactly that episode and Karna's response in Dinakar's re-telling.

[ManuT]

We can be sure Karna paid for his karma, but was == with <xyz>, not clear how that comes about.

[Yayavar]

it is not ==. it is just all have flaws in the MB. As I said it is (mostly) right vs (often) wrong. The mostly right group has Krishna on their side too - it is of course not independent of being in the right.

[abhishek_sharma]

Look how many times you have used terms to goad or insult . Those are sins too .

I believe that my assessment is accurate. Your posts are offending me too. What to do onlee.

Ishwara! was she still his wife if he is giving her away in a game of dice? It is a sin. not a 'mistake'

See here

What does this mean? Clearly, the game has been started by the king’s command, and only by his command can it be paused or ended. Without his permission Yudhishthir cannot leave the game, and as he plays, he must wager something. During this process it appears that this gambling continues to the end like a duel. A duel ends with the death of one of the fighters. Similarly this gambling can end only after one side has lost every thing. The compulsion that’s making Yudhishthir play is clear. Therefore while he still has any wealth of any kind, he cannot leave the game. Perhaps this is why he is in a hurry of sorts to lose every thing as quickly as he can, given he can’t win. May the gambling end so he may get up.

Knowingly, he loses everything and stops. He has already lost his brothers and his own self. As he loses himself, 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.”[11] This means that even if a gambler wishes to save some of his money, he can’t.

If Draupadi had not been wagered, Duryodhan would have argued that a slave’s wealth is the master’s wealth, thus even without being explicitly wagered, Draupadi is his property. All other wives of the Pandavas and their children could have been considered Duryodhan’s property by this logic

That Dusashana or Duryodhana committed another sin does neither absolve nor enhance Yudhishtra's doing.

I did not say that he should be absolved. And all sins are not equal. How many times should I repeat that?

Karna does not suggest disrobing. He does not stop it,

See..and you guys wonder why I am losing my cool. Karna said that Draupadi should be disrobed completely. He also called her a prostitute. This has already been mentioned a few times here in last 2 pages. Please read more carefully. If your assertions are not based on facts, you will get negative feedback.

[abhishek_sharma]

Okay...going to sleep...see you guys later

[Yayavar]

Look how many times you have used terms to goad or insult . Those are sins too .

I believe that my assessment is accurate. Your posts are offending me too. What to do onlee.

you used terms to directly insult. You are offended by the analysis that does not agree with yours and then using terms to insult. Big difference !!

Regarding what Karna said during the episode will read the original since the description I read is different. As I said, in that episode 'hamam mein sab nangey hain'. No heroes there.

[putnanja]

if you read MB carefully, at least twice Arjun lost his patience and was ready to kill Yudhistir
once while Yudhistir put up Duoropadi as a bet(was forcefully stopped by Bheem)
secound during MB one day Arjun/Lord Shree Krishn were fighting far away Karna took advantage
and was about to kill Yudhistir when Yudhistir fled the field (first time in his life) later Arjun found Yudhistir
lying on a huge bed fussed over by countless wimins and Yudhistir bad mouthed Arjun for being useless etc.
Lord Krishna had to pull Arjun out of the tent and there is 39 shlokas devoted as to how Lord pacified Arjun.

It is Bhima who gets angry with Yudhishtira during the disrobing episode, and Arjuna prevents him. During the Draupadi disrobing episode, Bheema wants to burn the hands of Yudhishtira, and Arjuna pacifies him.

While all characaters have their share of flaws, what is important is what the actions were for. Even though all the pandavas had one flaw or the other, they didn't abandon the path of Dharma. In fact, throughout MB, when Vidura or anyone else talks about Pandavas, they say that the pandavas are righteous and follow dharma. Duryodhana on the other hand was selfish, coveted wealth and kingdom of pandavas and was hell bent on humiliating them whenever possible, and wanted to kill them off. And he employed adharmic methods for his own success.

So, don't focus on the individual flaws, look at what their larger aim was. They followed dharma, and wherever they encountered adharma, they tried to rectify it. And Lord Krishna was on their side precisely because of that reason.

[abhishek_sharma]

you used terms to directly insult. You are offended by the analysis that does not agree with yours and then using terms to insult. Big difference !!

It is not about disagreeing with "my" analysis. It is about using *all* facts to reach a conclusion. You have certainly not done so. Those facts were mentioned here but you chose to ignore them in your so-called "analysis". The link on the "game of dice" was posted here a few weeks ago. You continue trolling here even though you don't address the points mentioned there (and in other posts).

Don't expect compliments if you do so again.

[RamaY]

On the name of Duryodhana (IMHO, Suyodhana is a later twist)

Adi Parva - SECTION CXVII

"Janamejaya said, 'Please recite the names of Dhritarashtra's sons according to the order of their birth.'

"Vaisampayana said, 'Their names, O king, according to the order of birth, are Duryodhana, Yuyutsu, Duhsasana, Duhsaha, Duhsala, Jalasandha, Sama, Saha, Vinda and Anuvinda, Durdharsha, Suvahu, Dushpradharshana, Durmarshana and Durmukha, Dushkarna, and Karna; Vivinsati and Vikarna, Sala, Satwa, Sulochana, Chitra and Upachitra, Chitraksha, Charuchitra, Sarasana, Durmada and Durvigaha, Vivitsu, Vikatanana; Urnanabha and Sunabha, then Nandaka and Upanandaka; Chitravana, Chitravarman, Suvarman, Durvimochana; Ayovahu, Mahavahu, Chitranga, Chitrakundala, Bhimavega, Bhimavala, Balaki, Balavardhana, Ugrayudha; Bhima, Karna, Kanakaya, Dridhayudha, Dridhavarman, Dridhakshatra, Somakitri, Anudara; Dridhasandha, Jarasandha, Satyasandha, Sada, Suvak, Ugrasravas, Ugrasena, Senani, Dushparajaya, Aparajita, Kundasayin, Visalaksha, Duradhara; Dridhahasta, Suhasta, Vatavega, and Suvarchas; Adityaketu, Vahvashin, Nagadatta, Agrayayin; Kavachin, Krathana, Kunda, Kundadhara, Dhanurdhara; the heroes, Ugra and Bhimaratha, Viravahu, Alolupa; Abhaya, and Raudrakarman, and Dridharatha; Anadhrishya, Kundabhedin, Viravi, Dhirghalochana Pramatha, and Pramathi and the powerful Dhirgharoma; Dirghavahu, Mahavahu, Vyudhoru, Kanakadhvaja; Kundasi and Virajas. Besides these hundred sons, there was a daughter named Duhsala. All were heroes and Atirathas, and were well-skilled in warfare. All were learned in the Vedas, and all kinds of weapons. And, O, king, worthy wives were in time selected for all of them by Dhritarashtra after proper examination. And king Dhritarashtra, O monarch, also bestowed Duhsala, in proper time and with proper rites, upon Jayadratha (the king of Sindhu).'

On Karna attending Drona's gurukula

Adi Parva SECTION CXXXIV

Drona, thereupon joyfully, accepted the Kauravas, viz., the sons of Pandu and Dhritarashtra, as his pupils. And having accepted them all as his pupils, one day Drona called them apart and making them touch his feet, said to them with a swelling heart, 'I have in my heart a particular purpose. Promise me truly, ye sinless ones, that when ye have become skilled in arms, ye will accomplish it.'

"Vaisampayana continued, 'Hearing these words, the Kuru princes remained silent. But Arjuna, O king, vowed to accomplish it whatever it was. Drona then cheerfully clasped Arjuna to his bosom and took the scent of his head repeatedly, shedding tears of joy all the while. Then Drona endued with great prowess taught the sons of Pandu (the use of) many weapons both celestial and human. And, O bull of the Bharata race, many other princes also flocked to that best of Brahmanas for instruction in arms. The Vrishnis and the Andhakas, and princes from various lands, and the (adopted) son of Radha of the Suta caste, (Karna), all became pupils of Drona. But of them all, the Suta child Karna, from jealousy, frequently defied Arjuna, and supported by Duryodhana, used to disregard the Pandavas. Arjuna, however, from devotion to the science of arms, always stayed by the side of his preceptor, and in skill, strength of arms, and perseverance, excelled all (his class-fellows). Indeed, although the instruction the preceptor gave, was the same in the case of all, yet in lightness and skill Arjuna became the foremost of all his fellow-pupils. And Drona was convinced that none of his pupils would (at any time) be able to be equal to that son of Indra.