Mahabharat Ki Ek Saanjh (An Evening of Mahabharata)


Right from childhood we heard that – Pandavas were good and  Kauravas were bad. The main reason for battle was the kingdom and disrespect of Draupadi.

When I was in 12th, there was a chapter called “Mahabharat Ki Ek Saanjh“. This chapter was extracted from a book on Mahabharat…I forgot the book and author name. This book has a complete different perspective and explains Mahabharat from the perspective of Kauravas.

I will tell you some of the things the book brings to light…

It is agreed upon that the kingdom belonged to Pandu and Pandavas deserved to become the King when they grow up. BUT!! Shakuni played his trick.. He wanted kids of his sister to be the kings, so he played the trick. Now some may call this as Adharma/Greed, but this isn’t wrong if you consider it from a different angle. He didn’t cheat anyone (before the actual battle), he played the game faithfully, he didnt break anyone’s promise, neither he deceived anyone nor he wanted a huge battle! He wanted everything to go peacefully.

So he challenges Yudhishtira. Now Yudhishtira does some idiotic things that finally lead to war..

1. He keeps his kingdom at stake! Foolish isnt it? What was the need!! Why can’t he accept defeat from Shakuni after loosing a lot of gold the Pandavas had?? (Yudhishtira wasn’t the best player anyway.) So it was just because of his EGO that he kept his kingdom at stake for a hope to win it back.

2. After loosing Kingdom he kept his wife at stake! Now those who say that draupadi was insulted and blame Karna and Durryodhan for Vastra haran and all the act, tell me one thing, Agar itna he pyar hai apni patni se..toh use GAME ke liye use kyun kiya?? Is wife some item to trade in the game??

When Durryodhan did vastraharan Draupadi wasn’t a princess, she was just a dasi who was won in the Game..Jab Draupadi ke patiyon ne usko Trading Item ka darja diya..why you expect Duryodhan to respect her?? Duryodhan did what everyone used to do with the dasis who were won in the Games!! She was just a dasi and not the princess Draupadi!!  What Duryodhan did was bad indeed but using our wife as a trading item is worse than that!

There are some things which even I pondered upon, was surprised and appreaciated the authors point of view….

When Duryodhan was lying at the lake..waiting for his moment of death Krishna visits him. He tells him the following few things to let him know that even if they have lost the battle, who was right and who was wrong.

Durryodhan says..

1.If Kauravas were doing Adharma.. why all the great people, Rushi Muni, our teachers,people like Bheeshma and Dronacharya – the people we all worshipped and have grown up seeing their glory… were on my side and not yours??

2.You have cheated every time in the battle field.. you took away Karnas Kavach Kundal, you played with the clouds hiding the sun and made your filthy move!

3.You cheated even when I came to you for your help. (Guys..this is true.. according to the common rule it was followed that who came first to Krishna..he has right to ask first, Duryodhan came first and Arjun came just moments after that, both went to Krishna but he was sleeping. Arjun sat next to Krishnas feet and Duryodhan sat next to his head..waiting for his sleep to complete. When Krishna woke up..he first saw Arjun and declared that Arjun was the first one he saw and hence he should be given first chance to ask him what he wants.. Arjun asked Krishna and only thing left for Duryodhan was his army. Krishna the cheater..changed his rule as he sensed it should be Arjun to ask first.)

4. And now Krishna you have again cheated when you made me wear a small cloth before visiting my mother Gandhari. (Okay here is another small incident if you guys dont know.  At the end of the battle Duryodhan and Bhima were to fight… before going to fight Gandhari asked Duryodhan to meet her and that he should be completely naked. She had a powerful vision with heavently powers and he wanted to shield his complete body with her powers. But Duryodhan didnt know why his mother has called him.He was going naked to her and on his way Krishna stopped him and said I understand that she is your mother but atleast cover your xxx parts with a small clothing or something.What will the world say?? just think! On this Duryodhan wrapped a small piece of cloth around his waist..and then went to his mom, She was with closed eyes ready for him to come.. as soon as she sensed his son has come..she opened her eyes.. and a powerful ray of light scanned Duryodhan completely from  tip of his hair to the tip of his toes! Every inch of his body! When this ‘Vidhi’ was over, Gandhari saw the piece of cloth around his waist and scolded him that she already advised him to come completely naked and warned him that this particular part of his body has remained weak and to protect it during his one-to-one battle with Bheema. Then the cunning Krishna goes to Bheema and advises him to hit Duryodhan on his thighs which are weak compared to other parts.. Bheema was great..but Duryodhan was also very strong for him.. If you read in any book of Mahabharat..it is clearly written that Bheema injured Duryodhan by wounding his thighs. Hence Duryodhan says that you cheated even in the battle of Bheema and me.)

5. Krishna, why are you people so furious about the Vastraharan case? When I did Vastra haran..she was just a simple dasi which I won in the game. If they loved their wife so much…why did they traded her?

6. You even cheated in case of Karna by intelligently taking away his Kavach Kundal, also in case of Ashwatthama and many other cases in battle field like the example of Clouds covering the Sun. You blame us that we all killed Abhimanyu but he sholudnt have entered the “Chakraview” if he didnt know how to break it! He entered and got killed, this is a WAR! Whts our fault?

And then besides the lake Durryodhan tells one great thing to Krishna which is really worth to think upon…

He says.. Krishna my greatest sorrow will be that the world will never come to know what our thinking was, because always it is the survivors who write the History. The history which will be read by future generations, you all Victors will write it your way, as you have killed every one who supported us. So History will never remember me as “Suyodhan” (Guys guys guys.. Duryodhan was a great king..was really loved by his people for his admnistration.) History will glorify you and will curse us, because you winners will write the history with your perspective, but your side  started the battle with EGO, there was no need for this battle, we already had won all the Kingdom in the Game and they shouldnt have traded Draupadi. Also if you would havn’t cheated in the battle there was NO WAY your side  would have won. The brave Karna was alone enough for all of you, he also didnt use some of his best weapons and his great bow – “Vijaya”.

My sorrow is because of this war many great warriors have lost their lives and the world will never come to know what our thinking was and every evil thing your side has committed you will cover it under the guide of “Dharma”..saying it was wrong but you needed to do it for protection of Dharma.

….saying the above lines duryodhan dies at the lake side.

Truly mind boggling perspective which left me impressed for many years after my 12th std.. many many years to come.

Jai Karna!

Advertisements

61 thoughts on “Mahabharat Ki Ek Saanjh (An Evening of Mahabharata)

  1. This is the best article I’ve ever read…I appreciate your thoughts…everyone glorifies pandav but no one thinks from kaurav’s point of view….Thanks for changing my opinion over kauravas,specially duryodhan…..keep it up 🙂

    Like

  2. This writer himself says abhimanyu entered n got killed… Coz its war then same way karna and others got killed… War is war right….n it was abhimanyu wadh where cheating started n once a party breaks the rules, other is not bound to follow

    Like

  3. Ya u mi8 b ryt accrdn 2 ur knwledge of some kind of book. Buh sry Mr. Patil e1 I have gone thru da whle book of mahabharat. U clearly stated dat Krishna cheated.
    Nw y nt? He’s god aftr all he knew evathn ryt frm da beginnin. Buh still he gav chance to Duryodhn by tellin hm dat as per da reignship rules eldest son becums da king
    1st. So it ws Yudhistr. Buh Duryodn refused. Krishna also stated dat Yudhistr wud b happy if he’s givn only 5 villages n nt da whle hastinpur, buh agn Duryodhn refused
    statin dat he wnt grant a bit of land of his father’s. At dis Krshna said as u wsh by keepin a smile on his face. Dis is hw Duryodhn lost his last chance of nt dyin in
    vain which was adharma n dn he dnt have any ryt to state dat Krshna cheated neithr u. Anothr thing u said dat Shakuni was never wrng.? Argh try to b Shakuni at ur
    sistr’s place at presnt age n see who’s gonna get his ass whuppd, mattr of joke no hurt feelings. Accrdn to mahbhrt Shakuni knew dat his dice are goin to lsn to his
    numbrs. Dn hw cn u state dat Yudhistr was tradin his own wife. Der’s no point in winnin. N Shakuni dint wanted nethn buh end of hastinapur agn adharma. It was her
    sisters choice to blindfold herself fuh her husband. Nw dats da mattr of love n she neva askd her bro b4 doin it, dn hw cn Shakuni play his tricks wdout askin hr. I
    knw no brothr lyks to see own sistr in such conditn, still its adharma. Also Karna was da greatst no doubt invincible, buh e1 afta knwin dat pandavas wer his bros he
    fought vd them fuh sake of his frndshp. Its kuntis mstake dat she lft him nower, n afta cumin to knw dat hes da strngest she tld him to fight frm pandavas side. Agn
    adharma. So no doubt e1 afta knwn dat he’s doin wrng he choose frndshp which nly thng he evr had in his lyf, but his side of fiting was wrng whis was da cause of his
    death n curse by Parshurama, which he deserved for lying to him. So at d end its all abt righteousness msg behind mahbhrt dat Krishna give us, cuz e1 Krshna was
    cursed by Gandhari dat e1 his own ppl will fite themselves n perish lyk Kuru Reign dis n perishd. So if e1 god have faced it dn who v r? N 1 mre imp thng its jus dat
    nobody knew dat Karna ws son of Kunti o else bein much eldest he was da 1 to b announcd as king of Hastinapur nt e1 Yudhistr n Duryodhn was far long in da list.

    Like

    1. Yah…abhimanyu defeated karna n all others in chakravyuha, arjuna defeated him in viraat war with the kavach kundal, Dhritrashtra was a caretaker of hastinapur n when pandavas got matured, he had to appoint yudhishthira as king but he dint….is there a rule even today that any lady can be stripped no matter what status she has… Nop… Duryodhan did n got punished…

      Like

  4. u shud read ‘mrutyunjay’ book based on great karna, its marathi originally but also available in hindi, english. it contains some part of duryodhana niti, its great. the author name is shivaji sawant.

    Like

  5. Hey, i agree to a lot of the stuff you have said but i guess you have been slightly harsh on Krishna here. I too read Mahabharat ki ek Saanjh in the 8th grade in school and loved it. Duryodhan had some wonderful qualities for eg: he did not believe in caste differences and believed that everyone should be treated equally regardless of their background and his friendship with karna was as pure as it gets but what about Lakshagrahay? That wasn’t right, was it?

    The world knows Arjun as a great warrior but he was not as good as Karan. As the story goes not only was Lord Krishna his charioteer but Hanuman himself was sitting on top of his chariot. Each time Arjun shot an arrow it took Karan’s chariot 10 steps back and in return it only took Arjun’s chariot 4 steps back. At this Krishna did applaud karan and Arjun asked him when i’m pushing him 10 steps back you’re still applauding him. In return Krishna said you have me as your charioteer and Hanuman for help as well and inspite of that he is doing that to you, who does he have?? To top it all Krishna had to sink the chariot on 4 occasions to save Arjun’s life. Karan if he wanted could have killed him but he did not as Krishna made the sun set and Karan did not shoot the arrow and in return Arjun killed him when he was helpless. All that for him being on Durodhan’s side but look what karan gave in return for being on the wrong side:

    1) He spared the life of all this brothers in the war
    2) The war should have been fought for him as he was eldest
    3) He gave his almost invisible shield.
    4) What he got was nothing but trauma, he did not know who his mother was and if Kunti would have spoken up earlier, this war anyway wouldn’t have happened, but as they say what is meant to be, is meant to be.

    That’s the whole reason why i feel certain aspects of the Mahabharat are not justified.

    Ok, about Lord Krishna being cunning, i don’t think he was as cunning as you put it. He was just portraying what all a man has to do to literally survive in today’s day and age. If he wanted he could have prevented everything from happening but he had to do it to show the world that if you are on the right path to defeat the wrong even if you have to cheat, its not wrong. That was the whole idea of the Geeta or his conversation with Arjun before the war.

    All in all i do agree with a lot of the stuff you mentioned, there are a lot of grey area’s in this masterpiece but that’s what makes it so human.

    Best wishes,
    Mohit

    Like

  6. Was looking for the script of Mahabharata ki ek saanjh. Found this. Loved it! It has quite a few points I absolutely agree to. Have you read “the difficulty of being good”? It has a very new perspective on many of the things we take for granted.

    Like

  7. By any chance, did you get hold of that book? I remember reading that book during my 9th standard in NCERT.. I think its a play by Bharat Bhushan Agarwal. Let me know if you get hold of the complete play/book. Thanks.

    Like

  8. Mr writer : i respect your admiration for Karna… but then you shouldn’t manipulate the facts so much..
    1. Bhishma had vouched for saving the Hastinapur empire(remember his pratigya…) and Drona had to fulfil his duties as a loyal minister in the court of Dhritarashtra…they knew they were on the side of the evil but their commitments and loyalty stood against their conscience…that doesnt prove that Karna or Duryodhana were justified in their action to call for a war..

    2. it was Karna’s vouch that he would grant any wish to anyone who he sees after his worship of the Sun god…and if Indra used it for his profit – that’s not shrewdness but smartness.. whatever becomes of you because of your vouch(pratigya) is your own fate… Bhishma Pitamah already taught us that with his vouch for the Hastinapur empire…

    3. Duryodhana should have known better than to walk naked on the streets of his empire..he could’ve uncovered the banyan leave wrapped around his genitals and thighs when he met his mother on the river bank..it was stupid of him to not think of that..

    4. Any war dictates one simple rule: one man fights against another man..
    How can you ever justify the seven experienced Kauravs fighters fighting against a 13 year old boy…even if he crossed into the “chakravyuha”, he thought he may have to face one person at a time which he proved he could easily do…

    5. About the Vastra-haran case, anyone would respect his elder brother’s wife and atleast would not try to strip her naked..Yudhisthira was stupid in putting his wife on stake- but then you cannot turn a coutroom into a strip club with your “bhabhi” being made to strip forcefully.. that’s utterly disgusting and diabolic…

    6. if you can kill a 13 year old boy by making him fight 7 warriors at a time- there is no point shouting “adharma” by a simple trick of covering the cloud for a second.

    Like

    1. Defects in argument
      Bhishma had vouched for saving the Hastinapur empire(remember his pratigya…) and Drona had to fulfil his duties as a loyal minister in the court of Dhritarashtra…they knew they were on the side of the evil but their commitments and loyalty stood against their conscience…that doesnt prove that Karna or Duryodhana were justified in their action to call for a war.
      Ans. Yes but Karna also had the same stand like Bheeshma and Drona. He had told sri Krishna before the war that the Pandavas would win ultimately. Ie like Bheeshma and Drona he knew his fate.
      it was Karna’s vouch that he would grant any wish to anyone who he sees after his worship of the Sun god…and if Indra used it for his profit – that’s not shrewdness but smartness.. whatever becomes of you because of your vouch(pratigya) is your own fate… Bhishma Pitamah already taught us that with his vouch for the Hastinapur empire
      Ans,. Taking undue advantage of some ones virtue or pledge for personal benefit is always questionable. Going by this stupid logic Kakiyee was also justified in taking those boons from Dashratha.
      Any war dictates one simple rule: one man fights against another man..
      How can you ever justify the seven experienced Kauravs fighters fighting against a 13 year old boy…even if he crossed into the “chakravyuha”, he thought he may have to face one person at a time which he proved he could easily do…
      Boy you need a reality check. Abhimanyu was 16 years old not 13 years. Age was not all that a criteria those days. Arjuna was a teenager when he captured Drupad. In any case an idea of many warriors attacking one warrior is not something unheard of. Karna himself was attacked on many ocassions by many warriors.
      If you can kill a 13 year old boy by making him fight 7 warriors at a time- there is no point shouting “adharma” by a simple trick of covering the cloud for a second.
      Ans. Your Abhimanyu queri has been solved. It was not adharma but a trick. But it also concedes that without Sri Krishna Pandavas were incapable of winning the war.

      Like

    2. Absolutely agree with Niraj.just want to add that Krishna purposefully taught Abhimanyu only how to get into the chakravyuh, not how to get out. Who is to blame then? The Kauravas or Krishna?

      Like

  9. Krishna has all ;through Mahabharata played dirty politics, which even in kalyug people should restrain from doing. Pandavas except, Yudhister were arrogant and full of proud, the way they insulted and humiliated Karna during his entire time time was not a behaviour expected from Princes. Even Dhaupadi, was so arrogant and proudy that she insulted Duryodhan by saying that bliend’s son is also blind. Same way she insulted karna while he was aiming at the fish in the Swayamber called for Draupadi. How can we condem Duryodhana and Karna if they spoke insulting words to Draupadi because that was the rule of the day in Mahabharata.

    WIthout Krishana’s help Pandavas were nothing in front of Duryodhana, Karna, Bheeshma and other Kaurava warriors but Krishna played all tricks and games to defeat Kauravas. You can not have two standards in the war. On the one way to instigate Pandavas to kill Dron by sending wrong massage that his son has been killed and when his son Ashwashthama takes revenge to his father’s killing and in that process unknowingly he kills the sons of uttra then Krishna punishes him severally by cursing him rigourously.

    It can also not be justified to say that after the death of Pandu, the Pandvas
    were the real owners of throne. I think Duryodhan’s stake is also fully justified due to the reason that he was the son of elder son ie. Dhritrashtra. If for som physical disability, Dhritrashtra was held uneligible to sit on throne how can his son be deprived of the right..

    What is dharma in a family dispute of two brothers families what right does a third person has to interfere in their family matter. That way Lord Krishna at best could have acted like an impartial conciliator. We have never heard in Mahabharata or in any other book that Kaurava were bad rulers to their subject. So its beyond my understanding what was the need for a war like Mahabharat. What was the gain to Pandavas after getting the throne at the cost of lives of millions of innocent.

    PCJ

    Like

    1. The greatness of ITIHAS(Ramayana & Mahabharat) lies in the Characters it presents to human beings – The differential analysis it presents to human to pick what is right in wrong and what is wrong with right. If you call Mahabharat all played dirty politics—then what do you call the politics that is being currently played in Indian democracy, in World, in Middle east and every other realm in Maya we don’t know?
      Yudhishthir was not arrogant, whatever he disrespected he felt bad for his misdoing that is why he accepted exile. People call Mahabharata dirty but the FOOLS don’t realize that they themselves are drown into filth of politics and corruption everywhere in Home, Office or state.
      Even If Draupadi laughed at him, does this gives freedom to Duryodhan to attempt RAPE of brother’s wife? How is this good justification or MAD-ANDHTA?
      Arjuna Helped himself by getting help from all lord Krishna. It was idiot Duryodhan who ASKED THE AKHSHAUHINI SENA and did not cared for Krishna and even called Krishna a fool and Mayadhari. It was the Arjuna who choose the right person in turn of Army. Choice matters.
      Krishna punished Ashwathama because IT WAS END OF YUDDHA. and he attacked at the WOMB. How disgraceful was that! Duryodhan could have been given the throne but all life he was burnt into the hate for Pandvas by Shakuni.
      FYI, The reason of war was the HATE and EVILNESS OF DURYODHANA which he made life out of that. He did not agreed to give 5 Village after Pandavs return from the Agyatwas. and Duryodhan said he would not even give them the land of size equivalent to tip of needle. The gain was the ascension to Swarga Lok with physical body. Get your facts right.

      Like

  10. Dear Sir,

    Even still i remember this chapter (hindi subject). as rightly said by many, it explains that what we have not seen and only heard or read about, should not be believed in full. as once tenali rama has told his king that the difference between truth and false is four fingers (the gap between eyes and ears). believe something as truth only when actual seen.

    even i am searching for this story.

    if you have a copy, kindly forward to my email id csnaidu03@gmail.com.

    with regards
    KCS Naidu

    Like

  11. Thank you for this wonderful article. It was enlightening and fulfilling to read the article as well as subsequent comments, particularly the dignified and healthy exchange of thoughts between Niraj Sharma and Lawrence Manzo. It reminded me of the shastrarth I have read about in our holy books, which is so rare to find to the internet these days. Please keep up the spreading of knowledge and wisdom.

    I had also read this story of Mahabharat during my school days, it is written by Shri Bharat Bhushan Aggarwal. The singlemost important lesson I learnt from this story is that history that we believe today may not be true and there might be another version of the same sequence of events, albeit from the perspective of the defeated ones. It taught me discretion and to read the history with a pinch of salt.

    This is true as much for our mythology as much as it is for modern history including World Wars and India’s own independence struggle. So today when I read history books which are judgmental or try to indicate victory of ‘good over evil’, I try to apply my own logic rather than take the word at the face of it. We could have been reading a diametrically opposite history, if the defeated had emerged a winner.

    The other important lesson I learnt from this story is that one needs to have survived to write history. No great surprises here, but if you actually read the historical anecdotes, it is not difficult to notice that not only ‘the winners write history’ but also ‘the dead never write history’. How can one challenge the winner’s version if he is not even alive. So one also needs to be flexible, keeping the end result in mind.

    Like

  12. The things is not that ….. this is just the bludy mentality ” jo humare mom and dad bachpan se maar maar ke bhar dete hai … this is the way and you have to travel this way … Krishnsa, Shiv, Bharma …. All gods had done some cheating sort of things as it is also mentioned in our holy books …. but we always ignore them ….. “aare take another xample of krishna ” vo kare toh raas leela kitne kaand kiya hain usne aapni life mein no one can imagine … and shiva also cheated a rakshas ….vaise good one ….

    Like

  13. Mr. Niraj,
    I agree with you on some issues. But, Arjun can be superior to Bhim in battle formation and Divya astras. Bhim was superior to Arjun in Mace, and wrestling. Out of Pandavs, Yudhisteer could be considered superior because his chariot was above the ground due to his satya. Yudhisteer alone answers all the questions given by the Gandherva ( Dharm Raj ). Yudhisteer alone is able to climb the mountain and go to heaven alive. Yudhisteer passes all the great tasks given to him by the Devs.
    Yudhisteer guides his brother in wisdom all the time. Yudhsteer is borned with such a great satya that Krishna did not even needed to guide him during the MB war. Out of all the Pandavs, Bhim has the greatest love for his family.
    So, we can see that all the Pandavs were superior in different ways. Dorna making fake crocodile is from TV Serial which are mostly made up of added things.

    Like

  14. Mr. Niraj,
    I just wanted to let you know that Arjun was great but not the Supreme among Pandavs. The reason why Lord Krishna says to Arjun in Gita that:
    In mountains, I am Himalays – Himalays in ansh avatar of Sri Vishnu.
    In Jal, I am Ocean – Ocean is also ansh avatar of Sri Vishnu.
    In Nags, I am Shesh – Sheshji is ansh avatar of Sri Vishnu.
    In warriors, I am Sri Ram – Baghwan Ram was the 7th avatar of Sri Vishnu.
    In Pandavs, I am Arjun – Arjun is avatar of Nar. Nar is an ansh avatar of Sri Vishnu.
    In Rishies, I am Vyass – Vyassji was an ansh avatar of Sri Vishnu.
    So, Lord Krishna mentioned all the avatars that he had taken by explaining this. We cannot really compare the versions becasue they are different. But, just to let you know that in Gujarati version, at times Bhim was also willing to fight Karna, Ashwattama, Balram and Mahadevji. I do not think that Bhim would win against these great men but he was ready to fight them. If you have any questions, just let me know. Thanks.

    Like

    1. Mr Sanjay Patel. The Gita is not the only proof of Arjunas superiority over Bhima. In dronas ashrama also when all the princes including Bhima gives the unimpressive answer that he can see the full bird. Whearas its Arjuna who gives the best answer that apart from the eye he cannot see anything. I have also mentioned Lord Shivas boon to Jayadratha including Bhima and excluding Arjuna. Coming back to Drona again. To test the princes he makes a fake crocodile and pretends to get caught by it. Its Arjuna who make a valiant attempt to protect Drona not Bhima. In the chakravyooha episode as well Yudhishthira make a checklist about those who can break the charkavyooha. This list also included Arjuna Abhimanyu but excludes Bhima. After the war the Pandavas go in search of Ashwatthama. Ashwattama sees them and fires the brahmastra saying o brahmastra rid the world of the pandavas. Its Arjuna who fires the counted brahmastra to protect himself and the pandavas including bhima. Then Ashwattamas brahmastra is diverted to Uttaras womb and its Shri Krishna who comes to their rescue. You can see how irrelevat Bhima is here in these episodes. Please dont get me wrong. I also admire Bhima. Infact in the blog the intelligence of bhima I too have posted a story which has glorified bhima and with due humility I might add that story was quite well received among readers. But in the end you have to call a spade a spade.
      Best Regards
      Niraj Sharma

      Like

      1. Jai sri krishna. Heres wishing everyone a happy new year.
        Yes Mr. Kotian. Bhima had upset Ashwatthama and Karna many times but he too was defeated by Karna. You have quoted C. Rajagolacharis mahabharata in your posting. There in chapter titled Pledge Respected is made clear that although Bhima had an upper hand over Karna in the end its Karna who prevailed and there was absolutely no doubt who the better warrior was. Among the Pandavas its not Bhima but Arjuna who was supreme. Please read the Gita. :Lord Krishna says Among warriors I am Rama, among birds I am Garuda among devas I am Indra among Pandavas I am Arjina. He was comparing the best of the best and its Arjuna who was mentioned. Lord Shivas boon to Jayadratha that he will check 4 Pandavas one day included Bhima excluded Arjuna. Hence Lord Shiva also confirms that its Arjuna who was supreme. Bhima has a track record. Whoever insults draupadi his name automatically enters bhimas hitlist ie men t obe killed. He was all set to kill Jayadratha in forest but was stopped by yudhishthira only for dushalas sake. Jayadrahta was killed by arjun becoz of abhimanyu. Like duryodhana and dushasana karna too was insulting draupadi but bhima took pledge to kill douryodhana and dushasana. He did not vow to kill Karna. He said shakuni would be killed by sahadeva. Karna would be killed by arjuna. Its clear he was doing job distribution according to capability. He knew that he could match duryodhanas muscle power with his own and take care of dushasana. Shakuni being an inferior warrior was assigned to Sahadeva. Arjuna was supreme among pandavas. Lord Shivas boon also included bhima exluded arjuna. Karna was assigned to Arjuna the supreme among pandavas hence it was common knowledge among the pandavas that Duryodhana dushasan killing was one thing but facing Karna was another ball game. For that only Arjuna is qualified. Yes bhima had his fair share of victories over Karna but Karna had taken pledge not to kill him and Karna too has defeated bhima. Bhima because of brute strength could create lot of problems for his opponents at stages of battle but when his opponent like Karna or Ashwatthama fought at their best they were more than capable of subduing bhima.
        Friends please realize I have a high regard for Mr. Kotain but I don’t agree with his views entirely. Knowing form past experience He has a habit of refuting information and also getting a little lost in the example which has been given to prove a point. In bhima karna duel as descrrbed by Rajagopalahcair which Mr. Kotain has quoted in his past posting yes bhima did make karna loose ground its just like a cricket match where an ordinary bowler is regularly beating a master batsman outside the offstump but once batsman gets over that and raises his run scoring ability so that the bowler is taken off the bowling attack( bhima the bowler was left hiding behind a dead elephant ) then it’s the batsman who is the winner. Batsman only loses when he is sent back to the pavilion.

        Like

  15. Dear Mr. Lawrence Manzo. Despite my disagreement with you I admire the dignified way you have conducted yourself.

    Karna was basically Arjunas rival and Arjunas is supreme among the Pandavas. This is mentioned in the Gita when Sri Krishna says Among Pandavas I am ARjuna. Earlied he had said among birds I am Garuda among mountains I am himalayas etc. He was talking about the best of the best. Even Lord Shivas boon to Jayadratha that he will check 4 Pandavas included Bhima excluded ARjuna. Hence 2 GODS Shiva and Krishna have sanctioned Arjunas superiority. And since Karna was an arch rival of Arjuna its clear that he was superior to Bhima. Even during Draupadis insult. Karna too was insulting Draupadi Bhima took pratigya to kill Duryodhana and Dushasana. He said Sahadeva would kill Shakuni and Arjna will kill Karna. Its clear he was doing job distribution according to capability. He knew he could match Duryodhanas muscle power with his own and take care of Dushasana. Shakuni being an inferior warrior was assigned to Sahadeve. But Karna was not assigned to Sahadeva or himself. He was assigned to Arjuna. This is proof that Bhima himself knew that he cannot harm Karna. In mahabharata there is a record between bhima and draupadi. Whoever insults Draupadi Bhima make a massive determination to kill that man whether Dushasana or Keechaka or Duryodhana. He wanted to kill Jayadratha as well but was stopped by Yudhishthira becos he was their cousin Dushalas husband. But Bhima made NO attempt to kill Karna despite Karna insulting Draupadi. Hence it was common knowledge even among the Pandavas that killing dushasana shakuni etc is one thing but facing Karna is a different ball game altogether. For facing Karna it is Arjuna only who is qualified.
    Best regards
    Niraj

    Like

  16. Before the Rajasuya Sacrifice, when Arjun goes north, Sahadev & Nakul go south & west, and Bhima goes East to conquer the world, Bhima marches through the kingdom of Anga, fights a battle with Karna, easily kicks his butt, and moves on to conquer the rest of East India, pushing as far as Burma.

    It’s funny that Bhima has no trouble at all dealing with Karna at this time. His resistance is so insignificant that the Mahabharata describes Karna’s defeat in just one sentence. Somehow, later in the story Karna is a tough guy and a threat to Arjun. Maybe at the time of the Rajasuya, Karna had already lost his armor, but had not yet gotten lessons from Parashuram?

    Like

    1. Karnas kingdom was not in east but in north ie modern Karnal in Haryana. C. Rajagopalacharis mahabharata mentions that when Shishupal challanged Krishnas nomination for first pooja he had nominated Bheeshma and Karna.
      A man nominated for the first pooja cannot have been a conquered king.
      This tallie with Mr. R.C . Dutts translation. Just for your info Mr. R.C.C Dutt served as the first president of Bangiya Sahitya Parishad (Bengali: বঙ্গীয় সাহিত্য পরিষদ) in 1894, while Rabindranath Tagore (the author of our national anthem was the vice-presidents of the society. Ie Shri Tagore worked under Mr. Dutt
      R.C Dutts Mahabharat quotes Shishupala as below
      ” Unto Krishna as a rishi should the foremost rank be given?
      Saintly Vyasa claims the honour, Vedic bard inspired by Heaven!
      Unto Krishna should we render honour for his warlike fame?
      Thou, O Bhishma! Death’s Subduer, surely might precedence claim!
      Unto Krishna for his knowledge should the noble prize we yield?
      Drona’s son unmatched in learning surely might contest the field!
      Great Duryodhan midst the princes stands alone without a peer,
      Kripa priest of royal Kurus, holiest of all priests is here!
      Archer Karna–braver archer none there is of mortal birth
      Learnt his arms from Par’su Rama, he who slew the kings of earth!
      This version and C. Rajagopacharis version tally with each other. Karna was also among the nominees for the Araghya. The other nominees were
      Ved Vyasa Bheeshma etc, hence this is biggest proof that Karna was not conquered by bhima or any one else during the Rajsooya. You are perhaps influenced by the Ganguly version. Below are the confessions of Ganguly which I have recorded from a website. ” The entire translation
      is practically the work of one hand. In portions of the Adi and the Sabha
      Parvas, I was assisted by Babu Charu Charan Mookerjee. About four forms of the Sabha Parva were done by Professor Krishna Kamal Bhattacharya, and
      about half a fasciculus during my illness, was done by another hand. I
      should however state that before passing to the printer the copy received
      from these gentlemen I carefully compared every sentence with the original,making such alterations as were needed for securing a uniformity of stylewith the rest of the work. Quoting him. I should here observe that in rendering the Mahabharata into English I have derived very little aid from the three Bengali versions that are supposed to have been executed with care. Every one of these is full of inaccuracies and blunders of every description.
      I cannot lay claim to infallibility. There are verses in the Mahabharata
      that are exceedingly difficult to construe. I have derived much aid from
      the great commentator Nilakantha. ” As you can see Mr. Lawrencethat
      Prof Ganguly himself mentions that he has erred and his version in his own opinion cannot be considered authentic. You can type Karnal in google .com you will get information. There is infact historical evidence that this was the city of Anga which Karna ruled. Its north where Karna ruled NOT any part in east india.

      Like

      1. Thats a very impressive citation. You obviously are more knowledgable about the subject than I am, but I did not get this story of Bhima’s conquest from Ganguli. I got it from the University of Chicago translation of the Pune Critical Edition: Dyuta Parva (Book of the Assembly Hall), 27.15: “After defeating Danda and Dandadhara and the landlords,he stormed Girivraja with all of them. He quieted Jarasandha’s son and made him tributary; and with all of them the mighty conqueror, O king, hastened to his task. Shaking the earth with his four-membered host, the best of the Pandavas battled with enemy-slaying KARNA. Having defeated Karna in battle and bringing him under his power, Bharata, he mightily laid low the chieftains who dwell in the mountains.” …He then goes on to conquer the kingdom of Vanga.

        Now, if you were to locate the places mentioned in this brief excerpt, you’ll find that there is no question that Girivraja/Magadha is in East India, as is the kingdom of Vanga.

        I am reading both Ganguli AND the Critical Edition in parallel, and so far neither disagrees on the point that Karna is King of Anga, and that Anga is in Eastern India.

        I also find it interesting that while Ganguli downplays his own translation, at the same time, he criticizes the Bengali translations (that you appear to depend on) for their inaccuracies! All we can do is triangulate with these finer points, unfortunately, because even if we learned sanskrit and studied the originals, we’d find that even the most ancient versions out there do not agree on every point!

        To make matters even more difficult, the Mahabharata is not always internally consistent either! The one that comes immediately to mind is the three different explanations of the Pandavas’ divine origins– In the Partial Incarnations, they are avatars of Dharma, Wind God, Indra, & the Ashvins. In the main story, they are the sons of the same. And in the aftermath of Draupadi’s swayamvar, Vyasa shows Drupad that they are actually each an incarnation of Indra!

        Back to the question of Karna, I just think he is a complicated figure who is dealt with inconsistently in the Mahabharata itself. Sometimes he is portrayed as the most dangerous foe of the Pandavas, & equal to Arjun in battle, and at other times he is treated like a peripheral blowhard. I can’t explain it, but there it is, so I just accept it!

        I should also express my appreciation that we are able to disagree without resorting to name-calling or insults, which is all too common on the internet!

        Take care.

        Like

  17. One thing bhisma didnt have control over the kingdom or dhirtrastra or duri, Duri is like the king indirectly, none can question him , only at the extreme cases dhirastra will interfere , so no point in blaming bhisma,

    Like

    1. You might cite a rule, but there’s a good example of questioning the king in this story– Vidur does it repeatedly, in this very scene. If his words had been put in Bhismas mouth, Dhrtarastra would undoubtedly have snapped out of his stupor and pit a stop to it.

      Still, there are many strange things about the dice game, and we can only accept the version we get in the original text. I don’t see much point in going outside the original story and making assumptions. The book says Duryodhana was bad, and it shows Karna as a tragic anti-hero. So we can only accept that and not try changing the story!

      Like

  18. At the beginning of the Mahabharata, there is a chapter called “The Partial Incarnations”. In there, they explain that there had been a cosmic struggle between the Devas and Asuras, and that ultimately the Asuras were all defeated and killed. These Asuras re-incarnated on earth as humans and rakshasas, and Bhumi Devi went to Brahma & Vishnu begging them to rid the earth of her evil burdens. Brahma summoned the Devas and they all volunteered to incarnat on earth with portions of themselves to help rid the earth of the Asuras. Vishnu then offered to send down an Avatar in the form of Krishna. This essay then takes an inventory of nearly every character in the book and identifies them as the re-incarnation of some Deva (good guys) or Asura (bad guys). Krishna’s purpose was to rid the world of the Asuras, and this meant not only wiping out the armies on the side of the Kauravas, but also most of the Pandavas’ allies!

    So from that perspective, the entire drama was manipulated by Krishna for the sole purpose of leading to this war and cleansing the earth with a massive blood sacrifice at Kurukshetra. Duryodhana was without question the incarnation of a demonic Asura, and therefore had to be eliminated.

    Krishna’s secondary purpose was to conduct his war of extermination according to Dharma, so as to set an example for later generations on how to live their lives and make decisions. Krishna himself is above Dharma and does not live by the rules of Karma, so he was allowed to bend or even break the rules to accomplish his ends. He was very careful to preserve Yuddhistira as Dharmaraja, however, to set an example for history.

    As for the dice game, Yuddhistir was gambling in the presence of all his elders, to whom he gave complete obedience. He stated that he was only gambling at the request of his “father” the king, and once he started, his Dharma as a Kshatriya was to never turn down a challenge, thus he was forced to raise the stakes until his elders followed their own Dharma and put a stop to it.

    Although it goes unstated, my guess is that he ultimately staked Draupadi and his brothers because they were all he had left to stake, and his “father” had not yet told him to stop gambling.

    It is important to remember that the dice game occurred in the presence of all the Kuru elders, and it was incumbent on them to control what their sons did in their presence. The shame should fall on Dhritarastra, and even on Bhisma, more than on Yuddhistira who was only following orders; the Dharma of every son.

    My question is why Bhisma refused to act. He was effectively Dhritarastra’s father, certainly his elder, and so he should have had the authority to command the game be stopped at any time.

    The only time Bhisma ever intervened in state affairs was when he swore an oath to make Satyavati’s sons the kings and himself never to marry or have children. This set the whole tragedy in motion, and despite every opportunity Bhisma had to repair things, he remained quiet, until the end.

    Like

    1. Question
      I have read some posts in this blog saying that Bhim defeated Karna during the Rajsuya Yagna. It is mentioned in KMG. Do you have any more information on that? Please, let me know. Thanks.

      Like

  19. @akshay

    >>Shakuni also used to address him as Moorkhaha (fool))
    when did shakuni call like that give proof

    About other rules and thing you posted about duryodhana, this is the question see in that yuga if some one leaves his property for 13 years then it doesn’t belong to him ,that is why duryodhana asks pandavas to go away for 13 years so after that they lose their property actually , then also in DVSK movie duryodhana says that he will give the kingdom only to his uncle pandu’s sons and says that why should he give the kindgom to the sons of yama,vayu, indra and the aswini stars , then he puts a question are pandavas the sons of pandu .then the reason for duryodhana not giving 5 villages is that ,
    1)it would make pandavas as beggars as they beg and ask duryodhana, instead of fighitng it is an insult to the race
    2)it would appear as if duryodhana is afraid of pandavas

    Like

    1. 9. // in that yuga if some one leaves his property for 13 years then it doesn’t belong to him //
      Please let us know where is this rule mentioned?

      Like

  20. @akshay
    About abhimanyu , it is not a great thing to defeat abhimanyu, he had a impenetrable armour ( just like karna’s kavach ) the armour was taught by drona to arjuna and arjuan told abhimanyu ,For your info abhimanyu had been defeated many times by bheesma and he ran away too ,if you tell killing abhimanyu is unfair in the many on one battle then abhimanyu himself has made that mistake first , abhimanyu and all the maharathis(arjuna,satyaki,bheema …….) of pandava side fought a one on 22 fight against bheesma all lost and ran away except arjuna who was hiding behind sikandin ,indeed many on one fights were so common that days, also bheema took 12 people with him to fight karna and all lost and ran away from karna too .first abhimanyu didnt defeat drona , then abhimanyu is very egoistic ,his charioter warns abhimanyu about the strategy of drona but abhimanyu tells that he can fight even arjuna or indra and he can killl all the kaurava warriors singlehandedly , abhimanyu is very egoistic and over confident . then karna goes and asks drona on why abhimanyu is strong that day, drona tells that he has impenetrabale armour , so his body is immune to arrows ,and drona tells that abhimanyu is only good with archery,(some how drona learns that abhimanyu is bad with mace so the strategy is to make abhimanyu fight with mace )the drona asks karna to cut the bow of abhimanyu as he is the one who is capable of doing it , and karna cuts it only from front and not from behind .(this is a myth shown in movies ). then abhimanyu’s other weapons are removed by many on one fight , then when he takes mace the many on one attacks are stoppped not even a single arrow from karna ,drona or any other maharathi attacked abhimanyu when he took mace, then abhimanyu goes and killls some 72 people all the maharathis just watch it silently as it is not fair to hit him now ,and then there was a one on one fight with dussan’s son and abhimanyu with mace and then abhimanyu is killed by the blow to the head (remmeber he cannot be killled when he is targeted in the chest because of armour and then most arrows only target chest ) so only the weapon removing part may be done by many people , that too karna did it only from front and then abhimanyu was killed fairly , if you tel that abhimanyu was the first unfair thing bheesma was killled unfairly before itself

    Like

    1. Jai Sri Krishna
      A maharathi is a warrior who can tackle a large number warriors at a radius of 360 degrees. C. Rajagopalacharis Mahabharata reveals Satyaki and his 10 sons attack Bhurishrava and Bhurishrava without complaining tackles all of them. Hence Karna attacking Abhimanyu with many warriors is not a serious offence. A maharathi does not need his bow to launch a counter attack. After the war when Pandavas went in search of Ashwatthama and found him, this Ashwatthama picked up a straw and charged it with the brahmastra. He did not fuss about not having a bow. Karna did not kill Abhimanyu . A disciple of Parshurama before beginning his training has to take a pledge that he wont fire the weopens given by Parshurama on the following. A woman, a eunuch a retreating warrior and a eklauta putra – only son of his mother. This is revealed in a conversation between Bheeshma and Yudhishthira in the beginning of the war. Karna too was a disciple of Parshurama it’s a strong possibility that he was not firing lethal weapons given by Prashurama. Its worth noting he did not fire Parshurama given weapons like Bhargavastra Brahmastra and Nag astra at Ghatotkacha as well who was Hidimbas ek Lauta putra and fired Indras weapon which he was saving for Arjuna.

      Like

    2. 6. // abhimanyu and all the maharathis(arjuna,satyaki,bheema …….) of pandava side fought a one on 22 fight against bheesma all lost //
      Did this happen in the Kurukhestra War?
      Please provide us some evidence/proofs.

      7. // abhimanyu is killed by the blow to the head (remmeber he cannot be killled when he is targeted in the chest because of armour and then most arrows only target chest ) //
      Please let us know how Arjuna kill Karna? …. Did he shoot an arrow in Karna’s chest? … Did he behead Karna? .. and also please let us know whether beheading someone with Bow and Arrow was possible or not? .. and if possible whether illegal or not? … then I will post my actual questions about your “Abhimanyu Killing was fair” explanation.

      8. // abhimanyu is killed by the blow to the head // and
      // the weapon removing part may be done by many people , that too karna did it only from front //
      I am guessing that Karna removed Abhimanyu’s Kavach from front, correct me if I am wrong.
      So if Kavach was removed then why was he killed by the blow to the head?

      Like

      1. Jai Shri Krishna
        Abhishek you have raised very valid questions. I will try to answer some of them. First of all Bheeshma was a warrior whom even Shri Parshuram could not defeat. Neither could the Pandavas. I am not sure about Bheeshma but I can show you an incident in this very blog where many warriors have attacked Karna and Karna single handedly tackled them without complaining. In any case a defination of a maharathi is a warrior who can fight with more than 10,000 warriors at a radius of 360 degrees. Hence many warriors attacking Abhumanyu cannot be a serious offence. Coming to death of Abhimanyu my humble knowledge tells me that Dushasanas son and Abhimanyu attacked each other with gada ie mace. Both rendered each other unconsious. But Abhimanyu was fatigued by his earlier encounters with the Kuru warriors hence Dushasanas son recovered earlier. And landed a blow to Abhimanyu killing him. When you have just recovered consciousnes after getting hit by a formidable opponent and you see that formidalbe opponent lying in a vulnerable postion your psychology will be to hit him where ever you can at the most vulnerable postion which will cause instaneous death. Neck and Head is more vulnerable than chest. Even in Bhurishrava Satyaki episode. After recovering conscousness Satyaki cut the head of Bhurishrava with his sword when Bhurishrava was in vulnerable position. He did not go for chest. Hence Abhimanyus armour been broken or not been broken is totally immaterial from Dushasanas sons point of view as in both the cases he was certain to have struck the lethal blow on the head which is not covered by the armour. Your other question Please let us know how Arjuna kill Karna? …. Did he shoot an arrow in Karna’s chest? … Did he behead Karna? .. Some versions say that he beheaded Karna with Anjalika astra the south indian version says that he hit Karna on his chest with Pashupata astra. Your next question and also please let us know whether beheading someone with Bow and Arrow was possible or not? Yes its possible. Kumbhakarna was beheaded by Shri Rama. Jayadratha was beheaded by Arjuna using bow. But the weapons were divayastras. I feel an ordinary arrow also can behead becoz Abhimanyu behaded Duryodhanas son Lakshamana with ordinary arrow. Question and if possible whether illegal or not? …It legal. Definately you can behead you opponent. However attacking an unconscious opponent is illegal. Dushasana attacked unconscious Abhimanyu. I would request you to read the section of the blog Your favourite character in Mahabharata with explainantion. You will get the incident which has been posted where it has been pointed out that many warriors had attacked Karna and Karna single handedly stood up to them
        best regards
        Niraj Sharma

        Like

    3. 6. // abhimanyu and all the maharathis(arjuna,satyaki,bheema …….) of pandava side fought a one on 22 fight against bheesma all lost //
      Did this happen in the Kurukhestra War?
      Please provide us some evidence/proofs.

      7. // abhimanyu is killed by the blow to the head (remmeber he cannot be killled when he is targeted in the chest because of armour and then most arrows only target chest ) //
      Please let us know how Arjuna kill Karna? …. Did he shoot an arrow in Karna’s chest? … Did he behead Karna? .. and also please let us know whether beheading someone with Bow and Arrow was possible or not? .. and if possible whether illegal or not? … then I will post my actual questions about your “Abhimanyu Killing was fair” explanation.

      8. // abhimanyu is killed by the blow to the head // and
      // the weapon removing part may be done by many people , that too karna did it only from front //
      I am guessing that Karna removed Abhimanyu’s Kavach from front, correct me if I am wrong.
      So if Kavach was removed then why was he killed by the blow to the head?

      Like

        1. And you are leader of all fools in this world
          Foolishest comments from the foolishest person of the world.
          And no need to cry like a new born baby.
          Each person have different perspective and god created them like that
          so you foolishest person is questioning the power of god.
          And 1st you have to know the meaning of Lord and God
          So grow up and stop behaving like a new born kiddo

          Like

  21. @akshay
    an abbrivation
    dana vera sura karna(DVSK) – telungu movie (where duryodhana is portryaed in his true self )
    KMG – K m ganguli translation of mahabharat

    >>sleeping Krishna and sat near his feet
    Well in DVSK krishna acts like he is sleeping when duryodhana comes to his house, duryodhana wonders why he is sleeping in the untimley period, there was a seat near krishna’s head so duryodhana went and sat there and when arjuna comes he stands nears the feet and offers the salutation and then at the same moment krishna wakes up , ( arjuna didnt sit in the KMG )why should krishna wake up in that exact moment when arjuna enters.you tell that krishna first sees arjuna only ,but krishna is god can’t he see duryodhana who came first even while he is sleeping .If only younger persons are given first choice then duryodhana must be given choice of kingdom than yuddithira, because duryodhana is younger than yuddithira . About narayana sena,those are cow herds , they have been defeated by jarasandha before it self and they ran away from him , if the narayana seni is so great tell what acheivement they did in kurushetra.IF duryodhana is given choice who knows he could have choosen krishna too
    One more thing balarama didnt participate in the war, so his power is not inculded in the narayana seni.

    Like

    1. I have few Questions for Gandharva

      1. // dana vera sura karna (DVSK) – telungu movie (where duryodhana is portryaed in his true self ) //
      Is DVSK based on KMG’s Mahabharat?
      Please let us know why should anyone believe a movie? Correct me if I am wrong, if I produce and direct a movie showing how Dushyasan was Sushyasana or Shakuni as a noble and and honest guy, should anyone accept that too?
      DVSK is NTR’s thinking while Sushyasana etc. is my thinking.

      2. // (arjuna didnt sit in the KMG) why should krishna wake up in that exact moment when arjuna enters //
      Now as far as I know KMG’s Mahabharat is touted as the most authentic version of Mahabharat coz it is the translation of the Mahabharat’s Sanskrit verses.
      So anyway …
      My question is, does KMG Mahabharat say that Krisha “acts” as if he was sleeping (Krishna fakes sleeping)? … If yes could u plz give us the verses or the translation of KMG or any links?

      3. // but krishna is god can’t he see duryodhana //
      Do you know the difference between Deva and God (Eeshwar)?

      4. // If only younger persons are given first choice then duryodhana must be given choice of kingdom than yuddithira //
      You have mentioned one rule that was in existence at that time —– in that yuga if some one leaves his property for 13 years then it doesn’t belong to him —– then what was the rule as far as giving the throne of a kingdom is concerned?

      5. // IF duryodhana is given choice who knows he could have choosen krishna too //
      Expressing a possibility like ‘ifs’ and ‘buts’ does not prove anything so i will ignore this statement.

      Like

      1. 1. // dana vera sura karna (DVSK) – telungu movie (where duryodhana is portryaed in his true self ) //
        Is DVSK based on KMG’s Mahabharat?
        Please let us know why should anyone believe a movie? Correct me if I am wrong, if I produce and direct a movie showing how Dushyasan was Sushyasana or Shakuni as a noble and and honest guy, should anyone accept that too?
        DVSK is NTR’s thinking while Sushyasana etc. is my thinking.

        yes, people are going to believe u if u produce a movie. But it takes lot of time(some years) to believe u.

        In the ramanand sagar ramayan, when lakshmana is leaving sita in the kuteer(hut) to help rama, he draws lakshamana lines(lakshmana rekha’s).

        In most of the indian movies, ravana abducts sita by not touching her. he lifts the place where sita was standing . etc……

        For ramayan, Maharshi Valmiki is the author and it was accepted by most of the people. Shrimad Valmiki Ramayan is the most believable life of rama and sita.

        In the Shrimad Valmiki Ramayan, there were no lakshamana lines. But even today most of the people believe lakshamana rekhas(lakshamana lines).
        abduction of sita. Sita was dragged by hair and she was sat on the lap of Ravan.

        the above facts can’t be digested by our people. thats why various versions of ramayana.

        Like

    1. you are a fool. you should know that first. you guys are nobody to question if lord krishna who is above all, if he did cheat or not, if he was fair or not.

      Like

  22. @Akshay
    No need to disgrace someone related to Mahabharta every one is righteous at there position in Mahabharta so no need to call Duryodhana or Bheema or anyone a fool.

    Hope you will keep this in your mind.

    Thanks a lot

    Dhruv Gaba

    Like

  23. Abhimanyu killing is not righteous thing but before that all rules are already broken by Dharma Rakshak(so called) Pandavas so whatever Kauraves did is also acceptable. Bheesma Vadh Drona Vadh Jayadhartha Vadh Karna Vadh all are wrong.

    And Duryodhana refused as we refuse to give our land to Pakistan as they will eat grow and then act. So its also acceptable.

    And Krishna cheated lots of time.

    Pandavas and Kaurvas both did many wrong things.

    And Karna already told Suyodhana to get Krishna not his Sena.

    And Krishna again cheated here.

    Like

  24. I don’t think u knw anything about the rule of the game…..Yes I agree…Yudhisthira was a knucklehead, he put his kingdom and his wife’s reputation at stake.. But jz think..the rule of the game was that if Pandava’s lost they should go to vanavas(wander in forest) for 13 years and should be in 1 year of agyathvas(remain in any kingdom in disguise). The rule was also that during the agyatvas they shudnt be recognised by anybody. If they are recognised they would be subjected again to 13 yrs of vanvas and 1 yr of agyatvas ang this would continue. And once they finish this, they could come back and reclaim rightfully wat was theirs. But when Pandavas fulfilled all conditions and came back Duryodhana disagreed to return them their kingdom. When Krishna went as a messenger of peace to Hastinapur, asking for the kingdom Duryodhana refused and when Krishna asked for only 5 villages, Duryodhana denied saying that he wouldnt give Pandavas any part of the land. Not even so much of land that would cover the tip of a needle. This calls for war!!! Because war always is the final resort…. Like the Vedas say…Saam, Dhaam, Dand, Bedh…..This is wat happened…. people shud knw this fact…Duryodhana was one of the main causes for war!!!

    Like

  25. Abhimanyu was backed by Bhimsena and others, but I don’t blame Jayadratah and Kaurava’s for blocking Bhimsen…. The fault lies when Abhimanyu was killed inside the chakravyuha by treachery…Do u knw that Abhimanyu was a great warrior? So great that he also defeated Karna and Guru Dronacahrya himself who was the commander in chief of the Kaurava army then. They figured out that theer was no way they could defeat Abhimanyu by battling one on one as the rule says. So they decided to break the rule and attack from the backside while he was ebgaged with someone else in a battle. And Drona instead of abiding by the laws of the war that was set by the great Bheeshma pitamaha himself, agreed to do this treachery and Abhimanyu was stabbed in the back and he dies when hit on the head. This is to be blamed and Duryodhana can’t question anything regarding y Abhimanyu entered the chakravyuha and what their fault is!!! He was the greatest fool in Mahabharatha (Shakuni also used to address him as Moorkhaha (fool))….And if Duryodhana really asked Krishna to explain what their fault was about Abhimanyu’s killing then he is the greatest fool of all tym!!!

    Like

  26. Brother, I agree with you.. Krishna did cheat…but tell me something, someone as genius as Krishna…do u think he’d really take a risk of giving Duryodhana a chance to ask first what he wants??? There are a few points here that I’d like to say…

    * Although Duryodhana came first, he sat near Krishna’s head… that was out of ego! He didnt want to sit at his feet… Arjuna came in and first thing he did was offered salutations to the sleeping Krishna and sat near his feet and waited patiently for Krishna to complete his nap while Duryodhana was getting impatient. Arjuna was Humble.

    *And second, not to forget Arjuna was the younger brother of Duryodhana. Common sense, the elder one should first see that his li’l bro gets a chance to ask first. When Krishna asks Arjuna to ask wat he wants, Duryodhana gets furious and he tells Krishna that he was the first to come and Krishna replies sayin that he saw Arjuna first and besides it as the younger one it was Arjuna’s right to ask first.

    *Third, Even if Duryodhana was given a chance to ask first he would have definitely asked for Krishna’s invincible Narayani saina(the army of Narayana) that would be led by the powerful Balarama, who is also Duryodhana’s teacher who taught him the art of gadayuddha…because Krishna’s condition was that on one side would be Balarama and the whole army and on the other hand would be only Krishna alone without any weapons!! And Duryodhana\was actually worried when Krishna gave Arjuna first preference because he thought that Arjuna would ask for the indestructible army and that he himself would be left with Krishna alone. But when Arjuna opted for Krishna, Duryodhana felt like in heaven!!!

    This was the actual thing that happened and by no means can we say that Krishna cheated while it comes to this part….coz he did wat he felt was right… He saw Arjuna first and he gave him the right to ask first…

    Thank You

    Jai Sri Krishna

    Like

Say it right

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s