Kunti and karna

I just want to know how many 16 year old girls in todays "modern" generation would have accepted their child born out of wedlock ???? And are we really sure that pandu would have accepted karna had kunti told him ??? If kunti was being selfish enough to look out for herself just like all other characters including the man himself a.k.a karna was she really wrong ??

The issue though wasn't so much her abandoning Karna: it was her approaching him years later just to save her other 5 sons. From that aspect, her behavior towards Karna was reprehensible.

If she genuinely regarded Karna as her son, she should have come clean not just to him, but to Yudhisthir as well. If she didn't regard Karna as her son, then she shouldn't have approached him to beg him to join her other sons.

But her strategy was to hunt w/ the hounds, hide w/ the hares. Not much respect can be evoked from such an opportunist stance

Originally posted by: .Vrish.

The issue though wasn't so much her abandoning Karna: it was her approaching him years later just to save her other 5 sons. From that aspect, her behavior towards Karna was reprehensible.

If she genuinely regarded Karna as her son, she should have come clean not just to him, but to Yudhisthir as well. If she didn't regard Karna as her son, then she shouldn't have approached him to beg him to join her other sons.

But her strategy was to hunt w/ the hounds, hide w/ the hares. Not much respect can be evoked from such an opportunist stance

Who was not opportunistic apart from probably drapaudi and krishna. Karna himself was opportunistic enough to side with duryodhan because that suited him/ was convinient for him. Sometimes turning a blind and most of the times actively participating in it .Afterall an entire kingdom was presented to him on a platter . But kunti gets way too much hate for this . And the shakti weapon that radheya got in return of his "daan". The point is that everyone was looking out for themselves.

I'll grant you that everyone was looking out for themselves. But in Kunti's case, she tried to have it both ways: extract promises from Karna on the basis that she was his mother, while keeping quiet about him for all the years that she could have helped him. Like I said, the former would only have been justified had she publicly acknowledged him as her son (and I'm talking about anytime b/w the archery contest where Karna first appeared and the game of dice). In fact, she could, during the Pandava rule at Indraprastha when she lived w/ them, easily have confided the truth w/ Yudhisthir and let him take the appropriate steps.

Show me other characters in the story who tried to have it both ways? Duryodhan maybe - wanting Krishna's support despite ignoring his pleas for peace, or manipulating Shalya into joining him. But other than that, no one was as self-centered as Kunti, who then turned around and virtue-signaled by joining Dhritarashtra and Gandhari to the forest.

Originally posted by: .Vrish.

I'll grant you that everyone was looking out for themselves. But in Kunti's case, she tried to have it both ways: extract promises from Karna on the basis that she was his mother, while keeping quiet about him for all the years that she could have helped him. Like I said, the former would only have been justified had she publicly acknowledged him as her son (and I'm talking about anytime b/w the archery contest where Karna first appeared and the game of dice). In fact, she could, during the Pandava rule at Indraprastha when she lived w/ them, easily have confided the truth w/ Yudhisthir and let him take the appropriate steps.

Show me other characters in the story who tried to have it both ways? Duryodhan maybe - wanting Krishna's support despite ignoring his pleas for peace, or manipulating Shalya into joining him. But other than that, no one was as self-centered as Kunti, who then turned around and virtue-signaled by joining Dhritarashtra and Gandhari to the forest.

Umm actually i don't think kunti asked him for any sort of promise ( if she did i would love if you can give the citation) it was karna himself who promised to not attack - four of the five Pandavas that including yudhishtra whose death would have tilted the result in their (duryodhan) s favour. And i don't think it was out any kind of affection for his "brothers" but more out of his own selfish need to prove himself better than arjun by killing him there you have kunti s eldest acting just like her - having both ways and in doing so betraying his best friend somebody who provided him with friendship affection and even kingdom

Didn't Kunti call Karna "the wretch who wants to eat my children"? This was just prior to Krishna going to Karna, IIRC.

Doesn't look like she was trying to have it both ways. Kunti seeks to have been doing the same thing as Krishna. Making sure Karna's hand shook when he took aim at the Pandavas.

What I'd blame her for is telling the Pandavas after war. What was the point at the time? The only thing she achieved was pile guilt and misery on the 5 for something they weren't even aware of.

Oh, well... at least that gave the reader the chance to see Panchali rip into Yudhishtira. She called him a mad man who should be locked up. Gave me a warm glow to hear SOMEone tell him off finally.

I do not blame Kunti for abandoning Karna at birth - that is understandable for an unwed woman, a princess especially.

Although one question - was giving away the baby not an option? Why did she float him in the river? He could have died.

I blame her for keeping quiet all those years. Never caring even when he went on to Duryodhana's side.

And THEN go and emotionally manipulate him and weaken his resolve

She had NO rights to him, she gave them up. So she should not have gone to beg him for anything at the beginning of the war.

Yes, this could be just a strategic move with no motherly affection at all, but that doesn't make her any more likable to me as an admirer of the character Karna.

Originally posted by: AnkitaPurka66

I do not blame Kunti for abandoning Karna at birth - that is understandable for an unwed woman, a princess especially.

Although one question - was giving away the baby not an option? Why did she float him in the river? He could have died.

I blame her for keeping quiet all those years. Never caring even when he went on to Duryodhana's side.

And THEN go and emotionally manipulate him and weaken his resolve

She had NO rights to him, she gave them up. So she should not have gone to beg him for anything at the beginning of the war.

Yes, this could be just a strategic move with no motherly affection at all, but that doesn't make her any more likable to me as an admirer of the character Karna.

Ofcourse you can not like kunti as your karna s fan.because of the equation . But what i want to understand is that how is all that Karna did is ok and acceptable him siding with duryodhan is ok??? Him asking duryodhan to take a hunting trip just so that he can mock their misery is ok?? And his trade of shakti weapon in return of his kavaach kundal ( daan is when you give something without asking anything in return ) is ok??? But kunti looking out for herself and her sons is not ???

Not including dice hall here.

What i feel is that kunti gets way too much backlash for her selfish nature than any other character that includes man himself karna

I view Kunti as a practical woman who didn't allow certain attachments to hamper the greater purpose. Such a contrast against the likes of Gandhari and Dhritrashtra. Also, Karna's involvement with Duryodhana may have made her bitter against the former.

That meeting before the war was a purely political move on her part.

But I don't see what good an acceptance would have done in that age. Bheeshma had made it clear that KANEENA sons can't inherit the throne. Karna was better off as Radha's son and Anga's ruler. With the Pandavas he would have been forced to roam in jungles amid conspiracies.

Originally posted by: Wistfulness

I view Kunti as a practical woman who didn't allow certain attachments to hamper the greater purpose. Such a contrast against the likes of Gandhari and Dhritrashtra. Also, Karna's involvement with Duryodhana may have made her bitter against the former.

That meeting before the war was a purely political move on her part.

But I don't see what good an acceptance would have done in that age. Bheeshma had made it clear that KANEENA sons can't inherit the throne. Karna was better off as Radha's son and Anga's ruler. With the Pandavas he would have been forced to roam in jungles amid conspiracies.

Not that I think Karna would have been made the king but did actually Bheeshm say that Kaneen children can't become kings?