Who do you think is main villian of Mahabharat - Page 8

It is not shakuni who told duryodhan not to be jealous of pandav. It is dhrithrashtra who told duryodhan not to be jealous of pandav

And yudhistar was never fond of dice and he oppose gambling

He came to gambling because king dhrithrashtra order it

Here is link

http://hi.krishnakosh.org/कृष्ण/महाभारत_सभा_पर्व_अध्याय_53_श्लोक_1-19

http://hi.krishnakosh.org/कृष्ण/महाभारत_सभा_पर्व_अध्याय_53_श्लोक_20-26

http://hi.krishnakosh.org/कृष्ण/महाभारत_सभा_पर्व_अध्याय_57_श्लोक_1-5

http://hi.krishnakosh.org/कृष्ण/महाभारत_सभा_पर्व_अध्याय_58_श्लोक_20-22

http://hi.krishnakosh.org/कृष्ण/महाभारत_सभा_पर्व_अध्याय_58_श्लोक_23-38

http://hi.krishnakosh.org/कृष्ण/महाभारत_सभा_पर्व_अध्याय_59_श्लोक_1-15

http://hi.krishnakosh.org/कृष्ण/महाभारत_सभा_पर्व_अध्याय_59_श्लोक_16-21

http://hi.krishnakosh.org/कृष्ण/महाभारत_सभा_पर्व_अध्याय_60_श्लोक_1-9

http://hi.krishnakosh.org/कृष्ण/महाभारत_सभा_पर्व_अध्याय_61_श्लोक_1-13

Originally posted by: surabhi01

It is not shakuni who told duryodhan not to be jealous of pandav. It is dhrithrashtra who told duryodhan not to be jealous of pandav

And yudhistar was never fond of dice and he oppose gambling

He came to gambling because king dhrithrashtra order it

Here is link

http://hi.krishnakosh.org/कृष्ण/महाभारत_सभा_पर्व_अध्याय_53_श्लोक_1-19

http://hi.krishnakosh.org/कृष्ण/महाभारत_सभा_पर्व_अध्याय_53_श्लोक_20-26

http://hi.krishnakosh.org/कृष्ण/महाभारत_सभा_पर्व_अध्याय_57_श्लोक_1-5

http://hi.krishnakosh.org/कृष्ण/महाभारत_सभा_पर्व_अध्याय_58_श्लोक_20-22

http://hi.krishnakosh.org/कृष्ण/महाभारत_सभा_पर्व_अध्याय_58_श्लोक_23-38

http://hi.krishnakosh.org/कृष्ण/महाभारत_सभा_पर्व_अध्याय_59_श्लोक_1-15

http://hi.krishnakosh.org/कृष्ण/महाभारत_सभा_पर्व_अध्याय_59_श्लोक_16-21

http://hi.krishnakosh.org/कृष्ण/महाभारत_सभा_पर्व_अध्याय_60_श्लोक_1-9

http://hi.krishnakosh.org/कृष्ण/महाभारत_सभा_पर्व_अध्याय_61_श्लोक_1-13

Surabhi, these write ups are not citations from text.

If you so wish, please go to KMG which is FREELY available online.

Shakuni does tell Suyodhana not to be jealous of his cousins. Shows, poetry, etc. are not Mahabharata no matter how great the credentials if the author.

https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/index.htm

Originally posted by: .Vrish.

One of my biggest beefs w/ this serial is treating the partition of Hastinapur in the dwapar yuga at par w/ the partition of India in 1947. Nowhere near the same thing.

At that time, there was no concept not just of a single Aryavarta, but also, of the integrity of kingdoms. Kings would go on conquests, conquer kingdoms and then put their own relatives on the throne. Janaka did that w/ his brother, Yudhajit of Kekaya allied w/ Rama and Bharat to place Bharat's kids on the throne of Gandhara after a fierce war against the Gandharvas. In the Chandravansh, Yayati, who ruled at Prathisthana (later Prayag) gave each of his 5 sons 5 different kingdoms. Similarly, down the line, various kingdoms were partitioned when there were 2 or more brothers - not everybody did what the Pandavas did, or what Rama's brothers did and served their eldest brother.

So the partition of Hastinapur was just fine. One can debate on whether Arjun was justified in doing a genocide of the Nagas living in the Khandava forests, but that is tangential to the question of whether Yudhisthir deserved his own kingdom.

One of the driving factors behind partitioning kingdoms or giving different sons different kingdoms was to ensure the continuation of a lineage. So lets say that Prathisthana - Yayati's kingdom - got conquered by an enemy king, 4 of his other sons would still continue his lineage elsewhere, and that was a major factor in those times. Ironically, after the Kurukshetra war, w/ many dynasties wiped out in the war, there was only one strand left of the original Purus - the Pandavas, so that's how Parikshit and his successors were known. And note that while King Puru succeeded Yayati at Prathisthana, the dynasty of his that Parikshit kept alive was in Hastinapur/Indraprastha, and not at his original base.

I agree.

My point was Bheeshma had the power to do it. He wasn't a helpless old man as he claimed any time he had to do the right thing.

Why this is not citations from text if u check link which I gave they gave shlok ( verse number) as well name of parv with translation

When they are giving shlok number ( verse number of each chapter ) and giving name of parv so it citations from text

And more over kmg doesn't not give any shlok ( verse number) it just transalate Mahabharata book Shakespeare style

http://hi.krishnakosh.org/कृष्ण/महाभारत_आदि_पर्व_अध्याय_140_श्लोक_1-17

Here is link kanik talking to dhrithrashtra and then he went home

And after ward shakuni duryodhan, dussasan, karma all are discussing secretly how to kill pandav along with kunti

I always think that bhishma Pitamah and Dritrashtra are at major fault than shakuni/ durodhan. I think that bhishma had every right to choose whats wrong and right about hastinapur future and should have spoken from time to time. I think his silence does the other way round. Dritrashtra was made king only because pandu wasnt available and from childhood he considered himself to b worthy of king which should be altered to him right in the beginning that pandu is more considerable. Sometimes not speaking at the right time puts u in a situation where there is no truth left to say afterwards.

I absolutely hate Shakuni's guts, so in my book, it's him the biggest poison Hastinapur has ever had. Next, Kunti is one villain who could have saved Hastinapur a lot of trouble had she come clean earlier.

But I dont consider the Kurukhsetra mahayudhha as a bad war, hence, whoever made it happen, is not a villain IMO.

Originally posted by: Wistfulness

What? 🤔😆

He was killed by Sahdev because he participated in the war. Simple.

Shakuni participated for Duryodhana. Before the war he advised the latter to hand over the kingdom to the Pandavas to avoid the war. He was in favour of peace.

where is this said that he was in favor of peace??? he had vowed to destroy the Kurus for his sister and he did that by staying with the kurus and by taking advantage of Dhriti's moh for his son and Dhuri's ego and stupidity.

Shakuni did want to take revenge from bhishm pitamah as bhishm fix dhrithrashtra marriage to shakuni sister gandhari and shakuni did not like that bhishm get married gandhari to blind king

When shakuni want to take revenge from bhishm so obviously shakuni was not in favor of peace

Originally posted by: RainFire125

where is this said that he was in favor of peace??? he had vowed to destroy the Kurus for his sister and he did that by staying with the kurus and by taking advantage of Dhriti's moh for his son and Dhuri's ego and stupidity.

Only in tv serials.