Why the Shift?? - Page 7

Originally posted by: NoraSM

Wow

Hard to imagine this when we had to struggle for years seeking provincial autonomy

Whose provincial autonomy are you talking about here?

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

Because Gufi Paintal did a great job. 😆 I mean, to this day, audience thinks original Shakuni walked with a limp.

Agreed my husband yesterday also argued with me on this

He said maybe there is some word in Shakuni's description which means limp as well as something else

Despite my telling him multiple times that limping is completely Gufi Paintal's invention he was finding it hard to believe

Even the kind of dice they use (rectangular shaped) seems to me some creativity to differentiate from today's dice. Those dice can practically land only on the longer face owing to the laws of physics, only four faces, hence we can't get a Pau Barah there.

But we can't deny that BRC Shakuni was still much better than the Shakunis of later adaptations

Originally posted by: .Vrish.

Whose provincial autonomy are you talking about here?

She meant we had to fight for independence for long

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

I think she meant we don't use the word Hatya and use the word Vadh for Kamsa

The difference between Vadh and Hatya is exactly the same as your explained. Vadh is killing in a battle like Abhimanyu, Drona, Ghatochkat or Shalya and Karna, Hayta is killing illegally at times the other party is not expecting like Prativindhya, if fact I call the killing of all Uppandavas as Hatya

The problem is she is quibbling over the translator's word usage, nor Vyasa's😆. I believe she wants it to somehow mean Shakuni planned everything from then. Well, not unless KMG took a time machine and after getting to know of Shakuni's nefarious plans, used the word formal on purpose because...

Well, formal offering of hand still means ceremonial precursor to wedding, but maybe KMG also foresaw an intrepid millennial reader translating his English word back to Hindi instead of Sanskrit and somehow deciding the characters who spoke pre Panini Sanskrit actually meant to say what KMG did in mid 20th century English 😆.

And if you can actually understand that last sentence, kudos to you🤣

Originally posted by: Wistfulness

Damn! That's the problem. People are too engrossed in propaganda stories and folklores and refuse to accept anything that threatens their beliefs.

I've had to change so many things that I originally read in ACKs after reading the originals in KMG. Even there, seeing Vyasa contradict himself in several places has made him lose credibility w/ me, even if he was satisfying Ganapati-bappa. Valmiki is a lot cleaner, although even he makes things slightly confusing by repeating 10000 years while describing Rama's reign: reading Uttarkand at various points, it's unclear whether Rama ruled for 10000 or 11000 or 20000 years, depending on the points where the references are

General it is believed when a evil person killed by good person it is called vadh and also it is also called sanghaar

Like durga ne mahishasur ka vadh kiya ya sanghar kiya

Bheem ne jarasandh ka vadh kiya

Arjun ne jadrath ka vadh kiya

Anyway in kalyug most of things change

Jahan pur vadh , sanghaar use nahi karna chahjye wahan pur bh sanghar,vadh i use hota hai

If we say durga murder mahisasur it will look as if durga maa did crime / sin in killing mahisasur yahan muder लिखने pur alag hi sense hota hai

And if use durga maa slay / killed mahishasur then it will make another sense that durga maa give punishment to mahishasur

Use of words is very important in religious epic because of wrong use of word is disrespectful to certain character particularly in religious epic

Originally posted by: .Vrish.

Yeah, he was Yudhisthir's vassal, but once Indraprastha was won by the Kauravas in the dice game, he was either free from Yudhisthir, or he was now a vassal of Duryodhan. I think it was more the former, since he told both Krishna and Kunti how he owed Duryodhan a debt of gratitude. If it was that he was Hastinapur's vassal, he would have said so clearly.

'Conquest' in a Rajasuya yagna simply made that kingdom follow the 'foreign policy' of the 'master' kingdom. Like when Jarasandha declared war on Mathura, then his vassals - Paundrak, Shalva, Rukmi, Sishupala, Dantavatra, et al all joined him and participated in those invasions. When Bhima visited Chedi during his Rajasuya campaign, Sishupala welcomed him, since Bhima had killed his master Jarasandha, and in fact took part in a few military conquests for Bhima near his kingdom. Similarly, had Yudhisthir retained Indraprastha and then gone to war w/ Hastinapur, Karna would have been obligated to fight on his side. Which would have looked strange, given that he was sitting alongside Duryodhan and openly insulting Draupadi to please him

We can't call it a proper vassal state too. Since vassal states need to pay revenue to the master every month/year and have to take permissions from the master for their foreign policy. The states under the emperor only paid gift (read acceptance amount) at the time of surrender at any later time when the emperor asks for (not fixed portion/amount regularly) also they didn't need the permission of their respective masters to design their foreign policy. Samrat however could have later asked the state to change it, if the policy affected him

These states had greater autonomy and power than the vassal states.

I think Karna got under Duryodhan after the dice hall or else he couldn't have had his Digvijay Yatra under the Hastinapur flag. Also it is mentioned that he had his royal accomodation (I think it was some kind of official quarter alloted to him) at Hastinapur and had a permanent seat in Hastinapur Rajya Sabha. I don't think the king of a different kingdom who doesn't have any official relation to the state will get such privileges in a different kingdom

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

While Panchali did make good arguments, Suyodhana did make the foolish mistake of offering to take one of the brothers' words, and Arjuna did speak up, IMO, none of that freed her ON ITS OWN.

If your notice, Dhritharashtra was gung ho about it until the jackals howled. Gandhari was present in court and didn't say a word until the jackals howled. This even AFTER Suyodhana made that offer, and Arjuna spoke up.

Now, Hastinapuri was located in Kurujangala. I assume jackals howling were not uncommon. So why did it become a bad omen that day?

One of the things you see in text is jackals being used to indicate spies.

Tracking forward a bit, we know Krishna was fending off an attack by Salwa, Kamsa's half brother. In that episode, Salwa made it very clear his interest was in Krishna, not Dwaraka or any of the other Yadavas.

The following is extrapolation on my part, but I do thing this is likely what happened.

It is improbable that both events, dice hall qnd the attack on Krishna, which happened at the same time to be coincidence. My feeling is that the conspirators meant Krishna to die. In his absence, it would be difficult for Panchal alone to do much for the enslaved. The jackal/spy likely delivered news that Krishna remained alive and well.

Krishna being still around, combined with the political conundrum Panchali and Arjuna placed the Kurus in thanks to Suyodhana's idiocy, made the risk vs. benefit ratio tilt on the side of freeing them. The 2nd dice game was a clever work around to that where Pandava/Panchali slavery was not an issue, so no one would have a reason to attack as gaming was completely legal at the time.

I happen to think that Krishna was nowhere near Hastinapur, since he was in the middle of his war against Shalva, who may have been avenging Sishupala's death (as per the ACK Krishna and Sishupala). I think in reality, Draupadi's sari may have completely come off, or Dushashan may have stopped at the point where the sari was pinned to the pettiskirt, since it wouldn't come off, and that later Vyasa changed it to save Draupadi's name from embarrassment.

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

The problem is she is quibbling over the translator's word usage, nor Vyasa's😆. I believe she wants it to somehow mean Shakuni planned everything from then. Well, not unless KMG took a time machine and after getting to know of Shakuni's nefarious plans, used the word formal on purpose because...

Well, formal offering of hand still means ceremonial precursor to wedding, but maybe KMG also foresaw an intrepid millennial reader translating his English word back to Hindi instead of Sanskrit and somehow deciding the characters who spoke pre Panini Sanskrit actually meant to say what KMG did in mid 20th century English 😆.

And if you can actually understand that last sentence, kudos to you🤣

Ha ha this is the best explaination

And yes after multiple interactions I have started understanding

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

Because Gufi Paintal did a great job. 😆 I mean, to this day, audience thinks original Shakuni walked with a limp.

Yeah, they don't wonder how would he have even fought in a war, much less command an akshauni of his own?

Besides, BRC didn't even makes sense in that if Shakuni was limping, how did he always lock Sahadev in battle? Logic was as absent in the show as it often is w/ Vyasa himself