Dharmakshetra :) - Page 53

so, karna's title "daan-veer" is a lie then?

Originally posted by: Arijit007

so, karna's title "daan-veer" is a lie then?

Yes at least for me. Because if we obey Krishna and His uttering in Geeta, then Karna's daan is a tamasik thing. Maybe he can be called 'tamasik daan veer'.
For me, that man is even greater daan veer who forgave kauravas several times and gave them kshamaa daan, and even gave jeevan daan by saving them from hands of gandharvas in ghosha yatra episode. And wanted to give them whole IP taking only 5 villages for himself. They look like greater daan for me. Unfortunately, no one can see that man! Lord Krishna did not use to fall at his feet without reason.

Originally posted by: Arijit007

so, karna wasn't a "daan-veer" after all, kk daan wasn't a daan, because karna asked for the shakti astra for his kavach kundal.

Urmila thanx for the citations😊

so wht actually Daan meant??
see I found this while dissecting the topic: "DAN (Sanskrit Dana from the root da to give') means the act of giving or that which is given either as charity or alms or as offering, fee or reward for spiritual instruction received or for religious rite or ritual performed. The latter, however, is more appropriately called daksina. Dan (charity or alms-giving), according to the Brahmanical code as well as the code of Manu, is a means or earning spiritual merit, and is thus a religious obligation and may not necessarily be the result of a feeling of compassion or pity, and the human motive cannot be completely excluded from the concept of dan. The mode of dan and the selection of person worthy of receiving it may, however, differ. For example, a Brahman, according to Hindu tradition, retains preferential status as a fit recipient of dan. Next come wandering ascetics, and then ordinary beggars seeking alms. Orphans, widows and are also considered to be deserving of sympathy and help. According to Hindu texts, Ksatriyas and Vaisyas are expressly forbidden to receive dan"
@Red: AFAIK Indra ws none also, so in no manner its righteous for him to ask for a daan maybe for same reason he disguised himself as a Brahmin!!
@Black: I dnt need to xplain here😛 do I??😆

Interesting things coming up as I m pondering😛 Lemme search more!!😆😉
😉

In Geeta, Lord Krishna says:
Satvik daan: the daan which is performed without expecting anything in return, only thinking that daan is a duty.
Rajasik daan: the daan performed expecting something in return, and unwillingly.
Tamasik daan: daan which is performed with a negligence in giver's heart and without speaking any good word to the receiver.

In reply to yaksha prashna, Yudhi says: (yaksha's question was, what is daan?)

It is daan which protects every creature!

Now decide yourself. Citation is given above.

@Jamy/Brahmaputra

I wish people do not connect Hindi meaning of Daan with that of Sanskrit.
In Sanskrit, Daana primarily means 'to give'. It is not specified in the language that whether something is recieved in return or not. For example, marriage is incomplete with Kanya daana. Does that mean the girl is being donated there? How abusrd if one thinks so. Daana only means to give in primary sense. Donations & charity all come later. Also the word Daana Dharma is used to specify charity & donations, in Sanskrit. So there is nothing wrong in calling Karna a Daana veera.
There are many other meanings for Daana in Sanskrit. What will you do with all those then? It is always better people do a little research before they jump up with their own theories.

@Brishti - thanks for the advise. I must tell I was a great Karna hater until I read original MB.

Asura vrata was not taken because Karna wanted to kill Arjuna! Read Karna's words again & think in terms of Yudhi. You will get what it actually was for. By the way, Karna used to perform Daana dharma even before he took Asura vrata. Hope people will read more clearly MB next time.

Problem is not for the meaning of word 'daana'. Problem is: in MB itself some beautiful definitions of daana is given by people like Krishna and Yudhi. It should be found whether their theory of true daana matches with Karna's daana or not. I am neither Krishna nor Yudhi to claim those theories as mine. But yes, their definitions of daana seems more logical for me than any dictionary or internet.

May be your definition is right, Urmila. Who did deny? But I cannot replace whole Sanskrit language only with the definitions given by Krishna/Yudhi.