Posted:
See dear, what you said about being chosen as the 'Best Leader' and the consequences - that was the way they represented your action. You opened your hair. There was nothing wrong in that. But! They way they (whoever they were) presented your action, it was looked as a wrong action. Just like some people say that Duryodhan was wrong to use the rules. But he was not! Right. He broke no rule but he used the rules in a way which they benefitted him. Mso his means were not wrong. Hence blaming the means makes no sense. So even if people see means first rather than the complete action in this case, it makes no sense entirely. And in my FF too you should better look at the end because everyone knows what will happen but the ending of this track is still under the sheets of fog. Then I never said Duryodhan discriminated on the basis of Cates for creed. In fact I consider him better than Pandavs in this case. As of you said that promoting a wrong message in the society doesn't make you unjust, why doesn't it! It does make you unjust. Because you support the wrong with will lead to injustice. Right or not? All of them who were present in Dyut Sabha were unjust. Why? Because they never spoke against never spoke against the injustice Draupadi had to go through. So they were unjust because they never spoke out in favour justice and promoted a wrong message. And Dharma can never be bound to some text or Many Samhita. Because Krishna himself said that Dharma changes with time a d is different in every situation. So how can you decide that someone was just or unjust on the basis that he followed Manu Samhita's laws. Though I agree here that Dhritrashtra was unjust. Like I said a good administrator can be unjust. Dhritrashtra was unjust when he put his family ahead his subjects but he was a good administrator. Punishment and revenge are to faces of the same coin. Some may call punishment revenge but it cannot be called wrong. In EHT too they call punishment revenge. They showed revenge as a form of punishment. Just like I am presenting in my FF. And I do completely agree that Pandavs were no followers of Dharma, wholly. Because whatever great deeds Yudhishtir did in his life, he will always be called faulty for his silence in Dyut Sabha and his wrong decisions he made in Dyut Sabha will always be criticised and the same rests for the other four.Originally posted by: Yagyaseni
I will take that as a compliment.Then my 'Leadership Course' can go wherever it wants to, at this point!! I say being won ' the Best Leader' three times consecutively, that after being in a position where you make the rules and you don't have to do anything, even a minute mistake become magnified! As simple as leaving your hair open after physically taxing job, was told to the Head, that Yagya is setting up a wrong example for us!! Not Being a ruthless kin as I have proven just now, is equal to being unjust!! Did discriminate people on the basis of the caste? No. Why? Take the example of Karna! And Bhishma, every single version of Mahabharat, points out that he was one of the main reasons of Mahabharat! He knew Dharm but chose to limit it! Underestimated it would have been a right word! And to say that Dhritrashatra was not a good king, for he always put his family's safety ahead of his people's safety, breaking the Dharma of Kind according to Manu Samhita! DId Duryodhan make the rules of Dyut Sabha! I believe it was the elders who did that! Was really asking for his fathers right so wrong? I believe not! He chose the wrong way, infact the very wrong one, but the fact remains, he misunderstood the whole thing! No person is perfect, nor me, nor you, nor Arjun, nor Draupadi, nor Krishna nor Duryodhan!! And promoting a wrong message, definitely doesn't make you unjust! I used punishments several times, but when it was required, but others may interpret it as misuse of power or they can take it as fulfilling responsibility! People may do wrong things but it is upto us if we take a lesson from it or take it as an encouragement!!It was proper guidance that he lacked, as he had a blind father and voluntarily blinded mother! And this again says, why Bhishma stopped Dhrit from being the king! When a blind father couldn't stop the misguidance his son was getting, how would he deal with a whole society when he was blind! People don't see the ends, Angela they see means sometimes! A good deed with a wrong means, can destroy its essence, as you can see in Pandavs case! If they didn't do Adharm in Kuruksetra, I would definitely got less points to support Duryodhan today!!
Kyunki Saas Bhi Kabhi Bahu Thi 2
Anupamaa
193