B R Chopra portrayal of Karna with reference to KMG - Page 15

shindes

Please read my post on the previous page, it has enough reasons to prove that Suryaputra Karna was not a part of Guru Dakshina war, it was Gandhari's son Karna.

The CE supports the claim of Karna not being a part of Guru Dakshina war.

Originally posted by: TheWatcher

shindes

Please read my post on the previous page, it has enough reasons to prove that Suryaputra Karna was not a part of Guru Dakshina war, it was Gandhari's son Karna.

The CE supports the claim of Karna not being a part of Guru Dakshina war.

Please refer to my reply 2 posts earlier as to why it is eminently possible for him to be part of Gurudakshina.

Originally posted by: shindes

The Drupad-Karna duels occur at least 2 times in MB. Once at Gurudakshina and then at Karna's campaign post Gandharwa.

Both win one duel/skirmish each. So why should the results of the 2nd duel prove Drupad inferior?

If that is so, then Bheem 'brings Anga ruler under his sway' during Rajsuya yagna in eastern direction. He also overpowers Karna mention multiple times on day 16; whereas the reverse occurs at day 17. So now who is superior?

Why call Drupad a 'nothing'?

Bhima overpowers Karna on the 14th day, not the 16th, its not that Karna sat on his butt while Bhima punched him in the face, Karna too overpowered Bhima on the 14th day., Bhima had a strength of 10,000 elephants, he again was no way comparable to Drupad ( Drupad was inferior ).

If Drupad is compared to Karna in terms of military prowess, skill, valor etc, Drupad is below Karna in that.

Originally posted by: shindes

Please refer to my reply 2 posts earlier as to why it is eminently possible for him to be part of Gurudakshina.

I read it and found it quite illogical, Karna wouldnt have gatecrashed the guru Dakshina war, it was specifically only Pandavas and Kaurava's, Drona made it clear.

And supposedly I have used logic in my post and based it on KMG and the Critical edition. I didnt make it out of thin air, both of the translations support my claim .

Originally posted by: Sabhayata

right before his death also he fired brahamastra so parashuram's curse cant be about brahamastra

parashuram's curse cant fail

but even this is not that simple CE interprets this to be brahmastra only not brahamshira

but how can parashuram's curse fail

logically it should be brahamshira only

As I have written earlier, when Vyasa means Brahmastra he means Brahmastra and when he means Brahmashira he means Brahmashira.

See my post here

There need be no confusion on this point. I have given the relevant line numbers in case anyone wants to confirm.

He may have fired the brahmastra right before his death, but at the precise moment, the final moment,Parashurama's curse came into effect.

Originally posted by: Sabhayata

again i am not denying that karna and arjuns knew each other

see what i am saying this all of them would have met each other during gurukul

but to claim that they were friends or enemies from gurukul days to rangbhoomi is just an assumption

right before the citation that you have highlighted it is said that karna takes permission from drona

certainly he would have introduced himself hence arjuna knows his name

bhima doenst know karna is a sut putra becuase they havent met each other for a long time

Here again, I have, in an earlier post, given a relevant quote which proves beyond doubt that Dury and Karna were friends from their boyhood days. Re-posting once again

From the Santi Parva, Narada's conversation with Yudi about Karna



From the CE / (Shanti Parva, Adhaya 1 Verse 8)

Sa Sakhyamagmad Baalye Raja Duryodhanay vai
...
Baalaye is the word used here. Meaning : 'From his boyhood.'


And there is no ambiguity here. 'Karna' refers to Radheya Karna, not anyone else.

Originally posted by: Sabhayata

.Karna clearly took drona's permission before showcasing his skills he would have introduced himself as well so arjuna knew his name.As simple as that

Karna does not formally introduce himself until much later when Kripacharya asks him his lineage.

No introduction was needed since amongst themselves, they knew each other very well.

It was the general public that was left wondering who this gate crasher was.

There is no mention of them knowing Karna 'very well' during the Rangbhoomi incident.

Below Duryodhana again wanted Karna to be his freind, why would Duryodhana say that if they were ' already friends', this clearly says that Duryodhana and Karna were not friends before the Rangbhoomi

"...And the cheers, having ceased, king (Karna) said unto the Kaurava Duryodhana, 'O tiger among monarchs, what shall I give unto thee that may compare with thy gift of a kingdom? O king, I will do all thou biddest!' And Suyodhana said unto him, 'I eagerly wish for thy friendship.' Thus spoken to, Karna replied, 'Be it so'..."

Karna too agreed to be his friends from thereon, hence they were not friends before the Rangbhoomi.

It was only after Karna told that he is a Suta, Bhima started insulting him, why didn't Bhima do it before?

The contradiction still stands.

Originally posted by: TheWatcher

There is no mention of them knowing Karna 'very well' during the Rangbhoomi incident.

Below Duryodhana again wanted Karna to be his freind, why would Duryodhana say that if they were ' already friends', this clearly says that Duryodhana and Karna were not friends before the Rangbhoomi

"...And the cheers, having ceased, king (Karna) said unto the Kaurava Duryodhana, 'O tiger among monarchs, what shall I give unto thee that may compare with thy gift of a kingdom? O king, I will do all thou biddest!' And Suyodhana said unto him, 'I eagerly wish for thy friendship.' Thus spoken to, Karna replied, 'Be it so'..."

Karna too agreed to be his friends from thereon, hence they were not friends before the Rangbhoomi.

It was only after Karna told that he is a Suta, Bhima started insulting him, why didn't Bhima do it before?

The contradiction still stands.

Since this line keeps popping up, let us see the original line and understand the context

This is how the original line reads

Atyantam Sakhyami Ichchamityaah tam sa Suyodhana

Atyantam (Ati + Antam) : Till the end / forever. This meaning is more accurate than KMG's "eagerly"

Sakhyami Icchamityah : Your friendship I want

tam sa Suyodhana : So said Suyodhana

Till the end / forever I want your friendship.

Now why does he say this? Not because they are forging a friendship for the first time. But because in the previous verse, just after Karna has been crowned king, Karna asks

Asya Rajyapradaasya Sadrishya kim dadani tay
prabruhi Rajashardula karta hyasmi tatha nrupa

In lieu of the kingdom you have given me, O tiger among kings, what is the equivalent I can give you? asks Karna. And then adds " I will do all that you say"

In reply to this Duryodhana says that all he wants in return is Karna's friendship for life.

It doesn't mean they are forging friendship for the first time. When asked by Karna what he can do in lieu of the magnificent gift given by Duryodhana, Duryodhana replies that he need not do anything, just be friends with him (Dury) till the end.

Originally posted by: TheWatcher

Bhima overpowers Karna on the 14th day, not the 16th, its not that Karna sat on his butt while Bhima punched him in the face, Karna too overpowered Bhima on the 14th day., Bhima had a strength of 10,000 elephants, he again was no way comparable to Drupad ( Drupad was inferior ).

If Drupad is compared to Karna in terms of military prowess, skill, valor etc, Drupad is below Karna in that.