B R Chopra portrayal of Karna with reference to KMG - Page 4

Originally posted by: Shivang

Awaking after such a vision, that excellent king, moved by pity towards the deer, thus spake unto his brothers assembled there, 'Those deer that are alive after them that have been slaughtered, accosted me at night, after I had awakened, saying, 'We remain like the cues of our lines. Blest be thou! Do thou have compassion on us.' And they have spoken truly. We ought to feel pity for the dwellers of the forest. We have been feeding on them for a year together and eight months*. Let us, therefore, again (repair) to the romantic Kamyakas, that best of forests abounding in wild animals, situated at the head of the desert, near lake Trinavindu. And there let us pleasantly pass the rest of our time.'

*We have been feeding on them for a year together and eight months: the original verse is:

"Saashta Maasah Hi No Varshah Yad Enaan Upayunjmahe"

Here Upayunjmahe has loot vibhakti in uttam purush plural number. Loot vibhakti is always used for future tense. So it means "We will spend 1 year and 8 months"

Shivang ,

I beg to differ with your interpretation here. It cannot be in future tense. Here is my anvayakrama (analysis) of the same verse.

This is the full verse:

Te satyamahuhu kartvyaa dayasmabhihirvanowkasaam

saashtamaasam hi no varsham yadenanupayunjmahe

There is no indication of future tense anywhere. Let us split it word by word:

Te satyamahuhu kartvyaa dayasmabhihirvanowkasaam

Te : they (the deer)

satyamuhuhu: speak the truth

kartvyaa: our duty

dayasmabhihirvanowkasaam : This is split like this - daya + asmaabhihi + vana + okasaam

Daya : compassion

asmaabhihi: by us

vana: forest

okasaam: dwelling, abode

Full meaning: The deer speak the truth. Compassion ought to be shown by us (since it is our duty) towards those who have this forest as their dwelling.

saashtamaasam hi no varsham yadenanupayunjmahe

sa + astha: More than eight months

hi no varsham : perhaps even a year

yad enaan: on these

upayunjmahe: we have been feeding / using

Upayunjmahe is just plain Atmanepade vartamana kaala (lat lakara) uttama purusha bahu vachana. There is no Future tense indicated anywhere.

Originally posted by: varaali

@ red bold : I think Shivang means 'Lut Lakara" not loot vibhakti . Lut Lakaraka is a.k.a Anadyatana Bhavishyat kaalaha. indicating Immediate future.

You would be knowing about " Lrit Lakaraha" - the normal future tense indicated by words like "gamishyati, vadishyati ...etc". This indicates anytime in future

But to indicate the immediate future the "lut lakara" is used. Lut lakara takes the "ta" pratyaya in prataham purusha, ekavachana. For instance "gamishyati" would become "ganta" in Lut Lakara, bhavishyati would become "bhavita"...etc

Gottit ?

@ Shivang: Tense (Kaal) is indicated through Lakara in Sanskrit - not Vibhakti.

Lovely analysis Varaali. Agree whole-heartedly on every single point.

Originally posted by: smrth

Great discussions here. And a composed attempt to see other side with logic and reasons by .Vrish. But I am genuinely confused. How does Karna's mention at Gurukul 'contradicts' Bhima's poisoning? I mean, where is it mentioned that 'he first met Pandavas at Gurukul'? Pardon me the naivete.

Originally posted by: shindes

Sambhava Parv CXXXIV

Then Drona taught the sons of Pandu many weapons both celestial and human. And many other princes also flocked to that best of Brahmanas for instruction in arms. The Vrishnis and the Andhakas, and the (adopted) son of Radha of the Suta caste, (Karna), all became pupils of Drona. But of them all, the Suta child Karna, from jealousy, frequently defied Arjuna, and supported by Duryodhana, used to disregard the Pandavas. Arjuna, however, from devotion to the science of arms, always stayed by the side of his preceptor, and in skill, strength of arms, and perseverance, excelled all (his class-fellows). Indeed, although the instruction the preceptor gave, was the same in the case of all, yet in lightness and skill Arjuna became the foremost of all his fellow-pupils.

Karna could be friend of Kauravas even before joining Gurukul so he could be party to Bheem given poison nothing contradicting in it. Adhirath was sarathi of Hastinapur and also friend of Dhritarashtra and hence Karna's friendship with Duryodhan (or at least introduction) before Gurukul of Drona is logically acceptable and surely no way contradicting.

Here is a citation from KMG:

"And the Kurus beholding the Pandavas gifted with physical strength, energy, and power of mind, popular also with the citizens, and blessed with good fortune, became very jealous. Then the crooked minded Duryodhana, and Karna, with (the former's uncle) the son of Suvala began to persecute them and devise means for their exit..The wicked son of Dhritarashtra gave poison to Bhima, but Bhima of the stomach of the wolf digested the poison with the food. Then the wretch again tied the sleeping Bhima on the margin of the Ganges and, casting him into the water, went away. "

Shivang dadabhai (the TM) read your post on the first day and was very very happy to see your acknowledgement and wanted to reply you along with his reply to Janaki, Surya and Amrita. But on that day, he couldn't reply since page were taking time in loading and his connectivity was poor and it was very late night. He met me on FB messenger from his phone and told me this that his connectivity is still very poor on laptop so I should convey his thanks and regards to you since he may not be able to login this week.

And thanks from my side for your comments here 😊

Yes Shivang dadabhai is very good at Sanskrit so far as pronunciation and sandhi vichchhed is concerned. Due to Devi Kavach and Bhagwad Geeta, he has good grip over that language. But that vibhakti and Sanskrit verse interpretation and comments everything was done by me in our personal conversations and he compiled it as he has already mentioned. So it becomes my responsibility to reply that on his behalf when he can't come online due to busy week and weak internet connection.

Actually I always supposed that Loot is a vibhakti as my Sanskrit grammar book says so (I am not a Sanskrit scholar, learned it out of my own passion & my knowledge is very initial compared to yours). I did not know that it's called lakara. Anyway I guessed it as Loot (like Shee becomes Shayitaasmahe in vahuvachan uttam purush) & Loot is used for future tense, right? I checked another reliable translation & a research paper both of which said it was 1 year & 8 months more to finish exile, also from the 10 years passing before Nahush captured Bheem is another proof of it, so I was almost confirmed from both ways. I also thought to ask Varaali didi personally what is its actual tense as my grammar may be wrong, but she is rarely available nowadays so could not ask her. Sorry for the mistake. Sanskrit is not my subject, I am a student of Physics but I do love this language very much.

But whatever the case may be, it is confirmed that Karna took his vow of charity just for few years & with an evil wish. He was not as great as daanveer like many people think him.

Originally posted by: Surya_krsnbhakt

@Semanti

Could you explain the deer story?