Dharmakshetra on Epic channel #4/ DT Nt pg 3 - Page 11

Created

Last reply

Replies

386

Views

32.6k

Users

31

Likes

970

Frequent Posters

AnuMP thumbnail
11th Anniversary Thumbnail Rocker Thumbnail
Posted: 10 years ago
@Bhas
If he wanted his citizens to be well cared for, he shouldn't have staked them, their families or their livelihood in the first place. They were not his property, regardless of what manner if fondness they may have felt. And if he felt he had the right to order DDSK and Dhrith to treat the common people well, WTH didn't he demand that in the DS for Panchali?!

As for Dury's misdeeds, check for writings outside of cannon MB, you will find plenty praising him. Esp in my home state of Kerala.
Edited by AnuMP - 10 years ago
LiveYourDream thumbnail
11th Anniversary Thumbnail Voyager Thumbnail
Posted: 10 years ago

Originally posted by: Arijit007

it's posible, may be as shown in dharmakshetra he wanted to unite his brothers to the bondages of pain and revenge.


šŸ˜†
The logic being nothing brings you closer than suffering together...
I thought they had 'suffered' enough after the lakshagriha and had bonded enough for a lifetime!
Ah but I forget they had not bonded through pain and suffering with Panchali... and DS/VH was that divine opportunity!
Edited by LiveYourDream - 10 years ago
Arijit007 thumbnail
12th Anniversary Thumbnail Sparkler Thumbnail Networker 1 Thumbnail
Posted: 10 years ago
so, dury being a good ruler is a lie then. ok, is there an apealing system in dharmakshetra? it seams that the verdict against him was not a right one.
LiveYourDream thumbnail
11th Anniversary Thumbnail Voyager Thumbnail
Posted: 10 years ago
@Arijit Mr. Chitragupt either has a soft corner for Dury or he is scared of him!
Dury gets away with more nakhras in his court than anyone elder including Keshav
So no chance of overturning that verdict šŸ˜†
ashne thumbnail
15th Anniversary Thumbnail Rocker Thumbnail
Posted: 10 years ago

Originally posted by: LiveYourDream


šŸ˜†
The logic being nothing brings you closer than suffering together...
I thought they had 'suffered' enough after the lakshagriha and had bonded enough for a lifetime!
Ah but I forget they had not bonded through pain and suffering with Panchali... and DS/VH was that divine opportunity!



Thats true, maybe he thot he ddin't take Panchali along the previous time they were to the forest, so why not make it a 13 yr long picnic and all 6 of them bond again.
Edited by ashne - 10 years ago
DharmaPriyaa thumbnail
14th Anniversary Thumbnail Dazzler Thumbnail + 2
Posted: 10 years ago

Originally posted by: bhas1066

When Yudhisthara went to forest at start of the vana parva. The entire populace of kurujangala the nation showed up and pleaded with their father and mother to not go. Vasa uses the term father and mother in context of king Yudhisthara and queen draupadi. When Yudhisthara sends two messages one via sanjaya and second via Krishna, he emphasized on two items and he gave more importance to the second group of items. In both messages, first demand was kingdom (in Krishna message he allowed a negotiating tactic of 5 places) but Yudhishtahra insisted on second demand in both messages: pension and charity due to teachers, orphans, poorest of poor, those who are unable to support themselves, handicapped, dwarves and those who are different. Same ones plus urdhavretas who were looked after by draupadi on daily basis. The "real" children of the Janaka, the King who is father. They were the ones they fought the war for. He repeated the message from Udyoga parva, the success of independence is meant by how you treat the lowest of low the ones who cannot help themselves the handicapped and the orphans.

No one was happy under duryodhana rule. It is clearly stated in Udyoga that Dhritrashtra's officers were corrupt stealing jeevika vriti of even Brahmins let alone orphans and others. It is clearly stated that because of huge number of dacoits the Praja was trasta. It is very clearly stated that because of law order no foreigner or pilgrim dared stay the night in kuru country for fear of bring robbed or killed or their children stolen. It is very clearly stated even by Dhritrashtra during vana that his sons are always immersed in shameful activities and vyabhichara.

Duryodhan had unfortunately not seen the throne as a responsibility. To him, it was about self definition. It was about himself. notice that when he dies all his words are about his life , his valour, his satisfaction but not a word for his praja or for that matter for any one else!!

and above all else to know the rule in dhrit's time do read the chapter of "kanika neeti" and also the reply of andavas to it during yudi-bheeshma convo.



Bhas, I love you for this šŸ¤— I always try to tell people the same things, esp Yudhi Sanjay convo of Udyoga Parva which is my favorite. There is a long lecture on prajas, and surprisingly, orphans, handicapped, and even prostitutes were not deprived from his care, it is clear. He asked Sanjay for everybody. He wanted to know were they happy or not. I become overwhelmed with his love for people whenever I read it. Yes he staked them for one day but that does not mean he was a beast as ruler. He was good king before dice game, he was good king after dice game. Only one day does not draw a conclusion IMO. Krishna was not a fool to choose this man as a king.
In addition, I would like to say that there are more proofs on this. In Virat Parva Arjun tells Virat, "this is the King who always treated beggars, orphans etc as own sons."
In Udyoga Parva when Uluk came to bash Pandavas & Krishna, he told Yudhi, "you always assure all creatures, so why do you want a destruction now?" this line was direct from Duri so we can know that even Duri had an idea about Yudhi's nature, or his role as a ruler.
In Van Parva and Virat Parva, Draupadi herself narrated whatever Yudhi did for his prajas. And she too accompanied him, that is also stated there. No wonder people treated them as their parents.
Brahmaputra thumbnail
13th Anniversary Thumbnail Sparkler Thumbnail + 2
Posted: 10 years ago
@maverick_me - I thought well before I wrote. But my friend, you either did not read it proper or read only what you wished to read.

Examples you gave are entirely different & opposite from Draupadi's conditions. She herself did not ask Yudhi to stake her. She did not come to sabha herself. Whatver happened to her, for that, in first place, Yudhishthira will always be the reason.

I never meant yudhi staking his wife gave right for others to humiliate her. Eeryone, every single person present in DS did mistke, terrible mistake with Draupadi. But that chain of mistakes was began by Yudhishthira. You cannot change that.

Regarding Draupadi being an object or not, Yudhishthira had proven it the day he met her for the first time. Nothing than lust that man had for her. Had he loved her truly, he would never have allowed diving a woman among five unknown men.
DharmaPriyaa thumbnail
14th Anniversary Thumbnail Dazzler Thumbnail + 2
Posted: 10 years ago
Sorry to interrupt, Yudhi 'lusted' her is an old topic and we had discussed a lot about it. If 'lust' is the word then he was not the only one to have that feeling, all his brothers had it. And oh what 'lusty' would share his desired women with his brothers? Oh yes, how lusty he was! He himself told Arjun to marry her, but it was Arjun who denied that proposal because he could not marry before Yudhi. Then, Yudhi thought of unity of brothers & finally took the decision, Which lusty would think so much about family, brothers' unity etc etc? If I'm not wrong, lust makes people mad & blind, and senseless. I salute that 'lust' which thought for others' welfare.
And oh yes, which lusty would reject Drupad's proposal when he offered her daughter only to Yudhi instead of 5? Why did he not take that golden opportunity?
ashne thumbnail
15th Anniversary Thumbnail Rocker Thumbnail
Posted: 10 years ago

Originally posted by: Urmila11

Sorry to interrupt, Yudhi 'lusted' her is an old topic and we had discussed a lot about it. If 'lust' is the word then he was not the only one to have that feeling, all his brothers had it. And oh what 'lusty' would share his desired women with his brothers? Oh yes, how lusty he was! He himself told Arjun to marry her, but it was Arjun who denied that proposal because he could not marry before Yudhi. Then, Yudhi thought of unity of brothers & finally took the decision, Which lusty would think so much about family, brothers' unity etc etc? If I'm not wrong, lust makes people mad & blind, and senseless. I salute that 'lust' which thought for others' welfare.
And oh yes, which lusty would reject Drupad's proposal when he offered her daughter only to Yudhi instead of 5? Why did he not take that golden opportunity?



Well all brothers lusted after her, not just Yudhi - there is nothing wrong in that. As u put it if he was lusty, why did he share panchali with his brothers - Panchali was not his to begin with. There was no need to ask Arjun to marry Panchali, when Arjun had every right to marry her. Yudhi need not have said anything. his saying only makes Arjun feel guilty and Yudhi used that to his benefit. If Yudhi wanted unity, he should have found other ways to achieve it, not by dividing a girl amongst themselves that too with out her permission. The fact that she was happy later on is credit to her.

There is no welfare he did here. I'm sure even if Drupad asked him to marry, he himself marrying would have caused discord amongst his brothers, plus he needed arjun on his side to get his throne.

We have discussed this at lengths before, there was no accident there, everything was well planned out from the start, going to the wedding, winning her, dividing her etc.
Edited by ashne - 10 years ago
Brahmaputra thumbnail
13th Anniversary Thumbnail Sparkler Thumbnail + 2
Posted: 10 years ago
@bhas - generally, we cannot expect a book to praisebthe villain also.. But there are, though a few, references in MB to show Dury was a good ruler. At least he did not stake all those who trusted him.

And the same HP people, having been under Yudhi's rule for 16 years, tell Dhrit about his son who took care about his people like a father or brother did. It clearly stated that 'duryodhana did no wrong to his subjects' & that is repeated twice.

- ashramavasika parva, chap 10 - Thy son, O monarch, never did us the slightest wrong. We lived, relying on that king as trustfully as on our own father.

These words were also that of a Brahmin, who was appointed by the people to speak for them. Had Dury been so bad, there was no need for the people to remember him even when they were under Yudhi's rule. They only needed to thank Dhrit & say tata bye bye to him. There are still many citations to prove Dury was a good king.

Related Topics

Top

Stay Connected with IndiaForums!

Be the first to know about the latest news, updates, and exclusive content.

Add to Home Screen!

Install this web app on your iPhone for the best experience. It's easy, just tap and then "Add to Home Screen".