Dharmakshetra on Epic channel #4/ DT Nt pg 3 - Page 6

Originally posted by: Brahmaputra

Anu, congrats for panchaali's colour...

1. Adhiratha, acc to bhagavata also was a suta only. He was no prince, but a suta born to some anga king.

2. Curses, if they are related to Karna, I think those stories are added to create confusions about his death. Curses were always a topic of debate in Karna AT. However, I have not found any other internal evidences than curse stories themselves to show these curses were real. So I believe Karna was not cursed.

still can't figure out about what was so important about karna that the devas conspired about his death.

anu, congratd for turning into rockerz.

Originally posted by: Arijit007

still can't figure out about what was so important about karna that the devas conspired about his death.

why would the gods would meddle into the business of the mortal kings?

Originally posted by: Arijit007

why would the gods would meddle into the business of the mortal kings?

Depends on which version of MB one believes in. If u believe in the divine version then, there was god, demigods and children of demigods in the story, If that's the case why wouldn't the Gods interfere.

They were already involved, what with the paternity of the 5 Ps + Karna, Krishna etc etc.

well, they were indirectly involved because of the peternity isue, they weren't puling the strings. as for krishna, he had to be involved, otherwise, who would be able to "paritranaaya saadhunaam, vinaashaayacha dushkritaam" ? about the kavach kundal daan, i think indra was alone in that. mahabharat is not iliad where greek gods were directly involved.

They werent directly involved. But they wanted a particular outcome probably. Didn't all the God fathers want that? Were the other Gods impartial?

Originally posted by: AnuMP

Thats is the whole question. Apparently they keep saying Karna has to die. IMO, they really wanted Yudhi to be king and wanted no questions of rightful heir

as i keep saying and nobody listens , unless kunti had told her secret to pandu and he would have accepted karna as son after and only after adhiratha disowns karna, there is absolutely no way karna could claim any right to the throne

bhisma says in anushasana parva

"Bhishma said, 'His is the son from whose seed he has sprung. If, however, the owner of the seed abandons the son born of it, such a son then becomes his upon whose spouse he has been begotten. (the pandavas become pandu's sons )

"Bhishma said, 'When a person takes up and rears a son that has been cast off on the road (or in the river in certain case) by his father or mother, and when the person thus taking and rearing him fails to find out his parents after search, he becomes the father of such a son and the latter becomes what is called his made son. Not having anybody to own him, he becomes owned by him who brings him up. Such a son, again, comes to be regarded as belonging to that order to which his owner or rearer belongs.'(karna becomes officially adhiratha's son and suta)

Karna knew that he is "Made" son of Adiratha and would give him Pind rather to Pandu. Thats why he refuses the offer from Krishna- who also knew the rules - and deduces the real motive of Krishan in telling him the truth. In no circumstance would Karna be considered heir to the throne or heir to Vichitravirya. So even if Karna joins his uterine brothers, he will be son of Adiratha in Pandava camp like he is son of Adiratha in Kaurava camp now.

Vrishaketu also is "made" son of Yudi post-war.

@bold: just FYI :though kripa is a"made" son of shantanu he doesnt inherit the throne after bhishma's oath because shantu finds and brings kripa's father to hastinapur losing his rights over kripa.

😆 I got you. But law is something and reality is something else. May be they didn't want anything left to chance. Perhaps they thought if Adhirath knew Karna could be Emperor he would have disowned him😆. Who knows?