Welcome to the forum!!

First Previous

Page

Next Last

Frequent Posters

1123225

Hibernated

Posted: 6 years ago

#141

Actually, Dr. Debroy is on Twitter. He does take questions. You can ask him if the root word is the same. 😆

Quote

Priya_Vrisha

@Priya_Vrisha

Beginner

Posted: 6 years ago

#142

Haha , Mahanharat expert Uncle didn't teach Sanskrit to his follower kids.

Professor Uncle's follower kids are Killing Sanskrit just like Mr.Patel ( Member of Dhruv Rathi squad ) 😆😆

Quote

Looks like you are new here. Register for free, learn and contribute.

pd_am

@pd_am

Beginner

Posted: 6 years ago

#143

Originally posted by: Mahanayak-Karna

@pd_am .. mr jeet atleast you accepted mahanalayak was crying for his own interpretation crook theory when krishna himself offered draupadi to karna for SEXUAL INTERCOURSE

If you dont accept theory over proof still duryodhan is real heir as he is type-1 born heir

Sorry, saw your edit just now.

First of all, who is this Mr. Jeet? I am a WOMAN for God's sake. At least get my gender right.

Secondly, is Dury is still real heir for Type-1? Seriously? 😆

What does Type-1 state?

They are: 1st, the son begotten by one's own self upon his wedded wife

"Son begotten by one's own self upon his wedded wife."

Who is this SELF? Pandu? Dhritarashtra? Vidur? Who is this self?

If this self can be anyone...then any random biological son of any guy can claim the throne. Even Vidur can bring his own biological son (if he had any) and come and say - "This is a son begotten by myself. So, give me the throne."

This "self" has to be the King himself. Not some random guy. Anyone who has a brain of the size of a garden lizard should be able to deduce this much.

If Dhrit had been the King, then I would have agreed with you. And Dury would have had a fair chance by Type 1. But unfortunately, Dhrit was never the King, which he himself confesses clearly.

---------------------------------------

And coming to Krishna's offer, Krishna's words are pretty clear. Now why did Krishna say this? What did he MEAN? That only Krishna knows.

As readers, we can only make assumptions.

As per Karna fans -

He offered her for intercourse. No need to use brain to analyze why.

As per Pandav fans-

He offered her as sarcasm to demoralize him. Many Indologists go by this theory.

I am neither bothered about Karna nor Pandavas. So I dont care.

Edited by pd_am - 6 years ago

Quote

1123225

Hibernated

Posted: 6 years ago

#144

Originally posted by: Priya_Vrisha
Haha , Mahanharat expert Uncle didn't teach Sanskrit to his follower kids.
Professor Uncle's follower kids are Killing Sanskrit just like Mr.Patel ( Member of Dhruv Rathi squad ) 😆😆

Buddy

Check with Debroy what it means 😆

Go on. I dare you.

Or send it to any Sanskrit scholar.

You have no clue what it means, do you? 😆You just translated it from the dictionary. And you're afraid it means the exact same thing. If they are, one of two things will need to be admitted. 1) Karna was gay 2) Or there was no sex in Krishna's offer.

Like Karna, lying on your resume. About Sanskrit in your case, about caste in his. Jaise raja, waise praja. 😆

I have no idea what professor or uncle or Patel you're talking about 😆 if you look at my profile, I've been on IF for a while.

Edited by MahanalayakKarn - 6 years ago

Quote

1123225

Hibernated

Posted: 6 years ago

#145

And yet.

No explanations for Karna's crimes. All what the fans have is that mockery of an offer which had been thoroughly debunked 😆

Ooh. There IS the list of Pandava crimes. As though that is of any interest to me. 😆

Quote

pd_am

@pd_am

Beginner

Posted: 6 years ago

#146

Originally posted by: MahanalayakKarn

Buddy

Check with Debroy what it means 😆

Go on. I dare you.

Or send it to any Sanskrit scholar.

You have no clue what it means, do you? 😆You just translated it from the dictionary. And you're afraid it means the exact same thing. If they are, one of two things will need to be admitted. 1) Karna was gay 2) Or there was no sex in Krishna's offer.

Like Karna, lying on your resume. About Sanskrit in your case, about caste in his. Jaise raja, waise praja. 😆

I have no idea what professor or uncle or Patel you're talking about 😆 if you look at my profile, I've been on IF for a while.

I am also confused about this Professor, Uncle thing. Who the hell are they?

Anyway, I find it funny that people who read Mahabharata using online Sanskrit-English dictionary assume that they have read the Sanskrit version and understood everything. I know a 20-something boy from Facebook who does the same and makes dirty stories about Sita/Hanuman/Draupadi/Kunti, etc. 😭

In that case, I can use English to Arabic or English-Latin dictionary and read and understand each and every philosophy of Quran and Bible. 😆

I wonder, why do pundits even spend so many years to learn Sanskrit, its grammar, vocabulary, etc, when they can easily use a dictionary and understand the greatest and the most complex epic in the world in just a few months? 😆 Stupid pundits. They should take some advice from these young, bright minds from Facebook and India Forums.

Edited by pd_am - 6 years ago

Quote

1123225

Hibernated

Posted: 6 years ago

#147

One more

http://spokensanskrit.org/index.php?mode=3&script=hk&tran_input=Upagam&direct=au

Even as per the Sanskrit dictionary thoughtfully provided by the scholar, Upagam means Approach. Not intercourse.😆

If you're somehow translating it in the offer verse as sex, then it has to be the same in Karna Duryodhana scene also.

Quote

pd_am

@pd_am

Beginner

Posted: 6 years ago

#148

Originally posted by: MahanalayakKarn
Actually, Dr. Debroy is on Twitter. He does take questions. You can ask him if the root word is the same. 😆

On a positive note, why cant we invite Dr. Debroy to join this forum?

It would be really helpful to have people who have learnt Sanskrit for "real" among us. I too would get some sound advice from where to start learning. Can we invite him Priyamvada?

I hope he doesnt get a shock to see so many abusive posts though. 😆

Quote

gwen4aero

@gwen4aero

Beginner

Posted: 6 years ago

#149

If no interpretation are accepted then accept that krishna offered arjuna's wife to karna

Let us assume that Krishna was a bad person as you put it. Does that entitle Karna to sell wives ( married women and children ) as farm animals? This is something ISIS thugs are doing in Syria. Does that entitle Karna to help Duryodhana to rape a princess in her Swamvara? The fact of the matter is that guys like Karna have fan give me a reason to worry about humanity.

Quote

1123225

Hibernated

Posted: 6 years ago

#150

Problem is, Gwen, they don't have anything else to say. There is very little positive about Karna, so they have to malign other characters to prop him up.

For the faux Sanskrit scholars here. There is something called a root word. Upagam means "approach." Words derived from the root word mean the same. If you're insisting that the root word means something else, then it has to mean the same thing in the Karna situation with Suyodhana also 😆. So if Krishna offered sexual intercourse, Karna and Suyodhana had sexual intercourse. Same word, same meaning.😆

Of course, if you actually knew Sanskrit, you'd know that. Well, Karna lied on his resume, too.😆

Edited by MahanalayakKarn - 6 years ago