Loving Karn nd Dislyking Arjun

First Previous

Page

Next Last

Frequent Posters

Priya_Vrisha

@Priya_Vrisha

Beginner

Posted: 6 years ago

#21

ts not simple book. Its direct translation of original sanskrit mahabharata. Critical edition by bhandarkar oriental research institute. If you want sanskrit quote then I can provide it.

Dont drag karn to level of arjun. Karn was fair fighter who followed all rules in his life unlike arjun who cheated whenever his life fell in danger

Morever Dussasan son killed abhimanyu but that doesnt mean abhimanyu was inferior. sometimes inferior warrior can kill superior warrior. Its war anything is possible

Karna's role was he just disarmed abhimanyu and it was not crime. when karna broke bow of abhimanyu then it was single combat karn vs abhimanyu. then karn stopped attacking when other attacked abhimanyu. So karn never involved himself in attack as his role ended after breaking his bow

I can show you even abhimanyu attacked drona by surrouning him from all side by 22 warriors. Abhimanyu himself was master of group attack still duryodhan gave him fair chance to fight dussasan son but he lost

Quote

Ardhanarishwara

@Ardhanarishwara

Dazzler

Posted: 6 years ago

#22

Originally posted by: Poorabhforever

karna did stabbed him he was not just present their yes abhimanyu was sacrifised so that arjun can come in his potential which he was not showing till then because his love and respect for his elders on the other side but this act made let go of all his apprehension and he killed jayadharath later karan but he did regret it when he came to know karanas true identity

The versions I have read never mentioned him attacking Abhimanyu..so let's agree to disagree.

The fact is Arjuna could comeback to his full potential though a little late..while on the other hand Karnas hands were tied down by Kunti in the beginning itself..Karna was Duryodhanas master player and by weakening him by the truth and also with the promises she took Kunti played a master stroke..karna could have easily killed the 4 Pandavas if not for the promise he gave to kunti.. Karna-Arjuna war can never be considered fair one because one was battling with full potential while the others hand was fully tied down.

Quote

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

Priya_Vrisha

@Priya_Vrisha

Beginner

Posted: 6 years ago

#23

Nothing was wrong in killing abhimanyu in group attack but still duryodhan gave him chance to fight alone with son of dussasan. It was his greatness and finally abhimanyu fell in single combat not group attack

See master of group attack. Abhimanyu himself attacked alone Drona in group. Abhimanyu and gang of 17 maharathas attacked alone Drona still lost and fled away for their life

Sanjaya said, "That invincible army was protected by Bharadvaja's son. With Bhimaseana atthe forefront, the Parthas( Yudhishira and Bhima ) advanced against it. Satyaki, Chekitana, ParshataDhrishtadyumna,the valiant Kuntibhoja, maharatha Drupada, Arjuna's son (Abhimanyu), Kshatradharma, the brave Brihatkshatra, Dhrishtaketu the king of Chedi, the sons of Madri (Naula & sahdeva),Ghatotkacha, the brave Yudhamanyu, the unvanquished Shikhandi, the unassailable Uttamouja, maharathaVirata, Droupadi's enraged sons, Shishupala's brave son,theimmensely valorous Kekayas, thousands of Srinjayas and many others, skilled in use ofweapons and irresistible in battle, suddenly advanced, together with their followers, wishingto fight against Bharadvaja's son. However, Bharadvaja's valiant son was not agitated. As theyapproached, he repulsed all of them with a mighty shower of arrows. Like a large mass ofwater confronting an impenetrable hill, or like the shoreline driving back the ocean, theywere driven back by Drona. O Indra among kings! They were oppressed by the arrowsreleased from Drona's bow. The Pandavas were incapable of standing before Bharadvaja's son.

On 13th day in morning, Abhimanyu and all 17 maharatah warriors decided to kill alone Drona still they failed to match drona and abhimanyu was the first who ran away for his life

1 Drona V/S Abhimanyu and 17 maharathas

WAS IT FAIR?

Edited by Priya_Vrisha - 6 years ago

Quote

Ardhanarishwara

@Ardhanarishwara

Dazzler

Posted: 6 years ago

#24

Originally posted by: Poorabhforever

well if dris and pandu are considered legitimate then even pandavas are they were kunti s son so in a way they were pandu s son too

though i agee that wrong and right are subjective that is i guess beauty of mahabharath nobody is right nobody is wrong

Pandu-Dritharashtra scenario cannot be compared to kaourava-Pandavas because in the first scenario there was no legitimate heir so they had to go for an illegitimate one... while in the 2nd scenario they already have legitimate heir in the form of Kouravas so no need to accept the illegitimate one.

So I am saying is Duryodhana stand is also not wrong..both are right in their places.

So I don't see the argument of Karna was on right side while Arjuna is on the wrong..right and wrong here is purely subjective.

Quote

Adhya

@Agni_Jytsona

Sparkler

+ 15

Posted: 6 years ago

#25

Originally posted by: Priya_Vrisha
ts not simple book. Its direct translation of original sanskrit mahabharata. Critical edition by bhandarkar oriental research institute. If you want sanskrit quote then I can provide it.

Dont drag karn to level of arjun. Karn was fair fighter who followed all rules in his life unlike arjun who cheated whenever his life fell in danger

Morever Dussasan son killed abhimanyu but that doesnt mean abhimanyu was inferior. sometimes inferior warrior can kill superior warrior. Its war anything is possible

Karna's role was he just disarmed abhimanyu and it was not crime. when karna broke bow of abhimanyu then it was single combat karn vs abhimanyu. then karn stopped attacking when other attacked abhimanyu. So karn never involved himself in attack as his role ended after breaking his bow

I can show you even abhimanyu attacked drona by surrouning him from all side by 22 warriors. Abhimanyu himself was master of group attack still duryodhan gave him fair chance to fight dussasan son but he lost

Not abhimanyu but bheem yudhishtra and Krishna plotted against drona abhimanyu was dead by then dhrishdyum was one who beheaded dron

But Karan was present when abhimanyu was killed he helped him disarme him and then all of them together attacked abhi and it was only after he lost his entire strength did dusshan s son killed so it wasn't a fair play

Quote

Priya_Vrisha

@Priya_Vrisha

Beginner

Posted: 6 years ago

#26

though i agee that wrong and right are subjective that is i guess beauty of mahabharath nobody is right nobody is wrong

Well even if Pandvas called legitimate children of Pandu, they can't claim the Throne.

Pandu left the kingship and said he will never return and will follow celebacy.

Now suddenly Pandu feared that he might not go to Heaven as he don't have any son which is quite funny , because Bhishma never feared from it. It shows Pandu's weak and confused character.

Pandu also claimed the he will follow celebacy, but he broken it and due to that he died which represents Pandu's lesser self control over his desire .

Let's come back to the topic. That Pandu himself Handed over Kingdom to Dhritarashtra , So even his real Sons can't claim it back. If you sell of Gift property to someone and then your adopted sons can't claim the sold property back. It is simple.

Quote

Adhya

@Agni_Jytsona

Sparkler

+ 15

Posted: 6 years ago

#27

@Ardhanarishwara: pandavas lost their kingdom in dice game and didn't sell it but tell me something if a ruler loses his kingdom once does he stops fighting for it no na so in the same way pandavas wanted indraprasth plus they had right because it was their hard work which converted barren land into a kingdom it was their hardwork because of which they were given the supreme power over the entire aryavarth theirs and theirs alone no person can snatch it from them based on dice roll they had every right to fight for it

Plus Karna only promised kunti about other four pandavas and not Arjun so I don't he would have held back in his war with Arjun

About kunti I agree she was partial andclever but since we are considering everyone s pov let's consider hers too kunti was young when she had Karan it's was just an experiment for her to try the boon which backfired on her and since she was unmarried and knew fully well that nobody would accept an unmarried mother she abondoned Karan she was selfish enough to let go Karan but are so are all the characters of mahabharath all of them are selfish and have chosen their own interest over other at some point of their lives as I said that s Mahabharata for you extremely layered and beautiful in a way that all the characters are real and so relatable

Edited by Poorabhforever - 6 years ago

Quote

Ardhanarishwara

@Ardhanarishwara

Dazzler

Posted: 6 years ago

#28

Originally posted by: Poorabhforever
@Ardhanarishwara: pandavas lost their kingdom in dice game and didn't sell it but tell me something if a ruler loses his kingdom once does he stops fighting for it no na so in the same way pandavas wanted indraprasth plus they had right because it was their hard work which converted barren land into a kingdom it was their hardwork because of which they were given the supreme power over the entire aryavarth theirs and theirs alone no person can snatch it from them based on dice roll they had every right to fight for it

But there was no clause like Kouravas should give back the land when Pandavas come back from the vanvas...they put their kingdom as stake and lost it permanently...so Kouravas were not obliged to give it back..

Anyway I didn't tell Pandavas were wrong..I only said Kouravas were not entirely wrong...for me both are right and wrong..so I disagree with "Karna was on the wrong side and Arjuna on the right"argument.

Edited by Ardhanarishwara - 6 years ago

Quote

Adhya

@Agni_Jytsona

Sparkler

+ 15

Posted: 6 years ago

#29

Originally posted by: Ardhanarishwara

But there was no clause like Kouravas should give back the land when Pandavas come back from the vanvas...they put their kingdom as stake and lost it permanently...so Kouravas were not obliged to give it back..
Anyway I didn't tell Pandavas were wrong..I only said Kouravas were not entirely wrong...for me both are right and wrong..so I disagree with "Karna was on the wrong side and Arjuna on the right"argument.

I agree kaurvas was entirely wrong but somehow pandavas side of argument was more strong as they wanted to get back their kingdom based on real war and not on dice game and on top of that they also avenged drapaudi s insult kaurvas were completely wrote their in the way they treated drapaudi that was gross and disgusting

Though I would like to add that they weren't waging the war to avenge her insult specifically and it was more of their personal interest second but still it somehow did have her justice and probably taught nobody should treat a woman like that

Quote

Ardhanarishwara

@Ardhanarishwara

Dazzler

Posted: 6 years ago

#30

Originally posted by: Poorabhforever
@Ardhanarishwara:
Plus Karna only promised kunti about other four pandavas and not Arjun so I don't he would have held back in his war with Arjun

About kunti I agree she was partial andclever but since we are considering everyone s pov let's consider hers too kunti was young when she had Karan it's was just an experiment for her to try the boon which backfired on her and since she was unmarried and knew fully well that nobody would accept an unmarried mother she abondoned Karan she was selfish enough to let go Karan but are so are all the characters of mahabharath all of them are selfish and have chosen their own interest over other at some point of their lives as I said that s Mahabharata for you extremely layered and beautiful in a way that all the characters are real and so relatable

Karna was held back because he new he was fighting his own brother..Karna was made to promise that he won't use any divine astra more than once in the war and it was like tying his hands partially.

I can understand Kunti when she decided to abandon the newborn..But I am talking about what happened later on.. there were many instances where Karna was insulted for his cast infront of Kunti but she chose her honor over her sons.. She had seen injustice happening to Karna because of his low birth status but she didn't protest..Disclosing it was not even a big deal like it's today... everyone new about the boon and how Pandavas were born, if she disclosed Karnas birth secret later in life nothing major would have happened.. If people didn't had any problem in accepting Pandu,Drithrashtra,Pandavas etc then they could have accepted Karna also..But Kunti snatched that right from her first born and never let tge secret out until his death.

Edited by Ardhanarishwara - 6 years ago

Quote

1 2 3 4 5

Loving Karn nd Dislyking Arjun - Page 3

Related Topics

Explore Topics