To all those who are arguing with the troll

SweetRogue thumbnail
9th Anniversary Thumbnail Explorer Thumbnail
Posted: 6 years ago
#1
"Arguing with a troll is a lot like wrestling in the mud with a pig. After a while you realize he likes it."
Don't bother guys. This person who goes by Mahagandu, chakka etc. (You can't fault this person for honesty about themselves. They know exactly what they are 😆) is hell bent on cherry picking incidents from Mahabharat and completely ignoring all citations that go against their Lord and Savior Karna.

Created

Last reply

Replies

7

Views

1.4k

Users

3

Likes

16

Frequent Posters

SweetRogue thumbnail
9th Anniversary Thumbnail Explorer Thumbnail
Posted: 6 years ago
#2

Originally posted by: Chakka_Arjun

Stop stop stop

no no no

Arjun was just great, What if he burn woman in varnavrat. low cast people deserve to die dont forget arjun hold dharma and woman dont have dharma tag so he can burn woman. Its actually failure of woman she failed to counter fire of arjun

Rape of subhadra was common act you cant say that its crime. Rape -kidnapping is indeed common when you hold dharma. Why didnt subhadra run away when arjun rape her? Its not fault of arjun at all if subhadra cant save her dignity

murder of ashwasena mother, huh. she was old and after few years she would be dead. nothing wrong in killing that mother. Infact she should say that to arjun for moksha.

Sharing wife was not crime. never. I can share my wife if my brother lusted for her. Afterall brother is important for me

Now what if he sold her wife at dice. Its kauravas fault why they played to win stake? They should return his wife whenever pandav lost

Regarding order to come at assembly exposing navel. It was fashion show and pandav wanted to show beauty of wife and her navel to all.

Keechak can kick draupadi what should arjun stop him? draupadi was just actress and its dury of wife to sleep with enemy if husbands need protection

See I have justify all crimes as per ved vyass. Arjun was woman protector greatest human


Sod off bro.. I'm not going to dignify your shit with an answer you're anyway going to ignore
SweetRogue thumbnail
9th Anniversary Thumbnail Explorer Thumbnail
Posted: 6 years ago
#3
Regarding '''rape of Subhadra" pg. No. 147 and 148 of Debroy's translation of BORI CE- "He once went to Hrishikesha in Dwarawati and obtained as his wife Subhadra, with eyes like the blue lotus, sweet of speech and Vasudeva's younger sister. As Shachi with the great Indra and Shri with Krishna, Subhadra was delighted to be United with Pandu's son, Arjuna.
Which woman is delighted at her rape? It is clearly stated that in Debroy's translation that Subhadra was delighted to be with Arjuna. Hence proved, Arjuna didn't rape her.
1123225 thumbnail
Posted: 6 years ago
#4
@sweetrogue.
Oh, I'm totally done. For one, only those who are asleep can be woken up, not those who are pretending sleep.

For another, the troll's English is terrible. Riddled with grammar and spelling errors. Now, language is just a medium of communication, but given that CE is available only in Sanskrit and English (AFAIK) I have to assume he didn't understand half of what he read. Or he is disturbed. In either case, it would be punching down for me debate him. Let him wallow in his illiteracy and ignorance.
Edited by MahanalayakKarn - 6 years ago
1123225 thumbnail
Posted: 6 years ago
#5
Interesting thing I noted though. 😆

They haven't been able to refute any of Karna's crimes. All they have to cling to is that offer which was an obvious trick. Or bring up Pandava crimes, apparently thinking I'm going to lose my cool over it 😆.
pd_am thumbnail
Posted: 6 years ago
#6
Sadly I would have to agree with @Mahanalayak aka Priyamvada. Since we are discussing a scholarly topic like Mahabharata, proficiency in language is important.
This person - or persons - cannot even type a long comment in correct English. He had to post and re-post his reply to me. And even the final draft was riddled with grammatical errors.

If this is the level of language skills, I have doubt how much he understood K.M. Ganguly's translation which is in 19th Century Victorian English.

@SweetRogue - Coming to "Rape of Subhadra", the Sanskrit itself says "SubhadraHaran". And the archaic meaning of Rape is Abduction bcoz, "Rape" comes from latin word "rapere" which originally means abduction. This meaning matches with Sanskrit SubhadraHaran.

But then, given the language proficiency, what to say!!! Reminds me of Shashi Tharoor's "cattle class" controversy.


SweetRogue thumbnail
9th Anniversary Thumbnail Explorer Thumbnail
Posted: 6 years ago
#7

Originally posted by: pd_am

Sadly I would have to agree with @Mahanalayak aka Priyamvada. Since we are discussing a scholarly topic like Mahabharata, proficiency in language is important.

This person - or persons - cannot even type a long comment in correct English. He had to post and re-post his reply to me. And even the final draft was riddled with grammatical errors.

If this is the level of language skills, I have doubt how much he understood K.M. Ganguly's translation which is in 19th Century Victorian English.

@SweetRogue - Coming to "Rape of Subhadra", the Sanskrit itself says "SubhadraHaran". And the archaic meaning of Rape is Abduction bcoz, "Rape" comes from latin word "rapere" which originally means abduction. This meaning matches with Sanskrit SubhadraHaran.

But then, given the language proficiency, what to say!!! Reminds me of Shashi Tharoor's "cattle class" controversy.


Yeah I had read somewhere that the original meaning of rape was abduction. But the guy is using it in a modern context. Arjuna for all his faults wasn't a rapist and Krishna would never support let alone love a rapist the way he loved Arjuna.
1123225 thumbnail
Posted: 6 years ago
#8

Originally posted by: SweetRogue

Yeah I had read somewhere that the original meaning of rape was abduction. But the guy is using it in a modern context. Arjuna for all his faults wasn't a rapist and Krishna would never support let alone love a rapist the way he loved Arjuna.



The best part of the posts is that they don't know or understand


1) Abduction and marriage was a legal thing those days, as long they did marry.

2) What was not legal or moral was for the girl's brother to instigate the abduction.

Krishna was much more at fault here. The sin becomes even worse when you consider Krishna admits there was a chance Subhadra could refuse Arjuna.

To top it off, Krishna stops the family from sending rescue.

The only person without fault in that scenario was Subhadra.

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".