{| Doubts and Discussions about Mahabharata |}

First Previous

Page

119

Next Last

Frequent Posters

Diala D

@...Diala...

Sparkler

+ 2

Posted: 11 years ago

#911

I read ur post sometime back forgot to comment.. some I knew were right, some I had no idea about.. only this one I had to disagree so posted.. and the Bheeshma Yudi conversation is too much for my brain to read without falling asleep 😆

Vidura was called Kshatri in the Vastraharan episode.. when he was asked to bring Draupadi to the hall..

Quote

_vash_

@_vash_

Explorer

Posted: 11 years ago

#912

Originally posted by: .Vrish.
Hidimba

Oh ok thanks😊. I read two books in one it said Bakasura vadh comes first and in the other Hidimba and Startbharat didn't even dare to show Bakasura Vadh.. so got confused.

Quote

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

Diala D

@...Diala...

Sparkler

+ 2

Posted: 11 years ago

#913

Originally posted by: varaali

Why do you think Sutas are not Kshatriyas?

Why should I think they are same? if they are same why will Karna turn pale? why did he silently accept the words 'inglorious lineage'? no one told him that Kshatriyas are no less than Sutas?

if it is only for Kuru princes he should have been thrown out in the same speed he came in.. if a combat is agreed after he is crowned king of Anga, then which fact stopped him earlier other than his caste?

Kripa, knowing all duties and cognisant of the rules regulating duels, addressed Karna, saying 'This Pandava, who is the youngest son of Kunti, belongeth to the Kaurava race: he will engage in combat with thee. But, O mighty-armed one, thou too must tell us thy lineage

and the names of thy father and mother and the royal line of which thou art the ornament. Learning all this, Partha will fight with thee or not (as he will think fit). Sons of kings never fight with men of inglorious lineage.'

"Vaisampayana continued, 'When he was thus addressed by Kripa, Karna's countenance became like unto a lotus pale and torn with the pelting showers in the rainy season.'

Edited by ...Diala... - 11 years ago

Quote

Diala D

@...Diala...

Sparkler

+ 2

Posted: 11 years ago

#914

Originally posted by: varaali

@ bold : There is a qualification attached in Drona's rejoinder. Not all brahmanas or Kshatriyas were eligible. A kshatriya should have performed severe austerities to have qualified.

If he meant Suta also as a part of Kshatriya, why din't Drona guide Karna in performing the austerities?

Quote

Bhaskari

@bhas1066

Navigator

Posted: 11 years ago

#915

hello

for all those who want to know about the caste system those times here is a link to the book "laws of Manu" translated by george buhler:

http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/manu/manu10.htm

its quite a read so i have copied some points pertaining to karna's castes:

From a Kshatriya by the daughter of a Brahmana is born (a son called) according to his caste (gati) a Suta; from a Vaisya by females of the royal and the Brahmana (castes) spring a Magadha and a Vaideha.

To Sutas (belongs) the management of horses and of chariots; to Ambashthas, the art of healing; to Vaidehakas, the service of women; to Magadhas, trade;

http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/manu/manu09.htm

He whom (a man) receives as his son, (after he has been) deserted by his parents or by either of them, is called a son cast off (Apaviddha).

A son whom a damsel secretly bears in the house of her father, one shall name the son of an unmarried damsel (Kanina, and declare) such offspring of an unmarried girl (to belong) to him who weds her (afterwards).

Edited by bhas1066 - 11 years ago

Quote

Vrish

@Vr15h

Stunner

+ 6

Posted: 11 years ago

#916

^^^ So under that definition, Karna would have been a Pandava - Pandu's endorsement wasn't essential for him to get that recognition?

Quote

Rumjhum Laha

@Patrarekha

Sparkler

+ 3

Posted: 11 years ago

#917

Originally posted by: .Vrish.
^^^ So under that definition, Karna would have been a Pandava - Pandu's endorsement wasn't essential for him to get that recognition?

ofcourse

Quote

Diala D

@...Diala...

Sparkler

+ 2

Posted: 11 years ago

#918

Originally posted by: .Vrish.
^^^ So under that definition, Karna would have been a Pandava - Pandu's endorsement wasn't essential for him to get that recognition?

I am sure it does not need Pandu's endorsement.. Like Satyavati could use Vyasa for Niyoga as Vichitravirya's elder brother without the consent of Shantanu.. If Vyasa was not a sage, he could have become the King himself marrying Vichi's wives like what Satya suggested Bhishma..

Quote

Manan

@Proud-India

Rocker

+ 5

Posted: 11 years ago

#919

Who was Bhanumati ? Means from which state ?

How she married Duryodhan ? Means normal arranged marriage or with some drama

Any special story related to her in MB?

Name of wives of Yuyutsu , Dushashan & Vikarna ?

Had Duryodhan only 1 wife or any other too ?

Thanks 😊

Quote

Vrish

@Vr15h

Stunner

+ 6

Posted: 11 years ago

#920

Bhanumati was princess of Trigartha, & sister of Sushama (enemy of Virata). From what I understand, her marriage was arranged, and led to a matrimonial alliance b/w the 2. Trigartha would have been somewhere in Rajputana - maybe in the Amber/Jaipur/Ranthambor area, for them to be @ loggerheads w/ Matsya. Bhanumati was also mother of Laxman & Laxmanaa. Former was a son killed by Abhimanyu shortly b4 his death, while latter was a daughter abducted from her swayamvara by Jambavati's son Samba.

Duryodhan had at least 2 wives. If Bhanumati was the first, he probably married her shortly after the tournament. Karna helped him abduct another princess of Kalinga, daughter of king Chitrasena. Check out section 4 of Shanti Parva for details.

All the other 99 brothers had wives - maybe 1, maybe more. All of them lived on as widows in Hastinapur under Yudisthir.