'Mahabharat- Different Versions -Perspectives' - Page 60

I was trying to tell myself to stay away/refrain from quoting Vedas, let me tread along some fine line.

Originally posted by: Raghuji

I was trying to tell myself to stay away from quoting Vedas, let me tread along some fine line.

Sri Rudram Krishna yajur veda 4th kandam 5prasnam can be completely interpreted as Narayana.

While the NA (referring NA in the end - Sanskrit UI) - nathva doesn't allow Narayana to be interpreted as Shiva. But that doesn't mean shiva is inferior or superior. The same Narayana Suktham that Jamy has quoted says " sa brahma sa shivah sa hari sendra sokshara paramaswarat ".

There is no difference between Shiva and Vishnu , we just create all this differences.

I too believe in the same thing.
Brahma-Vishnu-Maheswar r the same. All three r equally powerful n there is no difference between them.

Madhusudhana Saraswathi great advaitic scholar could interpret veda vakya to lord Shiva barring the word Narayana. He was a great Krishna bhakt. We have to be careful in not calling one superior over the other.

Originally posted by: Raghuji

Madhusudhana Saraswathi great advaitic scholar could interpret veda vakya to lord Shiva barring the word Narayana. He was a great Krishna bhakt. We have to be careful in not calling one superior over the other.

Indeed, Madhusudana Sarasvati's Annotated Bhagavad-Gita (Goodhaartha Deepikaa) stands out for its sheer interpretive brilliance of Krishna's Philosophy.

Originally posted by: bheegi

I found an interesting perspective on Duryodhana's death:

The fall of Duryodhana

The trick by Duryodhana is mentioned here as well. Still, it is such a popular misconception that Bhimasena unfairly killed Duryodhana.

http://anandatirtha.wordpress.com/2009/01/22/the-fall-of-duryodhana/

This is a dvaita philosophy website.
"Hari Sarvottama Vayu Jeevotthama" hence they will always portray Bhima (Hanuma/Bhima/Madhvacharya) as perfect and correct.

Difference between Puranas and History

History contains no more than accounts of monarchs and other rulers in chronological order. It does not give importance to their moral character : whether wicked rulers suffered an ill fate or whether just and righteous rulers earned a high place. According to the law of Karma, God/Iswar determines the fate of people on the basis of their actions, meritorious and sinful. Such justice is not necessarily meted out during the lifetime of a person. The fruits of a man's action are reaped in subsequent births. It is not the task of history to deal with such questions, nor do historians have the capacity to inquire into such matters. Whether a cruel ruler like Hitler was consigned to hell on his death and whether he had a lowly rebirth is a subject for the Puranas. Those who composed these texts had the requisite insight to deal with such questions. Indeed the very purpose of these stories is this, to impart moral lessons. From history we do not derive any edification.

The Puranas are also history. But, they contain lessons in papa and punya . In fact, their choice of stories and narration are such as to bring people closer to the path of dharma. Again, the Puranas contain accounts of individuals who by virtue of their steadfast adherence to dharma attained to an elevated state in this birth itself. At the same time, they also tell is about persons who, by their acts of adharma, came to harm in this very birth itself. There are in fact no Puranic stories that do not contain some moral lesson or other.


To improve ourselves morally and spiritually we must turn to the Puranas.

The purpose of the Puranas is not to give [as history does] a chronological account of kings or their quarrels without imparting lessons on good and evil. We do not need such history since it does not contain any guide for the conduct of our life. History must be capable of bringing us spiritual rewards.

For instance, Srimad Bhagavata tells the story of Uttanapada, the father of Dhruva, and of Dhruva's son, but only very briefly. However, the story of Dhruva himself is told in detail, Dhruva because he is an example for us in devotion, determination and courage.

British/foreign historians dismiss the Puranas as false/myth etc. But on the pretext of carrying out impartial research they twist history to suit their ends like, for instance, their "divide and rule" policy. It is in this way that they have propagated the Aryan invasion theory. If the Puranas are a lie, what about the history written by these Englishmen? Whatever claim the historians make to impartiality, it is hard to say how far the new history (or histories) are likely to be truthful.

Vyasa, who composed the eighteen Puranas, the great men who wrote various Puranas, Tamil authors like Sekkizhar were unbiased in their accounts. I am sure there are several great men who wrote in other Indian languages

If the talk about Vishnu-Shiva superiority is due to my comment, let me make it clear that I only mentioned about the importance of Vishnu over Indra in Vedic literature though the latter is praised more in them. My comment on Vishnu-Shiva was only about whether both of them were being worshipped during Indus Valley Civilisation. Anyhow it is beyond the content and purpose of this thread & now it is better we stick to the main topic.

Jamy/Narada(Brahmaputra) 😊
Vedas have given space for different devatas and they praise them at various places.
There are several sookthas in RV praising them. Yajur/Saama have used them to present it in prose or singing/song format. It doesn't matter how many places it has been quoted (quantity) but essence is what is more important.

If you look at Puranas, Skandha puran will praise Lord Karthik, Srimad Bhagavatha will praise Vishnu, Shiva puran Shiva and so on.

Cleansing mind/thoughts etc are the purpose of Vedas or Puranas.

The Vedanta portion is where we ultimately need to get ourselves to.

On the Aryan invasion etc, I am TOTALLY against that theory. I do NOT believe any of that.

Let me stop here and not digress.

Originally posted by: SayaneeH.Lecter

Nomoshkar Sir and thanks for this beautiful citation .. I have few queries .. please reply if possible

this is definitely one of the most substantial and convincing. I always believed Karna's tragedy is tragedy of every proletarians who are struggling to make an identity against stubborn refusal of society. The tragedy is not only in his unarmed death but in almighty's involvement in a man's death who is trying hard to drag the wheel out of mud .. "Wheel" in History always symbolized "Progress" isn't it?? The very scene of A man who struggled whole life to earn respect and appreciation for his skill is dying struggling with chariot's wheel and the entire scenario is orchestrated or conducted by a God gives me a bigger picture of social catastrophe .. Sir can you please give your insight here

2ndly Sir as you said Karna was the right man in wrong side .. what does the wrong side actually mean. If I go through conventional Dharma-Adharma concept even then I can't tag Pandava side as absolutely righteous in their acts. The much I have understood, this is a classic case of Churchill's "history is written by the victors" .. I found this as plausible reason of the inconsistency of some characters in epics. The way Historians don't follow the journals of ancient historians,writers or traveler-writer's [like hu En Sung] blindly should we believe whatever is written in the epics or try to reason things out with modern rationalism and epic .. what is your take on it??

Thanks, Sayanee. As rightly pointed out by you, the tragic pathos of Karna's death is its being the result of destiny ordained by an unfair divinity and curses ('almighty's involvement', as you call it.) Incidentally, Karna's place in this narrative of 'curse' is an interesting one, as you would see from this extract from my book (pp. 114-15):
Interestingly, the role of curses in the world's epics, insofar as they counterweigh human will and volition, offers an intriguing psycho-philosophical theme worthy of deeper study. Comparisons with the Greek epics and tragic drama could be relevant to the context. The death of heroes like Agamemnon and Achilles, the sufferings of Oedipus and Orestes, were results of curses " but there the curses do not just represent a mindset of feared retribution for past misdeeds; rather, in many cases, they reveal a leitmotif of blatant partiality and favouritism of the gods. Indeed, this theme of the unfairness of divinities seems more pronounced in Greek and Biblical literature than in Indian traditions. The Old Testament Book of Job is perhaps the aptest case in point. That story of awfully cruel punishments inflicted by God on a good man, only for the purpose of testing the limits of his faith and virtue, has little or no parallel in ancient Indian literature, where the causality of poetic justice is normally more at play. The only limited comparison of divine unreasonableness that one can draw from the Mahabharata is perhaps the lot of Karna in being dogged by an unconscionably cruel destiny. But then, Karna's righteousness is that of a generous man and great warrior, and not the pious righteousness of Job.
I am also impressed by your brilliant metaphor of the wheel, and Karna's tragic manly effort in trying to lift the wheel of progress from its epochal rut.
As for the right or wrong of Karna's partisanship, that again is a question of perspectives, one of which has been presented by you. But there is also the perspective of Krishna's higher dharma, which, in simple terms, is to undo the 'original sins' (if one may use that biblical phrase here) -- of trying to kill the child Bheema; of plotting that abominable burning of the Pandavas at Varanavata; of committing that fraud with Shakuni's loaded dice; of the utterly despicable and reprehensible humiliation of Draupadi, and finally, of that dismissive rejection of Yudhishthira's (and his emissary Krishna's) very reasonable request for only five villages.
Incidentally, I also liked your very valid observation regarding the Persian references to 'Asura', while commenting on Panchaali's article on Duryodhana. The theme of that ancient Indo-Iranian swap of divinities forms an important part of a chapter entitled 'Mythology of Gods and Demons' in the book I am writing now.