'Mahabharat- Different Versions -Perspectives' - Page 61

Has any one here read Aryavarta Chronicles? Apart from Sangeeta and Sabhayata that is?

Originally posted by: AnuMP

Has any one here read Aryavarta Chronicles? Apart from Sangeeta and Sabhayata that is?

yes. I have read both Govinda and Kaurava. It is a good concept. Not too happy with the characters though. Especially Arjuna's portrayal and the distortions in that book make even starbharat seem original.

Originally posted by: Crazypheonix008

yes. I have read both Govinda and Kaurava. It is a good concept. Not too happy with the characters though. Especially Arjuna's portrayal and the distortions in that book make even starbharat seem original.

The incidents are the same just the strategy and motive behind are different, as far as I can see


You would have to read it with an open mind though and not as a fan of any character

I have bought first book govinda but unluckily since then not getting proper time to read, as I like to read whole book in one go with no one disturbing

Originally posted by: AnuMP

The incidents are the same just the strategy and motive behind are different, as far as I can see


You would have to read it with an open mind though and not as a fan of any character

Originally posted by: bheegi

@AbhijitBasu

Sir, I've a question for you. Yesterday, a few of us debated on why the MB war was actually fought.

As Star plus' version has repeatedly emphasized that the war was important to establish dharma and was fought for the greater good of the society. However, books like KMG imply that the war was fought for justice and rights of the Pandavs and there is no mention of waging the war for the benefit of the society.

Would love your thoughts on this.

@Bheegi
Sangeeta, Somehow, I had earlier missed seeing your question, hence the delay in reply.
As regards the point why the Bhaarata war was fought, there could be layers of interpretation. The traditional one-point answer, of course, is to establish dharma, which is mentioned many a time in the original epic, as is duly conveyed in the KMG translation. This theme is wonderfully encapsulated in Krshna's epochal message in the Bhagavad-Gita: paritraanaaya saadhunaam vinaashaaya ca dushkrtaam / dharma-samsthaapanaarthaaya sambhavaami yuge yuge //. 'For the protection of the good, for the destruction of the wicked, and for the establishment of righteousness, I come into being from age to age.' In the limited context of the warrior story, Yudhishthira with his right of primogeniture and with his own credentials of virtue, embodied goodness, while the other side, with their 'original sins' (as already cited by me in an earlier comment), represented the 'wicked' cause. Those acts of protection and destruction are of course for the greater good of the society. To that extent the Star-Plus interpretation is correct, more so because for quite some time after the war, there was greater 'unity' in Aryavarta under first the Philosopher-King Yudhishthira and thereafter the great Kuru empires (recorded in Puranas) of Pareekshit and Janamejaya.
But that is not all. The Mb has its other philosophic-mystic messages which have to be factored in here. To mention one, it is a Tragedy driven by the nature of the Time (kaala). The epic events take place in a rare juncture of cyclic Cosmic Time - at the transition between two yugas, or cosmic ages. There is a certain forlorn inevitability in the happenings, as expressed in that exquisite shloka of hair-raising quietude (shaanta-rasa) uttered by Yudhishthira: asmin mahaamohamaye kataahe / sooryaagninaa raatri-dinendhanena / maasartu-darvee parighattanena / bhootaani kaalah pacateeti vaarta // [In this cauldron of great illusion, with the sun as fire and day-night as fuel, Time is cooking all beings. That is the message.]

@abhijitbasu
Thank you sir. I was also looking for an answer to that one. I had personally interpreted it as relating to points of view. For God there was a larger purpose. For Panchali, though she was well aware it was not fought for her, KK became the way justice was meted out. For the kings, the fight was over power and land


I agree with Sangeeta that if SP is able to reach even a handful of young people about the true meaning of justice, then they have served a great purpose

Originally posted by: abhijitbasu

@Bheegi
Sangeeta, Somehow, I had earlier missed seeing your question, hence the delay in reply.
As regards the point why the Bhaarata war was fought, there could be layers of interpretation. The traditional one-point answer, of course, is to establish dharma, which is mentioned many a time in the original epic, as is duly conveyed in the KMG translation. This theme is wonderfully encapsulated in Krshna's epochal message in the Bhagavad-Gita: paritraanaaya saadhunaam vinaashaaya ca dushkrtaam / dharma-samsthaapanaarthaaya sambhavaami yuge yuge //. 'For the protection of the good, for the destruction of the wicked, and for the establishment of righteousness, I come into being from age to age.' In the limited context of the warrior story, Yudhishthira with his right of primogeniture and with his own credentials of virtue, embodied goodness, while the other side, with their 'original sins' (as already cited by me in an earlier comment), represented the 'wicked' cause. Those acts of protection and destruction are of course for the greater good of the society. To that extent the Star-Plus interpretation is correct, more so because for quite some time after the war, there was greater 'unity' in Aryavarta under first the Philosopher-King Yudhishthira and thereafter the great Kuru empires (recorded in Puranas) of Pareekshit and Janamejaya.
But that is not all. The Mb has its other philosophic-mystic messages which have to be factored in here. To mention one, it is a Tragedy driven by the nature of the Time (kaala). The epic events take place in a rare juncture of cyclic Cosmic Time - at the transition between two yugas, or cosmic ages. There is a certain forlorn inevitability in the happenings, as expressed in that exquisite shloka of hair-raising quietude (shaanta-rasa) uttered by Yudhishthira: asmin mahaamohamaye kataahe / sooryaagninaa raatri-dinendhanena / maasartu-darvee parighattanena / bhootaani kaalah pacateeti vaarta // [In this cauldron of great illusion, with the sun as fire and day-night as fuel, Time is cooking all beings. That is the message.]

Thanks sir for the explanation .However i still have some doubts regarding the purpose of this great war .I hope you wont mind clarifying them.

I understand and agree that this was a war of righteousness as it was fought between righteous panadavs and less righteous kauravas.Kauravas had tormented pandavs for a long time and panadavs had to face a lot of injustice and through this war panadavs got their justice and kauravas were punished for their sins.Which is why this could be called dharma yudh and perhaps this war set an example for the society that righteousness will always win in the end.And like the sholka you shared krishna ji came for the protection of panadavs and so that righteosuness in form of panadavs can win

But where i digress with SP's Mahabhart is how they interpreted this dharma yudh.As in from what i could understand their interpretation was that all kings of aryavrata were evil,the society at large of aryavarat was suffering hence all of them had to be killed in the great war.This is what krishna ji indicated in the second last episode i think.This is something i cant find in KMG at all.But my knowledge is fairly limited so perhaps you can help me understand this.

Were all kings of aryavrat evil , was the society of aryvrat suffering due to which all of them had to die?Even for that matter duryodhna?SP's mahabahrat seems to indicate that war wasn't fought becuase panadvas wanted justice or because yudhishtir wanted his throne back .Yes this was one of the reason but the greator reason was that Duryodhan wasn't good king and people of HP won't be happy under him.Again this is something i cant find in KMG infact KMG at two points seems to suggest Duryodhan was a good king.

Yes certainly Yudhishtir would have been a better king but does that mean that dury was a terrible king and people of HP were to be freed of him.I do agree that unified aryavrat would have prospered but does that mean the society was suffering under its previous rulers.For me this just seems like SP's attempt to sweep under the rug the destruction this war caused by saying all kings were evil so they had to be killed so that Yudhisitr can rule over them

I have also read that later in the epic Ved vyas tells Dhrithrashtra that this war was ordained by god's as vishnu ji had promised bhoomi devi that kshatraiya's will be destroyed and her burden will be reduced.But like you explained this was mostly due to the beginning of a new yuga and the old kshatraiya world had to be destroyed because of that.

Like i said my knowledge is limited to only two translations i have read so i have based my POV's on that hope you can shed some light and help clarify my doubts.I would like to learn more from some one as well read as you.

Also sir i had another query was Aryavrata united under Yudhsitir after this war only or was it after Ashwmedha yagna?

Originally posted by: AnuMP

Has any one here read Aryavarta Chronicles? Apart from Sangeeta and Sabhayata that is?