'Mahabharat- Different Versions -Perspectives'

First Previous

Page

Next Last

Frequent Posters

bheegi

@bheegi

Stunner

+ 5

Posted: 11 years ago

#671

Originally posted by: KrisUdayasankar

Adding in on this thread of whether or not we can apply current day morality to the past yugas:

First, the timelessness of the MBh suggests a certain adherence to universal values - including human dignity and right to self-determination. I see no reason why we should excuse Dharma's actions citing current day morality, because those actions were in defiance of universal morality. I refer here not just to the staking of his brothers and Draupadi but a) the fact that he had pretty much wagered away all his citizenry and their resources and b) the fact that no one in the Sabha objected to this wager - assuming that it was 'ok' for dharma to do so, because he was emperor. I think this is the fundamental problem of the time, and the war was but a means of revolution against the oppressive structure which made it acceptable (though not in universal terms) for Dharma to wager his empire away

Second, even for arguments sake, if we are to say different standards apply to different yugas, should we not hold Dwapara to higher standards than Kali? It seems to me again that egalitarianism is the ultimate manifestation of philosophical oneness - should that not be the standards for Dwapara or any yuga, really? I'd argue that at some level, this is what the Gita is trying to get at.

Finally, an apology for not replying to earlier posts addressed to me - have been traveling. Look forward to hearing everyone's thoughts on this issue.

I kinda agree with your POV @Krishna. Even if Yudhishtra wagered himself, his brothers and his wife, did he really have any right to wager his whole kingdom and the trust of all his subjects? Didn't these subjects help him build Indraprastha into the glorious empire that it was? These people left their homes in HP to establish homes in IP and their king just wagered them away - in fact even before he staked his own family. One would think that a good king puts the interests of his kingdom before his own personal interests. We all criticize Rama for banishing Sita to appease one of his subjects but what Dharma did was even more deplorable in my eyes.

Quote

AnuMP

@AnuMP

Rocker

Posted: 11 years ago

#672

Sangeeta and Krishna

I still find it hard to believe that the Pandavs were fighting for anything other than HP (except may be, Brikodar😳). Krishna (the epic one) talked frequently about recreation of a just society if I am not mistaken. But, I cant find any instance where the Pandavs were looking at liberty and justice for all (pardon my plagiarism) as the end goals. And I liked AC's interpretation of Drau's motives. Its hard to believe that a Kshatriya woman who stood up in court and verbally battled the Kuru elders would not be aware enough of the consequences of large-scale conflict; she must have had a reason for circumventing her husband(s) and making certain that Krishna would bring out war in spite of the Shanti Prastav

I liked that preface to CE that Sangeeta posted which says there were many motives merging in that war. My personal interpretation of Krishna and Draupadi is that they saw society and saw not just what is wrong but what it could be (credit: RFK)

Edited by AnuMP - 11 years ago

Quote

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

KrisUdayasankar

@KrisUdayasankar

Beginner

Posted: 11 years ago

#673

I liked that preface to CE that Sangeeta posted which says there were many motives merging in that war.

I totally agree with you on the multiplicity of motives. I also think war was not a programmed consequence of one persons actions - not even Krishna/Govinda's or Draupadi's. At the end of the day, they would have (I believe) tried their best to have peace, provided it was peace on conscionable terms - and by conscionable I dont mean favorable to them/ Dharma, but from the larger perspective of Aryavarta as a whole.

It is also interesting to read the CE for Syoddhan/Duryodhan's arguments against peace, even on the eve of the war. It gives a different image than a man who just hated his cousins or was an arrogant demon etc...

I keep thinking of the line from the Gita "I am Time, the Destroyer." The war was precisely about that (IMHO), the culmination of a great social force for change.

Quote

bheegi

@bheegi

Stunner

+ 5

Posted: 11 years ago

#674

Originally posted by: KrisUdayasankar
I liked that preface to CE that Sangeeta posted which says there were many motives merging in that war.

I totally agree with you on the multiplicity of motives. I also think war was not a programmed consequence of one persons actions - not even Krishna/Govinda's or Draupadi's. At the end of the day, they would have (I believe) tried their best to have peace, provided it was peace on conscionable terms - and by conscionable I dont mean favorable to them/ Dharma, but from the larger perspective of Aryavarta as a whole.

It is also interesting to read the CE for Syoddhan/Duryodhan's arguments against peace, even on the eve of the war. It gives a different image than a man who just hated his cousins or was an arrogant demon etc...

I keep thinking of the line from the Gita "I am Time, the Destroyer." The war was precisely about that (IMHO), the culmination of a great social force for change.

@Krishna, what's your opinion on destiny vs human initiative as a cause for the war? There are various instances in the text that allude to destiny being the prime factor behind all the actions including the dice game and the war. I would like to believe that human initiative played a bigger role in all these actions leading to the war even though prophecies like Draupadi was born to destroy the Kuru race or Amba was reborn to kill Bhishma and many more are scattered all over the epic.

Quote

AnuMP

@AnuMP

Rocker

Posted: 11 years ago

#675

Oh absolutely.

MB is not about one man or woman's actions. Just like WWII is not all about Hitler or the Jewish people or even Churchill/Stalin/Roosevelt.

But, the Pandavs did plenty of wrong left to their own devices. The Lakshagarh incident was just the beginning. They did need Krishna's guidance and Draupadi's drive to get them to that point

Suyodhan's part in CE I havent read (lacking the patience to go through it). But will definitely give it a look. NO ONE can be as black as he has been painted over the millenia

The destiny part of it, I usually feel its a cop-out to avoid having to explain their own actions. If everything is God's doing, then where is the role for humanity in all this?

Edited by AnuMP - 11 years ago

Quote

riti4u

@riti4u

Stunner

+ 7

Posted: 11 years ago

#676

Originally posted by: KrisUdayasankar
I liked that preface to CE that Sangeeta posted which says there were many motives merging in that war.

I totally agree with you on the multiplicity of motives. I also think war was not a programmed consequence of one persons actions - not even Krishna/Govinda's or Draupadi's. At the end of the day, they would have (I believe) tried their best to have peace, provided it was peace on conscionable terms - and by conscionable I dont mean favorable to them/ Dharma, but from the larger perspective of Aryavarta as a whole.

It is also interesting to read the CE for Syoddhan/Duryodhan's arguments against peace, even on the eve of the war. It gives a different image than a man who just hated his cousins or was an arrogant demon etc...

I keep thinking of the line from the Gita "I am Time, the Destroyer." The war was precisely about that (IMHO), the culmination of a great social force for change.

Nice views. Even I feel war didnt have any one motive or say initiator. For me it was a consequence of lot of factors actually. Like you said, about force for change. Indeed it was a change and most powerful of all Time which led to collaboration of all conditions favorable to war at that time and it happened..

Quote

AnuMP

@AnuMP

Rocker

Posted: 11 years ago

#677

Krishna

Is there any likelihood that AC will be available in the US on kindle? Or at least as PB? I had to get family to buy the last one and mail to me

Quote

KrisUdayasankar

@KrisUdayasankar

Beginner

Posted: 11 years ago

#678

Krishna

Is there any likelihood that AC will be available in the US on kindle? Or at least as PB? I had to get family to buy the last one and mail to me

Hi Anu,

No, unfortunately not officially, because the publishers only have Asia rights. Off the record though, there are sites which specialize in 'exporting' desi books to the US. Amazon US also has a few copies through individual sellers.

Quote

KrisUdayasankar

@KrisUdayasankar

Beginner

Posted: 11 years ago

#679

Destiny is a strong thread of thought, one that Dharma Yudhisthir relies on often to justify the turn of events. But as for my own opinion - I'm going to let Govinda Shauri answer this one for me:

"'When we first met, a long time ago, you told me that for a cowherd to rise to be a prince was nothing less than the work of either divinity or destiny...do you remember?'

'I do. I also remember what you said. You told me that your rise was the work of neither divinity nor destiny, but of humanity.'

'And that, I think, has been the only other occasion, Acharya, when you've said you didn't understand me.'

'Surely an explanation is now overdue?'

'Indeed. You asked me who is responsible for the state of things around us - Firewright, Firstborn, the kings of the realm. The answer is simple. The only person who is responsible for any situation is the one who has chosen to do nothing about it. The only people responsible for the rise of a tyrant are those who choose to submit and suffer. The only people responsible for evil are those who choose not to fight it. That the gwala you once knew rose to be prince was nothing but an instrument, a means to an end. It was the people of Surasena who raised him to that position, because they decided that enough was enough. And I don't know about you, but I think Aryavarta has reached that point. Enough.'

'Because a man sworn as Emperor to protect these lands wagered them away? Because a good woman was humilated and hurt in the most terrifying of ways?'

'Because after all that happened, someone stood up and said: Enough. But it wasn't me.' " - end of extract-

- Kaurava: The Aryavarta Chronicles Book 2. (p. 345-346).

Edited by KrisUdayasankar - 11 years ago

Quote

AnuMP

@AnuMP

Rocker

Posted: 11 years ago

#680

IMO a great ruler can see potential in the citizenry and designs his rule accordingly. Yudhishtir instead memorized the outdated rules and used them to HIS advantage with Panchali Swayamvar and then he tried to do the same in DS. He treated his family and people as property. And even if we use Dwapar Yug ethics as the benchmark, then that makes his a run-of-the-mill dictator like every other king in Aryavarta. I could never see what makes him so great. Admittedly, part of that is because I thought Arjun was robbed

And now that I am older and not any wiser, I still dont find Yudhishtir to be an admirable character. I look at what they did in Dwarka. Democracy was unheard of at the time but they had something of the sort. That is Vision.

EDIT - 😆 I just realized that this post must seem strange standing on its own. I made it after an off-thread discussion with another IF-er

Edited by AnuMP - 11 years ago