'I will not wed a Suta ...' - Page 6

Originally posted by: amritat

Thanks Varaali...thank u so much for this post...😊

However, most people here follow KMG, n hence, we stick to one translation, while arguing on controversial parts.

In Archive Mansion's 3rd post some online sources for easy referance are posted.
Vedabase are SB links.
People prefer to read English more then Sanskrit or Hindi. Many regional languages too have MB translated. All of them are not awailable online. Referance links were given so as people can have a commen base. Since many posts were made initially just to show others in bad light, without giving any reliable source. That was the reason a source that can be refered by all was given.
WE have other version's thread too, that can be used if one is refering other sources. Even the regional language translations are quite good. English is a commen language so online KMG version was suggested. We've asked again & again if any other version of MB is awailable onlinr, provide the link, we'll add it in Archive Mansion. But got no reply. So we are left with links given below only.

Originally posted by: mnx12

Read Mahbharat online:

http://www.mahabharataonline.com/translation/index.php

http://vedabase.net/sb/10/en

http://vedabase.net/sb/11/en

http://vedabase.net/sb/12/en

Some more links:

1) here the site where you can download the K.M.Ganguli eng translation of ved vyas mahabharata:

http://www.holybooks.com/mahabharata-all-volumes-in-12-pdf-files/

2) here you can read it in sanskrit:

http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/maha/index.htm

3) for those who have android phones:

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.indianic.collectionofmahabharat1&hl=en

4) other translations and works:

http://www.mahabharata-resources.org/

5) the gita press hindi-sanskrit version

http://www.scribd.com/collections/3733957/Mahabharata-Hindi-Translation-in-Six-Volumes-by-Pandit-Ramnarayan-Dutt-Shastri-Pandey-from-Gita-Press-Gorakhpur

6) translation by R.C.Dutt

http://oll.libertyfund.org/index.php?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php&title=1778

Originally posted by: varaali

My only problem arises when citations from other sources (which have equal claim to authenticity) are not considered, especially when they are at varaiance with KMG.

i agree
personally for me while discussing if another version or translation of mahabharat claims something else i am willing to accept that as a possibility but only indian version of MB's not Indonesian or Cambodian because that is a totally different story

also not books written from a character's POV by modern writers like POI or arjuna the warrior prince or mrityunjay.They are interesting to read as an interpretation of certain character's but credibility wise these books are fictional personally wont use them from discussion POV

Originally posted by: varaali

I understand, that KMG is in English (hence can be read by a wider population) and freely available over internet (hence easy to quote) and therefore used as reference. My only problem arises when citations from other sources (which have equal claim to authenticity) are not considered, especially when they are at varaiance with KMG.

Originally posted by: Sabhayata

i agree
personally for me while discussing if another version or translation of mahabharat claims something else i am willing to accept that as a possibility but only indian version of MB's not Indonesian or Cambodian because that is a totally different story

Originally posted by: varaali

The CE came into being after the KMG publication. While compiling the CE, Dr Suthankar and his team took into consideration all the different editions that were available, painstakingly sifting through the palm manuscripts. The resultant CE was a work that was- according to him - as close to the original as possible.

Hence, as far as authenticity goes, the CE is most reliable.

Originally posted by: ThePirateKing

There are many who believe that the Far East version may be relatively untainted as compared to the versions we currently have in India. Maybe in India it makes sense to probably stick with the different Indian versions that we have.

I believe that the current CVs have been incorporating stuff from the non-Indian versions as well.

i haven't read any far eastern version completely but from what little bit i have read about the indonesian version its a completely different story and characters are completely different from what we know hence mixing up characters of two completely different storylines creates an inconsistent storyline that does justice to none of the versions.

So if far eastern version has to be shown it should be shown in its true form this mixing of two different story lines does justice to none

@Varaali...I'm not sure if this is the right thread to post this but as we are discussing the suta comment, I thought I would share this citation re: intercaste marriages in the MB era:

Originally posted by: bheegi

@Varaali...I'm not sure if this is the right thread to post this but as we are discussing the suta comment, I thought I would share this citation re: intercaste marriages in the MB era:

The Mahahharata noisily denounces interclass relationships, insisting that people should marry within their own class. Interclass couplings are rhetorically rejected, and considered to be emblematic of vice. As one passage states: "Because of inducements of wealth, greed, lust, or lack of clarity about the varna order, or even ignorance of the varna order, intermixtures of class occur" (XIII.48.1). The most righteous marriages, therefore, are class endogamous, observing the boundaries of one's station.

certain kinds of union are tolerated. These are anuloma marriages, involving the union of a high-class man with a lower-class woman. Men may marry beneath themselves, particularly in polygynous marriages, although their primary wife is still expected to be of equal rank. Women, however, are strongly discouraged from marrying low. Thus, the alliance of a hrahmana woman and a ksatriya man is actively disapproved. As king Janaka says to the hhiksunf Sulabha, assuming her to be a hrahmana, "You are a brahmana, and I a ksatriya. There is no union permitted for the two of us. Do not cause varnasamkara" (XII.308.59). Pratiloma marriages, where women marry below their class, are the source of much antipathy in the text. Children born from these marriages take the class neither of their fathers nor of their mothers. Instead, they form a series of subclasses categorized below the class of both their parents.

A hrahmana woman with a ksatriya man yields a siita, which is a subclass lower than all of the four traditional varna groups. A suta earns his living as a minstrel, a bard, or a chariot driver. A hrahmana woman married to a vaisya man yields a vaidehaka. His occupation is looking after the bars and bolts for protecting the privacy of women in respectable households. The very worst of combinations is that of a hrahmana woman and a sudra man. Such a union yields a candala, a subclass that is the very lowest of the low, even lower than the sudra. All pratiloma unions are held in contempt, but the sentiment for candalas is nothing short of spiteful. The candalas are worse than the dogs of society; they are the "dog-eaters" (svapakah) the most despised of all.

Whereas Sudras work as dasas and dasis in dvija homes, and dasis occasionally are even privileged to bear children for dv~a men, candalas are objects to be despised or hated. Passages in the Anusasanaparva presage the attitudes toward outcasts in later Hinduism. A hrdhmana must not allow the shadow of a candala to fall on him. If the shadow of a candala falls on a consecrated space, the space becomes immediately defiled, and so forth.

Arti Dhand. Woman As Fire, Woman As Sage: Sexual Ideology in the Mahabharata (S U N Y Series in Religious Studies) (Kindle Locations 1644-1646). Kindle Edition.

I'm glad we don't think in these terms in kaliyuga (at least most of us I hope) but based on this citation, can one blame Draupadi for even thinking in those terms? So what if she rejected a lower caste man? It was consistent with the beliefs of those times

Originally posted by: varaali

How does that help anyone? If we have a different source, why not accept that version too.