Dharamraj or Adharamraj yudhisthira - Page 2

Oh comeon no one in this world who has even an iota of knowledge about Mahabharat can say that Yudishthir had a bad character. He was the most righteous man of his time. But then he was a "man" and he did commit a grave crime that day. And his crime was bigger than Kauravas, (excluding Vikarana of course)., Karna and rest present at the sabha (even the rest of the Pandavas). And if you say that they repented, then so did Karna and Vidur, so how come Pandavas be forgiven for their mistake and Karan not???

On a second thought Draupadi had insulted Dury, Karna and Dhritrashta , so they atleast had an justification (as lame as it might be) for their sin. What excuse did Yudi have for his actions that he could not resist his temptation to gamble????

Originally posted by: Pamalo

yes i agree tht yudhi redeemed himself Krishna was on their side & all wat i'm asking is did he have the right to stake any of his bros ok leave them they are his bros so can be justified bt why did he stake paanchali tht was wrong i dont care if krishna was on their side or not bt yudhi did wrong tht day period.

sorry i dont want to offend or hurt you bt i dont like yudhi's actions tht day.

Originally posted by: Medha.S

As wrong as it sounds by todays standards -- yes actually, He got to stake them because he had the right to stake them -- as bad as that sounds.

And again, you are saying that by today's standard -- today, you cant stake wives or a family member --but this happened about 5000 years back -- Do you think he would have staked her if he did not have the right to do it by all the laws and whatever there was in those days?

Originally posted by: shipreeta

Oh comeon no one in this world who has even an iota of knowledge about Mahabharat can say that Yudishthir had a bad character. He was the most righteous man of his time. But then he was a "man" and he did commit a grave crime that day. And his crime was bigger than Kauravas, (excluding Vikarana of course)., Karna and rest present at the sabha (even the rest of the Pandavas). And if you say that they repented, then so did Karna and Vidur, so how come Pandavas be forgiven for their mistake and Karan not???

On a second thought Draupadi had insulted Dury, Karna and Dhritrashta , so they atleast had an justification (as lame as it might be) for their sin. What excuse did Yudi have for his actions that he could not resist his temptation to gamble????

Originally posted by: Medha.S

As wrong as it sounds by todays standards -- yes actually, He got to stake them because he had the right to stake them -- as bad as that sounds.

If thats the case, Duryodhan after winning her had right to misbehave and humiliate her. Yudishthir atleast had a duty towards Draupadi (to ensure her safety), Duryodhan had none. So in that case why blame him. My question is not about questioning his right (although even this is challengable as when Yudi staked Draupadi, the former himself was a Das and a Das has no possession of himself while Draupadi was still a free and respectable women) But I am not going into that, my question is which Dharma states that one has to gamble unless he loses everything??? I mean he could have surely done that as per laws, but what was the necessity to do this??? Again if he had staked her then what did he expect that if he loses again then Dury will respectfully apologize his sil for the misdeeds of his elder brother (current daas). He knew very well the nature of Dury plus he had just witnessed the humiliations to his brothers. Even after being fully aware of consequences, he staked Draupadi, then why blame Duryodhan?

If we say that Duryodhan was at fault (which is surely was), then Yudhisthir did a much bigger crime.

And as per the social and legal norms of those days, however weird it might sound no one was at fault.

Originally posted by: Medha.S

And again, you are saying that by today's standard -- today, you cant stake wives or a family member --but this happened about 5000 years back -- Do you think he would have staked her if he did not have the right to do it by all the laws and whatever there was in those days?

Yes and 5000 years back a master had full right to humiliate (even forcefully) a daasi. Only condition being that after once a master has forcefully humiliated a daasi, the daasi has to be laid free. So that is what was done there. In fact not only Draupadi but all the Pandavas were let free after this episode. I mean after this Draupadi was given more compensation than she deserved due to such action of her master than what was required by the law.

So can we say that Kauravas or Duryodhan dint do any wrong???

Originally posted by: shipreeta

I think you dont know but there was a person at the Sabha who strongly condemned the ill act and tried his level best to stop it. And can you guess who he was?? His name was Vikarana, a son of Dhritrashta and Gandhaari and a brother of Duryodhan (in short a Kaurav) He was also killed by Bheem during Mahabharat (like his 99 brothers). I think if the case was only of Draupadi's revenge atleast his life should have been spared. (I mean if everyone did a mistake why wasnt Vidur punished?)

And sorry to say apologies are of mistakes, not for crimes. What Yudi did was a crime and not a mistake

I know abt vikarn!! Vikarn had to die as he was frm the opposite camp!!
Who said vidur was nt punished?? He had to see the death of his entire clan!! Pandavas had to see the death of their children!! Death is nt the only punishment a persom can get!!Everyone in that sabha had got punishment of some kind!

Originally posted by: Medha.S

And again, you are saying that by today's standard -- today, you cant stake wives or a family member --but this happened about 5000 years back -- Do you think he would have staked her if he did not have the right to do it by all the laws and whatever there was in those days?

Whatever I have to say regarding this topic, I have already posted in this thread:

https://www.indiaforums.com/forum/mahabharat/3874335/like-or-dislike-yudhishtir-vb-nt-pg-22?pn=10

My request is: please read the epic properly before commenting anything against a respectable character.
I must say that I am not trying to support him morally. But we must realize a character's mental situation & thoughts from his POV always while judging or analyzing him, otherwise our analysis will be a one-sided thing based on our own liking or disliking. To avoid this we must study the character's overall nature throughout the whole epic too & then we need to think neutrally. This is 18 parva great epic Mahabharat & we can never conclude on a character just seeing one single action of one single parva. We must judge on the total thing being unbiased. If we become blind like Dhritarashtra then we will be unable to judge properly & conclude with Duryodhan is the best character of MB' 😈 😆 but this is not a research mentality, right? Liking or disliking a character is completely personal matter (as for dyutasabha many people hate Yudhishthir, I can say that I hate Karna for ordering Dushshashan to torture Draupadi 😡😆, but that's only personal POV, not of a reader & researcher 😳) & during research or serious discussions we must reject that biased nature. I have noticed that there is a trend now to dislike Yudhishthir. Some people say that he was bad & some say that he was unnecessarily good at that time, but nobody tries to understand him in a neutral way rather always misunderstand him 😭. But I think the person claimed as Dharmaraj by Lord Krishna & great sage Vedvyas must be discussed logically & neutrally for welfare of present society as we Kaliyug people have many lessons to learn from him 😊