Dharamraj or Adharamraj yudhisthira - Page 4

Originally posted by: santhiyaa_J

agree👍🏼

Originally posted by: Pamalo

yes i never said yudhi only is at fault i say all the damn maharathis in the sabha were wrong all committed a crime a sin but wat i say is tht the stopping of the game lied with yudhi even though dhritrashtra cud've stopped he didnot tht was his crime but after him( or before him)yudhi had the chance to stop it but he didnot the reasons are of no matter here i dont know if e was compelled or wantedly did tht he simply should've stopped playing once he understood things were getting out of control so the fault lies with all in the sabha buy first with yudhi tht's all im saying.

i'm not against yudhi infact i like him but wat he did tht day is unacceptable.this is my pov sorry if hurt you.

Originally posted by: Angela_Grokes

No dear it doesn't hurt me at all. Infact you are keeping your POV forward very well. Yes exactly in the sabha this was one wrong done by Yudhishthir for which I can never forgive him myself. When he understood that the game was not fair he could have stopped playing but no for the sake of this mere Swadharma (sorry to say) he kept playing. It was really, really wrong of him. How can he even think of gambling his wife is a game. And this is one sin done by him for which I can never ever forgive him.

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.

Yudhishtra is portayed as an ideal and straight follower of dharma, and who does not sway from Dharma even for personal gain. However, the truth is that though he is Dharmaraj, he too is flawed in that not only he was addicted to gambling he also had roving eyes and lust for Draupadi, it was he who left Arjun/Draupadi Swayamwar and went to Kunti to inform her what has happened, and Kunti after seeing lust in her eyes, and fearing that this issue might divide the brothers, ordered them to share whatever they might have brought. Yudhishtra has been portrayed as a saint though he is not. Due to people inability of access to vast resources regarding Mahabharat we have been left to believe whatever is generally know, and not the things which are not well known.

As far as Dharma is concerned, virtually all the characters in Mahabharata have misunderstood it. Dharma does not mean to stay put steadfastly on Pran, Pratigya, and obeisance to the elders, no matter if it means do Adharma or letting Adharma happen. Fulfilling obligations and obeisance to elders is only limited to the point where you are not induced into committing Adharma, the moment your elders ask you to Commit any Adharma, you are not duty bound to follow their diktat, but rather do what is right or Dharma.

Originally posted by: Angela_Grokes

Ok now since you have started let me keep my view forward too. But before I keep my view forward let me tell you that I am neither a supporter of Yudi nor I am against him.

Now here's my POV - I microscopically seen do you think that there was even one person in that dyut sabha who was not at fault. Whether it was Adharmi Duryodhan, Shakuni or Dharma mahagyaanis Yudhishthir, Bhishm, Vidhura or Karna. From slaves to kings all were wrong. Only two people involved in that incident were not at all wrong firstly of course Draupadi because I think it was no fault of her , some may say she said Karna a suta at the swayamvar or she laughed at Duryodhan but by the end of the day she should have been kept away from the sabha in any case. And the second who was not at fault was Krishna yes though he was not present in the Sabha but he did help Draupadi, isn't it? So you cannot only point out Yudhishthir since he gambled Draupadi. No not at all, if Yudhishthir gambled her all others kept mum. So aren't all equally at fault. Just think that if Krishna would not have helped Draupadi and she would have been disrobed would still you regard only Yudhishthir at fault. No my dear friend the one who does bad or takes part in it is not the only one at fault but the ones who tolerate it are equally at fault.

To err is human

Originally posted by: jackburton

Yudhishtra is portayed as an ideal and straight follower of dharma, and who does not sway from Dharma even for personal gain. However, the truth is that though he is Dharmaraj, he too is flawed in that not only he was addicted to gambling he also had roving eyes and lust for Draupadi, it was he who left Arjun/Draupadi Swayamwar and went to Kunti to inform her what has happened, and Kunti after seeing lust in her eyes, and fearing that this issue might divide the brothers, ordered them to share whatever they might have brought. Yudhishtra has been portrayed as a saint though he is not. Due to people inability of access to vast resources regarding Mahabharat we have been left to believe whatever is generally know, and not the things which are not well known.

As far as Dharma is concerned, virtually all the characters in Mahabharata have misunderstood it. Dharma does not mean to stay put steadfastly on Pran, Pratigya, and obeisance to the elders, no matter if it means do Adharma or letting Adharma happen. Fulfilling obligations and obeisance to elders is only limited to the point where you are not induced into committing Adharma, the moment your elders ask you to Commit any Adharma, you are not duty bound to follow their diktat, but rather do what is right or Dharma.

Originally posted by: jackburton

Yudhishtra is portayed as an ideal and straight follower of dharma, and who does not sway from Dharma even for personal gain. However, the truth is that though he is Dharmaraj, he too is flawed in that not only he was addicted to gambling he also had roving eyes and lust for Draupadi, it was he who left Arjun/Draupadi Swayamwar and went to Kunti to inform her what has happened, and Kunti after seeing lust in her eyes, and fearing that this issue might divide the brothers, ordered them to share whatever they might have brought. Yudhishtra has been portrayed as a saint though he is not. Due to people inability of access to vast resources regarding Mahabharat we have been left to believe whatever is generally know, and not the things which are not well known.

As far as Dharma is concerned, virtually all the characters in Mahabharata have misunderstood it. Dharma does not mean to stay put steadfastly on Pran, Pratigya, and obeisance to the elders, no matter if it means do Adharma or letting Adharma happen. Fulfilling obligations and obeisance to elders is only limited to the point where you are not induced into committing Adharma, the moment your elders ask you to Commit any Adharma, you are not duty bound to follow their diktat, but rather do what is right or Dharma.

Dear friend, let me tell you that Yudhishthir was not a gambler. Loving to play dice & being a professional gambler are not same thing. He loved the game very much but never played to harm anyone, it was just his hobby. If he was really a gambler then why did he request Shakuni again & again not to play dice with him? What kind of gambling addict do so? Besides, if he could be a real gambler then at least he did not lose everything by another gambler's cheating.

Regarding your next complain I would like to ask you, where this completely false story originated from? I guess you have not read original Mahabharat written by Vyas Dev, rather you are interested in Palace of Illusion or Yaggaseni etc novels. I know that many authors showed that Yudhishthir was lusty towards Draupadi & so he requested Kunti to give such an order. But in Vyas's Mahabharat, nothing like this happened. In Dwapar yug, no obedient son could discuss with his mother about his lust, & you are talking about that mother & son who were great followers of Dharma, & where mother was respectable like Goddess for the son. Now just think that how could this scene happen?

I agree with TM, yes I can't forgive Yuddhistir for that particular day! According to the original MB he had the liking and addiction for that game and this addiction led him to stake his brothers and himself and his wife.

Originally posted by: Urmila11

Dear friend, let me tell you that Yudhishthir was not a gambler. Loving to play dice & being a professional gambler are not same thing. He loved the game very much but never played to harm anyone, it was just his hobby. If he was really a gambler then why did he request Shakuni again & again not to play dice with him? What kind of gambling addict do so? Besides, if he could be a real gambler then at least he did not lose everything by another gambler's cheating.

Regarding your next complain I would like to ask you, where this completely false story originated from? I guess you have not read original Mahabharat written by Vyas Dev, rather you are interested in Palace of Illusion or Yaggaseni etc novels. I know that many authors showed that Yudhishthir was lusty towards Draupadi & so he requested Kunti to give such an order. But in Vyas's Mahabharat, nothing like this happened. In Dwapar yug, no obedient son could discuss with his mother about his lust, & you are talking about that mother & son who were great followers of Dharma, & where mother was respectable like Goddess for the son. Now just think that how could this scene happen?

I am not going into your second point because I havent read anything about the lust part myself. But as far as the dvut kreeda is concerned, how on the earth you can say that he wasnt addicted to the game. Agreed he asked again and again to stop the game, but why had he to continue on Shakuni's insistence? I mean there was no such "Darma" to continue gambling neither was there any "Dharma" about not rejecting someone's plea for a recreational activity.

He asked stop because his conscience was asking him to do so, but he continued because his desire to play further overpowered his conscience, Yudhisthir was great, but at this time, he had committed a crime