Mahabharat Episode Discussion Thread # 17 - Page 25

Created

Last reply

Replies

1.1k

Views

93.9k

Users

58

Likes

4.4k

Frequent Posters

amritat thumbnail
14th Anniversary Thumbnail Sparkler Thumbnail Engager Level 1 Thumbnail
Posted: 11 years ago

Well if that be said TheWatcher, then almost every character brought upon Kurukshetra War.

Satyavati's father, coz no father would want her daughter's sons getting sidelined from the throne. Hence, instead of Bhishm, inept people acquired throne, leading to dispute, and hence war.
Dhritarashtra, coz no father would want his son, to not get throne. And hence the psychological blindness, leading to Duryodhan's over-sized ego, and hence, indirectly war.
Kunti, coz no woman would want her character to be tainted, for a child. And hence, abandoning of Karna, then Karna and Duryodhan's friendship, leading to Duryodhan's confidence for waging war.
Karna, coz no man can take rejection from a woman. Hence, Draupadi's Vastraharan.
And also for giving Duryodhan confidence with his military prowess, and thus the rejection of the peace proposal, and hence war.
Draupadi, coz no woman should reject a King 🤢. And no woman can let her molesters be unpunished. Hence the war.
Arjun, coz no prince would want to be challenged by an apparent son of a charioteer. Hence, the enemity, and Karna-Duryodhan's friendship, and hence again rise in Duryodhan's confidence to wage war.
Edited by amritat - 11 years ago
Sabhayata thumbnail
12th Anniversary Thumbnail Sparkler Thumbnail + 4
Posted: 11 years ago

Originally posted by: TheWatcher

Maybe I got carried away with Starbharat, So, was Bhima was born with the strength of 10,000 elephants?

If he was, wasn't it unfair for Duryodhana that his rival was born with immense strength and bullied him throughout his before gurukul days. At least Arjuna and Karna were sons of major gods unlike Duryodhan.

My opinion is that Bhima himself bought the destruction of Kuru's by mercilessly bullying Duryodhana , no big brother would silently see himself (and his brothers) getting insulted infront of his 99 brothers, let alone Duryodhan who had a large ego.


Bhima was born with extraordinary strength as that is what kunti had wished for but even vasuki gave him the strength of 1000 elephants so i guess Bhima became doubly powerful

As far as Bhima and his bullying is concerned no doubt it was wrong but it was more of a child's play .Even in KMG its mentioned that Bhima did it more out of his childishness than any malice.It is no excuse for what all Dury did as an adult
Sabhayata thumbnail
12th Anniversary Thumbnail Sparkler Thumbnail + 4
Posted: 11 years ago
@amritat:I don't think dury was evil though

Yes he did commit some inexcusable crimes against pandavas for which he deserved to get punished

but he wasn't terrible towards the society at large only towards panadvas.there are instances in the epic where it is mentioned that he indulged in welfare of the other's and Brahmins ,where he shows great respect to Bhishma even Narad in the end says to Yudi that dury has obtained heaven because he did preform his other kshatriya duties well

So yes he wasn't as righteous as pandvas but i wont call him evil as well
amritat thumbnail
14th Anniversary Thumbnail Sparkler Thumbnail Engager Level 1 Thumbnail
Posted: 11 years ago

Originally posted by: Sabhayata

@amritat:I don't think dury was evil though

Yes he did commit some inexcusable crimes against pandavas for which he deserved to get punished

but he wasn't terrible towards the society at large only towards panadvas.there are instances in the epic where it is mentioned that he indulged in welfare of the other's and Brahmins ,where he shows great respect to Bhishma even Narad in the end says to Yudi that dury has obtained heaven because he did preform his other kshatriya duties well

So yes he wasn't as righteous as pandvas but i wont call him evil as well

U r right. No one is completely evil.
I called Duryodha evil, coz that's how he is addressed in the epic.
Duryodhan is called wicked, every many times by the narrator.
So, going by the epic, and some of his deeds, he was "evil", atleast from one angle.
divyasn thumbnail
17th Anniversary Thumbnail Dazzler Thumbnail
Posted: 11 years ago
if drit can do the duties of the king when Pandu was in forest , then he could as well be appointed as the king in the first place .. If you think like that , then Vidur has caused the war ...

I have to say Mahabharat is the most intriguing and exciting piece of literature ever written ...
Sabhayata thumbnail
12th Anniversary Thumbnail Sparkler Thumbnail + 4
Posted: 11 years ago

Originally posted by: amritat

U r right. No one is completely evil.

I called Duryodha evil, coz that's how he is addressed in the epic.
Duryodhan is called wicked, every many times by the narrator.
So, going by the epic, and some of his deeds, he was "evil", atleast from one angle.


ya some of his acts were wicked so he could be referred to as evil for those acts but not as a whole person like i said he did have some positive qualities he was respectful to his elders and did do good for other people
RamKiSeeta thumbnail
17th Anniversary Thumbnail Achiever Thumbnail + 6
Posted: 11 years ago

Originally posted by: TheWatcher

Maybe I got carried away with Starbharat, So, was Bhima was born with the strength of 10,000 elephants?

If he was, wasn't it unfair for Duryodhana that his rival was born with immense strength and bullied him throughout his before gurukul days. At least Arjuna and Karna were sons of major gods unlike Duryodhan.

My opinion is that Bhima himself bought the destruction of Kuru's by mercilessly bullying Duryodhana , no big brother would silently see himself (and his brothers) getting insulted infront of his 99 brothers, let alone Duryodhan who had a large ego.


Bhima was not born with the strength 10,000 elephants. After Duryodhan poisoned him and threw him into the ocean, he met the nagas who gifted him with divine ambrosia that gave him that strength. After that he began bullying the Kauravas brothers as revenge for how they were treating him and his brothers.

The person who brought about the destruction of Kuru clan was Dhritarastra. He did not punish his sons for their ill deeds against his nephews. He pampered them and secretly supported them, and when children at that age are not taught what's right or wrong, they grow up to be perpetrators of crime, which is exactly what Duryodhan and his brothers did. However, one cannot blame just Duryodhan. After all, the apple does not fall far from the tree, so if the parent is corrupt, the child is bound to be corrupt too. That is why I dislike the characters of Dhritarastra and Gandhari so much. They played the victim card several times throughout the epic, trying to put the blame of their bad parenting on someone else, when in fact they are to be blamed for how their sons turned out to be.
RamKiSeeta thumbnail
17th Anniversary Thumbnail Achiever Thumbnail + 6
Posted: 11 years ago

Originally posted by: amritat

Draupadi, coz no woman should reject a King 🤢. And no woman can let her molesters be unpunished. Hence the war.


I agree with all your points but this one. Sorry, but I don't believe that a woman has no right not to reject a King. When it comes to her marriage, it is her choice, and that is exactly what a swayamvar is. She has to choose her groom, and even though there was a test one had to pass, she had to choose which participants were worthy of the test. If she did not want to marry Karna, she cannot be blamed for it, for her father wanted her to marry Arjuna and so did she. Caste was very important in those days, far more than it is now, and even though Karna became a King, he was still considered a suta putra so society would have condemned a marriage between a suta man and a kshatriya woman. Even today, people reject potential partners based on criteria such as height, weight or complexion, which IMO is equally superfluous. It may be right or wrong for different people, but it's each person's individual preference and we have to respect that. Back then, caste was definitely the most important criteria so Draupadi refusing Karna was not an insult to him, but simply her stating her preference in a marriage partner. How else could she have done it? The swayamvar had already begun, women were not allowed contact with other men for her to do it privately, and there was no other way to let him down lightly. IMO, Draupadi refusing Karna was within her rights, as no woman (or man) should be forced to marry someone they do not like.

So as per this point, I do not agree she did wrong.
AnuMP thumbnail
11th Anniversary Thumbnail Rocker Thumbnail
Posted: 11 years ago

Originally posted by: ..RamKiJanaki..


I agree with all your points but this one.


So as per this point, I do not agree she did wrong.



😃I think she was being sarcastic. Amrita is a big fan of Draupadi
srishtisingh thumbnail
14th Anniversary Thumbnail Voyager Thumbnail
Posted: 11 years ago

Originally posted by: divyasn

if drit can do the duties of the king when Pandu was in forest , then he could as well be appointed as the king in the first place .. If you think like that , then Vidur has caused the war ...

I have to say Mahabharat is the most intriguing and exciting piece of literature ever written ...

I don't think dhrit could really do duty of a king.no kingship quality is there apparent.a king is not just supposed to sit on throne. a king is leader who leads his army, who takes decisions, who keeps everyone in check, sometimes even personally go in praja and look for wrongs. dhrit could do none of these. may b I sound cruel but this is truth. how dhrit could do these.let us say hypothetically some minister like bheeshma(if he was not bheeshma we knew) try to unsurp him from throne, or did something really wrong to praja how would dhrit b able to forge his authority?

Related Topics

Top

Stay Connected with IndiaForums!

Be the first to know about the latest news, updates, and exclusive content.

Add to Home Screen!

Install this web app on your iPhone for the best experience. It's easy, just tap and then "Add to Home Screen".