death of tragic hero karna - Page 3

Originally posted by: ..RamKiJanaki..

Karna being invincible with his kavach and kundal does not portray him in a great light. It can be compared to Vali's necklace in the Ramayana. It was said that Indra Dev had given his son Vali a necklace which would make him invincible when he wore it. That is why Lord Ram made him take it off and give it to Sugriva before he died. He said that it's unethical to fight with objects that give one an unfair advantage over their opponent. So Karna had to lose his kavach and kundal, or else people would have said he needed them in order to fight Arjuna, when in reality both were pretty evenly matched in terms of skill.

Also, Kunti never asked Karna to spare the other Pandavas and sacrifice himself. She asked him to switch sides and join with his brothers, but Karna told her that was impossible. Still, since she had come to ask him something at sunrise time, he could not deny her completely, so he said he'd spare four of her sons but not Arjuna, and in the end of the war, she would have five sons, whether the fifth be Karna or Arjuna. While Kunti committed mistakes as a mother and did act selfishly at times, she was not that evil that she'd tell Karna to go die and spare his brothers. She was a flawed mother, but she was still a mother who mourned the fact that one of her sons would die.

Even after his Kavach and Kundal was removed, Krishna called him a superior ( If not equal) warrior to Arjuna and told Arjuna that Karna cannot be killed while he has his weapons in his hand.

Actually Karna sparing the 4 brothers shows that he somewhat loved his brothers, why did he give a promise which wasnt even asked?, simple answer - he developed a soft corner for his brothers. No elder brother would like to kill his brothers. As for Arjuna - Karna already said that no-one in the three worlds can harm him while Krishna is with him.

Am not here for a pointless argument!!! 🥱

KMG at one point says Indra was gratified with Karna's donation and hence he provided him with Shakti. Prove me wrong now. Since many people give precedence to one liners instead of the incident.

"..And Sakra (accepting the gift) presented to the giver a dart, surprised (at his open handedness), and addressed him in these words, 'O invincible one, amongst the celestials, Asuras, men, Gandharvas, Nagas, and Rakshasas, he at whom thou hurlest (this weapon), that one shall certainly be slain.' And the son of Surya was at first known in the world by the name of Vasusena. But, for his deeds, he subsequently came to be called Karna.."

"..Indra in the guise of a Brahmana. And the chief of the celestials accepted the gift and was exceedingly gratified with Karna's liberality. He therefore, gave unto him a fine dart, saying, 'That one (and one only) among the celestials, the Asuras, men, the Gandharvas, the Nagas, and the Rakshasas, whom thou desirest to conquer, shall be certainly slain with this dart.'.."

I agree with you completely ...Karna has always been my fav character 😊😊😊😊😊😊

Whatever happened with Karna was not right but what can we do about ...its a story and we cant control the end off it 😕😕😕😕😕😕

Had he known the truth earlier about his true parentage ...he would never have been on the kaurvas side 😲😲😲😲😲😲😲

He learned about his brothers quite late ...Kunti should have told the pandvas about him they had the right to know he was thier eldest brother 😭😭😭😭😭

The way they showed this scene was amazing the guilt on the pandvas face was so sorrow full😭😭😭😭😭😭

The way everyone especially arjun were feeling guilty was real sad 😭😭😭😭😭😭

Overall the scene was very emotional 😭😭😭😭😭

Tragedy was a part of Karna's life ...But even then he was Truly a Hero .

Originally posted by: ..Apz..

Tragic hero is a definition that is to be seen in the literary sense. Tragedy is something of a serious nature capable of invoking Katharsis in people who read/view the drama. It is the fall of a noble character from great heights due to a fatal flaw in his character called Hamartia.

Take examples of Shakespearean tragic heroes. Macbeth,Hamlet,Lear and Othello...They all had fairly good lives. Still they are called tragic heros.

Karna is probably the only character from Indian epic who fits into the bill. Infact even the flaws in him were so noble that it thrusts a greatness upon him ( loyalty and daan) and also had circumstances against him right from his birth. People who read MB as scripture are free to believe in the spiritual side of the epic. But those who read it also as a piece literature tend to empathise with the humane characters of the epic. So for every post on Karna people do not have to go on quoting some translations trying to prove it otherwise.

On a serious note, if anyone questions any thing in the epic, it should not be seen as finding fault with the God. Without questions one never gets answers. Questions lead to answers and then to enlightenment. I truly believe even God acknowledges those who ask questions and gives answers in His own way.

Originally posted by: Sabhayata

Great
so in the same context please tell what hardships did pandavas face except for their exile after lakshagarh that wasn't their own doing ?

Originally posted by: ..dreamygatz..

Am not here for a pointless argument!!! 🥱

But one thing I just want to say, one point which no one fails to put in against Karna is what he called Draupadi in Dyut Sabha! Agreed what he called is not right and is indeed very wrong! But what is worse than that is the action of her five husbands who silently let everything happen without going to help her and muttered some vows to kill them all later!

Originally posted by: ..RamKiJanaki..

Great
so in the same context please tell what hardships did pandavas face except for their exile after lakshagarh that wasn't their own doing ?

Was losing their father anyone's mis-deed? like Kunti?, it was no-one's fault. What antagonism?, Bhima was the one who bullied Duryodhana and his brothers. Pandavas lived a very happy life in the gurukul and they were the favourites of their guru. They came back, exhibited their skills and gained great fame.

Lakshagriha and Bhima's poisoning was the only thing where they faced hardships which was anyone's wrongdoing, after that - they wed a beautiful wife, came back to claim the kingdom and apparently got one didn't they?, No-one forced Yudisthira to come and play dice, and no-one forced him to bet his brothers and his wife ( karna and Kaurava's were also definitely wrong.). And then too, Yudisthira played the second and game again lost. Exile was their own fault.

Killing Vikarna was a shame for the Pandavas, the guy who stood up for their wife while they were sitiing with their mouths shut. Killing Vikarna was just like a person who got lung cancer without smoking, he died even when he stood up for Draupadi.

As far as physical capability goes, it's true Karna was equal to Arjuna as Lord Krishna himself said so, but Krishna also said in the Shrimad Bhagavatham that he and Arjuna are incarnations of Nara and Narayana, who are Vishnu's avatars, so Arjuna was in no way inferior to Karna. He was another incarnation of Vishnu in the form of Nara.

Originally posted by: TheWatcher

How about losing their father in childhood and facing antagonism from their cousins and uncle until they got their own kingdom? The death of a parent is pretty tragic in my opinion.

Was losing their father anyone's mis-deed? like Kunti?, it was no-one's fault. What antagonism?, Bhima was the one who bullied Duryodhana and his brothers. Pandavas lived a very happy life in the gurukul and they were the favourites of their guru. They came back, exhibited their skills and gained great fame.

Lakshagriha and Bhima's poisoning was the only thing where they faced hardships, after that - they wed a beautiful wife, came back to claim the kingdom and apparently got one didn't they?, No-one forced Yudisthira to come and play dice, and no-one forced him to bet his brothers and his wife. And then too, Yudisthira played the second and game again lost. Exile was their own fault.