Was Karn loyal to Duryodhan ?

Karn without any iota of doubt is the greatest Daanveer and one of the greatest warrior to have lived.

Sacrificing one's life is definitely great but it is more like Daan. We are aware he had done a lot for Duryodhan prior to Mahabharat war.

Was he really loyal to Duryodhan when it mattered ?

hmmm... tough one.

• promise not to kill 4 out of 5 pandavas
• donating Kavach while it was essential for his protection, inturn Duryodhan's safety
  
• Not to use Nagastra more than once against Arjun (depends on which version you read),but did he really put his heart ?

Let's brush aside Krishna's maaya for this discussion.

Eager to know your thoughts

Karn was very much loyal to Duryodhan or else he would have joined Pandvas when Kuti told him the truth ,He actively took part in Abhimanyu 's assassination and killed Gathotkatch too , and fulfilled his duty .

Karna was definitely loyal, but even loyalty has its boundaries. One cannot sacrifice personal beliefs or ethics in the name of loyalty. Whatever Karna's faults may be, one cannot deny that he was loyal to Duryodhan. Whether he was a true friend or not is up for debate, because real friends criticize each other when one of them is committing sins, like Krishna did to Arjuna whenever the latter became too proud. Karna silently supported Duryodhan even in his bad deeds, which is not something a friend does, but yes he was loyal. Loyalty and friendship are two different things.

I do think epic karn was much loyal to dury than starkarn! starkarn is definetly not which makes me sympathies with stardury(which I don't want to). still I do think epic karna was disloyal to dury much more than previous commanders because dury entire hope was on him(not that I am displeased but its TRUE when we see from duri pov)

Let's discuss about epic Karn, May be stick to Vyas version. Again Sanskrit is such a great language that it can be interpreted in many ways.

^^^

well i agree with ritu in this case i think he was trying to be fair to all after the truth was revealed but overall yes i think one can take it as betrayal from dury's POV.

I mean if i would have been in dury's shoes i would have taken it as a betrayal

so lets see after the truth is revealed what all he does for dury and for pandavs

pandavas

1)refuses the throne so that yudi can be a king along with refusing the infamous offer

2)Asks krishna ji not to tell the truth to pandavs so that they are not in any kind of delimna

3)Promises kunti to not kill 4 pandavas and fulfills it as well

Dury

1)he doesn't promise not to kill arjuna since he was the main combatant for arjuna in the war and he had earlier promised dury that he will kill arjuna which he doesnt break

2)4 times he refuses the offer to join pandavas(twice by krishna ji,once by kunti and once by bhishma)

3)Except for sparing the 4 panadavs he does what all he can to ensure dury's victory including participating in abhimanyu's death and killing gatotkacha even if it meant losing his shakti

so all in all after the the truth is revealed he tries to do things for both the sides i would 50-50 percent but this 50% would have been a betrayal from dury's POv as dury would have expected karna to give his 100%