Bigg Boss 19 - Daily Discussion Topic - 31st Aug 2025 - WKV
Yeh Rishta Kya Kehlata Hai - 31 Aug 2025 EDT
CASE IN COURT 31.8
Yeh Rishta Kya Kehlata Hai - 01 Sep 2025 EDT
Why Sidharth Malhotra films flop! Guess with the hint written in this
UMAR KHAYID 1.9
Anupamaa 31 Aug 2025 Written Update & Daily Discussions Thread
Vicky says Katrina hates ‘honest feedbacks’ about her acting but…..
CID episode 73 - 30th August
BALH Naya Season EDT Week #12: Sept 1 - Sept 5
24 years of Lajja
Why she gets bollywood movies
The Curry-ous Readers 🍛 Book Talk Reading Challenge September 2025
Happy Birthday wat_up 🎂
The Naan -Stop Readers 🫓📚| BT Reading Challenge || September 2025
Originally posted by: shruthiravi
Yes if a lawyer claims truth is where I am then that lawyer has to be ethically 100% correct. No tedha method is expected from such a lawyer. Else just fight the case for what it is. I only told Saanjh cannot claim morality after asking the eye witness not to come. In cases like that of Maya usually the protoganist plays the game straight and fails, then start using tedha methods. Here at first go itself she asked Samay not to come thus losing the moral high ground.
You cant expect straight Maya in season 2. But she was in season 1 when she tried to adapt to Arjun family and VM insulted her and Saanjh broke her trust. Yes she goes tedha when her direct methods are not approved.I dont know whether you have watched Ek Hasina Thi by the same PH. Male protoganist was Dev Goenka. Many forum members were telling why he is not using tedha methods. At that time I had told he is a protoganist, he has to play straight, fail and then only use tedha. That is the difference of protagonist and antagonist.Protoganist always plays straight first and even while using tedha methods the thin line of dharma-adharma needs to be maintained for protagonist to differentiate him/ her from antagonist . That is what a good script is.
sometimes to save truth ppl has to take a wrong path, krishna did it bhem n duryodhan gada yudh in MB, de told bhem to attack on dur's thighs , it was morally wrong but to save dharm krishna did it ,bhishm pitamah ko marne ke liye pandav took help of lie det was morally wrong but to save dharm it was needed n kechad ko saaf karne ke liye kechad mai utarna padta , to catch thief police have to think like a thief n den catch him.
if wrong ko goodness se hi correct karna hota den indian law mai death sentence nhi hoti , cruel crimes ke cruel punishment milti hai ,no one tries to correct criminals by goodness , if saanjh want to defeat maya she has to start thinking like her , she cant defeat her by goodness maya know other cant cross lines bcs of their morals so she take advantage of it .
sometimes to save truth ppl has to take a wrong path, krishna did it bhem n duryodhan gada yudh in MB, de told bhem to attack on dur's thighs , it was morally wrong but to save dharm krishna did it ,bhishm pitamah ko marne ke liye pandav took help of lie det was morally wrong but to save dharm it was needed n kechad ko saaf karne ke liye kechad mai utarna padta , to catch thief police have to think like a thief n den catch him.
if wrong ko goodness se hi correct karna hota den indian law mai death sentence nhi hoti , cruel crimes ke cruel punishment milti hai ,no one tries to correct criminals by goodness , if saanjh want to defeat maya she has to start thinking like her , she cant defeat her by goodness maya know other cant cross lines bcs of their morals so she take advantage of it .
Originally posted by: ---Khushi---
I have 100% tolerance to all opposing viewpoints, n I engage in a debate to put forth my viewpoint.
It's these baseless comparisons to Mahabharata which is not acceptable...
too good. Just too good. 👏
sometimes to save truth ppl has to take a wrong path, krishna did it bhem n duryodhan gada yudh in MB, de told bhem to attack on dur's thighs , it was morally wrong but to save dharm krishna did it ,bhishm pitamah ko marne ke liye pandav took help of lie det was morally wrong but to save dharm it was needed n kechad ko saaf karne ke liye kechad mai utarna padta , to catch thief police have to think like a thief n den catch him.
if wrong ko goodness se hi correct karna hota den indian law mai death sentence nhi hoti , cruel crimes ke cruel punishment milti hai ,no one tries to correct criminals by goodness , if saanjh want to defeat maya she has to start thinking like her , she cant defeat her by goodness maya know other cant cross lines bcs of their morals so she take advantage of it .
Originally posted by: ---Khushi---
There are many other examples...Yudhistir lied to Dronacharya about his son Ashwathama to have him dead...He implied that Dronacharya's son Ashwathama was dead, when actually, Ashwathama the elephant was dead. & Yudhistir is considered the epitome of truthfulness or Dharmaraj...
Krishna in Mahabharata says, "What they are doing is adharma; what we are doing is also adharma, but we are doing it with an intention of establishing dharma. They are doing it with the intention of establishing adharma." It is not a question of right and wrong. It is a question of purpose, and of whether you would be successful within the limitations of the law or not. He did not say what he was doing was right - he knew it was wrong. But what he was trying to achieve was right. That is why he did all this.Citing references from classics, epics, etc is one thing, but making baseless comparisons of a fictional tale filled with psychotic characters to a great religious epic quite another.Yes Priyanka, I m reporting such posts , but without moderators around, I don't really know what the outcome will be.