This is disrespectful to the Bhagwad Geeta - Page 4

Originally posted by: BeyondHorizon

Like I said Mahabharata is filled with grey characters. Duryodhana too had some good traits. He might have befriended Karna for his own selfish reasons but he was known for his generosity too. There is also an instance when Karna was playing with Bhanumati, Duryodhana's wife and accidentally pulled her waist chain but Duryodhana never doubted his friend nor his wife. Karna was given an opportunity to reveal his identity before Pandavas by Krishna which would give him the right to claim the throne. Karna knew this would put an end to the war as Yudhishtra would happily give up his throne and Duryodhana wouldn't challenge him either. But he refused Krishna's offer as he knew he would give up the throne to Duryodhana to repay him for all he had done for him and he knew that would be wrong. As for Draupadi vastraharan, the Kauravs laid foundation for their destruction. Not justifying their act but Draupadi was not a naive woman either. She has humiliated Karna and Kauravas on countless occasions. That's the beauty of Mahabharata. All characters are human with their own set of strengths and weaknesses but with varying shades of grey.

Bold: So? Nothing justifies sexual assault. I know you didn't intend to justify the vastraharan, but this sentence trivializes what happened to Draupadi. What Karna did cannot be called a mere 'flaw'. It was/is/always will be a heinous crime to molest and disrobe a woman publicly. NOTHING on earth can justify that.

The Kauravas and Duryodhan were pitch black, not grey.

Originally posted by: Mahisa22

Bold: So? Nothing justifies sexual assault. I know you didn't intend to justify the vastraharan, but this sentence trivializes what happened to Draupadi. What Karna did cannot be called a mere 'flaw'. It was/is/always will be a heinous crime to molest and disrobe a woman publicly. NOTHING on earth can justify that.

The Kauravas and Duryodhan were pitch black, not grey.

Karna did not assault Draupadi. He insulted her and yes they committed a heinous crime by insulting Draupadi and that brought their downfall. A mistake is a mistake, big or small. I am not saying that what Draupadi did justifies what happened with her but if the Kauravas committed a sin she too had committed her share is mistakes. I won’t consider Kauravas pitch black but they were bordering on black for sure. While Pandavs too had a streak of grey in them.

Originally posted by: BeyondHorizon

Like I said Mahabharata is filled with grey characters. Duryodhana too had some good traits. He might have befriended Karna for his own selfish reasons but he was known for his generosity too. There is also an instance when Karna was playing with Bhanumati, Duryodhana's wife and accidentally pulled her waist chain but Duryodhana never doubted his friend nor his wife. Karna was given an opportunity to reveal his identity before Pandavas by Krishna which would give him the right to claim the throne. Karna knew this would put an end to the war as Yudhishtra would happily give up his throne and Duryodhana wouldn't challenge him either. But he refused Krishna's offer as he knew he would give up the throne to Duryodhana to repay him for all he had done for him and he knew that would be wrong. As for Draupadi vastraharan, the Kauravs laid foundation for their destruction. Not justifying their act but Draupadi was not a naive woman either. She has humiliated Karna and Kauravas on countless occasions. That's the beauty of Mahabharata. All characters are human with their own set of strengths and weaknesses but with varying shades of grey.

I beg to differ in few statements! Yes, karn was not bad by birth, but he became bad after joining duryodhan's camp! Draupadi had less encounters with Kauravas and karna, not much insulting took place like they portray on serials! The scene b/w karna & duryodhan's wife is not mentioned as they potray in that movie which was just made to glorify karna! Nd duryodhan was not grey, he was evil

Originally posted by: BeyondHorizon

Karna did not assault Draupadi. He insulted her and yes they committed a heinous crime by insulting Draupadi and that brought their downfall. A mistake is a mistake, big or small. I am not saying that what Draupadi did justifies what happened with her but if the Kauravas committed a sin she too had committed her share is mistakes. I won’t consider Kauravas pitch black but they were bordering on black for sure. While Pandavs too had a streak of grey in them.

Sexual assault is not a 'mistake', its a grave crime. Saying 'a mistake is a mistake' is downplaying the impact of sexual assault. And no mistake on earth justifies sexual assault. NOTHING.

Karna might not have assaulted her directly, but he wa standing and laughing while Draupadi was being molested. That's as heinous as molesting her himself.

Originally posted by: Mahisa22

Sexual assault is not a 'mistake', its a grave crime. Saying 'a mistake is a mistake' is downplaying the impact of sexual assault. And no mistake on earth justifies sexual assault. NOTHING.

Karna might not have assaulted her directly, but he wa standing and laughing while Draupadi was being molested. That's as heinous as molesting her himself.

I called the vastraharn a sin and Draupadi insulting Dhritarashtra a mistake. Again u misunderstood my words. I only tried to point out that all characters are grey in Mahabhata. Wow! Did I say anything justified a sexual assault? I suppose twisting words is an art in itself and I am afraid I don’t possess that like u do. I am done here.

Originally posted by: kb_always_96

I beg to differ in few statements! Yes, karn was not bad by birth, but he became bad after joining duryodhan's camp! Draupadi had less encounters with Kauravas and karna, not much insulting took place like they portray on serials! The scene b/w karna & duryodhan's wife is not mentioned as they potray in that movie which was just made to glorify karna! Nd duryodhan was not grey, he was evil

There are many versions of MB. If Karna was indeed bad y does the world call him daanveer shoor? If ur talking about SP version of MB they practically whitewashed the Pandavs. There is also a version of MB where Duryodhan was once known as Suyodhan before he was brainwashed by Shakuni. Even Shakuni for that sake orchestrated the Great War sowing the seeds early on to avenge his brothers. Every character had layers. Anyways the only point I wanted to make is that even though Pandavs were fighting for justice they used unfair means to win the war on several occasions. The TM was saying how the show is insulting Bhagwad Geetha and even dragged religion into picture. So I just cited that even Mahabharata was won on the basis on deceit. Not at all justifying Maya harming innocent people (if at all she does that in future.)

Originally posted by: BeyondHorizon

I called the vastraharn a sin and Draupadi insulting Dhritarashtra a mistake. Again u misunderstood my words. I only tried to point out that all characters are grey in Mahabhata. Wow! Did I say anything justified a sexual assault? I suppose twisting words is an art in itself and I am afraid I don’t possess that like u do. I am done here.

You didn't say anything about Dhritarashtra. You said 'mistake is mistake no matter how big or small', and you put it right after you talked about the assault.

Also you said, "If Kauravas committed a sin then Draupadi also did mistakes". That would come across as downplaying the crime to ANYONE who reads it. I don't see where I twisted any of your words.

Thanks for commenting here.

Originally posted by: Mahisa22

You didn't say anything about Dhritarashtra. You said 'mistake is mistake no matter how big or small', and you put it right after you talked about the assault.

Also you said, "If Kauravas committed a sin then Draupadi also did mistakes". That would come across as downplaying the crime to ANYONE who reads it. I don't see where I twisted any of your words.

Thanks for commenting here.

I was talking about characters being grey. Never did I justify or said Draupadi insulting Dhritarashtra gave anybody the free rein to sexually assault her. Never did I say that what she did led to the assault. I just pointed characters being grey. I feel strongly about a sensitive issue like that and never will I justify that happening to anyone no matter who it is. Hope I made my stance clear in this regard.

Originally posted by: Mahisa22

You're completely wrong. There have been PLENTY of indications that Maya will be negative this season as well, see some pre-airing segments.

As i said before, let's wait for the back story and actual facts before coming to that conclusion. There is not much to go on to make that conclusion. It is too early.

Your argument was "Soldiers could not afford not to fight because of caste"

Answer: No offence, but your knowledge of Indian history and mythology is quite wanting. There is no caste that requires its members to become soldiers compulsorily. The only exception might be Kshatriyas, but not every kshatriya was bound to become a soldier in those days. Also, most of the soldiers in those days were from lower castes, not kshatriyas which were the next highest caste after Brahmins. Again, like I said, soldiers are not included in civilian casualties of war. And Abhimanyu was a soldier.

No offense to you either but you totally missed my point on caste system. I didn't imply that people were forced to become soldiers or they were being taken from their homes to join the army. What makes you conclude that most of soldiers were from lower caste? I doubt karna would have faced so much if that was the case. Caste system was followed strictly for majority and thanks to that a person cannot freely chose a profession that they want. So especially kshatriyas didn't have much choice and had to go for options that they have to maintain their respect and position in a society. Not every normal person has that spirit to swim against the current. This was a family feud and those soldiers or their families didn't have anything to do with the family feud and the reasons behind it. So they were innocent party in that scenario. Abhimanyu, Uttar etc were warriors but they were just teenagers who were in this due to their families. Basically, we have different definition of what "innocent" means in this context as it is all about perspective at this point it has become a moot point now.

About Barbareek, well he was killed because of a curse by Lord Brahma because he was an evil yaksha in previous birth. Please read up before making sweeping comments such as 'innocents were killed in the war'. Barbareek sacrificed himself WILLINGLY, also his death was INEVITABLE because of Brahma's curse.

Your second argument: Many kingdoms were coerced into fighting alongside Pandavas

The Pandavas all had WILLING allies, not coerced into supporting them. Can you give me ANY such example? You can't.

You do know what intimidation is right ? Even if they were allies, hastinapur had a reputation and it was very powerful. Nobody wanted a fight or enimity with hastinapur. The allies had good relationships but hastinapur never took slighting lightly and their past actions shows that. So yes they were not dragged kicking and screaming into joining the war but the pressure to join was there. Saying no at this point would affect their relationship with hastinapur. Point is, there is a high possibility that most of the allies joined the war because they were just trying to maintain their relationship with hastinapur. No king in their right mind would join a war like this when they know it will gravely affect their economy and people and also knowing that there is nothing to gain from it for themselves except instability and grave losses.

Originally posted by: BeyondHorizon

There are many versions of MB. If Karna was indeed bad y does the world call him daanveer shoor? If ur talking about SP version of MB they practically whitewashed the Pandavs. There is also a version of MB where Duryodhan was once known as Suyodhan before he was brainwashed by Shakuni. Even Shakuni for that sake orchestrated the Great War sowing the seeds early on to avenge his brothers. Every character had layers. Anyways the only point I wanted to make is that even though Pandavs were fighting for justice they used unfair means to win the war on several occasions. The TM was saying how the show is insulting Bhagwad Geetha and even dragged religion into picture. So I just cited that even Mahabharata was won on the basis on deceit. Not at all justifying Maya harming innocent people (if at all she does that in future.)

Dear, i don't support TM's view of Gita getting insulted!

Secondly, yes there are many versions of MB, some because of poor interpretation and understanding of Sanskrit! Karna had donated so many, but what's the use? When you give evil ideas and insulting Draupadi & encouraging duryodhan?

And SP version of MB was crappy crap! Couldn't even have patience to watch a single episode, everytime I tried to! It was just cooked up stories to show Arjun as hero, while the main was Bheem who destroyed the 100 kauravas!

And yes Sakuni was the mastermind who took the oath to destroy Hastinapur!

And yes after Abhimanyu was killed by unfair means as Kauravas broke the rules, the Pandavas didn't care about the rules! Since kauravas were wrong, pandavas were supported in every move be it fair or unfair means!