Mahabharat of B. R. Chopra: Discussions/ DT note pg 119 - Page 28

Originally posted by: RainFire125

I totally agree and that's the beauty of this thing and their relation!!

Yess.

Their relation is a delight, and I could spend hours just discussing it.

Pro, I know that KMG does say Karna was Drona's student, but what the others are saying has its merit.

Why was Karna the only low caste student on Drona's list, the same Drona who refused to teach Ekalavya?

It doesn't make sense at all.

I do believe that Parashurama was Karna's Guru, but each scripture varies as well.

Originally posted by: proteeti

Duryodhana was the clearest opportunist here. He gave Karna the kingdom of Anga (Karna's adoptive father was an estranged Anga royal dynasty member), and he was just keeping Karna in hand to pose against Arjuna because he knew about their childhood rivalry.

Throughout the series I feel Dury has taken advantage of Karna and given him almost nothing in return. Karna could have won Anga himself, but technically he was also an heir to that throne. Dury didn't do him a great favour there, only big promises.

Karna did everything for Duryodhana.

I know Mahabharata calls him the trunk of the Adharma tree, and I am not saying he didn't make big mistakes. He did, but he also repented them.

He was, after all, in heaven with the Pandavas and Panchali. As per Svargarohanika Parva.

So we can see that repentance takes you far in this case too.

I always find Karna correct in protocol, he stayed true to himself throughout... His only fault for me was insulting Draupadi nothing can excuse that. But like Krishna said he repented.

Originally posted by: KrishnaPriyaa

Pro, I know that KMG does say Karna was Drona's student, but what the others are saying has its merit.

Why was Karna the only low caste student on Drona's list, the same Drona who refused to teach Ekalavya?

It doesn't make sense at all.

I do believe that Parashurama was Karna's Guru, but each scripture varies as well.

Of course. Other versions matter. 😳

However, Karna was not low-caste. Adhirath was a Kshatriya and Radha was a Brahman so...pata nahi bhai. 😆

Originally posted by: KrishnaPriyaa

Yess.

Their relation is a delight, and I could spend hours just discussing it.

I am with you on this girl!! :) I love this duo more than Ram-Lakshman

Originally posted by: Sanskruthi

I always find Karna correct in protocol, he stayed true to himself throughout... His only fault for me was insulting Draupadi nothing can excuse that. But like Krishna said he repented.

I think we can open a thread to discuss this character as well!! lot of perceptions will come out, am sure

Originally posted by: Viswasruti

Word Gayatri.👍🏼 Karna is a grey character in Mahabharatha. His caste-based suppression led him to search for sideways to surpass Arjuna in archery. For that, he lied, he cried and ultimately tried to insult Panchali, because she was the wife of Pandavas.

He committed many sins, telling lies to Parasuram for getting an education, insulting Draupadi in the royal court, heckled her while disrobing by Dussasan, he tried to tie Krishna when he was there as a messenger, killing Abhimanyu in deceit, and finally perished in that fierce war, a war against sinners to humanity and divinity alike!

Once I read that Duryodhan's wife Bhanumathi and Karna's wife Vrishali were close friends, and at first, they tried their best to correct their husbands' misdeeds with the help of Gandhari, but consequently yielded to their strong negativity.

Duryodhan, Dussasan, Shakuni and Karna are the four persons who ruined the prospects of Hasthinapur's prosperity.

True M, as the LORD rightly says - an insult to a woman can never be tolerated or forgiven easily - no matter how small or big it is!! And in my books they must be punished severely.

Oooh Kans admits he's afraid of Krishna! 😎

...Govinda Gokula aayo...☺️

Originally posted by: RainFire125

I think we can open a thread to discuss this character as well!! lot of perceptions will come out, am sure

We can😃 but let the characters enter so that we can discuss in context.