Unluckiest Character in Mahabharat? - Page 7

Originally posted by: NoraSM

That's just so tragic, Ass mutilated them

Where were Pandavas?

Krishna advised the Pandavas and Satyaki to stay in the Kaurava camp for the night. Which was bizarre: if he knew what Ashwatthama was up to, why not warn them and protect the rest of the army? After all, Ashwi was after not just them, but Yudhisthir as well

Originally posted by: CaptainSpark

Yeah well I don't consider him to be unfortunate because technically this kind of death is what warriors wish for, no? (I mean not the unfair means involved but the tragedy associated with it). Hence I used the term tragedy for Abhimanyu.

And the general vibe is correct, Abhi does get more credit and footage than Ghatothkach and Upapandavas get, naturally because Janamejaya is the listener😆

I think in the epic both Abhimanyu and Ghatochkat have equal importance.

Both had combats with few of the greatest warriors. Both killed some Maharathis

Kauravas had to go out of the way to kill both.

It's now that we have shows giving more importance to Abhimanyu, it's shown like Ghatochkat only joined as a part of the plan to get the Indrast wasted, which definitely was not the case. He was in war before Karna joined

I guess a kid who fought and died unfairly gives more TRP than a Rakshas who fought

What about Eklavya?

his only fault - giving respect to Drona as his guru even though Drona never taught him a single thing

Everyone who for no reason had to lose something precious of theirs

The ones who werent the cause of the destruction and still got destroyed

Everyone is unlucky

Luck favoured once but the next moment it didnt

So its all

Originally posted by: sshirley

What about Eklavya?

his only fault - giving respect to Drona as his guru even though Drona never taught him a single thing

Ekalavya was from Magadha, Jarasandh's kingdom (enemy of Hastinapur) who came to Hastinapur to secretly learn knowledge of the missiles from Dronacharya. Dronacharya never accepted him as a student as he was the Guru of the Kuru princes only (and also the princes of ally kingdoms like Panchala and Mathura). Ekalavya learned his 'knowledge' by spying on Dronacharya's lessons. He essentially stole the knowledge that he developed. Thus Dronacharya punished him.

This epic teaches us that ambition has its place, but one shouldn't break ethics in the name of ambition. Anyone who lied/cheated others for knowledge were punished or cursed, like Ekalavya and Karna. Every action comes with a consequence, good or bad.

I understand what Drona did to Ekalavya was wrong, but his intention is not how it is portrayed today - that he didn't accept him because of caste or due to partiality to for Arjun.

Look there isn't much evidence to say Drona was partial. He loved Arjun more than others, definitely. He would use Drona's teaching for his country, Magadh and against Hastinapur and its allys. This was the main reason for what he did. Cruel? Yes. But Drona was living on Hastinapur's food and money, it wouldn't be good for him to let a Magadha prince get hold of his knowledge.

It's not even about stealing knowledge. It's espionage. Today, we put spies to death for stealing military secrets. Eklavya got a much lighter punishment than warranted.

Originally posted by: CaptainSpark

I understand what Drona did to Ekalavya was wrong, but his intention is not how it is portrayed today - that he didn't accept him because of caste or due to partiality to for Arjun.

Look there isn't much evidence to say Drona was partial. He loved Arjun more than others, definitely. He would use Drona's teaching for his country, Magadh and against Hastinapur and its allys. This was the main reason for what he did. Cruel? Yes. But Drona was living on Hastinapur's food and money, it wouldn't be good for him to let a Magadha prince get hold of his knowledge.

Exactly!

Shows and movies always portray the Dwapara yuga as being casteist, but in that era there was no caste. There were "varnas", and these varnas were based on occupation. The Brahmanas were the educators/ministers, the kshatriyas the warriors, and so on. It wasn't like today, where there are untouchables and people discriminate based on caste. People view the previous yugas through the eyes of our current society and that wasn't true.

There was other discrimination then, but not caste discrimination. Ekalavya and Karna were not discriminated based on caste. They were punished for lying and cheating.

Yes, Ekalavya's punishment was cruel, no doubt about it, but such punishments were the norm then, especially under a monarchy. Thiefs were punished by having their hands chopped off. Many rapists were castrated. Crimes were punished a lot more harshly than they are today, so if want to judge anything, then we should judge the nature of the punishment, but not blame everything on caste without understanding what was actually written in the original epic.

Dronacharya favored Arjuna due to his dedication and studious nature, but he was not partial. He treated all his students fairly and graded them based on their dedication and nature. But Ekalavya was not his student, so Dronacharya owed him no loyalty.

Originally posted by: RamKiSeeta

Exactly!

Shows and movies always portray the Dwapara yuga as being casteist, but in that era there was no caste. There were "varnas", and these varnas were based on occupation. The Brahmanas were the educators/ministers, the kshatriyas the warriors, and so on. It wasn't like today, where there are untouchables and people discriminate based on caste. People view the previous yugas through the eyes of our current society and that wasn't true.

There was other discrimination then, but not caste discrimination. Ekalavya and Karna were not discriminated based on caste. They were punished for lying and cheating.

Yes, Ekalavya's punishment was cruel, no doubt about it, but such punishments were the norm then, especially under a monarchy. Thiefs were punished by having their hands chopped off. Many rapists were castrated. Crimes were punished a lot more harshly than they are today, so if want to judge anything, then we should judge the nature of the punishment, but not blame everything on caste without understanding what was actually written in the original epic.

Dronacharya favored Arjuna due to his dedication and studious nature, but he was not partial. He treated all his students fairly and graded them based on their dedication and nature. But Ekalavya was not his student, so Dronacharya owed him no loyalty.

I have always said this, we have to judge something on the basis of the time its set in. People judge MB on the basis of today's values, which is not fair. Can we judge what we do today based on those days? The way people were is due to the society back then. That's why we see Drona being strict about whom they're teaching, that's why Arjun never protests when Yudhishthir says Draupadi will be married to all five and so on.

Also, Karna's caste is not a lower caste to begin with. It is only not royal in nature ie he wasn't known as a PRINCE. Yet he had loving parents, connections in the royal family ie Duryodhan, Dushashan etc. I don't see where discrimination is coming from. 😆

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

It's not even about stealing knowledge. It's espionage. Today, we put spies to death for stealing military secrets. Eklavya got a much lighter punishment than warranted.

And attempt to murder lands you capital punishment or something. Imagine if these people would be punished on today's terms. 🤣