Saif : " we will justify abduction of Sita and war with ram" - Page 11

Originally posted by: Mahisa22

Is there any original text where it is explicitly mentioned that Ekalavya wanted to steal military secrets and not interested in just knowledge? If yes, then please do show me. Also why did he cut off his finger if that was the case? Shouldn't spies do their work and try to escape?

The story of Ekalvya is known through generations, it's not something invented by any serial. Also, Mahabharat's beauty lies in the fact that all characters are grey or dark, so its futile to try to whitewash Dronacharya.

Harivamsa gives you both Eklavya's parentage and his adoptive father's alliance with Jarasandha.

Eklavya went to Drona, a guru hired to exclusively teach the Kuru princes and their allies. Drona refused.

If Eklavya merely wanted to practice archery with Drona's statue, he could've gone back to his kingdom. And these weren't weapons which could taught on their own.

99.999% chance is that he stole military secrets. It's a matter of analysis.

Even on the 0.001% chance he didn't and was miraculously teaching himself military tactics, fact remains he was a Yadava adopted by a Nishada king.

Caste had nothing to do with what happened to him.

Not whitewashing Drona here. He did a lot of questionable things. But Eklavya was not one of them.

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

Harivamsa gives you both Eklavya's parentage and his adoptive father's alliance with Jarasandha.

Eklavya went to Drona, a guru hired to exclusively teach the Kuru princes and their allies. Drona refused.

If Eklavya merely wanted to practice archery with Drona's statue, he could've gone back to his kingdom. And these weren't weapons which could taught on their own.

99.999% chance is that he stole military secrets. It's a matter of analysis.

Even on the 0.001% chance he didn't and was miraculously teaching himself military tactics, fact remains he was a Yadava adopted by a Nishada king.

Caste had nothing to do with what happened to him.

Not whitewashing Drona here. He did a lot of questionable things. But Eklavya was not one of them.

Doesn't matter whether adopted or not, he was a Nishad prince and Nishads were outcasts at that time. Also, spies don't go straight to the military tacticians and say, "Oh please teach me". If his intention was to spy, he could've kept his secrets to himself and not claimed to be a student of Dronacharya. Even if he did follow Drona's classes secretly, it was out of thirst for knowledge and not any spying intent. Intent is what matters here.

Also, in almost every text it is mentioned that Drona did what he did because he didn't want Ekalavya to rival Arjuna. So that only adds to the utterly petty and heinous crime he did.

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

@LW, UNTIL end of exile, all of Krishna and Arjuna's moves were those dictated by Vyasa, the character (as opposed to the poet).

If not them, one of the others would've sufficed, and story wouldn't change an iota. Bheem could easily win a mace contest for swayamvara. In fact, in Indonesian MBh, he does. Bheema or Yudhishtira could marry Subhadra.

Hero is one who does heroic deeds, not the main character. Arjuna was a hero in the story. So was Krishna. So was Bheema. So was Panchali.

Yudhishtira most definitely was not a hero.

But his birth before Suyodhana started the plot of core MBh. Then, he made decisions which moved the plot. The lac garh, the decision to attend swayamavara, the decision on ployandry (though it was on Vyasa's advice), the decision to build an empire, do the yagya, go to the dice hall, play the second game, prep for war on Vyasa's advice, etc. etc.

He is the main character.

2. Selectively quoting Krishna is done a lot. If we unquestioningly accept Krishna's words as literal and not hyperbole, following that logic, Arjuna was also impotent as per Krishna. A fool, too, IIRC from war parvas.

Don't get me wrong. I think Krishna was giving his buddy the carrot and stick treatment in both cases.

3. Vyasa was also a poet who wrote in anustubh meter and used plenty of metaphors in writing. Panchali cannot be borne of fire. That's just biologically impossible. She most likely belonged to the Angirasa clan. Yudhishtira was fathered by Vidura as is stated by Vyasa after war. Akshaya Patra means they provided food for everyone who visited, and Panchali ate last. Putana was acrually a childhood pox which is in fact stated in MBh itself.

None of this is questioning Vyasa. It's about understanding that MBh is a poem.

I respect your opinion & now I also understand where they are coming from since you clarified that you do not believe in the Divine Interventions or the Avatars.

@Bold : Didn't I just explain that I was not declaring Arjuna as Nara relying solely on Krishna's statement? There are other prominent people vouching for it too?

Your & my opinions are different because we have interpreted MB differently. It all depends on the interpretation to be honest. You do not believe in the divine interventions so a lot of things look illogical to you & hence you are discarding a lot of the important elements as impossible events.

I do not believe that Mahabharata itself, as we know today, can be deciphered into a concrete history. There very probably is a historical base for it, but that alone, is not the Mahabharata as we know. I take the whole Mahabharata as a literature piece which have its root in history as well as Indian culture and so I believe all the divine aspects involved in it. To me, Shri Krishna is actually an incarnation of Lord Vishnu, Arjuna is his human part Nara, Panchali is Sri, Surya Dev, Yamraj, Pawan Dev & Indra actually fathered Karna, Yudhistira, Bheema & Arjuna....Arjuna did visit Indralok & slayed the Nivatakachas, Arjuna did penance & got Pashupatastra from Lord Shiva & so on.
I do not read Harry Potter & discard the magical world settings as illogical. That would ruin the whole HP for me. Same with MB.

I get your pov & respect it but I don't think it's necessary for me agree to them. 2 people can have 2 different interpretations of the same thing, right? 😊

Originally posted by: Mahisa22

Doesn't matter whether adopted or not, he was a Nishad prince and Nishads were outcasts at that time. Also, spies don't go straight to the military tacticians and say, "Oh please teach me". If his intention was to spy, he could've kept his secrets to himself and not claimed to be a student of Dronacharya. Even if he did follow Drona's classes secretly, it was out of thirst for knowledge and not any spying intent. Intent is what matters here.

Also, in almost every text it is mentioned that Drona did what he did because he didn't want Ekalavya to rival Arjuna. So that only adds to the utterly petty and heinous crime he did.

No, Nishadas weren't outcasts. Hiranyadhanus - Eklavya's adoptive father - was a Nishada king allied with the emperor, Jarasandha. How is that being an outcast?

Military tactics and weaponry were what Drona taught the Kuru princes and their allies, not vedas. Eklavya approaching Drona out of thirst for knowledge was thirst for knowledge of said military tactics and weaponry.

Drona rightly refused.

Of course, he didn't want anyone rivalling Arjuna. That wasn't an Olympic archery contest. Eklavya knowing Kuru tactics better than Kurus - and by extension Jarasandha knowing them - would've been catastrophic to Hastinapuri.

Imagine a Pakistani asking for admittance to NDA and being refused and still going ahead and learning them. Imagine the Pakistani being a Muslim from lower strata. if he gets caught and punished, is that a caste crime or a punishment for espionage?

We can debate about anything but there are some undebatable things like a guy who instigated for a woman to be disrobed and raped shouldn’t NEVER be whitewashed, let alone be idolized.

A guy who abducts the wife and keeps her captive for years,when his beef was with actually the husband should NEVER be justified, regardless of how accomplished he happens to be otherwise!

As for the main protagonists of MB, its Yudhi, Duryodhana and Panchali. Arjuna and Lord Krishna are the heros!

Originally posted by: Aanandaa

We can debate about anything but there are some undebatable things like a guy who instigated for a woman to be disrobed and raped shouldn’t NEVER be whitewashed, let alone be idolized.

A guy who abducts the wife and keeps her captive for years,when his beef was with actually the husband should NEVER be justified, regardless of how accomplished he happens to be otherwise!

As for the main protagonists of MB, its Yudhi, Duryodhana and Panchali. Arjuna and Lord Krishna are the heros!

100%.

Sadly, crimes against women are not considered as important. And we wonder why said crimes don't go down.

I'd add Bheema and Panchali to heroes list. Disagree that Panchali was protag though she did make some key decisions.

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

No, Nishadas weren't outcasts. Hiranyadhanus - Eklavya's adoptive father - was a Nishada king allied with the emperor, Jarasandha. How is that being an outcast?

Military tactics and weaponry were what Drona taught the Kuru princes and their allies, not vedas. Eklavya approaching Drona out of thirst for knowledge was thirst for knowledge of said military tactics and weaponry.

Drona rightly refused.

Of course, he didn't want anyone rivalling Arjuna. That wasn't an Olympic archery contest. Eklavya knowing Kuru tactics better than Kurus - and by extension Jarasandha knowing them - would've been catastrophic to Hastinapuri.

Imagine a Pakistani asking for admittance to NDA and being refused and still going ahead and learning them. Imagine the Pakistani being a Muslim from lower strata. if he gets caught and punished, is that a caste crime or a punishment for espionage?

The thing is, no ISI agent would ever outright go to the NDA and ask for knowledge. This is the most glaring fallacy of your argument. Like I said, had Ekalavya intended to spy, then he wouldn't have built Dronacharya's statue and worshipped it. Spies don't do that. Also why would he cut off his thumb as guru-dakshina if he wanted to spy? Does that make ANY sense?

This theory is pure speculation at best and has zero proof to back it up.

Originally posted by: Aanandaa

We can debate about anything but there are some undebatable things like a guy who instigated for a woman to be disrobed and raped shouldn’t NEVER be whitewashed, let alone be idolized.

A guy who abducts the wife and keeps her captive for years,when his beef was with actually the husband should NEVER be justified, regardless of how accomplished he happens to be otherwise!

As for the main protagonists of MB, its Yudhi, Duryodhana and Panchali. Arjuna and Lord Krishna are the heros!

This I definitely agree with!

Originally posted by: Mahisa22

Eklavya did not steal any secrets. What happened to him was a caste crime, as simple as that. No need to whitewash it.

No. It wasn't a caste crime, Eklavya was the son of Vasudeva's brother who was adopted by Hiranyadhanus. Dronacharya was supposed to give knowledge to the princes of Hastinapur only, he was only allowed to teach his son other than them. Also, Eklavya was ally to the enemy of Hastinapur. It would have been treason, had he willingly taught him. In asking for his thumb, Drona played a political game along with keeping his promise to Arjun. He was trying to eliminate a threat in the future.

Their caste has a deep history, they have also corroborated with outcasts Rajputs.. they are not underprivileged people..

Originally posted by: Mahisa22

The thing is, no ISI agent would ever outright go to the NDA and ask for knowledge. This is the most glaring fallacy of your argument. Like I said, had Ekalavya intended to spy, then he wouldn't have built Dronacharya's statue and worshipped it. Spies don't do that. Also why would he cut off his thumb as guru-dakshina if he wanted to spy? Does that make ANY sense?

This theory is pure speculation at best and has zero proof to back it up.

By God. It isn't as though Eklavya wouldn't have known Drona was the guru for a rival kingdom. 😆Eklavya still went ahead and asked. When he failed to get it, he stole it. Yes, that is espionage whether he revered Drona or not, whether he asked first or not.

The spy was in enemy territory. What do you think would've happened if he refused a thumb?

It's not theory. 1. Eklavya was born Yadava, to Krishna's uncle. 2. Eklavya was adopted by Hiranyadhanus, a Nishadha king allied with Jarasandha. 3. Drona was the Kuru teacher. 4. Kuru kings and Jarasandha were enemies 5. Eklavya went to Drona in Hastinapuri to learn military tactics and weaponry. 6. Drona refused. 7. Eklavya then STAYED around and "taught himself" which is impossible to do unless he were spying. 8. He got caught 9. Drona had a responsibility to Hastinapuri 10. He asked for Eklavya's thumb. 11. Eklavya had no choice but to give it up because the alternative would be death as he was in enemy territory.

Out of this #7 and #11 are analysis. The rest are all evidenced by text.