Saif : " we will justify abduction of Sita and war with ram" - Page 13

Originally posted by: Mahisa22

Propaganda articles? This story has been known to GENERATIONS in its present form. Heck, we grew up reading it in our school textbooks. Dronacharya refused to teach Ekalavya precisely because he was an adopted Nishad, which was a tribal caste considered an outcast in general society back then.

The justifications you are offering sound more like propaganda made up by upper caste apologists to whitewash Dronacharya.

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

Fact in text - Drona refused to teach Eklavya

Another fact - Eklavya stole the info

Even if he weren't spying intentionally- I don't know😆, maybe he was too naïve to imagine it as theft of military secrets - fact 3 - he did.

Fact 4 - He wasn't advertising it. Kuru princes happened on him.

Fact 5 - Arjuna went to Drona to inform him. Appropriately! 😆 Arjuna was a prince of the kingdom. It was the responsible thing to do. He didn't complain. He reported. There is a difference.

Fact 6 - Drona confronted Eklavya, meted out punishment and made sure the knowledge could not be taught to Hastinapuri's enemies.

I think I'm going to stop here because at this point, I'm saying the same things over and over and having everything fall on deaf ears.

You're repeatedly saying things which I'm not questioning. You saying everything EXCEPT what I'm asking. 😆

Underlined: No that isn't a fact. Fact is, he was CLAIMING to be a student of Dronacharya to others. You're repeatedly glossing over this fact.

Yes, its better to stop when you don't have the answer ready.

Originally posted by: Autumn_Rose

But Lord Krishna is Parbrahm, so everything on the mind and material plane becomes him, all other Gods & Goddesses are his manifestations. He is Kaalpurush.

That's Lord Vishnu. Not Krishna. (As per my understanding)

Originally posted by: Mishh007

I have no idea what’s going on in this thread.

Seeing Saifu's comment about justifying Ravana, I was reminded of another such character who get whitewashed & glorified on a regular basis by modern writers & Indian tv show makers. I commented on that & since then this thread turned into a Mahabharata thread 🙈

Sorry😳

Originally posted by: Mahisa22

You're repeatedly saying things which I'm not questioning. You saying everything EXCEPT what I'm asking. 😆

Underlined: No that isn't a fact. Fact is, he was CLAIMING to be a student of Dronacharya to others. You're repeatedly glossing over this fact.

Yes, its better to stop when you don't have the answer ready.

Sigh

https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m01/m01135.htm

And one day, O grinder of foes, the Kuru and the Pandava princes, with Drona's leave, set out in their cars on a hunting excursion. A servant, O king, followed the party at leisure, with the usual implements and a dog. Having come to the woods, they wandered about, intent on the purpose they had in view. Meanwhile, the dog also, in wandering alone in the woods, came upon the Nishada prince (Ekalavya). And beholding the Nishada of dark hue, of body besmeared with filth, dressed in black and bearing matted locks on head, the dog began to bark aloud.

"Thereupon the Nishada prince, desirous of exhibiting his lightness of

p. 281

hand, sent seven arrows into its mouth (before it could shut it). The dog, thus pierced with seven arrows, came back to the Pandavas. Those heroes, who beheld that sight, were filled with wonder, and, ashamed of their own skill, began to praise the lightness of hand and precision of aim by auricular precision (exhibited by the unknown archer). And they thereupon began to seek in those woods for the unknown dweller therein that had shown such skill. And, O king, the Pandavas soon found out the object of their search ceaselessly discharging arrows from the bow. And beholding that man of grim visage, who was totally a stranger to them, they asked, 'Who art thou and whose son?' Thus questioned, the man replied, 'Ye heroes, I am the son of Hiranyadhanus, king of the Nishadas. Know me also for a pupil of Drona, labouring for the mastery of the art of arms.'

______________

You're claim is that because Eklavya was a bit of a show-off, he didn't commit any crime?😆

That he was unjustly punished? Stealing military secrets (art of arms) is still espionage whether Eklavya was fool enough to brag or not.

That he was punished because he was lower caste /outcast (which he was not acc to his own statement)?

Being foolish doesn't change what he did. He went to an enemy kingdom and stole info. That is fact, stated in above text. He received lighter punishment than most people who did what he did. Jarasandha, the king Eklavya was allied with, imprisoned kings who opposed him and was preparing a human sacrifice.

_______________

You've somehow managed to bring around the argument to whether what Eklavya did qualified as espionage instead of your original statement what happened to him was a caste crime.

Eklavya was neither low caste, nor underprivileged. He was first cousin to both Krishna and Pandavas, a prince of a kingdom allied with the emperor.

Eklavya was an enemy to Hastinapuri, period.

He stole secrets.

He got punished.

Unless you have citations to refute these which are actually stated in text, I fail to see how the incident was a caste crime.

https://youtu.be/zd_vwXDiUpQ

Originally posted by: ght_shona_4evr

https://youtu.be/zd_vwXDiUpQ

This guy is so irritating. I think he thinks he's Bheeshma reincarnated or some such.

Originally posted by: blue-ice.1

How is he better than the cheap politicians who use religion to spread hatred??🤢

Bollywood - media - politicians . All of them play money and power game . Some stars become politicians too . These Bollywood stars and media are pals with politicians .

I am surprised even that someone thinks Bollywood is any holier than politicians.

sunil Dutt was against Bal thakrey since mr Dutt thought thakrey was a demagogue . Well that did not stop him from going with begging bowl to help his TADA accused and Mumbai bomb blast accused , possessing illegal assault rifle and friend of Mumbai underworld son sanju baba ... to get him out of prison .

Put these stars so called ideology to test and see what kind of turncoats they are that they will put even politicians to shame .

The list of examples is endless .

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

This guy is so irritating. I think he thinks he's Bheeshma reincarnated or some such.

🤣🤣🤣

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

Sigh

https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m01/m01135.htm

And one day, O grinder of foes, the Kuru and the Pandava princes, with Drona's leave, set out in their cars on a hunting excursion. A servant, O king, followed the party at leisure, with the usual implements and a dog. Having come to the woods, they wandered about, intent on the purpose they had in view. Meanwhile, the dog also, in wandering alone in the woods, came upon the Nishada prince (Ekalavya). And beholding the Nishada of dark hue, of body besmeared with filth, dressed in black and bearing matted locks on head, the dog began to bark aloud.

"Thereupon the Nishada prince, desirous of exhibiting his lightness of

p. 281

hand, sent seven arrows into its mouth (before it could shut it). The dog, thus pierced with seven arrows, came back to the Pandavas. Those heroes, who beheld that sight, were filled with wonder, and, ashamed of their own skill, began to praise the lightness of hand and precision of aim by auricular precision (exhibited by the unknown archer). And they thereupon began to seek in those woods for the unknown dweller therein that had shown such skill. And, O king, the Pandavas soon found out the object of their search ceaselessly discharging arrows from the bow. And beholding that man of grim visage, who was totally a stranger to them, they asked, 'Who art thou and whose son?' Thus questioned, the man replied, 'Ye heroes, I am the son of Hiranyadhanus, king of the Nishadas. Know me also for a pupil of Drona, labouring for the mastery of the art of arms.'

______________

You're claim is that because Eklavya was a bit of a show-off, he didn't commit any crime?😆

That he was unjustly punished? Stealing military secrets (art of arms) is still espionage whether Eklavya was fool enough to brag or not.

That he was punished because he was lower caste /outcast (which he was not acc to his own statement)?

Being foolish doesn't change what he did. He went to an enemy kingdom and stole info. That is fact, stated in above text. He received lighter punishment than most people who did what he did. Jarasandha, the king Eklavya was allied with, imprisoned kings who opposed him and was preparing a human sacrifice.

_______________

You've somehow managed to bring around the argument to whether what Eklavya did qualified as espionage instead of your original statement what happened to him was a caste crime.

Eklavya was neither low caste, nor underprivileged. He was first cousin to both Krishna and Pandavas, a prince of a kingdom allied with the emperor.

Eklavya was an enemy to Hastinapuri, period.

He stole secrets.

He got punished.

Unless you have citations to refute these which are actually stated in text, I fail to see how the incident was a caste crime.

Let's go through the link you provided....

And hearing reports of his skill, kings and princes, desirous of learning the science of arms, flocked to Drona by thousands. Amongst those that came there, O monarch, was a prince named Ekalavya, who was the son of Hiranyadhanus, king of the Nishadas (the lowest of the mixed orders). Drona, however, cognisant of all rules of morality, accepted not the prince as his pupil in archery, seeing that he was a Nishada who might (in time) excel all his high-born pupils. But, O oppressor of all enemies, the Nishada prince, touching Drona's feet with bent head, wended his way into the forest, and there he made a clay-image of Drona, and began to worship it respectfully, as if it was his real preceptor, and practised weapons before it with the most rigid regularity. In consequence of his exceptional reverence for his preceptor and his devotion to his purpose, all the three processes of fixing arrows on the bowstring, aiming, and letting off became very easy for him.

So from that very page, the text tells us that Eklavya was a Nishada, that he was of a "low caste", that according to the "rules of morality", Drona rejects him, because he was a Nishada, fearing he will excel all his "high-born" pupils. A distinction is made between him and his "high-born" pupils, because despite being a prince of a forest-tribal community, the Nishada's were not considered "upper-caste" by mainstream society.

The passage also states that after being rejected he goes back to the forest where he builds a clay image of Drona, where he worships and practices his art in front of it. How is this considered espionage? LOL.... how does being self-taught get characterised as stealing state-secret? 🤣

And where is it mentioned in the Mahabharata that Eklavya is related to Krishna and Pandavas?