Saif : " we will justify abduction of Sita and war with ram" - Page 17

Originally posted by: Mahisa22

What is this alternate Mahabharat that y'all seem to be coming up with? If Eklavya's caste was not important, then why would it be mentioned in the first place? And caste is the reason why Drona refused to teach him, it's EXPLICITLY mentioned. If "stealing state secrets" was so important, why did Drona act ONLY after Arjuna started crying?

I really want to know the source of this "Eklavya was not victim of caste crime" theory that IF-ians seem to have been brainwashed with, when GENERATIONS have grown up knowing it was a caste crime. Even the most ardent Hindu agrees Shambuk Vadh and Eklavya are instances of caste crimes.

The whitewashing theories make Z. E. R. O. sense.

@Bold : It makes zero sense to you probably because either you have not read the whole Mahabharata or you just simply refuse to consider other aspects & want to base your opinion, or should I say force your opinion on others, based on a certain narration of one particular page? Just because a certain belief has been propagated for generations does not make it the ultimate truth. There are always different interpretations possible. You are writing them off because you don't seem to understand the gravity of the situation Drona was faced with regarding Eklavya. Not everything needs to be "explicitly" mentioned. Drona was loyal to Hastinapur, was entrusted with the responsibility of training Hastinapur's future warriors - this is definitely a fact stated in Mahabharata. Not some theory "IFians" have been brainwashed with. You seem to be totally fine with Eklavya sticking around & announcing to strangers that he is Drona's student, which can jeopardize Drona's position, WITHOUT Drona's consent. But if Drona is being defended for the action he was ought to take, in his position, that's whitewashing is his apparent "crime"?

So what's the alternate you suggest? Drona should have let Eklavya go scot free with all the knowledge he obtained, which can very probably be used against Hastinapur? Does that make sense to you?

You did not answer my question that if Drona was so fixated on Caste, why did he accept Karna as student?

@ Italic if only the narration style in KMG is your "proof" of the caste angle, let me post another narration then? This is from Bibek Debroy's translation of the BORI Compilation.

See the narration here?

"Drona, who was learned in Dharma, thought about it & refused to accept him as student of archery, out of consideration for the others. Nothing is said about it being a caste problem. Even the footnote regarding the word "Nishada" does not say it was a low caste hence Drona refused or something on that line.

The narration in the first screenshot also says that Eklavya devoted his mind to learning archery "in accordance with proper disciplines". Can you elaborate on how Eklavya came to know what was the proper disciplines to learn archery? That's also only after meeting Drona?

And Drona did not take the drastic decision just to please a child. Arjuna was insecure after seeing Eklavya's feat, true. But that necessarily not be the reason why Drona took that action. Screenshot of that part from the BORI edition.

It doesn't say anywhere that Drona was delighted on hearing this from other Princes & changed his mind only when Arjuna complained. The others narrating the story & Arjuna complaining - all happened at the same time. And after that " Drona thought for a moment and arrived at a decision". Drona didn't need to think anything if Arjuna's complaint was the sole reason for his action. The fact that everyone readily believed Eklavya was Drona's student & Drona was teaching him was more worrying than a child's whining. That would put Drona in serious trouble with Bhisma & Dhritarashtra. That's when Drona did not even wish to have Eklavya as his student and made this very clear to him. Drona was being set up as a traitor by a stubborn boy who just refused to accept Drona's wish and Drona is being accused of committing "caste crime"? 😆

Drona doesn't need any whitewashing in this aspect. If anything, Eklavya has been victimized "for generations" to whitewash his crime.

Originally posted by: Krishnapanchali

Ramesh menon is more like retelling author s interpretation than the cannon translation

I know that it's not canonically correct. But I see it more like a 'fill in the blanks'. Ramesh Menon's version is excellent for first timers. It got the tone of the epic right. I'd rather see a first timer read it rather than say Jaya by Pattanaik's which is nothing but fan fiction and meant for those already familiar with the original epic. Menon's version cuts away a lot of boring parts,increases the pace making it more identificatble to a Lord of the Rings sort of epic fantasy. Once you fall in love with the epic you can always read a more comprehensive version. But I agree that some of his explanations fall on the fantastical and outrageous range. Matali's chariot as an inter-plantatory vehicle full of the latest gizmos.Thankfully he doesn't say that Shiva is an alien.That annoys me every time.

Originally posted by: .Lonewalker.

@Bold : It makes zero sense to you probably because either you have not read the whole Mahabharata or you just simply refuse to ignore everything & want to base your opinion, or should I say force your opinion on others, based on a certain narration of one particular page? Just because a certain belief has been propagated for generations does not make it the ultimate truth. There are always different interpretations possible. You are writing them off because you don't seem to understand the gravity of the situation Drona was faced with regarding Eklavya. Not everything needs to be "explicitly" mentioned. Drona was loyal to Hastinapur, was entrusted with the responsibility of training Hastinapur's future warriors - this is definitely a fact stated in Mahabharata. Not some theory "IFians" have been brainwashed with. You seem to be totally fine with Eklavya sticking around & announcing to strangers that he is Drona's student, which can jeopardize Drona's position, WITHOUT Drona's consent. But if Drona is being defended for the action he was ought to take, in his position, that's whitewashing is his apparent "crime"?

So what's the alternate you suggest? Drona should have let Eklavya go scot free with all the knowledge he obtained, which can very probably be used against Hastinapur? Does that make sense to you?

You did not answer my question that if Drona was so fixated on Caste, why did he accept Karna as student?

@ Italic if only the narration style in KMG is your "proof" of the caste angle, let me post another narration then? This is from Bibek Debroy's translation of the BORI Compilation.

See the narration here?

"Drona, who was learned in Dharma, thought about it & refused to accept him as student of archery, out of consideration for the others. Nothing is said about it being a caste problem. Even the footnote regarding the word "Nishada" does not say it was a low caste hence Drona refused or something on that line.

The narration in the first screenshot also says that Eklavya devoted his mind to learning archery "in accordance with proper disciplines". Can you elaborate on how Eklavya came to know what was the proper disciplines to learn archery? That's also only after meeting Drona?

And Drona did not take the drastic decision just to please a child. Arjuna was insecure after seeing Eklavya's feat, true. But that necessarily not be the reason why Drona took that action. Screenshot of that part from the BORI edition.

It doesn't say anywhere that Drona was delighted on hearing this from other Princes & changed his mind only when Arjuna complained. The others narrating the story & Arjuna complaining - all happened at the same time. And after that " Drona thought for a moment and arrived at a decision". Drona didn't need to think anything if Arjuna's complaint was the sole reason for his action. The fact that everyone readily believed Eklavya was Drona's student & Drona was teaching him was more worrying than a child's whining. That would put Drona in serious trouble with Bhisma & Dhritarashtra. That's when Drona did not even wish to have Eklavya as his student and made this very clear to him. Drona was being set up as a traitor by a stubborn boy who just refused to accept Drona's wish and Drona is being accused of committing "caste crime"? 😆

Drona doesn't need any whitewashing in this aspect. If anything, Eklavya has been victimized "for generations" to whitewash his crime.

Are you for real? The sentence reads, "However, since he was a Nishada, Drona who was learned in Dharma refused to accept him out of consideration for the others." SINCE HE WAS A NISHADA. This line EXPLICITLY mentions that Drona didn't teach him out of 'dharmic considerations'-----"since he was a Nishad and Drona knew about Dharma". This CLEARLY points to caste. And the low-caste status of Nishads or tribals is found in a gazillion texts. Read some history, tribals were always marginalized in post-Vedic society.

You are so obsessed with disproving the caste angle that literally whole sentences are now made to defy rules of grammar to change their meaning. 😆

Also, your (forced) interpretation of Drona's 'thinking' literally is just that--an interpretation. Nowhere can you actually read his mind; nor it is clarified what he was thinking.

As for Karna. he was a Suta, still permissible for intermingling with Brahmins. Nishads were the un-teachable category. They were recorded as one of the 10 outcasts.

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

Amazing how people aren't able to see beyond grandma's tales and fan fictions to the pure politics which informed the actions in MBh.😆

I think the best reaction I ever got was when i informed someone Karna's kingdom was the hub of child sex trafficking in Aryavarta. I mean, this is the dude lauded as the hero by some.

@Bold: Source?

Originally posted by: .Lonewalker.

It doesn't say anywhere that Drona was delighted on hearing this from other Princes & changed his mind only when Arjuna complained. The others narrating the story & Arjuna complaining - all happened at the same time. And after that " Drona thought for a moment and arrived at a decision". Drona didn't need to think anything if Arjuna's complaint was the sole reason for his action. The fact that everyone readily believed Eklavya was Drona's student & Drona was teaching him was more worrying than a child's whining. That would put Drona in serious trouble with Bhisma & Dhritarashtra. That's when Drona did not even wish to have Eklavya as his student and made this very clear to him. Drona was being set up as a traitor by a stubborn boy who just refused to accept Drona's wish and Drona is being accused of committing "caste crime"? 😆

Drona doesn't need any whitewashing in this aspect. If anything, Eklavya has been victimized "for generations" to whitewash his crime.

The text literally says that Arjuna kept thinking about him and then went to Drona, this was after his students had already told him about Eklavya. If Drona was so concerned about Eklavya claiming to be his student, he would have acted straight away and not AFTER Arjuna's complaint. After Arjuna reminds him of his promise, the text says "THEREUPON, Drona thought for a moment and arrived at a decision", implying that he only thought about it after Arjuna's complaint, and not before.

Just think about this logically, if Drona was really concerned about him being set up as a traitor by Eklavya for claiming to be his student, why in the blue hell would he then ask for a GURU DAKSHINA????????... I mean he is literally accepting Eklavya as a student by asking guru dakshina, and that too in front of Arjuna, he has just incriminated himself, with an eye witness. 🤣

Why not just accuse him of fraud/espionage, and deal with him appropriately? Because that isn't what the text says.

Saif and his stupid comments to get attention. Is he getting influenced from Kangana?

Originally posted by: Sharpener

Wow Saif sure is desperate for attention these days

He understands he will fade away soon as he is getting old.

Originally posted by: Mahisa22

Are you for real? The sentence reads, "However, since he was a Nishada, Drona who was learned in Dharma refused to accept him out of consideration for the others." SINCE HE WAS A NISHADA. This line EXPLICITLY mentions that Drona didn't teach him out of 'dharmic considerations'-----"since he was a Nishad and Drona knew about Dharma". This CLEARLY points to caste. And the low-caste status of Nishads or tribals is found in a gazillion texts. Read some history, tribals were always marginalized in post-Vedic society.

You are so obsessed with disproving the caste angle that literally whole sentences are now made to defy rules of grammar to change their meaning. 😆

Also, your (forced) interpretation of Drona's 'thinking' literally is just that--an interpretation. Nowhere can you actually read his mind; nor it is clarified what he was thinking.

As for Karna. he was a Suta, still permissible for intermingling with Brahmins. Nishads were the un-teachable category. They were recorded as one of the 10 outcasts.

I can ask the same to you 😆 You seem to be confused about which narrative you want to pursue and going back & forth on your own words 😆

So far you were hell bent on the explanation that this particular page explicitly mention this & hence let's ignore everything else & just take up in total literal sense. You were turning deaf ears to HearMeRoar's explanation about Eklavya's origin or infringement crimes or his kingdom's alliance with Hastinapur's arch rival.... because they were not explicitly mentioned in this particular portion even though they are facts mentioned in Mahabharata. Now that I showed that the "explicit mention" about the caste discrimination has been removed by BORI & BORI edition's narration simply reads that Drona, loyal to his Dharma & other students refused Eklavya, you want me to go reading up & looking up for references from sources outside Mahabharata? 😆

1. You are accusing me of defying grammar & making up stuffs with mind reading, but yet you are doing the same with the word Dharma. Since it's not an "explicit mention" about caste anymore, you are making the word "Dharma" analogous to caste discrimination😆 Since when Dharma or Dharmik Knowledge is only about caste? The whole Mahabharata is based on the concept Dharma vs Adharma so it's about caste?🤓You seem to not know that "Dharma" essentially means the right thing to do. Drona, being the military instructor of Hastinapur, protecting the interest of Hastinapur & eliminating any threat to its security is also his Dharma.

2. We don't need to read Drona's mind to understand his action. It is clearly stated that Eklavya introduced himself as Drona's student (AGAINST Drona's wish) → everyone believed it to be true → Arjuna even questioned his loyalty. Drona thinks about it & took his decision. No need to assume anything. The chain of events is self-explanatory. Accusations of treason was already being made when he did not even have anything to do with it & caste was the only thing he was thinking? Looks like you are the one who have read his mind 😆

My request to you is without going on back and forth on narratives please first decide what you want to take into consideration & what to not.

i) If you wish to bring references of Nishadas from outside of MB, something that has not been mentioned in the Eklavya chapter and want to base your argument on common knowledge or anything as such, you then have to take other variables like Drona being the Military instructor of Hastinapur, his duty / Dharma being loyal to Hastinapur & safeguarding its interest, Eklavya being a Prince whose Kingdom had allies with Magadha - the arch rival of Hastinapur, the strong probability that whatever he learns from Drona will be put to use against Hastinapur leading to Drona being labelled a traitor etc etc into consideration too. You can not cherry pick between them as per your convenience. If you are considering other facts, consider ALL of them.

ii) If you do not wish to consider those & want to stick to only what's been mentioned in the Eklavya portion, nothing out of it, then please do so. BORI team has removed the caste/ lowborn highborn part & retained only the part where Drona, being dharma / duty bound & considerate to others, could not take in Eklavya since he was Nishada (the footnote here mentioning them being from Mountains or Forests, practically an outsider to Hastinapur, nothing on the caste angle). That's it. It does not elaborate whether Nishada was low caste, Drona was caste supremacist & hence rejected him on grounds of low caste. It says nothing like that.

So you need to make up your mind & choose which approach you prefer and then stick to it. You cannot go back & forth between the two only to pick up the parts you like & discard the rest. Whichever approach you prefer, accept all that it entails.

Originally posted by: Heisenberg17_

The text literally says that Arjuna kept thinking about him and then went to Drona, this was after his students had already told him about Eklavya. If Drona was so concerned about Eklavya claiming to be his student, he would have acted straight away and not AFTER Arjuna's complaint. After Arjuna reminds him of his promise, the text says "THEREUPON, Drona thought for a moment and arrived at a decision", implying that he only thought about it after Arjuna's complaint, and not before.

Just think about this logically, if Drona was really concerned about him being set up as a traitor by Eklavya for claiming to be his student, why in the blue hell would he then ask for a GURU DAKSHINA????????... I mean he is literally accepting Eklavya as a student by asking guru dakshina, and that too in front of Arjuna, he has just incriminated himself, with an eye witness. 🤣

Why not just accuse him of fraud/espionage, and deal with him appropriately? Because that isn't what the text says.

Drona took the "Guru Dakshina" route since Eklavya was hell bent on identifying himself as Drona's pupil😆 It was a smart move which eliminated the threat without the higher authorities getting involved. Drona should have dragged him to Dhritarashtra or Bhisma by all means, but that would put Drona in an unfavorable position too. Arjuna was practically accusing him of treason & was questioning his loyalty, Bhisma & Dhritarashtra would have too. Is it that tough to comprehend? 🤓

Originally posted by: sub_rosa

@Bold: Source?

https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m08/m08045.htm

If that does not satisfy the person that discovers Arjuna to me, I will make him a more valuable gift, that, indeed, which he himself will solicit. Sons, wives and articles of pleasure and enjoyment that I have, these all I shall give him if he desires them. Indeed, unto him who discovers Keshava and Arjuna to me, I shall, after slaying those two, give all the wealth that may be left by them."

^ Here, Karna offers women and children to the soldiers to discover Arjuna's whereabouts.

https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m08/m08038.htm