DOTM#2 : Arjuna's skill defines heroism more than Karna's integrity - Page 9

May be, let's have a separate topic for Shantanu/Satyavati/Bhishma angle and also the birth of trio. We can discuss it either here or MB Katha forum. It a whole other interesting topic.

Originally posted by: NoraSM

Hey

I actually thought about it but I don't think the story was changed because it was being narrated to Arjuna's great grandson.

The Kavya was composed by Ved Vyasa and was told by him to his subordinates who then went to various places and participated in "Katha Vachan"

This particular incident took place in Yagna hosted by Janmejaya but what we read is actually being retold by a Katha Vachak who was present in that Yagna and he didn't have any connection to Arjuna

I don't think they'd present a distorted version of Mahabharata to Janmejaya as it was in form of a poem, it is much more difficult to change

I never said it was a distorted version

I myself said that the events mentioned were all accurate. I said the importance given was more

For example Ruchiparvan died and say Abhimanyu died. Now both had fought bravely and would have hurt their parents, but while the mourning of Abhimanyu was explained in such a detail, Ruchiparvan's death was closed in a line...

You don't need to distort a thing for making it important for a person, but just focus on some events more.

I am not sure if it was poem that was being narrated to Janmejaya or in a form of conversation, because the poem was the one which was composed basis Ugrashrawa and Shaunak's conversation. Janmejaya was literally asking questions which were being answered. I think Vaishampayan was just taking references from the Kavya of Vyasa

Originally posted by: Loving2Missing2

Thank you, much appreciated.

Nora already answered you about the Karna arresting Krishna part

And about Karna meeting Kauravas, they learnt under Drona since Duryodhan's childhood.

Even before that Karna is mentioned having making conspiracies along with Shakuni to get Pandavas removed

Rangabhoomi:

Okay, this is going to be complex. So, Drona had taken his own sweet time to find the perfect place, and used the royal architects to construct a beautiful stadium where the 100+5 could showcase their talents. Then, all the important people in the administration and business fields were invited. The common people also had the option to come and see. From all these specifications, it is clear that this was always meant to be a privately organized and selectively curated event, to showcase the next-gen royalty, and not an open-for-all gladiator match.

But on the other hand, were gladiator matches officially a thing in their time? If not, then this WAS the most efficient way for Karna to snatch away some of the glory meant for the Kuru princes. Much faster than if he had taken an ordinary job in the army and fought his way to the top. And historically, Karna does like shortcuts!

After Arjun, the showstopper, spends some time showcasing his skills to the public, Karna just bursts in with a load of insults aimed at the former. Quite uncharacteristically, here Arjuna kinda just freezes up, like he is also not sure how to even respond. Maybe, from the shock of seeing an old, angry classmate from so much time ago? Also, how does Karna even get direct access to the place? Unless of course he had already met Dury, and to humiliate Arjuna, they had a full-fledged conspiracy, including the dramatic transfer of Anga?!

Anyway, then Karna challenges Arjuna to a duel-until-death.While Karna has been away from some time now, Drona and Kripa still remember his prowess. They must definitely also have heard about his time with Parashurama, so both of them are pretty eager to not let this duel happen. With Karna and Arjuna both being untested on a battlefield, the duel could have gone either way,but if Arjuna, their star performer, lost/was murdered in plain sight of a solid 50% of Hastinapura’s citizens, it would be at the very least, extremely difficult for the Kuru family to maintain power and order in the kingdom. They simply cannot take this risk.

So, the duel can’t happen. Great. However, instead of pulling Karna to a side and explaining these things (maybe because they knew Karna’s ekbar commitment kar di toh…wala attitude), Kripa decides instead to take things a little too far. He is the one that brings up Karna’s father’s mixed lineage,and refuses to let him fight. Encouraged by this, Bheema joins him in insulting Karna (Bheema is 110% wrong here though, he shouldn’t have done that), resulting in one of the most beautifully (personally) written descriptions: Karna’s face looked like a full-bloomed lotus mercilessly rained upon. And, he just stands there, staring at the sun, as if (even unknowingly) demanding redressal for the circumstances of his birth. Here, Karna looms in complete heroic isolation,dwarfing even the actual maha-nayaka.

Here, Duryodhana comes to Karna’s rescue as we all know. He makes him Anga-raja and all that. There are two things here that intrigue me with all their dramatic potential:

1. Bheema continues to insult Karna (looping in poor Adhiratha as well), and Duryodhana says something very out-of-character (among many other in-character insults):logical and far-sighted. Which was: never go looking for the source of a river or a dynasty- you may not be able to digest what you find. This dialogue, such a stark reality-check for all the Pandavas, comes from Vyasa himself,intentionally from the mouth of his most wayward grandson…that it’s not a great achievement- being born in a ‘good’ family, that they still have a long way to go to prove themselves to be as worthy as Karna at this specific moment

2. Once Karna’s impromptu abhisheka has been done…it’s at that very moment that Adhiratha enters the ranga-bhoomi, and Karna falls at his feet, ‘sacred water still dripping from his locks’ it’s very “Look you son has made it. Despite EVERYTHING the world has thrown at him, He’s made it!” Adhiratha’s tears of happiness here is what seals it for me. Karna may or may not have deserved the throne of Anga, but Adhiratha definitely did.

Even though, the dialogue from Venisamhar is not meant for this part of the story, still I find it most appropriate for the Karna of the Rangabhoomi.

सूतो वा सूतपुत्रो वा यो वा को वा भवाम्यहम्।

दैवायत्तं कुले जन्म मदायत्तं तु पौरुषम् ।।

Sooto va Soota-putro va yo va ko va bhavamyaham |

Daivayattam Kule Janma Madaayattam Tu Pourusham ||

I read something in Dr. Bhaduri’s work that really moved me.He said that MB would be decidedly much more boring if Karna, Vyasa’s naughty little soul-child, hadn’t gone so obstinately off-script every chance that he’d gotten.

So far then the score stands:

Arjuna: 0.75

(banda literally didn’t do anything personality-wise)

Karna: 1.5

(like it or hate it, he’s the hero of this chapter!)

^^^

Interesting take Pro. Although I won't call Karna as the hero here since he was definitely there with ill intent but yes he was the central figure here.

About Duryodhan, I don't think it was the only time he had been sensible. Rather he showcasesd that multiple times, even his instructions to Dusshasan when he decided to commit suicide after Gosala Yatra handling throne to Dusshasan was very sensible. He literally told Dusshasan to always keep Praja over himself. To be available for them even if he is tired or about to hit bed and someone reaches him

Yes he was villian of the epic and hence the root of evil, but that doesn't mean he was always wrong. No one is like that..

About this episode I personally feel that handling over Anga was pre decided and yes probably this was all a plan , else how did they immediately do all arrangements of Rajyabhishek? And how was it announced without anyone batting an eye

Maybe initially Dury thought to do this once Karna defeated Arjun, but then owing to Kripa's thing, he did that earlier..

Bheema was wrong here, but then he would have known that this is a guy who has been trying to kill us since childhood, I don't think we can expect a neutral behaviour from him here.

Hey, I removed the quotes ok

Interesting take Pro. Although I won't call Karna as the hero here since he was definitely there with ill intent but yes he was the central figure here.

Yup, 100%! He would've been hated by the public though. Ironically, he got some positive PR due to Bheema and Kripa hitting below the belt.

About Duryodhan, I don't think it was the only time he had been sensible. Rather he showcasesd that multiple times, even his instructions to Dusshasan when he decided to commit suicide after Gosala Yatra handling throne to Dusshasan was very sensible. He literally told Dusshasan to always keep Praja over himself. To be available for them even if he is tired or about to hit bed and someone reaches him

Yes he was villian of the epic and hence the root of evil, but that doesn't mean he was always wrong. No one is like that..

Yeah, that's what I love about the story. Everyone has their own agenda, both positive and negative.

Bheema was wrong here, but then he would have known that this is a guy who has been trying to kill us since childhood, I don't think we can expect a neutral behaviour from him here.

Absolutely, he has the right to be angry. However, as we know that in all cases, past and present, insulting someone by invoking their caste/race/gender/sexuality/economic status etc. etc. is always wrong and unacceptable. Bheem, while insulting Karna not just needlessly pulled Adhirath into this, but he also dragged the entire Suta community through the mud, the members of which have never actually done anything to him personally.

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

I never said it was a distorted version

I myself said that the events mentioned were all accurate. I said the importance given was more

For example Ruchiparvan died and say Abhimanyu died. Now both had fought bravely and would have hurt their parents, but while the mourning of Abhimanyu was explained in such a detail, Ruchiparvan's death was closed in a line...

You don't need to distort a thing for making it important for a person, but just focus on some events more.

I am not sure if it was poem that was being narrated to Janmejaya or in a form of conversation, because the poem was the one which was composed basis Ugrashrawa and Shaunak's conversation. Janmejaya was literally asking questions which were being answered. I think Vaishampayan was just taking references from the Kavya of Vyasa

It was essentially a poem composed by Vyasa which was being passed down from one person to another, the form was poem and not a conversation because these epics were memorized and retold in form of poems

For example one of the biggest parva, Shanti parva doesn't really feature Arjuna or the discussion between Narad and Yudhishthira, the war is one part of it but in much more important issues except Geeta Gyan, Yudhishthira takes prominence as the King. I don't see any apparant bias due to lineage

The bias is among readers because we mostly focus on the war part and there, none is better than Arjuna.

Originally posted by: Loving2Missing2

Thank you for expressing your opinion on my shared views. Let us not get at loggerheads with each other but understand this thread as a paradigm churning, A Meemansa or A Manthan.

I saw your video on myths of Mahabharata (not in full owing to lack of time then). You have already studied the critical edition of Mahabharata. so we both agree that Mahabharata started as an orally transmitted tale and the recovered Original Vyasa written "Jaya" was just 8800 verses. Sukhtankar himself agreed that it was impossible to reconstruct an actual fluid text of the whole Mahabharat.

So the way Ganesha wrote Mahabharat is added later on, I wonder how many incidents are actually authentic?? Even in current times of preserving written texts there's so much deviation from historical facts in media e.g. the famous misnomer of Jodha Bai. So one can only imagine what happened in the BC and BCE era.

What's best for us is to interpret the teaching/learning we take from these epic scriptures. The scriptures can be interpreted in multiple ways...... Each one is right and from the creator's viewpoint perhaps none.

I have a firm belief that dharma starts degrading as a slow process. It's that state like cancer when there's a choice to revert back..... When you don't, it becomes a state/ a phase which the creator cascades to the worst possible limits and then creates final destruction.......

In DKDM, I loved one dialogue of Mahadev in the Jalandhar track .... A person is always given two choices..... destiny is all about the result of the choices he has made...... And a sentence that appears in the last Krishna Chapter in Mrityunjay, the Marathi Novel..... I am always telling you what's right or wrong but when you unhear me constantly, then I create death in front of you..... That moment between life transitioning to death always brings the TRUE REALISATION!

You are an erudite yourself on Mahabharata. So let us both, Instead of judging from outside, make an effort to understand character psychology. You are defending Shantanu and Satyavati whereas I held them equally responsible along with Bheeshma...... I am fully aware of and agree with the data points you gave about Shantanu Period..... Now let's discuss about whether he's allowed to have personal wishes?....... When his personal wish starts interfering with the future of Kingdom, then no! You have assumed a position which requires a lot of personal wish sacrifices...... You needed a wife? Fine! Choose any beauty who does not take away your legal heir ke rights....... Satyavati's adoptive father put forth the conditions, then Satyavati could make her father understand that she becoming the queen itself was itself a great feat achieved and if she ever got sons they would still be princes...... How can a condition be put forth based on a future occurrence? All girls born hoti toh kya karate? Bachche hote hi nahi toh kya karate?...... And with such condition, Shantanu should not start pining to such a level that his son, the prince, understood something was wrong........Devadatta/Devavrata, The prince should not have taken an oath like ab jaan gayee toh bhi nahi todunga.

Ram could not unify with Seeta for 14 years after his marriage and thereafter he had to send a pregnant Seeta to the jungles to fend for herself during which he remained faithful with Seeta........ I have a personal experience to share. I lost my mother in my childhood but my father refrained from remarrying because he wasn't sure whether any stepmother would give correct treatment. He dedicated his life to first raise me and thereafter my kids while I lived abroad for my career........... With such example benchmarks seen at multiple places, I will not spare Shantanu as never have faltered. Of course, I agree that he was a good administrator...... but then so was Raavana for Lanka and in current times, Hitler for Germany. Can they be spared as no fault of theirs?

So the destiny of these choices made by Shantanu, Satyavati and Devavrata is the birth of incapable Vichitraveerya and Chitrangada....... The cascade starts from thereon leading to a blind Dhrutarashtra and an anemic Pandu and a servant heir Vidur further.

Regarding Bheeshma and Rajdharma......... I wonder what he and Satyavati were doing when Vichitraveerya got addicted or when Chitrangada started getting air in his head?...... Aaj bhi bachche wrong path pe ja rahe hain, toh ek chamaat hum log laga hi dete hain for their own betterment...... So doesn't Bheeshma's Rajdharma include guiding these two heirs to proper kinghood...... And if he was as such the de facto King, then follow your parampara and make Dhrutarashtra the king..... Bheeshma and Pandu could easily take care of duties which he couldn't cater to...... Agar Vichitraveerya King ho sakata hai toh Dhrutarashtra kyun nahi?

If Bheeshma was truly fulfilling his duties, then he would give the example of Bharata and advise Satyavati on a deserving candidate from their huge family clans as there used to be. Or he would accept the non-fulfilment of his own oath...... By staying stuck on that oath, he only creates his name as Bheeshma...And this is his ahankaar... No benefit thereon for the great Kuru empire which had been running through generations...... In all further period, he is not decisive with anybody. With every non-choice of his, Hastinapur destiny gets worse and worse.

Dhrutarashtra and Pandu as per IVF logic given by you can be said sons of Ambika and Ambalika. But the claim that they are the heir of Kuruvansh ancestral property, Hastinapur kingdom, can be disputed even today, especially with DNA parenting becoming a vital test to prove the parentage.

Destruction is planned by Vidhata due to an overall social degradation including Varnabhed for treating Vidur as Daasiputra or Karna as Sootapootra, also treating the kingdom like personal property and not acting as public servant to Mother Earth and the Praja, gambling, disrespect for women.

Panchali and Arjun are Vidhata's mediums to bring the degradation cascade to the absolute base of Vastraharan and the real purpose of the entire Mahabharat, the Geeta.

I am not aware of Dhritarashtra not being considered the king. In that case, was Hastinapur Throne kept vacant till Kauravas and Pandavas grew old enough to show their colours? This is just my query.

Also, as per my information, Karna didn't live in the palace. He met Duryodhan and the other clan for the first time during the competition. Because he wanted to prove his archery skills against Arjuna and was denied the opportunity, his jealousy against Arjuna fired up.

Arjun had everything while Karna had none. Karna had his own set things too.:- I have a nephew who's an adopted child to middle-class parents. Today he has strived to become a successful businessman. By some conspiracy of the Universe, if he had Akash Ambani as an Opponent in some business competition, what would my nephew's winning chances be? Though his capabilities are much better because he didn't get anything on silver platter and then had to understand his being original orphan, so the mental trauma and adjustment thereafter. That's why I mentioned comparing Orange to apple.

I thought of Karna being devoted to Krishna based on my various readings and multiple serial depictions right from B R Chopra Mahabharat to Radha Krishna of StarPlus recently. If you have any PDF of the authentic Mahabharat edition, please do share across or copy paste the part where he tried to arrest Krishna. I have the belief, it was Duryodhana ordering his soldiers to arrest Krishna.

Pandavas are not Doodh ke dhoole, I agree. But that's the beauty of the scripture. I derive this trust that Narayana /Krishna is a true kamalnayan..... Like the Lotus grows in the mud-slush but the dirt doesn't touch it; so I may have multiple avagun, par voh chit nahi dharega..... he will see the goodness of my soul.

To Sima,

I humbly request once again. Could you please change the title from DOTM. The word debate gets a connotation like swords leke khade ho gaye...... Meemansa or Manthan is a much better way of having healthy sharing/discussion of paradigms. After all, what's the use of Mythology if we don't take learnings from it and implement in our lives?

In next one, if the title continues, I'll follow CB di's way and not share my views.

See when it comes to how much of it is authentic we might never know, who knows might be Karna on his overall wasn't a part of Mahabharat, we currently are best suited to believe in whatever is mentioned in the text we have now (believing more in CE since it has been worked upon academically), so that statement is completely irrelevant here.

Yes interpretation is definitely upto you, but whatever is mentioned can not be ignored to cherry pick the stuff you want.

Now coming to your second point, since now here we are talking about interpretations, let's do that. Being a king is a position of utmost responsibility and need sacrifice, so think of it, who was Satyvatavi? Daughter of King Upachari Vasu, having 5 brothers who ruled Avanti, Matasya, Chhedi surrounding the kingdom of Hastinapur from all sides, won't you want to have a friendly relation with a family whose members actually have you landlocked within (not saying this was the only reason why Shantanu selected her, but just telling you since you said how it could be),would you like to have an enimity with this family by rejecting the proposal of a girl from such unit? Rejecting such a proposal in political setup is simply declaring your enimity. And yes who was Bheeshm's mother? A simple girl with limited backing. Definitely her children would have had more support and you need friendly relations with your neighbor. And why wouldn't such an influential lady want her progeny on throne?

Stating that xyz people had stayed alone hence Shantanu should also have is again very unreal, different people have different mindset.

Chitrangada wasn't a meek ruler and was rather very powerful and just, he died while killing a demon who could have caused harm to his subjects. Yes Vichitraveer wasn't and I agree it was the failure of Satyavati, no justification there.

No the children born by IVF using sperm of others (despite the DNA test results) still remain the legal heir of the family if it was done with approval of parents/family. This was the law back then as well, the children of wife are children of husband irrespective of who their biological parents are.

About destruction for treating Vidur as Dasiputra and Karna as Sutaputra, I would have agreed had this stopped after the distruction, or if at least Krishna advised against in Geeta. That never happened. Dasiputra even after the war didn't have the right on the throne..Vidur wan't given the throne after Pandavas won, nor did Krishna advise, anyone even think of it. So that definitely had nothing to do with it.

Dhritarashtra was on the throne but without a Rajybhishek

As I already said, Karna was with Duryodhan since start. He studied under Drona and Karna and Duryodhan were friends since then. Even before that Karna and Shakuni plotted to kill Pandavas, now remember before Drona Ashram, Duryodhan was a kid, but Karna was an adult and was working for it. Karna's jealously was since then.

About your nephew, if for example your nephew is patronized by say Mukesh Ambani, who facilitates for his study, gives him all the comforts to excel and he has to (assume) compete against the son of Anil Ambani whom Akash hates for some reason and has been trying to kill him since his childhood and not just him but his entire family, he spent his life protecting and escaping. This son of Anil Ambani although studied along with your nephew yet his childhood years were spent in forest with limited interaction to others in poverty while your nephew got to grow in patronage of Mukesh Ambani. What exactly is difference here? Except for the fact that your nephew doesn't know his lineage while Anil Ambani's son is an Ambani? What exactly did he get in a silver platter? That's why I said that both of them had some things in their lives and lacked some.

Nora has already shared the part where Karna tried to arrest Krishna. Also nowhere is it mentioned that Karna was a devotee of Krishna except definitely in the TV serials (P.S. Radha Krishna is the most distorted show that has come on TV, if something is shown there, be 90% sure it was fake)

If Narayan will see Beauty of soul despite Avgun, why didn't he see that of Duryodhan and Dusshashan

Originally posted by: NoraSM

It was essentially a poem composed by Vyasa which was being passed down from one person to another, the form was poem and not a conversation because these epics were memorized and retold in form of poems

For example one of the biggest parva, Shanti parva doesn't really feature Arjuna or the discussion between Narad and Yudhishthira, the war is one part of it but in much more important issues except Geeta Gyan, Yudhishthira takes prominence as the King. I don't see any apparant bias due to lineage

The bias is among readers because we mostly focus on the war part and there, none is better than Arjuna.

When Vaishampayan was talking to Janmejaya it couldn't have been a poem. The poem was wowen around what Shaunak and Ugrashwar's conversion was and then retold to remember.

Shanti Parva doesn't mention Arjun since it didn't have anything to do with Arjun. They can not forecefit Arjun anywhere, but whereever he was, his acts was over emphasized and explained in details

Its not just the war part. Even the abduction of Subhadra is in such detail while not that of other marriages.

Originally posted by: devashree_h

May be, let's have a separate topic for Shantanu/Satyavati/Bhishma angle and also the birth of trio. We can discuss it either here or MB Katha forum. It a whole other interesting topic.

Yes please, the text of MB has only one third of this story. It is the Purana which fill the remaining 2/3 gap of Santanu Pratipa Ganga Satyavati and Bhishma story