Lord krishna--real hero or villain of mahabharat??

Lord Krishna - The Real Villain of Mahabharata

here is the post--and link(http://aaruljothi.blogspot.in/2011/02/lord-krishna-real-villain-of.html )

{post by the person--}following--

Some time back I saw a Hindi movie "Rajneeti". The story line is based on the great Indian epic "Mahabharata". In an after-movie discussion with my friends I was telling them why I don't like Lord Krishna, though he is supposed to be "the GOD". I had this thought for quite a few years when I started asking questions "Why" for everything. This blog is based on this. I am putting forward my thoughts on "Why Lord Krishna is the real Villain?"

Originally posted by: .Vrish.

Actually, in the Karna story, I consider 2 people culpable - first Kunti, and then Krishna.

Kunti's fault was that she refused to recognize Karna & give him his rights, and gave Duryodhan an opening w/ which to challenge them.  I'll accept that Kunti got totally shocked by Karna's appearance at the contest, and that was no place to reveal her own youthful indiscretions.  However, don't tell me that Kunti never had any private moments w/ her sons.  That night, had she summoned her sons, and told them what she told them after his funeral, the whole matter could have been set right.  Then she could have invited Karna, revealed to him his identity, and offered him a place in the family.  Even if Karna couldn't have taken Yudhisthir's place on the throne (as per the rules regarding adoption & inheritance), he would still have had an honorable place amongst the Pandavas, like Bhima & Arjun.  True, Duryodhan made him the ruler of Anga, but had Kunti too stretched out her hand honorably, Karna would have been in a better position to mediate b/w Duryodhan & the Pandavas.  Or Duryodhan would have gotten back Anga, and had to look for new plots.

On a side-note, there would have been the question of Adhiratha & Radha, but there too, Kunti could have invited them and thanked them for taking care of Karna, and offering them something like partial parental rights.  Also, by then, Karna probably had his brothers (by Radha), and they too could have been given honorary positions.  Even in Indraprastha.

As for Krishna, his culpability is secondary.  Given the dilemma that Kunti was in, he should have persuaded her to fess up to both Yudhisthir & Karna and helped do what I suggested above.  They could have done that either privately, or publicly.  Yeah, while Kunti may have been berated, particularly by Shakuni, for having Karna out of wedlock, and chances are that she may have had to leave Hastinapur, w/ or w/o her sons, it would have prevented the genocide @ Kurukshetra.

One thing I disagree w/ the above post - Karna did not fight and defeat all the Pandavas, as the serials - both BRC & RS-SK - showed.  He only defeated Nakul (on day 16) and Yudhisthir (on day 17).  On day 14, his battle w/ Bhima was deadlocked, and that too after Duryodhan sent some 14 of his brothers - including Vikarna - to defend him, and all got killed by Bhima right in front of him.  In that Bhima vs Karna battle, while Karna did remember his promise to Kunti, Bhima too remembered that it was Arjun who had vowed to kill Karna, and so refrained from killing him himself.

As I pointed out in a DBSK thread, when the Pandavas did their Rajasuya conquests, Karna's kingdom Anga was in the path of Bhima's conquests.  At that time, Karna had no idea who he was - neither Krishna nor Kunti had revealed anything to him.  Nor had Duryodhan pledged to kill Bhima.  In fact, Karna even had his kavach-kundalas.  So had Karna been that all conquering warrior that modern serials proclaim him to be, he should have easily - or w/ difficulty - been able to kill Bhima - there was no vow preventing him from doing that.  But what happened was that every kingdom that the Pandavas invaded recognized their suzerainty - including Karna's.  So what was he so afraid of - wasn't that a golden opportunity for him to do a competing Rajasuya Yagna of his own, and fight and kill all the Pandavas in the process?

But Kunti, by her actions, was a characterless woman, and an even bigger traitor to her family than Vibhishan is (wrongly) alleged to be.  In keeping her secret, she caused the deaths of at least 5 of her grandsons, and even Abhimanyu's, if one factors in Karna's role in disarming him.  While I'm no fan of BRC, one thing he depicted right was have Yudhisthir accuse Kunti of being primarily responsible for every death in that battlefield, and then cursing women that they'd never be able to keep secrets.  The last was a tad unfair - but Yudhisthir couldn't curse Kunti, even though she deserved to be cursed.

I think that after the war, Kunti should have been thrown in a dungeon, and never allowed to see the sunlight again.  She certainly shouldn't have been allowed to leave w/ Dhritarashtra, Gandhari & Vidura - her proper punishment would have been incarceration & isolation for life.  A woman who couldn't accompany her sons during their exile b'cos she was a princess, and yet could do the same thing 29 years later.  What a crock!!! 😡

Originally posted by: SRUJAconscience

God is faultless. He is pure and unsullied.

Ifs and but do not exist in the system of God. Nor is God Almighty the form of human beings. God Almighty is a source of colossal primordial energy much beyond the comprehension of most human beings. The concept of God Almighty and Cosmos becomes clear only when one gains enlightenment (kaivalya jnana) and finally salvation (moksha)... never before!

Lord Krishna was an embodiment of Dharma (righteousness). He had nothing to do with killing of people. In the face of adversities facing mankind he only advised king Arjuna not to lay down arms but fight his enemy for the sake of countrymen and the country! Lord Krishna advised king Arjuna that Dharma (righteousness) had to be upheld at all costs,come whatever may!

In the fight between Dharma (righteousness) and adharma (lawlessness), the position of Lord Krishna was of a Avatar.(God manifest in human form). It is the law of karma that holds good in the cosmic system. As we sow so shall we reap nothing less or more!

God Almighty always acts as a Dhrista (onlooker),never interfering with the creation of his! Whatever the residual balance of karma of one at a given moment of time,accordingly is the destiny. One with a sunny disposition and godly thinking reaps fruits of good karma most of the time. Those indulging in adharma (lawlessness) eventually bite the dust.

The life of every human being is directly governed by the law of karma. Even the likes of Lord Krishna can never change the karma of one. Lord Krishna, an Avatar of his era only acted as a guide, in the routine affairs of life. In the eyes of Lord Krishna, both Pandava king Arjuna and Kaurava King Duryodhana were equal,always and ever! 

Originally posted by: SRUJAconscience

"Lord Krishna appears as an old aged brahmin in front of Karna and asks him for the fruits of all the dharma that he has done and as usual Karna gives that and dies."

This episode is not from the Vyasa Mahabharata. 

This is from 'Villi Bharatham' a Tamil poetic translation by Villiputhur Alwar.

A Brahmin appears before Karnan when he is about to die having been pierced by Arjuna's arrow, while trying to lift his chariot's wheel. The Brahmin requests for some dhana from Karna. Karna, the supreme man of charity, cries that he does not have anything to give this Brahmin.

The Brahmin reminds him that he can give him the mountain like punya which he has accumulated throughout his life with his matchless dhana. Karna feels happy that he has now got something to give this Brahmin. He spontaneously does so without any further thought. And at that moment he sees the Brahmin transforming into Lord Hari.

Why did Hari (Krishna) do it? Why did he ask Karna for dhana even at that desperate moment? Why did he take away all his punya? Is it a cruel act of Krishna? No. It is very easy to get misled by such erroneous thoughts or misunderstanding. It is actually an act of karunya by Lord. Throughout his life Karna indeed did limitless dhana. But he had not performed them as an arpana to Lord Hari. This limits the benefits he will eventually derive out of that punya. But Krishna by asking for and accepting all his punya, makes Karna do the supreme dhana, that of donating all his punya to Bhagavan Himself. This elevates his dhana to a supreme level, as a Bhagavath Arpana. To bless Karna with his bhagya is the real intention of Lord Krishna, while He himself risks being seen as heartless. This is the true karunya nature of God Sri Hari.

At this juncture, Krishna induces Karna to ask whatever boon he wants. And Karna asks whether there is any boon bigger than dying in the lap of God Krishna with the vision of His Divine face.

Villi Bharatham, Book 17, Verses 250 & 251:

Krishna then said, 

" I was instrumental for the following;

1) Indra got Kavach kundal from you as a gift.

2) Kunti prayed you not to use Nagastra twice and got that boon.

3) I informed your birth secret long before.

4) Lowered the ratha and thus saved Arjuna from Nagastra.

I have done these things for the sake of you. If Jivatma does wrong due to friendship, I have to rectify those." 

Thus Lord Krishna elevated Karna to the level of Sarabhanga Rishi who submitted all his punya to Lord Rama.