I do think that there's a possibility that Duryodhan would have grudgingly accepted Pandava rule in Indraprastha, and not risked a war. I happen to think that there may not have been a war had Karna not been around, since Duryodhan always had doubts about the loyalties of Bheeshma, Drona, Kripa and even Ashwatthama, all of whom would counsel him to make peace w/ the Pandavas
I do think that there's a possibility that Duryodhan would have grudgingly accepted Pandava rule in Indraprastha, and not risked a war. I happen to think that there may not have been a war had Karna not been around, since Duryodhan always had doubts about the loyalties of Bheeshma, Drona, Kripa and even Ashwatthama, all of whom would counsel him to make peace w/ the Pandavas
i agree with this. i dont think he doubted ashwatthama but bheeshma, drona yes. he knew their heart was with pandavas specially bheeshma. Also karna was the only one who could ideally match up to arjun and defeat him. So he wouldnt have thought of war Karna was not there with him.
Definitely Karna is the second most important antagonist in the Epic. Mahabharata can not be the same without him.
1) No Vastraharan or name calling for Draupadi. Without that probably Krishna ji wouldn't be so much against Kauravas. He might still support Pandavas in their claim, but it wouldn't be so personal. Might be even the Panchal army wouldn't be so supportive of Pandavas since in absence of that comment and Vastraharan attempt, the major fault would be of Yudhishtir. Aside had the VH not been attempted, Dhritrashtra was in no compulsion to give three boons to Draupadi, so might be Draupadi would not have been enslaved, but the Pandavas would have remained slaves
2) As already pointed out without Karna, Duryodhan might not be confident enough to challenge Pandavas and would have returned them at least Indraprasth. Karna had got nearly the entire country under Hastinapur during his Vijay Yatra hence majority of the kings supported Kauravas
3) Without Karna in the picture, probably the Kaurav Pandav enimity wouldn't have escalated to such high intensity. Duryodhan might have been against the Pandavas, but Karna always supported him and helped him in further infuriated Dury. The elders including Gandhaari, Dhritrashtra and even Shakuni wanted the enimity to lessen
Karna was the second in command to Duryodhan just as Arjun was to Yudhishtir, one might say what would change if Arjun wasn't there. (Not comparing Arjun and Karna, just saying Karna was the same to Duryodhan what Arjun was to Yudhishtir, and while we might have multiple things in the nutshell Mahabharata was only the battle of throne between Yudi and Dury)
Edited by FlauntPessimism - 3 years agoBut Karna wasn't there for 61% of the war, The war went on for 18 days, Bheeshma alone carried Kaurava army for 10 days, after Bheeshma 3 people stepped in and couldn't do anything
Duryodhana went with Bheeshma without Karna for 10 days of the war, if he didn't trust Bheeshma, he wouldn't have gone in the war without Karna
Yudhishtira wouldn't think about going to the war without Arjuna
But Karna wasn't there for 61% of the war, The war went on for 18 days, Bheeshma alone carried Kaurava army for 10 days, after Bheeshma 3 people stepped in and couldn't do anything
Duryodhana went with Bheeshma without Karna for 10 days of the war, if he didn't trust Bheeshma, he wouldn't have gone in the war without Karna
Yudhishtira wouldn't think about going to the war without Arjuna
That is not the case. Duryodhan knew Bheeshm was a better warrior and commander in chief, plus he was a name under which majority of his army could have agreed for, he didn't have any anyone else of that calibre. Despite of his distrust for Bheeshm, he was the best option he had.
Karna denied to fight under his leadership in the last moment by then the war was declared and things had escalated. He couldn't have backed off then.
Aside it was not like Karna was not at all with him. Karna was very much present in Kurukshetra and they must have been discussing the strategies too. Duryodhan knew that if at all he found Bheeshm proving to be a betrayer, he would easily trade him for Karna. Since Bheeshm never betrayed hence that wasn't needed
To be on someone's side doesn't mean only to fight from their side
This situation is different from one where Karna was not at all present in the picture. He couldn't have thought of going into the war in such scenario. Aside as I said it was Karna during his Vijay Yatra who had won majority support for Kauravas winning over many Pandava allies too.
Anyway, The question is not from war perspective
I am just trying to understand if there's any drastic change without Karna in Mahabharata
Actually that's what I answered, probably there would have been no war at all had Karna not been there
1) Not such personal humiliation of Draupadi
2) Non confidence of Duryodhan to enter the war
3) No one to further agitate Duryodhan against Pandavas
No war means no Mahabharata
But Karna wasn't there for 61% of the war, The war went on for 18 days, Bheeshma alone carried Kaurava army for 10 days, after Bheeshma 3 people stepped in and couldn't do anything
Duryodhana went with Bheeshma without Karna for 10 days of the war, if he didn't trust Bheeshma, he wouldn't have gone in the war without Karna
Yudhishtira wouldn't think about going to the war without Arjuna
That was an accident of fate. Like others pointed out above, Duryodhan wanted someone who could match Arjun.
The way Duryodhan looked at it, he could take care of Bhima, while his 99 brothers could combined defeat Yudhisthir, Nakul and Sahadev (never mind that none of the Pandavas would have trouble defeating any of his brothers). His only doubt was Arjun, and that was where Karna came in.
Duryodhan didn't have a choice about the war: he had already rejected Krishna's peace initiative, and it was after that that Karna refused to fight under Bheeshma. What was Duryodhan suddenly gonna do - return Indraprastha to the Pandavas and apologize for Draupadi?
Point being - had Karna not existed, Duryodhan would never have had the confidence that there was any loyal friend who could address his Arjun issue. And in that situation, it's unlikely that he'd have started a war w/ warriors whose loyalties he never trusted
