Saif : " we will justify abduction of Sita and war with ram" - Page 19

Originally posted by: .Lonewalker.

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? 🤓

I must say, there are some great fan-fictions writers on here. 😆

So according to you, Arjuna was "practically accusing him of treason", and what does Drona do? he takes Arjuna with him and confirms his suspicions by asking for Eklavya for Guru Dakshina? 😆... Nevermind that Arjuna literally does not accuse him of treason or any such thing, and there is no basis for this claim in the epic, because at this point we're just making stuff up as we go along. 😆

I mean, the BORI version itself explicitly states Eklavya's caste, so does every other version that I've come across, why would his caste be mentioned at all if it wasn't a reason for his rejection, it's just common sense.  Why does Drona act only AFTER Arjuna meets him alone and reminds him of his promise, the narrator, Vaisampayana himself is telling us all this.  Your claims are not backed up by the source material.

Originally posted by: return_to_hades

Karna always aspired to be bigger than who he was. He wanted to be a great warrior. But was always dismissed and chided because he was a sutaputra and it was foolish for him to have such lofty notions. 

Interestingly, despite being Brahmins Drona and Kripa faced a lot of poverty and harassment in their lives. 

From my understanding, a lot of people went to the Gurukul at Hastinapur. But Drona's exclusive tutelage in weaponry and warfare was reserved for the Hastinapur princes. I see it more like Drona rejects Karna because he had signed an exclusive contract. 

Again from my understanding, it was Sakuni who inspired Bhima's poisoning. Duryodhana and Karna don't really become BFFs until Karna challenges Arjuna in the showcase. 

They are not mutually exclusive. Draupadi insulted Karna because he couldn't string the bow. Many couldn't string the bow - but Draupadi chose him to taunt. 

True. 

True. 

Karna has a reputation of being "danveer" well before this. He consistently and generously gave more than anyone of his era. Also can we not ignore the fact that Indra disguised himself as a Brahmin to ask Karna for his kavacha and kundala. Let's not dismiss Indra's schemes and treachery. Karna never refused to part with his kavacha and kundala. But because Surya had warned him he knew Indra would offer him a trade. I don't think this one trade-off where Indra was duplicitous can erase a lifetime of generosity. 

True. But it's not pure malevolence. Karna believes it is better to die on the battlefield than give up without a fight. 

Bheeshma later admits that he needled Karna intentionally as he didn't want Karna battling his own brothers for Duryodhana. Before taking command, Karna has a long conversation with Bheeshma on his deathbed, and the two reconcile. Bheeshma even blesses his grandson Karna for battle. 

I feel like there are other crimes of Karna you missed - like conspiring to kill 16-year-old Abhimanyu in a way that broke all the rules of engagement in war. It is said that dharma left the battlefield that day and no war henceforth would be honorable. He also encourages the midnight battle which again broke the agreed-upon code of when the two sides would fight. 

Karna is by no means heroic. As a woman, I found his abuse of Draupadi exceptionally distasteful. Encouraging sexual assault of a woman just because she rejected/insulted you is like modern-day incel behavior. But he is by no means a villain either. There are many honorable things he does. And ultimately he is a victim of circumstance. Would he have been a better person if the circumstances in his life were better - if his birth mother acknowledged him and he had access to the dreams he aspired to? Most people who see him as a tragic hero answer yes to that. I prefer the term tragic anti-hero as some analysts have given him.

.  Drapaudi did NOT and absolutely DID NOT taunt anyone And there nothing honourable about karna. that just some another bogus faniction

Originally posted by: .Lonewalker.

😆 😆

At this point you have ditched Eklavya & are focusing only on Nishadas as a whole.😆

Nishadas were not a single tribe. In most of the ancient texts, all the indigenous tribes have been grouped together under the generic term Nishadas. Nishadas had several branches & they ruled quite a few kingdoms. Mountains & Forests were their abode. Not all of them were considered lowborn or outcast. gradually assi

As per Linguist S. K. Chatterji the Nishadas were different from the Dasas and the Dasyus. Ancient texts like Shrauta, Apastamba Shrauta Sutra, Latyayana Shrauta Sutra etc project them as powerful tribes. certain Vedic Rituals like Vishvajit sacrifice required the performer to live with the Nishadas & share their food. The Satapatha Brahmana mentions them among the groups whom the Vedic priests taught Itihasa, the Atharvaveda, the art of snake-charming (sarpa-vidya), and demonology (deva-jana-vidya). There are texts like The Manava-Shrauta-Sutra which explicitly prescribes a Shrauta (Vedic) sacrifice for a Nishada chief. 
The existence of these texts clearly suggests that efforts were made to assimilate the Nishadas into the Indo - Aryan Social Framework.  As per historian Ramaprasad Chanda, the Nishadas were too numerous and too powerful to be eliminated, enslaved, or expelled by the Indo - Aryans. Panini's Ganapatha even mentions a particular gotra called Nishada, which your suggested scholar D. D. Kosambi, interpreted into some of the Nishada priests being assimilated as Brahmanas in the Indo-Aryan society. 😆

In Mahabharata, Eklavya belonged to royal lineage & had alliances with other kingdoms. He was even invited to Yudhistira's Rajsuya Sacrifice & he attended it. Even if some of the Nishadas branches had limited social status or were relegated to the status of untouchable later on, Eklavya did not belong to those branches.

I thought we were talking about this Eklavya character in particular, not all the branches of Nishadas? 🤔 You again have gone off topic & now this pointless argument is getting really boring 😆

None of what you said remote proves the fact that Nishadas were not considered untouchables or at least low-born. Mahabharat explicitly mentions that they were created from the thighs of Vena, and hence they were lower in stature. Arts such as snake-charming have traditionally been the hold of lower caste groups. Atharvaveda was taught to them because it was the LOWEST form of the Vedas, dealing in magick and the occult-ish practises. My goodness. 🤣 

And, where did I ever say Dasyus were the same as Nishadas? Dasyus were comparable to Asuras, not Nishadas. The two were completely different, I never once mentioned Dasyus or Dahyus. 🤪 In your rush to prove you were aware of history, you copy-pasted a lot of utterly irrelevant information here. 

Also, have you correctly read what you copy-pasted from Wikipedia and Abhipedia? The Indo-Aryans attempted several times to expel and enslave them, but since they were too powerful, there were LIMITED attempts to ingrain them into Indo-Aryan societies. The instances you mentioned were OUTLIERS (such as one person being required to live with Nishads for a specific religious purpose). Do you know the Brahmanic rules regarding Nishads? Also here's a sentence from Wikipedia: "These references suggest that the Indo-Aryans made efforts to assimilate the Nishadas into their own social order, but the Vedic ritual status granted to the Nishadas was limited in nature". Also, read the "social section" part of the Wikipedia page that you quoted from. 

That means, while they were considered a part of the social framework, INTER-MIXING WITH THEM WAS A STRICT NO-NO.  Which explains the sentence, "Drona could not teach him since he was a Nishada." Do you under stand the difference between alliances and being on the same social level? There's a hell lot of difference between the two. This is why you should read actual history books and not copy-paste from random sites which aren't reliable half the time. 

As for Ekalavya being invited when he became king, that is purely because of military and political purposes. Military alliances are one thing, but social mixing with higher Indo-Aryan castes and being allotted the same stature was completely another thing. Let me explain with an example. Mayawati and the BSP will be called to participate in any all-party meet in the UP, but does that mean that Dalits are no longer oppressed in that state? 

If you still fail to understand, there's nothing I can do. 

I have only read a handful of posts here, so don’t know if this has been mentioned or not...

If Draupadi’s disrobing itself is an interpolation as some scholars and non-scholars believe ( with good reason), then the biggest accusation against Karna doesn’t stand, does it?

Would like to clarify a few misconceptions

1. About some famous Nishadas other than Eklavya

Dasaraja - chief of fishermen on the banks of Yamuna was a Nishada and foster father of Satyavati.

He is foster grandfather to Krishna Dwaipayana whom we know as Veda Vyasa. Satyavati conceived Krishna Dwaipayana with Brahmin Parasara who duly acknowledged and raised his son.

Satyavati then moved on to marry Santanu after Kshatriya prince Devvrat agreed to Nishada Dasaraja's terms that his grandson will rule the kingdom of kurus.

Nala of the famous Nala Damayanti fame was King of eastern Nishadas

He was chosen by Damayanti, the yadava princess of Vidarbha after she rejected Indra and other devas. Their daughter Nalayani Indrasena married Brahmin Rishi Maudgalya.

2. About Nagas, Nishadas, Danava, Daitya, Rakshas, Asura  and Aditya tribes.

They all have common brahmin origin with Rishi Kashyap and his 13 wives. There is no native tribe of nagas asura daitya etc and outsider aryan devas.

All were aryan. 

All of them had their own kingdoms and routinely fought to take over others kingdoms. They freely intermarried without any restrictions

All of them had brahmins, kshatriya, vaishya and shudra varna people within the tribe.

All of the kingdoms had cities and urbam centres, villages and forests occupied by the same tribe.

Do note that one city is not one kingdom

Eg. Kuru tribe descended from Aditya Manu Vaivasvan's daughter Ila

Their cities were Hastinapur, Kaushambi, Villages Varnavrat, Shakraprasth, Forest Kurujangala, barren uninhabited land Kurukshtera within one kingdom.

A famous Asura Bali (Vamana Avatar) had 5 sons who settled in eastern India and established kingdoms of Anga, Vanga, Pundra, Suhma and Kalinga.

If we take Anga (made famous by Karna) one of earlier descendent of Bali and ruler of Anga was Romapada, who was best friend of Dasarath. He being a Asura had a Brahmin son in law Rishyaringa who did Dasrath's putrakameshti Yagya. Rishyaringa also became King after Romapada.

This Anga at one point was divided into two kingdoms and each had a capital city Malini and Champapuri. Karna was adopted by Adhirath who was younger son of King Satyavrat of Anga and born to his brahmin wife and hence Adhirath was a Suta Prince. But he excelled in charioteering and was famous for it.

Anga was not the only Asura kingdom with two major cities (ofcourse some parts were forests with members of same tribe living there) Pragjyotishpur, Shatpur, Shonitpur were famous cities and capitals of Asura kingdoms

Famous Rakshasa Kingdoms were Lanka and Sauba (the kingdom that did aerial attack on Dwarka)

Similarly Nagas ruled their own teritories, most of them south of Godavari. Mathura was also established by Nagas but conquered by Raghuvanshi Shatrughan and then later by Haihaya Yadava. Local Naga chief Aryaka's daughter married King of Mathura Shurasena and her son was Vasudev and daughter Kunti. Ugrasen and his brother Devaka later overthrew Shurasen and took over Mathura.

Arjuna had accepted widow naga Ulupi as his wife and also married Vasuki Naga's sister after Khandavdahan.

Bhogavathi was a famous Naga city ruled by Vasuki.

 Do note region south of Godavari were designated Pataal and Regions beyond Himalayas Swarga. 

Some Brahmin Asura/Rakshas  were Shukracharya, Prahlad, Vibhishan, Ravan

Some Aditya tribe Vaishya (Into trade and husbandry) Vasudev's brothers and friends (Nanda and Yashoda).

Only so called non aryan forest tribes were Vanara (the name actually means man of the forest) and Riksha (Krishna's wife Jambavati was Riksha)

Eklavya was rejected by Drona, but Karna was not.

There were two ways of acquiring knowledge in that era 

1. Was through a guru (Drona, Agnivesha, Sandipani,Parshuram were contemporary famous gurus

2. Tapasya or self study (Vishwamitra, Jayadrath, Arjuna to Shiva)

If Guru Shishya method was chosen, the basic knowledge was given to all whom the Guru chose, but specialised was restricted to own family and most meritorius student.

Drona refused Eklavya for caste, he did not even have to give any excuse, it was his choice guided by preference of his employer. Eklavya went ahead and learned by self study but proclaimed Drona as his Guru to Drona's students. Forcing Drona to acknowledge him as a student which he was not. So Drona countered it by asking for his thumb thereby trapping him with the punishment he deserved for going against Drona's explicit refusal.

But his best weapon was Brahmashira, that he gave to his son Ashwatthama.by default. And to Arjun after he alone passed the bird eye and crocodile text. 

He refused Karna by citing caste again. But he had a right to. And he specifically adds that only special brahmins and special kshtriya who deserve it will be given it. Not everybody. Kshtriya Yudhishtir and Duryodhan were not given the weapon

Karna understands the system and probably realises he does not have merit like Arjun and tries nepotism with Parshuram, saying I am Bhargava Brahmin. Parshuram was a Bhargava Brahmin, gets caught and gets cursed.

But do note Karna was adopted by Royal family. He was raised as prince. He studied with the prince. And he usurped the throne of Anga from his cousin with Duryodhan's help. 

There is a very famous Suta and Suta Putra. Queen Kaikeyi wife of Dasratha was Suta Princess. Kaikeya kingdom was ruled by Sutas. Rama's brother Bharat is a SutaPutra from the mother's side.

All yadava were Suta. Matsya Queen, mother of Abhimanyu's wife Uttara was a Suta.

Originally posted by: BettyA1

I have only read a handful of posts here, so don’t know if this has been mentioned or not...

If Draupadi’s disrobing itself is an interpolation as some scholars and non-scholars believe ( with good reason), then the biggest accusation against Karna doesn’t stand, does it?

The point made for this point is that disrobing is not mentioned afterwards but that's not true since there is quite a few mention including duryodhans. And no that does not says anything about karna. His suggestion is still mentioned in every version of the epic only parts that are debated is divine intervention which could be latter interpolation. Panchali saved herself and her husbands. That much is a fact.  

Plus that was not the only thing he did. He is described as delighted while drapaudi is being dragged. He calls her a wh*r he asks her to choose another lord. He even asks dusshan to drag drapaudi to "inner chamber where they will enjoy her" plus he suggests disrobing. 

He was ready to sell his wife amd children to anyone who will give him arjun s location on the battlefield. 

He was even involved in bheem s poisoning And the list goes on. 

Recaping once again the great angraj s role in dice hall - 

1) On seeing Krishna look at her miserable husbands, Duhshasana dragged her with even greater force, so that she almost lost her senses. He repeatedly called her “slave” and laughed uproariously. Karna was delighted at these words and approved of them by laughing out loudly.

Vyasa describes karna as delighted and laughing basically as a sadist. 

2) It has been ordained by the gods that a woman should only have one husband. However, she submits to many and it is therefore certain that she is a courtesan. It is my view that there is nothing surprising in her being brought into the sabha in a single garment, or even if she is naked.

O Duhshasana! This Vikarna is only a child, though he speaks words of wisdom. Strip away the garments from the Pandavas and Droupadi.”

Gives the idea of disrobing

3) 

On hearing Vidura’s words, none of the kings uttered a single word. Karna told Duhshasana, “Take Krishna away to the quarters meant for the servant girls.”

He does not stop even after the attempt to disrobing

4) ‘Karna said, “There are three who can own no property—a slave, a student and a woman. O fortunate one! You are the wife of a slave and have nothing of your own. You have no lord and are like the property of slaves. Enter226 and serve us. That is the task for you in this household. O Princess! All the sons of Dhritarashtra are now your masters and not the sons of Pritha. O beautiful one! Choose another one for your husband, one who will not make  you a slave through gambling. Remember the eternal rule among slaves. Sexual acts with one’s masters are never censured. Nakula, Bhimasena, Yudhishthira, Sahadeva and Arjuna have been won over. O Yajnaseni! Enter as a slave. The ones who have been won over can no longer be your husbands. Valour and virility are of no use to Partha227 now. In the middle of the sabha, he has gambled away the daughter of Drupada, the king of Panchala.”’

Asks her to choose another husband. Says to enter as a slave and how it is not wrong for them to have s*x with slave. 

This guy is still very much responsible. Still a sadist. Still an eve teaser. Deserved the death that he got. 

Oppression and discrimination against of people on the basis of their birth in a particular caste is unfortunately real.

It happens now, it happened during Britishers and Mughal times, and it definetly happened during the period of Ramayana and Mahabharata also.

As Bhishma tells Draupadi in Dyut Sabha when she asks him if her humiliation is Dharma or Nyaya. He says Dharma is decided by the powerful, those who are weak have no say in what Dharma or Nyaya is.

So when people make charachters like Eklavya (A crown prince, king and commander of Jarasandha), Ravana (A brahmin uppercaste criminal) or Karna (A suta upper caste criminal)  I really am disappointed.

All the three charachters were raised in a priviledged family, recieved good education, became rulers and yet instead of doing something to improve the lives of opressed and discriminated, they became criminals, power hungry and glory seeking misogynist evil villains, who deserved the death that they got. All three of them including Eklavya. 

Karna and Ravana every one knows. Krishna's killing of Eklavya is not so well known. This story is in Harivansh. After Jarasandh's death. Eklavya had been waiting in the sidelines for revenge. He joined hands with Kings of Kashi and Pundra and waited for a day when Krishna would not be at Dwarka. When Krishna went to Kailash, he attacked Dwarka with his allies, to burn it to ashes and kill the residents. But Krishna reached in time. While his allies and army continued to fight, Eklavya left the battle mid way and hid himself like a coward. Krishna then went after him and found him and killed him. 

That was the mentality of this guy. Hiding like a thief to learn, hiding like a robber to raid when people were not protected, hiding like a coward while his allies were being killed.

If you want to make someone a mascot against casteism choose Krishna Dwaipayana who was abandoned by his Nishada mother, but who pursued education and became The Veda Vyasa whom later his own mother who abandoned him was proud to acknowledge as her son to the whole world

Or make Vidura the One born to the Shudra maid your mascot, who stood up against his own family and king to stop injustice to a woman and tried to protect her when everybody else was either laughing at her or sulking in shame.

There are many more such brave men, chandragupta maurya the son of a shudra who became the emperor of India. Even women like Shabari and Panna. 

Instead of them you make a hero out of evil charachters like Ravana Karna and Eklavya....

Ravana Karna and Eklavya did not face any discrimination or opression. They led very priviledged life filled with all comforts that any royal family in that enjoyed. They were insulted, punished and killed for their crimes. 

And please none of their crimes can be justified by any excuse, least of all caste

Originally posted by: Krishnapanchali

The point made for this point is that disrobing is not mentioned afterwards but that's not true since there is quite a few mention including duryodhans. And no that does not says anything about karna. His suggestion is still mentioned in every version of the epic only parts that are debated is divine intervention which could be latter interpolation. Panchali saved herself and her husbands. That much is a fact.  

Plus that was not the only thing he did. He is described as delighted while drapaudi is being dragged. He calls her a wh*r he asks her to choose another lord. He even asks dusshan to drag drapaudi to "inner chamber where they will enjoy her" plus he suggests disrobing. 

He was ready to sell his wife amd children to anyone who will give him arjun s location on the battlefield. 

He was even involved in bheem s poisoning And the list goes on. 

Okay, here I am only talking about the disrobing incident being an interpolation, not about the other points you made in your posts.

Yes the main reason given as you said is - No cross-references.

The incident is mentioned once in the book and never repeated or retold again.

Usually the characters of Mahabharata repeatedly mention the important events in their life including and  especially insults but nobody involved mentions this incident ever again, NOT EVEN Draupadi when she meets Krishna after the incident and lists all the atyachar that happened to her but doesn’t mention the disrobing at all... Isn’t that something!?!

She mentions her being dragged in a single cloth which was blood stained, weeping, trembling, being mocked and called a slave but not a word about being stripped and saved by Krishna with endless clothing

Even when Krishna berates Karna before his killing and lists his evil deeds he never mentions his instigating of Draupadi’s disrobing or the attempted disrobing itself

Yes, after they lost the game Pandavas and their wife were asked to remove their attires, their royal attires and don the slave attires

According to Dr Pradeep Bhattacharya None of the Puranas—NOT even the bhakti-cult’s Bhagavata, nor Harivamsa—refer to the stripping. In the Devi Bhagavata Purana, which adds significant material to the Pandava story, Janamejaya only refers to Draupadi being dragged by her hair by Duhsasana twice while using the word dharshita, violated , to describe what Kichaka did to her but not the disrobing

Duryodhana tells Kripacharya that there is no point seeking peace because, “Wearing a single cloth and covered in dust, dark Draupadi was wronged by Duhshasana in the middle of assembly hall under the eyes of the entire world. Even today the Pandavas still remember how she was naked (vivasanam) and wretched (dinam); those enemy-destroyers cannot be turned from war.” This is the only instance of Duryodhana referring to Draupadi being stripped. However, other manuscripts have vimanasa instead of vivasana. 

https://www.boloji.com/articles/1769/was-draupadi-ever-disrobed