Sasha to play karna in rakesh omprakash mehra's mahabharata???? - Page 4

Originally posted by: heartbleed

So according to who have read the original Mahabharata here,

Karna was amost a devil and monster. He was a sexual molester and child trafficker. 

and 

Panchali was almost a goddess. She was an innocent, pure and poor soul who did not utter any bad word against anyone. 

Nice.

i don't see anyone here yet calling Panchali a goddess. We simply refuted the nonsense from TV shows. if you have ANY version - not fan fiction  or adaptation - which proves 1) andhe ka putr 2) blood bath 3) curses on Kurus, please do post the citation with link.

Here go the citations for Karna.

https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m01/m01130.htm

"When that terrible poison intended for thedestruction of Bhima failed of its effect, Duryodhana. Karna and Sakuni,without giving up their wicked design had recourse to numerous othercontrivances for accomplishing the death of the Pandavas. And though everyone of these contrivances was fully known to the Pandavas, yet in accordancewith the advice of Vidura they suppressed their indignation.

https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m01/m01144.htm

"Vaisampayana said, 'Then the son of Suvala(Sakuni), king Duryodhana, Duhsasana and Kama, in consultation with oneanother, formed an evil conspiracy. With the sanction of Dhritarashtra, theking of the Kurus, they resolved to burn to death Kunti and her (five) sons. 

CE, Vol 2, 286 (61)

On hearing these words, a great roar arose from all those who were in the sabha.They approved of Vikarna and censured Soubala. When the noise died down, Radheya, whowas almost senseless with anger, gripped his lustrous arms212 and uttered these words, “Ihave witnessed many distortions in Vikarna. Like fire destroys the block from which it hasbeen kindled, his destruction will come from the fire he has created. Though urged byKrishna, those who are assembled here have not uttered a word. I consider that Drupada’sdaughter has been won in accordance with dharma, and so do they. O son of Dhritarashtra!Out of childishness, you alone are being torn to bits. Though but a child, you speak in thissabha what should be spoken by elders. O Duryodhana’s younger brother! You do not knowthe reality of what dharma is. Like one with limited intelligence, you proclaim that Krishna

has not been won, when she has been won. O Dhritarashtra’s son! How can you think thatKrishna has not been won? In this sabha, the eldest Pandava staked everything he possessed.O bull among the Bharata lineage! Droupadi is included in all his possessions. When Krishnahas been won in accordance with dharma, how can you think she has not been won?Droupadi was mentioned in the speech and the Pandava approved. According to what reasondo you then think that she has not been won? If you think that bringing her into the sabhawhen she is clad in only a single garment is against dharma, listen to the words I have to sayin response. O descendant of the Kuru lineage!213 It has been ordained by the gods that awoman should only have one husband. However, she submits to many and it is thereforecertain that she is a courtesan. It is my view that there is nothing surprising in her beingbrought into the sabha in a single garment, or even if she is naked. In accordance withdharma, Soubala has won all the riches the Pandavas possessed, including her andthemselves. O Duhshasana! This Vikarna is only a child, though he speaks words of wisdom.Strip away the garments from the Pandavas and Droupadi.”

CE, Vol 2, 288(63)

Karna said, “There are three who can own no property—a slave, a student and a woman. Ofortunate one! You are the wife of a slave and have nothing of your own. You have no lordand are like the property of slaves. Enter226 and serve us. That is the task for you in thishousehold. O Princess! All the sons of Dhritarashtra are now your masters and not the sons ofPritha. O beautiful one! Choose another one for your husband, one who will not make you aslave through gambling. Remember the eternal rule among slaves. Sexual acts with one’smasters are never censured. Nakula, Bhimasena, Yudhishthira, Sahadeva and Arjuna havebeen 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 ofthe sabha, he has gambled away the daughter of Drupada, the king of Panchala.”’

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

If that does not satisfy the person that discovers Arjunato me, I will make him a more valuable gift, that, indeed, which he himselfwill solicit. Sons, wives and articles of pleasure and enjoyment that Ihave, these all I shall give him if he desires them.

This was not hyperbole. This was an outright offer.

https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m08/m08040.htm

Evidenceof Karna's casteism and misgyny.  It'sabout 6 or 7 pages long.

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

Shalya said, "The abandonment of the afflicted andthe sale of wives and children are, O Karna, prevalent amongst the Angas whoseking thou art

https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m05/m05029.htm

Duryodhana is a big tree of evil passions; Karna is itstrunk; Sakuni is its branches; Dussasana forms its abundant blossoms

p. 51

and fruits; (while) the wise king Dhritarashtra is itstoots.

https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m08/m08091.htm

Then Vasudeva, stationed on the car, addressed Karna,saying, "By good luck it is, O son of Radha, that thou rememberest virtue!It is generally seen that they that are mean, when they sink into distress,rail at Providence but never at their own misdeeds. Thyself and Suyodhanaand Duhshasana and Shakuni, the son of Subala, had caused Draupadi, clad in asingle piece of raiment, to be brought into the midst of the assembly. On thatoccasion, O Karna, this virtue of thine did not manifest itself. When atthe assembly Shakuni, an adept in dice, vanquished Kunti's son Yudhishthira whowas unacquainted with it, whither had this virtue of thine gone? When the Kuruking (Duryodhana), acting under thy counsels, treated Bhimasena in that waywith the aid of snakes and poisoned food, whither had this virtue of thine thengone? When the period of exile into the woods was over as also the thirteenthyear, thou didst not make over to the Pandavas their kingdom. Whither had thisvirtue of thine then gone? Thou didst set fire to the house of lac atVaranavata for burning to death the sleeping Pandavas. Whither then, O son ofRadha, had this virtue of thine gone? Thou laughedest at Krishna while shestood in the midst of the assembly, scantily dressed because in her season andobedient to Duhshasana's will, whither, then, O Karna, had this virtue of thinegone? When from the apartment reserved for the females innocent Krishna wasdragged, thou didst not interfere. Whither, O son of Radha, had this virtue ofthine gone? Thyself addressing the princess Draupadi, that lady whose tread isas dignified as that of the elephant, in these words, viz., 'The Pandavas, OKrishna, are lost. They have sunk into eternal hell. Do thou choose anotherhusband!' thou lookedest on the scene with delight. Whither then, O Karna, hadthis virtue of thine gone? Covetous of kingdom and relying on the ruler ofthe Gandharvas, thou summonedest the Pandavas (to a match of dice). Whitherthen had this virtue of thine gone? When many mighty car-warriors, encompassingthe boy Abhimanyu in battle, slew him, whither had this virtue of thine thengone? If this virtue that thou now invokest was nowhere on those occasions,what is the use then of parching thy palate now, by uttering that word? Thouart now for the practice of virtue, O Suta, but thou shalt not escape withlife. Like Nala who was defeated by Pushkara with the aid of dice but whoregained his kingdom by prowess, the Pandavas, who are free from cupidity, willrecover their kingdom by the prowess of their arms, aided with all theirfriends. Having slain in battle their powerful foes, they, with the Somakas,will recover their kingdom. The Dhartarashtras will meet with destruction atthe hands of those lions among men (viz., the sons of Pandu), that are alwaysprotected by virtue!'"

__________________________

nowadays people are writing their own version of MB in other platforms🤣

karna-draupadi love angle😆😡

justice for subadara😆

arjun-draupadi link up is a sin🤣

I came across these few and totally got shock of my life what the hell am i reading🤦🏻‍♀️

Karna gets a lot of leeway because he was suta.

Thing is suta wasn't even low caste😆, just intercaste between brahmana and kshatriya. Many confuse it with shudra.

KRISHNA was a suta. KUNTI was biologically a suta, adopted kshatriya. SUBHADRA was a suta. BHEESHMA was a suta because Ganga was Rishi Jahnu's daughter (a brahmana woman). Uttara's mother and uncle were sutas. Ugrasravas Sauti was a suta.

So why does Karna get extra credit?

Of all the lower caste people in Mahabharata, Vidura was one. He was a kshatta, which was considered even lower than shudra. He was treated with utmost respect by Pandavas and Panchali.

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

Karna gets a lot of leeway because he was suta.

Thing is suta wasn't even low caste😆, just intercaste between brahmana and kshatriya. Many confuse it with shudra.

KRISHNA was a suta. KUNTI was biologically a suta, adopted kshatriya. SUBHADRA was a suta. BHEESHMA was a suta because Ganga was Rishi Jahnu's daughter (a brahmana woman). Uttara's mother and uncle were sutas. Ugrasravas Sauti was a suta.

So why does Karna get extra credit?

Of all the lower caste people in Mahabharata, Vidura was one. He was a kshatta, which was considered even lower than shudra. He was treated with utmost respect by Pandavas and Panchali.

wow,thats an amazing info actually

though i am a hindu i am a free thinker when it comes to caste so its a great read👍🏼

Mahabharata is one of the most fascinating epics. The fact that people still debate on which character was actually better 2000 years after it happened speaks volumes on the story and the characters of the topic.

Who are we to judge about people who lived in a different era, Mahabharata shows and teaches us about life and to learn from these characters, that is why Mahabharata is taught not to judge as to the characters in the epic😁😁

Many writers and directors have actually used the some of the qualities and stories of these characters, case in example Raajneeti, Thalapathy etc.

Rajmouli actually took some characteristics of Mahabharata and even Ramayana and put it in Baahubali.

Katappa loyalty similar to Bheeshma, Bhallaladev similar to Duryodhana, his father similar to Dhritarashtra, the childhood of Shivudu and the whole baby found in the river similar to that of Karna.

Originally posted by: cts22

Mahabharata is one of the most fascinating epics. The fact that people still debate on which character was actually better 2000 years after it happened speaks volumes on the story and the characters of the topic.

Who are we to judge about people who lived in a different era, Mahabharata shows and teaches us about life and to learn from these characters, that is why Mahabharata is taught not to judge as to the characters in the epic😁😁

Many writers and directors have actually used the some of the qualities and stories of these characters, case in example Raajneeti, Thalapathy etc.

Rajmouli actually took some characteristics of Mahabharata and even Ramayana and put it in Baahubali.

Katappa loyalty similar to Bheeshma, Bhallaladev similar to Duryodhana, his father similar to Dhritarashtra, the childhood of Shivudu and the whole baby found in the river similar to that of Karna.

Who are we to judge? Humans, readers, students of history. 

Some things were considered crimes then and are considered crimes now. Sexual assault is one of them. So is murder - by poisoning, by burning. So is sex trafficking.

So yeah, such criminals will and should be judged and not whitewashed ever. 

@Bold. Kid found in river was the Krishna story, not Karna. Because Krishna was actually brought up clandestinely to save him from a murderous tyrant. Karna was sent along by his mom because she was a child-mother with no resources.

Shahid kapoor is unfirt to play karna 

for God sake karna is a warrior take a 6 feet and above strong man 

He spoiled ratan singh in padmavaat hope he does not spoil mahabharat 

We can have foll people 

Bheesma - Amitabh bachchan 

Dhritarastra  Anupam kher 

Yudishtra  Hrithik Roshan 

Bheema The guy who played bhallal deva in bahubhali or a new actor (some wrestler)

Arjun - Prabhas 

Duryodhan Sonu Sood  

Dushashan 

Karan  Bobby deol 

Krishna  Amir Khan 

Draupadi Deepika padukone or anushka shetty(bahubhali fame) 

I found out today that even mb has a strong fandom. 😆

.. I just remember the childhood mb. The ekta mb was beyond pathetic and i personally did not like the star plus mb either.  Barring 2/3 actors, the rest were terrible. But apparently it has alot of fans

Thanks to all the people who linked and quoted the original texts. These were things i didn't know of at all. 

Ott- Shahid just doesn't have the gravitas to play this role. 

Whenever Shahid is chosen as a cast for a film, the forum goes like- "Shahid is oh-so-unfit for the role!"

The same was said when he signed for Haider, but once the film was released, the rest became a history. Even earlier many doubted on him when he chose to play double roles in Kaminey as Charlie and Duggu, but that was the film where he had broken his chocolate boy stereotype. Then when he agreed to play Arjun Reddy remake, people started to bash him and told that he would never be able to do justice for the role like Vijay did. But Shahid has indeed done justice in his own way, and the box office report definitely speaks.

Karna might be a controversial historical figure, but we don't know how the makers are gonna portray him as. Even Alauddin Khilji's character was glorified in Padmaavat, but the critics and audience hailed Ranveer's performance like anything. Sometimes the actors end up choosing a controversial role for the sake of it's arc and range of emotions. So we can't blame them for choosing such scripts. And it's too early to judge whether Shahid is fit or unfit for the role unless we see how he performs. Also it's foolishness to bring up his performance as Rawal Ratan Singh here, he got the smallest piece of cake in Padmaavat after all and he wasn't well trained by SLB to fit the character, coz sadly SLB's all focus was on Ranveer. Even DP sucked there. So rather than comparing Shahid's past performance, let's see if Shahid can excel here if he really signs for the film.

Originally posted by: ffkhan

Whenever Shahid is chosen as a cast for a film, the forum goes like- "Shahid is oh-so-unfit for the role!"

The same was said when he signed for Haider, but once the film was released, the rest became a history. Even earlier many doubted on him when he chose to play double roles in Kaminey as Charlie and Duggu, but that was the film where he had broken his chocolate boy stereotype. Then when he agreed to play Arjun Reddy remake, people started to bash him and told that he would never be able to do justice for the role like Vijay did. But Shahid has indeed done justice in his own way, and the box office report definitely speaks.

Karna might be a controversial historical figure, but we don't know how the makers are gonna portray him as. Even Alauddin Khilji's character was glorified in Padmaavat, but the critics and audience hailed Ranveer's performance like anything. Sometimes the actors end up choosing a controversial role for the sake of it's arc and range of emotions. So we can't blame them for choosing such scripts. And it's too early to judge whether Shahid is fit or unfit for the role unless we see how he performs. Also it's foolishness to bring up his performance as Rawal Ratan Singh here, he got the smallest piece of cake in Padmaavat after all and he wasn't well trained by SLB to fit the character, coz sadly SLB's all focus was on Ranveer. Even DP sucked there. So rather than comparing Shahid's past performance, let's see if Shahid can excel here if he really signs for the film.

It's precisely because Shahid is good that I'm expecting he's going to evoke sympathy for a blatantly criminal character... a sex assaulter and child trafficker.