The Greatest Indian Epic - Mahabharath

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by viggop

2 questions
============
(1)Can someone tell me the story behind Karna's wheel getting stuck because of a curse during the battle?

(2) I think Krishna also sacrifices the life of "Aravan" .another son of the Pandavas.But the above quiz gives name of Bheema's son being sacrificed.I have not heard about this story too.

---

I am going through the old pages. Interesting posts indeed. Here are your answers:

1) While returning from Parasurama, cursed that he would forget whatever he learnt by cheating the Guru, Karna keeps shooting his arrows in frustration. That's how he killed a cow belonging to a Brahmin, without realising that it was a cow. The Brahmin cursed him that the wheel of his chariot would get stuck at the most difficult time.

2) The story of Aravan is an addition by Villi. It is narrated in Villi Bharatam. I have not come across the name in Vyasa Bharatam.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by viggop

A very tough quiz on the Mahabharatha.I scored 10/25

http://www.funtrivia.com/playquiz.cfm?qid=150304
&origin=http://www.funtrivia.com/search2_act.cfm_QN_type=quizzes_AND_searchstring=
The+great+mahabharatha_AND_Go.x=13_AND_Go.y=14

---

It is a nice quiz indeed. But the answers/choices contain wrong suggessions. I have reported the errors to the website. :-)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by viggop

Atleast 1 Kaurava brother is supposed to have joined the Pandavas in the war.Do not know whether he was killed in the war or not.

---

No. Not a single Kaurava brother joined the Pandava side.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Raghu

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by viggop

Atleast 1 Kaurava brother is supposed to have joined the Pandavas in the war.Do not know whether he was killed in the war or not.

---

Viggop,

It would be great, if you can or some post about Vikarna.


Q 4)

What was the reason for Vidura to break his bow and not to take part in the war? :?

---

Ans for Q 3) Vikarna died on the 14th day of the war, and was killed by Bheema. He killed 7 of the Kaurava brothers that day. After killing Vikarna, Vyasa says, Bheema shed tears saying, 'Gory indeed is this war, Vikarna, in which you and Bheeshma had to be killed.'


Ans for Q 4) As far as I can recollect, Vidura abstains from joining either side and the incident of his breaking the bow is not to be seen in Vyasa Bharata. But, I will have to double-check this. My memory may be slipping.

The incident of Vidura breaking his bow and going away from the Sabha is found in Villi Bharata. This was becasue Duryodhana insulted him for playing the host to Krishna, against his orders.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by viggop

Coming to charcater of Draupadi,she appears very haughty, arrogant,proud and vengeful character.
She is born in the yagna of Draupada.The objective of the yagna was to take revenge(not noble) on Drona and both Drishtadyumna and Draupadi are born in it.

She laughs at Duryodhana when he slips and falls in Indraprastha.
She takes a vow not to plait her hair till she drinks the blood of dushashana.Hence she is also very vengeful person full of fury.

She loves Arjuna more than other husbands and does not treat them equally as Arjuna.This is supposed to be adharmic! Hence,she is the first to fall down dead on the way to Himalayas at the end.

She is much sinned against too.Arjuna loves Satyabhama(?) more than Draupadi.Yudishtra keeps her as an object in the game of dice and loses her.She is disrobed publicly.When Pandavas have to be incognito for 14 years,she is serving as a servant for some queen.

---

I am sorry to say this. The perception of Draupadi is not right. And it is not right to say that she did not treat everyone of the Pandavas equally.

Draupadi is an admirable character. Very brave; excellent in wisdom; very precise in her stand; very sound in her reasoning and logic.

Hope we will have more time to see the facts and come to conclusions rather than on impressions. :-)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jaiganes

hey!
slight misunderstanding. what krishna drops is his modhiram or ring. Jewel is something he is born with and in the last day of the war, shri krishnaa takes that jewel away from him as a punishment for his unjust practices in the war (by killing children of the pandavaas when they are asleep).

---

Are you speaking about the incident that is associated with Vidura (which is again a hearsay) or Aswathama? If it is Aswathama, it is Sironmani that was removed from him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Raghu

Dear Viggop,

Vidur had a bow which can destroy the universe, which was granted to him by the supreme personality of god head Maha Iswar(Lord Shiva),similar to Shiva thanusu in Ramayna,

---

What Vidura had was known as Narayana Dhanus. The very same bow that Sri Rama had. These divine weapons keep changing hands from time to time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by viggop

I thought Kunti went along with the Pandavas in the forest.It is there she asks them to share Draupadi.
Vidura was a great devotee of Lord Krishna

He is supposed to have given the banana peel instead of banana to Krishna when praying but the Lord accepted it gladly because of his devotion.Similar ,one Nayanmar was throwing stones at the lingam deeply absorbed in Bhakthi thinking them to be flowers but shiva gladly accepts it.In Kalahasthi,the hunter nayanmar,kannappa nayanar, offers pork to the Lingam which is accepted by the lord much to the anger of the priest.

Is not Vidura called as Sanjaya? He narrates the entire war to Dhiritharashtra by seeing thru Gnana Kann.

---

No. Kunti stayed with Vidura. She did not accompany Pandavas. The sons did not want their mother to undergo suffering.

The banana peel story is interesting. But once again, not to be found in Vyasa or Villi. Can you please let me know the source?

Sanjaya was the charioteer whereas Vidura was the youngest of the three - Dhritharastra, Pandu and Vidura.

As mentioned elsewhere, Charioteer was not the equvilaent of a car driver. The Chariots of kings and emperors were driven by their ministers, or other smaller kings. This was essential because Charioteer played a very vital role in times of war. He played the part of counsellor too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ts

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by viggop

I thought Kunti went along with the Pandavas in the forest.It is there she asks them to share Draupadi.
Vidura was a great devotee of Lord Krishna

---

The draupadi story happened much earlier. This was when they were accomodated in the "arakku mAligai" in deceit where they was an attempt to kill them.

---

Draupadi story in arakku mALigai? It is AFTER the arakku mALigai incident that Pandavas reach Ekachakra and stay there for more than a year. After the killing of Baka, the Pandavas go to Panachala hearing the news about Draupadi's proposed swayamvaram. Therefore, the marriage takes place about 2 years after arakku mALigai incident.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Raghu

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by viggop

I thought Ashwathama was born with the jewel on his head.It is embedded into his body.

---

Not sure about that :?

---

Yes. It was known as sironmani.

My god! Though interesting, it is very difficult to navigate back and forth to post replies and go back to the original page to continue. May be I will continue some later. :-)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hari Krishnan

While returning from Parasurama, cursed that he would forget whatever he learnt by cheating the Guru, Karna keeps shooting his arrows in frustration. That's how he killed a cow belonging to a Brahmin, without realising that it was a cow. The Brahmin cursed him that the wheel of his chariot would get stuck at the most difficult time.

---

Mr. HariKrishnan,

Why should that Brahman curse Karna specifically on the wheel of his chariot ... I wonder why should he take that particular aspect to curse on Karna....
Normally while cursing, its natural human tendency to come out with whatever that one gets into his mind...

Can you pl enlighten us on this ..

Mr. HariKrishnan,

Why Karna could not get another Chariot ? ( I had raised this query earlier )… As a Commander of the Kaurava force, he should have had adequate back up and reserves… Also, if Saliya had ditched him in between, Karna should have had back up for that as well…Was it not a tactical blunder by Karna….
or probably at that time, the force was reduced bare minimum...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hari Krishnan

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by viggop

Coming to charcater of Draupadi,she appears very haughty, arrogant,proud and vengeful character.
She laughs at Duryodhana when he slips and falls in Indraprastha.
She takes a vow not to plait her hair till she drinks the blood of dushashana.Hence she is also very vengeful person full of fury.

---

Draupadi is an admirable character. Very brave; excellent in wisdom; very precise in her stand; very sound in her reasoning and logic.
Hope we will have more time to see the facts and come to conclusions rather than on impressions. :-)

---

If Draupadhi was so admirable character, why did she comment on Duryodhana like…. THE SON OF A BLIND MAN IS ALSO BLIND … etc etc ( I am not getting the exact wording but she had conveyed similar to this it seems )
Was it a spontaneous reaction ….There was no other news after that Draupadhi apologizing to Duryodhana for having uttered such insulting words on his Father…

Besides, Draupadhi uttering of words on Karna when he comes to participate in the contest to marry her….

There is no doubt that disrobing Draupadhi is a sinful act... but the above incidents might have provoked and triggered both of them to think and react negatively against Draupadhi ??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by S.Balaji

Mr. HariKrishnan,

Why Karna could not get another Chariot ? ( I had raised this query earlier )… As a Commander of the Kaurava force, he should have had adequate back up and reserves… Also, if Saliya had ditched him in between, Karna should have had back up for that as well.. Was it not a tactical blunder by Karna….
or probably at that time, the force was reduced bare minimum...

---

Karna had picked up a quarrel with Salya, who was his charioteer at that time. You know the saying 'a bad workman quarrels with his tools.'

The chariot getting stuck was just one of the reasons behind the defeat of Karna and was not the only one. Of course, replenishments were on way for Karna. If one remmbers that it was the 17th day of the war, one can see easily that they (on either side) were not left ith much resources. But, Krishna advices Arjuna (this is there explicity in Bharata) 'Kill him before he ascends another chariot.'

I agree that Karna was a great philonthropist et al. But it is also true that Vyasa classes him as one among the 'dushta chathustra' - evil four. The worst rogues ever. Karna's character is a mixture of the good and the evil. The evil side was high.

I am amazed at the kind of arguments that have taken place here. Please do not get carried away by cinematic/TV portrayals.

On the friendship of Duryodhana and Karna. There is not a single line in Vyasa Bharata to the effect 'edukkavO kOkkavO.' I welcome anyone to disprove me.

This particular incident is depicted in Bharata Venba. As far as Vyasa Bharata is concerned, even this good streak is not noteworthy. If he was such a great friend of Duryodhana, please do tell me why he ran away from the battlefield, when the Gandharva Chitrasena tied Duryodhana to his chariot wheel and dragged him along? Why he - once again - ran away from the battle field when Brahanala (Arjuna) fought with all of them, single handedly.

At least six or seven instances can be quoted when Karna deserted Duryodhana, in times of need.

Number one: A character is not assayed on the basis of an isolated incident. Every character has its plus and minus points. It is like what Valluvar said, 'guNam nAdi, kutramum nAdi..... mikka koLal.' What I said above is based on this 'mikka koLal.' This incident of Draupadi laughing at Duryodhana is a bit exaggerated one. Everybody laughed at the way he behaved that day and she was one among them.

This subject cannot be convincingly explained in a single post. I will give a complete description of the incident later.

Why would you expect Draupadi to apologise to Duryodhana later? Did Duryodhana apologise for any of his attrocious ways? From the first plot to kill Bheema, Arakku Maligai et al?

It was true that Duryodhana was disappointed at not being able to get Draupadi. And that was at the root of all the troubles, as far as Duryodhana-Draupadi incidents are concerned.

You mention about the words of Draupadi about Karna. One should not forget that it was Swayamvara. Which means, the bride is free to choose her groom. But from the persons who first qualify, stringing the bow and striking the target. She has every right to reject a person whom she did not like. I do not see anything wrong in what she uttered.

'I won't marry you Suta, even if you string the bow and strike the target,' was what she said. Now, tell me what's wrong about it? The reference to the unknown birth? Or the word Suta? Suta does not mean Sudra, please. That is another popular myth.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by S.Balaji

There is no doubt that disrobing Draupadhi is a sinful act... but the above incidents might have provoked and triggered both of them to think and react negatively against Draupadhi ??
[/tscii]

---

You are welcome to tell me how these incidents were at the root of all the troubles that Draupadi and Pandavas faced later.

[quote="Hari Krishnan"]

Quote:

---

Number one: A character is not assayed on the basis of an isolated incident. Every character has its plus and minus points. It is like what Valluvar said, 'guNam nAdi, kutramum nAdi..... mikka koLal.' What I said above is based on this 'mikka koLal.' This incident of Draupadi laughing at Duryodhana is a bit exaggerated one. Everybody laughed at the way he behaved that day and she was one among them.

---

Correct. A character should not measured by an isolated incident..
but was it true that she uttered such words...
In my opinion, anybody will get furious if someone utters wrong about their parents .... I expected some respectable behaviour and treatment to someone WHO WAS THEIR GUEST...

Quote:

---

Why would you expect Draupadi to apologise to Duryodhana later? Did Duryodhana apologise for any of his attrocious ways? From the first plot to kill Bheema, Arakku Maligai et al?

---

I think we should not equate Draupadhi with others as Duriyodhana was known for his wickedness. and bad character...
but Draupadhi need not follow the same path...
I FEEL IF SHE HAD APOLOGISED TO DURYODHANA... THE VARIOUS EVENTS WHICH FOLLOWED WOULD HAVE BEEN AVERTED..I MEAN.. THE ACT OF DISROBING... AND ALSO THE WAR....
Pls comment...

Quote:

---

It was true that Duryodhana was disappointed at not being able to get Draupadi. And that was at the root of all the troubles, as far as Duryodhana-Draupadi incidents are concerned.

---

Do you mean that Duryodhana also wanted to marry Draupadhi ?

Quote:

---

You mention about the words of Draupadi about Karna. One should not forget that it was Swayamvara. Which means, the bride is free to choose her groom. But from the persons who first qualify, stringing the bow and striking the target. She has every right to reject a person whom she did not like. I do not see anything wrong in what she uttered.

'I won't marry you Suta, even if you string the bow and strike the target,' was what she said. Now, tell me what's wrong about it? The reference to the unknown birth? Or the word Suta? Suta does not mean Sudra, please. That is another popular myth.

---

Agreed... it was a swayamvara and Draupadhi had the right to choose her choice...
Was there any eligibility criterion that a non Suta only can participate.. Was it part of the criterion set by Durupadha...

If Draupadhi is known for her wisdom.... THE SOURCE AND THE ORIGIN OF ONE'S BIRTH SHOULD NOT BE A FACTOR AT ALL..TO DETERMINE ONE'S RIGHT OR CHARACTER OR TRAITS..

This is my humble opinion...

[quote][quote="Hari Krishnan
I am amazed at the kind of arguments that have taken place here. Please do not get carried away by cinematic/TV portrayals. [/quote]

Sorry Mr. Harikrishnan...

Atleast my postings are not with reference to Cinematic / TV portrayals..

I am not sure about the source for others ...

Most of my references are from either Chakaravarthy Rajagopalarhari or from other sources but not from what you had mentioned as TV or Cinema...

Balaji
If duryodhana had also apologised , and renounced the kingdom etc., then too nothing would have happened.Duryodhana wanted kingdom and moreover he wanted to get rid of panadavas.the kingdom alone will not satisfy him.when yudishtra built indraprastha, why did Duryodhana want that too. he wanted everything for himself + pandavas to be gone for good.

Harikrishnan Sir
The story of Vidura accdepting the banana peel was shown in TV serial only. :oops:
I welcome you to present the right facts about Draupadi so that we get more knowledge.I've not read the Vyasa original mahabharatha.I've read Rajaji's english translation of Mahabharatha.

[tscii]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by S.Balaji

but was it true that she uttered such words...
In my opinion, anybody will get furious if someone utters wrong about their parents ....

---

Mr. Balaji,

The incident of Draupadi laughing at Duryodhana is narrated by Rajaji. The much respected (and so-called) translation of Mrs. Kamala Subramanian speaks of it for a complete chapter. But neither of them have written that she uttered words like, ‘The son of a blind man is also blind.’ This was a dialogue spoken in the TV serial, hearing which, I was also shocked and quickly leafed through my copy of Mahabharata and was convinced that this was a matter of dramatic element that the playwright has added.

This happens with every re-creation of the epic. The dialogues, the incidents, the moods, the tone, everything varies from version to version. Every creative writer would do that. Otherwise, we would not have so many differing versions. But, you will agree with me when I say, such depictions should not go into the character as cast in the original work, if one is really serious about the pursuit of the epics.

Now, here is the particular portion in the epic, translated by Kisari Mohan Ganguli, who has exercised utmost care (he has stated so in the introduction) to keep the translation closest to the Sanskrit text. This has been done with authenticity in view, and not ease/pleasure of reading as the primary motive.

Please go through this section. Please tell me where it has been stated that Draupadi laughed, or used such words that are alleged? Even Duryodhana, while recapitulating, does not accuse her of either laughing, or using such words.

However, there must have been some missing Sloka that mentions that Draupadi laughed. So many others laughed and she was one among them. I believe this because Bharati has mentioned this twice in his Panchali Sabatam, which is almost a translation of Vyasa. Even there, we do not find that she used such words as are alleged. It is true that she laughed. But the allegation that she said, ‘This fellow’s father is blind and therefore this fellow is also blind,’ is baseless.

Quote: Mahabharata Sabha Parva, Section 66
<><><><><><><><>

Vaisampayana said,--"That bull among men, Duryodhana, continued to dwell in that, assembly house (of the Pandavas). And with Sakuni, the Kuru prince slowly examined the whole of that mansion, and the Kuru prince beheld in it many celestial designs, which he had never seen before in the city called after the elephant (Hastinapore). And one day king Duryodhana in going round that mansion came upon a crystal surface. And the king, from ignorance, mistaking it for a pool of water, drew up his clothes. And afterwards finding out his mistake the king wandered about the mansion in great sorrow. And sometime after, the king, mistaking a lake of crystal water adorned with lotuses of crystal petals for land, fell into it with all his clothes on. Beholding Duryodhana fallen into the lake, the mighty Bhima laughed aloud as also the menials of the palace. And the servants, at the command of the king, soon brought him dry and handsome clothes. Beholding the plight of Duryodhana, the mighty Bhima and Arjuna and both the twins--all laughed aloud. Being unused to putting up with insults, Duryodhana could not bear that laugh of theirs. Concealing his emotions he even did not cast his looks on them. And beholding the monarch once more draw up his clothes to cross a piece of dry land which he had mistaken for water, they all laughed again. And the king sometime after mistook a closed door made of crystal as open. And as he was about to pass through it his head struck against it, and he stood with his brain reeling. And mistaking as closed another door made of crystal that was really open, the king in attempting to open it with stretched hands, tumbled down. And coming upon another door that was really open, the king thinking it as closed, went away from it. And, O monarch, king Duryodhana beholding that vast wealth in the Rajasuya sacrifice and having become the victim of those numerous errors within the assembly house at last returned, with the leave of the Pandavas, to Hastinapore.

And the heart of king Duryodhana, afflicted at sight of the prosperity of the Pandavas, became inclined to sin, as he proceeded towards his city reflecting on all he had seen and suffered. And beholding the Pandavas happy and all the kings of the earth paying homage to them, as also everybody, young and old, engaged in doing good unto them, and reflecting also on the splendour and prosperity of the illustrious sons of Pandu, Duryodhana, the son of Dhritarashtra, became pale. In proceeding (to his city) with an efflicted heart, the prince thought of nothing else but that assembly house and that unrivalled prosperity of the wise Yudhishthira. And Duryodhana, the son of Dhritarashtra, was so taken up with his thoughts then that he spoke not a word to Suvala's son even though the latter addressed him repeatedly. And Sakuni, beholding him absent-minded, said,--'O Duryodhana, why art thou proceeding thus'?

"Duryodhana replied,--O uncle, beholding this whole earth owning the sway of Yudhishthira in consequence of the might of the illustrious Arjuna's weapons and beholding also that sacrifice of the son of Pritha like unto the sacrifice of Sakra himself of great glory among the celestials, I, being filled with jealousy and burning day and night, am being dried up like a shallow tank in the summer season. Behold, when Sisupala was slain by the chief of the Satwatas, there was no man to take the side of Sisupala. Consumed by the fire of the Pandava, they all forgave that offence; otherwise who is there that could forgive it? That highly improper act of grave consequence done by Vasudeva succeeded in consequence of the power of the illustrious son of Pandu. And so many monarchs also brought with them various kinds of wealth for king Yudhishthira, the son of Kunti, like tribute-paying Vaisyas! Beholding Yudhishthira's prosperity of such splendour, my heart burneth, efflicted with jealously, although it behoveth me not to be jealous.'

"Having reflected in this way, Duryodhana, as if burnt by fire, addressed the king of Gandhara again and said,--'I shall throw myself upon a flaming fire or swallow poison or drown myself in water. I cannot live. What man is there in the world possessed of vigour who can bear to see his foes in the enjoyment of prosperity and himself in destitution? Therefore I who bear to see that accession of prosperity and fortune (in my foes) am neither a woman nor one that is not a woman, neither also a man nor one that is not a man. Beholding their sovereignty over the world and vast affluence, as also that sacrifice, who is there like me that would not smart under all that? Alone I am incapable of acquiring such royal prosperity; nor do I behold allies that could help me in the matter. It is for this that I am thinking of self-destruction. Beholding that great and serene prosperity of the son of Kunti, I regard Fate as supreme and exertions fruitless. O son of Suvala, formerly I strove to compass his destruction. But baffling all my efforts he hath grown in prosperity even like the lotus from within a pool of water. It is for this that I regard Fate as supreme and exertions fruitless. Behold, the sons of Dhritarashtra are decaying and the sons of Pritha are growing day by day. Beholding that prosperity of the Pandavas, and that assembly house of theirs, and those menials laughing at me, my heart burneth as if it were on fire. Therefore, O uncle, know me now as deeply grieved and filled with jealousy, and speak of it to Dhritarashtra.
<><><><><><><><>

End of quote.

Apart from not saying anything about Draupadi’s laughter, this section gives out the real reason behind Duryodhana’s anger. Jealousy.

Quote:

---

I expected some respectable behaviour and treatment to someone WHO WAS THEIR GUEST...

---

Now, this branches off to another issue. Duryodhana was NOT their guest. He was a part of the host. Please read Panchali Sabatham. i have written a verse for verse commentary, together with concordance from Vyasa. You may in particular see this page:

http://www.harimozhi.com/Article.asp?id=293

The Panchali Sabatham, with commentaries written so far can be accessed from here:

http://www.harimozhi.com/ListArticle...ngArticleId=22

Quote:

---

I think we should not equate Draupadhi with others as Duriyodhana was known for his wickedness. and bad character...
but Draupadhi need not follow the same path...
I FEEL IF SHE HAD APOLOGISED TO DURYODHANA... THE VARIOUS EVENTS WHICH FOLLOWED WOULD HAVE BEEN AVERTED..I MEAN.. THE ACT OF DISROBING... AND ALSO THE WAR....
Pls comment...

---

I have substantiated more than enough. I think the question of apology does not arise in the circumstances.

Quote:

---

Do you mean that Duryodhana also wanted to marry Draupadhi ?

---

Yes. Very much. More than that, when she was brought to the Sabha, Duryodhana moved his vastra aside and showed her his left thigh. Bare, naked thigh. And asked her to come and be seated on his thigh. "ayvar kUttu manaivikku naaNamE?" writes Bharati, as the words of Duryodhana. 'What is the need for the joint-wife of five to be ashamed?' He intended to have her as his concubine and ordered Vidura to fetch her to the Saba, first. Dussasana, when he reached her private chamber and when she pleaded that she was in menstural cycle and therefore was in a single piece of garment alone, he laughed and said, 'You be clad in a saree or be nude. I don't care. You are my brother's slave. Come with me now.' Need any further evidence?

I notice another comment by Viggop here. That she wanted to drink the blood of Dussasana. It was Bheema's vow. Bharati, towards the end of his work, has taken a portion from the Bengali 'Uru pangam' (breaking of the thigh) and added it to the vow of Bheema. Nonetheless, Bheema did drink his blood. That is another matter for another discussion, if needed.

Dear Mr. Hari Krishnan,

Thank you very much for the clarification..

Pl tell us on this…I have heard that the laughing incident happened when Duryodhana went a guest to the new palace of Pandavas . I mean when Duryodhana fell down…

Can you pl clarify on this..

Harikrishnan Sir
I thought Draupadi will want to wash her hair with blood of dushashana.Bhima will kill dusshashana on the 17th day(or 18th day?).He will catch Dusshasana by his throat, put him on the groud and cut off both his hands.then,he'll break open dusshashana's chest, pluck the heart and drink it.

Also, i think Yuyutsu will be a kaurava prince who will join the Pandava side.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by S.Balaji

Agreed... it was a swayamvara and Draupadhi had the right to choose her choice...
Was there any eligibility criterion that a non Suta only can participate.. Was it part of the criterion set by Durupadha...

If Draupadhi is known for her wisdom.... THE SOURCE AND THE ORIGIN OF ONE'S BIRTH SHOULD NOT BE A FACTOR AT ALL..TO DETERMINE ONE'S RIGHT OR CHARACTER OR TRAITS..

This is my humble opinion...

---

What is a Swayam-varam? The bride going around with a garland in hand and choosing her groom, as in the case of Nala-Damayanthi. On the otherside, the father of the bride would set some condition. Like Sri Rama had to string the bow of Shiva. Like the one that Drupada laid down that the person should be able to string the bow and shoot the target.

It is not as easy as that. There may be one; there may be none; or there may be many, who could perform this. The caste criterion was not primary, since Arjuna when he achieved the fete, was believed to be a Brahmana. Therefore caste considerations were set aside.

Let us assume that more than a single person could achieve the fete. (In this case, the five brothers married her. That is a different issue altogether. It was a post-competition-development. The other four did not participate at all.) If there were three different princes, or ordinary folks who could string the bow and shoot the arrow, does or does not the bride have the right to choose her groom? That is the question.

Karna was about to string the bow. Everyone hoped that he could do it. Panchali saw this. Somehow or the other she did not like Karna. Therefore she told him, 'I would not marry a Suta, even if you complete the game.' Here is the relevant portion from Vyasa.

Quote:
<><><><><><>
And beholding the plight of those monarchs, Karna that foremost of all wielders of the bow went to where the bow was, and quickly raising it strung it and placed the arrows on the string. And beholding the son of Surya--Karna of the Suta tribe--like unto fire, or Soma, or Surya himself, resolved to shoot the mark, those foremost of bowmen--the sons of Pandu--regarded the mark as already shot and brought down upon the ground. But seeing Karna, Draupadi loudly said, 'I will not select a Suta for my lord.' Then Karna, laughing in vexation and casting glance at the Sun, threw aside the bow already drawn to a circle.
<><><><><><>

Once again, Suta is NOT the name of a caste. It is just a synonym for a Charioteer. There are three are four variants to this word. The meaning differs from a Bard to Charioteer. It does not refer to a caste. There is no basis for such a meaning.

She did not like Karna and therefore she said even before he could complete the task, 'I won't marry you, even if you complete.' The son of a charioteer is of course the way Karna is addressed. That was how he was known. Almost everyone was calling him Radheya, whereas he actually was Kaunteya. Radha was the wife of Adiratha, the Charioteer who found Karna in the river.

We should not confuse ourselves with today's ideas with yesterdays conventions. It was perfectly right for everyone to be addressed by the caste name - even if Suta staands for a caste name. Thus, it is very common to come across expressions like 'O Brahmana'., 'O Vysya,' etc.

But the tone of address would express it all. Drona was always addressed as 'O Brahmana' by Bheema. In the later years, especially during the war, this never once was a respectable address. It was meant to be a ridicule.

But one cannot hold Panchali for demaning a person by caste. It was not the name of a caste.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by S.Balaji

Dear Mr. Hari Krishnan,

Thank you very much for the clarification..

Pl tell us on this…I have heard that the laughing incident happened when Duryodhana went a guest to the new palace of Pandavas . I mean when Duryodhana fell down…

Can you pl clarify on this..

---

Balaji, please see the five paragraph long quotation that I have given from Vyasa. That narrates the incident completely. In fact, that IS the incident which is elaborated, added and dished out in different formats.

[quote]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hari Krishnan

Panchali saw this. Somehow or the other she did not like Karna. Therefore she told him, 'I would not marry a Suta, even if you complete the game.' Here is the relevant portion from Vyasa.

---

Quote:

---

But seeing Karna, Draupadi loudly said, 'I will not select a Suta for my lord.' Then Karna, laughing in vexation and casting glance at the Sun, threw aside the bow already drawn to a circle.

---

[quote]Once again, Suta is NOT the name of a caste. It is just a synonym for a Charioteer. There are three are four variants to this word. The meaning differs from a Bard to Charioteer. It does not refer to a caste. There is no basis for such a meaning.
/quote]

Dear Mr. Hari Krishnan,

Very precise. I am also coming to this point only...

How can Draupadhi reject by saying the words...I WILL NOT SELECT A SUTA...

Forget the caste element... As you mentioned ... its very clear...

Which means... she touched the aspect of profession of Karna's father. who was a Charioteer...?

For the attention of moderators:

As reported earlier, I was not able to browse the Hub for the past fifteen days or so. However, I am now using the 'misterprivacy' linke to browse The Hub, which I presume, is blocked by my ISP.

Now, I have another problem. Though I have opted for watching this thread, I am not getting an intimation. I keep visiting this page hourly, only to see a response here, without the mail intimation reaching. Is this because I am browsing through another site? Do I have to live with this, or is there an alternative?

Thanks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by S.Balaji

Dear Mr. Hari Krishnan,

Very precise. I am also coming to this point only...

How can Draupadhi reject by saying the words...I WILL NOT SELECT A SUTA...

Forget the caste element... As you mentioned ... its very clear...

Which means... she touched the aspect of profession of Karna's father. who was a Charioteer...?

---

This point has already been answered. We should not be confusing today's ideas with yesterday's conventions. I do not see anything insulting here. He was known as the son of a charioteer and that was how almost everyone called him. Why should one exclude Draupadi and hold her critically, for something which was in vogue, practice, which was the convention?

In case you still want to call Draupadi arrogant, haughty etc. please do so. I am not her advocate :))

Though I sound critical of Karna here, I do have my admiration and love for this character. Even Duryodhana for the matter. I am a dispassionate observer of human behaviour. Nothing more than that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hari Krishnan

For the attention of moderators:

As reported earlier, I was not able to browse the Hub for the past fifteen days or so. However, I am now using the 'misterprivacy' linke to browse The Hub, which I presume, is blocked by my ISP.

Now, I have another problem. Though I have opted for watching this thread, I am not getting an intimation. I keep visiting this page hourly, only to see a response here, without the mail intimation reaching. Is this because I am browsing through another site? Do I have to live with this, or is there an alternative?

Thanks.

---

Mr. HariKrishnan,

I get messages onto my Yahoo id... and browse this TFM.. ( my link is established from TFM to Yahoo id whenever any posting is made by other DFers on the said topic )

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by S.Balaji

Mr. HariKrishnan,

I get messages onto my Yahoo id... and browse this TFM.. ( my link is established from TFM to Yahoo id whenever any posting is made by other DFers on the said topic )

---

Thank you. I will be obliged if you can teach me how to do it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hari Krishnan

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by S.Balaji

Mr. HariKrishnan,

I get messages onto my Yahoo id... and browse this TFM.. ( my link is established from TFM to Yahoo id whenever any posting is made by other DFers on the said topic )

---

Thank you. I will be obliged if you can teach me how to do it.

---

Pls go to the top of this page... There will be an icon for PROFILE.
Pl click and you will get into your personal profile..

There is a field for your Email id.. If you update your id there and save it... You should get the updates related to the threads which you are a participant

[quote][quote="Hari KrishnanThis point has already been answered. We should not be confusing today's ideas with yesterday's conventions. I do not see anything insulting here. He was known as the son of a charioteer and that was how almost everyone called him. Why should one exclude Draupadi and hold her critically, for something which was in vogue, practice, which was the convention?

In case you still want to call Draupadi arrogant, haughty etc. please do so. I am not her advocate :))[/quote]

No. No.. Thats not my intentions at all... We are only trying to analyse what sequence of events that led to Duryodhana and Karna getting so negative against Draupadhi......

Quote:

---

Though I sound critical of Karna here, I do have my admiration and love for this character. Even Duryodhana for the matter. I am a dispassionate observer of human behaviour. Nothing more than that

---

I had another query earlier... This is about the administration of Duryodhana when the Pandavas were in exile.. Was there any grief or complaint about his admn. capabilities.
Were the subjects happy with him....
Was he arrogant as a King also ....

Can you pls... clarify...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by S.Balaji

No. No.. Thats not my intentions at all... We are only trying to analyse what sequence of events that led to Duryodhana and Karna getting so negative against Draupadhi......

---

If that is so,

a) The hostile feelings that Duryodhana had for Draupadi, stem from the jelousy that he had for Pandavas.

b) One has to go back to the day on which Kunti came to Hastinapur, after the death of Pandu, with Dharmaputra who was about 16, Bheema 15, Arjuna 14, and Nakula Sahadeva about 12. Duryodhana was a day younger to Bheema. He grew up in the palace of Hastinapur for the first 15 years with the feeling that he was the sole emperor of Hastinapur. That the sons of Pandu returned to Hastinapur was something which could not be digested by him. So was Dhritharashtra.

c) The logic is very complicated on the lien on crown of Hastinapur. Pandu was of course holding a care-taker government on behalf of Dhritharashtra. But nonetheless, it was he who expanded the kingdom and added to its frontiers.

d) The crown that was with Pandu, came back to Dhritharashtra since Pandu left for the jungle on self-exile.

e) Dhritharashtra wanted the crown to go to his son, undivided. But it could not be so, because Yudhisthira became the eldest.

f) Whatever it was, the opinion of the public was strongly in favour of Pandu's sons getting their fair share.

g) The half-share that was allotted to Pandu's sons was nothing more than an unusable, uninhabited forest. They built a city on it, wherein people came to reside. If it was a difficult task to establish a new city, it was more than difficult to get it populated. Which people would come to reside in a place if it is not well-protected, and well-governed?

h) Dharmaputra's fame reached beyond China, Java etc. He was well known everywhere. He performed the Raja Suya Yaga. Performing this Yaga needed the support of all the kings around. Either they have to pay their goodwill, or they have to fight against giving it. Nobody - including Sisubala - resisted when Dharmaputra sent his brother's around and everybody willingly partook in the Yaga. Dharmaputra had earned such name.

i) Duryodhana could not bear this. His impression of Dharmaputra was that he was a coward and that but for the support of Bheema and Arjuna, he could not survive.

j Duryodhana saw a match for Bheema in himself. He needed a match for Arjuna, which he found in Karna, whom he made a king when the latter was in an ugly situation, which was of his own making.

k) Karna kept adding fuel to fire. He was the one who was always intensifying the greed and unjustified desire of Duryodhana to annex the land of Pandavas.

l) Hostility against Draupadi stems from the fact that she was a black beauty. One should see how Dhritharashtra reacted when Vidura reported that Kauravas have taken the hand of Draupadi. And then Vidura tells Dhritharashtra, 'Do remember that the sons of Pandu are Kauravas too.' This desire for Draupadi was deep seated in Duryodhana and to an extent Dhritharashtra too (that is, in getting her for his son.) If evidence is needed, please read the portion on the game of dice, to know how meanly he behaved.

It is a very vast and complicated subject. I can provide the support material, evidence etc. for those who want to understand the subject. Having devoted more than 35 years of my life to the study of epics, I do believe I have a reasonable grasp, perceptive powers, and that I am honest enough to base my conclusions strictly on evidence.

On the other hand, if people think that I can be cornered with the evidence that I supply, I am out of this game. I have better things to do. :-) I have enough conviction about what I have concluded and don't have to be told that my understanding is wrong, with the material that I supply. :-)

We may proceed accordingly.


[/quote]

I had another query earlier... This is about the administration of Duryodhana when the Pandavas were in exile.. Was there any grief or complaint about his admn. capabilities.
Were the subjects happy with him....
Was he arrogant as a King also ....

Can you pls... clarify...[/quote]

Duryodhana's rule was perfect. He was a very able and good administrator. He was particular that the people should stand by his side when at the end of 13 years the Pandavas return. He was aware of the effects of adverse public opinion. Otherwise, why should 11 akshaunis stand behind him, while only 7 stood behind Pandavas?

HariKrishnan Sir
Was there a Kaurava known as Yuyutsu who joined Pandavas?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by viggop

HariKrishnan Sir
Was there a Kaurava known as Yuyutsu who joined Pandavas?

---

We know that Gandhari's pregnancy lasted for two years and more. During this period, a nurse was appointed to look after Dhrirasthra. According to one version this woman belonged to the Vysya community. Another version says she belonged to Sudra community. Yuyutsu was born to Dhritharashtra and this maid. Yuyutsu - much before the war commenced - joined the side of Pandavas. He was the one who was in charge of the kitchen/cooking during the Raja Suya that Dharmaputra conducted.

And, Yuyutsu was the sole survivor on the Kaurava side - apart from
Kripa, Krithavarma and Aswathama. Later, he became the guardian of Parikshith.

Kripacharya was also a greta warrior and he fought for the Kauravas.He was advisor to Dritharashtra.Also, brother in law to Dronacharya as Kripi was his sister.
But,no one managed to kill him.Why? Because Duryodhana was down before that and Kaurava side surrendered.Kripa along with Kritavarma stood outside as guardians when Aswathama butchered songs of Draupadi,Shikandi etc.
So, they also share the sin but I think they escapd without any punishment.Kritavarma was army chief of Yadava clan and was given to Duryodhana by Lord Krishna.

I was exploring the various chances of the existence of the famous Gurukshetra where the war took place which is part of Haryana now ….

( BESIDES THIS, CAN SOMEONE BRING OUT THE VARIOUS RULERS AND THE KINGDOM THEY HAD RULED AND WHAT IS THE NAME OF THOSE KINGDOMS TODAY ? )


Here is an interesting article from Ms. Nandita Krishna who is Director, C P Ramaswami Aiyar Foundation , Chennai :
Last week, at the C P Art Centre in Chennai, T K V Rajan, archaeologist turned television producer, presented an exhibition titled "In Search of Krishna", a well-documented collection of material about the excavations conducted at the various sites connected with the life of Krishna and the events of the Mahabharata. In view of the ongoing excavations at Ayodhya, it is worthwhile to see what the Mahabharata excavations revealed.
Over 35 sites of the Mahabharata have been identified in the North, all of which have yielded material culture - painted grey ware (PGW) pottery painted over with designs in black pigment, and antiquities in uniform and identical levels. This pottery is made of a superior quality of paste formed of well levigated clay and fine, well-burnt fabric achieved by distributing heat in the kiln evenly. This civilisation is also characterised by the use of iron, unknown to the earlier Harappans.
Hastinapur, between Meerut and Mawana in Uttar Pradesh, is now a forgotten village, but excavations in 1952 revealed the existence of Vidur-ka-tilla (Vidura's palace), Draupadi-ki-rasoi (Draupadi's kitchen) and Draupadi Ghat (for bathing), besides copper utensils, iron seals, ornaments made of gold and silver, terracotta discs and several oblong-shaped ivory dice used in the game of chauper.
Iron objects numbering 135, and which included arrow and spearheads, shafts, tongs, hooks, axes and knives indicate the existence of a vigorous industry. There are indications of brick-lined roads and drainage systems, and an agro-livestock based economy. The PGW of Hastinapura has been assigned to 1100-800 BC. The events of the Mahabharata probably occurred around 1000-900 BC.
Later, according to the Matsya and Vayu Puranas, a heavy flood on the River Ganga destroyed Hastinapura, and Nichakshu, the fifth king after Parikshit (Arjuna's grandson) who ascended the throne after the Kurukshetra war, shifted his capital to Kausambi, 50 kilometres from Allahabad. There is definite archaeological evidence of a massive flood level. The devastation by the Ganga is still visible in the thick clay soil.
After their exile, the Pandavas asked for three villages: Paniprastha, Sonaprastha and Indiraprastha, generally identified with modern Panipat, Sonepat and Puranaqila in New Delhi. These sites have also yielded the same pottery and antiquities. Building structures with drainage systems and PGW were excavated at Purana Qila.
Kurukshetra, now in Haryana, was the site of the Kuru war. Excavations here have yielded iron arrow and spearheads, dated by Thermoluminence (TM) to 2800 BC. Today it is a town of bathing pools. At the Brahma Sarovar, a large lake 3,600 feet by 1,500 feet, Krishna, Balarama and Subhadra are said to have bathed after a solar eclipse. Bhishma lay on his bed of arrows at Bhishma Kund. Arjuna shot an arrow into the earth and a cool fountain of water flowed out directly into Bhishma's mouth, creating the Ban Ganga pond. Eight kilometres away is the village of Thanesar, the capital of Harsha Vardhana in the sixth century.
Yet, the excavations were stopped soon after these finds were revealed, and were never resumed. Why?
The submergence of Dwaraka is described vividly in the epic. Arjuna asked the residents to vacate the city immediately as it was going to be submerged by the sea. Dvaravati, according to the Sabhaparva of the Mahabharata, was heavily fortified. Dr S R Rao started excavating the Dwarkadish temple till he hit the remains of 15th, 12th and 9th century AD temples. He dug on, passing two earlier temples, until, at a depth of 9.5 metres, they came to the remains of two towns destroyed by the sea. From the earlier of the two they recovered the characteristic lustrous red pottery of the period and region. Encouraged by his findings, he decided to search for Dwaraka.
Underwater exploration yielded two gateways, fort walls, bastions and a jetty at a depth of 10 metres off Dwaraka, in the Arabian Sea. Apart from corresponding to the Mahabharata's description of the architectural features of the city and the mode of its submergence, it has directly fixed a date by TM for the pottery of Dwaraka at 3520 years BP (Before Present).
Other finds include pottery, bronze and iron implements, three-holed triangular stone anchors at Dwaraka, a late Harappan type of seal made of conch of a composite animal - a bull, unicorn and goat - and lustrous red ware pottery at Bet Dwaraka, linking the site to the Harappan culture, and thereby establishing its continuity.
Bet Dwaraka was an island frequented by Krishna who is said to have visited its Shankhodara Temple. It also contains the only ancient temple for Matsya, the epic saviour of the world at the time of the Great Flood. The materials discovered at Dwaraka corroborate history and myth, and fix a date for the inundation of the city - between 1500 and 1300 BC.
The most remarkable aspect of both epics is their geography. The Mahabharata mentions many small villages, tanks and hills, which are still identifiable.
What is the historicity of the Mahabharata? Our doubting historians will never accept any of these finds unless they are supported by inscriptions, which will never be forthcoming as the earliest Indian inscriptions belong to 300 BC. So, do we treat the epic as myth till they are satisfied?
Western scholars tried to establish a connection between Krishna and Christ, claiming that the former was derived from St Thomas' teachings about the latter, but literature and archaeology have proved otherwise. The Chandogya Upanishad mentions that Krishna Devakiputra was a student of Ghora Angirasa and the author of the Upanishad, which repeats the teachings of the Bhagavat Gita word by word.
In the 4th century BC, Chanakya refers to the story of Krishna's birth, while Megasthenes mentions that the Sourasenoi (Surasenas or Yadavas) worshipped Herakles (Krishna). Their two great cities were Methora (Mathura) and Kleisobora (Krishnapura?) on the navigable river Yobares (Yamuna). He also mentions that Herakles (Krishna) sent his daughter Pandaia to rule over the kingdom of Mathura (Madura) on the southern sea. Was she a descendant of the Pandavas, and did the latter re-emerge as the Pandyas, whose southern capital was named after Krishna's capital, Mathura?
Panini, Patanjali and the Buddhist and Jain works also mention Krishna and the events of the Kurukshetra war, while the Chinese traveller Yuan Chang records that a great war was fought at Kurukshetra and the bones of dead warriors lay buried under the soil.
In 180-165 BC, the Greek ruler Agathocles issued coins with images of Vasudeva holding a chakra. Several inscriptions are available in the first century BC: the Greek ambassador Bhagavata Heliodorus erected a Garuda column to Vasudeva at Besnagar; the Mora Well inscription near Mathura mentions the worship of the five Vrishni heroes, including Vasudeva; stone enclosures (Narayana vatika) were built for Vasudeva and his brother Shankarshana (Balarama) at Ghosundi and Hathivada.
The most controversial site is, of course, the temple at Mathura, the birthplace of Krishna. I am not aware if any excavation has been done here, but tradition and even eminent historians associate the site with the birth of Krishna, which is why Aurangazeb consciously chose to build a mosque over it.
Apart from knowing that vyuhas were army formations, I never really understood their formation or penetration. Rajan has computerised them to work out how the various Kaurava warriors were placed and how the Pandavas entered and destroyed these vyuhas, increasing the sophistication of what was always believed to be a primitive tribal war.
Krishna's divinity is a matter of faith, established by his identification with Lord Vishnu. But archaeology has conclusively established the veracity of the Mahabharata and the existence of the cult of Vasudeva-Krishna at a very early period. The epics form the soul of India, and Rajan has done well to document and bring alive ancient history.

Let us discuss about the various individuals who participated in the war and their kingdom…
There is one school of thought that some kings from South India also took part…


The Pandava Army
The Pandava Brothers:
Prince Yudhisthira, Eldest son of Pandu
Prince Bhima, Second son of Pandu
Prince Arjuna, Third son of Pandu
Twin Princes Nakula and Sahadeva, Youngest sons of Pandu

The Kingdom of Panchala:
King Dhrupad, Father-in-Law of the Pandavas
Prince Shikhandi, Elder son of Dhrupad
Prince Dhrishtadhyumna, Younger son of Dhrupad

The Kingdom of Matsya:
King Virata, Friend of the Pandavas
Prince Uttara, Son of King Virata

The Kingdom of Dwaraka:
Prince Satyaki
Prince Krishna (Served as Charioteer to Arjuna - vowed not to lift weapons during the war)

Others
Demon Ghatotkacha, Son of Bhima through the demoness Hidimba
Prince Abhimanyu, Son of Arjuna through Princess Subhadra of Dwaraka

The Kaurava Army

The Kaurava Brothers:
Prince Duryodhana, Eldest son of King Dhritarashtra
Prince Dushasana, Second son of King Dhritarashtra
And 98 others…..

The Kingdom of Hastinapur:
Bhishma, Grand-uncle to Pandavas and Kauravas, forced to side with Kauravas due to loyalty to King Dhritrashtra
Drona, Teacher to Pandavas and Kauravas, forced to side with Kauravas due to loyalty to King Dhritrashtra
Ashwathama, Son of Drona
Shakuni, Maternal uncle to the Kauravas ( WHO WAS THE KING OF KANDHAR , NOW ITS IN AFGANISTHAN !! )
Kripa, Family Sage and Advisor to the Kuru Dynasty, forced to side with Kauravas due to loyalty to King Dhritrashtra

The Kingdom of Anga:
Karna, illegitimate and abandoned elder brother of Pandavas, believed by most at the time to be son of a charioteer, but actually the son of Kunti

The Kingdom of Madra
King Shalya, Maternal uncle to the Pandavas, tricked into giving a promise to fight for the Kauravas by Duryodhana and Shakuni

The Tribe of Trigartha
Chief Susharma

The Kingdom of Dwaraka
Kritaverma, General of the Dwaraka Army ( as per the wishes of Duryodhana, Krishan gave his entire army to fight for Gauravas while he agreed to the wishes of Arjuna to be his Charioteer and will not take up arms )

The Kingdom of Sindh ( WHICH IS PART OF PAKISTAN NOW ! )
King Jayathradha, Brother-in-law to the Kauravas
Others – Bagadhathan… known for his Elephant based warfare.
Poorisiravas…..another valiant warrior…

During the Kurukshetra war, several weapons were used. The weapons, and their most notable users, included:
Bow and arrows- Arjuna, Bhishma, Drona, Karna, Abhimanyu, Aswathama
Mace- Bhima, Duryodhana
Spear- Yudhishtira
Dagger/Sword- Nakula, Sahadeva

The two Supreme Commanders met and framed "rules" for the war. The rules included:
·Fighting must begin no earlier than sunrise and end exactly at sunset.
·Multiple warriors may not attack a single warrior.
·Two warriors may "duel," or engage in prolonged personal combat, only if they carry the same weapons and they are on the same mount (no mount, a horse, an elephant, or a chariot).
·No warrior may kill or injure a warrior who has surrendered.
·One who surrenders becomes a prisoner of war and a slave.
·No warrior may kill or injure an unarmed warrior.
·No warrior may kill or injure an unconscious warrior.
·No warrior may kill or injure a person or animal not taking part in the war.
·No warrior may kill or injure a warrior whose back is turned away.
·The rules specific to each weapon must be followed. For example, it is prohibited to strike below the waist in mace warfare.
·Warriors may not engage in any "unfair" warfare whatsoever