Agreed Rohit. Nice point. But we have to remember Gita was not a part of original Mahabharat by Vyas. It was an insert at a later stage.
Is anyone going to convince me on the points I raised ?
Printable View
Agreed Rohit. Nice point. But we have to remember Gita was not a part of original Mahabharat by Vyas. It was an insert at a later stage.
Is anyone going to convince me on the points I raised ?
No one can convince anyone, pizzalot. One can at best place before you facts, interpretations and theories. Whether you choose to be convinced or not is your call, not any other's.Quote:
Originally Posted by pizzalot
Besides, I am quite positive that none of us have been born for the express purpose of convincing you on the points you have raised! That, I am sure, is not the overachieving destiny of our lives.
Yes. Yes. Yes... I radically agree with Mr. Badri on this point.Quote:
Originally Posted by Badri
The Scope and Purpose of this Forum is only as a DISCUSSION DAIS ...
...and Neither a Debate-Forum... which no doubt brings out and enlightens the hidden sides...
...but it cannot be the Common-dais for all of various standards of Knowledge on the subject...
...Nor this can be a COURT OF ARGUMENT...where two or more sides indulging... are NOT OPEN-MINDED...
...since have already DECIDED TO DIFFER with other sides of even Valid-points
But only an OPEN-FORUM OF DISCUSSIONS... by Mutual-Exchange of Knowledge and Thoughts... irrespective of one's own personal Principles and Faith.
...Rather a HEALTHY OPPORTUNITY for One and All here.... inviting Open-mindedly ...
... since commonly available to each and every segment of the multifareous hues of the GLOBAL-SOCIETY
... comprising of either the highly knowledged Experts or the Mediocres or even for a totally ignorant...or even a Boy, the School-student.
So all of us must ensure mutual-respect... by not only words but also by the Sense of approach..
..Not trying to exhibit one's own acclaimed versatile Smartness...
...Nor trying to beat out others in a Forum... which is Neither a Race-ground nor a Battlefield.
So I join with Mr. Badri to ASSERT that we are NOT INTERESTED to CONVINCE anyone...
... that they are WRONG to infer or contend different from us...
..Nor INTERESTED TO GET CONVINCED by others... that we are Wrong...
..since we are sure that we have adequate sense of Perception and Introspection too.
Even at my present Senior-citizens age... of last chapter of my Life... I am anxious to learn and learn further and thus add up my knowledge on any and every subject on Earth.... irrespective of my Engineering profession...
...right from my Boyhood...making me go in search of Knowledged Elders, Extraneous Scholars... Books, Seminars and the like... with an OPEN-MIND, Curiosity and Zeal ... extensively...
...because I have learnt one important Truth in Life... ascertained by means of my vast Experience.... that...
... KNOWLEDGE IS STRENGTH / POWER... the most meaningful for Mankind.
...Knowledge is the GREATEST EARNING AND TREASURE.... with PLEASURE
Such a sort of Healthy pursuit in Life... coupled with Kindled Wisdom ...
...and Hearty approach with others... towards gaining added circle of Friends in the Global arena...
... alone can cause and preserve a LIVELY AND WORTHY DISCUSSION. ..
...in this Rare Forum of opportunity of Common interest to all... ensuring Human-oulook towards our Overall benefit.
So let us all conserve here such a HEALTHY SPIRIT only...Nothing beyond.
...
Dear Mr. Sudhaama, happy to know that you are anxious to learn further. So are many of us, I am sure. But is not any discussion futile if none of us are prepared to be convinced. And for anyone to be unconvinced, there are only two possibilities: one, they are stubborn in their views, unprepared to see the possibility of truth in others' arguments and two, the arguments are simply unconvincing. As for pizzalot's questions, there have not been sufficient answers to arrive at the conclusion that he is unprepared to see others' point of view. So, that only leaves the second possibility.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sudhaama
Dear Mr. Kannan,Quote:
Originally Posted by kannannn
Well.. You have a point. But such of your healthy approach... when we do not find in case of anybody we have to REACT DIFFERENTLY.
Please note his NEGATIVE SENSE OF APPROACH conveyed by words....
// "... But we have to remember Gita was not a part of original Mahabharat by Vyas. It was an insert at a later stage.
Is anyone going to convince me on the points I raised ?//
Is it not a PERVERSION?.... A SURMISE?...
He is attacking the RUDIMENTARY TRUTH in this open forum, by which we the Devotees of Faith on Mahabharatha feel HURT.
Even if he says... "I doubt whether Geetha was an subsequent Insertion"... I would have tolerated and tried to CONVINCE HIM putting forth the other side, the valid points.
We don't relish anybody's THRUSTING HIS / HER PERSONAL CONCLUSIONS.
"Well... if it is your Conclusion... very well you can have it so." we will think and keep off the DRY ARGUMENT.
Why should we bother to correct others?.... even if they were wrong?? ... Nobody here is either a Teacher or Student or Acharyas....
...We are just Friends interested in Mutual-Exchange of Thoughts and Knowledge...
...Not even for ARGUMENTS and ESTABLISHMENT OF THE TRUTH OR FACTS ...
And the most important factor is.... this Forum is Not meant for only the two or a few under dispute...
...but for the sake of the whole lot of SILENT VIEWERS mainly.
It is better such Gentlemen like Mr. Pizzalot... study intensively the Books of REAL WORTH ... and then come to a conclusion...
... INSTEAD OF SUCH LOOSE TALK ...OF PERVERTED OUTLOOK...
...on a Great indian Heritage of Global appreciation...
...by the OPEN-MINDED AND UNBIASED SCHOLARS
Even if anybody believes..."There is No God"... we are not interested to Contradict... because it is his personal faith....
We are interested ONLY IN HEALTHY DISCUSSIONS...
...and Not in PROVING the Dubious Veracity and Ill-worth of OTHERS PERSONAL FAITHS AND BELIEFS...
...even if Contrary to ours which is based on WELL-FOUNDED TRUTH justifiable by WISDOM
...
Dear Sudhamma sir,
Can you please write up some info about Sahadeva, amongs the Pandavas and his role in the war, not a lot were mentioned about these two (Nakula/Shahadeva) and their bravery in the war, Mostly Arjuna and Bheema were talked much...
I feel now that this thread is going in different directions :cry:
Earlier we thought of analyzing the day by day account of war & Srivatsan said he will cover it but till now has not started it
Pizzalot's big posts also need to be addressed.
Can someone , probably Moderator Mr. Badri or Mr. Sudhama show us the right direction pls ? :(
Yes please. we are looking forward towards Mr. Srivatsan's presentations on the day to day Battle...Quote:
Originally Posted by Nakeeran
...on which all of us can have adequate points to discuss.
Then I will take up the subject... totally in a different angle...
...a Schoolboy's approach on high values... towards Human-worth..
...which too can be made quite lively and interesting...
... by means of congregation of several divergent brains on a single task.
...
sudhamma sir,
again and again you are ignoring my request
Mr. Sudhaama, if you had been hurt by his views, you could have said so first. Maybe he could have posed his question differently. My point is, Pizzalot was never given a chance in this discussion. His questions still remain unanswered.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sudhaama
For all we know, a majority of such silent viewers may be waiting for answers to his questions.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sudhaama
Open-mindedness doesn't jump to the conclusion that an assertive view represents a perverted outlook, just because it doesn't agree with their perspective. And I am interested to know how you came to the conclusion that his views don't constitute a healthy discussion. The sentences in bold surprised me. Does it mean that all views contrary to your own are of 'ill-worth and dubious veracity'? Does it mean that all your views are 'well-founded truth justifiable by wisdom'? There is nothing for us to learn then..Quote:
Originally Posted by Sudhaama
I am sorry for my outburst, but couldn't help noting that you were offended by the tone of a single post and chose not to answer any of his questions.
My Dear Mr. Raghu,Quote:
Originally Posted by Raghu
I am NOT IGNORING your request.
I have already replied on your point... that about NAKULA and SAHADEVA....
....I had detailed in my Old-postings.... under this thread itself... more elaborately too...
... especially in reply to a question from our Moderator Mr. Thiru.
Please find out such of my Old postings and ask me further if any point specifically you want me to clarify. I need not repeat the same matter once again now...especially under the same Thread. ...Is it Not?
...
By the word.... "others" ...here I mean... only the person whom I am referring about.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sudhaama
Not.... ALL OTHERS... as a Sweeping generalisation.
Questions with HEALTHY INTENTIONS... I Welcome for my reply.
I am not interested to continue further argument on this Personal considerations.
If OTHERS are interested to answer such "others"... it is left to them.
...
Ok. Let me make a beginning on the great war
To start with, lets list the representatives from both sides
Soon, I will do the posting :D
The Pandava army :
The Pandava army was organized into seven divisions. Each of these divisions were led by Drupada, Virata, Dhristadyumna, Shikhandi, Satyaki, Chekitana and Bhima. After consulting his commanders, the Pandavas appointed Dhristadyumna as the supreme commander of the Pandava army.
Interestingly , kingdoms from all over ancient India supplied troops or provided logistic support on the Pandava side. Some of these were: Kekaya, Pandya, Cholas, Keralas, Magadha, and many more.
The Kauravas :
Duryodhana requested Bhishma to command the Kaurava army. Bhishma accepted on the condition that while he will fight the battle sincerely, he will however not harm the five Pandava brothers. He also said that Karna was opposed to his leadership and perhaps Duryodhana should consider making Karna the commander. Karna had declared that he will not fight under Bhishma and had withdrawn from the army. Duryodhana however agreed to Bhishma's conditions and made him the supreme commander of the Kaurava army.
The army was divided into eleven divisions. Apart from the one hundred Kaurava brothers, headed by Duryodhana himself and his brother Dushasana, the second son of Dhritarashtra, the Kauravas were assisted in the battlefield by Drona and his son Ashwathama, Kripacharya , Shakuni, and many more who were bound by their loyalty towards either Hastinapura or Dhritarashtra.
The kingdom of Vidarbha and its King Rukmi were the only neutrals in this war
I do not understand why the tamil brain always works in such an abnormal fashion.But its good that tamils think differently .
Army divisions and weaponry:
Each army consisted of several divisions; the Kauravas had eleven
Pandavas controlled seven.
A division (akshauhini) includes 21,870 chariots and chariot-riders, 21,870 elephants and riders,
65,610 horses and riders,
109,350 foot-soldiers (in a ratio of 1:1:3:5).
The combined number of warriors and soldiers in both armies was approximately four million.
Each Akshohini was under a commander or a general, apart from the Commander in chief or the generallisimo who was the head of the entire army.
During the Kurukshetra war, several weapons were used. The weapons, and their most notable users, included the Bow and arrows, the weapon of choice for Arjuna, Bhishma, Drona, Karna and Abhimanyu, the Mace, chosen by Bhima and Duryodhana apart from the Spear and the Dagger / Sword.
This war was perhaps the bloodiest war in history as most of the warriors and soldiers perished during the brief period of only eighteen days.
Arjuna, in a fit of extreme anger over the death of his son Abhimanyu, alone killed one akshauhini of Kaurava soldiers in a single day.
The war left an extremely large number of widows and orphans
Military formations
At various times during battle, the supreme commander of either army ordered special formations ("vyuhas").
Each formation had a specific purpose; some were defensive while others were offensive. Each formation had its specific strengths and weaknesses.
Mahabharata list the following :
1.Krauncha vyuha (heron formation)
2.Makara vyuha (crocodile formation)
3.Kurma vyuha (tortoise or turtle formation)
4.Trishula vyuha (the trident formation)
5.Chakra vyuha (wheel or discus formation)
6.Kamala vyuha or Padma vyuha (Lotus formation).
It is not clear what the formations actually indicate. They may be formations bearing resemblance to animals, or they may be names given to strategies and formations
WAR RULES THAT WERE SUPPOSED TO BE FOLLOWED !
WHAT HAPPENED ACTUALLY WAS ABSOLUTE BREAKAGE OF WAR RULES
Lets go through the rules :
The two supreme commanders met and framed "rules of ethical conduct", dharmayuddha, for the war. The rules included:
1.Fighting must begin no earlier than sunrise and end exactly at sunset.
2.Multiple warriors may not attack a single warrior.
3.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).
4.No warrior may kill or injure a warrior who has surrendered.
5.One who surrenders becomes a prisoner of war and a slave.
6.No warrior may kill or injure an unarmed warrior.
7.No warrior may kill or injure an unconscious warrior.
8.No warrior may kill or injure a person or animal not taking part in the war.
9.No warrior may kill or injure a warrior whose back is turned away.
10.No warrior may attack a woman.
11.No warrior may strike an animal not considered a direct threat.
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.
Unfortunately , many of these laws were broken at least once by both sides.
I will try to give examples of who & how the above rules were broken during the war once we start running through the day by day account of the war :D
Sudhama Sir, in a forum set-up, there could be others joining the thread with exactly opposite views. Some of the members can really be very assertive and may not be telling the truth according to others. But what is important is their sincerity of expression. And how sincerely others contend them. Sometimes the outcome will seem nothing but that may not be true. Each of us or the silent observers will carry home a balanced view which is what the outcome is. Even Buddha is said to have told not to argue with a contender, but you must remember he himself argued with rational explainations when the time came. His disciples also contended and waged intellectual wars in proper forum for reasons they believed was good.
My views may be different and you might feel they are perverted and am messed-up, but alas, be it, if that is what you think I am. But atleast I will know if any others share my views. This is what I expect in forums like this, at a minimum. Feeling connected.
That being said, I sincerely wish someone contends my views.
Raghu's thirst about Nakula and Sahadev have been quenched in your previous posts. His duty is to think proactively of other ideas to place in front of us.
Nakeeran is coming-up with great list war rules broken in Mahabharath. (Nakeeran, please also be able to tell us how the people of those days reacted when such rules were broken. Especially Sri Krishna's reactions).
So our job is to think proactively and keep issues at hand to discuss while simultaneously contending others' views.
In you we saw a person reacting and contending our views. And you ARE important here. If not you someonelse should play this role. Otherwise who are we talking to ? That is what I meant when I said "convince me". So you see, how we respect and need your presence ?
Kannannn rescues me when I was branded perverted and obnoxious element and not worthy of reply.
Badri, as usual refrains from taking sides as behaving as a true moderator.
You see, everyone's presence is vital here. More people the better. And contradictions=liveliness.
I unintentionally included one other contentious point to my long list that “Gita Upnanishad is a later-insert and not a part of Vyas Mahabharath”. It may be a belief out of ignorance, but explain otherwise so several others who are messed-up also know the truth. I am not here to "silence" or drive away others with my "assertions". I like them to be vocal so we can feel connected even though we might be thousands of miles apart physically.
If we do not contend with each other sincerely, any thread will be boring and die. Do other's agree ?
Was there a rule like "only men of similar ranks can fight each other" ..? This point might justify why Dhuryodhan, The Great, sacked Bhishma when he refused to kill the Pandavas. If he was not going to, howelse Arjuna , The Menace could be killed in the war ?Quote:
Originally Posted by Nakeeran
<digression>Quote:
Originally Posted by pizzalot
Good one pizza. Your sincerity is to be certainly appreciated and your views respected. :thumbsup:
<end digression>
Pizzalot, I think you are looking for something in the Mahabharatam that traditionally Hindus do not see in it. You are looking at it as if it is a moral guide. I don't know how the northern-revivalist Hindu schools treat it, but in traditional orthodox Hinduism in Tamil Nadu at least it has not had that status. I come from a traditional Vaishnavite background. When we were children, we were taught to keep people like Alavandar, Kurattazhwar, Cherachakravarthi Kulasekara Perumal and other devotees as our role models. For every great devotee there was some quality we were taught to emulate, but we were never told to behave like Yudhistiran or Arjunan or Vimasenan.Quote:
Originally Posted by pizzalot
For us the importance of the Mahabharata is not that its characters conduct shows morality but that the story as a whole holds many religious and spiritual truths. An itihasam comes in nyanakandam, not karmakandam. I think Badri pointed out that the Mahabharatam shows that in Kali Yuga nobody can be perfectly righteous, because everybody in the Mahabharata has their flaws. The deeper lesson in this is that righteousness based purely on the old texts of the Dharmasutras will by itself not get you beyond a point in the Kali Yuga. Ultimately, in the end even Duryodhanan can argue that he has lived by the letter of the shastras. The only true source of righteousness in the Kali Yuga is the righteousness that comes when you surrender completely to God and let him guide your conduct. For those who have not reached that stage, the only true guide is following the conduct of those who have. Because they did not do this the result of the Shastric conduct of the Pandavas and Kauravas was that they brought destruction on everybody around them including their subjects who they were supposed to protect. This is the only moral lesson that can be learnt from the conduct of the parties.
We do not look for moral lessons in the deeds of Sri Krishnaperumal. It is not like the role of Lord Buddha or the imitation of Christ. Their significance is different. We are taught that the two avatarams at the time of the Mahabharatam demonstrate the difference between an avataram for the earlier yugams and for the Kali yugam. Balaraman is the former - he is disgusted by the war and refuses to take part in it, and he condemns immoral conduct on both sides. But Krishnaperumal's conduct is different because his avataram is a manifestation of God's role in the Kaliyugam. The avataram is not understood from the revelation of the Gita or the killing of Kamsan, but by the moment when Krishnaperumal walks as a humble messenger to the Kauravas. For us this is a very profound revelation about the relationship between a soul and God when it takes refuge in God. Traditionally, we did not even look for moral lessons in the deeds of Sri Ramachandran though because of north Indian influence some now do. The captivity of Sitaiammal had more religious significance in the Ramayanam in traditional orthodox interpretation.
I do not like to discuss my religion here because it is very personal and it is not good to talk about it in a place like this, but since you have been asking these questions for a while I felt it would be rude not to try to answer. I hope I have not upset or offended anybody. Sorry.
[quote="dsath"]Dear Mr pizzalot,Quote:
Originally Posted by pizzalot
Please look back my SUPPORTIVE STATEMENTS on your Opposite thoughts...
...which was UNWELCOME BY OTHERS HERE.... and after my Intervention... others kept silent, stopped opposing you... because of the personal regards they have on me.
How I had appreciated and defended your DIVERGENT VOICE... even though RADICALLY OPPOSITE to mine...
... as also CONTRARY TO TRUTH... please think awhile... before expressing DISPLEASURE ON ME NOW.
.. My vociferous objection... was and is... NOT ON YOUR OPPOSITE VIEWS...
...but your CHANGE OF DIRECTION... personalising the discussions ... as if others are bound to convince you... more than REFUTING on the matter.
Now You are coolly commenting as if I do not tolerate your Opposite Views or Stand.
Have I not thanked you, for giving us THUS a BETTER OPPORTUNITY to bring to light several hidden truth of high values?
Have I not appreciated for your INAUGURATING THE SECOND SESSION on this Topic?
Dear Pizzalot... Still I continue to be your well-wisher.. irrespective of your Views, Beliefs and Faith... as I am with others too here.
So I reiterate that I feel HURT by another point also... by your loose-comment... that Geetha was a subsequent insertion.
You are at Lioberty to raise your doubt if you feel so... and NOT AS A CONCLUSION... in this Common Forum.
Bhagawad Geetha is our GOSPEL...similar to Bible for Christians and Koran for Muslims.
So please DON'T INJURE US ANYMORE...even if you feel you are Correct to conclude so.
Please do not justify on such BLACK-SPOTS in the course of a Lively discussion.
I wish you to continue your discussions further... in a HEALTHY APPROACH...
...duly honouring the Sentiments of others empathetically
...even though DIVERGENT, CONTRADICTORY and COMBATIVE.
...
-deleted-
i read it in a weekly magazine..sorry if i had hurt anyone's feelings!
nakeera..u do a good job..continue!
Nilavu
I havent heard your version & hence I request other dfers to clarify you . OK :)
Pizzalot, I will certainly answer all your queries relating to the war . However, I am not a philosophical analyst / thinker & hence what is Dharma or adharma , I request the senior hubbers - Mr. Badri & Mr. Sudhama to chip in & share their thoughts !
After all, they have been the driving force to this thread all these days :D
While I could see arguments & counter arguments on several fronts within our dfers, I wish to proceed WITH MY MISSION - that of narrating the Day by Day account of the war & then look forward to some healthy discussion on that :D
The great Kurukshetra war lasted eighteen days.
The war was fought only during daylight hours and fighting ceased at sunset.
The armies met on a vast field in Kurukshetra and each day of the battle was characterised by numerous indiviual combats as well as mass raids against entire enemy divisions.
The victor or the vanquished on each day was determined not by any territories gained, but by the body count.
This was a war to the death.
The victor was the survivor.
Pizzalot !Quote:
Originally Posted by pizzalot
Straight answer to you here - SRI KRISHNA HIMSELF WAS THE CENTRIFUGAL FIGURE TO MOST OF THE WAR RULES GETTING BROKEN ( EITHER THROUGH CONVENTIONAL METHODS OR UNCONVENTIONAL METHODS )
In other words, what Krishna advised, was followed religiously by the Pandavas to annihilate their great arch rivals :D
However, I will explain at every stage , what Krishna did to change the course of the war & how the Pandavas followed his orders :D
Bye
Duplicacy DELETED
Duplicacy DELETED
Duplicacy DELETED
...
Chea...Chea... CHEAP ... and FALSE STORY.!... INSULT.!!!
Dear Mr. Nilavupriyan
// Was sahadevan the only guy to have gnana dhrishti??//
From where you got this false story?...FICTION?...CONCOCTION?
It does not form part of Mahabharatha...
...either of Vyasa in Sanskrit or Villi-puthooraar in Tamil.
Such a FILTHY STORY... let NOT BE SPREAD amongst the Society.
There are several such fictions and imaginary stories by several authors... like MAYIL-RAVANA....RAMA-ANJANEYA-YUDDHAM...and the like... totally deviating from the basic Epics...
...and so disegarded by the public especially the Scholars.
Above all such STORIES.... Your story is NAUSATING and INJURIOUS as well as SERIOUS INSULT
... to this Great Indian Heritage Treasure of India.
Will you please DELETE YOUR POST?...I feel much Hurt and Wounded.
...
Dear Mr. NILAVU PRIYAN,Quote:
Originally Posted by nilavupriyan
Very many thanks. You have proved yourself as a Gentleman.
With Best Wishes,
Sudhaama
...
War-Rules:SPECIAL / BREAKTHROUGH for Mahabharatha?.
Glad and Thanks... Mr. Nakkeeran...Welcome. You have taken good amount of efforts and pains to gather much informations. Please continue.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nakeeran
But I find several FALSE INSERTIONS too... in between. Please check up and delete such parts only....
... by referring to AUTHORITATIVE DOCUMENTARY VERSIONS on this Great Epic.
For example... No special War-Codes were framed...DEVIATING THE BASIC YUDDHA-SASTHRA... prevalent in those days, before and after Mahabharatha extending to Ramayana period too. We have to remember the War-Codes then were FAR DIFFERENT from that of the Present days.
...Whereas you are basing some of your arguments, indirectly taking the War-Codes of the present days as your YARDSTICK?
(1) There was NO Category of PRISONERS OF WAR (P.O.W) in those days. Only Two Categories : Friend or Foe. The War should decide it by means of Combative Valour. So the aim of every Warrior was to weaken and disarm the Enemy, especially the Commanders, ultimately making him TOTALLY DISARMED AND HELPLESS...
...forcing him towards only Two Options...
...Either accept the Defeat by Surrender to become a SLAVE or DIE in the Battlefield..
So if any Warrior refused to surrender... even after his helpless state as Totally Disarmed... HE USED TO BE KILLED.
Lord Rama is highly praised mainly because He was MAGNANIMOUS to grant exception to His Enemy...
...by asking him to return on the next day....either to confess or better prepared to confront and DIE. in the Battle.
If Rama would have killed Ravana in his disarmed state... Nobody could have found fault with him...ACCORDING TO THE WAR-RULES of those days....of both these Epics.
The Law Banning the attack on an Un-armed person...was applicable only amongst the Civilians... and NOT IN THE BATTLEFIELD.
... Whereas DISARMING is DIFFERENT from UNARMEDNESS....
"Intentional" DISARMING was THE RUDIMENT OF WAR...in those days.
Rather the purpose of Disarming is to make him realise his Combative incapability, failing in the Supremacy amongst the Combatants...
...Ultimately FORCING HIM to a Dilemma in the Battle... either to SURRENDER or DIE....No other Choice.
Even the acceptance of Surrender... by the Enemy, was left to the Discretion of the Dominant.
EVEN THE SURRENDERER could be killed in the Battlefield due to Distrust by the Winner...
... Treating him as a Traitor...WORSE THAN AN ENEMY...Or as a Future MIGHTIER ENEMY.
...War-Law could find No flaw in either sorts of decisions.
More To continue... after Discussions on this part.
...
Thanks Mr. Podalangai. It is really interesting how things are different in different parts of India though we all read the same text basically.Quote:
Originally Posted by podalangai
I come from a back-ground and understanding that Mahabharath is all about good vs evil. I believe Sudhama Sir too was setting a similar tone. So my contentions on behalf of Dhuryodhan revolved around proving that it was oppurtunism that drove the war and not for the purpose of upholding moral values.
With this explanation of yours ( and if everyone agrees to it ), that Mahabharath was not an idealistic follow-path, or not a fifth-veda, I have no point left to disagree. I was only saying that Dhuryodhan should not be considered as an embodiment of all-evil. For his mis-doings on earth were considered very minor, to the extent that he served only 40 years in hell and thence-forward became a permanent resident in heaven even before Yudhistr` arrived there !!
Well said Podalangai!
And thanks to Pizzalot's efforts in kickstarting this discussion that these other viewpoints have emerged. As I had stated, both the parties had their flaws and they reapeed the results of their wrongful deeds. That, is the only lesson one might learn from this whole story.
To divinise the Pandavas as has been done traditionally and call them perfect is narrow-minded and bigoted.
They certainly didn't lead very happy lives either, and paid for their deeds.
As Krishna summarizes in the Gita, as you do, so you reap, and the only way to get out of this cycle is to give up the fruits of your actions.
In some ways, if one looks deep enough, the entire MB can be seen as setting the stage for the Gitopanishad! The word "Kuru" also means "action". Thus, both Pandavas and Kauravas are descendents of Kuru (or action).
And their attachment to the fruits of their action leads them into the cycle of suffering and enjoyment. To get out, the only way is Nishkamaa Karma or desireless action.
Sudhama Sir, even if there was no explicit listing of rules we can still understand the rules of those days seeing the reactions of neutral characters.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sudhaama
Nakeeran, please assert your point with proof. We hope you are going to cover them in your day by day account of war.
Quote:
Sudhama : Whereas you are basing some of your arguments, indirectly taking the War-Codes of the present days as your YARDSTICK?
Mr. Sudhama !
I have not even started describing the war events . How did you conclude that I have based my arguments ?
I will ensure that the post of mine is with facts & adequate reliable documents :D as I have taken this task as a God sent mission to share with everyone about the great war & its consequences.
Thanks :D
Now, I am working ON THE EXACT TIME & PERIOD DURING WHICH THE WAR MIGHT HAVE TOOK PLACE .
I will be presenting this first before moving to the war .
When the war was about to commence, suddenly Yudhistira , dropping his arms & ammunition, proceeded towards the Kaurava army alone & by foot !!
This made every Pandava worried - why our Chief is going alone towards the enemy without informing anything to us ?
Right from Arjuna to Sahadeva , the entire Pandavas got terribly confused by his approach .
However, Krishna quicky assessing the mindset of Dharmaputhra told Arjuna that your brother is going to seek the blessings of all elders !
Thus proceeded Yudhistira first towards the great Grandsire , the ultimate warrior on the earth - THE SUPREME COMMANDER OF THE KAURAVA ARMY & HIS GRANDFATHER - BHEESHMA
Saluting to him, Dharmaputhra requests him for his blessings that he should win the war ! Bheeshma , on his part, blessed him that Dharma will always win
Then, Yudhistira takes the blessings of Drona & Kripa & finally goes back to his troops.
Atlast, the Pandavas heaved a sigh of relief on seeing their chief coming back !
When the war was about to commence, suddenly Yudhistira , dropping his arms & ammunition, proceeded towards the Kaurava army alone & by foot !!
This made every Pandava worried - why our Chief is going alone towards the enemy without informing anything to us ?
Right from Arjuna to Sahadeva , the entire Pandavas got terribly confused by his approach .
However, Krishna quicky assessing the mindset of Dharmaputhra told Arjuna that your brother is going to seek the blessings of all elders !
Thus proceeded Yudhistira first towards the great Grandsire , the ultimate warrior on the earth - THE SUPREME COMMANDER OF THE KAURAVA ARMY & HIS GRANDFATHER - BHEESHMA
Saluting to him, Dharmaputhra requests him for his blessings that he should win the war ! Bheeshma , on his part, blessed him that Dharma will always win
Then, Yudhistira takes the blessings of Drona & Kripa & finally goes back to his troops.
Atlast, the Pandavas heaved a sigh of relief on seeing their chief coming back !
how come parasuram and krishna be in same era?..
confusing..isnt parasuram an avatar of vishnu..
or the saint has the name of lord parasurama?