The Greatest Indian Epic - Mahabharath

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hari Krishnan

I can sense the sarcasm over there. I am not visiting the ForumHub to while my time away exchanging words on who is right and who is not; or to judge the historical accuracy of any particular incident; or to bandy words. I am just sharing whatever came in my way and whatever I learnt, appreciated, enjoyed..

---

Dear Mr. Hari Krishnan,
First of all I am not against you or any one writing here. I am against the concepts of converting or justifying myths through scientific or historical data. I accept MB is a great epic and uncomparably good literature. As long as it is discussed in that aspect, I never even bother to interfere. If some one says, a human can hold the so-called soul as per his wish even after his major life supporting organs were pierced by multiple number of arrows, I have no option except placing my views, even if you compare it with a better altered so-called historical evidences with accurate time scales.

Please go ahead....

Mr r_kk,

Thanks for your views. What I have written on Duryodhana is supported by the actual text from Vyasa Bharata and Srimad Bhagavata, It is not I who say that Duryodhana was lying there for two days, but Vyasa and Suka. Therefore your allegation should most properly be levelled against them and not against me.

Speaking of the last moments, if at all interested, please go through the words of Satyavan (Savithri) that Vysa gives, narrating all the symptoms and the pain that he is going through. He speaks of 'his head being pierced with thousands of nails at the same time; profuse sweating; pain on the back and chest.' Anyone who reads this portion can see what Satyavan was describing was nothing other than a heart attack.

May be, heart attack is a recent development and did not exist during the time of MB.

Every kind of view is welcome, as far as I am concerned. It is a free for all forum. But every freedom comes with its limitation. Why at all should I write the balance 80% for somebody to come and examine later! Am I taking some university exam or what!

I am presenting certain facts, support them with textual evidence and give an appropriate interpretation, from my point of view. How I do it is my business. If the interepretation is not convincing, yes, please go ahead and say why you think it is not convincing. Or raise a question on its validity. Sarcasm and veiled threats won't help in any manner.

Mr Hari Krishnan! That was by far the most level-headed statement made on this Hub in a long time.

Personally, I have great respect for r_kk's sensible views, but the superb way in which you demonstrate your total lack of interest in getting into any argument is laudable.

And besides, r_kk, faith is a personal prerogative! If one man is willing to believe that a man can hold on to his life for as long as he wants, or that a woman could wage a war with death and bring back her husband to life, it is Faith. Not all logic in this world can pierce that faith, and as such, it is a wholly unnecessary and unwarranted intrusion for anyone to cast any aspersions on that faith.

I do agree that you are extremely sensible in your views. And it is also clear that you do not subscribe to many views expressed in this or similar threads. That being the case, it is best if those that believe are left to their belief! There is no gain for either party in trying to do anything about the other.

And I think Mr Hari Krishnan's superb example is worthy of being emulated.

With this note, I hope all digressions will once again be ended, and we can resume discussing the epic and its stories.

Mr. Hari,
I thought 9 am - 3pm was your own view. If you would have told the source reference, I wouldn't have asked for the balance 80%. I thought raising comments on 20% may not be worthwhile.

Any way, let me stop here and allowing this discussions to flow.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by r_kk

Mr. Hari,
I thought 9 am - 3pm was your own view. If you would have told the source reference, I wouldn't have asked for the balance 80%. I thought raising comments on 20% may not be worthwhile.

Any way, let me stop here and allowing this discussions to flow.

---

Here are excerpts from The Bible:

"And straightway in the morning the Chief preists held a consultation with the elders and scribes and the whole council, and bound Jesus and carried him away, and delivered him to Pilate." (Testament according St. Mark, Chapter 15, Verse 1)

"And it was the third hour and they crucified him." (Ibid, Verse 25)

"And when the sixth hour was come, there was darkness over the whole land until the ninth hour." (Ibid, Verse 33)

""And at the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying E-lo'i, E-loi, la'ma sa-bach-tha-n-' which is, being interpreted, My God, my God, why has thou forsaken me?" (Ibid, Verse 34)

Since he was brought to Pilate "in the morning" (first verse) the calculations of the 'first hour' and other references to hours, commence from 6 am in the morning, which is believed to be the first hour, when the sun rises.

Therefore, third hour is 9 am, the sixth hour is 12.00 noon and the ninth hour is 3 pm. This is the prevalent view.

If you 'thought' this was my view, I would better have been asked why I hold that view. Or the basis for what I say. Instead, you asked me to write the balance 80%. In what way would that substantiate what I had expressed in the first place? And then the question took a U turn and criticised an incident which was not discussed at all. The event that is mentioned in your second post refers to Bheeshma, which was not the point of discussion, at least for now.

And now you say that commenting on the first 20% is not worthwhile. Beautiful.

Now I have given the basis for what I wrote. I would not have done this, because I respect the purpose behind the thread. However, if people prefer to indulge in nit-picking, I have to throw the cards on the table, open for everyone to see.

I hope this matter stands clarified here, if at all it was clarification which was sought for, as it appears to be, on the surface. Shall we stop the discussion of Bible and Jesus in this thread, with this?

Yes.Let us continue on Mahabharatha in this thread.Why did Duryodhana find a place in heaven? I read that Yudishtra was so surprised to see him there.Yudishtra is supposed to have entred heaven with his body itself.

Dear Mr. Harikrishnan,

We have gained a lot from your valuable postings including the posting on Jesus....
Requesting you to enlighten us on Mahabaratha .....

Pl post on the justification for Duryodhana attaining the Swarga....

Thank you Balaji and Viggop. In fact, I started writing my view on the point raised by you last night, and was diverted mid-way. The point is not easy of answering in a short form. Give me time for a day or two. Let me think of how to present the subject. Or we can break it into convenient pieces and tackle it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by S.Balaji

Dear Mr. Hari Krishnan,

For all the sins that he had committed on Pandavas ( and various adharmas ) , ultimately Duryodhana reaches Swargam only ( which is normally assigned for Punya aathmaas ) ….. What is the justification for this ?? Is it because he died like a true Kshatriya in battlefield …. Or any other reason… I am not able to understand this…… Pls enlighten us…
And also the shower of flowers which the Devas did to him ….

Pl enlighten us on this…..

---

Dear Balaji AnNe


Ok let me try, Harikrishnan sir, pls correct be if I am wrong.

Duryodhana had only 3 negative aspects with him,

1) Deceit
2) Jealousy
3) disrobing of Draupadai

It was Duryodhana's jealousy over Pandavas that led to war, but his brain was shakuni, Duryodhan was a puppet for Shakuni, and he had NEVER used any Yuth Adharma in the war, where else pandavas NEVER respected or followed Yuth Dharma, and he did fight till the last breath of air!

But Pandavs on other hand always used adharma to win the war, in cases of Karna, Drona and Bheesma !

besides your Moksha alias Mukti is not calculated on this birth ,here I am talking about the Atma within Duryodhana , this atma has gone through many transmigrations of bodies, along with it, it carried all its Karma, be it good deeds or bad deeds, so according to his karma his atma has attained mukti, perhaps Duryodhana's atma has done more good deeds than evil, similar to Pandavas, so we cannot say that, Duryodhana was evil and how come he attained Mukti, these all depend on Poorve Genma Karma!

ellam avan seyal

Om NamShivaya can some one validate my point here???

Dear HariKrishnan Sir

Please take your own time.But do explain how Duryodhana got into heaven.I think he must have sepnt sometime in hell too like all the Pandavas(except yudishtra).The concept of hell and heaven are somewhat confusing to me in Hindu context.We have the cycle of birth and death and that cycle ends only when we get Moksha.Moksha is merging with Brahmam or Shivam or Vishnu etc.So, does this this heaven mean being merged with Brahmam?Oncemerged, there is no seprate identity of a individual soul(jivatma),right? so, how come yudishtra has body too in heaven? Or maybe, this heaven is just another planne of existence and people in heaven too have to strive for moksha? I think i'm getting confused by reading various philosophies.:-(