| Author | Subject: Re: The beauty of MAHABAHARATHA |
| Bharat | Posted At 14:37:39 08/09/2002
viggie34, Drona beleived Yudhistir because Yudhistir had never lied. He was the epitome of truth. Here is one example why Drona had to beleive Yudhistir. Bheeshma was also an warrior who could not be defeated by anybody, Yet he was lying on the bed of arrows ie: on his deathbed. So Drona might have thought that if a person like Bheeshma is defeated, then what can be said about his son who was much younger and inexpereinced than Bheeshma. Drona might have also beleived Yudhistir because Krishna was on the side of Pandavas and Krishna can do anything, either by hook or crook. Hence Drona was led to beleive that Krishna along with pandavas must have killed his son. |
| atri |
Re: The beauty of MAHABAHARATHA (Currently 0 replies)
Posted At 06:29:28 09/12/2002 I seem to have embarked on this discussion at a very late stage. So much stuff has happened here for the last few years. I am really surprised that so many people are interested in this MahaKaavyaa ... besides myself. If you guys are interested, I would like to add a few comments myself. There are two ways to interpret the Mahabharata. I mean to say there are two points of view. 1) Keeping in mind that Shri Krishna is the Supreme Personality, the paramatma and the rest are all jeevathmaas... 2) Shri Krishna is another super human in the era, who no doubt was decietful... If you interpret the Mahabharata from the first view point, there is no reason for any explanations or justfications of all the occurings. They will automatically start making sense to you guys. But again if you feel otherwise, there is a place for a magna discussion. Let us talk from the second viewpoint. |
| atri |
Re: The beauty of MAHABAHARATHA (Currently 0 replies)
Posted At 06:31:52 09/12/2002 ) To address BHARAT's query about the right of Duryodhana(using sanskrit, not Duryodhanan-tamil or Duryodhanudu-telugu or Duryodhan-hindi) we will have to look back a few eras and look at the story of King Bharata, the son of Dushyantha and Shakuntala. He was no doubt an emperor,(who ruled the Akhanda Bharata of which Afghanistan, Nepal, Burma etc etc were part), with many strong sons. But he wanted a successor who was not just strong, but wise, just, kind, brave and with all the qualities of a perfect king. He found all these qualities in the son of a brahmin(note here that the caste system which was prevalent in the Vedic age, attributed the caste to the person's deeds and action and not to his birth the way it is misinterpreted by todays Indians) and made him his successor. Similarly, the rest of his descendants were supposed to follow suit in their choosing their successors. This is the reason why Shantanu, shirked and backed off when Satyavati's dad asked him to make Satyavati's son the heir to his throne. He knew that no one can be a better king than his eldest son, Bheeshma who was educated by gurus like Bharadwaja and Brihaspati. Similarly, when it came to installing the king after Vichitravirya, though Bheeshma was all in all for installing Dhritarashtra as the king, Vidura sites the above example of Maharaj Bharata and says that though Dhritarashtra was the eldest, strong, well versed in all the neethis and was fit to be a good administrator, he could not fit as a king as he was an invalid. You must have heard about "Sarvendriyaam, Nayanam Pradhaanam", meaning "Among all the senses, sight is foremost". If they had installed Dritharashtra as the king he could not have been a good king. Let us hypothyse that if Pandu wanted to, he could have plotted against his brother and usurped the throne as Drhitarastra would have definitely have relied on Pandu for his military strength.The king should also be capable of supressing revolutions in his own country and must be popular among the military ranks and the people. Otherwise, the people will throw him down in no time. So they made Pandu, who was equally qualified as an administrator and who won most of India during his conquest, king which is totally justified. |
| atri |
Re: The beauty of MAHABAHARATHA (Currently 0 replies)
Posted At 06:32:15 09/12/2002 Since Yudhistra was the eldest, had all the qualities of a king, since he was backed by his 4 brothers, since every one was sure that even if the Kauravas revolted, the Pandavas were capable enough to handle them(the way they handled Drupada's army where the Kauravas along with Karna failed), since the Pandavas were the sons of the former king namely Pandu(mind you Dritarashtra was just a representative of king Pandu), he was the choice of Bheeshma, Vidura and the entire populace of Hastinapura. Duryodhana, righfully called was analyzed by the elders of the Kuru dynasty as a very greedy, angry,disrespectful, jealous brat right from his childhood was not at all a choice. But they were not able to do anything as, though they could advise the king(representative), the final decision for the heir would be in the king's hand and at the most Vidura, Drona and others could resign if they did not like it, but Bheeshma would have to side with it because of his promise. There is also a discussion by Bheeshma and Vidura where they feel that if Dritarashtra was made king instead of Pandu, his thirst for power would have been quenched and would definitely have willingly crowned Yudishtra the king as he too knew that Yudishtra was more eligible to the throne than his own son. But he had this grudge and felt that he was deprived of the throne by Virura's neethi because of his blindness, and did not want his son to get deprived of the same and his only justification was that Duryodhan was not an invalid. From any angle you look at, Duryodhana did not have the right to the throne. In age, Yudishtra was elder. The Pandavas were more powerful than the Kauravas. Yudhistra was a far better administrator. Yudishtra was the people's choice. He was respectful towards elders, with all the Samskaras. He was just. He treated even the Kauravas the way he treated his own brothers. And finally, he is the son of the KING of Hastinapura and not the respresentative's. More in my next post where I will talk about Shri Krishna and his WICKED WAYS...... |
| atri |
Re: The beauty of MAHABAHARATHA (Currently 0 replies)
Posted At 06:32:55 09/12/2002 Since Yudhistra was the eldest, had all the qualities of a king, since he was backed by his 4 brothers, since every one was sure that even if the Kauravas revolted, the Pandavas were capable enough to handle them(the way they handled Drupada's army where the Kauravas along with Karna failed), since the Pandavas were the sons of the former king namely Pandu(mind you Dritarashtra was just a representative of king Pandu), he was the choice of Bheeshma, Vidura and the entire populace of Hastinapura. Duryodhana, righfully called was analyzed by the elders of the Kuru dynasty as a very greedy, angry,disrespectful, jealous brat right from his childhood was not at all a choice. But they were not able to do anything as, though they could advise the king(representative), the final decision for the heir would be in the king's hand and at the most Vidura, Drona and others could resign if they did not like it, but Bheeshma would have to side with it because of his promise. There is also a discussion by Bheeshma and Vidura where they feel that if Dritarashtra was made king instead of Pandu, his thirst for power would have been quenched and would definitely have willingly crowned Yudishtra the king as he too knew that Yudishtra was more eligible to the throne than his own son. But he had this grudge and felt that he was deprived of the throne by Virura's neethi because of his blindness, and did not want his son to get deprived of the same and his only justification was that Duryodhan was not an invalid. From any angle you look at, Duryodhana did not have the right to the throne. In age, Yudishtra was elder. The Pandavas were more powerful than the Kauravas. Yudhistra was a far better administrator. Yudishtra was the people's choice. He was respectful towards elders, with all the Samskaras. He was just. He treated even the Kauravas the way he treated his own brothers. And finally, he is the son of the KING of Hastinapura and not the respresentative's. More in my next post where I will talk about Shri Krishna and his WICKED WAYS...... |