• Welcome to Tamil Brahmins forums.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our Free Brahmin Community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

How righteous was Karna?

sravna

Well-known member
The character of Karna in Mahabharata is a very intersting and difficult to understand one. His is a very peculiar situation wrought with dilemmas. Specifically I would like to pose the question was the loyalty shown by Karna to Duryodhana a virtue great enough that absolved his position of fighting against the Pandavas?

I would like to quote

You can be absolved of anything but not of ungratefulness to one who has helped you in time.

This is considered as one of the highest virtues because steadfastness to values is very difficult to practice especially when you are faced with severe dilemmas. Karna did it without second thoughts even when Kunti tried to emotionally tried to drag him to the side of Pandavas. Yes he was on the wrong side of Dharma and he knew it but did not let his higher personal values falter.

What do you think?
 

renuka

Well-known member
The character of Karna in Mahabharata is a very intersting and difficult to understand one. His is a very peculiar situation wrought with dilemmas. Specifically I would like to pose the question was the loyalty shown by Karna to Duryodhana a virtue great enough that absolved his position of fighting against the Pandavas?

I would like to quote

You can be absolved of anything but not of ungratefulness to one who has helped you in time.

This is considered as one of the highest virtues because steadfastness to values is very difficult to practice especially when you are faced with severe dilemmas. Karna did it without second thoughts even when Kunti tried to emotionally tried to drag him to the side of Pandavas. Yes he was on the wrong side of Dharma and he knew it but did not let his higher personal values falter.

What do you think?
Honestly Karna is the best character in the Mahabharat.
He is grateful to the extent that blood was not thicker than water.
A rare find..one in a million.

He did the right thing by not crossing over to the Pandavas.
Krishna even tried to tempt him by saying the Draupadi would be his wife too if he crosses over.
Kunti was just playing mega serial drama..she never really cared for him..she just wanted Arjuna to live.

Karna didnt fall for lust or emotions or drama.


Pandavas were always casteist..taunting him as Suta Putra.
Draupadi too insulted him on caste lines during the svayamvara.


Personally I feel Karna should have been the one receiving the Bhagavad Gita..he being the son of Surya Bhagavan who also had received the Gita.
 

prasad1

Active member

Karna in Mahabharat – Hero or Villain?​

Karna is among the most popular and complex characters in the Mahabharata, showing both nobility and nastiness over the course of the story.

Karna

ArticleJul 27, 2020
In this article, Sadhguru looks at the basis of his undoing – his bitterness.

Sadhguru: In India, for people who are conversant with the Mahabharata, there is a whole culture where Karna is a kind of anti-hero. He is a sweet mango gone bad. He was a wonderful human being gone totally bad because he invested in bitterness. His bitterness took him into a disastrous life story. He was a man with a phenomenal sense of integrity and generosity but all this was lost. He died in the battle in a bad way.

The “Low-Born” King​

He was resentful because he did not know whose child he was. But the people who brought him up, did so with utmost love. His foster parents, Radha and Athiratha, loved him immensely and brought him up very well, the way they knew. He always remembered how much his mother loved him. “That is one person who loved me for who I am,” he says. Out of his competence and the will of fate, he became Angaraja – the king of Anga. He got many things and was given a position and place in the palace. In many ways he was also a big king’s sidekick. Duryodhana held him dear and took advice from him. He had everything that life could offer. If you look at his life, the fact of it is that he was a charioteer’s son who became a king. He should have been really happy. A child who is found floating on the water grows up to become a king. Is it not a wonderful thing? But no, he did not give up his resentment. He was always unhappy and miserable because he could not come to terms with what he was being labeled as. Wherever he went, people referred to him as a suta or “low-born” because of his ambitions. Throughout his life he complained about this. All the time, he nourished bitterness within himself about his so-called low birth.
This bitterness made a wonderful human being into such a nasty and ugly character in the Mahabharata. He was a great human being and showed his greatness in different situations, but because of this bitterness, in many ways it was he who turned everything wrong. For Duryodhana, it did not matter what Shakuni said or did, it was Karna’s advice which always sealed the deal. After everything was decided, he would look at Karna, “What shall we do?” Karna could very easily have turned the direction of the whole story.
 

prasad1

Active member
Karna was appointed commander of the Kauravas and took charge of what was left of the Kaurava army on the sixteenth morning. His charioteer was the redoubtable Shalya – uncle of the Pandava brothers Nakula and Sahdeva. How the brother of Madri came to fight on the side of the Kauravas is a tale in itself, but how did the two warriors spend the morning before the battle resumed? Arjuna and Krishna had spent the time before the battle began by getting to understand the purpose of the battle itself. Krishna had delivered the eternal message of the Bhagvad Gita to Arjuna. How did Shalya and Karna spend the time on the sixteenth morning? By arguing. Shalya provoked Karna, comparing him to a child wanting to touch the sun, to “a stupid jackal” shouting “at a maned and angry lion.” The “stupid jackal” being Karna, while the “angry lion” was Arjuna.

How did Karna respond? Need we guess? Karna took Shalya’s bait, and thus began a long argument, a cacophony that was as ugly as the real battle being fought. Karna had the choicest of abuses for the king of Madra, Shalya, his charioteer – “evil in nature“, “You are stupid“, “There are no good feelings in a Madraka“, “He [a Madraka] always lies and is never straight.“, “Noble women [Madrakas], according to their own wishes, mingle with men, known and unknown“, “They drink liquor, eat the flesh of cows and dance and laugh. The songs don’t have proper rhymes“, “Women who are intoxicated by liquor cast off their clothes and dance around. … O Madraka! You are the son of one such“, “They drink liquor made from grain and molasses. They eat the flesh of cows, laced with garlic. They eat bread mixed with meat and fried barley that has not been sowed.

On and on went the bickering. Shalya recounted a tale about a crow and swan, comparing Karna to the crow “that fed on leftovers from a vaishya household.” Karna, in Shalya’s estimation, was no different, and had “subsisted on leftovers from the sons of Dhritarashtra.

This then was Karna’s state of mind as he entered the battlefield.

How did the end come? In the middle of the furious battle, Parashurama’s curse manifested itself, as did the brahmana’s. “the earth swallowed up one of the wheels of Radheya’s chariot.” Karna “wept in rage.” An anjalika arrow, invoked with the right mantras, affixed to Arjuna’s Gandiva, severed Karna’s head.

Karna was the eldest of the four sons of Kunti. He was elder to Arjuna, Bhimasena, and Yudhishthira. Yet his lifelong battle had been with Arjuna. If one looks at Arjuna, the image most likely to be imprinted on the minds of people would be of Arjuna in a chariot commandeered by Krishna, who held the reins of the horses of the splendid chariot. The image cannot, but remind oneself of these lines from the Katha Upanishad:

Know the Self as lord of the chariot,
The body as the chariot itself,
The discriminating intellect as
The charioteer, and the mind as reins.
The senses, say the wise, are the horses;
Selfish desires are the road they travel.
When the Self is confused with the body,
Mind, and senses, they point out, he seems
To enjoy pleasure and suffer sorrow
.” [Katha Upanishad, tr. Eknath Easwaran]
How did Karna respond? Need we guess? Karna took Shalya’s bait, and thus began a long argument, a cacophony that was as ugly as the real battle being fought. Karna had the choicest of abuses for the king of Madra, Shalya, his charioteer – “evil in nature“, “You are stupid“, “There are no good feelings in a Madraka“, “He [a Madraka] always lies and is never straight.“, “Noble women [Madrakas], according to their own wishes, mingle with men, known and unknown“, “They drink liquor, eat the flesh of cows and dance and laugh. The songs don’t have proper rhymes“, “Women who are intoxicated by liquor cast off their clothes and dance around. … O Madraka! You are the son of one such“, “They drink liquor made from grain and molasses. They eat the flesh of cows, laced with garlic. They eat bread mixed with meat and fried barley that has not been sowed.

On and on went the bickering. Shalya recounted a tale about a crow and swan, comparing Karna to the crow “that fed on leftovers from a vaishya household.” Karna, in Shalya’s estimation, was no different, and had “subsisted on leftovers from the sons of Dhritarashtra.

This then was Karna’s state of mind as he entered the battlefield.

How did the end come? In the middle of the furious battle, Parashurama’s curse manifested itself, as did the brahmana’s. “the earth swallowed up one of the wheels of Radheya’s chariot.” Karna “wept in rage.” An anjalika arrow, invoked with the right mantras, affixed to Arjuna’s Gandiva, severed Karna’s head.

Karna was the eldest of the four sons of Kunti. He was elder to Arjuna, Bhimasena, and Yudhishthira. Yet his lifelong battle had been with Arjuna. If one looks at Arjuna, the image most likely to be imprinted on the minds of people would be of Arjuna in a chariot commandeered by Krishna, who held the reins of the horses of the splendid chariot. The image cannot, but remind oneself of these lines from the Katha Upanishad:

Know the Self as lord of the chariot,
The body as the chariot itself,
The discriminating intellect as
The charioteer, and the mind as reins.
The senses, say the wise, are the horses;
Selfish desires are the road they travel.
When the Self is confused with the body,
Mind, and senses, they point out, he seems
To enjoy pleasure and suffer sorrow
.” [Katha Upanishad, tr. Eknath Easwaran]

The contrast between Karna and Arjuna could not have been starker. All through his life, although Karna was a man, who possessed the greatest of talents, he could not bring himself to focus with single-minded attention to any one task. Distracted, he killed a calf, and got cursed. In the Kuru dyuta sabha, he could not keep his mouth shut, ordering Duhshasana to disrobe Droupadi. At Virata, he could not go after Brihanalla, and got distracted in arguing with Drona. Later, before the Kurukshetra battle, he would not ignore Drona and Bhishma’s taunts and walked off the battlefield in a huff. While on the one hand Krishna had dispelled the demons of doubt that raged in Arjuna’s mind at the start of the battle, Shalya, on the other hand, filled Karna’s mind with rage, doubt, and fear.

Thus, when Karna’s end came, the “Self“, for all practical purposes, had already dismounted the “body“. The “intellect” had refused to cooperate with the “Self“, as we witnessed. Karna was a distracted person. In a final assessment, the only thing that separated Karna from Arjuna was focus. One possessed an “intellect” as Krishna, the other Shalya. Shalya himself had not exactly distinguished himself, when he had allowed himself to get fooled by Duryodhana, had he? Karna chose such a person as his charioteer. A starker contrast between the marriage of the self and intellect could not be found than what was on display with Jishnu and Vishnu on the one hand, and Karna and Shalya on the other.
A last question that reinforces this contrast was raised by Dhritarashtra himself, when he asked Sanjaya after Ghototakacha had been killed by Karna’s Shakti weapon. He wanted to know from Sanjaya, “Why did he [Karna] not forget everyone else and hurl it [Indra’s spear] at Partha? Had he been slain, all the Pandavas and Srinjayas would have been killed too. Had that brave one alone been killed, why should victory in the battle not have been ours?” The answer was provided by Krishna himself, to a similar question posed by Satyaki – “The thought of killing the wielder of Gandiva was always in Karna’s heart. O foremost among warriors! But I confused Radheya.” Through his yogic powers, Krishna had been able to distract Karna’s mind. Day after day, for four days, till Karna had been forced to use the Shakti against Ghatotakacha.

I forgot to mention one thing. When Bhishma had assessed Karna’s capabilities, Drona had also weighed in. Before rating Karna as “half a ratha,” Drona had said this about Karna, to Karna himself – “Karna is generous. But he is also distracted.


 

prasad1

Active member
Karna and his supporters often claim that Karna had no choice but to lie in order to get a good education – education worthy of his talent. They claim that the whole system of ashrams and gurukuls was rigged against those of the lower caste.

So Parashurama and Drona were unwilling to teach Karna for their own ideological reasons. Karna could have gone to other teachers who were not so strict and they would have taught him. Krushna went to Sandipani rishi’s ashram where brahmins and vaishyas were taught vedas side by side. I am sure he would have accepted a suta too. He could have asked Shiva, who was always generous with his teachings. Why did he not ask his divine father Surya to teach him ? Karna’s desire for learning was not learning sake. He wanted to show off his skills and prove he was better than his peers. Once he achieved the status of a “king”, he didn’t bother to learn any more. He stagnated because his desire for learning was induced by pride and not wisdom.

For all his generosity and valor in the battle field, Karna was rude, crude and insolent. He was always interrupting elders and other advisers in the Kuru court. His sense of “injured pride” stopped him from supporting the war effort while Bhishma pitamaha was heading the army as its commander. His personal ego was so huge, he could not let anyone else take the honour of beating Pandavas ! If the elders called him Suta-putra, he certainly wasn’t taking it lying down, he called them plenty of demeaning names including impotent, eunuch, traitors and worse. Even by today’s standards, such open insult of elders and seniors would be insolent and considered bad manners.



Bravado in battle –
Arjun baiters often claim Karna was better than Arjun. For all his bravado, Karna ran away from the battlefield when the gandharvas defeated Duryodhan and when Arjun fought on the battlefield of Virat. Even in the battle of Mahabharata, Karna joined the battle on the 11th day, fresh and unhurt, when Arjun had been battling the Kaurava army and the grandsire for 10 long days. For supposedly being better than Arjun, Karna didn’t last in the battle more than 7 days.

For being a self-confessed man of action, Karna consistently supported all of Duryodhan’s mad-cap under-handed, dishonest ideas to hurt, kill or humiliate the Pandavas. Not a good sign for a man of honour or valour.


Many Karna and Eklayva supporters rage and rant at society and its structures claiming it was unfair and offered no career options for those lower down the caste or class ladder. Is it any different now? Don't we still have private and government schools offering different quality of education to those who can afford it? In fact, the time of Mahabharata’s was very progressive. Sutas had just as much chance of social and financial advancement as anyone else. Lets not forget - Sanjay – the narrator of Gita was a suta and he rose in rank to become a very well respected royal adviser. Yadavas as vaishyas ran a prosperous republic. Vyasa and Vidur were also mixed caste and both were at the pinnacle of their own chosen profession. There were teachers like Sandipani in Ujjain who taught all worthy students regardless of their class or caste. Shri Krushna and Sudama, prince and pauper, Vaishya and Brahmin studied a variety of subjects in that ashram.

No matter how many hundreds of reasons Karna might have had for rebelling against the inequalities of the world but – and its a crucial but – he had no reason to take out his frustration on a defenceless woman. His insult to Draupadi was the lowest point in his life. Even if he felt aggrieved at being denied the chance to marry her at the svayamvar, if he was a real man of honour, he would not have asked a married woman to be stripped in public. That was the real “blow below the belt”. To hit out at a woman when he could not harm her husbands shows how low Karna could go. Rape or incitement rape is sinful. Full stop.

This – above all is unforgivable.

Life is unfair.
Deal with it.
Karna never learnt to “deal with it”.

Karna raged and ranted at all and sundry for his own failures till he lost his moral compass and hit out at a woman. For all his other great qualities, Karna was failed by his own utter disregard for morality, especially when it came to Pandavas and Draupdi. What a sad waste of such great potential !

 
OP
OP
sravna

sravna

Well-known member
All said and done Karna was a human being. He reached the heights any human could inspite of nature scheming against him. If he had not been bitter, if he had not been distracted we need to call him divine. Forget those inevitable lapses. He still stands as high as one could imagine for the only reason he stood steadfast with Duryodhana amidst irresistible pressure and temptation. He indeed tried to breach that human divine divide. But he was not with the plot of nature and so had to bungle now and then and eventually succumb.
 

prasad1

Active member
No matter how many hundreds of reasons Karna might have had for rebelling against the inequalities of the world but – and its a crucial but – he had no reason to take out his frustration on a defenceless woman. His insult to Draupadi was the lowest point in his life. Even if he felt aggrieved at being denied the chance to marry her at the svayamvar, if he was a real man of honour, he would not have asked a married woman to be stripped in public. That was the real “blow below the belt”. To hit out at a woman when he could not harm her husbands shows how low Karna could go. Rape or incitement rape is sinful. Full stop.

This – above all is unforgivable.

Life is unfair.
Deal with it.
Karna never learnt to “deal with it”.

Karna raged and ranted at all and sundry for his own failures till he lost his moral compass and hit out at a woman. For all his other great qualities, Karna was failed by his own utter disregard for morality, especially when it came to Pandavas and Draupdi. What a sad waste of such great potential !

 

renuka

Well-known member
Karna was appointed commander of the Kauravas and took charge of what was left of the Kaurava army on the sixteenth morning. His charioteer was the redoubtable Shalya – uncle of the Pandava brothers Nakula and Sahdeva. How the brother of Madri came to fight on the side of the Kauravas is a tale in itself, but how did the two warriors spend the morning before the battle resumed? Arjuna and Krishna had spent the time before the battle began by getting to understand the purpose of the battle itself. Krishna had delivered the eternal message of the Bhagvad Gita to Arjuna. How did Shalya and Karna spend the time on the sixteenth morning? By arguing. Shalya provoked Karna, comparing him to a child wanting to touch the sun, to “a stupid jackal” shouting “at a maned and angry lion.” The “stupid jackal” being Karna, while the “angry lion” was Arjuna.

How did Karna respond? Need we guess? Karna took Shalya’s bait, and thus began a long argument, a cacophony that was as ugly as the real battle being fought. Karna had the choicest of abuses for the king of Madra, Shalya, his charioteer – “evil in nature“, “You are stupid“, “There are no good feelings in a Madraka“, “He [a Madraka] always lies and is never straight.“, “Noble women [Madrakas], according to their own wishes, mingle with men, known and unknown“, “They drink liquor, eat the flesh of cows and dance and laugh. The songs don’t have proper rhymes“, “Women who are intoxicated by liquor cast off their clothes and dance around. … O Madraka! You are the son of one such“, “They drink liquor made from grain and molasses. They eat the flesh of cows, laced with garlic. They eat bread mixed with meat and fried barley that has not been sowed.

On and on went the bickering. Shalya recounted a tale about a crow and swan, comparing Karna to the crow “that fed on leftovers from a vaishya household.” Karna, in Shalya’s estimation, was no different, and had “subsisted on leftovers from the sons of Dhritarashtra.

This then was Karna’s state of mind as he entered the battlefield.

How did the end come? In the middle of the furious battle, Parashurama’s curse manifested itself, as did the brahmana’s. “the earth swallowed up one of the wheels of Radheya’s chariot.” Karna “wept in rage.” An anjalika arrow, invoked with the right mantras, affixed to Arjuna’s Gandiva, severed Karna’s head.

Karna was the eldest of the four sons of Kunti. He was elder to Arjuna, Bhimasena, and Yudhishthira. Yet his lifelong battle had been with Arjuna. If one looks at Arjuna, the image most likely to be imprinted on the minds of people would be of Arjuna in a chariot commandeered by Krishna, who held the reins of the horses of the splendid chariot. The image cannot, but remind oneself of these lines from the Katha Upanishad:

Know the Self as lord of the chariot,
The body as the chariot itself,
The discriminating intellect as
The charioteer, and the mind as reins.
The senses, say the wise, are the horses;
Selfish desires are the road they travel.
When the Self is confused with the body,
Mind, and senses, they point out, he seems
To enjoy pleasure and suffer sorrow
.” [Katha Upanishad, tr. Eknath Easwaran]
How did Karna respond? Need we guess? Karna took Shalya’s bait, and thus began a long argument, a cacophony that was as ugly as the real battle being fought. Karna had the choicest of abuses for the king of Madra, Shalya, his charioteer – “evil in nature“, “You are stupid“, “There are no good feelings in a Madraka“, “He [a Madraka] always lies and is never straight.“, “Noble women [Madrakas], according to their own wishes, mingle with men, known and unknown“, “They drink liquor, eat the flesh of cows and dance and laugh. The songs don’t have proper rhymes“, “Women who are intoxicated by liquor cast off their clothes and dance around. … O Madraka! You are the son of one such“, “They drink liquor made from grain and molasses. They eat the flesh of cows, laced with garlic. They eat bread mixed with meat and fried barley that has not been sowed.

On and on went the bickering. Shalya recounted a tale about a crow and swan, comparing Karna to the crow “that fed on leftovers from a vaishya household.” Karna, in Shalya’s estimation, was no different, and had “subsisted on leftovers from the sons of Dhritarashtra.

This then was Karna’s state of mind as he entered the battlefield.

How did the end come? In the middle of the furious battle, Parashurama’s curse manifested itself, as did the brahmana’s. “the earth swallowed up one of the wheels of Radheya’s chariot.” Karna “wept in rage.” An anjalika arrow, invoked with the right mantras, affixed to Arjuna’s Gandiva, severed Karna’s head.

Karna was the eldest of the four sons of Kunti. He was elder to Arjuna, Bhimasena, and Yudhishthira. Yet his lifelong battle had been with Arjuna. If one looks at Arjuna, the image most likely to be imprinted on the minds of people would be of Arjuna in a chariot commandeered by Krishna, who held the reins of the horses of the splendid chariot. The image cannot, but remind oneself of these lines from the Katha Upanishad:

Know the Self as lord of the chariot,
The body as the chariot itself,
The discriminating intellect as
The charioteer, and the mind as reins.
The senses, say the wise, are the horses;
Selfish desires are the road they travel.
When the Self is confused with the body,
Mind, and senses, they point out, he seems
To enjoy pleasure and suffer sorrow
.” [Katha Upanishad, tr. Eknath Easwaran]

The contrast between Karna and Arjuna could not have been starker. All through his life, although Karna was a man, who possessed the greatest of talents, he could not bring himself to focus with single-minded attention to any one task. Distracted, he killed a calf, and got cursed. In the Kuru dyuta sabha, he could not keep his mouth shut, ordering Duhshasana to disrobe Droupadi. At Virata, he could not go after Brihanalla, and got distracted in arguing with Drona. Later, before the Kurukshetra battle, he would not ignore Drona and Bhishma’s taunts and walked off the battlefield in a huff. While on the one hand Krishna had dispelled the demons of doubt that raged in Arjuna’s mind at the start of the battle, Shalya, on the other hand, filled Karna’s mind with rage, doubt, and fear.

Thus, when Karna’s end came, the “Self“, for all practical purposes, had already dismounted the “body“. The “intellect” had refused to cooperate with the “Self“, as we witnessed. Karna was a distracted person. In a final assessment, the only thing that separated Karna from Arjuna was focus. One possessed an “intellect” as Krishna, the other Shalya. Shalya himself had not exactly distinguished himself, when he had allowed himself to get fooled by Duryodhana, had he? Karna chose such a person as his charioteer. A starker contrast between the marriage of the self and intellect could not be found than what was on display with Jishnu and Vishnu on the one hand, and Karna and Shalya on the other.
A last question that reinforces this contrast was raised by Dhritarashtra himself, when he asked Sanjaya after Ghototakacha had been killed by Karna’s Shakti weapon. He wanted to know from Sanjaya, “Why did he [Karna] not forget everyone else and hurl it [Indra’s spear] at Partha? Had he been slain, all the Pandavas and Srinjayas would have been killed too. Had that brave one alone been killed, why should victory in the battle not have been ours?” The answer was provided by Krishna himself, to a similar question posed by Satyaki – “The thought of killing the wielder of Gandiva was always in Karna’s heart. O foremost among warriors! But I confused Radheya.” Through his yogic powers, Krishna had been able to distract Karna’s mind. Day after day, for four days, till Karna had been forced to use the Shakti against Ghatotakacha.

I forgot to mention one thing. When Bhishma had assessed Karna’s capabilities, Drona had also weighed in. Before rating Karna as “half a ratha,” Drona had said this about Karna, to Karna himself – “Karna is generous. But he is also distracted.


Drona saying Karna is distracted?
Well, Drona is the one who spent his whole life focussing on revenge even to the extent of making Ekalavya cut of his own thumb to make the revenge plot happen.

Drona isnt distracted..but too focus on revenge..what kind of life is that?

At least Karna was returning Shalya's insults with words..unlike Drupada whose revenge is out of proportion.

Drupada insulted Drona with words..so why not either forgive him and get over it or return the insult with words.
Heck no! Drona plots to kill Drupada..day in and day out his plans were on how to acheive that..his whole life was a series of planning and plotting.

God knows how one could survive with that much thoughts of revenge.
 
OP
OP
sravna

sravna

Well-known member
If Krishna were asked who is He among human beings, He definitely would have said, I am Karna among human beings.
 
OP
OP
sravna

sravna

Well-known member
Among the greatest virtues I would say are helping others in need and never forgetting those who helped us when in need. Karna had both these virtues
 
Karna is the true Dharma Raja in this war & he did not insult Draupadi period. Draupadis incident is a cooked up one to make sure kauravas are painted in bad light, & hence justify the war as Dharmic.

1. Krishna just days before the war goes to Karna & asks him to lead the Pandavas in the war as he is the true Dharma Raja. It was Krishna who saved Draupadi when Kauravas were humiliating her & admonishes all the warriors like Bishma, Drona, Duryodhana, & others for allowing such adharmic acts. if Karna really did make such insulting remarks, why on earth, would Krishna go to Karna and & tell him he is the true Dharma Raja & ask him to lead the war on behalf of his brothers Pandavas. ? He also mentions, the pandavas would gladly accept him as the King to lead their armies. Yudhistra & his brothers & most importantly Draupadi would never have agreed to this proposal if Karna had insulted Draupadi.

2. Karna's Death - After Karna was unfairly defeated by Arjuna, Kunti tells her sons that Karna is their eldest brother & pay tributes. Yuddhistra cries and blames Kunti for hiding this from them. His wife is molested, humiliated, and he swore to kill all the kauravas, but cries uncontrollably on Karnas death and curses Kunti.

3. Karna's Life - Except for Draupadis incident, there are no other negative mark on him. His has been an truly exemplary life, with many dravidian tribal legends glorifying him instead of Yuddhistra or Arjuna or others. Many of these legends are the basis for many movies made on Karna. No tribal legends talk negatively about Karna.

4. Kunti talks to Karna, to spare his brothers in the war after telling him that he is the eldest of all. Karna agrees to spare all except Arjuna. if Karna was bad & evil, she should have scolded him for the draupadi's incident or should never have met him.

5. In ancient times, of strict Patriarchy, such an incident happening in open sabha where all the senior warriors are sitting is highly unlikely.

6. Valmiki Ramayan itself praises Karna for his charity, goodness & many incidents like how Karna & Duryodhanas wife were playing board games & how Duryodhana had such faith, he never suspects Karna nor his wife.

7. Multiple Tribal legends all praises Karna and none talk about the molestation incident. Tribal legends are always more truthful than the official cooked up version. if Karna had humiliated Draupadi, all of them would not have written such glorious legends about him, that survive to this day, Atleast some legends would have made a mention of this.

All official texts like Ramayana & Mahabharat were written by victors & hence they had to glorify the winners & most importantly portray the opponents as evil, so that it can be portrayed as a dharmic war. In historical context, it was just a war between cousins & their armies. Neither of them were good or bad, but shades of good & bad like all humans.

In my view, this entire Draupadis incident & the manner of Abhimanyus death was cooked up to justify Arjunas unlawful attack on Karna when he was unarmed.
 
Arjuna lays down his weapons & tells Krishna, he cannot fight a war against Bishma, Drona, cousins & relatives, leading to the Gita Upadesham. After Draupadis incident, Arjuna & his brothers all swear they will kill them all for such a henious act. so why sh0uld Arjuna even hesitate to go to war that too after Draupadi cries in front of her 5 husbands and seeks revenge & she will only be at peace after smearing her hair with the blood of Dushasana.
 
OP
OP
sravna

sravna

Well-known member
Dear Jaykay,

There may be both the elements of awe and respect for elders and the need for revenge for Draupadis incident. Kindly note he did not want to fight against the vituous ones like Bheeshma, Drona etc. Krishna showed him the right path that fighting them and war is the only way for solutions.
 
OP
OP
sravna

sravna

Well-known member
The notion of dharma is a very important. Without it people have no fear or remorse for evil thoughts and actions. It will not only be destructive but sooner or later self destructive. Reality being timeless adharma is against reality and hence the emphasis of the moral angle.
 

renuka

Well-known member
Arjuna lays down his weapons & tells Krishna, he cannot fight a war against Bishma, Drona, cousins & relatives, leading to the Gita Upadesham. After Draupadis incident, Arjuna & his brothers all swear they will kill them all for such a henious act. so why sh0uld Arjuna even hesitate to go to war that too after Draupadi cries in front of her 5 husbands and seeks revenge & she will only be at peace after smearing her hair with the blood of Dushasana.
Btw in your earlier post, you said Valmiki Ramayan praises Karna.
But wasnt Valmiki Ramayan in treta yuga much before Mahabharat which was in Dwapara Yuga?
 

renuka

Well-known member
Arjuna lays down his weapons & tells Krishna, he cannot fight a war against Bishma, Drona, cousins & relatives, leading to the Gita Upadesham. After Draupadis incident, Arjuna & his brothers all swear they will kill them all for such a henious act. so why sh0uld Arjuna even hesitate to go to war that too after Draupadi cries in front of her 5 husbands and seeks revenge & she will only be at peace after smearing her hair with the blood of Dushasana.
Delayed response,.the Pandavas had the option to save Draupadi right away.
An Adharmic act doesnt need a Dharmic reaction...so the Pandavas could have saved her right away instead of saying they were helpless that they had lost the game.
Also gambling is Adharmic to start with..so why suddenly all the talk of Dharma..
 
OP
OP
sravna

sravna

Well-known member
Delayed response,.the Pandavas had the option to save Draupadi right away.
An Adharmic act doesnt need a Dharmic reaction...so the Pandavas could have saved her right away instead of saying they were helpless that they had lost the game.
Also gambling is Adharmic to start with..so why suddenly all the talk of Dharma..
Why the Pandavas did not save her right away? A excellent and very thought provoking question Renuka. I think the physical world is diametrically different from the spiritual world. Whereas in the spiritual reality there is no question of adharma, adharma is allowed to happen in the physical world. A play is set up and within that play all elements needed for unlearning the evil are incorporated. Physical world is more one of logical world and timing is very important than retaliating immediately.
 

renuka

Well-known member
Why the Pandavas did not save her right away? A excellent and very thought provoking question Renuka. I think the physical world is diametrically different from the spiritual world. Whereas in the spiritual reality there is no question of adharma, adharma is allowed to happen in the physical world. A play is set up and within that play all elements needed for unlearning the evil are incorporated. Physical world is more one of logical world and timing is very important than retaliating immediately.
True..just say if I am on a Mauna Vrtam and I see someone walking who might get hit by a speeding truck and did not see the truck..surely I would shout out to the person to alert the person.

I cant say " I was in a Mauna vrtam and I can go againsts Dharma and not alert the person"

Same way, the Pandavas should have helped Draupadi.
Krishna helped her..Krishna didnt say " your husbands have lost and you too are a pawn in the game of dice and the Kauravas have full right to do as they please as you have lost your rights"
 
OP
OP
sravna

sravna

Well-known member
True..just say if I am on a Mauna Vrtam and I see someone walking who might get hit by a speeding truck and did not see the truck..surely I would shout out to the person to alert the person.

I cant say " I was in a Mauna vrtam and I can go againsts Dharma and not alert the person"

Same way, the Pandavas should have helped Draupadi.
Krishna helped her..Krishna didnt say " your husbands have lost and you too are a pawn in the game of dice and the Kauravas have full right to do as they please as you have lost your rights"
Good point again Renuka. The karmic retaliation comes later and at the right time. But Krishna's help was to not let situation go out of control. He reined in the evil act but the real thing was to follow.
 
OP
OP
sravna

sravna

Well-known member
The ultimate goal is to make the wicked people repent for their actions and if not make them perish. However instant actions are required sometimes just as saving Draupadi by Krishna. The evil intent of the Kauravas were exposed but such an evil act would not be allowed to someone for whom God is a personal patron was also shown.
 
Btw in your earlier post, you said Valmiki Ramayan praises Karna.
But wasnt Valmiki Ramayan in treta yuga much before Mahabharat which was in Dwapara Yuga?
I dont think I ever mentioned Karna being praised in Valmiki Ramayan. If I did so, it is not correct.

Multiple tribal legends praise Karna which is the basis for many south indian movies.
 
Delayed response,.the Pandavas had the option to save Draupadi right away.
An Adharmic act doesnt need a Dharmic reaction...so the Pandavas could have saved her right away instead of saying they were helpless that they had lost the game.
Also gambling is Adharmic to start with..so why suddenly all the talk of Dharma..
Agreed. But the key question is did Karna who is otherwise well known for his righteousness, goodness, charity, humiliated Draupadi or not ? The point is if Karna really did it, then Krishna would never have gone to Karna saying he is the true Dharma Rajan, & asking him to lead the Pandavas in the war. My larger point is that the entire incident could be cooked up as victors always glorify themselves and show the losers in a bad light.
 

renuka

Well-known member
I dont think I ever mentioned Karna being praised in Valmiki Ramayan. If I did so, it is not correct.

Multiple tribal legends praise Karna which is the basis for many south indian movies.

You had written the following..i guess its a mistake as you said.

Valmiki Ramayan itself praises Karna for his charity, goodness & many incidents like how Karna & Duryodhanas wife were playing board games & how Duryodhana had such faith, he never suspects Karna nor his wife.
 
Top
Thank you for visiting TamilBrahmins.com

You seem to have an Ad Blocker on.

We depend on advertising to keep our content free for you. Please consider whitelisting us in your ad blocker so that we can continue to provide the content you have come here to enjoy.

Alternatively, consider upgrading your account to enjoy an ad-free experience along with numerous other benefits. To upgrade your account, please visit the account upgrades page

You can also donate financially if you can. Please Click Here on how you can do that.

I've Disabled AdBlock    No Thanks