Mythological Masti

   

Favorite Pandav from Mahabharat and why?? (Page 4)

Poll Question: Who is your favorite Pandav from the Mahabharat??

Poll Choice Votes Poll Statistics
3 [15.79%]
5 [26.32%]
11 [57.89%]
0 [0.00%]
0 [0.00%]
This topic is closed, no new votes accepted

Post Reply New Post

Page 4 of 5

Page 1 Page 3
Page   of 5
Page 5 Page 5

.Vrish.

IF-Veteran Member

.Vrish.

Joined: 25 October 2008

Posts: 20800

Posted: 16 January 2011 at 4:21am | IP Logged
Thank you for your responses.  I'm glad to see an objective analysis of Yudhisthir's actions, rather than just a boilerplate endorsement of anything & everything he did.  I largely accept many of the points you wrote - would have to revisit the ones where I might disagree.

Two things though.  I'd not use BRC's Mahabharat as authentic at all - he took major liberties w/ the story, and once one does that, who's to condemn Ekta or Peter Brooke?  No, I'd rather someone argue either from the texts, or from popular readings - even the ACKs are by & large okay.

The other thing - I don't think a Rama vs Yudhisthir comparison is fair @ all, since the former was divine and the latter wasn't.  And it drilled down to their actions - like Rama always was the warrior of last resort if his army couldn't handle the enemy, whether it was Kumbhakarna, Ravan or whoever.  In Panchavati, while Lakshman was protecting Sita, Rama took on the entire Rakshasha army and obliterated it.  Rama never needed - much less asked - his brothers to fight an enemy that he was capable of fighting (the battles w/ Kush & Luv over the Ashwamedha horse are fictional, and not there in Valmiki)  By contrast, Yudhisthir was easy to defeat and lost several battles to Drona, Karna.  He defeated Duryodhan in battles, but even in his battle w/ Shalya, it was similar to Abhimanyu's battle w/ the Kauravas.  Bhima, Nakul & Sahadev helped disarm Shalya, and when Shalya was on the ground, Yudhisthir speared him.  I don't fault Yudhisthir here, but his fighting prowess was way overrated.

In Yudhisthir's case, the way the battle was described in BRC when Drona tried to capture him was ludicrous - what happened on day 11 & 12 was that Drona was involved in fighting and killing several Pandava allies & warriors, including Drupad's sons Satrajit & Vikra, while Arjun was busy battling Bhagadatta.  Towards the end of 1 or both days, Drona did try to capture Yudhisthir, but Arjun intervened.  However, it's not correct that Drona defeated Nakul, Sahadev, Bhima & Yudhisthir himself b4 Arjun intervened, as shown in the serial.  After all, if Drona could defeat Bhima that easily then, how come he was worsted by Bhima on day 14?  But yeah, capturing Yudhisthir was a goal b'cos he could then be persuaded to play a game of dice on Shakuni's terms, while the bloodletting on the Kaurava side could stop.

But then again, if one were to compare Rama & Yudhisthir, can one even conceive of Rama being unable to defeat an enemy and being vulnerable to being captured unless Lakshman or Shatrughan intervened to save him?  But that's how it was w/ Yudhisthir.

Update: A good online reference to the Mahabharat can be found here

http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/maha/index.htm



Edited by _Vrish_ - 17 January 2011 at 4:10am

Dear Guest, Being an unregistered member you are missing out on participating in the lively discussions happening on the topic "Favorite Pandav from Mahabharat and why?? (Page 4)" in Mythological Masti forum. In addition you lose out on the fun interactions with fellow members and other member exclusive features that India-Forums has to offer. Join India's most popular discussion portal on Indian Entertainment. It's FREE and registration is effortless so JOIN NOW!

ShivangBuch

Goldie

ShivangBuch

Joined: 31 August 2009

Posts: 1045

Posted: 16 January 2011 at 11:19am | IP Logged
Originally posted by _Vrish_

Thank you for your responses.  I'm glad to see an objective analysis of Yudhisthir's actions, rather than just a boilerplate endorsement of anything & everything he did.  I largely accept many of the points you wrote - would have to revisit the ones where I might disagree.

Not at all. Sure. No problem. That is what we are here for. In debate, we are bound to have different opinions and views and we are bound to disagree. And by being aggressive and then giving response to others' aggression, we can bring out more defensive arguments which otherwise the person wouldn't have brought out despite knowing or believing. If we are open minded and still have independent judgmental abilities, objective debates help a lot in balancing each others' thinking and removing each others' wrong or biased beliefs. The rule of great debate should be "either convince or get convinced".

Two things though.  I'd not use BRC's Mahabharat as authentic at all - he took major liberties w/ the story, and once one does that, who's to condemn Ekta or Peter Brooke?  No, I'd rather someone argue either from the texts, or from popular readings - even the ACKs are by & large okay.

Yes. BRC MB had its inaccuracies but it also had great teachings through its interpolated dialogs also and very very extra ordinary interpretation of Bhagwad Geeta's essence and its Karmyog in all dialogs. Actually the Orkut community of this discussion is MB serial community rather than MB epic community. That's why in my responses to my friend, serial dialogs were quoted wherever anything was written in Hindi. I have not read the epic but I access KMG translation whenever I want to confirm about any specific event arising in the discussions or in mind. I would say for knowing about events, one should refer to text. But just like one can learn from any great message giving movie even, the serial has no wrong value to teach. It might misguide viewers about the characters' actual truth but what people will like in those characters will be good point only. I mean if Yudhishthir or Karna are shown to be greater or better in the serial than actual, people will like them more than they should but what they will like will be their virtues only (whether actually present or not). But while discussing in debate about a character, I prefer to come up with homework of epic.


But then again, if one were to compare Rama & Yudhisthir, can one even conceive of Rama being unable to defeat an enemy and being vulnerable to being captured unless Lakshman or Shatrughan intervened to save him?  But that's how it was w/ Yudhisthir.

OMG!! Please don't take me wrong over here otherwise all sisters in the forum would like to slap me.LOL Not at all. I haven't compared Ram with Yudhishthir. Being Ram's devotee, I couldn't do it obviously so in fact, I precisely had clarified that in the beginning of that paragraph. Putting 5 Pandavas together also wouldn't make them equal to Ramji for Ramji being Krishna only and divine incarnation of Lord. I actually only used Ramji's 'MARYADA PURUSHOTTAM' image to explain my point. Like Ram had that image and he actually was in all facets, Yudhishthir had the tag of 'DHARMRAJ' given by contemporary people (not in all facets but only as ruler of kingdom) of Dwapar. And that also not necessarily to be actually the follower of subtle dharma in all actions but being son of dharma and having that tag assigned, he should be having at least the constant mental attitude to do that and relatively to other kings (Krishna, Vidur & Bhishma therefore not considered), he should be wise enough to know all niti/policies of that time better. And Krishna who became ideal king (out of several other roles) as Ramji in previous birth chose Yudhishthir himself to carry forward good values to next generation (first generation of Kaliyug). Similar to he making Sugreev and Vibhishan the kings by removing their wrong doer brothers out of throne. Krishna also did that with Shishupal's and Jarasandh's sons. After defeating a king, winning the heart of the people of that kingdom by making their own original prince the king with generosity. The only difference is that Ram still remained the emperor - king of kings and Krishna never assumed that role. At the most we can compare Yudhisthir with Vibhishan in terms of situation but Vibhishan was chosen to rule only raakshasa race and Yudhisthir was chosen to rule the entire aaryaavarta. Anyway, that comparison also can't be made being the characters of different eras and also Vibhishan being very big big devotee also and a character simple to understand like most others in Ramayan. The point I was making is that Ram (Krishna) himself chose Yudhishthir for dharmasansthaapan (like choice of confusing mind of Arjun for Geetagyan to be given) to be the deserving ideal king; he should be dhaarmik in general (like Arjun should be character prone to unstable mind easily in general). I mean he may or may not be but as Krishna devotees, for all of us in the forum, either leaving Yudhisthir's character to be analyzed or trying to make our mind positive for Yudhishthir is more pacifying than doubting him.


Edited by ShivangBuch - 17 January 2011 at 2:27am

The following 1 member(s) liked the above post:

..RamKiJanaki..

.Vrish.

IF-Veteran Member

.Vrish.

Joined: 25 October 2008

Posts: 20800

Posted: 23 January 2011 at 4:18pm | IP Logged
I apologize to Shivang - I overlooked this key phrase of yours while responding:
Without comparing Yudhishthir with Ram, I agree that if there is any real symbol (icon) of Dharma, it was Maryada Purushottam. He established dharma of a son, an elder brother, a husband, a friend, a kshatriya, a king and above all sanaatan dharma. But in Dwapar, he (Ram = Krishna) himself chooses Yudhishthir to be only the appropriate person to reconstruct the society, to carry forward the values to next era [(Like he selected the king in Matsyaavtaar) and not as a man setting examples of so many roles as he had already done that in Treta] and assuming himself even a greater role that of a leader and philosopher of universal dharma & great trio GKB (Gnyaan, Karma & Bhakti). In Buddhaavtaar, he even assumes bigger role - the icon of supreme state of spirituality which was an example not for a common man but for a very limited mass of upgraded souls (And people made it a separate religion of common man Smile).

The following 1 member(s) liked the above post:

ShivangBuch

ShivangBuch

Goldie

ShivangBuch

Joined: 31 August 2009

Posts: 1045

Posted: 23 January 2011 at 10:54pm | IP Logged
Originally posted by _Vrish_

I apologize to Shivang - I overlooked this key phrase of yours while responding:
Without comparing Yudhishthir with Ram, I agree that if there is any real symbol (icon) of Dharma, it was Maryada Purushottam. He established dharma of a son, an elder brother, a husband, a friend, a kshatriya, a king and above all sanaatan dharma. But in Dwapar, he (Ram = Krishna) himself chooses Yudhishthir to be only the appropriate person to reconstruct the society, to carry forward the values to next era [(Like he selected the king in Matsyaavtaar) and not as a man setting examples of so many roles as he had already done that in Treta] and assuming himself even a greater role that of a leader and philosopher of universal dharma & great trio GKB (Gnyaan, Karma & Bhakti). In Buddhaavtaar, he even assumes bigger role - the icon of supreme state of spirituality which was an example not for a common man but for a very limited mass of upgraded souls (And people made it a separate religion of common man Smile).

No problem Vrish. That's alright. I enjoyed discussing with you in this poll.

And I couldn't find in KMG text the incident of Gandharva kidnapping Duryodhan to find whether Yudhishthir himself was ready to go alone to save him or not. But I found the Bakasur incident. Yudhishthir didn't offer to go himself but only stopped Kunti to send Bheem as it would be like abandoning the son. That dialog was BRC's interpretation. But then he was convinced by Kunti that what Kunti was doing was wisdom and she had full confidence on Bheem's might. 

The following 1 member(s) liked the above post:

.Vrish.

.Vrish.

IF-Veteran Member

.Vrish.

Joined: 25 October 2008

Posts: 20800

Posted: 23 January 2011 at 11:08pm | IP Logged
When you go thru the whole KMG, you'll be virtually unable to tell the similarity b/w BRC and the original Mahabharat.  There was a renowned author who once wrote a several volume analysis of how BRC was totally distorted from the Mahabharat - I'll try fishing out that name, and telling you which - I'd have to mine the Ramayan forum for that info.

I know a lot of people admire the poetic license, but I don't, since it draws meanings that the original epics never intended.  Just like in the Ramayan, things like the Lakshman rekha, Ahalya turning into stone, Sita being abandoned by Lakshman in the jungles, Kush-Luv fighting Rama's army never happened, similarly a lot  of  things popularly thought to be in the Mahabharat never happened.   Yet, both BRC  & Peter Brooke took great liberties w/ the story, and when one does that, who's to fault Ekta for writing the Mahabharat out of whole cloth?

The above incident -  the Gandharvas did not abduct (not kidnap - that one does only to kids) Duryodhan due to his insulting a girl of theirs, as shown in the serial.  They were friends of the Pandavas, and they were camping @ the same place that the Kauravas wanted to camp, and that's what started the battle, which ended w/ the Gandharvas capturing the Kauravas, & their womenfolk.  Read the Ghosha-yatra Parva and you'll know what really happened.



Edited by _Vrish_ - 24 January 2011 at 9:19am

ShivangBuch

Goldie

ShivangBuch

Joined: 31 August 2009

Posts: 1045

Posted: 24 January 2011 at 12:18pm | IP Logged
BRC MB is based on BORI research and I think it is not totally based on translation but many other research works of the organization (may or may not completely be based on Mahabharat but may also be parts taken from Harivansh as that is also part of BORI research and Mrityunjay - hopefully not the second one). They mention only BORI as the source in the title though and if BORI Mahabharat and KMG Mahabharat themselves are different, I am very puzzled how two translations of same Sanskrit origin can differ?Shocked But anyway, BRC can't be compared with Ekta. Authenticity can't only be the yardstick I would say. BRC's intention was far more noble & knowledgerich (Not the knowledge of epic events or characters I am talking about but knowledge of life and essence of life & philosophy of Geeta - not totally covered but whatever covered is well interpreted & portrayed) and far non-commercial than the latter from what I can see and judge. They can't be put in the same category. And if you talk about poetic license vs authenticity of events, MB itself is a poem. But anyway. It's fine. I am not into this debate. I am happy with BRC's liberties as long as it favours the heros and not anti-heroes (both not correct but the former is better or less worse in general for people's learning). But I would still gradually like to correct the complexities and misconceptions about the characters (even elevation of Pandavas I would like to see as corrected eventually because I can see the serial objectively without being influenced by its characterization anyhow - But I will prefer elevation of Pandavas over elevation of Kauravas and Karna and even Bhishma perhaps). And at any stage if I feel it disturbs the devotion of Krishna, I will leave it. Regarding Ramayan, I have only seen the old serial and I would like to accept both VR and RCM for my devotion and also because of simplicity of characters, I prefer Ramayan over MB for devotion. I don't know whether this post of mine is subjective or objective but don't take it as counter argument this time but only as expression of personal approach towards epics and serials (so it is more subjective this time round I think so you may just take it as an exception if you found my post in general to be objective so far and need not defend yourself because yours previous post also conveyed your personal approach. Matter of individual choice and weights and priorities over here rather than who is right and who is wrong.).


Edited by ShivangBuch - 24 January 2011 at 12:40pm

.Vrish.

IF-Veteran Member

.Vrish.

Joined: 25 October 2008

Posts: 20800

Posted: 24 January 2011 at 12:40pm | IP Logged
Ok, we do differ here - for me, authenticity is paramount.  If a show can't be true to the story, I have little use for it.  BRC seemed to me to be simply projecting BRC's own philosophy into the Mahabharat & changing the script wherever convenient.  That to me is unacceptable.

Here is one example.  At the end of the serial, when Bheeshma was giving his final bhashan to Yudhisthir, the main thing he talked about was maintaining the unity of the motherland, and how he was wrong in proposing partition.  That was not the main theme of the Shanti parva, and it was not even true: sometimes, if kings had more than one son, they'd sometimes either extend their kingdoms, or divide them between them.  Yayati, who was the ancestor of the entire Chandravansh, did precisely that - each of his 5 sons got kingdoms of their own so that they could establish dynasties in their names, but under his ancestry.  Outside the Chandravansh, Rama did both extend the empire - conquer other kingdoms for his nephews, and as for Kosala itself, he split it b/w Kush & Luv.  So what BRC projected Bheeshma as saying was more  of BRC's own political philosophy that partitioning a state is a bad idea, but in historical terms, that was very much the norm.  Today, when people talk about splitting Telengana, or Vidarbha, they are sometimes thought to be anti- their state, but in those times, splitting kingdoms b/w dynasties was very much the done thing.

I don't mind BRC telling the world what they thought should be the norm, but it's unacceptable that they project their views ahistorically onto ancient epics, that sometimes just downright fly in the face of what actually happened.


Edited by _Vrish_ - 24 January 2011 at 1:01pm

The following 1 member(s) liked the above post:

ShivangBuch

ShivangBuch

Goldie

ShivangBuch

Joined: 31 August 2009

Posts: 1045

Posted: 24 January 2011 at 12:52pm | IP Logged
Yes we do differ also and never mind because we also do not differ in a sense as I said, eventually, I also like to correct the inaccuracies gradually and eventually. We both understand the importance of accuracy/authenticity. Only the weight/magnitude is different for us and the urgency or intensity of need of correcting it. I can anytime easily switch over to BRC's approach to be equivalent to any great & beloved fictional movie or novel characters which I think make me grab always right thing only from them. Sometimes, our conscience might be enough judge (or the only possible or available judge if we haven't found the opportunity to know the epics thoroughly and in depth) than full knowledge of the epics.

Post Reply New Post

Forum Quick Jump

Forum Category

Active Forums

Mythological Masti Topic Index

Limit search to this Forum only.

 

Disclaimer: All Logos and Pictures of various Channels, Shows, Artistes, Media Houses, Companies, Brands etc. belong to their respective owners, and are used to merely visually identify the Channels, Shows, Companies, Brands, etc. to the viewer. Incase of any issue please contact the webmaster.