Dwarkadheesh - Bhagwaan Shree Krishna

   

DOTW: how do you choose b/w conflicting scriptures?

Poll Question: Which versions of Ved Vyasa do you most believe over others?

Poll Choice Votes Poll Statistics
0 [0.00%]
0 [0.00%]
0 [0.00%]
0 [0.00%]
2 [100.00%]
This topic is closed, no new votes accepted

Post Reply New Post

Page 1 of 1

.Vrish.

Viewbie

.Vrish.

Joined: 25 October 2008

Posts: 20917

Posted: 12 April 2012 at 2:00pm | IP Logged
Since this serial is about to end by default as a result of the channel itself shutting down, I decided that an interesting discussion of the week would be - what do you use to determine what to believe when there is a conflict b/w various works of Ved Vyasa?  Let me elaborate.

As is well known, Ved Vyasa was the author of the Mahabharata, Shrimad Bhagvatam and Hari Vamsa.  So one would normally expect there not to be discrepancies b/w his various works.  But there are, and pretty major ones.  Here are some examples:
  • Between different works - Vyasa has different accounts of the same events in different books.  For instance, in Mahabharata, in Mausala Parva, he describes how the Yadavas got destroyed, and after that, in the next parva, he describes how the Pandavas went to heaven.  But that account is very different from the one in SB in several details.  Also, in the Mahabharata, he describes how Satyaki's grandfather Sini helped Vasudeva win Devaki, but there's nothing of that sort in SB.
  • Within the same works - In Udyog Parva, Balarama is shown refusing to support either side in the war, but in Shalya parva, it's mentioned that Balarama had urged Krishna to join the Kauravas in the war, which Krishna spurned.  So which was right?  Similarly, the names of Draupadi's sons vary depending on where one reads them within the Mahabharata itself.
These are just 2 examples, and I'm sure that readers can come up w/ lots more.  But what I'm curious about is that whenever you encounter such discrepancies, what is the criteria you use in determining what to believe?  For this discussion, let's restrict it to Vyasa's works, and not go into how other authors of the same stories treat it.

I've also polled this above.  If you do select the last option, I would be interested to see what the various criteria are that help one in determining what to believe.

Hope we can have an objective discussion on these differences during the last few days of this channel.

The following 2 member(s) liked the above post:

ShivangBuchCool-n-Fresh

Dear Guest, Being an unregistered member you are missing out on participating in the lively discussions happening on the topic "DOTW: how do you choose b/w conflicting scriptures?" in Dwarkadheesh - Bhagwaan Shree Krishna 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!

Vibhishna

Goldie

Vibhishna

Joined: 08 January 2009

Posts: 1947

Posted: 12 April 2012 at 11:47pm | IP Logged
Personally, I haven't read Ved Vyasa's works to a great extent but I have tried to understand whatever I have read so far. Most of the stuff I've read are translations and descriptions - usually followed by my search for more info on the same story. Since the discussion is on Vyasa's works, I'll restrict my opinions o his works alone.

First of all, I tend to believe the works that give me the least number of doubts. A litte bit of thiking and analysis of the characters in any story will make the situation clear, like, why a person did what he did even if it was his consequence of his whim or thoughtlessness. I used to try to find logic when I want to choose the work I believe in but I feel that this criterion should be omitted for Mahabharata. The Mahabharata and the related stories are based more on the choices a person made and its consequences rather than the choices to be made. As for Hari Vamsa, it seems to be a catalog or list of facts and events rather than a epic or novel.

This is a guess of mine and I may be wrong. It may be that Vyasa was interested in writing as much as possible on the Kurus and Yadhus and may have been researching on their lineage. If this is true, he may have written more as and when he got more information and hence he may have written different versions in his own works.

Thus, I stick to my method of following what gives me the least number of doubts. I am willing to piece together parts from different works so as to get a clearer picture. I believe that restricting myself to a single work will only narrow down my view. For example,the Pandavas were said to travel South on pilgrimages and expeditions. The versions of the South may give more details on their journeys. I am not too rigid in what I believe though I am strong in my own opinions. If anyone manages to convince me otherwise, I do change my opinions too.

Sorry if this explanation was too boring. I tried to put in the right words Embarrassed


Edited by Vibhishna - 13 April 2012 at 5:02am

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

.Vrish.

.Vrish.

Viewbie

.Vrish.

Joined: 25 October 2008

Posts: 20917

Posted: 13 April 2012 at 2:03pm | IP Logged
I pretty much agree w/ this.  I usually look for the one that gives the most logical explanation, and go w/ that.

A case in point - the Yadava fratricide.  In SB, it's described as the Yadavas suddenly randomly killing each other, like Anirudh vs Satyaki, and so on.  In the Mahabharata, by contrast, it gives a pretty logical flow to things.  All the Yadavas, after years of prohibition, were pretty drunk, and Satyaki reminded everybody of Kritavarma's role in massacring the Pandava army @ night (along w/ Ashwatthama & Kripa).  Kritavarma then pointed out the example of Bhurishrava, Satyaki then reminded him of the murder of Satrajit and after a while, tempers surfaced, w/ everyone picking the people they normally supported.  Then suddenly Satyaki drew his sword & slew Kritavarma, and the Andhakas started attacking him.  Pradhyumna got in to save him, but both Satyaki & Pradhyumna was killed.  Krishna got upset and plucked some of that grass to become a mace, and the other Yadavas followed and started fighting w/ each other until all were dead.

So this Mausala Parva explanation certainly makes more sense to me than what's in SB.  As for the end of the Pandavas, I like the explanation in SB more, where Arjun & Bhima simply follow Krishna to Vaikuntha, as opposed to dropping dead while accompanying Yudhisthir.  However, the latter sounds more credible to me - the 2 of them couldn't abandon Yudhisthir for Krishna, unless it was the case that Yudhisthir too decided to take that route.

Post Reply New Post

Forum Quick Jump

Forum Category

Active Forums

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.