Mythological Masti

India-Forums

   
Mythological Masti
Mythological Masti

Lord krishna--real hero or villain of mahabharat?? (Page 2)

Rishrabh IF-Sizzlerz
Rishrabh
Rishrabh

Joined: 13 June 2012
Posts: 17322

Posted: 19 August 2013 at 12:09pm | IP Logged
Originally posted by SRUJAconscience


"Lord Krishna appears as an old aged brahmin in front of Karna and asks him for the fruits of all the dharma that he has done and as usual Karna gives that and dies."

This episode is not from the Vyasa Mahabharata. 

This is from 'Villi Bharatham' a Tamil poetic translation by Villiputhur Alwar.

A Brahmin appears before Karnan when he is about to die having been pierced by Arjuna's arrow, while trying to lift his chariot's wheel. The Brahmin requests for some dhana from Karna. Karna, the supreme man of charity, cries that he does not have anything to give this Brahmin.

The Brahmin reminds him that he can give him the mountain like punya which he has accumulated throughout his life with his matchless dhana. Karna feels happy that he has now got something to give this Brahmin. He spontaneously does so without any further thought. And at that moment he sees the Brahmin transforming into Lord Hari.

Why did Hari (Krishna) do it? Why did he ask Karna for dhana even at that desperate moment? Why did he take away all his punya? Is it a cruel act of Krishna? No. It is very easy to get misled by such erroneous thoughts or misunderstanding. It is actually an act of karunya by Lord. Throughout his life Karna indeed did limitless dhana. But he had not performed them as an arpana to Lord Hari. This limits the benefits he will eventually derive out of that punya. But Krishna by asking for and accepting all his punya, makes Karna do the supreme dhana, that of donating all his punya to Bhagavan Himself. This elevates his dhana to a supreme level, as a Bhagavath Arpana. To bless Karna with his bhagya is the real intention of Lord Krishna, while He himself risks being seen as heartless. This is the true karunya nature of God Sri Hari.

At this juncture, Krishna induces Karna to ask whatever boon he wants. And Karna asks whether there is any boon bigger than dying in the lap of God Krishna with the vision of His Divine face.

Villi Bharatham, Book 17, Verses 250 & 251:

Krishna then said, 

" I was instrumental for the following;

1) Indra got Kavach kundal from you as a gift.

2) Kunti prayed you not to use Nagastra twice and got that boon.

3) I informed your birth secret long before.

4) Lowered the ratha and thus saved Arjuna from Nagastra.

I have done these things for the sake of you. If Jivatma does wrong due to friendship, I have to rectify those." 

Thus Lord Krishna elevated Karna to the level of Sarabhanga Rishi who submitted all his punya to Lord Rama.



thanx 4 sharing this..Big smile


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

pakhara

..RamKiJanaki.. IF-Addictz
..RamKiJanaki..
..RamKiJanaki..

Joined: 20 August 2008
Posts: 59310

Posted: 20 August 2013 at 10:59am | IP Logged
God is faultless. The rules of right and wrong which govern human beings do not apply to God, because he does everything for the betterment of the entire human race. That is why, blaming Ram for exiling Sita, or blaming Krishna for the Mahabharata, is meaningless. We can spend our entire lifetime trying to find fault with God's incarnations, but ultimately we will be the fools.

As for the Mahabharat, every character besides Krishna had faults. It is not an epic of idealism like the Ramayana. Not just the Kauravas, even the Pandavas had faults, and Karna was no hero (at least in my opinion). He did pretty despicable things too, especially during the vastra haran. I also don't believe he was any stronger than Arjuna, for the reasons that Vrish pointed out.


Edited by JanakiRaghunath - 20 August 2013 at 11:01am

The following 9 member(s) liked the above post:

kshitu_20jklpcherrycoollanu rulzpakharamythili2debasree04RadhikeraniRishrabh

pakhara IF-Rockerz
pakhara
pakhara

Chidiya Ghar Banner Contest Winner
Joined: 13 October 2010
Posts: 6221

Posted: 20 August 2013 at 7:03pm | IP Logged

Okay, first of all, before you even read the Bhagavad Gita or Mahabharat, you have to recognize that Shri Krishna is God. Don't put quotations around the word. He is God. The Bhagavad Gita very explicitly declares him as God! He is the one who constructed the entire episode so as to teach all of humanity a lesson. So, if you don't believe in God, then you can treat all the characters in the Mahabharat as fictional characters, and what they do or don't do shouldn't matter to you at all. And if it doesn't matter to you, then there is no reason for you to even create a thread about it and that's that. But if you do believe in God, then you shouldn't doubt his actions. If you do believe in him, believe in what he does, and believe the fact that he did everything for the betterment of society.

Second, the Bhagavad Gita preaches the concept of rebirth and the fact that no one really ever dies. Their body dies, but their soul is reincarnated as another body. "Just as a man giving up old worn out garments accepts other new apparel, in the same way, the embodied soul, giving up old and worn out bodies, accepts new bodies." (Chapter 2, Verse 22) Obviously, that doesn't justify the killing of innocent people, that is still wrong, but you have to understand this was a war. Innocent people didn't die, warriors died in a battlefield. All of the people fighting on the side of the Kauravas, regardless of how virtuous they were, had basically signed themselves up to die when they rallied up on the evil side. You pointed out specific parts of the Mahabharata such as the Draupadi vastra haran as a vadlidation for the punishment of Duryodhan, but not of Karna. This is what you said: "If Krishna had to punish, he should have done it with Duryodhana and Shakuni and not Karna." But don't you see that Karna was fighting on the side of Duryodhan? Do you not get that? He was not fighting for dharma, he was fighting for adharma. Krishna was fighting on the side of dharma. By killing Karna, Krishna hasn't "eradicated dharma on earth," as you say. By helping defeat the Kauravas in a legitimate war, he reestablished religion!

The following 9 member(s) liked the above post:

Bhavaani_gReenheaRt_jklpcherrycoollsparikhmythili2debasree04Rishrabh..RamKiJanaki..

debasree04 IF-Sizzlerz
debasree04
debasree04

Joined: 13 August 2010
Posts: 19986

Posted: 22 August 2013 at 8:49am | IP Logged
Originally posted by JanakiRaghunath

God is faultless. The rules of right and wrong which govern human beings do not apply to God, because he does everything for the betterment of the entire human race. That is why, blaming Ram for exiling Sita, or blaming Krishna for the Mahabharata, is meaningless. We can spend our entire lifetime trying to find fault with God's incarnations, but ultimately we will be the fools.

As for the Mahabharat, every character besides Krishna had faults. It is not an epic of idealism like the Ramayana. Not just the Kauravas, even the Pandavas had faults, and Karna was no hero (at least in my opinion). He did pretty despicable things too, especially during the vastra haran. I also don't believe he was any stronger than Arjuna, for the reasons that Vrish pointed out.

Totally agree !!!

Krishna told after the Abhimanyu's death that though he knows everything still he cant go against nature...as far i can remember after rajsuya jagya at Indraprastha Krishna told everyone (Vishya, Dronacharya, Dhitarashtra etc) about their duties but everyone did their own...God gives us 2 paths - right & wrong but we choose the path according our mind, circumstances, wish etc...as @Janaki said every character including Pandavas did something wrong in their life...Krishna supported Pandavas not because he has relation with them rather Pandavas were still in side of dharma...
Now Comes to Karna, he also did wrong...how he behaved with Drapaudi is not at all appreciating...if anyone support some wrong person then their works also be wrong maximum times...when Krishna told Karna about his real parents, Karna told Him that if he overlooked the Duryadhana's friendship & join Pandavas, how would he face Drapaudi...its impossible for him...
When they killed Abhimanyu, Karna knows about his real relation with him still he was the part of that killing...then what Krishna did wrong when he told Arjuna not to wait in the time of Karna's last moment ??

The following 6 member(s) liked the above post:

kshitu_20jklp.Vrish.mythili2Rishrabh..RamKiJanaki..

rakshaanra IF-Dazzler
rakshaanra
rakshaanra

Joined: 16 July 2009
Posts: 3302

Posted: 29 August 2013 at 12:00am | IP Logged
Some people are envious and offensive
varaali IF-Dazzler
varaali
varaali

Joined: 17 July 2006
Posts: 2961

Posted: 30 August 2013 at 11:22am | IP Logged
In a war it does not matter who is right. What matters is who is left.


Krishna believed in this maxim.


Let me play the devil's advocate here. Let's not say that Krishna was God and hence what he did can be justified in the name of 'dharma'. 


Now let's for a moment forget that Krishna is supposed to be a God incarnate. Let's just assume he was an individual. So what kind of a man was he and what propelled him to the status of God?


To begin, with he was supremely talented in archery and martial skills. He was the only warrior of his time to be able to control the four horses yoked to a chariot (without the help of a sarathy ) and also take aim at a speeding target- something even Arjuna was unable to master. 


He is also supposed  to have been extremely good looking- albeit a little on the darker side.


Now  the deadly combination of points 1 and 2 made him  the heart throb of many a woman, and he ended up with not one, not two but eight wives. Surpassing even his father who had only seven. Arjuna, in comparison, could only manage four.


And oh, he was supremely self confident. The confidence that even at the last minute, it was possible to make work things in his favour. 


Now, because the Pandavas were more closely related to him than the Kauravas, he threw in his lot with them. Also he had a soft corner for Arjuna- who was the only archer who could come close to him in skill and ability.


Now, during the great battle, when rules were anyway being flouted, what sense did it make for the Pandavas alone to stick to the rules? Forget all talk about who was on the side of dharma and who was siding adharma. Okay, Duryodhana did cross the line by ordering his cousins' wife to be stripped, but who asked Yudhishtira to place her as a stake?


History would anyway be written by the winners, so just in case the Pandavas played the game by the rules and were killed in the process, was Duryodhana going to acknowledge that the Pandavas had stuck to the rules?


Krishna had to ensure that the Padavas came out of this battle alive and he used every trick in the book to make it possible. He goaded Arjuna when he lost his confidence at the crucial juncture, he suggested Yudhisthira lie about Ashwathama being killed, etc etc. 


He realized that Bhagadutta had discharged the Vaishnava astra and stood up to recieve it on his chest- thus saving Arjuna. He realized Ashwathama had discharged the Narayana Astra and only he (Krishna) knew how it could be quelled. He realized Karna had discharged the Nagastra and quickly forced the horses to bend so that the astra would miss Arjuna's face and hit his crown instead. This was Krishna's prodigious talent at display.


He had a hunch that Ashwathama would be up to some mischief on the final night and hence suggested that the Pandavas sleep elsewhere. 

Krishna, in the MB battlefield was essentially a warrior- not a pundit-  to discuss what was right or wrong. And a warrior's instinct is to come out of the battle field alive. Krishna had to think of every possible device, use every ounce of cunning he had, and come up with on- the spot solutions to ensure they won the war. 


Why, then was Krishna worshiped? 

Well, why won't he be? Heroes are always worshiped. Idols are always worshiped. 

It is true- Krishna was indeed a hero. And heroes need not be saint or martyrs...





Edited by varaali - 30 August 2013 at 10:58pm

The following 12 member(s) liked the above post:

sjnpchandana123srishtisinghnapster.Vrish.Surya_krsnbhaktanu rulzmythili2RadhikeraniArijit007VasusenaRadheya..RamKiJanaki..

.Vrish. Viewbie
.Vrish.
.Vrish.

Joined: 25 October 2008
Posts: 26250

Posted: 31 August 2013 at 12:13am | IP Logged
Varaali
You just opened a whole another can of worms, LOL but one that I've been wanting to see opened for a while, Evil Smile but never really got the opportunity, since none of the current shows, from DBSK onwards ever got to that stage.

I don't consider Krishna a villain, but too many of his decisions were incredulous, given the moral arguments that he presented against the Kauravas.  For instance, if the Kauravas were the core of all that was evil - sans his earlier enemies who had been decimated by him or Bhima - then it begs the question - why was he practically neutral during the war?

After all, when Duryodhan & Arjun both approached him, he saw Arjun first, and gave him the first choice of what he wanted.  But he could just as easily have said that he'd throw his entire lot w/ the Pandavas, and offer any dissenters the option of joining the Kauravas.  There were his familial relationships w/ the Pandavas, all of which trumped his cross-dressing son Samba's marriage to Duryodhan's little girl who was abducted from her swayamvara.  (Speaking of which, did Krishna support that marriage to prevent Duryodhan from getting another ruler as an ally from the matrimonial alliance w/ Lakshmanaa?)  Besides, Duryodhan too could have had the same sort of emotional heartache that Arjun had fighting Bheeshma had he been torn b/w widowing his daughter & risking defeat of his army at the hands of Samba.

It was not self preservation of his clan, b'cos at the end of it all, they were all destroyed, as a result of the cursen of rishis Durvasa, Kanva, Vishwamitra & Gandhari.  I don't see what that extra 36 years got them.  He might as well have asked Pradhyumna, Samba, Bhanu and others  to simply fight on the Pandava side (Samba would not have been obligated to fight for Duryodhan - that obligation only worked one way - for a jija's side to be supported, but not the bahu's maayka's side.)  If Bheeshma, Drona, Kripa, Ashwatthama, Karna knew that they were fighting on the side of evil, make it even more painful for them by making them fight Krishna himself.  Krishna was never one to mince words, so why couldn't he bluntly tell Duryodhan that he considered him evil, and therefore, the thought of supporting him simply didn't arise?  Instead of letting him have the Shamshaptakas and Kritavarma?  Had Krishna been at battle w/ Ashwatthama, Pradhyumna w/ Bheeshma & Arjun w/ Drona much of the time, then the war would have been more balanced, or in favor of the Pandavas.

If Krishna wanted the Pandavas to survive, why just them?  Since they were all aging anyway, and the next generation - Abhimanyu, Draupadi's sons, Virata's sons and so on were all coming of age.  If he kept the Pandavas out of the camp that 18th night so that they don't get slaughtered by Ashwatthama, why not save Draupadi's sons as well?  Had he fought in the war, there would have been 2 more warriors aside from Arjun & Abhimanyu who'd have known how to destroy a chakravyuha - himself and Pradhyumna.  Had he & his family fought on the Pandava side, they could have made this war largely one sided, and seen to the annihilation of the Kauravas, w/o Drona & Ashwatthama killing every major warrior that fought on the Pandava side.  As it is, the Pandavas were miserable for their 36 remaining years.  Saving their sons and allies would have made it more than a pyrrhic victory, and Krishna could also have had Yudhisthir lead a transitional government until Abhimanyu, Prativindya & whoever else was crowned, and then have the Pandavas retire for heaven, while he too could have made arrangements for the Yadavas as well.

Also, in the process, it's perfectly likely that a good portion of the Yadavas would have been destroyed, and the arrogance that descended on Dwaraka over time would have been tempered had Dwaraka too experienced war losses.  Combating the divine weapons of Bheeshma, Drona, Ashwatthama, Karna & Kripa, it's very likely that a lot of Krishna's sons and other warriors would have gotten killed, and that would have forced a sobriety on the part of the Yadavas as well.  And it's not even necessary for Krishna to have broken the vows of Bhima & Arjun - Bhima still could have massacred all the Kauravas, maybe sparing Vikarna, while Arjun could still have slain Karna (this part I still hold against Kunti, and to a lesser degree, Krishna himself).

Also, Bhulok would still have been rid of more than half its kshatriyas, which would have eased things a lot (since one of the reasons Krishna wanted this war was to rid the earth of its kshatriyas).  As it is, after the war, Yudhisthir asked Arjun not to kill enemies of the yagna, since he didn't want more bloodshed, so it's not like Yudhisthir/Krishna (I'm conflating the 2 here for this analysis) wanted all Kshatriyas destroyed, the way Parashurama did.  A situation where the Kauravas lost everything and the Pandavas some would have been more stable for Bhulok too.  Also, warriors on the Pandava side who were immoral, such as Drupad, could still have been killed, w/o having to destroy all Pandava allies as a result.

I think the point is that in Kurukshetra, one loses whether Krishna was human or divine.  Why would someone who defeated Banasura despite the latter being supported by Mahadev & Guha as well as slew the likes of Narakasura & Shalva and defeated Jarasandha 18 times in battle have to figure out ways of the Pandavas surviving?  He was the most powerful warrior on earth, make it count.  Confront Duryodhan in the same manner that he confronted Kansa, Jarasandha, Sishupala, Shalva, Dantavatra, Narakasura, Paundrak, Sudakshina, and oversee their defeat.  Bhima could still have destroyed Duryodhan's thighs in battle and drank Dushashan's blood, Arjun could still have slain Karna, but Krishna's participation in the war would have seen to a comprehensive, emphatic victory, not a pyrrhic one that the Pandavas ultimately achieved.

Originally posted by akshirocks

then according to u main villain behind mb or karna is kunti...

Absolutely Angry


Edited by .Vrish. - 31 August 2013 at 1:02am

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

chandana123srishtisingh

Patrarekha IF-Sizzlerz
Patrarekha
Patrarekha

Joined: 14 July 2010
Posts: 14203

Posted: 31 August 2013 at 7:13am | IP Logged
Karna is the most tragic character in Mahabharat

Go to top

Related Topics

  Topics Author Replies Views Last Post
Lord Rama had 1 sister ????????!!!

Author: Proud-India   Replies: 7   Views: 588

Proud-India 7 588 17 March 2014 at 4:56pm by ..RamKiJanaki..
TV show on Lord Buddha-Discussion

2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Author: .Samrata.   Replies: 56   Views: 4392

.Samrata. 56 4392 10 September 2013 at 2:26am by FrozenRain
Hanuman's meeting with His Lord in Dawapar Yug

Author: krsna17   Replies: 0   Views: 418

krsna17 0 418 27 August 2013 at 6:13am by krsna17
Lord Rama, Valmiki, Luv-Kush

2

Author: varaali   Replies: 11   Views: 2860

varaali 11 2860 15 April 2013 at 3:36pm by RJ1234
Radha as Krishna and Krishna as Radha

2 3

Author: ..RamKiJanaki..   Replies: 17   Views: 8999

..RamKiJanaki.. 17 8999 29 January 2011 at 8:57am by ...PARiNA...

Forum Quick Jump

Forum Category / Channels
Forums

Mythological Masti Topic Index

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.

Popular Channels :
Star Plus | Zee TV | Sony TV | Colors TV | SAB TV | Life OK

Quick Links :
Top 100 TV Celebrities | Top 100 Bollywood Celebs | About Us | Contact Us | Advertise | Forum Index