Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

Karna -The Astrologer

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

I disagree with the following comments of the author.

//# Karna is persuaded by Lord ,but to only Fight Arjun he refuses Krishna'sProposal [ Lord's command is not so important for him than his prestige [ego]that he will be declared coward . Lord could have as well made him a hero had heaccepted , NO faith ! ]# Karna is persuaded by Kunti and SOORYA . He admits he must obey them butcannot for the desire of Fighting Arjun . Karna does not grant what his MOTHERasks for , only for his good ! [ DAANVEER of no use to MOTHER ].//

There is no EGO in Karna. It is only being namak parayana, or being true to ones duty. Duryodhana gave him prestige, kingship, friendship and what not. He does not care of being called a coward. But he is a good friend, a swami bhakt, a faithful and ethical person and knew that he was the only strength of Duryodhana and if now he joins the opposite camp, it would be akin to pushing a spear in his friends heart who needs support from him. He also knew very well that he is going to perish, but he will not walk on dishonest paths and unethical ways of behaviour. So karna is not a coward, and nor does he possess a Ego. he is a good man indeed if you view at him with an unbiased prejudice or approach.

Who says that he is not Danveer or of no use to his mother. He did promise her that she will have 5 sons of her living after the war is over. And he kept his promise. he could have killed all the other Brothers in single combat, and if one reads the Mahabharata war proerly it will be found that he indeed spared his brothers at times when he could have killed them. So one cannot say that he was of no use to his brother. He knew very well when he mentioned to his mother that "5 sons of Yours will live". He meant that " Yudhistara.Bhima,Nakula and sahdev shall nlot be touched by me. And you will ahve either me or Arjuna as living".

Bhaskar. , "sreesog" <sreesog wrote:>> Dear All,> The following is from:http://chiraan.wordpress.com/2009/05/18/karna-the-astrologer/> Love and regards,> Sreenadh> ===================================> Karna -The Astrologer> ---------------------> Posted by chiraan in Astroanalysis, Astrology and purana, Daiva vs Purushartha - can destiny be changed?, karma, mahabharath, people and astrology, yashas -success in career. Tagged: Karna, krishna, kshatriya, kuntee, soota. Leave a Comment> > When Krishna the lord of Universe offers Karna the lordship of the World to leave Duryodhan and side with Pandavas .> > Karn said – "You are right, Krishn, I now know that whatever you have said to me that Kuntee bore me when she was a maiden through her connection with Soorya. At the command of Soorya she abandoned me as soon as I was born without thinking of my welfare. Soot Adhirath found me and took me home. There his wife Raadhaa brought me up with all her affection. Adhirath gave me the name Vasusen. When I grew up, I married the wives according to his selections. I have now sons grandsons through them. My all rites and religious duties are performed with Soot. With Duryodhan I have enjoyed sovereignty for over 13 years. Now when Duryodhan has decided to fight with Paandav considering me as against Arjun, I cannot go back because of fear, death or bloodshed. If I do not indulge with Arjun in single combat, it will be an insult to both of us. > > I am sure that Paandav will do whatever you have said but for now, you must hide this for the benefit of both of us. Let Yudhishthir be king for ever. He has collected a great crowd of warriors. I am repenting for what I said to Paandav. Duryodhan is going to do a Yagya. When you will see me slain by Arjun then Punachiti of this Yagya will begin, when you will see Bheem drinking the blood of Dushaasan's chest then the Som drinking of this Yagya will take place, and when the two sons of Drupad – Shikhandee and Drishtdyumn will overthrow Bheeshm and Drone, then this Yagya will be suspended for interval. When Bheem will kill Duryodhan then the Yagya of Duryodhan will be concluded. When all Kuru women will lament for their husbands and sons in the battlefield without their protector, it will be the last bath of this Yagya. [ Karna predicts the future ]> > I just pray you that don't let these Kshatriya be perished miserably for thy sake. Let them die by weapons in the most sacred place among the three worlds. Whatever you have in mind, accomplish it on this spot only. Till I face Arjun in the field, keep our talks secret."> > Krishn said – "O Karn, Don't you wish to rule over the whole world? You know that Paandav's victory is certain. Divine Bhaum has set up Hanumaan banner like Indra's banner. Extended for one Yojan it will never be obstructed by any thing. When Arjun will twang his bow then that signs off all Yug (Sat, Tretaa and Dwapar). All kings will get excellent state after dying for Duryodhan in the battlefield." Karn worshipped Krishn and said – "Knowing everything why do you want to baffle me? This war is going to happen. The great fierce planet Shani (Saturn) is afflicting the Nakshatra Rohinee which indicates the destruction on Prithvi. Mars is coming to Nakshatra Anuraadhaa through Jyeshthaa indicating a great a slaughter of friends. Certainly a great calamity will come over Kuru family when the planet Mahaapat will afflicts the Nakshatra Chitraa. Moon's position has changed and Raahu is also proceeding towards Soorya. A black circle surrounding the solar disc appears to view." [ Karna's command on astrology can be seen here ]> > Krishn said – "Yes, The destruction of the world is at hand but you are not agreeing for it." Karn said – "If we have come out of the war then we will meet here again, otherwise we shall surely meet in Heaven." and embraced Krishn very hard. Keshav dismissed him and he came back with us."> > > > Kunti went to Gangaa River where she heard Vedic mantra chanting by her son. Karn was standing facing east, so Kuntee stood waiting behind him burning in hot Sun. Then she shifted under the shade of upper cloth of Karn. And Karn continued his prayers until his back was very hot with Sun. Then he turned back and was surprised to see Kuntee standing there. He saluted her properly and bowing his head Vrish (Karn), the son of Vikartan (Adhirath), said to her – "I am Karn, Raadhaa and Adhirath's sson. Why have you come here and what can I do for you?"> > Kuntee said – "You are Kuntee's son, not Raadhaa's, nor your father is Adhirath, nor you are born in a Soot family. I bore you when I was a maiden. You were born in the palace of Kuntibhoj. I gave you birth in my father's house along with Kavach and Kundal on your body. You stand in Duryodhan's camp not knowing your brothers, is not proper. Duryodhan has wickedly snatched Yudhishthir's wealth. You take that wealth back from them and enjoy it. Let people call you like Raam Balraam. If you both are united what is in this world which cannot be accomplished?"> > As Kuntee finished, Karn heard a soft loving voice coming from Soorya – "What Prithaa is saying is true. Follow her words, it is for your good." Karn could not answer immediately because his heart was following only truth. He said – "I cannot accept what you have said to me. Although I should obey you as you are my mother. You abandoned me as soon as I was born. This was the greatest injury you did to my life and fame. Thus I was deprived of all the rights of Kshatriya. You have never thought about my good before this and you are telling me something for my good today? Who is not afraid of Arjun? And if I go to Paandav today, people will say that "I did so because of fright". Just to fulfill my own desires how can I leave Duryodhan's friendship? They always respect me, bow down to me and wait on me. I will surely fight with Paandav. However except Arjun, your other four sons will not be slain by me. I will fight only with Arjun. Whether he will be slain, or me, in both cases my life will be glorified and your five sons will always be alive."> > ————————————————————–end of extract ———————————————————> > Points to be noted in the above speech by Karna ;> > * Karna Knew he was going to be slained by ARJUN> * Karna had complete knowledge of the Planetary scenario at the MAhabharata WAR , he was great astrologer as he completely predicts the future about Bheem slaying Kauravs .> * Karna was chanting Vedic mantra [ Only higher caste chant VEdic mantra , Karna was not considered Low born as depicted ,soota is not low caste or untouchable]> * One's birth is not alone important in determining caste as much as His Sanskara , Karna had sanskara as SOOTA ,mark Karna's words , and hence He remained a SOOTA all along even if Duryodhan gave him Kingdom, even if he was born a Kshatriya . This was the point made in Vidyapradarshan BY BHEESHMA , when he objected to Arjun fighting Karna . That a Kshatriya should not fight with Soota at the competition .> * Karna admits to Duryodhan's Soverignty to as recent as 13 years and Not from the day He was made the King . why?> > * Karna was made the King when Yudhisthir and Duryodhan were around 25 years of Age .> * Then intermittently pandavas suffered treason in Varnavat .> * Then they were married in disguise .> * When Pandavas went to Vanvas , Yudhisthir was 57 years old .> * When they came back Yudhisthir was 70 years old .> * So Karna should have told 50 years of soverignty , why 13 years .> * because After Raajsooya Yagnya his Kingdom was snatched by BHEEMASEN and given back to him after his acceptance of soverignty of Yudhisthir .> * The kingdom of Yudhisthir was usurped in dice by Duryodhan and hence 13 years of soverignty .> > # Karna is persuaded by Lord ,but to only Fight Arjun he refuses Krishna's Proposal [ Lord's command is not so important for him than his prestige [ego] that he will be declared coward . Lord could have as well made him a hero had he accepted , NO faith ! ]> # Karna is persuaded by Kunti and SOORYA . He admits he must obey them but cannot for the desire of Fighting Arjun . Karna does not grant what his MOTHER asks for , only for his good ! [ DAANVEER of no use to MOTHER ].> > krishnarpanamastu.> ===================================>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My personal View -

 

Karna was a good man with a righteous approach and norms of ethical and

moral behaviours. He did what was the right path to be chosen. Krishna

also has blessed him for this path chosen. I wish the total context

could come here from wherever these dialouges have been penned. Such men

dont go the hells, but to the heavens for they are dutiful and know the

right way of conducts when they are living.

 

Bhaskar.

 

 

 

 

, " Bhaskar "

<bhaskar_jyotish wrote:

>

>

> I disagree with the following comments of the author.

>

> //# Karna is persuaded by Lord ,but to only Fight Arjun he refuses

> Krishna's

> Proposal [ Lord's command is not so important for him than his

prestige

> [ego]

> that he will be declared coward . Lord could have as well made him a

> hero had he

> accepted , NO faith ! ]

> # Karna is persuaded by Kunti and SOORYA . He admits he must obey them

> but

> cannot for the desire of Fighting Arjun . Karna does not grant what

his

> MOTHER

> asks for , only for his good ! [ DAANVEER of no use to MOTHER ].//

>

> There is no EGO in Karna. It is only being namak parayana, or being

true

> to ones duty. Duryodhana gave him prestige, kingship, friendship and

> what not. He does not care of being called a coward. But he is a good

> friend, a swami bhakt, a faithful and ethical person and knew that he

> was the only strength of Duryodhana and if now he joins the opposite

> camp, it would be akin to pushing a spear in his friends heart who

needs

> support from him. He also knew very well that he is going to perish,

but

> he will not walk on dishonest paths and unethical ways of behaviour.

So

> karna is not a coward, and nor does he possess a Ego. he is a good man

> indeed if you view at him with an unbiased prejudice or approach.

>

> Who says that he is not Danveer or of no use to his mother. He did

> promise her that she will have 5 sons of her living after the war is

> over. And he kept his promise. he could have killed all the other

> Brothers in single combat, and if one reads the Mahabharata war

proerly

> it will be found that he indeed spared his brothers at times when he

> could have killed them. So one cannot say that he was of no use to his

> brother. He knew very well when he mentioned to his mother that " 5

sons

> of Yours will live " . He meant that " Yudhistara.Bhima,Nakula and

sahdev

> shall nlot be touched by me. And you will ahve either me or Arjuna as

> living " .

>

> Bhaskar.

>

> , " sreesog " sreesog@

> wrote:

> >

> > Dear All,

> > The following is

> from:http://chiraan.wordpress.com/2009/05/18/karna-the-astrologer/

> > Love and regards,

> > Sreenadh

> > ===================================

> > Karna -The Astrologer

> > ---------------------

> > Posted by chiraan in Astroanalysis, Astrology and purana, Daiva vs

> Purushartha - can destiny be changed?, karma, mahabharath, people and

> astrology, yashas -success in career. Tagged: Karna, krishna,

kshatriya,

> kuntee, soota. Leave a Comment

> >

> > When Krishna the lord of Universe offers Karna the lordship of the

> World to leave Duryodhan and side with Pandavas .

> >

> > Karn said – " You are right, Krishn, I now know that whatever you

> have said to me that Kuntee bore me when she was a maiden through her

> connection with Soorya. At the command of Soorya she abandoned me as

> soon as I was born without thinking of my welfare. Soot Adhirath found

> me and took me home. There his wife Raadhaa brought me up with all her

> affection. Adhirath gave me the name Vasusen. When I grew up, I

married

> the wives according to his selections. I have now sons grandsons

through

> them. My all rites and religious duties are performed with Soot. With

> Duryodhan I have enjoyed sovereignty for over 13 years. Now when

> Duryodhan has decided to fight with Paandav considering me as against

> Arjun, I cannot go back because of fear, death or bloodshed. If I do

not

> indulge with Arjun in single combat, it will be an insult to both of

us.

> >

> > I am sure that Paandav will do whatever you have said but for now,

you

> must hide this for the benefit of both of us. Let Yudhishthir be king

> for ever. He has collected a great crowd of warriors. I am repenting

for

> what I said to Paandav. Duryodhan is going to do a Yagya. When you

will

> see me slain by Arjun then Punachiti of this Yagya will begin, when

you

> will see Bheem drinking the blood of Dushaasan's chest then the Som

> drinking of this Yagya will take place, and when the two sons of

Drupad

> – Shikhandee and Drishtdyumn will overthrow Bheeshm and Drone,

then

> this Yagya will be suspended for interval. When Bheem will kill

> Duryodhan then the Yagya of Duryodhan will be concluded. When all Kuru

> women will lament for their husbands and sons in the battlefield

without

> their protector, it will be the last bath of this Yagya. [ Karna

> predicts the future ]

> >

> > I just pray you that don't let these Kshatriya be perished miserably

> for thy sake. Let them die by weapons in the most sacred place among

the

> three worlds. Whatever you have in mind, accomplish it on this spot

> only. Till I face Arjun in the field, keep our talks secret. "

> >

> > Krishn said – " O Karn, Don't you wish to rule over the whole

> world? You know that Paandav's victory is certain. Divine Bhaum has

set

> up Hanumaan banner like Indra's banner. Extended for one Yojan it will

> never be obstructed by any thing. When Arjun will twang his bow then

> that signs off all Yug (Sat, Tretaa and Dwapar). All kings will get

> excellent state after dying for Duryodhan in the battlefield. " Karn

> worshipped Krishn and said – " Knowing everything why do you want

to

> baffle me? This war is going to happen. The great fierce planet Shani

> (Saturn) is afflicting the Nakshatra Rohinee which indicates the

> destruction on Prithvi. Mars is coming to Nakshatra Anuraadhaa through

> Jyeshthaa indicating a great a slaughter of friends. Certainly a great

> calamity will come over Kuru family when the planet Mahaapat will

> afflicts the Nakshatra Chitraa. Moon's position has changed and Raahu

is

> also proceeding towards Soorya. A black circle surrounding the solar

> disc appears to view. " [ Karna's command on astrology can be seen here

]

> >

> > Krishn said – " Yes, The destruction of the world is at hand but

> you are not agreeing for it. " Karn said – " If we have come out of

> the war then we will meet here again, otherwise we shall surely meet

in

> Heaven. " and embraced Krishn very hard. Keshav dismissed him and he

came

> back with us. "

> >

> >

> >

> > Kunti went to Gangaa River where she heard Vedic mantra chanting by

> her son. Karn was standing facing east, so Kuntee stood waiting behind

> him burning in hot Sun. Then she shifted under the shade of upper

cloth

> of Karn. And Karn continued his prayers until his back was very hot

with

> Sun. Then he turned back and was surprised to see Kuntee standing

there.

> He saluted her properly and bowing his head Vrish (Karn), the son of

> Vikartan (Adhirath), said to her – " I am Karn, Raadhaa and

> Adhirath's sson. Why have you come here and what can I do for you? "

> >

> > Kuntee said – " You are Kuntee's son, not Raadhaa's, nor your

> father is Adhirath, nor you are born in a Soot family. I bore you when

I

> was a maiden. You were born in the palace of Kuntibhoj. I gave you

birth

> in my father's house along with Kavach and Kundal on your body. You

> stand in Duryodhan's camp not knowing your brothers, is not proper.

> Duryodhan has wickedly snatched Yudhishthir's wealth. You take that

> wealth back from them and enjoy it. Let people call you like Raam

> Balraam. If you both are united what is in this world which cannot be

> accomplished? "

> >

> > As Kuntee finished, Karn heard a soft loving voice coming from

Soorya

> – " What Prithaa is saying is true. Follow her words, it is for

your

> good. " Karn could not answer immediately because his heart was

following

> only truth. He said – " I cannot accept what you have said to me.

> Although I should obey you as you are my mother. You abandoned me as

> soon as I was born. This was the greatest injury you did to my life

and

> fame. Thus I was deprived of all the rights of Kshatriya. You have

never

> thought about my good before this and you are telling me something for

> my good today? Who is not afraid of Arjun? And if I go to Paandav

today,

> people will say that " I did so because of fright " . Just to fulfill my

> own desires how can I leave Duryodhan's friendship? They always

respect

> me, bow down to me and wait on me. I will surely fight with Paandav.

> However except Arjun, your other four sons will not be slain by me. I

> will fight only with Arjun. Whether he will be slain, or me, in both

> cases my life will be glorified and your five sons will always be

> alive. "

> >

> > ————————————————————–end of extract

> ———————————————————

> >

> > Points to be noted in the above speech by Karna ;

> >

> > * Karna Knew he was going to be slained by ARJUN

> > * Karna had complete knowledge of the Planetary scenario at the

> MAhabharata WAR , he was great astrologer as he completely predicts

the

> future about Bheem slaying Kauravs .

> > * Karna was chanting Vedic mantra [ Only higher caste chant VEdic

> mantra , Karna was not considered Low born as depicted ,soota is not

low

> caste or untouchable]

> > * One's birth is not alone important in determining caste as much as

> His Sanskara , Karna had sanskara as SOOTA ,mark Karna's words , and

> hence He remained a SOOTA all along even if Duryodhan gave him

Kingdom,

> even if he was born a Kshatriya . This was the point made in

> Vidyapradarshan BY BHEESHMA , when he objected to Arjun fighting Karna

..

> That a Kshatriya should not fight with Soota at the competition .

> > * Karna admits to Duryodhan's Soverignty to as recent as 13 years

and

> Not from the day He was made the King . why?

> >

> > * Karna was made the King when Yudhisthir and Duryodhan were around

25

> years of Age .

> > * Then intermittently pandavas suffered treason in Varnavat .

> > * Then they were married in disguise .

> > * When Pandavas went to Vanvas , Yudhisthir was 57 years old .

> > * When they came back Yudhisthir was 70 years old .

> > * So Karna should have told 50 years of soverignty , why 13 years .

> > * because After Raajsooya Yagnya his Kingdom was snatched by

BHEEMASEN

> and given back to him after his acceptance of soverignty of Yudhisthir

..

> > * The kingdom of Yudhisthir was usurped in dice by Duryodhan and

hence

> 13 years of soverignty .

> >

> > # Karna is persuaded by Lord ,but to only Fight Arjun he refuses

> Krishna's Proposal [ Lord's command is not so important for him than

his

> prestige [ego] that he will be declared coward . Lord could have as

well

> made him a hero had he accepted , NO faith ! ]

> > # Karna is persuaded by Kunti and SOORYA . He admits he must obey

them

> but cannot for the desire of Fighting Arjun . Karna does not grant

what

> his MOTHER asks for , only for his good ! [ DAANVEER of no use to

MOTHER

> ].

> >

> > krishnarpanamastu.

> > ===================================

> >

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Bhaskar ji,It is a popular opinion, but if we look up Vyasa Bharata, we get a totally different picture of Karna. When judged on any of the attributes - valor, commitment to friendship, dana guna, ego, morality, Karna does fall below the mark. Here is the piece on Karna from from an article I wrote on some of the the major characters of Mahabharata some time back:

1.

Karna

 

1.1. Valor

 

Basically,

putting valor aside, Karna had one quality: to run away from the field when the enemy proves stronger. Which is what made him show low in front of great Kurus like Bhishma and Arjuna. His curses combined with this quality were the reasons Bhishma categorized him as Artha rathi and not as a Maha rathi.

a)

Karna was taught by Drona with the permission of Kuru

rulers. When Drona asked for Guru dakshina, which is to arrest Drupada, Karna was there with Duryodhana and the entire army. They lost to Drupada, could not stand his army and came back showing their backs to Drupada. Immediately after this, just the five Pandavas went, without army, defeated and arrested Drupada, presented him in front of Drona as their Guru dakshina.

b)

Then not much of war, just a show where Arjuna and

Karna competed - no result.

c)

Ghosha yatra: The Gandharva Citrasena attacked the

Kaurava army, Karna ran away from him, unable to stand him. And Citrasena arrested Duryodhana and Arjuna-Bhima released Duryodhana upon Yudhistira's instruction.

 

We cannot say humans cannot fight Gandharvas, because Arjuna defeated Gandharvas, and Bhima defeated even Yakshas in different occasions.

d)

Gograhana: Arjuna alone, vanquished the entire Kaurava

army - with Aswatthama, Drona, Bhishma, Kripa, Duryodhana and Karna. Of these, some were defeated - Karna was defeated and he basically ran away from the field.

 

The Great

Mahabharata War:

e)

Abhimanyu defeated Karna

f)

Satyiki defeated Karna

g)

On the day Jayadratha was killed, Bhima was on fire. To

protect Duryodhana's brothers from gettign killed in Bhima's hands, Karna went. Bhima defeated Karna (mind you, with archery alone), then killed 5 brothers of Duryodhana. Karna came back. Then Bhima again defeated Karna, and killed 10 more brothers of Duryodhana. Again he defeated

Karna, and killed 10 more brothers of Duryodhana. Then he again took on Karna, but they went into an army of elephants. Then Bhima got out of his car, with his mace. At this point he came too close to Karna's chariot. Then Bhima had one option to break the car and Karna - he did not because Arjuna had taken oath to kill Karna. It is at this point, that Karna puts his bow around Bhima's neck and insults him.

 

Then Arjuna defeats Karna, takes Bhima on his chariot, and rebukes Karna for behaving cheaply. While Bhima defeated Karna so many times, he does not insult Karna. But the one chance Karna gets, he shows his character.

h)

Again, the day Karna is killed - Bhima fights Karna,

and Karna faints. When Bhima, out of anger, tries to cut his tongue off - Salya saves Karna by asking Bhima to leave him and go away.

i)

Karna loses to Arjuna in every encounter, and Arjuna is

called Vijaya- he has not been defeated anytime. The only one single occasion when Karna gets advantage is when he uses Nagastra that hits Arjuna's helmet. And there is nothing about Brahmastra here, because Arjuna never had to use it in the entire war.

 

2. Friendship

 

Following valor, the next to be

talked is his friendship. This is another point on which we hear a lot of rallying around Karna. We can see what aspects of friendship did Karna satisfy.

a)

There are three grades of friendship - 1. Out of mutual

affection, 2. Out of common cause, 3. Out of common enmity. These are uttama, madhyama and adhama kinds.

 

There are two contrasting pairs of friends in Mahabharata. Krishna-Arjuna is the first kind, and Karna-Duryodhana is the last kind. Krishna and Arjuna held each other's

side for their affection, for their commitment to dharma.

 

b)

While Karna and Duryodhana stuck to each other, out of

strategic enmity. Karna to vanquish Arjuna, and Duryodhana to vanquish Pandavas with Karna's help.

 

Next, friendship, as it is defined, a good friend is one who guides us in the right path, makes us do things for our well-being. While we see Krishna always guiding Arjuna on the right

path, Karna always guided Duryodhana on the wrong. He not only persuaded Duryodhana not to do wrong things, but in fact he was the architect of most unrighteous

deeds of Duryodhana - burning the palace of lac, insulting Draupadi, killing Abhimanyu through deceit, what not.

 

Not only, that,

but the false kind of confidence Karna gave to Duryodhana about his own skill and boasting of vanquishing Pandavas, was the inspiration for Duryodhana to go into the war, eliminate his clan and cause a huge human loss.

 

c)

A friend is one who stands by us in times of

difficulty. While Karna, in most of the occasions, has ditched Duryodhana in the middle of the war. Right from when they ran away from Drupada (while trying to fight and arrest Drupada as part of Gurudakshina), Karna could not be of help. In Ghosha yatra when Citrasena attacked their army, Karna, instead of trying to rescue Duryodhana, ran away first. He did the same in Gograhana when Arjuna was slaying their armies. Karna left Duryodhana to his fate and fleed.

 

So not only from valor perspective, but even as a good friend, Karna basically failed Duryodhana.

 

3. Dharma Nistha

Karna was among the most Adharmic

characters of Mahabharata. We say someone is Dharmic, if the purpose of his

actions is Dharma, and when it is not arbitrary, but consistent. When we talk of a person, it is good to list out what his dharma is, and then evaluate how much he stood for it. So in case of Karna, these are the applicable ones:

 

a)

Raja Dharma: Karna is appointed the king of Anga, and

became a king. Karna, as a samanta of Duryodhana, executed his duties well. Though there is no special mention or praise for his ruler ship, that is one thing he smoothly conducted.

b)

Kshatriya Dharma:

a.

A Kshatriya is not supposed to accept any favor from

anyone. This is demonstrated by many kings, including Pandavas. Rama was offered the heavenly worlds by the Rishis when he visits them during vana vasa, but Rama replies that being a Kshatriya he should not accept, but will earn those himself. Hariscandra, was offered help when in trouble, so that he could be bailed out. He too, refuses help as he is a Kshatriya.However, the beginning of Karna's career includes taking such

favors - he does not win but gets Anga Rajya as a favor. Also, he, along with Duryodhana's team, fails in giving Gurudakshina to Drona.

b.

A Kshatriya is not supposed to run away from the war,

even if it means death. Karna not only arbitrarily runs, but has the habit of running from the field. He ran away in the following occasions:

i.

When he fought Drupada to arrest him and present him as Gurudakshina to Drona

ii.

When the Gandharva Citrasena fights them during Ghosha

yatra

iii.

During Gograhana, unable to withstand Arjuna

iv.

In the war, he runs multiple times in the few days he fights - from Bhima, Arjuna, Satyiki, Abhimanyu

 

c)

Mitra dharma:

i.

A friend's duty is to guide, as a well wisher, and make

the friend do what is good for him. Sreya (one that gets good) and Preya (what

we want) are two things and it is the responsibility of a friend to do both,

and when there is a contention, choose sreya. Karna chose to tell preya to

Duryodhana, even if it meant destruction, thus being a bad friend. He guided

Duryodhana on the path of unrighteousness.

ii.

A friend should be with us, in times of need. Karna did

fight the

war on Duryodhana's side, like others - Aswatthama, Drona, Kripa,

Bhishma, Vikarna who knew Dharma was on the other side but it was their Dharma

to fight on Duryodhana's side. But unlike those, Karna left Duryodhana many

times in the field to be arrested:

1.

Ghosha Yatra

2.

Gograhana

3.

Duryodhana was defeated multiple times in the war, by

Yudhistira, Arjuna, Nakula. It was in front of Karna's eyes, that Duryodhana's

brothers were killed by Bhima. Karna's valor not only proved useless in

stopping Bhima, but in turn it was Duryodhana who sacrificed his brothers to

save Karna.

 

d)

Vyakti Dharma: A Dharmic person is supposed to act

dispassionately, according to Dharma. His actions should be based on dharma and

not on preferences.

Whereas Karna's actions, most of the times, are driven by strong negative tendencies:

 

a.

Jealousy for Arjuna was one motivator for his life.

During vidyabhyasa, when the princes were to display their martial arts, Arjuna did, so as Bhima and other princes. Karna asked for a chance and he was immediately given chance by Drona to exhibit his skill. But he did not stop there, he wanted to fight Arjuna. It was then that he was insulted and consequently given Angarajya. The same was the reason he

approached Drona for Brahmastra. Drona refuses, since his motive is based on

enmity and not loka kalyana. Then he approaches Parasurama for the same and

lies to him that he is a brahmana. Parasurama, being noble, curses Karna only to the extent that he gave instruction and not for entire astra vidya of Karna. Even here, it is clear that Karna put his enmity above Dharma.

 

Very few know that Karna had a sense of competition with Arjuna even in dana guna. There is a story where a brahmin goes to Arjuna while it was raining, and asks for wood. Arjuna says he cannot give. Then he goes to Karna and says he needs wood for cooking. Karna asks him if he went to Arjuna, is pleased by the reply, and then gives him the wood from his own house - by breaking a pillar of his palace.

 

The technical aspect in dana guna is that it should be done purely as a matter of principle and not for any return. The moment there is a return, then it does not remain dana. And Karna giving his natural armor to Indra is such. Karna's desire in doing dana is to get the power to slay Arjuna. And the moment he gives his armor to Indra, Indra gives him the Sakti which is capable of slaying anyone. There, that very moment, Karna's offering is returned with something that is capable of fulfilling his desire. He used it to save his life from Ghatotkaca later, but that is a different thing. (That again proves that power cannot do anything when you are not on the side of Dharma.)

 

Contrasting this with Arjuna, his virtue was purely a virtue, and not a rule or contract. When a brahmin approaches him to save his cattle, he goes, knowing that he has to pass through and disturb Yudhistira's

privacy if he has to take his weapons. The arrangement was that he had to do vanavasa if he did that. But Arjuna being noble, saves the brahmin's cattle, then goes to vanavasa. (Of course, he gets more astras, marries Subhadra and gets benefited in many ways. And this proves that if you are by Dharma your wellbeing is ensured.)

 

It is the same jealousy for Arjuna, that makes Karna insult Draupadi. It is the same jealousy, that makes him conspire Laksha griha, engineer the murder of Abhimanyu and many other unrighteous deeds. A person, however knowledgeable he may be, will turn into a wretch if he surrenders to qualities like envy - and entire life of Karna stands for it.

 

b.

Karna lacks the dignity of a king. He bad mouthed those

revered like Bhishma and Drona, in multiple occasions - Gograhana, during Krishna's rayabara, before the treacherous

game of dice and before the war begins. The reasons:

 

i.

they praise Arjuna

ii.

they want to do good to Duryodhana and prevent him from inviting his death

iii.

they adjudged Karna's valor, with a balancesheet based

on his capabilities and weaknesses

 

e)

Karna's death: He was killed when he was standing

without a weapon, and that was the inspiration of Krishna

to punish Karna for what he did. Technically, a person who has Brahmastra and Pasupata cannot be defeated and Arjuna, along with Bhima, was ajeya, who cannot be slain. They were the only ones in entire Dwapara Yuga who could not be defeated. So it was out of question that Karna could defeat Arjuna. And with Pasupata or Brahmastra or any other Divya astra, Arjuna could have easily slain Karna any moment he wanted.

 

 

(But Arjuna was

principled to the hilt - he did not use those astras because they should not be used for selfish reasons, and against an enemy who is weaker. While Karna tried to gain and use those purely for selfish reasons, that too negative. Also by Astra vidya or tapas Karna was much inferior to Arjuna who was none but Nara maha rishi taking another life to continue his tapas. For both the reasons, Arjuna did not use those astras. He uses Brahma siro namaka, against Aswatthama, that too as a response to his astra. And he takes it back when Rishis ask him to. While Aswatthama still does not, and directs it on Uttara's womb. Even at his own loss, Arjuna heeds to elders' words, withdraws instead of using his astras.) Instead of

killing Karna in an encounter, killing him when he was helpless was to teach him that he did similar things which were wrong.

ShankarBhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish Sent: Fri, November 27, 2009 1:43:24 PM Re: Karna -The Astrologer

 

 

I disagree with the following comments of the author.

//# Karna is persuaded by Lord ,but to only Fight Arjun he refuses Krishna'sProposal [ Lord's command is not so important for him than his prestige [ego]that he will be declared coward . Lord could have as well made him a hero had heaccepted , NO faith ! ]# Karna is persuaded by Kunti and SOORYA . He admits he must obey them butcannot for the desire of Fighting Arjun . Karna does not grant what his MOTHERasks for , only for his good ! [ DAANVEER of no use to MOTHER ].//

There is no EGO in Karna. It is only being namak parayana, or being true to ones duty. Duryodhana gave him prestige, kingship, friendship and what not. He does not care of being called a coward. But he is a good friend, a swami bhakt, a faithful and ethical person and knew that he was the only strength of Duryodhana and if now he joins the opposite camp, it would be akin to pushing a spear in his friends heart who needs support from him. He also knew very well that he is going to perish, but he will not walk on dishonest paths and unethical ways of behaviour. So karna is not a coward, and nor does he possess a Ego. he is a good man indeed if you view at him with an unbiased prejudice or approach.

Who says that he is not Danveer or of no use to his mother. He did promise her that she will have 5 sons of her living after the war is over. And he kept his promise. he could have killed all the other Brothers in single combat, and if one reads the Mahabharata war proerly it will be found that he indeed spared his brothers at times when he could have killed them. So one cannot say that he was of no use to his brother. He knew very well when he mentioned to his mother that "5 sons of Yours will live". He meant that " Yudhistara.Bhima, Nakula and sahdev shall nlot be touched by me. And you will ahve either me or Arjuna as living".

Bhaskar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Bhaskar ji,

Karna is the most beautiful character I like in Mahabharata, and feel in tune

with. He is my most favorite character. If I were in place of Karna, I would

have taken the same decision and would have followed the same path - ditto!

I cannot find any other character in Mahabharata to be compared with him - he

was so unique! May be so are others, but I feel my self resonating to his

thoughts and feelings than with anyone else - and so I like him most.

//Such men dont go the hells, but to the heavens//

Hell or Heaven doesn't matter - it is 'Swa-dharma' (own nature) that matters.

When swa-dharma (own original nature) is given importance, everything else is

irrelevant.

Love and regards,

Sreenadh

 

, " Bhaskar " <bhaskar_jyotish

wrote:

>

>

> My personal View -

>

> Karna was a good man with a righteous approach and norms of ethical and

> moral behaviours. He did what was the right path to be chosen. Krishna

> also has blessed him for this path chosen. I wish the total context

> could come here from wherever these dialouges have been penned. Such men

> dont go the hells, but to the heavens for they are dutiful and know the

> right way of conducts when they are living.

>

> Bhaskar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the several "favors" the Nastika matas did to Sanatana Dharma is the reversal of Pauranic characters, showing the Pauranic heroes in negative light and glorifying the negative characters. Much of what we see about the MBH villiany and heroic is portrayed not just in recent films, but their origin is found in the pervert commentaries of Nastika mata scholars. Reversal of MBH characters specifically, is found in Pampa's commentary. Shankar

ShankaraBharadwaj Khandavalli <shankarabharadwaj Sent: Fri, November 27, 2009 2:09:19 PM Re: Karna -The Astrologer

 

 

Dear Bhaskar ji,It is a popular opinion, but if we look up Vyasa Bharata, we get a totally different picture of Karna. When judged on any of the attributes - valor, commitment to friendship, dana guna, ego, morality, Karna does fall below the mark. Here is the piece on Karna from from an article I wrote on some of the the major characters of Mahabharata some time back: 1.

Karna 1.1. Valor Basically,

putting valor aside, Karna had one quality: to run away from the field when the enemy proves stronger. Which is what made him show low in front of great Kurus like Bhishma and Arjuna. His curses combined with this quality were the reasons Bhishma categorized him as Artha rathi and not as a Maha rathi.

a)

Karna was taught by Drona with the permission of Kuru

rulers. When Drona asked for Guru dakshina, which is to arrest Drupada, Karna was there with Duryodhana and the entire army. They lost to Drupada, could not stand his army and came back showing their backs to Drupada. Immediately after this, just the five Pandavas went, without army, defeated and arrested Drupada, presented him in front of Drona as their Guru dakshina.

b)

Then not much of war, just a show where Arjuna and

Karna competed - no result.

c)

Ghosha yatra: The Gandharva Citrasena attacked the

Kaurava army, Karna ran away from him, unable to stand him. And Citrasena arrested Duryodhana and Arjuna-Bhima released Duryodhana upon Yudhistira's instruction.

 

We cannot say humans cannot fight Gandharvas, because Arjuna defeated Gandharvas, and Bhima defeated even Yakshas in different occasions.

d)

Gograhana: Arjuna alone, vanquished the entire Kaurava

army - with Aswatthama, Drona, Bhishma, Kripa, Duryodhana and Karna. Of these, some were defeated - Karna was defeated and he basically ran away from the field.

The Great

Mahabharata War:

e)

Abhimanyu defeated Karna

f)

Satyiki defeated Karna

g)

On the day Jayadratha was killed, Bhima was on fire. To

protect Duryodhana's brothers from gettign killed in Bhima's hands, Karna went. Bhima defeated Karna (mind you, with archery alone), then killed 5 brothers of Duryodhana. Karna came back. Then Bhima again defeated Karna, and killed 10 more brothers of Duryodhana. Again he defeated

Karna, and killed 10 more brothers of Duryodhana. Then he again took on Karna, but they went into an army of elephants. Then Bhima got out of his car, with his mace. At this point he came too close to Karna's chariot. Then Bhima had one option to break the car and Karna - he did not because Arjuna had taken oath to kill Karna. It is at this point, that Karna puts his bow around Bhima's neck and insults him.

 

Then Arjuna defeats Karna, takes Bhima on his chariot, and rebukes Karna for behaving cheaply. While Bhima defeated Karna so many times, he does not insult Karna. But the one chance Karna gets, he shows his character.

h)

Again, the day Karna is killed - Bhima fights Karna,

and Karna faints. When Bhima, out of anger, tries to cut his tongue off - Salya saves Karna by asking Bhima to leave him and go away.

i)

Karna loses to Arjuna in every encounter, and Arjuna is

called Vijaya- he has not been defeated anytime. The only one single occasion when Karna gets advantage is when he uses Nagastra that hits Arjuna's helmet. And there is nothing about Brahmastra here, because Arjuna never had to use it in the entire war.

2. Friendship Following valor, the next to be

talked is his friendship. This is another point on which we hear a lot of rallying around Karna. We can see what aspects of friendship did Karna satisfy.

a)

There are three grades of friendship - 1. Out of mutual

affection, 2. Out of common cause, 3. Out of common enmity. These are uttama, madhyama and adhama kinds.

 

There are two contrasting pairs of friends in Mahabharata. Krishna-Arjuna is the first kind, and Karna-Duryodhana is the last kind. Krishna and Arjuna held each other's

side for their affection, for their commitment to dharma.

b)

While Karna and Duryodhana stuck to each other, out of

strategic enmity. Karna to vanquish Arjuna, and Duryodhana to vanquish Pandavas with Karna's help.

 

Next, friendship, as it is defined, a good friend is one who guides us in the right path, makes us do things for our well-being. While we see Krishna always guiding Arjuna on the right

path, Karna always guided Duryodhana on the wrong. He not only persuaded Duryodhana not to do wrong things, but in fact he was the architect of most unrighteous

deeds of Duryodhana - burning the palace of lac, insulting Draupadi, killing Abhimanyu through deceit, what not.

Not only, that,

but the false kind of confidence Karna gave to Duryodhana about his own skill and boasting of vanquishing Pandavas, was the inspiration for Duryodhana to go into the war, eliminate his clan and cause a huge human loss.

c)

A friend is one who stands by us in times of

difficulty. While Karna, in most of the occasions, has ditched Duryodhana in the middle of the war. Right from when they ran away from Drupada (while trying to fight and arrest Drupada as part of Gurudakshina) , Karna could not be of help. In Ghosha yatra when Citrasena attacked their army, Karna, instead of trying to rescue Duryodhana, ran away first. He did the same in Gograhana when Arjuna was slaying their armies. Karna left Duryodhana to his fate and fleed.

 

So not only from valor perspective, but even as a good friend, Karna basically failed Duryodhana.

3. Dharma Nistha Karna was among the most Adharmic

characters of Mahabharata. We say someone is Dharmic, if the purpose of his

actions is Dharma, and when it is not arbitrary, but consistent. When we talk of a person, it is good to list out what his dharma is, and then evaluate how much he stood for it. So in case of Karna, these are the applicable ones:

a)

Raja Dharma: Karna is appointed the king of Anga, and

became a king. Karna, as a samanta of Duryodhana, executed his duties well. Though there is no special mention or praise for his ruler ship, that is one thing he smoothly conducted.

b)

Kshatriya Dharma:

a.

A Kshatriya is not supposed to accept any favor from

anyone. This is demonstrated by many kings, including Pandavas. Rama was offered the heavenly worlds by the Rishis when he visits them during vana vasa, but Rama replies that being a Kshatriya he should not accept, but will earn those himself. Hariscandra, was offered help when in trouble, so that he could be bailed out. He too, refuses help as he is a Kshatriya.However, the beginning of Karna's career includes taking such

favors - he does not win but gets Anga Rajya as a favor. Also, he, along with Duryodhana's team, fails in giving Gurudakshina to Drona.

b.

A Kshatriya is not supposed to run away from the war,

even if it means death. Karna not only arbitrarily runs, but has the habit of running from the field. He ran away in the following occasions:

i.

When he fought Drupada to arrest him and present him as Gurudakshina to Drona

ii.

When the Gandharva Citrasena fights them during Ghosha

yatra

iii.

During Gograhana, unable to withstand Arjuna

iv.

In the war, he runs multiple times in the few days he fights - from Bhima, Arjuna, Satyiki, Abhimanyu

c)

Mitra dharma:

i.

A friend's duty is to guide, as a well wisher, and make

the friend do what is good for him. Sreya (one that gets good) and Preya (what

we want) are two things and it is the responsibility of a friend to do both,

and when there is a contention, choose sreya. Karna chose to tell preya to

Duryodhana, even if it meant destruction, thus being a bad friend. He guided

Duryodhana on the path of unrighteousness.

ii.

A friend should be with us, in times of need. Karna did

fight the

war on Duryodhana's side, like others - Aswatthama, Drona, Kripa,

Bhishma, Vikarna who knew Dharma was on the other side but it was their Dharma

to fight on Duryodhana's side. But unlike those, Karna left Duryodhana many

times in the field to be arrested:

1.

Ghosha Yatra

2.

Gograhana

3.

Duryodhana was defeated multiple times in the war, by

Yudhistira, Arjuna, Nakula. It was in front of Karna's eyes, that Duryodhana's

brothers were killed by Bhima. Karna's valor not only proved useless in

stopping Bhima, but in turn it was Duryodhana who sacrificed his brothers to

save Karna.

d)

Vyakti Dharma: A Dharmic person is supposed to act

dispassionately, according to Dharma. His actions should be based on dharma and

not on preferences.

Whereas Karna's actions, most of the times, are driven by strong negative tendencies:

a.

Jealousy for Arjuna was one motivator for his life.

During vidyabhyasa, when the princes were to display their martial arts, Arjuna did, so as Bhima and other princes. Karna asked for a chance and he was immediately given chance by Drona to exhibit his skill. But he did not stop there, he wanted to fight Arjuna. It was then that he was insulted and consequently given Angarajya. The same was the reason he

approached Drona for Brahmastra. Drona refuses, since his motive is based on

enmity and not loka kalyana. Then he approaches Parasurama for the same and

lies to him that he is a brahmana. Parasurama, being noble, curses Karna only to the extent that he gave instruction and not for entire astra vidya of Karna. Even here, it is clear that Karna put his enmity above Dharma.

 

Very few know that Karna had a sense of competition with Arjuna even in dana guna. There is a story where a brahmin goes to Arjuna while it was raining, and asks for wood. Arjuna says he cannot give. Then he goes to Karna and says he needs wood for cooking. Karna asks him if he went to Arjuna, is pleased by the reply, and then gives him the wood from his own house - by breaking a pillar of his palace.

 

The technical aspect in dana guna is that it should be done purely as a matter of principle and not for any return. The moment there is a return, then it does not remain dana. And Karna giving his natural armor to Indra is such. Karna's desire in doing dana is to get the power to slay Arjuna. And the moment he gives his armor to Indra, Indra gives him the Sakti which is capable of slaying anyone. There, that very moment, Karna's offering is returned with something that is capable of fulfilling his desire. He used it to save his life from Ghatotkaca later, but that is a different thing. (That again proves that power cannot do anything when you are not on the side of Dharma.)

 

Contrasting this with Arjuna, his virtue was purely a virtue, and not a rule or contract. When a brahmin approaches him to save his cattle, he goes, knowing that he has to pass through and disturb Yudhistira's

privacy if he has to take his weapons. The arrangement was that he had to do vanavasa if he did that. But Arjuna being noble, saves the brahmin's cattle, then goes to vanavasa. (Of course, he gets more astras, marries Subhadra and gets benefited in many ways. And this proves that if you are by Dharma your wellbeing is ensured.)

 

It is the same jealousy for Arjuna, that makes Karna insult Draupadi. It is the same jealousy, that makes him conspire Laksha griha, engineer the murder of Abhimanyu and many other unrighteous deeds. A person, however knowledgeable he may be, will turn into a wretch if he surrenders to qualities like envy - and entire life of Karna stands for it.

b.

Karna lacks the dignity of a king. He bad mouthed those

revered like Bhishma and Drona, in multiple occasions - Gograhana, during Krishna 's rayabara, before the treacherous

game of dice and before the war begins. The reasons:

i.

they praise Arjuna

ii.

they want to do good to Duryodhana and prevent him from inviting his death

iii.

they adjudged Karna's valor, with a balancesheet based

on his capabilities and weaknesses

e)

Karna's death: He was killed when he was standing

without a weapon, and that was the inspiration of Krishna to punish Karna for what he did. Technically, a person who has Brahmastra and Pasupata cannot be defeated and Arjuna, along with Bhima, was ajeya, who cannot be slain. They were the only ones in entire Dwapara Yuga who could not be defeated. So it was out of question that Karna could defeat Arjuna. And with Pasupata or Brahmastra or any other Divya astra, Arjuna could have easily slain Karna any moment he wanted.

 

 

(But Arjuna was

principled to the hilt - he did not use those astras because they should not be used for selfish reasons, and against an enemy who is weaker. While Karna tried to gain and use those purely for selfish reasons, that too negative. Also by Astra vidya or tapas Karna was much inferior to Arjuna who was none but Nara maha rishi taking another life to continue his tapas. For both the reasons, Arjuna did not use those astras. He uses Brahma siro namaka, against Aswatthama, that too as a response to his astra. And he takes it back when Rishis ask him to. While Aswatthama still does not, and directs it on Uttara's womb. Even at his own loss, Arjuna heeds to elders' words, withdraws instead of using his astras.) Instead of

killing Karna in an encounter, killing him when he was helpless was to teach him that he did similar things which were wrong.

ShankarBhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ .co. in>ancient_indian_ astrologyFri, November 27, 2009 1:43:24 PM[ancient_indian_ astrology] Re: Karna -The Astrologer

 

 

I disagree with the following comments of the author.

//# Karna is persuaded by Lord ,but to only Fight Arjun he refuses Krishna'sProposal [ Lord's command is not so important for him than his prestige [ego]that he will be declared coward . Lord could have as well made him a hero had heaccepted , NO faith ! ]# Karna is persuaded by Kunti and SOORYA . He admits he must obey them butcannot for the desire of Fighting Arjun . Karna does not grant what his MOTHERasks for , only for his good ! [ DAANVEER of no use to MOTHER ].//

There is no EGO in Karna. It is only being namak parayana, or being true to ones duty. Duryodhana gave him prestige, kingship, friendship and what not. He does not care of being called a coward. But he is a good friend, a swami bhakt, a faithful and ethical person and knew that he was the only strength of Duryodhana and if now he joins the opposite camp, it would be akin to pushing a spear in his friends heart who needs support from him. He also knew very well that he is going to perish, but he will not walk on dishonest paths and unethical ways of behaviour. So karna is not a coward, and nor does he possess a Ego. he is a good man indeed if you view at him with an unbiased prejudice or approach.

Who says that he is not Danveer or of no use to his mother. He did promise her that she will have 5 sons of her living after the war is over. And he kept his promise. he could have killed all the other Brothers in single combat, and if one reads the Mahabharata war proerly it will be found that he indeed spared his brothers at times when he could have killed them. So one cannot say that he was of no use to his brother. He knew very well when he mentioned to his mother that "5 sons of Yours will live". He meant that " Yudhistara.Bhima, Nakula and sahdev shall nlot be touched by me. And you will ahve either me or Arjuna as living".

Bhaskar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sometimes, we have to do what we have to, knowing that we are on the wrong side or the loosing side. That is the decision we take in the dilemma of loyalty and dharma - albeit on the side of people we like little. Karna took the hard way and did walk the thin line.

He also did not flinch from his promises. He must have felt like a righteous man in todays world/ kalyuga, surrounded by people of less worth but loyal to them.

Like Karna the righteous man of today is also doomed, yet he will go satisfied at having paid his debts.

It is only God that can ride this dilemma without meeting the fate of Karna - as Krishna did.

Goes to prove that too much sentiment can cloud vision.Chiranjiv Mehta--- On Fri, 27/11/09, sreesog <sreesog wrote:

sreesog <sreesog Re: Karna -The Astrologer Date: Friday, 27 November, 2009, 2:12 PM

Dear Bhaskar ji, Karna is the most beautiful character I like in Mahabharata, and feel in tune with. He is my most favorite character. If I were in place of Karna, I would have taken the same decision and would have followed the same path - ditto! I cannot find any other character in Mahabharata to be compared with him - he was so unique! May be so are others, but I feel my self resonating to his thoughts and feelings than with anyone else - and so I like him most. //Such men dont go the hells, but to the heavens//Hell or Heaven doesn't matter - it is 'Swa-dharma' (own nature) that matters. When swa-dharma (own original nature) is given importance, everything else is irrelevant. Love and regards,Sreenadhancient_indian_ astrology@

. com, "Bhaskar" <bhaskar_jyotish@ ...> wrote:>> > My personal View -> > Karna was a good man with a righteous approach and norms of ethical and> moral behaviours. He did what was the right path to be chosen. Krishna> also has blessed him for this path chosen. I wish the total context> could come here from wherever these dialouges have been penned. Such men> dont go the hells, but to the heavens for they are dutiful and know the> right way of conducts when they are living.> > Bhaskar.

The INTERNET now has a personality. YOURS! See your Homepage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Shankara Bharadwaj ji,

 

I am not siding Karna, but a lover of the Pandavas so my loyalties

remakin with Arjuna. But at the same time what I feel is justified must

be mentioned.

 

In any war one side wins and the other gets defeated. The one who gets

defeated cannot be considered always to have run away. They did put up a

fight is what matters for warriors.

 

And all wars cannot be won by anybody.

 

You must also be knowing what " Ranchod " stands for.

 

This does not mean that Krishna ran away.

 

Certain Leelas are played for certain reasons incomprehensible to

mortals the secrets of which only the supery human or Divine know.

 

Without Shikhandi Bheeshma could not have been defeated. It was not that

Shikhandi did not fire arrows at bheeshma. But bheeshma was proud of the

fact that Arjuna used Shikhandi in front of him, and fired arrows at

him, and he did mention that the arrows that have hurt him and caused

the deepest of wounds are only from my priya(Dearest) shishya Arjuna.

Shikhandi who he was, why he was, and what scores he had to settle with

bhishma I am sure every normal devout Hindu would know.

 

There are many rinabadhans of previous janmas in the whole story of

Mahabharata so why did one kill somebody, and why the other could not

have killed him, is a matter of discussion which may fill in ten

thousand pages.

 

I personally do not feel that karna falls below the mark of valor,

commitment to friendship, dana guna, ego, and morality, In fact being

the son of Surya Narayan, he even presented his abodh kavach to you know

whom , though he was warned by Surya Narayan that tomorrow morning who

is going to come and ask you what.

 

best wishes,

 

Bhaskar.

 

 

 

 

, ShankaraBharadwaj

Khandavalli <shankarabharadwaj wrote:

>

> Dear Bhaskar ji,

>

> It is a popular opinion, but if we look up Vyasa Bharata, we get a

totally different picture of Karna. When judged on any of the attributes

- valor, commitment to friendship, dana guna, ego, morality, Karna does

fall below the mark.

>

> Here is the piece on Karna from from an article I wrote on some of the

the major characters of Mahabharata some time back:

>

>

>

> 1. Karna

>

> 1.1. Valor

>

> Basically,

> putting valor aside, Karna had one quality: to run away from the field

when the enemy proves stronger. Which is what made him show low in front

of great Kurus like Bhishma and Arjuna. His curses combined with this

quality were the reasons Bhishma categorized him as Artha rathi and not

as a Maha rathi.

> a) Karna was taught by Drona with the permission of Kuru

> rulers. When Drona asked for Guru dakshina, which is to arrest

Drupada, Karna was there with Duryodhana and the entire army. They lost

to Drupada, could not stand his army and came back showing their backs

to Drupada. Immediately after this, just the five Pandavas went, without

army, defeated and arrested Drupada, presented him in front of Drona as

their Guru dakshina.

> b) Then not much of war, just a show where Arjuna and

> Karna competed - no result.

> c) Ghosha yatra: The Gandharva Citrasena attacked the

> Kaurava army, Karna ran away from him, unable to stand him. And

Citrasena arrested Duryodhana and Arjuna-Bhima released Duryodhana upon

Yudhistira's instruction.

>

> We cannot say humans cannot fight Gandharvas, because Arjuna defeated

Gandharvas, and Bhima defeated even Yakshas in different occasions.

> d) Gograhana: Arjuna alone, vanquished the entire Kaurava

> army - with Aswatthama, Drona, Bhishma, Kripa, Duryodhana and Karna.

Of these, some were defeated - Karna was defeated and he basically ran

away from the field.

>

> The Great

> Mahabharata War:

> e) Abhimanyu defeated Karna

> f) Satyiki defeated Karna

> g) On the day Jayadratha was killed, Bhima was on fire. To

> protect Duryodhana's brothers from gettign killed in Bhima's hands,

Karna went. Bhima defeated Karna (mind you, with archery alone), then

killed 5 brothers of Duryodhana. Karna came back. Then Bhima again

defeated Karna, and killed 10 more brothers of Duryodhana. Again he

defeated

> Karna, and killed 10 more brothers of Duryodhana. Then he again took

on Karna, but they went into an army of elephants. Then Bhima got out of

his car, with his mace. At this point he came too close to Karna's

chariot. Then Bhima had one option to break the car and Karna - he did

not because Arjuna had taken oath to kill Karna. It is at this point,

that Karna puts his bow around Bhima's neck and insults him.

>

> Then Arjuna defeats Karna, takes Bhima on his chariot, and rebukes

Karna for behaving cheaply. While Bhima defeated Karna so many times, he

does not insult Karna. But the one chance Karna gets, he shows his

character.

> h) Again, the day Karna is killed - Bhima fights Karna,

> and Karna faints. When Bhima, out of anger, tries to cut his tongue

off - Salya saves Karna by asking Bhima to leave him and go away.

> i) Karna loses to Arjuna in every encounter, and Arjuna is

> called Vijaya- he has not been defeated anytime. The only one single

occasion when Karna gets advantage is when he uses Nagastra that hits

Arjuna's helmet. And there is nothing about Brahmastra here, because

Arjuna never had to use it in the entire war.

>

> 2. Friendship

>

> Following valor, the next to be

> talked is his friendship. This is another point on which we hear a lot

of rallying around Karna. We can see what aspects of friendship did

Karna satisfy.

> a) There are three grades of friendship - 1. Out of mutual

> affection, 2. Out of common cause, 3. Out of common enmity. These are

uttama, madhyama and adhama kinds.

>

> There are two contrasting pairs of friends in Mahabharata.

Krishna-Arjuna is the first kind, and Karna-Duryodhana is the last kind.

Krishna and Arjuna held each other's

> side for their affection, for their commitment to dharma.

>

> b) While Karna and Duryodhana stuck to each other, out of

> strategic enmity. Karna to vanquish Arjuna, and Duryodhana to vanquish

Pandavas with Karna's help.

>

> Next, friendship, as it is defined, a good friend is one who guides us

in the right path, makes us do things for our well-being. While we see

Krishna always guiding Arjuna on the right

> path, Karna always guided Duryodhana on the wrong. He not only

persuaded Duryodhana not to do wrong things, but in fact he was the

architect of most unrighteous

> deeds of Duryodhana - burning the palace of lac, insulting Draupadi,

killing Abhimanyu through deceit, what not.

>

> Not only, that,

> but the false kind of confidence Karna gave to Duryodhana about his

own skill and boasting of vanquishing Pandavas, was the inspiration for

Duryodhana to go into the war, eliminate his clan and cause a huge human

loss.

>

> c) A friend is one who stands by us in times of

> difficulty. While Karna, in most of the occasions, has ditched

Duryodhana in the middle of the war. Right from when they ran away from

Drupada (while trying to fight and arrest Drupada as part of

Gurudakshina), Karna could not be of help. In Ghosha yatra when

Citrasena attacked their army, Karna, instead of trying to rescue

Duryodhana, ran away first. He did the same in Gograhana when Arjuna was

slaying their armies. Karna left Duryodhana to his fate and fleed.

>

> So not only from valor perspective, but even as a good friend, Karna

basically failed Duryodhana.

>

> 3. Dharma Nistha

> Karna was among the most Adharmic

> characters of Mahabharata. We say someone is Dharmic, if the purpose

of his

> actions is Dharma, and when it is not arbitrary, but consistent. When

we talk of a person, it is good to list out what his dharma is, and then

evaluate how much he stood for it. So in case of Karna, these are the

applicable ones:

>

> a) Raja Dharma: Karna is appointed the king of Anga, and

> became a king. Karna, as a samanta of Duryodhana, executed his duties

well. Though there is no special mention or praise for his ruler ship,

that is one thing he smoothly conducted.

> b) Kshatriya Dharma:

> a. A Kshatriya is not supposed to accept any favor from

> anyone. This is demonstrated by many kings, including Pandavas. Rama

was offered the heavenly worlds by the Rishis when he visits them during

vana vasa, but Rama replies that being a Kshatriya he should not accept,

but will earn those himself. Hariscandra, was offered help when in

trouble, so that he could be bailed out. He too, refuses help as he is a

Kshatriya.However, the beginning of Karna's career includes taking such

> favors - he does not win but gets Anga Rajya as a favor. Also, he,

along with Duryodhana's team, fails in giving Gurudakshina to Drona.

> b. A Kshatriya is not supposed to run away from the war,

> even if it means death. Karna not only arbitrarily runs, but has the

habit of running from the field. He ran away in the following occasions:

> i. When he fought Drupada to arrest him and present him as

Gurudakshina to Drona

> ii. When the Gandharva Citrasena fights them during Ghosha

> yatra

> iii. During Gograhana, unable to withstand Arjuna

> iv. In the war, he runs multiple times in the few days he fights -

from Bhima, Arjuna, Satyiki, Abhimanyu

>

> c) Mitra dharma:

> i. A friend's duty is to guide, as a well wisher, and make

> the friend do what is good for him. Sreya (one that gets good) and

Preya (what

> we want) are two things and it is the responsibility of a friend to do

both,

> and when there is a contention, choose sreya. Karna chose to tell

preya to

> Duryodhana, even if it meant destruction, thus being a bad friend. He

guided

> Duryodhana on the path of unrighteousness.

> ii. A friend should be with us, in times of need. Karna did

> fight the

> war on Duryodhana's side, like others - Aswatthama, Drona, Kripa,

> Bhishma, Vikarna who knew Dharma was on the other side but it was

their Dharma

> to fight on Duryodhana's side. But unlike those, Karna left Duryodhana

many

> times in the field to be arrested:

> 1. Ghosha Yatra

> 2. Gograhana

> 3. Duryodhana was defeated multiple times in the war, by

> Yudhistira, Arjuna, Nakula. It was in front of Karna's eyes, that

Duryodhana's

> brothers were killed by Bhima. Karna's valor not only proved useless

in

> stopping Bhima, but in turn it was Duryodhana who sacrificed his

brothers to

> save Karna.

>

> d) Vyakti Dharma: A Dharmic person is supposed to act

> dispassionately, according to Dharma. His actions should be based on

dharma and

> not on preferences.

> Whereas Karna's actions, most of the times, are driven by strong

negative tendencies:

>

> a. Jealousy for Arjuna was one motivator for his life.

> During vidyabhyasa, when the princes were to display their martial

arts, Arjuna did, so as Bhima and other princes. Karna asked for a

chance and he was immediately given chance by Drona to exhibit his

skill. But he did not stop there, he wanted to fight Arjuna. It was then

that he was insulted and consequently given Angarajya. The same was the

reason he

> approached Drona for Brahmastra. Drona refuses, since his motive is

based on

> enmity and not loka kalyana. Then he approaches Parasurama for the

same and

> lies to him that he is a brahmana. Parasurama, being noble, curses

Karna only to the extent that he gave instruction and not for entire

astra vidya of Karna. Even here, it is clear that Karna put his enmity

above Dharma.

>

> Very few know that Karna had a sense of competition with Arjuna even

in dana guna. There is a story where a brahmin goes to Arjuna while it

was raining, and asks for wood. Arjuna says he cannot give. Then he goes

to Karna and says he needs wood for cooking. Karna asks him if he went

to Arjuna, is pleased by the reply, and then gives him the wood from his

own house - by breaking a pillar of his palace.

>

> The technical aspect in dana guna is that it should be done purely as

a matter of principle and not for any return. The moment there is a

return, then it does not remain dana. And Karna giving his natural armor

to Indra is such. Karna's desire in doing dana is to get the power to

slay Arjuna. And the moment he gives his armor to Indra, Indra gives him

the Sakti which is capable of slaying anyone. There, that very moment,

Karna's offering is returned with something that is capable of

fulfilling his desire. He used it to save his life from Ghatotkaca

later, but that is a different thing. (That again proves that power

cannot do anything when you are not on the side of Dharma.)

>

> Contrasting this with Arjuna, his virtue was purely a virtue, and not

a rule or contract. When a brahmin approaches him to save his cattle, he

goes, knowing that he has to pass through and disturb Yudhistira's

> privacy if he has to take his weapons. The arrangement was that he had

to do vanavasa if he did that. But Arjuna being noble, saves the

brahmin's cattle, then goes to vanavasa. (Of course, he gets more

astras, marries Subhadra and gets benefited in many ways. And this

proves that if you are by Dharma your wellbeing is ensured.)

>

> It is the same jealousy for Arjuna, that makes Karna insult Draupadi.

It is the same jealousy, that makes him conspire Laksha griha, engineer

the murder of Abhimanyu and many other unrighteous deeds. A person,

however knowledgeable he may be, will turn into a wretch if he

surrenders to qualities like envy - and entire life of Karna stands for

it.

>

> b. Karna lacks the dignity of a king. He bad mouthed those

> revered like Bhishma and Drona, in multiple occasions - Gograhana,

during Krishna's rayabara, before the treacherous

> game of dice and before the war begins. The reasons:

>

> i. they praise Arjuna

> ii. they want to do good to Duryodhana and prevent him from inviting

his death

> iii. they adjudged Karna's valor, with a balancesheet based

> on his capabilities and weaknesses

>

> e) Karna's death: He was killed when he was standing

> without a weapon, and that was the inspiration of Krishna to punish

Karna for what he did. Technically, a person who has Brahmastra and

Pasupata cannot be defeated and Arjuna, along with Bhima, was ajeya, who

cannot be slain. They were the only ones in entire Dwapara Yuga who

could not be defeated. So it was out of question that Karna could defeat

Arjuna. And with Pasupata or Brahmastra or any other Divya astra, Arjuna

could have easily slain Karna any moment he wanted.

>

>

> (But Arjuna was

> principled to the hilt - he did not use those astras because they

should not be used for selfish reasons, and against an enemy who is

weaker. While Karna tried to gain and use those purely for selfish

reasons, that too negative. Also by Astra vidya or tapas Karna was much

inferior to Arjuna who was none but Nara maha rishi taking another life

to continue his tapas. For both the reasons, Arjuna did not use those

astras. He uses Brahma siro namaka, against Aswatthama, that too as a

response to his astra. And he takes it back when Rishis ask him to.

While Aswatthama still does not, and directs it on Uttara's womb. Even

at his own loss, Arjuna heeds to elders' words, withdraws instead of

using his astras.) Instead of

> killing Karna in an encounter, killing him when he was helpless was to

teach him that he did similar things which were wrong.

>

> Shankar

>

>

>

> ________________________________

> Bhaskar bhaskar_jyotish

>

> Fri, November 27, 2009 1:43:24 PM

> Re: Karna -The Astrologer

>

>

> I disagree with the following comments of the author.

> //# Karna is persuaded by Lord ,but to only Fight Arjun he refuses

Krishna's

> Proposal [ Lord's command is not so important for him than his

prestige [ego]

> that he will be declared coward . Lord could have as well made him a

hero had he

> accepted , NO faith ! ]

> # Karna is persuaded by Kunti and SOORYA . He admits he must obey them

but

> cannot for the desire of Fighting Arjun . Karna does not grant what

his MOTHER

> asks for , only for his good ! [ DAANVEER of no use to MOTHER ].//

> There is no EGO in Karna. It is only being namak parayana, or being

true to ones duty. Duryodhana gave him prestige, kingship, friendship

and what not. He does not care of being called a coward. But he is a

good friend, a swami bhakt, a faithful and ethical person and knew that

he was the only strength of Duryodhana and if now he joins the opposite

camp, it would be akin to pushing a spear in his friends heart who needs

support from him. He also knew very well that he is going to perish, but

he will not walk on dishonest paths and unethical ways of behaviour. So

karna is not a coward, and nor does he possess a Ego. he is a good man

indeed if you view at him with an unbiased prejudice or approach.

> Who says that he is not Danveer or of no use to his mother. He did

promise her that she will have 5 sons of her living after the war is

over. And he kept his promise. he could have killed all the other

Brothers in single combat, and if one reads the Mahabharata war proerly

it will be found that he indeed spared his brothers at times when he

could have killed them. So one cannot say that he was of no use to his

brother. He knew very well when he mentioned to his mother that " 5 sons

of Yours will live " . He meant that " Yudhistara.Bhima, Nakula and sahdev

shall nlot be touched by me. And you will ahve either me or Arjuna as

living " .

> Bhaskar.

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

HaHa.

 

dear shankar babu,

 

I am not glorifying any negative characters. Karna was after all the son

of Kunti and a real brother of the Pandavas. Krishna too did treat him

with affections. All his wrong doing was due to ignorance he joined

hands with the Duryodhana and fought in his side. So I see no wrong in

that. that was his Dharma which he fllowed. In fact if he had left

duryodhana and taken sides with Pandavas after realising that Pandavas

were his brothers, it would have been adharma. He did not feel tempted

after knowing that he is Kuntis son and a brother of Pandavas, but did

what was right as per his dharma, which i consider only a Real Surya

putra will do.

 

best wishes,

 

Bhaskar.

 

 

 

 

, ShankaraBharadwaj

Khandavalli <shankarabharadwaj wrote:

>

> One of the several " favors " the Nastika matas did to Sanatana Dharma

is the reversal of Pauranic characters, showing the Pauranic heroes in

negative light and glorifying the negative characters. Much of what we

see about the MBH villiany and heroic is portrayed not just in recent

films, but their origin is found in the pervert commentaries of Nastika

mata scholars. Reversal of MBH characters specifically, is found in

Pampa's commentary.

>

> Shankar

>

>

>

> ________________________________

> ShankaraBharadwaj Khandavalli shankarabharadwaj

>

> Fri, November 27, 2009 2:09:19 PM

> Re: Karna -The Astrologer

>

>

> Dear Bhaskar ji,

>

> It is a popular opinion, but if we look up Vyasa Bharata, we get a

totally different picture of Karna. When judged on any of the attributes

- valor, commitment to friendship, dana guna, ego, morality, Karna does

fall below the mark.

>

> Here is the piece on Karna from from an article I wrote on some of the

the major characters of Mahabharata some time back:

>

>

>

> 1. Karna

>

> 1.1. Valor

>

> Basically,

> putting valor aside, Karna had one quality: to run away from the field

when the enemy proves stronger. Which is what made him show low in front

of great Kurus like Bhishma and Arjuna. His curses combined with this

quality were the reasons Bhishma categorized him as Artha rathi and not

as a Maha rathi.

> a) Karna was taught by Drona with the permission of Kuru

> rulers. When Drona asked for Guru dakshina, which is to arrest

Drupada, Karna was there with Duryodhana and the entire army. They lost

to Drupada, could not stand his army and came back showing their backs

to Drupada. Immediately after this, just the five Pandavas went, without

army, defeated and arrested Drupada, presented him in front of Drona as

their Guru dakshina.

> b) Then not much of war, just a show where Arjuna and

> Karna competed - no result.

> c) Ghosha yatra: The Gandharva Citrasena attacked the

> Kaurava army, Karna ran away from him, unable to stand him. And

Citrasena arrested Duryodhana and Arjuna-Bhima released Duryodhana upon

Yudhistira's instruction.

>

> We cannot say humans cannot fight Gandharvas, because Arjuna defeated

Gandharvas, and Bhima defeated even Yakshas in different occasions.

> d) Gograhana: Arjuna alone, vanquished the entire Kaurava

> army - with Aswatthama, Drona, Bhishma, Kripa, Duryodhana and Karna.

Of these, some were defeated - Karna was defeated and he basically ran

away from the field.

>

> The Great

> Mahabharata War:

> e) Abhimanyu defeated Karna

> f) Satyiki defeated Karna

> g) On the day Jayadratha was killed, Bhima was on fire. To

> protect Duryodhana's brothers from gettign killed in Bhima's hands,

Karna went. Bhima defeated Karna (mind you, with archery alone), then

killed 5 brothers of Duryodhana. Karna came back. Then Bhima again

defeated Karna, and killed 10 more brothers of Duryodhana. Again he

defeated

> Karna, and killed 10 more brothers of Duryodhana. Then he again took

on Karna, but they went into an army of elephants. Then Bhima got out of

his car, with his mace. At this point he came too close to Karna's

chariot. Then Bhima had one option to break the car and Karna - he did

not because Arjuna had taken oath to kill Karna. It is at this point,

that Karna puts his bow around Bhima's neck and insults him.

>

> Then Arjuna defeats Karna, takes Bhima on his chariot, and rebukes

Karna for behaving cheaply. While Bhima defeated Karna so many times, he

does not insult Karna. But the one chance Karna gets, he shows his

character.

> h) Again, the day Karna is killed - Bhima fights Karna,

> and Karna faints. When Bhima, out of anger, tries to cut his tongue

off - Salya saves Karna by asking Bhima to leave him and go away.

> i) Karna loses to Arjuna in every encounter, and Arjuna is

> called Vijaya- he has not been defeated anytime. The only one single

occasion when Karna gets advantage is when he uses Nagastra that hits

Arjuna's helmet. And there is nothing about Brahmastra here, because

Arjuna never had to use it in the entire war.

>

> 2. Friendship

>

> Following valor, the next to be

> talked is his friendship. This is another point on which we hear a lot

of rallying around Karna. We can see what aspects of friendship did

Karna satisfy.

> a) There are three grades of friendship - 1. Out of mutual

> affection, 2. Out of common cause, 3. Out of common enmity. These are

uttama, madhyama and adhama kinds.

>

> There are two contrasting pairs of friends in Mahabharata.

Krishna-Arjuna is the first kind, and Karna-Duryodhana is the last kind.

Krishna and Arjuna held each other's

> side for their affection, for their commitment to dharma.

>

> b) While Karna and Duryodhana stuck to each other, out of

> strategic enmity. Karna to vanquish Arjuna, and Duryodhana to vanquish

Pandavas with Karna's help.

>

> Next, friendship, as it is defined, a good friend is one who guides us

in the right path, makes us do things for our well-being. While we see

Krishna always guiding Arjuna on the right

> path, Karna always guided Duryodhana on the wrong. He not only

persuaded Duryodhana not to do wrong things, but in fact he was the

architect of most unrighteous

> deeds of Duryodhana - burning the palace of lac, insulting Draupadi,

killing Abhimanyu through deceit, what not.

>

> Not only, that,

> but the false kind of confidence Karna gave to Duryodhana about his

own skill and boasting of vanquishing Pandavas, was the inspiration for

Duryodhana to go into the war, eliminate his clan and cause a huge human

loss.

>

> c) A friend is one who stands by us in times of

> difficulty. While Karna, in most of the occasions, has ditched

Duryodhana in the middle of the war. Right from when they ran away from

Drupada (while trying to fight and arrest Drupada as part of

Gurudakshina) , Karna could not be of help. In Ghosha yatra when

Citrasena attacked their army, Karna, instead of trying to rescue

Duryodhana, ran away first. He did the same in Gograhana when Arjuna was

slaying their armies. Karna left Duryodhana to his fate and fleed.

>

> So not only from valor perspective, but even as a good friend, Karna

basically failed Duryodhana.

>

> 3. Dharma Nistha

> Karna was among the most Adharmic

> characters of Mahabharata. We say someone is Dharmic, if the purpose

of his

> actions is Dharma, and when it is not arbitrary, but consistent. When

we talk of a person, it is good to list out what his dharma is, and then

evaluate how much he stood for it. So in case of Karna, these are the

applicable ones:

>

> a) Raja Dharma: Karna is appointed the king of Anga, and

> became a king. Karna, as a samanta of Duryodhana, executed his duties

well. Though there is no special mention or praise for his ruler ship,

that is one thing he smoothly conducted.

> b) Kshatriya Dharma:

> a. A Kshatriya is not supposed to accept any favor from

> anyone. This is demonstrated by many kings, including Pandavas. Rama

was offered the heavenly worlds by the Rishis when he visits them during

vana vasa, but Rama replies that being a Kshatriya he should not accept,

but will earn those himself. Hariscandra, was offered help when in

trouble, so that he could be bailed out. He too, refuses help as he is a

Kshatriya.However, the beginning of Karna's career includes taking such

> favors - he does not win but gets Anga Rajya as a favor. Also, he,

along with Duryodhana's team, fails in giving Gurudakshina to Drona.

> b. A Kshatriya is not supposed to run away from the war,

> even if it means death. Karna not only arbitrarily runs, but has the

habit of running from the field. He ran away in the following occasions:

> i. When he fought Drupada to arrest him and present him as

Gurudakshina to Drona

> ii. When the Gandharva Citrasena fights them during Ghosha

> yatra

> iii. During Gograhana, unable to withstand Arjuna

> iv. In the war, he runs multiple times in the few days he fights -

from Bhima, Arjuna, Satyiki, Abhimanyu

>

> c) Mitra dharma:

> i. A friend's duty is to guide, as a well wisher, and make

> the friend do what is good for him. Sreya (one that gets good) and

Preya (what

> we want) are two things and it is the responsibility of a friend to do

both,

> and when there is a contention, choose sreya. Karna chose to tell

preya to

> Duryodhana, even if it meant destruction, thus being a bad friend. He

guided

> Duryodhana on the path of unrighteousness.

> ii. A friend should be with us, in times of need. Karna did

> fight the

> war on Duryodhana's side, like others - Aswatthama, Drona, Kripa,

> Bhishma, Vikarna who knew Dharma was on the other side but it was

their Dharma

> to fight on Duryodhana's side. But unlike those, Karna left Duryodhana

many

> times in the field to be arrested:

> 1. Ghosha Yatra

> 2. Gograhana

> 3. Duryodhana was defeated multiple times in the war, by

> Yudhistira, Arjuna, Nakula. It was in front of Karna's eyes, that

Duryodhana's

> brothers were killed by Bhima. Karna's valor not only proved useless

in

> stopping Bhima, but in turn it was Duryodhana who sacrificed his

brothers to

> save Karna.

>

> d) Vyakti Dharma: A Dharmic person is supposed to act

> dispassionately, according to Dharma. His actions should be based on

dharma and

> not on preferences.

> Whereas Karna's actions, most of the times, are driven by strong

negative tendencies:

>

> a. Jealousy for Arjuna was one motivator for his life.

> During vidyabhyasa, when the princes were to display their martial

arts, Arjuna did, so as Bhima and other princes. Karna asked for a

chance and he was immediately given chance by Drona to exhibit his

skill. But he did not stop there, he wanted to fight Arjuna. It was then

that he was insulted and consequently given Angarajya. The same was the

reason he

> approached Drona for Brahmastra. Drona refuses, since his motive is

based on

> enmity and not loka kalyana. Then he approaches Parasurama for the

same and

> lies to him that he is a brahmana. Parasurama, being noble, curses

Karna only to the extent that he gave instruction and not for entire

astra vidya of Karna. Even here, it is clear that Karna put his enmity

above Dharma.

>

> Very few know that Karna had a sense of competition with Arjuna even

in dana guna. There is a story where a brahmin goes to Arjuna while it

was raining, and asks for wood. Arjuna says he cannot give. Then he goes

to Karna and says he needs wood for cooking. Karna asks him if he went

to Arjuna, is pleased by the reply, and then gives him the wood from his

own house - by breaking a pillar of his palace.

>

> The technical aspect in dana guna is that it should be done purely as

a matter of principle and not for any return. The moment there is a

return, then it does not remain dana. And Karna giving his natural armor

to Indra is such. Karna's desire in doing dana is to get the power to

slay Arjuna. And the moment he gives his armor to Indra, Indra gives him

the Sakti which is capable of slaying anyone. There, that very moment,

Karna's offering is returned with something that is capable of

fulfilling his desire. He used it to save his life from Ghatotkaca

later, but that is a different thing. (That again proves that power

cannot do anything when you are not on the side of Dharma.)

>

> Contrasting this with Arjuna, his virtue was purely a virtue, and not

a rule or contract. When a brahmin approaches him to save his cattle, he

goes, knowing that he has to pass through and disturb Yudhistira's

> privacy if he has to take his weapons. The arrangement was that he had

to do vanavasa if he did that. But Arjuna being noble, saves the

brahmin's cattle, then goes to vanavasa. (Of course, he gets more

astras, marries Subhadra and gets benefited in many ways. And this

proves that if you are by Dharma your wellbeing is ensured.)

>

> It is the same jealousy for Arjuna, that makes Karna insult Draupadi.

It is the same jealousy, that makes him conspire Laksha griha, engineer

the murder of Abhimanyu and many other unrighteous deeds. A person,

however knowledgeable he may be, will turn into a wretch if he

surrenders to qualities like envy - and entire life of Karna stands for

it.

>

> b. Karna lacks the dignity of a king. He bad mouthed those

> revered like Bhishma and Drona, in multiple occasions - Gograhana,

during Krishna 's rayabara, before the treacherous

> game of dice and before the war begins. The reasons:

>

> i. they praise Arjuna

> ii. they want to do good to Duryodhana and prevent him from inviting

his death

> iii. they adjudged Karna's valor, with a balancesheet based

> on his capabilities and weaknesses

>

> e) Karna's death: He was killed when he was standing

> without a weapon, and that was the inspiration of Krishna

> to punish Karna for what he did. Technically, a person who has

Brahmastra and Pasupata cannot be defeated and Arjuna, along with Bhima,

was ajeya, who cannot be slain. They were the only ones in entire

Dwapara Yuga who could not be defeated. So it was out of question that

Karna could defeat Arjuna. And with Pasupata or Brahmastra or any other

Divya astra, Arjuna could have easily slain Karna any moment he wanted.

>

>

> (But Arjuna was

> principled to the hilt - he did not use those astras because they

should not be used for selfish reasons, and against an enemy who is

weaker. While Karna tried to gain and use those purely for selfish

reasons, that too negative. Also by Astra vidya or tapas Karna was much

inferior to Arjuna who was none but Nara maha rishi taking another life

to continue his tapas. For both the reasons, Arjuna did not use those

astras. He uses Brahma siro namaka, against Aswatthama, that too as a

response to his astra. And he takes it back when Rishis ask him to.

While Aswatthama still does not, and directs it on Uttara's womb. Even

at his own loss, Arjuna heeds to elders' words, withdraws instead of

using his astras.) Instead of

> killing Karna in an encounter, killing him when he was helpless was to

teach him that he did similar things which were wrong.

>

> Shankar

>

>

>

> ________________________________

> Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ .co. in>

> ancient_indian_ astrology

> Fri, November 27, 2009 1:43:24 PM

> [ancient_indian_ astrology] Re: Karna -The Astrologer

>

>

> I disagree with the following comments of the author.

> //# Karna is persuaded by Lord ,but to only Fight Arjun he refuses

Krishna's

> Proposal [ Lord's command is not so important for him than his

prestige [ego]

> that he will be declared coward . Lord could have as well made him a

hero had he

> accepted , NO faith ! ]

> # Karna is persuaded by Kunti and SOORYA . He admits he must obey them

but

> cannot for the desire of Fighting Arjun . Karna does not grant what

his MOTHER

> asks for , only for his good ! [ DAANVEER of no use to MOTHER ].//

> There is no EGO in Karna. It is only being namak parayana, or being

true to ones duty. Duryodhana gave him prestige, kingship, friendship

and what not. He does not care of being called a coward. But he is a

good friend, a swami bhakt, a faithful and ethical person and knew that

he was the only strength of Duryodhana and if now he joins the opposite

camp, it would be akin to pushing a spear in his friends heart who needs

support from him. He also knew very well that he is going to perish, but

he will not walk on dishonest paths and unethical ways of behaviour. So

karna is not a coward, and nor does he possess a Ego. he is a good man

indeed if you view at him with an unbiased prejudice or approach.

> Who says that he is not Danveer or of no use to his mother. He did

promise her that she will have 5 sons of her living after the war is

over. And he kept his promise. he could have killed all the other

Brothers in single combat, and if one reads the Mahabharata war proerly

it will be found that he indeed spared his brothers at times when he

could have killed them. So one cannot say that he was of no use to his

brother. He knew very well when he mentioned to his mother that " 5 sons

of Yours will live " . He meant that " Yudhistara.Bhima, Nakula and sahdev

shall nlot be touched by me. And you will ahve either me or Arjuna as

living " .

> Bhaskar.

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Bhaskar ji,"

I am not siding Karna, but a lover of the Pandavas so my loyalties

remakin with Arjuna. But at the same time what I feel is justified must

be mentioned."No, it is not about siding with a person - it is about siding with an idea: "In any war one side wins and the other gets defeated. The one who gets

defeated cannot be considered always to have run away. They did put up a

fight is what matters for warriors."1. When we talk of valor, the question obviously is about who exhibited what kind of valor. And fact in that remains that from all the incidents of war compiled in the MBH, Karna comes out inferior to those like Bhishma, Arjuna, Bhimasena. The point is not about soimeone winning all the wars. The fact is that Karna *never* won a war in his life against the Pandava side. His loss is not arbitrary, or statistical, it is *invariable*. And to run away is not "considered" - it is *reported*. MBH clearly notes who all fled in the war at what time. Gograhana, Guru dakshina, and many instances in the great war Karna *did run away*. 2. Similarly when we talk of friendship, I noted what is a great friendship, what is ordinary and what is inferior. Karna was at most a rina grasta, an indebted human. To treat that indebtation as friendship is stretching it too far. Being indebted is a totally, totally

different thing from being a friend. 3. As for presenting his armor, I remember having dealt this - his reasons for dana are personal, and not magnanimous or selfless. Which is what makes the difference between a Karna and an Arjuna. It is for the sake of Dharma that Arjuna does a dana, while Karna does it for his virtue. 4. As for morality, there is not even a need to discuss this - lying (to Parasu Rama), treason (he was a main architect in all the fraud against Pandavas, including the laksha griha), are not forced on him but are his choices. The point is, it is not primary whether one sides with Karna. But what matters is the ideals one takes up in his life, after taking an ordinary, mean moral character like Karna versus the character one emulates by setting a man of lofty ideals as his model - say a Bhimasena or Krishna. The fact that these two sides are not fortunately the positive-negative, but just incomparable by their

virtue. Most of the times you might have observed, that Karna is held great, by showing how worse he could have been, and not by virtue of how great one can be. On the contrary, one would talk of a Krishna or Arjuna, with respect to what is the greatest possible and not how worse could they have been. This exactly, is the problem with the character of Karna :) Hope you are seeing my point. ShankarBhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish Sent: Fri,

November 27, 2009 3:01:24 PM Re: Karna -The Astrologer

 

 

 

Dear Shankara Bharadwaj ji,

 

I am not siding Karna, but a lover of the Pandavas so my loyalties

remakin with Arjuna. But at the same time what I feel is justified must

be mentioned.

 

In any war one side wins and the other gets defeated. The one who gets

defeated cannot be considered always to have run away. They did put up a

fight is what matters for warriors.

 

And all wars cannot be won by anybody.

 

You must also be knowing what "Ranchod" stands for.

 

This does not mean that Krishna ran away.

 

Certain Leelas are played for certain reasons incomprehensible to

mortals the secrets of which only the supery human or Divine know.

 

Without Shikhandi Bheeshma could not have been defeated. It was not that

Shikhandi did not fire arrows at bheeshma. But bheeshma was proud of the

fact that Arjuna used Shikhandi in front of him, and fired arrows at

him, and he did mention that the arrows that have hurt him and caused

the deepest of wounds are only from my priya(Dearest) shishya Arjuna.

Shikhandi who he was, why he was, and what scores he had to settle with

bhishma I am sure every normal devout Hindu would know.

 

There are many rinabadhans of previous janmas in the whole story of

Mahabharata so why did one kill somebody, and why the other could not

have killed him, is a matter of discussion which may fill in ten

thousand pages.

 

I personally do not feel that karna falls below the mark of valor,

commitment to friendship, dana guna, ego, and morality, In fact being

the son of Surya Narayan, he even presented his abodh kavach to you know

whom , though he was warned by Surya Narayan that tomorrow morning who

is going to come and ask you what.

 

best wishes,

 

Bhaskar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Bhaskar ji,I responded to your points in another post. This post was rather an FYI, for those who did not know the origin of the arguments we are seeing today. Not an addendum to the argument itself :) ShankarBhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish Sent: Fri, November 27, 2009 3:19:32

PM Re: Karna -The Astrologer

 

 

 

HaHa.

 

dear shankar babu,

 

I am not glorifying any negative characters. Karna was after all the son

of Kunti and a real brother of the Pandavas. Krishna too did treat him

with affections. All his wrong doing was due to ignorance he joined

hands with the Duryodhana and fought in his side. So I see no wrong in

that. that was his Dharma which he fllowed. In fact if he had left

duryodhana and taken sides with Pandavas after realising that Pandavas

were his brothers, it would have been adharma. He did not feel tempted

after knowing that he is Kuntis son and a brother of Pandavas, but did

what was right as per his dharma, which i consider only a Real Surya

putra will do.

 

best wishes,

 

Bhaskar.

 

ancient_indian_ astrology, ShankaraBharadwaj

Khandavalli <shankarabharadwaj@ ...> wrote:

>

> One of the several "favors" the Nastika matas did to Sanatana Dharma

is the reversal of Pauranic characters, showing the Pauranic heroes in

negative light and glorifying the negative characters. Much of what we

see about the MBH villiany and heroic is portrayed not just in recent

films, but their origin is found in the pervert commentaries of Nastika

mata scholars. Reversal of MBH characters specifically, is found in

Pampa's commentary.

>

> Shankar

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Sirs,

 

Okay I get your points, and must say your english is really superb when

you wish to convey your thoughts and ideas.

 

So we will not side by Karna nor his ideals, but certainly sympathise

with his having lost his mother, being flown on the water in a basket,

being found by a Suta, being reared by them, being admonished at time of

the competetion in Draupadi swayamvar, the curse on him resulting in his

chariots wheel being stuck up and thereafter loosing his Life. All this

though being Kuntis putra, brother of the Great pandavas and a cousin of

Krishna ?

 

I feel sad for this man. I will not talk bad about him, even if I am

not allowed to talk good for him.

 

I rest this thread here from my side.

 

best wishes,

 

Bhaskar.

 

 

 

, ShankaraBharadwaj

Khandavalli <shankarabharadwaj wrote:

>

> Dear Bhaskar ji,

>

> "

> I am not siding Karna, but a lover of the Pandavas so my loyalties

> remakin with Arjuna. But at the same time what I feel is justified

must

> be mentioned. "

>

> No, it is not about siding with a person - it is about siding with an

idea:

>

> " In any war one side wins and the other gets defeated. The one who

gets

> defeated cannot be considered always to have run away. They did put up

a

> fight is what matters for warriors. "

>

> 1. When we talk of valor, the question obviously is about who

exhibited what kind of valor. And fact in that remains that from all the

incidents of war compiled in the MBH, Karna comes out inferior to those

like Bhishma, Arjuna, Bhimasena. The point is not about soimeone winning

all the wars. The fact is that Karna *never* won a war in his life

against the Pandava side. His loss is not arbitrary, or statistical, it

is *invariable*.

>

> And to run away is not " considered " - it is *reported*. MBH clearly

notes who all fled in the war at what time. Gograhana, Guru dakshina,

and many instances in the great war Karna *did run away*.

>

> 2. Similarly when we talk of friendship, I noted what is a great

friendship, what is ordinary and what is inferior. Karna was at most a

rina grasta, an indebted human. To treat that indebtation as friendship

is stretching it too far. Being indebted is a totally, totally different

thing from being a friend.

>

> 3. As for presenting his armor, I remember having dealt this - his

reasons for dana are personal, and not magnanimous or selfless. Which is

what makes the difference between a Karna and an Arjuna. It is for the

sake of Dharma that Arjuna does a dana, while Karna does it for his

virtue.

>

> 4. As for morality, there is not even a need to discuss this - lying

(to Parasu Rama), treason (he was a main architect in all the fraud

against Pandavas, including the laksha griha), are not forced on him but

are his choices.

>

> The point is, it is not primary whether one sides with Karna. But what

matters is the ideals one takes up in his life, after taking an

ordinary, mean moral character like Karna versus the character one

emulates by setting a man of lofty ideals as his model - say a Bhimasena

or Krishna. The fact that these two sides are not fortunately the

positive-negative, but just incomparable by their virtue.

>

> Most of the times you might have observed, that Karna is held great,

by showing how worse he could have been, and not by virtue of how great

one can be. On the contrary, one would talk of a Krishna or Arjuna, with

respect to what is the greatest possible and not how worse could they

have been. This exactly, is the problem with the character of Karna :)

Hope you are seeing my point.

>

> Shankar

>

>

>

> ________________________________

> Bhaskar bhaskar_jyotish

>

> Fri, November 27, 2009 3:01:24 PM

> Re: Karna -The Astrologer

>

>

>

> Dear Shankara Bharadwaj ji,

>

> I am not siding Karna, but a lover of the Pandavas so my loyalties

> remakin with Arjuna. But at the same time what I feel is justified

must

> be mentioned.

>

> In any war one side wins and the other gets defeated. The one who gets

> defeated cannot be considered always to have run away. They did put up

a

> fight is what matters for warriors.

>

> And all wars cannot be won by anybody.

>

> You must also be knowing what " Ranchod " stands for.

>

> This does not mean that Krishna ran away.

>

> Certain Leelas are played for certain reasons incomprehensible to

> mortals the secrets of which only the supery human or Divine know.

>

> Without Shikhandi Bheeshma could not have been defeated. It was not

that

> Shikhandi did not fire arrows at bheeshma. But bheeshma was proud of

the

> fact that Arjuna used Shikhandi in front of him, and fired arrows at

> him, and he did mention that the arrows that have hurt him and caused

> the deepest of wounds are only from my priya(Dearest) shishya Arjuna.

> Shikhandi who he was, why he was, and what scores he had to settle

with

> bhishma I am sure every normal devout Hindu would know.

>

> There are many rinabadhans of previous janmas in the whole story of

> Mahabharata so why did one kill somebody, and why the other could not

> have killed him, is a matter of discussion which may fill in ten

> thousand pages.

>

> I personally do not feel that karna falls below the mark of valor,

> commitment to friendship, dana guna, ego, and morality, In fact being

> the son of Surya Narayan, he even presented his abodh kavach to you

know

> whom , though he was warned by Surya Narayan that tomorrow morning who

> is going to come and ask you what.

>

> best wishes,

>

> Bhaskar.

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Bhaskar ji,Yes, Karna is probably the most unfortunate character of MBH. Also, there is no offense here. If we look at Karna as a man, he is valorous, is committed, knowledgeable and all that. But - - all that is not strung by the one and most important basis namely Dharma - he was not comparable in any of these, to the greatest men of his age The great lesson MBH has to offer anyone, is that one whose actions are based on Dharma, all his vices become virtues, all his curses become boons. This is why, even a curse on Arjuna proved to be his boon during ajnata vasa. And one who stands for Adharma, all his virtues become vices - this is why even the positives of Karna put him at disadvantage. Karna was unfortunate because of his Adharma, and not the other way

round. Karna remained an object of dislike precisely because of his Adharma combined with his high ambition. Else, he would be as revered as Vidura. Again as I said, a glorification of Karna cannot happen on the basis of

how great a man can be, but only on the basis of how mean one can be.

One would say Karna could have ditched Duryodhana, and is great because

he did not. But no body would say Karna being a wellwisher should have

put Duryodhana on the path of righteousness, and should have led him to

glory. One would say Karna had to cheat Parasu Rama because he was

denied an Astra, but no body would say Karna should have, if he was

Dharmic, get the eligibility for the Astra through his righteous

conduct and tapas. This by itself, stands to say what kind of character

Karna is. His goal itself, was never being idealistic. Desire being

primary, righteousness was always secondary and even tertiary for him.

Which is the definition of Adharma. A person who subordinates his

desires to dharma, is the example for mankind.If this fundamental lesson is not learned, if the characters of MBH are not seen from this perspective, then MBH is just a story, like any other story! One can go on and on listing out events, quoting incidents. One could be sympathetic, one could be emotional, one could be dispassionate, one could have his favorites. But the crux of the matter remains the evaluation of anyone on the basis of Dharma, which is the basis, which is the purpose. ShankarBhaskar <bhaskar_jyotishTo:

Sent: Fri, November 27, 2009 4:28:10 PM Re: Karna -The Astrologer

 

 

 

Dear Sirs,

 

Okay I get your points, and must say your english is really superb when

you wish to convey your thoughts and ideas.

 

So we will not side by Karna nor his ideals, but certainly sympathise

with his having lost his mother, being flown on the water in a basket,

being found by a Suta, being reared by them, being admonished at time of

the competetion in Draupadi swayamvar, the curse on him resulting in his

chariots wheel being stuck up and thereafter loosing his Life. All this

though being Kuntis putra, brother of the Great pandavas and a cousin of

Krishna ?

 

I feel sad for this man. I will not talk bad about him, even if I am

not allowed to talk good for him.

 

I rest this thread here from my side.

 

best wishes,

 

Bhaskar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Shankara Bharadwaj ji,

 

Every sentence of your mail echoes great and lofty thinking. I agree to

every word of your mail undoubetdly.

 

Yes compared to his peers, Karna could have been better than what he

already was. We are certainly watching what he did not do, and not

watching what he could have done for general good of all.

 

He could have left the game of dice and not participated in it. He could

have left the Court Hall at time of Vastraharan. He could have pledged

loyalty only to Universal Dharma instead of individual dharma. He could

have persuaded Duryodhana from his destructive thinking. He could have

laid down his arms in front of Parshuarama. He could have done much more

which he did not but revolved his Life around Duryodhana and his

personal ambitions.

 

Which is why he is not revered but just a subject of pity.

 

regards,

 

Bhaskar.

 

 

 

 

, ShankaraBharadwaj

Khandavalli <shankarabharadwaj wrote:

>

> Dear Bhaskar ji,

>

> Yes, Karna is probably the most unfortunate character of MBH. Also,

there is no offense here. If we look at Karna as a man, he is valorous,

is committed, knowledgeable and all that. But -

> - all that is not strung by the one and most important basis namely

Dharma

> - he was not comparable in any of these, to the greatest men of his

age

>

> The great lesson MBH has to offer anyone, is that one whose actions

are based on Dharma, all his vices become virtues, all his curses become

boons. This is why, even a curse on Arjuna proved to be his boon during

ajnata vasa. And one who stands for Adharma, all his virtues become

vices - this is why even the positives of Karna put him at disadvantage.

Karna was unfortunate because of his Adharma, and not the other way

round. Karna remained an object of dislike precisely because of his

Adharma combined with his high ambition. Else, he would be as revered as

Vidura.

>

> Again as I said, a glorification of Karna cannot happen on the basis

of

> how great a man can be, but only on the basis of how mean one can be.

> One would say Karna could have ditched Duryodhana, and is great

because

> he did not. But no body would say Karna being a wellwisher should have

> put Duryodhana on the path of righteousness, and should have led him

to

> glory. One would say Karna had to cheat Parasu Rama because he was

> denied an Astra, but no body would say Karna should have, if he was

> Dharmic, get the eligibility for the Astra through his righteous

> conduct and tapas. This by itself, stands to say what kind of

character

> Karna is. His goal itself, was never being idealistic. Desire being

> primary, righteousness was always secondary and even tertiary for him.

> Which is the definition of Adharma. A person who subordinates his

> desires to dharma, is the example for mankind.

>

> If this fundamental lesson is not learned, if the characters of MBH

are not seen from this perspective, then MBH is just a story, like any

other story! One can go on and on listing out events, quoting incidents.

One could be sympathetic, one could be emotional, one could be

dispassionate, one could have his favorites. But the crux of the matter

remains the evaluation of anyone on the basis of Dharma, which is the

basis, which is the purpose.

>

> Shankar

>

>

>

> ________________________________

> Bhaskar bhaskar_jyotish

>

> Fri, November 27, 2009 4:28:10 PM

> Re: Karna -The Astrologer

>

>

>

> Dear Sirs,

>

> Okay I get your points, and must say your english is really superb

when

> you wish to convey your thoughts and ideas.

>

> So we will not side by Karna nor his ideals, but certainly sympathise

> with his having lost his mother, being flown on the water in a basket,

> being found by a Suta, being reared by them, being admonished at time

of

> the competetion in Draupadi swayamvar, the curse on him resulting in

his

> chariots wheel being stuck up and thereafter loosing his Life. All

this

> though being Kuntis putra, brother of the Great pandavas and a cousin

of

> Krishna ?

>

> I feel sad for this man. I will not talk bad about him, even if I am

> not allowed to talk good for him.

>

> I rest this thread here from my side.

>

> best wishes,

>

> Bhaskar.

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Shankar-ji,

 

With all of his well known weaknesses, Karna remains a favorite

person to some of us.

 

Reason is : we, ordinary mortal, can relate to him.

 

Karna, apparently, had a single goal... to destroy Arjuna.

He did whatever was he felt needed, dharmic / adharmic

differentiation did not matter.

 

He had many weaknesses. One of the greatest weaknesses

was his inability to withstand pressure and leaving the 'field'.

He fled away from many battles.

 

But when not under pressure, he was a different man. He

was a Daanveer. He could give his Akshaya Kavach, he

could use his single Baan(Aghna ?) to kill Ghatotkach,

knowing well that his chances of killing Arjuna went with that.

 

Somehow, some of us, could relate to him for his weaknesses.

 

For rest, we put them in pedestal.. to revere only and not to

emulate them in action. That would be very difficult too. How

many of us would care to emulate Yudhisthira in real life ?

 

Karna looks more Human than others.

 

regards

 

Chakraborty

 

 

 

On Behalf Of ShankaraBharadwaj KhandavalliFriday, November 27, 2009 5:29 PM Subject: Re: Karna -The Astrologer

 

Dear Bhaskar ji,Yes, Karna is probably the most unfortunate character of MBH. Also, there is no offense here. If we look at Karna as a man, he is valorous, is committed, knowledgeable and all that. But - - all that is not strung by the one and most important basis namely Dharma - he was not comparable in any of these, to the greatest men of his age The great lesson MBH has to offer anyone, is that one whose actions are based on Dharma, all his vices become virtues, all his curses become boons. This is why, even a curse on Arjuna proved to be his boon during ajnata vasa. And one who stands for Adharma, all his virtues become vices - this is why even the positives of Karna put him at disadvantage. Karna was unfortunate because of his Adharma, and not the other way round. Karna remained an object of dislike precisely because of his Adharma combined with his high ambition. Else, he would be as revered as Vidura. Again as I said, a glorification of Karna cannot happen on the basis of how great a man can be, but only on the basis of how mean one can be. One would say Karna could have ditched Duryodhana, and is great because he did not. But no body would say Karna being a wellwisher should have put Duryodhana on the path of righteousness, and should have led him to glory. One would say Karna had to cheat Parasu Rama because he was denied an Astra, but no body would say Karna should have, if he was Dharmic, get the eligibility for the Astra through his righteous conduct and tapas. This by itself, stands to say what kind of character Karna is. His goal itself, was never being idealistic. Desire being primary, righteousness was always secondary and even tertiary for him. Which is the definition of Adharma. A person who subordinates his desires to dharma, is the example for mankind.If this fundamental lesson is not learned, if the characters of MBH are not seen from this perspective, then MBH is just a story, like any other story! One can go on and on listing out events, quoting incidents. One could be sympathetic, one could be emotional, one could be dispassionate, one could have his favorites. But the crux of the matter remains the evaluation of anyone on the basis of Dharma, which is the basis, which is the purpose. Shankar

 

 

 

Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish (AT) (DOT) co.in> Sent: Fri, November 27, 2009 4:28:10 PM Re: Karna -The Astrologer

Dear Sirs,Okay I get your points, and must say your english is really superb whenyou wish to convey your thoughts and ideas.So we will not side by Karna nor his ideals, but certainly sympathisewith his having lost his mother, being flown on the water in a basket,being found by a Suta, being reared by them, being admonished at time ofthe competetion in Draupadi swayamvar, the curse on him resulting in hischariots wheel being stuck up and thereafter loosing his Life. All thisthough being Kuntis putra, brother of the Great pandavas and a cousin ofKrishna ?I feel sad for this man. I will not talk bad about him, even if I amnot allowed to talk good for him.I rest this thread here from my side.best wishes,Bhaskar.

This Message was sent from Indian Oil Messaging Gateway, New Delhi, India. The information contained in this electronic message and any attachments to this message are intended for the exclusive use of the addressee(s) and may contain proprietary, confidential or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately and destroy all copies of this message and any attachments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

dear Chakroborty ji,

// One of the greatest weaknesses > was his inability to withstand pressure and leaving the 'field'. > He fled away from many battles.//

Can you please elaborate on above ?

The following is an extract from Wikipedia which please read-

During the Pandavas' exile, Karna took upon himself the task of establishing Duryodhana as the Emperor of the World. Karna commanded an army to different parts of the country to subjugate kings and made them swear allegiance to Duryodhana, the king of Hastinapura or else die in battle. Karna succeeded in all the battles. In this military adventure, Karna is stated to have waged wars and reduced to submission numerous kingdoms including those of the Kambojas, the Shakas, the Kekayas, the Avantyas, the Gandharas, the Madarakas, the Trigartas, the Tanganas, the Panchalas, the Videhas, the Suhmas, the Angas, the Vangas, the Nishadas, the Kalingas, the Vatsa, the Ashmakas, the Rishikas and numerous others including mlecchas and the forest tribes. (MBH 8.8.18-20).

Now can you please tell us how many times and where did he run away from the battle field ?

I also do not think that he could not withstand pressures. This can be seen from the starting of his childhood Life, receiving curse from parshurama due to withstanding pressure of pains caused by ants, and also till the end of his Life when he was caught between pressures of having promised to Mother Kunti 2 boons, knowing well that the pandavas were his brothers, and yet owing allegiance to duryodhana again knowing fully well that he was adharmic and the war was already lost where Krishna was not.

regards/bhaskar.

 

, "Chakraborty, PL" <CHAKRABORTYP2 wrote:>> Dear Shankar-ji,> > With all of his well known weaknesses, Karna remains a favorite> person to some of us.> > Reason is : we, ordinary mortal, can relate to him.> > Karna, apparently, had a single goal... to destroy Arjuna.> He did whatever was he felt needed, dharmic / adharmic> differentiation did not matter.> > He had many weaknesses. One of the greatest weaknesses> was his inability to withstand pressure and leaving the 'field'.> He fled away from many battles.> > But when not under pressure, he was a different man. He> was a Daanveer. He could give his Akshaya Kavach, he> could use his single Baan(Aghna ?) to kill Ghatotkach,> knowing well that his chances of killing Arjuna went with that.> > Somehow, some of us, could relate to him for his weaknesses.> > For rest, we put them in pedestal.. to revere only and not to> emulate them in action. That would be very difficult too. How> many of us would care to emulate Yudhisthira in real life ?> > Karna looks more Human than others.> > regards> > Chakraborty> > ________________________________> On Behalf Of ShankaraBharadwaj Khandavalli> Friday, November 27, 2009 5:29 PM> > Re: Karna -The Astrologer> > > > Dear Bhaskar ji,> > Yes, Karna is probably the most unfortunate character of MBH. Also, there is no offense here. If we look at Karna as a man, he is valorous, is committed, knowledgeable and all that. But -> - all that is not strung by the one and most important basis namely Dharma> - he was not comparable in any of these, to the greatest men of his age> > The great lesson MBH has to offer anyone, is that one whose actions are based on Dharma, all his vices become virtues, all his curses become boons. This is why, even a curse on Arjuna proved to be his boon during ajnata vasa. And one who stands for Adharma, all his virtues become vices - this is why even the positives of Karna put him at disadvantage. Karna was unfortunate because of his Adharma, and not the other way round. Karna remained an object of dislike precisely because of his Adharma combined with his high ambition. Else, he would be as revered as Vidura.> > Again as I said, a glorification of Karna cannot happen on the basis of how great a man can be, but only on the basis of how mean one can be. One would say Karna could have ditched Duryodhana, and is great because he did not. But no body would say Karna being a wellwisher should have put Duryodhana on the path of righteousness, and should have led him to glory. One would say Karna had to cheat Parasu Rama because he was denied an Astra, but no body would say Karna should have, if he was Dharmic, get the eligibility for the Astra through his righteous conduct and tapas. This by itself, stands to say what kind of character Karna is. His goal itself, was never being idealistic. Desire being primary, righteousness was always secondary and even tertiary for him. Which is the definition of Adharma. A person who subordinates his desires to dharma, is the example for mankind.> > If this fundamental lesson is not learned, if the characters of MBH are not seen from this perspective, then MBH is just a story, like any other story! One can go on and on listing out events, quoting incidents. One could be sympathetic, one could be emotional, one could be dispassionate, one could have his favorites. But the crux of the matter remains the evaluation of anyone on the basis of Dharma, which is the basis, which is the purpose.> > Shankar> > ________________________________> Bhaskar bhaskar_jyotish > Fri, November 27, 2009 4:28:10 PM> Re: Karna -The Astrologer> > > > Dear Sirs,> > Okay I get your points, and must say your english is really superb when> you wish to convey your thoughts and ideas.> > So we will not side by Karna nor his ideals, but certainly sympathise> with his having lost his mother, being flown on the water in a basket,> being found by a Suta, being reared by them, being admonished at time of> the competetion in Draupadi swayamvar, the curse on him resulting in his> chariots wheel being stuck up and thereafter loosing his Life. All this> though being Kuntis putra, brother of the Great pandavas and a cousin of> Krishna ?> > I feel sad for this man. I will not talk bad about him, even if I am> not allowed to talk good for him.> > I rest this thread here from my side.> > best wishes,> > Bhaskar.> > > > This Message was sent from Indian Oil Messaging Gateway, New Delhi, India. The information contained in this electronic message and any attachments to this message are intended for the exclusive use of the addressee(s) and may contain proprietary, confidential or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately and destroy all copies of this message and any attachments.>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Chakraborty ji,The way collective morale has been demolished in our society, has a lot

to do with the perversion of Pauranik parlance. The progressively bad

favorites and Pauranic models people started choosing, reflects

directly on the current state of Dharma in our society:

"Karna, apparently, had a single goal... to destroy Arjuna.

He did whatever was he felt needed, dharmic / adharmic

differentiation did not matter."Yes exactly. The goal for his life itself was not Dharmic, much less a great goal. Which lowers him even in his other stronger aspects. "Reason is : we, ordinary mortal, can relate to him."Exactly the pitfall we all are prone to. "He could give his Akshaya Kavach, "Many people are prone to this error too. Many ignore, that something is called a dana when it is given away. When a return is taken, it no more remains a dana. The only weapon he had and he wanted to use against Arjuna, which he was forced to use on Ghatotkaca, was given by Indra *in return* to his armor - which *negates* his dana. That does not bring down the virtue of preparedness he showed to give away his armor, but certainly defeats the merit of giving away. I wonder how such a simple, straight point is missed. "he

could use his single Baan(Aghna ?) to kill Ghatotkach,

knowing well that his chances of killing Arjuna went with that."Being the weilder of Pasupata and Brahmastra, Arjuna could *never* be conquered or killed in combat. So that is a moot point. The other part of Aindri Sakti being used on Ghatotkaca, was not an act of preparedness but desperation - he had no option. Shankar"Chakraborty, PL" <CHAKRABORTYP2 Fri, November 27,

2009 5:59:53 PMRE: Re: Karna -The Astrologer

 

 

 

Dear Shankar-ji,

 

With all of his well known weaknesses, Karna remains a favorite

person to some of us.

 

Reason is : we, ordinary mortal, can relate to him.

 

Karna, apparently, had a single goal... to destroy Arjuna.

He did whatever was he felt needed, dharmic / adharmic

differentiation did not matter.

 

He had many weaknesses. One of the greatest weaknesses

was his inability to withstand pressure and leaving the 'field'.

He fled away from many battles.

 

But when not under pressure, he was a different man. He

was a Daanveer. He could give his Akshaya Kavach, he

could use his single Baan(Aghna ?) to kill Ghatotkach,

knowing well that his chances of killing Arjuna went with that.

 

Somehow, some of us, could relate to him for his weaknesses.

 

For rest, we put them in pedestal.. to revere only and not to

emulate them in action. That would be very difficult too. How

many of us would care to emulate Yudhisthira in real life ?

 

Karna looks more Human than others.

 

regards

 

Chakraborty

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My Comments in red

 

Dear Chakraborty ji,The way collective morale has been demolished in our society, has a lot to do with the perversion of Pauranik parlance. The progressively bad favorites and Pauranic models people started choosing, reflects directly on the current state of Dharma in our society: "

Karna, apparently, had a single goal... to destroy Arjuna.

He did whatever was he felt needed, dharmic / adharmic

differentiation did not matter."

Yes exactly. The goal for his life itself was not Dharmic, much less a great goal. Which lowers him even in his other stronger aspects.

 

This goal was developed and not inborn. it developed just like any other goal which develops with any other man. We know Arjuna as Dharmic, but in his times and era Arjuna must have been a opponent for him in Archery etc. Why dont we view this scenario from the horizon of those times ?

Who says that differentiation did not matter to Arjuna. If one reads the story of Mahabharata as well as Karna in it, one will find many values which have been adhered to by Karna. But we are simply negating all his good points completely and highlighting only the undesirable ones.

 

"Reason is : we, ordinary mortal, can relate to him."Exactly the pitfall we all are prone to.

 

We dont and cannot relate to him. Its just not possible. We dont possess neither the fine blood of karna, neither his Dana giving propensities, neither his valour and neither his skills, and neither a great friend and King as Duryodhana. His problems were different and we cannot use Karna as an excuse to do the same what he did."He could give his Akshaya Kavach, "Many people are prone to this error too. Many ignore, that something is called a dana when it is given away. When a return is taken, it no more remains a dana. The only weapon he had and he wanted to use against Arjuna, which he was forced to use on Ghatotkaca, was given by Indra *in return* to his armor - which *negates* his dana. That does not bring down the virtue of preparedness he showed to give away his armor, but certainly defeats the merit of giving away. I wonder how such a simple, straight point is missed.

 

He never asked for return gift. Did he ? Indra Devata came disguised as a Brahmin and asked for his kavach because with it on his body, Karna was invincible and Arjuna (Indras son) could not kill him. Though Surya devata had warned in advance the previous night to karna that tomorrow Arjunas father Indra will come and ask you for armour, still knowing this Karna gave it lovingly to him. Pleased with this great show of Daan dharma from karnas side, Indra was bound ethically to grant him something in return, and so he did by giving him his personal Weapon with caution saying that it could be used only once. How can Indras giving in return a gift to Karna defeat his merits. Not at all? Please remove a biased prejudiced thinking against Karna and then view the whole show. The Dana was given to a Brahmin but the return gift came not froma Brahmin but Indra devata who lett of his disguise and came in in original form pleased with Karna. "he

could use his single Baan(Aghna ?) to kill Ghatotkach,

knowing well that his chances of killing Arjuna went with that."Being the weilder of Pasupata and Brahmastra, Arjuna could *never* be conquered or killed in combat. So that is a moot point. The other part of Aindri Sakti being used on Ghatotkaca, was not an act of preparedness but desperation - he had no option.

Who knows whether it was an act of desperation or with preparedness ? Who can vouch or guarantee this ?At least again he showed his sterling qualities by using a weapon reserved for Arjuna on Ghatotkacha. Didnt he ? Knowing fully well that now it would be difficult to kill Arjuna yet he parted with this one time use of the weapon. he could have denied it. Did he ?

 

what is good in him is good. What is bad is bad. We are not denying the wrongdoings of Karna. At the same time it will be like a Fatwa to put on his head and being unjust and cruel to rub him,completely as a evil or adharmic man which he was not.

 

Remove the knowledge that Arjuna was a Pandava, and remove the knowledge that he was a revered personage (As we know him now). Consider Arjuna as a foe of Karna and then proceed to evaluate the sterling or despisable qualities of Karna, and one will surely find the difference if he is humane.

 

regards/Bhaskar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Bhaskar ji,Peace, peace... no red :) "This goal was developed and not inborn. "No goal is inborn - something becomes a goal for any human. The point is what kind of tendency and character sets what kind of goals. "But we are simply negating all his good points completely and highlighting only the undesirable ones. "No, it is not about negating the good or about condoning the bad. As I mentioned previously, the strength and weakness by itself becomes irrelevant, the thread that strings the being, that puts all these in perspective, that determines the loftiness of a being, the character, the Dharma, is what makes all the difference. For a Dharmic man, his "bad" or "good" is all strung by Dharma.

For an Adharmic man, his virtues too become his vices - because they are all applied not with the motive of Dharma. Which is the point I am trying to make. "He never asked for return gift. Did he ? Indra

Devata came disguised as a Brahmin and asked for his kavach because

with it on his body, Karna was invincible and Arjuna (Indras son) could

not kill him."Here, one should understand the nature of karma phala. Just because he did not ask for it, he would not be getting anything greater than what he desreved. For the great dana that Karna did, why did the result have to be so trivial? Because, the motive, the mind, the ideal is not lofty. Someone does a much smaller offering with a better motif, the result is much bigger. While Indra took away Karna's armor and gave a weapon that could not eventually kill Arjuna, on the other side, Surya had given an Akshaya patra to Yudhistira, and had protected Draupadi once from the hands of Kichaka by sending a Sakti. So to evaluate Surya or Indra as merely fathers of Karna and Arjuna is not proper. They are Devatas and they have their divine motif, and they side invariably with Dharma. Neither does Surya save Karna nor does he harm the Pandavas. Both Indra and Surya conducted their divine role. Aditya signifies soul-force, and Karna merely

knows before hand about Indra's coming - that makes no difference to what is destined and how things have to shape. They are beyond the control of Karna, and even Surya and Indra. For that matter, Karna even foretold his death in Arjuna's hands! It was a foregone conclusion for anyone learned. Arjuna "could not kill Karna" makes no meaning, because there was no deciding combat until then between them. As I said, with the kind of Astra vidya and tapas Arjuna had, Karna was simply no match. Also, Karna did face defeat in Arjuna's hands by then - Gograhana to mention an instance. "Who knows whether it was an act of desperation or

with preparedness ? Who can vouch or guarantee this ?At least again he

showed his sterling qualities by using a weapon reserved for Arjuna on

Ghatotkacha. Didnt he ? Knowing fully well that now it would be

difficult to kill Arjuna yet he parted with this one time use of the

weapon. he could have denied it. Did he ?"We certainly know whether it was desperation or preparation, from the Ghatotkaca episode in Vyasa's words verbatim :) "what is good in him is good. What is bad is bad.

We are not denying the wrongdoings of Karna. At the same time it will

be like a Fatwa to put on his head and being unjust and cruel to rub

him,completely as a evil or adharmic man which he was not."Again, it is not about the evaluation of good or bad. It is about the motive that underlies one's actions. With a mean motive, one might do some "good" and some "bad" things - but that is not important. Even with the worst of motives one ends up doing some good to the world - one is bound to, because he is after all a pawn in the cosmic game. But what his character wis evaluated on, is still that motive. The centrality of motive, bhavana is not understood by us to the extent necessary, but it is extremely important when we talk of karma yoga. ShankarBhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish Sent: Fri, November 27, 2009 7:37:07 PM Re: Karna -The Astrologer

 

 

My Comments in red

 

Dear Chakraborty ji,The way collective morale has been demolished in our society, has a lot to do with the perversion of Pauranik parlance. The progressively bad favorites and Pauranic models people started choosing, reflects directly on the current state of Dharma in our society: "

Karna, apparently, had a single goal... to destroy Arjuna.

He did whatever was he felt needed, dharmic / adharmic

differentiation did not matter."

Yes exactly. The goal for his life itself was not Dharmic, much less a great goal. Which lowers him even in his other stronger aspects.

 

This goal was developed and not inborn. it developed just like any other goal which develops with any other man. We know Arjuna as Dharmic, but in his times and era Arjuna must have been a opponent for him in Archery etc. Why dont we view this scenario from the horizon of those times ?

Who says that differentiation did not matter to Arjuna. If one reads the story of Mahabharata as well as Karna in it, one will find many values which have been adhered to by Karna. But we are simply negating all his good points completely and highlighting only the undesirable ones.

 

"Reason is : we, ordinary mortal, can relate to him."Exactly the pitfall we all are prone to.

 

We dont and cannot relate to him. Its just not possible. We dont possess neither the fine blood of karna, neither his Dana giving propensities, neither his valour and neither his skills, and neither a great friend and King as Duryodhana. His problems were different and we cannot use Karna as an excuse to do the same what he did."He could give his Akshaya Kavach, "Many people are prone to this error too. Many ignore, that something is called a dana when it is given away. When a return is taken, it no more remains a dana. The only weapon he had and he wanted to use against Arjuna, which he was forced to use on Ghatotkaca, was given by Indra *in return* to his armor - which *negates* his dana. That does not bring down the virtue of preparedness he showed to give away his armor, but certainly

defeats the merit of giving away. I wonder how such a simple, straight point is missed.

 

He never asked for return gift. Did he ? Indra Devata came disguised as a Brahmin and asked for his kavach because with it on his body, Karna was invincible and Arjuna (Indras son) could not kill him. Though Surya devata had warned in advance the previous night to karna that tomorrow Arjunas father Indra will come and ask you for armour, still knowing this Karna gave it lovingly to him. Pleased with this great show of Daan dharma from karnas side, Indra was bound ethically to grant him something in return, and so he did by giving him his personal Weapon with caution saying that it could be used only once. How can Indras giving in return a gift to Karna defeat his merits. Not at all? Please remove a biased prejudiced thinking against Karna and then view the whole show. The Dana was given to a Brahmin but the return gift came not froma Brahmin but Indra devata who lett of his disguise and came in in original form pleased

with Karna. "he

could use his single Baan(Aghna ?) to kill Ghatotkach,

knowing well that his chances of killing Arjuna went with that."Being the weilder of Pasupata and Brahmastra, Arjuna could *never* be conquered or killed in combat. So that is a moot point. The other part of Aindri Sakti being used on Ghatotkaca, was not an act of preparedness but desperation - he had no option.

Who knows whether it was an act of desperation or with preparedness ? Who can vouch or guarantee this ?At least again he showed his sterling qualities by using a weapon reserved for Arjuna on Ghatotkacha. Didnt he ? Knowing fully well that now it would be difficult to kill Arjuna yet he parted with this one time use of the weapon. he could have denied it. Did he ?

 

what is good in him is good. What is bad is bad. We are not denying the wrongdoings of Karna. At the same time it will be like a Fatwa to put on his head and being unjust and cruel to rub him,completely as a evil or adharmic man which he was not.

 

Remove the knowledge that Arjuna was a Pandava, and remove the knowledge that he was a revered personage (As we know him now). Consider Arjuna as a foe of Karna and then proceed to evaluate the sterling or despisable qualities of Karna, and one will surely find the difference if he is humane.

 

regards/Bhaskar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Bhaskar Ji,

 

Despite different perspectives, Karna will remain the favorite character of Mahabharatha amongst many of us.

His character, generosity, sacrifices, valor and other qualities can’t be overlooked by any viewpoint. He could've chosen the simple path as he was the true heir to the throne of Hastinapur. He was one among the best of the Greatest Men during his Age.

 

Best Regards,

Deepak Sharma

--- On Fri, 11/27/09, Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish wrote:

Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish Re: Karna -The Astrologer Date: Friday, November 27, 2009, 7:37 PM

 

My Comments in red

 

Dear Chakraborty ji,The way collective morale has been demolished in our society, has a lot to do with the perversion of Pauranik parlance. The progressively bad favorites and Pauranic models people started choosing, reflects directly on the current state of Dharma in our society: "

Karna, apparently, had a single goal... to destroy Arjuna.

He did whatever was he felt needed, dharmic / adharmic

differentiation did not matter."

Yes exactly. The goal for his life itself was not Dharmic, much less a great goal. Which lowers him even in his other stronger aspects.

 

This goal was developed and not inborn. it developed just like any other goal which develops with any other man. We know Arjuna as Dharmic, but in his times and era Arjuna must have been a opponent for him in Archery etc. Why dont we view this scenario from the horizon of those times ?

Who says that differentiation did not matter to Arjuna. If one reads the story of Mahabharata as well as Karna in it, one will find many values which have been adhered to by Karna. But we are simply negating all his good points completely and highlighting only the undesirable ones.

 

"Reason is : we, ordinary mortal, can relate to him."Exactly the pitfall we all are prone to.

 

We dont and cannot relate to him. Its just not possible. We dont possess neither the fine blood of karna, neither his Dana giving propensities, neither his valour and neither his skills, and neither a great friend and King as Duryodhana. His problems were different and we cannot use Karna as an excuse to do the same what he did."He could give his Akshaya Kavach, "Many people are prone to this error too. Many ignore, that something is called a dana when it is given away. When a return is taken, it no more remains a dana. The only weapon he had and he wanted to use against Arjuna, which he was forced to use on Ghatotkaca, was given by Indra *in return* to his armor - which *negates* his dana. That does not bring down the virtue of preparedness he showed to give away his armor, but certainly defeats the

merit of giving away. I wonder how such a simple, straight point is missed.

 

He never asked for return gift. Did he ? Indra Devata came disguised as a Brahmin and asked for his kavach because with it on his body, Karna was invincible and Arjuna (Indras son) could not kill him. Though Surya devata had warned in advance the previous night to karna that tomorrow Arjunas father Indra will come and ask you for armour, still knowing this Karna gave it lovingly to him. Pleased with this great show of Daan dharma from karnas side, Indra was bound ethically to grant him something in return, and so he did by giving him his personal Weapon with caution saying that it could be used only once. How can Indras giving in return a gift to Karna defeat his merits. Not at all? Please remove a biased prejudiced thinking against Karna and then view the whole show. The Dana was given to a Brahmin but the return gift came not froma Brahmin but Indra devata who lett of his disguise and came in in original form pleased

with Karna. "he

could use his single Baan(Aghna ?) to kill Ghatotkach,

knowing well that his chances of killing Arjuna went with that."Being the weilder of Pasupata and Brahmastra, Arjuna could *never* be conquered or killed in combat. So that is a moot point. The other part of Aindri Sakti being used on Ghatotkaca, was not an act of preparedness but desperation - he had no option.

Who knows whether it was an act of desperation or with preparedness ? Who can vouch or guarantee this ?At least again he showed his sterling qualities by using a weapon reserved for Arjuna on Ghatotkacha. Didnt he ? Knowing fully well that now it would be difficult to kill Arjuna yet he parted with this one time use of the weapon. he could have denied it. Did he ?

 

what is good in him is good. What is bad is bad. We are not denying the wrongdoings of Karna. At the same time it will be like a Fatwa to put on his head and being unjust and cruel to rub him,completely as a evil or adharmic man which he was not.

 

Remove the knowledge that Arjuna was a Pandava, and remove the knowledge that he was a revered personage (As we know him now). Consider Arjuna as a foe of Karna and then proceed to evaluate the sterling or despisable qualities of Karna, and one will surely find the difference if he is humane.

 

regards/Bhaskar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Shankara Bharadwaj ji,

 

You write well if one can understand what you write. I will not discuss

further and let all arguments stay, but just confirm that Yes, Karna was

not a match for Arjuna, for Arjuna being not only on side of Dharma, for

not only having learnt all his skills in use of weapons through the

right protocol, for not only having blessings of his parents, gurus and

near and dear ones, but also because Krishna was on his side.

 

best wishes,

 

Bhaskar.

 

 

 

 

, ShankaraBharadwaj

Khandavalli <shankarabharadwaj wrote:

>

> Dear Bhaskar ji,

>

> Peace, peace... no red :)

>

> " This goal was developed and not inborn. "

>

> No goal is inborn - something becomes a goal for any human. The point

is what kind of tendency and character sets what kind of goals.

>

> " But we are simply negating all his good points completely and

highlighting only the undesirable ones. "

>

> No, it is not about negating the good or about condoning the bad. As I

mentioned previously, the strength and weakness by itself becomes

irrelevant, the thread that strings the being, that puts all these in

perspective, that determines the loftiness of a being, the character,

the Dharma, is what makes all the difference. For a Dharmic man, his

" bad " or " good " is all strung by Dharma. For an Adharmic man, his

virtues too become his vices - because they are all applied not with the

motive of Dharma. Which is the point I am trying to make.

>

> " He never asked for return gift. Did he ? Indra

> Devata came disguised as a Brahmin and asked for his kavach because

> with it on his body, Karna was invincible and Arjuna (Indras son)

could

> not kill him. "

>

> Here, one should understand the nature of karma phala. Just because he

did not ask for it, he would not be getting anything greater than what

he desreved. For the great dana that Karna did, why did the result have

to be so trivial? Because, the motive, the mind, the ideal is not lofty.

Someone does a much smaller offering with a better motif, the result is

much bigger. While Indra took away Karna's armor and gave a weapon that

could not eventually kill Arjuna, on the other side, Surya had given an

Akshaya patra to Yudhistira, and had protected Draupadi once from the

hands of Kichaka by sending a Sakti. So to evaluate Surya or Indra as

merely fathers of Karna and Arjuna is not proper. They are Devatas and

they have their divine motif, and they side invariably with Dharma.

Neither does Surya save Karna nor does he harm the Pandavas. Both Indra

and Surya conducted their divine role. Aditya signifies soul-force, and

Karna merely knows before hand about

> Indra's coming - that makes no difference to what is destined and how

things have to shape. They are beyond the control of Karna, and even

Surya and Indra. For that matter, Karna even foretold his death in

Arjuna's hands! It was a foregone conclusion for anyone learned.

>

> Arjuna " could not kill Karna " makes no meaning, because there was no

deciding combat until then between them. As I said, with the kind of

Astra vidya and tapas Arjuna had, Karna was simply no match. Also, Karna

did face defeat in Arjuna's hands by then - Gograhana to mention an

instance.

>

> " Who knows whether it was an act of desperation or

> with preparedness ? Who can vouch or guarantee this ?At least again he

> showed his sterling qualities by using a weapon reserved for Arjuna on

> Ghatotkacha. Didnt he ? Knowing fully well that now it would be

> difficult to kill Arjuna yet he parted with this one time use of the

> weapon. he could have denied it. Did he ? "

>

> We certainly know whether it was desperation or preparation, from the

Ghatotkaca episode in Vyasa's words verbatim :)

>

> " what is good in him is good. What is bad is bad.

> We are not denying the wrongdoings of Karna. At the same time it will

> be like a Fatwa to put on his head and being unjust and cruel to rub

> him,completely as a evil or adharmic man which he was not. "

>

> Again, it is not about the evaluation of good or bad. It is about the

motive that underlies one's actions. With a mean motive, one might do

some " good " and some " bad " things - but that is not important. Even with

the worst of motives one ends up doing some good to the world - one is

bound to, because he is after all a pawn in the cosmic game. But what

his character wis evaluated on, is still that motive.

>

> The centrality of motive, bhavana is not understood by us to the

extent necessary, but it is extremely important when we talk of karma

yoga.

>

> Shankar

>

>

>

> ________________________________

> Bhaskar bhaskar_jyotish

>

> Fri, November 27, 2009 7:37:07 PM

> Re: Karna -The Astrologer

>

>

> My Comments in red

>

> Dear Chakraborty ji,

>

> The way collective morale has been demolished in our society, has a

lot to do with the perversion of Pauranik parlance. The progressively

bad favorites and Pauranic models people started choosing, reflects

directly on the current state of Dharma in our society:

> "

> Karna, apparently, had a single goal... to destroy Arjuna.

> He did whatever was he felt needed, dharmic / adharmic

> differentiation did not matter. "

>

>

> Yes exactly. The goal for his life itself was not Dharmic, much less a

great goal. Which lowers him even in his other stronger aspects.

>

> This goal was developed and not inborn. it developed just like any

other goal which develops with any other man. We know Arjuna as Dharmic,

but in his times and era Arjuna must have been a opponent for him in

Archery etc. Why dont we view this scenario from the horizon of those

times ?

> Who says that differentiation did not matter to Arjuna. If one reads

the story of Mahabharata as well as Karna in it, one will find many

values which have been adhered to by Karna. But we are simply negating

all his good points completely and highlighting only the undesirable

ones.

>

>

> " Reason is : we, ordinary mortal, can relate to him. "

>

> Exactly the pitfall we all are prone to.

>

> We dont and cannot relate to him. Its just not possible. We dont

possess neither the fine blood of karna, neither his Dana giving

propensities, neither his valour and neither his skills, and neither a

great friend and King as Duryodhana. His problems were different and we

cannot use Karna as an excuse to do the same what he did.

>

> " He could give his Akshaya Kavach, "

>

> Many people are prone to this error too. Many ignore, that something

is called a dana when it is given away. When a return is taken, it no

more remains a dana. The only weapon he had and he wanted to use against

Arjuna, which he was forced to use on Ghatotkaca, was given by Indra *in

return* to his armor - which *negates* his dana. That does not bring

down the virtue of preparedness he showed to give away his armor, but

certainly defeats the merit of giving away. I wonder how such a simple,

straight point is missed.

>

> He never asked for return gift. Did he ? Indra Devata came disguised

as a Brahmin and asked for his kavach because with it on his body, Karna

was invincible and Arjuna (Indras son) could not kill him. Though Surya

devata had warned in advance the previous night to karna that tomorrow

Arjunas father Indra will come and ask you for armour, still knowing

this Karna gave it lovingly to him. Pleased with this great show of Daan

dharma from karnas side, Indra was bound ethically to grant him

something in return, and so he did by giving him his personal Weapon

with caution saying that it could be used only once. How can Indras

giving in return a gift to Karna defeat his merits. Not at all? Please

remove a biased prejudiced thinking against Karna and then view the

whole show. The Dana was given to a Brahmin but the return gift came not

froma Brahmin but Indra devata who lett of his disguise and came in in

original form pleased with Karna.

>

> " he

> could use his single Baan(Aghna ?) to kill Ghatotkach,

> knowing well that his chances of killing Arjuna went with that. "

>

> Being the weilder of Pasupata and Brahmastra, Arjuna could *never* be

conquered or killed in combat. So that is a moot point. The other part

of Aindri Sakti being used on Ghatotkaca, was not an act of preparedness

but desperation - he had no option.

>

> Who knows whether it was an act of desperation or with preparedness ?

Who can vouch or guarantee this ?At least again he showed his sterling

qualities by using a weapon reserved for Arjuna on Ghatotkacha. Didnt he

? Knowing fully well that now it would be difficult to kill Arjuna yet

he parted with this one time use of the weapon. he could have denied it.

Did he ?

>

> what is good in him is good. What is bad is bad. We are not denying

the wrongdoings of Karna. At the same time it will be like a Fatwa to

put on his head and being unjust and cruel to rub him,completely as a

evil or adharmic man which he was not.

>

> Remove the knowledge that Arjuna was a Pandava, and remove the

knowledge that he was a revered personage (As we know him now). Consider

Arjuna as a foe of Karna and then proceed to evaluate the sterling or

despisable qualities of Karna, and one will surely find the difference

if he is humane.

>

> regards/Bhaskar.

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Bhaskar-ji & Shankar-ji,

 

I wish I did not comment on this matter. Anyway, following

are my understanding...

 

1) I don't have any problem with anybody having a goal

- Karna felt "deprived" of his due and he took the path

that he thought could succeed. I guess there was

some incident where Arjuna laughed at him / did not

allow Karna to participate.

2) We relate to different people ,..... not necessarily

in our 'LEAGUE". Some of us like Mahatma Gandhi,

some of us relate to Netaji (Subhash Bose)....why ??

Because we could relate to his sentiment.

 

People said that younger generation in Delhi voted

for Sheila Dixit...why ?? Because they could relate

emotionally to her ideas.

 

Another point...probably very important is...To me,

Karna is a complex character..with different shades.

The so called good characters are purely white..not

exciting for probing.

 

3) Karna had his weaknesses..he fled from few battles

Shankar-ji has always provided few examples. Also

his decision to take few adharmic course to obtain

his goal is an indirect examples of his weakness.

 

I do employ touts to get my driving license./ to bypass

the queue in Howrah station & get a ticket. This is a

weakness..inability/unwillingness to go thru' the rigor.

 

4) Regarding his Daan of Akshay Kavach...what I remember

that Karna did not bargain. Indra gave him that Baan

'after being please with Karna'. Otherwise it could have

been shameful for Indra.

 

Regarding its use....what I remember that an unwilling

Karna used it after repeated urging by Duryodhana. And

Krishna knew it very well...he had used Ghatotkoch as

'pawn' to neutralize the Aindra Shakti Karna had gained.

 

Probably there was a conversation between Krishna and

others after Ghatotkoch' death - about why Ghatotkoch

needed to be eliminated because of his Rakshasa origin.

However, I read MBH while I was in class VI and have not

repeated it. So, my memory could be failing me. 30 yrs is

a long time.

 

And yes, I do agree to Bhaskar-ji's other points.

 

regards

 

Chakraborty

 

 

 

 

On Behalf Of BhaskarFriday, November 27, 2009 7:37 PM Subject: Re: Karna -The Astrologer

 

My Comments in red

 

Dear Chakraborty ji,The way collective morale has been demolished in our society, has a lot to do with the perversion of Pauranik parlance. The progressively bad favorites and Pauranic models people started choosing, reflects directly on the current state of Dharma in our society: "

Karna, apparently, had a single goal... to destroy Arjuna.

He did whatever was he felt needed, dharmic / adharmic

differentiation did not matter."

Yes exactly. The goal for his life itself was not Dharmic, much less a great goal. Which lowers him even in his other stronger aspects.

 

This goal was developed and not inborn. it developed just like any other goal which develops with any other man. We know Arjuna as Dharmic, but in his times and era Arjuna must have been a opponent for him in Archery etc. Why dont we view this scenario from the horizon of those times ?

Who says that differentiation did not matter to Arjuna. If one reads the story of Mahabharata as well as Karna in it, one will find many values which have been adhered to by Karna. But we are simply negating all his good points completely and highlighting only the undesirable ones.

 

"Reason is : we, ordinary mortal, can relate to him."Exactly the pitfall we all are prone to.

 

We dont and cannot relate to him. Its just not possible. We dont possess neither the fine blood of karna, neither his Dana giving propensities, neither his valour and neither his skills, and neither a great friend and King as Duryodhana. His problems were different and we cannot use Karna as an excuse to do the same what he did."He could give his Akshaya Kavach, "Many people are prone to this error too. Many ignore, that something is called a dana when it is given away. When a return is taken, it no more remains a dana. The only weapon he had and he wanted to use against Arjuna, which he was forced to use on Ghatotkaca, was given by Indra *in return* to his armor - which *negates* his dana. That does not bring down the virtue of preparedness he showed to give away his armor, but certainly defeats the merit of giving away. I wonder how such a simple, straight point is missed.

 

He never asked for return gift. Did he ? Indra Devata came disguised as a Brahmin and asked for his kavach because with it on his body, Karna was invincible and Arjuna (Indras son) could not kill him. Though Surya devata had warned in advance the previous night to karna that tomorrow Arjunas father Indra will come and ask you for armour, still knowing this Karna gave it lovingly to him. Pleased with this great show of Daan dharma from karnas side, Indra was bound ethically to grant him something in return, and so he did by giving him his personal Weapon with caution saying that it could be used only once. How can Indras giving in return a gift to Karna defeat his merits. Not at all? Please remove a biased prejudiced thinking against Karna and then view the whole show. The Dana was given to a Brahmin but the return gift came not froma Brahmin but Indra devata who lett of his disguise and came in in original form pleased with Karna. "he

could use his single Baan(Aghna ?) to kill Ghatotkach,

knowing well that his chances of killing Arjuna went with that."Being the weilder of Pasupata and Brahmastra, Arjuna could *never* be conquered or killed in combat. So that is a moot point. The other part of Aindri Sakti being used on Ghatotkaca, was not an act of preparedness but desperation - he had no option.

Who knows whether it was an act of desperation or with preparedness ? Who can vouch or guarantee this ?At least again he showed his sterling qualities by using a weapon reserved for Arjuna on Ghatotkacha. Didnt he ? Knowing fully well that now it would be difficult to kill Arjuna yet he parted with this one time use of the weapon. he could have denied it. Did he ?

 

what is good in him is good. What is bad is bad. We are not denying the wrongdoings of Karna. At the same time it will be like a Fatwa to put on his head and being unjust and cruel to rub him,completely as a evil or adharmic man which he was not.

 

Remove the knowledge that Arjuna was a Pandava, and remove the knowledge that he was a revered personage (As we know him now). Consider Arjuna as a foe of Karna and then proceed to evaluate the sterling or despisable qualities of Karna, and one will surely find the difference if he is humane.

 

regards/Bhaskar.

This Message was sent from Indian Oil Messaging Gateway, New Delhi, India. The information contained in this electronic message and any attachments to this message are intended for the exclusive use of the addressee(s) and may contain proprietary, confidential or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately and destroy all copies of this message and any attachments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

dear Chakroborty ji,

 

I understood very well previously too when you mentioned about relating

to Karna. Yes now let me accept this that at times we relate to people

like not even Karna but even Arjuna too, because Mahabharata is a great

epic and what melodrama or emotions or sentiments is there in this

world, all is there in mahabharat and what is not here is not there.

Interestingly we can co-relate to almost every character of Mahabharata

at one of the other times in our Life. But co-relations should be done

only in trying to emulate their high ideals.

 

Now one sentence I diasgree with -

 

// Karna had his weaknesses..he fled from few battles //

 

I will just ask all of those who agree with above to give just 2

incidents from where he fled away from battle. You wont find even two.

Getting defeated in a battle does not mean " fled away " . Let us give due

credit where requisited, to great heroes instead of tainting them black

fully.

 

Love n regards,

 

Bhaskar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Bhaskar-ji & Shankar-ji

 

Bhaskar-ji said...

 

//Now one sentence I diasgree with -// Karna had his weaknesses..he fled from few battles //

I am copy / pasteing from Shankar-ji's mail. It shows that Karna did fled.

 

//A Kshatriya is not supposed to run away from the war, even if it means death.

Karna not only arbitrarily runs, but has the habit of running from the field.

He ran away in the following occasions:

When he fought Drupada to arrest him and present him as Gurudakshina to Drona

When the Gandharva Citrasena fights them during Ghosha yatra

During Gograhana, unable to withstand Arjuna

In the war, he runs multiple times in the few days he fights - from Bhima,

Arjuna, Satyiki, Abhimanyu.

--------------

Shankar-ji said

//Being the weilder of Pasupata and Brahmastra, Arjuna could *never*

be conquered or killed in combat.

 

I have my doubts on this. While fighting with Bhagadutta, Bhagadutta

did fire some Astra (probably Vaisnavastra or something). Krishna had to

shield Arjuna & accept that Astra as a garland. Similar incidents happened

while Arjuna was fighting post Kurukshetra. He was even killed by

Babhruvahana (Prince of Manipur & Arjuna's own son).

 

In one occasion, Krishna advised that everybody should give up arms to evade

the ill effects of that Astra during Kurukshetra. Arjuna also did so.

 

So, the events are so many that a very clear conclusion is difficult to

attain.

 

regards

 

Chakraborty

 

..

 

 

 

 

 

On Behalf Of BhaskarSaturday, November 28, 2009 10:26 AM Subject: Re: Karna -The Astrologer

dear Chakroborty ji,I understood very well previously too when you mentioned about relatingto Karna. Yes now let me accept this that at times we relate to peoplelike not even Karna but even Arjuna too, because Mahabharata is a greatepic and what melodrama or emotions or sentiments is there in thisworld, all is there in mahabharat and what is not here is not there.Interestingly we can co-relate to almost every character of Mahabharataat one of the other times in our Life. But co-relations should be doneonly in trying to emulate their high ideals.Now one sentence I diasgree with -// Karna had his weaknesses..he fled from few battles //I will just ask all of those who agree with above to give just 2incidents from where he fled away from battle. You wont find even two.Getting defeated in a battle does not mean "fled away". Let us give duecredit where requisited, to great heroes instead of tainting them blackfully.Love n regards,Bhaskar.This Message was sent from Indian Oil Messaging Gateway, New Delhi, India. The information contained in this electronic message and any attachments to this message are intended for the exclusive use of the addressee(s) and may contain proprietary, confidential or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately and destroy all copies of this message and any attachments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Chakraborty ji,"I have my doubts on this. While fighting with Bhagadutta, Bhagadutta

did fire some Astra (probably Vaisnavastra or something). "There are multiple instances as you mentioned, including the Nagastra that Karna used, when Arjuna was apparently defenseless. It was Aswatthama's Narayanastra in front of which every one had to leave their weapons. However, we should remember that Pasupata or Brahmastra was not used by Arjuna to repel any of these - by their very power they can destroy the universe, and Arjuna was made to commit during the vana vasa that he would not apply the greatest of weapons even during a duel, for the same reason. Even when Aswatthama applied the Brahmasironamaka and could not take it back, Arjuna took it back - that shows the restraint Arjuna has on himself and his weaponry. He would apply those astras only when the world is threatened, but not for any selfish reason. If he had not that principle,

then the Kurukshetra was a matter of few moments, not eighteen days. Now contrast this with the very motive for which Karna sought Brahmastra or Aswatthama sought Brahmastra and Sudarsana. This is what I mean by a character being lofty or mean. Shankar"Chakraborty, PL" <CHAKRABORTYP2 Sat, November 28, 2009 12:18:10 PMRE:

Re: Karna -The Astrologer

 

 

 

Dear Bhaskar-ji & Shankar-ji

 

Bhaskar-ji said...

 

//Now one sentence I diasgree with -// Karna had his weaknesses.. he fled from few battles //

I am copy / pasteing from Shankar-ji's mail. It shows that Karna did fled.

 

//A Kshatriya is not supposed to run away from the war, even if it means death.

Karna not only arbitrarily runs, but has the habit of running from the field.

He ran away in the following occasions:

When he fought Drupada to arrest him and present him as Gurudakshina to Drona

When the Gandharva Citrasena fights them during Ghosha yatra

During Gograhana, unable to withstand Arjuna

In the war, he runs multiple times in the few days he fights - from Bhima,

Arjuna, Satyiki, Abhimanyu.

------------ --

Shankar-ji said

//Being the weilder of Pasupata and Brahmastra, Arjuna could *never*

be conquered or killed in combat.

 

I have my doubts on this. While fighting with Bhagadutta, Bhagadutta

did fire some Astra (probably Vaisnavastra or something). Krishna had to

shield Arjuna & accept that Astra as a garland. Similar incidents happened

while Arjuna was fighting post Kurukshetra. He was even killed by

Babhruvahana (Prince of Manipur & Arjuna's own son).

 

In one occasion, Krishna advised that everybody should give up arms to evade

the ill effects of that Astra during Kurukshetra. Arjuna also did so.

 

So, the events are so many that a very clear conclusion is difficult to

attain.

 

regards

 

Chakraborty

 

..

 

 

 

 

 

ancient_indian_ astrology [ancient_ indian_astrology ] On Behalf Of BhaskarSaturday, November 28, 2009 10:26 AMancient_indian_ astrology[ancient_indian_ astrology] Re: Karna -The Astrologer

dear Chakroborty ji,I understood very well previously too when you mentioned about relatingto Karna. Yes now let me accept this that at times we relate to peoplelike not even Karna but even Arjuna too, because Mahabharata is a greatepic and what melodrama or emotions or sentiments is there in thisworld, all is there in mahabharat and what is not here is not there.Interestingly we can co-relate to almost every character of Mahabharataat one of the other times in our Life. But co-relations should be doneonly in trying to emulate their high ideals.Now one sentence I diasgree with -// Karna had his weaknesses.. he fled from few battles //I will just ask all of those who agree with above to give just 2incidents from where he fled away from battle. You wont find even two.Getting defeated in a battle does not mean "fled away". Let us give duecredit where requisited, to great heroes instead of tainting them blackfully.Love n regards,Bhaskar.This Message was sent from Indian Oil Messaging Gateway, New Delhi, India. The information contained in this electronic message and any attachments to this message are intended for the exclusive use of the addressee(s) and may contain proprietary, confidential or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately and destroy all copies of this message and any attachments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...