Guest guest Posted January 17, 2005 Report Share Posted January 17, 2005 Hi, I was just wondering about Gandhari and Dhritarasthra - they had 100 sons, yet with their given lifespans it would be almost impossible to have that many children. Is it possible that Dhritarasthra had more than one wife and the so-called "100 sons of Gandhari" in the Mahabharata were actually children by many wives? (althogh Gandhari was the most senior, so she was entitled to have the label of a mother of 100 sons). Is there any such reference in the Mahabharata? Sorry, i know this is a mundane question but i'm compiling info on the Mahabharata and i need these kinds of details. Cheers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 17, 2005 Report Share Posted January 17, 2005 Later, Dridharashtra's wife Gandhari gave birth to a lump of flesh which Vyasa cut into 100 pieces and kept each one in a pot. At the appropriate time, each piece was born as a son and thus a 100 sons were born to Gandhari. (Mahabharata, Aadhiparvam, chapter 114, sloka 17). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 17, 2005 Report Share Posted January 17, 2005 upon hearing that Kunti had given birth 2 Yudhistira, Gandhari who was pregnant at that time felt upset that although she was the elder Kuru daughter in law Kunti gave birth 2 the first prince, so she thud her stomach and her pregnancy fell.....was a lump of flesh....then vyasadev who is able 2 see and know things by dint of his advanced spirituality appeared and advised her to divide the lump of flesh into 100 pieces as mentioned above. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 17, 2005 Report Share Posted January 17, 2005 Gandhari had a hundred sons and a daughter. what was her name ...who did she marry? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 17, 2005 Report Share Posted January 17, 2005 Once Rishi Vyas came to visit Gandhari in Hastinapur. She took great care of the comforts of the great saint and saw that he had a pleasant stay in Hastinapur. The saint was pleased with Gandhari and granted her a boon. Gandhari wished for one hundred sons who would be as powerful as her husband. Vyas granted her the boon and in due course of time Gandhari found herself to be pregnant. But two years passed and still the baby was not born. Meanwhile Kunti gave birth to a son whom she called Yudhisthar. After two years of carrying her pregnancy, Gandhari gave birth to a hard piece of lifeless flesh that was not a baby at all. Gandhari was devastated as she had expected hundred sons according to the blessing of Rishi Vyas. She was about to throw away the piece of flesh when Rishi Vyas appeared and told her that his blessings could not have been in vain. He asked Gandhari to arrange for one hundred jars full of Ghee (oil). He told Gandhari that he would cut the piece of flesh into hundred pieces and place them in the jar, which would then develop into the one hundred sons that she so desired. Gandhari told Vyas then that she wanted that she should also have a daughter. Vyas agreed and cut the piece of flesh into one hundred and one pieces and placed them each in the jar. After two more years of patient waiting the jars were ready to be opened. When the first jar was opened Gandhari took the baby out and named him Duryodhan. But alas! As soon as the baby started crying all the beasts of the jungle started howling and many signs of ill omen were seen. Everyone was shocked and disappointed as this meant that the baby was not auspicious and would bring harm on the entire clan of the Kauravas. Vidur spoke then and said that the child would have to be abandoned as the omens at his birth spell doom for the Kuru clan. He said, "The scriptures clearly state that for the good of the clan an individual can be sacrificed, for the good of the village a clan can be sacrificed, for the good of the country a village can be sacrificed and for the development of the soul, even the earth can be sacrificed." So for the good of the clan and of the country and of humanity, please sacrifice this son of yours. But both Gandhari and Dhritrashtra were adamant that a baby could not cause any harm and much against Vidur's wishes kept the baby. At the same time Bheemsen was born to Kunti in the forest. The other children of Gandhari were taken out of the jars and now Gandhari had one hundred sons and a daughter called Duhshala. All the children grew up to be strong and powerful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 17, 2005 Report Share Posted January 17, 2005 she married Jayadrat....who upon insulting Draupadi...carrying her and trying 2 kidnap her...was punished...not killed.....cos he was married to Dhushala Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 17, 2005 Report Share Posted January 17, 2005 wow - thanks for your responses - i had never heard that (slightly disturbing) story. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 17, 2005 Report Share Posted January 17, 2005 I have a feeling that the scientific technique of INvitro-fertilization must have existed during that time although we dont have any records of all those they used in those times. What was mentioned as pots could be specialized culture flasks, simillar to what we use in laboratory and the ghee could be the required nutrient solutions to sustain. The reason why I feel this as scientist is it took 10 months for them to open such pots to get those babies. That means it would have been somitic cell cloning technique or something simillar to that which could have been a more advanced science in those days itself. Vyasa being a genius would have handled it. R Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theist Posted January 18, 2005 Report Share Posted January 18, 2005 Is it necessary to accept such stories as literal occurences? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sumedh Posted January 18, 2005 Report Share Posted January 18, 2005 Hare Krishna I think this account should rather be understood as mystic opulence of Srila Vedavyasa or through subtle energies and not as being similiar to current scientific methodologies. That is how Srila Prabhupada has explained brahmaastra and other weapons. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 18, 2005 Report Share Posted January 18, 2005 Yuyutsu - also known as Vikarna was not Gandharis son....he was born of a vaisya women and Dhrtarastra....he objected to the dirobing of Draupadi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 18, 2005 Report Share Posted January 18, 2005 "Is it necessary to accept such stories as literal occurences? " bhagavad gita AS IT IS is part of mahabharata.. so we need to read mahabharata AS IT IS Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 18, 2005 Report Share Posted January 18, 2005 The history of the Mahäbhärata is taken as quaint mythology, and Krsna becomes a poetic device for presenting the ideas of some anonymous genius, or at best He becomes a minor historical personage. But the person Krsna is both the goal and the substance of Bhagavad-gita, so far as the Gitä speaks of itself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 18, 2005 Report Share Posted January 18, 2005 The froggish philosophers and mundane wranglers in science and mathematical calculation may not believe in the inconceivable potency of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, but they are sometimes puzzled by the wonderful jugglery of man and nature. Such jugglers and magicians of the mundane world are actually puzzled by the jugglery of the Lord in His transcendental activities, but they try to adjust their bewilderment by saying that it is all mythology. There is, however, nothing impossible or mythological in the Supreme Omnipotent Person. The most wonderful puzzle for the mundane wranglers is that while they remain calculating the length and breadth of the unlimited potency of the Supreme Person, His faithful devotees are set free from the bondage of material encagement simply by appreciating the wonderful jugglery of the Supreme in the practical field. The devotees of the Lord see the wonderful dexterity in everything with which they come in contact in all circumstances of eating, sleeping, working, etc. A small banyan fruit contains thousands of small seeds, and each seed holds the potency of another tree, which again holds the potency of many millions of such fruits as causes and effects. So the trees and seeds engage the devotees in meditation about the activities of the Lord, while the mundane wranglers waste time in dry speculation and mental concoction, which are fruitless in both this life and the next. In spite of their pride in speculation, they can never appreciate the simple potential activities of the banyan tree. Such speculators are poor souls destined to remain in matter perpetually. SB 3.6.40 TRANSLATION AND PURPORT by AC BHAKTIVEDANTA SWAMI PRABHUPADA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theist Posted January 18, 2005 Report Share Posted January 18, 2005 Doesn't matter to me either way so I don't spin my wheels on it. But does it matter to you? In other words, if some account in the Mahabharata is not 100% literal in the 3d sense would that constitute a faith crisis for you? Just one of those questions we should ask ourselves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sumedh Posted January 18, 2005 Report Share Posted January 18, 2005 Hare Krishna and dandavat pranam Nice point theist prabhu. On the other hand it will not be prudent to take stories like these which do not fit in our current understanding as non-literal. I say this because i have been actually witness to some of the minor mystic opulences, with sufficient grounds to rule out any case of fraud, through the medium of my mother's guru. So i believe that such things would not be a big deal for someone like Vyasadeva. The amazing thing is that despite this i was attracted to teachings of Srila Prabhupada. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theist Posted January 18, 2005 Report Share Posted January 18, 2005 I never said that. Only that to me that it doesn't really matter. First let us establish what is meant by literal. We here are all conditioned by this 3d view of reality. What every we experience in this 3d way we term literal. Other things are imagination surreal or supernatural etc. while to others who experience things on a scale not limited to 3d may consider those happenings as real or literal. So what does literal mean exactly? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sumedh Posted January 18, 2005 Report Share Posted January 18, 2005 Hare Krishna and dandavats I never said that. Only that to me that it doesn't really matter. Sorry if i gave that impression; i was not meaning that for yourself rather a separate point. I understand your point and agree with it in the sense that these things have little importance. What every we experience in this 3d way we term literal. Other things are imagination surreal or supernatural etc. while to others who experience things on a scale not limited to 3d may consider those happenings as real or literal. Actually i was trying to say the same thing. That is why i do not agree with the guest's interpretation of comparing "INvitro-fertilization" with what Vyasadeva did. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theist Posted January 19, 2005 Report Share Posted January 19, 2005 Yes who is to say what cannot happen. Afterall everything we see in "ordinary" day to day lfe is a miracle already. Then again just because it can happen doesn't mean it did. I have seen so many people lose faith in Krishna consciousness because of the moon controversy and one sun etc. etc. It is soooo very unfortunate. We can't hang our faith on the temporal but rather we must place it on the eternal. Haribol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.