The Sheer Magnitude of it All

[sangom]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

Dear Sri. Sangom, Greetings.

Most members love to address your messages. Nothing really personal. It is always nice to engage a knowledgable person. For example, personally I did not object due to any religious reasons. In my opinion, since the soldiers of Mahabharata had a choice to leave, they could not be equated to any holocaust or genocide victims. That was all.

I would look at each situation separately. Granted, second world war caused millions of death. But we can not be equating persons on that alone, in my humble opinion. Nature also caused tens of thousands of death....... We can not be equating Hitler to nature, can we?

If we look at the story more deeply, it was Sakuni who took an oath to wipe out kuru dynasty. Droyodhana followed Sakunis advice. Sakuni lead them to that situation. I am wondering why Sakuni is not blamed for the war?

Cheers!

Regarding the portions in bold fonts, my understanding is that right up to the Vijayanagara and the subsequent Naiks' rule, the enlisted soldiers as also any able-bodied male had no choice to leave a battle/war if enjoined by the ruler to do so. It had always been a conscription of sorts; the ones who had the choice to stand aloof were the kings and rulers proper and we have Balarama doing exactly that because he was the guru and a friend of Duryodhana. Thus we find, once again that Balarama (who is supposed to be Adisesha) elder brother of Krishna, not finding the Mahabharata war as one of good vs evil, and being indifferent to it, at best.

As regards Sakuni, he might have vowed to exterminate the Kuru race but I have not found any direct reference to that. What I have understood is that he was probably unhappy at Gandhari being married to a blind person and that was why he refused the Gandhara throne and accompanied his sister in order to ensure her well-being. Naturally he was in favour of the Kauravas and against the Pandavas. I don't know whether we can therefore put the entire blame on to Sakuni.

But Krishna's involvement/complicity is indirectly admitted by Vyasa himself in Gandhari's words:—

Mahabharata, Book 11: Stri Parva, Chapter 25, Verses 36 to 38:

[SIZE=-1]36[/SIZE] pāṇḍavā dhārtarāṣṭrāś ca drugdhāḥ kṛṣṇa parasparam
upekṣitā vinaśyantas tvayā kasmāj janārdana

[SIZE=-1]37[/SIZE] śaktena bahu bhṛtyena vipule tiṣṭhatā bale
ubhayatra samarthena śrutavākyena caiva ha

[SIZE=-1]38[/SIZE] icchatopekṣito nāśaḥ kurūṇāṃ madhusūdana
yasmāt tvayā mahābāho phalaṃ tasmād avāpnuhi

[SIZE=-1]39[/SIZE] patiśuśrūṣayā yan me tapaḥ kiṃ cid upārjitam
tena tvāṃ duravāpātmañ śapsye cakragadādhara

[SIZE=-1]40[/SIZE] yasmāt parasparaṃ ghnanto jñātayaḥ kurupāṇḍavāḥ
upekṣitās te govinda tasmāj jñātīn vadhiṣyasi

[SIZE=-1]41[/SIZE] tvam apy upasthite varṣe ṣaṭtriṃśe madhusūdana
hatajñātir hatāmātyo hataputro vanecaraḥ
kutsitenābhyupāyena nidhanaṃ samavāpsyasi

[SIZE=-1]42[/SIZE] tavāpy evaṃ hatasutā nihatajñātibāndhavāḥ
striyaḥ paripatiṣyanti yathaitā bharata striyaḥ

‘The Pandavas and the Dhartarashtras, O Krishna, have both been burnt. Whilst they were thus being exterminated, O Janardana, why wert thou indifferent to them? Thou wert competent to prevent the slaughter, for thou hast a large number of followers and a vast force. Thou hadst eloquence, and thou hadst the power (for bringing about peace). Since deliberately, O slayer of Madhu, thou wert indifferent to this universal carnage, therefore, O mighty-armed one, thou shouldst reap the fruit of this act. By the little merit I have acquired through waiting dutifully on my husband, by that merit so difficult to attain, I shall curse thee, O wielder of the discus and the mace! Since thou wert indifferent to the Kurus and the Pandavas whilst they slew each other, therefore, O Govinda, thou shalt be the slayer of thy own kinsmen! In the thirty-sixth year from this, O slayer of Madhu, thou shalt, after causing the slaughter of thy kinsmen and friends and sons, perish by disgusting means in the wilderness. The ladies of thy race, deprived of sons, kinsmen, and friends, shall weep and cry even as these ladies of the Bharata race!’"
(The Mahabharata of Krishna-Dwaipayana Vyasa ~ translated by Kisari Mohan Ganguli)

Thus we have Gandhari's certificate to implicate Krishna and to curse him too.

See also the reply of Krishna to Gandhari:—

[SIZE=-1]44[/SIZE] saṃhartā vṛṣṇicakrasya nānyo mad vidyate śubhe
jāne 'ham etad apy evaṃ cīrṇaṃ carasi kṣatriye

[SIZE=-1]45[/SIZE] avadhyās te narair anyair api vā devadānavaiḥ
parasparakṛtaṃ nāśam ataḥ prāpsyanti yādavāḥ

[SIZE=-1]46[/SIZE] ity uktavati dāśārhe pāṇḍavās trastacetasaḥ
babhūvur bhṛśasaṃvignā nirāśāś cāpi jīvite

‘There is none in the world, save myself, that is capable of exterminating the Vrishnis. I know this well. I am endeavouring to bring it about. In uttering this curse, O thou of excellent vows, thou hast aided me in the accomplishment of that task. The Vrishnis are incapable of being slain by others, be they human beings or gods or Danavas. The Yadavas, therefore shall fall by one another’s hand.’ After he of Dasharha’s race had said these words, the Pandavas became stupefied. Filled with anxiety all of them became hopeless of life!’"

Note particularly that Krishna asserts that his next mission is the extermination of vrishnis. Is this not proof that Krishna's hobby was extermination of whole tribes/populations?

We should also note that Dhritarashtra was elder to Pandu. Bheeshma made Pandu ascend the throne because Dhritarashtra was blind. But when Pandu left for the forest after the curse he received, Dhritarashtra was crowned the king of Hastinapura. Hence the kauravas were the legal heirs to the throne and Pandavas were non-entities, since their father had been only a substitute king, as it were, and not the real heir to Vichitravirya.

 

[Govinda]

‘There is none in the world, save myself, that is capable of exterminating the Vrishnis. I know this well. I am endeavouring to bring it about. In uttering this curse, O thou of excellent vows, thou hast aided me in the accomplishment of that task. The Vrishnis are incapable of being slain by others, be they human beings or gods or Danavas. The Yadavas, therefore shall fall by one another’s hand.’ After he of Dasharha’s race had said these words, the Pandavas became stupefied. Filled with anxiety all of them became hopeless of life!’"

Note particularly that Krishna asserts that his next mission is the extermination of vrishnis. Is this not proof that Krishna's hobby was extermination of whole tribes/populations?

We should also note that Dhritarashtra was elder to Pandu. Bheeshma made Pandu ascend the throne because Dhritarashtra was blind. But when Pandu left for the forest after the curse he received, Dhritarashtra was crowned the king of Hastinapura. Hence the kauravas were the legal heirs to the throne and Pandavas were non-entities, since their father had been only a substitute king, as it were, and not the real heir to Vichitravirya.

Continued....

The holy one (Krishna) said, ‘Arise, arise, O Gandhari, do not set thy heart on grief! Through thy fault, this vast carnage has taken place! Thy son Duryodhana was wicked-souled, envious, and exceedingly arrogant. Applauding his wicked acts, thou regardest them to be good. Exceedingly cruel, he was the embodiment of hostilities, and disobedient to the injunctions of the old. Why dost thou wish to ascribe thy own faults to me? Dead or lost, the person that grieves for what has already occurred, obtaineth more grief. By indulging in grief, one increases it two-fold. A woman of the regenerate class bears children for the practice of austerities; the cow brings forth offspring for bearing burdens; the mare brings forth her young for acquiring speed of motion; the Shudra woman bears a child for adding to the number of servitors; the Vaishya woman for adding to the number of keepers of cattle. A princess, however, like thee, brings forth sons for being slaughtered!’

"Dhritarashtra said, ‘Tell me, O mighty-armed one, for thou art conversant with everything, what ends have those foremost of men attained.’

Yudhishthira said, ‘Those warriors of true prowess that have cheerfully cast off their bodies in fierce battle have all attained regions like those of Indra. Knowing death to be inevitable, they that have encountered it cheerlessly have attained the companionship of the gandharvas. Those warriors that have fallen at the edge of weapons, while turning away from the field or begging for quarter, have attained the world of the guhyakas. Those high-souled warriors who, observant of the duties of kshatriya-hood and regarding flight from battle to be shameful, have fallen, mangled with keen weapons, while advancing unarmed against fighting foes, have all assumed bright forms and attained the regions of Brahman. The remaining warriors, that have in anyhow met with death on the precincts of the field of battle, have attained the region of the Uttara-Kurus.’

Sangom Sir,

Karna's words to Krishna (when the latter tried to convince him), "I pray to thee, O bull of the Kshatriya race, let not the Kshatriyas, old in learning and old in years, perish miserably, O Janardana, for thy sake. Oh, let this swelling host of Kshatriyas perish by means of weapons on that most sacred of all spots in the three worlds, viz. Kurukshetra, O Kesava. O thou of eyes like lotus-leaves, accomplish on this spot what thou hast in thy mind, so that, O thou of Vrishni's race, the whole Kshatriya order may attain to heaven. As long, O Janardana, as the hills and the rivers will last, so long will the fame of these achievements last. The Brahmanas will recite this great war of the Bharatas. The fame, O thou of Vrishni's race, that they achieve in battles is the wealth that Kshatriyas own. O Kesava, bring Kunti's son (Arjuna) before me for battle, keeping for ever this our discourse a secret, O chastiser of foes."

The willingness to fight, those gushing flow of veera, dheera, emotional blood comes with the pride, status, rajasic qualities. What they wanted, they achieved. All actions have consequences, and their magnitudes get higher with the riskier actions. They also attained heaven like higher realms. Why blame Krishna? Krishna is only a JUST grantor, but the responsibility is with the individual's free-will. The curse of Gandhari is her own angry, jealous mind and Krishna grants one's will depending on 1. the power of the individual's feeling (like dhurvasu muni's) and 2. on the karma of the curse victims.

Pandavas, aided by Krishna, demanded only 5 villages from the whole share, which Duryodhana refused. So, Duryodhana, wanted to just challenge them. It seems, DritarAstra, put all the 100 sons of Suvala (Gandhari/sakuni's father) to starvation, when he came to know that Gandhari was married to a goat first (for sentiments). Only Sakuni survived (limping) and other sons died. So, Sakuni devised a master plan to kill the whole kuru clan. Looks like, the whole game of kuru, had a vicious cycle of anger, stupidity. Now, why blame Krishna?? He came to enjoy the Brindavan people and the rishis, and to save them killed many rakshasAs. The whole kuru game must have been accidental and Krishna had to intervene for the sake of dharma.

 

[jaisiyaraam]

Namaste to All,

I believe to even hold an opinion on historical (unwritten? poor written? manipulated over time?) events one has to set premise/assumptions.

Mahabharatha was written by Veda Vyasa
or
Mahabharatha was written by many Veda Vyasas over period of time
or
something else altogether

Veda Vyasa is/was avatar of Lord Vishnu (Narayana? Krishna? etc.,)
or
Veda Vyasa is/was not avatar of Lord Vishnu (Narayana? Krishna? etc.,)
or
Veda Vyasa is/was not an avatar but a mere human being
or
something else altogether

Believe the Dharma prevailing during Mahabharatha period
or
Dont Believe the Dharma prevailing during Mahabharatha period
or
something else altogether

etc., etc., I dont want to prolong, I believe you understand my effort/direction.

My opinion on Mahabharatha (its characters etc.,) is based on the pravachanams that I attended so my views are their views. Also, I believe my views would not be different or will change even after I read sanskrit Mahabharatha (manipulated over period of time? written by winners? outdated dharma?).

I strongly believe that my opinion is a very much reflection of my character (ie my character associating with a similar character of Mahabharatha).

Off the topic: History written by winners (corrupt ?) etc.,
This kind of talk/opinion will lead to chaos ie we will be skeptic to each/every event that happened in past (1000yrs? 100yrs? 10yrs? 1yrs? 1day? 1min back?)
Ex:
Societal/Cultural Change: Brahmins leaving the learning & teaching Vedas and taking up varna professions...oh influenced by winners (corrupt ?)
Societal/Cultural Change:Women & Education, Right to Vote, Politics...oh enforced by winners (corrupt ?)
Laws: Reservations to caste-based, gender based, physically&mentally handicapped, Children of ExServiceMen, Sportsmen, NonLocals, economically-backward etc.,...oh enforced by winners (corrupt ?)
Microscopic Level: Posts (opinions ?) censored in TB forum...oh say of winners (corrupt ?)

Thanks,
Jai SiyaRaam

 

[tbs]

Dear Sri. Sangom, Greetings.

Most members love to address your messages. Nothing really personal. It is always nice to engage a knowledgable person. For example, personally I did not object due to any religious reasons. In my opinion, since the soldiers of Mahabharata had a choice to leave, they could not be equated to any holocaust or genocide victims. That was all.

I would look at each situation separately. Granted, second world war caused millions of death. But we can not be equating persons on that alone, in my humble opinion. Nature also caused tens of thousands of death....... We can not be equating Hitler to nature, can we?

If we look at the story more deeply, it was Sakuni who took an oath to wipe out kuru dynasty. Droyodhana followed Sakunis advice. Sakuni lead them to that situation. I am wondering why Sakuni is not blamed for the war?

Cheers!

hi raghy sir,
yes, you are rite....sakuni was the man behind the war...just for the sake of his own sister gaandhari......even story goes

beyond queen gaandhari's wedding king dritharastra.....mahabharata war may be between 2 families.....but for evil and good....

but hitler was against one particular community jews....history always repeat stories...ONCE JEWS KILLED CHRISTIANS....

a powerful community in the world.....still powerful...a tiny state isreal in the middle of arab countires.....so called powerful

christians want destroy jews...in the form of aryan.....so mahabharata and hitler in a different angles of destroy... im not

completely justified mahabharata....i like karna and bhisma in mahabharata than arjuna and krishna......so my angle is different

from others...

 

[sarang]

There are some who misquote and misinterpret and give a twist when none exists. Many whites learnt samskrit to find ways to destroy brahmins, as they knew that their learning, culture and values are deeply routed in samskrit, vedas, scriptures and samskrit secular literature. This vile scheme to display knowledge of samskrit to confuse the brahmins and the faithful is being done by many post white rule too, by natives, will fail miserably as in the past.

All characters play their part in mahabharata and so described by sage vyasa. Just because jarasanda talks like sangom, it does not mean that krishna is less divine.

Sangom is breaking forum rules with such insulting posts. Let us hope he finds a guru who can redeem him and give him shanti.

Continued....

The holy one (Krishna) said, ‘Arise, arise, O Gandhari, do not set thy heart on grief! Through thy fault, this vast carnage has taken place! Thy son Duryodhana was wicked-souled, envious, and exceedingly arrogant. Applauding his wicked acts, thou regardest them to be good.

 

[sangom]

Namaste to All,

I believe to even hold an opinion on historical (unwritten? poor written? manipulated over time?) events one has to set premise/assumptions.

Mahabharatha was written by Veda Vyasa
or
Mahabharatha was written by many Veda Vyasas over period of time
or
something else altogether

Veda Vyasa is/was avatar of Lord Vishnu (Narayana? Krishna? etc.,)
or
Veda Vyasa is/was not avatar of Lord Vishnu (Narayana? Krishna? etc.,)
or
Veda Vyasa is/was not an avatar but a mere human being
or
something else altogether

Believe the Dharma prevailing during Mahabharatha period
or
Dont Believe the Dharma prevailing during Mahabharatha period
or
something else altogether

etc., etc., I dont want to prolong, I believe you understand my effort/direction.

My opinion on Mahabharatha (its characters etc.,) is based on the pravachanams that I attended so my views are their views. Also, I believe my views would not be different or will change even after I read sanskrit Mahabharatha (manipulated over period of time? written by winners? outdated dharma?).

I strongly believe that my opinion is a very much reflection of my character (ie my character associating with a similar character of Mahabharatha).

Off the topic: History written by winners (corrupt ?) etc.,
This kind of talk/opinion will lead to chaos ie we will be skeptic to each/every event that happened in past (1000yrs? 100yrs? 10yrs? 1yrs? 1day? 1min back?)
Ex:
Societal/Cultural Change: Brahmins leaving the learning & teaching Vedas and taking up varna professions...oh influenced by winners (corrupt ?)
Societal/Cultural Change:Women & Education, Right to Vote, Politics...oh enforced by winners (corrupt ?)
Laws: Reservations to caste-based, gender based, physically&mentally handicapped, Children of ExServiceMen, Sportsmen, NonLocals, economically-backward etc.,...oh enforced by winners (corrupt ?)
Microscopic Level: Posts (opinions ?) censored in TB forum...oh say of winners (corrupt ?)

Thanks,
Jai SiyaRaam

Shri Jai SiyaRaam,

In my opinion there is no need to set any premises or presumptions in matters of this type. The General Discussions in this Tamil Brahmins Forum allows new interpretations and conclusions to be made here on topics issues covering any subject, including our Hindu scriptures, as long as impolite or obscene language is not used.

When radical or non-conformist views are expressed it is for each reader to read, think about it and then either accept it /ask for further clarifications or reject such non-conformist/unorthodox views, because there is no compulsion that all members of this forum have been deemed to have contributed to every shade of opinion expressed here.

If, therefore, some views expressed here are not to your liking, kindly skip this thread altogether in future, please.

 

[sravna]

Just think about this. Would the pandavas have ever done what Duryodhana did which is the way Draupadi was humiliated or would pandavas have ever schemed the way Duryodhana and Sakhuni did for the sake of kingdom?

What finally matters for the Lord is that the good should triumph over the evil. In that sense Krishna definitely fits the bill of an avatar as he ensured that good indeed triumphed over the evil.

 

[renuka]

Just think about this. Would the pandavas have ever done what Duryodhana did which is the way Draupadi was humiliated or would pandavas have ever schemed the way Duryodhana and Sakhuni did for the sake of kingdom?

What finally matters for the Lord is that the good should triumph over the evil. In that sense Krishna definitely fits the bill of an avatar as he ensured that good indeed triumphed over the evil.

Hey Sravna..looking good in your pic!

BTW Arjuna was really jealous of Ekalavya...he wanted to be the best archer ever but I wonder how he felt he was the best archer when he knew Ekalavya was better than him.

Ekalavya was self taught where else Arjuna had Dronacharya.

Elimination one's rival does not make one the best...cos we will still know that someone is better than us.

Yudhisthira was not all the great a person...after the Mahabharat war he refused to do final rites of Karna when requested by Kunti saying "why should I do final rites for a Suta Putra when I am a Kshatriya?"
That was extreme pride on his part..only when he was told that Karna is also his brother..he agreed to do the final rites.

Just imagine..how great can that be?? Nothing right?

Karna would have done anything for anyone unlike Yudhisthira.

Arjuna also had some ego and pride in him once he had refused to get down from the chariot first cos he felt that all other warriors get down after their charioteers and he wanted Lord Krishna to get down first.

Lord Krishna refused to get down first and insisted Arjuna get down.

After Arjuna got down and then Krishna got down the chariot blew up in flames.

It was the effect of some divine weapon used by the Kaurava army that made the chariot blow up in flames.
It did not have any effect on the chariot as long Lord Krishna was on the chariot.

That humbled Arjuna right away.

Just imagine..after getting the Geeta still he could still have pride and ego that too with Krishna???

Give me a break! these Pandavas are not all that great ok!LOL

Pandavas may be were a bit more straight forward and adhered to Dharma most of the while despite being imperfect like any other human being.

See....in comparison the with the Kauravas..the Pandavas were the lesser devils that's all!

For me I feel the throne should have been the Kauravas..cos genetically the Kauravas were fathered by Dhristarasthra and hence they were the rightful blood line.

Pandavas were NOT the biological sons of the Pandu at all..so they were not the royal blood line.

Each were fathered by a Deva...so technically they were Demi Gods.

A Demi God should be having a throne in some other Loka ..neither heaven nor earth.

 

[sravna]

Dear Renuka,

If you believe in Krishna you need to accept that pandavas deserved a share. Simple right?

 

[jaisiyaraam]

Namaste sangomji,

Shri Jai SiyaRaam,
If, therefore, some views expressed here are not to your liking, kindly skip this thread altogether in future, please.

I read posts even that I dont agree with, without mixing/bringing-up my likes&dislikes.

I am not fretting on/with any differing views/opinions.

I was stating my reasons for my views ie I am open to change my views (with scientific approach) and/but for poorly-recorded/debate-able/belief-based topics I rely on my instincts/inheritance/conditioned-mind.

I am apologize if my post is controversial especially given the fact that I am avid reader of your posts.

Thanks,
Jai SiyaRaam

 

[palindrome]

Regarding Palindrome's post, I will request a look at "Phulgenda Sinha" and "The Gita As It Was:
Rediscovering the Original Bhagavadgita." through googling. I think even if Isvara Krishna wrote the BG, it was revised, probably more than once, because whatever plus points of Samkhya was written has been nullified by subsequent adhyayas and specific slokas. I shall carefully go through the google book suggested by you, please.

Thanks sir. I do agree Bhagavad Gita grew in volume, as shlokas were added to the composition, after the time of Ishvara-Krishna. Some say Adi Shankaracharya added shlokas. Whatever may be the case, apparently BG came to be interpreted in a way which the original Sankya teachers may have disliked / detested. Anyways, surely Krishna (Devaki's son) or Ishvara-Krishna (of Samkya school), cannot be held responsible for it. IMO Krishna (Devaki's son) was just human, who played a role in kuru politics as diplomatically as he could; but he may have been partial to Pandavas, since Kunti was related to him (and so was arjuna through subhadra). Best wishes.

 

[padders]

This is a very interesting discussion. But I don't think we can mix up legend (the Mahabharatha) with fact (World War 2). Without meaning to sound sacriligeous, the deaths in WW2 were fairly well documented (altho there is disagreement about the number of total dead) while that in theMahabharatha cannot really be proved, as it is so far back in time.
I think the world has not really changed - there's always a tussle between good and evil, innocents always are slaughtered, but at the end sense does prevail (as it does in the Mahabharata and in other epics too). But the cycle continues. I think the Mahabharata and Ramayana have to be read symbolically or allegorically, not literally. I am not pretending to be a "vidwan" or an expert on either of these great texts, but giving the views of an ordinary person.

 

[renuka]

Dear Renuka,

If you believe in Krishna you need to accept that pandavas deserved a share. Simple right?

Dear Sravna,

I do believe in the Poornavatar Krishna...Pandavas deserved some share but not the whole kingdom.

The problem is there was no proper system of administration.

Bhisma should have thought of a way to divide the duties of Pandu and Dhritarashtra.

Since Dhritarashtra was elder but born blind...Pandu became the proxy king.

So rightfully the Kingdom is Dhritarasthra's but since Pandu was ruling on behalf..Pandu should have been given a salary and also a portion of a kingdom which he could give to his son's later on.

So Kauravas would have had the main share of the Kingdom and the Pandavas could have had their smaller portion of the Kingdom and everyone would have been happy I hope.

 

[Raghy]

Sri. Sangom, greetings.

Sir, many wars took place in the past. Many wars may take place yet. We do not usually name a person as a villan unless a genocide or killing of unarmed civilians took place. In that context Hitler and Nazi party was blamed for the holocaust. The victims of holocaust were unarmed unlike the soldiers in kurushetra. That was why I did not like to equate Hitler to Krsna.

It takes two to tango. There have to be two parties with conflicting views determined enough to fight it out for a war to start. Krsna just on his own could say " let us have a party" and could have gathered a crowd..... But he could not have said " let us have a war" and hoped for a war to start. Personally I would not blame one single person for the kurushetra war. If desperate, I might think of blaming bheeshma for his idiotic oath and for installing Pandu on the throne. What if dridharashtra was blind? Pandu could have helped and Bheeshma could have helped too. Bheeshma should have known better.

Let us hypothetically say, after listening to BG, still Arjuna decided not to fight and said " machan, née vandiya thiruppumaa! Naan Indha sandayilerndhu jaga vaangaren! Naan oottukku poren, aala udu!" would the war not take place? Possibly it would have taken place minus Arjuna.

I still like to analyse each event on its merits and demerits without comparing or clubbing them together.

Cheers!

 

[sangom]

Shri Sravna in his post # 34 above echos the overwhelming sentiments of many here, and that is, first one ought to believe Krishna (and his avataara status) and then, necessarily, the Pandavas become the embodiments of virtue while the Kauravas turn out to be adharma personified!! I am compelled to say LOL here.

Even the names of the kauravas were changed by the brahmins from Suyodhana etc to Duryodhana series, therefore.

I have read that in the Aryaavarta, a contingency arose, once in the remote past, when jnAtis staked claim to a certain throne and the ruling king very like our Arjuna in his viShAda yOga scene was ready to surrender his kingdom to the enemic jnAtis so that there would be no bloodshed. But this king's rajaguru and his ministers did not like that idea, for fear of losing their cushy lives. So some sanskrit scholars were commanded to produce a scripture which would sanction fight among jnAtis and killing of one's own siblings in a battle for kingdom. The Jaya was written then, the war-reluctant king underwent a change of mind and fought a war and so on.

This Jaya later underwent many redactions, interpolations etc., and became the M. Bh. we know today.

If we are able to keep Krishna as just another prince from one of the small kingdoms which then existed in the Indian sub-continent and who was related to the Pandavas through Draupadi, it should be possible to see clearly that Krishna could have prevented the war, and this is the view expressed through Gandhari's character by those who wrote M. Bh.

Shri Raghy,

The argument that Hitler killed ordinary citizens while in M.Bh. the two armies collided will have to be seen against the back-drop of the very many adhArmic actions indulged in by Krishna, like how Ekalavya was brought to fight on Pandava's side, how he made Yudhishtira utter a falsehood, hiding the sun and killing Jayadratha by treachery, and so on. Last but not least, how do you explain the massive support which Hitler got from the non-Jews? Is it not the truth that the Jews, as a people, were disliked right from the times of the Roman empire and were taxed for just being a Jew? Why did the Jews court such hatred throughout the centuries? And, just see what Israel is now doing to the original UN demarcation of Israel and Palestine? Is it not feasible that Hitler could judge the innate nature of the Jews?

Krishna himself says he was planning the extermination of his own Vrishni race. This means that Krishna had an inborn interest in seeing that large numbers of people were killed, one way or another, the justifications given being not relevant to the point why a fellow should be interested in exterminating his own race, much like the BBs are imagined by some members of this forum!

I am therefore, unable to change my perception that Krishna was an ancient day Hitler, or, Hitler was a modern day Krishna.

 

[sangom]

Namaste sangomji,



I read posts even that I dont agree with, without mixing/bringing-up my likes&dislikes.

I am not fretting on/with any differing views/opinions.

I was stating my reasons for my views ie I am open to change my views (with scientific approach) and/but for poorly-recorded/debate-able/belief-based topics I rely on my instincts/inheritance/conditioned-mind.

I am apologize if my post is controversial especially given the fact that I am avid reader of your posts.

Thanks,
Jai SiyaRaam

Shri Jaisiyaraamji,

Namaskar. You have no reason to apologize at all. You wrote your views and I wrote mine, that was all. Please do continue giving your valuable views.

What I wanted to convey was that in topics such as the instant one, there will always be controversy. I feel it is because most people have been indoctrinated to find their "God" in some place other than themselves, like literary characters like Krishna, Rama, actual personalities who project themselves before the public as gurus, swamijis, Babas, godmen, godwomen etc., but nowhere are people told to look (search) inwards to find their God. The couplet ascribed to Sant Kabeer given in my flag,

जैसे तिल में तॆल है, ज्यों चक्मक् में आग ।
तेर साई तुझ् में है तू जाग सकै तो जाग ॥

has, sadly, not percolated into human minds.

 

[sravna]

Dear Shri Sangom,

Krishna being an avatar, the truthness of which I firmly believe had a unique responsibility. That responsibility was less that of preventing the war than that of correcting the corruption of minds. The physical world being only a sojourn for the souls, they have to learn all that they can in that sojourn and hence become pure. The lesson that the soul of Duryodhana or that of Shakuni would have learnt from the defeat of the war is certainly that such endeavors are futile and self destructive ultimately. This message would have been firmly driven this way than if Krishna had not let the war happen and hence let the doubts linger in the souls about the usefulness of such affairs.

So the way we need to view Krishna's action is based on that unique responsibility of an avatar which has to balance everything with particular emphasis on enlightening the souls.

 

[sangom]

Dear Shri Sangom,

Krishna being an avatar, the truthness of which I firmly believe had a unique responsibility. That responsibility was less that of preventing the war than that of correcting the corruption of minds. The physical world being only a sojourn for the souls, they have to learn all that they can in that sojourn and hence become pure. The lesson that the soul of Duryodhana or that of Shakuni would have learnt from the defeat of the war is certainly that such endeavors are futile and self destructive ultimately. This message would have been firmly driven this way than if Krishna had not let the war happen and hence let the doubts linger in the souls about the usefulness of such affairs.

So the way we need to view Krishna's action is based on that unique responsibility of an avatar which has to balance everything with particular emphasis on enlightening the souls.

Dear Shri Sravna,

Your above post raises many points/questions.

1. Do ordinary people learn lessons only when an avataar comes down from the high heavens, selects the bad from the good and completely exterminates the bad people who failed to become pure? What happens then, in the interrugnum between two avataaras which is one yuga as per the verse "paritrANAya sAdhUnAm..."? Do people (as also perhaps animals, because all the bad people's horses, elephants etc., were also killed in the M. Bh. war) just simply go on living from one birth to another, just like a classroom with the teacher absent?

2. Have we any evidence to prove that people like Sakuni and/or Duryodhana did learn the necessary lessons? And if endeavours like war are futile, are they not futile for both sides equally? What beneft did the Pandavas gain by the war or what benefit did Krishna gain from the war? In addition, did people in general get this so called sublime message and were the remaining souls enlightened? If so why did Janamejaya himself start killing all the serpents of all the worlds (did he not learn that such destructive endeavours are self-destructive ultimately? Why did wars happen, and continue to happen right till today, in the very same area of earth (in which this sublime lesson is stated to have been taught by Krishna) which today comprises India, Pakistan and Afghanistan mainly? Hence is god waging a foolish fight against humanity with his avowed aim of "paritrANAya sAdhUnAm vinASAya ca duShkritAm...etc."? Is the evil ways of this physical world (which is only a sojourn for the souls, according to your own words) vastly more powerful than the god's power that the god himself had not understood till he completed the Krishna avataar? Has he learnt his lesson thereafter and is that why He is not coming here again, to stage yet another of his PSVD (paritrANAya... etc. acronym)?

 

[sravna]

Dear Shri Sangom,

My reply in blue.

Your above post raises many points/questions.

1. Do ordinary people learn lessons only when an avataar comes down from the high heavens, selects the bad from the good and completely exterminates the bad people who failed to become pure?

When people are impervious to reason just as Duryodhana was there is nothing really he can learn in that birth. So exterminating and letting a fresh life start and let the soul imbibe the lessons in the meantime could well be nature's plan.


What happens then, in the interrugnum between two avataaras which is one yuga as per the verse "paritrANAya sAdhUnAm..."? Do people (as also perhaps animals, because all the bad people's horses, elephants etc., were also killed in the M. Bh. war) just simply go on living from one birth to another, just like a classroom with the teacher absent?


It would make sense for avatars to happen when the situation is going out of control. For some reason, things deteriorate as a yuga progresses just as it does in a mahayuga which is nothing but the four yugas together(those who are familiar with the second law of thermodynamics may resonate with this idea of deterioration). Divine intervention is not required till the yuga nears its end and the spirituality has waned and it needs God to descend and restore spirituality with his presence.

The interrugnum between avatars is guided by spiritual forces that form the destiny such as starting at the highest level with maya, then manifested as each one's karma which are carried out by astrological forces.

All happen with a purpose including the extent of spirituality within a yuga and between yugas and I think if I may guess to create different environments to be in for the soul each time. The fact that things deteriorate within a yuga is in consonance with the transient nature of the physical world. So when the spirituality is almost not there it signals that the time is ripe for the appearance of an avatar.


2. Have we any evidence to prove that people like Sakuni and/or Duryodhana did learn the necessary lessons? And if endeavours like war are futile, are they not futile for both sides equally? What beneft did the Pandavas gain by the war

It is for the one who is responsible for the war to realize the futility of the war and not for the one who is drawn into it.

or what benefit did Krishna gain from the war?

As I said Krishna's role is in reality is being impartial and for the ultimate benefit of all.

In addition, did people in general get this so called sublime message and were the remaining souls enlightened? If so why did Janamejaya himself start killing all the serpents of all the worlds (did he not learn that such destructive endeavours are self-destructive ultimately? Why did wars happen, and continue to happen right till today, in the very same area of earth (in which this sublime lesson is stated to have been taught by Krishna) which today comprises India, Pakistan and Afghanistan mainly?

Wars keep happening and people again become wicked because of the nature of the yugas which keep happening in a cycle.

Hence is god waging a foolish fight against humanity with his avowed aim of "paritrANAya sAdhUnAm vinASAya ca duShkritAm...etc."? Is the evil ways of this physical world (which is only a sojourn for the souls, according to your own words) vastly more powerful than the god's power that the god himself had not understood till he completed the Krishna avataar? Has he learnt his lesson thereafter and is that why He is not coming here again, to stage yet another of his PSVD (paritrANAya... etc. acronym)?

I think my replies above would answer these queries

 

[Govinda]

Shri Jaisiyaraamji,
The couplet ascribed to Sant Kabeer given in my flag,

जैसे तिल में तॆल है, ज्यों चक्मक् में आग ।
तेर साई तुझ् में है तू जाग सकै तो जाग ॥

has, sadly, not percolated into human minds.

Sangom Sir,

How did Kabir come to know of this "तेर साई तुझ् में है"? [your divinity/god is in you]

 

[sangom]

Sangom Sir,

How did Kabir come to know of this "तेर साई तुझ् में है"? [your divinity/god is in you]

Shri Govindaji,

Definitely not by following or observing the brahministic nithyahnikam and its pet beliefs, because, Kabirdas was a low caste (weaver) and the brhamins, it is said, were dead set against him.

I feel he must have found out in the same way in which I came to the same conclusion.

Now, you may wonder how I found out? was it by bashing a "not-so-few" orthodox brahmins? I leave it unanswered, deliberately.

 

[sangom]

My reply in blue.

When people are impervious to reason just as Duryodhana was there is nothing really he can learn in that birth. So exterminating and letting a fresh life start and let the soul imbibe the lessons in the meantime could well be nature's plan.

It would make sense for avatars to happen when the situation is going out of control. For some reason, things deteriorate as a yuga progresses just as it does in a mahayuga which is nothing but the four yugas together(those who are familiar with the second law of thermodynamics may resonate with this idea of deterioration). Divine intervention is not required till the yuga nears its end and the spirituality has waned and it needs God to descend and restore spirituality with his presence.

The interrugnum between avatars is guided by spiritual forces that form the destiny such as starting at the highest level with maya, then manifested as each one's karma which are carried out by astrological forces.

All happen with a purpose including the extent of spirituality within a yuga and between yugas and I think if I may guess to create different environments to be in for the soul each time. The fact that things deteriorate within a yuga is in consonance with the transient nature of the physical world. So when the spirituality is almost not there it signals that the time is ripe for the appearance of an avatar.

It is for the one who is responsible for the war to realize the futility of the war and not for the one who is drawn into it.

As I said Krishna's role is in reality is being impartial and for the ultimate benefit of all.

Wars keep happening and people again become wicked because of the nature of the yugas which keep happening in a cycle.

I think my replies above would answer these queries

Dear Shri Sravna,

For the sake of convenience, I have given all your replies together.
It looks to me a jumble of pet beliefs, some mutually contradictory too.
Anyway, I feel that dragging in the second law of thermodynamics is a very simplistic step and cries out loud.

Both of us know that we are like antipodes as regards our outlooks on issues such as this. Hence we will never come to any meeting ground. So, I feel it will be better if I stop here and do not continue replying to your posts.

Still, you may, if you feel like, consider the last sentence in your replies (I think my replies above would answer these queries.) really answers my points.

 

[sravna]

Dear Shri Sangom,

I was only stating, as you rightly said, my beliefs. Everything is finally a belief. What finally matters to me is whether you have a good rationale for the beliefs and whether they help you lead a life that is tranquil.

 

[Govinda]

Shri Govindaji, Definitely not by following or observing the brahministic nithyahnikam and its pet beliefs, because, Kabirdas was a low caste (weaver) and the brhamins, it is said, were dead set against him. I feel he must have found out in the same way in which I came to the same conclusion. Now, you may wonder how I found out? was it by bashing a "not-so-few" orthodox brahmins? I leave it unanswered, deliberately.

Oops! What a pity! The first batch of northern Sants/sat-saints are 12 disciples of Swami Narayana Sect founder- Sri Ramananda, a Brahmin/Sharma himself. He advocated Bhakti movement and was a social reformer. His disciples include Kabir, ravidas, tulsidas. There were more disciples to those 12 followers - Guru Nanak, Meera, Caitanya. etc. They were more vaishnavic but also has other influences depending on their locality. So, everyone had a preceptor, a previous guru/teacher to obtain knowledge from.It is said Ramanand obtained diksha from Sri Ramanuja. And there were many contemporaries for Sri Ramanand at that time. And , Kabir like reformers didnt get a sky-lotus from heaven!

 

[kunjuppu]

the title of the thread is apt for this article by P.A.Krishnan, perhaps my most favourite author of modern tamil.

P.A.Krishnan |

this was a speech given by krishnan, jan 13 i think. it has a historical perspective of periyar, tamil society and tambrams - all through the eyes of this agnostic born tambram but living tamilian

i hope you enjoy atleast 1% of what i did.