The birth of Karna was an unfortunate event . But Sympathy for Karna Stops here. Because at every stage God having helped him Karna outrightly chose his own selfish path annoying several along the way.For example
- When Drona refused to teach him , he went to Drona ’s Guru Shri Parshuram to learn the astras.
- He lied to God Parshurama that He is Bramhin to learn astras.(God Knowingly teaches him all , because God knew Duryodhan would wage a war against Pandavas only on the confidence of Karna’s capability.)
- But when caught Karna did not humbly accept his lie but persisted with it( Perhaps God would have forgiven him ,had he accepted) Hence he obtains curse that his learning will not help him in competition , all other times He would be unparalleled.
- Karna accepts Friendship of Duryodhana only to oppose Arjun.( Lack of morals)
- When Father (Sun)advises him not to give kavach kundal to Indra , he disobeys Father and gives it away.
- When Mother kunti asks him not to harm Pandavas, He displeases her saying He would kill Arjun
- When Lord Krishna offers him the entire Kingdom of the universe to join Pandavas as eldest brother in war , He rejects Lord’s suggestion and fights for Duryodhana.( Ego before the Lord)
- Was he loyal to Duryodhan? No , when Bheeshma calls him “ardharathi”, He does not enter battelfield for 10 days till Bheeshma falls. So much for a false friendship.(Given to anger)
- He was acclaimed as Daan Veer , but He had taken a vow that he would donate only till he kills Arjun, his dana was only out of ego and jealousy towards Arjun, to attain fame and not to please God or recipient .
- When Bheemasena striked on his chariot , he hid under the chariot in fear leaving his shakti astra , He was defeated thrice by Bheemasena during Rajsuya yagna ,this even when he had Kavach and Kunadala.(was he veer).
When one annoys so many elders , and is disobedient, given to falsehood , bitten by jealousy and ego and anger , can one expect success? One becomes the architect of his own misfortunes.Karna fell due to failure of chariot , lapse of memory absence of kavach kundala and shakti of Indra.
People born under aquarius lagna and navamsa are given to such characteristic , though they attain fame , and heroics in practical life it helps them in none , but only brings misfortunes.When both benefics and malefics aspect a particular house results are mixed in nature giving success and failure alternatively ,provided both benefics and malefics are of equal strength.
krishnarpana.
Posted by Amit Shukla on 16/12/2008 at 03:46
Hello krishnarpana,all the things you have stated here in regard with Great Karna are truly wrong. I am able to change your view for Karna at each and every points you have stated, but you seem to be influenced purily by serials and stories heard everywhere. Before writing something for someone you have choosen, you should keep your mind stable. If you have already made your mind that he was bad then how could you describe him with truthness and purity.
Do you know when Lord Krishna was giving knowledge of Gita in the battlefield to Arjun. There were Seven person(apart from Sanjay) who were able to here him live. They were Bheeshm Pitamah, Karn, Dronacharya, Ashwathama, Kripacharya, Lord Hanuman and Barbareek.
And Lord Krishna himself said that in whole Mahabharat only Bheesm and Karn were the two who have truly followed the Teaching of Gita.
There are many more things about Karna, but I dont’t think you are here to discuss truth. It seems you all will always hear and continue with the same misinterpreted information that you earn.
Posted by chiraan on 16/12/2008 at 15:15
Dear mr Amit,
The fact that you have addressed me as Krishnarpana ,shows you do not have understanding of the word Krishnarpana, Title of the blog is Chiraan’s astrology .Also I can safely assume you are not yet initiated into philosophy. You have scant knowledge of mahabharath and vedic studies in particular.
kindly give some scriptural proof before uttering words of misconception, first of all writings in these posts if you have understood them a bit could be easily known to have been written after intense vedic study. very fact that you have dismissed them as a influence of tv and serial, speaks a lot about your analysis. secondly kindly let me know which version of mahabharath that you have read tells that seven people heard live bhagavadgeeta , kindly let me know if you have read original mahabharath in sanskrit or english translation.Karna was not present in the battlefield[on the day of geeta upadesha] till Bheeshma fell.Please get your facts right before venturing to offer your arguments.
what we are discussing here is about vedic literature as it exists and interpreted by srimadanandtirtha [Madhvacharya ,I pity if thyself has ever heard of this great name of the saint ,who is incarnation of Hanuman] and in their treatises and commentaries on vedic literature.
not any concocted stories that appear elsewhere.
these are supported by bramhand purana verses, bhagvat,and sangraha ramayana .
do give your scriputural support and not some self assumed versions as basis for your arguments.
chiraan
Posted by Amit Shukla on 23/12/2008 at 07:16
Dear Friend,
First thing, to be a philosopher one do not needs to have any degree of diploma. And Second, Philosophy is distinguished from other ways of addressing these questions (such as mysticism or mythology) by its critical, generally systematic approach and its reliance on reasoned argument. But as I see you are stick with your proudness of knowledge, friend ! always remember knowledge means gyaan and gyaan has no limitation and it comes to those who have crave for it, it is earned with each fraction of time(that is my experience) Wanted to inform you that “Acharya Shree Madhavacharya” is not an incarnation of Lord Hanuman, he is third incarnation of Vaayu Dev. And you said that Karn was not present in the battlefield on the day of Shrimadbhagwad Geeta’s incarnation, for that gothrough the 1st and 2nd chapter of ShrimadbhagwadGeeta itself.
Now something unknown about Karna:
Karna’s charioteer Shalya, who was Pandavas’ uncle had agreed to the pandavas that he’d try to insult Karna whenever possible, and he did exactly that, to lower Karna’s morale to help pandavas. In short, while Arjun’s charioteer helped Arjun, Karna’s charioteer was helping Arjun and Co. as well.
And every great man in Mahabharat praised Karna for who he was. Regardless of whether you like him or not, that fact cannot be changed. The whole kingdom was his birthright. Krishna, his mother and Bheeshma offered the whole world at his feet, yet he was respected by them even more because he wasn’t tempted, and he kept his loyalty and did his duty.
There is something special about these 3 people – Bheeshma, Drona and Karna.
1. No one in the Pandavas could kill either of the 3, because all 3 of them were greater than them all.
2. All 3 of them were disciples of sage Parashuram.
3. All 3 of them met their end as a result of the Pandavas cheating, because they couldn’t win straight on.
Among these, Bheeshma and Karna have even more similarities.
Both were born with blessings that made them virtually immortal. While Bheeshma could die only when he wishes, Karna was immortal and invincible against all celestial weapons with the armor and earrings that were part of his body.
The difference is, Karna gave away that part of his body to Lord Indra of the Gods, knowing he was trying to protect Arjun. He, and if you follow South Indian mythology – Mahabali, are the only 2 characters from whom a Deva begged for something.
In addtion, what seperates Karna from the other 2 great warriors, is that while they were cheated once, he was cheated no less than 6 times for this particular battle.
1. The curse of Parashuram, thinking Karna was a Kshatriya since he was a mortal enemy of kshatriyas. Karna at this time didn’t know he was a kshatriya. This curse was a blessing for Arjuna, protecting him.
2. The curse of the brahman, as a result of accidentally killing his cow. Though an accident, he recieved the curse of the chariot sinking in the field, once again, a blessing for Arjuna, protecting him.
3. Indra begging the armor and earrings. Karna had the combined qualities of all 5 Pandavas, being the eldest of them, and was always loyal and gave anyone, anything they asked. Knowing everything, he gave them away.
4. Krishna disarms him by informing him about the pandavas being his brother. This caused his hatred for the pandavas to be destroyed, and it’s said that afterwards, his love for the pandavas rivaled that of Bheeshma’s to them. Yet he kept fighting just like Bheeshma, to fulfil his duty.
5. Kunti disarms him and safeguards her 4 sons, by the boon given by Karna that he would not kill any of them except Arjun.
6. Using Ghatotkach to steal Karna’s shakti gained from Indra to protect Arjuna. Khadotkaj’s duty was fulfilled and Arjun was saved.
And at last, even with all the above 6, none of them, even Arjun could kill Karna. Yet Karna with the curses and the knowledge that he’s fighting his brothers, was capable of killing all of them. He spared all save Arjun, and Arjun could not defeat him except by cheating somehow.
Krishna knew this, and when the curses took effect, he knew that the only way to kill Karna was when he was unarmed, and the moment was taken advantage of.
Go and study Ved Vyas Mahabharat and Shrimad Bhagwat Mahapuran.
And one thing very important that inspite of studying all the veds,vedaangs, purans and upnishads (as you say you did) I got hold of my Father-Mother, Gayatri Maa, my Gurudev, my Gurumantra and 3rd chapter of Shrimadbhagwat Geeta.
I am really very sorry from bottom of my heart if I had hurt you in anyway. My only intention was to expand the truth. If I have hurt you in anyway I will not comeback anymore. That’s All
Radhe Radhe
Posted by chiraan on 23/12/2008 at 15:35
Dear Shree.Amit ,
we are in a discussion on a topic whereby you have putforth some comments which are debatable, there is no scope for personal egos in these , however let me assure there is no hurt either , i welcome the fact that you have taken a stance to debate , but debate goes on only on facts that are tenable ,not on impressions and prejudiced assumptions.[debate should help in advancement of tattva]. Astrology is not mystique as you have opined, it is vedanga ,it is a valid and justified tool to decipher Vedas and and other shastras. People who fall short of intellect [given the oceanic nature of vedanga] brush it off as untenable ,mystique etc.
Let us come one by one to your points.
first of all Acharya Madhva is incarnation of Hanuman only ,he has not descended from moolroopa of Vayu.
Bhagavdgeeta mentions Duryodhana speaking about karna as from his side to his preceptor and not being present in the army.[he was always accesible to the Kauravas in case bheeshma fell early to take over the reins]
Shalya takes on the mantle as sarathi only when Karna is appointed as Commander in Chief. that was after Bheeshma fell to the arrows of Arjuna.Karna was decisively not on the battlefield as he was addressed as Ardharathi . Bheeshma wanted to save him for the last.
Shalya himself was decietfully taken on Duryodhana’s side, upon that a great warrior like him was made to be charioteer to Karna ,only to psychologically elevate him to equal Arjuna. is there any comparision between Arjuna’s charioteer [Lord Krishna ] and Shalya ,shalya himself was averse to the idea, Karna persisted only out of ego.He deserved discouragement thus.
everyone praised Karna, Karna was incarnation of Soorya [a divine] hence he had some devata like qualities and valour [not equivalent to arjun] ,these were definitely praised [every good man praises whatever little good others have,this is greatness of the good Bheeshma others ,not Karna].But Karna also had the presence of daitya suryavarman ,here all his bad acts are attributed to this demon.
Karna was not the son of Pandu , thus Kingdom cannot be birthright.[just like kingdom was not birthright of Duryodhana ,even after being son of caretaker King Dhrutrashtra].
He was offered world to tempt him towards righteousness, The height of evil is they are intent on doing evil to Arjuna[friendship was his selfish aide].
a duty conscious man [if he was] then his primary duty was towards Lord Krishna ,which he could never think of , but he was prompt in quoting loyalty towards a evil duryodhana .[more than duty he was out to prove his greatness towards Arjun, which chance only Duryodhan could provide and not Krishna ]This is known as kapat in real world terms.
speciality is of Lord Parashurama that he taught these three BHeeshma ,Drona and Karna ,knowing that they would aide Duryodhan in garnering enough guts to wage war against Pandavas. Parashuram is lord all knowing ,yet he himself appointed these as guards for Duryodhan. this increases the emphasis of power fo pandavas.
Pandavas did not cheat Bheeshma Drona, Karna , they were already defeated all put together single handedly by Arjuna in Draupadi swayamvar, Viarat [Agyatvasa] Go samrakshana episode. where was Karna’s valour at that time , when ARjuna defeated him ,what about his Kavach Kunadal then] Arjuna proved outrightly he was great . Karna was only blabbering amassing pity over his birth ,and other misfortunes.
Brave dont lament over their misfortunes. Bheeshma and Drona were killed in a fashion not to attract sin on account of they being preceptors. [everything was done as suggested by Krishna]. Dronacharya had clearly mentioned to Duryodhana , I shall protect you along with my family ,i shall take to weapons even though being a Bramhin ,but know it firmly even I will not be able to save you from BHeema.
Karna was defeted even before Mahabharath war by Bheema , in rajasooya digvijaya. At that time Karna had Kavach Kundala.
He could have killed him with kavach kundal also , but that would amount to insulting donor of kavach kundal. and thus kavach kundal had to be begged ,to keep its honor not greatness of Karna.
Now your other points. [mishaps to karna]
1. God Parashurama gave shapa , God knew he was kshatriya [God knows everything] , thus he taught him, it was foolish of Karna to have thought that he has tricked God , and also he had lied that he was Bramhin, thus he was rightly cursed.
2.Curse of a Bramhin, killing of a cow cannot be accidental , nothing is accidental , his loss of respect towards god , mother ,brothers,father ,friends,everything has rightly come to him as a curse. misfortunes wait to occur for those who are headlong and anti God.misfortunes get avoided for those who respect preceptors,parents ,freinds and others who have done some good.
3.Karna gave daana only to keep up his vrata that he would donate everything asked for till he kills arjuna. [ordinary people do vrata to obtain wishes, Greats perform vrata for Pleasing Vishnu] . He gave away kavach kundala fearing vrata bhanga and subsequently defeat at the hands of Arjuna , not out of bravery or devotion . Kavach kundal were divine present from Sun , they had to be preserved ,Arjunas arrows would have destroyed it anyhow, that would have brougth disgrace to Sun as having given false promise . Thus Surya ’s words were upheld by INDRA. Karna was destined to die for siding with Duryodhana. NO pity for him.
4.A kshatriya wages war with full force ,no matter brother or enemy, Arjuna had more love towards Kauravas,thus refused to wage war, he was sermoned by Krishna to wage a war as duty. Karna even after revealing that Arjuna was younger brother ,could not suppress his jealousy , thus could not promise Kunti that he would leave Arjun. this shows he had no love ,he was fighting for his honor [to prove he was greatest dhanurdhar ,which he was never ,time had proved it again and again]
5.Kunti does not disarm him , she makes an attempt to save him from sin of killing his brothers who were righteous , mother always wants her sons to be on the right path. She asks him to refrain, he bestows her with a boon to spare[ this is karna's ego that he is capable of killing pandavas, thus he offers boon] KUNTI{Krishna} had attempted to save Karna ,Karna felt he was being pampered , a sign of durabhimana.if he was a saint he could have offered to spare Arjuna also ?why only four?
6.Those who have weapons , it is their management to use or misuse ,Karna has used Shakti on Ghatotkacha ,its his mismanagement of resources , what Arjuna has done for it. Pity had he not used shakti ,even ghatotkacha would have finished him[it means obvious] that means Karna without Shakti was no match for Ghatotkacha ,[a small warrior compared to Arjuna] , what this Karna would have fought Arjuna then without Shakti? your own illustration is proving Karna as an unfit warrior.
7.Arjuna had disarmed him totally , and refused to kill Karna, But it was Krishna who insisted to kill him as a punishment because Karna had killed Abhimanyu when he was disarmed.where was Karna’s valor when Abhimanyu was fighting , why he could not have killed him with his weapons on. Karna could not defeat even Abhimanyu with arms, Ghatotkacha by pure skill he had to use boons of INdra to kill them . He ran away from battlefield when Bheema attacked him. Was he a match to Pandavas. A cheat himself had died unworthily there is nothing wrong in it. [he had earned his skills by cheating, he lost it by cheating] You reap what you sow.
now do quote the verses from bharath or bhagavat where you can see karna having listened to Bhagavadgeetha [ and that barbareek].
I am not hurt a bit by your verdict , but amused as I am that the whole text appeared to you as without any source . The above words are of Srimad Poornapragnya teertha and not my imaginations.
I shall always welcome you to my site , and thank you for enlightening our readers with various ways a treatise can be interpreted and corrected.
Do keep visiting and commenting however controversial it may be it gives us a chance to dwell deeper into the subject and fortifies our wisdom and Bhakti towards Lord Shri Krishna .
Let me reiterate none of these were intended to undermine your sadhana , but it is just a refutation of the thought you have putforth albiet in a stronger words Although I must outrightly admit I admire your debating skills and capabilities.
chiraan
Posted by Niraj on 06/08/2009 at 15:44
Shri Chiraan. I have found many of my comments edited like
Mr. suryas. I only hope I have not offended you in any way
best regards
Niraj
Posted by Smita Chaudhari on 01/11/2009 at 14:33
Dear Sir,
I quite accidently came across this article whilst i was looking for something else.
Read your views that are scientific and purely from astrology point of view; however, judgemental. Read counter views too.
SIr, it is a fact that nothing in this world is ‘right’ or ‘wrong’. Nor is anybody qualified to pass a judgement on God and his creation. Human (man) is undoubtedly his the best and the most fascinating creation – because Man is his only intelligent creature known to all. One more thing about human is – HE IS SELFISH CREATURE and will do all such things that give him satisfaction and dispel with those that make him uneasy. This aspect is reflected in each and every character in Mahabhrata too.
Karna was a popular king, an excellent warrior, obedient son, perfect husband, loving brother and ideal father and a committed friend. Despite of all his sufferings Karna had never compromised with his values such as commitment to his words, never returned an yachak empty handed. He had donated various astra-shastra which he had procured keeping in view the potential fight with Arjun on different occasions, knowingly that it was part of the strategy to weaken him against Arjun. Karna knew that Krishna was motivating Arjun to kill him against the rules of war but bowed his head to Shri Krishna with respect. Even on the deathbed, Karna donated his gold plated tooth on demand of financial assistance by a poor Brahmin.
It is true that Karna was very unfortunate and clearly on the wrong side of war. Had it not been so, it would have altered the course of history to an extent.
To best understand Karna, i urge you to read the classic novel “MRITYUNJAY” written by Shivaji Savant on the life of Karna – the great warrior and benevolent hero in the Indian history. Though the novel is dedicated to the Karna, it also highlights the important characters in the Mahabharat and socio- political frame of that time. NOT MANY BOOKS BRING A TEAR TO YOUR EYE BUT THIS ONE SURE DID TO ME AND IT WILL TO YOU TOO SIR.
Regards,
Smita
Posted by chiraan on 01/11/2009 at 16:37
I have answered this questions many times by now . Let me answer again differently .
Long before sawant wrote Mrutyunjay , bhasa has done it , mrutyunjay is by product .
These are delusive writings . let us analyse .
People feel . Karna has suffered , but the fact is he never suffered [ this psuedo sympathy has been created by distorted facts] . If sufferings is the cause of sympathy to Karna , then Pandavas have suffered more than Karna . But nobody sympathises .simply because , there is a feeling ‘oh these people are very capable ones , and also they have GOD by their side , so they dont require me or anyone else . But Karna has no one on his side poor fellow needs sympathy and I am also going to extend it ”
This is kind of saying I am going to do what GOD could not do , give my sympathies to one who is shunned by GOD . I call this foolish .[ Because even Karna was helped by Lord although in different form]
because , Karna had a very good and rich upbringing [ adhirath was no poor man , he was charioteer of emperor , a close confidante of emperor could not have been a poor man ]
He had love of both parents . Pandavas were born in exile brought up in forest . They lost father early .
Karna had good education despite odds [ who helped him Ofcourse lord parshuram ]
Karna was given Kingdom [ look at his fate given by GOD ]
pandavas were robed off their kingdom .
He was always in riches , pandavas were always in troubles
He was party to every rape arson and sin of Duryodhan
Pandavas were always abiding by Dharma
Arjun gave up his life while sticking to his words for a bramhin and at other times risked his life and even fought with INDra. never asked anything in return .
Karna turned away his own mother when her wishes conflicted his interest [ yet people say he never turned anyone down ]
Arjun always abided by his elder brother his master . karna always ditched his master [ gandharva episode , bheeshma episode viraat episode , swayamvar episode , he always fled the scene ] He gave to INDRA his kavach in return of SHAKTI [ this is not dana it is exchange ]
Now writing a book on Karna[ and shedding a tear on it] is like look I have done justice to a person who was denied a due place even by GOD . this is vipareet gyana . If GOD has not helped Karna than as a devotee i see a valid reason I dont revolt and challenge GOD’s verdict .
Posted by Niraj on 20/01/2009 at 18:45
The greatness of Karns charatcter has been sanctioned by Swami Vivekananda. There is a temple of Karna in a place called karnaprayag. It is on the way to Badrinath, on the confluence of two holy rivers Alaknanda and Pindar. Swami Vivekananda meditated here for eighteen days in this temple. Temples have formed of actresses also. But god realised men dont go there. Rishi Durvasa blessing to Kunti starts only on this note that she can invoke a desired deva and be a brilliant son. Hence all the other sons ie the Pandavas were also outstanding. Coming to his battle competency appreciate the fact that its Indra who took the initiative to come to him to take his Kavach. Karn didnt go to him a beg take my kavach and give me your shakti instead.
Posted by chiraan on 20/01/2009 at 19:12
is there any efficacy in sanction of a mortal . Does a mortal have any right to adjudicate any character ? if yes who has given it, has anybody seen or certified that one has realised God .
According to vedas there is no sin greater than meditating and thinking oneself as equivalent to God such people invariably attain hell.
There is a temple for rakshasas and duryodhana also , does that mean they all become right or heroes?
.Karna was no doubt very brave and heroic and competent archer but when it comes to comparision with Arjun he stands nowhere , neither in qualities and archery .
Moreover its not right to sing praises of those who side with evil , it is akin to endorsing evil ,which is straight doorway to hell.
The blog about Karna is meant to warn people that such an act of sympathising with Karna raises a serious issue of justice on part of God , and endorsing such thoughts is evil and against God Narayana . Lord is impartial and his justice is always correct.
Posted by Niraj on 15/05/2009 at 18:41
Swami Vivekananda was the man whom even the Americans acknoweldge as a great soul. And if he acknowledges the great ness of karna who are we to challange. With all due respect to Chiraans comment “Does a mortal have any right to adjudicate any character ? Going by that logic Chiraan and all of us are mortals and we have no right to give judgement to karna or for that matter anyones character. Coming to his second comment ” has anybody seen or certified that one has realised God .” Then no one can certify Krishna as God or an avtar and Arjun as the devotee.
Chiraans views , All those who have come to teach quote from vedas and their avatar is prewriiten in Vedas and Puranas ., krishna advent is a vedic lore . Nowhere I have heard Vivekananda’s name in Purana . What Vivekananda says is against Vedas , and truly no one has seen him realise God , As far as adjudicating Karna , vivekanada does not get right because Americans have accepted , vedas must accept , Chiraan the mortal’s speech is in unison with Vedas .Karna’s defiling has been done quite prior to my birth by great saints of INdia , whose births are mentioned in vedas and puranas”
His 3rd comment “Acording to vedas there is no sin greater than meditating and thinking oneself as equivalent to God such people invariably attain hell. ” Swami Vivekanda is said to be God realised ie attaining state of enlightenment like Buddha he neve claimed to be GOD. His third comment ie about the temple of Duryodhan – No saintly man goes there only ordinary tourists and lollipop eating children. Swami Vivekananda acknoweldes Duryodhan as evil.
To your good senses let me enlighten you Vivekananda’s theory is that of Advaita , it speaks of human as equivalent to GOD , and he meditated on himself as GOD ” get your facts right before venturing to comment , as nobody has seen him realize GOD or attain whatsoever , his verdict cannot be accepted
Posted by Niraj on 16/05/2009 at 09:38
To your good senses let me enlighten you Vivekananda’s theory is that of Advaita which speaks of human as equivalent to GOD or atleast the theory that God resides in everyony is quoted in an incident in mahabharata itself where Bhim refuses to jump over a monkey ( Hanuman in disguise ) and gives this same explanation and why its not correct to jump over living beings – not only humans and prefers to push his tail instead – of course he couldnt move that tail even an inch.
Chiraan’s views :
So your good senses have accepted that Vivekananda is Advaita . And now to enlighten you more , God exists in all the human is not Advaita . According to Advaita there is no human other than GOD . get your facts right and dont blabber on wrong assumptions .
regarding Bheema not jumping HAnuman , going by thta logic no war would have been possible because in war BHeema is seen to have jumped kicked and killed all the kauravas . He has even kicked duryodhan’s head in presence of all in the battlefield .
SO your claim that Bheema did not cross the tail because gOd existed is faulty ,
by the way Bheema and Hanuman are one and same inacrnations of VAYU .
Posted by Niraj on 16/05/2009 at 11:35
To enlighten you more, bheema and hanuman are not incarnations of Vayu but the sons of Vayu. practice what you preach ” get your facts right before venturing to comment ” this discussion is not about advaita but about Karna – was he evil or good.
Chiraan’s View
All the texts of RAMAYANA and MAHABHARATA declare HAnuman and Bheema as incarnation of VAYU go and read them before I give verses to prove and chide your remarks ., MAdhvacharya is also incarnation of VAYU .
Your vivekanada fad should be first cleared and hence the ADvaita ,now since you have agreed , now let me see what you have to say about karna .Decisively he was evil .All his acts points towards his evils .
without head and tail and qualification of whatsoever type people like you venture to enlighten , it is shameful . your statements show your poor understanding of epics . Even small children in India know Hanuman as windGOD .
Posted by chiraan on 16/05/2009 at 23:09
Niraj ,
you are raising same questions that has been already discussed at length in previous post ,
even with kavach kundal ON , Arjun defeated KARNA TWICE and BHEEMA also defeated KArna and snatched his kingdom .
So there is nothing special about that when it comes to Arjun and Bheema about KAvach and kundal , They had to be begged by INdra to keep its value , see the latest post on the site About nara and narayana . It explains why kavach and kundal were begged .
Just because it was begged it does not come in the way of superiority of Arju as even with them KArna was defeated by Arjun and more than once . Even petty Gandharva also defeated Karna with his Kavach and KUndal and captivated him. captivation imprisonment is shameful of KArna along with duryodhan , pity Arjun had to come to rescue them .
Posted by Niraj on 17/05/2009 at 16:21
Good day Sir
Its these recorded incidents of Karnas defeat
at the hands of Bhima Arjuna and gnadharvas
which I am challanging. Legendary director B.R Chopra
Mahabharat shows the other version of the gandharva
episode is that Karna was drunk and by the time he
got ready bhima and arjuna had rescued Duryodhan
legendary director Mr. Ramandand Sagar who had
consulted various sources show bhima did defeat Karna
on one ocassion but when Karna became the commander
in chief of the Kaurava army one by one all the Pandava
brother were defeated by him on day one and day 2
respectively. Lord Krishna himself saves Arjun from
the Nagastra and Vaishnav astra respectively. Indian
mythology is so vast that every incident has 2 or 3 versions
For example Drapadis swayamvara. One version says
that Karna was rejected by her because he was a
sutputra the other version says that he missed the
fishes eye by a small margin – this is just an example
to quote my point of differant versions of one particulatr
incident.
Regards
Niraj
Chiraan’s view : Thank you Shree Niraj , You have just highlighted our point that Mahabharata has been highly tampered , and authenticity has to be established before aaccepting any views , I have already given Views of Great saints as to How auhenticity has to be established . And How other texts and Puranas have to be also consulted in making a judgement .
When there is internal contradiction within the same text then it implies there is tampering . When the Text contradicts with tradition , then also it implies tampering. Director’s views cannot be taken seriously , Saint’s views , Scholarly views are important . Directors and writers are known to make commercial movies and dramatisation is necessay to make a earning and livig .
Saints and Scholars of this country have known to renunciate for the sake of TRUTH .
Plus LOgic also suggests that Karna had defaulted many times Dharma .
Look at the Krishna’s words when Karna is about to be Killed , He enumerates WHy Karna did not resort to Dharma on several occasions.
Karna was the main inspiration to Duryodhan in disrobing Draupadi and he insists that she go to Duryodhans’ house .
Is this not enough to certify him EVIL .
Karna is the ,main person who aks for the illicit way of Killing ABHIMANYU [ what was the neccessity]
Karna was the main person who inspires Duryodhan to wage war rather than give KIngdom back to PANDAVS .
These are main grave mistakes :[ He was also a main participant in captivitaing KRSIHNA during sandhi ]
smaller mistakes : Lie to GOD PARSHURAM
killing cow [gohatya]
Wishing for BHEESHMA’s death
Visiting Pandavs in Forest to tease them of poverty
Ditching Duryodhan a friend when he was in need , by refusing to enter war .
Resorting to Fight in the NIGHT .[ rules of war dont allow this ]
With so many illustrations
Can Karna be not termed EVIL .
Posted by Niraj on 18/05/2009 at 09:57
Respected Sir. What you say is true about
directors. They have to make a living
Your other statement is also very correct
the Mahabharata has been highly tampered with but this is a 2 edged
weapon. You may say its tampered to favour Karna, I may say its tampered to prove him a vain braggarat
BR Chopras t.v serail show that Karna does get defeated by Arjun in Virata Yuddha I may quote your statement
against directors and dissmiss it ie but I
myself admit it is a very popular version
ie Arjun defeating Karn at Virat. Ultimately
your 3rd statement is also very correct we
need the statement of a great saint or god
realised person whose word we can trust
to know the truth. In the mahabharat everyone has done something evil. Bhishma
forced 3 princess of Kashi to marry Vichitra
virya interrupting a swayamvar. he may have let Amba go but the other 2 were
denied the right of swayamvar. when a
womans self esteem is in question there
is no such thing as a 10% or 20% insult.
Its all 100 %. Drona also took had eklavyas thumb cut off which was rather barbaric. Infact drona was the commander in chief of the Kaurava army when leader of the chakravyooha when abhimanyu was slaughtered.
He refused Karna as a disciple on grounds
of caste discrimination Karna had no choice but to lie to Guru Parshuram because of this. Other wise his guru bhakti
was no less. He bore excruciating pain
when the insect bit him on his thigh so that
his guru could sleep peacefully. His gohatya was a mistake even King Dashratha killed shravan kumar by mistake
same for King Pandu. True he visited the Pandavs in Forest to tease them of poverty
but the pandavs with all due respects to them also never missed an oppurtunity to
tease him. Bhima insulted his father adiratha also in the dhanush competion.
He never ditched Duryodhan a friend when he was in need. He was well aware that Bhisma was a great warrior and when he is around no one can touch Duryodhan events proved him right. Bhishma was too hot to handle for the pandavas and finally Shikhandi was used to disarm him.
When Dronacharya was the commander and Fight in the NIGHT also took place. but yes he did support Draupadis vastraharan and Abhimanyus
death also which I acknowledge was not
right but the Pandavas also did use unfair means in the battle- admitted they did it
to protect dharma
Best Regards
Niraj
Posted by Sonu on 18/05/2009 at 16:02
Pandavas did not use unfair means in the battle. WHAT WAS THEIR UNFAIR MEANS?
Chapter 25. Arjuna Encounters Karna (Book 2 in the same book) pages 768 to 784
On page 781, “Karna wept in frustration. Seeing Arjuna near him he called, “O Partha, wait for a moment while I extract my wheel. Do no cherish entertained only by cowards. Brave and pious persons never aim their arrows at those who are without weapons. You are the bravest and most pious of all warriors. Excuse me for a moment, standing helpless as I am, I will soon stand again for battle. Remembering virtue and the codes of warfare, hold off your attack until then”.
“Hearing his agonized plea, Krishna smiled and replied, “It is fortunate indeed that you remember virtue, O Karna, men in distress almost always censure providence, forgetting their own evil deeds. Where, O Karna, was your virtue when Draupadi was brought weeping into the Kuru assembly? Where was it when Yudhisthira was robbed of his kingdom? When he asked for it to be returned, after spending his promised thirteen years in exile, did your virtue suggest that it be returned? Was it virtue that conspired to set fire to the wax house in Varanavata? Did virtue urge you to laughlying say to Draupadi, “O, lady, choose another husband?” “Was it that same virtue that ordered Dushashana to strip her”? “Was it the same virtue when you” and other brave heroes surrounded that boy Abhimanyu, did virtue enter your mind then”? “Karnas head fell and he made no reply”. Krishna continued “If it was virtue acting on all these occasions, then do not waste your time summoning it now. You wish us to practice piety today, but will not escape with your life.” “Karna could not respond. He trembled with anger.” Krishna ordered “O Arjuna, strike Karna down at once”.
In the end it is always GOOD over EVIL. What goes around, comes around. God sides with selfless devotees that are righteous.
Posted by Sonu on 18/05/2009 at 16:34
Niraj says the following to support Karna (sounds like excuses)
“He refused Karna as a disciple on grounds of caste discrimination Karna had no choice but to lie to Guru Parshuram”
“He never ditched Duryodhan a friend when he was in need.” (Referring to Karna).
That was Karna`s destiny by God, you only get what is yours (where law of karma plays a role), Karna should have been upfront about who he is. He told a lie as he was greedy for weapons. Putting that aside to think logically and outside the box, do you think it is appropriate to lie for example to get into any field or county you’re not really qualified for or entitled to? (where you would use the desired to become a threat to an enemy).
Karna`s friendship with Duryodhana started on a selfish motive, as mentioned with evidence. Karna did ditch his friend a number of times, as mentioned with evidence a number of times. Karna felt indebted to Duryodhana and had a motive of fighting with Arjuna, Karna knew already Kuru`s will be defeated, so why was Karna, who was meant to be and known as the best loyal friend, giving Duryodhana false hope in winning? True friends do not do that especially where death is concerned.
Posted by Sonu on 18/05/2009 at 15:54
Niraj said
“Its these recorded incidents of Karnas defeat at the hands of Bhima Arjuna and gnadharvas which I am challanging. Legendary director B.R Chopra Mahabharat shows the other version of the gandharva episode is that Karna was drunk and by the time he got ready bhima and arjuna had rescued Duryodhan”
I can see a version can be found online.
http://www.mypopkorn.com/tv/mahabharat—episode-152.html
So far I have found that there are various versions of the Gandharvas incident (one version I have already quoted from a book and presented on this page). Although having come across various versions, they all show that the Pandavas rescued the Kuru`s.
Question for Karna supporters: If Karna could not rescue Duryodhana. How is Karna the best hero and warrior and an extremely loyal friend? A true superior warrior and loyal friend is well prepped and present at all times for the needy and always win. If it is true that Karna was drunk, Hinduism does not even permit drinking.
In this day and age (and it is Kal Yug) even non Hindu’s and irreligious people are well prepped for their events, well months and weeks in advance. i.e. cricketers, footballers and so on and follow the codes of being in control of their mind and body.
Posted by Niraj on 18/05/2009 at 20:36
Good day Sir
Ref your comment I agree it was wrong for
karna to lie but it is also very unbecoming
of great Gurus like Dronacharya and
Parshuram to refuse students on grounds of caste.
Refusal of any education on any grounds whether on
caste or sex is not done. Ishwar chandra Vidya sagar
himself took a forefront in Indian education system when
he observed that girls were no allowed in school. As far as
duisguising as a brahmin is concerned to get their motive
done even Yudhisthira dusiguised as a brahmin same for Indra
while getting karnas kavach. Lord Krishna also duisguised himself
as a brahmin when he visited Jarasandha. Karna was not greedy for
weapons he had an ambition to become a great warrior. Nothing
wrong in that. Arjun too had this same desire.
Chiraan’s view : You are airing your view without going through the blog completely , these questions have been answered : let me repeat .
Drona did not refuse Karna or Ekalavya on the grounds of caste . If these castes were not fit for learning they would not have dared to go to the Head master of Royal school of MONARCH . Drona refused because only royals and princes were allowed to study in that school . It was an exclusive school and Ordinary citizens were not allowed .
HE himself taught Ekalavya later on he mount Raivat in a special way after the thumb episode .
Suta is a caste which tells purana and drives a chariots , when in war chariots are driven , arrows are shot at drivers also . See MAhabharta is full of illustration where a warrior kills horses of other chariots and charioteer also .
susharma shot three arrows at Krishna . etc …….
so a charioteer ,[suta] drives and also fights to save himself . SO sutas also learn archery and warfare . they are also taught . also some sutas teach puraanas . the whole mahabharata is recited and told by SUTA muni . Primary aim of a KIng in a society is to maintain VARNA ashram dharma , each section maintains their work is the chief duty of KING .
so no one turned Karna because he was suta . reda the blogs properly . Ekalavya was also nishad Prince .and not low caste . HE was also given education . Girls were alwas educated in INDIA , Look how Draupadi questions dharma in mAHABHARAT , without education is that possible ?
Look how priyamvada speaks to Dushyant in a very learned manner , all these point to the fact Girls were given education . In between due to Mughal era we have adapted those themes , you cannot confuse eras.
everybody disguised as BRamhin , but nobody gave their introduction as bramhins . WHen asked by JArasandha , Everyone revealed their Identity .
EVen in Draupadi swayamvar When KArna says , You must be bramhins mantra , or Ram himself or Indra , Arjun says I am none .
So no one lied when asked .
Karna clearly lied , that too before Lord ., That Lord who knows everything . If all he wanted was archery any school would have taught him that , he was greedy of astras , thats what marks a warrior apart from others , That’s why He approached DRONA , when denied he went to his Teacher . only desirous of astras .
Posted by SONU on 19/05/2009 at 01:44
Niraj said “Ref your comment I agree it was wrong for
karna to lie but it is also very unbecoming
of great Gurus like Dronacharya and
Parshuram to refuse students on grounds of caste.”
SO YOU THINK IT`S FINE TO LIE TO GET YOUR WAY? EVEN IF IT NEVER WAS MEANT TO BE FOR YOUR?
Posted by Niraj on 23/05/2009 at 09:13
Good morning Sonu. I admit that ultimately it was the Pandavs who
rescued Duryodhan. But please realise that any warrior however
great he may be is mortal and
cant be every where all the time.
He is not an astrologer or an antaryami. Bhisma too could not
rescue Satyavatis elder son Chirtangada from getting slain by
a gandharva of the same name.
nor he avenged his death. Coming
too his drinking scenario. Yudhishthira also had a fondness for gambling ( which is also a bad habit )
which Shakuni took advantage of
Best Regards
Niraj
Posted by Sonu on 23/05/2009 at 16:50
Good afternoon Niraj
I hope you realise a person who desires and considers themselves to be a great warrior is supposed to be well prepped at all times. To think outside the box, take a Doctor for an example; in order to treat emergency patients in critical situations, they are on call 24 hours a day, can an excuse not being well prepped (all the time) be used if i.e. if the Doctor fails all the time?
Karna felt he had a duty towards Duryodhan and felt indebted. However, in no circumstances Karna fulfilled his duty that he claimed to have.
Much analysis and supporting evidence has been provided on this page and on the following page.
http://chiraan.wordpress.com/2009/05/17/superiority-of-arjun-vis-a-vis-karna-a-debate/#comment-2666
There are facts about what actually happened with supporting evidence, not what could have/had/if/but/should have happened.
The Mahabharata translations have been discussed in greater detail on the above link, to increase the awareness of data integrity and consistency.
Kindly read the following link about Karna and how astrology played a role in his life.
http://chiraan.wordpress.com/2009/05/18/karna-the-astrologer/
Kindly read the following link
http://chiraan.wordpress.com/2009/05/18/lord-krishna-praises-karna/
All the articles by Guru Chiraan, all the books and other sources shows Karna did have plus points but more negative points, any why he was not successful as Arjuna and Bhima and the others following Dharma. Mahabharata teaches what one should do and what one should not do and how law of karma plays a big role. They are actual facts, so it is not being biased. Even the sources that are not authentic shows where Arjuna succeeded, Karna failed.
Drinking is not permitted in Hinduism, if what you claim is true, than I am sure you seen the consequence. Going back to gambling, Kuru`s cheated, they won, the Pandava`s did take part and you I am sure you know what the consequence was. Moral of the story is don’t do it, else the consequence is not a positive one, and the law of Karma is, one will have to pay for it. You must know how each and every person paid for it in the end.
Posted by Sonu on 24/05/2009 at 13:15
At the bottom of this page, Guru Chiraan has given a better response with facts of what actually happened, kindly read that.
Posted by BB on 10/09/2009 at 13:08
Is not hanuman incarnation of rudra? vayu only carried the flame to anjani which emerged from union of shiva and mohini?
Posted by anonymous on 06/09/2009 at 20:16
If Karna is that bad, why do you think Krishna gave his vishwaroopam to him? He was a good soul that’s why he was blessed with such a rare sight. Very few got to see it indeed. He was also bestowed moksham by lord.
I’m not trying to defend the character of karna. He was not a flawless man. Like every human he also had his own share of flaws. But I definitely don’t agree with all your points.
//He lied to God Parshurama that he is Brahmhin to learn//
Well he was told or in other words forced to lie(by duryodhan and co) because Parshurama had taken a vow that he will not cheat kshatriyas. When parushurama takes a nap on his lap a bee stung on his thigh. He will not try to move as it may disturb his guru’s sleep. It highlights the fact that he is a good character. But what did he get in return? Curses. He was ignorant. He did not know what fate has in store for him. Parushuram will come to know that he is a kshatriya as only kshatriyas have that kind of endurance. It is his fate that he should be cursed by Parushurama that he would forget all the skills he learnt from him at the crucial time of battle.
//When Drona refused to teach him , he went to Drona ’s Guru Shri Parshuram to learn the astras.//
Seriously, what else could he have done?! Just keep begging Drona to teach him?!
I really don’t see anything wrong on it. But he should not have lied that he is brahmin to learn from him.
//Karna accepts Friendship of Duryodhana only to oppose Arjun.( Lack of morals)//
It is human nature. Because he was humiliated by everyone. Duryodhan was the first person to support him. It was quite natural of him to accept his friendship. I don’t think he befriended duryodhan merely to oppose Arjun.
//When Father (Sun)advises him not to give kavach kundal to Indra , he disobeys Father and gives it away.//
It is not about disobeying. It is because he never says no to people who approach him.
//He had taken a vow that he would donate only till he kills Arjun//
I have never heard/read such a thing. Can you kindly provide any proof supporting it?
Posted by anonymous on 06/09/2009 at 21:22
Sorry, I actually meant Parshurama had taken a vow that he will not ‘teach’ kshatriyas. Typo!
Posted by chiraan on 07/09/2009 at 05:49
Kindy get your facts right , Was Bheeshma not Kshatriya , then how did Bheesha learn from Parshuram , Parshuram never vowed not to teah Kshatriya . Karna lied beacuse he wanted more astras.
Karna does not say no , this conclusion is illogical , Karna did say no to his mother when asked to stop WAR . Karna did say no to Krsihna when asked to switch sides , Karna did say no to Duryodhan on fighting war alongwith Bheeshma . Kindly read complete blog before jumping to write.
Posted by chiraan on 07/09/2009 at 05:53
Karna never got Vishwaroop darshan , there is no mention in mahabharata . Karna did not get moksha . Infact andavas have not yet got Moksha .
Dhritarashtra did get Vishwaroop Darshan , but we still say he is bad and root of the evil . Even Duryodhan went to swarga , but that does not make him good. Karna was not huamn , he was born to a devata . semi divine . so reacting to insult is not devata like quality , what Karna did was owing to his prarabdha which is condemnable. There is nothing wrong in calling bad a bad .
On 9/7/09, Chiraan S wrote: > > > Kindy get your facts right , Was Bheeshma not Kshatriya , then how did > Bheesha learn from Parshuram , Parshuram never vowed not to teah Kshatriya . > Karna lied beacuse he wanted more astras. > > Karna does not say no , this conclusion is illogical , Karna did say no to > his mother when asked to stop WAR . Karna did say no to Krsihna when asked > to switch sides , Karna did say no to Duryodhan on fighting war alongwith > Bheeshma . > Kindly read complete blog before jumping to write. > >
Posted by BB on 10/09/2009 at 13:16
Sir,
Dhritrashtra did not get vishvaroop darshan because he asked the divya drishti to be given to Sanjay, and Karna did not say no if someone came to ask for dakshiya immediately after his morning prayers. other times i am not sure
Barbareek did get the darshan as he was given the boon by krishna himself that he can see whatever happening on battlefield when beheaded by krishna because he decided to help weaker side.
Posted by Prabhakar on 14/03/2009 at 00:55
Sir,
I have not read mahabharath. However, i like it so much when compared to other epics. I like to know the truth as i have a great respect for lord krishna who stood by justice. However. i have never heard anyone be it in mahabharat serials (im sure they would have read and consulted great people) or even in other websites who have degraded the great karna like you. If its the real truth im ready to buy it. But, lets openly discuss and know how does one judge what is stated .. you may refer me to mahabharat written by a particular person (may be a great person) .. but there is a possiblity that the great person may have interpretted his views of the story and the characters involved. Unfortunately i dont think we have a copy of mahabharat written by the great saint vyas … the rest is by the other authors ( again with all due respects ) …. so how do we know the truth afterall i want to know it before i leave …. i hope you will be fair
Posted by chiraan on 15/03/2009 at 15:27
Dear Mr Prabhakar ,
First of all I must appreciate your sincerety in knowing the truth and giving it a try with a open discussion. Firstly to start with epic written By Vyasa is also supported by different puranas , so the author never mentions that its written by one great person so its acceptable and others are not. The facts presented in one epic should also be supported by other puranas and they should be above all in coherence with vedas.
Now each character i mahabharatha represents certain qualities and certain do’s and dont’s for a common man. According to Vyasa Mahabharatha is written in three types of languages [ symantics] These aspects are explained in Padma purana . The three types are 1. which has be taken as it is 2. which is to be taken with interpretation 3. where actual meaning as suggested must be rejected and inner meaning be taken.
for example if its written spit and excreta are sacred that means reference is to ganga and cow’s milk /urine and not to actual spit and excreta
Thus there are ten meaningS for mAHABHARATHA .
Karna represents the desire in mankind to achieve fame by siding with evil ,just because luck did not intervene at the right time.This is clearly not liked by God.
Karna was also a station to a demon suryavarman , all his evil acts are attributed to this demon. But as he was also incarnation of Sun , he did exhibit some good qualities , which were duly rewarded . God himself has rewarded him with education , boons , kavach kundal , undaunted opportunities. Instead of seeing his mercy He only brooded over his misfortunes and sided with the evil.
according to dharma , Going against the Krishna is the greatest Sin and having all other qualities are nullified before it.
Others like Bheeshma and Drona kripa they fight on behalf of Duryodhan only when Krishna instructs them to do so.
Drona being Bramhin is nott entitled to fight a war as per Dharma , but since Krishna orders him he sets aside Dharma [verbatim] and fights.
Whereas Karna even after Krsihna’s injunctions refuses to abide by God , and gives false pretext of promise to Duryodhan evil . Is there any weightage of promise to evil person more than God’s dictum . Okay was he loyal to his promise , no , he did not participate till Bheeshma fell. what if Kauravas had lost during Bheeshma’s senadhipatya [ can Karna be not held responsible for ditching Freind as well] His only intention was to be called the greatest [ to be just called without qualification] where as he never truly matched to that reputation . And only fighting against Arjuna could give him that opportunity , thus he flouted every terms and conditions to his advantage.
This is what every human does when he sees his ambitions failing. such acts are condemned.
Posted by kiran on 31/07/2009 at 08:23
hey chiran………………sorry to intrupt u…………….but hear the truth…………….do u know hw many times u hav taken breath exactly since ur birth………………..if u r not sure ………..then here this much more………….if u r not sure abt something u do……………….that tooo of a present………………….wat surety u hav for the past………………that 2 said by somone translated and passed on by generations…………….so dont ever put ur arguments saying tat………………so and so is said there or by somone……………so its true……………this is the same pblm with terrorists………….they say wat their holy book says is rgt…………..so all should follow it………………and again if u really want to know the past…………then u hav to traven in time to the past…………….if not accept the alterations or wrongs tat may occur………………………and abt karna………….he is grt in abilities……………..his only wrong was tat he was in the wrong side…………..and if to blame karna…………then first blame kunthi……………for giving him such a birth…………..then drona…..bhisma…………..and finally the …………..pandavas………….who always disgraced him……………so the only help he got was frm duryodhana…………..so he joined him…………..its always comment on others……………..but think wat wil b ur thoughts if u where karna………questioned ur meternity…………..disgraced by all………………think abt u in a class……………where the teacher…shws partiality……ur ideas r not considered even though goood…………..always teased by the fav of the teacher…………..think abt the anger u had………..and in mahabharat the biggest adharmi according to me is yudhistir,…………….wether sis, mother or wife…………..its the duty of man to protect her……………..but he used a women tat too his own wife as object to surender……………..had he not done tat…………..duryothan , karn or dusyasan would not hav insulted her…………….here this much more……………befor the worship 2 ur nation.,……………..bfor the worship 2 ur parants…………….coms the god……………..so by disobeying the god he has done adharma…………….and god is not simply krishna…………he is every where……………….
Posted by Prabhakar on 15/03/2009 at 23:36
i dont know what to say …. suddenly what i beleived has been put down by facts for which im not able to counter … not just me, people around me and with those whom i have discussed karna have held him in high regard …. but one thing is that i beleive in supreme power very much and im 200 % sure that he’ll somehow give me a clarification about this topic somewhere down the line …. i have accepted what you have said to a certain extent though its bitter
Posted by Hariprasad on 23/03/2009 at 16:16
Namaskara Sri Prabhakar and Sri Chiraan,
My two cents on this topic.
Greatness of a warrior cannot be judged merely based on ability to fight. Otherwise, even Duryodhana can be termed a great soul. Karna fails on multiple counts.
1) Complete subservience and surrender to GOD : Krishna invites Karna to join the Pandavas multiple times, and Karna refuses every single time. Contrast this to what Bhima and Yudhishthira do, during the Ashwathama-elephant-death-announcement episode. Karna also lies to Parashurama. There is no bigger sin than what he has done.
2) Respect to elders : Karna hates Bhishma, the Pitamaha of the entire dynasty. He refuses to fight till Bhishma is in the battlefield, effectively wishing for his death. Not at all acceptable. Contrast this with the Pandavas who take Bhishma’s permission to kill him! even though he is on the enemy’s side.
3) Respect to women : Karna uses the worst possible language towards Draupadi during the Vastrapaharana episode. Even Vikarna, Duryodhana’s brother, opposes it (albeit just for showing off). But Karna does not just NOT oppose it, he actively encourages and participates in the worst of sins. Contrast this with the Jayadratha episode in the forest when Yudhishthira asks Bhima to let Jayadratha go, because he is the husband of their sister (Dushala).
4) Fairness in war : Karna is one of the main plotters in the downfall of Abhimanyu, a very young warrior, and he knows that Abhimanyu is his brother’s son.
5) Dharma : There is not even one significant episode in the entire Mahabharata when Karna, being such a close friend, advises Duryodhana against cheating Pandavas. He is an active and willing participant every single time.
There are many other aspects about the fallacies of Karna that Sri Chiraan has highlighted very well in his writeup.
Regards, Hari
Posted by chiraan on 24/03/2009 at 19:25
Namaskar shri Hariprasad,
Thank you for the enlightening 5 points.
I agree with you mere defeat an win does not classify someone into great or be denigrate .
But By far this topic has been most commented post of mine , I am not able to publish scores of comments containing all possible expletives against me on this . I would have loved to publish them as well but for leaving a distaste.
Most of the people are carried away by the fact that Arjun was saved by the God during the Nag astra of Karna [ else his story would have ended and karna would have been easily the greatest, but for Srikrishna !!!] thisthinking is faulty because in a battle its only lord who saves warriors and accords them win or loss or death. so it cannot be concluded that Karna had actually overcome NEARLY Krishna’s wishes [ through will power although everything was against him] proved a better.
This thinking highlights human’s wish to exceed God and his designs to prove self mettle. this is greatest sin. sympathisisng Karna is an act of nurturing such desires. Hence my criticism is very harsh. You have also put up certain issues which bringsforth this point rather strongly.
Karna is also subservient to Krishna as a soul. his acts were only to bolster the confidence of Duryodhan to wage a war.
Karna was killed by unfair means. ie unarmed ,Arjun was made to Kill Karna [ suggesting Karna could not be killed in a straight fight ] wrong , its the great law of Karma here God has displayed.
As sugreeva Karna had got Killed Vali[ arjun] from behind by Lord Ram. for the sake of kingdom( knowing that he was his brother). Lord Krishna [Ram] gave it back to him as a brother again killed the other for the sake of kingdom from behind. thus runanubandha ended between the two.
Karna’s character is a lesson for many dont’s for the humans . This is what an a ttempt to highlight.
Thanks once again for the highlights.
Posted by ada on 26/04/2009 at 00:13
This is my last post. I’am sorry for you.
Posted by chiraan on 26/04/2009 at 09:10
Shri ADA ,
Kindly view the facts about ARjun having fought all the celestials and INdra and having defeated them
……………………………………..extract from Khandav dahan parva ……………………………………………
Then Sakra the lord of the celestials, riding on his white elephant, rushed at those heroes, and taking up his thunderbolt which could never go in vain, hurled it with great force. And the slayer of Asuras said unto the gods, ‘These two are slain.’ Beholding the fierce thunderbolt about to be hurled
p. 444
by their chief, the celestials all took up their respective weapons. Yama, O king, took up the death-dealing mace, and Kuvera his spiked club, and Varuna his noose and beautiful missile. And Skanda (Kartikeya) took up his long lance and stood motionless like the mountain of Meru. The Aswins ………………….
But Arjuna and Krishna, fearless and invincible in battle, beholding Sakra and the other celestials prepared for fight, calmly waited, bows in hands. Skilled in battle, those heroes in wrath assailed the advancing host of celestials with their own thunderlike arrows. The celestials repeatedly routed by Krishna and Arjuna, at last left the field of battle for fear and sought the protection of Indra. The Munis who were witnessing the battle from the skies, beholding the celestials defeated by Madhava and Arjuna, were filled with wonder. Sakra also repeatedly witnessing their prowess in battle, became exceedingly gratified, and once more rushed to the assault.
Arjuna, in great wrath, dispelled with his arrows that thick shower. Then he of a hundred sacrifices beholding that shower baffled, once more caused a thicker shower of stones. But the son of the chastiser of Paka (viz., Arjuna) gratified his father by baffling that shower also with his swift arrows
http://www.mahabharataonline.com/translation/mahabharata_01230.php
…………………………………………………………………..End of extract ………………………………………………………………..
Posted by ada on 26/04/2009 at 00:19
Sir I hope you are happy in life and not as frustated as you come out in the posts. Your character remisds me of Dhrithrashtra, who refused to see the truth in the eye. Who twisted facts to suit his own purpose, who was like an ostritch with his head in sand, I’am sorry for you.
Posted by chiraan on 26/04/2009 at 06:27
Let me assure you Devotees of Bheemasen are never frustrated in life , Only enemies of Bheemasen , like Karna and Dhritarashtra always face frustration and failures . This post is again a reminder to all those frustrated people and also rans ,who secretly nurture a admiration for Karna thus exhibiting slight hate towards Pandavas and krishna , Good days and success are not for thee . Only those who pray and abide by BHeemasen and walk the path showed by him in Mahabharata will always achieve success.And Moksha is also reserved for them , Srimadanand teertha , the very Vayu [ Hanuma Bheema Madhva ] has given assurance of this .
Posted by Raj Shekhar on 29/04/2009 at 16:18
I want to put the facts for karna mentality and and his sacrifices:
1. He had great love for Arjun after he came to know this fact. otherwise he could have revealed the fact at his last time.
chiraans answer : KNowingly killing brothers son by deciet [ ABHIMANYU WAS PRIMARILY KILLED BY KARNA UNFAIRLY TEAMED UP WITH DURYODHANA , this was the most brutal illegal [ adharmik ] unfair killing of a brother’s son ] do people who love dear and near act in this way ;
2. He had great love to his mother though she never accepted him as son in public.
Kunti ccame to him to spare Arjun, knowing this he understood that there was no need of him on this earth now and his life was a futile object, but he could not commit suicide out of this.
Chiraan’s answer : Committing suicide would have been a better option than disappointing a mother , history is full of heros who have given their lives for the sake of mother’s words , what kind of hero is this who turned away his mother without granting her what she wished for [ he could give dana to his mother as well and that would have proved his love for Arjun ]
4. He knowingly donated his Teeth, Kavach kundal and many more knowing the fact it would be detrimental for him one day.
CHiraans’ answer : It has been already proved , karn was no better even with kavach kundal , with all that teeth and kundal he had lost his kingdom to BHeemasena [ what more detrimental could he expect than loss of kingdom and honour ]
5. He was so polite that he never let any body to turn down.
Chiraans’ answer : your own point 3 says he has turned down his mother , [what is the use of a person who fulfills other's material wishes and turns down mother and God himself and disrespects Father ]
5. Lord krishna himself said that Karna was greater warrior and donor.This was proved at various occasion.
Chiraan’s answer : Nobody disputed he was not a warrior, a good one at that , but not better than Arjun , not invincible as BHeemsen . There is no occasion where this could be proved .
7. he never liked Shanuni ploy and tricks and always prohibited Duryodhan to follow .
chiraan’s answer: Not a single incident in mahabharatha where Karna has objected to shakuni or duryodhana
8. He knew duryodhana was desparate to kill Arjun, but during Ghatotkach war, he could have easily refused to kill Ghatokach had he so burning desire to kill Arjun.
Chiraan’s answer : HAd he not used shakti , Ghatotkach himself would have killed them all , because the fight had taken place in the night and rakshasas are very powerful in the night . So he would never had got opportunity to face Arjun . Even Duryodhan gives this same logic to use shakti .
9. Bhishma knowingly did not take him by his side in the battle as it would have been heavier for Arjun.Bhishma revealed this later to Karna and karna accepted it with sincerety.
CHiraans’ answer : Thrice in the life Arjun defeated Bheeshma and Karna and all others put together singlehandedly without army , so this time with complete army , it would not have been any different .
10. Arjun always used to call him Soot pootra which Krishna alays objected. This was done at several occasion.
chiraan’s answer:
HE was son of Adhiratha [ Suta]as known to all , so what is wrong in calling him sutaputra . this is not a derogatory term , all those born to kshatriya father and bramhin mother are knowm as suta , suta is a very high caste and all sarathi[ charioteer {driver}] were from suta caste only .
11.Karna only mistake was to kill Abhimanu ,however ,this also can be justified that by that time war was in so intense stage and many cheats were also committed by pandavas.
Chiraan’s answer : Infact before killing ABhimanyu no cheating was done it all started after that . A good person never becomes victim of circumstances , they maintain resilience under intense pressure , its only average person who lets his guard down in pressure and then tries to justify it with stories.
12. If war had been so easy to win, Krishna would not had suggested so many tricks. It was required .
Chiraan’s answer : War was a means to bring downfall of Duryodhan and also a lesson for many along the way , had Bheemasena been born the eldest he would have finished Duryodhan in the beginning itself , Its the good fate of kauravas and wish of Krishna that Mahabharath war should go on for 18 days , these survived that long , Bheem had capacity to end them on day one . Krishna leela cannot be construed as strength of evil .
13. Nagastra could have been used two time by karna ,but he refused to do so.Why, because he knew ,this time Arjun might be killed.
Chiraan’s Answer : Karna knew , he could have been saved again by Krishna because lord was determined to do so . Secondly it was not nagastra , it was takshak’s son sitting on the arrow to kill Arjun , had it killed the credit would have gone to takshak’s son and not to Karna . but in desperation Karna also resorted to use such filthy means ,[ its akin to two people fighting at the same time with one person from behind ]
14. Karna knew his fate, When Lord Krishna offered him Kingdom to join pandavas, it was not his rudeness ,rather a gesture to his friendship which was indebted by Duryodhana and one should learn a lesson from this.If you consider it wrong than ,Bhishma, Drona, Sanjay ,Laxman all are wrong.
Chiraans’ answer : only evil befriends evil , No where it is said that bheeshma , drona , and Sanjay were
right . They were wrong from the Dharma point of view .
Karna should have been more indebted to Yudhisthir because after his kingdom was snatched b y Bheem , he was allowed to rule by just paying taxes and accepting subservience to Yudhisthir , which Karna did . Now who is master of Karna , Duryodhan or Yudhisthir , where his loyalty should be ? but evil as he was , on the first opportunity available , he Joined Duryodhan to kill Arjun . his aim was to Kill Arjun so that he can be called the best , which he never was ; that was his mistake , he overestimated himself and met his fate;
What lesson is to be leant here ? that one must side with terrorist[ atataayi] against humanity for the sake of friendship , Duryodhan is declared atataayi in Mahabharata by Vyasa ,krishna and Arjun .!
15. it was Draupadi who called him sootpootra and humiliated him first.
chiraan’s answer :Again Soota is pratiloma caste , Swayamvar was only for Kshatriyas and above and not for others . So no cultured woman would flout the norm , and it was a swayamvar , meant to wed the one she Likes and not anyone . So there’s no insult here .
Finally again raising same question again and again , shows you have not read the discussion and jumped to write , it shows pure dogmatism , illogical and unfound loyalties towards unfair and unjust ,despit having proved with facts the superiority of Arjun and Bheem in particular , this argument of yours was totally lacking tooth and TRUTH .
Posted by chiraan on 30/04/2009 at 01:00
sonu said ,
Naturally people have different views; however I cannot tolerate to see Guruji Chiraan being spoken to insolently over straightforward truths highlighted in the article.
Everybody has a combination of good qualities/skills and bad qualities/skills. To reiterate Chiraanji`s point, only thinking about the good points does not make someone a great soul especially when it was for selfish purposes.
It is crystal clear why Lord Krishna sided with the Pandavas and not people like Karna. What part of ‘in the end it is always good over evil and God supports the people on the right path’ is difficult to understand? lessons should be learnt from this. This article is not biased for any selfish motive whatsoever. If you read the other articles in this blog or do your own research, some of the Pandavas paid for their bad karma. Mahabharata teaches a lot from the God himself.
‘Tricks’? God should not be insulted; Lord Krishna has no interest playing tricks for the fun of it, favouritism and selfish motives. law of karma is one pays for their karma (good or bad). God has ways and should be understood only in a benevolent auspicious way, especially if one does not accept the truth, does not try to achieve the aim of life and not willing to surrender onto God.
This following is a general statement: what you are taught and believe afterwards are two different things, and there is nothing wrong with questioning in a civilised way. However to an extent it certainly reveals a true reflection of yourself.
Posted by chiraan on 30/04/2009 at 01:18
Somewhere in a praise for Karna , is a hidden agenda of belitteling Arjun’s achievement , This is what is strongly objected in my arguments . I or for that matter nobody minds giving consolation prize to the Warrior Karna , but one cannot raise him to the level of invincibility . Even Karna got his prowess from God Parashuram who is not different from Krishna ,but success he gave it to Arjun , this blog is explaining reasons for it .
Again People have qualms about Arjun’s success , they brush it off as a extreme blessings of Krishna on the other hand Karna is supposed to have fought without Krishna’s blessings and yet shone .
This smells of the philosophy giving some independence to soul [ Karna and Arjun] in their Karma and achievements . There is a small garva on part of soul here [ the Vadi, the adversaries ] , THEY ARE THE DOER ie KARNA & ARJUN ARE THE DOER . & KRISHNA IS THE ASSISTING FORCE .
I am totally against it ; Hence the harsh criticism , Jeeva is not independent ,his actions are primarily inspired by GOD . And only his wholehearted commitment to GOD leads to success like ARJUN . BUT if you think you are independent and have unparallel qualities and dare to go AGAINST GOD and his wishes only to showand prove your qualities, you fail miserably and also fall pray to misfortunes. BOTH SUCCESS AND FAILURE ARE GIVEN BY GOD AND UNDER HIS CONTROL . THE GYANI DOES NOT WORRY ABOUT IT ,THEY WORRY ONLY ABOUT BHAKTI TOWARDS GOD AND SERVICE TO HIM .
when majority fail they feel like Karna and feel solace in taking refuge to excuses and blame God for the failure and taunt the success of winner . This is not a good quality .
In Telugu there is saying “Andani Draksha pullana” it is a case of Khatte ANGUR ;
If one wants to be a clear winner then oe must be like ARjun , pious , dedicated and and whole heartedly submitted to Krishna .
Once when Arjun was tired , He slept on the thighs of Krishna . Narada came by and asked him what makes him so attached to PARTHA , then KRishna asks Narada to take a closer look at the Arjun , when Narada examines closely , even the breath of ARjun coms out muttering ” Krishna Krishna ” . So how can God leave such a noble soul unprotected and unpraised . Success of Arjun is result of undaunted bhakti in Krishna .
One should not undermine this and even a comparision to someone very very inferior to Arjun is a sin .
Posted by chiraan on 30/04/2009 at 12:07
sonu said,
Guruji Chiraan, you are right with no doubt. It is a real concern to see the teachings from the Lord are not accepted. This creates further complexity and twisted beliefs in Hinduism created by people themselves. This will lead to people failing and furthermore poses a question on faith and devotion. It reduces the chances of achieving the aim of life and passing down the appropriate teachings.
For those who find Hinduism and Gods message complex or unwilling to accept the truth:
God should not be insulted and referred to as biased. Karna should not be regarded equal to or greater than God or Arjun.
From a psychological point of view, there is contradicting information and hidden truth for the reason that people have created hypothesis themselves because it’s representation (could be of oneself) and is socially learnt. This explains how people think and behave. It is these acquired beliefs that cause people to pigeonhole the truth.
We are lucky this blog presents the accurate information and clears any doubts and misinterpretation. There is no selflish motive by Guru Chiraanji at all.
Pandavas were devoted to God selflessly and respected their Mother and elders, had good manners, values and principles and the list goes on.
In the nicest possible way, it is Good over Evil, and God will side with those who are on the right path of life and has selfless devotion.
Posted by chiraan on 01/05/2009 at 01:50
Few more extracts from Mahabharatha depicting Karna’s defeat in the hands of SATYAKI – the disciple of ARJUN and ABhimanyu – the son of ARJUN ;
………………………………..extract DRona Parva ……………………
[SATYAKI] Sini’s grandson also, of splendour equal to that of Indra himself, taking up another bow pierced Suta’s son with four and sixty shafts and roared like a lion. And cutting off Karna’s bow with a couple of well-shot shafts, he once more pierced Karna on the arms and the chest with three arrows. The king Duryodhana, and Drona and Jayadratha, rescued Karna from the Satyaki-ocean, as the former was about to sink into it.
Then Abhimanyu, excessively pierced by those great bowmen with their straight shafts, shot shafts at Karna which was capable of piercing through every armour and body. That shaft, piercing through Karna’s coat of mail and then his body, entered the earth like a snake piercing through an anthill. Deeply pierced, Karna felt great pain and became perfectly helpless. Indeed, Karna began to tremble in that battle like a hill during an earthquake.
With his shafts whetted on stone and furnished with sharp points, the son of Arjuna, cutting off the bows of many heroic warriors, began to afflict Karna in return. With shafts resembling snakes of virulent poison and shot from his bow drawn to a circle, Abhimanyu quickly cut off the umbrella, standard, the charioteer, and the steeds of Karna, smiling the while. Karna then shot five straight arrows at Abhimanyu. The son of Phalguna, however, received them fearlessly. Endued with great valour and courage, the latter then, in a moment, with only a single arrow, cut off Karna’s bow and standard and caused them to drop down on the ground. Beholding Karna in such distress, his younger brother, drawing the bow with great force, speedily proceeded against the son of Subhadra. The Parthas then, and their followers uttered loud shouts and beat their musical instruments and applauded the son of Subhadra [for his heroism].’”
. Meanwhile, the son of Subhadra, causing Karna by means of his arrows to turn away from the field, quickly rushed against the other great bowmen. Then Abhimanyu of fierce energy and great fame, filled with wrath, broke that host of diverse forces abounding with elephants and steeds and cars and infantry. As regards Karna, afflicted by Abhimanyu with countless shafts, he fled away from the field borne by swift steeds.
…………………………………END of EXTRACT …………………………….
how many more defeats are required to declare a warrior as inferior and on the other hand there is no single incident where ARJUN is seen to be defeated or fleeing the battle .
Sane and logical people should by now have understood that purport which this blog is intended at . It should rest for once that Karna was no equivalent to ARJUN [ HE was defeated by his disciples and even son ] .
Posted by Surya on 12/05/2009 at 16:59
Let me give some counter points to support Karna
1) KNowingly killing brothers son by deciet [ ABHIMANYU WAS PRIMARILY KILLED BY KARNA UNFAIRLY TEAMED UP WITH DURYODHANA , this was the most brutal illegal [ adharmik ] unfair killing of a brother’s son ] do people who love dear and near act in this way ;
Response: According to Gita, one has the responsibility to carry out his dharma, even if that entails fighting and killing his own grand parents. Then what is wrong in killing brother’s son in a battle? Abhimanyu fought with the Pandavas and naturally Karna had to kill him. Despite knowing that he’ll win everlasting glory by just abandoning his benefactor (Duryodhan) and joining his siblings, he never did that. He was steadfast in his dharma – he fought to protect his friend till his last breath. Nakula killed his brother’s son as well (Karna’s son). Despite this, Karna spared the life of Nakula.
It was Arjun who started the deceit, by killing unarmed Bhishma by hiding behind Shikhandi. The rules had already been broken by Arjun. Then why should Karna follow the rules?
Chiraan’s Answer : The whole debate is Karna was not waging a dharma Yuddha ,it was pandavas who were waging Dharma Yuddha .
There is nothing wrong in killing the brother’s son in a straight battle , but cutting his bow and arrow from behind and before he takes up his bow , simulataneously four other warriors attacking him with arrows and weapons is adharma and it does not befit Karna to disarm a small warrior from behind This is no Dharma . This he did because he was defeated ina straight fight by Abhimanyu [ read my previous post ] , this made him jealous of abhimanyu and resort to adharma . and not to save duryodhan or carry out duty .
Reagarding Arjun killing Bheeshma , Bheeshma had resorted to Shastra sanyas , Dharma allows one to kill the person who has shed his weapons and decided to die on the battlefield . And Arjun killed Bheeshma from front alerting him of his astra .
unlike Karna who has shot from behind and cut off the Abhimanyu’s arrow . Arjun had also sought permission from Bheeshma to carry out the neccessary so it is not deciet . Interpretation of Dharma cannot be such that evil is set about to get anything for his selfish end and greats when they resort to Dharma as instructed by GOD , you try to call it as cheat . strange is your logic raising doubts over your credentials .
2)Committing suicide would have been a better option than disappointing a mother , history is full of heros who have given their lives for the sake of mother’s words , what kind of hero is this who turned away his mother without granting her what she wished for .
Response: History is full of heroines too who have given their lives for the sake of their children. But what did this mother do? She abandoned her first born by throwing him into Ganga. This son grew up as a Sootha, enduring all the insults. Never did this mother recognize him or give him any respite from the insults that he had to endure. Even during the tournament organized by guru Drona, when everyone insulted Karna as “Sooth puthra”, Kunti never came to his rescue. This extremely selfish woman came to Karna only when she realized that the lives of her other sons are at stake. Still Karna magnanimously accepted her wishes as best as he could. Anyone other than Karna would have spat on the face of such a selfish mother.
Chiraan:
Kunti had immediately got Karna by Surya .SHe did not carry him for Nine months . So AS Sun is a Deity and she had ensured that he was pratected by SUN and also she aske for KAvach and Kundal as a boon for the child . Infact she is resposible for what Karna boasted all along for KAVACH KUNDAL . had she not asked boon karna would have beeneaten by wild aquatic animals . She ensured his safety from a deity who is visble in the heavens . what else women as mother can do .
Again let me tell you calling somebody sootaputra is not a insult . As in olden days everyone was called so all charioteers were called so. for ex. A bramhin is addressed as ” HEY DWIJ ” a Kshatriya is addressed as ” HEY ARYA ” or ” HEy VRISHABH/arsh ” ” Vaishya is addresses as ” HEy Shreshthi / vaishya /vanik ” etc similarly a suta who is higher than kshatriya and Vaishya in guna /qualities were employed as cooks in bramhin and Kshatriya families , and charioteers or as ministers . they were addresed as ” Hey Suta” what’s derogatory in this ? You are trying to callibrate these days with Mahabharatha era which is illogical . So Karna did not face insult by such calls , it was norm of the day .
The one who gifted him kavach , he should have been ever indebted to such mother . She was a queen and recognisisng him would be akin to puting KIngdom at shame . [ If karna can do thousand mistakes and you justify for a Duryodhan , then KUNTI sacrificing a son's recognition for the sake of her kingdom ' people praja , is more greater , how can you term her as selfish ]
3) It has been already proved , karn was no better even with kavach kundal , with all that teeth and kundal he had lost his kingdom to BHeemasena
Response: Could you please quote the relevant passage where Karna loses kingdom to Bheemasena?
chiraan
First uderstand RAAJ SUYA YAGNYA IS TERMED COMPLETE ONLY WHEN ALL THE KING’S ARE WON , BHEEMA HAD GONE TO ANGA AND WON HIM . read those passages of Raajsuya parva .
4) Nobody disputed he was not a warrior, a good one at that , but not better than Arjun , not invincible as BHeemsen . There is no occasion where this could be proved .
Response: If Arjun was better than Karna, then why did Indra beg Karna for his Armor and earring? If Arjun was better than Karna, then why did Arjun have to kill Karna when he was unarmed, helpless and trying to drag his chariot out of the earth?
chiraan
I will write a post today separately as to why Indra had to beg kavach kundal .kindly read it .Killing Karna from behind is the law of karma , as karna [ sugreeva had got killed VAli from behind with the help of RAM/Krishna ] so Vali[ Arjun ] killed him unarmed with the help of RAM/KRISHNA ]
5)Not a single incident in mahabharatha where Karna has objected to shakuni or duryodhana
Response: Karna was always against Shakuni’s plan of dice and other treacharies. He always exhorted Duryodhan to fight against the Pandavas and win rather than using deceit.
chiraan
SHow me where Karna objected to SHakuni in MAhabharata
6)HAd he not used shakti , Ghatotkach himself would have killed them all , because the fight had taken place in the night and rakshasas are very powerful in the night . So he would never had got opportunity to face Arjun . Even Duryodhan gives this same logic to use shakti .
Response: Possible. We’re comparing Karna with Arjun (human beings), not a demon – Ghatokach.
Chiraan:
Very nice atleast Karna’s defeats and incapabilities are slowly being accepted , Ghatotkach was a inferior warrior to Arjun , Satyaki was inferior , Abhimanyu was also inferior yet Karna lost to all these , i have quoted from MAhabhrata !
so if one has lost to chela /shishya then GURU can automatically win over .
7)Thrice in the life Arjun defeated Bheeshma and Karna and all others put together singlehandedly without army , so this time with complete army , it would not have been any different .
Response: That’s entirely different. On earlier occasions either Arjun was in disguise or Karna/Bhishma/Drona had not been prepared. They had been expecting to fight some trivial warriors, but they encountered Arjuna. To fight with a great warrior like Arjuna, anybody has to be well prepared with their celestial weapons. And when they came prepared, all three of them – Karna, Drona & Bhishma routed Arjuna.
Chiraan :
HE was son of Adhiratha [ Suta]as known to all , so what is wrong in calling him sutaputra . this is not a derogatory term , all those born to kshatriya father and bramhin mother are knowm as suta , suta is a very high caste and all sarathi[ charioteer {driver}] were from suta caste only .
So you are suggesting a great warrior is one who can lose if he does not know his opponent . and Yet be called as greatest because he had no knowledge who his opponent was . this is by far silliest support i could ever have imagined for KARNA .
Trouble never comes giving invitation and introduction , a great warrior is one who is always prepared and wins .
Response: So will you call our ex president K.R Narayanan “Shoodra”, using the same logic? A warrior should be judged by his skills, not his birth.
Chiraan:
EVEn Sutas were takens as warriors in war . All devayanis son’s through YAYATI were suta yet they rule by the name Haihayas . what’s derogatory in that . LEt me explain Do uppercaste people feel insulted when you call them by name reddy or gaouda etc . these are caste and they are proud of it that they have kept it as surnames . Do you find someone getting insulted by being called “sarma ,yadav raju ” etc . similarly “suta” is a very high caste two points greater than Kshatriyas . There is falacy created by films and tv that Karna and ekalavya were low caste or underpriviliged .
If driving chariot was an inferior ” JOB” then KRISHNA ,SATYAKI , SHALYA ,SUBHADRA ,SATYABHAMA, ” would not have taken up this job . Its a highly skilled job . SUTA was not a untouchable . SUta is employed as a cook in many houses of bramhins and KINGS . get your facts right .
Shri K R NARAYANAN belonged to reserved community as declared by the constitution . The term backward is modern concoction and convenience for the politics of VOTE BANK . Backward /SC /ST are not sudras . they are tribal castes . GEt your facts right again .
9) Infact before killing ABhimanyu no cheating was done it all started after that . A good person never becomes victim of circumstances , they maintain resilience under intense pressure , its only average person who lets his guard down in pressure and then tries to justify it with stories.
Response: Wrong. Arjun used much worse deceit to defeat Bhishma prior to Abhimanyu’s death. In case of Abhimanyu, Arjuna got a taste of his own medicine, albeit in a much lower dose.
Chiraan :
his has been answered .
10) Karna knew , he could have been saved again by Krishna because lord was determined to do so . Secondly it was not nagastra , it was takshak’s son sitting on the arrow to kill Arjun , had it killed the credit would have gone to takshak’s son and not to Karna . but in desperation Karna also resorted to use such filthy means ,[ its akin to two people fighting at the same time with one person from behind
Response: So you know and agree that Arjuna was saved not by his skills, rather by God's grace. This itself proves that Karna was a much superior warrior. Secondly, it was nagastra, not takshak's son that could achieve the feat. Because, when Karna refused to lauch takshak's son the second time, he lauched himself like an arrow on Arjuna trying to kill him. But Arjuna split him into three pieces using his arrows. This itself proves that it was Karna's prowness, not takshak's son that was capable of killing Arjuna.
Chiraan
Everybody in the battle is saved or Killed by KRISHNA only , Here it was Takshak's son as he had escaped during Khandav dahan , he had vowed to kill ARJUN and had a boon to do so by INDRA . so first attempt Arjun could not face him as INDRA's boon would go waste . KRsihna saved . Once boon is honoured , Second time Takshak is a opponent and hence was cut into three pieces .It was not nagastra . Nagastra is one induced by NAga mantra of vasuki /takshak etc . when they themselves were defeated by Arjun in khandav dahan their mantras could not do anything to him .
11)only evil befriends evil , No where it is said that bheeshma , drona , and Sanjay were right . They were wrong from the Dharma point of view .
Response: The whole blame for Duryodhana befriending Karna goes to Kunti and Krishna. Both of them knew that Karna was the eldest son of Kunti and the incumbant king of Hastinapur. But neither of them revealed it to him even when he was insulted and humiliated based on his low birth. Karna had every right to be indignated. In the tournament, he surpassed the skills of Arjuna, but still he was humiliated by all the elders by pointing to his caste. At that time he knew nothing about Duryodhana's evil designs against the pandavas. Duryodhana was the only one that was available to praise Karna and make his eligible to compete with Arjun by offering him the throne of Anga. And Karna was indebted to Duryodhana, which he paid with his life. Had Kunti recognized Karna atleast during the tournament when he was insulted and humiliated, none of this would have happened.
CHiraan :
EVEN if Kunti had recognised , KArna would not become KING as he is not PAndu Putra . Hastinapur could be only ruled by king 's eldest son ; PAndu was the KIng , KARNA Was born before marriage and hence could not be his son . Because he surpassed the skills of Atjuna by the boon of Parashuram , he was made King of ANGA and nobody objected , if he was low born the whole public , praja and rajya would have revolted , as he was of high caste suta , everybody accepted him as King . You mean to say BHEESHMA AND DRONA and other greats were fools to have accepted him . His birth and qualities were duly taken into consideration . What more could Lord have done for him . what more could Kunti had wished for him . He shined[shone] in the competition because , of KUntii’s boon kavach kundal and Krishna [ parshuraam's ] boon . So Kunti and Krishna are to be praised and not blamed . get your facts right again .
12)Again Soota is pratiloma caste , Swayamvar was only for Kshatriyas and above and not for others . So no cultured woman would flout the norm , and it was a swayamvar , meant to wed the one she Likes and not anyone . So there’s no insult here .
Response:As I described above, calling a great warrior and the King of Anga by this epithet is a grave curse. It is like calling KR Narayanan “Shoodra putra” during an international summit. Draupati could wed anyone she liked, no issues. But that doesn’t justify gravely insulting a delegate with a racist abuse. She also insulted Durydhan during his visit to Indraprasta, commenting “the blind son of the blind father”. Karna merely returned the favor. He never insulted anyone who had not insulted him.
Chiraan:
Karna had actually participated in the swavayamvar on behalf of Duryodhan , here according to VYas bharata , he could not try string to the bow and felt unconscious ,. Modern MAhabharatha version say He was called Suta .
Your whole post is based on assumption that calling somebody Suta is calling him low . get this fact right , i have explained it more elaborately .
Posted by Surya on 17/05/2009 at 08:15
>>Karna had actually participated in the swavayamvar on behalf of Duryodhan , here according to VYas bharata , he could not try string to the bow and felt unconscious ,
————
That’s a blatant criminal lie. Can you prove your claim by quoting the passage here? The original Vyas Bharatha says that Karna quickly and easily took the bow and stringed it and aimed the target. Seeing him aiming the target, the Pandavas considered the target as already acquired. That’s when Draupadi insults him with the racist slur and vexes Karna. I can quote the relevant passage here from the original.
Chiraans’ view If I quote the passage , will you shave your head . first pu something on the stake , i shall do it very gladly . I have three copies of Vyas bharath written in three different periods from Ghorakput press and other copies from Library of mysore and tajavore to quote from .
before think twice before taking up the challenge . Mahabharata has been tampered thorughly I have proved it .
Posted by Surya on 17/05/2009 at 18:56
>>If I quote the passage , will you shave your head . first pu something on the stake , i shall do it very gladly . I have three copies of Vyas bharath written in three different periods from Ghorakput press and other copies from Library of mysore and tajavore to quote from .
before think twice before taking up the challenge . Mahabharata has been tampered thorughly I have proved it .
————
Ha ha ha, now you’re stooping to the level of street thugs to wish physical harm to your fellow debator when your claims are proven wrong.
Contrary to you, I don’t wish any physical harm or physical humiliation to you. When you make libelous claim on someone then you have the moral responsibility to back it with evidence. That’s all I asked for. Should I shave my head for that? 
C’mon, haven’t you passed out of primary school yet? 
You have posted one version here as original Vyas bharath. This is the link that you yourself posted:
http://is1.mum.edu/vedicreserve/itihas.htm Can you quote the passage where Karna becomes unconscious during Draupadi swayamvar from this version? Or can you quote from mahabharatOnline.com where you used to quote from, until I joined the debate? Don’t shave your head if you can’t, just admit your lie. That is sufficient.
Posted by kiran on 31/07/2009 at 08:41
hey chirang…………none of the padu sons r actually pandu sons……………i stress the word actually……………..so hw com yudhistir b a king……………if yudhistir b a king such way so can karna…..
Posted by Surya on 13/05/2009 at 11:10
[quote]My dear friends even when Karna was blazing at his best Bhemsen rendered him unconscious . How many bad days at office should Karna be exempted from ????[/quote] Let me quote you the passage where Karna thoroughly defeats Bheema and spares him remembering his promise to Kunti:
http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m07/m07135.htm
Then excited with rage, the Suta’s son, Karna, by the power of his weapons, with his
p. 298
straight arrows, cut off in that encounter the couple of quivers and the bow-string of fighting Bhima, as also the traces of his steeds. And then slaying his steeds also, Karna pierced Bhima’s charioteer with five shafts. The charioteer, quickly running away, proceeded to Yudhamanyu’s car. Excited with rage, the son of Radha then, whose splendour resembled that of the Yuga-fire, smiling the while, cut off the flag-staff of Bhima and felled his banner. Deprived of his bow, the mighty-armed Bhima then seized a dart, such as car-warriors may use. Excited with wrath, he whirled it in his hand and then hurled it with great force at Karna’s car. The son of Adhiratha then, with ten shafts, cut off, as it coursed towards him with the effulgence of a large meteor, the gold-decked dart thus hurled (by Bhima). 1 Thereupon, that dart fell down, cut off into ten fragments by those sharp shafts of the Suta’s son, Karna, that warrior conversant with every mode of warfare, then battling for the sake of his friends. Then, the son of Kunti took up a shield decked with gold and a sword, desirous of obtaining either death or victory, Karna, however, O Bharata, smiling the while, cut off that bright shield of Bhima with many fierce shafts. Then, car-less, Bhima, O king, deprived of his shield, became mad with rage. Quickly, then, he hurled his formidable sword at Karna’s car. That large sword, cutting off the stringed bow of the Suta’s son, fell down on the earth, O king, like an angry snake from the sky. Then Adhiratha’s son, excited with rage in that battle, smilingly took up another bow destructive of foes, having a stronger string, and tougher than the one he had lost. Desirous of slaying the son of Kunti, Karna then began to shoot thousands of arrows, O king, equipped with wings of gold and endued with great energy. Struck by those shafts shot from Karna’s bow, the mighty Bhima leaped into the sky, filling Karna’s heart with anguish. Beholding the conduct of Bhima, in battle desirous of victory, the son of Radha beguiled him by concealing himself in his car. Seeing Karna concealing himself with an agitated heart on the terrace of his car, Bhima catching hold of Karna’s flagstaff, waited on the earth. All the Kurus and the Charanas highly applauded that attempt of Bhima of snatching Karna away from his car, like Garuda snatching away a snake. His bow cut off, himself deprived of his car, Bhima, observant of the duties of his order, stood still for battle, keeping his (broken) car behind him. The son of Radha, then, from rage, in that encounter, proceeded against the son of Pandu who was waiting for battle. Then those two mighty warriors, O king, challenging as they approached each other, those two bulls among men, roared at each other, like clouds at the close of summer. And the passage-at-arms that then took place between those two engaged lions among men that could not brook each other in battle resembled that of old between the gods and the Danavas. The son of Kunti, however, whose stock of weapons was exhausted, was (obliged to turn back) pursued by Karna. Beholding the elephants, huge as hills that had been slain by Arjuna, lying (near), unarmed Bhimasena entered into their midst, for impeding the progress of Karna’s car. Approaching that multitude of elephants and getting into the midst of that fastness which was inaccessible to a car, the son of Pandu, desirous of saving his life, refrained from striking the son of Radha. Desirous of shelter, that subjugator of hostile cities viz., the son of Pritha, uplifting an elephant that had been slain by Dhananjaya with his shafts, waited there, like Hanumat uplifting the peak of Gandhamadana. 1 Karna, however, with his shafts, cut off that elephant held by Bhima. The son of Pandu, thereupon, hurled at Karna the fragments of that elephant’s body as also car-wheels and steeds. In fact, all objects that he saw lying there on the field, the son of Pandu, excited with rage, took up and hurled at Karna. Karna, however, with his sharp arrows, cut off every one of those objects thus thrown at him. Bhima also, raising his fierce fists that were endued with the force of the thunder, desired to slay the Suta’s son. Soon, however, he recollected Arjuna’s vow. The son of Pandu, therefore, though competent, spared the life of Karna, from desire of not falsifying the vow that Savyasachin had made. [b]The Suta’s son, however, with his sharp shafts, repeatedly caused the distressed Bhima, to lose the sense. But Karna, recollecting the words of Kunti, took not the life of the unarmed Bhima.[/b]
Posted by chiraan on 13/05/2009 at 13:52
Thank you mr surya for this extract , in your extract you have given that B HEEMA had spared the life of KARNA . sometimes evil has its own nemesis . i have highlighted the portion in bold where your own passage shows BHEEMA AS having defeated KARNA and spared the life of KArna though competent to kill . read carefully your illustration .
Bheema was always unarmed , he fought with fists , karna fled away when challenged with fists , when with Bow his bow was cut off , but when both of them stood without bows , karna took up bow and proceeded towards other warrior not killing bHeema with the arrows . This is not sparing life , as even astras could not kill Bheema , so arrows of Karna could never kill him .
Karna proceeds to other warrior giving the pretext of KUnti’s words . WHereas not before this incident is a single incident where Karna has shown to overpower Bheema , whereas Bheema had earlier overpowered him , ANd remeber the passage quoted explicitly says , BHEEMA spared Life of KARNA though competent to kill.. This is your illustration and rests the debate one for all that BHEEMA Was superior to KArna in bow and archery and karna was no match when it came to war he ran away . such a shame .
kindly note the illustration is a dialogue between Sanjay and Dhritarashtra , look how repeatedly sanjay is using the word son of suta . now is sanjay not cultured , has Dhritarashtra not objected to his son’s saviour being insulted .
your logic of suta puthra has no meaning .
it is a high caste and not derogatory.
Posted by Surya on 13/05/2009 at 15:10
Chiraan: Thank you mr surya for this extract , in your extract you have given that B HEEMA had spared the life of KARNA . sometimes evil has its own nemesis . i have highlighted the portion in bold where your own passage shows BHEEMA AS having defeated KARNA and spared the life of KArna though competent to kill . read carefully your illustration .
Surya:
You are good at selective reading. “Sparing the life of Karna” was just Bheema’s hallucination, as can be clearly seen from the context.
The Suta’s son, however, with his sharp shafts, repeatedly caused the distressed Bhima, to lose the sense. But Karna, recollecting the words of Kunti, took not the life of the unarmed Bhima.
When distressed Bhima lost his senses, he would hallucinate many things. But what was the fact?
How could he who could not do anything to Karna with all his weapons even touch the fully armed Karna when he’s deprived of all his weapons? On the contrary, Karna, despite thoroughly defeating Bheema, recollecting the words of Kunti, took not the life of the unarmed Bhima.
Karna deprived Bheema of his car, his charioteer and his multitude of weapons. Then Bhima tried to kill Karna by throwing elephant carcass, ruins of chariots etc. When that too failed, Bhima just desired to kill Karna with his bare hands.
* chiraan says ” read the passage carefully shri Surya Bheema spares his life though competent and then Karna attacks with the shafts , so even if we go by your version , halucinationcan come after the arrows have been shot , the passage clearly says before that Bheema had attacked Karna he hid under chariot out of fear and then BHeema spared his life ”
————————————————————-
Chiraan: Bheema was always unarmed , he fought with fists , karna fled away when challenged with fists , when with Bow his bow was cut off , but when both of them stood without bows , karna took up bow and proceeded towards other warrior not killing bHeema with the arrows . This is not sparing life , as even astras could not kill Bheema , so arrows of Karna could never kill him .
Surya: Never. Read the passage that I quoted again. Bhima was armed to the teeth when he encountered Karna. But Karna easlily disarmed him and chided him by poking his bow at Bhima’s soft spots and tickling him.
:) Not just here, throughout the war, Bheema fought with the top warriors with top class weapons, not with fists. When Karna was fully armed, why should he respond to Bheema’s challenge to fight with bare fists? This is amusing. Both were fully armed, then Karna broke all the weapons of Bheema. Now when Karna prevailed with car, and all his mighty weapons, why should he throw those weapons away? No rule of war demands such a folly.
chiraans says again , karna was disarmed totally and hid under chariot , this was when Bheema went flying towards him with fists alone , KArna had shakti with him , he left it there in the chariot , Bheema did not take it . BHeema was hrowing all the things around him at Karna and karna was cutting it with arrows . SO what rules are you talking about , Bheema is without arms and throwing things like elephants and wheels and KArna is using arrows . I think you have lost seriatim reading ability “
———————————————————-
Chiraan: Karna proceeds to other warrior giving the pretext of KUnti’s words .
Surya: That’s your version. That’s not what Vyas says. Vyas says: The Suta’s son, however, with his sharp shafts, repeatedly caused the distressed Bhima, to lose the sense. But Karna, recollecting the words of Kunti, took not the life of the unarmed Bhima.
————————————————————–
Chiraan: WHereas not before this incident is a single incident where Karna has shown to overpower Bheema , whereas Bheema had earlier overpowered him , ANd remeber the passage quoted explicitly says , BHEEMA spared Life of KARNA though competent to kill.. This is your illustration and rests the debate one for all that BHEEMA Was superior to KArna in bow and archery and karna was no match when it came to war he ran away . such a shame .
Surya: Already answered.
Chiraan: kindly note the illustration is a dialogue between Sanjay and Dhritarashtra , look how repeatedly sanjay is using the word son of suta . now is sanjay not cultured , has Dhritarashtra not objected to his son’s saviour being insulted . your logic of suta puthra has no meaning .it is a high caste and not derogatory.
Surya: Folks like Sanjay, Vidur etc had always been loyal to Pandavas. They disliked Karna for obvious reasons. Can you point out one instance where his well wishers – Duryodhan, Dussassan, Shakuni or Dhritarashtra call Karna with this epithet? As for Dhritarashtra not objecting, he never objected to Sanjaya criticizing him and his own sons either. You can see everywhere in Sanjaya’s narration – “as a result of your evil policies O King … “. Dhritarashtra did not object to this either.
Posted by chiraan on 13/05/2009 at 19:43
there is difference inyour version and ganguly version ,
ganguly version does not mention ” Bheema having lost senses ,” instead it mentions , BHeema having vanquished KArna and then
next
“Full three akshauhinis of Duryodhana’s soldiers had been assembled together (in front of Bhima). They have all been checked by that lion among men, Bhimasena, in wrath.’”
also origial Vyasa version also does not mention , plus see your version is howing karna having conealed under the chariot
in fear of Bheema [ is this a quality of great warrior ] . whereas actual verses in vayas says he hid under the [ not concealed ] this itself shows the author is manipulating the words in diluting the effect .
now i have shown so many incidents where Karna has been defeated by so many people , you have not been able to show a single incident .
In a qustion of might the number of times I am illustrating already pus Karna in light weight , you have not been able to either disprove them and your silence on those issues shows acceptance of Karna’s inferiority .
i shall give some more extracts to show how Karna feared [ a weak warrior ]
“thy army fled away in the very sight of the Suta’s son, overwhelmed with the fear of the Pandavas. Then, O king, great fear entered the heart of Karna at sight of Bhima’s prowess which resembled that of the Destroyer himself unto living creatures. Then Shalya, that ornament of assemblies, understanding the state of Karna’s mind from a survey of his features, addressed that chastiser of foes in words suited to the hour, “Do not be grieved, O son of Radha! This deed does not become thee. “
Addressing Karna and Suyodhana and Kripa and Drona’s son and Kritavarma, he said, “Today I shall slay the wretched Duhshasana. Let all the warriors protect him (if they can).” Having said this, Bhima of exceeding strength and great activity suddenly rushed, from desire of slaying Duhshasana. Like a lion of fierce impetuosity rushing towards a mighty elephant, Vrikodara, that foremost of heroes, rushed towards Duhshasana in that battle and attacked him in the very sight of Suyodhana and Karna. ………………………that are sweet as ambrosia or nectar.” Once more, Bhima of fierce deeds, his heart filled with wrath, beholding Duhshasana dead, laughed softly and said, “What more can I do to thee? Death has rescued thee from my hands.
Bhima, having slain there (at the very sight of Karna) the vindictive Duhshasana, took up a little quantity of his blood, and, endued with stentorian lungs, he said these words in the hearing of all those foremost of heroes of the world, “O wretch amongst men, here I drink thy life-blood from thy throat. Filled with joy, abuse us once more, saying ‘beast, beast’ (as thou didst before).” why did Karna not interfere to save even though he was invited [ Fear my dear fear ]
NOw look what karna has to say about Arjun [ mark the fear in him and expectation of death ]
“‘Shalya said, “All great car-warriors, O Karna, say that this foremost of car-warriors, (Arjuna), even when alone, is invincible. When again, he is protected by Krishna, who will venture to vanquish him?”
“‘Karna said, “As far as I have heard, such a superior car-warrior has never been born on earth! Behold my prowess, since I will contend in battle with even that Partha who is such. This prince of Kuru’s line, this foremost of car-warriors, careers in battle, borne by his steeds white in hue. Perhaps he will despatch me to Yama’s abode today. Know, however, that with Karna’s death, these all will be exterminated. The two arms of this prince are never covered with sweat. They never tremble. They are massive and covered with cicatrices. Firm in the use of weapons, he is possessed of great skill and endued with great lightness of hands. Indeed, there is no warrior equal to the son of Pandu. He taketh a large number of arrows and shooteth them as if they were one. Quickly fixing them on the bow-string, he propelleth them to the distance of two miles. They always fall on the foe. What warriors is there on earth that is equal to him? That Atiratha, endued with great activity, with Krishna as his ally, gratified the god Agni at Khandava. There, on that occasion, the high-souled Krishna obtained his discus, and Savyasaci, the son of Pandu, obtained his bow Gandiva. There that mighty-armed one, endued with might that knows no decay, also obtained his terrible car unto which are yoked those white steeds, as also his two great celestial and inexhaustible quivers, and many celestial weapons, from the God of Fire. In the region of Indra he obtained his conch Devadatta and slew innumerable Daityas, and all the Kalakeyas. Who is there on earth that is superior to him? Possessed of greatness of soul, he gratified Mahadeva himself in fair fight, and obtained from him the terrible and mighty weapon Pasupata that is capable of destroying the three worlds. The several Regents of the world, united together gave him their weapons of immeasurable energy, with which that lion among men quickly destroyed in battle those united Asuras, the Kalakhanjas. So also, in Virata’s city, moving on a single car he vanquished all of us, and snatched from us that wealth of kine, and took from all the foremost of car-warriors (portions of) their garments. Challenging that foremost of Kshatriyas, that hero having him of Vrishni’s race for his ally, that warrior who is endued with such energy and such attributes, I regard myself, O Shalya, to be the foremost of persons in all the world in point of courage. He is, again, protected by that Keshava of great energy, who is Narayana himself and who is without a rival, that high-souled Vasudeva, that ever-victorious Vishnu armed with conch, discus, and mace, whose attributes all the world united together, cannot (in narrating) exhaust in 10,000 years. Beholding the two Krishnas together on the same car, fear entereth my heart together with courage. Partha is the foremost of all bowmen, while Narayana is unrivalled in encounters with the discus. Even such are Vasudeva, and the son of Pandu. Indeed, the mountains of Himavat may move from the spot where they stand but not the two Krishnas. Both of them are heroes, possessed of great skill, firm in the use of weapons, and mighty car-warriors. Both of them have adamantine frames. Who else, O Shalya, save myself, would proceed against Phalguna and Vasudeva that are even such? The desire cherished by me today, viz., that of a battle with the son of Pandu, O ruler of the Madras, will be fulfilled without delay. Soon will that wonderful and matchless and beautiful battle take place. Either I will overthrow those two in battle today, or the two Krishnas will today overthrow me.”
look karna himself has agreed that he is inferior to Arjun.
How many illustrations have come from my side , what you all have to offer except dogmatic repetition o same words aagain and again without logic .
Posted by chiraan on 13/05/2009 at 19:52
Now some education to you on caste suta ! learn with single minded concentration so you dont baffle on the issue again .
From dictionary and internet sources where you have immense faith than sansrit sorces I quote ”
Suta (Sanskrit: ???) is the name of a class of people mentioned in the epic Mahabharata. Sutas were the children of two parents of different castes. They were one of the castes that sprang from inter-mixing of the four castes of ancient India, by way of the Brahmana, Kshatriya, Vaishya and a Shudra. The foster-parents of Karna, a great hero of Kurukshetra War, were Sutas. Hence Karna too was considered as a Suta. Kichaka the commander of Matsya army was a Suta.
The two main occupation of Sutas as per epic Mahabharata were:
story telling
chariot-driving
The entire Mahabharata was narrated by a Suta named Ugrasrava Sauti and was made popular in ancient India by many other story telling Sutas Mahabharatahim.
Suta puranik is main person to have narrated entire 18 puranas [ son of Lomharshan muni a suta ] if suta is low caste how come we are discussing the mahabharatha as told by Suta , every purana starts with Suta UVACHA . Do you mean to say entire Indian civilization is learning from abuses of suta uvacha . [ As you feel calling suta is derogatory]
[edit] Etymology 3
[edit] Noun??? (suta) m.
a charioteer, driver, groom, equerry, master of the horse (esp. an attendant on a king who in earlier literature is often mentioned together with the (grama-ni´); in the epics also a royal herald or bard, whose business was to proclaim the heroic actions of the king and his ancestors, while he drove his chariot to battle , or on state occasions , and who had therefore to know by heart portions of the epic poems and ancient ballads; he is the son of a (kshatriya) by a (brahmani) or of a Brahman [accord. to (sasvata) ; the most celebrated suta was (loma-harshana) who was a pupil of (vyasa))
[edit] ReferencesSir Monier Monier-Williams, A Sanskrit-English dictionary etymologically and philologically arranged with special reference to cognate Indo-European languages
Suta is one born to Kshatriya and Bramhani , when both parents are higher caste how son beacomes a low born and untouchable . Kindly know your facts better [ pity monier williams knew this fact better than SURYAN a Indian ]
Dharma is not interpreted through SHakuni , dushyashan and Duryodhan’s behaviour , if these people did not call Karna a suta puthra , it does not put them in cultured category .and Just because rest of the world called him suta , it does not make them less cultured . Your logic here is faulty and against worldly ethics .
for Karna [ as you say he was reprieved and felt insulted , look what kind of racist remark he is making in this extract , can a person of low born and abused man as you put it pass racist comment ; justify
” karna said : I will recite it to you. Listen to me. ‘The mlecchas are the dirt of mankind: the oilmen are the dirt of the Mlecchas; eunuchs are the dirt of oilmen; they who avail of the priestly ministrations of Kshatriyas, in their sacrifices, are the dirt of eunuchs. The sin of those again that have the last-named persons for their priests, of also of the Madrakas, shall be thine if thou do not abandon me ”
Karna is a fallen hero with malice and jealousy and wounded ego , I have proved it with many illustrations . Except talks no proofs are coming from others .
Posted by Surya on 14/05/2009 at 12:37
Chiraan: ganguly version does not mention ” Bheema having lost senses ,” instead it mentions , BHeema having vanquished KArna and then next
Surya’s answer: Ganguly version clearly mentions that Bheema lost his senses. Read again:
http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m07/m07135.htm
The Suta’s son, however, with his sharp shafts, repeatedly caused the distressed Bhima, to lose the sense. But Karna, recollecting the words of Kunti, took not the life of the unarmed Bhima.
Chiraan: BHeema having vanquished KArna and then next “Full three akshauhinis
Surya’s answer: Read again,it is Karna who vanquished Bheema, and spared his life.
Chiraan: also origial Vyasa version also does not mention , plus see your version is howing karna having conealed under the chariot in fear of Bheema [ is this a quality of great warrior ] . whereas actual verses in vayas says he hid under the [ not concealed ] this itself shows the author is manipulating the words in diluting the effect .
Surya’s answer: It does not say that Karna concealed in fear. It clearly says that Karna concealed himself in his car to dodge Bheema’s attempt to snatch him. Dodging attacks is the fundamental lesson in martial arts. This is what Karna demonstrated successfully. How could Karna “fear” Bheema, whom Karna had disarmed and spared using his superior skills?
Chiraan’s views
There are three or four versions of ganguly translation available on net , show me concurrence and consistency in all those , if you can then your sacred text christian version can be taken as authentic . what you are showing is a perverted translation and basing your logic , when the source itself is wrong , yes all your illustration deems wrong . And dogmatically crying that you have shown bheema has been vanquished when it is clearly written there that bheema spared life and Karna remembering kunti’s words moved on shows lack of grasping power .
And when Karna praised Arjun and accepted , you have concocted your own story of diplomacy , where it is written that karna has diplomatically said ,Your words carry no wieght .
FIrst prove
http://www.mahabharataonline.com/translation
http://www.vedicbooks.net/mahabharata-krishna-dwaipayana-vyasa-vols-p-5714.html
http://www.geocities.com/harindranath_a/maha/maha.html
this is alo a version of ganguly can you show your verses here .
there are few more translation try to show your verses there .
if there is discrepancy and no consisitency , it shows the translqations are not authentic .[ discrepancy because , same verses have been written in variety of forms suiting the situation, such translations are not considered authentic . the stories you mention should appear elsewhere too in purana , etc . to be valid . just giving some perverted version and calling it authentic shows your intelligence and dogmatically baselessly arguing talks a lot about your abilities . its high time to let you know you are making senseless statements . ]
So your base is wrong and not tenable.
get your facts right.
Posted by chiraan on 14/05/2009 at 14:48
Dear Mr Surya ,
You have concluded in your previous arguments that you have countered all my logic . Let me recapitulate your logic
1. You started your argument with sympathising Karna for being abused as suta , your entire first post repeated this sympathy covering his evil intention blaming Kunti .
::: I have countered this with expalanation of term suta as high caste and thorughly proved it , and gave you how Karna has used abuses …….
You have kept mum on this subject [ accepting your failure on this topic ]
2. You deviated to BHeeshma killing and tried to establish it was adharma and hence Karna could kill abhimanyu .
::: I have clearly showed you the meaning of MAHARATHI and how people fight simultaneously with others in front of each other , when lakhs of soldiers are in front , one will be behind another , killing in this form is not adharma . [ even Arjun fought single handedly with karna drona and Bheeshma all put together earlier .and defeated them ]
whereas Abhimanyu was killed from behind arrows being pierced in back . [ shameful of Karna] , you have accepted this by keeping silent on this subject .
3. You have already accepted Karna’s defeat with satyaki , abhimanyu , ghatotkach in particular . you have agreed that Karna was a human being a no match for rakshas ghatotkach . Arjun has killled many rakshasas , nivat kavach, samsaptak , khilavats etc, [ again you have accepted superiority ]
3. Bheemasena defeated 21 times [ read mahabharata carefully] and once spared him to keep arjun’s words . Karna only once thought of moving ahead giving excuse of kunti’s words . here you are dogmatically showing that Karna has not been defeated . [ Whereas all the translations are showing him defeated ; your inability to read english seriatim is noticed ] Bheemasen invites Karna to save Dushyasana , karna out of fear runs away . Bheema attacks him , he hides under chariot . Karna himself praises Bheema as one fighting with fists, read my excerpts ,[ you have no answers for all this ]
4. Karna praises Arjun and accepts Arjun is superior , now here you pretend as if this was diplomacy , [ is this way a debate is conducted ] did karna come and tell you in your ears that he was diplomatic and lied . When karna himself has accepted where is your stance .
ideally debate should stop with one accepting the superiority . KArna himself accepted superiority , you have also accepted defeat of KArna atthe hands of ARjun three time [ although you have tried to give it a silly turn saying karna did not know who opponent was .so even if karna loses he is great and arjun continuous winner is less is silliest argument]
You have no explanation as to why karna lost to ghatotkach , satyaki ,and Abhimanyu .
so how come you say you have countered my all logic and yet say Karna is great .
When debating with people like you a judge is meccessary to chide your dogmatic unrealistic statements . unfortunately we do not have one .
Posted by Surya on 13/05/2009 at 12:26
Response to Chiraan
In your post, you’re struggling so much to establish that Suta is a high caste and calling someone Suta is not derogatory.
I feel ashamed to debate against such a silly argument. In Mahabharata, one can easily see Karna feeling humiliated when he’s addressed with this racist remark. Fyi, a racist abuse is insulting irrespective of the ages. None of Karna’s friends and well wishers addressed him “sootha putra”. Instead they addressed him as “Anga raaj Karn” or “Raadhey”. That’s how decent people address others, not with racist epithets.
Chiraan: The whole debate is Karna was not waging a dharma Yuddha ,it was pandavas who were waging Dharma Yuddha . There is nothing wrong in killing the brother’s son in a straight battle , but cutting his bow and arrow from behind and before he takes up his bow , simulataneously four other warriors attacking him with arrows and weapons is adharma and it does not befit Karna to disarm a small warrior from behind This is no Dharma . This he did because he was defeated ina straight fight by Abhimanyu [ read my previous post ] , this made him jealous of abhimanyu and resort to adharma . and not to save duryodhan or carry out duty . Reagarding Arjun killing Bheeshma , Bheeshma had resorted to Shastra sanyas , Dharma allows one to kill the person who has shed his weapons and decided to die on the battlefield . And Arjun killed Bheeshma from front alerting him of his astra . unlike Karna who has shot from behind and cut off the Abhimanyu’s arrow . Arjun had also sought permission from Bheeshma to carry out the neccessary so it is not deciet . Interpretation of Dharma cannot be such that evil is set about to get anything for his selfish end and greats when they resort to Dharma as instructed by GOD , you try to call it as cheat . strange is your logic raising doubts over your credentials .
Suryan: Here your logic seems to be that since Krishna was on Pandava side, they could do anything and that automatically becomes dharma. What kind of logic is this? Then there is no need for debate. This is the same logic as “there is not right or wrong, the deeds of the victors become right”.
)C’mon, I didn’t expect this silly reasoning from you. First decide upon the rights and wrongs. Then judge everyone impartially according to the same standard. According to the rules of the war dictated by Bheeshma, an unarmed warrior should not be attacked. Also, one Maharadhi should be fought at a time by only one Maharathi. Here Bheesha was encountered by Shikhandi and Arjun hiding behind Shikhandi – both were Maharathis. And Arjun shot the unarmed Bheesha innumerable arrows and immobilized him. This was clearly against the laws of the battle. Then why do you try to judge only Karna based on the laws of the battle? Bheeshma did not desire to die in the battlefield at that stage of the war. He was bound by his oath to remain alive and guard Hastinapur until it is safe from all sides. Hence your argument does not hold water. Please get your facts right.
Chiraan: Kunti had immediately got Karna by Surya .SHe did not carry him for Nine months . So AS Sun is a Deity and she had ensured that he was pratected by SUN and also she aske for KAvach and Kundal as a boon for the child . Infact she is resposible for what Karna boasted all along for KAVACH KUNDAL . had she not asked boon karna would have beeneaten by wild aquatic animals . She ensured his safety from a deity who is visble in the heavens . what else women as mother can do .
Suryan: The primary Kavach and Kundal that any child requires is his mothers love. To the best of my knowledge, Karna was born with Kavach and Kundal, it was not specifically demanded by Kunti. But that’s besides the point. Kunti in this case is no different from irresponsible mothers who throw their kids infront of orphanages citing higher purposes like honor of the family country etc. As a mother, did she fulfill her responsibility to Karna? No. But still Karna accepted his mother and accepted her wishes as best as he could.
chiraan:First uderstand RAAJ SUYA YAGNYA IS TERMED COMPLETE ONLY WHEN ALL THE KING’S ARE WON , BHEEMA HAD GONE TO ANGA AND WON HIM . read those passages of Raajsuya parva .
Suryan: Please post the relevent passage here, or atleast tell me the relevent chapter and verses. I’ll look it up. I can post multiple passages from Mahabharata where Karna defeats Bheema and spares his life.
chiraan:
I will write a post today separately as to why Indra had to beg kavach kundal .kindly read it .Killing Karna from behind is the law of karma , as karna [ sugreeva had got killed VAli from behind with the help of RAM/Krishna ] so Vali[ Arjun ] killed him unarmed with the help of RAM/KRISHNA ]
Suryan: Again, as I said above, first decide upon the rules of the war. Then apply it impartially on all. If killing Karna from behind is the law of karma then killing Abhimanyu from behind is also the law of karma.
chiraan:SHow me where Karna objected to SHakuni in MAhabharata
Suryan: See here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karna
Karna was never happy with Shakuni’s plan to defeat the Pandavas by trickery and deceit. He preferred the way of battle and repeatedly cajoled Duryodhana to choose that path. To please Duryodhana, however, he chose to be a part of the game, leading to the infamous “Vastra Haran” incident.
Chiraan:Very nice atleast Karna’s defeats and incapabilities are slowly being accepted , Ghatotkach was a inferior warrior to Arjun , Satyaki was inferior , Abhimanyu was also inferior yet Karna lost to all these , i have quoted from MAhabhrata !
so if one has lost to chela /shishya then GURU can automatically win over .
Suryan: Warriors fight during the day. During day, Ghatotkach was an inferior warrior to Karna as well. Whether Ghatotkach was inferior or superior to Arjun could be determined only during a duel between them. This never happened. So your claims are merely speculations, not facts.
Chiraan :
So you are suggesting a great warrior is one who can lose if he does not know his opponent . and Yet be called as greatest because he had no knowledge who his opponent was . this is by far silliest support i could ever have imagined for KARNA .
Trouble never comes giving invitation and introduction , a great warrior is one who is always prepared and wins .
Suryan: Not just Karna, during those occations even Bheeshma and Drona lost to Arjun since they too had not been prepared. Does that mean that they’re not great warriors either? We’re debating on whoz a better warrior, not whoz better in identifying disguised people. May be Karna was not too great at identifying people in disguise. Then there is no evidence to suggest that Arjun was any better either. Karna never fought with Arjun in disguise. So again you’re going by mere speculations, not facts.
Chiraan: Everybody in the battle is saved or Killed by KRISHNA only , Here it was Takshak’s son as he had escaped during Khandav dahan , he had vowed to kill ARJUN and had a boon to do so by INDRA . so first attempt Arjun could not face him as INDRA’s boon would go waste . KRsihna saved . Once boon is honoured , Second time Takshak is a opponent and hence was cut into three pieces .It was not nagastra . Nagastra is one induced by NAga mantra of vasuki /takshak etc . when they themselves were defeated by Arjun in khandav dahan their mantras could not do anything to him .
Suryan: Again you are resorting to “God’s grace”. Then there is no point in the debate. Ultimately everybody is killed or saved by Krishna only. Then what is the point in judging who is better warrior?
) We are debating on the skills of the warriors, not divine intervention. And you already agreed that if Karna used the weapon again, Arjuna still would have to depend on divine intervention. Your Freudian slip clearly shows that you too are aware of the fact that Karna is superior to Arjuna in battle. Indra’s boon does not apply here since Karna had already used that boon against Ghatotkach and the weapon returned to Indra.
Chiraan: EVEN if Kunti had recognised , KArna would not become KING as he is not PAndu Putra . Hastinapur could be only ruled by king ’s eldest son ; PAndu was the KIng , KARNA Was born before marriage and hence could not be his son . Because he surpassed the skills of Atjuna by the boon of Parashuram , he was made King of ANGA and nobody objected , if he was low born the whole public , praja and rajya would have revolted , as he was of high caste suta , everybody accepted him as King . You mean to say BHEESHMA AND DRONA and other greats were fools to have accepted him . His birth and qualities were duly taken into consideration . What more could Lord have done for him . what more could Kunti had wished for him . He shined[shone] in the competition because , of KUntii’s boon kavach kundal and Krishna [ parshuraam's ] boon . So Kunti and Krishna are to be praised and not blamed . get your facts right again .
Suryan: That way, none of the Pandavas were Pandu puthras, since Pandu was proscribed from having sex. Just because they’re born after her wedding doesn’t make them Pandu puthras. Moreover, Kunti herself clearly told Karna that if she reveals the truth then the whole world will recognize Karna as the eldest and the incumbant emporer. The same thing was said by Krishna as well. And it is a fact. Had Kunti recognized Karna during the tournament, then Yudhishtir being the just one would have stepped aside and accepted him as the incumbant emperor. But due to her selfishness, Kunti didn’t accept Karna. And he stood there humiliated. And when Duryodhana recognized him, he felt vindicated. In that context, Karna had no way of knowing the evil plans that Duryodhana was going to plot agaisnt Pandavas. So he did what was entirely justified and honorable at that point in time. He accepted Duryodhana as his friend.
During any phase of the Kurukhetra war, all Karna had to do was to declare the fact that he’s the “Jyesht Kunti puthr”. The war would have ended there. And nobody would have questined his ascendency to the throne. Or he could have bestowed the throne on his friend Duryodhan. But he didn’t want to be unjust towards Pandava, and he continued his life and dharma as “Sooth Puthra” knowing very well that he was “Surya puthra”. He didn’t want to tie the hands of Pandavas by telling the truth, just as Krishna and Kunti had tied his hands. That’s the greatness of Karna. He fought against the odds in his life courageously, never compromised on his loyalties and sacrificed his life for his friend.
Posted by chiraan on 13/05/2009 at 13:48
Your quotation from wikepedia is laughable , wikepedia is not authentic source , and Read Vyasa Bharath to understand how people are addressed .
The dharma is universal and not set by BHeeshma . Dharma was set by greats like parashar , Manu , apastamba etc . All the warriors etc are interpreted according to these texts and not BHeeshma , These words of yours suggest you are influenced by TV and film presentation and basing your debate on those views which are of deirectors and wriers and not Dharma . Dharma and Adharma are discussed with VEdic background and Smriti .
Takshaks’s son had INdra’s boon . so he was allowed once to attack Arjun and Saved by Lord .
I have given many accounts of loss of Karna , go on and read them , show me one illustration . not wikepedia , wikepedia is a compilation and not authentic source . None of you all those sup
porters of Karna have yet even once given a illustration where he eon over Arjun . You have already accepted his defeat with ghatotkach , satyaki ,abhimanyu .
Sons born to a wife with the insistence of Husband is known as NIYOGA , this was acceptable form of getting sons in the era and EVEn Duryodhan had accepted , If you dont have knowledge of this , then its a pity , there is no point in debate with people with no knowledge . Such people have no right to discuss.
CAste system is very elaborate , i can see you dont even know the names of castes that exist
read my other blogs whre there is elaborate description of castes 256 in numbers with their status .
Without this knowledge your assumption that karna faced humiliation is faulty . sanjay was also suta , Vidura was parashava , have they felt insulted when they were addresed thus . EVen Dhritarashtra and sanjay have used the term suta and son of suta towards Karna . does that mean they also hated karna . or insulted him knowingly being their commander in chief. #
Ascendancy to the throne : When Kunti appears for the first time before the court in Hastinapur with children , The first question that Duryodhan raises is these were born after the death of PAndu and cannot be held as niyoga . so yudhisthira cannot claim for the throne .All of the greats BHeeshma ,Drona etc appeal to Kunti to prove that they were born while Pandu was alive . Ther is aakashvani in the space that says , they were born in presence of PANDU , yet Duryodhan refuses to accept . Then VEdaVYASA appears and tells Dritarashtra that they were born at the instance of Pandu . and takes them to his ashram and Dhritarashtra and all accept it .
this incident shows that one who is not son of PANDU he cannot acsend the throne . SO question of KArna ascending throne does not arise .
get your facts and knowledge updated .
Kavach kundal were asked by Kunti as boon from SUn if he had to give her a son , read mahabhratha properly .
Posted by Surya on 13/05/2009 at 17:59
Your strategy seems to be sidelining the key issues and nit picking on trivialities in my post.
Cheeran: Your quotation from wikepedia is laughable , wikepedia is not authentic source , and Read Vyasa Bharath to understand how people are addressed .
Suryan: Agreed. What is the significance that this point carries? The deciets against Pandavas was plotted by Shakuni and approved by Duryodhan. Karna’s approval is totally irrelevent. My knowledge is that Karna joined them unwittingly. Whether that is right or not, it is does not make any difference to the key issues. Let’s assume that Karna had objected. Would Duryodhan change his plans? Karna was obliged to Duryodhan, not the other way. And the people responsible for making Karna obliged to Duryodhan are Kunti and Krishna.
Chiraan’s answer SO it can be said also that had Karna been declared son of Kunti the war wuld not have stopped as duryodhana would have shuned his friendship too . You are contracditing your earlier statements , infact all your statements you are either contradicting or quoting on the basis of faulty understanding
Chiraan: The dharma is universal and not set by BHeeshma . Dharma was set by greats like parashar , Manu , apastamba etc . All the warriors etc are interpreted according to these texts and not BHeeshma , These words of yours suggest you are influenced by TV and film presentation and basing your debate on those views which are of deirectors and wriers and not Dharma . Dharma and Adharma are discussed with VEdic background and Smriti .
Suryan: Now when your double standards in judging Karna and Arjuna are exposed, you’re resorting to technicalities.
My point was not where the dharma was discussed. My point is that the deeds of people should be judged consistently and impartially against the dharma. According to dharma, was Arjuna’s elimination of Bheesma justified? Yes or no?
Chiraan’s answer Maharathi means one who fights simulataneously with 10000 rathis and their army . SO it is allowd to fightwith many , IN sucha fight when any of the arrows pierce and death occurs , it is dharma ….
look at your own illustrations about karna ,Karna simultaneously fought with many warriors ‘ BUt here all the warriors are lined up before the MAHARATHI , they can be one behind the other , ”
BUt in case of ABHIMANYU KARNA struck from behind . ”
Chiraan: Takshaks’s son had INdra’s boon . so he was allowed once to attack Arjun and Saved by Lord .
Suryan: Mahabharata says that it is the fierceness of Karna’s weapon that threatened Arjuna’s life. I think that you’re the one whoz influenced by serials.
This is what Mahabharata says:
http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m08/m08090.htm [ This translation is faulty and not in concurrence with VYasa ]
The Suta’s son then fixed on his bow-string that foe-killing, exceedingly keen, snake-mouthed, blazing, and fierce shaft, which had been polished according to rule, and which he had long kept for the sake of Partha’s destruction. Stretching his bow-string to his ear, Karna fixed that shaft of fierce energy and blazing splendour, that ever-worshipped weapon which lay within a golden quiver amid sandal dust, and aimed it at Partha. Indeed, he aimed that blazing arrow, born in Airavata’s race, for cutting off Phalguna’s head in battle. ………………….enemy. Then Krishna, addressing Partha in that encounter, said into him, “Slay that great snake inimical to thee.” Thus addressed by the slayer of Madhu, the wielder of Gandiva, that bowman who was always fierce unto foes, enquired of him, saying, “Who is that snake that advanceth of his own accord against me, as if, indeed he advanceth right against the mouth of Garuda?” Krishna replied, “Whilst thou, armed with bow, wert engaged at Khandava in gratifying the god Agni, this snake was then in the sky, his body ensconced within his mother’s. Thinking that it was only a single snake that was so staying in the sky, thou killedest the mother. Remembering that act of hostility done by thee, he cometh towards thee today for thy destruction. O resister of foes, behold him coming like a blazing meteor, falling from the firmament!’”
…………………………………………………………..
“Sanjaya continued, ‘Then Jishnu, turning his face in rage, cut off, with six keen shafts, that snake in the welkin as the latter was coursing in a slanting direction. His body thus cut off, he fell down on the earth.
Chiraan: I have given many accounts of loss of Karna , go on and read them , show me one illustration . not wikepedia , wikepedia is a compilation and not authentic source . None of you all those sup
porters of Karna have yet even once given a illustration where he eon over Arjun .
Suryan: You yourself admitted the illustration where Karna prevailed over Arjun and had to be saved with divine intervention. Throughout the battle, Karna had the upperhand over Arjun. See this:
Chiraan: Sons born to a wife with the insistence of Husband is known as NIYOGA , this was acceptable form of getting sons in the era and EVEn Duryodhan had accepted , If you dont have knowledge of this , then its a pity , there is no point in debate with people with no knowledge . Such people have no right to discuss….Ascendancy to the throne : When Kunti appears for the first time before the court in Hastinapur with children , …this incident shows that one who is not son of PANDU he cannot acsend the throne . SO question of KArna ascending throne does not arise .
Suryan:
Let Lord Krishna decide who has knowledge and who hasnt, who has right to discuss and who hasn’t. These are Krishna’s statements to Karna:
http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m05/m05140.htm
“Vasudeva said, ‘O son of Radha, thou hast worshipped many Brahmanas fully conversant with the Vedas. With concentrated attention and mind free from envy thou hast also (on many an occasion) enquired of them after truth. Thou knowest, therefore, O Karna, what the eternal saying of the Vedas are. Thou art also well-versed in all the subtle conclusions of the scriptures. It is said by those conversant with the scriptures that the two kinds of sons called Kanina and Sahoda that are born of a maiden, have him for their father who weddeth the maid. Thou, O Karna, hast been born in this way. Thou art, therefore, morally the son of Pandu. Come, be a king, according to the injunction of the scriptures. On the side of thy father, thou hast the sons of Pritha, on the side of thy mother, thou hast the Vrishnis, (for thy kinsmen). O bull among men, know that thou hast these two for thy own. Proceeding this very day with me hence, O sire, let the Pandavas know thee as a son of Kunti born before Yudhishthira. The brothers, the five Pandavas, the son of Draupadi, and the invincible son of Subhadra, will all embrace thy feet. All the kings and princes, again, that have been assembled for the Pandava-cause, and all the Andhakas and Vrishnis, will also embrace thy feet. Let queens and princesses bring golden and silver and earthen jars (full of water) and delicious herbs and all kinds of seeds and gems, and creepers, for thy installation. During the sixth period, Draupadi also will come to thee (as a wife).
get your facts and knowledge updated .
Posted by chiraan on 13/05/2009 at 20:32
This is totally concocted version of MAHABHARATHA , the sacred text version is adulterated , because nowhere anyone has heard that Krishna has sanctioned Draupadi to become wife of KARNA [ this shameful interpretation ] now we must get to the original verses in sanskrit where this version has been taken from and translated , show me that and i shall show you the interpreatation ..
Draupadi is a chste woman sanctified by LORD KRISHNA , if she could accept any and anyone as sixth husband , it becomes adultery . There was no point in fighting war of mahabharatha for her dignity .
You cannot base your arguments on some concocted stories , SHow me original sanskrit verses showing this from VYAS MAHABHARATH .
If so many incidents from this translation of your is seen as faulty naturally every other statement that you make basing on this translation becomes faulty . I have already shown discrepancy vis a vis other transaltions . when sources clash , then ambiguities are weeded out . Your version is showing ambiiguities .
you have to disprove to get authenticity to your wordings of translation .
Posted by Surya on 14/05/2009 at 14:58
Chiraan: This is totally concocted version of MAHABHARATHA , the sacred text version is adulterated ,
Suryan: Ha ha, all this while throughout the debate [even before I entered], you had been swearing by this translation of Vyas Mahabharat. When you have been proven wrong, suddenly this becomes unacceptable.
#Chiraan answers again I am quoting from ganguly version which shri ganguly has written , i have given in the previous reply the correct version of ganguly , surely ganguly could not have written in three diffrent english ways as you suggest , where one translation shows ” Hid ” other shows ” concealed ” , it shows discrepancy . so we must resort to other copies of translation when majority shows ” hid” your version becomes faulty . SO I have proved your version is faulty .and unacceptable , you have to show other copies where your draupadi etc foolish statements exist except films and sacred text , I have not quoted from Sacred texts , i have quoted fro kisar ganguly text copy which i have in print .”
————————————————————————————————————————————-
Chiraan: because nowhere anyone has heard that Krishna has sanctioned Draupadi to become wife of KARNA [ this shameful interpretation ]
Suryan: That clearly proves that you are influenced by the popular bollywood characterizations and TV serials rather than the original. The logic according to which Draupadi became the wife of the 4 pandavas [except Arjun] applies to Karna as well since he’s Kaunteya. Then where is the problem?
The point to be noted here is, Karna was tempted with woman, wealth, power and love of his biological mother/siblings. Still Karna could not be won over.
Chiraan: Draupadi is a chste woman sanctified by LORD KRISHNA , if she could accept any and anyone as sixth husband , it becomes adultery . There was no point in fighting war of mahabharatha for her dignity.
Suryan: Ha ha, there you are. You feel that accepting 6th husband is adultery. Karna felt the same – that accepting 5 husbands itself is adultery. That’s what he expressed albeit in harsh language [retaliating her insult to him as well as his friend Duryodhan].
chiraan again
: Here your real self has come out , Your understanding is faulty is clearly known now .
Draupadi marrying four Pandavs is not adultery . I have written a clear post artcle on that explaining that .
NOw You are not only short sighted but also revealing your evil designs and mindtrack . Although i dont intend to repeat what i have said in the article elaborately , but let me bring some good sense to you . Mahabharata was a dharma yudhdha, Bheeshma and every good citizen all felt Pandavs’ were on right side[ Surely I dont think you will put intelligence at stake by saying whole hastinapur was wrong and KArna and duryodhana were right ] , the war took place for a woman’s pride and uplifting dharma , SO Pandav cannot be on wrong side of DHarma . Adultery is adharmik . so whence proved it is no adultery , if you dont understand that, We ALL pity your intellect and upbringing ; [ Read the article and there raise your doubts on Draupadi there in that post , I shall give you befitting answer ]
She was married simulatneously to all five . Marriage is done only once my dear . And after marriage courting other man is adultery [ I hope you have ability to understand English definitions]
Now You have to show me verses and not dodge this draupadi Krishna and KArna . if you have any show it and then come back for discussion .
———————————————————————————————————————————-
Chiraan: SO it can be said also that had Karna been declared son of Kunti the war wuld not have stopped as duryodhana would have shuned his friendship too . You are contracditing your earlier statements , infact all your statements you are either contradicting or quoting on the basis of faulty understanding
Suryan: Rather than accusing me of contradiction, you could not point out a single instance where I have contradicted. On the 17th day of the battle, Duryodhana learned from Bheesma that Karna was infact the eldest brother of the Pandavas. That only caused to intensify Duryodhana’s love and affection for Karna. So it can be said that had Karna declared that he’s the eldest son of Kunti, as Krishna said, he would have been recognized as the eldest son of Pandu and the incumbent emperor. Unlike the case of Yudhistira, Duryodhana would never have objected to Karna ascending the throne. Draupadi would have had to swallow her bitterness and marry Karna (I’m sure that Karna would never have accepted her). Due to the greatness of Karna, he did not let that happen.
I have shown your silence on many issues that I have countered strongly with facts . then you suddenly deviate to other topics , this shows you are unable to withstand the force of truth and desperately seeking recourse to imagination , in previous post you imgined Karna as having diplomatically accepted Arjun’s superiority and now you are imagining Duryodhan would have given kingdom to KARNA [ I think you are cousin of Duryodhan to read his mind so well ] One who has not given even a pin size place to a brother , what will he give to a friend whom he was using for a selfish end . YOUR FIGMNET OF IMAGINATIONS SHOWS YOUR EXHAUSTION OF LOGIC AND SENSE .
CAn anybody vouch for your statement about duyodhan leaving kingdom for the sake of KARNA a KUNTI PUTRA , now its my turn to laugh …………………………….. I have to repeat your statements are becoming more and more senseless .
give me some more imagination for loss to satyaki ,abhimanyu and Ghatotkach .
Posted by chiraan on 14/05/2009 at 17:50
In the previous post Shri Surya has alleged that not a single contradiction I have shown in his comments . Let me highlight the contradiction and Imaginations of Surya :.
1. Cultured people dont use abuses of Suta and other castist mark Sanjay and other are uncultured . Karna when abuses Draupadi its just a retatiliation [ contradiction] KArna also abuses Shalya . however suta is not abuse . entire mahabharat has been revealed by suta muni .
Shakuni and Duryodhan do not call him suta hence they were very cultured . [ Duryodhan calls Yudhisthiras born to someone this is very cultured]
2. Bheeshma kiling by Arjun with permission , one warrior killing on the chest is big deciet and Karna cutting bow of Abhimanyu and others killing on the back ,many stabbing in the back is small deciet [ contradiction ]
3. Karna is a great warrior according to Surya , He losing to Arjun thrice is justified and does not come in the way of his greatness , because he did not kw who his oppoment was .Arjun was without gandiva , no boons , no Krishna by his side , no armour and single , KArna and bheeshma ,drona , all with armour , boons , kavach kundal on and all together they lose [ contradiction , great warriors can lose if they dont know their opponents ]
4. KArna loses to Ghatotkach ,[ a human can lose to rakshas ] so Arjun who killed samsaptaka rakshas , khilvat etc is not great – contradiction .
5. Karna can be justified for his misdeeds because he had obligation to Duryodhan a evil , Kunti cannot be justified for her obligation to husband and her kingdom when she does not recognise Karna . Although she had done her duty as mother in ensuring his safety with kavach and kundal and money to radha . — contradictions and double standard .
6. Draupadi married other four pandavas because they were sons of kunti and hence should accept Karna as sixth [ contradiction ---- Draupadi did not accept other four pandav as husband because they were sons of Kunti , she had married all the five at the same time and hence they became her husband . Karna was not married and hence he cannot be accepted by her . ]
7 KArna was cultured and principled and would not have accepted Draupadi [ contradiction- Karna insisted Draupadi to become wife of Duryodhan leaving PAndavas ,no culture or principle ] This surya justifies as retaliation [ what a contradiction of principles]
8. Duryodhan would have accepted Karna ascending the throne ,[ contradiction - Duryodhan objects to Yudhisthir as having born afterthe death of PAndu and does not give throne , how come he gives throne to KArna who is known to have born before marriage of PANDU .--Imagination and contradictory ]
9 . Shri surya says because Krishna said that Karna could be called as son of PAndu Duryodhan would leave his throne and give it to karna [ contradictory .... had Duryodhan given importance to Krishna's advice and thoughts , MAHABHARATHA woukd not have happened at all ]
10 Bheema defeats KArna 21 times , KArna is defeated by even inferior warriors[ accepted by surya] , now one who has never won halucinates the win or one who has always won halucinates .] contradictiona galore , i can go on on on …..
but alpabudhdhi SURYA does’nt seem to understand his follies and blunders in making statements .
This is just short of being labelled MOODHA
Posted by chiraan on 14/05/2009 at 19:48
Shri Surya BEfore Quoting further from Sacred texts try to get verified this version with other english translations . As your sacred texts is full of contradictions and unrealistic statements , going to the extent of concoction , such quotes cannot be held authentic . #
There are other sites which also mention ganguly’s translation and we do not find your verses or quote there .
So discussion basing on concocted version is not acceptable and does not stand .
You prove that sacred text is authentic and then I shall accept your quotes .
Posted by Surya on 14/05/2009 at 20:20
Shri Cheeran,
I can point out several posts from you much before myself joining the debate where you have quoted from the Ganguly version in sacred texts. When your “silver screen” version of the story is proven wrong with the original, then it has become unacceptable. Now the onus is on you to quote from the version that is acceptable to you.
Posted by Surya on 14/05/2009 at 20:15
just read this entire post and see if there is even a single point that I haven’t answered. I hope that like last time, you’ll not heavily edit my posts and claim that I did not answer your points.
Posted by chiraan on 14/05/2009 at 21:25
As i said earlier , I have not quoted from Sacred texts , I have quoted from the print and it coincides with the other online sources . I have given to you links of those online sources , now you can do some research and find coherence to your texts about Draupadi and Krishna etc .
What I say is sanskrit Vyas version as accepted in north and South is considered authentic . The verses quoted by YOu of BHEEMA having lost senses dont appear there . Niether the vereses where You show Draupadi and Krishna giving sanction of Adultery wrt Karna .
WHen I have read the original , I know these verses do not exist , I cannot acceptsuch verses to be posted . I have also given you the logic as why it is not dharma .
despite that if you keep quoting from unauthentic sources and then say I have countered your point . How far is this tenable .
To prove your point You must show sanskrit verses of Vyas MAhabharath , it is available with gorakhpur press ANd other Indian publications as well . Maharishi Mahesh Site also has a full sanskrit version , download them and see if your verses are there .#
I have given three more links of translation of different people . YOur verses are also not there .
So how can I accept your logic . I repeat my quotes are not FRom Sacred Texts . So I am not saying that what I quote is right and what You quote is wrong and unacceptable. # This is your perception , I am saying the online source you are quoting is unauthentic.
Posted by Surya on 15/05/2009 at 11:26
The links that you’ve provided are not to original versions of Mahabharata. They’re just summaries and links to spam sites. This clearly proves that you yourself have not even visited those links. And then you have the nerve to claim that the verses that I have quoted are not there in those links.
And like a typical coward, you have edited the relevent portions of my posts where I have cornered you, and swallowed completely my elaborate posts where I have exposed your criminal lies against Karna and refuted all your claims. And after removing my posts, you have declared yourself as the winner. 
These are essentially the very same deciets that Arjuna used to kill Karna. Shame on you. When calmer, you yourself go and check the links that you have provided:
http://www.geocities.com/harindranath_a/maha/maha.html
http://www.mahabharataonline.com/translation
http://www.vedicbooks.net/mahabharata-krishna-dwaipayana-vyasa-vols-p-5714.html
Posted by chiraan on 15/05/2009 at 11:49
Shri Surya ,
I think you have lost completely the sense of judgement ,
THe first link is the original online text upload of kisari Ganguly text ,
the second link is the complete text of the ganguly transaltion
here is the copy of first page
……………………………………………….
The Mahabharata
of Krishna-Dwaipayana Vyasa
translated by Kisari Mohan Ganguli
[published between 1883 and 1896]
………………………………………………………………
the third is a print media available for your perusal . If you are serious about knowing the truth you can go through these
http://is1.mum.edu/vedicreserve/itihas.htm
this source is complete download of sanskrit version .
If you cannot see the links and clear text translations , I dont know what else to say .
However these are pointers to the fact that there is no consistency in translation . So one must resort to that version of sanskrit which is uniform in all the libraries across the nation . ANd most importantky the stories in this version should also be supported in other puranas , This is the mark of authenticity .
If tommorrow I edit one source and upload it online [ with concotion] it cannot be held authentic 200 years from now .
EVEN Shri Ganaguly has missed translation to many verses in Raajsuuya parva .
The translation misses the important verse of PAnchala and Drupada sending emmissary to HAstinapur prior to WAr . The emissary was sage MAndavya and his name is totally absent in the translation .
The original Mahabharata shows Karna falling unconscious during Swayamvar of Draupadi while lifting the bow , this has been throroughly edited .
so there are discrepancies ,additions and deletions . thismakes a text unauthentic nline sources cannot betermed as authentic . its original preserved and consisitent with other copied that can be taken as authentic.
Posted by Surya on 14/05/2009 at 20:07
Chiraan:I am quoting from ganguly version which shri ganguly has written , i have given in the previous reply the correct version of ganguly , surely ganguly could not have written in three diffrent english ways as you suggest , where one translation shows ” Hid ” other shows ” concealed ” , it shows discrepancy . so we must resort to other copies of translation when majority shows ” hid” your version becomes faulty . SO I have proved your version is faulty .and unacceptable , you have to show other copies where your draupadi etc foolish statements exist except films and sacred text , I have not quoted from Sacred texts , i have quoted fro kisar ganguly text copy which i have in print .”
Surya: I can point out several posts from you much before myself joining the debate where you have quoted from the Ganguly version in sacred texts. When your “silver screen” version of the story is proven wrong with the original, then it has become unacceptable. Now the onus is on you to quote from the version that is acceptable to you the equivalent version of the following passage:
http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m05/m05140.htm
“Vasudeva said, ‘O son of Radha, thou hast worshipped many Brahmanas fully conversant with the Vedas. With concentrated attention and mind free from envy thou hast also (on many an occasion) enquired of them after truth. Thou knowest, therefore, O Karna, what the eternal saying of the Vedas are. Thou art also well-versed in all the subtle conclusions of the scriptures. It is said by those conversant with the scriptures that the two kinds of sons called Kanina and Sahoda that are born of a maiden, have him for their father who weddeth the maid. Thou, O Karna, hast been born in this way. Thou art, therefore, morally the son of Pandu. Come, be a king, according to the injunction of the scriptures. On the side of thy father, thou hast the sons of Pritha, on the side of thy mother, thou hast the Vrishnis, (for thy kinsmen). O bull among men, know that thou hast these two for thy own. Proceeding this very day with me hence, O sire, let the Pandavas know thee as a son of Kunti born before Yudhishthira. The brothers, the five Pandavas, the son of Draupadi, and the invincible son of Subhadra, will all embrace thy feet. All the kings and princes, again, that have been assembled for the Pandava-cause, and all the Andhakas and Vrishnis, will also embrace thy feet. Let queens and princesses bring golden and silver and earthen jars (full of water) and delicious herbs and all kinds of seeds and gems, and creepers, for thy installation. During the sixth period, Draupadi also will come to thee (as a wife).
The sacred text version is what you are quoting again , Such a verse does not exist in original Mahabharath , if they exist , you must show a sanskrit version , and it must also exist with the other sanskrit version in other libraries . THere no such sanction of Scriptures where a KANIN or SAHODA is given sanction of parenthood . If so show me those scriptures . neither manu , nor , apastamba, nor parashar has given such sanctions , so which scriptures are you talking about by adding the verses as spoken by KRISHNA , ………………………
it is only that Karna was offered the rule of the world , the throne , but not draupadi . it becomes against shastras . …… This is maligning , if you say YOU UNDERSTAND the wrods of KRISHNA so WELL , then in previous post you were abusing KRISHNA of letting KARNA go Duryodhans’ way. so clearly you are not the one who would take Krishna’s words seriously , we are following Krishna’s words tooth and nail . So wrongly concocting the words as having said by Krishna …seriously hampers discussion ……………………………. You are trying to tell that our understanding of DHARMA is faulty . In that case you must quote from DHARMA SHASTRA according to which scriptures a KANIN can inherit the kingdom of husband of mother .
remarriages are not allowed in DHARMA , under which scripture KARNA becomes the husband of DRAUPADI .
falsifying the scriptures is ageold tradition of evil ….
————————————————————————————————————————
Chiraan: Here your real self has come out , Your understanding is faulty is clearly known now .
Draupadi marrying four Pandavs is not adultery . I have written a clear post artcle on that explaining that . NOw You are not only short sighted but also revealing your evil designs and mindtrack . Although i dont intend to repeat what i have said in the article elaborately , but let me bring some good sense to you . Mahabharata was a dharma yudhdha, Bheeshma and every good citizen all felt Pandavs’ were on right side[ Surely I dont think you will put intelligence at stake by saying whole hastinapur was wrong and KArna and duryodhana were right ] , the war took place for a woman’s pride and uplifting dharma , SO Pandav cannot be on wrong side of DHarma . Adultery is adharmik . so whence proved it is no adultery , if you dont understand that, We ALL pity your intellect and upbringing ; [ Read the article and there raise your doubts on Draupadi there in that post , I shall give you befitting answer ]
She was married simulatneously to all five . Marriage is done only once my dear . And after marriage courting other man is adultery [ I hope you have ability to understand English definitions]
Now You have to show me verses and not dodge this draupadi Krishna and KArna . if you have any show it and then come back for discussion .
Suryan: My understanding is consistent with what Lord Krishna says to Karna. It is your understanding that is faulty and inconsistent with the words of Krishna. You think that your understanding is better than Lord Krishna. That’s the crux of the issues here.
I never disputed the fact that Pandavas were on the right side. I disputed your claim that Karna was an evil character and was inferior to Arjun and Bheema. That’s the only point of contention. You are putting your words in my mouth. It was you who claimed that Draupadi marrying Karna would be adultary, not me. Lord Krishna did not feel so. If you pity my intellect and upbringing then you’ll have to do the same for Lord Krishna as well, which is blasphemy. Krishna is talking about Karna marrying Draupadi, not courting her. And as I said, I have quoted from the very source where you had been quoting. If that’s unacceptable to you, then you identify the right source and quote it.
CHiraan : CAn you give me an instant where a woman who is married to a person has been sanctioned to marry other in presence of husband , just because he happens to be his brother …….. which shastra justifies this …… and let me see how conversant you are with Krishna’s words , YOu have all along disputed that BHeeshma ’s killing is adharma , if Krishna’s words so dear to you , you would not have disputed that adharma ……………
Karna’s killinghas also been by the command of Krishna ……. you are disputing this adharma ……. selectively following Krishna’s words does not entitle you to consistency ……………… Moreover I have clearly rejected this as concoction and made up story , its your duty to show that this was a fact by illustrations from various sources ans dharma shastra and puranas , as i usually do to establish a fact . WHat you are doing now is true blasphemy attaching sinful statements to lord
—————————————————————————————————————-
Chiraan: I have shown your silence on many issues that I have countered strongly with facts . then you suddenly deviate to other topics , this shows you are unable to withstand the force of truth and desperately seeking recourse to imagination , in previous post you imgined Karna as having diplomatically accepted Arjun’s superiority and now you are imagining Duryodhan would have given kingdom to KARNA [ I think you are cousin of Duryodhan to read his mind so well ] One who has not given even a pin size place to a brother , what will he give to a friend whom he was using for a selfish end . YOUR FIGMNET OF IMAGINATIONS SHOWS YOUR EXHAUSTION OF LOGIC AND SENSE .
CAn anybody vouch for your statement about duyodhan leaving kingdom for the sake of KARNA a KUNTI PUTRA , now its my turn to laugh …………………………….. I have to repeat your statements are becoming more and more senseless .
Suryan: I have disproved each and every one of your points. But when the truth hurts you cowardly edit it and remove it. This shows you are unable to withstand the force of truth and desperately seeking recourse to editing. Duryodhan accepting Karna is a speculation [as Karna was his best friend], I’ve given the other possibility as well – Karna bestowing the throne on Duryodhan [since Karna was indebted to Duryodhan and was his best friend]. There was no third possibility if Karna had declared the truth. In either cases the war would have ended then and there. Karna did not want to be unjust to Pandavas and did not let either of this happen. That’s the greatness of Karna.
chiraan : Self assumption without giving any upright answers , followed up with imaginative speculations is not called as ” disproving” by your own statements you are admitting you are speculating , imagining , and concocting , how far is this tenable …….. I am enetrtaining this post since you are accusing me of editing , blasphemic statements without source should be edited ……………….. You have nothing to prove except a online version of sacred texts , which I have already rejected showing discrepancy …….. I have also given other links , do some research into those books and show if your verses exist there . SINCE THEY CONCLUSIVELY DONT EXIST THERE AND ELSEWHERE < YOUR WORDS ARE BLASPHEMOUS AND DO NOT DESERVE ATTENTION
Posted by BB on 10/09/2009 at 15:31
Going by simple logic, I think though Krishna may have offered kingdom to Karna owing to his being first son of Kunti, he could not offer Draupadi to him because 1) Kunti said “jo bhi laye ho paancho bhai aapas me baant lo” so even though they all honoured mother’s wish, no need to accept sixth husband for Draupadi 2) when draupadi was in dilemma to marry all 5, krishna reminded her of boon of previous birth that she will have 5 husbands, so there is no possibility of sixth one. and Krishna won’t bite his words later on that no I said six you mishead Draupadi, in case Karn accepts the offer.
I would just like to say that all my comments are based on what I have seen in different TV serials and/or read on net. Also I would personally not believe the sacred text versions as its written by a Britisher Max Muller possibly under British supervision and you can never trust their intentions
Posted by chiraan on 11/09/2009 at 03:25
that was good observation
Posted by Sonu on 14/05/2009 at 22:37
Majority of the responses the Karna supporters have presented to support their arguments have no real evidence. Majority of the interpretation is just all wrong, with supporting evidence it is fair to say that one of the factors is the sources used are not genuine. The rest of the factors are broad-spectrum, one’s upbringing and what they been taught, becoming enthusiast of various people especially where the characteristics resemble and so on.
Intellectual individuals are the first to question the information available on the internet, TV (serials), newspapers, you can’t believe everything you hear, see or read without evidence.
In this topic there are too many contradicting statements to even replicate (none are contradicted by Guru Chiraan, but if anyone thinks so then you have clearly misinterpreted the information).
I have never ever heard of Draupadi to become wife of KARNA. In fact I have never heard of anyone praise Karna accept Karna supporters on this blog.
Karna was put in the river not “thrown” in the river; Kunti clearly felt emotional and had motherly love, the reasons why she could not accept Karna has been explained on this post. I am fully aware the circumstance`s are different, but even Lord Krishna was not brought up by his biological parents. Lord Krishna could have defeated his evil uncle much earlier, the point I am trying to emphasis is there is always a reason for why, who, what, when, where and law of Karma plays a role. As mentioned a number of time by Guru Chiraan, facts need to be right and well understood in order to have a productive and to the point debate.
Do Karna supports actually believe in God or not? Your very existence and everything you have is due to Gods Grace (Krishna) and not soul`s like Karna.
It is highly worrying and frustrating that God is insulted in many ways (being literally called a cheater).
Below are just some of the quotes directly from this blog from Karna supporters, they show insults and contradictions in beliefs.
“Let Lord Krishna decide who has knowledge and who hasn’t, who has right to discuss and who hasn’t.”
“If war had been so easy to win, Krishna would not had suggested so many tricks.”
“Gods Grace”
“The whole blame for Duryodhana befriending Karna goes to Kunti and Krishna.”
Supporting evil will cloud your mind and emotions, correct simple information will become difficult to digest. Concentration on having love and devotion for God would be a lot more fruitful rather than insulting and going against God. From supporting the wrong over right, I really hope the consequences are fully understood too? Bearing in mind “law of karma”.
regards
Sonu
Posted by Surya on 15/05/2009 at 12:17
Sonu: Majority of the responses the Karna supporters have presented to support their arguments have no real evidence.
Surya: Sonu, that’s because the “real evidences” have been edited and removed by your beloved “Guruji”.
Just ask him how many of the evidences he has removed from my posts. The stategy of your Guruji is simple – Edit and remove the evidences from the posts and make his posts look superior.
Sonu: Majority of the interpretation is just all wrong, with supporting evidence it is fair to say that one of the factors is the sources used are not genuine. The rest of the factors are broad-spectrum, one’s upbringing and what they been taught, becoming enthusiast of various people especially where the characteristics resemble and so on.
Surya: My challenge is open. You point out the version that is acceptable to you. I’ll quote from there. Or you yourself quote from the version that is acceptable to you the equivalent passeges that I have quoted. Can you do that?
Sonu: Intellectual individuals are the first to question the information available on the internet, TV (serials), newspapers, you can’t believe everything you hear, see or read without evidence.
Surya: Definitely. That’s what I’m saying too…
Sonu: In this topic there are too many contradicting statements to even replicate (none are contradicted by Guru Chiraan, but if anyone thinks so then you have clearly misinterpreted the information).
Surya: I challenge you to point out just one contradiction. Your guruju swallowed my answers to his posts when he found that his arguments have been proven wrong.
Sonu: I have never ever heard of Draupadi to become wife of KARNA. In fact I have never heard of anyone praise Karna accept Karna supporters on this blog.
Surya: That was a proposal made by Krishna to Karna. I have clearly quoted the source as well. If you think that this is adulterated, then why don’t you quote the same passage from the version that is acceptable to you? I challenge you to do that.
Sonu: Karna was put in the river not “thrown” in the river; Kunti clearly felt emotional and had motherly love, the reasons why she could not accept Karna has been explained on this post. I am fully aware the circumstance`s are different, but even Lord Krishna was not brought up by his biological parents.
Surya: Lord Krishna was not brought up by his biological parents due to the theat to Krishna’s life from Kamsa. There was no selfishness there. But in case of Kunti, she abandoned him for her own personal comfort and well being.
Sonu: Do Karna supports actually believe in God or not? Your very existence and everything you have is due to Gods Grace (Krishna) and not soul`s like Karna.
It is highly worrying and frustrating that God is insulted in many ways (being literally called a cheater).
Surya: These are totally irrelevent to the points discussed here. The debating point is whether Karna is evil and whether Karna is inferior to Arjun/Bheema.
Sonu: Below are just some of the quotes directly from this blog from Karna supporters, they show insults and contradictions in beliefs.
“Let Lord Krishna decide who has knowledge and who hasn’t, who has right to discuss and who hasn’t.”
“If war had been so easy to win, Krishna would not had suggested so many tricks.”
“Gods Grace”
“The whole blame for Duryodhana befriending Karna goes to Kunti and Krishna.”
Surya: Can you challenge even a single point raised by me? If Krishna or Kunti had revealed the truth to Karna anytime before the tournament, then Karna would have joined the Pandavas. Who is to be blamed for not informing Karna of the truth? Did Karna have any means to know the evil designs that Duryodhana was going to plot in the future, when Karna accepted Duryodhana’s friendship?
Sonu: Supporting evil will cloud your mind and emotions, correct simple information will become difficult to digest. Concentration on having love and devotion for God would be a lot more fruitful rather than insulting and going against God. From supporting the wrong over right, I really hope the consequences are fully understood too? Bearing in mind “law of karma”.
Surya: Nobody supported evil here. The point is simple. For the good to prevail, the powerful warriors from the Kaurava side like Karna had to be eliminated. Krishna knew that Karna could not be defeated by Arjuna or Bheema. Hence Krishna advised Arjuna to use deciet to kill Karna. That’s the simple truth. I never objected to it. My objection is to the point that Arjuna/Bheema are superior to Karna.
Posted by chiraan on 15/05/2009 at 13:56
Shri Surya ,
By your own admission ,it is kown that you are speculating and imagining , this is not called as disproving . Speculations and imaginations do not hold ground .You have to show valid proof in terms of words of many as acceptable to all .
On what basis you are making challenge ? Let’s go one by one . Answer my this question .
You have not yet given any answer to why Karna Lost to Arjun earlier , when Karna had Kavach and Kundal and all the boons . Arjun without Gandiva , boons or armour , not only defeated Karna but all the warriors together .#
Defeat means , Karna accepted defeat and stopped the fight once , in the next he was totally vanquished where his dress was also taken away .[ Dont you feel this as shame to a great warrior ]
Is there any INcidence where Karna won unanimously over Arjun ?
why did Karna lose to Gandharva he was captivated along with Duryodhan [ shame again to a great warrior he was captivated ] Arjun saved him by defeating Gandharva whom Karna could not defeat proves superiority 1
Still you say Arjun is not greater than KArna . I say a defeated warrior is inferior . c’mon give your say again . then we will move to next point . this way we will have fruit ful discussion readable by all .
Let us see what you have to disprove . Nothing will be edited . take one more chance .
Posted by Surya on 15/05/2009 at 15:57
What is the point in answering any of your question? You are going to remove it anyway. First post my earlier answers and unedited versions of my posts. Only then I’ll answer your questions, else it is a total waste of my time and efforts. You have seriously compromised your credibility by editing my posts and removing my posts whenever I’ve proven you wrong. Now you want me to again answer your questions? What for? To exercise your scissors again, edit out the evidences that I cite and declare yourself winner? Ha ha, nice try. First you repair your credibility by re-instating my posts where I have proven you wrong. Then I’ll answer your further questions.
Posted by chiraan on 15/05/2009 at 16:04
Resorting to blasphemous statements concocted in allied sources are not called [proving wrong] . i had edited them because they are in poor state of mind . and they did not pertain to any of the question I have raised . Now your refusal to answer these questions shows you have no answers .
Except quoting from “sacred texts” you have no other source to quote from .
Posted by chiraan on 15/05/2009 at 16:09
May be you dont have answer to this one . let me move on to next question .
Why Karna could not kill Ghatotkach with plain archery if he was great warrior , his skills should have been enough to kill Ghatotkach ? why he had to use his Shakti only . [ that means withou shakti he is useless]
Look at Arjun He killed Khilavats , Shamsaptak and many more Rakshashas and yet He was ready to fight other warriors . His weapons did not get exhausted . [ Without shakti ,kavach kundal , KArna is an ordinary warrior ] even without these Arjun unanimously won . He is superior warrior .
any more imaginations and speculations you have here to disprove. You seem to have very fertile imagination . I will wait for your answer ……………….. then we move on to nextpoint .
score Arjun is superior here again .
Posted by chiraan on 15/05/2009 at 16:26
Arjun defeated celestials devatas like INdra , varun ,skanda all put together . Karna was defeated by small gandharva .
Arjun went a step ahead , he equalled MAhadev[ Rudra ,shiva] in archery when bothe tired , cast aside their bows and resorted to mantra yudhdha , Rudra excelled and then gave pashupataastra to ARjun happy at his skills .
Karna has no instance to prove his superiority , because Gandharvas are very very small deity [ gandharvas are servants of Devatas] , he was captivated . But for arjun who saved him he would have been a slave to the gandharva or lkanguishing in his prison along with his dear freid Duryodhan [ what's use of he could not save his friend but he could not show his gratitude towards ARJUN who saved him ]
Any answers or speculation for this ARJUn is superior because he has defeated INdra . karna is inferior he was saved by ARjun
Posted by Surya on 15/05/2009 at 17:34
Ha ha, after removing my posts that proves all these claims wrong, you’re continuing your monologue to convince yourself of Arjun’s supremacy. Carry on.
Your speciality seems to be to disarm your opponent with the editor’s scissors and attack the unarmed opponent. Co-incidentally that seems to be the speciality of Arjun as well. 
Posted by Surya on 15/05/2009 at 17:26
I did not make any blasphemous statement. I quoted the original Mahabharata from sacred texts as it is which shows Bheem running for his life from Karna and Karna magnanimously sparing him . I also challenged you to quote the equivalent verses from the version of Mahabharatha that you deem authentic. But you are unable to do that. I can very well quote from other sources as well. But what’s the point? Going by your track record, you’ll reject that too as adulterated.
So now the ball is in your court. Re-instate my posts and show the equivalent passages from the version that you deem authentic, adjacent to my quotes from sacred text. We can take it forward from there.
Posted by chiraan on 15/05/2009 at 19:33
Shri Surya let me take you to some course on original Mahabharata
the following is the extract of sanskrit version as present in ” your source SACRED TEXTS ” , i am also giving the english transliteration of the same as given by the ” your holy SACRED TEXT ” [ look at the discrepance in sanskrit version and english tranliteration ] These are the same words that you have quoted as translated from……. if you dont know sanskrit let me help you …………. you can mark the words ” KANIN SAHODA ………..etc
after the transliteration I will give the link to unedited original MAHABHARATA verses , kindly find the difference[ in terms of jugulary of words ,misplacement of letters , sanskrit is known to give different meanings in displacement of letters ] and then I give the meaning of each verses in english .
Sacred text sanskrit version
7 तवम एव कर्ण जानासि वेथवाथान सनातनान
तवं हय एव धर्मशास्त्रेषु सूक्ष्मेषु परिनिष्ठितः
8 कानीनश च सहॊढश च कन्यायां यश च जायते
वॊढारं पितरं तस्य पराहुः शास्त्रविथॊ जनाः
9 सॊ ऽसि कर्ण तदा जातः पाण्डॊः पुत्रॊ ऽसि धर्मतः
निग्रहाथ धर्मशास्त्राणाम एहि राजा भविष्यसि
10 पितृपक्षे हि ते पार्दा मातृपक्षे च वृष्णयः
थवौ पक्षाव अभिजानीहि तवम एतौ पुरुषर्षभ
11 मया सार्धम इतॊ यातम अथ्य तवां तात पाण्डवाः
अभिजानन्तु कौन्तेयं पूर्वजातं युधिष्ठिरात
12 पाथौ तव गरहीष्यन्ति भरातरः पञ्च पाण्डवाः
थरौपथेयास तदा पञ्च सौभथ्रश चापराजितः
13 राजानॊ राजपुत्राश च पाण्डवार्दे समागताः
पाथौ तव गरहीष्यन्ति सर्वे चान्धकवृष्णयः
14 हिरण्मयांश च ते कुम्भान राजतान पार्दिवांस तदा
ओषध्यः सर्वबीजानि सर्वरत्नानि वीरुधः
15 राजन्या राजकन्याश चाप्य आनयन्त्व अभिषेचनम
षष्ठे च तवां तदा काले थरौपथ्य उपगमिष्यति
16 अथ्य तवाम अभिषिञ्चन्तु चातुर्वैथ्या थविजातयः
पुरॊहितः पाण्डवानां वयाघ्रचर्मण्य अवस्दितम
17 तदैव भरातरः पञ्च पाण्डवाः पुरुषर्षभाः
थरौपथेयास तदा पञ्च पाञ्चालाश चेथयस तदा
18 अहं च तवाभिषेक्ष्यामि राजानं पृदिवीपतिम
युवराजॊ ऽसतु ते राजा कुन्तीपुत्रॊ युधिष्ठिरः
19 गृहीत्वा वयसनं शवेतं धर्मात्मा संशितव्रतः
उपान्वारॊहतु रदं कुन्तीपुत्रॊ युधिष्ठिरः
20 छत्रं च ते महच छवेतं भीमसेनॊ महाबलः
अभिषिक्तस्य कौनेय कौन्तेयॊ धारयिष्यति
21 किङ्किणीशतनिर्घॊषं वैयाघ्रपरिवारणम
रदं शवेतहयैर युक्तम अर्जुनॊ वाहयिष्यति
22 अभिमन्युश च ते नित्यं परत्यासन्नॊ भविष्यति
नकुलः सहथेवश च थरौपथेयाश च पञ्च ये
Sacred text version
Sacred english transliteration
7 tvam eva karṇa jānāsi vedavādān sanātanān
tvaṃ hy eva dharmaśāstreṣu sūkṣmeṣu pariniṣṭhitaḥ
8 kānīnaś ca sahoḍhaś ca kanyāyāṃ yaś ca jāyate
voḍhāraṃ pitaraṃ tasya prāhuḥ śāstravido janāḥ
9 so ’si karṇa tathā jātaḥ pāṇḍoḥ putro ’si dharmataḥ
nigrahād dharmaśāstrāṇām ehi rājā bhaviṣyasi
10 pitṛpakṣe hi te pārthā mātṛpakṣe ca vṛṣṇayaḥ
dvau pakṣāv abhijānīhi tvam etau puruṣarṣabha
11 mayā sārdham ito yātam adya tvāṃ tāta pāṇḍavāḥ
abhijānantu kaunteyaṃ pūrvajātaṃ yudhiṣṭhirāt
12 pādau tava grahīṣyanti bhrātaraḥ pañca pāṇḍavāḥ
draupadeyās tathā pañca saubhadraś cāparājitaḥ
13 rājāno rājaputrāś ca pāṇḍavārthe samāgatāḥ
pādau tava grahīṣyanti sarve cāndhakavṛṣṇayaḥ
14 hiraṇmayāṃś ca te kumbhān rājatān pārthivāṃs tathā
oṣadhyaḥ sarvabījāni sarvaratnāni vīrudhaḥ
15 rājanyā rājakanyāś cāpy ānayantv abhiṣecanam
ṣaṣṭhe ca tvāṃ tathā kāle draupady upagamiṣyati
16 adya tvām abhiṣiñcantu cāturvaidyā dvijātayaḥ
purohitaḥ pāṇḍavānāṃ vyāghracarmaṇy avasthitam
17 tathaiva bhrātaraḥ pañca pāṇḍavāḥ puruṣarṣabhāḥ
draupadeyās tathā pañca pāñcālāś cedayas tathā
18 ahaṃ ca tvābhiṣekṣyāmi rājānaṃ pṛthivīpatim
yuvarājo ’stu te rājā kuntīputro yudhiṣṭhiraḥ
19 gṛhītvā vyasanaṃ śvetaṃ dharmātmā saṃśitavrataḥ
another version of mahabharath sanskrit version
http://chiraan.wordpress.com/files/2009/05/udyog-parva.jpg
Posted by chiraan on 15/05/2009 at 19:46
The verses say KANIN and SAHODA are born out of KAnya |
vodharam pitarm = the father known to have been brought in ………. prahu = word from praya means as perhaps complied by the shashtravido jana: = the learned in shashtras ,
the sentence has been shown as accepted in shastras by the learned ,
next see the next line
pandoh putrosi dharmatah nigrahad dharmashashtranam ehi raja bhavishyasi |
mark the word nigrahad , this means objected by shunned by , abhored by ;
what lord is saying even if learned abhor such words of you being PAndu putra [ perhaps complied as one brought in by kanya mother ] you shall be made KING .
Lord is not giving sanction to his birth . he is still being maintained as KANIN and his father as vodhar .
His being Pandu puthra is not acceptable to dharma shastra is what LOrd is saying .
contrarily the translations have been bungled .
Posted by chiraan on 15/05/2009 at 20:09
Lets move to important verse 15
in this verse sanskrit version mentions ” kale tharoupathya english version “kale draupadya upagamishyati” [ look at the discepancy ]
the other version says ” kale atha aroupitya upagamishyati ”
even if you take ” kale draupadi upagamishyati ” it still does not give the meaning what has been translated .
let me elaborate
mark the word ” shashte” it is followed by “cha” and then ” tvam”
it means those six and you at that time while you are being enthroned [ rajya abhishek aropitya ] upagamishyati [ will abide by you ]
see the verse berore this verse 14 talks about abhishek [ abhishinchanam with aushadhi and ratnani ]
and see the verse after that 16 talks about [tvam abhishinchantu chaturvaidhya] that shows the context here is that of abhisheka to KArna [ illustrated by Krishna ]
and not about the sixth period of draupadi .
shashte ch tvam [ who are the six , five pandavas and Draupadi ] , it is not written shashth kale [ sixth period]
its written shashthe ch tvam [ those six and you] tatha kale [ at that time ] why tatha is being forgotten ;
there is no mention of draupadi marrying or courting Karna [ as concocted by you and your sacred text idiots ]
And when the cotext is that of abhisheka how come intermittently a krishna suggest about giving draupadi and again continue with abhisheka by purohit . this is out of context , and not written there , [ upagamishyati does not mean courting , upagamishyati does not mean marriage ] upagamishyati means , to ahdre to , to abide by . to acknowledge , to come near , all the six are abiding , there is no mention of sixth period .
I have proved your text source as unauthentic …………………..
Posted by Surya on 15/05/2009 at 20:25
http://www.mahabharataonline.com/translation/mahabharata_05140.php
“Vasudeva said, ‘O son of Radha, thou hast worshipped many Brahmanas fully conversant with the Vedas. With concentrated attention and mind free from envy thou hast also (on many an occasion) enquired of them after truth. Thou knowest, therefore, O Karna, what the eternal saying of the Vedas are. Thou art also well-versed in all the subtle conclusions of the scriptures. It is said by those conversant with the scriptures that the two kinds of sons called Kanina and Sahoda that are born of a maiden, have him for their father who weddeth the maid. Thou, O Karna, hast been born in this way. Thou art, therefore, morally the son of Pandu. Come, be a king, according to the injunction of the scriptures. On the side of thy father, thou hast the sons of Pritha, on the side of thy mother, thou hast the Vrishnis, (for thy kinsmen). O bull among men, know that thou hast these two for thy own. Proceeding this very day with me hence, O sire, let the Pandavas know thee as a son of Kunti born before Yudhishthira. The brothers, the five Pandavas, the son of Draupadi, and the invincible son of Subhadra, will all embrace thy feet. All the kings and princes, again, that have been assembled for the Pandava-cause, and all the Andhakas and Vrishnis, will also embrace thy feet. Let queens and princesses bring golden and silver and earthen jars (full of water) and delicious herbs and all kinds of seeds and gems, and creepers, for thy installation. During the sixth period, Draupadi also will come to thee (as a wife).
Chiraan’s views ,
http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/mbs/mbs05138.htm
your verses are translation of this chapter 138 udyog parva of Mahabharatha . you can see verses and discrepancy in sanskrit and english transliteration .
below is the another sanskrit version
http://chiraan.wordpress.com/files/2009/05/udyog-parva.jpg
if you can read sanskrit see the discrepancy .
now let me show which verses you are quoting from that is verse 15 .
let me reproduce that
14 हिरण्मयांश च ते कुम्भान राजतान पार्दिवांस तदा
ओषध्यः सर्वबीजानि सर्वरत्नानि वीरुधः
15 राजन्या राजकन्याश चाप्य आनयन्त्व अभिषेचनम
षष्ठे च तवां तदा काले थरौपथ्य उपगमिष्यति
16 अथ्य तवाम अभिषिञ्चन्तु चातुर्वैथ्या थविजातयः
पुरॊहितः पाण्डवानां वयाघ्रचर्मण्य अवस्दितम
14 hiraṇmayāṃś ca te kumbhān rājatān pārthivāṃs tathā
oṣadhyaḥ sarvabījāni sarvaratnāni vīrudhaḥ
15 rājanyā rājakanyāś cāpy ānayantv abhiṣecanam
ṣaṣṭhe ca tvāṃ tathā kāle draupady upagamiṣyati
16 adya tvām abhiṣiñcantu cāturvaidyā dvijātayaḥ
purohitaḥ pāṇḍavānāṃ vyāghracarmaṇy avasthitam
The verses
During the sixth period, Draupadi also will come to thee (as a wife).
15 rājanyā rājakanyāś cāpy ānayantv abhiṣecanam
ṣaṣṭhe ca tvāṃ tathā kāle draupady upagamiṣyati
show me where you can find the sanskrit word wife [ that you and yourtranslators have put in bracket ] exist .
upagamishyati does not mean wife .
shashte ch tvam [ six and you ] where is sixth period .
tatha kale means – at that time .
and see the sanskrit version shows as kaleth aropatya and not as kale draupadya ………
YOu are basing your arguments assuming what you are reading in English is the most accurate and final verdict on the issue .NO logical person ever accepts anything without inspection . I had said , I am quoting from the original , and where the original is not conflicting with the online version I am quoting . There are many online versions and they are contradictory with original as such quoting original is important , [ in my previous post i have made clear how Ganguly has also missed certain issues . ]
If you think you have found certain translation [ blasphemous ] and start dancing around its not going to help you see the truth .
Posted by Surya on 16/05/2009 at 06:51
I do not make any assumption of any particular version as the most authentic. I challenged you to quote from any source that you deem authentic. Rather than doing it, you’re translating it yourself according to your pre-conceived notions.
This is not acceptable at all. Sanskrit texts should be translated only by scholars. I’m willing to accept any translation that is well accepted. Should I believe Ganguly’s translation that is internationally accepted, or Chiraan’s translation? 
Posted by Surya on 16/05/2009 at 12:57
Though I knew right from the beginning that your translation is fraudulent, I just thought of checking it up. You have fraudulently claimed that “थरौपथ्य” in your quote is “tharoupathya” and not draupadya and that it does not refer to Draupadi. Nothing can be further from the truth. Look at the other passages in Mahabharata that refer to “थरौपथ्य”:
http://www.aryabharati.org/mahabharat/mahabharsn.asp?ln=sn&bk=03&pt=a&pg=030
तस्यात्मानं संत्यजतॊ लॊका नश्यन्त्य अनात्मनः
तस्माथ थरौपथ्य अशक्तस्य मन्यॊर नियमनं समृतम
http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/mbs/mbs01188.htm
ततॊ मुहूर्तान मधुरां वाणीम उच्चार्य पार्षतः
पप्रच्छ तं महात्मानं थरौपथ्य अर्दे विशां पतिः
Contrary to your fraudulent concoction, it is very evident that the sacred text and mahabharataOnline carries the correct translation of the above passage. fyi, the verbiage of Sanskrit poetic language does not follow that of English. If we reorganize the above quote according to English construction it will be as follows:
षष्ठे च तवां तदा काले थरौपथ्य उपगमिष्यति
(During sixth period, Draupadi will come to you)
Posted by Sonu on 15/05/2009 at 14:07
You will get a response from (only where necessary and worth talking about), I know I am going to have structure my answer where it will be simple and easy to understand, as I only intend to do it once especially if my points are missed, because afterwards it is a waste of time.
Irrelevant thoughts , discussions, etc, has been started by Karna supporters hence they have been elaborated, especially where God is concerned.
Posted by Surya on 15/05/2009 at 16:09
I have got plenty of responses to each and every one of my post. According to your own words, this means that my posts have been worth talking about.
The present issue is your and your Guruji’s claim that what I’m quoting is from adulterated source. Then why don’t you take up my challenge and post the corresponding verses from the unadulterated source? Anybody can just claim that the source is adulterated and persist with his arguments fanatically without any basis. But if your argument has even an iota of credibility then you have the moral responsibility to quote from the source that you deem authentic. Can you do that?
Posted by chiraan on 15/05/2009 at 16:37
I will certainly do that , wait till I complete with karna’s defeat saga , then i will quote from original and also supportive sources . I am not handicapped with sources as you are miserable with a single translation . keep patience till I show few more debacles of the so called dubiously Great KARNA
Your posts are indeed worth mentioning because it brings life to the fact that , a man in his eagerness to justify evil [in moha] does not stop at stooping so low as to defile a woman of great character and chastity , it does not stop at that they do not fear to raise a finger at the very GOD Krishna
Posted by Surya on 15/05/2009 at 18:15
I’m not handicapped with a single translation. Multiple times I’ve offered willingness to quote from the source that you deem authentic. I’m handicapped with your editors scissors with which you chop off my citations of Karna’s greatness and the failings of Arjun/Bheema and then declare yourself victorious.
I could post from other sources as well, but what is the point? Going by your track record, you’ll edit that too alleging that they’re spurious too. 
If you had even an iota of faith that Arjun/Bheem were unassailable, then you would not have removed my post claiming that the source is spurious. Rather you would have countered by posting the corresponding passage from the post that you deem authentic. But like Arjuna, you continue to shoot your scandelous arrows with absolutely no basis whatsoever on the unarmed opponents[by removing the opponents post that disprove your allegations].
Posted by Surya on 15/05/2009 at 20:12
Now since sacred text.com has become your mortal enemy, let me quote the same passage from the site that you used to quote until I entered the debate:
http://www.mahabharataonline.com/translation/mahabharata_05140.php
“Vasudeva said, ‘O son of Radha, thou hast worshipped many Brahmanas fully conversant with the Vedas. With concentrated attention and mind free from envy thou hast also (on many an occasion) enquired of them after truth. Thou knowest, therefore, O Karna, what the eternal saying of the Vedas are. Thou art also well-versed in all the subtle conclusions of the scriptures. It is said by those conversant with the scriptures that the two kinds of sons called Kanina and Sahoda that are born of a maiden, have him for their father who weddeth the maid. Thou, O Karna, hast been born in this way. Thou art, therefore, morally the son of Pandu. Come, be a king, according to the injunction of the scriptures. On the side of thy father, thou hast the sons of Pritha, on the side of thy mother, thou hast the Vrishnis, (for thy kinsmen). O bull among men, know that thou hast these two for thy own. Proceeding this very day with me hence, O sire, let the Pandavas know thee as a son of Kunti born before Yudhishthira. The brothers, the five Pandavas, the son of Draupadi, and the invincible son of Subhadra, will all embrace thy feet. All the kings and princes, again, that have been assembled for the Pandava-cause, and all the Andhakas and Vrishnis, will also embrace thy feet. Let queens and princesses bring golden and silver and earthen jars (full of water) and delicious herbs and all kinds of seeds and gems, and creepers, for thy installation. During the sixth period, Draupadi also will come to thee (as a wife).
This site is also adulterated, isn’t it? It had not been adulterated until I joined the debate and you had been quoting from there. May be somebody has adulterated it after I joined the debate. 
This was one of your prior quoted from this site:
But the son of the chastiser of Paka (viz., Arjuna) gratified his father by baffling that shower also with his swift arrows
http://www.mahabharataonline.com/translation/mahabharata_01230.php
…………………………………………………………………..End of extract
Chiraan’s view :
those quotation which are in coherence with original I have quoted and shown to exist online . As fas as originals are maintained there cannot be falacy of thought . only when originals are tampered with , we ahave to resort to originals and other copies.
let me counter your son of pandu …….. quote with original … the verses are these you can mark word kanin and sahoda for your reference .
8 kānīnaś ca sahoḍhaś ca kanyāyāṃ yaś ca jāyate
voḍhāraṃ pitaraṃ tasya prāhuḥ śāstravido janāḥ
9 so ’si karṇa tathā jātaḥ pāṇḍoḥ putro ’si dharmataḥ
nigrahād dharmaśāstrāṇām ehi rājā bhaviṣyasi
vodharam pitaram means one who has brought in father [ brought in by mother;s marriage ] it is complied by learned . Nobody is declaring the child as legitimate . the new person is called brought in father .[ so asi karna] likewise . you being PAndu Puthra as per dharma is abhored [nigrahad ] in dharmashastra ehi [even then ] you shall be king .
can you understand english and translation now . Go and get it verified , stop jumping to blasphemous conclusions .
what i have done in previous few posts is called as disproving and not quoting erroneous texts and basing on someone else’s translations .
I shall now give some more texts and transaltions in sanskrit written by great saints to support my analysis of sanskrit lines .
I am not handicapped like you in being dependent on sacred texts or english versions to learn our holy texts .
Posted by vikrant goyal on 15/05/2009 at 11:28
hi chiraan,
first it ll be really foolish to hate lord krishna. and the way i have read comment on this page doesn’t seems that they possibly hate lord krishna or pandavas for that matter. i don’t know much but i think they hate you instead for not understanding their logic.
and if you have doubt about my saying show your page to another 100 unbaised people and without fail everybody would come to the same conclusion.
Posted by chiraan on 15/05/2009 at 11:53
Most of the Karna supporters are especially Shri SUrya is of the opinion that Duryodhan and Shakuni and KArna were cultured people as they addresed each other respectfully and It was Lord Krishna who had cheated and responsible for KArna to side with Duryodhan and in ecstasy to uphold Arjun has done grave injustice to these trio . They are out to prove Draupadi as Unchaste and Karna as principled in having said so .
This type of thinking is hate personified. God and his qualities are no different , pointing out defects in GOD is akin to hate . This is what I have establishing all through .
Well as for the hate towards me , Evil always hate Vishnu bhaktas .
Posted by Sonu on 15/05/2009 at 12:34
“Hate” is a very big word, but yes it IS really foolish to “hate” Lord Krishna. In this blog nobody has used the word “hate” where the lord is concerned.
You have said “I don’t know much”, you seem really polite and I really don’t mean to sound offensive to you, but in order to comment, you do need to know.
One’s logic is extremely difficult to understand if contradicting statements are made, sources used are not reliable, one cannot think straight and when supporting evidence is not provided. A soul like Karna is supported by means of even insulting God, hence I have emphasised more on insulting Lord Krishna and statements that show contradicting beliefs, and this is bound to pose questions and further debates.
You haven’t directly called me biased and I would like to say I am not BIASED. I only have interest in God and I would like to learn what is right and wrong and live my life correctly, Ramayana and Mahabharata teaches this, it is there so one can learn from it. I can clearly see the point Guru Chiraanji made about this post has been missed and turned into lengthy debates. Guru Chiraan has written other posts on Pandavas and how some of them their paid for their Karma, he is not biased either.
Posted by Sonu on 15/05/2009 at 13:17
“Pointing out defects in GOD is akin to hate”, I do agree with this statement. Before anyone does get offended please note the word ‘AKIN’ in the statement. It is true “Evil always hate Vishnu bhaktas”, Ramayana and Mahabharata has many examples of this.
I did mention “hate” is a big word and it had not been used where the Lord is concerned until people supporting Karna supporter`s used it, but it appears like “hate” is an easy word for some people to use and somewhat understand.
Posted by Surya on 16/05/2009 at 14:45
I don’t need to counter you with rules of grammer or anything of that sort. You are resorting to red herrings when your fraudulent translation is pointed out. I proved my point by quoting the authentic translation that is accepted all over the world. You’re deliberately trying to discredit Ganguli using your concocted translations only to reinstate your fallen heros. I challenged you several times to point out one authentic translation that is consistent with your concocted version. You can’t do that. So you try to take the discussion astray by demanding rules in Sanskrit. Accordin+g to you neither me nor Shri Ganguli nor Vyasa know sanskrit, only you know it.
Posted by chiraan on 16/05/2009 at 14:51
Finally you have accepted you dont know how to counter the points . so you have no right to discuss further . I have descively shown mistakes you should disprove it or accept it . [ You have claimed you have fertile imagination and good at speculative debate ] why cant you speculate few sanskrit rules here . that will show how sensless you have been allthrough in quoting erroneous texts .
Ther are several translations , I have given some extracts of Arjun winning and Satyaki winning all from the original . You have no answer yet to those verses . You thought usage of lasphemous sentences would make us shy away from discussion , when proved wrong you are crying foul . it is akin to KARNA .
Posted by Surya on 17/05/2009 at 07:43
>>I have given some extracts of Arjun winning and Satyaki winning all from the original . You have no answer yet to those verses .
I have given proper answers to that and refuted your arguments. But you have conveniently edited and removed my answers. And then you have the nerve to claim that I have no answer.
Chiraan–Repost it I will Answer befittingly , what makes you shy away , perhaps you have forgotten the verses . Am I not answering your repeated chatter again and again with vigour . I have vowed to make you speechless , that’s why i am posting your illogical views . else You dont deserve any answer because Senselessness is althrough exhibited.
Posted by Surya on 17/05/2009 at 18:41
>>Chiraan–Repost it I will Answer befittingly , what makes you shy away , perhaps you have forgotten the verses . Am I not answering your repeated chatter again and again with vigour . I have vowed to make you speechless , that’s why i am posting your illogical views . else You dont deserve any answer because Senselessness is althrough exhibited.
———–
I haven’t kept the backup of all my posts. But that doesn’t matter. If you promise me that you’ll never edit or swallow my posts till the end of this debate then I’m willing to prepare it again. I’m also willing to post the ones which I have backed up. Are you willing to make such a promise?
It is not my view, rather it is your views that are illogical. If wikipedia is against your contentions, then it is adulterated. Fine, then I quote the authentic traslation of the original from sacred-texts. Then that too is adulterated according to you. Fine again, I quote the authentic translation from mahabharataOnline.com from where you yourself used to quote. And you claim that this is spurious as well. Now you claim that onlyl your concocted translation is authentic, rest all are spurious.
It is very clear that it is your understanding that is adulterated, and not these sources.
Posted by Sonu on 17/05/2009 at 00:38
1. Sonu: Majority of the responses the Karna supporters have presented to support their arguments have no real evidence.
1. Surya: Sonu, that’s because the “real evidences” have been edited and removed by your beloved “Guruji”. Just ask him how many of the evidences he has removed from my posts. The stategy of your Guruji is simple – Edit and remove the evidences from the posts and make his posts look superior.
1. Sonu: I don’t believe anything you say, you really need to get over yourself and learn to have respect.
2. Sonu: Majority of the interpretation is just all wrong, with supporting evidence it is fair to say that one of the factors is the sources used are not genuine. The rest of the factors are broad-spectrum, one’s upbringing and what they been taught, becoming enthusiast of various people especially where the characteristics resemble and so on.
2. Surya: My challenge is open. You point out the version that is acceptable to you. I’ll quote from there. Or you yourself quote from the version that is acceptable to you the equivalent passages that I have quoted. Can you do that?
2. Sonu: http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Arjuna
this link makes logical sense with supporting references, at the bottom of the page.
I will make quotes from the following book at the bottom.
Book: The Greatest Spiritual Epic of All Time MAHABHARTA / Retold by Krishna Dharma. Second printing 2007. ISBN 978-1-887089-13-5
3. Sonu: Intellectual individuals are the first to question the information available on the internet, TV (serials), newspapers, you can’t believe everything you hear, see or read without evidence.
3. Surya: Definitely. That’s what I’m saying too…
3. Sonu: I am glad you actually agree on something, but it would be more appreciated if it was followed.
4. Sonu: In this topic there are too many contradicting statements to even replicate (none are contradicted by Guru Chiraan, but if anyone thinks so then you have clearly misinterpreted the information).
4. Surya: I challenge you to point out just one contradiction. Your guruju swallowed my answers to his posts when he found that his arguments have been proven wrong.
4. Sonu: Again, I don’t believe you, it seems like the best excuse you have to cover yourself, but it really is a lame excuse, it is better to admit to your own mistakes. There are just too many contradictions and to even waddle through your text presented is a waste of time. Guruji Chiraan has mentioned numerous contradictions already.
In one of your statements you said “Let Lord Krishna decide who has knowledge and who hasn’t, who has right to discuss and who hasn’t.” In another statement you made “The whole blame for Duryodhana befriending Karna goes to Kunti and Krishna.” So one minute you acknowledge that everything is in Gods hands and one minute you are blaming God.
5. Sonu: I have never ever heard of Draupadi to become wife of KARNA. In fact I have never heard of anyone praise Karna accept Karna supporters on this blog.
5. Surya: That was a proposal made by Krishna to Karna. I have clearly quoted the source as well. If you think that this is adulterated, then why don’t you quote the same passage from the version that is acceptable to you? I challenge you to do that.
5. Sonu: I don’t approve from the source you have quoted from, I have never seen it in genuine sources. Book: The Greatest Spiritual Epic of All Time MAHABHARTA / Retold by Krishna Dharma. Second printing 2007. ISBN 978-1-887089-13-5
PAGE 105
Direct quotes from the book: Draupadi`s Swayamvara: when it was Karna`s turn “as he approached the bow, however, Draupadi stood up and said in a loud voice, “I shall not accept a charioteer’s son as my husband”. “Draupadi exercised her prerogative and denied him the opportunity to attempt the test. Karna blushed deeply and laughed in vexation”. “It was Draupadi`s destiny to marry Arujuna”. How she became the wife of all 5 Pandavas has been explained, elaborating this topic falls outside the scope of this debate, below you said “The debating point is whether Karna is evil and whether Karna is inferior to Arjun/Bheema.” Furthermore, you clearly misinterpret information and it would be beyond your understanding.
6. Sonu: Karna was put in the river not “thrown” in the river; Kunti clearly felt emotional and had motherly love, the reasons why she could not accept Karna has been explained on this post. I am fully aware the circumstance`s are different, but even Lord Krishna was not brought up by his biological parents.
6. Surya: Lord Krishna was not brought up by his biological parents due to the theat to Krishna’s life from Kamsa. There was no selfishness there. But in case of Kunti, she abandoned him for her own personal comfort and well being.
6. Sonu: You have missed the point AGAIN, and you must have forgotten to add some of my other quotes in my orginal text on top “Lord Krishna could have defeated his evil uncle much earlier, the point I am trying to emphasis is there is always a reason for why, who, what, when, where and law of Karma plays a role. As mentioned a number of times by Guru Chiraan, facts need to be right and well understood in order to have a productive and to the point debate.”
Book mentioned above PAGE 912-913. “Kunti again explained that it had only been childishness and naiveté that made her use the mantra. She begged the god to forgive her and to leave. Surya would not relent.”
The reasons why Kunti could not accept Karna has been explained already. Karna being Surya`s son was bound to be protected. Quote from the book, “Kunti also prayed to Vishnu for the boy’s welfare”. There is much supporting evidence available to show Kunti`s motherly love. Kunti was the sister of Vasudeva, Lord Krishna`s Father, she could not have had selfish motives to be a close relative of Lord Krishna.
7. Sonu: Do Karna supports actually believe in God or not? Your very existence and everything you have is due to Gods Grace (Krishna) and not soul`s like Karna.
It is highly worrying and frustrating that God is insulted in many ways (being literally called a cheater).
7. Surya: These are totally irrelevent to the points discussed here. The debating point is whether Karna is evil and whether Karna is inferior to Arjun/Bheema.
7. Sonu: Of course it is relevant; Karna supporters have insulted God just to support Karna. I will address your debating points at the bottom.
8. Sonu: Below are just some of the quotes directly from this blog from Karna supporters, they show insults and contradictions in beliefs.
“Let Lord Krishna decide who has knowledge and who hasn’t, who has right to discuss and who hasn’t.”
“If war had been so easy to win, Krishna would not had suggested so many tricks.”
“Gods Grace”
“The whole blame for Duryodhana befriending Karna goes to Kunti and Krishna.”
8. Surya: Can you challenge even a single point raised by me? If Krishna or Kunti had revealed the truth to Karna anytime before the tournament, then Karna would have joined the Pandavas. Who is to be blamed for not informing Karna of the truth? Did Karna have any means to know the evil designs that Duryodhana was going to plot in the future, when Karna accepted Duryodhana’s friendship?
8. Sonu: I am not surprised you cannot recognise your own statements. You made further insulting statements below “Krishna knew that Karna could not be defeated by Arjuna or Bheema. Hence Krishna advised Arjuna to use deciet to kill Karna.” Now I really wouldn’t be surprised if you said you didn’t and twist it, then to cover up, blame Guru Chiraanji for editing or removing your words. Karna knowingly supported many of Duryodhana’s evil acts.
9. Sonu: Supporting evil will cloud your mind and emotions, correct simple information will become difficult to digest. Concentration on having love and devotion for God would be a lot more fruitful rather than insulting and going against God. From supporting the wrong over right, I really hope the consequences are fully understood too? Bearing in mind “law of karma”.
9. Surya: Nobody supported evil here. The point is simple. For the good to prevail, the powerful warriors from the Kaurava side like Karna had to be eliminated. Krishna knew that Karna could not be defeated by Arjuna or Bheema. Hence Krishna advised Arjuna to use deciet to kill Karna. That’s the simple truth. I never objected to it. My objection is to the point that Arjuna/Bheema are superior to Karna.
9. Sonu: Again you have missed the point and twisted a simple point.
Below is some supporting evidence to say Karna is not worthy to praise and how Arjuna and Bhima are superior.
Book: The Greatest Spiritual Epic of All Time MAHABHARTA / Retold by Krishna Dharma. Second printing 2007. ISBN 978-1-887089-13-5
Page 914
Karna cursed: Karna killed a Brahmins cow, and got cursed “O wicked one, you deserve death for this crime. You will suffer the fruit of your foolishness even in this life. When you finally meet in battle with your mortal enemy, your chariot will be swallowed by the earth. As you have carelessly cut down my cow, so will your head be cut off by your foe. Go now, O vile man”. Whether killing a cow is accidental or not, law of karma: this act cannot be forgiven by God.
Page 915.
Karna lied to Parasurama (incarnation of Vishnu) and said to Karna “Greedy for weapons, you have lied to me. Therefore, I say this: When you face your greatest danger and desperately need your most powerful celestial weapon, you will not able to remember the mantras.” “For this is no place for one who behaves falsely”. Chapter 5. The Martial Exhibition – pages 55 to 62
Karna and Duryodhana friendship started on selfish motives. Karna was jealous of Arjuna right from the start. Page 60, “Karna replied, “by your words I already consider my desire fulfilled. I only wish for your undying friendship. But I have one request: please allow me to engage in single combat with Arjuna”.
Chapter 31. The Fight with the Gandharva – Page 311 to 324
Gandharvas were fighting with Karna and Kurus, Page 315 “Duryodhana, Dushashana and their other brothers raced to assist Karna”. They were losing against the Gandharvas, Pandavas, rescued them. Page 320 “Looking at Karna, his eyes filled with tears, he said, “Men like me, puffed up with vanity and insolence, are never blessed for any length of time even if they obtain prosperity and knowledge. Alas I have been wicked. Now I suffer. Leave me to die. I can no longer continue to live. What man can be rescued by his enemies and then drag on his miserable existence? Proud I am, the enemy laughed at me, finding me deprived of my prowess.”
Chapter 20. Draupadi dragged to the assembly hall – pages 200 to 211
Karna laughed along with the other evil people when Draupadi was dragged in the assembly hall. Page 204, “When Draupadi refused to allow him to compete in her swayamvara. The pain of that refusal still rankled, “Well, he thought, “that proud princess is now getting what she deserves”. He turned to the assembly and argued that there was no sin in bringing Draupadi into the hall in her present state”. Karna used the most foul language towards her. Draupadi was saved by lord Krishna, she was a virtuous women.
Chapter 34. The lake of death – pages 344 to 363
On page 346, Karna said “As the lord of Gods, it is you who should be bestowing boons upon me. Therefore, O Deva, please consider offering me a boon in exchange for my armour”. Karna gave his armour asking for something in return, it was not a kind charity act.
Chapter 48. To Kurukshetra – pages 495 to 509
Kunti and Krishna told Karna the truth about his identity when the time was right and tried to save him, Karna rejected their request, Karna supported evil despite being told not. PAGE 499, Karna said “With exception of Arjuna, I will not kill any of your sons in battle.” “When I kill Arjuna I will become famous for my prowess”.
PAGE 500 “I have chosen to face Arjuna in combat. If I back down now, then I become infamous. O Keshava, I cannot let myself be labelled as a coward.
“As soon as he had seen Arjuna in the arena his heart had filled with envy”. PAGE 501 Karna himself doubted the Kaurava`s victory. “It is likely that I will die, because I do not see the Kaurava`s winning.”
Chapter 24. Karna`s Prowess (Book 2 in the same book) – pages 757 to 767
On page 765, Krishna says to Arjuna. “O valiant one, Karna has harassed the king. Heavy at heart he spoke angrily to you. He also hoped to provoke you to slay the sutas son without delay. Dharmaraja sees none other capable of killing Karna”. “O Partha, you should fulfil his desire and slay the wicked-minded Karna in battle”.
Chapter 15. Abhimanyu`s Incomparable Power (Book 2 in the same book) – pages 647 to 767
On page 653, “Seeing Dushashana overpowered, Karna came to challenge Abhimanyu, but he too could not defeat the young warrior”. “Karna fell back and turned away”.
On page 654, “Drona looked at Abhimanyu with respect and admiration.” “Karna grew impatient on upon hearing Abhimanyu praised. Karna asked for advice on how to kill Abhimanyu. “Drona knew his advice was not in keeping with the codes of combat, but there seemed no alternative.” How they killed Abhimanyu unlawfully is explained fully in the chapter.
Chapter 18. Krishna`s Mystic Power (Book 2 in the same book) – pages 689 to 701
On page 691 to 693, “Bhima assailed Karna with all his power. He looked at him with unbridled contempt”. Karna “was one of the prime causes of the Pandavas suffering. This was the one who laughed in the dice game and ordered Draupadi to find another husband. Indeed, it had been he who suggested she be disrobed. He had always conspired with the Kauravas to bring about the Pandavas downfall. In the battle field Karna was losing against Bhima. “Bhima once again cut apart Karna`s bow, then immediately slew his four horses and his second charioteer. Summoning all this strength, he sent a terrific downpour of arrows that completely enveloped Karna. His horses and charioteers slain, and himself struck everywhere and continuously, Karna was confounded and did not know what to do. Seeing his friend in such a predicament, Duryodhana commanded his brother Durmukha to rescue him” but got killed by Bhima. “Shocked, Karna quickly circumambulated the dead Kaurava and then ran across to another warriors chariot.”
Chapter 25. Arjuna Encounters Karna (Book 2 in the same book) pages 768 to 784
On page 781, “Karna wept in frustration. Seeing Arjuna near him he called, “O Partha, wait for a moment while I extract my wheel. Do no cherish entertained only by cowards. Brave and pious persons never aim their arrows at those who are without weapons. You are the bravest and most pious of all warriors. Excuse me for a moment, standing helpless as I am, I will soon stand again for battle. Remembering virtue and the codes of warfare, hold off your attack until then”.
“Hearing his agonized plea, Krishna smiled and replied, “It is fortunate indeed that you remember virtue, O Karna, men in distress almost always censure providence, forgetting their own evil deeds. Where, O Karna, was your virtue when Draupadi was brought weeping into the Kuru assembly? Where was it when Yudhisthira was robbed of his kingdom? When he asked for it to be returned, after spending his promised thirteen years in exile, did your virtue suggest that it be returned? Was it virtue that conspired to set fire to the wax house in Varanavata? Did virtue urge you to laughlying say to Draupadi, “O, lady, choose another husband?” “Was it that same virtue that ordered Dushashana to strip her”? “Was it the same virtue when you” and other brave heroes surrounded that boy Abhimanyu, did virtue enter your mind then”? “Karnas head fell and he made no reply”. Krishna continued “If it was virtue acting on all these occasions, then do not waste your time summoning it now. You wish us to practice piety today, but will not escape with your life.” “Karna could not respond. He trembled with anger.” Krishna ordered “O Arjuna, strike Karna down at once”.
In the end it is always GOOD over EVIL. What goes around, comes around. God sides with selfless devotees that are righteous.
Posted by Sonu on 17/05/2009 at 15:23
Just to emphasis to particular Karna supporters, as they tend to miss the points being made.
I had used a book to quote from
As Source: http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Arjuna is not entirely correct, but only used to emphasis on the characteristics. For the scope a Karna supporter said, “The debating point is whether Karna is evil and whether Karna is inferior to Arjun/Bheema.”.
Under the section “Showdown with Karna”, the source does contain the following.
“Karna, Arjuna’s childhood rival and unrecognized brother, also grew to become a formidable warrior, although he aligned himself with the Kauravas.”
As mentioned, although not entirely correct, the link recognises why Arjun could not have been inferior, and furthermore states Karna grew to become a “formidable warrior”.
The following source:
http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Mahabharata
Under the section “External links: The text and translations”
Recognised “It should be kept in mind that different translators and commentators have widely differing views on what multi-layered Sanskrit words and passages truly signify, and their best possible presentation in English depending on the sampradaya they are affiliated to. Especially in Western philology, interpretations of particular passages often do not agree with traditional views.”
There is use of references, but serious students need to verify the data accuracy by all means in order to learn the correct information.
Posted by Sonu on 17/05/2009 at 17:08
I just wanted to present readers a very familiar quote a Karna supporter used that is found in another website, the following.
“I believe that everybody has a bad day in office, isnt it.”
http://www.indiadivine.org/audarya/hinduism/452421-karna-arjuna-abilites.html
The username: Username: mahiyar, Date: Join Date: Apr 2009
“People are mixing two issues one is archery skills and the other is perfection as a human being.
1) As far as perfection as a human being is concerned Arjun was certainly ahead of Karna. As a human being he was more perfect in all sense, he did much less wrong then Karna, in his behavior and attitude, he was again on the side of righteousness. Karna’s life was more tragic, he was more prone to human flaws, like speaking first and repenting later.
2) As an archer Karna was more then equal to Arjun. As somebody has said in the above post, it took six people or incidents to pull him down, where people say Karna was defeated here and there, I believe that everybody has a bad day in office, isnt it. There are lot of instances where even weakness of Arjun was exposed like being defeated by his son, in the end being unable even to defend Krishna’s women folk from mere thieves. Karnas skill as a warrior can be seen here”
Please note, if you cannot access the above text via the following link, you will need to search for it in the forum.
http://www.indiadivine.org/audarya/hinduism/452421-karna-arjuna-abilites.html
This highlights Karna supports cannot even use their own made statements to justify their points.
Posted by Surya on 17/05/2009 at 19:44
>>I don’t believe anything you say, you really need to get over yourself and learn to have respect.
———-
I never asked you to believe anything that I said. Why don’t you ask your Guruji whether he has swallowed by whole posts and edited and removed evidences from my posts when he was cornered?
>>2. Sonu: http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Arjuna
this link makes logical sense with supporting references, at the bottom of the page.
———-
Ha ha, when I had quoted http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karna to support a certain point, your guruji had broken the hell loose claiming that I’m quoting from unreliable sources. Now that guruji’s most devoted disciple is quoting from newworldencyclopedia.
Yadha guru thadha sisya. 
>>I will make quotes from the following book at the bottom.
Book: The Greatest Spiritual Epic of All Time MAHABHARTA / Retold by Krishna Dharma. Second printing 2007. ISBN 978-1-887089-13-5
———-
Read your book’s title again “The Greatest Spiritual Epic of All Time MAHABHARTA / Retold by Krishna Dharma.”
>>3. Sonu: Intellectual individuals are the first to question the information available on the internet, TV (serials), newspapers, you can’t believe everything you hear, see or read without evidence.
3. Surya: Definitely. That’s what I’m saying too…
3. Sonu: I am glad you actually agree on something, but it would be more appreciated if it was followed.
———–
Mine: The Mahabharata of Krishna-Dwaipayana Vyasa translated by Kisari Mohan Ganguli
Yours: The Greatest Spiritual Epic of All Time MAHABHARTA / Retold by Krishna Dharma.
The information available on the internet/TV(serials)/newspapers are Mahabharata retold by some Tom, Krishna Dhrama & Harry. You agree that those can’t be belived. Then you have the nerve to quote from the pulp fiction by Krishna Dharma.
>>4. Sonu: Again, I don’t believe you, it seems like the best excuse you have to cover yourself, but it really is a lame excuse, it is better to admit to your own mistakes. There are just too many contradictions and to even waddle through your text presented is a waste of time. Guruji Chiraan has mentioned numerous contradictions already.
———–
You need not believe me dude. Why don’t you ask your Guruji whether I’ve answered all these points and why he removed my posts.
>>In one of your statements you said “Let Lord Krishna decide who has knowledge and who hasn’t, who has right to discuss and who hasn’t.” In another statement you made “The whole blame for Duryodhana befriending Karna goes to Kunti and Krishna.” So one minute you acknowledge that everything is in Gods hands and one minute you are blaming God.
————-
Where is the contradiction in that? Lord Krishna’s statement that “Karna is eldest Pandava” clearly disproves the claim by your Guruji that Karna will not be accepted as Pandava. Also, definitely The whole blame for Duryodhana befriending Karna goes to Kunti and Krishna. If either of them had revealed the truth behind Karna’s birth then Karna would not have gone to the Kaurava camp. Can you deny that? Where is the contradiction? You need to look up the meaning of the word “Contradiction”.
If Kunti had not forsaken Karna, then he too would have been educated by guru Drona, just like the other Pandavas. He would not have been attracted any of the curses. He would have fought against Duryodhana from the side of Pandavas. Who is to be blamed for not revealing the truth to Karna and making him indebted to Duryodhana?
>>5. Sonu: I don’t approve from the source you have quoted from, I have never seen it in genuine sources. Book: The Greatest Spiritual Epic of All Time MAHABHARTA / Retold by Krishna Dharma. Second printing 2007. ISBN 978-1-887089-13-5
———
Again, your pulp fiction is meant for TV serials, not for debate.
Quote from any authentic translation of original Vyas Bharath. 
>>6. Sonu: You have missed the point AGAIN, and you must have forgotten to add some of my other quotes in my orginal text on top “Lord Krishna could have defeated his evil uncle much earlier, the point I am trying to emphasis is there is always a reason for why, who, what, when, where and law of Karma plays a role. As mentioned a number of times by Guru Chiraan, facts need to be right and well understood in order to have a productive and to the point debate.”
——–
You are unnecessarily dragging Krishna’s episode here to take the debate astray. This is totally irrelevent. Krishna’s parents have witnessed the cold blooded murder of their kids. It is natural for them to take extra precaution in case of Krisha. But in case of Karna, it was purely selfishness.
>>Book mentioned above PAGE 912-913. “Kunti again explained that it had only been childishness and naiveté that made her use the mantra. She begged the god to forgive her and to leave. Surya would not relent. The reasons why Kunti could not accept Karna has been explained already. Karna being Surya`s son was bound to be protected. Quote from the book, “Kunti also prayed to Vishnu for the boy’s welfare”. There is much supporting evidence available to show Kunti`s motherly love. Kunti was the sister of Vasudeva, Lord Krishna`s Father, she could not have had selfish motives to be a close relative of Lord Krishna.
———–
That’s the excuse made by every irresponsible unwed mother who throw their kids infront of orphanages, beg god to forgive and leave. If she had been a responsible mother, then she would have forsaken all her comforts for the sake of Karna.
>>8. Sonu: I am not surprised you cannot recognise your own statements. You made further insulting statements below “Krishna knew that Karna could not be defeated by Arjuna or Bheema. Hence Krishna advised Arjuna to use deciet to kill Karna.” Now I really wouldn’t be surprised if you said you didn’t and twist it, then to cover up, blame Guru Chiraanji for editing or removing your words. Karna knowingly supported many of Duryodhana’s evil acts.
————
Where is the insult there? It is a fact declared by Lord Krishna that nobody in three worlds can defeat Karna when he’s fully prepared. Unlike your guruji, I never twist my statements. I stand by my statement that Krishna knew that Karna could not be defeated by Arjuna or Bheema. Hence Krishna advised Arjuna to use deciet to kill Karna. This is 100% true. However, I never said that it is wrong. To achieve victory of good over evil, the means can be justified in other words, the end justifies the means. The only contention here is on the point that Arjun/Bheem were better warriors than Karna.
>>Below is some supporting evidence to say Karna is not worthy to praise and how Arjuna and Bhima are superior.
————
Save your pulp fiction for TV serials.
>>In the end it is always GOOD over EVIL.
——–
Definitely. I never contested that. The dispute is only on whoz a better warrior.
Posted by Sonu on 17/05/2009 at 21:56
You have got a nerve and clearly dumb dim-witted. You repeatedly keep on making your own statements and waffling, possibly to cover up relevant points you cannot argue with evidence. You bring in irrelevant points to back up what you say without any genuine evidence, when that has been exposed; you say that was never relevant to the topic.
Regarding http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Arjuna, you clearly have not read the comment I made afterwards regarding this source. I don’t know what level you have studied up to and I am not interested either, but if you have studied anything, surely you have not studied solely using few same old online sources. You are acting like Ganguly is your God.
Referring to what your statement “the debating point is whether Karna is evil and whether Karna is inferior to Arjun/Bheema.”
You challenged me to quote from sources to back up my statements; I provided statements and mainly direct quotes. Enough evidence to state Karna was EVIL and Arjuna and Bhima were better warriors. I presented God did not use tricks or deceit in Arjuna`s victory. Funny how you did not have a response to that and present me your findings with evidence (according to you Karna better person and always winning). WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE?
You and other Karna supporters keep going outside to scope of this debate when you have nothing left to say. A lot of information is clearly hard for you to handle in one go. Guru Chiraanji has kindly created another page
http://chiraan.wordpress.com/2009/05/17/superiority-of-arjun-vis-a-vis-karna-a-debate/#comment-2382
To remain within scope of the debate the points are being broken down. To prove what you say kindly present your findings with evidence (sources, fully identified) in quotes regarding the following topics (they are all Arjun winning over Karna), present your evidences on the new pages. Please avoid making your own statements and quotes because they do not make any sense. Please avoid using irrelevant excuses on why Karna failed, this will help to remain within the scope of the debate.
1. Once in the Draupadi swayamvar episode .
2. Second in Virat parva Go samrakshan episode .[ here KArna's dress was stolen ]
3. Drona asks who can get him DRUPAD captivated
4. Gandharva
Posted by Sonu on 18/05/2009 at 03:27
To Surya:
Sonu :I thought I would be kind enough to help you quote from a translation that is valid and acceptable to you, seeing as you swear by Ganguly`s translation. (Other readers please note, I would question it and cross check the information from this source).
Mahabharata of Krishna-Dwaipayana Vyasa
translated by Kisari Mohan Ganguli
Just one of Arjuna`s Victory
http://www.bharatadesam.com/spiritual/mahabharata/mahabharata_08003.php
“Sanjaya continued, ‘Having said these words, O sinless one, thy son Duryodhana, with his brothers, made Karna the generalissimo (of the Kuru army). Obtaining the command, the mighty car-warrior Karna, so fierce in battle, uttered loud roars and fought with the foe. He caused, O sire, a great carnage among the Srinjayas, the Pancalas, the Kekayas, and the Videhas. From his bow issued innumerable lines of arrows, one close behind the wings of another, like flights of bees. Having afflicted the Pancalas and the Pandavas endued with great activity, and slain thousands of warriors, he was at last slain by Arjuna!”
On 13/05/2009 Surya said, “In Mahabharata, one can easily see Karna feeling humiliated when he’s addressed with this racist remark. Fyi, a racist abuse is insulting irrespective of the ages. None of Karna’s friends and well wishers addressed him “sootha putra”. Instead they addressed him as “Anga raaj Karn” or “Raadhey”. That’s how decent people address others, not with racist epithets.”
A karna supporter (Surya), highly emphasised Karna being insulted when called a “Suta`s son”. This shows excuses for Karna poor behaviour and evil ways. Even Kuru`s addressed him as “O Suta`s Son.
http://www.bharatadesam.com/spiritual/mahabharata/mahabharata_08010.php
“Sanjaya continued, ‘Strong became that hope, O king, in the heart of thy son, viz., that where Bhishma and Drona had been slain, Karna would vanquish the Pandavas. Cherishing that hope within his heart, he said unto Karna, “O Suta’s son, Partha never wishes to fight, standing before thee!” Karna said, “I have, O son of Gandhari, said before in thy presence, even these words, vanquish all the Pandavas with their sons and Janardana!’ I shall become thy General. In this there is no doubt. Tranquilise thyself, O monarch I Consider the Pandavas to be already vanquished!’”
The whole caste debate started by Surya falls outside the scope of what Surya suggested “The debating point is whether Karna is evil and whether Karna is inferior to Arjun/Bheema”.
Posted by Surya on 18/05/2009 at 19:10
>>I thought I would be kind enough to help you quote from a translation that is valid and acceptable to you, seeing as you swear by Ganguly`s translation
————-
Ha ha, so bharatdesam is acceptable to you, right? Fine with me. Henceforth I’ll quote everything from here. Don’t claim that this source is spurious as well.
>>Just one of Arjuna`s Victory
http://www.bharatadesam.com/spiritual/mahabharata/mahabharata_08003.php
“Sanjaya continued, …he was at last slain by Arjuna!”
——————
Ha ha, nobody questioned this. How Karna was at last slain by Arjuna, that is the point of contention. I’ll show you how:
http://www.bharatadesam.com/spiritual/mahabharata/mahabharata_08090.php
The Suta’s son then fixed on his bow-string that foe-killing, exceedingly keen, snake-mouthed, blazing, and fierce shaft, which had been polished according to rule, and which he had long kept for the sake of Partha’s destruction. Stretching his bow-string to his ear, Karna fixed that shaft of fierce energy and blazing splendour, that ever-worshipped weapon which lay within a golden quiver amid sandal dust, and aimed it at Partha. Indeed, he aimed that blazing arrow, born in Airavata’s race, for cutting off Phalguna’s head in battle. All the points of the compass and the welkin became ablaze and terrible meteors, and thunderbolts fell. When that snake of the form of an arrow was fixed on the bow-string, the Regents of the world, including Sakra, set up loud wails. The Suta’s son did not know that the snake Aswasena had entered his arrow by the aid of his Yoga powers. Beholding Vaikartana aim that arrow, the high-souled ruler of the Madras, addressing Karna, said, “This arrow, O Karna, will not succeed in striking off Arjuna’s head. Searching carefully, fix another arrow that may succeed in striking off thy enemy’s head.” Endued with great activity, the Suta’s son, with eyes burning in wrath, then said unto the ruler of the Madras, “O Shalya, Karna never aimeth an arrow twice. Persons like us never become crooked warriors.” Having said these words, Karna, with great care, let off that shaft which he had worshipped for many long years. Bent upon winning the victory, O king, he quickly said unto his rival, “Thou art slain, O Phalguna!” Sped from Karna’s arms, that shaft of awful whizz, resembling fire or the sun in splendour, as it left the bow-string, blazed up in the welkin and seemed to divide it by a line such as is visible on the crown of a woman dividing her tresses. Beholding that shaft blazing in the welkin, the slayer of Kamsa, Madhava, with great speed and the greatest ease, pressed down with his feet that excellent car, causing it to sink about a cubit deep. At this, the steeds, white as the rays of the moon and decked in trappings of gold, bending their knees, laid themselves down on the ground. Indeed, seeing that snake (in the form of an arrow) aimed by Karna, Madhava, that foremost of all persons endued with might, put forth his strength and thus pressed down with his feet that car into the earth, whereat the steeds, (as already said) bending down their knees, laid themselves down upon the earth when the car itself had sank into it. Then loud sounds arose in the welkin in applause of Vasudeva. Many celestial voices were heard, and celestial flowers were showered upon Krishna, and leonine shouts also were uttered. When the car had thus been pressed down into the earth through the exertions of the slayer of Madhu, the excellent ornament of Arjuna’s head, celebrated throughout the earth, the welkin, heaven, and the waters, the Suta’s son swept off from the crown of his rival, with that arrow, in consequence of the very nature of that snaky weapon and the great care and wrath with which it had been shot. That diadem, endued with the splendour of the sun or the moon or fire or a planet, and adorned with gold and pearls and gems and diamonds, had with great care been made by the puissant Self-born himself for Purandara. Costly as its appearance indicated, it was inspiring terror in the hearts of foes, contributing to the happiness of him that wore it, and shedding a fragrance, that ornament had been given by the chief of the celestials himself with a cheerful heart unto Partha while the latter had proceeded to slaughter the foes of the gods. That diadem was incapable of being crushed by Rudra and the Lord of waters and Kuvera with Pinaka and noose and thunderbolt and the very foremost of shafts. It could not be endured by even the foremost ones among the gods. Vrisha, however, now broke it forcibly with his snake-inspired shaft. Endued with great activity, that wicked-natured snake of fierce form and false vows, falling upon that diadem-decked with gold and gems, swept it away from Arjuna’s head. That snake, O king, forcibly tore it away from Partha’s head, quickly reducing into fragments that well-made ornament set over with many a gem and blazing with beauty, like the thunderbolt riving a mountain summit decked with lofty and beautiful trees graced with flowers. Crushed by that excellent weapon, possessed of splendour, and blazing with the fire of (the snake’s) poison, that beautiful and much-liked diadem of Partha fell down on the earth like the blazing disc of the Sun from the Asta hills. Indeed, that snake forcibly swept away from Arjuna’s head that diadem adorned with many gems, like the thunder of Indra felling a beautiful mountain summit adorned with lofty trees bearing budding leaves and flowers. And the earth, welkin, heaven, and the waters, when agitated by a tempest, roar aloud, O Bharata, even such was the roar that arose in all the worlds at that time.
During the encounter, Arjun was saved from Karna only by God’s grace, not by Arjun’s archery skills. After the above incident, the duel continued. Then see what happened:
http://www.bharatadesam.com/spiritual/mahabharata/mahabharata_08090.php
Displaying also his own prowess, he seemed to get the better of Dhananjaya at that time. Then Krishna, beholding Arjuna afflicted with the weapons of Karna, said these words unto Partha: “Approaching Karna, strike him with superior weapons.” Then Dhananjaya, filled with rage, inspiring with mantras another celestial weapons that looked like fire and that resembled the poison of the snake and that was as hard as the essence of adamant, and uniting the Raudra weapon with it, became desirous of shooting it at his foe. At that time, O king, the earth swallowed up one of wheels of Karna’s car. Quickly alighting then from his vehicle, he seized his sunken wheel with his two arms and endeavoured to lift it up with a great effort. Drawn up with force by Karna, the earth, which had swallowed up his wheel, rose up to a height of four fingers’ breadth, with her seven islands and her hills and waters and forests. Seeing his wheel swallowed, the son of Radha shed tears from wrath, and beholding Arjuna, filled with rage he said these words, “O Partha, O Partha, wait for a moment, that is, till I lift this sunken wheel. Beholding, O Partha, the left wheel of my car swallowed through accident by the earth, abandon (instead of cherishing) this purpose (of striking and slaying me) that is capable of being harboured by only a coward. Brave warriors that are observant of the practices of the righteous, never shoot their weapons at persons with dishevelled hair, or at those that have turned their faces from battle, or at a Brahmana, or at him who joins his palms, or at him who yields himself up or beggeth for quarter or at one who has put up his weapon, or at one whose arrows are exhausted, or at one whose armour is displaced, or at one whose weapon has fallen off or been broken! Thou art the bravest of men in the world. Thou art also of righteous behaviour, O son of Pandu! Thou art well-acquainted with the rules of battle. For these reasons, excuse me for a moment, that is, till I extricate my wheel, O Dhananjaya, from the earth. Thyself staying on thy car and myself standing weak and languid on the earth, it behoveth thee not to slay me now. Neither Vasudeva, nor thou, O son of Pandu, inspirest me with the slightest fear. Thou art born in the Kshatriya order. Thou art the perpetuator of a high race. Recollecting the teachings of righteousness, excuse me for a moment, O son of Pandu!”‘”
……
“Sanjaya continued, ‘Thus addressed, O Bharata, by Vasudeva, Karna hung down his head in shame and gave no answer. With lips quivering in rage, he raised his bow, O Bharata, and, being endued with great energy and prowess, he continued to fight with Partha. Then Vasudeva, addressing Phalguna, that bull among men, said, “O thou of great might, piercing Karna with a celestial weapon, throw him down.” Thus addressed by the holy one, Arjuna became filled with rage. Indeed, remembering the incidents alluded to by Krishna, Dhananjaya blazed up with fury. Then, O king, blazing flames of fire seemed to emanate from all the pores of the angry Partha’s body. The sight seemed to be exceedingly wonderful. Beholding it, Karna, invoking the brahmastra, showered his shafts upon Dhananjaya, and once more made an effort to extricate his car. Partha also, by the aid of the brahmastra, poured arrowy downpours upon Karna. Baffling with his own weapon the weapon of his foe, the son of Pandu continued to strike him. The son of Kunti then, aiming at Karna sped another favourite weapon of his that was inspired with the energy of Agni. Sped by Arjuna, that weapon blazed up with its own energy. Karna, however, quenched that conflagration with the Varuna weapon. The Suta’s son also, by the clouds he created, caused all the points of the compass to be shrouded with a darkness such as may be seen on a rainy day. The son of Pandu, endued with great energy, fearlessly dispelled those clouds by means of the Vayavya weapon in the very sight of Karna. The Suta’s son then, for slaying the son of Pandu, took up a terrible arrow blazing like fire. When that adored shaft was fixed on the bow-string, the earth, O king, trembled with her mountains and waters and forests. Violent winds began to blow, bearing hard pebbles. All the points of the compass became enveloped with dust. Wails of grief, O Bharata, arose among the gods in the welkin. Beholding that shaft aimed by the Suta’s son, O sire, the Pandavas, with cheerless hearts, gave themselves up to great sorrow. That shaft of keen point and endued with the effulgence of Sakra’s thunder, sped from Karna’s arms, fell upon Dhananjaya’s chest and penetrated it like a mighty snake penetrating an ant-hill. That grinder of foes, viz., the high-souled Vibhatsu, thus deeply pierced in that encounter, began to reel. His grasp became loosened, at which his bow Gandiva dropped from his hand. He trembled like the prince of mountains in an earthquake. Availing himself of that opportunity, the mighty car-warrior Vrisha, desirous of extricating his car-wheel that had been swallowed up by the earth, jumped down from his vehicle. Seizing the wheel with his two arms he endeavoured to drag it up, but though possessed of great strength, he failed in his efforts, as destiny would have it. Meanwhile the diadem-decked and high-souled Arjuna, recovering his senses, took up a shaft, fatal as the rod of Death, and called anjalika. Then Vasudeva, addressing Partha, said, “Cut off with thy arrow the head of this enemy of thine, viz., Vrisha, before he succeeds in getting upon his car.” Applauding those words of the lord Vasudeva, and while the wheel of his enemy was still sunk, the mighty car-warrior Arjuna took up a razor-headed arrow of blazing effulgence and struck the standard (of Karna) bearing the elephant’s rope and bright as the spotless sun. That standard bearing the device of the costly elephant’s rope, was adorned with gold and pearls and gems and diamonds, and forged with care by foremost of artists excelling in knowledge, and possessed of great beauty, and variegated with pure gold. That standard always used to fill thy troops with high courage and the enemy with fear. Its form commanded applause. Celebrated over the whole world, it resembled the sun in splendour. Indeed, its effulgence was like that of fire or the sun or the moon. The diadem-decked Arjuna, with that razor-headed shaft, exceedingly sharp, equipped with wings of gold, possessed of the splendour of fire when fed with libations of clarified butter, and blazing with beauty, cut off that standard of Adhiratha’s son, that great car-warrior. With that standard, as it fell, the fame, pride, hope of victory, and everything dear.
As you can see, even after Karna knew that Arjuna will attack Karna when he is unarmed, he still didn’t attack Arjun when Karna’s arrows caused Arjun to lose sense and drop his Gandiv. On the contrary, Arjun, urged by Krishna, cowardly killed Karna who was unarmed and trying to drag out the chariot.
Throughout this passage, it is very clear that Karna is a much better warrior than any of the Pandavas.
See other illustrations:
Yudistira admitting that Karna is invincible to the three worlds:
http://www.bharatadesam.com/spiritual/mahabharata/mahabharata_08011.php
Only one great bowman, viz., the Suta’s son, shineth in it! That foremost of car-warriors is incapable of being vanquished by the three worlds with their mobile and immobile creatures, including the gods, Asuras and Gandharvas, and the Kinnaras and great serpents!
See Karna single handedly defeating Bheema, Yudhishthira, Dhristadyumna, Shikhandi, Satyaki
Then Dhristadyumna pierced Karna with ten arrows, and the sons of Draupadi pierced him with three and seventy, and Yuyudhana with seven. And Bhimasena pierced him with four and sixty arrows, and Sahadeva with seven. And Nakula pierced him with thirty arrows, and Satanika with seven. And the heroic Shikhandi pierced him with ten and king Yudhishthira with a hundred. These and other foremost of men, O monarch, all inspired with desire of victory, began to grind that great bowman, viz., the Suta’s son, in that dreadful battle. That chastiser of foes, viz., the Suta’s son of great heroism, performing quick evolutions with his car, pierced every one of those warriors with ten arrows. We then, O king, witnessed the lightness of hand displayed by the high-souled Karna and the power of his weapons. Indeed, what we saw appeared to be highly wonderful. People could not notice when he took up his arrows, when he aimed them, and when he let them off. They only beheld his enemies dying fast in consequence of his wrath. The sky, the firmament, the Earth, and all the quarters seemed to be entirely shrouded with sharp arrows. The firmament looked resplendent as if covered with red clouds. The valiant son of Radha, armed with the bow, and as if dancing (on his car), pierced each of his assailants with thrice as many arrows as each of them had pierced him with. And once more piercing each of them, and his steeds, driver, car, and standard with ten arrows, he uttered a loud roar. His assailants then gave him a way (through which he passed out). Having crushed those mighty bowmen with showers of arrows, the son of Radha, that crusher of foes, then penetrated, unresisted, into the midst of the division commanded by the Pandava king. Having destroyed thirty cars of the unreturning Cedis, the son of Radha struck Yudhishthira with many sharp arrows. Then many Pandava warriors, O king, with Shikhandi and Satyaki, desirous of rescuing the king from the son of Radha, surrounded the former. Similarly all the brave and mighty bowmen of thy army resolutely protected the irresistible Karna in that battle. The noise of diverse musical instrument arose then, O king, and the leonine shouts of brave warriors rent the sky. And the Kurus and the Pandavas once more fearlessly encountered each other, the former headed by the Suta’s son and the latter by Yudhishthira.’” “Sanjaya said, ‘Piercing through the Pandava host, Karna, surrounded by thousands of cars and elephants and steeds and foot-soldiers, rushed towards king Yudhishthira the just. Cutting off with hundreds of fierce shafts the thousands of weapons sped at him by his foes, Vrisha fearlessly pierced through that host. Indeed, the Suta’s son cut off the heads, the arms and the thighs of his enemies, who, deprived of life, fell down on the Earth. Others, finding their divisions broken, fled away. The Dravida, the Andhaka, and the Nishada foot-soldiers, urged on by Satyaki, once more rushed towards Karna in that battle, from desire of slaying him. Deprived of arms and head-gears, and slain by Karna with his shafts, they fell down simultaneously on the Earth, like a forest of Sala tree cut down (with the axe). Thus hundreds, thousands and ten thousands of combatants, deprived of life and filling the whole welkin with their fame, fell down with their bodies on the Earth. The Pandus and the Pancalas obstructed Karna, otherwise called Vaikartana, who careered wrathfully in battle like the Destroyer himself, even as people seek to obstruct a disease with incantations and drugs. Crushing all those assailants Karna once more rushed towards Yudhishthira, like an irresistible disease unchecked by incantations and drugs and (propitiatory) rites. At last checked by the Pandus, the Pancalas, and the Kekayas, all of whom were desirous of rescuing the king, Karna could not succeed in passing them over, like Death that is unable to vanquish persons conversant with Brahma. Then Yudhishthira, with eyes red in wrath, addressed Karna, that slayer of hostile heroes, who was held in check at a little distance from him, and said these words “O Karna, O Karna, O thou of vain sight, O son of a Suta, listen to my words. Thou always challengest the active Phalguna in battle. Obedient to the counsels of Dhritarashtra’s son, thou always seekest to oppose us. Mustering thy great prowess, show thou today all thy might, all thy energy, and all the hatred thou bearest towards the sons of Pandu. Today in dreadful encounter, I will purge thee of thy desire for battle.” Having said these words, the son of Pandu, O king, pierced Karna with ten shafts made entirely of iron and equipped with wings of gold. That chastiser of foes, and great bowman, viz., the Suta’s son, O Bharata, pierced Yudhishthira, with the greatest care, in return, with ten arrows equipped with heads like the calf’s tooth. Thus pierced by the Suta’s son in contempt, O sire, the mighty-armed Yudhishthira, blazed up with wrath like a fire upon receiving butter. Bending his formidable bow decked with gold, the son of Pandu placed on his bow-string a whetted arrow capable of piercing the very hills. Drawing the bow to its fullest stretch, the king quickly sped that arrow, fatal as the rod of the Destroyer, from desire of slaying the Suta’s son. Sped by the king endued with great might, that arrow whose whizz resembled the noise of the thunder, suddenly pierced Karna, that mighty car-warrior, on his left side. Deeply afflicted by the violence of that stroke, the mighty-armed Karna with weakened limbs, fell into a swoon on his car, his bow dropping from his hand. Beholding Karna in that plight, the vast Dhartarashtra host uttered cries of “Oh” and “Alas,” and the faces of all the combatants became colourless. Beholding the prowess of their king, on the other hand, O monarch, amongst the Pandavas, leonine roars and shouts and confused cries of joy arose. The son of Radha, however, of cruel prowess, recovering his senses soon enough, set his heart on the destruction of Yudhishthira. Drawing his formidable bow called Vijaya that was decked with gold, the Suta’s son of immeasurable soul began to resist the son of Pandu with his sharp shafts. With a couple of razor-headed arrows he slew in that encounter Candradeva and Dandadhara, the two Pancala princes, that protected the two car wheels of the high-souled Yudhishthira. Each of those heroes, standing by the side of Yudhishthira’s car, looked resplendent like the constellation Punarvasu by the side of the moon. Yudhishthira, however, once more pierced Karna with thirty arrows. And he struck Sushena and Satyasena, each with three arrows. And he pierced everyone of the protectors of Karna with three straight arrows. The son of Adhiratha then, laughing and shaking his bow inflicted a cutting wound on the king’s body with a broad-headed arrow, and again pierced him with sixty arrows and then uttered a loud shout. Then many foremost heroes amongst the Pandavas, desirous of rescuing the king, rushed in wrath towards Karna and began to grind him with their arrows. Satyaki and Chekitana and Yuyutsu and Shikhandi and the sons of Draupadi and the Prabhadrakas, and the twins (Nakula and Sahadeva) and Bhimasena and Shishupala and the Karushas, Matsyas, the Suras, the Kaikayas, the Kasis and the Kosalas, all these brave heroes, endued with great activity, assailed Vasusena. The Pancala prince Janamejaya then pierced Karna with many arrows. The Pandava heroes, armed with diverse kinds of arrows and diverse weapons and accompanied by cars and elephants and steeds, rushing towards Karna, encompassed him on all sides, from desire of slaying him. Thus assailed on all sides by the foremost of Pandava warriors, Karna invoked into existence the brahmastra and filled all the points of the compass with arrows. The heroic Karna then, like unto a blazing fire having shafts for its scorching flame, careered in battle, burning that forest of Pandavas troops. The high-souled Karna, that great bowman, aiming some mighty weapons, and laughing the while, cut off the bow of that foremost of men, Yudhishthira. Then aiming ninety straight arrows within the twinkling of an eye, Karna cut off, with those sharp shafts, the armour of his antagonist. That armour, decked with gold and set with gems, looked beautiful, as it fell down, like a wind-tossed cloud penetrated by the rays of the Sun. Indeed, that armour, adorned with costly brilliants, fallen off from the body of that foremost of men, looked beautiful like the firmament in the night, bespangled with stars. His armour cut off with those arrows, the son of Pritha, covered with blood, wrathfully hurled at the son of Adhiratha a dart made wholly of iron. Karna, however, cut (into pieces) that blazing dart, as it coursed through the welkin, with seven shafts. That dart, thus cut off with those shafts of great bowman, fell down on the Earth. Then Yudhishthira, striking Karna with four lances in his two arms and forehead and chest, repeatedly uttered loud shouts. Thereupon blood spouted forth from the wounds of Karna, and the latter, filled with rage and breathing like a snake, cut off his antagonist’s standard and pierced the Pandava himself with three broad-headed arrows. And he also cut off the couple of quivers (that his foe had) and the car (he rode) into minute fragments. Thereupon the king, riding on another car unto which were yoked those steeds, white as ivory and having black hair on their tails, that used to bear him (to battle), turned his face and began to fly. Thus did Yudhishthira began to retreat. His Parshni driver had been slain. He became exceedingly cheerless and unable to stay before Karna. The son of Radha then, pursuing Yudhishthira, the son of Pandu, cleansed himself by touching him in the shoulder with his own fair hand (the palm of which was) graced with the auspicious signs of the thunderbolt, the umbrella, the hook, the fish, the tortoise, and the conchshell, and desired to seize him by force. He then remembered the words of Kunti. Then Shalya addressed him, and said, “Do not, O Karna, seize this best of kings. As soon as thou seizest him, he will reduce both thee and me to ashes.” Then Karna, O king, laughing in mockery, addressed the son of Pandu and thus spoke unto him disparagingly. “How, indeed, born though thou art in a noble race, and observant though thou art of Kshatriya duties, wouldst thou leave the battle in fear, desiring to save thy life? I think that thou art not well-acquainted with the duties of Kshatriyas. Endued with Brahma-force, thou art indeed devoted to the study of the Vedas and the performance of sacrificial rites. Do not, O son of Kunti, fight again, and do not again approach brave warriors. Do not use harsh language towards heroes and do not come to great battles. Thou mayst use such words, O sire, towards others, but thou shouldst never address persons like us in that way. By using such words towards persons like us, thou wouldst in battle meet with this and other kinds of behaviour. Go back to thy quarters, O son of Kunti, or thither where those two, viz., Keshava and Arjuna, are. Indeed, O king, Karna will never slay one like thee.” Having said these words unto the son of Pritha, the mighty Karna, setting Yudhishthira free, began to slaughter the Pandava host like the wielder of the thunderbolt slaughtering the Asura host. That ruler of men, (viz., Yudhishthira,) then, O king, quickly fled away. Beholding the king flying away, the Cedis, the Pandavas, the Pancalas, and the mighty car-warrior Satyaki, all followed that monarch of unfading glory. And the sons of Draupadi, and the Suras, and the twin sons of Madri by Pandu, also followed the king. Beholding the division of Yudhishthira retreating, the heroic Karna became highly glad with all the Kurus and began to pursue the retreating force. The din of battle-drums and conchs and cymbals and bows, and leonine shouts, arose from among the Dhartarashtra troops. Meanwhile Yudhishthira, O thou of Kuru’s race, quickly riding on the car of Srutakirti, began to behold the prowess of Karna.
I have already posted the incident where Karna spares Bhima remembering his promise to Kunti. I you want, then I can quote the same again from this site.
Finally, let me quote the passage where Krisha declares Karna as the son of Pandu and offers Draupadi as wife to Karna:
http://www.bharatadesam.com/spiritual/mahabharata/mahabharata_05140.php
It is said by those conversant with the scriptures that the two kinds of sons called Kanina and Sahoda that are born of a maiden, have him for their father who weddeth the maid. Thou, O Karna, hast been born in this way. Thou art, therefore, morally the son of Pandu. Come, be a king, according to the injunction of the scriptures. On the side of thy father, thou hast the sons of Pritha, on the side of thy mother, thou hast the Vrishnis, (for thy kinsmen). O bull among men, know that thou hast these two for thy own. Proceeding this very day with me hence, O sire, let the Pandavas know thee as a son of Kunti born before Yudhishthira. The brothers, the five Pandavas, the son of Draupadi, and the invincible son of Subhadra, will all embrace thy feet. All the kings and princes, again, that have been assembled for the Pandava-cause, and all the Andhakas and Vrishnis, will also embrace thy feet. Let queens and princesses bring golden and silver and earthen jars (full of water) and delicious herbs and all kinds of seeds and gems, and creepers, for thy installation. During the sixth period, Draupadi also will come to thee (as a wife).
>>The whole caste debate started by Surya falls outside the scope of what Surya suggested “The debating point is whether Karna is evil and whether Karna is inferior to Arjun/Bheema”.
———
Caste debate is very well in context since your Guruji brands Karna as evil based on his insults to Draupadi. I counter that claiming that it was Draupadi who insulted Karna first by calling him Sutha putra infront of all the esteemed delegates. It was she who insulted Karna’s friend Duryodhan by calling him the blind son of the blind father. Karna’s action was a retaliation to this insult. Your guruji has unknowingly admitted that Sutha is inferior to Kshatriya. So don’t waste your time trying to claim that it is a higher caste.
Posted by Surya on 18/05/2009 at 16:56
>>You have got a nerve and clearly dumb dim-witted.
—————
So, when your arguments have been proven wrong, you’ve started personally attacking the arguer.
This is the 19th trick exhibited by inferior debators, prior to fleeing the forum altogether. 
Anyway, I’m here for debate, not for a muck throwing competition and therefore I’m not answering your personal affronts in the same coin. It was the same thing done by Draupadi – by personally attacking Karna with racist slurs and then when she got it back in the same coin from Karna, took it very personally. So the moral of the story is, don’t give it if you can’t take it. 
>>You repeatedly keep on making your own statements and waffling, possibly to cover up relevant points you cannot argue with evidence. You bring in irrelevant points to back up what you say without any genuine evidence, when that has been exposed; you say that was never relevant to the topic.
———–
That’s what you have been doing all this while, not me. I have backed up each and every claim that I’ve made with evidences from the authentic translation of Mahabharatha, not your pulp fiction meant for TV serials.
>>Regarding http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Arjuna, you clearly have not read the comment I made afterwards regarding this source. I don’t know what level you have studied up to and I am not interested either, but if you have studied anything, surely you have not studied solely using few same old online sources.
————-
This is the answer that your guruji gave me when I quoted wikipedia: “Your quotation from wikepedia is laughable , wikepedia is not authentic source , and Read Vyasa Bharath to understand how people are addressed .” That’s my answer to you as well.
>>You are acting like Ganguly is your God.
————-
On the contrary, I challenged you to quote from any authentic translation of Vyas Bharath. Rather than doing so, you quoted from a pulp fiction, which is the story retold by some Tom/Dick/Harry. Every TV serial based on Mahabharata is a retold story by some Tom/Dick/Harry. Then how is your pulp fiction any different from those silver screen versions?
Referring to what your statement “the debating point is whether Karna is evil and whether Karna is inferior to Arjun/Bheema.”
>>You challenged me to quote from sources to back up my statements; I provided statements and mainly direct quotes. Enough evidence to state Karna was EVIL and Arjuna and Bhima were better warriors.
————
You quoted from a pulp fiction, not authentic translation of Mahabharat. I can cite thousand of such pulp fictions from the net/TV/magazines and get away with whatever I want. No sensible person will accept it.
>>I presented God did not use tricks or deceit in Arjuna`s victory. Funny how you did not have a response to that and present me your findings with evidence (according to you Karna better person and always winning). WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE?
————-
I have presented these evidences several times here. But your Guruji edited and removed it. I’ll make a seperate post with the evidences. I hope that your Guruji will not edit it this time. If he does, then gimme your mail id. I’ll email it to you.
>>You and other Karna supporters keep going outside to scope of this debate when you have nothing left to say. A lot of information is clearly hard for you to handle in one go. Guru Chiraanji has kindly created another page
————
It is you who has been doing it regularly and I had to remind you of the scope everytime. Can you point out one instance where I went out of the scope?
>>To remain within scope of the debate the points are being broken down. To prove what you say kindly present your findings with evidence (sources, fully identified) in quotes regarding the following topics (they are all Arjun winning over Karna), present your evidences on the new pages. Please avoid making your own statements and quotes because they do not make any sense. Please avoid using irrelevant excuses on why Karna failed, this will help to remain within the scope of the debate.
1. Once in the Draupadi swayamvar episode .
2. Second in Virat parva Go samrakshan episode .[ here KArna's dress was stolen ]
3. Drona asks who can get him DRUPAD captivated
4. Gandharva
—————-
If you had atleast a basic minimum sincierity in what you just said, you would have provided quoted for the above incidents.
Anyway, the issue here is after reading too much of pulp fiction and watching too much of bollywood movies, you think that a great warrior would never caught offguard. You think that Sunny Deol singlehandedly defeating the whole Pakistan army or Sylvester Stallone singlehandedly defeating the whole Soviet army is reality. 
And then you try to judge Karna with that benchmark. That is the problem. The original Mahabharata (not your pulp fiction) depicts realistic incidents. In reality any great warrior will get wounded in battle, get defeated sometimes by inferior warriors. I quoted the instance of Arjuna getting mortally wounded from an insignificant warrior Susharma.
http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m08/m08053.htm
The latter again, at the sight of rangers of the sky, began, O king, to fly away. Freed from that foot-tying weapon, the Samsaptaka force, O monarch, looked like the Sun himself giving light unto all creatures, when freed from clouds. Thus liberated, those warriors once more shot their arrows, O sire, and hurled their weapons at Arjuna’s car. And all of them pierced Partha with numerous weapons. Cutting off with his own arrowy downpour that shower of mighty weapons Vasava’s son, that slayer of hostile heroes, began to slaughter those warriors. Then Susharma, O king, with a straight arrow, pierced Arjuna in the chest, and then he pierced him with three other shafts. Deeply pierced therewith, and feeling great pain, Arjuna sat down on the terrace of his car. Then all the troops loudly cried out, saying, “Partha is slain.” At this the blare of conchs, and the peal of drums, and the sound of diverse musical instruments, and loud leonine shouts, arose there.
I can quote the same passage from mahabharatOnline as well. There are several such incidents. Karna too has such vulnerabilities, that’s the point. Why do you use seperate standards to judge Karna? But when fully prepared, Arjuna could not even face Karna, even with his chariot wheel swallowed by the earth. See the relevent quote from my next post.
Posted by chiraan on 19/05/2009 at 00:58
Kindly have a look at the translation of how shalya raises the same points we have raised :
…………………………………………..extract ………………………..
Sanjaya continued: Hearing the boastful words of Karna, Salya gave the
following reply, “O Karna, do not pierce my ears with these conceited words of
vanity. Arjuna is the foremost warrior, and you are the lowest of kshatriyas.
Who else but Arjuna could have kidnapped Subhadra in the presence of all the
Yadu princes and kings? Who, save Arjuna, could have satisfied the great Lord
Shiva in battle? To protect the Khandava forest and assist Agni, who, save
Arjuna, could have fought with all the heavenly gods, headed by Indra, and
defeated them in battle? Was it not Phalguna who released Duryodhana from the
hands of the Gandharvas after you had run away from the battlefield? When the
cows were stolen away from the kingdom of Virata, wasn’t it Bhishma, Drona,
Kripa, Ashvatthama, Duryodhana and yourself who were defeated by Arjuna? Why
did you not endeavor to defeat him then? Now on this occasion, you will get
another chance to fight with the son of Kunti, and I think that if you do not
flee from battle, you will be slain by Arjuna.”
check for more quotes from now on…..
Posted by chiraan on 19/05/2009 at 01:07
ANother of karna’s defeat ……………..
………………………………………………..extract……………..
King Yudhisthira was angered by Karna’s words, but as he looked around he saw
that he had no weapons to challenge him. Bhima then came upon Karna, and a
fierce battle ensued. Karna managed to shatter Bhimasena’s bow, but Bhima
strung another bow and pierced Karna with many arrows. Karna countered with
twenty arrows, but Bhima pierced Karna in the chest with a broad headed shaft
released with the force of lightning. The arrow hit Karna with the sound of
thunder, and Karna fell to the floor of the chariot in a deadly swoon. Salya
then took Karna from the battlefield to save his life.
Witnessing Karna’s defeat, Duryodhana sent twenty of his brothers to fight
with Bhima. They were like flies about to enter fire.
………………………………….end of extract ……………….
these verses are from
http://www.philosophy.ru/library/asiatica/indica/itihasa/mahabharata/eng/gbmb08xt.html
Your verse are not even a single verse of yours you will find here in this authentic transaltion ….. keep checking and do consider shaving your head ……….
Posted by chiraan on 19/05/2009 at 01:09
For your easy browsing Ib shall give a complete translation link
http://www.philosophy.ru/library/asiatica/indica/itihasa/mahabharata/eng/index.html
mahAbhArata
Narration | Translation
Posted by chiraan on 19/05/2009 at 01:30
extract of karna losing to Drupad’s army
>>>>>>>>>>>>>extract >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
As the Kurus
approached Drupada’s capital, they informed the King of their desire for
battle. The Kuru army was led by Duryodhana, Karna, Yuyutsu, Duhshasana and
Vikarna. King Drupada, not tolerating the attack on his kingdom, mounted his
chariot and along with his brothers met the Kuru army head on. Duryodhana and
his followers then competed with one another to see who could capture King
Drupada first.
Before the battle started, Arjuna saw the vanity of Duryodhana and his
brothers. He therefore informed Drona, O best of the brahmanas, we shall
refrain from fighting until Duryodhana has displayed his prowess. The King of
the Panchalas can never be captured on the battlefield by any of these
warriors. Having made his plan, Arjuna, surrounded by his brothers, waited
outside the town about a mile away.
Meanwhile, King Drupada, beholding the Kuru army, rushed forward releasing
hundreds of arrows from his powerful bow. The Kuru ranks were so afflicted that
they thought that there were many Drupadas opposed to them. There arose from
the Panchala army a war cry that shook the firmament. Duryodhana and his
brothers became furious and began to shower their arrows upon the enemy. But
the mighty bowman Drupada was not affected and began killing the enemy with
greater vigor. He challenged Duryodhana, Vikarna and Karna, and sent them
running from the battlefield. The arrows from the Panchala army began to rain
upon the Kurus, breaking their ranks and causing them to flee for their very
lives.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>end of extract >>>>>>>>>>
http://www.philosophy.ru/library/asiatica/indica/itihasa/mahabharata/eng/gbmb01xt.html
look it is the same site ………..
Posted by chiraan on 19/05/2009 at 01:43
This is go sanrakshana episode ……………
……………………extract …………………………………….
Arjuna then ranged the field of battle depriving life from the Kuru host. The
next warrior to approach Arjuna was Sangramajit, the brother of Karna. He
challenged Arjuna like a tempest, but Arjuna quickly killed his four red horses
and with a crescent shaped arrow, severed his head. When his brother had fallen
on the battlefield, Karna quickly pierced Arjuna with twelve arrows. He covered
his horses with arrows and pierced Virata’s son in the hand where he held the
chariot’s reins. Seeing the duel that was taking place, the Kuru host looked
on, not taking any part. Arjuna covered the Karna’s chariot with thousands of
arrows so that it could not be seen. However, Karna soon released himself from
that network of arrows and sent forth a thunderous roar competing with the
monkey on the banner of Arjuna’s chariot. Karna then released a multitude of
arrows that covered Arjuna’s chariot. Highly annoyed, and drawing his bow back
to his ear, Arjuna pierced Karna in every part of his body. Mangled by Arjuna’s
crescent shaped arrows, Karna fled the battlefield.
After Radha’s son had been routed, the Kuru host fell upon Arjuna like the
…………………………………………………………..end of extract ……………………………
http://www.philosophy.ru/library/asiatica/indica/itihasa/mahabharata/eng/gbmb04xt.html
ocean attacks the beach.
Posted by chiraan on 19/05/2009 at 01:48
Look what kripa and AShvaththama say to KArna
……………………………extract ……………………………………………
“O Karna,” Kripacharya said, “your heart is crooked and always inclined to
war. Do you not remember that Arjuna alone stopped the onslaught of the
Gandharvas in the Dvaitavana forest while you ran from the battlefield. Do you
not remember that Arjuna alone killed the Nivatakavachas which were incapable
of being slain by the demigods.
………..Ashvatththama …………
“O Karna,” Ashvatthama advised, “you cannot win battles with words. Why then
do you boast? What kshatriya is there that expresses delight at winning a
kingdom with dice like the wicked son of Dhritarastra? In single combat did you
defeat the Pandavas for their kingdom? What act of prowess caused you to order
Draupadi to be brought into the assembly of Kings, and by what act of prowess
did you endeavor to see her stripped naked? Take out your dice now and throw
them at Arjuna. Let the sinful Shakuni come and fight with Arjuna. The Gandiva
does not throw dice, but arrows as deadly as virulent poison. Let this battle
be lead by Shakuni, if he chooses to fight. I shall, however, not fight with
one who is greater than all the demigods combined.”
…………………………………..end of extract ……………………………………
http://www.philosophy.ru/library/asiatica/indica/itihasa/mahabharata/eng/gbmb04xt.html
this is what is called as consistency …………
Posted by Ahambrahmasmi on 18/05/2009 at 19:19
All those bashibazouks who seem to eulogise Karna, know this, he did have some plus points, a hell lot of negative ones. He had a monumental ego. He was a pathetic friend. If Duryodhan and Karna were the best of friends, surely they would heed to each other’s counsel and guide each other from right or wrong. But that low-life Karna never guide him or opposed his evil actions…..He was a wimp and yes, he was a LOW-LIFE. Talking about his archery and fighting skills being at par with Arjun, know this you scumbags, that Karna could not even defeat Abhimanyu !!!!!!!! PERIOD, there is NO CONTRADICTION to this. I don’t know whether it was Dronacharya or Duryodhana, one of them suggested to gang-attack the kid as they did not have the balls to face him alone !!! Arjun fought with his full prowess only on the day he had to slay Jayadhratta, the INVINCIBLE KARNA, sadly….could not stop him………and you say Karna is equal to Arjun !!! Krishna praises him, as somebody said here, the lord is balanced and not like us…..I HATE KARNA, HE WAS THE LOWEST OF ALL LIVES. OTHER LOW LIVES misunderstood as good people and whom I hate the most are:
DRONACHARYA, KRIPACHARYA (he was just a puppet), AHSWATHAMA (GOOD THAT HE IS CURSED WITH LIFE TILL THE END OF KALIYUG!), (strangely, he was the strongest man alive,says-Bhima)
Some of you have said that if Karna was not cursed at all and had his Kavatch-Kundall etc., he would not have been invincible….It is a BIG IF. Probably then Abhimanyu would have slaughtered him and his ego and died of killing him…..
Posted by chiraan on 18/05/2009 at 20:23
Shabhash !!!!!!! , I like the spirit with which you have presented the views
Posted by Sonu on 18/05/2009 at 21:32
Thanks for your comment & views, it shows there are still people out there believing the correct views.
Posted by Surya on 19/05/2009 at 09:23
You mean, you like the brand of the spirit that he has consumed?
From his language, looks like the spirit is nothing other than country arrack. 
And this dude has the nerve to advice dharma to Karna. My answer to this dearest disciple of yours is this: “:D 
Physician, heal thyself. First rein in your foul tongue by learning some dharma. Then advice dharma to the others. 
”
Chiraans views
Speaking foul of Women is acceptable this lad surya , he desperately seeks dharma when he himself is taken for task , but does not remember dharma when talking of Greats like Draupadi , Kunti and Krishna , Dharma cannot be selective . It is universal ”
Dharma says no desires , no siding with evil , BUT KArna just because he has been raised to a level of KING is sticking to friendship . WHy should one accept freindship of evil for the desire of KIngdom .[ though unworthy].
EVEN if you have accepted , what stops one from leaving a friendship once he has found Duryodhan is evil . Conspiring to killing the brothers is it not evil [ was Karna not part of that conspiracy] .
Where was his Dharma here .
WHy could he not say to Duryodhan you are wrong [ greed for KIngdom ] Duryodhan would have kicked him out for being ungrateful.
Which dharma says you should continue with bad people , and cannot come out of bad company .
Which dharma says following LOrd’s words is greater than Friendship .
What he has done for Friendship either except nodding his head [ LIKE A SLAVE] to duryodhan for every of his act .
Was he able to save him from disgrace of defeat in virat ,gandharva , draupadi svayamvar , or even MAhabharat.
He was a classic ” chamcha “. who just use words to satisfy their masters .
Similarly going by his standards , you do not deserve discusseth dharma . rectify your words , We shall respect you ,. Although we still respect you for your skills .
Karna flees is there for everyone to see in ” ganguly translation and other translations as well ” There is no word flee or defeat for ARJUN or BHEEMA in your transaltio or our translation . Whenever this point is raised , you shy away and dont show these vereses .[ It is acceptable that KArna spares life of YUdhisthir , nakul sahadev ] BUT bheema getting defeated
. The wrod defeat is explicitly used for KARNA [even inyour ganguly] And not used FOR BHEEMA and ARJUN .
show me verses [ explain this properly and do not deviate]
Posted by Sonu on 19/05/2009 at 17:16
Message for Surya and other Karna supporters (if applicable).
You don’t agree on my own views and I don’t agree with your own views.
You don’t agree on my sources, I say your sources need to be questioned and sources need to be cross checked.
You say I have gone outside the scope of this debate and I say the same to you.
You say I make excuses and I say the same to you.
You say I use inappropriate language and I say the same to you.
Summarising the points above, the purpose of the debate really has not working as it is extra “noise” and wasting time for everybody. In order for ALL OF US to remain within professional standards and as civilised beings. I propose the above mentioned to be excluded from the debate, in future I will only present findings from a source that can be identified, with main use of quotes. It is much appreciated if Surya and other Karna supporters accept this and do the same.
Hopefully the debate can now continue on the following
http://chiraan.wordpress.com/2009/05/17/superiority-of-arjun-vis-a-vis-karna-a-debate/#comments
Peace.
Posted by Surya on 19/05/2009 at 17:58
>>Speaking foul of Women is acceptable this lad surya ,
———–
Speaking foul of anybody is unacceptable, not just women. See the language used by your hero Bheemasen on Karna when he showed is respect to his father Adiratha during Karna’s coronation as the King of Anga:
http://www.bharatadesam.com/spiritual/mahabharata/mahabharata_01140.php
“Vaisampayana said, ‘After this, with his sheet loosely hanging down, Adhiratha entered the lists, perspiring and trembling, and supporting himself on a staff.
“Seeing him, Karna left his bow and impelled by filial regard bowed down his head still wet with the water of inauguration. And them the charioteer, hurriedly covering his feet with the end of his sheet, addressed Karna crowned with success as his son. And the charioteer embraced Karna and from excess of affection bedewed his head with tears, that head still wet with the water sprinkled over it on account of the coronation as king of Anga. Seeing the charioteer, the Pandava Bhimasena took Karna for a charioteer’s son, and said by way of ridicule, ‘O son of a charioteer, thou dost not deserve death in fight at the hands of Partha. As befits thy race take thou anon the whip. And, O worst of mortals, surely thou art not worthy to sway the kingdom of Anga, even as a dog doth not deserve the butter placed before the sacrificial fire.’ Karna, thus addressed, with slightly quivering lips fetched a deep sigh, looked at the God of the day in the skies. And even as a mad elephant riseth from an assemblage of lotuses, the mighty Duryodhana rose in wrath from among his brothers, and addressed that performer of dreadful deeds, Bhimasena, present there, ‘O Vrikodara, it behoveth thee not to speak such words.
>>he desperately seeks dharma when he himself is taken for task , but does not remember dharma when talking of Greats like Draupadi , Kunti and Krishna , Dharma cannot be selective . It is universal ”
————
Ha ha, I don’t seek any dharma. I just feel pity when I encounter such worthless characters. Skilled debators defeat their opponents with arguments. Likewise skilled warriors crush their opponents with their skills. Good for nothing folks can’t do either of this. So they just abuse. And then they have the nerve to preach dharma to great warriors like Karna.
>>Dharma says no desires , no siding with evil , BUT KArna just because he has been raised to a level of KING is sticking to friendship . WHy should one accept freindship of evil for the desire of KIngdom .[ though unworthy].
————
During the tournament, Karna had no way of knowing the evils that Duryodhana was going to plot against the Pandavas in the future. In that context, Karna did whatever was most appropriate. Even Kunti felt happy at Karna’s choice:
http://www.bharatadesam.com/spiritual/mahabharata/mahabharata_01140.php
And Kunti, recognising her son in Karna by the various auspicious marks on his person and beholding him installed in the sovereignty of Anga, was from motherly affection, very pleased.
Going by your logic, why would Kunti be pleased if she had felt that Karna had sided with evil?
>>EVEN if you have accepted , what stops one from leaving a friendship once he has found Duryodhan is evil . Conspiring to killing the brothers is it not evil [ was Karna not part of that conspiracy] .
Where was his Dharma here .
————
Because due to the selfishness of Kunti, Karna became indebted to Duryodhana. Karna was a very honorable and loyal person. He willingly sacrificed his own life along with that of his sons to repay this debt. It is due to the very same debt that he participated in all the conspiracies as Duryodhana’s most trusted friend.
Had Kunti recognized Karna anytime before that as her son, none of this would have happened. Karna would not have attracted any curse either. But this selfish woman was willing to recognize Karna only when she realized that the lives of her other five sons were in deep peril.
>>WHy could he not say to Duryodhan you are wrong [ greed for KIngdom ] Duryodhan would have kicked him out for being ungrateful.
————-
Ha ha, Duryodhan, who doesn’t listen to his own father, teacher Drona, pitamah Bheesha would listen to Karna.
What an argument!!! It was Karna who was indebted to Duryodhana, not vice versa. Duryodhana did not make Karna his friend to receive moral sermons. 
>>Which dharma says you should continue with bad people , and cannot come out of bad company .
Which dharma says following LOrd’s words is greater than Friendship . What he has done for Friendship either except nodding his head [ LIKE A SLAVE] to duryodhan for every of his act .
———
Every dharma says that you cannot be a free man until you repay the debt. The debt was not just Anga, it was Duryodhana’s vindication of Bheema’s racial abuses and the opportunity to compete with Arjuna. When Yudhistira pawned his brothers and lost, why didn’t the brothers claim that we cannot be the servants of an evil king and come out of the bad employer? The same reason – debt incurred by Yudhistira. Even before Duryodhana had a chance to speak, Kunti could have rebuked Bheema and recognized Karna. Then the tides of history would have reversed. But for her, her personal comforts had been more valuable than her first born.
>>Was he able to save him from disgrace of defeat in virat ,gandharva , draupadi svayamvar , or even MAhabharat.
He was a classic ” chamcha “. who just use words to satisfy their masters .
———
Even if you claim that he was a chamcha, you’ll have to admit that it was Kunti’s selfishness that made him a one.
>>Similarly going by his standards , you do not deserve discusseth dharma . rectify your words , We shall respect you ,. Although we still respect you for your skills .
———-
On the contrary, it is Bheema and Draupadi that do not deserve to discuss dharma. If you curse someone, then that person will curse you back. That’s human nature. If you don’t want then you should not curse the others in the first place. Both Bheema and Draupadi failed to comprehend this simple logic.
>>Karna flees is there for everyone to see in ” ganguly translation and other translations as well ” There is no word flee or defeat for ARJUN or BHEEMA in your transaltio or our translation . Whenever this point is raised , you shy away and dont show these vereses .[ It is acceptable that KArna spares life of YUdhisthir , nakul sahadev ] BUT bheema getting defeated
————–
I have shown multiple occations where Karna spares Bheema. I even quoted an occation where Karna singlehandedly defeats Bhima, Yudhistrira, Drishtadyumna, Shikhandi, Satyaki and several others put together. Both Krishna and Yudhistira have admitted that Karna is invinsible for the three worlds with all the organisms put together.
>>. The wrod defeat is explicitly used for KARNA [even inyour ganguly] And not used FOR BHEEMA and ARJUN .
show me verses [ explain this properly and do not deviate]
———
What is the big deal? In case of Bheema and Arjuna, the auther has used words like Karna spared their life, Bhima ran away to save his life etc. Why do you have particular affinity to a particular word? I have already quoted all these occasions it in this forum. If you can’t find it then tell me. I’ll post again.
Posted by chiraan on 19/05/2009 at 18:27
Pity on surya who seeks dharma in the words of duryodhan , a mother is always happy in seeing her son succeed .
What dharma has been abused When Bheema says dog’s dont deserve yagnya ahuti , it is truth even lowest people on the earth drive away dogs when they are praying . Kingdom is a sacred issue and it cannot be given to any and sundry who walks into pavilion .
What insult is there in calling a spade a spade , but if a spade feels insulted at being called Spade , even then Dharma does not allow it to disrobe a woman under the pretext of insult .
[ it is like a girl has insulted to someone has proceeded to rape and judge is aquiting the culprit] this is distasteful
statement .
In your whole ganguly text not a single statement shows ARJUN as fleeing and KArna flees at every opportunity . You have not shown it either ,
And Defeat is a explicit word . after defeat One withdraws from fighting like in case of KARNA , he is carried away by duryodhan or shalya , SUch statements are not there for ARJUN , even in your GANGULY . kindly show them if you can .
I am surprised at your interpretationof dharma .
Posted by Surya on 20/05/2009 at 19:11
>>Pity on surya who seeks dharma in the words of duryodhan , a mother is always happy in seeing her son succeed .
—————
My question was, as you said, if in that context Karna had any way of knowing that he was siding with evil, then Kunti too would have known the same thing. Then Kunti should have got concerned rather than feeling glad. Right? Kunti was glad, not concerned. This clearly proves that like Karna, Kunti too had no idea in that context that Karna was siding with evil. So as I said, the whole blame for the consequences should go to Kunti.
>>What dharma has been abused When Bheema says dog’s dont deserve yagnya ahuti , it is truth even lowest people on the earth drive away dogs when they are praying . Kingdom is a sacred issue and it cannot be given to any and sundry who walks into pavilion .
———
Ha ha, there you are. When Duryodhan declared that he’s giving the kingdom of Anga to this “sundry who walked into pavilion”, Bheema did not say anything. He made this basest racial abuses only when Bheema thought that Karna was the son of the charioteer Adiratha. Read the passage again.
So much for your desperation to exalt of sutha caste.
>>What insult is there in calling a spade a spade , but if a spade feels insulted at being called Spade , even then Dharma does not allow it to disrobe a woman under the pretext of insult .
[ it is like a girl has insulted to someone has proceeded to rape and judge is aquiting the culprit] this is distasteful statement .
————
There is no insult in calling a spade a spade. If Bheema had pointed out the flaws in Karna’s archery and criticized it, there would not have been any issue. Rather, he hit Karna on his weak spot – his honor – by racially abusing him, comparing him to a dog vying for butter. And you see nothing wrong in that. Your sense of judgement is seriously hampered by your irrational loyalties. Karna did not rape or disrobe Draupadi. Just has she had insulted Karna’s honor where it hurt most, Karna merely returned her favor by insulting her honor where it hurt most. Score 1:1
The match should have ended in a draw.
Posted by chiraan on 20/05/2009 at 20:56
Save your best for debate ,
i am here to answer you ,
kindly accept the support of Shri AMit SHUKLA ,
I would like to say , few jury have been brought in with their loyalties to Arjun/karna[ predebate] and yet their sense of judgemnt be towards fairness of debate , they would highlight the points of Shri SUrya and also see a point in it . So Shri AMIT [ as a predebate Karna enthusiast ] you are welcome as a jury .
Please Do join in . I like the way you have given encouragement to Shri Surya.
this debte would be incomplete without balance in argument , which I am sure you can lend to us.
I welcome you Shri Amit Shukla and urge Shri SUrya to welcome you as well .
Posted by SONU on 19/05/2009 at 02:25
SONU: Other then the debating points and addressing the insults on God. I AM replying to your nonsense because I want to highlight to you a true reflection of yourself. (Debate with Surya)
>>You have got a nerve and clearly dumb dim-witted.
—————
SURYA: So, when your arguments have been proven wrong, you’ve started personally attacking the arguer. This is the 19th trick exhibited by inferior debators, prior to fleeing the forum altogether. Anyway, I’m here for debate, not for a muck throwing competition and therefore I’m not answering your personal affronts in the same coin. It was the same thing done by Draupadi – by personally attacking Karna with racist slurs and then when she got it back in the same coin from Karna, took it very personally. So the moral of the story is, don’t give it if you can’t take it.
SONU: You just have given your own personal views.
>>You repeatedly keep on making your own statements and waffling, possibly to cover up relevant points you cannot argue with evidence. You bring in irrelevant points to back up what you say without any genuine evidence, when that has been exposed; you say that was never relevant to the topic.
———–
SURYA: That’s what you have been doing all this while, not me. I have backed up each and every claim that I’ve made with evidences from the authentic translation of Mahabharatha, not your pulp fiction meant for TV serials.
SONU: Why are you giving Guru`s answers when you cant think of your own, especially when you don’t follow the advice yourself.
>>Regarding http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Arjuna, you clearly have not read the comment I made afterwards regarding this source. I don’t know what level you have studied up to and I am not interested either, but if you have studied anything, surely you have not studied solely using few same old online sources.
————-
SURYA: This is the answer that your guruji gave me when I quoted wikipedia: “Your quotation from wikepedia is laughable , wikepedia is not authentic source , and Read Vyasa Bharath to understand how people are addressed .” That’s my answer to you as well.
SONU: Majority of my quotes are from a book, it is not surprising you cannot see that.
>>You are acting like Ganguly is your God.
————-
SURYA: On the contrary, I challenged you to quote from any authentic translation of Vyas Bharath. Rather than doing so, you quoted from a pulp fiction, which is the story retold by some Tom/Dick/Harry. Every TV serial based on Mahabharata is a retold story by some Tom/Dick/Harry. Then how is your pulp fiction any different from those silver screen versions?
Referring to what your statement “the debating point is whether Karna is evil and whether Karna is inferior to Arjun/Bheema.”
>>You challenged me to quote from sources to back up my statements; I provided statements and mainly direct quotes. Enough evidence to state Karna was EVIL and Arjuna and Bhima were better warriors.
SONU: On 17/05/09 Surya SAID: “My challenge is open. You point out the version that is acceptable to you. I’ll quote from there. Or you yourself quote from the version that is acceptable to you the equivalent passages that I have quoted. Can you do that?”
SONU: On another point in that same reply SURYA Said “Surya: That was a proposal made by Krishna to Karna. I have clearly quoted the source as well. If you think that this is adulterated, then why don’t you quote the same passage from the version that is acceptable to you? I challenge you to do that.”
SONU: WHERE does it SAY in your ORIGINAL message “I challenged you to quote from any authentic translation of Vyas Bharath.???”
————
SURYA: You quoted from a pulp fiction, not authentic translation of Mahabharat. I can cite thousand of such pulp fictions from the net/TV/magazines and get away with whatever I want. No sensible person will accept it.
>>I presented God did not use tricks or deceit in Arjuna`s victory. Funny how you did not have a response to that and present me your findings with evidence (according to you Karna better person and always winning). WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE?
————-
SURYA: I have presented these evidences several times here. But your Guruji edited and removed it. I’ll make a seperate post with the evidences. I hope that your Guruji will not edit it this time. If he does, then gimme your mail id. I’ll email it to you.
SONU: That’s your own statement, waffle & EXCUSE. WHERES EVIDENCE?
>>You and other Karna supporters keep going outside to scope of this debate when you have nothing left to say. A lot of information is clearly hard for you to handle in one go. Guru Chiraanji has kindly created another page
————
SURYA: It is you who has been doing it regularly and I had to remind you of the scope everytime. Can you point out one instance where I went out of the scope?
SONU: Suggested by you “the debating point is whether Karna is evil and whether Karna is inferior to Arjun/Bheema.” Here are just a few out of scope excuses you used for Karna`s failure.
You used Karna`s birth, Arjuna was in disguise & Druapadi`s martial life. Even then the excuses are waffle and not true.
>>To remain within scope of the debate the points are being broken down. To prove what you say kindly present your findings with evidence (sources, fully identified) in quotes regarding the following topics (they are all Arjun winning over Karna), present your evidences on the new pages. Please avoid making your own statements and quotes because they do not make any sense. Please avoid using irrelevant excuses on why Karna failed, this will help to remain within the scope of the debate.
1. Once in the Draupadi swayamvar episode .
2. Second in Virat parva Go samrakshan episode .[ here KArna's dress was stolen ]
3. Drona asks who can get him DRUPAD captivated
4. Gandharva
—————-
SURYA: If you had atleast a basic minimum sincierity in what you just said, you would have provided quoted for the above incidents. Anyway, the issue here is after reading too much of pulp fiction and watching too much of bollywood movies, you think that a great warrior would never caught offguard. You think that Sunny Deol singlehandedly defeating the whole Pakistan army or Sylvester Stallone singlehandedly defeating the whole Soviet army is reality. And then you try to judge Karna with that benchmark. That is the problem. The original Mahabharata (not your pulp fiction) depicts realistic incidents. In reality any great warrior will get wounded in battle, get defeated sometimes by inferior warriors. I quoted the instance of Arjuna getting mortally wounded from an insignificant warrior Susharma.
http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m08/m08053.htm
The latter again, at the sight of rangers of the sky, began, O king, to fly away. Freed from that foot-tying weapon, the Samsaptaka force, O monarch, looked like the Sun himself giving light unto all creatures, when freed from clouds. Thus liberated, those warriors once more shot their arrows, O sire, and hurled their weapons at Arjuna’s car. And all of them pierced Partha with numerous weapons. Cutting off with his own arrowy downpour that shower of mighty weapons Vasava’s son, that slayer of hostile heroes, began to slaughter those warriors. Then Susharma, O king, with a straight arrow, pierced Arjuna in the chest, and then he pierced him with three other shafts. Deeply pierced therewith, and feeling great pain, Arjuna sat down on the terrace of his car. Then all the troops loudly cried out, saying, “Partha is slain.” At this the blare of conchs, and the peal of drums, and the sound of diverse musical instruments, and loud leonine shouts, arose there.
SURYA: I can quote the same passage from mahabharatOnline as well. There are several such incidents. Karna too has such vulnerabilities, that’s the point. Why do you use seperate standards to judge Karna? But when fully prepared, Arjuna could not even face Karna, even with his chariot wheel swallowed by the earth. See the relevent quote from my next post.
SONU: Above is more is more and constant waffle that has no meaning and not even worth discussing.
SONU: It is very easy to navigate to the following to see the evidence I have presented.
http://chiraan.wordpress.com/2009/05/17/superiority-of-arjun-vis-a-vis-karna-a-debate/
1. Once in the Draupadi swayamvar episode .
2. Second in Virat parva Go samrakshan episode .[ here KArna's dress was stolen ]
3. Drona asks who can get him DRUPAD captivated
4. Gandharva
SONU: seeing as you swear by Ganguly`s translation. (Other readers please note, I would question it and cross check the information from this source).
Mahabharata of Krishna-Dwaipayana Vyasa
translated by Kisari Mohan Ganguli
Just one of Arjuna`s Victory
http://www.bharatadesam.com/spiritual/mahabharata/mahabharata_08003.php
“Sanjaya continued, ‘Having said these words, O sinless one, thy son Duryodhana, with his brothers, made Karna the generalissimo (of the Kuru army). Obtaining the command, the mighty car-warrior Karna, so fierce in battle, uttered loud roars and fought with the foe. He caused, O sire, a great carnage among the Srinjayas, the Pancalas, the Kekayas, and the Videhas. From his bow issued innumerable lines of arrows, one close behind the wings of another, like flights of bees. Having afflicted the Pancalas and the Pandavas endued with great activity, and slain thousands of warriors, he was at last slain by Arjuna!”
SONU: Surya quoted from
http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m08/m08053.htm
Surya left a quote saying
“The latter again, at the sight of rangers of the sky, began, O king, to fly away. Freed from that foot-tying weapon, the Samsaptaka force, O monarch, looked like the Sun himself giving light unto all creatures, when freed from clouds. Thus liberated, those warriors once more shot their arrows, O sire, and hurled their weapons at Arjuna’s car. And all of them pierced Partha with numerous weapons. Cutting off with his own arrowy downpour that shower of mighty weapons Vasava’s son, that slayer of hostile heroes, began to slaughter those warriors. Then Susharma, O king, with a straight arrow, pierced Arjuna in the chest, and then he pierced him with three other shafts. Deeply pierced therewith, and feeling great pain, Arjuna sat down on the terrace of his car. Then all the troops loudly cried out, saying, “Partha is slain.” At this the blare of conchs, and the peal of drums, and the sound of diverse musical instruments, and loud leonine shouts, arose there.
SONU: From that very source Surya forgot or left out the vital quotes that I would like to present.
“Recovering his senses, Partha of immeasurable soul, owning white steeds and having Krishna for his driver, speedily invoked the Aindra weapon. Then thousands of arrows, O sire, issuing from that weapon, were seen on all sides to slay kings and elephants. And steeds and warriors, in hundreds and thousands, were also seen to be slaughtered in that battle, with these weapons. Then while the troops were thus being slaughtered, a great fear entered the hearts of all the samsaptakas and Gopalas, O Bharata. There was no man amongst them that could fight with Arjuna. There in the very sight of all the heroes, Arjuna began to destroy thy troops. Beholding that slaughter, all of them remained perfectly inactive, without putting forth their prowess.”
From reading Guru Chiraan Ji`s views and VARIOUS sources and the above, I can confidently conclude that Arjuna has been the winner and Karna has been the loser.
SONU: Enough is enough now, take up your arguments on the following, kindly remain within scope of the point raised. PRESENT CLEAR EVIDENCE (sources identified) WITH USE OF QUOTES.
http://chiraan.wordpress.com/2009/05/17/superiority-of-arjun-vis-a-vis-karna-a-debate/
Posted by Ahambrahmasmi on 21/05/2009 at 15:48
Hey Surya dude, you seem to be debating just for the heck of it, don’t you understand, we all know of the good side of Karna. BUT, his bad side way outweighed his good side! Parauram clearly told him that his debt to Duryodhan was cleared off the day he participated in the murder of Abhimanyu, why then continue on Duryodhan’s side?
Dharma???????? Yeah right……
Krishna told him, that isn’t Dharma more important than you debt to Duryodhan? Even at the cost of this debt, you should be on Dharma’s side.
But he did not choose. If he was so sensible and on Dharma’s side, he could have agreed and there would not have been any war. Duryodhan being such a good friend, would not have denied him a kingdom. He was against the other five Pandavas, not against Karna. Karna could have easily stopped the war, but because he wanted to prove that he was better than Arjun (which he miserably failed), he wanted the war….that is DHARMA !!!
.
Foul tongue! Draupadi just told him that she doesn’t want to marry a Sutputra, which he was believed to be at that point. But he did called her a PROSTITUTE IN PUBLIC !!! Boss, that is not just foul language, that is totally diabolical!
And mind you, it was on Krishna’s behest that she said this. Admit it, Arjun was way superior to Karna. Arjun had no KAVACH KUNDALL, or any Suraksha kavach like Duryodhan….
Why Arjun, just answer me dear, why couldn’t Karan inflict any damage to Abhimanyu????????????????????????????????WHY???????? That vily, crafty, cunning Dronacharya also couldn’t do anything???????????
Karan could only kill Ghatotkach, because of the Shakti of Indra, without that, the giant was hacking down the Kaura army.
ALL THE THREE PARSURAM students could not beat Abhimanyu single-handedly!
I don’t understand why you keep debating, its like you are debating and questioning Krishna himself……siding any character of Kaurava army is blasphemy…. As per Lord Krishna, NOTHING is more important than Dharma, no promises, oaths, bonds, nothing…..in this Bheesma also was wrong, and hence he got that painful death. So dude, don’t question Krishna. Karna was having a positive side, he was a very good warrior, but in totality, taking all aspects in to account, Arjun was a superior personality, and a much better warrior. I have read many versions, heard many, and in all there is one thing in common, Krishna was on the side of Arjun. He also tried guiding Karna, but Karna declined. Also, it is my personal deduction that Arjun only fought at his best the day he was avenging Abhimanyu’s death and in the Virat war.
A bunch of fools on some other blog site, have just like you, eulogised Karna, if they did that to Krishna, they would surely be enlightened. They say that Chenghiz Khan and the Huns are all descendants of Karna, who had captured a lot of Central Asia, and there they used to call him Kahn, they said that Karn, Hun, Kahn means the same thing, which is Ears, but those dorks don’t even know that Kahn means leader in Mongolian language……
My, My, My……………………………..
Posted by Sonu on 21/05/2009 at 17:07
Yes everybody has good qualities and skills along with flaws, this does not apply to God and God cannot be compared to humans or anything else. Mahabharata teaches what one should do and what one should not do, teaches the law of Karma and lessons learnt. Surely the real Mahabharata does not suggest creating a new Mahabharata consisting of what should have happened.
Posted by Ahambrahmasmi on 22/05/2009 at 18:07
Hey Surya dude, you seem to be debating just for the heck of it, don’t you understand, we all know of the good side of Karna. BUT, his bad side way outweighed his good side! Parasuram clearly told him that his debt to Duryodhan was cleared off the day he participated in the murder of Abhimanyu, why then continue on Duryodhan’s side?
Dharma???????? Yeah right……
Krishna told him, that isn’t Dharma more important than your debt to Duryodhan? Even at the cost of this debt, you should be on Dharma’s side.
But he did not choose so. If he was so sensible and on Dharma’s side, he could have agreed and there would not have been any war. Duryodhan being such a good friend, would not have denied him a kingdom. He was against the other five Pandavas, not against Karna. Karna could have easily stopped the war, but because he wanted to prove that he was better than Arjun (which he miserably failed), he wanted the war….that is DHARMA !!!
.
Foul tongue! Draupadi just told him that she doesn’t want to marry a Sutputra, which he was believed to be at that point. But he called her a PROSTITUTE IN PUBLIC !!! Boss, that is not just foul language, that is totally diabolical!
And mind you, it was on Krishna’s behest that she said this. Admit it, Arjun was way superior to Karna. Arjun had no KAVACH KUNDALL, or any Suraksha kavach like Duryodhan….
Why Arjun, just answer me dear, why couldn’t Karan inflict any damage to Abhimanyu????????????????????????????????WHY???????? That vily, crafty, cunning Dronacharya also couldn’t do anything???????????
Karan could only kill Ghatotkach, because of the Shakti of Indra, without that, the giant was hacking down the Kaurav army.
ALL THE THREE PARSURAM students could not beat Abhimanyu single-handedly!
I don’t understand why you keep debating, its like you are debating and questioning Krishna himself……siding any character of Kaurava army is blasphemy…. As per Lord Krishna, NOTHING is more important than Dharma, no promises, oaths, bonds, nothing…..in this Bheesma also was wrong, and hence he got that painful death. So dude, don’t question Krishna. Karna was having a positive side, he was a very good warrior, but in totality, taking all aspects in to account, Arjun was a superior personality, and a much better warrior. I have read many versions, heard many, and in all there is one thing in common, Krishna was on the side of Arjun. He also tried guiding Karna, but Karna declined. Also, it is my personal deduction that Arjun only fought at his best the day he was avenging Abhimanyu’s death and in the Virat war.
A bunch of fools on some other blog site, have just like you, eulogised Karna, if they did that to Krishna, they would surely be enlightened. They say that Chenghiz Khan and the Huns are all descendants of Karna, who had captured a lot of Central Asia, and there they used to call him Kahn, they said that Karn, Hun, Kahn means the same thing, which is Ears, but those dorks don’t even know that Kahn means leader in Mongolian language……
My, My, My……………………………..
Posted by Dhruv Kumar Sharma on 20/06/2009 at 13:04
Mr. Krishnarpana,
You are basically a kind of person who always takes the side of winners whoever, whatever he/she would be! You are basically not concern with right or wrong, true or false but you are a person who always choose the path of winners whether it could be “Duryodhana or Pandavas and Krishna”. You have first look into your soul and then put question mark upon any one. I put one question in front of you that “Who are you to put question mark upon the Karna’s Name his attitude, his generousity, loyalty, friendship. Were you present when he took the decision to not to take part in the battlefield until Bhisham Pitamah present in war ground? Did you heard the version that what were they said to him or vica-versa?
I am an advocate by profession and I am much able to understand, read and perceive the thought in your mind, You will definately took side of Adolf Hitler if he could win the World War-II, then that person never wrong/mean in your eyes even he have had killed several persons in Gas Chamber. Never hurt anybody’s religious feelings this is cowardness.
Posted by chiraan on 20/06/2009 at 14:46
Dear Mr Sharma, I think all karna supporters have habbit of self contradicting their own statements. In one stroke you say , you can percieve[rather assume] my state of mind in arguing against Karna and in another stroke you say I cannot understand Karna’s staement of mind! when you who have not seen me and not present where I am , can understand my state of mind , then why I acnnot understand Karna’s state of mind. when it is clearly described by Vedvyasa.
Mahabharat has been written for the human mankind to understand do ’s and dont’s , and great saints haev laid down those principle . For ages Mahabharta has been guiding force to lives in India . It is called pancham veda.
I am merely highlighting the Truth, and I must sincerely doubt your credentials as you compare Pandavas and my supporting them equivalent to supporting Adolf . so I think it is you who should sincerely introspect as what is wrong and right.
we have given ample proofs and supporting statements in the
page
http://chiraan.wordpress.com/2009/05/17/superiority-of-arjun-vis-a-vis-karna-a-debate/
I dont think so calling wrong a wrong is hurting sentiments.
Posted by chiraan on 20/06/2009 at 15:00
Dear Mr Sharma , it is just common sense ,
When Krishna offered him kingdom to join Pandavs Karna gave the excuse of duty consciousness to Krishna the God [ he disobeyed] . He gave same reason to Mother Kunti , [ if he was danveer he should have given Arjun's life as dana to his mother also ,but he did not again siting duty bound to Duryodhan] .
If he was so much duty bound to Duryodhna to te extent of rejecting GOD’ s coomand . Then he should have swallowed what Bheeshma had said and fought with duty consciousness to repay debt of Duryodhan. After all Duryodhan relied so much on him .
No here all duty consciousness vanished as his ego was hurt . This is what is defect . This is what every egoistic person does , he feels whatever good he has is best and when his interests are hurt he goes against very same priciples and tries to quote how can he allow self harm .But in order to gain shakti he did undergo self harm [desite advise father surya] ,and claimed to be daanveer , this selective dharma selfish motive.
Posted by Niraj on 28/06/2009 at 19:38
Jai Shri Krishna
Sri Chiraan from whatever I have read in the blog I have observed that
Most points against Karn are either 2 edged, subject to opinion or the
Event has another version. I will start by quoting the point concerning
Lord Krishna
• When Lord Krishna offers him the entire Kingdom of the universe to join Pandavas as eldest brother in war , He rejects Lord’s suggestion and fights for Duryodhana.( Ego before the Lord)
Good point but then again why did Lord Krishna offer him the Kingdom of the universe and try to coax him to join the Pandavas. If you say that he was their elder brother than why wasn’t he approached earlier why just before the war was inevitable? If the point was that he was siding with adharmi like Duryodhan then by that logic many noble people were doing that. Why didn’t the Lord approach Kripacharya or Yuyutsu – Yuyutsu came on Yudhishthiras call not Shri Krishnas’ and he was not given any incentive and the call wasn’t specifically directed towards him. Yudhishthira had made an all round appeal. Why didn’t the Lord try to coax Shalya when he told the Pandavas that he was joining the Duryodhan. There is no record of the Lord approaching even Bhishma or Drona to give up their respective stands on their support to Duryodhana. Even Ashwatthama a wielder of weapons like Brahmastra or Naryanastra was not approached by Him. Reasoning says that Yuyutsu Shalya may be noble but they did not
have the battle competency to harm the Pandavas. Even Ashwatthama was inferior to Arjuna. Bhishma and Drona were capable but they had a soft corner for the Pandavas.
Karna was not only capable but hostile also towards them. In fact in both our epics Ramayana and Mahabharata I can think of only one character who was approached by and avtaar of God to desert the man he is supporting and join the other camp and actually given and incentive, and that character answers to the name Karna. Even Vibhishna although a devotee of Lord Ram was not approached by Him. After Ravan had insulted him and kicked him he went and joined Lord Ram
To quote your second point
• When Mother kunti asks him not to harm Pandavas, He displeases her saying He would kill Arjun
Another good point but then why did Kunti ask him not to harm the Pandavs. Its clear that she also knew the capabilities of Karna. You may argue that Karna was siding with
Adharma that’s why Kunti had to approach him but then again Karna was siding with adharma all along. If Kunti was so concerned about her son siding with adharma she would have approached him the very next day when he insulted Draupadi. Why just after became inevitable. Gandhari was chastising her sons all along NOT only just before the war. Your point mother wants her son to be on the right path is subject to opinion. Your statement she wants to save him from the sin of killing his brothers is self explanatory that he had the capability to kill them. You have mentioned that Bhima defeated him there are versions that show that its Karna who had defeated Bhima and spared his life on his promise to Kunti. C. Rajagopalachari whom you have quoted in your blog has confirmed this point in his Mahabharata its chapter 87 titled pledge respected. Coming to his danveerta as only a vrata. Any warrior to kill his enemy does NOT do a vrata, he does a tapasya eg Jayadratha did it so did Arjuna to gain the Pasupata astra. Its people who are not into fighting do vratas ie Draupadis not tying her hair. Even Chankya did it to that effect. Bhima did a pratigya to break Duryodhans thigh but he did not do a vrata ie refraining from or persisting in any act. To do an act of daan you require a spirit of self sacrifice or an ability to tolerate high level inconvenience for the sake of others.. Karna had proved this quality ie by tolerating the sharp shooting pain caused by the scorpion which made Shri Parshuram realise that only a kshatiya could tolerate so much pain. Now I know this means any kshatriya could tolerate it but it’s the thought that count ie ability to tolerate inconvenience just for the sake of Gurus sleep – please realize I am not defending his lie to Shri Parshurama. The Rajsuya yagya episodes other version is that after Lord Krishna proved it to Yudhishtira that Karna was a bigger danveer than any one he ( Karna ) was actually an invited guest and was requested to be in charge of the charity section of the Yagya. And moreover Rajsuya Yagya does not guarantee that you have defeated every King. It’s the Ashwamedha Yagya which can suggest your complete victory and record show that this was done by the Pandavas after the Mahabharata war ie death of Duryodhana and all his supporters. Even Ravan after being a trilok viajayi had not defated Vaali, or Kartavirya Arjuna.
Now I am Quoting Shri Haripasad Jury says “Karna lost to Drupad , Arjun thrice ,Gandharva ,Bheemasen Ghatotkach, Satyaki , Abhimanyu . He also failed to string the bow in Draupadi Swayamvar. So with so many failures Karna cannot be declared as Supreme Warrior .
Arjun is undoubtedly a superior warrior than Karna as he never lost a Battle until Krishna was there on the earth. “
Concerning his loss to Drupad I will not quote any excuse that this was dronas war and Karna was not interested in winning it . He was less enthusiastic so he lost. My explanation is that Drona’s instruction to both the parties was to capture Drupada alive. In other words none of them were allowed to kill Drupada hence when Karna or even Duryodhana is fighting Drupada they cannot hit him a lethal blow which could end his life but Drupada had NOT received any such instruction from any of his superiors and was not obliged to fight with an intent NOT to kill hence the point of aggression was in Drupadas favor. Agreed Arjuna was also fighting under this same handicap but he had the guidance of the wise Yudhishthira who may not be a great warrior like him but certainly had more wisdom than any of his contemporaries so the Drupada episode proves Yudhishthiras superiority over Duryodhana. I have cleared Bhimas episode above
Even in one of my earlier messages I have mentioned the other version of the Gandharva episode. Ie Karna was drunk at that time and by the time he collected himself duryodhan was already rescued. That does not mean he could not resue Duryodhan its just that Duryodhan was resued by the time he arrived. Coming to the Ghatotkacha episode I have read versions that even Ashwatthama had defeated him in daylight. When Ghatotkach was killed Dhritrashtra asked Sanjay why did not Karna fire the Shakt earlier on Arjuna and was delaying it for so long then Sanjay replied that Lord Krishna in the battle field is explaining the same thing Lord Krishna says that every day Karna would plan to lure Arjun in the battle and plan to use the Shakti but With my maya I would block his mind and prevent that thought coming in his mind ie this reveals that every incarnation has a power to block the mind of any human being and prevent a particular thought from entering it hence its possible that in the final battle with Ghatotkach the thought of other weapons was prevented in entering the mind of Karna by Krishna and hence he ended up using the Shakti. Coming to Abhimanyu and Satyaki even Drona was defeated by Abhumanyu and I belive that Satyaki successfully prevented Drona from capturing Yudhishthira as well during the jayadrath vadh but still when he was in his full fury even Arjuna could not stand up to him hence its reasonable to assume that fighting a supreme warrior like Drona or Karna when they chose to fighting on the human level ie ordinary man made weapons is one thing and fighting them in a situation when he in his full fury employing his divine weapons etc could be a different experience altogether.
Best Regards
Niraj
Posted by aditya on 31/07/2009 at 12:21
I dont know much about all this pre-historic stuff. I know Pandavs won because Krishna was on their side, who is God himself. Arjun, Bheema no doubt were great warriors and they followed God’s will. But I as a human no matter what texts say or God wills, do not approve of the way they got the kingdom back. Both parties were resposible for the battle.
Regarding Karna, he was equally great. He knew his fate in the war but still fought for his friend. As Krishna was to Arjun, so was Karna to Duryodhan. Comparing Krishna and Karna is difficult. Krishna worked for overall good of mankind, while Karna showed the great paths of sacrifice, charity and affection.
Posted by chiraan on 31/07/2009 at 13:28
To Both kiran and aditya , most of the questions raised by you two have been aptly discussed into reams of sections in the post superiority of Arjun vs Karna . kindly go through them and readdress your concerns.
most of the points raised by kiran is again his understanding of some tranmslation , so your words of support for karna is equally debatable as neither you have travelled in time back nor have you read original. so soft corner for karna by putting yourselves into his shoes is bias in itself.
Why others were pandu sond and not karna has been discusssed at length . Why Yudhisthir has put his kin on bet is also been explained , kindly go through them , putting blame on Yudhisthir and Pandavas is perverted ways of thinking . This blog post is precisely been wriiten to remove such perverted thinking.
Posted by Niraj on 04/08/2009 at 13:46
shri chiraan. Karna did not flee ( in the gandharva version which I mentioned )
He had gone to the other tent where his weapons where and a slight delay was caused. Its Duryodhans body guard who thought that karna fleed.
best regards
Niraj
Posted by Niraj on 04/08/2009 at 15:27
Shri Chiraan. I agree that Bhima was the bravest of them all
but I see like Mr. Surya many of my answers have been removed
I hope I was not insulting or indulged in blasphemy.
best regards
Niraj
Posted by Karna on 20/08/2009 at 13:14
Wats happening Guys… Has the three panel Jury finalised… I want to know the result… It is a nail biting climax…
Posted by Karna on 20/08/2009 at 13:16
hello… hello… Mike testing 1… 2…. 3…. anybody there….
Posted by Niraj on 29/08/2009 at 09:03
Jai Shri Krishna.
As a Karna supporter I feel its my duty to try to clear the Kunti confusion scenario. I agree that like Karna Kunti too was a victim of circumstances. When Karna challanged Arjun for the first time she could not have acknowldged him becoz Karna also could have said that you are lying to protect your son. But after the Pandavas marraige with Draupadi Lord Krishna had entered her life. She could have taken Sri Krishnas help to inform Karna about his relationship with the Pandavas and end this enimosity. GOD is kind and merciful but you have to approach HIM to seek his help. Sudama also got help only after he came to Sri Krishna. By the time his indentity was revealed war was just round the corner and too many insults were heaped on the Pandavas and there was a litreally a point of no return. Satyavati had acknowldged her illlegmitate child Ved Vyasa publically. With Sri Krishnas help Kunti could have done the same. Karnas father Surya devta (with all due respects to him ) would have done a better job to come in a dream to him and warn him against Duryodhan rather than Indra. Is it not parents duty to prevent their son from falling into wrong company ?
Posted by Sonu on 29/08/2009 at 14:21
Niraj
You express your views about Karna and that too without evidence and statements full of ifs/buts/could have/should have and so on. The points you are raising have been covered in great detail and with evidence on this site, it does not add any value to repeat. The same debate points keep going in circles and some Karna supporters are not going to change their views even if real evidence is presented them, its your own will to be devoted to who ever you like, but why constantly repeat your points without evidence?
What ever happened was Karna`s own fate and destiny and taking Karma into consideration. Karna and Duryodhans friendship started on own personal motives, and Karna was old enough to know what is right and wrong. There is a time and place for everything, Lord Krishna and Kunti told Karna about his identity in time for when Karna could have saved himself, but out of ego Karna refused Gods and his mother’s requests. Kindly go over the debating pages to remind yourself on the points you are raising, they have been covered with evidence. The articles Guru Chiraan has written on Karna have not been written to down grade his or anyone’s character but rather to teach others and what one should do and what one shouldn’t do (like a lessons learnt).
Posted by Niraj on 30/08/2009 at 12:48
Jai Shri Krishna
Sonu I apologise. I have not been able to read the whole blog completely. One reason is that the blog is one of the most commented post and is very big. You are also right that Karnas character also teaches what one should do and should not do. But this- what one should do and one should not do is applicable to many characters in the Mahabharat. For example Draupadi.
There is an old english saying when you want to take revenge on a person dont dig one but 2 graves. One for your enemy and the other for you own self. Isnt this applicable to Draupadi ? She was itching for Dushasanas blood she got it alright but with his blood she also got the added blood of her 5 sons, her father, brother and abhimanyus blood as well. You cant be a revenge oriented person. Killing should be done as a last option to protect life and self respect. You just cant decide to kill a person who calls you a toobar.(Bhim ) or tells you to throw away your bow ( ARjun) I am not recommending lack of self respect but one should also have an ability to forgive. Bhismas life teaches you shouldnt take pratigyas at a whim same goes for Yudhishthiras oath at gurukul regarding gambling.
best regards
Niraj
Posted by Niraj on 30/08/2009 at 16:27
Jai Sri Krishna. Despite being a Karna supporter I will have to admit that as of now its Arjuna supporters like Sonu and Sri Chiraan who have an upper hand. A Karna supporter would have more questions rather than answers for his or her debate. However I would also like to add that Karna supporters are in good company because great sons of India like Swami Vivekananda, Rabindranath Tagore ( he has written a poem on Karna ) and Ramdhari Singh Dinkar – He wrote the novel Rashmirathi and is considered to be a great poet. I know their names do not figure in the Vedas but they are men of integrity.
best regards
Niraj
Posted by chiraan on 30/08/2009 at 17:46
Oaths are taken to safeguard siddhi , when you are full moustached , if somebody calls toobar , it shows maleficence , remember the greatest Man on the earth only who is eveil will dare insult him , such evil desrves death . like Gandhi was shown in poorlight in avideo on google people revolted why Gandhi symbolises something and only eveil would denigrate [ thinking] and even google felt punishing the video . so to keep oath harmless is not wrong , why should one ask Arjun to cast off Bow . so oaths were in harmless way . why would one call Dharmamurty for a gamble . these were remotest possibilities only evil would dare to do . And hence deserves punishment . anyways all these were forgiven . Karna was not killed by Bheema. Draupadi never inched for Dushyasana , when Krishna proposed peace she was first toa ccept your BR CHOPRA DOES NOT SHOW IT , but MAHBAHRAT says so.
Posted by Niraj on 30/08/2009 at 20:27
Jai Shri Krishna
Shri Chiraan I must admit that above answers were impressive. My faith in
B R. Chopra serial is wavering
best regards
Niraj
Posted by chiraan on 30/08/2009 at 17:26
Jai sri krishna , this post of yours is complete crap . VedVyasa is not illegitimate son of Satyavati . He is legitimate son of Parashara and Satyavati . God does not take illegitimate birth . There is no difference between Krishna and VedaVyasa. If you are short of information you need not speculate . Karna was born to adevata , attributing human like qualities like reacting to insult , having pervert mind because of indiffrent attitude towards him does not qualify him to be Devata [ contraray to his image of Devata ,son] If good humans can show extradordinary restraint [ sages etc] A son of Deavata should show extraordinary qualities ,it is childish to say he perverted because he was called suta . calling suta was order of the day . Kunti was not introduced to Krishna after Pandava marriage , Krishna was born to Kunti’s own brother. They knew each other since childhood , and child Krishna was no different than Adult Krishna as far as Karna’s status was concerned .
Surya The zsun Deity intercated with Karna on everyday basis , directly and not just in dreams . Karna was aware that he was son of SUN . thrugh his Devata status and extraordinary intelleigence and knowledge of Astrology . story is only for the sake of humans , every character in amhabharata was aware of his fate and his sins. it does not take great intelligence or learning to decipher Duryodhan was evil , what made Drona Ashwaththama karna side with him is the philosophy. So stop speculation and think lime learned people and discuss on the basis of facts.and not superstitious beliefs and biased interests.
Posted by chiraan on 03/03/2009 at 20:46
Dear freind,
Bheema was not only expert in Gada yudhdha but also expert in all kinds of warfare, by the own words of Yudhishir and Bheeshma ,” Arjun you can hold Gandeeva better only after Krishna ,Bheema and Ashwaththama” this shows superiority of Bheema even in archery. Note Karna’ name is not here.
Regarding terrorist matter : your arranged mind seems to be suggesting that if not for motherland misiles may be allowed out of indebtedness to terrosrists ,this is immoral my dear friend, Karna was told by Krishna that he was brother of Pandavas ,and also offred kingship of Hastinapur ,yet he rejected , so your opinion that if he had known……. does not stand.
Kindly read mahabharath as deciphered by Srimadanand teertha and other great scholars, here I have written what these greats have enumerated and not self declarative opinions like yours under the pretext of Mahabharath.
There was none ever who has given jeevan dan to Bheema , because Bheema is vayuputra [the jeevan,mukhyaprana himself] he is the one who gives everyone prana , he is also prana for Karna, so it will be ridiculous saying someone has given jeevandan to him. [one cannot give life to one's own life]
kindly read Vyas bharath again to improve your understanding , and back your statements with facts and proofs and not repeated english words , in past two posts you have only repeated and corrected yourself [ I am glad for that, half of the post reply consists of your acceptance on my clarification ,example Krishna as God, Duryodhana as terrorist etc.].
Karna went to parshuram seeking education as Bramhin and not suta , kindly read properly and make statements. Parshuram is God narayana himself, there is no difference between him and Krishna , He knew who Karn was , yet he taught him that is to be noted .
In a war , oe needs more than four times the strength to defeat a person somehow , evn here a opponent can sometimes defeat you. one needs 10 times the strength of opponent to always defeat him , and 100times more strength to kill the opponent . Karna was nearly killed twice by Bheema in archery itself during Rajsooya , he was left alive to be killed by Arjun.
kindly read Mahabharath again .
Posted by Ada on 24/04/2009 at 17:51
There is no doubt that Arjun as a person was superior to Karna. He was a more complete character and made fewer mistakes then Karna. But as an archer I believe both are equal, Karna with his Kavacha-Kundala was unbeatable. Read this from Ganguly’s original text.
In Drona Parva book at the end of Ghatotkacha vadha parva, after Karna kills Ghatotkacha, every body is sad, but Lord Krishna dances while others are crying for Ghatotkacha, on being asked the reason this is the reply Lord himself gives
“Vasudeva said, Great is the joy I feel. Listen to me, Dhananjaya! This that I will tell thee will immediately dispel thy sorrow and infuse delight into thy heart. O thou of great splendour, know, O Dhananjaya, that Karna, his dart being baffled through Ghatotkacha, is already slain
in battle. The man does not exist in this world that could not stay before Karna armed with that dart and looking like Kartikeya in battle. By good luck, his (natural) armour had been taken away. By good luck, his earrings also had been taken away. By good luck, his infallible dart also is now baffled, through Ghatotkacha. Clad in (natural) coat of mail and decked with his (natural) ear-rings, Karna, who had his senses under control, could singly vanquish the three worlds with the very gods. Neither Vasava, nor Varuna the lord of the waters, nor Yama, could venture to approach him. Indeed, if that bull among men had his armour and ear-rings, neither thyself, bending the Gandiva, nor myself, uplifting my discus, called Sudarsana, could vanquish him in battle. For thy good, Karna was divested of his ear-rings by Sakra with the help of an illusion. Similarly was that subjugator of hostile towns deprived of his (natural) armour. Indeed, because Karna, cutting off his (natural) armour and his brilliant car-rings, gave them unto Sakra, it is for that he came to be called Vaikartana. Karna now seems to me to be like an angry snake of virulent poison stupefied by power of incantation, or like a fire of mild flames. From that time, O mighty-armed one, when the high-souled Sakra gave that dart unto Karna in exchange for the latter’s ear-rings, and celestial armour, that dart, viz., which has slain Ghatotkacha, from that time, Vrisha, having obtained it, had always regarded thee as slain in battle! But though deprived of that dart, O sinless one, I swear to thee that hero is still incapable of being slain by anybody else save thee. Devoted to Brahmanas, truthful in speech, engaged in penances, observant of vows, kind even unto foes, for these reasons Karna is called Vrisha. Heroic in battle, possessed of mighty arms and with bow always uplifted, like the lion in the forest depriving leaders of elephantine herds of their pride, Karna always deprives the greatest car-warriors of their pride on the field of battle, and resembles the mid-day sun at whom none can gaze. Contending with all the illustrious and foremost of warriors of thy army, O tiger among men, Karna, while shooting his arrowy showers, looked like the autumnal sun with his thousand rays. Indeed, incessantly shooting showers of shafts like the clouds pouring torrents of rain at the end of summer, Karna is like a pouring cloud charged with celestial weapons. He is incapable of being vanquished in battle by the gods, he would mangle them in such a way that their flesh and blood would fall copiously on the field. Deprived, however, of his armour as also of his car-rings, O son of Pandu, and divested also of the dart given him by Vasava, Karna is now like a man (and no longer like a god). There win occur one opportunity for his slaughter. When his car-wheels will sink in the earth, availing thyself of that opportunity, thou shouldst slay him in that distressful situation. I will make thee a sign beforehand. Warned by it, thou shouldst act. The vanquisher of Vala himself, that foremost of heroes, wielding his thunder, is incapable of slaying the invincible Karna while the latter stands weapon in hand.
http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m07/index.htm -> this is the link.
This comes from an unadulterated source.
Surely you are not greater then Lord himself to deprive Karna of his greatness, whatever other flaws he had.
Posted by chiraan on 25/04/2009 at 00:27
Shri ADA [ffaltu@gmail.com],
There are three types of strength a person has 1.natural strength [swabhavik bal] 2. astra bal[ strength o account of weapons] 3. vara bala [ strength owing to boons ] .
In your own link it can be seen that Karna without boons was an ordinary person . even arjun without astras was an inferior warrior compared to Bheemasen who never used any astras in the battle , neither any astras ever hit him , he could vanquish others by his hands alone sometimes by gada and bow [shastr] .Bheemsen won all only by his swabhavik bal ;
But both Arjun and Karna resorted to astras and karna to primarily boons and secondarily to astras . Arjun had no boons earlier in the initial combats , but Karna always had kavach kundal and Parshuram ’s boon and a invincible chariot as well right from the birth and education .
EVen with boons [all the three bal ] Karna could not defeat Arjun even once , But Arjun with [ only Astra bal and svabhavik bal] vanquished him many times ,not only him but all Kauravas put together .
Bheema vanquished Karna with his strength alone , Karnas astras , kavach kundal on , still he had to surrender his Kingdom to Bheem during Raajsuya [ Can there be any shame grerater than this; as to surrender of Kingdom to a King or archer or warrior, Karna 's kingdom Anga desha now belonged to Yudhisthir as they had won it , he had to give them tax .]
Bheema was greatest among these ,
look at the ganguly’s own translation from your source about draupadi swvayamvar:
“Fighting with each other thus for a few seconds, Bhima the foremost of the Kuru heroes taking up Salya on his arms hurled him to a distance. And Bhimasena, that bull amongst men, surprised all (by the dexterity of his feat) for though he threw Salya on the ground he did it without hurting him much. And when Salya was thus thrown down and Karna was struck with fear, the other monarchs were all alarmed. And they hastily surrounded Bhima and exclaimed, ‘Surely these bulls amongst Brahmanas are excellent ”
karna feared BHeema , [ a great warrior never fears ]
and when addressing {Arjun in disguise } during draupadi swayamvar , arjuna ,karna says ” either you are a mantra personified by bramhin or , INdra or son of PAndu or Parashurama himself , for only these can vanquish me in battle ” Look at the words of karna ,
also from your own quote let me show you KRishna is proclaiming Karna as not to be won by YAMA ,..varuna …..etc all the names are of deity inferior then INdra , [ so deities greaterthan Indra like Rudra[ ashwaththama ] , Sesha[ Balrama ,Arjuna] , Garuda , Vayu[ Bheema] and ofcourse Lord himself can vanquish him ] .
Lord says he cannot be slayed by discuss [sudarshan] because , Krishna has vowed not to raise weapons , thus and not because Karna was immune to sudarshan chakra.
SO without the use of astra or vara [boons], Karna was vanquished many times by Bheema [ your own source is testimony to it] ,
Arjuna had no boons to safeguard him , like KArna had Parshuram’s boon that he is invincible till he fights without competitive spirit .he had kavach kundala , and many more. Yet he vanquished him .
When it comes to plain archery
Look at the swayamvar episode , all warriors put together could not vanquish Arjun , Karna himself withdrew , tired and fearful ,
also during , gandharva episode to save duryodhan , Karna was of no use in archery , it was Arjun who won there and saved Duryodhan ,
again in Virat gosanrakshana episode , KArna and others put together could not defeat Arjun he single handedly won all and also Karna along with them ; And in all these incidents KArna still had Kavach Kundal ;
KArna along with others together could not defeat , that means Arjun was far far ….. superior than Karna .
SO plain archery too Arjun was superior ;
if for the praise of warriorship by Krishna entitles Karna to greatness
, Look Duryodhan is also praised many times to be more powerful by KRishna ,
Duryodhan was superior in fighting skill to all the warriors in Mahabharatha except Bheem , and also in mantrashastra ,
thus ARjuna and others were asked to refrain from fighting with him by Krishna . This does not make duryodhan a great , and we cannot argue to deprive him of his greatness because Krishna praised him .
Lord is impartial towards both good and evil ,he imparts equal opportunity and perhaps greater balance in favour of evil , look he gave duryodhan 11 akshouhini , pandavs only 7 etc . only to show PAndavs were great . greater in strength ,greater in qualities , greater in warriorship and invincibilty , compared to them Karna stood nowhere .
SO your arguments does not stand , Karna was no great warrior . He was defeated time and again not by chance but by skill and archery .
http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m01/m01193.htm
the above link will give you more clarity from your own source , kindly check it.
Posted by Ada on 25/04/2009 at 15:03
Good, I like arguments, now from debasing a person, you are nit-picking his skills as an archer, and finding nothing else bringing Bheema into picture. Everybody has a bad day at office, can the Lord be said to be inferior in any way after quitting battle so many times that he was called Ranchoddas, can Arjun be inferior in any way when he was incapable of defending Lord’s womenfolk from mere thieves. No, their greatness stands. So it is with Karna. BTW in answer to the Bheema Karna issue here is another fight another day — Karna victorious, link — http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m01/m01002.htm
Text –
When I heard that Karna even though he had got Bhima within his power allowed him to escape after only addressing him in contemptuous terms and dragging him with the end of his bow, then, O Sanjaya, I had no hope of success.
But the point you have raised is not about skills, it is about a person named Karna, by painting him thus, you have depicted Karna as an totally evil person, which he is certainly not. Lord does not praise Karna for his warrior ship alone, read carefully he says — “Devoted to Brahmanas, truthful in speech, engaged in penances, observant of vows, kind even unto foes, for these reasons Karna is called Vrisha.” In the first post only I agreed that Karna has his flaws, but he had his virtues too, and when a well read person posts something, it should be a well balanced view. And not mis-construe clearly written words like “neither thyself, bending the Gandiva, nor myself, uplifting my discus, called Sudarsana, could vanquish him in battle.” to mean something else. And who else then Indra is “vanquisher of Vala”, and when Lord says “The vanquisher of Vala himself, that foremost of heroes, wielding his thunder, is incapable of slaying the invincible Karna while the latter stands weapon in hand.” are you satisfied about Karna’s greatness and your folly. Karna HAS the capacity to defeat “superior” dieties.
Posted by Surya on 17/05/2009 at 08:06
>>Lord says he cannot be slayed by discuss [sudarshan] because , Krishna has vowed not to raise weapons , thus and not because Karna was immune to sudarshan chakra.
That’s merely your fertile imagination. Lord says very clearly that as long as Karna had his natural armor he’s invincible to the three worlds.
Clad in (natural) coat of mail and decked with his (natural) ear-rings, Karna, who had his senses under control, could singly vanquish the three worlds with the very gods. Neither Vasava, nor Varuna the lord of the waters, nor Yama, could venture to approach him. Indeed, if that bull among men had his armour and ear-rings, neither thyself, bending the Gandiva, nor myself, uplifting my discus, called Sudarsana, could vanquish him in battle.
Lord is making general statements here, not specific to Kurukshetra battle. Karna with his natural armour and senses under control was invincible even to Lord Krishna with sudarshana in battle. He was also invincible to the three worlds according to the Lord’s own words. Now whom should we believe? The Lord Krishna or Guruji Chiraan?
>>There was none ever who has given jeevan dan to Bheema , because Bheema is vayuputra [the jeevan,mukhyaprana himself] he is the one who gives everyone prana , he is also prana for Karna, so it will be ridiculous saying someone has given jeevandan to him.
———–
Then Karna is suryaputhra [the jeevan, mukhyaprana himself since sunlight is the basis for the life on the planet] he is also prana for Bheema. So there is absolutely nothing wrong in giving jeevandan to Bheema.
Chiraan’s view , NO scientific person will accept that man breaths because of SUNLIGHT . Now you are proving yourself to be a laughing stock .
Its the breath that sustains the man and not the sunlight .[ people are seen to die inspite of sunlight and in absence of air ,breath wind , no living thing exists it immediately dies ] CAN YOU UNDERSTAND THIS LOGIC ?
HA ha ha , it shows how desperate you are in making foolish statements .
I am posting your foolish satemenst to make people aware that peole do discuss without head and tail .
Karna’s armour was of no use when he was captivated by GAndharva , 2 his kingdom was snatched by Bheema ,3 arjun tooka away his dress . 4 He could not defeat Drupad on behalf of Duryodhan to pacify Drona after vidyabhyasa . After these people terribly retreated , ARjun and BHeem captured Drupad .
Answer explain these situations.
Posted by chiraan on 25/04/2009 at 20:09
Your question was Karna was equal to Arjun in skills of archery and invincible with KAvach Kundal on
SO I have shown through illustration had facts that Arjun was far superior ; INvincibilty renders Karna as greatest with kavach and kundal according to your statements , so Bheema was brought in to show what INvincibilty means . Bheema had grabbed his kingdom with his kavach and kundal on , Great people dont complain of Bad days at office , Bheemasen was a true invincible great hero he did not require any weapons or boons to defend or win . For him trees around were enough to subdue , even with bow and arrow he has subdued manytimes Karna . Now that is invincibilty , Karna poor warrior it seems always had a story to tell behind his failures , you his adversary are trekking the same path .
Now coming to your text for Bheem and Karna , ” it is mere thoughts of Dhritarashtra and not the fact , what is meant by allowed to escape , is there any such thing in a combat , whether is there any incident before this duel where Karna had overpowered Bheem NO , so how come we come to conclusion that Karna had allowed BHeema to escape , its just that Bheem could easily come out of his grip , NOw as Dhritarashtra is partial towards Kauravas and a father , he uses rhetorical fitting his warrior , and Sanjay many times corrects his statements to show reality ”
So having failed on account of proving Karna’s valour in archery you have come back to your favourite topic of raising Karna to superhuman level by quoting Krishna :—
For this I will have to reinterprete : I have depicted Karna as totally evil person ——— , not only me , Duryodhan Dushyashan Shakuni and Karna are famously known as Dushtachatushtaya , kindly let me know what does Dushta …. means ……………
Lord Krishna praises ……… devoted to Bramhins , engaged in penances , observant of vows , kind unto even foes …..
let me take them …. Karna was giving alms to bramhins everday , because he had vowed to kill Arjun and he knew he naturally had no strength and thus resorted to Vrat niyama to gain boons , he had vowed I shall do austereties till I kill Arjun , I shall not let go anyone from my door empty handed , ……”
The intention is to kill Arjun and not please bramhins or Lord ……
ANything done with sincerety is rewarded ……. Lord Krishna is highlighting this fact …… since he had undertaken vrata , he was a formidable force , but not a good person , no good person does vrata niyama to kill someone as good as Arjun himself …………… he was just a formidable force like shalya ,drona and others and not invincible as sated by you !
Jayadrath also did penance for many years to obtain the boon , does that make him a good man with virtue , Duryodhan at the end of Mahabharath was trying penance in ganga does that make him austere ? Duryodhan was also temporarily devoted to Durvas muni a bramhin…………. so go on in the next comment you can even raise him to be a great person .
KArna’s virtues were a show to get punya to go against Lord Krishna …….
Again Lord himself has ssaid many things and clarified in other texts to get right meaning , for example . as BUddha , Lord vishnu has rendered Vedas as false and ineefective , are we taking those words as final ., no , because elsewhere it has been clarified in bhagavat itself that it was a moha avatara ,
This example is given to bring to the notice of readers that Just because Lord praises Karna does not become benevolent person , VEdvyasa has clarified his words must be taken in accordance with other texts as well .
Misconstrued words : no
Arjuna has vanquished Indra in a straight battle twice , Bheema has defeated INdra ,shiva , garuda ,shesha during Rajsuya yaaga , show me single incident where Karna has even fought with devatas , he could not overpower even a gandharva .
show me facts and not statements that Karna had capacity to defeat superior Deties . Illustration no empty talks ……..
Krishna has avoided battle with jarasandha because later his subordinate Bheema had to kill him , if subordinate can kill so can Superior , so Krishna could kill jarasandha is a foregone conclusion and illustration of BHeem killing him is testimony to it . Ranchoddas is a hindi term given by those who rejoice in thinking that lord had to flee and quitely admire that to extol jarasandha . Is there any vedic statement or shloka where lord is praised as one run away from a battle .
But Karna ran away out of fear and for the sake of his life . NEver did he succeed in making Arjun run for cover or face BHeem in a straight combat . Show me illustration . dont show me thoughts and assumptions ; the fact says he always had a bad day . For what ????? because he was not capable and never on the right side.
Karna was a supporting actor with boons by Parshuram to make Duryodhan fight the war . He cannot be compared to Arjun and others in any manner .
Ther has never been a folly in writing this article . It is meant to remove the follies of others wrt Karna. He represents many things that one must not undertake in the life . Instead of learning this lesson if we admire him for nothing , it is sure way to hell as it reflects that God was wrong in handling Karna , which has nothing to support it .
Your arguments are helping readers explore more and more about Bheema and Arjun and Mahabharta in particular , so we admire your arguments and knowledge as well …..
Posted by chiraan on 25/04/2009 at 20:54
LEt me give readers an extract from the ganguly’s translation from the KArna parva itself , where Karna was supposed to be very hard to fight with bow and arrow …….. [ it was supposed to be the best day in office for Karna ]
let us see what mahabharata says about battle between Bheema and Karna ………….. with bow and arrow [ archery ] this should rest for once the debate that Karna was not able archer before Bheema , the protector of Arjun ………
……………………………………………………. the extract from MAhabharatha …
………………………………………………………….Karna Parva……………………………………………………..
Having said these words, the mighty-armed Bhima proceeded towards Adhiratha’s son,
‘Shalya said, “Behold, O Karna, the mighty-armed son of Pandu, who is filled with rage. Without doubt, he is desirous of vomiting upon thee that wrath which he has cherished for many years. Never before did I see him assume such a form, not even when Abhimanyu was slain and the Rakshasa Ghatotkaca. Filled with wrath, the form he hath now assumed, endued with the splendour of the all-destroying fire at the end of the Yuga, is such that it seems he is capable of resisting the three worlds united together.’”
Sanjaya continued, ‘While the ruler of the Madras was saying these words unto the son of Radha, Vrikodara, excited with rage, came upon Karna. Beholding Bhima, that delighter in battle, approaching him in that way, the son of Radha [Karna]laughingly said unto Shalya these words, “The words that thou, O ruler of the Madras, hast today spoken to me regarding Bhima, O lord, are without doubt all true. This Vrikodara is brave and is a hero full of wrath. He is reckless in protecting his body, and in strength of limbs he is superior to all. While leading a life of concealment in the city of Virata, relying then on the might of his bare arms, for doing what was agreeable to Draupadi, he secretly slew Kichaka with all his relatives. Even he stands today at the head of battle clad in mail and insensate with wrath. He is ready to engage in battle with the Destroyer armed with uplifted mace. This desire, however, hath been cherished through all my days, viz., that either I shall slay Arjuna or Arjuna will slay me. That desire of mine may be fulfilled today in consequence of my encounter with Bhima. If I slay Bhima or make him carless, Partha may come against me. That will be well for me. Settle that without delay which thou thinkest to be suitable to the hour.” Hearing these words of Radha’s son of immeasurable energy Shalya replied, saying, “O thou of mighty arms, proceed against Bhimasena of great might. Having checked Bhimasena, thou mayst then obtain Phalguna. That which is thy purpose, that desire which for many long years thou hast cherished in thy heart, will be accomplished, O Karna. I tell the truth.” Thus addressed, Karna once more said unto Shalya, “Either I shall slay Arjuna in battle, or he will slay me. Setting thy heart on battle proceed to the spot where Vrikodara is.’”
Then Karna pierced him with five and twenty arrows, like a hunter striking a proud and infuriate elephant in the forest with a number of blazing brands. His limbs mangled with those shafts, his eyes red with rage and the desire of revenge, the son of Pandu, insensate with wrath, and impelled by the desire of slaying the Suta’s son, fixed on his bow an excellent shaft of great impetuosity, capable of bearing a great strain, and competent to pierce the very mountains. Forcibly drawing the bow-string to his very ear, the son of the Wind-god, that great bowman, filled with wrath and desirous of making an end of Karna, sped that shaft. Thus sped by the mighty Bhima, that shaft, making a noise loud as that of the thunder, pierced through thunderbolt Karna in that battle, like the thunderbolt itself piercing through a mountain. Struck by Bhimasena, O perpetuator of Kuru’s race, the Suta’s son[Karna], that commander (of thy forces), sat down senseless on the terrace of his car. The ruler of the Madras then, beholding the Suta’s son[Karna] deprived of his senses, bore that ornament of battle away on his car, from that fight. Then after Karna’s defeat, Bhimasena began to rout the vast Dhartarashtra host like Indra routing the danavas.’”
Dhritarashtra said, ‘Exceedingly difficult of accomplishment was that feat, O Sanjaya, which was achieved by Bhima who caused the mighty-armed Karna himself to measure his length on the terrace of his car. There is only one person, Karna, who will slay the Pandavas along with the Srinjayas–even this is what Duryodhana, O Suta, used very often to say unto me. Beholding, however, that son of Radha now defeated by Bhima in battle, what did my son Duryodhana next do?’
“Sanjaya said, ‘Beholding Radha’s son of the Suta caste[KArna] turned back from the fight in that great battle, thy son, O monarch, addressed his uterine brothers, saying, ”
……………………………………..end of extract………………………………….
can we see the words defeat and of karna with bow and arrow by Bheema , and still people extoll him unnecessarily as invincible . My dear friends even when Karna was blazing at his best Bhemsen rendered him unconscious . How many bad days at office should Karna be exempted from ????
Posted by ada on 25/04/2009 at 20:55
So, the statements I put forward from texts are not facts but just statements and what you say is facts, you who do not know the difference between conch and discuss, and then you, who change posts surreptitiously, no wonder you do not like Karna. I dare you to post this. If statements of Dhirthrashtra are mere thoughts, then that could apply to every bodies statements in Mahabharata. It is a well known fact that he allowed to escape, means he gave lives to all the four pandava brothers other then Arjuna. As far as celebration of of the lord running away from battle, there is Ranchodrai temple in Dakor celebrating this maya (search the net). Now I will ask you tell me occurrences where Arjun fought with Indra, or Bheema fought with Indra. Show the facts please.
BTW — Adversary means opponent.
Posted by Surya on 17/05/2009 at 12:07
>>Now coming to your text for Bheem and Karna , ” it is mere thoughts of Dhritarashtra and not the fact , what is meant by allowed to escape , is there any such thing in a combat , whether is there any incident before this duel where Karna had overpowered Bheem NO , so how come we come to conclusion that Karna had allowed BHeema to escape , its just that Bheem could easily come out of his grip ,
———–
Suryan: Ha ha, I have clearly quoted the actual incident that Dhritharashtra is talking about from Drona parva. This clearly proves that contrary to your claim, Ganguli’s version that I’m quoting from is internally consistent and there is absolutely no contradiction.
The following narration from Adi parva:
http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m01/m01002.htm
When I heard that Karna even though he had got Bhima within his power allowed him to escape after only addressing him in contemptuous terms and dragging him with the end of his bow, then, O Sanjaya, I had no hope of success.
is corroborated in Drona parva:
http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m07/m07135.htm
Then excited with rage, the Suta’s son, Karna, by the power of his weapons, with his straight arrows, cut off in that encounter the couple of quivers and the bow-string of fighting Bhima, as also the traces of his steeds. And then slaying his steeds also, Karna pierced Bhima’s charioteer with five shafts. The charioteer, quickly running away, proceeded to Yudhamanyu’s car. Excited with rage, the son of Radha then, whose splendour resembled that of the Yuga-fire, smiling the while, cut off the flag-staff of Bhima and felled his banner. Deprived of his bow, the mighty-armed Bhima then seized a dart, such as car-warriors may use. Excited with wrath, he whirled it in his hand and then hurled it with great force at Karna’s car. The son of Adhiratha then, with ten shafts, cut off, as it coursed towards him with the effulgence of a large meteor, the gold-decked dart thus hurled (by Bhima). 1 Thereupon, that dart fell down, cut off into ten fragments by those sharp shafts of the Suta’s son, Karna, that warrior conversant with every mode of warfare, then battling for the sake of his friends. Then, the son of Kunti took up a shield decked with gold and a sword, desirous of obtaining either death or victory, Karna, however, O Bharata, smiling the while, cut off that bright shield of Bhima with many fierce shafts. Then, car-less, Bhima, O king, deprived of his shield, became mad with rage. Quickly, then, he hurled his formidable sword at Karna’s car. That large sword, cutting off the stringed bow of the Suta’s son, fell down on the earth, O king, like an angry snake from the sky. Then Adhiratha’s son, excited with rage in that battle, smilingly took up another bow destructive of foes, having a stronger string, and tougher than the one he had lost. Desirous of slaying the son of Kunti, Karna then began to shoot thousands of arrows, O king, equipped with wings of gold and endued with great energy. Struck by those shafts shot from Karna’s bow, the mighty Bhima leaped into the sky, filling Karna’s heart with anguish. Beholding the conduct of Bhima, in battle desirous of victory, the son of Radha beguiled him by concealing himself in his car. Seeing Karna concealing himself with an agitated heart on the terrace of his car, Bhima catching hold of Karna’s flagstaff, waited on the earth. All the Kurus and the Charanas highly applauded that attempt of Bhima of snatching Karna away from his car, like Garuda snatching away a snake. His bow cut off, himself deprived of his car, Bhima, observant of the duties of his order, stood still for battle, keeping his (broken) car behind him. The son of Radha, then, from rage, in that encounter, proceeded against the son of Pandu who was waiting for battle. Then those two mighty warriors, O king, challenging as they approached each other, those two bulls among men, roared at each other, like clouds at the close of summer. And the passage-at-arms that then took place between those two engaged lions among men that could not brook each other in battle resembled that of old between the gods and the Danavas. The son of Kunti, however, whose stock of weapons was exhausted, was (obliged to turn back) pursued by Karna. Beholding the elephants, huge as hills that had been slain by Arjuna, lying (near), unarmed Bhimasena entered into their midst, for impeding the progress of Karna’s car. Approaching that multitude of elephants and getting into the midst of that fastness which was inaccessible to a car, the son of Pandu, desirous of saving his life, refrained from striking the son of Radha. Desirous of shelter, that subjugator of hostile cities viz., the son of Pritha, uplifting an elephant that had been slain by Dhananjaya with his shafts, waited there, like Hanumat uplifting the peak of Gandhamadana. 1 Karna, however, with his shafts, cut off that elephant held by Bhima. The son of Pandu, thereupon, hurled at Karna the fragments of that elephant’s body as also car-wheels and steeds. In fact, all objects that he saw lying there on the field, the son of Pandu, excited with rage, took up and hurled at Karna. Karna, however, with his sharp arrows, cut off every one of those objects thus thrown at him. Bhima also, raising his fierce fists that were endued with the force of the thunder, desired to slay the Suta’s son. Soon, however, he recollected Arjuna’s vow. The son of Pandu, therefore, though competent, spared the life of Karna, from desire of not falsifying the vow that Savyasachin had made. The Suta’s son, however, with his sharp shafts, repeatedly caused the distressed Bhima, to lose the sense. But Karna, recollecting the words of Kunti, took not the life of the unarmed Bhima.
Chiraan’s view . ,
I have highlighted BHimas ‘ triumhph in your write up [ though you are quoting again from sacred texts ] , ClearlyBhima giving life and karna concealing[ actual word is hid in fear , better check out with sanskrit version in next post] , these words come prior to BHeema being spared , so who has spared his life first . had he killed him there , [ becuas he was competent , karna ' chapter was closed .
let us examine your earlier point it says " was (obliged to turn back) pursued by Karna" lok again the words are in bracket a speculation , the reality is weapons exhausted , there is no obliged to turn back ,its in racket a imagination . again let us resort to original sanskrit here to see [ like draupadi wife you have put in bracket ,, this is similar ] imagination .
This incident is figment of imagination and still there is no defeat here . but the illustration I have given Dhritarashtra sanjay and all , clearly mention as Karna’s defeat .
Posted by chiraan on 25/04/2009 at 23:20
There is difference between a statement and a fact , in mahabharata , a fact is presented as seen by sanjay or as occured and recorded by Vyasa and a statement is said by someone and it must be checked whether the incident happened as said .
Dhritarashtra is known to have made uncorellated statements throughout ” Like When Vidura says ” Your sons have excelled ” ……. Dhritarashtra proclaims ” I am happy about Duryodhan ” Vidura clarifies ” he is mentioning about Pandavas are they not your sons “……..
DHritarashtra ’s words always need clarification through facts ………
Krishna’s words I have already clarified ……..
My post clearly shows Karna as defeated by words and facts ………
Now as your logic has exhausted , english words seem to be bothering you a lot
here I give you the meaning of adversary
adversary
traditional appellation of Satan [O.T.: Job 1:6; N.T.: I Peter 5:8]
Also adversary has other meaning as follows from thesaurus
In Anglo-American law, the principal method of offering evidence in court. It requires the opposing sides to present pertinent information and to introduce and cross-examine witnesses before a jury and/or a judge. Each side must conduct its own investigation. (Legal aid is available for the poor.) In civil (noncriminal) proceedings the adversary system works similarly, except that both sides engage private attorneys to prepare their cases. Skillful questioning often produces testimony that can be interpreted in various ways; in cross-examination, lawyers seek to alter the jury’s initial perception of the testimony.
Encyclopedia Britannica, 2008. Encyclopedia Britannica Online.
I hope now it is clear in what context i have used adversary .
Next I shall give you facts about Arjun fighting Indra …….
Temples having vedic background or installed by Puranpurush are only considered others are not considered authentic as place of worship . One should not meditate on lord as run away from battlefield , these akin to showing defects in Lords , a sin . One must refrain from such activity.
Posted by chiraan on 26/04/2009 at 09:54
ada said,
26/04/2009 at 00:13 · Edit
This is my last post. I’am sorry for you.
Reply
chiraan said,
26/04/2009 at 09:10 · Edit
Shri ADA ,
Kindly view the facts about ARjun having fought all the celestials and INdra and having defeated them
……………………………………..extract from Khandav dahan parva ……………………………………………
Then Sakra the lord of the celestials, riding on his white elephant, rushed at those heroes, and taking up his thunderbolt which could never go in vain, hurled it with great force. And the slayer of Asuras said unto the gods, ‘These two are slain.’ Beholding the fierce thunderbolt about to be hurled
p. 444
by their chief, the celestials all took up their respective weapons. Yama, O king, took up the death-dealing mace, and Kuvera his spiked club, and Varuna his noose and beautiful missile. And Skanda (Kartikeya) took up his long lance and stood motionless like the mountain of Meru. The Aswins ………………….
But Arjuna and Krishna, fearless and invincible in battle, beholding Sakra and the other celestials prepared for fight, calmly waited, bows in hands. Skilled in battle, those heroes in wrath assailed the advancing host of celestials with their own thunderlike arrows. The celestials repeatedly routed by Krishna and Arjuna, at last left the field of battle for fear and sought the protection of Indra. The Munis who were witnessing the battle from the skies, beholding the celestials defeated by Madhava and Arjuna, were filled with wonder. Sakra also repeatedly witnessing their prowess in battle, became exceedingly gratified, and once more rushed to the assault.
Arjuna, in great wrath, dispelled with his arrows that thick shower. Then he of a hundred sacrifices beholding that shower baffled, once more caused a thicker shower of stones. But the son of the chastiser of Paka (viz., Arjuna) gratified his father by baffling that shower also with his swift arrows
http://www.mahabharataonline.com/translation/mahabharata_01230.php
…………………………………………………………………..End of extract ………………………………………………………………..
Reply
Posted by chiraan on 26/04/2009 at 09:56
ada said,
26/04/2009 at 00:19 · Edit
Sir I hope you are happy in life and not as frustated as you come out in the posts. Your character remisds me of Dhrithrashtra, who refused to see the truth in the eye. Who twisted facts to suit his own purpose, who was like an ostritch with his head in sand, I’am sorry for you.
Reply
chiraan said,
26/04/2009 at 06:27 · Edit
Let me assure you Devotees of Bheemasen are never frustrated in life , Only enemies of Bheemasen , like Karna and Dhritarashtra always face frustration and failures . This post is again a reminder to all those frustrated people and also rans ,who secretly nurture a admiration for Karna thus exhibiting slight hate towards Pandavas and krishna , Good days and success are not for thee . Only those who pray and abide by BHeemasen and walk the path showed by him in Mahabharata will always achieve success.And Moksha is also reserved for them , Srimadanand teertha , the very Vayu [ Hanuma Bheema Madhva ] has given assurance of this .
Sonu said
This is not to kick off further ‘Arguments’, but individuals with good values, manners and morals discuss views in a civilised way, just like respected Guruji Chiraan. When one is prompted to give such answers it is a different story altogether. Chiraanji does not come across frustrated (it is far from the truth); they are views presented with evidence without being rude. There is consistency across the blog.
Ramayana and Mahabharata brings to light and teach the simple truth, that is In the end it is always good over evil and God sides with those who are on the righteous path. Lessons learnt is also emphasised, etc.
We should respect God and teachings about right and wrong, it is a real disgrace some people that are proud of their intelligence and yet still fail to see ultimate truth and praise the unworthy.
We only pick up Good vibes according to what we believe, teachings, etc, that is truth and logical explanations. Bearing in mind that is just the start and only a part of trying to accomplish your aim of life. Thanks for all the views Guruji Chiraan.
regds
Sonu
Posted by chiraan on 16/05/2009 at 09:19
Now you get it verified with any scholar , I hace shown clear transaltion , for your kind information I have studied in agurukul for 16 years under the turtorship of great sanskrit scholars . My translations are more authentic than ganguly . I have shown discrepancy in the sanskrit version and tranlsiterated version . Even a layman can make out the didcrepancy with naked eye . I hope your growing blind to apparent misquote of the words ” kale throupatya upagamishyati ” and replacing it with ” kale draupadya upagamishyati “ then I have also shown even in this way also it does not mean what translators have written . And look at your quotes , you have put ( as a wife ) in the bracket that shows it is a blatant concotion as those words are not appearing in the main text .
The translations are a concoction can be seen clearly and also logically too I have proved that it is against dharma shastra as no woman is ever married to Some one else when her Husband is present [alive] to another man [ and in the least just because he happens to be his brother ]
when it can be seen there is supporting statement in other shastra and traslation is also faulty , Your argument fails .
Any layman with little or no knowledge in sanskrit will also say that it is concoction . I have thoroughly proved it . NOw I will give in support of my statements some scholarly translations and bhashya .
What I have quoted is in unison with Acharya srimadanandateertha in his Mahabharath Tatparya Nirnay and Shri Raghavendra Swamy in his BHAva sangraha
it is authentic text and has been traslated by many scholars of sanskrit and is also in digital library of INdia and Also on all the mahabharata resources . It is more authentic version than ganguly and written 600 years ago .
see my next post with quotes from those translations and also what other english transaltors have to say on the same topic.
.
Posted by chiraan on 16/05/2009 at 09:31
Chapter-II
In the second chapter, designated as suvAkyoddhAra, the purport of the sacred scripture delineated in the first chapter is demonstrated by the verses in the Mahabharata:
uktaH pUrvAdhyAye shAstrANAM nirNayaH paro divyaH |
atha khalu bhAratavAkyAnyetairevAdhyavasyante || [MBTN II.2] [ MBTN means MAhabharata tatparya nirnay ]
Before this task is executed, two points have to be clarified:
1) Whether the text of the Mahabharata that is handed down is authentic.
2) What the grounds to select theMahabharata especially for this purpose are.
Sri Madhvacharya concedes that attempts are made to contaminate and mutilate the text of the Mahabharata.This has happened not only in the case of the Mahabharata, but in several other texts also. Therefore, he assures that he has collected the manuscripts of the Mahabharata from different parts of the country and hasascertained the authentic version of it. In doing so, he has not merely relied on manuscripts as the modern scholars do but also taken into consideration the entire tradition of the scriptural literature. The latter criteriais very important. Every text is a part of a tradition. Therefore, anything that is contrary to or contradicts thetext is not likely to be the authentic portion of that text. Internal contradiciton within the text or contradiction with the tradition is likely to be the result of theinterpolation or mutilation. In modern textual criticism, this vital point is ignored. The second criteria is stated by Sri Madhvacharya as:
shAstrAntarANi saJNjAnan.h vedAmshchAsya prasAdataH This is how the contamination and the mutilation of the texts and his efforts to ascertain the authentic text ofthe Mahabharata is regarded. His observations set very scientific guidelines of textual criticism.
a.kvachidganthAn.h praxipanti kvachidantaritAnapi |kuryuH kvachichcha vyatyAsaM pramAdAt.h kvachidanyathA ||anutsannA api granthAH vyAkulA iti sarvashaH |utsannAH prAyashaH sarve koTyaMsho.api na vartate ||grantho.apyevaM vilulitaH kimvartho devadurgamaH | (MBTN II-3,4,5)b. deshe deshe tathA granthAn.h dR^ishhTvA chaiva pR^ithagvidhAn.h |yathA cha bhagavAn.h vyAsaH sAxAnnArAyaNaH prabhuH ||jagAda bhAratAdyeshhu tathA vaxye tadIxayA |saN^xepAt.h sarvashAstrAryaM bhAratAryAnusArataH ||
(MBTN II-7,8)
After assuring that, the purport of the Mahabharata will be explained by a reference to the authentic text ascertaining it as stated above. Sri Madhvacharya states the special grounds because of which this work is
——————————————————————————–
Page 7
especially selected for shAstratAtparyanirNaya | The treatment of this topic is quite elaborate in this chapter.We mention the most striking grounds, which will be stated in the postings that follow1) The most important ground is that the Mahabharata declares the supremacy of Narayana emphatically,unconditionally,
and as the total purport of the entire scripture.
vAsudevastu bhagavAn.h kIrtyate.atra sanAtanaH |pratibimbamivAdarshe yaM pashyantyAtmani sthitam.h || (
II-68)nAsti nArAyaNasamaM na bhUtaM na bhavishhyati |etena satyavAkyena sarvArthAn.h sAdhayAmyaham.h || (II-68,69)AloDya sarvashAstrANi vichArya cha punaH punaH |idamekaM sunisshhpannaM dhyeyo nArAyaNaH sadA || (II-72)vAsudevasya mahimA bhArate nirNayoditaH |tadarthAstu kathAH sarvAH nAnyArthaM vaishhNavaM vachaH || (II-123)2) The second important ground is that the Mahabharata declares the importance of Vayu. It clearly statesthat Vayu played the role of the chief assistant of Lord Narayana in His three incarnations of Rama, Krishna,and Vedavyasa, assuming the incarnation of Hanuman, Bhima, and Madhva.
The fact that Bhimasena plays amajor role in the Mahabharata is fully brought out:
a. tasmAd.h balapravR^ittasya rAmakR^ishhNAtmano hareH |antaraN^ga hanUmAmshcha bhImastatkAryamAdhakau || (II-34,35)
b. priyashcha vishhNoH sarvebhyaH iti bhImanidarshanAt.h |bhUbhAraharaNe vishhNoH pradhAnAN^gaM hi mArutiH ||mAgadhAdivadhAdeva duryodhanavadhAdapi ||yo ya eva balajyeshhTaH xatriyeshhu ma uttamaH |aN^gaM ched.h vishhNukaAryepu tadbhaktyaiva na chAnyathA ||
Several events in Mahabharata clearly show that Bhimasena plays the most important role in Mahabharata guided by Lord Sri Krishna. The killing of Jarasandha and Duryodhana are two major instances. The purposeof God’s incarnation is to remove the burden of the evil persons on the earth. In achieving this purpose,Maruti, i.e. Mukhyaprana, plays an important role as Bhimasena
Posted by Surya on 17/05/2009 at 11:43
>>I hope your growing blind to apparent misquote of the words ” kale throupatya upagamishyati ” and replacing it with ” kale draupadya upagamishyati “ then I have also shown even in this way also it does not mean what translators have written . And look at your quotes , you have put ( as a wife ) in the bracket that shows it is a blatant concotion as those words are not appearing in the main text .
——–
I have proven that there is no contradiction by citing other passages in Mahabharata that refers to Draupati as थरौपथ्य from the original Mahabharata published in sites such as Aryabharathi and multiple other scriptural sites, not just sacred texts. But you persist on deluding yourself to assert the supremacy of your fallen heroes.
chiraans view , in all those sites tharupatya is not for draupadi , rajaybhisheka is also known by word rajayaaroupan.
I have given a version from mahesh yogi site , there is no such words there . It is also internationally acclaimed version going by your standards.
Posted by chiraan on 16/05/2009 at 10:33
so according to Great Saint Madhvacharya
Every text is a part of a tradition. Therefore, anything that is contrary to or contradicts the text is not likely to be the authentic portion of that text. Internal contradiciton within the text or contradiction with the tradition is likely to be the result of the interpolation or mutilation.
Thus you can see your sacret text version has internal contradictions in sanskrit and english transliteration ; thus translator relying on transliteration has bungled and concocted . This text is worth rejecting .
Secondly the words of Krishna as stated by your translator is against the Tradition of this land[ women is not seen anywhere to be married in presence of husband in our tradition ] , and hence cannot be considered authentic .
Posted by chiraan on 16/05/2009 at 14:38
Chiraan’s views ,nowhere in hindu literature draupadi is addressed as thraupatya , that’s where the ambiguity shows , you yourself have shown few more ambiguities to make your transaltion invalid . by the even the second passage does not refer to draupadi .
Now if you feel you know sanskrit very well or for that matter bring on the team of sanskrit scholars and show me the rules of sanskrit that makes this sentence translate as you [ and translators have done]
षष्ठे च तवां तदा काले थरौपथ्य उपगमिष्यति
(During sixth period, Draupadi will come to you)
tatha kale —- at that time , look at the verse preceding it it is
15 राजन्या राजकन्याश चाप्य आनयन्त्व अभिषेचनम
षष्ठे च तवां तदा काले थरौपथ्य उपगमिष्यति
16 अथ्य तवाम अभिषिञ्चन्तु चातुर्वैथ्या थविजातयः
tatha kale [ at that time ......the context is that of abhisheka , mark the word abhishechanam i have made bold ]
at that time of abhisheka ,
look again the next verse [ again the context is continuing with abhishinchantu , after the abhisheka ]
so while abhisheka is going on [ the middle verse is about abhisheka only and not about sixth period]
all along with draupadi will abide by you .
Counter this with rules of grammar . [ by the way where is wife that has been put in bracket , putting in bracket is assumption ,speculation your favourite ground of imagination ]
Whole world recognises ARJUN as supreme , whole World recognises BHEESHMA killing as just , but here you choose to dispute with international acceptance ,
but the faulty translation is acceptable to you because it is internationally accepted .
WHat is criteria for this acceptance without head and tail , if few sites have accepted without inspection it does not become authentic .
have shown how great saints have shown to weed out discrepancy . Ganguly has not been declared saint anywhere . He has not been termed anywhere in any other works as author of great sanskrit works , so his version can be taken up for contradiction .
Show me grammar rules that declare sixth period , take the help of sanskrit scholars and pervet like you to your aid and come back . the discusion will be more fruitful , it seems you do not know sanskrit well and ar handicapped and not eligible for this type of debate.
Posted by chiraan on 17/05/2009 at 15:09
KIndly view the latest post and continue your debate their , bring along with you few impartial judges from your side .suggest or accept the ones that volunteer .
I accept your open challenge and let the panel of judges decide who is RIGHT OR who is BIASED in views . Also I call upon other like minded [to SURYA] to join this debate and strengthen SURYA . as he is quiet short of logical conclusion and help him debate rather than speculate and imagine .
Posted by Surya on 17/05/2009 at 18:27
>>Chiraan’s view , NO scientific person will accept that man breaths because of SUNLIGHT . Now you are proving yourself to be a laughing stock .
Its the breath that sustains the man and not the sunlight .[ people are seen to die inspite of sunlight and in absence of air ,breath wind , no living thing exists it immediately dies ] CAN YOU UNDERSTAND THIS LOGIC ? HA ha ha , it shows how desperate you are in making foolish statements .
————-
Every scientific person knows that sunlight is the basis of life in the planet. It is you whoz proving yourself to be a laughing stock. Without sunlight, the molecules that comprise the air will not be able to acquire the kinetic energy to exist in the gaseous state. Which means that air, even to exist is dependent on the energy from the sun. Don’t struggle too much. These facts are beyond your comprehension.
>>Karna’s armour was of no use when he was captivated by GAndharva , 2 his kingdom was snatched by Bheema ,3 arjun tooka away his dress . 4 He could not defeat Drupad on behalf of Duryodhan to pacify Drona after vidyabhyasa . After these people terribly retreated , ARjun and BHeem captured Drupad .
Answer explain these situations.
————-
I’m willing to answer these points only if you re-instate my posts that you have swallowed and unedited versions of my prior posts. Else as usual, you’ll edit my replies, remove the evidences and declare yourself as the winner.
Posted by chiraan on 17/05/2009 at 20:34
Molecules of air acquiring kinetic energy ………………to exist in gasseous state .
1. At south pole there is no sunlight for months men live there and breath .
2. In the solar system there are many planets which have sunlight but no air and water and hence life is not found on them
3. Primary thing that cosmologist or space engineers look for is air and water on any surface to ascertain life .ie life exists even without SUNLIGHT but not without air . [ SO VAYU is GREATER THAN SUN]
You are debating with a qualified Engineer and one who has many research papers in ” propagation of air through vocal chords and different mediums ” I dont know about your credentials .. SO what is beyond comprehension is something you must prove .
IN one of the posts you have dismissed the source as ………….
The Greatest Spiritual Epic of All Time MAHABHARTA / Retold by Krishna Dharma.
as unauthentic by saying it is retold and translation . FYI what Kisari Ganguly has done is akin to what Krishna Sharma has done .
And it is a book and not wikepedia . just like GAnguly . Your extreme devtion to Ganguly if at all it had been towards Dharma , it would fetched lot of respect .
Coming back to shaving head is not physical harm , its a symbol of acceptance of superiority , the fact that you are woefully short of injunctions in dharma is very evident .
When I start quoting it should ensure an end to your blasphemy . That ’s what is my intention. I am waiting till you put your entire faith in the translation you are quoting . Once you have complete faith and to the point of being foolhardy you shall accept my challenge and I shall see to it that none again ever makes such a attempt in future .
I have already invited you to open discussion with jury . you have not responded to it . Let jury be appointed and lets see how my quotes flow .
By now Mr Niraj has also indicated that even he is aware if various versions .
TV pulp fiction that you keep mentioning , also have some source as you are not accepting them your version is nopt acceptab le to us .
Authenticity comes from KNowledge . Common sense cannot be left at home while viewing your Sacred Text version .
let me show you , your own words how you have admitted concoction .
You quote ” Sanskrit sentences do not follow english like rules , this sntence when rearranged gives the meaning ” during the sixth period ………”
where as I have shown that
shasthe ch tvam tatha kale ath aropitya[draupadya] upagamishyati !
shasthe is the word and not shasth kale .
even if you rearrange the grammar becomes wrong .
ch means ‘and’ in english [six and you] .
even if draupadya is taken as correct , still it does not speak about marriage or being wife of Karna .
Even your translators have put those words in bracket . [ as a wife] . cant you ask why ?
so when plain translation gives required meaning in accordance to dharma , why should you REARRANGE to get something else meaning which is not in accordance to dharma . the very word rearrange is what meant by concotion ,[ you are admitting to it ] it is delibearte rearrangement to show faulty meanings . when context is of RAJYAROPAN why should sixth period be mentioned . this is concoction by your opwn words it has been rearranged for malicious purpose .
now counter this point .#
Krishna is LOrd and perfect being he would not speak in a faulty manner suddenly moving out of context from abhisheka to something else .
even if then also sanskrit does not allow shashte kale , this is wrong sanskrit go and get it verified . and then usage of “ch” and “tatha ” becomes useless in that context , why would KRishna resort to unnecessary words . Answer this point .
I would have asked this to ganguly himself if he were alive .
Posted by Sonu on 18/05/2009 at 01:39
A karna supporter (Surya) made up a statement’s/excuses without any real evidence, saying the following that is in quotes.
“Krishna knew that Karna could not be defeated by Arjuna or Bheema. Hence Krishna advised Arjuna to use deciet to kill Karna.”
“The whole blame for Duryodhana befriending Karna goes to Kunti and Krishna.”
Definition of Deceit:
Fraudulence: the quality of being fraudulent
Misrepresentation: a misleading falsehood
Deception: the act of deceiving
Deception (also called beguilement or subterfuge) is the act of convincing another to believe information that is not true, or not the whole truth as in certain types of half-truths.
Any attempt or disposition to deceive or lead into error; any declaration, artifice, or practice, which misleads another, or causes him to believe what is false; a contrivance to entrap; deception; a wily device; fraud; Any trick, collusion, contrivance, false representation, or underhand
Deceitful – deliberately misleading or cheating; deceptive in multiple ways
Definition of Blame:
Put or pin the blame on
Harass with constant criticism
Incrimination: an accusation that you are responsible for some lapse or misdeed.
Surya the Karna supporter, you have no respect for GOD or perhaps you don’t know the meaning of words.
Surya said “The debating point is whether Karna is evil and whether Karna is inferior to Arjun/Bheema”. The above statements/excuses still does not tell anybody Karna was a good person or if Karna was superior to Arjuna & Bhima.
Posted by Surya on 18/05/2009 at 19:23
Did you swallow this post too? Let me post it again:
>>I thought I would be kind enough to help you quote from a translation that is valid and acceptable to you, seeing as you swear by Ganguly`s translation
————-
Ha ha, so bharatdesam is acceptable to you, right? Fine with me. Henceforth I’ll quote everything from here. Don’t claim that this source is spurious as well.
>>Just one of Arjuna`s Victory
http://www.bharatadesam.com/spiritual/mahabharata/mahabharata_08003.php
“Sanjaya continued, …he was at last slain by Arjuna!”
——————
Ha ha, nobody questioned this. How Karna was at last slain by Arjuna, that is the point of contention. I’ll show you how:
http://www.bharatadesam.com/spiritual/mahabharata/mahabharata_08090.php
The Suta’s son then fixed on his bow-string that foe-killing, exceedingly keen, snake-mouthed, blazing, and fierce shaft, which had been polished according to rule, and which he had long kept for the sake of Partha’s destruction. Stretching his bow-string to his ear, Karna fixed that shaft of fierce energy and blazing splendour, that ever-worshipped weapon which lay within a golden quiver amid sandal dust, and aimed it at Partha. Indeed, he aimed that blazing arrow, born in Airavata’s race, for cutting off Phalguna’s head in battle. All the points of the compass and the welkin became ablaze and terrible meteors, and thunderbolts fell. When that snake of the form of an arrow was fixed on the bow-string, the Regents of the world, including Sakra, set up loud wails. The Suta’s son did not know that the snake Aswasena had entered his arrow by the aid of his Yoga powers. Beholding Vaikartana aim that arrow, the high-souled ruler of the Madras, addressing Karna, said, “This arrow, O Karna, will not succeed in striking off Arjuna’s head. Searching carefully, fix another arrow that may succeed in striking off thy enemy’s head.” Endued with great activity, the Suta’s son, with eyes burning in wrath, then said unto the ruler of the Madras, “O Shalya, Karna never aimeth an arrow twice. Persons like us never become crooked warriors.” Having said these words, Karna, with great care, let off that shaft which he had worshipped for many long years. Bent upon winning the victory, O king, he quickly said unto his rival, “Thou art slain, O Phalguna!” Sped from Karna’s arms, that shaft of awful whizz, resembling fire or the sun in splendour, as it left the bow-string, blazed up in the welkin and seemed to divide it by a line such as is visible on the crown of a woman dividing her tresses. Beholding that shaft blazing in the welkin, the slayer of Kamsa, Madhava, with great speed and the greatest ease, pressed down with his feet that excellent car, causing it to sink about a cubit deep. At this, the steeds, white as the rays of the moon and decked in trappings of gold, bending their knees, laid themselves down on the ground. Indeed, seeing that snake (in the form of an arrow) aimed by Karna, Madhava, that foremost of all persons endued with might, put forth his strength and thus pressed down with his feet that car into the earth, whereat the steeds, (as already said) bending down their knees, laid themselves down upon the earth when the car itself had sank into it. Then loud sounds arose in the welkin in applause of Vasudeva. Many celestial voices were heard, and celestial flowers were showered upon Krishna, and leonine shouts also were uttered. When the car had thus been pressed down into the earth through the exertions of the slayer of Madhu, the excellent ornament of Arjuna’s head, celebrated throughout the earth, the welkin, heaven, and the waters, the Suta’s son swept off from the crown of his rival, with that arrow, in consequence of the very nature of that snaky weapon and the great care and wrath with which it had been shot. That diadem, endued with the splendour of the sun or the moon or fire or a planet, and adorned with gold and pearls and gems and diamonds, had with great care been made by the puissant Self-born himself for Purandara. Costly as its appearance indicated, it was inspiring terror in the hearts of foes, contributing to the happiness of him that wore it, and shedding a fragrance, that ornament had been given by the chief of the celestials himself with a cheerful heart unto Partha while the latter had proceeded to slaughter the foes of the gods. That diadem was incapable of being crushed by Rudra and the Lord of waters and Kuvera with Pinaka and noose and thunderbolt and the very foremost of shafts. It could not be endured by even the foremost ones among the gods. Vrisha, however, now broke it forcibly with his snake-inspired shaft. Endued with great activity, that wicked-natured snake of fierce form and false vows, falling upon that diadem-decked with gold and gems, swept it away from Arjuna’s head. That snake, O king, forcibly tore it away from Partha’s head, quickly reducing into fragments that well-made ornament set over with many a gem and blazing with beauty, like the thunderbolt riving a mountain summit decked with lofty and beautiful trees graced with flowers. Crushed by that excellent weapon, possessed of splendour, and blazing with the fire of (the snake’s) poison, that beautiful and much-liked diadem of Partha fell down on the earth like the blazing disc of the Sun from the Asta hills. Indeed, that snake forcibly swept away from Arjuna’s head that diadem adorned with many gems, like the thunder of Indra felling a beautiful mountain summit adorned with lofty trees bearing budding leaves and flowers. And the earth, welkin, heaven, and the waters, when agitated by a tempest, roar aloud, O Bharata, even such was the roar that arose in all the worlds at that time.
During the encounter, Arjun was saved from Karna only by God’s grace, not by Arjun’s archery skills. After the above incident, the duel continued. Then see what happened:
http://www.bharatadesam.com/spiritual/mahabharata/mahabharata_08090.php
Displaying also his own prowess, he seemed to get the better of Dhananjaya at that time. Then Krishna, beholding Arjuna afflicted with the weapons of Karna, said these words unto Partha: “Approaching Karna, strike him with superior weapons.” Then Dhananjaya, filled with rage, inspiring with mantras another celestial weapons that looked like fire and that resembled the poison of the snake and that was as hard as the essence of adamant, and uniting the Raudra weapon with it, became desirous of shooting it at his foe. At that time, O king, the earth swallowed up one of wheels of Karna’s car. Quickly alighting then from his vehicle, he seized his sunken wheel with his two arms and endeavoured to lift it up with a great effort. Drawn up with force by Karna, the earth, which had swallowed up his wheel, rose up to a height of four fingers’ breadth, with her seven islands and her hills and waters and forests. Seeing his wheel swallowed, the son of Radha shed tears from wrath, and beholding Arjuna, filled with rage he said these words, “O Partha, O Partha, wait for a moment, that is, till I lift this sunken wheel. Beholding, O Partha, the left wheel of my car swallowed through accident by the earth, abandon (instead of cherishing) this purpose (of striking and slaying me) that is capable of being harboured by only a coward. Brave warriors that are observant of the practices of the righteous, never shoot their weapons at persons with dishevelled hair, or at those that have turned their faces from battle, or at a Brahmana, or at him who joins his palms, or at him who yields himself up or beggeth for quarter or at one who has put up his weapon, or at one whose arrows are exhausted, or at one whose armour is displaced, or at one whose weapon has fallen off or been broken! Thou art the bravest of men in the world. Thou art also of righteous behaviour, O son of Pandu! Thou art well-acquainted with the rules of battle. For these reasons, excuse me for a moment, that is, till I extricate my wheel, O Dhananjaya, from the earth. Thyself staying on thy car and myself standing weak and languid on the earth, it behoveth thee not to slay me now. Neither Vasudeva, nor thou, O son of Pandu, inspirest me with the slightest fear. Thou art born in the Kshatriya order. Thou art the perpetuator of a high race. Recollecting the teachings of righteousness, excuse me for a moment, O son of Pandu!”‘”
……
“Sanjaya continued, ‘Thus addressed, O Bharata, by Vasudeva, Karna hung down his head in shame and gave no answer. With lips quivering in rage, he raised his bow, O Bharata, and, being endued with great energy and prowess, he continued to fight with Partha. Then Vasudeva, addressing Phalguna, that bull among men, said, “O thou of great might, piercing Karna with a celestial weapon, throw him down.” Thus addressed by the holy one, Arjuna became filled with rage. Indeed, remembering the incidents alluded to by Krishna, Dhananjaya blazed up with fury. Then, O king, blazing flames of fire seemed to emanate from all the pores of the angry Partha’s body. The sight seemed to be exceedingly wonderful. Beholding it, Karna, invoking the brahmastra, showered his shafts upon Dhananjaya, and once more made an effort to extricate his car. Partha also, by the aid of the brahmastra, poured arrowy downpours upon Karna. Baffling with his own weapon the weapon of his foe, the son of Pandu continued to strike him. The son of Kunti then, aiming at Karna sped another favourite weapon of his that was inspired with the energy of Agni. Sped by Arjuna, that weapon blazed up with its own energy. Karna, however, quenched that conflagration with the Varuna weapon. The Suta’s son also, by the clouds he created, caused all the points of the compass to be shrouded with a darkness such as may be seen on a rainy day. The son of Pandu, endued with great energy, fearlessly dispelled those clouds by means of the Vayavya weapon in the very sight of Karna. The Suta’s son then, for slaying the son of Pandu, took up a terrible arrow blazing like fire. When that adored shaft was fixed on the bow-string, the earth, O king, trembled with her mountains and waters and forests. Violent winds began to blow, bearing hard pebbles. All the points of the compass became enveloped with dust. Wails of grief, O Bharata, arose among the gods in the welkin. Beholding that shaft aimed by the Suta’s son, O sire, the Pandavas, with cheerless hearts, gave themselves up to great sorrow. That shaft of keen point and endued with the effulgence of Sakra’s thunder, sped from Karna’s arms, fell upon Dhananjaya’s chest and penetrated it like a mighty snake penetrating an ant-hill. That grinder of foes, viz., the high-souled Vibhatsu, thus deeply pierced in that encounter, began to reel. His grasp became loosened, at which his bow Gandiva dropped from his hand. He trembled like the prince of mountains in an earthquake. Availing himself of that opportunity, the mighty car-warrior Vrisha, desirous of extricating his car-wheel that had been swallowed up by the earth, jumped down from his vehicle. Seizing the wheel with his two arms he endeavoured to drag it up, but though possessed of great strength, he failed in his efforts, as destiny would have it. Meanwhile the diadem-decked and high-souled Arjuna, recovering his senses, took up a shaft, fatal as the rod of Death, and called anjalika. Then Vasudeva, addressing Partha, said, “Cut off with thy arrow the head of this enemy of thine, viz., Vrisha, before he succeeds in getting upon his car.” Applauding those words of the lord Vasudeva, and while the wheel of his enemy was still sunk, the mighty car-warrior Arjuna took up a razor-headed arrow of blazing effulgence and struck the standard (of Karna) bearing the elephant’s rope and bright as the spotless sun. That standard bearing the device of the costly elephant’s rope, was adorned with gold and pearls and gems and diamonds, and forged with care by foremost of artists excelling in knowledge, and possessed of great beauty, and variegated with pure gold. That standard always used to fill thy troops with high courage and the enemy with fear. Its form commanded applause. Celebrated over the whole world, it resembled the sun in splendour. Indeed, its effulgence was like that of fire or the sun or the moon. The diadem-decked Arjuna, with that razor-headed shaft, exceedingly sharp, equipped with wings of gold, possessed of the splendour of fire when fed with libations of clarified butter, and blazing with beauty, cut off that standard of Adhiratha’s son, that great car-warrior. With that standard, as it fell, the fame, pride, hope of victory, and everything dear.
As you can see, even after Karna knew that Arjuna will attack Karna when he is unarmed, he still didn’t attack Arjun when Karna’s arrows caused Arjun to lose sense and drop his Gandiv. On the contrary, Arjun, urged by Krishna, cowardly killed Karna who was unarmed and trying to drag out the chariot.
Throughout this passage, it is very clear that Karna is a much better warrior than any of the Pandavas.
See other illustrations:
Yudistira admitting that Karna is invincible to the three worlds:
http://www.bharatadesam.com/spiritual/mahabharata/mahabharata_08011.php
Only one great bowman, viz., the Suta’s son, shineth in it! That foremost of car-warriors is incapable of being vanquished by the three worlds with their mobile and immobile creatures, including the gods, Asuras and Gandharvas, and the Kinnaras and great serpents!
See Karna single handedly defeating Bheema, Yudhishthira, Dhristadyumna, Shikhandi, Satyaki
Then Dhristadyumna pierced Karna with ten arrows, and the sons of Draupadi pierced him with three and seventy, and Yuyudhana with seven. And Bhimasena pierced him with four and sixty arrows, and Sahadeva with seven. And Nakula pierced him with thirty arrows, and Satanika with seven. And the heroic Shikhandi pierced him with ten and king Yudhishthira with a hundred. These and other foremost of men, O monarch, all inspired with desire of victory, began to grind that great bowman, viz., the Suta’s son, in that dreadful battle. That chastiser of foes, viz., the Suta’s son of great heroism, performing quick evolutions with his car, pierced every one of those warriors with ten arrows. We then, O king, witnessed the lightness of hand displayed by the high-souled Karna and the power of his weapons. Indeed, what we saw appeared to be highly wonderful. People could not notice when he took up his arrows, when he aimed them, and when he let them off. They only beheld his enemies dying fast in consequence of his wrath. The sky, the firmament, the Earth, and all the quarters seemed to be entirely shrouded with sharp arrows. The firmament looked resplendent as if covered with red clouds. The valiant son of Radha, armed with the bow, and as if dancing (on his car), pierced each of his assailants with thrice as many arrows as each of them had pierced him with. And once more piercing each of them, and his steeds, driver, car, and standard with ten arrows, he uttered a loud roar. His assailants then gave him a way (through which he passed out). Having crushed those mighty bowmen with showers of arrows, the son of Radha, that crusher of foes, then penetrated, unresisted, into the midst of the division commanded by the Pandava king. Having destroyed thirty cars of the unreturning Cedis, the son of Radha struck Yudhishthira with many sharp arrows. Then many Pandava warriors, O king, with Shikhandi and Satyaki, desirous of rescuing the king from the son of Radha, surrounded the former. Similarly all the brave and mighty bowmen of thy army resolutely protected the irresistible Karna in that battle. The noise of diverse musical instrument arose then, O king, and the leonine shouts of brave warriors rent the sky. And the Kurus and the Pandavas once more fearlessly encountered each other, the former headed by the Suta’s son and the latter by Yudhishthira.’” “Sanjaya said, ‘Piercing through the Pandava host, Karna, surrounded by thousands of cars and elephants and steeds and foot-soldiers, rushed towards king Yudhishthira the just. Cutting off with hundreds of fierce shafts the thousands of weapons sped at him by his foes, Vrisha fearlessly pierced through that host. Indeed, the Suta’s son cut off the heads, the arms and the thighs of his enemies, who, deprived of life, fell down on the Earth. Others, finding their divisions broken, fled away. The Dravida, the Andhaka, and the Nishada foot-soldiers, urged on by Satyaki, once more rushed towards Karna in that battle, from desire of slaying him. Deprived of arms and head-gears, and slain by Karna with his shafts, they fell down simultaneously on the Earth, like a forest of Sala tree cut down (with the axe). Thus hundreds, thousands and ten thousands of combatants, deprived of life and filling the whole welkin with their fame, fell down with their bodies on the Earth. The Pandus and the Pancalas obstructed Karna, otherwise called Vaikartana, who careered wrathfully in battle like the Destroyer himself, even as people seek to obstruct a disease with incantations and drugs. Crushing all those assailants Karna once more rushed towards Yudhishthira, like an irresistible disease unchecked by incantations and drugs and (propitiatory) rites. At last checked by the Pandus, the Pancalas, and the Kekayas, all of whom were desirous of rescuing the king, Karna could not succeed in passing them over, like Death that is unable to vanquish persons conversant with Brahma. Then Yudhishthira, with eyes red in wrath, addressed Karna, that slayer of hostile heroes, who was held in check at a little distance from him, and said these words “O Karna, O Karna, O thou of vain sight, O son of a Suta, listen to my words. Thou always challengest the active Phalguna in battle. Obedient to the counsels of Dhritarashtra’s son, thou always seekest to oppose us. Mustering thy great prowess, show thou today all thy might, all thy energy, and all the hatred thou bearest towards the sons of Pandu. Today in dreadful encounter, I will purge thee of thy desire for battle.” Having said these words, the son of Pandu, O king, pierced Karna with ten shafts made entirely of iron and equipped with wings of gold. That chastiser of foes, and great bowman, viz., the Suta’s son, O Bharata, pierced Yudhishthira, with the greatest care, in return, with ten arrows equipped with heads like the calf’s tooth. Thus pierced by the Suta’s son in contempt, O sire, the mighty-armed Yudhishthira, blazed up with wrath like a fire upon receiving butter. Bending his formidable bow decked with gold, the son of Pandu placed on his bow-string a whetted arrow capable of piercing the very hills. Drawing the bow to its fullest stretch, the king quickly sped that arrow, fatal as the rod of the Destroyer, from desire of slaying the Suta’s son. Sped by the king endued with great might, that arrow whose whizz resembled the noise of the thunder, suddenly pierced Karna, that mighty car-warrior, on his left side. Deeply afflicted by the violence of that stroke, the mighty-armed Karna with weakened limbs, fell into a swoon on his car, his bow dropping from his hand. Beholding Karna in that plight, the vast Dhartarashtra host uttered cries of “Oh” and “Alas,” and the faces of all the combatants became colourless. Beholding the prowess of their king, on the other hand, O monarch, amongst the Pandavas, leonine roars and shouts and confused cries of joy arose. The son of Radha, however, of cruel prowess, recovering his senses soon enough, set his heart on the destruction of Yudhishthira. Drawing his formidable bow called Vijaya that was decked with gold, the Suta’s son of immeasurable soul began to resist the son of Pandu with his sharp shafts. With a couple of razor-headed arrows he slew in that encounter Candradeva and Dandadhara, the two Pancala princes, that protected the two car wheels of the high-souled Yudhishthira. Each of those heroes, standing by the side of Yudhishthira’s car, looked resplendent like the constellation Punarvasu by the side of the moon. Yudhishthira, however, once more pierced Karna with thirty arrows. And he struck Sushena and Satyasena, each with three arrows. And he pierced everyone of the protectors of Karna with three straight arrows. The son of Adhiratha then, laughing and shaking his bow inflicted a cutting wound on the king’s body with a broad-headed arrow, and again pierced him with sixty arrows and then uttered a loud shout. Then many foremost heroes amongst the Pandavas, desirous of rescuing the king, rushed in wrath towards Karna and began to grind him with their arrows. Satyaki and Chekitana and Yuyutsu and Shikhandi and the sons of Draupadi and the Prabhadrakas, and the twins (Nakula and Sahadeva) and Bhimasena and Shishupala and the Karushas, Matsyas, the Suras, the Kaikayas, the Kasis and the Kosalas, all these brave heroes, endued with great activity, assailed Vasusena. The Pancala prince Janamejaya then pierced Karna with many arrows. The Pandava heroes, armed with diverse kinds of arrows and diverse weapons and accompanied by cars and elephants and steeds, rushing towards Karna, encompassed him on all sides, from desire of slaying him. Thus assailed on all sides by the foremost of Pandava warriors, Karna invoked into existence the brahmastra and filled all the points of the compass with arrows. The heroic Karna then, like unto a blazing fire having shafts for its scorching flame, careered in battle, burning that forest of Pandavas troops. The high-souled Karna, that great bowman, aiming some mighty weapons, and laughing the while, cut off the bow of that foremost of men, Yudhishthira. Then aiming ninety straight arrows within the twinkling of an eye, Karna cut off, with those sharp shafts, the armour of his antagonist. That armour, decked with gold and set with gems, looked beautiful, as it fell down, like a wind-tossed cloud penetrated by the rays of the Sun. Indeed, that armour, adorned with costly brilliants, fallen off from the body of that foremost of men, looked beautiful like the firmament in the night, bespangled with stars. His armour cut off with those arrows, the son of Pritha, covered with blood, wrathfully hurled at the son of Adhiratha a dart made wholly of iron. Karna, however, cut (into pieces) that blazing dart, as it coursed through the welkin, with seven shafts. That dart, thus cut off with those shafts of great bowman, fell down on the Earth. Then Yudhishthira, striking Karna with four lances in his two arms and forehead and chest, repeatedly uttered loud shouts. Thereupon blood spouted forth from the wounds of Karna, and the latter, filled with rage and breathing like a snake, cut off his antagonist’s standard and pierced the Pandava himself with three broad-headed arrows. And he also cut off the couple of quivers (that his foe had) and the car (he rode) into minute fragments. Thereupon the king, riding on another car unto which were yoked those steeds, white as ivory and having black hair on their tails, that used to bear him (to battle), turned his face and began to fly. Thus did Yudhishthira began to retreat. His Parshni driver had been slain. He became exceedingly cheerless and unable to stay before Karna. The son of Radha then, pursuing Yudhishthira, the son of Pandu, cleansed himself by touching him in the shoulder with his own fair hand (the palm of which was) graced with the auspicious signs of the thunderbolt, the umbrella, the hook, the fish, the tortoise, and the conchshell, and desired to seize him by force. He then remembered the words of Kunti. Then Shalya addressed him, and said, “Do not, O Karna, seize this best of kings. As soon as thou seizest him, he will reduce both thee and me to ashes.” Then Karna, O king, laughing in mockery, addressed the son of Pandu and thus spoke unto him disparagingly. “How, indeed, born though thou art in a noble race, and observant though thou art of Kshatriya duties, wouldst thou leave the battle in fear, desiring to save thy life? I think that thou art not well-acquainted with the duties of Kshatriyas. Endued with Brahma-force, thou art indeed devoted to the study of the Vedas and the performance of sacrificial rites. Do not, O son of Kunti, fight again, and do not again approach brave warriors. Do not use harsh language towards heroes and do not come to great battles. Thou mayst use such words, O sire, towards others, but thou shouldst never address persons like us in that way. By using such words towards persons like us, thou wouldst in battle meet with this and other kinds of behaviour. Go back to thy quarters, O son of Kunti, or thither where those two, viz., Keshava and Arjuna, are. Indeed, O king, Karna will never slay one like thee.” Having said these words unto the son of Pritha, the mighty Karna, setting Yudhishthira free, began to slaughter the Pandava host like the wielder of the thunderbolt slaughtering the Asura host. That ruler of men, (viz., Yudhishthira,) then, O king, quickly fled away. Beholding the king flying away, the Cedis, the Pandavas, the Pancalas, and the mighty car-warrior Satyaki, all followed that monarch of unfading glory. And the sons of Draupadi, and the Suras, and the twin sons of Madri by Pandu, also followed the king. Beholding the division of Yudhishthira retreating, the heroic Karna became highly glad with all the Kurus and began to pursue the retreating force. The din of battle-drums and conchs and cymbals and bows, and leonine shouts, arose from among the Dhartarashtra troops. Meanwhile Yudhishthira, O thou of Kuru’s race, quickly riding on the car of Srutakirti, began to behold the prowess of Karna.
I have already posted the incident where Karna spares Bhima remembering his promise to Kunti. I you want, then I can quote the same again from this site.
Finally, let me quote the passage where Krisha declares Karna as the son of Pandu and offers Draupadi as wife to Karna:
http://www.bharatadesam.com/spiritual/mahabharata/mahabharata_05140.php
It is said by those conversant with the scriptures that the two kinds of sons called Kanina and Sahoda that are born of a maiden, have him for their father who weddeth the maid. Thou, O Karna, hast been born in this way. Thou art, therefore, morally the son of Pandu. Come, be a king, according to the injunction of the scriptures. On the side of thy father, thou hast the sons of Pritha, on the side of thy mother, thou hast the Vrishnis, (for thy kinsmen). O bull among men, know that thou hast these two for thy own. Proceeding this very day with me hence, O sire, let the Pandavas know thee as a son of Kunti born before Yudhishthira. The brothers, the five Pandavas, the son of Draupadi, and the invincible son of Subhadra, will all embrace thy feet. All the kings and princes, again, that have been assembled for the Pandava-cause, and all the Andhakas and Vrishnis, will also embrace thy feet. Let queens and princesses bring golden and silver and earthen jars (full of water) and delicious herbs and all kinds of seeds and gems, and creepers, for thy installation. During the sixth period, Draupadi also will come to thee (as a wife).
>>The whole caste debate started by Surya falls outside the scope of what Surya suggested “The debating point is whether Karna is evil and whether Karna is inferior to Arjun/Bheema”.
———
Caste debate is very well in context since your Guruji brands Karna as evil based on his insults to Draupadi. I counter that claiming that it was Draupadi who insulted Karna first by calling him Sutha putra infront of all the esteemed delegates. It was she who insulted Karna’s friend Duryodhan by calling him the blind son of the blind father. Karna’s action was a retaliation to this insult. Your guruji has unknowingly admitted that Sutha is inferior to Kshatriya. So don’t waste your time trying to claim that it is a higher caste.
Posted by Sonu on 19/05/2009 at 02:31
SONU: Other then the debating points and addressing the insults on God. I AM replying to your nonsense because I want to highlight to you a true reflection of yourself. (Debate with Surya)
>>You have got a nerve and clearly dumb dim-witted.
—————
SURYA: So, when your arguments have been proven wrong, you’ve started personally attacking the arguer. This is the 19th trick exhibited by inferior debators, prior to fleeing the forum altogether. Anyway, I’m here for debate, not for a muck throwing competition and therefore I’m not answering your personal affronts in the same coin. It was the same thing done by Draupadi – by personally attacking Karna with racist slurs and then when she got it back in the same coin from Karna, took it very personally. So the moral of the story is, don’t give it if you can’t take it.
SONU: You just have given your own personal views.
>>You repeatedly keep on making your own statements and waffling, possibly to cover up relevant points you cannot argue with evidence. You bring in irrelevant points to back up what you say without any genuine evidence, when that has been exposed; you say that was never relevant to the topic.
———–
SURYA: That’s what you have been doing all this while, not me. I have backed up each and every claim that I’ve made with evidences from the authentic translation of Mahabharatha, not your pulp fiction meant for TV serials.
SONU: Why are you giving Guru`s answers when you cant think of your own, especially when you don’t follow the advice yourself.
>>Regarding http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Arjuna, you clearly have not read the comment I made afterwards regarding this source. I don’t know what level you have studied up to and I am not interested either, but if you have studied anything, surely you have not studied solely using few same old online sources.
————-
SURYA: This is the answer that your guruji gave me when I quoted wikipedia: “Your quotation from wikepedia is laughable , wikepedia is not authentic source , and Read Vyasa Bharath to understand how people are addressed .” That’s my answer to you as well.
SONU: Majority of my quotes are from a book, it is not surprising you cannot see that.
>>You are acting like Ganguly is your God.
————-
SURYA: On the contrary, I challenged you to quote from any authentic translation of Vyas Bharath. Rather than doing so, you quoted from a pulp fiction, which is the story retold by some Tom/Dick/Harry. Every TV serial based on Mahabharata is a retold story by some Tom/Dick/Harry. Then how is your pulp fiction any different from those silver screen versions?
Referring to what your statement “the debating point is whether Karna is evil and whether Karna is inferior to Arjun/Bheema.”
>>You challenged me to quote from sources to back up my statements; I provided statements and mainly direct quotes. Enough evidence to state Karna was EVIL and Arjuna and Bhima were better warriors.
SONU: On 17/05/09 Surya said: “My challenge is open. You point out the version that is acceptable to you. I’ll quote from there. Or you yourself quote from the version that is acceptable to you the equivalent passages that I have quoted. Can you do that?”
SONU: “Surya: That was a proposal made by Krishna to Karna. I have clearly quoted the source as well. If you think that this is adulterated, then why don’t you quote the same passage from the version that is acceptable to you? I challenge you to do that.”
SONU: WHERE does it SAY in your ORIGINAL message “I challenged you to quote from any authentic translation of Vyas Bharath.???”
————
SURYA: You quoted from a pulp fiction, not authentic translation of Mahabharat. I can cite thousand of such pulp fictions from the net/TV/magazines and get away with whatever I want. No sensible person will accept it.
>>I presented God did not use tricks or deceit in Arjuna`s victory. Funny how you did not have a response to that and present me your findings with evidence (according to you Karna better person and always winning). WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE?
————-
SURYA: I have presented these evidences several times here. But your Guruji edited and removed it. I’ll make a seperate post with the evidences. I hope that your Guruji will not edit it this time. If he does, then gimme your mail id. I’ll email it to you.
SONU: That’s your own statement, waffle & EXCUSE. WHERES EVIDENCE?
>>You and other Karna supporters keep going outside to scope of this debate when you have nothing left to say. A lot of information is clearly hard for you to handle in one go. Guru Chiraanji has kindly created another page
————
SURYA: It is you who has been doing it regularly and I had to remind you of the scope everytime. Can you point out one instance where I went out of the scope?
SONU: Suggested by you “the debating point is whether Karna is evil and whether Karna is inferior to Arjun/Bheema.” Out of scope excuses you used for Karna`s failure:
You used Karna`s birth, Arjuna was in disguise & Druapadi`s martial life. Even then the excuses are waffle and not true.
>>To remain within scope of the debate the points are being broken down. To prove what you say kindly present your findings with evidence (sources, fully identified) in quotes regarding the following topics (they are all Arjun winning over Karna), present your evidences on the new pages. Please avoid making your own statements and quotes because they do not make any sense. Please avoid using irrelevant excuses on why Karna failed, this will help to remain within the scope of the debate.
1. Once in the Draupadi swayamvar episode .
2. Second in Virat parva Go samrakshan episode .[ here KArna's dress was stolen ]
3. Drona asks who can get him DRUPAD captivated
4. Gandharva
—————-
SURYA: If you had atleast a basic minimum sincierity in what you just said, you would have provided quoted for the above incidents. Anyway, the issue here is after reading too much of pulp fiction and watching too much of bollywood movies, you think that a great warrior would never caught offguard. You think that Sunny Deol singlehandedly defeating the whole Pakistan army or Sylvester Stallone singlehandedly defeating the whole Soviet army is reality. And then you try to judge Karna with that benchmark. That is the problem. The original Mahabharata (not your pulp fiction) depicts realistic incidents. In reality any great warrior will get wounded in battle, get defeated sometimes by inferior warriors. I quoted the instance of Arjuna getting mortally wounded from an insignificant warrior Susharma.
http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m08/m08053.htm
The latter again, at the sight of rangers of the sky, began, O king, to fly away. Freed from that foot-tying weapon, the Samsaptaka force, O monarch, looked like the Sun himself giving light unto all creatures, when freed from clouds. Thus liberated, those warriors once more shot their arrows, O sire, and hurled their weapons at Arjuna’s car. And all of them pierced Partha with numerous weapons. Cutting off with his own arrowy downpour that shower of mighty weapons Vasava’s son, that slayer of hostile heroes, began to slaughter those warriors. Then Susharma, O king, with a straight arrow, pierced Arjuna in the chest, and then he pierced him with three other shafts. Deeply pierced therewith, and feeling great pain, Arjuna sat down on the terrace of his car. Then all the troops loudly cried out, saying, “Partha is slain.” At this the blare of conchs, and the peal of drums, and the sound of diverse musical instruments, and loud leonine shouts, arose there.
SURYA: I can quote the same passage from mahabharatOnline as well. There are several such incidents. Karna too has such vulnerabilities, that’s the point. Why do you use seperate standards to judge Karna? But when fully prepared, Arjuna could not even face Karna, even with his chariot wheel swallowed by the earth. See the relevent quote from my next post.
SONU: Above is more, constant and never ending waffle that has no meaning and not even worth discussing.
SONU: It is very easy to navigate to the following to see the evidence I have presented.
http://chiraan.wordpress.com/2009/05/17/superiority-of-arjun-vis-a-vis-karna-a-debate/
1. Once in the Draupadi swayamvar episode .
2. Second in Virat parva Go samrakshan episode .
3. Drona asks who can get him DRUPAD captivated
4. Gandharva
SONU: seeing as you swear by Ganguly`s translation. (Other readers please note, I would question it and cross check the information from this source).
Mahabharata of Krishna-Dwaipayana Vyasa
translated by Kisari Mohan Ganguli
Just one of Arjuna`s Victory
http://www.bharatadesam.com/spiritual/mahabharata/mahabharata_08003.php
“Sanjaya continued, ‘Having said these words, O sinless one, thy son Duryodhana, with his brothers, made Karna the generalissimo (of the Kuru army). Obtaining the command, the mighty car-warrior Karna, so fierce in battle, uttered loud roars and fought with the foe. He caused, O sire, a great carnage among the Srinjayas, the Pancalas, the Kekayas, and the Videhas. From his bow issued innumerable lines of arrows, one close behind the wings of another, like flights of bees. Having afflicted the Pancalas and the Pandavas endued with great activity, and slain thousands of warriors, he was at last slain by Arjuna!”
SONU: Surya quoted from
http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m08/m08053.htm
Surya left a quote saying
“The latter again, at the sight of rangers of the sky, began, O king, to fly away. Freed from that foot-tying weapon, the Samsaptaka force, O monarch, looked like the Sun himself giving light unto all creatures, when freed from clouds. Thus liberated, those warriors once more shot their arrows, O sire, and hurled their weapons at Arjuna’s car. And all of them pierced Partha with numerous weapons. Cutting off with his own arrowy downpour that shower of mighty weapons Vasava’s son, that slayer of hostile heroes, began to slaughter those warriors. Then Susharma, O king, with a straight arrow, pierced Arjuna in the chest, and then he pierced him with three other shafts. Deeply pierced therewith, and feeling great pain, Arjuna sat down on the terrace of his car. Then all the troops loudly cried out, saying, “Partha is slain.” At this the blare of conchs, and the peal of drums, and the sound of diverse musical instruments, and loud leonine shouts, arose there.
SONU: From that very source Surya forgot or left out the vital quotes that I would like to present.
“Recovering his senses, Partha of immeasurable soul, owning white steeds and having Krishna for his driver, speedily invoked the Aindra weapon. Then thousands of arrows, O sire, issuing from that weapon, were seen on all sides to slay kings and elephants. And steeds and warriors, in hundreds and thousands, were also seen to be slaughtered in that battle, with these weapons. Then while the troops were thus being slaughtered, a great fear entered the hearts of all the samsaptakas and Gopalas, O Bharata. There was no man amongst them that could fight with Arjuna. There in the very sight of all the heroes, Arjuna began to destroy thy troops. Beholding that slaughter, all of them remained perfectly inactive, without putting forth their prowess.”
From reading Guru Chiraan Ji`s views & VARIOUS sources and the above, I can confidently conclude that Arjuna has been the winner and Karna has been the loser.
SONU: Enough is enough now, take up your arguments on the following, kindly remain within scope of the point raised. PRESENT CLEAR EVIDENCE (sources identified) WITH USE OF QUOTES.
http://chiraan.wordpress.com/2009/05/17/superiority-of-arjun-vis-a-vis-karna-a-debate/
Posted by chiraan on 19/05/2009 at 01:56
Look where is your draupadi [ as a wife ] in this translation …………
………………………..extract………………………………………….
Before leaving Hastinapura, Lord Krishna took Karna, the son of Radha, on His
chariot and spoke with him concerning his birth. Lord Krishna revealed the
truth to him, O son of Radha, you have worshiped the brahmanas who have
realized the truth of the Vedas. Therefore, you know what is the Vedic
conclusion regarding the birth of a child. In the past you have not known who
your real mother was. This remains a mystery to you. Actually you were born to
Kunti before her marriage to Pandu. Your father is the sun god. The daughter of
Surasena had received a benediction from Durvasa Muni that she could call any
heavenly lord from the higher planets to conceive a child. In her youthful
innocence, she called for the sun god, and because the mantra could not prove
fruitless, a child was conceived. Out of fear that she would never be able to
marry, she placed the child in a basket and cast it afloat on the Ganges. Thus,
you are actually known as Kaunteya. The Pandavas are, in reality, your younger
brothers. If you come to their side, they will bow at your feet, and you will
become the emperor of the world. When you are coronated as King of the earth,
Yudhisthira will stand behind you in your chariot. Bhimasena will hold the
royal umbrella over your head, and Arjuna will hold the reins of the chariot.
Nakula and Sahadeva, as well as Draupadi’s five sons, will walk behind you. Let
the Pandavas proclaim, çVictory to Vasusena.’ Surrounded by the Pandavas, you
will appear like your father, the sun god, followed by his many assistants.
Bewildered upon hearing the shocking facts from Lord Krishna, Karna did not
reply, but contemplated the words spoken to him. After a few moments of
silence, Karna said, Without a doubt, O Keshava, I believe that your words are
truth. From the moral and Vedic understanding, I am the son of Kunti
…………………………….end of extract ………………………
There is no morally son of PANDU or draupadi [as a wife ] translation in this passage .
I have shown you all the verses , your verses are not here , this is also a translation ………….available on the internet internationally acclaimed .
There are so many versions ………….varying and ,…………………. Authenticity needs to be established the way
I have even better transaltions than these , if you wish I can quote from them as well ……..
As for you keep searching for your headless statements in this site ………….
http://www.philosophy.ru/library/asiatica/indica/itihasa/mahabharata/eng/gbmb05xt.html
Posted by chiraan on 19/05/2009 at 02:24
Look what kripa and AShvaththama say to KArna
……………………………extract ……………………………………………
“O Karna,” Kripacharya said, “your
heart is crooked and always inclined to war. Do you not remember that Arjuna alone stopped the onslaught of the
Gandharvas in the Dvaitavana forest while you ran from the battlefield. Do you not remember that Arjuna alone killed
the Nivatakavachas which were incapable of being slain by the demigods.
………..Ashvatththama …………
“O Karna,” Ashvatthama advised, “you cannot win battles with words. Why then do you boast? What kshatriya is there
that expresses delight at winning a kingdom with dice like the wicked son of Dhritarastra? In single combat did you
defeat the Pandavas for their kingdom? What act of prowess caused you to order Draupadi to be brought into the
assembly of Kings, and by what act of prowess did you endeavor to see her stripped naked? Take out your dice now and
throw them at Arjuna. Let the sinful Shakuni come and fight with Arjuna. The Gandiva does not throw dice, but arrows as
deadly as virulent poison. Let this battle be lead by Shakuni, if he chooses to fight. I shall, however, not fight with
one who is greater than all the demigods combined.”
…………………………………..end of extract ………………………………
http://www.philosophy.ru/library/asiatica/indica/itihasa/mahabharata/eng/gbmb04xt.html
this is what is called as consistency
…………
This is go sanrakshana episode
……………
…………………extract …………………………………….
Arjuna then ranged the field of battle depriving life from the Kuru host. The next warrior to approach Arjuna was
Sangramajit, the brother of Karna. He challenged Arjuna like a tempest, but Arjuna quickly killed his four red horses
and with a crescent shaped arrow, severed his head. When his brother had fallen on the battlefield, Karna quickly
pierced Arjuna with twelve arrows. He covered his horses with arrows and pierced Virata’s son in the hand where he held
the chariot’s reins. Seeing the duel that was taking place, the Kuru host looked on, not taking any part. Arjuna covered
the Karna’s chariot with thousands of arrows so that it could not be seen. However, Karna soon released himself
from that network of arrows and sent forth a thunderous roar competing with the monkey on the banner of Arjuna’s
chariot. Karna then released a multitude of arrows that covered Arjuna’s chariot. Highly annoyed, and drawing his bow
back to his ear, Arjuna pierced Karna in every part of his body. Mangled by Arjuna’s crescent shaped arrows, Karna fled
the battlefield. After Radha’s son had been routed, the Kuru host fell upon Arjuna like the ………
……………………………………………
……………..end of extract ……………………………
http://www.philosophy.ru/library/asiatica/indica/itihasa/mahabharata/eng/gbmb04xt.html
extract of karna losing to Drupad’s army
>>>>>>>>>>>>>extract
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
As the Kurus approached Drupada’s capital, they informed the King of their desire for battle. The Kuru army was led by
Duryodhana, Karna, Yuyutsu, Duhshasana and Vikarna. King Drupada, not tolerating
the attack on his kingdom, mounted his chariot and along with his brothers met the Kuru army head on. Duryodhana
and his followers then competed with one another to see who could capture King Drupada first. Before the battle started, Arjuna saw the vanity of Duryodhana and his brothers. He therefore informed Drona, O best of the brahmanas, we shall
refrain from fighting until Duryodhana has displayed his prowess. The King of the Panchalas can never be captured
on the battlefield by any of these warriors. Having made his plan, Arjuna, surrounded by his brothers, waited
outside the town about a mile away.
Meanwhile, King Drupada, beholding the Kuru army, rushed forward releasing hundreds of arrows from his powerful
bow. The Kuru ranks were so afflicted that they thought that there were many Drupadas opposed to them. There
arose from the Panchala army a war cry that shook the firmament. Duryodhana and his brothers became furious and began to shower their arrows upon the enemy. But
the mighty bowman Drupada was not affected and began killing the enemy
with greater vigor. He challenged Duryodhana, Vikarna and Karna, and sent them
running from the battlefield. The arrows from the Panchala army began to rain
upon the Kurus, breaking their ranks and causing them to flee for their very
lives.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>end of extract >>>>>>>>>>
http://www.philosophy.ru/library/asiatica/indica/itihasa/mahabharata/eng/gbmb01xt.html
look it is the same site ………..
For your easy browsing I shall give a
complete translation link
http://www.philosophy.ru/library/asiatica/indica/itihasa/mahabharata/eng/index.html
mahAbhArata
Narration | Translation
……………………………………………………..
ANother of karna’s defeat ……………..
………………………………………………..extract……………..
King Yudhisthira was angered by Karna’s words, but as he looked around he saw
that he had no weapons to challenge him. Bhima then came upon Karna,
and a fierce battle ensued. Karna managed to shatter Bhimasena’s bow, but Bhima
strung another bow and pierced Karna with many arrows. Karna countered
with twenty arrows, but Bhima pierced Karna in the chest with a broad headed
shaft released with the force of lightning. The arrow hit Karna with the sound of
thunder, and Karna fell to the floor of the chariot in a deadly swoon.
Salya then took Karna from the battlefield to
save his life. Witnessing Karna’s defeat,
Duryodhana sent twenty of his brothers to fight
with Bhima. They were like flies about to enter fire.
………………………………….end of extract ……………….
these verses are from
http://www.philosophy.ru/library/asiatica/indica/itihasa/mahabharata/eng/gbmb08xt.html
Your verse are not even a single verse of yours you will find here in this
translation ….. keep checking and do consider shaving your head
Posted by chiraan on 19/05/2009 at 02:49
The above post is in response to what Shri Surya had challenged ………
I quote ”
On 17/05/09 Surya said: “My challenge is open. You point out the version that is acceptable to you. I’ll quote from there. Or you yourself quote from the version that is acceptable to you the equivalent passages that I have quoted. Can you do that?”
“Surya: That was a proposal made by Krishna to Karna. I have clearly quoted the source as well. If you think that this is adulterated, then why don’t you quote the same passage from the version that is acceptable to you? I challenge you to do that.”
………………………………………………………………………………………….
end of quote
WHAT DOES NOW FOLLOWERS OF KARNA SAY <
WE HAVE QUOTED FROM A SINGLE SOURCE ALL THE POINTS AND YOUR POINTS ARE NOT HERE .
CAN THESE FOLLOWERS STOP MAKING BLASPHEMOUS STATEMENTS …..
AS ACCEPTANCE OF MISTAKE IS NOT A INBORN QUALITY OF EVIL WE CANNOT EXPECT THESE NEO RADHEYAS TO BE HUMBLE ; THOSE WHO DO NOT HESITATE A BIT IN DEFILING A WOMAN ,THEY DO NOT DESERVE RESPECT .
Posted by Surya on 19/05/2009 at 07:50
>>There is no morally son of PANDU or draupadi [as a wife ] translation in this passage .
———–
That is because your source is an abridged version that has summarized 150 chapters into 5 chapters.
What a desperation. Take any complete translation. You’ll find “morally son of Pandu” and “Draupadi coming to Karna” there.
Posted by Surya on 19/05/2009 at 09:02
As I said, this is just an abridged version.
Posted by chiraan on 19/05/2009 at 14:13
Shri Surya has accepted the debate with the formation of JURY panel . SO I shall ask Surya to suggest his three members .
I shall get three members , It is neccessary to get three neutral judges , that which is acceptable to SUrya .
Tommrrow WE can finalise the panel .
I welcome Surya .
I shall remove the moderation check mark , from the post so that post can be made freely without moderation ,,
we request surya to post smaller posts so that it becomes readable or split them into smaller posts to acknowledge each point quickly and address individually .
Kindly shift this discussion to Debate page , so we have better Views and logical conclusion to the matter .
Posted by Surya on 19/05/2009 at 07:35
I stand by my challenge. Your source http://www.philosophy.ru/library/asiatica/indica/itihasa/mahabharata/eng/ is just an abridged version. Each parva that has around 100s of chapters have been abridged into 5 or 6 chapters.
What difference is there between Sonu’s pulp fiction and your abridged version? 
What a desperation. My challenge is open. Point out any authentic translation of the Original Mahabharata that is acceptable to you- not abridged versions, not retold pulp fictions. I’ll quote from there.
Posted by chiraan on 19/05/2009 at 13:40
Finding excuses again , why we have shown all the points you have raised and not a single illustration that you have give exists , why did translator find your words here , oh because it is not showing your verses it has become abridged version , whta an excuse . If there were an iota of truth in your words , there would be atleast a single sentence in your favour . why is it not there ?
Perhaps this translators did not have concocted version like the one your GAnguly had .
Dont worry I have three more elaborate versions , I shall quote from them .
Posted by Surya on 19/05/2009 at 14:37
What is the excuse in that? You’ve quoted from a version that has abridged 150 – 250 chapteres into a mere 5 chapters. Can you deny that? Then how will the details that I’ve quoted be present there? You’ll find some more abridged versions for kids, like “Chotta Bheem”. I guess your next quote will be from that, claiming that “Droupadi being offered as wife to Karna is not present in Chotta Bheem”
Posted by chiraan on 19/05/2009 at 14:50
Well we will give full version , dont worry , let us move to the debae page , This is just a beginning of your excuses ,you will needing some more in future , the version gives full translation of every pasage you have quoted with details , when talking indetail about pandavsa carrying umbrella…… why does author forget to talk about draupadi ,
why aswatthama speech is not there in your version , why kripa speech is not there in your version ,
when complete detail of BHeema vanquishing Karna is given , why your one liner of [ karna spare bheema's life ] has been left out .
you have no answer to this , perhaps you want to say the author / translator in every context he has quoted at length and forgotten your verses .
ha ha ha excuses aka KARNA
Anyway speculate few more when I guve full versions , there you will not have anything to say but i am inviting jury to seal your lips then so you dont resort excuses .
Posted by chiraan on 19/05/2009 at 14:55
By the way I would request you to bring three jury from your side , else you would find another excuse of rigging .
kindly post your acceptance comments on the post
http://chiraan.wordpress.com/2009/05/17/superiority-of-arjun-vis-a-vis-karna-a-debate/
that would be great for us to start in a logical manner .
also ask your three juries to post their willingness .
Now this seems to be going in a right dierction .
I shall switch off moderation [ so none of your posts could be edited ], you can test it , but I request you to post smaller posts for redability . and presentability .
Posted by chiraan on 19/05/2009 at 14:55
By the way I would request you to bring three jury from your side , else you would find another excuse of rigging .
kindly post your acceptance comments on the post
http://chiraan.wordpress.com/2009/05/17/superiority-of-arjun-vis-a-vis-karna-a-debate/
that would be great for us to start in a logical manner .
also ask your three juries to post their willingness .
Now this seems to be going in a right dierction .
I shall switch off moderation [ so none of your posts could be edited ], you can test it , but I request you to post smaller posts for redability . and presentability .
Posted by chiraan on 24/05/2009 at 03:20
Dear Neeraj
A kshatriya should not avoid a call for war or game , this is a small rule . However Yudhisthir was not addicted to gambling . There is a rule in gurukul , while leaving gurukul one takes a secret oath before guru . This is not revealed .
Yudhisthir took a vow , he would never refuse if called for dice .[game] . This was overheard by Duryodhan and he exactly hatched a plan .
Arjun had vowed He would kill the one who abuses his gandiva .and he had tried to kill Yudhisthir .
http://anandatirtha.wordpress.com/2009/04/30/when-arjuna-killed-yudhishtira/
Bheema had vowed anyone calling him “toobar” [one without moustache ] he will kill him . Incidentally Duryodhan overhears this one too . BHeema had thick moustache , so anyone calling him so is unimaginable , and liar can be killed .
Karna abuses him when prompted by Duryodhan to say so !
B R CHopra thinking Karna could not have lied , made BHeema’s character moustachless . The most manly man was without Moustache in great teleepic . which you are incidentally a fan…..
So yudhisthir was not addicted , he was helpless before his vow . [otherwise no sane man would go twice ]
Balaram was also drunkard , in a fit of anger fully drunk he dragged enitre HASTINAPUT into GANGA , Neither BHishma ,Karna ,Duryodhana all the sundry could anything to him even if he was drunk [ The mighty BAlarama] .
They cooly surendered and handed over ” SAMB” Krishna son whom they had imprisoned .
Kshatriyas Drink , there is no qualms about it , Shalya was a 24hr drunkard , [ a fat he regreted , because of which he had to join Kauravas , because they gave him enough and he thought it came from Yudhisthir ]
Everyone cannot be everyhwere , But wherever one is one must not flee , warriors die but dont take bullets on the back [ bullets or arrows] ie they dont flee , Every warrior fled except BHEEM in the WAR . When BHEEM killed Dushyasan , All ran away , whole battlefield was empty for 48 minutes out of fear of BHEEMA .
Karna fled at every time when he saw his defeat imminent .