Shin_Chan_5334

I'll give it a shot, after trusting you, mate. Hope what you said is true. I'm actually out of content to read, so I guess I'll just give it a chance. Thanks a lot for letting me know though. Appreciate it.

I'll be honest I enjoy having these discussions as I get to learn something new. For example from this thread I got to know there are two books of Mahabharat, one where Karna picked up the bow and Draupadi insulted him, another where he didn't pick up the bow. Those are the kinds of nuances I respect to talk about. There's no fun talking to a monolith who's gonna ramble the same thing again and again irrespective of what you say. Which is why please try to bring something worthwhile to the table or there's no point in discussing it. If your aim is just to "win" against me, you're out of luck, Mahabharat isn't important enough for me to lose anything.

yup mate I'm twisting words, you've yet to answer to anything though. You just keep repeating the same thing. Did Arjun not fall in a moral dilemma over killing his kin (not just Kauravas, but also Dronacharya, Bhishma etc.) or are you saying he wanted to kill them from the start too? Didn't Krishna have to tell him not to focus on the fruits of your actions and perform Karma? But, these same guys then on Day 10 brought in shikandi to defeat Bhishma, breaking the Dharma. Abhimanyu was killed on day 13 after Pandavas used trickery. For you and quite a few others, the whole idea is that Krishna can do no wrong as he's the embodiment of Dharma. I don't buy that "propaganda". Krishna justifies, attacking below the belt by Bhim, Yudhishtr lying about Ashwathama etc as it is for the universal good. But the universal good is decided by Krishna himself. Karna is fighting for Mitra Dharma. That's still following Dharma. Arjun needed to be taught to follow dharma, Karna didn't. There's no twisting of words. You're just unable to comprehend the words and haven't answered a single point. Your whole argument is that you don't understand what I'm saying so I'm twisting words. Worse off you're relying on personal attacks from the beginning. "Too nuanced for you", "trying to act cool" and what not. I'd say you should learn some of the stuff that you're trying to preach and at least try to have a fair debate, answer my points, don't just discard everything with the "twisted words" argument. If you mention twisted words the next time you comment, our discussion ends there. Have a good one.

first of all ad Hominem. Try to have arguments w/o personal attacks. Now twisting words? what are you in about. I said Arjun was willing to kill other kings and people, i know he's a warrior he kills people. But was he performing that killing for fun? Was he a sociopathic killer? No, right. He was performing that killing in the name of Dharma too. However, when it came to his own kin, he suddenly started having second thoughts. I am just pointing that out. Arjun only followed dharma when it was convenient for him, to the point that Krisn had to come and teach him. None of the other Pandavas had to be taught that. Karna didn't need a lecture from Krishna to kill people. That too was pointed out wrt the comment that the other guy made, saying that Krishna chose Arjun because he dropped his weapons. Krishn had already chosen Arjun way back and only later did the weapon thing happen. But let's say Arjun is great somehow as he didn't want to lift weapons against his kin. (as the other guy said) Or however you want to put these words in a sentence, as I'm probably twisting words 😂- then Bhim, Yudhishtr, Nakul etc. who were fighting w/o having these second thoughts were as bad as Kauravas? As far as playing tricks is concerned Pandavas won because of tricks only. Bhishma, Dronacharya, Karna and many more were killed through treachery. I'm not saying it's wrong to do it in a war. But these mfs have the gall to call themselves righteous and heroic after that. That's what I pointed out, Mahabharat was a war between two bad elements of society. People pray the one who won. I really just read it as a story. Finally I'll use "" to add emphasis, what's wrong with that, it's just modern English, there's no being cool there. Seriously, stop with the personal attacks, talk facts.

``` Karna that foremost of all wielders of the bow went to where the bow was, and quickly raising it strung it and placed the arrows on the string. And beholding the son of Surya--Karna of the Suta tribe--like unto fire, or Soma, or Surya himself, resolved to shoot the mark, those foremost of bowmen--the sons of Pandu--regarded the mark as already shot and brought down upon the ground. But seeing Karna, Draupadi loudly said, 'I will not select a Suta for my lord.' Then Karna, laughing in vexation and casting glance at the Sun, threw aside the bow already drawn to a circle. ``` - The Mahabharata Book 1: Adi Parva Kisari Mohan Ganguli, tr. CLXXXIX I've no idea what you're on about mate, but I don't see why I should read anything if your start itself is flawed. I don't know if there is some other Mahabharat you're reading but the one I've read clearly shows discrimination against him. As far as being rude is considered. Karna was really raised as a prince mind you, he was a self made person, being rude is complete bs. But let's say you are right, still, is being rude being a villain? I hope not. Next Dronacharya Vaisampayana continued, 'The Pandavas then, having made themselves acquainted with everything connected with him, returned (to the city), and going unto Drona, told him of that wonderful feat of archery which they had witnessed in the woods. Arjuna, in particular, thinking all the while, O king, Ekalavya, saw Drona in private and relying upon his preceptor's affection for him, said, 'Thou hadst lovingly told me, clasping me, to thy bosom, that no pupil of thine should be equal to me. Why then is there a pupil of thine, the mighty son of the Nishada king, superior to me?" - CXXXIV This is the kind of guy Arjun and Drona were, he didn't want Karna to learn as he wanted to defeat Arjun, and as eklavya was better than Arjun, he got his thumb 😂. The so-called dharma amounts to bull. As I already mentioned, I'm not saying Karn was a hero, but neither was Arjun or Pandavs for that matter. So it was not a battle between a hero and a villain, rather one between two gangs, the worst of the society. I'd say that is why it marked the beginning of kaliyug, no matter who one, the true DHARMA lost. (This single line is just my interpretation, not something I read somewhere. This is what I want to believe for my sanity, otherwise Krishna turns into an evil mastermind in my head and I don't want him to be evil) Sadly, Karn was just in the losing gang and the superior authority (krishn) favored the pandav gang for a bunch of reasons, maybe a lesser evil, definitely not because they were good 😂. I would like to see your sources though. There are some things you have said which are true. There might be some other renditions of Mahabharat which I'm not aware about, but then the debate fails as we're not talking about the same Karn and same Arjun, but I'd love to read that either way.