Duryodhana was nice to Karna and Bhanumati

RBee · Post by **RBee** » Thu Dec 18, 2014 11:06 pm

Duryodhan(a) is one of the most vilified characters in Mahabharata epic.
OTOH Krishna is the most revered figure in the same epic.

Inspite of all the character flaws Duryodhana was depicted with, he was very kind to Karna/Shakuni and loved his wife Bhanumati very much. Once, Karna and Bhanumati were playing a dice game while Durodhana was conducting business in King's court. Karna won the game and asked Bhanumati to sacrifice her pearl necklace per bet, but she refused, instead she teased him. Due to the passion of the moment, Karna pulled Bhanumati's pearl necklace while she was getting up and the beads dispersed everywhere. Duryodhana stepped in her room around the same time. Any ordinary husband would have suspected an extra marital relationship between his closest friend and his lovely wife, but Duryodhana didn't. He asked Bhanumati to follow the rules of the game, and if she bet her necklace, she should honor it.

Krishna with all his virtues had staunch enemies in Jarasandha, Shishupala, and Rukmi. He resorted to killing the first two in unlawful ways. He kept quiet when Rukmi was killed by BalaRama in a drunken stupor, even though Rukmi had forgotten the animosity between him and Krishna. The occasion was on the marriage day of Krishna's son and Rukmi's daughter.

Shows good people are not always good, and bad people are not always bad.

Comments.. ? Feel free to use this thread to share such less heard stories of the epic..

Hyderabadi · Post by **Hyderabadi** » Fri Dec 19, 2014 12:39 am

RBee;588403

Comments.. ? Feel free to use this thread to share such less heard stories of the epic..

Men usually are very touchy about sharing their vehicles, cars, motorcycles or chariots.

Once Duryodhan's chariot wheel spoke had come out. Karna let him take his chariot out for a spin. Karna is very largehearted man.

dixit · Post by **dixit** » Fri Dec 19, 2014 1:00 am

Hyderabadi;588406....

Once Duryodhan's chariot wheel spoke had come out. Karna let him take his chariot out for a spin. Karna is very largehearted man.

Men also don't like to spend money....Both Duryodhan and Karna never took the membership of HAA (Hastinapur Auto Association) for any road-side assistance. Karna had to lend his chariot to D-man and Karna himself lost his life when his was trying to change the wheels of his limousine by himself.

Sarkar07 · Post by **Sarkar07** » Fri Dec 19, 2014 1:29 am

RBee;588403
Shows good people are not always good, and bad people are not always bad.

Comments.. ?

That is very true. While everybody is grey, (some) people in real world like to classify others as simply black or white....as it helps to give a quick explanation to (complex) behavior of humans - a tendency most humans are victim of at most times. That's why we find people worshipping (sometimes literally) other humans...or finding it hard to appreciate good things in people they have already classified as bad.

If anything Mahabharata, imo, is classic because none of the characters in it come across as "true" heroes...or true villians for that matter. For a tale that supposedly involves god(s), its as human as a story can get.

VS007 · Post by **VS007** » Fri Dec 19, 2014 6:33 am

Even as a child I thought Duryodhana's claim of throne as the rightful one and saw krishna as an instigator/narada cheering for war! Even then as a child I rooted for Duryodhana and Karna were the heroes of Mahabharata.

Sometimes good people dont win in a novel!

Desi · Post by **Desi** » Fri Dec 19, 2014 6:39 am

VS007;588436
Sometimes good people dont win in a novel!

So very true - much more true in real life.

RRS · Post by **RRS** » Fri Dec 19, 2014 9:37 am

RBee;588403
Shows good people are not always good, and bad people are not always bad.

Feel free to use this thread to share such less heard stories of the epic..

Good people try to see good even in bad people but bad people rarely see good in good people. That is the difference in real or fictional world.

Duryodhana was not entitled to all of Hastinavati/Kuru Kingdom like VS007 alludes to. Pandu was the king before he went to pilgrimage with Kunti and Madri. Niyoga was the socially accepted social norm of that time to have offsprings if one was childless due to impotency or advanced age or if king died prematurely. So Pandavas too had rights on part of the kingdom as they too were legitimate heirs.

Yuyudhan Satyaki's monologue in 'Parva' is interesting. He asks if Pandavas were illegitimate, what makes of Dritharashtra and Pandu who were also born through Niyoga and in turn, Dritharashtra's sons.

VS007 · Post by **VS007** » Fri Dec 19, 2014 9:41 am

Wasn't Pandu made king because Elder brother Dhritharashtra was blind? Elder brother is still the rightful heir of the kingdom, and his sons inherit it.

RRS · Post by **RRS** » Fri Dec 19, 2014 9:48 am

VS007;588452Wasn't Pandu made king because Elder brother Dhritharashtra was blind? Elder brother is still the rightful heir of the kingdom, and his sons inherit it.

Blind was not made king those days; not as a cruelty to handicapped people but king had to rule the kingdom and take care of citizens. King's post was not just ceremonial (like India's president : ) ). When Pandu left to pilgrimage, Bheeshma agreed to look upon the administrative part and Dritharashtra was crowned as king after Bheeshma agreed to rule on behalf of Dritharashtra without taking the king title due to his oath/proposition. So Bheeshma/Dritharashtra were caretakers till Pandu returned (like stop-gap arrangement). But Pandu died and only Pandavas returned. So why do you say they aren't legal heirs like Dritharashtra's sons?

VS007 · Post by **VS007** » Fri Dec 19, 2014 9:53 am

True, but as a elder brother, he has the right, and hence his eldest son DD.