Originally posted by: HearMeRoar
@Persephone_ Pri
Fact remains Bheema started the violence. Fact remains none of the adults did anything about it. When children are expected to go and face violence of the kind described by VYASA, and adults refuse to intervene, yeah, that's punishment no matter how many people like to forget it. And yeah, it warps a child's mind.
I never said anything otherwise. In my previous posts, I haven't defended Bhima anywhere. I am just stating the OTTness of it all. The writer is certainly exaggerating. The magnitude of strength possessed by a kid Bhima is overestimated. And, I find it hard to believe how the overtly indulgent parents Dhritu-Gandhari, who would move the sun and moon for their kids, didn't do anything to stop the ordeal faced by their 100 sons. Here, the Pandavs who spent most of their lives in a forest with no allies in the kingdom, except for helpless Vidur and Bheesma who never went against the king; would run over the 100 Kauravs, who were the sons of the king and bully them. In fact, not 5 Pandavs but only one of them ill-treated the whole Ks clan and went scot-free with it. In my opinion, it was a bit of a stretch. There were obvious differences, powerplay, and competition but the way it's amplified seems a bit overdone to me. Moreover, the writer wrote it with a positive undertone, so it's possible the whole thing was exaggerated to showcase the strength of the Bhima.
In my previous post, I just questioned if certain things are seen as OTT and non-factual then why must this be taken at its face value. Especially, when it seems so far-fetched.
This is not to say what Suyodhana did was excusable. Not at all!
I simply wanted to know if he was ever held accountable for his murderous acts. Was he properly punished for the attempted murder, a heinous crime he committed at such a young age.
But as Krishna said later on, it is not enough to understand truth. It is important to understand the difference between truth and a lie. It is not enough to see the dharma on the Pandava side. It is important to know the adharm they did, as well.
I agree with this. I said a similar thing in my post. The beauty of Mahabharata lies in the way how it is interpreted by everybody differently. There are so many angles a sequence can be viewed. And the best part of the epic is the way no character is flawless. There is no black and white in Mahabharat. Everybody has flaws in the tale, some are bullies, some are sexiest, misogynist, some overly compliant and spineless and some criminally insane. And, at the same time, they have extremely positive characteristics too. Everyone has their own truth.
Shakuni didn't plan any of the RETALIATIONS. Suyodhana did. Shakuni actually tries to dissuade Suyodhana a couple of times.
I got to know this now. Thanks for providing me with the knowledge. People mostly view him as the evil genius, the master of all the schemes but yes, he shouldn't be held totally accountable for all the misfortunes of Kuru Vansh
Moreover, as a guest of Hastinapuri, it wasn't his responsibility to ensure cordiality between cousins. The authority belonged to Bheeshma, Vidura, and Dhritharashtra as well as Gandhari and Kunti. They failed miserably.
True, I feel they are the ones who were mostly responsible for the animosity. The Two Matriarch, the "good men" Bheesma, Vidur, Dhritu, and the greatest teacher Drona, all played a major part in shaping the mind of the Ks and Ps. In fact, rather than dissuading the hostility, they added more flame to the fire. It just reinforces how much good parenting and teachers affects one's mind.
comment:
p_commentcount