Crisp bytes 3rd October 13

The present track is raising a lot of pertinent questions.

Well written👏

Dhridhrashtra has certainly more passion than Pandu, I give him that. But I somehow cannot see him as the better king.

While he certainly has done everything beyond what was expected, his disability defines him and pulls him down. He is unfortunately not able to come out of his complex. Any action of his and the justification he has for the same is colored by his disability.

While Vidur has certainly stirred the hornet's nest, his words hold a well of meaning. Seeing from the PoV of a human being, Dhridhrashtra stands as an example of how there is no limit if you only have passion. But seeing from the views of a ruler, will Dhridhrashtra rule well? Will his decisions not always be blinded by his thoughts of disability? That is something that will remain a mystery forever😊

Wonderfully put! 👏

I think he should have put his points of why he's eligible to be the king across Vidur. His ego came in between his dream and passion. Since the first episode, they have concentrated only on what's lacking in him than his good qualities.

I loved loved how Vidur put across his points. Brilliant dialogues there. Especially when he says how would a blind king identify the enemy within his kingdom👏 But its not only his blindness thats his shortcoming, he lacks clarity of thought... that too in a calm manner. Like how he said I am shaanth to Pandu, else I'd have taken your life.. thats not how an ideal king should be.😆

Originally posted by: Justlikethat1

Well written👏

Dhridhrashtra has certainly more passion than Pandu, I give him that. But I somehow cannot see him as the better king.

While he certainly has done everything beyond what was expected, his disability defines him and pulls him down. He is unfortunately not able to come out of his complex. Any action of his and the justification he has for the same is colored by his disability.

While Vidur has certainly stirred the hornet's nest, his words hold a well of meaning. Seeing from the PoV of a human being, Dhridhrashtra stands as an example of how there is no limit if you only have passion. But seeing from the views of a ruler, will Dhridhrashtra rule well? Will his decisions not always be blinded by his thoughts of disability? That is something that will remain a mystery forever😊

Originally posted by: Binge

Wonderfully put! 👏

I think he should have put his points of why he's eligible to be the king infront of Vidur. His ego came in between his dream and passion. Since the first episode, they have concentrated only on what's lacking in him than his good qualities.

I loved loved how Vidur put across his points. Brilliant dialogues there. Especially when he says how would a blind king identify the enemy within his kingdom👏 But its not only his blindness thats his shortcoming, he lacks clarity of thought... that too in a calm manner. Like how he said I am shaanth to Pandu, else I'd have taken your life.. thats not how an ideal king should be.😆

Originally posted by: Arshics

While I agree to you to an extent

But till now his disability has been his drive, made him work harder and better - desirable qualities for a king.

Look at Pandu, isn't his sweetness and lack of any assertiveness his disability?

So, these questions are subjective, but dhritrashtra was denied an opportunity he had trained for all his life.

His lack of sight had not become his disability, rather it was his drive, till gandhari and now Vidur made it so

But while Dhridhrashtra certainly had the drive, he lacked foresight and he totally lacked understanding of people around him.

When Vidur talks of sight, he does not only mean blindness and eyes. He means the sight wherein the king is able to look into the soul of a person before pronouncing any verdict. He means the foresight to lead the kingdom and his court in a way that would befit a king. Does Dhridhrashtra have it? I do not think so..

As for Pandu, he may have been the weaker of the two but he had the strength to take up the throne and yet make his brother happy, atleast for a while. He had compassion and respect that his elder brother lacked. He had the patience to see from another's perspective even if it meant facing the harsh truth.. That is why he made a better king😊

Originally posted by: Justlikethat1

But while Dhridhrashtra certainly had the drive, he lacked foresight and he totally lacked understanding of people around him.

When Vidur talks of sight, he does not only mean blindness and eyes. He means the sight wherein the king is able to look into the soul of a person before pronouncing any verdict. He means the foresight to lead the kingdom and his court in a way that would befit a king. Does Dhridhrashtra have it? I do not think so..

As for Pandu, he may have been the weaker of the two but he had the strength to take up the throne and yet make his brother happy, atleast for a while. He had compassion and respect that his elder brother lacked. He had the patience to see from another's perspective even if it meant facing the harsh truth.. That is why he made a better king😊

Originally posted by: Arshics

Very well said Justlikethat1. Tis was not the physical disability that was the problem.

Love the way you put points across. What is your view on gandharis pratigya?

I am Harini😛 and Thank you😊

Gandhari's pratigya was to me a little short sighted but that is in hindsight. I have the luxury of knowing that if she had perhaps not blindfolded herself, she would have been able to see her brother plot her dynasty's downfall. She would have seen what Duryodana was doing and corrected him. She would not have had to rely on those around her for information and could have been Dhridhrashtra's eyes.. Her being fair and strong, I think she would have made a great difference if only she had not taken the decision to share her husband's dark world.

But she wanted to be his equal in that way. She wanted to empathize with him and she took a decision that she thought was right at that point of time. She did not realize that it would become the biggest disadvantage for her family when she did it.
But credit to her, she never went back on her word. I wonder if a pratigya was so important that you are willing to sacrifice everything for your word.. Are Bhishm and Gandhari's vows worth what they lost in exchange? I keep wondering..🤔

Originally posted by: Justlikethat1

I am Harini😛 and Thank you😊

Gandhari's pratigya was to me a little short sighted but that is in hindsight. I have the luxury of knowing that if she had perhaps not blindfolded herself, she would have been able to see her brother plot her dynasty's downfall. She would have seen what Duryodana was doing and corrected him. She would not have had to rely on those around her for information and could have been Dhridhrashtra's eyes.. Her being fair and strong, I think she would have made a great difference if only she had not taken the decision to share her husband's dark world.

But she wanted to be his equal in that way. She wanted to empathize with him and she took a decision that she thought was right at that point of time. She did not realize that it would become the biggest disadvantage for her family when she did it.
But credit to her, she never went back on her word. I wonder if a pratigya was so important that you are willing to sacrifice everything for your word.. Are Bhishm and Gandhari's vows worth what they lost in exchange? I keep wondering..🤔

Well it was the hunger for power and obsession with the throne that led to Dhritrashtra's doom and certainly not his blindness. And like someone said, it will always remain a mystery as to who could have had been the greatest king for Hastinapur.:)