Originally posted by: Poorabhforever
No its not biology never works that way it takes it on course
There are women who get pregnant within weeks of giving birth in 21st century but it is possible that Draupadi had to wait for 6 months
I think the writer goes with the theory of one year which was the age difference between Yudhishtira and Bhim.
Originally posted by: .Lonewalker.
That's why I said it's debatable. I am not trying to prove that he is 16 years old. It's just....so confusing 😆 Everything in Mahabharat is confusing. There are points in favour & counter in every topic. 😆
I think it could be best if we could read the Sanskrit version....but well... sanskrit ati nahi 😆😆
ðŸ˜ðŸ˜ Sanskrit has been my enemy, my high school % went below 90% because I scored only 44 marks in Sanskrit 🤧
Let's wait for people who know Sanskrit to translate it properly but I guess none can translate this without inherent bias
Originally posted by: .Lonewalker.
Same 🤣🤣 I had read only an intermediate version of Mahabharat (Bengali translation by Rajshekhar Basu). That's also years ago. Because of lockdown started watching this SP's Mahabharat & now I am doing research work like a scholar 🤣
🤣
Word Count: 0
Re: age
If you leave aside biological improbabilities like Bheeshma being 200 years old, there is one plausible age mentioned in MBh. That Drona was 85 during war. Let's calculate back. Drona was married to Kripi who was Shanthanu's adopted daughter. Ie, Drona was of Bheeshma's gen which is plausible given that he couldn't take part in war if he were much older.
So Bheeshma were around mid 80s like Drona. Vichithravirya would've been 15 to 20 years younger than Bheeshma. Pandu and Dhritharshtra would've been 35 or so years younger. So Suyodhana's parents would've been in their 50s. Putting Kauravas and their cousins in their early to mid 40s by war.
By this count, Abhimanyu was easily 16.
Another corroborating finding. The summary given at the beginning of the MBh text actually states Arjuna's exile was 1 year and 1 month, not 12 years. Which makes sense because Subhadra was born after Krishna's return to Mathura, and Krishna was supposedly in early to mid teens at the time. Arjuna and Krishna were supposedly similar in age. If Arjuna finished gurukul, he'd have been in mid 20s by the time of swayamvar. There would've been a couple of years gap between that and exile. Add 12 years to that, he would've been 40 by the time he met Subhadra.
Remember, Subhadra was born when Krishna waa in early to mid teens. If Krishna and Arjuna were 40, she would've been mid 20s, late 20s at the worst if the exile were 12 years. I cannot imagine an Aryavarta princess would've been unmarried until that age.
Now if the exile were 13 months, it makes sense. She would've been in late teens to Arjuna's late twenties. Say he was 30 to round up.
When Arjuna's exile was only 13 months, the Pandava ages match up to Drona being 85 at time of war.
Hence, it is very likely Abhimanyu was only 16.
Not only that, he gets called a child multiple times after his death.
Re: upapandavas. Abhimanyu is called the heir to the throne in the text. Have to assume he was the oldest.
But it is impossible Panchali didn't have kids for the first 15 years or so of her marriage and then, had 5.
Vana parva states Pradyumna trained Abhimanyu. Pradyumna and Abhimanyu trained the upapandavas which again was not likely if Abhimanyu were younger.
Most likely, Arjuna's exile was 13 months. Abhimanyu was born after, followed by upapandavas. The dice game happened in the 4 to 5 years since.
Abhimanyu was trained by Pradyumna, and both trained the younger upapandavas. Abhimanyu also likely got some pre war sessions with daddy.
I think only in the digital world , you see people glorifying him to no end or hating him so much that even his best qualities are questioned.
In most families of parents and grandparents there is tremendous respect towards his charitable nature and sympathy for the character. Overall inspite of his flawed persona he is a respected character and one of the most complex and nuanced characters
The problem with most is many view the Mahabharata from a western perspective and get into endless debates on whether Karna or Arjuna were better skilled or does he even deserve sympathy at all.
Mahabharata is complex and nuanced, where each character and story teach you a valuable lesson in life.
For me personally I love some characters because I see most of the characters showing tremendous growth.
In this regard especially Draupadi, Kunti, Arjun, Yudhishthir, Bhishma and Karna show great growth.
For Karna, he was always in war within himself, he loved his adoptive parents but also wanted to know about his birth parents. He wanted to rise above his means to become a great warrior but respected the traditions of the caste rules. To prove that he was a greatest warrior, it was to kill Arjuna. He was dharmic and still supported Duryodhana in his wrong deeds for gratitude and misplaced loyalty. He was always in a bitter conflict with Bheeshma.
His biggest fault was in the dyut sabha and had to be punished for it.
His donation of Kavach and Kundal does earn him as a daanveer . Similarly him rejecting Krishna's offer truly makes him magnanimous , of course he had come too far in his wrongdoing that his conscience could not accept it.
Karna knowing about his birth definitely gave him closure and peace for what he was searching all his life. He had resolved his conflict with Bheeshma.
He knew about his parentage and had closure with Kunti. He had also mentally made peace with the Pandavas. The need to prove himself to be more skilled than Arjun was not there anymore as he was his brother. He knew that he would die as he was in the wrong, and to die in the war was his redemption but that is the way he wanted to go fighting down in a war.
He had made peace , resolved his inner war and chose to die the way he wanted to
I think only in the digital world , you see people glorifying him to no end or hating him so much that even his best qualities are questioned.
In most families of parents and grandparents there is tremendous respect towards his charitable nature and sympathy for the character. Overall inspite of his flawed persona he is a respected character and one of the most complex and nuanced characters
The problem with most is many view the Mahabharata from a western perspective and get into endless debates on whether Karna or Arjuna were better skilled or does he even deserve sympathy at all.
Mahabharata is complex and nuanced, where each character and story teach you a valuable lesson in life.
For me personally I love some characters because I see most of the characters showing tremendous growth.
In this regard especially Draupadi, Kunti, Arjun, Yudhishthir, Bhishma and Karna show great growth.
For Karna, he was always in war within himself, he loved his adoptive parents but also wanted to know about his birth parents. He wanted to rise above his means to become a great warrior but respected the traditions of the caste rules. To prove that he was a greatest warrior, it was to kill Arjuna. He was dharmic and still supported Duryodhana in his wrong deeds for gratitude and misplaced loyalty. He was always in a bitter conflict with Bheeshma.
His biggest fault was in the dyut sabha and had to be punished for it.
His donation of Kavach and Kundal does earn him as a daanveer . Similarly him rejecting Krishna's offer truly makes him magnanimous , of course he had come too far in his wrongdoing that his conscience could not accept it.
Karna knowing about his birth definitely gave him closure and peace for what he was searching all his life. He had resolved his conflict with Bheeshma.
He knew about his parentage and had closure with Kunti. He had also mentally made peace with the Pandavas. The need to prove himself to be more skilled than Arjun was not there anymore as he was his brother. He knew that he would die as he was in the wrong, and to die in the war was his redemption but that is the way he wanted to go fighting down in a war.
He had made peace , resolved his inner war and chose to die the way he wanted to
I agree with a lot of what you said, but where was Karna dharmic? Most of Suyodhana's misdeeds were done with full participation from Karna. There was no remorse whatsoever for poisoning attempt on Bheema or burning attempt on Pandavas. Karna asked for Brahmashira specifically to kill Arjuna. The dice hall was not Karna's only mistake, not even his first mistake. Then, the sex trafficking ring in Anga. Karna's own casteism is pretty evident in his conversation with Shalya.
I agree that Karna did do a lot of misdeeds before the dyut sabha.
I meant that Draupadi's incident was the final nail in the coffin. Before that incident if Karna truth was out there might have been a reunion or acceptance from Pandavas but that incident was unforgivable and Karna knew that and I think that was one of the biggest reasons for not accepting Krishna's offer and him being ready to die in the battle.
I agree that Karna did do a lot of misdeeds before the dyut sabha.
I meant that Draupadi's incident was the final nail in the coffin. Before that incident if Karna truth was out there might have been a reunion or acceptance from Pandavas but that incident was unforgivable and Karna knew that and I think that was one of the biggest reasons for not accepting Krishna's offer and him being ready to die in the battle.
That part is likely true. After dice hall, it wasn't simply a matter of Pandavas. Panchali would've had him killed probably, as she did with Keechak. The other part is Suyodhana wouldve never done the things he did if he didn't have Karna's support. He was the main strength of the Kauarava brothers. So if Karna ditched them at the crucial point, it would've been tremendous treachery.
Karna is both faulted and flawed
Hes both good and bad
Karna's fate was decided by kunti when she let him float in river. She could have given him to someone who would bring him up someone who was not a low caste. But she was selfish to let the baby go. Is it not similar to mothers leaving babies in garbage cans or bushes without thinking of babys life. Kunti only thought for herself than Karna.
Karna was humiliated all life as low caste by draupadi, pandavas etc but Dhuryodhana gave him respect. In that way Dhuryodhana is better at respecting human and not their birth caste
Regarding Draupadi swayamwar, Draupadi did not want to marry a low caste karna fine so why call him in first place to swayamwar is my question. To insult him?
Karna humiliated Draupadi in return at court. But Karna would have become a great man if he had told duryodhana not to disrespect draupadi. He died because of this grave sin. So even if he lived after war can draupadi forgive him and give him elder brother in law respect?
Regarding Kunti behaviour - shes most selfish human and mother. She went and told karna hes her son why to save life of pandavas? Did she go and tell pandavas karna is their brother do not kill him? No. I do not think kunti was a great mother at all to karna
Arjun was also sitting in sabha when draupadi was humiliated? He also sat seeing all insults at her. Hes also equal fault as Karna or Beeshma or Drona charya etc
I like Bheema atleast he spoke out against whats happening to draupadi
I often wonder why good humans support bad friends or family members in their misdeeds. Bheeshma was a good man why he supported Dhuryodhan? Karna was a good human majority times yet he supported Dhuryodhan in dhyut sabha and war. Than i think its more of gratitude or many people lack courage to say no to do wrong things for friend and family. Out of obligation they do bad things. Like a worker obeys his boss even if he knows that work is illegal as per law because he wants to remain in that job. Second reason is for status and wealth. People are in a bad race to defeat and outdo rest of world. Once they enter that race they do not know to come out of it or to say enough i am leaving. That was problem with bheeshma and karna and so many others you see. They cannot say no to king drithrastra or duryodhana although they know they are wrong. Very few hardly 5% in entire world has braveness to say no to do bad deeds when family or friends or boss ask them too. Karna wanted to show hes better than arjuna(competition) hence accepted dhuryodhanas friendship and want to get out of low caste tage(status) to world. Than he wanted to take revenge for Draupadis insult in swayamwar. All these are one way streets getting wealth,, status, revenge once you start you cannot stop or return back in life to your old self your normal self your righteous self
comment:
p_commentcount