Sunday, March 28, 2010

Your best character in Mahabharata with explanation

I like Karna's character in Mahabharata. He always acted like a human and always kept his words. Whatever happened but he never dishonored his own words. And he is one of the greatest archer of all time.


  1. I like karna ,well i like almost everthing from him like chartiy ,valour, dharma friendship, duty consiousness , respect to guru, affection towards bought up parents , gratitude ,Then finally i also like the way in which karna fought against all odds of like to set an example for us


  2. Karna's life is an example of human struggle against odds..
    Karna fought against misfortune throughout his life.
    His Courage, Valor and generosity r incomparable.

  3. abhimanyu is the best archer of the mahabharata look at the heroism valour of that young lad he was only sixteen not even an adult that dashing hero defeated drona ,karna, dushasana, ashvathama, shalya and all the great warriors of the kaurava army combined, his archery skills were outstanding and talking about other things he did not have a celestial bow like gandiva or vijaya(karna's bow) he did not have a divine chariot like arjuna hanuman or krishna;s presence with him but he singlehandedly overcame all those odds with his mighty determination and his sheer belief in himself karna and the others had to cheat in order to kill him

  4. Bhisma was the greatest warrior of Mahabharata time
    Bhisma also fought with 22 warriors single handly
    And in some versions of Mahabharata Karna just cut the string of his bow and after that Dusasna's son kills him with mace in one-2-one fight.
    So if you see only B.R. Chopda's Mahabharata then there are some misleading facts regarding Abhi Killing.

    And I think Bhrurusrava is also one of the greatest warriors of his time
    he also fought with Satyiki and his 10 son single handly and defeated them
    And Bhrurisgrava never complained regarding this.

  5. I like Abhimanyu and Karna
    But the best character in Mahabharath is Bheeshma. Everyone other than Bheesha had some black mark on his character.

    1) Yudhistir - lying(Or hiding) to Drona about aswathama
    2) Karna - abetting the disgrace done to draupadi in hastinapur court and killing of abhimanyu with others.

    It is only Bheeshma whos life had no blemishes.

  6. Jai Shri Krishna
    Sorry Mr. Ramalingam but I beg to differ. Bheeshma has done something wrong. He interrupted the swayamwara of the 3 kashi princess Amba, Ambika and Ambalika and took them away. He let Amba go but Ambika and Ambalika were married to Vichitraveerya the youngest son of Shantanu.
    They were denied the right of Swayamvar. Indirectly he ruined the life of Amba as well. Snatching the right of a woman to marry a man whom she wants is a serious offence. Lord Krishna has explained this to Rukmini when he was punishing Rukmi who was trying to make Rukmini marry Shishupal. When a ladys selfrespect is in question there is no such thing as a 10% insult or a 20 % insult. Its all 100 %. Where was the great Bheeshma when Draupadi was humiliated ? Almost all the heroic characters in mahabharata do have a sweet little skeleton to hide in their cute little closet. Coming to Karna I ciritisice him for insulting Draupadi. But critisizm for Karn stops right here. Karna did not kill Abhimanyu. It has been made clear in this blog. Its Dushasanas son who killed Abhimanyu NOT Karna.
    best regards

  7. @Niraj,
    But karna was part of Abhimanyu's Slaughter. I dont expect him to tell others to stop fightin against abhimanyu in heaps. He could have restrained from fightin abhmanyu when abhimanyu wax fightin with others. He is the one who broke abhimanyu's bow, no one else could have done that.

  8. Mr. Ramalingam. I would humbly request you to read the whole blog. In mahabharata its proven that a maharathi does not need his bow to launch a counter attack. After the war when Pandavas went in search of Ashwatthama and found him. They attacked him becoz he had killed the 5 sons of Draupadi. Here Ashwatthama picked up a blade of grass and charged it with the brahmastra and fired it at the Pandavas. He did not even have a bow let alone bow being broken from front or behind. Hence Karnas cutting Abhimanyus bow from behind cannot be sanctioned as a serious offence. But however I agree with you to an extent becoz Dushasanas son was no match for Abhimanyu under normal circumstances. Drona and Karna created those circumstances hence they are guitly but only to a certain extent. In my next post I will show you an incident of KM Gangulys mahabharat where Karna himself has been attacked by many warriors and faced them without a fuss.

  9. Here is the incident which shows many warriors including the Pandavas had attacked Karna “O bull of Bharata’s race, and supported by many Kuru heroes and many mighty Madraka car-warriors, protected Karna while the latter was engaged in battle with the Pandavas, the Pancalas, the Cedis, and Satyaki. Destroying that vast division with his sharp arrows, and crushing many foremost of car-warriors Karna succeeded in afflicting Yudhishthira. Cutting off the armour, the weapons, and the bodies of thousands of foes and slaying his foes by thousands and sending them to heaven and making them earn great fame, Karna caused his friends great joy.
    The son of Radha then, that crusher of foes, turning back from the pursuit, quickly covered Bhima himself with sharp arrows from every side. Then Satyaki, of immeasurable soul, O Bharata, placing himself on the side of Bhima’s car, began to afflict Karna who was in front of Bhima.
    Karna too, otherwise called Vaikartana, O Bharata, in that battle, resisted Bhimasena, and the Karushas, the Kaikayas, and the Srinjayas
    Sanjaya said, ‘Meanwhile Vikartana himself, resisting Bhimasena supported by the Pancalas and the Cedis and the Kaikayas, covered him with many arrows. In the very sight of Bhimasena, Karna, slew in that battle many mighty car-warriors among the Cedis, the Karushas, and the Srinjayas. Then Bhimasena, avoiding Karna, that best of car-warriors, proceeded against the Kaurava troops like a blazing fire towards a heap of dry grass
    The son of Radha, too, O monarch, singly resisted the Pancalas and the Pandavas and the (five) sons of Draupadi and Yudhamanyu and the mighty car-warrior Satyaki, in consequence of which feat he became the cynosure of all eyes.” ( Mr. Ramalingam see how many people are attacking Karna- Pandavas 5 sons of Draupadi Yudhamanyu and Satyaki and lets not forget the Panchalas cheidis etc. )
    Yonder Karna urges forward the mighty car-warriors of the Dhartarashtras towards the son of Pritha with the weapons called Sthunakarna, Indrasjaha and Pasupata,” quote end.

  10. Chakravarthy PhanishayiJuly 5, 2010 at 4:24 AM

    Guys, I don't think many of you have not read Mahabharat (original, published either by Bharath Darshan or Gita press) or the commentaries written on it by many knowledgeable people. First, let me take the character of Karna. True he had many good qualities like charity, keeping his word, etc., but we would be biased if we judge a person based on just some of his qualities. Veda Vyas himself has classified 4 persons as very wicked in the whole of Mahabharat (dushta chatushtaya)-Duryodhan, Shakuni, Karna, and Dushyasan, which clearly signifies karna as wicked. Let us see some instances where he is proved wicked. When Yudhishtir loses his wife Draupadi in the gamble, it was Karna who provokes Duryodhan to bring her to the kreedabhavan, calling her a prostitute. It was karna who gives the idea of making her naked in front of all of them. If we consider his friendship with Duryodhan, he was not a true friend at all. A true friend or a true well wisher never abandons you but always keeps telling you rights and wrongs. Karna staying with Duryodhan in all situations in fine, but there is not a single instance where Karna advises him not to do immoral things or Adharma, in fact Karna always provokes Duryodhana to do the wrong things. For some of you who consider him very brave and courageous, there are many instances in Mahabharat where Karna is the first one to run away from the battlefield. When Pandavas are in vanvas and Duryodhan comes there to inflict harm on them, they are caught by Gandharvas. Where was Karna then? he had ran away to Hastinapur. In the Uttara gograhana, Karna is the first one to be defeated by Arjun and ran away. If you take the Abhimanyu incident, Abhimanyu was very brave and could not be defeated by any one person. One of the major factors for that was the way he used to tie his Kavach. For your information, Karna does not cut the bowstring of Abhimanyu, he cuts the kavach from behind on the instructions of Drona. In fact, Drona does not ask him to do that, he just tells the fact and lets Karna decide what to do. Karna, if he was righteous, should not have done that. Abhimanyu was not killed in a one-on-one combat, 7 Maharathis kill him by attacking simultaneously. In the final fight between Arjun and Karna, Karna asks Arjun some time as his chariot wheels are stuck in mud and lectures about Dharma. To this, Krishna counters Karna asking from when did he start thinking about Dharma, citing his wicked deeds the whole of his life. Karna puts his head down in shame (which can only mean he repented for his deeds). Arjun does not shoot an arrow to Karna's chest, he actually cuts off his head. When you are inflicting harm on the universal Dharma, however well your personal Dharma is does not matter.

  11. Chakravarthy PhanishayiJuly 5, 2010 at 4:51 AM

    Coming to Bhishma, no doubt a very knowledgeable person. But we should not look in the point of view of respect for a very old and scholarly person if we need to learn something from his life. In a practical point of view, he did a lot of mistakes in his life which he repents on his deathbed. First, he made 2 oaths that he will never sit on the throne of Hastinapur and second, he will never marry. In a normal circumstance, these oaths would be very strong. But in that context, he was doing it just to satisfy his father's lust for a woman, who had forgotten his duties towards the nation and sitting very depressed. Bhishma should have reminded his father about his duties and asked him to move on. Instead by taking these oaths, he himself ran away from his duties. He was the righteous prince of the kingdom, and he was nobody to forego it unless the situation demanded. After some years when the same woman Satyavati asks Bhishma to break his oath for the good of his country, he bluntly rejects it.

    In the swayamvara of the three pincesses Amba, Ambika, and Ambalika, he again commits a grave mistake. He should never have kidnapped the princesses in the first place. Even the kings who are supposed to be defeated were without any weapons and could not give a fight.

    Next, in the rangabhoomi where Pandava and Kaurava princes are showcasing their strengths, and in the end when Karna enters and is abused, Duryodhan makes him the king of Angarajya. Bhishma never cared to worry who was Duryodhan to do this, neither was he coronated a king nor had he any authority.

    After the lakshagriha incident when pandavas escape the fire. be in disguise, win Draupadi and come back to Hastinapur, Yudhishtir who was already a coronated King in waiting had to be satisfied with half the kingdom, that too a barren land. This idea of dividing the kingdom was given by Bhishma.

    During Draupadi vastrapaharan, being the eldest of the family, he should never have let the incident happen, but he never utters a word. When Draupadi asks him questions, he is unable to answer even one of them.

    In the battle, he should never have taken the side of evil just because you had been fed by them. In fact if we see this deeply, it was actually the others who were fed by Bhishma because by his sacrifice did others get the kingdom. Even then, he stood against the Lord himself and fought.

    In the end when Krishna asks Bhishma to give knowledge to Yudhishtir, he repents a lot for his deeds and asks Yudhishtir never to do commit any of those mistakes.

  12. Good evening Mr. Chakravarthy Phanishayi.
    I agree with you in your anaylisis of Bheeshma pitamha. Coming to Karna I honestly admit I have not read Mahabharat (original, published either by Bharath Darshan or Gita press). But I have read some commentaries on it by some knowledgeable people including Swami Vivekananda, Mahatma Gandhi, Rabindranath Tagore (he glorified Karna in a poem ) and C. Rajagopalacharis version of Mahabharata. In C. Rajagopalacharis version in the first chapter its mentioned that more or less Mahabharata is slightly fictitious. This hasalso been also quoted by Mahatma Gandhi. Swami Vivekanandas commentry found in internet puts Karna in the same categoree as Bheeshma and Drona. I follow Kriya yoga. Its founder Paramhansa Yoganandaji said that the general skeleton of events is historically valid and the main characters actually existed, but Shri Vyasa (its author) doubtlessly — and perhaps drastically in some cases — reworked the details of the story into the brilliant spiritual teaching that this great scripture conveys. As such, the teachings in the scripture are far more important for the devotee than the historical events themselves, or the actual historical details of any one individual’s character. A deep study of Mahabharata will reveal that the men who hurt Draupadi the most were not the fearsome four of Duryodhan Dushasan Karna and Shakuni but the terrible trio of Kripacharya Kritverma and Ashwatthama. (out of which Kripacharya was revered by the Pandavas. Its indeed rather hypocritical of him that when Karna talks about killing Pandavas he chides Karna for it but when Ashwatthama talks the same he litrally becomes Ashatthamas right hand man for that barbaric mission )
    In the end of the war Draupadi was as heartbroken as Dhritarashtra or perhaps more as Dhritarashtra had one son Yuyutsu surviving but all five sons of Draupadi got killed. Here we see Gandhijis statement an eye for an eye will only make the whole world blind ringing completely true over here.The main message of Mahabharata is to enlighten everyone about the futility of war. There are evidences of Karna being equal to Arjuna. Otherwise why else would Indra come to take his Kavach and kundal. I have raised this question on other blogs as well. I got one answer as follows " Indra took it and begged it so that he wanted to respect Surya devtas boon." I am Sorry I find this logic utter nonsense. Indra has no motive to respect Suryas boon. Yes his strong motive is to protect his son Arjuna. He is a devta with a fair amount of degree of arrogance and a strong capability to stoop to conquer. His adventure or rather misadventure with Ahalya in the Ramayana is ample proof. And let’s not forget his disrespect to Shri Krishna on at least 2 occasions. Remember Your Mahabharata balance sheet will only tally when you admit that Karna was Arjunas equal otherwise many questions like above Karnas kavach etc will remain unanswered or you might come across answers which completely defy elementry logic.
    best regards
    Niraj Sharma

  13. Good evening to you too Mr. Niraj. I do not remember myself writing that Karna was inferior to Arjuna in archery skills. I am sorry to say that in the above people, except Swami Vivekananda, nobody else is considered to be knowledgeable regarding Mahabharat. Both Mahatma Gandhi and Tagore were not educated in sanskrit, which means that they came to their conclusions either by reading other commentaries or translations. C. Rajagopalachari, even though he was knowledgeable, has made some mistakes in his version. I agree that may be some things have been exaggerated in Mahabharata, but calling it fictious is absurd. All these 3 people are never considered very knowledgeable regarding our epics, so as you should follow what they have written. This is not my opinion, but that of many scholars whose only aim has been to propagate Mahabharata without any misconceptions. I have not read Swami Vivekananda's commentary, will definitely go through it and get back. What you have told is right that spiritual teachings in it are important, but the historical incidents are equally important. I say so as not everyone on earth has an ultimate goal of moksha. Majority of the people are materialistic, and if you know the incidents and the wrongdoers of Mahabharata, it makes it easier for us to take decisions in particular circumstances. That is the only reason the whole Mahabharata was written which includes very fine details. If spiritual advancement was the only purpose, why would somebody write 1 lack verses and waste his time. I would suggest please read the part in the original where Karna's wheels are caught in mud and Krishna reminds him of his wrongdoings from the start. Actually, I forgot to write previously that whatever Karna was giving in charity was not his, he did not have anything of his own to do that, he was doing it from the treasury of Anga Rajya which he got as a charity. If I remember properly, there are just some 2 or 3 incidents when he gave away something that was his own. One more thing, being the king of Anga Rajya, he never went to that place and worried about the administration or the welfare of his people. All the time, he used to be beside Duryodhan, thinking his only aim in life was to make Duryodhan happy. It is very true that Karna was as skilled as Arjuna in the battlefield. But, if Karna had come with kavach and kundal which prevents anybody, even devatas from killing him, it would have been unfair on the other warriors who did not have the same advantage. Bhishma himself tells Arjuna on the night of his downfall that he was unfair in fighting this battle as he had the boon of Icchha Mrityu. He should have kept the boon aside and then fought. The arguement here is not if Karna was Arjuna's equal or not, but whether Karna was great or not. I can never classify somebody who has done so many immoral things into the list of great persons which includes people like Krishna and Vidura. Why I am very particular about the original is because whichever other version is there, the author's prejudices, biases, motive, will always come into picture. Only in Vyas's Mahabharata will you find the whole thing free of negatives.

  14. Mr. Chakravarthy
    Let us all first start with not judging by just one book. All of us are from different parts of India and we all have read different versions. Some of these versions are biased on one particular character, such as Arjun being the greatest warrior of all ( going by some versions )
    Now let us start on the facts of Karna. ( I am not biased toward one character.) I have read few versions of MB, but I mostly go by Gujarati version. I will explain some of the things from other versions as well.
    1. Karan - a wicked person who told Dusasan to disrobe Draupadi.

    As I have said, we cannot go by one book. In Gujarati version, Karna was against Draupadi. When Duryodone and Sakuni wins Draupadi by cheating and it was Duryodone who asks Dusasan to bring and disrobe Draupadi. Karna, even though was insulted by Draupadi in the Swayamver, tries to protect her. In Gujarati version, there is no Vikarna but it was Karna.

    Karna - Duryodone, what are you doing? Draupadi is a great sati and you will die by harressing a sati.
    Duryodone - I have won her so I can do anything I want with her. No one is going to tell me what to do.
    Karna knew that Duryodone is not going to listen to him and looking at a woman who belongs to another, getting naked is a great sin so Karna closed his eyes and looked downward.
    ( This tells you that Karna is not wicked but just fell in on the wrong side. )
    Another example:
    Duryodone - I cannot live without Draupadi. I have everything except Draupadi. Who is a great warrior that will bring her to me and I will give a great reward?
    Jaidrath - I will go and bring her to you, great Duryodone.
    Duryodone - Great Bhenavi ( brother in law ), get Draupadi for me and you will no longer be a King under me. You will rule your Kingdom freely joined by other lands that I will reward you for bringing Draupadi to me.
    Karna - Duryodone, what are you doing? How can you think about sending Pujaneer ( one whom we should respect ) for such a task? What if something happens to him, what will Dushalaben do? Harressing a Sati ( Draupadi ) is a great sin.
    Duryodone - Draupadi is going to be mine, it does not matter if she is a sati or not. As for Jaidrath, he is a king under me just like all of you so he will listen to me. If something happens to him, my sister has 100 brothers to watch her so she will be fine.
    Another example:
    Pandavs save Duryodone from a Gandherva. When Karna comes to rescue Duryodone, Pandavs have already saved him.
    Karna - I was busy fighting on the other side so I could not get here on time. But the Pandavs have saved you otherwise you would have been dead. ( The Gandherva carried Duryodone up in the sky and was about to throw him down ). Give some of the land back to them and let them live peacefully.
    Sakuni - What are you saying Karna? Even if the Pandavs helped Duryodone, he is their King so it is their duty to protect him. The Pandavs did nothing special.
    Duryodone - Mama, I agree with you.

    Duryodone - Aunt Kunti has brought five beggars and made them her son to take my kingdom away from me.
    Karna - You did not see the Devs, but you heard them claiming the Pandav brothers as their sons so they are not pretenders but sons of King Pandu, given by Devs. Aunt Kunti is not a liar but a great sati. Let us make peace with them. Naradji also said that who ever harress them shall be destroyed.

    All these examples are written in Gujarati version about Karna so we can see that he has fallen on the wrong side but he is not wicked. Karna is also a true friend to Duryodone because he does not follow him blindly but tries to bring him on the path of dharm. I plan to write more on other topics that you have mentioned.

  15. Mr. Chakravarthy,
    Now let us go on the second topic.
    2. Karna being a daan veer.
    You have stated that Anga was given to Karna in Daan and everything that he was donating was not his. First, if you are qualified and you get a flat, car and bonus when you take a job, they are not considered daan from the owner. These things are given because your ablity is needed. Duryodone needed Karna being a great warrior so he gave him the kingdom of Anga to rule.
    Karna, even though ruled Anga, the gold that he donated was generated from a jewel that his father Suryadev had given him. Instead of using gold for self enjoyment, he donated it.
    Karna made great daans
    1. Willing to give his body to an old Brahmin ( Krishna )
    2. Gave up the Kingdoms to stay on Duryodone's side.
    3. Gave his Kavach and Kundals.
    4. Gave two of his greatest death arrows to his mother Kunti.
    5. Promised to kill only Arjun and not other Pandavs.
    6. When dying, broke his teeth and donated the diamonds to Brahmin. ( Krishna )
    Besides other donations, Karna had performed these great donations. Even Lord Krishna says that Karna is one of the greatest Daan veer that he had ever seen. ( Baliraja, Shibiraja, Harischandra, Bheesma, Hanumanji, Laxmanji were others )
    All versions are different. In Gujarati version, Karna dies by an arrow in the chest, his head does not get cut off. Krishna, himself had burned Karna's body on his palm and this site is found by Tapi River, near Surat. DO NOT GO BY JUST ONE VERSION.

  16. Good morning Mr. Chakravorty. I am not saying Mahabharata is ficticious at all. Definately it has happened. but as you say "that may be some things have been exaggerated in Mahabharata" I might add that Swami Vivekananda has also paid tribute to Karna at a place call Karnaprayag. Coming to the death of Karna my humble knowledge tells me that the cycle of events is as follows.He has a grim battle with Arjuna his chariot wheel gets stuck. He pleads with Arjuna to follow dharma and not attack him as he is unarmed. Shri Krishna chides him and reminds him of his wrong doings and says that he doesnt deserve fair play as he himself was not fair. This is when Karna goes back on his chariot and renders Arjuna unconcious and gets back to his chariot wheel. You can see the greatness of Karna here. Despite both Shri Krishna and Arjuna making it clear to him that they wont follow the battle rules and attack him Karna followed the rules and did not attack the unconcious Arjuna and tried to get his chariot wheel extracted instead. This may not have been a very sensible decision but certainly a noble one. I admit Tagore was not a sanskrit scholar hence your point well made. But C. Rajagopalachari certainly was. Coming to mistakes every one makes it. I can quote K. .M Gangulys mistakes as well in this very blog. The other gentlemen I quoted was not in their designation as sanskrit scholars but as spiritual men. Mahatma Gandhi had infact predicted the time of his death. Mahabharat shows Arjuna superior to Karna but Srimad Bhagwat puran told to Raja Parikshit by Ved Vyasas son Shuka deva quotes as follows
    "Bhisma, Drona, Karna, were not ordinary fighters. Such warriors have been compared to the timingila fish in the ocean. The timingila fish can very easily swallow up big whales. The great fighters on the battlefield of Kuruksetra could swallow many, many Arjunas very easily, but simply due to Krsna's mercy, Arjuna was able to kill all of them." Even there are 2 versions of Jarasandhas death. Mahabharata says Bhima overpowered him then Krishna Guided him how to kill him. Bhagwata says Bhima and Jarasandha were equals.

  17. Well, I think all the above evaluation of Karna's character has got no meaning. Both Karna and Arjuna were equal, or may be Karna was slightly above Arjuna in all respects. But the only difference was that Arjuna had Lord Krishna to advise him for everything, whereas Karna had nobody to advise him. You very easily said that whatever Karna donated did not belong to him, but here you forget that the Kavach and Kundal that he donated were his own as he was born with them and were a part of his body, and cutting the body parts and donating them, knowing fully well the consequences thereof, is not a mean thing. My evaluation is not based on any study or any comments, these are purely my own comments.

  18. Hi
    I like Duryodhan the best:

    He was a full human able to go toe to toe with a half dev/human like Bhima and was a better fighter then him.

    He was a great king (the ordinary citizens were happy under his rule & he ensured heaven for nearly all his warriors first before dying).

    He was extremely charming, charismatic, commanding & arrogant (Lord Balram preferred him to Bhim, Salya agreed to fight for him, good men like Bhishma & Karna died for him, Ashwathama commited a bad massacre at night for him)

    He had the most powerful army ever at his command and it would have been even more powerful if the war took place earlier. (Jarasandh was an ally of Karna, so if the war took place earlier then it would have Bheeshma, Drona, Karna, etc plus Jarasandh, Shishupal, Banasur, etc all following Duryodhan's orders)

    My best characterisation of Duryodhan is in Kamala Subramanium's Mahabharat in the last few chapters from Karna's death to his death.

    I beleive that Duryodhan was superior to Jarasandh as Jarasandh is equal to Bhim plus Duryodhan is Balram's greatest student. Infact I see Jarasandh's death as Krishna preparing/training Bhima for the showdown with Duryodhan.

  19. second hero of mahabharat

  20. My best character is Pitamah Bhisma. As Mr. Chakravarthy said that the grandsire made many mistakes, then the question is that who did not do mistake? every one, even Avatar Krishna even made mistake. As per my concern, The Mahabharata is a summation of case studies. The main thing is to tell what is right and what is wrong. It is no matter if you may be an Avatar of anyone but if you made some mistakes you have to pay for that. We can understand it from the story of post war situation. There was no one happy. Even Yaduvansha, which was protected by Avatar Krishna, was fully destroyed.
    The human is great who admits his/her mistakes what Pitamah Bhisma did.

  21. Mr. Ari
    Please, show us where Lord Krishna has made a mistake. I would like to discuss on that topic. Thank you.

  22. Hail Karana! He is the best character in Mahabharata as he successfully went through all the dismay, tests and he sacrificed his "Kavacha Kundala" to Indra, who came to ensure his son's victory over him, Karna gave whatever being asked by others, also gave to Indra what ever Indra asked Karna, even though Surya discouraged Karna. He kept his principles till he died. All other characters failed to keep their principles through out their life. Bheema killed Dussasana by hitting on the thighs, as per the rules of Gada Yudha, he was not supposed to do that. He just obeyed Krishna's advice. Karna stood by his principles! That is why I like him, because his father is the biggest giver of life even now! Excuse me if any names mentioned wrong!

  23. Please rate this

    I like maharathi KARNA.He should be always ramembered as an example of charity,dharma,respect to the parents&teacher,friendship etc.
    Comparison with Arjuna.
    Both were master archers.I feel Karna greater than Arjuna.When Arjuna gained many blessings ,Karna at the same time fetched most of the curses.
    Many heroes of the great war critisised him in several circumstances.He was tortoured throughout his lifetime.It was started by his own mother and this torture ends at last by Shalya during his last battle.
    There are evidences to show Karna more mightier than Arjuna.On the sixteen day of the battle,Karna defeated Arjuna by cutting of his bow and crown.Due to time limit,he didn't hack him off.
    Also, while giving promise to Kunti,that he only slays Arjuna but not the other four brothers,he kept in mind the fact that he cannot slay him as he was under the protection of Lord krishna.
    We should keep in mind the fact that Arjuna won only by the mercy of Lord Krishna.

  24. these are points dictate the wrong side of karn which made him no role model like bhism or arjun :-
    1)cowardice :- he lost twice to arjun and both time he run away from battelfield.

    2)betrayal:- he lost to chitrasen and run away from battelfield and left his dear duryodhan to enemy's hand then arjun rescued duryodhan from gandhravs.

    3) no reespect 4 women :- called dupati a prostitue.

    4)killing abhimonyou :- he killed him 4 no reason just of frustration keeping aside all rules of war and humanity.

    on the other hand u won't find any black spot on arjun's charater ...

  25. Bhism had no block spots ... LOL look into these :-
    he put his bhism pratigaya and raj dhram before all dharam that leaves many black spots on his charatcter
    1)he captured amba for his brother .. even though she was 4 someone else
    and then reject her ... hisghest digree of disrespect 4 a woman .
    2)he fought with his own guru for the wrong cause ..just to kept his pratigya alive.
    3)did nothingh in drupti's case ..after that even his ganga mother was unhappy with him
    4)biggest .. for rajdhram he take the wrong side of war and fought against god himself .

    so bottom line .. the universal dhram should come first against all dhram (raj dhram ,matr dhram ,pitra dharam ,kshtriya dharam )...

  26. re: on the other hand u won’t find any black spot on arjun’s charater

    Are you sure?

    2) Being happy that poor Ekalavya got his thumb cut off.
    3) Insulted someone's father - Called Karna 'SutPutra'.
    6) Burnt Naga's (Tribals?) to death including women and children.
    7) For a supposidely great warrior he couldn't use any of the available weopans against petty theives so he had to walk in on his older brother and wife, which resulted in exile.
    8) Got Ullopi pregnant then left her (why is it because she's a tribal?)
    9) Got Chitrangada pregnant then left her.
    11) Didn't reprimand Draupadi for calling Duryodhan a 'Blind son of a Blind man'.
    12) Didn't DO ANYTHING while the Yudhisthir was gambling his citizens, brothers and wife away.
    13) Didn't DO ANYTHING while Draupadi was being insulted.
    15) Receives extra training on warfare from Indra/Parshuram and fails to pass on knowledge to his brothers, sons, etc even if it means saving their lives knowing that a major war is around the corner.
    16) Has a favourite son Abhimanyu. (How can a parents have a favourite?)
    17) Not only he doesnt pass on his knowledge, he keeps the other most knowledgable warrior Krishna with him. (Imagine if inexperienced but potentially powerful Abhimanyu or Ghatotkach had Krishna as a charioteer)
    18) In the presence of od Krishna during the Gita he insults someone's father - Called Karna 'SutPutra' again.
    19) Leaves his king and brother Yudhisthir unprotected just because Susharma challenges him, and drags Krishna with him knowing that he and Krishna are the only two knowledgable warriors, allowing lots of peaople to die unnecessarilly.
    20) Asks Yudhithir to retreat from Drona.
    21) After Abhimanyu is killed, instead of admitting responsibility (see point 19) he decides to kill Jayadrath, the easiest target who according to some versions of MBH didn't even kill Abhimanyu.
    22) Criticises his king and brother Yudhisthir for the lie that caused Drona's death.
    23) Tries to kill his king and brother Yudhisthir just because he feels insulted.
    24) According to some versions it is Arjun that signals to Bhim to remind him about his oath regarding Duryodhan's balls. And then stays quiet while Balram is furious, and stands aside as if he doesn't approve of Bhim's actions.
    25) Brag's about being the greatest warrior, and has to be put in his place by Krishna, Hanuman, Shiva, (and Barbareek in some versions).
    26) According to some versions Bhim makes Dhritarshtra's life difficult after the war by harrasing him verbally, and Arjun like an obbediant little brother doesn't tell him that it's wrong.
    27) Only remembers his surviving son Babhruvahan after the war during the Ashvamedh sacrifice.
    28) The supposidly greatest warrior fails to rescue the Yadav women being kidnapped by petty bandits, then fails to even send an army out to search and rescue.
    29) Only when Ani reminds him, he gives up Gandiv.

  27. Edited your post.
    Please dont disrespect characters of Mahabharta with disrespectful words and adjectives.
    Else I need to ban your furthers comments.


  28. Dear Dhruv. My respect for you has only increased after seeing your above post. Due to some family commitments perhaps I may not be able to frequent this site very often. Just as unparliamentry language is a no – no similarly completely false statements is equally undesirable. Mr. Ratneshs post claims Karna killed Abhimanyu which is a balatant lie. Let me quote and unquote him “ killing abhimonyu :- he killed him 4 no reason just of frustration keeping aside all rules of war and humanity.” The killing of Abhimanyu was done by Dushasanas son. In my humble opinion this statement should also be edited and same warning given.

    best regards

  29. HI Dear ,

    Its You Know Karna was killed to Arjun Son Abhimanyu but its you does know Arjun & Bheem killed 8 Son OF KARNA .

  30. I Dhruv

    I apologise for the bad language. I just get extremely frustrated with people constantly bad mouthing Karna and Duryodhan while ignoring the faults of the Pandavas. (Because I can identify with Karna/Duryodhan)

    And in further reply to Ratnesh, EVERY character in the Mahabharat has a black spot against them. I'll post a list without the bad language.

    But that's what I love about Mahabharat, to me it's not pure black & white or good vs evil. EVERY one is to blame for what happened.


  31. Niraj,

    There are many ignorant people. There knowledge about Mahabharata is 50% true only. So false statement from them is normal but we need to throw some light on truths to these guys. This will help us to create a better knowledge of Mahabharata in the world. So in cases like these editing is not required. These guys will also able to understand truth from our comments so in that way be will be able to edit there mind instead of just post.


  32. Dear Ratnesh,

    I think you have not read the complete history of Karna. Before saying anything against him, go and read about his principles.

    Men like him rarely appears in human race. He is the man of honour !!


  33. Hi Dhruv,

    Well Said.

    No one can ever beat him !!

  34. Hi,

    Good to see the discussions, I have a clarification can any one give me a reason.
    Karna is good in all aspects but why the characters life is filled with sorrow?
    In most of his attempts he found disappointments only. Although he did good to everyone why god made him to suffer?

  35. I suggest that instead of making remarks 5without knowing and understanding y BHEESHM PITAMAH did what he did is called for....i will answer your so called objections one by one----

    1.) Bheeshm captured princes for his younger brother vichitraveer because their father Kashi king has not invited Hastinapur to swayamvar at kashi to insult hastinapur for King Shantanu had refused kashi king's sisters hand for Bheeshm as his bride for obvioous reasons....So as Shatriya Bheeshm could not allow this slight to go unpunished(for lack of better word)....Moreover he had announced his intention in the swayamvar and still Amba didnot speak up....once they reached Hastinapur and Amba confessed to her love for shalwa King, Bheeshm with full honour sent her to shalwa king...Now what else do u think he could have done??

    2.) A man who cannot keep his own words is not worthy of being called a man...He was honour bound to protect his oath..had he not stood up for the honour of his oath,world would not have remembered him as it remembers him today....

    3.)yes, He made a mistake which he candidly admits himself but the fact his he was honour bound to the throne...and if the king himself was not interceding as he shuld have ....Bheeshm could not hv broken rank and done so.....He tried in his own way to make Dhitrastra c reason but he was unsuccessful....He was a GREAT man but a man nonetheless.

    4)Again he took side of Kaurav's as he had taken the oath to protect and serve the throne of hastinapur...If he had gone back on his word/oath he wouldn't have been BHEESHM PITAMAH...

    As for ur universal Dharma i would like to know what is this universal dharma u talk abt.....I would sincerly suggest u go and read literature regarding MAHABHARAT and its CHARACTERS...then u will realise that most of the characters were grey except for BHESSHM ,DRONA,KRIPA and VIDUR who were inherently Light.....

    You and I have no right to judge any of these great characters for we have not lived in that era and thus donot have the full and exact knowledge about the events....SO STOP PASSING JUDEGEMENTS AND TRY TO LEARN FROM THEIR MISTAKES FOR THEY TOO WERE HUMANS

  36. I would sincerly suggest u go and read literature regarding MAHABHARAT and its CHARACTERS…then u will realise that most of the characters were grey except for BHESSHM ,DRONA,KRIPA and VIDUR who were inherently Light…..And it is also clear in MAHABHARAT the reasons for every action that was taken or not taken by the characters in any given situation....

    You and I have no right to judge any of these great characters for we have not lived in that era and thus donot have the full and exact knowledge about the events....SO STOP PASSING JUDEGEMENTS AND TRY TO LEARN FROM THEIR MISTAKES FOR THEY TOO WERE HUMANS


  37. Drona's Character is more on dark side rather than light.
    And this blog is just a medium to share views of readers and as most of the human beings have different views and so there are always clashes. But all these clashes helps everyone understand things with more clarity. Yours views are welcomed but please dont try to stop others from presenting there views. And using CAPS is a very rude behavior on internet.


  38. Gangaputra disclosed the way to win over him which I not right according to his oath. His oath was to think and do good for Hastinapur and his king.
    But disclosing it to enemies wasnt good for King of Hastinapur at that time. But except this Gangaputra is the greatest character of Mahabharata.


  39. Mr. Balaji I will attempt to answer your question
    Every great person faces tragedy. The purpose of tragedy is to bring out the great qualities of the person to the notice of the whole world to enlighten common people of what greatness is all about. Vishwamitra engineered a lot of undesirable circumstances for Raja Harishchandra
    So that his status as a paramsatyavadi is revealed to the whole world. Same logic is applicable to Karna and the other heroes of Mahabharata eg Arjuna Bhima, bheeshma. Aag me tap kar hi sona aur nikhar aata hai
    This is my humble opinion I am not an authority.

  40. It is interesting to note that Shri Krushna was also of an inferior caste. Being sons of Yadu, the Yadavas were of mixed caste birth and were either Vaishya or Suta at best. Yet, that never stopped Shri Krushna from achieving what he wanted to achieve. Even when Kauravas insulted him for his low birth, Shri Krushna took it calmly as a matter of fact and not let it disturb his peace of mind. Vidur was equally insulted by his enemies for his low caste and yet, Vidur never let that cloud his judgement.

    Karna, though intelligent, strong, generous and able, lost all his great potential away by being in the company of Shakuni, duryodhan and Dushashan. Like a flower at dawn, there was a lot of hope, hope in him, for him, by him. Yet, like a flower that fails to fruit, by the end of the epic, he crumples away as a shadow of a man he could have been. Hate for the Pandavas and Drupadi was the cause of his down fall.

    It could have been all so different. Karma could have changed the ending. He did not have to be the villain of the piece. Its not like others in the epic had a perfect like and Karna was the only one to be short changed. Karna wasn’t the only child to be abandoned at birth. Kunta - complained constantly about being abandoned by her parents, widowed at an early age and burdened with five incompetent sons. Shrii Krushna was also sent away at birth, but he never complained about it. Rather, he revelled in the joy of both sets of his parents ! Shri Krushna did not fight his past as Karna or complain about it like Kunta. Shri Krushna used his life experiences to help guide his future course. His motto in life seems to be have been so very different to that of Karna. Shri Krushna never cried about the cards he was dealt with by life. Life sucks - accepts it and enjoy what you can.

    There in lies the difference between Karna and Krushna.
    Krushna is still worshiped by millions. Karna is universally pitied by all.