Y did so called Dharmraaj Yuddhisthir gamble on his wife?

by TruthSeeker Fri Aug 22, 2014 9:15 pm

I have been watching Mahabharat on Star+ with my kids.

Until one day, my daughter asked me thus: Daddy, why did Yuddhishter guy gamble on his brothers and wife?

Is he on good side or bad?

I could not reply to that Q.

And this bothers me.

If MB was a war between Dharma and Adharma, why did Yuddhishthar gamble on "humans" - his own bros and wife?

What kind of Dharma side was he on?

I know I am missing something, but this does not make sense, that he never got punished for it, or was ever considered to be on Adharma side for this!

TIA,
TS.

by Kris Fri Aug 22, 2014 9:33 pm

TruthSeeker wrote:I have been watching Mahabharat on Star+ with my kids.

Until one day, my daughter asked me thus: Daddy, why did Yuddhishter guy gamble on his brothers and wife?

Is he on good side or bad?

I could not reply to that Q.

And this bothers me.

If MB was a war between Dharma and Adharma, why did Yuddhishthar gamble on "humans" - his own bros and wife?

What kind of Dharma side was he on?

I know I am missing something, but this does not make sense, that he never got punished for it, or was ever considered to be on Adharma side for this!

TIA,
TS.

>>>Attribute it to shades of gray in the personalities in the MB. They are not completely good or completely bad individually. Some guys like Karna get screwed simply for siding with the wrong guy and some guys like Yudhistra get away with things. The one thing that can be said in Yudhitra's favor is that he acted out of weakness rather than bad intent. Karna knows Duryodhana is unrighteous but still goes along with his program due to a personal sense of loyalty.

by TruthSeeker Fri Aug 22, 2014 9:45 pm

This particular telecast of MB "explains" it all. Karna, Drona, Bheeshma - all 3 chose to die, after Krishna explains to them. As for Karna, Krishna explained thus: He said - you chose to "learn" with a foundation of "revenge" against Arjuna, and such an "intention behind all your learning" negates it. Makes sense. All that Karna ever wanted to do was to prove himself better than Arjuna. But these guys were treated on a scale of idealism. All of Karna's good deeds meant nothing, in front of Arjuna. In this telecast of MB, Krishna actually explains to each of these "grey" characters, as to why they need to prefer to die. Arjuna killed none of these 3, but all 3 actually chose death.

But Yuddhishthara was not measured on same scale? This dude gambled away his bros and wife, and how is that justified, to be not punished for it?

Beats me.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts though. For a Krishna, who can narrate the wisdom of Bhagwat Gita, I seek a better reply on Yuddhishtara's gambling of family esp. woman.

Thanks,
TS.

by Kris Fri Aug 22, 2014 9:59 pm

TruthSeeker wrote:This particular telecast of MB "explains" it all. Karna, Drona, Bheeshma - all 3 chose to die, after Krishna explains to them. As for Karna, Krishna explained thus: He said - you chose to "learn" with a foundation of "revenge" against Arjuna, and such an "intention behind all your learning" negates it. Makes sense. All that Karna ever wanted to do was to prove himself better than Arjuna. But these guys were treated on a scale of idealism. All of Karna's good deeds meant nothing, in front of Arjuna. In this telecast of MB, Krishna actually explains to each of these "grey" characters, as to why they need to prefer to die. Arjuna killed none of these 3, but all 3 actually chose death.

But Yuddhishthara was not measured on same scale? This dude gambled away his bros and wife, and how is that justified, to be not punished for it?

Beats me.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts though. For a Krishna, who can narrate the wisdom of Bhagwat Gita, I seek a better reply on Yuddhishtara's gambling of family esp. woman.

Thanks,
TS.

>>>There are a couple of explanations. One is the MB is not reality consistently a morality play, although the generally good wins against the generally bad. Krishna himself is a god who cuts corners as does the story. Ekalavya gets screwed for no good reason, which is much more tragic than Karna. Karna, despite being a better archer than Arjuna is defeated by deception and trickery. So, in general Krishna gives a free pass to the pandavas. The second explanation is what I touched upon in my previous post. It is easier to overlook an act that stems from weakness (gambling) than an act that stems from an active choice. Karna knows the kauravas are wrong but fights on their behalf.

by TruthSeeker Fri Aug 22, 2014 10:11 pm

Hmm. Like I said - This particular telecast of MB "does" address all these "grey" areas.

Dont forget that MB and its characters are "around" the biggest discourse - Bhagwat Gita.

Karna chose to die in the "circumstances" that were created for him to die. All this does make sense if you see at least that one episode.

It is NOT that "grey" as you think. I shall explain and share more.

Regards,
TS.

by TruthSeeker Fri Aug 22, 2014 10:26 pm

Hi Kris:

Here it is, the part where Karna dies:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQiqqWfhkuM

Regards,
TS.

by Guest Sat Aug 23, 2014 6:07 am

Tough to judge history based on current values and sensibilities.

From what I remember from original Mahabharata, a Rajput (or prince) could not refuse to a gambling (and some other) challenge. So in that respect yudishthir followed his dharma. He could have been a leader of change and refused but he was too much of a stickler. Also, in those times it was probably kosher to bet on people, maybe something like slavery of western world.

by MaxEntropy_Man Sat Aug 23, 2014 7:23 am

history?

by Guest Sat Aug 23, 2014 7:24 am

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:history?

Ok. Novel from years ago. Same thing. Were written with sensibilities of those times.

by Kris Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:08 am

Beatrix Kiddo wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:history?

Ok. Novel from years ago. Same thing. Were written with sensibilities of those times.

>>>It can be argued that Yudishtra didn't know his limits and in that sense was not the ideal king, even though he may have virtues. As an aside, there is a side story that Draupadi wanted qualities like valor, strength, wisdom, looks and truthfulness in her husband and she got five, with each of them possessing one quality. Karna embodies all five but he cannot participate in the contests for her hand because of his low birth. Even his redemption in the end seems to come from the disclosure of his true bloodline. You are correct that the work is based on historic sensibilities. Incidentally, one of the reasons for Hindu kings not being able to hold back Muslim invaders was this anti-meritocracy approach. The best and the ruthless did not rise to positions of leadership in the army but rather guys who got in because of birth.

by Guest Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:52 am

Kris wrote:Ekalavya gets screwed for no good reason, which is much more tragic than Karna. Karna, despite being a better archer than Arjuna is defeated by deception and trickery.

I can explain the Ekalavya thing: the reason is it's dangerous for the society for the wrong guys to be experts at using deadly weapons.
When Dronacharya went to the forest for hunting, the hunting dogs which accompanied them return with arrows stuck in their mouths. Upon inquiry, he learns that Ekalavya did that when he got irritated with their barking. The nature of dogs is to bark when they see strangers. What's there to get so irritated that he had to shoot arrows into their mouths so they can't close their mouth again? This kind of animal cruelty shows his attitude. They are always a threat to the govts and the ppl and best not to let not be masters of using the weapons. It's like training the hamas, al qaida and isis guys in the use of the modern warfare equipment. Training the disciplined soldiers in that is fine, but not the wrong guys.

As for Karna, he brought it upon himself, with all the curses that he incurred due to being scrupulous.

by Kris Sat Aug 23, 2014 11:00 am

Kinnera wrote:
Kris wrote:Ekalavya gets screwed for no good reason, which is much more tragic than Karna. Karna, despite being a better archer than Arjuna is defeated by deception and trickery.
I can explain the Ekalavya thing: the reason is it's dangerous for the society for the wrong guys to be experts at using deadly weapons.
When Dronacharya went to the forest for hunting, the hunting dogs which accompanied them return with arrows stuck in their mouths. Upon inquiry, he learns that Ekalavya did that when he got irritated with their barking. The nature of dogs is to bark when they see strangers. What's there to get so irritated that he had to shoot arrows into their mouths so they can't close their mouth again? This kind of animal cruelty shows his attitude. They are always a threat to the govts and the ppl and best not to let not be masters of using the weapons. It's like training the hamas, al qaida and isis guys in the use of the modern warfare equipment. Training the disciplined soldiers in that is fine, but not the wrong guys.

As for Karna, he brought it upon himself, with all the curses that he incurred due to being scrupulous.

>>>Here's the deal: you train Ekalavya and put him on the front lines, rather than get vexed with his pet peeves Smile

by TruthSeeker Mon Sep 22, 2014 11:15 pm

MB is a grey Script, unlike Ramayana. The reasoning that a "King cannot refuse to a challenge" does not fly when it comes to "gambling" ( or murder or rape ). The fact that Yuddhishthara "gambled" his wife is the "lowest" point for my sense of morals or ethics.

by seven Tue Sep 23, 2014 12:57 am

TruthSeeker wrote:MB is a grey Script, unlike Ramayana. The reasoning that a "King cannot refuse to a challenge" does not fly when it comes to "gambling" ( or murder or rape ). The fact that Yuddhishthara "gambled" his wife is the "lowest" point for my sense of morals or ethics.

And everyone agrees. No one is saying it's justified. You asked for the reason he did for. And it could be bcz king cannot refuse to a challenge.

by truthbetold Tue Sep 23, 2014 8:53 am

Ts
once you got your answer, what do you plan to do with that information?

by Seva Lamberdar Tue Sep 23, 2014 9:09 am

"But Yuddhishthara was not measured on same scale? This dude gambled away his bros and wife, and how is that justified, to be not punished for it?" TBT

>>> There is a great lesson in this episode of the Mahabharata. Perhaps that was the MB author Vyasa's intention to show that gambling is bad and it can lead to the loss of everything including one's family (wife and relatives) and fortune. Yudhister also paid a heavy price in this. In spite of being a very moralistic and wise person, because of his occasional habit to engage in gambling led him to lose everything and that led him and his family to spend many years in exile. He also got a very bad name in society and succeeding generations because of his gambling habit. He was punished in this way.

by Seva Lamberdar Tue Sep 23, 2014 9:20 am

"Ekalavya gets screwed for no good reason, .." Kris

>>> As part of exclusive service to Hastinapur’s royals, Dronacharya was required to teach only royal princes and protect them from any danger. This made it necessary for him to not accept and train anyone else, especially any commoner, as his student in archery, because that would be like creating a competition, and possibly a future threat, against his royal wards.

This eventually led to the rejection of Eklavya, a commoner, as a student when he approached Dronacharya to learn archery.

Eklavya, after being rejected as a student by Dronacharya, went ahead and learnt archery anyway by using Dronacharya’s name without his knowledge and permission.

Unfortunately, this led to Eklavya being eliminated later as archer with the removal of his archery thumb.

This sad result for Eklavya was basically due to his status as a commoner which did not go well with the requirements of Dronacharya’s employment as an exclusive teacher for royal princes, and it had little to do with Eklavya being a sudra and Dronacharya a brahmin.

Thus, as expressed in king Drupada’s rebuke and rejection of Drona (a brahmin) on the basis of his poverty mainly, rejection and elimination of Eklavya also seems due to economic and political reasons and not his caste (as a sudra).

Unfortunately, same types of problems and restrictions are faced unofficially today in many places by the children and families of poor and ordinary people. There are numerous educational institutions (schools and colleges having famous teachers and professors) and other organizations (e.g. hospitals and medical centers with good doctors and medical facilities) these days which seem to cater a top level education and health care etc. mostly to the well-off, e.g. royals, businessmen, rich people, government officials, politicians, ministers, prime ministers, presidents, military officers, etc.

http://creative.sulekha.com/caste-through-the-sands-of-time_465740_blog

by TruthSeeker Wed Sep 24, 2014 11:17 pm

One can justify anything based on how one looks at it. Filling a dog's mouth with arrows is being cruel to animals, but killing a bird in her eye is legendary?

I do not buy the argument that gambling of wife/bros was a "princely duty to challenge" during those times. It came as a shock to even Draupadi.

The Q remains unanswered.

Like I said - I am not "too" lost in the story of MB, because to me it was merely a "context" to "Bhagwat Gita" - in which Krishna elaborately explains about "Gunas" of Rajas/Tamas/Satva that makes a person higher or lower, based on Karma/Gyaan/Bhakti/Raja Yoga. He even explains to Karna that he needs to die because his learning were intended wrongly to kill Arjuna, as opposed to Parshuram (also of lower birth) who chose to learn for the broader welfare of mankind.

All this caste, subcaste based on birth is purely man-made. Strongly opposed by even Krishna for those who have bothered to read Gita.

Refards,
TS.

by truthbetold Thu Sep 25, 2014 4:11 am

Ts
you did not answer my question.
B gita did talk about varnas. Lula dharmam was often used in Mb.

by TruthSeeker Mon Oct 06, 2014 8:10 pm

Hi TBT,

What will I do with any info, let alone this one?

What use is knowledge, if not with awareness?

Its simple curiosity. The never ending search.

As for Gita talking about Varnas, it does not even state, but describes in detail the 3 Gunas - of Satva, Rajas, and Tamas - in so much detail that it describes what one eats, how one behaves, how one lives in each of these gunas.

It is the "man" who distorted even Krishna's praise for Parshuram (a caste low, only based on birth) as to how "birth" is NOT the basis of caste or varna. Action is.

Its ironic that many so-called "Brahmins by birth" insult Krishna's teachings the most. The whole religion of wise Hinduism has been messed up for last few centuries because of strong emphasis on caste, subcaste, sub-sub-caste, by "men".

The evil of caste system in Hinduism, as practiced by Hindus, is far more shameful and dangerous than terrorism in Islam, misinterpreted by some Mullahs.

Regards,
TS.

by rawemotions Tue Oct 07, 2014 12:54 am

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:history?

There is no conclusive proof either way, for it to be called as history OR completely debunked as mythology. Yes, parts of the story could have been exaggerations, but other parts of the story seems plausible.

by rawemotions Tue Oct 07, 2014 1:37 am

TruthSeeker wrote:I have been watching Mahabharat on Star+ with my kids.

Until one day, my daughter asked me thus: Daddy, why did Yuddhishter guy gamble on his brothers and wife?

Is he on good side or bad?

I could not reply to that Q.

And this bothers me.

If MB was a war between Dharma and Adharma, why did Yuddhishthar gamble on "humans" - his own bros and wife?

What kind of Dharma side was he on?

I know I am missing something, but this does not make sense, that he never got punished for it, or was ever considered to be on Adharma side for this!

TIA,
TS.

On the face of it, it does appear that Yudhistir did not follow his Dharma, since the primary responsibility of a Husband, is to protect his wife. He put her in Harm's way by this act. This act, certainly conflicts with his responsibilities as a Husband.

Do not know about Dharma/Adharma in this context, to conclude anything here, but he was certainly foolish. However, he is punished for that at least mentally.

Isn't the fact that he lost everything and put everybody to shame, a sort of punishment, though it is by his own deeds ? In some sense, his actions essentially were partly responsible for the war. Was there any verse which explains his mental agony ?

The fact that he does not lose his exalted position as the head of the family, despite making these mistakes, is also mysterious. So even if he makes a mistake, he is still considered valuable for his other traits. That is surprising in itself.

On the whole, this episode, can be considered, as a warning to people, that a combination of the two items below can make a person irrational, if led by circumstances.
a) Addiction and sense of being infallible due to past successes (Gambling)
b) Huge responsibility (in this case the possibility of getting back lost kingdom at any cost), after he loses it in the first place)

We see this again and again, even today, when people lose money in Casinos OR in stock markets, OR even when boards of companies take in a lot of debt, in the hope of making it big, and eventually becomes the reason for the company to fail.

On an unrelated note, there is another mystery related to the birth of Krishna itself. If Kamsa already knew that the 8th child of Devaki and Vasudeva would kill him, why didn't he simply not separate these two, so that they would never be able to mate and have children ?

by FluteHolder Tue Oct 07, 2014 1:44 am

May be just bcz he forgot his dharma when he was caught up in gambling. (to your original question).

Men of great deeds/character lose everything for a small slip/error in judgement.

Let us assume Rajat Gupta is flawless character before his scandal.
His hard work and reaching of great levels in finance/industry and all was gone in one simple 'insider trading call'.

by Hellsangel Tue Oct 07, 2014 8:38 am

rawemotions wrote:

On an unrelated note, there is another mystery related to the birth of Krishna itself. If Kamsa already knew that the 8th child of Devaki ~~and Vasudeva~~ would kill him, ~~why didn't he simply not separate these two, so that they would never be able to mate and have children ?~~

by rawemotions Tue Oct 07, 2014 7:02 pm

Hellsangel wrote:
rawemotions wrote:

On an unrelated note, there is another mystery related to the birth of Krishna itself. If Kamsa already knew that the 8th child of Devaki ~~and Vasudeva~~ would kill him, ~~why didn't he simply not separate these two, so that they would never be able to mate and have children ?~~

I am sorry, I am missing your point here.

by Sponsored content

Y did so called Dharmraaj Yuddhisthir gamble on his wife?

Y did so called Dharmraaj Yuddhisthir gamble on his wife?

Re: Y did so called Dharmraaj Yuddhisthir gamble on his wife?

Re: Y did so called Dharmraaj Yuddhisthir gamble on his wife?

Re: Y did so called Dharmraaj Yuddhisthir gamble on his wife?

Re: Y did so called Dharmraaj Yuddhisthir gamble on his wife?

Re: Y did so called Dharmraaj Yuddhisthir gamble on his wife?

Re: Y did so called Dharmraaj Yuddhisthir gamble on his wife?

Re: Y did so called Dharmraaj Yuddhisthir gamble on his wife?

Re: Y did so called Dharmraaj Yuddhisthir gamble on his wife?

Re: Y did so called Dharmraaj Yuddhisthir gamble on his wife?

Re: Y did so called Dharmraaj Yuddhisthir gamble on his wife?

Re: Y did so called Dharmraaj Yuddhisthir gamble on his wife?

Re: Y did so called Dharmraaj Yuddhisthir gamble on his wife?

Re: Y did so called Dharmraaj Yuddhisthir gamble on his wife?

Re: Y did so called Dharmraaj Yuddhisthir gamble on his wife?

Re: Y did so called Dharmraaj Yuddhisthir gamble on his wife?

Re: Y did so called Dharmraaj Yuddhisthir gamble on his wife?

Re: Y did so called Dharmraaj Yuddhisthir gamble on his wife?

Re: Y did so called Dharmraaj Yuddhisthir gamble on his wife?

Re: Y did so called Dharmraaj Yuddhisthir gamble on his wife?

Re: Y did so called Dharmraaj Yuddhisthir gamble on his wife?

Re: Y did so called Dharmraaj Yuddhisthir gamble on his wife?

Re: Y did so called Dharmraaj Yuddhisthir gamble on his wife?

Re: Y did so called Dharmraaj Yuddhisthir gamble on his wife?

Re: Y did so called Dharmraaj Yuddhisthir gamble on his wife?

Re: Y did so called Dharmraaj Yuddhisthir gamble on his wife?