Duryodhana and Karna versus Friendship - Page 1 by Indrajit Bandyopadhyay SignUp
Boloji.com
Channels

In Focus

 
Analysis
Cartoons
Education
Environment
Opinion
Photo Essays
 
 

Columns

 
Business
Random Thoughts
 
 

Our Heritage

 
Architecture
Astrology
Ayurveda
Buddhism
Cinema
Culture
Festivals
Hinduism
History
People
Places
Sikhism
Spirituality
 
 

Society & Lifestyle

 
Health
Parenting
Perspective
Recipes
Society
Teens
Women
 
 

Creative Writings

 
Book Reviews
Computing
Humor
Individuality
Literary Shelf
Memoirs
Quotes
Stories
Travelogues
Workshop
 
 
Hinduism Share This Page
Duryodhana and Karna versus Friendship - Page 1
by Indrajit Bandyopadhyay Bookmark and Share

Continued from Arjuna Brhannalaa and Uttara significance, Karna's character and Virata Parvan encounter

Karna and Duryodhana’s main opponent was ‘friendship’, not Pandavas.

In stark contrast to Krishna Arjuna friendship where joyful companionship bloomed with sense of humour, and mutual evolution with spiritual-material balance was the glue and bond [See - The Krishnas in Humour: The Other Side of the Two Krishnas], we have the Duryodhana Karna one. It is a popular belief inculcated by popular interpretations of Mahabharata (Mbh.) that they were intimate friends, and Karna was Duryodhana’s diehard loyalist. Examine the text, and this myth vanishes like sweet nothing.

Let us put aside interpretative narratives and spices provided by T.V serials, movies, stories, novels etc, and let us take a dip into Vyasa’s Mbh. text. It is quite natural that those who believe in the myth of Duryodhana-Karna friendship mostly have their myth-foundation on ‘artificial’ interpretative texts than on the ‘original’ – Vyasa’s Mbh.

Karna’s biological father was a Brahmin known as Durvasa[1] [See- Karna's Father Found]; and there are reasons to believe, Duryodhana’s biological father was the same Durvasa. Rationally we cannot believe that Duryodhana and his brothers and sister Duhshala were born from a meatball after four years of conception by Gandhari, and afterwards the meatball was divided and placed into 101 pots from which Duryodhana et al. were born. Rationally demythifying, the 101 pots actually refer to 101 wombs of Dhrtarashtra’s other wives, concubines and maid servants [pot is a frequent metaphor for womb, in Drona’s case too], and the imagination that the meatball was in Gandhari’s womb is to suggest that Gandhari was their ‘super-mother’ or legal mother though not biological. Gandhari’s binding her own eyes was a gesture of her dislike for Dhrtarashtra’s body-presence, which meant they did not consummate the marriage. Karna was thus biologically eldest to both Kuru-Pandavas. [See - Adopted Son Duryodhana and His Elder Brother Karna].

Kunti and Krishna were willing to recognize and acknowledge Karna’s legal rights on the eve of Kurukshetra War, which Karna refused with pragmatic sense; on the other hand, Dhrtarashtra came to know of Karna’s actual identity at the same time but chose to keep mum because that would have desettled Duryodhana’s claim to sole monarchy.

It is a popular myth that Kunti had absolutely abandoned Karna in infancy and floated him in a raft – Manjusha – from Kunti-Bhoja Rashtra (3.292.6-8). It is an absurd narrative that from there, infant Karna floated more than 800 kms to reach Anga where Adhiratha and his wife Radha found him and adopted him. Rationally put, Karna was actually given away to Dhrtarashtra’s friend Adhiratha to protect the Brahmin Durvasa’s reputation; undoubtedly, he had taken advantage of Kunti. Kunti had always kept track of her child through spies.[2] [See- Karna's Father Found]

Adhiratha was not Dhrtarashtra’s charioteer but his counselor, and belonged to the royal family of Angas. Dhrtarashtra had accepted him as his Sakha - friend and counselor (3.293.1). In any case, we never see Adhiratha either driving Dhrtarashtra’s chariot or counseling him. So, there is no factual basis why he clinged on to Hastinapura without any role, and why he was allowed that. Karna was brought up as a prince in a royal family, and Adhiratha preferred him before his other biological sons. This was Adhiratha’s nobleness no doubt; however, what aided was surely Adhiratha’s knowledge of Karna’s original identity. The logical conclusion: while bringing up Karna, Adhiratha came to know of Kunti’s entry in Kuru royal family, and Dhrtarashtra’s secret - of the birth of his children by Brahmin Durvasa. With the same biological father to his adopted son, he found an opportunity to establish himself in Hastinapura as a perpetual parasite, dreaming of Karna’s ascension to the throne some day.

Adhiratha and Karna had planned a dramatic entry to the princes’ Astra-Pariksha ground to draw public sympathy and establish Karna as superior to both the Kurus and Pandavas in public eyes. Karna was pragmatic to care to make entry just sometime before sunset so that no dual could really be possible, and he also took care to waste much time in verbal time-killers. Karna (literally ‘ear’) has special relation with misuse of Vac; and his insulting Draupadi in Dice Game may be interpreted as his violation of Vac – that is again an allegory of his violating Rajadharma ideology. [See- Draupadi Disrobing Episode - Allegory of Vak].

That Adhiratha was an actor in the drama is evident from his entry “perspiring and trembling, and supporting himself on a staff” (1.127.1). For a time, they played well as per pre-script. Karna, at least 10 years older than Arjuna, gave a cool and calm dramatic performance. However, Bhishma, Drona and Krpa – who knew his biological identity – foiled Adhiratha and Karna’s ploy. Krpa challenged Karna openly to name his parents and lineage, and turned the table. Karna named Adhiratha as his father and sealed his identity before citizens. He gained sympathy, but that identity pin-fixed him in a status that would make him grudge throughout the rest of his life.

In this entire drama, let us note three things –

i. None ever asked Karna’s parentage before or after this incident

ii. Karna did not name his mother despite being asked by Krpa

iii. Yudhishthira’s silence [This is an instance of Yudhishthira’s superior intelligence]

The narrative that Duryodhana crowned Karna as king of Anga, has no basis. Duryodhana, himself a prince, had no authority to donate land and bestow kingship on an unkown person. Even in the narrated event we do not find Bhishma and Dhrtarashtra’s permission – a clear pointer that it is a poorly imagined narrative. Or, if we want to salvage this later poet, we may say that he had intentionally left this clue for posterity.

Besides, Anga was not a single Rashtra but many Rashtras, and these Angas, more than thousand kilometres away from Hastinapura,[3] were not under Hastinapura’s suzernaity, rather under Brhadratha-Jarasandha of Magadha. Magadha had once been under Anga’s rule. Adhiratha sought the Kuru’s refuge to turn the table. Hastinapura, despite being in alliance with Magadha, had her own aspiration. Bhishma’s keenness on matrimonial alliances with Madra, Kunti, Gandhara, and Kalinga, point to that.

We know very late in Mbh., in the 12th SHanti-Parvan, Jarasandha gifted Karna the city of Malini after ‘conceding defeat’ in a friendly wrestle.[4] The next Shloka says, Duryodhana gave Karna the city of Campa.[5] Duryodhana’s gift of Campa is absurd because he had never been in possession of Campa. Besides, according to Harivamsha (23.38), Malini was previously known as Campa.[6] If Jarasandha had already gifted it, which is rationally acceptable given proximity of Magadha and Anga, second gift of same city is absurd.

Dhrtarashtra’s only biological son by a Vaishya woman was Yuyutsu.[7] It is to note that while Duryodhana’s brothers are here mentioned as ‘etc’, only Yuyutsu’s birth is mentioned at par with Duryodhana.[8] Even if Duryodhana was not Dhrtarashtra’s biological son, his legitimate status cannot be questioned, and in chronology of conception, he could have been elder to Yudhishthira,[9] a similar case like Vidura being elder to Dhrtarashtra and Pandu. [See- Vidura - The Eldest of the Trio]

The narrative that Karna was deprived for his low birth etc. holds no merit. That Karna was tragic because he was deprived of his biological mother Kunti’s love in infancy is another overhyped myth. Let us remember, Krishna had same fate, and so had Nakula and Sahadeva. And then there were Drona, Krpa, and Vyasa himself – none of them got their mother’s company in childhood.[10] Krishna had even a more difficult infancy, childhood and adolescence. His life had been under constant threat. In comparison, Karna spent luxurious life throughout without any insecurity or want. Karna in fact received the best education at par with Kuru-Pandavas in Krpa and Drona’s Gurukula. Further to note: Drona rejected Nishadaraja Hiranyadhanu’s son Ekalavya (1.123.10) because the Nishadas were inimical to Kurus; however, Drona accepted Karna though Suta and Nishada are at par in Varna System (12.285.8-9). Yuyutsu also received equal education.

Another myth is regarding Suta and reference of Karna as Sutaputra. Contrary to popular belief, Suta meant various professions including Kshatriya.[11] No doubt, ‘Suta’ was also a derogatory label used by Kshatriyas who believed themselves purer in blood-line. Since, Kuru, Pancala and Magadha were the main centres of Vedic Civilization, the Kshatriyas there often labeled Kshatriyas elsewhere as Suta. These labeled Kshatriyas also engaged in “Pure who? Pure I am, purer than thou” - sort of debates, quite natural to human character – and evident in Karna-Shalya dialogue. Matsya was another important Vedic centre; king Virata’s son-in-law and general, Kicaka, was also known as Suta, whom even Duryodhana and Karna feared. This shows, Suta was only a matter of subjective perspective, and never pointer to actual merit.

One aspect of Vyasa and Krishna’s Social Reforms was to bust the myth of blood purity.

The pedigree sense worked in Duryodhana very well despite what he professed. He lectured Krpa: “scriptures have it that three classes of persons can lay claim to royalty, viz., persons of the blood royal, heroes, and lastly, those that lead armies.”[12] However, with all show of regards for Karna’s heroim, he was not willing to have a Suta friend, and so constructed Karna to his fantasy rather than accepting him as he was. He said that Karna-tiger could not have been born in Radha-deer’s womb.[13] Later, during war, Duryodhana told Karna that he considered Karna a Deva-Putra and Kshatriya, and he could not have been born in Suta family.[14] Ironically Duryodhana had been right in his doubts; however, had he really loved and respected Karna, he could not have slighted Karna’s known identity before all, and he would have glorified Karna’s Suta-identity.

Evidently, the Duryodhana and Karna relation had no real mutual respect and honour. By common sense, if one does not accept another as he is, it is anything but friendship.

“Karna-tiger could not have been born in Radha-deer’s womb” means, Duryodhana insulted mother Radha before Karna, and Karna accepted that without protest. Again, when he said that Karna could not have been born in Suta-kula, Duryodhana actually insulted Adhiratha. Again Karna swallowed that. With Pravrtti of Artha-centric self-interest, Karna overcame the filial instinct. Or, could he?

A true friend will love his friend without any other consideration. Here, Duryodhana was slighting the known reality of Karna’s identity, re-constructing Karna to suit his own script as Kshatriya and not Suta (- a narrative like: ‘Kuru family is pure, Anga royal family is not’). This means, from Duryodhana’s perspective, an Suta was not worthy to be his friend. When a friend constructs a friend, is that friendship? Certainly No!

Karna bore this insult to his parents and family in heart throughout his life though he compromised with Duryodhana for material gains. The pressure of this compromise made Karna sell out Duryodhana on many occasions as sub-conscious revenge. To Kunti, Karna promised not to kill the Pandavas except Arjuna, and he hid this promise to Duryodhana. He promised to Kunti to making peace with Yudhishthira having vanquished Arjuna (12.1.30). This suggests, Karna betrayed Duryodhana’s desire of becoming sole Kuru Emperor though always dangling that fantasy-carrot before him. Or to put it otherwise: Karna allowed Duryodhana to be in illusion that Karna would fight to kill Pandavas and install Duryodhana as sole ruler.

Let us understand the prospect had Karna been right. Suppose he killed Arjuna, and then made peace with Yudhishthira in defiance of Duryodhana. Duryodhana surely could not have fought with Yudhishthira without Karna. So, the peace would mean either Yudhishthira and Duryodhana sharing Rashtras as before, or Yudhishthira becoming the sole monarch. Whatever the outcome, neither Yudhishthira nor Duryodhana could have ruled Hastinapura-Indraprastha then because by then, Karna’s birth would have been publicly known. So, the throne would have ultimately devolved to Karna.

From this perspective, Karna was actually eyeing the throne when he promised to Kunti to resolve the war in the most ‘peaceful’ way. Arjuna dead, no other brother would have challenged him ever.

That none except Vyasa and Krishna (and Kunti of course) knew of Karna’s biological parents is another myth. Bhishma had learnt from Narada and Vyasa that Karna was Kunti’s Kanina-Putra (6.117.9).[15] Dhrtarashtra and Sanjaya also knew that because Sanjaya reported the entire Krishna-Karna conversation to Dhrtarashtra (5.139-140) in which Krishna revealed Karna’s identity. So, Dhrtarashtra came to know of Karna’s identity before the war but kept mum. He was thus more responsible for fomenting sibling rivalry and let it continue than any other. Since Kunti’s dhatri and spies also knew the truth, we may be certain that many other ‘common people’ also knew the truth. The secret of Karna’s birth had the same fate like most other secrets. Everyone knows the truth, thinks it secret, and claims it is a secret. This is the tragedy of most secrets.

Karna himself had no sense of inferiority about his birth (that is, to him, Adhiratha and Radha’s as parents). He told Shalya that he belonged to a noble lineage (sujata).[16]

This is very interesting. If Karna himself was satisfied with his lineage (adopted) and never complained on that count, who are the sympathy-Oalas shedding crocodile tears for him, and with what agenda? Actually this attempt to reconstruct Karna – like reconstructing Ravana and Ekalavya as victimized Low-Caste - is a part of greater agenda to subvert Vedic-Hinduism. More on this later in separate article.

From early days in Drona’s tutelage, Karna was envious of Arjuna in particular: “Karna, from jealousy, frequently defied Arjuna, and supported by Duryodhana, used to disregard the Pandavas.”[17] Karna was jealous of Arjuna’s friendship with Krishna.[18]

Karna took active part in Shakuni-Duryodhana’s machinations against the Pandavas. Karna and Shakuni endeavoured in various ways to kill the Pandavas, but the Pandavas successfully counteracted all those contrivances with Vidura’s counsel.[19] Later this gang tried to kill Pandavas and Kunti in Varanavata (1.129.1-2), and failed again.

In Draupadi's Svayamvara, Karna himself was an aspirant to win Draupadi. He failed to string the bow by a hair’s breadth (Southern Recension).[20] Some of the Northern Recensions depict Draupadi as rejecting Karna calling him Sutaputra; however, both versions are left out by the Critical Edition.[21] Even in the Critical Edition, Karna’s failure is clearly depicted. A patriarchal and casteist poet who wanted to redeem Karna at the cost of ill-portraying Draupadi as “casteist”, interpolated this in a case of memory lapse or selective-amnesia that he had already mentioned Karna’s failure. [See- Note-1]

Karna had been Kama-attached to Draupadi like all other kings in the Svayamvara Sabha, and so he became more frustrated and obsessed with Draupadi. The assembled princes were so Kama-struck at her beauty that they were utterly lost in her contemplation[22] and even regarded their best friends with jealousy.[23] This is not an ordinary matter, and though the information is rushed by the narrator in a matter of a Shloka, its import cannot be missed. ‘Best friends …jealousy’ would mean, even Duryodhana and Karna grew jealous of each other over Draupadi.

Krishna says in Gita – “From attachment/addiction is born Kama, from Kama, Krodha is born.”[24] We see this is indeed Karna’s Life-Script that he faithfully follows throughout.

Karna vented his frustration by fighting with Arjuna (in Brahmana’s guise). Forgetting all Kshatriya Ideology, he rushed to and attacked Arjuna first (jagamarjunam ojasa, 1.181.7a), lost the dual, and all of a sudden decided to quit taking care to protect his ego.[25] There is no real scope here to misunderstand Karna that he quitted out of respect for Brahmanas. Just sometime back, the kings (and Karna) had been eager for the fight with Brahmanas, and wanted to slaughter them.[26]

So, having taken the lead to attack the Brahmana, why did Karna quit now? Vyasa makes it pretty clear that Karna quitted being frightened (karne ca shankite, 1.181.26a).

Karna’s manner in Svayamvara is nothing new here; and he had never had any respect for the concerned maiden’s wish in matters of choice. That however, remains justified in the name of Kshatriya ideology of those days. Earlier when Duryodhana went to Svayamvara of Citrangada’s daughter in the capital city of Rajapura in Kalinga, and abducted the maiden being intolerant of her rejection of him, Karna protected his rear and vanquished the kings who followed them (12.4). No doubt it was Karna’s “great achievement”, however, it would be wrong to suppose that Duryodhana’s confidence was Karna only, or that he had escaped with Karna’s help only. Vyasa states clearly that Duryodhana had dared to abduct relying upon Bhishma and Drona.[27]

Why, having lost the Svayamvara contest, Karna couldn’t accept that? Why did he engage in conflict with the Brahmana (Arjuna)?

Karna’s Kama-frustration has a definite role behind this illogical departure from Kshatriya ideology. Kama for Draupadi and subsequent frustration made him angry and obsessive with Draupadi. He wanted to kill the Brahmana (Arjuna) to prove to Draupadi that her choice was wrong. His remembering Arjuna at this phase shows how his Arjuna-obsession and Draupadi-obsession merged into one. This episode is the Key to understand Karna’s mind, self and psyche vis-à-vis Arjuna: simultaneous SHraddha (respect), obsession, denial of reality, hatred and Matsyarya (envy, jealousy). This simultaneous flow of positive and negative energy with reaction to Arjuna’s image in his mind defines not only his attitude to Arjuna, but also his identity and identity crisis, which actually relates to his gender identity with feminine deficit. [See- Karna – Masculine-Mask Vulnerable Gender Identity]

While returning from Pancala with his brothers, Karna, Shalya, Shakuni and Ashvatthama, Duryodhana were depressed (vimana, 1.192.9a), cheerless and sorrowful (dina vigatacetasah, 13). Understanding the rise in power of Pandavas by virtue of their alliance with Drupada, Duryodhana, Karna etc were struck with fear and overcome with despair (trasta vigatasamkalpa, 14). When Duryodhana proposed of tempting the Pandavas by women of beautiful appearance[28] so that Draupadi gets annoyed with them (virajyatam, 15), Karna’s reaction to Duryodhana’s speech is even revealing: “women always like to have many husbands (bahubhartrta, 8a), Krishna hath obtained her wish. She can never be estranged from the Pandavas (1.194.8c).”

This speech reveals the patriarchal frame of Karna’s mind, other than pointing to his having known precedence; that is, his criticism of woman’s nature was based on his knowledge of similar cases and his personal experience. Indeed Karna had a troubled married life. His promise to not wash his feet till he killed Arjuna is actually a veiled revealer that Karna did not have well-balanced conjugal and sexual relation with his wives. [See- Karna – Masculine-Mask Vulnerable Gender Identity]. His casting aspersion on Draupadi for the polyandrous marriage suggests, Karna had doubts about his own wife/wives’ fidelity. This is another reason to believe why he clinged on to Duryodhana in Hastinapura leaving his Anga-Rajya headless. Rashtra is imagined as the ruler’s wife; Karna’s wife-abandoning go together.

From Shalya we know, “The abandonment of the afflicted and the sale of wives and children are prevalent amongst the Angas whose king thou (Karna) art.”[29] The patriarchal and misogynist culture that Karna lived in explains why he proposed Draupadi-disrobing in the Dice-Game Sabha. Of course, that proposal also betrays Karna’s secret and frustrated Kama for Draupadi for which he wanted to see her nude.

It is another myth that Karna had left Drona’s tutelage because Drona did not give him lessons in superior arms. Later Karna acknowledged that he had great strength of weapons obtained from Jamadagni and the high-souled Drona, with which he would conquer Arjuna.[30] So, why did he leave Drona’s Gurukula?

After completion of teachings, Drona wanted gurudakshina in the form of Drupada’s fall. Karna failed miserably along with Kauravas in the war against Drupada. Drupada and his citizens gave him severe beating and the Kauravas “beholding the battle become frightful, broke and fled wailing towards the Pandavas.”[31] Even if we ignore this episode because CE has left it out, the Kauravas failure to give gurudakshina is confirmed.

In my opinion, this humiliation was the reason why Karna left Drona’s tutelage. He realized that after this defeat, Drona would never consider him of merit.

Thereafter Karna pursued a false career. He falsely introduced himself as a Brahmana (ironically true! He was Brahmana Durvasa’s biological son) to Bhargava Rama and procured arms before being driven out. So, he was a drop-out to Guru Drona, and to that Guru’s Guru Bhargava Rama, he was a rusticated student. There are reasons to believe that Bhishma, Drona and Karna’s Guru Bhargava Rama were different individuals.

It is another myth that Karna had left Drona’s tutelage because Drona did not give him lessons in superior arms. Later Karna acknowledged that he had great strength of weapons obtained from Jamadagni and the high-souled Drona, with which he would conquer Arjuna.[32] So, why did he leave Drona’s Gurukula?

After completion of teachings, Drona wanted gurudakshina in the form of Drupada’s fall. Karna failed miserably along with Kauravas in the war against Drupada. Drupada and his citizens gave him severe beating and the Kauravas “beholding the battle become frightful, broke and fled wailing towards the Pandavas.”[33] Even if we ignore this episode because CE has left it out, the Kauravas failure to give gurudakshina is confirmed.

In my opinion, this humiliation was the reason why Karna left Drona’s tutelage. He realized that after this defeat, Drona would never consider him of merit.

Thereafter Karna pursued a false career. He falsely introduced himself as a Brahmana (ironically true! He was Brahmana Durvasa’s biological son) to Bhargava Rama and procured arms before being driven out. So, he was a drop-out to Guru Drona, and to that Guru’s Guru Bhargava Rama, he was a rusticated student. There are reasons to believe that Bhishma, Drona and Karna’s Guru Bhargava Rama were different individuals.

True friend never incites sadistic pleasure in his friend. Karna did that.

While the Pandavas and Draupadi were in exile post-Dice Game, Shakuni and Karna fed Duryodhana with the illusion that he had exiled the Pandavas by his prowess. They understood Duryodhana’s psychology that he loved to be in that delusion and had a hungry stomach for that. Karna proposed sadistic pleasure for Duryodhana: “Let the sons of Pandu behold thee like Yayati, the son of Nahusha, accompanied by a large train of followers and enjoying bliss that is great. O king, that blazing Prosperity which is seen by both one's friends and foes, is regarded as well-bestowed! What happiness can be more complete than that which he enjoyeth who while himself in prosperity, looketh upon his foes in adversity, like a person on the hill top looking down upon another crawling on the earth? O tiger among kings, the happiness that one derives from beholding his foes in grief, is greater than what one may derive from the acquisition of offering or wealth or kingdom!” (3.226.15-18). Hearing Karna’s proposal, Duryodhana was Hrshta (3.227.1).

This is not a friend by any standard. Karna’s pleasure is conditional to other’s distress.

With Dhrtarashtra’s permission, Duryodhana et al. set out for Ghosha-Yatra – supervising cattle and also a hunting expedition. They picked up quarrel with the Gandharvas and the result was disastrous for the Kauravas. Karna fought with Gandharvas but soon fled the battlefield leaving Duryodhana behind: “And while his car was thus attacked, Karna leaped therefrom with sword and shield in hand, and mounting on Vikarna's car, urged the steeds for saving himself."[34]

Duryodhana’s life and security simply vanished from Karna’s head. His instinct to preserve himself outsmarted his mammalian brain – the emotional attachment for Duryodhana. And when that happens, it is the Reptile Brain taking over, suggesting Karna’s relation with Duryodhana a case of emotional manipulation and control system, not different from two reptiles ‘loving’ each other or two reptiles’ friendship. [See- The Inner Script and Sri Ramakrishna – for an understanding of Reptile Brain]

No wonder, Vyasa has compared Duryodhana and Karna with Vrtra, the Ahi or snake, and Indra’s chief opponent in the RgVeda. Even Duryodhana’s birth myth of being born as meatball points to his Vrtra-reptile nature. Ball is footless, so is Vrtra. Karna’s misuse of Vac also makes him footless – foot or Pada being pun. [See- Draupadi Disrobing Episode - Allegory of Vak]

After Karna was routed,[35] Duryodhana fought for sometime, and soon both he and Duhshasana were captured. The devastated and dejected Kuru soldiers sought Yudhishthira’s help, and on his command, the Pandavas, particularly Arjuna fought with Citrasena and defeated him, and released Duryodhana, Duhshasana and their wives.

Karna and Duryodhana had insulted Arjuna’s wife, and now Arjuna (Pandavas) rescued Duryodhana’s wife with all honour. That is Karna, and that is Arjuna.

Continued to Next Page

Footnotes

  1. Not Atri’s son Durvasa of yore.
  2. sa jyeshthaputrah sutasya vavrdhe 'ngeshu viryavan / carena viditash casit prthaya divyavarmabhrt // (3.293.14)
  3. Rough estimate as per google map
  4. pritya dadau sa karnaya malinim nagarim atha (12.5.6a)
  5. palayam asa campam tu karnah parabalardanah / duryodhanasyanumate tavapi viditam tatha // (12.5.7)
  6. campasya tu puri campa ya purvam malini babhau // HV_23.38 //
  7. tasmin samvatsare rajan dhrtarashtran mahayashah / jajne dhimams tatas tasyam yuyutsuh karano nrpa // (1.107.36)
  8. duryodhanaprabhrtayo yuyutsuh karanas tatha (1.57.99)
  9. Duryodhana considers himself elder to Yudhishthira (speech to Dhrtarashtra: jyeshtho 'yam iti mam matva shreshthash ceti visham pate / yudhishthirena… 2.46.23; kaniyamso vivardhante jyeshtha hiyanti bharata, 2.49.24a).
  10. advaipayana in his infancy from Satyavati
  11. Parashara: 12.225.8-9: “The Kshatriyas called Atirathas, Ambashthas, Ugras, Vaidehas, Shvapakas, Pulkasas, Tenas, Nishadas, Sutas, Magadhas, Ayogas, Karanas, Vratyas, and Candalas, O monarch, have all sprung from the four original orders by intermixture with one another.”
  12. acarya trividha yoni rajnam shastravinishcaye / tatkulinash ca shurash ca senam yash ca prakarshati // 1.126.34
  13. sakundalam sakavacam divyalakshanalakshitam / katham adityasamkasham mrgi vyaghram janishyati (1.127.15)
  14. napi sutakule jatam karnam manye katham cana / devaputram aham manye kshatriyanam kulodbhavam // 8.24.159
  15. kaunteyas tvam na radheyo vidito naradan mama / krshnadvaipayanac caiva keshavac ca na samshayah // (6.117.9)
  16. mam ekam abhisamyatau sujatam shalya pashya me (8.27.63c)
  17. sutaputrash ca radheyo gurum dronam iyat tada/ spardhamanas tu parthena sutaputro 'tyamarshanah/ duryodhanam upashritya pandavan atyamanyata // (1.122.47)
  18. sakhyam ca vasudevena balye gandivadhanvanah (12.2.7a)
  19. tato vaikartanah karnah shakunish capi saubalah / anekair abhyupayais tan jighamsanti sma pandavan // pandavash capi tat sarvam pratyajanann arimdamah/ udbhavanam akurvanto vidurasya mate sthitah// (1.129.2-3)
  20. 01,178.017d*1830_02 dhanur aropyamanam tu romamatre 'bhyatadayat
  21. Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute
  22. kandarpabanabhinipiditangah; krshnagatais te hrdayair narendrah; 1.178.5a
  23. dveshyan hi cakruh suhrdo 'pi tatra; 1.178.5c
  24. sangat samjayate kamah kamat krodho 'bhijayate // (Gita- 2.62/ Mbh.-6.24.62)
  25. tushyami te vipramukhya bhujaviryasya samyuge/ avishadasya caivasya shastrastravinayasya ca, 15
  26. ahave hi dvijasyapi vadho drshto yuyutsatah, 6c
  27. sa viryamadamattatvad bhishmadronav upashritah, 12.4.13a
  28. darshaniyabhih pramadabhir vilobhyatam
  29. aturanam parityagah svadarasutavikrayah / angeshu vartate karna yesham adhipatir bhavan // 8.30.83
  30. tavapi viditam deva mamapy astrabalam mahat / jamadagnyad upattam yat tatha dronan mahatmanah // 3.286.8
  31. 01,128.004b@078_0038 shrutva tu tumulam yuddham nagaranam ca bharata
    01,128.004b@078_0039 dravanti sma nadanti sma kroshantah pandavan prati
  32. tavapi viditam deva mamapy astrabalam mahat / jamadagnyad upattam yat tatha dronan mahatmanah // 3.286.8
  33. 01,128.004b@078_0038 shrutva tu tumulam yuddham nagaranam ca bharata 01,128.004b@078_0039 dravanti sma nadanti sma kroshantah pandavan prati
  34. gandharva bahusahasrah khandasho 'bhyahanan ratham // tato rathad avaplutya sutaputro 'sicarmabhrt / vikarnaratham asthaya mokshayashvan acodayat // (3.230.3c-31)
  35. gandharvais tu maharaja bhagne karne maharathe // 3.231.1a
Share This:
10-Jul-2021
More by :  Indrajit Bandyopadhyay
 
Views: 605      Comments: 0




Name *
Email ID
 (will not be published)
Comment *
Characters
Verification Code*
Can't read? Reload
Please fill the above code for verification.
 
Top | Hinduism



 
 
 
 
 
 
1999-2021 All Rights Reserved
 
No part of this Internet site may be reproduced without prior written permission of the copyright holder
.