Saturday, March 31, 2018

Misconceptions about the Virata war

One of the most hyped up incidents in the Mahabharata, an incident that has been the topic of debates and discussions for many years in the Mahabharata community will now be discussed by me too as well also.
This post is merely my attempt to debunk any pieces of misinformation that many others have spread about the Virata war. Since for so many years people have done nothing more than selective quoting, copying and pasting material from fan pages etc. Cause a lot of people these days just don't know what they're talking about, or like to lie a lot. To fool the public.
They don't look at the whole incident at all and formulate their own opinion to spread lies and several untruths about this war. So now here are a list of misconceptions that need to be addressed and debunked. They will be proven false by me right now.

  • Misconception number 1 - 
Arjuna did not fight off any group attacks, he always fought one warrior at a time. 
    • Then i'm going to send you a list of most of the group attacks Karna and his cronies and everyone else did to Arjuna during this war.
Incident 1 - Multiple Kuru warriors showered their arrows on Arjuna. http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m04/m04059.htm key word warriors. Meaning more than one.
And, O king, beholding Partha turn away from Aswatthaman's side, the Kuru warriors discharged thousands of arrows on Arjuna
Incident 2 - Duhsasana, Vikarna, Vivingsati and Dussaha all ambush Arjuna. http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m04/m04061.htm
And at this, four mighty warriors, Dussasana and Vikarna and Dussaha and Vivingsati, skilled in weapons and endued with great energy, and all decked with handsome garlands and ornaments, rushed towards that terrible bowman. And advancing towards Vibhatsu--that fierce archer, these all encompassed him around. Then the heroic Dussasana pierced the son of Virata with a crescent-shaped arrow and he pierced Arjuna with another arrow in the breast. And Jishnu, confronting Dussasana, cut off by means of a sharp-edged arrow furnished with vulturine wings his adversary's bow plaited with gold, and then pierced his person in the breast by means of five arrows. And afflicted by the arrows of Partha. Dussasana fled, leaving the combat. Then Vikarna, the son of Dhritarashtra, pierced Arjuna--that slayer of hostile heroes, by means of sharp and straight arrows furnished with vulturine wings. But the son of Kunti within a moment hit him also in the forehead with straight shafts. And pierced by Arjuna, he fell down from his car. And at this, Dussaha, supported by Vivingsati, covered Arjuna with a cloud of sharp arrows, impelled by the desire of rescuing his brother. Dhananjaya, however, without the least anxiety, pierced both of them almost at the same instant by means of couple of keen-edged arrows and then slew the steeds of both. And there upon, both those sons of Dhritarashtra, deprived of their steeds and their bodies mangled were taken away by the warrior behind them who had rushed forward with other cars.
Incident 3 - Everysingle warrior and foot soldier of the Kaurava army attacks a lone Arjuna.  http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m04/m04062.htm
Then, O thou of the Bharata race, all the great car-warriors of the Kurus, united together, began to assail Arjuna to the best of their might from all sides. But that hero of immeasurable soul completely covered all those mighty car-warriors with clouds of arrows, even as the mist covereth the mountains. And the roars of huge elephants and conchs, mingling together, produced a loud up roar. And penetrating through the bodies of elephants and horses as also through steel coats of mail, the arrows shot by Partha fell by thousands. And shooting shafts with the utmost celerity, the son of Pandu seemed in that contest to resemble the blazing sun of an autumnal midday. And afflicted with fear, the car-warriors began to leap down from their cars and the horse-soldiers from horse-back, while the foot-soldiers began to fly in all directions.
    • Note: "all the great car-warriors of the Kurus," this would have to include Karna as well too.
  • Misconception number 2 - 
Uttara was a very poor charioteer, and he did not know that many moves, yet Arjuna was able to still win in war despite having a driver like that.
    • Debunk: Wrong, Uttara was actually a really good charioteer, here is the proof from Virata Parva
Then the son of Virata, turning the steed to the left began to perform circuitous evolution called Yamaka and thus withstood all those warriors.
      • The above quote proves that Uttara had the knowledge of the Yamaka maneuver in car driving. It's clear like water that Uttara was not a mediocre charioteer. He had great knowledge of driving.

  • Misconception number 3 - 
Considering his Virata war performance Arjuna should have bene able to kill Bhisma and Drona in the Kurukshetra war
    • Debunk: Arjuna did not end the Kurukshetra war in a single day because of many reasons.
      • He did not want to cause colossal damage:
Arjuna to Yudhishthira (on the 17th day): - Karna Parva (the book of Karna) chapter 70
I alone have slain half of the entire (hostile) army. Slaughtered by me, the Bharata host that resembled, O king, the very host of the celestials, is lying dead on the field. I slay those with (high) weapons that are conversant with high weapons. For this reason I do not reduce the three worlds to ashes.
        • Point (1) - Arjuna claims that he alone killed half of the enemy army in the war.
        • Point (2) - Arjuna says he only uses high weapons (astras) on those who are conversant and knowledgeable about such high weapons (astras).
          • He also stated that this was the reason why he did not reduce the Kurukshetra war grounds to ash.
      • He had to allow Bhima to keep his vow of slaying Duryodhana and his brothers.
      • He had to protect Sahadeva's promise to kill Sakuni.
    • In Kurukshetra war Arjuna had to bear the burden of protecting millions of soldiers and comrades, in Virata war he only had to protect one man besides himself Uttara. So their is a clear difference in the situations of both the wars.
  • Misconception number 4 -
Arjuna asked for a boon in Vana Parva to remain undefeated at the hands of warriors like Karna, Drona, Bhisma etc - quote:
"Arjuna said, 'O illustrious god having the bull for thy sign, if thou wilt grant me my desire, I ask of thee, O lord that fierce celestial weapon wielded by thee and called Brahmasira--that weapon of terrific prowess which destroyeth, at the end of the Yuga the entire universe--that weapon by the help of which, O god of gods, I may under thy grace, obtain victory in the terrible conflict which shall take place between myself (on one side), and Karna and Bhishma and Kripa and Drona (on the other)--that weapon by which I may consume in battle Danavas and Rakshasas and evil spirits and Pisachas and Gandharvas and Nagas--that weapon which when hurled with Mantras produceth darts by thousands and fierce-looking maces and arrows like snakes of virulent poison, and by means of which I may fight with Bhishma and Drona and Kripa and Karna of ever abusive tongue, O illustrious destroyer of the p. 91 eyes of Bhaga, even this is my foremost desire, viz., that I may be able to fight with them and obtain success.'
    • Debunk:
      • This quote is an interpolation as it is stating that Arjuna asked Shiva for the Brahmasira (a weapon Arjuna already got during the Adi Parva of Mahabharata). 
        • Another possibility is that this quote does not make sense because Arjuna never used the Brahmasira on any of those warriors, not the Gandharvas, not the Nagas, not the Pisachas, not even the Danavas and Rakshasas. And he most certainly did not use it (Pasupata/Brahmasira) on Karna, Bhisma, Kripa & Drona.
          • These warriors were not the targets of weapons like Pasupata and Brahmasira.
            • Arjuna used ordinary arrows against Nagas.
            • Arjuna used the Agneya weapon against Gandharvas.
            • Arjuna used the thunderbolt of Indra to beat the Rakshasas.
            • Arjuna utilized a Raudra weapon to kill the Danavas.
            • Arjuna launched the Anjalika shaft to behead Karna.
        • So this can't be true, it's a lie.
          • Many incidents in the Mahabharata contradict this incident from Vana Parva where Arjuna asked for the desire to be able to fight with Karna, Bhisma etc.
  • Misconception number 5 - 
All the Kuru warriors were just trying to capture Arjuna not actually defeat him.
But irresistible though he be p. 86 in battle, we should fight against him. Let, therefore, our troops, clad in mail, stand here arrayed in ranks and ready to strike. Let Drona and Duryodhana and Bhishma and thyself and Drona's son and ourselves, all fight with the son of Pritha. Do not O Kama, act so rashly as to fight alone. If we six car-warriors be united, we can then be a match for and fight with that son of Pritha who is resolved to fight and who is as fierce as the wielder of the thunderbolt. Aided by our troops arrayed in ranks, ourselves--great bowmen--standing carefully will fight with Arjuna even as the Danavas encounter Vasava in battle.'"
  • Misconception number 6 -
Arjuna was disguised as a eunuch by the name of Vrihanalla, so that's why Karna and Bhisma refused to fight him and accepted defeat, they let Arjuna wound him and claim victory. They did not even know it was Arjuna.
    • Debunk: Lies all lies, the reality is actually that every single person even the foot soldiers of the Kuru army (at Virata war) knew that they were encountering Arjuna not Vrihanalla. Here is the proof:
Screenshot from original BORI Mahabharata
Then Sikhandin, O king, excited with rage, struck the grandsire of the Bharatas in the chest with nine sharp arrows. The Kuru grandsire Bhishma, however, though struck by him in battle, thus, trembled not, O monarch, but remained unmoved like a mountain during an earthquake. Then Vibhatsu, drawing his bow Gandiva with a laugh, pierced the son of Ganga with five and twenty arrows. And once more, Dhananjaya, with great speed and excited with wrath struck him in every vital part with hundreds of arrows. Thus pierced by others, also with thousands of arrows, the mighty car-warrior Bhishma pierced those others in return with great speed. And as regards the arrows shot by those warriors, Bhishma, possessed of prowess in battle that was incapable of being baffled, equally checked them all with his own straight arrows.
King Yudhishthira then, beholding Sikhandin flying away, having had his weapon cut off by Santanu's son became filled with anger. The high-souled Ajatasatru, angrily addressing Sikhandin in that battle, said these words, 'Thou saidst at that time, in the presence of thy sire, unto me – Even I shall slay Bhishma of high vows with my shafts of the hue of the effulgent sun. Truly do I say this. – Even this was thy oath. That oath of thine thou dost not fulfil inasmuch as thou dost not slay Devavrata in battle. O hero, be not a person of unfulfilled vow. Take care of thy virtue, race, and fame.
  • Misconception number 7 -
Arjuna merely used the Sammohana weapon and swooned all warriors making them unconscious and sleeping, thus Arjuna won the fight but did not actually win (through his own prowess), it is his weapons that make him powerful. If you give this Sammohana even to Sakuni, then even he can defeat Karna and co.
And once more, taking up with both his hands that large conch of loud blare, Partha, that slayer of foes, blew it with force and filled the cardinal and other points, the whole earth, and sky, with that noise. And those foremost of the Kuru heroes were all deprived of their senses p. 115 by the sound of that conch blown by Partha.
        • So he probably never even used the Sammohana weapon in the Virat war.

  • Misconception number 8 -
The goal of Suyodhana, Bhisma and Karna & Drona was not to defeat Arjuna but to break the year of incognito.
    • Debunk: That is false. The truth is that the Kouravas main goal and aim was to conquer matsya desh and Arjuna became the greatest obstacle in their path to achieving this goal. Here is the proof that they all were planning to conquer the kingdom's wealth. Here is proof once again from BORI Mahabharata
    All in all the Kaurava were not expecting Arjuna to arrive their and fight them, but they clearly recognized him in the war and they knew who they were fighting with when push came to shove.
    O preceptor's son, do thou forgive. This is not the time for disunion. Let all of us, uniting, fight with Indra's son who hath come. Of all the calamities that may befall an army that have been enumerated by men of wisdom, the worst is disunion among the leaders. 
          • It's like their goal was to fight Arjuna.
    • Misconception number 9 - 
    Arjuna had Hanumana on the flag of his chariot, he was dampening the energy of Arjuna's opponents
      • Debunk:
        • Of course this shows the true colors and nature of the majority of debaters in the Karna fanbase that they need to come up with some excuse to justify the losses of their hero.
      • First of all the ape that was present on Arjuna's flag was clearly not Hanuman
      • Second of all if Karna's energy is dampened by the roar of some random ape then it shows how incompetent Karna is.
      • No where was it mentioned in the text of the actual fight that Karna was not at his full potential/capacity/ability in this war.
      • Whenever the chariot banner is talked about, it simply mentions "great ape", not Hanumana. At-least in virata parva war.
    And he hoisted on that car his own golden banner bearing the figure of an ape with a lion's tail, which was a celestial illusion contrived by Viswakarman himself. For, as soon, indeed, as he had thought of that gift of Agni, than the latter, knowing his wish, ordered those superhuman creatures (that usually sat there) to take their place in that banner.
              • This is Vaisampayana's opinion:
                • He considered the ape a mere figure and a celestial illusion.
                • This leads to many possibilities. So since it was an illusion we can say that the ape was fake and did not actually exist, he was never on Arjuna's flag to begin with.
                • It's just a banner.... what type of advantage could it possibly provide? 
                  • I don't see anything unfair about this.
            • Incident 2: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m04/m04048.htm
    Having obtained weapons from that best of ascetics--the son of Jamadagni, I would, relying on their energy, fight with even the celestials. Struck with my javelin, the ape stationed on his banner-top shall fall down today on the ground, uttering terrible cries. The firmament will today be filled with the cries of the (super-human) creatures stationed in the flagstaff of the foe, and afflicted by me, they will fly away in all directions.
              • Note what Karna said:
                • He compared the ape to super human creatures.
                • He considered the "ape" to be weaker than celestials (the Devas).
                  • This clearly proves the ape cannot be considered the same Hanuman that defeated the Deva Surya in his childhood.
                • He considered the ape on Arjuna's flag to be weak compared to him.
            • Incident 3: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m04/m04053.htm
    And noting all this, and seeing that great car-warrior--the wielder of the Gandiva--come, Drona spoke thus, 'That is the banner-top of Partha which shineth at a distance, and this is the noise of his car, and that is the ape that roareth frightfully. Indeed, the ape striketh terror in the troops.
    And beholding Kiritin filling the air with the twang of Gandiva, and the upraised tail of the monkey that constituted his flag and that terrible creature yelling furiously from the top of his flagstaff, Karna sent forth a loud roar.
              • Just because the monkey (ape) yelled that doesn't mean that the ape was Hanuman. It could just be an ordinary ape. 
                • And anyways Karna was not even frightened (scared) by it.
            • Incident 5: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m04/m04063.htm
    And Bhishma, endued with great energy, pierced Partha's flag-staff with eight arrows. The arrows reaching the flag-staff of Pandu's son, struck the blazing ape and those creatures also stationed in the banner-top.
              • The text just states that Bhisma struck the ape with with 8 arrows, the effect the arrows had on the ape is not even stated.
    • Misconception number 10 -
    Arjuna won these fights only due to the advantage of his celestial bow (Gandiva). While all other warriors were just fighting with the use of an ordinary bow at their disposal.
    And seeing this those mighty car-warriors, Chitrasena and Sangramajit and Satrusaha and Jaya, desirous of aiding Karna, rushed with arrows and long shafts, towards the advancing hero of Bharata's race.
            • I'm pretty sure that the difference in their bows would be made up in the difference of how fighters were on one side compared to the other. Arjuna was alone against Karna, Chitrasena (perhaps the Gandharva lol), Sangramajit and Jaya & Satrusaha. It was five (led by Karna) vs one (Arjuna).
          • The support of several more warrior (including Bhisma) in another encounter with a single Arjuna:
    And Arjuna then shot three and seventy arrows of sharp points at Drona, and ten at Dussaha and eight at Drona's son, and twelve at Dussasana, and three at Kripa, the son of Saradwat. And that slayer of foes pierced Bhishma, the son of Santanu, with arrows, and king Duryodhana with a hundred. And, lastly, he pierced Karna in the ear with a bearded shaft. And when that great bowmen Karna, skilled in all weapons, was thus pierced, and his horses and car and car-driver were all destroyed, the troops that supported him began to break.
            • Our great Karna had the help of two students of Parasurama, the mighty Aswathama, king Duryodhana & Kripa yet he could not cause any notable wound on Arjuna's body and gain any advantage against him (Arjuna), that too just because of a bow?
              • No this excuse is not valid, it is a foolish excuse, created by blind fanatics. The true excuse should be Karna is useless.
          • The mercy of Arjuna, he would spare the life of Karna
          • The opportunity to run and hide and wait to recover - http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m04/m04054.htm
        • Double debunk: And for the record Shiva also had the Pinaka bow, Vishnu had the Saranga bow, Rama had the Kodanda bow, Indra had the Vijaya bow, Krishna also used a bow named Saranga, does that mean we should credit all of their victories to their bows instead of their competence?
          • Arjuna used the Gandiva bow because it is the only bow that suits the strength, speed and force his arms had acquired over the years. No other bow would work anymore, this was stated in the Khandava-Daha Parva: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m01/m01227.htm
    Vibhatsu said unto him these words well-suited to the occasion, I have numberless excellent celestial weapons with which I can fight even many wielders of the thunderbolt. But, O exalted one, I have no bow suited to the strength p. 439 of my arms, and capable of bearing the might I may put forth in battle. In consequence of the lightness of my hands also I require arrows that must never be exhausted.
            • His arrows would run out quickly due to the fast rate in which he fires them. Which is why he needed those inexhaustible quivers.
              • And for the record, warriors with an ordinary bow like Susharman, Aswathama, Duryodhana etc, have been able to achieve better feats than Karna in the Kurukshetra war. And they did not need the help of any celestial bow like Vijaya, they were also able to swoon Arjuna, and check him, and even break his bow-string unlike Karna who failed to accomplish this without his celestial Vijaya bow. SO i guess they were more powerful than Karna. (At-least based on karnian logic).
    • Misconception number 11 -
    Karna was still afflicted by the loss of his armor and ear-rings (from Vana Parva) in the Wirata war (of Virata Parva). Thus Karna was not even at full power.
      • Debunk: Nowhere was it ever written that prior to the battle of Virata) our Karna was still afflicted and suffering from the pain of losing his Kavach Kundal. 
        • As a matter of fact Karna said that he was fully capable and fully equipped to fight with Arjuna, he said he was ready completely prepared for the war.
          • On the other hand Karna himself says that it is not him but Arjuna who was afflicted and out of shape and not in his prime, that Arjuna will not be able to fight to his full potential not Karna.
    Having been engaged in ascetic austerities for the (last) eight and five years, Vibhatsu will strike me but mildly in this conflict, and the son of Kunti having become a Brahmana endued with good qualities, hath thus become a fit person to quietly receive shafts by thousands shot by me.
    • Misconception number 12 -
    None of the warriors who fought Arjuna, even used any celestial weapons of mass destruction on him.
      • Debunk: Nice joke, here are multiple incidents where divine weapons were used on Arjuna. Only bhisma and drona used them in this war against Arjuna by the way.
    And unable to bear this, Bhishma though cognisant of the Pandava's might, covered Dhananjaya with a powerful celestial weapon.
          • Second incident:
    And repelling weapons with weapons, those two bulls of the Bharata race, both endued with great might, fought on playfully and infatuated the eyes of all created beings. And those illustrious warriors ranged on the field of battle, using the celestials weapons obtained from Prajapati and Indra, and Agni and the fierce Rudra, and Kuvera, and Varuna, and Yama, and Vayu. And all beings were greatly surprised, upon beholding those warriors engaged in combat. And they all exclaimed,--Bravo Partha of long arms? Bravo Bhishma! Indeed, this application of celestial weapons that is being witnessed in the combat between Bhishma and Partha is rare among human beings."
    And the fierce and terrible encounter that took place between the illustrious Drona and Arjuna resembled that between Virata and Vasava of old. And discharging arrows at each other from bows drawn at their fullest stretch, they resembled two elephants assailing each other with their tusks. And those wrathful warriors--those ornaments of battle--fighting strictly according to established usage, displayed in that conflict various celestial weapons in due order.
          • Second instance:
    And Bharadwaja's son fought on with Falguna, resisting with his own the celestial weapons shot by the former. And the fight that took place between those enraged lions among men, incapable of bearing each other, was like unto encounter between the gods and the Danavas. And the son of Pandu repeatedly baffled with his own, the Aindra, the Vayavya, and the Agneya weapons that were shot by Drona.
    • Misconception number 13 -
    Karna's performance was better than Arjuna's in this war.
      • Refute: lol, hahahahah, this is the biggest lie in history of the Mahabharata community and the Karna vs Arjuna debate. It does not even deserve a debunk. But fine. I'll show you the truth, Arjuna killed Karna's brother Sangramajit, yet Karna never killed any of Arjuna's comrades. So how can you say karna's performance was better? Karna repeatedly resorted to rule breaking and sacrificed his ethics to fight against Arjuna but Arjuna never let go of his ethics to fight Karna.
        • If his performance was better than in every reference of this war Karna would have been praised not Arjuna. Karna would not have been insulted, bashed, rebuked, exposed, disgraced etc for his repeated defeats at the hands of his opponent in this war.
    Beholding in the city of Virata his beloved brother slain by Dhananjaya who displayed such prowess, what did this one then do? When Dhananjaya, rushing against all the assembled Kurus, crushed them and took away their robes, was this one not there then?
    About a year ago, on the occasion of attacking Virata's kine, did not Bhishma, on their way back, solicit Duryodhana about this very peace so beneficial to all? Believe me, they have been defeated even then when their defeat was resolved by thee.
    On the occasion also of the seizure of (Virata's) kine, the Kauravas, swelling with numbers in respect of both men and animals, and having the preceptor and the preceptor's son and Bhishma amongst them, were vanquished by that foremost of men. Why, O son of Suta, didst thou not vanquish Arjuna then? For thy destruction another excellent battle has now presented itself. If thou dost not fly away from fear of thy enemy, know O Suta's son, that as soon as thou goest to battle thou wilt be slain.
          • Now look at Karna's response:
    "'Karna said, "Let it be so, let it be so. Why, however, dost thou indulge in Arjuna's praises? A battle is about to ensue between myself and him. If he vanquishes me in fight, then will these thy praises be regarded as well-uttered.'"
    There where, like a pack of jackals defeated by a lion, ye all were defeated with great slaughter by the diadem-decked Arjuna, what became of your prowess? Beholding also thy brother slain by Savyasaci, in the very sight of the Kuru heroes, it was thou that didst fly away first.
      • Kripa talks to karna about Virat war:
    In Virata's city also, all the Kauravas, united together, including thyself and thy younger brother were vanquished by Partha in battle. Thou art not a match for even one of the sons of Pandu, viz., Phalguna, on the field of battle. 
    He clearly considered this as Karna's defeat. http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m07/m07154.htm
    • Misconception number 14 - 
    Arjuna had a impenetrable armor during this war.
      • Debunk: Every single armor in Mahabharata is useless whether it is states as impenetrable or not each armor was broken through. None of the armors ever protected anyone from their deaths, and the weapons of an enemy. An armor cannot cover all parts of your body so this theory of impenetrable armor is quite foolish and stupid, it just shows sheer desperation and reaching for excuses to defend the warrior images of Bhisma, Duryodhana & Karna etc.
    Here is proof of others defeating a dozen warriors who had such armor and boasted of it as impenetrable, you can find this incident in the Drona Parva of Mahabharata.
    Indeed, Satyaki, then aiming another arrow of golden wings, that emitted blazing flames and resembled an angry snake, or the rod of the Destroyer himself, pierced Kritavarman. That terrible arrow, penetrating through his antagonist's effulgent armour decked with gold, entered the earth, dyed with blood. Afflicted with the shafts of Satwata, and bathed in blood in that battle, Kritavarman throwing aside his bow with arrow, fell upon his car. That lion-toothed hero of immeasurable prowess, that bull among men, afflicted by Satyaki with his arrows, fell on his knees upon the terrace of his car.

    The preceptor (Drona), cased as he is in impenetrable mail, in consequence of his lightness of arms, obtaining thee in battle, will sport with thee as a child with a little bird.

    The grandson of Sini then, O king, pierced Drona with many winged arrows. Indeed, striking him on the right arm, Satyaki, O bull of Bharata's race, afflicted him greatly. 

    • Misconception number 15 -
    Indra fought on behalf of Arjuna in the Virat war

      • Debunk:
    This is the quote provided by the Karnians:
    And struck and mangled by Partha, the hostile warriors thought that,--Verily, Indra himself, desirous of Partha's victory, accompanied by all the immortals is slaying us! And they also regarded Vijaya, who was making a terrible slaughter around, to be none else than Death himself who having assumed the form of Arjuna, was slaying all creatures.
    http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m04/m04055.htm Even though Karna was not even among those that was being slain.

    Now this is another quote to prove that Indra was not fighting alongside Arjuna, he was all alone, Indra was a spectator while Arjuna (who was Indra's son was fighting).
    And all the celestials with Indra, stationed in the firmament, gazed with wonder upon another celestial weapon hurled with great force by that wonderful archer Arjuna. And beholding that wonderful weapon of great beauty, the mighty Gandiva, Chitrasena, highly pleased, addressed the lord of celestials, saying, 'Behold these arrows shot by Partha coursing through the sky in one continuous line. Wonderful is the dexterity of Jishnu in evolving this celestial weapon!
    http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m04/m04063.htm Over here Indra's name is clearly used, and it is written in clear English language that he was a spectator, that he was looking at the battle of Arjuna and Bhisma, gazing with wonder. Even Chitrasena the leader of the Gandharvas that defeated Karna) was a spectator of the war.

    Arjuna's claims:
    I slew of old, at Indra's command, hundreds and thousands p.108 of Paulomas and  Kalakhanjas in battle. I have obtained my firmness of grasp from Indra, and my lightness of hand from Brahman, and I have learnt various modes of fierce attack and defence amid crowds of foes from Prajapati. I vanquished, on the other side of the great ocean, sixty thousands of car-warriors--all fierce archers--residing in Hiranyapura. Behold, now I defeat the multitudinous host of the Kurus like a tempest scattering a heap of cotton.
    This clearly mean that when Arjuna was attacking the Kuru warriors and slaying some of them, he resembled Indra killing the Danavas. http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m04/m04061.htm
    Conclusion: Indra was not a part of the Virata war. Arjuna was the only one fighting from Virata's side.
    Posted by at 4 comments:

    Monday, March 12, 2018

    Duryodhan is superior to Hanuman, Laxman, Parshuram.

    Duryodhan did not sell his wife.
    Duryodhan did not give anyone female slave's (Balram did).
    Duryodhan never murdered a baby (parshuram did).
    Duryodhan never burnt a innocent kid alive (hanutati did).
    Duryodhan was a better human being and character.

    Posted by at 4 comments:

    Thursday, March 8, 2018

    The death of Vikarna.

    =
    Quote.
    The seven sons of thine that were thus slain were Satrunjaya, Satrusaha, Chitra, Chitrayudha, Dridha, Chitrasena & Vikarna. Amongst all thy sons thus slain, Vrikodara, the son of Pandu, grieved bitterly from sorrow for Vikarna who was dear to him. Bhima said "Even thus was the vow made by me, that all of you should be slain by me in battle. It is for that, O Vikarna, that thou hast been slain. My vow hath been accomplished. O hero, thou camest to battle, bearing in mind the duties of a Kshatriya. Thou wert ever engaged in our good & especially in that of the king (our eldest brother). It is scarcely proper, therefore, for me to grieve for thy illustrious self." Having slain those princes in the very sight of Radha's son, the son of Pandu uttered a terrible leonine roar.
    Point: Bhima said Vikarna was ever engaged in their good especially of the king (their eldest brother [either Karna or Yudhishthira, both of them were kings] because he saved Karna's life twice), but that is considered a later interpolation as it has been removed by BORI Mahabharata.
    ======
    Later quote in Karna Parva:
    "Thy heroic son Vikarna, deprived of steeds and weapons, stood, facing the foe, remembering the duties of Kshatriyas. Remembering the many foul wrongs inflicted upon him by Duryodhana & bearing in mind his own vow, Bhimasena hath slain him."
      Analysis: Sanjaya claims that Vikarna had no weapons when he died.

      • Described by Gandhari in Stri Parva
      Quote:
      There, O Madhava, my son Vikarna, applauded by the wise, lieth on the bare ground, slain by Bhima and mangled horribly! Deprived of life, O slayer of Madhu, Vikarna lieth in the midst of (slain) elephants like the moon in the autumnal sky surrounded by blue clouds. His broad palm, cased in leathern fence, and scarred by constant wielding of the bow, is pierced with difficulty by vultures desirous of feeding upon it. His helpless young wife, O Madhava, is continually endeavouring, without success, to drive away those vultures desirous of feeding on carrion. The youthful and brave and handsome Vikarna, O bull among men, brought up in luxury and deserving of every kind of weal, now sleepeth amid the dust, O Madhava! Though all his vital parts have been pierced with clothyard shafts and bearded arrows and nalikas, yet that beauty of person which was his hath not forsaken this best of the Bharatas.
      Analysis: Gandhari (even though she was blindfolded) claimed that Vikarna's corpse was mangled and left to rot in the midst of dead elephants on the ground. She claims he was killed in an archery battle.

      Source: http://sacred-texts.com/hin/m11/m11018.htm
      =
      VIKARNA.
      14th day.
      [start]
      The seven sons of thine that were thus slain were Satrunjaya, and Satrusaha, and Chitra, and Chitrayudha, and Dridha, and Chitrasena and Vikarna. Amongst all thy sons thus slain, Vrikodara, the son of Pandu, grieved bitterly from sorrow for Vikarna who was dear to him.
      14th night.
      What Drona did (lighting lamp's);
      "Indeed, all the troops, thus made radiant by the foot-soldiers with oil-fed lamps in their hands, looked beautiful like clouds in the nocturnal sky illumined by flashes of lightning. When the Kuru host had thus been illuminated, Drona, endued with the effulgence of fire, scorching everything around, looked radiant, O king, in his golden armour, like the midday sun of blazing ray. The light of those lamps began to be reflected from the golden ornaments, the bright cuirasses and bows, and the well-tempered weapons of the combatants."
      {complete}
      Suyodhana talked to Vikarna.
      [quote]
      Understanding the wishes of Drona who was bent on battle, Duryodhana, on that night addressing his obedient brothers, Vikarna and Chitrasena and Suparsva and Durdharsha and Dirghavahu, and said "Ye heroes of great valour, struggling with resolution, all of you protect Drona from the rear. The son of Hridika will protect his right and Sala his left." Saying this, thy son then urged forward placing them at the van.
      =
      Conclusion: So all three descriptions differ in certain ways. All of them agree that Bhima killed Vikarna, two of them say that he was killed in an archery battle, one of them says that he was unarmed when he was slain.
      Regarding the mention of vikarna on the 14th night it can be considered either a clerical error or a inaccuracy in mahabharat.
      Posted by at 3 comments:

      Wednesday, March 7, 2018

      The ages of Mahabharata characters written by Krishna-Dwaipayana Vyasa

      This post is my attempt to find out how old each of the major characters of the epic Mahabharata were during the time of the war of Kurukshetra and before it.
      Pandavas are old enough to be grandfathers they had alot of grandchildren.
      The first piece of evidence:
      “I will slay within the twinkling of an eye the Panchalas, the Karushas, the Matsyas, and the sons of Pritha with their sons and grandsons.”
      Source: www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m05/m05062.htm
      The second piece of evidence:
       “Beholding his sons, grandsons, and friends all slain in battle, the king's soul became overwhelmed with great grief, O Janamejaya! Recollecting those sons and grandsons and brothers and allies, a deep sorrow took possession of the illustrious monarch.”
      Source: www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m10/m10011.htm
      The third piece of evidence:
      "The king, then, recollecting his sons and grandsons and kinsmen and friends, became filled with anxiety and grief."
      Source: www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m12/m12a006.htm
      It says “grandsons” (meaning more than one) not grandson (just one). The only grandson of the Pandavas (that fought in the war) whose name is mentioned is Anjanaparvan (the son of Ghatotkatcha), but their were other grandsons who fought and died in the war he wasn’t the only one.
      Also Ghatotkatcha was born before any of the Upapandavas, so maybe his son Anjanaparvan was nearly as old as Ghatotkatcha’s half brothers/cousins (the upapandavas).

      Arjuna's statement about the Gandiva bow:
      And finally Partha, p. 75 surnamed Swetavahana, 1 hath held it for five and sixty years. 2 Endued with great energy and of high celestial origin, this is the best of all bows.
      Analysis: This means that at the time of the Go-harana war the bow known as Gandiva was already held by Arjuna for 65 years! Note that Arjuna was talking about himself in a third person perspective.

      Source: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m04/m04043.htm


        • Meaning of the Nilakantha text

      Quote:
      75:2 Nilakantha spends much learning and ingenuity in making out that sixty-five years in this connection means thirty-two years of ordinary human computation.
      Analysis: Someone called Rishabh Rakesh decided to cherry pick this quote but fails to realize it's true meaning. The meaning of this quote is for ordinary human's capacity. And Arjuna was not an ordinary human, so this cannot be used to say that the years in Mahabharata are only 49 percent of one year in the numerical system that we use nowadays. Also according to karna fans, footnotes are not a part of the original epic. And i tend to somewhat agree with this claim, because most times the translators themselves are nto sure of what they are doing and writing. Also by this 0.49 of a year logic, Arjuna would have been 13 years old (a mere adolescent) at the time of the Swayamvara. Which is not believable at all.

      Source: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m04/m04043.htm

      • How long was Arjuna's Tirtha-Yatra?
        • The vow announced
      Quote:
      The illustrious Pandavas, thus addressed by the great Rishi Narada, consulting with one another, established a rule amongst themselves in the presence of the celestial Rishi himself endued with immeasurable energy. And the rule they made was that when one of them would be sitting with Draupadi, any of the other four who would see that one thus must retire into the forest for twelve years, passing his days as a Brahmacharin.
      Analysis: The Pandavas made this vow in-front of Narada, the same Narada who they worship, respect and honor. They would certainly adhere to it.

      Source: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m01/m01215.htm
        • References about the vow several times
          • Vaisamapayana's description of Arjuna's exile
      Quote:
      'Obtaining then the king's permission, Arjuna prepared himself for a forest-life; and he went to the forest to live there for twelve years.'
      Analysis: Vaisampayana also agrees that it was 12 years. He reported years, not months, not seasons but years to Janamejaya.

          • Ulupi refers about the vow to Arjuna
      Quote:
      'I know, O son of Pandu, why thou wanderest over the earth, and why thou hast been commanded to lead the life of a Brahmacharin by the superior. Even this was the understanding to which all of you had been pledged, viz., that amongst you all owning Drupada's daughter as your common wife, he who would from ignorance enter the room where one of you would be sitting with her, should lead the life of a Brahmacharin in the woods for twelve years.
      Analysis: So not just people of the Kshatriya countries but also people of the outcast lands like the Nagas know about the specific details about Arjuna's tirtha yatra and how long it is. It was a universal fact that it was 12 years long.

            • Conclusion: Arjuna's tirtha-yatra was twelve (12) years long. Their has been a counterargument saying that a general of the army (Arjuna) could not stay absent for 12 years. But that is simply not true since the Pandava empire was well protected without Arjuna as well. They had alliances with the Yadavas & Pancalas. So the claim in itself is ludicrous that Arjuna could not have been away for that many years. Case closed it was 12 years.
      • When did the Kouravas have children?
        • At birth
      Quote:
      And, O, king, worthy wives were in time selected for all of them by Dhritarashtra after proper examination. And king Dhritarashtra, O monarch, also bestowed Duhsala, in proper time and with proper rites, upon Jayadratha (the king of Sindhu).'
      Analysis: This is said as the answer to Janamejaya's question about the Kauravas. Basically all Kauravas had wives, but we do not know how many of them had sons.
        • Prior to Varanavata
          • Duryodhana talks to Dhritarashtra
      Quote:
      In that case, O king of the world, ourselves with our children, excluded from the royal line, shall certainly be disregarded by all men. Therefore, O monarch, adopt such counsels that we may not suffer perpetual distress, becoming dependent on others for our food. 
      Analysis: Duryodhana said his children, so one can assume that he and his (some of them) brothers already had sons at this point in time.
            • Wives of the Kouravas part 2
      Quote:
      Meanwhile the Pandavas got into their cars, yoking thereto some fine horses endued with the speed of wind. While they were on the point of entering their cars, they touched, in great sorrow, the feet of Bhishma, of king Dhritarashtra, of the illustrious Drona, of Kripa, of Vidura and of the other elders of the Kuru race. Then saluting with reverence all the older men, and embracing their equals, receiving the farewell of even the children, and taking leave of all the venerable ladies in their household, and walking round them respectfully, and bidding farewell unto all the citizens, the Pandavas, ever mindful of their vows, set out for Varanavata.
      Analysis: The ladies of the household had to have been the wives of the Kouravas. They could not have been Satayvati, Amvika, Amvalika etc (because they already left after Pandu's death). It talks about the household of the Kurus, so those children could be the sons of the Kauravas.

        • More proof of having children before Swayamvara Parva
      Quote:
      Else this very day, filled with wrath, I would send thee, (O Duryodhana), to the regions of Yama (Pluto) with thy children and friends and brothers, and Karna, and (Sakuni) the son of Suvala! But what can I do, for, ye sinful wretches, the virtuous king Yudhishthira, the eldest of the Pandavas, is not yet angry with you?'
      Analysis: Even Bhima says that their were children of Duryodhana alive at this point in their lives. And it's only been a year since he last met Duryodhana.

        • After Droupadi Swayamvara
      Quote:
      O sinless one, thou actest not, O king, in the way thou shouldst! O father, we should now act every day in such a way as to weaken (the strength of) the Pandavas. The time hath come, O father, for us to take counsel together, so that the Pandavas may not swallow us all with our children and friends and relatives.
      Analysis: Duryodhana & Karna talk about themselves having children, so this proves they were (both) already fathers at the time of the Swayamvara of Draupadi.

      Source: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m01/m01203.htm

        • How old were Duryodhana and Karna (at that time alone)?
      Quote:
      Duryodhana and Karna and Sakuni, the son of Suvala, are sinful, foolish and young; listen not to them.
      Analysis: I can understand if Vidura calls Duryodhana young, but Sakuni? Karna? Karna is considered sixteen years older than Yudhishthira. Vidura was an uncle of Duryodhan and Sakuni was also a uncle of Duryodhana. Yet here one uncle is calling another uncle young?

          • Conclusion: So all of the quotes point to the fact that the Kauravas became fathers before the Pandavas even married their wives. The Kauravas led by Duryodhana were already husbands and fathers, that too much before the Pandavas.

      • The age of Sakuni
        • Earliest mention of Sakuni
      Quote:
      Sakuni, the son of Suvala, bringing unto the Kurus his sister endued with youth and beauty, formally gave her away unto Dhritarashtra. And Gandhari was received with great respect and the nuptials were celebrated with great pomp under Bhishma's directions. And the heroic Sakuni, after having bestowed his sister along with many valuable robes, and having received Bhishma's adorations, returned to his own city.
      Analysis: So contrary to popular belief Sakuni did nto stay in Hastinapore at all. He never stayed behind with the Kauravas with Gandhari and Dhritarashtra. Karna and the Kauravas were always alone.
        • Sakuni's involvement in the poisoning
      Quote:
      "Some time after, Duryodhana again mixed in the food of Bhima a poison that was fresh, virulent, and very deadly. But Yuyutsu (Dhritarashtra's son by a Vaisya wife), moved by his friendship for the Pandavas, informed them of this. Vrikodara, however, swallowed it without any hesitation, and digested it completely. And, though virulent the poison produced no effects on Bhima. "When that terrible poison intended for the destruction of Bhima failed of its effect, Duryodhana. Karna and Sakuni, without giving up their wicked design had recourse to numerous other contrivances for accomplishing the death of the Pandavas. 
      Analysis: This proves that Sakuni was only involved in the second poisoning of Bhima. After this he is not mentioned at all until the lac house incident. He (Sakuni) wasn't even present in the Tournament. The first poisoning was done by Duryodhana alone (he was advised by Karna though Karna told him to do it), int eh second poisoning Sakuni & Karna (again) were both involved.

        • Sakuni's statement to Yudhishthira
      Quote:
      "Sakuni said,--'One that is intoxicated falleth into a pit (hell) and stayeth there deprived of the power of motion. Thou art, O king, senior to us in age, and possessed of the highest accomplishments. O bull of the Bharata race, I (beg my pardon and) bow to thee. Thou knowest, O Yudhishthira, that gamesters, while excited with play, utter such ravings that they never indulge in the like of them in their waking moments nor even in dream.'
      Analysis: Over here Sakuni straight up admitted that he is younger to not just Yudhishthira. He did call Yudhishthira his senior. But does it make sense? Could this not be a later addition? Sakuni gave away Gandhari to Dhritarashtra before the birth of Yudhishthira. Yet here he says Yudhishthira is older? No that is not the truth it has to be a lie or their has to be a different meaning, or Yudhishthira was born before the birth of Sakuni. Could it be that Yudhishthira was not an offspring but an adopted child? It seems unlikely but possible the possibility is their. 

      Source: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m02/m02064.htm
      • Question: How many years in between Tirtha-yatra and Khandava-Daha?
        • Answer: Enough years for the Pandavas next generation to be born. And to reach such an age where they could partake in warfare education and be trained under Arjuna.
      Quote:
      The sons of Draupadi were born, each at the interval of one year, and all of them became renowned and much attached to one another. And, O monarch, all their rites of infancy and childhood, such as Chudakarana and Upanayana (first shave of the head and investiture with the sacred threads) were performed by Dhaumya according to the ordinance. All of them, of excellent behaviour and vows, after having studied the Vedas, acquired from Arjuna a knowledge of all the weapons, celestial and human.
      Analysis: The text says that all the sons of Draupadi were well known and famous. Now think about how old the Pandavas were when they received education in warfare? The sons of Draupadi received education under Arjuna. The sons of Draupadi would have to be at-least teenagers. They were each (five total) one year apart from each other in age. So the youngest would be 14 and the oldest would be 18 or more (14, 15, 16, 17, 18). I do not believe Yudhishthira would wait for Arjuna before he has a son with Draupadi but even if he did we cannot ignore the fact that Arjuna's son with Draupadi was born after the tirtha yatra. It would take Arjuna's son 1 year to be born (9 months but that's very close to a year). And 14 more years to mature into eligible age.

        • Conclusion: So the Khandava Daha had to have occurred 15 years after the Tirtha Yatra.
      • Arjuna's age.
        • Arjuna's chronology.
          • When his birth happened
            • Tapasya to get Indra's approval
      Quote:
      After this, the Kuru king Pandu, taking counsel with the great Rishis commanded Kunti to observe an auspicious vow for one full year, while he himself commenced, O Bharata, to stand upon one leg from morning to evening, and practise other severe austerities with mind rapt in meditation, for gratifying the lord of the celestials.
      Analysis: They did this for a whole year (after the birth of Bhima). So Arjuna is at-least one year younger.

              • Age difference of Pandavas.
      Quote:
      The eldest of Kunti's children was called Yudhishthira, the second Bhimasena, and the third Arjuna, and of Madri's sons, the first-born of the twins was called Nakula and the next Sahadeva. And those foremost sons born at an interval of one year after one another, looked like an embodied period of five years.
      Analysis: Some people may believe that if we consider this quote then that means Arjuna was one year younger to Bhima who was a year younger than Yudhishthira. But let us consider this, the difference cannot be five years if each of them were born at an interval of just one year. Because Nakula and Sahadeva were born during the same year. So that negates the claim of them being born in interval of a year. Nakula and Sahadeva were twins they were born the same day. the Pandavas can indeed be a embodied period of five years if we consider the fact that Arjuna is two year younger than Bhima who is a year younger than Yudhishthira. The same Arjuna is just one year older than Nakula and Sahadeva.

          • When Pandu died
            • Arjuna was old enough to have studied the vedas (you have to be at-least 5 years old).
      Quote:
      The birth, growth, and Vedic studies of these children of Pandu, will, no doubt, give you great pleasure. Steadily adhering to the path of the virtuous and the wise, and leaving behind him these children, Pandu departed hence seventeen days ago. 
      Analysis: So the Pandavas were probably not even that old when their father died. They were not 18, 16, 17, 15, 14 etc. They were not teenagers and they were not adolescents. Although we can make many guesses and inferences the sad truth is that the age of the Pandavas (when Pandu died) was never stated and has been lost forever. We don't know, i don't know. It's not given in the real Mahabharata.

          • Completion of education
      Quote 1:
      but Arjuna, however, outdistanced everyone in every respect--in intelligence, resourcefulness, strength and perseverance. Accomplished in all weapons, Arjuna became the foremost of even the foremost of car-warriors; and his fame spread all over the earth to the verge of the sea. And although the instruction was the same, the mighty Arjuna excelled all (the princes in lightness of hand). Indeed, in weapons as in devotion to his preceptor, he became the foremost of them all. And amongst all the princes, Arjuna alone became an Atiratha (a car-warrior capable of fighting at one time with sixty thousand foes). And the wicked sons of Dhritarashtra, beholding Bhimasena endued with great strength and Arjuna accomplished in all arms, became very jealous of them.
      Analysis 1: Arjuna gained a lot of expertise in the use of weapons over here. This could not have happened in just a short amount of time like a few days. I think it would have taken Arjuna at-least a year. One year of training to gain the type of mastery that he gained.


      Quote 2:
      And having performed the propitiatory rites, the youthful Phalguna, equipped with the finger protector (gauntlet) and his quiver full of shafts and bow in hand, donning his golden mail, appeared in the lists even like an evening cloud reflecting the rays of the setting sun and illumined by the hues of the rainbow and flashes of lightning.
      Analysis 2: This text tells us many things. It shows that Arjuna had armor on him meaning he was old enough to fight a war. It also calls him youthful, so he has to be a teenager at this time. Even 14 year-olds have mustaches these days, so i'll put Arjuna at the age of 18.

          • Pre-lac house days
      Quote:
      'After the expiration, O king, of a year from this, Dhritarashtra, moved by kindness for the people, installed Yudhishthira, the son of Pandu, as the heir-apparent of the kingdom on account of his firmness, fortitude, patience, benevolence, frankness and unswerving honesty (of heart). And within a short time Yudhishthira, the son of Kunti, by his good behaviour, manners and close application to business, overshadowed the deeds of his father.
      Analysis: This proves that a year passed by after Arjuna defeated Drupada. So i assume that they're entering adulthood now.

            • How much time passed by during the stay at lac house
      Quote:
      'Seeing the Pandavas living there cheerfully and without suspicion for a full year, Purochana became exceedingly glad. And beholding Purochana so very glad, Yudhishthira, the virtuous son of Kunti, addressing Bhima and Arjuna and the twins (Nakula and Sahadeva) said, 'The cruel-hearted wretch hath been well-deceived. I think the time is come for our escape. Setting fire to the arsenal and burning Purochana to death and letting his body lie here, let us, six persons, fly hence unobserved by all!'
      Analysis: Over here Arjuna's name is clearly mentioned. It is said that they all lived their (in Varanvata's house of lac) for at-least a year. And their would have also been at the very least another year for the conquests of Bhima & Arjuna (that they did after the Drupada incident) and one more year after their higher education with Balarama and Drona. So a year after the Drupada incident, another year of higher education, and one more year for the conquest, a last year for the Varnavata saga. Four (4) years had passed by after the Drupada incident, Arjuna would have to be an adult by now.

          • How much time passed by for Ghatotkacha to be born (their is no way he was born in just a day)
              • Hidimva's request
      Quote:
      O illustrious dame, unite me with this thy son, my husband. Endued as he is with the form of a celestial, let me go taking him with me wherever I like. Trust me, O blessed lady, I will again bring him back unto you all. When you think of me I will come to you immediately and convey you whithersoever ye may command. I will rescue you from all dangers and carry you across inaccessible and uneven regions. I will carry you on my back whenever ye desire to proceed with swiftness. O, be gracious unto me and make Bhima accept me.
      Analysis: Hidimva made a proposal in-front of Kunti and said she would do so and so for the Pandavas and her. She couldn't have done all of these things in one day (especially considering her intercourse with Bhima).

              • Yudhishthira's statement
      Quote:
      Yudhishthira said. 'It is even so, O Hidimva, as thou sayest. There is no doubt of it. But, O thou of slender waist, thou must act even as thou hast said. Bhima will, after he hath washed himself and said his prayers and performed the usual propitiatory rites, pay his attentions to thee till the sun sets. Sport thou with him as thou p. 324 likest during the day, O thou that art endued with the speed of the mind! But thou must bring back Bhimasena hither every day at nightfall.'
      Analysis: Notice that Yudhishthira said every day. Key word "every" that means it was at-least more than one, right?! Yudhishthira also talked about some marriage rites and the prayers of Bhima. So all of these things could not have happened in one day.

              • Bhima's demands
      Quote:
      'Then Bhima, expressing his assent to all that Yudhishthira said, addressed Hidimva, saying, 'Listen to me, O Rakshasa woman! Truly do I make this engagement with thee that I will stay with thee, O thou of slender waist, until thou obtainest a son.' Then Hidimva, saying, 'So be it,' took Bhima upon her body and sped through the sides.
      Analysis: Bhima clearly said he will keep staying with Hidimva until she gives birth to a son. So he'll leave her then. And a child takes at-least nine months to be born.

              • Vaisampayana's description
      Quote:
      On mountain peaks of picturesque scenery and regions sacred to the gods, abounding with dappled herds and echoing with the melodies of feathered tribes, herself assuming the handsomest form decked with every ornament and pouring forth at times mellifluous strains. Hidimva sported with the Pandava and studied to make him happy. So also, in inaccessible regions of forests, and on mountain-breasts overgrown with blossoming trees on lakes resplendent with lotuses and lilies, islands of rivers and their pebbly banks, on sylvan streams with beautiful banks and mountain-currents, in picturesque woods with blossoming trees and creepers in Himalayan bowers, and various caves, on crystal pools smiling with lotuses, on sea-shores shining with gold and pearls, in beautiful towns and fine gardens, in woods sacred to the gods and on hill-sides, in the regions of Guhyakas and ascetics, on the banks of Manasarovara abounding with fruits and flowers of every season Hidimva, assuming the handsomest form, sported with Bhima and studied to make him happy. Endued with the speed of the mind, she sported with Bhima in all these regions, till in time, she conceived and brought forth a mighty son begotten upon her by the Pandava. Of terrible eyes and large mouth and straight arrowy ears, the child was terrible to behold. Of lips brown as copper and sharp teeth and loud roar, of mighty arms and great strength and excessive prowess, this child became a mighty bowman. Of long nose, broad chest, frightfully swelling calves, celerity of motion and excessive strength, he had nothing human in his countenance, though born of man. And he excelled (in strength and prowess) all Pisachas and kindred tribes as well as all Rakshasas. And, O monarch, though a little child, he grew up a youth the very hour he was born. The mighty hero soon acquired high proficiency in the use of all weapons. The Rakshasa women bring forth the very day they conceive, and capable of assuming any forms at will, they always change their forms. And the bald-headed child, that mighty bowman, soon after his birth, bowing down to his mother, touched her feet and the feet also of his father. His parents then bestowed upon him a name. His mother having remarked that his head was (bald) like unto a Ghata (water-pot), both his parents thereupon called him Ghatotkacha (the pot-headed). And Ghatotkacha who was exceedingly devoted to the Pandavas, became a great favourite with them, indeed almost one of them.
      Analysis: Now please tell me how could Ghatotkaca have become a favorite of the Pandavas in under a day? This clearly means the Pandavas had to have spent at-least a year with the Rakshasas (not a day). They waited for Ghatotkaca's birth and then spent a few more months with him in his infant stage. How could Ghatotkaca have become such a great bowman in a few months or a day though? All of the things described in the text above could not have happened in a single day. During this chapter the dart of Indra (given to Karna) was also described. So perhaps this quote is just attempting to summarize what will happen in the future of Ghatotkaca's life. Regardless the Pandavas had to have spent at the very least one year with Ghatotkaca. Maybe two years. And please do note that if we believe that Krishna was of the same generation of the Pandavas then since Krishna was already a grandfather by the time of the Swayamvara Parva (father if we talk about BORI Mahabharata since Aniruddha's presence is removed in the Swayamvara of BORI) that means that the Pandavas were very old during that time not that they were very young compared to Krishna. The Pandavas might have been very old. And this may have been because of the amount of time they spent with Ghatotkaca. It's worth looking into.

          • After Ghatotkaca's birth
        • How much time flew by
      Quote:
      Those mighty car-warriors, the heroic Pandavas, then went, O king, from forest to forest killing deer and many animals (for their food). And in the course of their wanderings they saw the countries of the Matsyas, the Trigartas, the Panchalas and then of the Kichakas, and also many beautiful woods and lakes therein. And they all had matted locks on their heads and were attired in barks of trees and the skins of animals. Indeed, with Kunti in their company those illustrious heroes were attired in the garbs of ascetics. And those mighty car-warriors sometimes proceeded in haste, carrying their mother on their backs; and sometimes they proceeded in disguise, and sometimes again with great celerity. And they used to study the Rik and the other Vedas and also all the Vedangas as well as the sciences of morals and politics.
      Analysis: Now do try to understand how long, what amount of time it would take to cover such distances? To travel in great countries of north India from place to place. Add that to the time it would take them to study more political science and morality. Studying, hunting (they were not begging for alms at this point of their exile), traveling and wandering. Perhaps another year? Nonetheless the five brothers should still be in their twenties. With Yudhishthira in his late twenties getting close to thirty years of age.

          • When Arjuna won Draupadi
            • Fool Karna's opinion of the Pandavas age
      Quote:
      Karna said, 'It doth not seem to me, O Duryodhana, that thy reasoning is well-founded. O perpetuator of the Kuru race, no method will succeed against the Pandavas. O brave prince, thou hast before, by various subtle means, striven to carry out thy wishes. But ever hast thou failed to slay thy foes. They were then living near thee, O king! They were then unfledged and of tender years, but thou couldst not injure them then. They are now living at a distance, grown up, full-fledged. The sons of Kunti, O thou of firm resolution, cannot now be injured by any subtle contrivances of thine. This is my opinion.
      Analysis: As per fool karna's opinion the Pandavas (prior to Varnavrata) were mere children/teens and very young, but now after Draupadi Swayamvara they are fully grown adults.

        • Time in-between Tirtha Yatra & (and) Swayamvara.
          • How much time did the Pandavas take to build Khandavaprastha?
      Quote:
      And content with half the kingdom, they removed to Khandavaprastha, which was in unreclaimed desert. Then those heroes of unfading splendour, viz., the Pandavas, with Krishna at their head, arriving there, beautified the place and made it a second heaven. And those mighty car-warriors, selecting with Dwaipayana's assistance a sacred and auspicious region, performed certain propitiatory ceremonies and measured out a piece of land for their city. Then surrounded by a trench wide as the sea and by walls reaching high up to the heavens and white as the fleecy clouds or the rays of the moon, that foremost of cities looked resplendent like Bhogavati (the capital of the nether kingdom) decked with the Nagas. And it stood adorned with palatial mansions and numerous gates, each furnished with a couple of panels resembling the out-stretched wings of Garuda. And it was protected with gateways looking like the clouds and high as the Mandara mountains. And well-furnished with numerous weapons of attack the missiles of the foes could not make slightest impression on them. And they were almost covered with darts and other missiles like double-tongued snakes. The turrets along the walls were filled with armed men in course of training; and the walls were lined with numerous warriors along their whole length. And there were thousands of sharp hooks
      and Sataghnis (machines slaying a century of warriors) and numerous other machines on the battlements. There were also large iron wheels planted on them. And with all these was that foremost of cities adorned. The streets were all wide and laid out excellently; and there was no fear in them of accident. And decked with innumerable mansions, the city became like unto Amaravati and came to be called Indraprastha (like unto Indra's city). In a delightful and auspicious part of the city rose the palace of the Pandavas filled with every kind of wealth and like unto the mansion of the celestial treasurer (Kuvera) himself.
      Analysis: Judging by (from) the description of Vasiampayana it would have taken a long time to build such a city and add so many specific details like this over here. It would have taken a few months at the very least. A barren waste land doesn't turn into a utopia in a day. So i say at-least one year would be a good estimate.

          • How much time till Arjuna goes on a twelve year exile (Arjuna-Vanavasa/Tirtha-yatra)
            • Before the Pandavas listen to the story of Tilottama and make a vow
      Quote:
      Those scorchers of foes, the Pandavas, having obtained their kingdom, at the command of Dhritarashtra, passed their days in joy and happiness at Khandavaprastha with Krishna. And Yudhishthira. endued with great energy and ever adhering to truth, having obtained the sovereignty, virtuously ruled the land, assisted by his brothers. And the sons of Pandu, endued with great wisdom and devoted to truth and virtue, having vanquished all their foes, continued to live there in great happiness. And those bulls among men, seated on royal seats of great value, used to discharge all the duties of government.
      Analysis: This means Arjuna had to have helped alot with running the kingdom and governing it before the vow happened. The time is something i cannot estimate over here. Perhaps just days as the text says?

          • Last passage before the exile
      Quote:
      The Pandavas, having established such a rule, continued to reside there. By the prowess of their arms they brought many kings under their sway. And Krishna became obedient unto all the five sons of Pritha, those lions among men, of immeasurable energy. Like the river Saraswati decked with elephants, which again take pleasure in that stream, Draupadi took great delight in her five heroic husbands and they too took delight in her. And in consequence of the illustrious Pandavas being exceedingly virtuous in their practice, the whole race of Kurus, free from sin, and happy, grew in prosperity.
      Analysis: Since the text says that the Pandavas did some further conquests and had even more battles perhaps they would have spent another year prior to the exile. Maybe Arjuna/Pandavas had intercourse with Draupadi before the exile of Arjuna.

      Source: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m01/m01216.htm
          • Let me just use common sense for this. I will not need any quotes since i have already provided quotes in this post that prove the facts that tirtha yatra was 12 years long and Go Harana happened 65 years after Khandava Daha. While Khandava daha occurred 15 years after tirtha yatra. 27 plus 65 equals 92.
            • Arjuna was born 2 and a half years after Yudhishthira. 
              • Because Yudhishthira took 9 months to be born, Bima also took 9 months to be born. But Arjuna took 21 months (12 plus 9) to be born. All in all 30 months difference in the age of Yudisthira and Arjuna.
                • So the statement that their age difference was each a year is not credible. Either Kunti's tapasya is a later addition or the statement is.
            • Arjuna (at Virata Parva) was 119 years old
              • He was 27 right before his 12 year exile
              • He came back to Indrarastha when he was 39 years of age 
              • Then 15 more years passed by until Khandava-daha (where he gets his signature Gandiva bow). So that makes him 54 years old.
              • 65 more years go by as Arjuna said he had the Gandiva for 65 years up until that point in time.
                • 65 plus (+) 54 = (equals) 119 logically.
            • Arjuna was 22 during the fire at Varnavrata (house of lac).
              • Arjuna spent two more years with Ghatotkaca
              • Arjuna spent another year travelling to different countries and hunting with his brothers.
              • Arjuna spent a year living with his in-laws at Pancala. Now he's 26 years old.
        • Now if we assume that Arjuna had a child with Draupadi prior to the exile then these are how the factors would end up.
          • Arjuna's age during Khandava-daha
            • Arjuna only had 3 years of marital life with Droupadi before the exile. So it's safe to say they had intercourse during that time. 12 years later their son would be 14 years old (9 months pregnancy leads to him being 14 instead of 15).
              • So since his child is already close to 15 that means he is already old enough to partake in military training under him. So taht would mean Arjuna is younger if we consider this theory. He is still 39-40 years old instead of 54 years old.
                • He would be 39 years old when he comes back from his exile but 40 years old during Khandava-daha.
          • Arjuna's age during Virata Parva
            • 65 years passed by after the khandava-daha forest burning incident.
              • So that makes Arjuna 105 years old.
                • Because 65 + 40 is equivalent to 105.
        • We should not take the Mahabharata Chronology on sacred-texts.com to be a credible source for ranking the age of Mahabharata characters.


      Conclusions (what the heck we learned):

      1. Virata Parva occurred 65 years after Khandava-Daha did.
      2. Kauravas became husbands and fathers long before the Pandavas did. Before Bhima too.
      3. Sakuni was younger than Vidura.
      4. Arjuna's tirtha-yatra was not 12 months or 12 seasons but 12 years.
      5. Khandava-Daha incident happened 15 years after the tirtha yatra of Arjuna. Unless Arjuna had intercourse with Droupadi before his exile.
      6. Arjuna was born 2 and a half years after Yudhishthira.
      7. Bhima was born exactly after Yudhishthira. No tapasya was done for Bima.
      8. Krishna was already a father while the Pandavas were still bachelors.
      9. Arjuna was two and a half years younger to Yudhishthira. But 1 and three fourths of a year younger than Bhima.
        1. Because it is a year of tapasya and 9 months of pregnancy.
      10. Nakula & Sahadeva were of the same age. They were twins, they were born at the same time, neither of them was older or younger than the other
      11. Their is no information on how much time passed by between Pandu's death and completion of the education of Kuru princes.
      12. Pandavas and Kauravas were teenagers during the Tournament, Karna was a adult.
      13. After the guru dakshina incident of Drupada's defeat a year passed by and Yudhishthira was corona-ted as the heir to the throne.
      14. Sakuni's statement to Yudhishthira (in Sabha Parva) should not be taken seriously or literally because he was talking about Yudhishthira being older than Duryodhana and the Kouravas not himself (Sakuni). And he said since Yudhishthira is a king he is superior to Sakuni (who is a prince).
      15. In between Drupada's defeat and the house of lac burning 4 years had been crossed.
      16. The Pandavas were in disguise (after Varnavata) for 4 years.
      17. The Pandavas spent 2 years with Hidimva (1 year was with Ghatotkaca cause he took nine months to be born).
      18. Pandavas did not grow into real men until the Swayamvara Parva, before that they were not adults but just little kids.
      Posted by at 6 comments:
      Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)