Thursday, May 22, 2025

Mistranslation'S in both stories

Intro: This post will cover not all but still quite a decent amount of mistranslations in both Mahabharat & Ramayana. It show's that sometimes you can not always rely on the text. I gathered a list of 13 in total, five for MB eight from ramayan.

Mistranslation's of Ramayana;
Sundar Kanda is example 1.
Original text
saH mahaakapiH = That great Hanuma; tathaa = in the same way; plupluve = leapt; bhavanam = for the house; mahodarashya = of Mahodara; viruupaakshasya caivaH = and also that of Virupaaksha; viddyujjihvasya = that of Viddutjihva; tathaivacha = and in the same fashion; vidyunmaaleH = that of Vidhunmaali; tathaiva = and in the same way; vjradamshhTrasya = that of Vajradamshhtra.
translated text
"That great Hanuma in the same way leapt for the house of Mahodara and also that of Virupaaksha, that of Viddutjihva."
Logic -Vidyunmali & Vajradaamsthra were ignored. While vidyujihvasya's name got misspelled.

Mistranslation 2
[begin]
Elaboration - the term used here 'purusha' refers to males & their manhood, it has nothing to do with whether a character was a coward or not.

Mistranslation 3 [another mistake]
kham = (discover) the hole (made by the arrow of Skanda; the Commander-in-chief of the gods);
Logic - the reason i consider this to be a big mistake is that only one sanskrit word is used (kham) yet its exaggerated by the translators as being a hole that was created by skanda's arrow even though skanda never made an appearance in yuddh kanda itself. The statements of kumbhkarna dont have anything to do with skanda so this was a error.

Example 4 is where Shambar is Subahu's father was mistranslated.
[Quote]
timidhvajasutam = Subahu; the son of Shambarasura; daanavendram = the chief of demons ; hatam = being killed
[End]
Explanation - "Timidhwajasutam" should mean son of Timidhwaja (another name for "Shambar"). Nowhere in the Sanskrit was the name "Subahu" ever mentioned.

5TH EXAMPLE.
krauN^chabarhiNa viinaanaam = herons; peacocks; veena the Indian lute
Logic - the word ''india/indian" did not exist during the period of Ramayana so it makes no sense for sanskrit word's to include it aswell.

Example 6.
This one will involve screenshot image's to prove it:
Logic - Here u look at the Sanskrit/Hindi words & their translations then see if the next text actually matches or not. Clearly biased hanubhakts intervened with the script.

7th example.
Photo;
Logic: fake glorification was given to Hanutati again, read the letters that are in crimson red color (that is the original) you will never find "hanuma" or "maruti" so the translators added his name on purpose cause of their bias/favoritism. Ask yourselves what "mahaabhaagaaH" really translates into? Cause clearly it does not mean or indicate hanumana.

8 (Kumbhkarn Chapter).
mohitaaH = confused to think ayam kaalaH iti = that he was Yama the god of Death.
Reason's - Cause Kala is a different character while Yama Dev is also different.

Evidence from both Ramayan/Mahabharata.
[quote]
"And the son of Dhruva is the illustrious Kala (Time), the destroyer of the worlds."
[complete]
[quote]
"After entering a great ocean in the shape of Yama's realm, with a huge alligator in the form of death's rod of punishment, adorned with silk-cotton trees (bristling with thorns to be used a weapons), turbulent with a huge wave in the shape of noose of Kala (Time Spirit)."
[complete]

[Begin]
"The daughters of Daksha are, O tiger among men and prince of the Bharata race, Aditi, Diti, Danu, Kala, Danayu, Sinhika, Krodha, Pradha, Viswa, Vinata, Kapila, Muni, and Kadru."[complete]

[start] "And the sons of Kala were all like Yama himself and smiter of all foes. And they were of great energy, and oppressors of all foes. And the sons of Kala were Vinasana and Krodha, and then Krodhahantri, and Krodhasatru. And there were many others among the sons of Kala." [end]
[Quote]
At that time, when the hour of Karna's death had come, Kala, approaching invisibly, and alluding to the Brahmana's curse, and desirous of informing Karna that his death was near, told him, "The Earth is devouring thy wheel!"
Basically: Kala was not Yama.
=
MISTRANSLATIONS (of MB).
Example 1;
"As he of Vrishni's race protects the son of Pandu under all circumstances, even so let thyself protect Vikarna's son Karna in battle."
Logic - Vikarna was not a epithet or name for surya, pandu, adhiratha or durvasa muni.
Example 2:
"This large-eyed one had been bestowed by her father, the king of the Drupadas, in the hope that the blessed girl would be happy, by obtaining the sons of Pandu for her lords."
Logic - it said drupada in place of pancala. Theirs no kingdom or tribe named Drupadas.
Example 3:
[quote]
"Then that grandsire of the Bharatas, Bhishma the son of Sutanu, conversant with the Vedas, acquainted with the proprieties of time and place, and possessing a knowledge of every duty of morality, after the conclusion of Drona's speech, applauded the words of the preceptor."
Basic's - it says sutanu instead of santanu.

Example 4 - Staying was typed in place of slaying;
[begin]
"Yudhishthira, of virtuous soul, with his brothers in that battle, felt great joy and wandered over the field from desire of staying Duryodhana." https://sacred-texts.com/hin/m09/m09030.htm

5th mistranslation mistake.
Quote;
"They were Nagadatta, and Dridharatha, and Viravahu, and Ayobhuja, and Dridha, and Suhasta, and Viragas and Pramatha, and Ugrayayin. Beholding them Bhimasena became filled with rage. He then took up a number of arrows, each capable of bearing a great strain. Aiming at each of them one after another, he sped those arrows at them, striking each in his vital part. Pierced therewith, they fell down from their cars, deprived of energy and life, like tall trees from mountain cliffs broken by a tempest. Having with those ten shafts slain those ten sons of thine."
Point - the reason this's a mistake is because the text said ten kaurava brothers yet named only nine of them, that means its likely their were only 9 that Bhima killed not 10.
Posted by at No comments:

Wednesday, May 21, 2025

OrnamentaLanguagE

Intro: This post will describe various incidents in Mahabharat & Ramayana that have to do with ornamental language or basically exaggerations. When Valmiki said meghanada was beaten by Angada then he called Meghanada a ever victorious or undefeated fighter.
That is one such example, but their are incidents in both epics where ornamental language is used and my post shall elaborate upon those very incidents instead of just being related to action or a fight always. It will be about quotes that are contradictory or statements made in Ramayan/MB that are clearly false.

Like all sons of pratipa were said to resemble gods, they had god like appearances according to this narrative;
"Unto that lion among kings, who ruled his kingdom virtuously were born three sons of great fame and resembling three gods. Of them, Devapi was the eldest, Vahlika the next and Santanu of great intelligence, who, O sire, was my grandfather, was the youngest."

But in the next narrative this flaw in the appearance of a son is revealed;
"Devapi was liberal, virtuous, devoted to truth, and loved by the subjects, yet in consequence of his skin-disease, he was excluded from his inheritance."
Conclusion - either the translator messed up or maybe the original text was actually translated correctly but the author/whoever spoke (Souti or Vaisampayana) contradicted himself. My opinion is that Devapi was not a handsome human being at all.
=
2nd usage of ornamental language in MB.
Virat's kavach; "And the coat of mail that the king himself of the Matsyas put on was invulnerable and decked with a hundred suns, a hundred circles, a hundred spots, and a hundred eyes."
Basic's - his armor is considered impenetrable like the kavach kundal of karna because its called 'invulnerable' so its a clear exaggeration, most likely the armor karna wore was not invincible.

Usage 3 is this:
"The sons of Draupadi, rivalling their fathers in valour, strength, grace, and prowess, sat upon excellent seats inlaid with gold."
Logic - their is no way those guys were even rivals to sahadev (weakest among the 5 pandavas) based on the way they performed in Kurukshetra Parva. So clearly not each quote should be taken literally as a fact.
=
The 4th usage is an exaggeration in MB.
Agnidev:
"O Agni, the flames put forth by thee consume every creature. O thou of great splendour, this universe hath been created by thee. The Vedas are thy word. All creatures, mobile and immobile, depend upon thee. Water primarily dependeth on thee, so also the whole of this universe. All offerings of clarified butter and oblations of food to the pitris have been established in thee. O god, thou art the consumer, and thou art the creator and thou art Vrihaspati himself (in intelligence). Thou art the twin Aswins; thou art Surya; thou art Soma; thou art Vayu."
Explanation - this makes it seem as if Agni was the one who did the creation of the universe not BRAHMA (who is the true god of creation).
=
PART 5;
Metaphors regarding the divine-chariot of Arjuna.
1st metaphor: "Its splendour was great and the sounds of its wheels was tremendous. It delighted the heart of every creature that looked at it. It had been made by Viswakarman, the architect of the universe and one of the lords of creation, after severe ascetic meditation."
Logic - if the noise of its wheel movement will fill all the witnesses with delight then chances are they would be more enthusiastic to do battle against arjuna, so how come his opponents were said to be distressed, depressed, discouraged, unconfident repeatedly?

2nd quote:
"Its splendour, like that of the sun, was so great that no one could gaze at it. It was the very car from which the lord Soma had vanquished the Danavas."
Basic - this text implies that if a person did gaze at arjuna's chariot {for a lengthy period of time} then they could go blind cause of how it's brightness compared to that of the Sun's itself.
6TH EXAMPLE.
This's related to Bhishma.
Quote 1; He commanded his charioteer, saying "Lead thou my car to where Salya is, so that I may slay him instantly as Garuda slays a serpent."
Quote 2; 'He then vanquished that best of monarchs but left him with his life.'
Logic - bhishma was all bark no bite, he just made a empty threat. Or maybe slaying meant defeating or possibly Souti/vaisampayana made a error (their memory was inaccurate).
=
EXAMPLE 7
How the term pandava is utilized by characters of MB.
Pandavas is a term used for nameless monarchs/kings that karna attack's during Night 14.
{Start}
Then Pandavas, O monarch, and the Panchalas, celebrated for their prowess, beholding the mighty-armed Karna, loudly shouted saying "There is Karna Where is Karna in this fierce battle. O thou of wicked understanding, O lowest of men, fight with us!" Others, beholding the son of Radha said, with eyes expanded In wrath "Let this arrogant wretch of little understanding, this son of a Suta, be slain by the allied kings. He hath no need to live. This sinful man is always very hostile to the Parthas. Obedient to the counsels of Duryodhana, this one is the root of these evils. Slay him." Uttering such words, great Kshatriya car-warriors, urged by Pandu's son, rushed towards him, covering him with a dense shower of arrows, for slaying him. Beholding all those mighty Pandavas thus the Suta's son, trembled not, nor experienced any fear.

Ashwathama Saga: "Learning that thy son had been slain unrighteously by Bhima, we slaughtered the Pandavas after entering their camp buried in sleep."
Note - here the term pandava got used by ashwathama even after the souptika parva war came to an ending. Meaning he considers the other casualties (foot-soldier's anyone who is not a son of droupadi or a drupadaputra) to be Pandavas.

How the term 'kouravA' is used.
"O king, when thus I fell down on the earth, Rama, filled with joy, sent forth loud shouts along with his followers, while all the Kauravas who stood beside me and all those who came there to witness the combat were afflicted with great woe on seeing me fall."
Point: unless the duel between parshuram/bhishma occurs after the birth of duryodhan but before the death of pandu (subsequent arrival of pandavas) then it makes no sense for the kauravas to be mentioned here as standing beside Bhishma.
Of course their exist's a counterargument which can be used against my opinion/claim, that possibly the word 'kauravas' was a reference to family members of the Kuru family, the issue with this counterclaim is that apart from Vicitraveerya their were none that could be considered male-relatives of Bhishma, cause Vyasa is not a kaurava, if he had been their his name would have been actually mentioned.

A different explanation could be that maybe by Kouravas it was a reference for foot soldier's of the Kuru kingdom.

Adi Parva the pandavas get called "kaurava" instead.
Quote;
"He then gave, O monarch, unto the Pandavas and Kunti and Draupadi, and unto Drupada and Drupada's sons, the gems and various kinds of wealth that the Kauravas had sent through him."
Logic - This's another example of ornamental language. Its more sensible to believe that these gifts given through vidura were deployed by Bhishma, Drona & Dhritrashtra, not by Suyodhan or his kaurava brothers. Why would the kouravas give presents to people they hate/dislike or individuals that defeated them earlier (Drupada/Satyajeet/Bheem)?
Another misuse of terms & words is below.
18th day;
"Shikhandi, supported by the Prabhadrakas, fought with two Kuru bowmen, Kritavarma and the great car-warrior Kripa."
{End}
Comment - now it is obvious that Kritavarma was a younger brother to Satadhanwan, he was a member of the yadava lineage & bhoja tribe/dynasty, he was never a kuru family member, here he is likely called a "kuru archer" because he was fighting on the side of a kuru king named Suyodhana.

EXAMPLE 9) Kuru Emperor is Yudisther instead of Dhritrashtra/Suyodhan.
Quote;
"Beholding them in that plight, Yudhishthira, that foremost of righteous men, became deeply afflicted. That chief of the Kurus then began to weep aloud and fell down on the earth, deprived of his senses, along with all his followers."
Logic - the proper name should've been either kounteya king or pandava emperor.
=
Other example of Ornamentalanguage
Kripa fled but gets called unretreating hero:
[Quote]
"Understanding his master afflicted with shafts to be deprived of his senses, and believing him to be dead, the driver of Kripa's car bore Kripa away from the fight. And after Kripa, the son of Saradwat, had thus been borne away from the battle."
[Finish]
[BEGIN]
"I bow to that worshipful son of Gotama, to that unretreating hero."
[END]
=
11TH EXAMPLE - Virat Parva inconsistency;
[passage]
"Indeed, our ranks seem to have been already vanquished, for none is eager to go to fight. All our warriors are of pale face, and almost deprived of their senses."
Analysis; despite guru drona's quotes still karna bragged and was eager to fight while many kaurav brothers were willing to fight arjuna, not 1 of these warriors had their senses afflicted at all, so the lines of drona make no sense.
=
Praise given to warriors.
Sugriva praised by Laxman;
"You are the knower of virtuousness and gratefulness and you do not retreat from battlegrounds, or, on your own word, thus what you have said is conclusive as well as coherent."
Logic - yes its true that sugriva was powerful/capable but it is also wrong/false to claim that he had never run away from a single fight in his life. He clearly fled twice from Vali, first was when vali returned (and blamed him for the cave blockage) the second was during the time raam told him to fight vali and could not see a difference in the looks of both brothers.

Srikandi was labelled a person superior to Parshurama.
"Drupada's son Sikhandin, therefore who hath slain in battle that bull of Bharata's race, that hero acquainted with the highest weapons, that brave and accomplished warrior conversant with every weapon, is superior in energy, prowess, and might to the invincible Vargava endued with the highest energy."

Satyajit was overhyped by Souti & Vaisampayana;
"Satyajit, who was equal to the diadem-decked Arjuna himself in battle as regards energy and might, hath been slain in battle by Drona of sure aim."
LAST EXAMPLE.
Bad omen's & nightmares was a common thing whenever a city or town was in the eve of being destroyed or invaded.
Dwaraka:
"Vrishni ladies dreamed every night that a woman of black complexion and white teeth, entering their abodes, laughed aloud and ran through Dvaraka, snatching from them the auspicious threads in their wrists. The men dreamt that terrible vultures, entering their houses and fire-chambers, gorged themselves on their bodies. Their ornaments and umbrellas and standards and armour were seen to be taken away by terrible Rakshasas."

For Lanka the statement of Malyavan is below.
Quote;
"By seeing various kinds of unexpected events (portents) and many types of terrific things, I am perceiving a destruction of all the demons. With terrifying clamour, monstrous clouds, inspiring horror, rain hot blood on Lanka on every side. Drops of tears drop from the weeping elephants, horses etc. whose skins became discoloured, covered with dust and are not shining as before. Flesh-eating animals, jackals and eagles and howling horribly. Entering Lanka, they are in the groves, forming into groups. Black women, chattering incoherently in dreams and robbing different houses stand in front, laughing loudly with their white teeth. Dogs devour the sacred offerings offered in homes. Donkeys are born of cows and rats of mongoose. Cats mate with tigers, pigs with dogs, Kinnaras (a species of demi-gods with the human figure and the head of a horse or with a horse's body and the head of a man) with demons and men. Red-footed and white pigeons, messengers of death, move in different directions, foretelling the extermination of demons. Domesticated minas (a kind of birds) making a chirping sound, defeated by other bellicose birds drop down, being twined together in groups. Birds and wild animals, facing towards the sun, cry out. Death, in the form of a frightful, monstrous and cruel blackish fellow with a shaven head casts his eyes on all our dwellings, both morning and evening. These and such other sinister omens appear."
Logic - the reason i consider this to be a not genuine quote is that if blood red rain really did pour down atr lanka then it would be red in color instead of golden. And if elephants/horses were crying then its unlikely those same animals would follow ravans army to battle when they use them. So this can be passed off as ornamental language or a exaggeration.
Posted by at No comments:

Tuesday, April 29, 2025

The Truth About Parshuram (chapter 3)

The post will be about many topic's all surrounding the character of parshuram. Like his duel against Raam (son of dashrath), how many brother's he actually had, what his character was like (ignoring his crime of slaying baby boys) also details of his chariot.

Intro; devotees of parshurama have lied to cover up his failure the same way fans of karna do. Among their BS claims is that they will choose to act like the fight between parshuram & shri raam never happened, they will say their was no fight between both warriors or characters/avtaars of vishnu.
Perhaps the biggest reason that parshuram bhakts deny this incident (the fight) is because they know deep down how embarrassing it is for parshurama.
=
Reason (behind why it is a big embarrassment/anti feat in parshuram's career):
Cause Raam's age was less than 12 during this incident & his battles with Khara, Wiradh & Tadka were much more difficult & challenging compared to his battle with Parshuram so it makes parshuram look weak.
Post begins:
A variety of sources prove their was a real fight which occurred between 2 vishnu avtars in treta yuga, it happened in between bala kandam & ayodhya kandam of Ramayan.

Quote from MB.
"And shot by the hand of Rama, that shalt, confounding by its energy the other Rama, came back blazing into Rama's hands. And Bhargava, who had thus been deprived of his senses, regaining consciousness and life, bowed unto Rama."
Logic - clearly parshuram was knocked out and anyone who knows what confound means will understand that parshuram lost here.

Before the fight began Ram could have killed Parashuram but spared him:
"Oh Rama of Bhaargava, even if you are a Brahman you are eliminable, but because of your relationship with Vishvamitra, and because you are a venerable one for me, I am disinclined to release this arrow that exterminates your life." [1-76-6]

Parshuram was a coward hiding his face from any public event;
"And commanded by Vishnu, he proceeded to the mountains of Mahendra. And thenceforth that great ascetic began to dwell there, in terror and shame."
Note; he went over their to hide as he feared Ram and other Kshatriyas, this guy felt ashamed of himself, he didnt do any tapasya in that mountain.

Even puranas aid this claim;
"He saw the son of Jamadagni on the way. Then, O king, a terrible battle unbearable even to the Devas to see ensued between them. After defeating Paraśurāma, Śrīrāma (the son of Daśaratha) came home accompanied by Sītā."
Conclusion: parshurama was a overrated donkey and not a decent warrior at all.
=
Parshuram getting a boon is a common achievement. Anyone could do it, even a blind animal had luck in getting a vardaan.
[start]
"That beast of prey, having undergone ascetic austerities, had obtained a boon and had become the cause of the destruction of all creatures. For this reason he was made blind by the Self-born. Having slain that animal which had resolved to slay all creatures, Valaka went to heaven."
Claim - so just cause he received boons that does not mean he was a special character, person or someone that deserves to be praised.
=
How many brothers did parshuram have?
Adi Parva says 3;
"Jamadagni had four sons. And the youngest of them all was Rama (Parasurama). And Rama was superior to all his brothers in the possession of good qualities. And he was skilful in all weapons, and became the slayer of the Kshatriyas. And he had his passions under complete control."
Logic - four in total means if u remove parshuram theirs 3 left.

Vana Parva said 4;
"At that very moment came in the eldest of Jamadagni's sons, Rumanvan; and then, Sushena, and then, Vasu, and likewise, Viswavasu. And the mighty saint directed them all one by one to put an end to the life of their mother." https://sacred-texts.com/hin/m03/m03116.htm
Logic - So it is upto the reader to decide which quote is more believable compared to the other.

I think it makes more sense for Jamdagni to have 4 sons in total instead of 5 so i will go with adi parva instead. Also a issue with vana parva is that one of the sons was called vasu another is viswavasu, it is confusing & generic, most parents would want their sons to have their own identity instead of such a close name to another sibling.
=
Analyzing Parshuram's career as a mentor to many;
Point 1 - he did a good job with drona but he failed big time when training rukmi and malaydhwaj. My reasoning that proves they were failures is that malaydhwaj was inactive for most of kurukshetra & before kurukshetra he hadnt achieved anything to prove his capabilities. While Rukmi appears to have not won a single fight in his career.
Point 2 - he deserves no credit for teaching bhishma cause that character had multiple teachers, he was also trained by Indra Dev but hindus never credited Indra out of bias & possibly hatred. For Karna he learned nothing from Parshuram apart from 2 weapons, so karna received limited education from him.

Point 3 - parshuram trained many other characters who were irrelevant or never made a name for themselves, or never did anything that could enhance the reputation of their guru.
First example is Pravara;
[Quote]
"I am the disciple of Jamadagni’s son Rama, and my name is Pravara. I enjoy the friendship of the illustrious Sakra."
Basics - pravara was a character that never made a appearance in a single tv serial, he also does not appear to be involved in a major conflict related to hinduism, whether it be the battle against Kartavirya or the battle of kurukshetra or the invasions on Mathura, so what did he do with his life?

Conclusion: As a teacher he was not great, so his character should not get overrated by Hindus.
=
Parshuram's chariot.
1st description.
[Quote]
"Jamadagni's son stationed on a car equipped with every kind of excellent weapons! And the car he rode was exceedingly handsome and was of wonderful appearance."
[End]

2nd description.
[quote]
"Having duly equipped that triumphal car, the foremost of its kind, which resembled the vapoury mansions in the sky, Shalya presented it to Karna."
[pause]
"Karna, that foremost of car-warriors, duly worshipping that car which had in days of old been sanctified by a priest conversant with Brahma."
[paUse]
"Thereupon Shalya of mighty energy ascended that large, invincible, and foremost of cars."
[end]

3rd description.
[quoTe]
"This foremost of cars covered with tigerskins, with axle producing no sound equipped with a golden seat endued with trivenu made of silver, and unto which are yoked these foremost of steeds, Rama gave unto me. Behold, also, O Shalya, these beautiful bows, these standards, these maces, these shafts of fierce forms, this blazing sword, this mighty weapon, this white conch of fierce and loud blare."
"Riding upon this car decked with banners, its wheels producing a rattle deep as that of the thunder, having white steeds yoked unto it, and adorned with excellent quivers, I will, putting forth my might, slay in battle that bull among car-warriors, Arjuna."
[eNd]
Conclusion - parashuram clearly had a chariot, and he used it in his duel with bhishma, the chariot was later owned by namard Karna (son of suryadev).
So this chariot elaboration was basically to disprove the claims of Parshuram fighting from the ground (while walking). Cause parshurama bhakts claim that parshuram never used a chariot.
=
MENTAL FAILURE OF PARSHURAMA.
Parshuram failed to tell the difference between a prince and a king.
[Quote]
"A truce to all crafty speech, O king! Take this bow."
[End]
Logic - he called Ram a king even though Dashrath was alive and ruling the throne of Ayodhya.

So not only did Parshuram fail to differentiate between sutas, kshatriya's, brahmins etc, he also failed to tell the differences between prince's and king's.
Conclusion is that Parshuram was not intelligent. Even before karna deceived him he already got fooled in his earlier days.
Points proven in this post are;
1 - he clearly lost against raam.
2 - he did not do any background checks before he accepted a student into his academy.
3 - he was a poorly skilled teacher/mentor.
4 - he got scared of a 12 yr old shri raam and had to hide for a unknown length of time.
5 - the place he chose to hide in was a mountain called Mahendra (named after Indra).
6 - it was harder for raam to fight against warriors like tadka, wiradh, khara & viswavasu, but a battle against parshuram was easy.
7 - he indeed had a vehicle/chariot, but his devotees are mostly unaware of such a fact.
8 - Him receiving a boon is not a praiseworthy achievement.
Posted by at 5 comments:

Sunday, April 27, 2025

Size of the army in virat yudh

Introduction - this post's motive/objective is to discover/unravel the truth about how many soldiers fought in the goharana battle (other name for virat yudh). Only soldiers that fought on hastinapur's side will be considered/counted and not any trigarta warrior.
=
Term division is mentioned.
Duryodhan says; "We also marching in two divisions, will seize thousands of excellent kine furnished with auspicious marks."
Size of a division:
"The mighty Bhima, with his mace, crushed those 21,000 foot-soldiers who were without cars and steeds and elephants. Having slain that strong division, Bhima, of prowess incapable of being baffled, showed himself with Dhrishtadyumna in his front."
Logic - Basic math indicates that 2 times 21 thousand means 42,000 but its unlikely that the kauravas took only that much with them, So i assume their exists more than two divisions of their army.

Due to this quote it's been proven that their's way more than just 2 divisions.
{Begin}
"Arjuna who was advancing towards Duryodhana. And beholding their countless divisions firmly arrayed in order of battle with countless banners waving over them."
Division mentioned:
[Begin]
"Take me without delay to the van of Bhishma's division. I will cut off his very bow-string in the battle."
Analysis - his division had remained unscathed for a large portion of the goharana battle. They were basically inactive until arjuna choose to target them. Apart from this Kripacharya also had his own personal division of troops.
It is mentioned that the number of flags their was impossible to count hence the term innumerable is applied by the translator;
"Arjuna urged the steeds towards the Kuru army over which floated innumerable flags."
Basics - a flag is only ever on a chariot whenever a military group is mentioned in MB. If they brought an aukshouni that means the kauravas had 3 times as many cavalry compared to their chariot group and five times as much infantry.

They snatched upto 60 thousand cow's.
quote;
"The Kauravas, surrounding all sides with a multitude of cars, seized sixty thousands of kine."

Half abandoned the field during arjuna's entrance;
[passage of text]
"Proceed thou towards the capital, without loss of time, taking with thee a fourth part of the army. And let another fourth march, escorting the kine. With half the troops we will fight the Pandava. Myself and Drona, and Karna and Aswatthaman and Kripa will resolutely withstand Vibhatsu, or the king of the Matsyas, or Indra himself, if he approaches."
Basic's - 25 % monitored the cows, another 25 percent were the bodyguards of Suyodhan. While 50 % stay back to fight arjuna and ensure the conquest of matsya desh.
Calculation's; if one fourth is adequate to escort all cows its fair to assume that for each cow their was a soldier, so 60 thousand soldier's were their. Most likely the full army of the kauravas here was 240,000 then cause 1/4th is guarding the 60 thousand cows.
2ND SEGMENT OF THE POST.
A inconsistency of how much was with Duryodhan:
"That warrior who stayeth on his car, cased in golden mail and surrounded by a third part of the army consisting of the most efficient troops, and whose flag beareth the device of an elephant in a ground of gold, is the illustrious king Duryodhana, the son of Dhritarashtra."
Comment: Basically first it was mentioned that he had a fourth, now due to arjuna's dialogue/statement its possible he actually had control of a full third of their army, or maybe arjuna was guessing (based on whatever he saw).

Description of army:
[begins] "And that large army of theirs looked like the vast sea or a forest of innumerable trees moving through the sky. And then was seen, O best among the Kurus, the dust raised by that moving army which reached the sky and obstructed the sight of all creatures. And beholding that mighty host abounding in elephants, horses and chariots, and protected by Karna and Duryodhana and Kripa and Santanu's son, and that intelligent and great bowman Drona." [completed]
Logic; no real amount is mentioned, just that its a massive army.

Possibility of other nations (besides trigarta/prasthala) supporting hastinapore in this war.
4 character's (most likely not relatives of kaurava royalty);
"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. Then that foremost of men, inflamed with wrath, began to consume by means of fiery arrows shot from his bow, that array of cars belonging to those bulls among the Kurus, like a tremendous conflagration consuming a forest."
Evidence of their death's;
"Then the warriors that followed the son of Radha rushed in crowds at Arjuna, but Partha sent them all to the abode of Yama by means of arrows shot from the Gandiva."
[end]
Logic - it is entirely possible because maybe the kauravas wanted to fight a war without risking their own resources, they would rather ask other kingdoms (which they formerly conquered) to provide soldiers that they can lead into battle so hastinapore's army remains alive/unharmed and never decreased in size. Like how the british emprie made use of Indian sepoys.

MY CLAIM - i think their were at minimum 240,000 soldiers that were following the kauravas here, i do not believe their was more than that.
Posted by at No comments:

Wednesday, April 23, 2025

Suyodhana final-respect-thread

The post here will be about more than just his combative talent as a fighter, it will also be about his lifetime accomplishments outside of the battlefield.
BEGIN
Duryodhan's hunting skill.
(Quote)
"The king, attended by all his followers, began also to slay hyenas and buffaloes and deer and gayals and bears and boars all around. And the king, piercing by his shafts those animals by thousands in deep forest, caused the deer to be caught in the more delightful parts of the woods."
(End).
Logic - the king here is duryodhan he fired a thousand arrows on a thousand animal's without getting fatigued himself.
Physical strength of Duryodhan.
[start]
"My son who was struck down possessed the strength of 10,000 elephants. In manhood's prime and possessed of an adamantine frame, he was not capable of being slain by any creature."
[end]
Logic; this could just be an exaggeration as its regular to praise a warrior after their death. But if taken literally then this confirms he has better physical strength than Bhishma pitamaha.
=
Suyodhan vs 13 warrior's:
[Quote]
Duryodhana pierced Bhimasena with ten arrows and each of the twins with three and king Yudhishthira with seven. And he pierced Virata and Drupada with six arrows, and Sikhandin with a hundred. And piercing Dhrishtadyumna with twenty arrows, he struck each of the five sons of Draupadi with three arrows. With his fierce shafts he cut off hundreds of other combatants in that battle, including elephants and car-warriors, like the Destroyer himself in wrath exterminating creatures."
"In consequence of his skill cultured by practice and of the power of his weapons, he seemed, as he was engaged in striking down his foes, to bend his bow incessantly drawn to a circle whether when aiming or letting off his shafts. Indeed, that formidable bow of his, the back of whose staff was decked with gold, was seen by people to be drawn into a perpetual circle as he was employed in slaying his enemies."
"Then king Yudhishthira, with a couple of broad-headed shafts, cut off the bow of thy son, O thou of Kuru's race, as the latter struggled in fight. And Yudhishthira also pierced him deeply with ten excellent and foremost of shafts. Those arrows, however, touching the armour of Duryodhana, quickly broke into pieces. Then the Parthas, filled with delight surrounded Yudhishthira."
Basic's - With due respect ramayan's lead protagonist Raam never had to fight off a group attack of more than six warriors, but here duryodhan handled more than double that number.
=
Duryodhan's later achievements.
17th afternoon.
[quote]
"When his army was thus broken, the Kuru king, O monarch, rushed against both friends and foes. Then Duryodhana challenged all the Pandavas to battle, O chief of Bharata's race, like the Asura Vali in days of yore challenging all the celestials. The Pandavas then, uniting together and filled with rage, upbraiding him repeatedly and shooting diverse weapons, rushed against the roaring Duryodhana. The latter, however, fearlessly smote his foes with shafts. The prowess that we then saw of thy son was exceedingly wonderful, since all the Pandavas together were unable to transgress him. At this time Duryodhana beheld, staying at a little distance from him, his troops, exceedingly mangled with shafts, and prepared to fly away. Rallying them then, O monarch, thy son, resolved on battle and desirous of gladdening them, addressed those warriors."
[end]
Logic - he only checked them but did not defeat any of them. After this Duryodhan went to go rally his forces. His retreat can be termed as a possible loss for him.
Most likely the other four pandavas were mild and only bhima used his full might against him cause duryodhan was his target.
=
Accolades for Suyodhana.
Quote;
"Who also can encounter Duryodhana in battle except Krishna, the son of Devaki, and Kripa, the son of Saradwan? Who also can overthrow in battle Salya, that first of mighty warriors, except the hero Valadeva or Vrikodara, the son of Pandu, or the heroic Duryodhana? Let us, therefore, desist from this fight with the Brahmanas."
Note: suyodhan was considered a elite.
Possibly due to mention of krishna here this's a hint that in a former incident duryodhan had a fight with krishna where krishna defeated him, likely a incident where jarasandha invades mathura.

But it is not made clear who he was fighting in the swayamvara, only tv serial's will portray it as a bheem vs duryodhan showdown when in truth bheem only dueled shalya nobody else, so the opponent of duryodhan remained unknown.
=
Kunti feared his potential.
(Quote)
"Meanwhile Kunti seeing that her sons were late in returning from their eleemosynary round, was filled with anxiety. She began to think of various evils having overtaken her sons. At one time she thought that the sons of Dhritarashtra having recognized her sons had slain them."
(End)
Logic - she knew duryodhan was capable, she feared him but she never had fear of karna or the other monarchs in the swayamvara.

14th day:
"Behold, O Dhananjaya, this Suyodhana who hath transgressed us! I regard this as highly wonderful. There is no car-warrior equal to him. His arrows are far-reaching. He is a great bowman. Accomplished as he is in weapons, it is exceedingly difficult to vanquish him in battle. The mighty son of Dhritarashtra strikes hard, and is conversant with all modes of warfare. Brought up in great luxury, he is much regarded by even the foremost of car-warriors. He is well-accomplished, and, O Partha, he always hates the Pandavas. For these reasons, O sinless one, I think, thou shouldst now fight with him. Upon him resteth, as upon a stake at dice, victory or the reverse."
=
Why he is a good human being/character.
He respected elderly people;
[quote]
"Duryodhana and other heroes, attired in robes dyed in yellow, formerly used, O king, to wait reverentially, with joined hands, on those old counsellors."
[ending]

He believed in fair play.
[quote]
"How will Gandhari endure such poignant grief, after she hears her son, who always fought fairly, slain unfairly by us?"
[ending]
Note - if you remove the incident with abhimanyu (which was done out of vengeance for laxman) then Suyodhan was a fair warrior.

Even when he did group attacks against other enemies then duryodhan did not aim for dealing a killing blow which is why Bhima survived a group attack of duryodhan.
=
Speech to Gavalgana's boy;
[begin]
"I have performed sacrifices, supported a large number of servants properly, governed the whole earth with her seas! I stayed on the heads of my living foes! I gave wealth to my kinsmen to the extent of my abilities, and I did what was agreeable to friends. I withstood all my foes. Who is there that is more fortunate than myself? I have made progresses through hostile kingdoms and commanded kings as slaves. I have acted handsomely towards all I loved and liked. Who is there more fortunate than myself? I honoured all my kinsmen and attended to the welfare of all my dependants. I have attended to the three ends of human existence, Religion, Profit, and Pleasure! Who is there more fortunate than myself? I laid my commands on great kings, and honour, unattainable by others, was mine, I always made my journeys on the very best of steeds. Who is there more fortunate than myself? I studied the Vedas and made gifts according to the ordinance. My life has passed in happiness. By observance of the duties of my own order, I have earned many regions of blessedness hereafter. Who is there more fortunate than myself? By good luck, I have not been vanquished in battle and subjected to the necessity of serving my foes as masters."
[end]
Logic - he lived a more honorable, better & noble life compared to bhishma, ganga, renuka, ahalya, hanuman, parshurama & karna.
=
Military Career;
{quote}
"Up to this day I have never been vanquished in fair fight on the field of battle! If you vanquish me by deceit, your infamy will certainly last for ever! That act of yours will, without doubt, be unrighteous and infamous!"
{done}
Suyodhan did win wars.
"I have conquered foreign kingdoms."
Logic - these wars and battle's were off screen conflicts not described or elaborated upon by the authors (Vaisampayana, Souti and Vyasa).

Yudisthir praised him:
"All men speak of thee in assemblies as a hero."
[end]

Stamina of bhagvan Duryodhan:
[quote]
"Standing in battle like a very lion, Duryodhana had no fear, no alarm, no pain, no anxiety."

Earth trembled from the lamentation of Suyodhan.
[begin]
"Thousands of men with eyes full of tears, fled away in all directions having heard these lamentations of the king. The whole Earth, with her forests & seas with mobile & immobile creatures, began to tremble violently & produce a loud noise. All the points of the compass became murky."
[completed]
Logic - fanclub's mention alot how Ravan's cries of pain (when the fake incident of kailash parvat or shivas toe happened) shook & trembled the universe but here authentic evidence has proven that Suyodhana's mere action in a moment where he is hurt can shake the whole planet by force.
=
Suyodhana's durability.
[Proof]
"Dhritarashtra's son, that foremost of heroes among the Kurus, recovering his senses, saw the son of Pritha."
Note - in virat war he was the first among arjuna's victims to recover, he got back to his senses before Guru Drona, karna, ashwathama, kripacharya etc.
=
What Suyodhana did AFTER Narayan Astra failed.
[begin]
"Perceiving partha staying on the field, thy son looking at his own army running away, rallied them with great courage. Having caused his divisions to take up their stand, thy son, O Bharata, relying on the might of his arms, fought for a long time with his foes, the Pandavas, who, having gained their end, were filled with joy and had been struggling for hours together. On the approach there of the evening twilight, he caused the troops to be withdrawn."
[done]
Note - this's from the 15th afternoon or close to the fifteenth night. The quote proves after drona's death suyodhan was brave enough to challenge all his enemies.

Apsaras found Suyodhan ATTRACTIVE not karna, hanuman or parshurama.
Quote;
"Upon the commencement of that passage-at-arms, various beings, with the gods, came there accompanied by the Apsaras, for beholding those foremost of men. Filled with joy, the Apsaras began to cover those foremost of men devoted to the duties of their order, with celestial garlands, with diverse kinds of celestial perfumes, and with diverse species of gems. Soft winds bore those excellent odours to the nostrils of all the foremost of warriors. Having smelt those perfumes in consequence of the action of the wind, the warriors once more engaged in battle, and striking one another began to fall down on the Earth."
=
Proof Duryodhan was considered a positive monarch.
Quote:
"The whole city, O tiger among men, including the very children, hearing of Duryodhana's death, sent forth notes of lamentation from every side."
Comment - one can say that children are ignorant/poor judges of character, but a mahabharat reader can not ignore that many adult's existed who held positive outlooks and views about Shri Duryodhan. It clearly says 'the WHOLE city' and that includes more than just widow's/orphans.

Suyodhan valued people's lives so he tried warning the human beings of madra nation from picking a fight with pandava emperor yudisther.
[begin]
Duryodhana riding upon an elephant gigantic as a hill, with an umbrella held over his head, and fanned the while with yak-tails, forbade the Madraka warriors, saying, "Do not proceed, Do not proceed!" Though repeatedly forbidden by Duryodhana, those heroes, desirous of slaying Yudhishthira, penetrated into the Pandava host. Those brave combatants, loyal to Duryodhana, twanging their bows loudly, fought with the Pandavas.
Another quote;
"Beholding, however, the heroic Pandavas, the brave warriors of thy army, O Bharata, though forbidden by thy son, still rushed against them. Duryodhana, speaking softly, sought to prevent those warriors from fighting with the foe. No great car-warrior, however, amongst them obeyed his behest."
Logic - their'd be more peace, less bloodshed, widow's and orphans if Duryodhan was the reigning monarch of our planet Earth.

Suyodhan's talent;
"Duryodhana stayeth in the midst of his cavalry, with the umbrella held over his head and himself flinging his glances all around! Having rearrayed the (remnant of his) army, he stayeth in the midst of his forces."
Point - he knew how organizing a army is done right, he arranged the final vyuha.

Duryodhan killed a fraction of the pandav army.
[Quote]
"Having slain a large number of thy troops in battle, the son of Dhritarashtra wears a proud aspect as if he believes that the Pandavas have been vanquished!"
Logic - one fraction of their army was bigger than double the number of homicides that Parshurama was involved in.

Cross-reference for his achievement;
"The forces of the Pandavas also, O Duryodhana, have all been slain by thee!"

Last segment of post:
Unknown secret's of Shri Suyodhana's family.
He had 2 son's or more than that.
Quote 1: "Wait, ye Pandavas! Like the sun destroying by his energy the light of all stars at dawn, I shall today, though weaponless and carless, destroy all of you possessed of cars and steeds! Today I shall free myself from the debt I owe to the many illustrious Kshatriyas (that have fallen for me), to Bahlika, the heroic Jayadratha and Bhagadatta, to Shalya the ruler of the Madras and Bhurishrava, to my sons." https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m09/m09032.htm
Quote 2: "Duryodhana, with his sons, brothers and kinsmen, was much to be pitied inasmuch as, moved by wrath, he made war with Hari and the wielder of Gandiva." https://sacred-texts.com/hin/m13/m13b113.htm
Quote 3; "I tell thee truly and swear by the good acts I have performed, by the prowess I possess and by my sons, that slaying all the Panchalas with the Pandavas, I shall obtain peace of mind, or slain by them in battle I shall repair to those regions whither those allies of mine have gone."

Quote 4; "After having caused and witnessed the slaughter of thy sons and brothers and sires and relatives and friends and maternal uncles and kinsmen?"
Quote 5; "Having caused friends such as I had to be slain and even sons and brothers and sires, and seeing my kingdom wrested by you." https://sacred-texts.com/hin/m09/m09031.htm

Quote 6: "Today I shall free myself from the debt I owe to the many illustrious Kshatriyas and to my sons, O chief of Bharata's race." https://sacred-texts.com/hin/m09/m09032.htm
Quote 7; "Thy heroic brothers, as also thy sons, with all thy troops, have been slain! Other kings also, possessed of heroism, and never retreating from battle, have been slain." https://sacred-texts.com/hin/m09/m09033.htm
=
Proof Duryodhan had more than 1 wife (so he was not a monogamist).
Quote 1: "O Karna, proceeding to the city of Kasi, alone with thy bow, thou hadst crushed the kings in battle for procuring a bride for the Kuru king!"
Basic's - this's one that can be considered shameful because this female was a long distant cousin of his own.
Quote 2:
"Duryodhana, however, of Kuru's race, could not tolerate that rejection of himself. Disregarding all the kings, he commanded the maiden to stop."
Duryodhan was married to Balram's daughter;
{begin} "I will not go near Duryodhana; or how, siding with the Pāṇḍavas, shall I slay king Duryodhana, my royal son-in-law and disciple? Therefore I will go neither to Arjuna nor to king Duryodhana."{end}
Logic - its entirely a possibility that balram gave away his daughter to suyodhan after being thrashed by him cause balram was a very weak warrior according to sanatan dharma.

Cross references indicating he had at minimum 2 wives.
1st: "O, why also hath Suyodhana with his wives been thus punished?"
2nd; "Here is king Duryodhana, the son of Dhritarashtra, who with his younger brothers and friends and wives is being led away a captive by the Gandharvas along the sky. Blest be ye. Liberate the king along with the women of the royal household!" https://sacred-texts.com/hin/m03/m03246.htm
3rd; "Then the protectors of the ladies, placing the wives of the king, as also those of his brothers, on vehicles, fled away in fear." https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m09/m09029.htm
Posted by at No comments:

Saturday, April 12, 2025

Which TV serial did the most justice to Arjuna's power?

Introduction - A easy answer could be BR Chopra's because hes the only one who did justice to virat yudh, while other tv serials barely came close, but a more keen look will tell a different story on which serial did true justice. So its possible that chopra will not be seen as the best.

The 7 serials i am considering:
Sanjay Khan's Jai Mahabharat (2001) & Maharathi Karna (2003).
Chopra's Mahabharat (1988).
Sagar's shri krishna series (1993).
Sony TV's suryaputr karn tv serial.
Karn Sangini - Kinshuk Vaidya was the guy who portrayed arjuna.

Jai hanuman was released in 1997, even for a little while it did focus on Mahabharat, they began with van parva & ended with kurukshetra, so i am counting it because they show arjuna fighting multiple times their.
=
Why Starplus Mahabharat failed to do justice?
Answer - Because they showed arjuna losing to bhishma, even if arjuna is clearly holding back still i do not accept this. It was clearly unfair biased handling and writing. They showed that even when arjuna had his four brothers doing a group attack he would fail to win against bhishma.

So starplus mahabharat will not be considered as a option here. I will also exclude the 'Radha Krishna' tv serial aswell. And ekta kapoor too since she had not given arjuna enough scenes.

My GOAL in this post will be to answer which the question of which show did the most justice to his power, which tv serial made him the most capable? The first show i am discussing will be the one with hanuman's name in the title.
=
JH - shows that he overpowered Karna before the curses kicked in (chariot wheel getting stuck):
Arjuna disarmed the kirata (Shiva in disguise):
They also showed that arjuna's arrow bridge could not be broken by hanumaan. But i will not provide a gif regarding that last achievement.

Explanation - The problem with his last 2 achievements is that they were done cause the characters were holding back, hanuman did not want arjuna to feel bad so he decided to not use his full power against that bridge of arrows. And shiva was dominating arjuna until hanuman appealed in front of him (with folded hands) to be mild which is why arjuna succeeded in disarming him their.

Apart from these 3 their's no achievement of arjuna in JH that is worth noting. Though the karna one was a fair achievement. Their were no defeats of Arjuna shown in JH because it was not focused on Mahabharat as the main/sole topic, and the character of arjuna did not have as many appearances as hanumana did. So JH's arjuna enjoys the factor of being the only one that never loses.
=
Sanjay Khans Mahabharat (2001):
They showed him losing to Bhishma once.
GIF
However they also showed him defeating bhishma in virat yudh. So i guess it's balanced out.
They always portrayed him better than karna so no point in elaborating on that.

For Guru Drona their is one time where they show drona overpowering arjuna even if it is by just 1 percentage (on day 12). It looks like drona was holding back or arjuna was holding back too, its upto the interpretation of the audience but a cross reference existed in the show of Duryodhan claiming that their were many times where drona could have slayed arjuna but choose to not do so.
GIF
Conclusion - my opinion is that drona overpowers Arjuna here but he does not defeat arjuna. Because arjuna did not get injured or tossed off his chariot here. Though the bow he wielded fell from his grip so it does look bad for him on screen.
=
SPK arjuna;
Had vaishnavastra, brahmastra & pashupatastra.
Also had fake astras (never shown in the book) like andhkar astra (used in rangbhoomi), and the bhaya astra (used to create fear).

The special astras they made him use in war itself, at day 2 he uses a illusionary type weapon which tricks ashwathama/duhsasana into fighting eachother. At day 14 he used nagastra on jayadrath.

His achievements without astras:
Rangbhoomi - built a throne of arrows for yudisther.
Guru Dakshina - cut off Drupad's bow.
Day 11 - injured karna in the stomach.
Kills a driver of Bhishma on day 2 of Kurukshetra Yudh;
Unarmed comparison with karna.
Karna (despite having kavach kundal) gets overpowered by Suyodhan:
Arjuna (on day 14) literally one shot's Suyodhan by throwing him back:
According to this tv serial duryodhan was also better than bheem with a mace (yet inferior to drupada) and bheem outmatched karna once in the same show. Using ABC logic arjun's achievement puts him far above karna (gautam rode).
Source - Ep 266 of spk
=
KarnSangini;
They showed arjuna's variety as he defeated king Drupada by wrestling rather than the redundant style of archery.
Arjuna overpowers Karna himself in a fight (after tournament before lakshagrah):
[Gif]
Source - episode 11 of karn sangini.
No incident of Karna (aashim gulati) overpowering Arjuna existed in KarnSangini.
=
Anti feats of arjuna khan [chopras arjun];
Loss to yudisther in tournament.
{gif that proved it}
Source - chopra's 24th episode.
The loss to yudisther brings chopra's arjun down alot.
=
My opinion of 2 incidents which occur in the serial of Chopra:
Episode 84 - arjuna fought Drona & then avoids him.
Ep 88 - duhsasana dies, karna supposedly spared Arjuna.

My analysis; the drona fight cant be seen as a bad performance or a loss because arjuna was still able to destroy the chariot of drona & he only begins to run away from drona after drona switched chariots by taking another. Though arjuna did not win & drona did not lose still he overpowered him by destroying his chariot once.

Gif that proves it.
The 88th episode incident is what i consider the true anti-feat/embarrassment. But i have a semi counter to this one. My counterargument is that the fight began as arjuna dominating karna by injuring him with 3 arrows while karna pulled those out of his limbs & only started to gain a upperhand once he fired the snake weapon. After that arjuna doesnt fight in a calm, cool or collected manner instead he began shooting arrows recklessly which couldnt touch karna.
So Karna is able to then wound him with 2 arrows & use another arrow to pierce his gandiva bow in a way where its basically stuck on the chariot's axle.

Based on who injured who more its 3-2 a scoreboard in favor of arjuna, but based on the arrow attacks of karna (cutting crown, getting gandiva stuck) he would get 2 additional points making it 4 to 3 in favor of karna. The point i am making is that this was only possible due to arjuna losing self control over his emotions and still it was a very close match between both of them.

Even if the 16th day incident is a win for Karna then it can be rendered irrelevant because of the number of incidents where arjun defeated karna in that same show:
1st - swayamvara duel
2nd & 3rd - matsya battle
4th - sammohan astra
5th - day eleven
6th - day fourteen
All six duels were fair fights. Basically arjuna wins 6 fights karna won 1 fight, its 85 percent in arjuna's favor only not karnas.
=
Maharathi Karna serial;
Over here the issue is it was a incomplete show and that arjuna really only had 3 action scenes, one was the incident of him capturing droopad:
Logic - this matters cause in this tv serials continuity droopad was a student of Parshuram like bhishma, drona & karna.
The 2nd incident was a duel against Karna which ends in a draw.
The 3rd is a duel against a Yaksha where he does win;
Logic - its possible that yaksha was Angaraparna (whose a gandharv warrior in adi parva) but his identity is upto speculation because it hasnt been mentioned what his name is.
Chopra's never shown a battle where arjuna fought a character that is deva, yaksh or gandharv, so when it comes to the VARIETY of enemies then MK did a slightly better job.
=
Shri Krishna serial (1993).
I know their exists a incident where he killed bhishma, drona & suyodhana but what the audience doesnt realize is that it was a dream sequence, which was filled with internal thought's in arjuna's own mind, it was apart of the bhagavad geeta segement of this tv show. It does not count as an achievement here.

Sandeep Mohan was immune to fire-damage:
Arjuna kills Bhayasur (after subhadra-vivaha pre dice game);
Arjuna overpowered Bhishma (ep 163):
LogicalQuestion - who was more wounded afterward's?
Answer: its clearly bhishma who was in a worse condition after that fight.
Arjuna defeated guru Drona (ep 164);
Bonus - it's the only tv serial which knew theirs a difference between Brahmasheer & Brahmastra so they gave Sandeep Mohan the honor of being the only arjuna actor to possess the brahmashir astra.
=
Difference between the representations of virat yudh.
Sagar's Shri Krishna - their are many cross references of it taking place but no presentation it was never shown on screen, also its implied only karna/kouravas participated no involvement of kripa, drona or bhishma or even ashwathama is mentioned.
Sanjay Khan's Jai Mahabharat - here they've shown that the battle happens onscreen but their was no sammohan astra, instead of beating karna twice they show arjuna defeated karna only once not twice, same with all other enemies.
And kripacharya was absent, one more difference is that they showed the army of matsya accompanying arjuna in the war, so the army of hastinapore fought matsya desh's army at the same time when arjuna was dueling the kaurav warriors.
Chopra's Mahabharat version does not need a introduction but its clear that chopra did the best work when it comes to virat yudh alone but this post is not meant to be specifically limited to just virat yudh only, its about arjuns power so all other things should be taken into account too.

Besides these 3 TV series none bothered to highlight or give attention to virat yudh except for SPK their they allow drona to lose against Arjuna but they do not allow karna to lose legitimately instead they make karna surrender to arjuna out of a vow to Kunti mata. While bhishma's character is white washed as not even fighting in the war yet being their to witness the battle.
=
CONCLUSION; If its just about virat yudh then i believe that Chopra did the best work, if its about a win/loss ratio then JH did the best job cause their arjuna never loses, but if you consider the amount of different astras they show him using then SPK did the best job.
Cause in spk they gave arjuna the nagastra, vaishnav astra, tvashtrastra, brahmastra & pashupatastra. Along with fan made weapons like bhayastra/chakravaan astra.
He just didn't have brahmashir astra but sagar's arjuna (sandeep mohan) did have it. Sandeep Mohan did not use the same number of astras that navi bhangu did. A good thing about both of them is that they never lose to yudisther.
Posted by at No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)