Ethics of Krishna

Dear Kanaka,
Very thought provoking observations.....just my two cents for teh sake of arguments.
Well Krishna, i also an Avatar , so as such he is in human form, with human failings maybe!?!
Also like Sravanthi says Karna was in Bad company, so maybe Krishna wanted to point that to us!
Also only because this act of wrongdoing to Karna has highlighted Karna's character and we all feel sorry for him and emphatise with him!Maybe that was another reason...otherwise this great character would be just another one of the villians from Kaurava side!
Ram was also a human, and he had to uphold the duty as a king! And doesn't all these mythological legends show us that destiny, fate will follow any Human , even if it is our Lord, but in human form.!? We all have our karma to be fulfilled and these cannot be bypassed ! And given the time period, all these have supposed to ahve happened in other yugas....so maybe all these were needed IN THAT SOCIETY! Also the dahavataram concept itself says that it is the evolution of mankind....seen in that light maybe the Perfect Human is yet to be BORN OR CONCEIVED!
Sorry went too long into my ramblings.....but glad to see that you are trying to get away from depression.....

Dear Kanaka and Ilites,

I read this thread of yours the first day of posting it. But I took time to give a proper reply.

I too admire Karna in many aspects. No doubt Karna is known for his charity, valour, loyalty and friendship. Though Karna had good qualities, he was associated with bad people. He was in a bad company.

Did he not know that he is supporting people who were not righteous? Where was his sixth sense then? That bad association alone was the reason for his defeat.

For this I would like to site an example given by Lord Krishna to Yudishtara in Mahabaratha which was told in one of Bagawan Baba's discourses.

Lord Krishna said Yudishtara that - A thief enters your house, rob the valuables and escapes through a narrow path which is full of thorns and bushes. So when you try to catch which way would you choose? Definitely the same way through which the thief escaped. You would not choose a thornless and a broad way to catch him. You will have to go through the same way which the thief chose.

The same applies to defeating Karna too. Though Karna was good at heart, done lot of charities and was very loyal to his king, he chose a very bad company and wasted all his fruits out of good deeds to those people.

Lord Krishna incarnated and helped Pandavas to establish "Dharma". So to save His bhakthas and to establish Dharma, the Lord has to force Himself to take such actions against Karna and others. Thus He said "Dharmasansthapanaya Sambhavai Yuge Yuge" (To establish Dharma Lord will incarnate age after age).

Pandavas were able to win the war inspite of having few supporters and they stood against their Pithama Bhishma and Guru Dronacharya and defeated them too. This was all possible for them because they obeyed implicitly Lord Krishna and followed His orders.

Lord Krishna adopted only the path of Dharma and truth to win the war. All those truths are hidden in the same Mahabaratha which can be understand only with His grace.

The activities of Lord Krishna may appear little confusing to us all. But He is the form of Dharma and Truth.

For this I shall site an other example from Mahabaratha in my next post in this thread. Till then I would like you and other ilites to assimilate what I have narrated here and give your feedback.

Originally Posted by kanaka

Any person can get solace in Bhagavad Gita. Yes I did get my mental strength from this great classic few days back. I thought of death as a pleasnt experience. Thought of the repurcussions in the absence of this phenomena. I realised how important is the fall of leaves to allow new leaves to sprout.
So also it is very much essential for the old generation to cast off its old body to assume new ones.

I also feel elated to see a text which is highly secular in nature with on reference to magnificience of any religion.

But I do feel there are contradictions in Gita. May be my ignorance or due to alck of comprehension to get the full essence of this areligious text. I make no claim of any scholarly thought over this.
But I would tolerate is the injustice done to Karna. I will never behappy over any justification. This makes me show disrespect to Krishna(Iam ready for the brickbats from my friends). Ethics of war doesn't permit a character like krishna to be maen. It was meanest of mean actions to sly a person who was not in a position to defend himself. It is here Karna becomes more glorified.
There can be no Gita without Karna- that karna who is noted for charity loyalty and credibility. The thought of Karna makes me feel proud of Vyasa for his creative ability. kanaka

Kanaka, Karna was not in bad company. He was bad company..He along with Shakuni was one of the two evil geniuses behind Duryodhana. Just examine his actions. Who ordered Draupadi to be stripped ? It was Karna. One of Karna's plus points is said to be charity. But please look at its origins. When saved from Gandharvas by the Pandavas, Duryodhana was full of remorse and decided to end his life by fasting to death. And Shakuni advised him to return Pandavas kingdom to them. But Karna put him back on the path of evil by swearing that he would not refuse anyone anything until Arjuna is killed and Pandavas are defeated. Charity with time limits? That is uncharitable! And when Krishna revealed to him that Pandavas were his brothers his first words (according to Vyasa Bharata) were the "evil Duryodhana will perish and my brothers will win". After that do you expect any sincerity on his part to his friend and benefector? Even when he went on his final confrontation with Arjuna his mind was not on the battle. Otherwise he wouldn't have constantly insulted his charioteer Shalya. A charioteer could make or mar the warrior by his manoeuvrings. Karna was not a fool, he was just being insincere to his benefector. Insincerity to his friends and brothers is the very essence of the man. He got his just deserts and hardly deserves sympathy.

Dear Balajee,

Certain parts of your narration like"Evil Duriyodhana - - - - - - - - - -- - .. As far as I know it is Kunti who discloses the secret. You mean to say Krishna had already briefeed Karna about his antecedents. I don't know.

I feel happy when there is a lot of yhoughts pouring in. I also get educated in that process. kanaka

Originally Posted by kanaka

Dear Balajee,

Certain parts of your narration like"Evil Duriyodhana - - - - - - - - - -- - .. As far as I know it is Kunti who discloses the secret. You mean to say Krishna had already briefeed Karna about his antecedents. I don't know.

I feel happy when there is a lot of yhoughts pouring in. I also get educated in that process. kanaka

Kanaka, Krishna reveals his origins to Karna when he goes as Pandavas emissary to Hastinapur. Kunti meets Karna only after that according to Vyasa Bharata'

You are quite right in pointing out the contradictions. But I think the Geeta and other epic literature in Hinduism are great precisely because they are not clear black and white documents. They raise questions which humanity can ponder over for the rest of eternity. Even God could be questioned in Hinduism. There lies the true openness of Hinduism. And since you bring up Karna, think about the way Meghnad was destroyed by Lakshman. The only difference was that he was not guided there by a God, but Lakshman himself was a godly character. Krishna will continue to be an all time enigma, a strange mixture of a politician and a God. Come to think of it, when Draupadi was humiliated in public, Karna, the great warrior, sat there and enjoyed the goings on. Even her 5 husbands did nothing. But Krishna prevailed. And it was this same Krishna who signalled to Bhima to hit Duryadhana's thighs, which was not permitted by rules. I am never sure how to judge these happenings. In the first place why did the Gods create sin in this world. Could they not have prevented it?

Dear Ojaantrik,

We blame Karna of being disloyal tec tec. But the unscrupulous behaviour of Kunti is forgotten. If Kunti ahd the audacity to claim and not disown him?
(1) Would Karna join Kauravas. his joining Duryodhana was accidental. We seem to forget the real culprit. We only accuse Karna of joining a wrong team.
Had not Kunti sown the seeds of infidelity, dishonesry and disloyalty. kanaka

My dear kanaka,
I can't agree with you more on the topic of karna.He is my all time favourite.One's heart bleeds when karna dies,he was slain in a cheap manner.
In Ramayan also,Rama kills Vali standing behind him,many may be the explanations given,but even as a young girl I felt sad to read that part.Somehow that act of Rama does not go well with his character.
But they are colourful epics with brilliant portrayals of lively characters.
love
mithila kannan

Dear kanak
Though Karan Was very brave ,kind & all but since very bigining he was jelous of Arjun.So he befriended koravs .When draupadi was brought to be strpped in Sabha & karan rather suggesting this that she is now a maid to duryodhana & so they have the right to strip .This was his biggest crime & so his end was justifiable .
It happens that all those who were mute on this occassion wheather Bhism or Dritrasthra or koraves all suffered to soem or more extant.Remember Bhism also has to lie on arrowbed though he was had the most unblemished life .
The mistake of karan was the company he had.
Same in Ramayana
Shri ram was not insulting sita when he asked for agni pariksha . It happened so that before sitaharan Shri ram asked sita that he is going to do some Human Chartram & so he asked Agni devta to keep sita safe for him. The sita Who was kidnapped by Ravana was only a chhaya( shadow) .So after ravana died & sita was brought it was to bring actual sita back from Agni & so he asked sita chhaya to step in agni,It was also so that nobody could raise a finger on charecter of Sita.Shri ramawatar was to set good moral chrectors for everybody be it father,brother,mother ,wife ,public or enamy.

Dear Mithila and Jaishri,

No dispute over our class one epics. as someone said Hinduism is a big canvas where you can draw and redraw allowing your imagination to soar. Otherwise there would not have been variety of Mahabharata and Ramayana. Our epics have the strength to take any amount of criticisms and enough space for any number of schools to thrive for ages. That's the beauty of Hinduism. No Fatwas. Ofcourse let us not forget the ritualistic aspect which are in a way Fatwas only. Then it is our own creation. kanaka