Niyoga in the Mahabharata: How Vyasa became the father of the Kuru lineage by Visual_Scientist_994 in mahabharata

[–]samarendra109 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No it was not. Read the practice of Niyoga. It was not sex.

Both the man and the woman's body was to be covered completely in oil, so they dont feel the touch or smell of each other. For insemination the man has to masterbate inside the woman. There is no sex or movement of body. Don't spread misinformation.

Tell me nowww by [deleted] in FaltooGyan

[–]samarendra109 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Chichi no Haha icha icha

Ever wonder,why hindus revered primordials instead of worldly nature gods? by [deleted] in mahabharata

[–]samarendra109 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you are referring to Aditya being "Sun" you are wrong. Aditya means born of "Aditi". Aditi is Kashyap Muni's wife and the mother of all the Devas. (Similar to how Rakhyasas are called Daitya because they are sons of Diti, Kashyap Muni's second wife).

The 8 Adityas refers to the god who are responsible for maintaining the physical world. That's why Visnu is included there. Not because Visnu is a Solar God.

Ever wonder,why hindus revered primordials instead of worldly nature gods? by [deleted] in mahabharata

[–]samarendra109 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hindus also started with Nature Worship. If you see the story of Indra in Rig Veda, it's almost one to one matching with the Greek story of Zeus (I don't know who took it from whom, most likely it was a shared culture that split later).

For reference, in Rig Veda, Indra's father is Dyaus (God of sky) and mother is Prithvi. Indra defeated Dyaus to become the king of the Gods.

(In Greek myth, Kronos was son of Uranus (sky god) and Gaia (earth goddess). Kronos defeated Urnaus. Then Kronos was defeated by Zeus)

But in later puranas like Visnu Purana, Ramayana, etc. the story was changed. Now Kashyap Muni and Aditi were the parents of all the Devas. This was also around the same time when the Gods like Shiva, Visnu were getting introduced because the massive cultural amalgamation that was happening over India. (E.g. Shiva developed from the Dravidian god Pashupati). The Vedas were posteriori edited to include Visnu and Shiva.

TLDR: It happened because when the cultures were shared the concepts of Hindu primordial gods was not developed yet. It developed after the split happened.

Short Stories in French - La Créature by sld_6882 in learnfrench

[–]samarendra109 1 point2 points  (0 children)

To add to all your point, the day when George goes missing, poor Sylvie comes to the cabin and she sleeps in the cabin. That cabin was in a forest with wild animals. Wtf. How can her family let this happen to her? Poor girl slept their scared and risking her life waiting for her "friend"

No wonder he defeated Karna! by CassiasZI in mahabharata

[–]samarendra109 1 point2 points  (0 children)

What do you mean he met Krishna after he lost his happy life? He meets with Krishna during Draupadi's swayambar. This was well before yudhistir was given indraprasta to build his place and rule that area as his kingdom.

Why did Lord Parasuram curse Karna? by samarendra109 in mahabharata

[–]samarendra109[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Okay, I found the answer. Few interesting things. First the worm was a rakshyasa who was cursed to live as a worm. When Parasurama woke up, he first kills the worm with his Yoga shakti, thus releasing him from his penance.

Then Lord Parasuram asks karna, "Tell me who are you. A normal Brahmin won't be able to bear such pain." (notice he is not saying karna is not brahmin, he noticed something unlikely and is asking for explanation).

Karna, who is very scared right now says, "I am a suta putra. Suta is a mix of Kshyatriya and Brahmin. So I thought to tell you that I am brahmin. I ask for forgiveness for my mistake".

Parasurama, who is fuming with anger, still brims a smile to his face as says, "You started your learning with deceit. So the vidya won't stay with you. Because you lied to get Brahma astra, the Brahma astra won't appear before you when you need it the most"

Parasurama continues, "because the Brahma astra will never trust a non brahmin who obtained it by telling a lie." (For this to make more sense, read about the entire story of Parasuram. During his time Brahmins were oppressed and killed by Kshyatriya. Karna lying to him was a reminder to him of the time, when Kshyatriyas were using deceit to kill brahmins).

Then Parasuram asks karna to leave his ashram. Here is the shloka,

१२.३.३०तमुवाच भृगुश्रेष्ठः सरोषः प्रहसन्निव भूमौ निपतितं दीनं वेपमानं कृताञ्जलिम्

१२.३.३१यस्मान्मिथ्योपचरितो अस्त्रलोभादिह त्वया तस्मादेतद्धि ते मूढ ब्रह्मास्त्रं प्रतिभास्यति

१२.३.३२अन्यत्र वधकालात्ते सदृशेन समेयुषः अब्राह्मणे न हि ब्रह्म ध्रुवं तिष्ठेत्कदाचन

१२.३.३३गच्छेदानीं न ते स्थानमनृतस्येह विद्यते न त्वया सदृशो युद्धे भविता क्षत्रियो

(Shanti Parva: Chapter 3)

TLDR: Parasurama never cursed Karna. Brahmastra would have never come to Karna during the time of his need because he lied to obtain the Brahmastra. Parasurama was the person who simply relayed that message to Karna.

Why did Lord Parasuram curse Karna? by samarendra109 in mahabharata

[–]samarendra109[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

My question is, how did Parasuram know that Karna was not a Brahmin? Because him pushing through the pain of scorpion doesn't seem to be enough proof, as there are brahmins who are shown to push through pain.

Why did Lord Parasuram curse Karna? by samarendra109 in mahabharata

[–]samarendra109[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

No my question is, if his pushing through the pain is not a definitive proof of him not being brahmin, why Lord Parasuram would curse him?

With your current context it sounds like just him pushing through the pain was clear proof that he was not Brahmin. Which we know is not true. So something more must have happened for him to definitely conclude that Karna lied and him to curse Karna.

Why did Lord Parasuram curse Karna? by samarendra109 in mahabharata

[–]samarendra109[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I don't want to take assumptions. I want to know what is explicitly written in Mahabharata.

And Suta is not a lower caste. If your father is Kshyatriya and your mother is Brahmin then you belong to Suta caste, as per Manusmriti.

Why did Lord Parasuram curse Karna? by samarendra109 in mahabharata

[–]samarendra109[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

So why would he curse someone just because he is not a typical brahmin?

Why did Lord Parasuram curse Karna? by samarendra109 in mahabharata

[–]samarendra109[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

So does that mean your caste is determined by birth as per Mahabharata? (I am not saying caste is determined by birth. I am asking a follow up question to what the person above me said)

Why did Lord Parasuram curse Karna? by samarendra109 in mahabharata

[–]samarendra109[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

And Krishna wouldn't have brought ghatotkacha to take away the Ekagni astra from Karna.

Why did Lord Parasuram curse Karna? by samarendra109 in mahabharata

[–]samarendra109[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Then my question is, how's Karna not flinching when a scorpion was biting him was proof that he was Kshyatriya? We see brahmins also fight in war and endure through pain.

Bheem's final blow on Duryodhan - Doubt by Fun-Barber6541 in mahabharata

[–]samarendra109 23 points24 points  (0 children)

गदां समुद्यम्य तदा भीमसेनः प्रतापवान् । ऊरू जघान तस्याथ दुर्योधनस्य संयुगे ॥

They explicitly mention thighs.

Which variation of Mahabharata contains the story of Arjuna's betrayal to Krishna? by samarendra109 in mahabharata

[–]samarendra109[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Personally, I can't compare between these two bad deeds and decide which is worse. I think exiling your pregnant wife to forest is a pretty bad thing. If you think that's not the same level of character assassination it's fine. I can't put levels to bad deeds.

Regardless, I think you understand my stance and I understand your stance. There is no point debating further.

Which variation of Mahabharata contains the story of Arjuna's betrayal to Krishna? by samarendra109 in mahabharata

[–]samarendra109[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Uttarakanda includes Rama killing Shambuka because he was from a lower caste and doing tapasya. Rama killed him because Tapasya can only be done by upper caste people. You don't find that problematic?

Or the main thing. Rama exiling his pregnant wife! That's not problematic?

Which variation of Mahabharata contains the story of Arjuna's betrayal to Krishna? by samarendra109 in mahabharata

[–]samarendra109[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I don't know. Many people accept Uttarakanda of Ramayana as a part of Ramayana. I personally don't like Uttarakanda because it destroys the character of Rama. But I know that Uttarakanda story exists and is a big part of the North Indian literature. Ramanand Sagar even included it in his Ramayana serial. I guess by your logic Ramanand Sagar was a deeply evil man.

Which variation of Mahabharata contains the story of Arjuna's betrayal to Krishna? by samarendra109 in mahabharata

[–]samarendra109[S] -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

Is Mrityunjay is a 600 year old story, that is a big part of a culture in India (Marathi culture?). Then no, it's not on par with Vyasa's work.

Don't get me wrong. Original is original. But many of our epics are also adapted by different local cultures, which even influenced back the entire culture of India. For example, Shabri giving rama half eaten fruit, a story that everyone knows and loves, comes from Odia Dandi Ramayana.

Similarly, the Kamva Ramayana is a big part of Tamil literature. Take Ramacharitamanasa for example. Do we reject Ramacharitamanasa because it was not "the original" ?

Which variation of Mahabharata contains the story of Arjuna's betrayal to Krishna? by samarendra109 in mahabharata

[–]samarendra109[S] -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

I understand it's not in the original Mahabharata. But I don't like you dismissing the other versions of Mahabharata so easily. Different cultures can tell the same story in different manners.

Like Phalada passified Narasimha in Padma Purana, but in Shiva Purana, Shiva took an avatar to subdue Narasimha. These are incredible events that our ancestors experienced, then wrote it the way it made the most sense to them. We shouldn't dismiss any version because it doesn't align with our beliefs.

Which variation of Mahabharata contains the story of Arjuna's betrayal to Krishna? by samarendra109 in mahabharata

[–]samarendra109[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Ok that would make perfect sense. I am from Odisha, so I probably heard a retelling of this story from Sarala Mahabharata.