Talk:Duryodhana/Archive 1

Archive 1

Untitled

Is that "parallels" really that important?

What is wrong in giving a parallel, when there is some similarity between two epic figures. After all, it is for the reader to decide the degree of similarity Doctor Bruno 02:15, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

i think this page reeks of bias against duryodhana....his humiliation at the hands of draupadi ets are not discussed.....and he was never in hell....i think that part abt him dng time in hell is false Sidmohata 08:25, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Thigh or Crotch

Where was Duryodhana actually hit by Bhima.... Wasn't it the thigh which was hit ??? Doctor Bruno 09:54, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

It was the thigh, I am 100% certain. DaGizza ^{Chat (c)} 10:08, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

File:Duryodhan-250x228.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Duryodhan-250x228.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests October 2011 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 12:04, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Duryodhana's goodness

The last section talks too much of Duryodhana's goodness and it is as if they are saying all the bad things are not Duryodhana's fault. This is certainly not true; as Duryodhana is the bad character in the entire Mahabharata! This seems too biased on the other side, so both sides should be clearly explained instead of saying Duryodhana is "all good" or "all bad." Llightex (talk) 02:23, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Duryodhana's [mythological] afterlife

Finally, when he reached a great height, Indra appeared in his chariot.

"Your brothers and Draupadi have arrived before you. You have lagged behind, burdened with your body. Ascend my chariot and go with me in flesh. I have come to take you," said Indra. But when Yudhishthira went up to take his seat in Indra's chariot, the dog also climbed up.

"No, no," said Indra. "There is no place for dogs in swarga," and pushed the dog away.

"Then there is no room for me either," said Yudhishthira and refused to enter the heavenly chariot if he had to leave his faithful companion behind.

Dharma had come to test Yudhishthira's loyalty and he was pleased with his son's conduct. The dog vanished from the sight.

Yudhishthira reached swarga. There, he saw Duryodhana. The Kuru prince was seated on a beautiful throne and he shone with the splendour of the sun and around him stood in attendance the goddess of heroism and other angels. He did not see his brothers or anyone else.

Yudhishthira was astonished.

"Where are my brothers, ye denizens of swarga?" asked Yudhisthira. "This man of greed, of limited vision, is here. I do not care to spend my time in his company. We were driven by this man's envy and spite to kill friends and relatives. We stood tied by dharma to inaction when, before our eyes, innocent Panchali, united to us in sacred wedlock, was dragged to the Hall of Assembly and insulted under the orders of this wicked man. I cannot bear the sight of this man. Tell me, where are my brothers? I wish to go where they are." Saying this Yudhisthira averted his eyes from where Duryodhana was seated in glory.

Then Narada, the heavenly rishi of encyclopaedic knowledge, smiled disapprovingly at Yudhisthira and said:

"Renowned prince, this is not right. In swarga, we harbour no ill–will. Do not speak in this manner about Duryodhana. The brave Duryodhana had attained his present state by force of kshatriya dharma. It is not right to let the things of the flesh stay in in mins and breed ill–will. Do follow the law and stay here with king Duryodhana. There is no place in swarga for hatred. You have arrived here with a human body; so it is that you have these inappropriate feelings. Discard them, son!"

.... .... ....

Thus sais Yama to Dharmaputra who, thereupon, was transfigured. The mortal frame was gone and he was a god. With the disappearance of the human body, also disappeared all trace of anger and hatred. Then Yudhisthira saw there Karna and all his brothers and the sons of Dhritarashtra also, serene and free from anger, all having attained the state of the gods. In this reunion, Yudhisthira at last found peace and real happiness.

What do you mean by Godhood in the title? Rameshnta909 (talk) 17:42, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi Dear, the Mahabharata claims that in svarga, Yudhisthira "saw Karna and all his brothers and the sons of Dhritarashtra also, serene and free from anger, all having attained the state of the gods." So, I placed "godhood" in the sub-Section title. If You believe that I may have erred, please kindly provide Your suggestion on what should be a better title, in fact, I request You to do so. Sincerely, ← Abstruce 18:02, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

First of all I appreciate your efforts to improve the page. I think simply Afterlife is enough. Rameshnta909 (talk) 18:21, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Dhanyawad , I AM an atheist and I have read the Mahabharata several times (before and after — atheism). Based on My understanding(s) of "how to" Edit better, a Section's title should reflect its content(s) with due gravity. I mean to say that a Section's title is only directly based on its content(s). I, at least for one, believes that "afterlife" would be a light-er title for the sub-Section. I sincerely welcome Your suggestion, and though, I AM not claiming that the title placed by Me is the best possible title for the sub-Section (as per its content), I don't think that only "afterlife" would be a fair title. Do You view "afterlife" as the perfect title for the sub-Section ?! We may wait for some more participation here, or You may provide more suggestion(s). Please suggest a title that best reflects the content in the sub-Section. Sincerely, ← Abstruce 19:07, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Settle for afterlife for now. A normal english wikipedia reader may not understand the term swargavaasa, its sanskrit. I have doubts about the part that a human gets a god's status after death. It may create confusion among the readers that he is now treated as a god. There are temples for duryodhan and pandavas as well but that doesn't make them gods for sure. thanks! Rameshnta909 (talk) 11:08, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

The godhood seems inappropriate in this context. I suggest that it be combined with Death. No separate 1 para section is needed. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 11:21, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

yeah I think merging with death is a good idea. Rameshnta909 (talk) 11:23, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Dear Rameshnta909, I have only mentioned (in this WP Article) what is written in the Mahabharata (45th edition) – in the ways – "according to the Mahabharata"/"the Mahabharata further mentions". For the fellow User's sake(s), I have even text-ed the relevant paragraphs from page 439 to 444. You may re-read them. I, as a Wikipedian, cannot mention what I personally believe (WP:POV) in any of the WP Article.

I won't argue much about what should be the sub-Section's title, but I guess it should have had a title because of the kind of claims (from the Mahabharata) mentioned it it. But, maybe, let them stay merged, and change the section of the title to 'death and ascension'. Any objections to 'death and ascension' !? Sincerely, ← Abstruce 12:16, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Sorry my friend I am not sure about the ascension part as well. If you are sure its in the source, go on and make the change. Rameshnta909 (talk) 14:55, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Dear Rameshnta909, I suggested changing the title of the Section from 'death' to 'death and ascension' based on the content in the Section (from the Mahabharata). As far as naming the Section's title is concerned, the very exact word "ascension" doesn't necessarily needs to appear in the Reference. It unambiguously claims that 'they' ascended to svarga and attained the state of the gods. We cannot discuss our view–points here, We cannot discuss what You and I believe or what We are sure of, but only what different–different Reference claims. You and I may even have diametrically–opposite views and beliefs as far as the Mahabharata is concerned, but You may be able to view that I edit Wikipedia only with a neutral point of view. Seems like You have no objections to 'death and ascension,' so I AM making the change. Thanks !! Sincerely, ← Abstruce 16:33, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

ascension is very confusing. ascension to what? I suggest we keep it simple "Death", till a much more appropriate title is found.Redtigerxyz ^Talk 12:42, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Well, Gentlemen, I hope You may found a much more appropriate title. Thanks !! ← Abstruce 15:15, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Duryodhana - a victim of massive cheating

Even though Duryodhana is often said as the villan in mahabratha, at the end even the gods praise the goodness in him.I am adding few quotes from the original to prove this.The policy of wikipedia is not to judge any character as good or bad but to give a fair opinion of all sides .I believe these article is made to appear duryodhana as a super villain but in real he was superbly cheated by pandavas and lord krishna.Even the gods in heaven acknowledge these.So i believe these quotes will give a neutral view to the article and the character of Duryodhana.

Duryodhana cries out, "I have no interest in becoming a king now, I have lost all interests in this world which is fake and temporary, slain in battle I shall spend the rest of my afterlife in heaven in the company of my friends, relatives and well wishers. You defeated us by cheating and trickery, otherwise the likes of Bhishma, Drona, Karna amongst others were unconquerable. The victory which you obtained is not true victory and your names will bear black stains in the future. I have always been a good son, loyal friend, caring brother, and terrible enemy, while I lived I stamped my foot on the heads of those who dared oppose me in any way, I am happy to have died fighting and thank everyone who laid his life down for me, I die happy."

Duryodhana afflicted Lord Krishna and Pandavas with keen and bitter words.He asked Lord Krishna about the unrightousss killing of Bhishma,Drona,Karna and the foul play of Bhima on him motivated by Krishna .

“ "The dart that had been given by Lord Indra to Karna for the slaughter of Arjuna was baffled by you through Ghatotkacha! Who is there that is more sinful than you? Karna had done a great feat for vanquishing Partha(Arjuna). You, however, caused Aswasena, the son of that prince of snakes (Takshaka), to be baffled in achieving his purpose! When again the wheel of Karna's car sank in earth,you caused that Karna to be slain! If sons of Pandu had fought me ,Karna , Bhishma and Drona by fair means, victory then, without doubt, would never have been yours. By adopting the most crooked and unrighteous means you caused many kings observant of the duties of their order and ourselves also to be slain!' ”

Upon the conclusion of these words of King Duryodhana, a thick shower of fragrant flowers fell from the sky. The Gandharvas played many charming musical instruments. The Apsaras in a chorus sang the glory of king Duryodhana.The Siddhas uttered loud sound to the effect, "Praise be to king Duryodhana!" Fragrant and delicious breezes mildly blew on every side. Beholding these exceedingly wonderful things and this worship offered to Duryodhana, the Pandavas headed by Lord Krishna became ashamed. Hearing (invisible beings cry out) that Bhishma and Drona and Karna and Bhurishrava were slain unrighteously, they became afflicted with grief and wept in sorrow.

Beholding the Pandavas filled with anxiety and grief, Krishna said "Yes, these men truly were invincible, while fought against fairly, but I had to uphold dharma".Krishna then spoke to Pandavas

“ All of them were great car-warriors and exceedingly quick in the use of weapons! If you had put forth all your prowess, even then you could never have slain them in battle by fighting fairly! King Duryodhana also could never be slain in a fair encounter! The same is the case with all those mighty car-warriors headed by Bhishma,Drona and Karna! From desire of doing good to you, I repeatedly applied my powers of illusion and caused them to be slain by diverse means in battle. If I had not adopted such deceitfulways in battle, victory would never have been yours, nor kingdom, nor wealth! Those four were very high-souled warriors and regarded as Maharathas in the world. The very Regents of the Earth could not slay them in fair fight! Similarly, the son of Dhritarashtra, though fatigued when armed with the mace, could not be slain in fair fight by Yama himself armed with his bludgeon! ”

It was each Kaurava's aim to protect Duryodhana till his last breath and so every one had vowed that they would fight for him till the end of their lives, so when Duryodhana died, it was after all those who had protected him had perished; he had millions of people protecting him, yet he lost the war. Duryodhana was always going to be the last person to die.The Pandavas and their allies leave Duryodhana in his suffering. The Pandavas, along with Yuyutsu, Krishna, and Satyaki go stay in the Kaurava camp, while the rest of the army returns to their camp.

Removing Karna-specific information

All the information (directly taken from the source; that is plagiarism) about Karna's specific conquests and achievements in getting Duryodhana his emperorship are not relevant to this article. They can go, with editing, in the Karna section. It is sufficient to say that Duryodhana achieved his emperorship, and with the help of Karna.

Pinkfloyd11 (talk) 18:29, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

@Pinkfloyd11:If you have a problem with Karna winning the whole earth story cut it short .But don't delete it entirely. It was Karna who fought and won the entire world for Duryodhana. Duryodhana haven't done absolutely anything. The theme is to make the readers understand that Karna the friend of Duryodhana conquered the entire world for him. Karna brought allegiance from all over the world so that Duryodhana can do Vaishnava sacrifice. You simply don't delete the core of an article bcoz you dont like it. Most of the data you deleted are very relevant to the information about the empire Duryodhana. Without Karna , Duryodhana would never be king. It was not Bhishma, or Drona, or Kripa who made Duryodhana the empire but Karna.

Again you deleted the quote of Krishna. Its saya that Krishna cheated all Kauvarava maharatha including Duryodhana. Krishna himself accepted that he cheated them all, including Duryodhana

“ All of them were great car-warriors and exceedingly quick in the use of weapons! If you had put forth all your prowess, even then you could never have slain them in battle by fighting fairly! King Duryodhana also could never be slain in a fair encounter! The same is the case with all those mighty car-warriors headed by Bhishma,Drona and Karna! From desire of doing good to you, I repeatedly applied my powers of illusion and caused them to be slain by diverse means in battle. If I had not adopted such deceitful ways in battle, victory would never have been yours, nor kingdom, nor wealth! Those four were very high-souled warriors and regarded as Maharathi (warrior)'s in the world. The very Regents of the Earth could not slay them in fair fight! Similarly, the son of Dhritarashtra, though fatigued when armed with the mace, could not be slain in fair fight by Yama himself armed with his bludgeon! ”

Do you think its irrelevant. If krishna hasn't cheated them, pandvas will never be victorious and Duryodhana would have remained as the empire.

"Similarly, the son of Dhritarashtra, though fatigued when armed with the mace, could not be slain in fair fight by Yama himself armed with his bludgeon!"

All your edits are reverted , bcoz you are simply trying to burn the entire forest down !!. Make consensus before deleting others contribution.

Arjunkrishna90 (talk) 03:27, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

I want to point out that I did cut it short. I didn't remove the whole thing. I just removed the extra details of who was conquered, how, etc. There is already a section about the friendship between Karna and Duryodhana; perhaps you can move the information there. Like I said, I included the line that Karna won Duryodhana a lot of kingdoms. Pinkfloyd11 (talk) 05:59, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

The problem with this part is that you are lifting a huge quote and just embeding it in the article. That is against wikipedia standards and just isn't necessary. The proper thing to do is briefly mention that Krishna admits his cheating to Duryodhana, while linking to the source with a footnote. The entire quote, with all the details, is not necessary for an encyclopedia!Pinkfloyd11 (talk) 05:59, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

@Pinkfloyd11: First things first, when you reply to some one in the TALK page dont add your reply inside in between the other persons comments. If you want to add something, add it under the signed comments by previous user. I rectified your mistakes and cut- pasted your comments to the right way so that when a 3rd party observes they will know it better

Coming to the article , you simply deleted entire quotes relating to the death of Duryodhana. Who said adding quotes in a page is against wikipedia policy. If its against wikipedia policy then why the hell they add the syntax for quotes??. The quotes you deleted are restored but cut short to relevant things in order to make the readers understand that Duryodhana was absolutely cheated by Krishna and Pandavas. Whose else words is better than the authors words to point out the emotions and originality of the situation. This quote is tell the core things in the life of Duryodhana. Pandavas won the war bcoz they cheated Duryodhana BIG TIME!!. Its relevant to convey the readers the truth than hiding the truth.

AGAIN ITS WIKIPEDIA POLICY TO MAINTAIN THE NEUTRALITY OF THE ARTICLE, ALL ENCYCLOPEDIC CONTENT. You are clouded by emotions, deluded and simply cant accept the facts. The Mahabharata is just an epic story, there is no real and historic evidence at present available in the world to prove otherwise. I believe you are thinking with your emotions and not by head. If you like a character in a story that's ok , but it dosent mean that you should constantly Vandalize Wikipedia, a public encyclopedic page in order to bias your opinions to the other readers. Good LUCK !!

Arjunkrishna90 (talk) 11:38, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

@ArjunKrisna90: Can you refrain from personal attacks and psychoanalysis? Wikipedia is exactly that...an encyclopedia. It is not a place to paste the original work's contents word-for-word. Such as the large quotes. The essence of the quote, while linking to the citation, is all that is needed. Otherwise wikipedia would be nothing more than large blocks of text pulled directly from sources. See this page regarding direct plagiarism from other sources: Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources. Also, this article (and the other articles we have discussed) bring up the same stories and issues over and over again. For example, Duryodhana being cheated by the Pandavas doesn't have to be brought up again and again again. I am reverting your reverts of my edits, as you classify them as vandalism, while they are hardly such a thing. Moreover, I did not see any editing of quotes on your part. Pinkfloyd11 (talk) 09:09, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Problem with Ganguly source

If you haven't noticed yet, the Ganguly translated version of the "Vyasa" Mahabharat has numerous problems with it. It is vastly contradictory and incomplete. When the sources is used numerous times in this Duryodhana article, those contradictions become apparent. Why would Duryodhana have to make "Ashwatthama furious". Wasn't Drona's death at the hands of the Pandavas enough?

Let us not forget that the translated version is not the Mahabharata as written by Vyasa...it is a translation of a compilation of the numerous Mahabharat folkore as written by a Neelakantha Chaturdhara in the 1600s...hence the numerous issues, as the author had to incorporate multiple different stories and viewpoints into a coherent story. Moreover, the guru's religious POV clearly shines through, as other sources of the Mahabharat severely tone down the religious aspects. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pinkfloyd11 (talk • contribs) 07:04, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

Merge

I propose to merge and redirect Lakshmanaa to this article, since its a one-liner. -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 02:01, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Duryodhana. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://sacred-texts.com/hin/m10/m10010.htm.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100205123023/http://ancientindians.wordpress.com/duryodhana/ to http://ancientindians.wordpress.com/duryodhana/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:08, 14 December 2017 (UTC)