Caste System and "Brahmanism"

Status
Not open for further replies.

Screambowl

Ghanta Senior Member?
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2015
Messages
7,959
Likes
7,860
Country flag
Y

Albeit, someone is conveniently forgetting to express shame at the fact that Sita was kidnapped by Ravaana who was a Brahmin, much before the random dhobhi came into the picture. Do you only express shame and desolation on someone else's behalf or do you still have some logistic capability left to feel shame for your own actions?

he was indeed a Brahmin and knew already that to attain Moksha he has to kidnap sita.. so that Ram gives him final mukti. For this reason only Parvati became sati and gave herself to fire before taking birth as human.

this is the story,

you are indeed not aware. Of course what ravan did was wrong so did what Vishwamitra who was greedy for kamdhenu.

pata wata hota nahi ajate hai.
 

AnantS

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2013
Messages
2,588
Likes
4,634
Country flag
We already have such a system if you consider the teachers to be Brahmins, soldiers to be Kshatriya, and traders to be Vaishya. Their trade itself sets the parameter for their qualification in a free market manner.
Indeed, thats the first thing that strikes you especially, when you have Govt Jobs classified as Class 1, Class 2, Class 3 & Class 4. Thats the varna system for you. What I am arguing is merge this with original Varna system, so that medieval neopotism in Varna system is done away for good!

This is in line with the theoretical claims Brahmins make about the caste system having been a fluid system with freedom of movement and no stratification or nepotism. If those claims are indeed genuine and honest, then Brahmins should have no problem with the free market system.
Turning it into a caste based thing creates monopoly where deserving people are denied the right to rise up; Much like the travesty that the current reservation system has imposed on the nation where deserving people are missing out on opportunities.

If it is turned into a caste based/nepotism thing, then it will suffer the same fate is Congress party suffered due to dynasty politics.
Its not theoretic. For eg, Rishi Vyas seems to have had humble non brahmin origins, today, lineages bearing his name are considered Brahmins. Mauryas in UP are OBC. IN Punjab & HP they are considered Rajput. Coming to Rajputs, some of them have similar Gotras with Gujjars. And some historians point to common origin. However today Rajputs consider themselves Upper caste and Gujarrs as lower. Punjabi "Khatri" are actually Kashatriyas, but are considered mercantile class today. Varna system had fludic origins, however, nepotism & exclusivity crept fast into it. It is dishonest, When you are say only Brahmins controlled & enforced/control who will become of what caste. Biggest proponents of caste system have been Warriors and Landowners caste. Brahmins unscrupulously collaborated with other two varnas, to codify & enforce varna system, in a way it suits the ancient Lutyens class. Caste system is never going to be given up voluntarily. Brahmins alone have hardly any power or had power earlier to enforce the same, as numerically/economically their strength has been less. For eg, Check composition of Ranveer Sena in Bihar and Caste Violence proponents in Haryana. They are not being guided by some evil Brahmins, sitting in Temples.

I remember a chat with Bhim fanatic Friend in Maharashtra. He was as usual arguing Brahmins are evil, and so are other upper caste, so forth. I just asked him one simple question, imagine for a moment we remove the evil Troika of Varnas. Could he guarantee, that there will be no caste discrimination among lower Varna. He sheepishly admitted, that indeed caste discrimination exists within their Varna too. And he belonged to upper sub caste within varna.

Varna/Caste system is not fluidic, was fludic. If you want to vanish caste system, simply open up the caste system club by merging with current system, legislatively. The old medieval definitions/clasifications of caste system will vanish into thin air quickly.
 
Last edited:

Navnit Kundu

Pika Hu Akbarrr!!
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2016
Messages
1,397
Likes
3,070
Fair enough, agreed with everything. Just responding to the part that I disagree :

It is dishonest, When you are say only Brahmins controlled & enforced/control who will become of what caste.
I've made it clear in the very first post that it became entrenched after the Mughals and British made it entrenched. I've been very particular to give specific examples of less than ideal behavior without going for gross generalizations (OR point out specific posts where I have). Don't club me with the others since I speak for myself. The very reason my prose is big is because I don't agree with everything everyone says, so whatever I want to say I say it for myself. I never said Brahmins controlled who became of what caste. See here :

http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/threads/caste-system-and-brahmanism.36337/page-52#post-1167372

My gripe with Brahmins is specifically on 3 things

  • Historic : Collapse of Maratha empire by Peshwas.
  • Post-independence : Communist tendencies of Bhadralok and Mallu Brahmins.
  • Recent : Refusal of Nairs to come together with Ezavas to form a Hindu coalition for Kerala assembly elections because the Nairs thought they were too good to share the podium with Ezavas.

I only make arguments which I can substantiate with facts and which I can stand up for, don't club me with others who made half baked arguments as it diminishes the credibility of my arguments merely by association of other stupid people. I hope even you don't club yourself with others who have made half-baked arguments, like claiming that Ambedkar was a British agent and then hid behind a dhobhi when called out. It is a good debate and people like screambowl are merely adding noise to it to compensate for the lack of facts.

There's a similar debate going on right now in Murica where those raising legitimate questions about specific cases of police brutality (while still admitting the good work that they do), is being hijacked by libtards and racist black people claiming all white policemen are evil, which is being retorted by white supremacists by tarring the other group as traitors. This thread has taken similar contours. Wherever specific insinuations are made, one could deal with it, how does one fight with generalizations? (unless those generalizations happen to be true, for example, in case of Waste Bengal where the entire state was gripped with communism for 35 years)
 
Last edited:

AnantS

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2013
Messages
2,588
Likes
4,634
Country flag
@Navnit Kundu

Navnit, Brahmins as community has many black spots, as well as bright spots, Just like any other community. If Peshavas expanded Maratha empire, they definitely also bought downfall. But how come Brahmins as a community is responsible for actions of individuals?Nor Peshva case pointed out by you is unique to Brahmins. Sikhs empire was created by Jatt community, and destroyed by folies of Jatt community themselves. Same can be said of Mauryan empire. Empires came and went.

The wretched condition of Kashmiri Hindu Pandits is mostly caused by converted Kashmiri Hindu Pandits(Lone, Kak, Butts/Bhatt, Sapru etc). The worst rabble rousers against Brahmins/Hindus are so called of Brahmin origin themselves(check commie/congi party composition).

But same can be said of other communities like Rajputs(Hindu vs Muslim/Secular), Jats, Nairs etc. Seriously, Our Desi commies when imported communist philosophy whole sale from Europe into India, they simply substituted word Bourgeoisie with Brahmins/Brahminical. Whats happened was a lot of fiction got added into facts, while setting narrative for Brahmins.

PS: Nairs are not Brahmins. They are Kashatriyas who intermarry with Brahmins in Kerala.
 

Navnit Kundu

Pika Hu Akbarrr!!
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2016
Messages
1,397
Likes
3,070
@Navnit Kundu

Brahmins as community has many black spots, as well as bright spots, Just like any other community.

But how come Brahmins as a community is responsible for actions of individuals?
That's exactly the macro picture I was trying to present, I truly think it was poor choice of words on my part. I apologize for that. Screambowl started accusing Ambedkar of being British agent simply for his caste. That was unnecessary nitpicking and extrapolation, so I just wanted to give some counter-examples of individuals who could fit the bill for being called traitors had Screambowl's assertions been uniformly applied to all communities. Those 'nitpickings' ended up taking center-stage and the essence of the debate was lost. That is why I provided a link to a detailed article I wrote about what I REALLY feel about the whole thing, isolated from the forum scuffle.

http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/threads/caste-system-and-brahmanism.36337/page-52#post-1167372

I had started with a balanced and re-conciliatory note, but trolls like Screambowl come and cherry-pick their 'facts', make obscure assertions then refuse to listen to reason and derail threads. In an effort to win an argument with him, my own arguments got stupider and stupider. People like him are what feminists are to genuine women's rights. The noisiest ones are the ones who end up getting more attention, and when angry people respond to the noise, they end up creating noise themselves. I've blocked that nutjob now. Can't deal with that headache inducing loudmouth.
 

AnantS

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2013
Messages
2,588
Likes
4,634
Country flag
@Navnit Kundu Your posts are well researched and are good to read. I support some few valid view points of Screambowl (eg: Today Financial/Social status counts more than caste/varna, while deciding for matrimony). Loosing cool, happens, (I also lost my cool against Mad Indian once on similar topic). Thats fine.
 

Navnit Kundu

Pika Hu Akbarrr!!
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2016
Messages
1,397
Likes
3,070
@Navnit Kundu Your posts are well researched and are good to read. I support some few valid view points of Screambowl (eg: Today Financial/Social status counts more than caste/varna, while deciding for matrimony). Loosing cool, happens, (I also lost my cool against Mad Indian once on similar topic). Thats fine.
Yeah, but that fabricated insinuation about Ambedkar was just a dick move. There were many topics discussed before and after that point, all had their own nuances, but if we have to build a single nationalist consensus, it is that the rejection of Ambedkar by commission or omission leads to more poisonous socio-political phenomenon like 'Amberkarites' which leads to a counter-nationalist mobilization and other self-serving social evils like Mayavati. At a time when we are trying to bring both Ambedkar and Sardar Patel under our nationalist fold (despite them not having been traditionally under the Hindu nationalist umbrella), it's unproductive to berate them, as it sends a wrong message. "He is not our leader, he is your leader", that leads to fragmentation of Hindus. One must use discretion and speak and act in a way which benefits the Hindu cause. Present day Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs, Jains are all children of Sanatana Dharma, at least these groups should stick together and speak in one voice (it's a little complicated about the others)

There has to be a way to compartmentalize Theological || Political || Social issues and debate each on on its own merits. One can't drag a dhobhi from Ramayan into an argument about current political situation.
 

AnantS

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2013
Messages
2,588
Likes
4,634
Country flag
Ambedkar cant be called stooge of British. He walked away from Brit offer of giving Dalit a separate homeland. He rejected Islam for a Dharmic religion. Those are hallmarks of a true Nationalist. But he was more than that. He was brilliant man, who architect-ed Indian constitution. Who was left bitter in the end, because he was sidelined by Congress. Sardar Patel & Ambedkars contribution to India as Nation state, has not been given proper respect in this country, as it should have been. Period!
 

Vikramjeet

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2015
Messages
136
Likes
27
he was indeed a Brahmin and knew already that to attain Moksha he has to kidnap sita.. so that Ram gives him final mukti. For this reason only Parvati became sati and gave herself to fire before taking birth as human.

this is the story,

you are indeed not aware. Of course what ravan did was wrong so did what Vishwamitra who was greedy for kamdhenu.

pata wata hota nahi ajate hai.
Ravan was not a Brahmin, Valmiki Ramayan does not call him a brahmin. Most people are clueless and inject modern day values into past. As per Brahmanical religion, there is no such thing as Brahmin unless both parents are of same varna. Ravan's father was Brahmin but his mother was an asur kanya and so he is not brahmin.
Anyway, the point is that Ravan was neither a Brahmin nor a role model for Brahmins and most of all Ram himself says 'Te Nar Pran Saman Mam Jinj Ke Dwij Pad Prem' meaning I love those individuals as dearly as my life who are devoted to feet of Brahmins.
 

Vikramjeet

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2015
Messages
136
Likes
27
Ofcourse Ambedkar was a British stooge who as late as 1946 was begging British not to leave India thus was in favour of perpetuating British rule over India at a time when everyone else had taken Indian independence as a matter of time rather than occurence. Ambedkar's books on Hinduism can easily beat any Owaisi or such in Hinduphobia . No wonder that while cunning BJP walas and their internet fanboys ( who are all atheists or brown skinned Englishmen) are trying to appropriate Ambedkar for their use , the genuine Ambedkarites like Republican parties of Maharashtra, Ambedkar's grandsons like Prakash Ambedkar and Mayawati etc. have nothing but contempt for such cunning moves and denounce any Hindu association of Ambedkar.
However, I agree that we should tell lies to ' make a great India' and so Ambedkar who was no more than one of several barristers in India of that time with added qualification being a dalit , who distorted Buddhism, produced Hinduphobia among dalit leaders is certainly a 'founding father of India'.
 

Vikramjeet

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2015
Messages
136
Likes
27
Ambedkar cant be called stooge of British. He walked away from Brit offer of giving Dalit a separate homeland. He rejected Islam for a Dharmic religion. Those are hallmarks of a true Nationalist. But he was more than that. He was brilliant man, who architect-ed Indian constitution. Who was left bitter in the end, because he was sidelined by Congress. Sardar Patel & Ambedkars contribution to India as Nation state, has not been given proper respect in this country, as it should have been. Period!
Why stop at this? Ambedkar gave us drinking water, it was he who told us how to write and he made us capable in every sphere of life. Fanboys of Ambedkar surpass Congressis and BJP Walas in being 'bhaktas'.
1. 'Separate homeland for Dalits' is a myth. British agreed on partition because Muslims in Sindh, NWFP and Punjab and Bengal were in majority. It is to credit of Hindus and British that they drew boundaries on basis of districts and their religious make up so a Lahore with 60 pc Muslims went to Pakistan while Amritsar with 53 Hindu Sikhs went to India. Do you know a single district where Dalits are even 40 percent? How would Dalits be given a separate homeland when they do not fulfil any critrea- they have no language of their own ( that is they do not speak any different language from rest Hindu castes) , have no culture, religion, do not have any positive identity and are not even 40 percent in a single district of India? A separate homeland for dalits is even more impossible than Islam being true religion. Most Dalits lived in rural areas where rest castes outnumbered them many times.

2. Ambedkar later was in favour of burning the constitution, he certainly did not think it as 'brilliant'. Anyway, Ambedkar can not be credited for any principle of our constitution, almost all were based on consensus or majority decisions. Secularism, Art26, India being democracy, end of untouchability and Parliamentary forms were simply due to British rule over Indians than some Ambedkar, Patel or Nehru.

3. Patel did contribute a lot but it was only because of him being compared against an utterly disgusting Nehru.
 

Vikramjeet

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2015
Messages
136
Likes
27
As to the main topic, it is one more sign of intellectual cretinism among many people to talk about caste oppression as something unique to India. These guys live in fool's paradise. Marxist theory here is of great help. Greed, arrogance and bullying weak people are certainly disgusting qualities but they have been and are rampant everywhere, what makes the difference is that societies which are more economically developed have mechanism to mitigate such issues. Hindi films show how some evil landlord seduces some low caste woman,things like this generate lot of hatred but fact of the matter is that it is not because of some landlord believing ' hey Hinduism tells me to force a low caste woman and being a pious Hindu I must do it' but simply because that is nature of humans. High ranked officials, bosses etc. also demand sexual favors from female colleagues all around the world. The only difference is that women these days would be more willing to bow to bosses and our modern governments make some redressal mechanism to tackle such issues.
If you are weak, chances are that you will be exploited by your own people, this does not require any caste system or class system. This is simply baser drives of humans coming into play same drives which create so many human traffickers, which turn women into prostitutes, which lead to corruption and fights.

Once a society develops economically, such exploitation can be reduced substantially though can never be eliminated completely. Kammas and Reddys are not even mentioned in any Brahmanical lawbook or canonical texts and are called as shudras but reality is shocking. Ranvir Sena killed maoist dalits when those dalits killed brahmin, bhumihars etc. as some class struggle . Kammas and Reddys have killed dalits on such trivial issues like some dalit putting foot on cinema hall seats etc. even when both are not named in any Hindu text and are called as shudras.
Caste system was simply a feudal aspect of economic and social setup of pre industrial societies of world. It has some advantages ( atleast in India) but nonetheless is certainly not just in 21st century. It would be foolish for modern day Indians to say that Aryabhatta was an idiot because he did not know calculus! Similarly when caste system is bashed, people overlook that such inequalities were norm those days and needed to sustain any society. What is good for our modern times was simply not available to most people those days and there is great limit to mobility even today.

As for Buddhism and caste equality, people are not aware of Tibet where lamas gogued out eyes of commoners on flimsy pretexts and Japan where samurai( japanese version of rajputs) could even kill a peasant. I challenge entire world to show me even 3 Buddhist philosophers of pre modern India who were not from upper varnas( brahmin, kshatriya and vaishya). Accept my challenge , neo buddhists and ambedkarites.are you listening?
 

Vikramjeet

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2015
Messages
136
Likes
27
German Indologist Edmund Weber has already shown how idiotic is this Ambedkarite version of egalitarian Buddhism. Readers can consult this work.
http://web.uni-frankfurt.de/irenik/relkultur50.pdf

He writes

"Hans Wolfgang Schumann has statistically proven that almost all of Buddha’s disciples were high caste people and that the brahmanas comprised the majority of the sangha"

"However, to Siddharta and the monks that listened to him, not only the varna, the hierarchical class but also the jati, the clan respectively the family were of substantial importance. For example, he tells about Buddha Vipassi that he belonged to the Kondanna clan. About himself Siddharta reports that he is a kshatriya and was born in the Gotama clan
The standpoint which caste a Buddha should belong to has not been revised in Buddhism up to the pre-sent day. It is dogmatised in the Lalitavistara in the following way: a Bodhisattva can by no means come from a lower or even mixed caste: “After all Bodhisattvas were not born in despised lineage, among pariahs, in families of pipe or cart makers, or mixed castes.”
Instead, in perfect harmony with the Great Sermon, it was said that: “The Bodhisattvas appear only in two kinds of lineage, the one of the brahmanas and of the warriors (kshatriya).”
In which of the two high castes they were born depended on the fact which of the two had the better reputation at that particular moment. "When the Brahmins are especially respected on earth, they were born in a lineage of Brahmins, when the warriors play a greater role, they appear in a noble family."
According to Buddha, at his time the kshatriyas were above the now impure brahmanas. That is why, only a kshatriya can have the Buddha-ship. "Today the nobility has priority in the world, therefore the Bodhisattvas were born in a noble family."28
Worldly reputation determines the Buddhas' caste, not the moral qualification of the family or the caste. Lower castes have never had the chance to consider Buddha among them namely because they don't have a good reputation.
The preference of the kshatriyas and the brahmanas in ancient Buddhism leaves no place for doubts: Buddha and the so called impure castes were entirely separated from each other. A Buddha had nothing to deal with the dalits. The dalits were unworthy of Buddha-ship."


So while real Buddhists fought whether bodhisatvas could be brahmins or kshatriyas all the while ignoring sudras leave alone dalits, modern day dishonest Ambedkarites live in a fantasy world of dalits and buddhism.

 

Navnit Kundu

Pika Hu Akbarrr!!
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2016
Messages
1,397
Likes
3,070
No wonder that while cunning BJP walas and their internet fanboys ( who are all atheists or brown skinned Englishmen)
You preemptively refer to everyone who might disagree with your snobbery as a brown skinned westerner but the irony is that you yourself had to take the support of two western crutches for your handicapped argument to stand.

Secularism, Art26, India being democracy, end of untouchability and Parliamentary forms were simply due to British rule over Indians..
German Indologist Edmund Weber has already shown how...
 
Last edited:

Sakal Gharelu Ustad

Detests Jholawalas
Ambassador
Joined
Apr 28, 2012
Messages
7,116
Likes
7,727
Ofcourse Ambedkar was a British stooge who as late as 1946 was begging British not to leave India thus was in favour of perpetuating British rule over India at a time when everyone else had taken Indian independence as a matter of time rather than occurence. Ambedkar's books on Hinduism can easily beat any Owaisi or such in Hinduphobia . No wonder that while cunning BJP walas and their internet fanboys ( who are all atheists or brown skinned Englishmen) are trying to appropriate Ambedkar for their use , the genuine Ambedkarites like Republican parties of Maharashtra, Ambedkar's grandsons like Prakash Ambedkar and Mayawati etc. have nothing but contempt for such cunning moves and denounce any Hindu association of Ambedkar.
However, I agree that we should tell lies to ' make a great India' and so Ambedkar who was no more than one of several barristers in India of that time with added qualification being a dalit , who distorted Buddhism, produced Hinduphobia among dalit leaders is certainly a 'founding father of India'.
You definitely need to read a bit more!!

Just because Mayawati and his grandson have appropriated some aspects of his life does not mean he had no other facets to him.

He was one of the few realists at the time of India who could clearly see the problem of Islam as it is. He was one of the only few Hindus, who thought population exchange was more than essential for survival of India and Dharmics. Ambedkar's books will put the current left wing as well as so called RW's pants on fire, if they read his analysis of Islam.

But guess what--you have not read and you don't care. The guy was more than just about dalit empowerment. His books on law, economics or politics are all very incisive and very useful even today!

Anyway, you alone are not at fault. Ambedkarites too have appropriated his legacy as dalit crusader which has reduced his overall footprint.
 

Sourav Kumar

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 13, 2016
Messages
748
Likes
1,279
I have a question/doubt in mind and I believe the question can be posted under this thread. If the question/doubt is deemed irrelevant for this thread, mods are requested to delete or move to any other proper thread.

In the Mahabharata, Ekalabya practised archery alone in front of a statue of Dronacharya. When Dronacharya found this, he wanted Ekalabya's thumb cut-off as his "guru dakshina" or tuition fees. Ekalabya promptly did so. (Ekalabya was from a tribal community and he was not a Kshatriya.)

Now in ancient indian culture, great emphasis was put on protecting Dharma and being Dharmic etc. How can Dronacharya's action be considered Dharmic in this case? Was it pure discrimination? Or is there any other explanation?
 

Sakal Gharelu Ustad

Detests Jholawalas
Ambassador
Joined
Apr 28, 2012
Messages
7,116
Likes
7,727
I have a question/doubt in mind and I believe the question can be posted under this thread. If the question/doubt is deemed irrelevant for this thread, mods are requested to delete or move to any other proper thread.

In the Mahabharata, Ekalabya practised archery alone in front of a statue of Dronacharya. When Dronacharya found this, he wanted Ekalabya's thumb cut-off as his "guru dakshina" or tuition fees. Ekalabya promptly did so. (Ekalabya was from a tribal community and he was not a Kshatriya.)

Now in ancient indian culture, great emphasis was put on protecting Dharma and being Dharmic etc. How can Dronacharya's action be considered Dharmic in this case? Was it pure discrimination? Or is there any other explanation?
It has nothing to do with caste, but Drona's love for Arjun.
 

Sourav Kumar

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 13, 2016
Messages
748
Likes
1,279
It has nothing to do with caste, but Drona's love for Arjun.
Maybe so. Dronacharya was kind of committed to making Arjuna the best archer in the world (or at least in India). On the other hand, he had no commitments to Ekalabya. The answers in Quora point to another theory. According to some of those answers, Ekalabya might have been the best archer but his temperament was not good enough. Apparently the fact that Ekalabya silenced (not killed or injured) a barking innocent dog which happened to disturb Ekalabya's meditation went against him, as per Drona's appraisal process. Apparently Drona did not want mighty weapons to fall in a guy's hands who would use them without much considerations. Cruelty towards animal apparently ruined it for Ekalabya.
 

raja696

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2010
Messages
1,020
Likes
1,464
who ever brahmins are in caste divisions, its time to realise people learn and gain knowledge through experience, scriptures and lessons from life should be regarded as bhramin.

Not as it is considered in caste system of today. And Same applies to kshetriyas.

Any body can become brahmin or kshetriya or shudra or chandala. It depends upon an individual capability to sustain his lively hood.

My point is vedas always provided dynamic structure of society but some where our ancestors ceased to exist in this fluidity and became static societies with greedy knowledge of static pyramid structure comprising kshetriyas, brahmins , shudras etc and it became apparent due to continually invasion of sultans and british colonial rule where each misused vedas to there own advantage.

Its karma we suffered till now from our ancestors deeds. Now it is the time to realise real facts of our sanatana dharma.

Any day i will consider nationalism as first priority.

If any religion claims above nationalism than i choose santana dharma which has given liberty to choose any god unlike bunch of other directives claiming there god is only one or salvation possible only through them.

Being a former sickular i am not ashamed to tell Hinduism is the only religion that solves the worldly problems of today's society.

All i wish is my war is on subjects which claim that there religion is exclusive and its time for them to denounce exclusivity and stop being over nationalism.
 
Last edited:

anoop_mig25

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2009
Messages
5,556
Likes
2,536
Country flag
Maybe so. Dronacharya was kind of committed to making Arjuna the best archer in the world (or at least in India). On the other hand, he had no commitments to Ekalabya. The answers in Quora point to another theory. According to some of those answers, Ekalabya might have been the best archer but his temperament was not good enough. Apparently the fact that Ekalabya silenced (not killed or injured) a barking innocent dog which happened to disturb Ekalabya's meditation went against him, as per Drona's appraisal process. Apparently Drona did not want mighty weapons to fall in a guy's hands who would use them without much considerations. Cruelty towards animal apparently ruined it for Ekalabya.

From where does this theory comes from ????

If you know there was some kind of match among pandavs

if yiu remember there was archery match durodhyan pitted karan against arjun

the contestant were blind folded and had to hit target my hearing its sound and apparently target was dog/puppy.

if hope rest pf story is know
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top