#Mythology: When Draupadi Calls Krishna as Saviour

In the infamous episode from the Mahabharata, where Draupadi, the wife of the Pandavas is in trouble as she is lost and owned by Duryodhana during game of dice, as people recall, she first tried to call upon all elders present in the court and asked them to help her. When no one saved her, in the end she prayed to Krishn, her friend and brother, and he, using his divine power saves her by giving her the ability to keep extending Saree into an endless thing.

There is an interesting aspect about this incident.

We can note that she first called out all elders in the court for protection. During the time she would not have remembered Krishn because she was a 'logical mind' and hence she was arguing with her husbands and all other elders. Because of her arguments she is considered a feminist symbol today. But when nothing else helped, in the end, she gave up i.e. shut down her logical mind and turned ‘inwards’ spiritually. After she did that, she got God's help and was protected.  

Thing to note here is that she was helped by God when she accepted that she was 'helpless' and weak and needed protection. (Something which modern feminists may not like to acknowledge because for them religion is one more constraint.) Until she had her strong ‘ego’, she did not recall Krishn and hence remained vulnerable. Message is that if we have to choose spiritual protection, ego is our biggest enemy.  

This can also be extended in the matters of all relationships – ego is an enemy.  

- Rahul Tiwary

[Television] Was Comedy Nights the Most Perverted Mass Show in India Ever?

Recently, one of India’s most popular TV shows ‘Comedy Nights with Kapil’ which aired on ‘Colors’ has come to a closure. While reason behind its abrupt demise is controversial enough in itself; the show, in my opinion, was no less either. That this ‘perverted’ show (as the title of this article asserts) ran so long, is disturbingly surprising. I shall now try to express my opinion on different aspects of this show in the following paragraphs.

I remember how I came across this show for the first time. Kapil and his pet gesture ‘Baba Ji Ka Thullu’ had already gained mass popularity by the time I got to hear about them. And I did hear about them so many times – it was almost as if I was the only person not watching it. So I went ahead and watched the show. What was my reaction? I found it as horrifying as it was entertaining. Why horrifying? Let me ask you a question to begin with – do you know what Kapil’s almost patented phrase “Baba ji ka thullu” mean?

What Does ‘Baba Ji Ka Thullu’ Mean? Warning: This phrase is slang or a cuss word. You may skip following two paragraphs if you want to avoid its details.

You might have come across a phrase called ‘Baba Ji ka Ghanta’. In exact terms, it means ‘testicles of a Sadhu (sage)’. Since long there have been Sadhus or sages who do not wear any clothes, due to spiritual reasons (e.g. to discard materialism). Many times such Sadhus depended on common population to survive – they wandered and did not care about the hassles of cooking, so the common people fed them with regular meals to the extent possible. Some mischievous kind from the common masses cooked up this slang or cuss word – ‘baba ji ka ghanta’ where ‘ghanta’ meant the ‘hanging’ (like a bell) testicles of a Sadhu. When was this term used? It was used to discard or discount something. Just like a monk’s testicles are futile (since Sadhus practiced celibacy, their testicles were of no practical use), anything which is worthless or futile could deserve this slang. Kapil’s ‘Babaji ka Thullu’ improvised over it and it meant, well, ‘penis of a Sadhu (sage)’!

In the phrase ‘Baba ji ka thullu’, the relevance of ‘Baba ji’ is already explained above. What does ‘Thullu’ mean? Some of you may recall that ‘Tullu’ was a popular brand of ‘water pump’. Thullu is ‘Tullu’ in the general term that it stands for a ‘pump’. I hope I don’t need to explain why a ‘penis’ could be called ‘pump’ in slang? So the overall meaning of ‘Baba Ji Ka Thullu’ remains the same. Since a Sadhu practices celibacy, his penis is of no practical use when it comes to sex and hence it means “nothing”. How savage! Do you remember what Kapil said whenever anyone asked him what did “Baba ji ka thullu” mean? He said – “It means ‘nothing’”. Indeed, it means “nothing”. The devil is in the details.

If Kapil is responsible for doing mass corruption by bringing a sexual slang to everyday usage, other members of his ‘on-screen family’ were no saints either.

Daadi: There are few relations as pure as the one between children and grand parents. We could hold grudges against our parents for any reasons, but the love and affection our grandparents give to us is always so pure and so divine. When I first saw the kind of ‘daadi’ which was being played by a male Ali Asgar in the female costumes, I was disturbed merely at the sight of it. The grandmother ‘daadi’ drinks alcohol, openly salivates and jumps on male guests who come on the set and does other disgusting things like farting and smooching. I know that you would say – it was all for fun! Agreed, this is how I also saw it and survived without getting heart attacks watching Comedy Nights every weekend. But, in the end, no one can deny it that the character of ‘daadi’ was sexually perverted. And this show was supposed to be so called ‘family show’. Every time ‘daadi’ jumped and painted the cheeks of her male guests in red lipstick, the show became a cheap perverted comedy. There was no subtlety, no grace, but only crass fun. I think in the history of Indian television industry there has not been a grandmother as vulgar and disgusting as the one played by Ali Asgar.

Bua: The way society was at one time, unwed daughters were looked down at. I don’t need to be a feminist to see the role of unwed ‘Bua’ of ripen age being a blot on the face of all feminists. In almost every episode some ridicule was passed on her only because she was still unmarried. I know the same justification – “it was all for fun”. But you can’t deny that deep rooted behind all such “fun” was still the gross sexist ridicule which is heaped on the girls who don’t marry at the ‘right age’.

Wife-Bashing: There has been some constant themes on which Comedy Nights with Kapil was based. One such was "wife-bashing". The manner in which Kapil abused his on-screen wife at the stage was disgusting. He made fun of her in front of the guests on stage. His repetitive taunt was for her "lips" - again showing sexist side of the man. I have never seen such a "popular" male-chauvinist as Kapil. 

In my opinion, Comedy Nights with Kapil raised a very important question – why should we be forced to watch sick perverted comedy in the name of humor? I don’t agree if anyone says that ‘comedy’ is not possible without being expletive or sexist. Many people have done that – there have been wonderful writers and poets who produce so hilarious literature. But then, they fail to be a ‘mass product’ like Kapil. Why? Extreme popularity of Kapil’s show is a proof that our society is not exactly going the right way. We are just running behind whatever is served to us in attractive labels.

I think the mass popularity of Kapil’s show was one of the best marketing gimmicks of our time. I know of several people in personal life who have no humor whatsoever in them; but every time the discussion goes around Comedy Nights, they repeat, like a parrot, “Kapil is the best; there is no one like Kapil”. How this vulgar TV show of a “poker faced” man-next-door gained mass popularity is not a proof of his talent but also speaks poorly about our society which looks for social approval and lacks individualism in all fields. I am not a sociologist to understand it totally – but I do feel that lack of criticism for perverted shows like Comedy Nights speaks poorly about our society.

[Disclaimer: Views expressed are personal.]

New Vedic Cultural Centre (ISKCON, NVCC) - Pune

A Temple of 2 Lakh Sq. Ft. built over 6 acres of land - ISKCON is inviting all to the Grand Inauguration of New Vedic Cultural Centre (ISKCON, NVCC) & installation of holy idols on 24th February 2013. 

For more details, check out: 

Facebook Page: http://www.facebook.com/ISKCONNVCC

Website: http://www.iskconpune.in/

Promo Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z3_5wnRniTw 

Jai Shri Krishna! 

School of Hinduism (Lesson-3)

Why do we ring a bell in the temple? The ringing of the bell produces what is regarded as an auspicious sound. It produces the sound Om, the universal name of the Lord... There should be auspiciousness within and without, to gain the vision of the Lord who is all-auspiciousness...

---

Why do we blow the conch (shankh) as part of worship (pooja)? When conch is blown, the primordial sound of Om emanates. Om is an auspicious sound representing the Truth behind the world. Om is the universal name of the Lord.

---

A kalasha is placed on all important Hindu rituals. It is a pot filled with water with mango leaves kept at its mouth, a coconut placed over it and a thread tied around its neck. The water in the kalasha symbolizes the primordial water from which the entire creation emerged. The leaves and coconut represent creation. The thread represents the love that "binds" all in creation. The kalasha is therefore considered auspicious and worshipped...

---

Meaning of fasting in Hinduism: Fasting means 'Upavaas' in Sanskrit. 'Upa' means 'near' and 'vaas' means 'to stay'. Upavaas means 'to stay near the Lord'. Purpose of not taking food was to free oneself from the time consumed with preparing food and resulting effects like dullness and agitation. So we either eat only fruits, light food or no food at all, thereby making our mind free, alert and pure, only to spend time in devotion. Staying near God... Upavaas...

=!=

Lord Shiva is also worshipped as Pashupati, literally Lord of the beasts and symbolically He who Controls our beastly passions... Shiva as Pashupati is worshipped in Pashupati Nath Temple in Kathmandu, Nepal.

---

Lord Shiva is also called Vrikshanath. Mythology says that when Shiva meditated, from the heat of his austerities, tapas, rose every herb, shrub, grass, creeper and tree... Shiva became lord of all vegetation, Vrikshanath... I think closeness with nature is a unique feature of our Hinduism...

---

Lord Shiva is also called Bhuteshvar, meaning "Master of the Elements"... There are five elements, the bhutas: earth, air, light, water and ether...

---

"Under a great banyan tree, seated on a tiger skin, facing the south, dakshin, Shiva revealed all secrets of Yoga to seekers... He charged no fee, dakshina, and so his students called this great cosmic teacher 'Dakshinamurti'..."

---

Shiva wandered in cremation grounds amidst the blazing pyres... Smearing His body with ash, bhasma, He became 'Bhasmeshvar', the lord of ash. "Every joy, every sorrow, every birth, every death, everybody, every mind, every event, every god and every cosmos, will end up in its own funeral pyre. After every fire only ash will remain. Why then be excited, why then be frustrated? Let me just be, exist in eternal equanimity, Vairagya." Shiva was at peace...

---

Lord Shiva is also called Ekavratya, who lives by his own rules; Vaidyanath, the supreme physician; Somnath, keeper of the sacred plant Soma; Chandrashekhara, saviour of the moon; Jvareshwara, lord of fevers; Hara, the ravisher; Shankara, the benevolent one, a kind god...

---

When Shiva went to marry Parvati, the bride's parents were shocked to see the groom with matted hair, ash smeared face, snakes around his neck and riding a bull. They called off the marriage. After Parvati ji's prayers Shiva transformed into the most handsom person ever seen, the personification of beauty... Lord Shiva is also called 'Sundaramurti'...

- Rahul Tiwary

Previous Posts: (1) School of Hinduism (Lesson-1) ; (2) School of Hinduism (Discussion-1 on Lesson-1) ; (3) School of Hinduism (Lesson-2)

School of Hinduism (Lesson-2)

Shiva is not just a Tapasvin. He is also a Yogi. The aim of yoga is to unknot the mind, uncrumple the consciousness, attain the triple state of sat-chitta-ananda: unconditional truth, purified consciousness, tranquil bliss. Shiva is therefore associated with bilva leaves, whose three leaves represent sat-chitta-ananda and whose stalk holding the three leaves together represents yoga. The three blades of Shiva's trident also represent sat-chitta-ananda and its staff represents yoga.

When Parvati ji was doing Tapa to become worthy of marrying Shiva, she used to eat only leaves - Bel patra. In the last stage she even quit taking leaves. Hence she got the name "Aparna".

Lord Shiva is shown to carry a Drum in his hand. It is actually a rattle-drum which is used by men who control and train monkeys. Monkeys are Symbols of our Mind: like monkeys our mind is Restless. So rattle drum in Shiva's hand is a Symbolism to control and tame our mind through yoga, tapa, or bhakti... Om Namah Shivaya...

Lord Shiva is shown to have moon on his head. That moon is like a cup and hence it is the last day of the waning moon before it disappears from sky on a new moon night. When it appears so in the sky, it's Shiv-ratri and people pray to Shiva. The Moon is Symbol of our Moods. Like moon waxes and wanes our mood changes too from sadness to happiness. So people pray to Shiva on Shivratri to bless them with happiness, symbolized in moon coming back after new moon night by His blessings. Om Namah Shivay.

Bhagwan Shankar is called 'Bholenath'. He is not 'Ignorant' but 'Innocent'. There is a difference between

Devas wanted Shiva to marry Parvati, so they sent Kamdev to Shiva. But Shiva's third eye opened and Kamdev was burnt down. Devas told Parvati jokingly that Shiva had destroyed Kama. Parvatiji said, "In your eyes He has destroyed Kama today. But I know that He has always been Nishkaam and victorious." Such was her trust and devotion on Shiva... Only she was worthy of being Shiva's wife... Jai Shiv Shambhu, jai Ma Parvati!

=!=

Why do we touch the feet of elders? Man stands on his feet. Touching the feet is a sign of respect for the age, maturity, nobility and divinity that our elders personify. It symbolizes our recognition of their selfless love for us. This tradition reflects the strong family ties in Indian/Hindu culture...

Homa (offering of oblations into the fire with sacred chants) signifies the offering or surrender of ego and egocentric desires into the flame of knowledge. The resulting ash signifies purity of mind resulting from such actions. Bhasma is especially associated with Shiva. Ash doesnt decay. God is the imperishable Truth that remains when all illusions of forms are dissolved.

At the end of the aarati, we place our hands over the flame and then touch our eyes and the top of the head. It means - may the light that illumined the Lord light up my vision, may my vision be divine and my thoughts noble and beautiful...

We break a coconut and offer as prasaada. The coconut is broken, symbolizing the breaking of the ego. The juice within, representing the inner tendencies (vaasanas) is offered along with the white kernel - the mind, to the Lord. A mind thus purified by the touch of the Lord is used as prasaada (a holy gift)...

=!=

What is freedom? Some take it that freedom is identified with slavery to their own impulses. This is the freedom that makes drunkards, gluttons, and libertines. ... Liberty to realize what is our own will may be an essential condition of freedom, but until we are as free from that will, and the desires suggested by that body and mind, as from those of all the other hundreds of millions of human beings, we do not know what real freedom is. - Sister Nivedita of Ramkrishna-Vivekananda, around 1905.

Sri Ramakrishna was gathering flowers one morning for the temple worship. It suddenly flashed upon his mind that the whole earth was a vast altar, and the flowers blossoming on the plants were already offered in worship at the feet of God. Sri Ramakrishna never again gathered puja-flowers...

When Swami Vivekananda was a small kid, he got to know that our Rishis and sadhus sat on meditation such that they won’t know and their hair and beard will grow long enough to touch the ground... He also then sat on Dhyan mudra and after every 5 minutes he opened his eyes to check if his beard grew or not :-)) Then he went to his mother and complained, "Maa, why doesn’t my beard grow??" Ma told him that it happens when one meditates for too long... From that day, he started meditating regularly...

- Rahul Tiwary 

Previous Posts: (1) School of Hinduism (Lesson-1) ; (2) School of Hinduism (Discussion-1 on Lesson-1)

School of Hinduism (Discussion-1 on Lesson-1)

This discussion followed after one quote which I posted within School of Hinduism (Lesson-1)

Original post:

Hindus are advised against reading the Mahabharata inside their homes for the fear that ideas in that book such as brothers fighting over property will pollute family values. They prefer reading the Ramayana because in it brothers never fight over inheritance. The principle underlying this custom is called "sympathetic or imitative magic". According to this events in a household are influenced by the ideas expressed in sacred symbols, rituals and narratives. That is why during marriage and childbirth symbols associated with fruition and fertility and opulence are placed in all corners of the house.

# Friend1:

IMHO it is just superstition born from ignorance. Mahabharata teaches us some very important things, one of them being not to fight over inheritance. But most importantly, it shows how elders can fail : fathers, teachers, etc. It shows theoretical knowledge is useless : like drona, bhishma, etc. I personally feel that it is very relevant for today, given that it was written on the eve of kalyug.

Just have a strong attachment to it :)

# Me:

It shows even God has to take up means which were considered adharma, in order to win and establish dharma. drona was killed by yudhisthira's white lie, karna by trick against kshatriya's dharma, duryodhana killed by hitting below belt, not to mention insult to draupadi while her husbands lost her in gamble. Mahabharata was a dark time, no one, not even Krishna could remain to path of true dharma. If it teaches us to abandon fair play and kill bad people after becoming bad ourselves, it is debatable

In a symbolic tale, all pandavas except yudhisthir die before reaching swarga because they had flaws. yudhsthr himself had to spend a day in nark. krishna dies because of gandhari, curse who lost al her sons. not one character in mahabharata is flawless. this is why it has more negatives than positives for the common man. but in ramayana many are flawless, its lessons serve as our ideal.

more than anything else, ramayana tells what ideal brother, wife, husband, father, friend and bhakt could be. it is not the same in mahabharata. because of this ramayana is our ideal and worthy of reading by whole family... btw what do yoy think are lessons from mahabharata for family values?

also, if you can plz explain why you think bhisma's knowledge was theoritical? imo if there is one character who remained on the path of dharma from the beginning till end, it was bhishna. because of his fear kauravas didnt play as evil as they were... but first, lessons from mahabharata for family values...

# Friend1:

i have no dispute with what you say. Its like this. To bat well, I must know the right technique. But a good teacher must also teach the results and consequences of the bad technique. Mastery and perfection is achieved with equal knowledge of both good and bad. To know only the good is incomplete knowledge.

The lessons from mahabharata are very deep. For example, it is common to see in family disputes one of sons is uncomprimising. Parents keep saying "For us all are equal". Mahabharata illustrates the consequences of such action on part of the elders : its the end of the vansh or ancestral tradition. We see this all around. Mahabharata has a lot of bitter lessons, which I agree are not for everybody.

After all, Lord Krishna did appeal to Dhritrashtra, who was the king, and invested with all authority to stop the war. Thus he too was responsible. The relevance to today is self evident.

As for flaws, Mahabharata is guidance for mankind in the Kali Yuga. Not to say Ramayana should not emulated. One must have knowledge of all.

#Me:

Your point is good... ramayana and mahabhrata are from different times which have different values... even definitions of dharma are diff in the times. but when we want an ideal, it should be flawless, having perfection... people may call it unreal but ideal has to be that much higher... like we try for 100 but get 90 and we are still better than f we tried fotr 70 and ahieved 69... i agree that there are many lessons from mahabharata but as an ideal to aspire for, Ram Rajya is our ideal...

#Friend1:

No doubt. Ram Rajya is the ideal. But even in Ram Rajya, we shall still teach our kids about demons. To keep them away from it, will only make them fall into it. Free will is essential.

#Me:

right... just for reflection, in Ramayana i think the barbarians were termed rakshasas.... so easy to identify and eliminate... but in mahabharata times it was so difficult to discriminate between manava and rakshasa... like kansa was a rakshasa or human? duryodhana could very well be a rakshasa if present in ramayana times... even pandavas who gambled and put wife on bet, even before that they shared one wife, all were against dharma during ramayana times...

But we have very good examples of great family values from mahabharata... pandavas were ideal sons... draupadi was almost an ideal wife... pandavas were ideal sons towards mother... krishna balram ideal brothers... krishna arjuna ideal friends... bhishma ideal son for his father... bhishma's great vow an ideal... arjuna rejecting menaka for good reason... krishna's ideal role as a diplomat... on the other side there are so many nonideal characters showing us what not to be...

#Friend2:

Sorry to participate and disagree with everything, most flawed character in Ramayana was Ram himself, the one who outed his own wife, based on some stupid low life. If this is the family value ram raja gives no wonder, in India women empowerment needs to be fought for.

#Me:

Friend I have done some research and read much on this. The portion where Ram deserts Sita comes in uttar ramayana which is not authentic. Most authentic tale of Ram's life is as written by Valmiki who lived himself during Ram's time. And his Ramayana doesnt mention anything like this. I have read C. Rajgopalachari's Ramayana too which he had written after much research himself. He says that this part of Sita's exile seems to have come afterwards in folk tales due to women's fears and C. Rajgopalachari clearly says that Sita's exile is not there in oldest scriptures and has been added afterwards... So learned that we are we should not believe in any such stories... Also in the stories and fictions which mention this episode, they said Raja Ram left Queen Sita because Praja didnt want her. He never gave his wife away, so he never remarried and when in yagya he was needed to sit with his wife, he sat with Sita's golden idol... when Sita left this world he too enteres the river...

So for all practical purposes Sita's exile is an unauthentic story which entered our folklore and should not be taken  seriously to make our opinion... Ram has always been the perfect husband... and i think we should correct the mistaken opinion of as many people as possible...

# Friend1:

Lord Ram was not only a husband : he was also a king, a father, etc. The part in uttar ramayana is the portrait of an ideal king. The first part is ideal student, then ideal son, then ideal husband, then ideal warrior, finally ideal king, and last ideal father. Further, he did not take another wife during the time, and pined for Sita only, and loved only her. The message is that an ideal ruler should be above reproach, and must listen to what his people want. If Sita lived in an ashrama, Lord Rama too lived in great sorrow during this time. Just bcoz he was living in a palace can be no comfort. He was not exactly gambling the nights away if thats what you think.

December 18, 2011 at 12:01am · UnlikeLike · 2

The idea is that of the bond that the two shared. Both grieved for the loss of their beloved. Neither was attached to wealth and power. It is an ideal that is naturally hard for us to grasp in this Kalyuga.

#Me:

You are very right... thanks a lot for putting it so well... Even in the later versions and additions where Ram is shown to leave Sita,i is reprentation of an ideal King... An ideal king has to make personal sacrifices if the people so want... queens were examples to whole public and when people started susecting her on her purity, to make good example, Ram is shown as leaving Sita... but he is never shown to be himself suspecting her or having mistrust... This dilemma of choosing between

December 18, 2011 at 12:11am · LikeUnlike · 1

This portion even though unauthentic shows the dilemma or conflict between different duties or dharmas...

Some more good examples from mahabharata... Karna is ideal daani, krishna ideal brother to draupadi, vidur ideal counsell, ghatotkach ideal son to bhim, abhimanyu great kshatriya, gandhari ideal wife... karna ideal friend to duryodhana... and so on... if we think we can find so many inspirations... but in totality Ram rajya is ideal for family values and culture...

#Friend3:

Concept of ramarajya doesn't fits well in today's society. Mahabharata is more appropriate. Even in Ramayan not everyone was ideal, kaikayi for instance.

he only perfectly ideal character in Mahabharat was karna. Others were ideal too but their ideals came out of teaching, belonging and convenience. Karna was the only character who had choice to change his alliance but he did not do so out of his friendship to his friend. He even donated his arms knowing fully well that this is deception. If it were Arjuna, I am sure Krishna might have helped him to dodge the situation.

Bhishma, Drona, Gandhari, Dhritrashtra all suffered due to their lack of conscience. I somewhere read about theortrical knowledge among comments. Thats explanable. Doesn't matters who is right or wrong, no one has got authority or right to insult a woman neither in public nor in private. What happened with Draupadi, was not the fault of her husband or duryodhan. All the elders who were present there were even more responsible for that. It was wrong on Drona's part, if he cannot instill good manners in his pupils he shoud have stopped them with all his authority.

It was wrong on Bhisma's part, he was the eldest and most experienced member of the family and he should have used his powers. Even after that they had a choice, both Bhishma and Drona should have abstained themselves from the war. Being a teacher (Drona)and being eldest of the family(Bhishma) they were supposed to be neutrals.

#Me:

For Karna, as i said he was ideal daani and ideal friend to duryodhana... or but his friendship was more loyalty than friendship. a good friend is a good adviser... but alas he always advised duryodhana to start war and was part of adventures to kill pandavas by trick. so he is never an ideal friend anyone can aspire for.. on the other hand he is ideal when it comes to loyalty. next he remains hateful and full of vengeance all through.. he was not the only lost royal in the family...

Vidura was exactly his case a generation back...not owned up legally... but he remained peaceful and balanced... karna was never balanced, though full of kshatriya valore but unthoughtful and quick and always ready for war... popular modern literature and fiction tries to make him a hero as people love underdogs but we need to read original classics to understand characters properly and fully...

For draupadi's incident and bhishma... as we know dhritirashtra returned all the kingdom kauravas won in gamble just after that event... it happened due to bhishma's pressure.. without bhishma's presence as keeper of dharma duryodhana wud have killed pandavas long time back. he and elders did all they cud, but there are limits. on draupdi if her husbands were wise enough to put her for gamble it was no business of others to interfere.. in that time also some women were keeps and if pandavas wanted

If pandavas were ok with letting their wife be slave of duryodhana, who were others to object? of course Krishna came to object and he saved draupadi... in the epic of mahabharata it was krishna who played role of keeper of dharma, if others cud do it he never had to take Avatar!

Bhishma and Drona could not be neutral to the war until they followed dharma... they were bound to protect the throne and pandvas were attacking it... dhritirashtra was the king and duryodhana was yuvaraj, they had to side with the throne... if they sided with pandavas or didnt support kauravas they wud not be kshatriyas and lose their honor...but they had to side with evil. in mahabharata it is shown as conflict between dharmas and ordinary morality vs higher morality...

You are right that kaikai was not ideal. people know the ideal characters in ramayana and they are flawless... like Ram, Sita, Bharat, Lakshman, Hanuman, Angad,... The character of Kaikai is there in Ramayana to test the character of Ram... if there was no kaikai or manthara Ram wuld not have achieved that much height and fulfilled purpose of his avatar... Vishnu had taken birth as Ram to eliminate rakshasas including ravana and all that happened was part of maya.in m.b. no 1 is flawless

#Friend1:

On the question of bhishma and drona, i would go with shweta. they were the elders, and if they had taken a stand the war would never have happened. Even then were it to happen, at least the elders would have done their duty. But in Mahabharata, none of the elders follow their duty

If we accept the dictum of "no action is also action", the elders were the most responsible for the war.

The actions of elders were shameful regarding draupadi. We must remember that any private deal if illegal or immoral can be nullified by the state. That is the duty of the king. Yet such a shameful act happened in the royal court.

Actually, these books are meant to illustrate certain things to us. The fact that Ved Vyas put Drona and Bhishma in the losing faction, opposing the Lord, should leave no doubts as to the intended meaning

#Me:

Duryodhana had gone to Draupadi's swayamvar and Drupadi had insulted him calling him Andhe ka Beta. So Duryodhan wanted to take revenge on her and hence the insult. Next if we start judging, elders of Gangeya who became Bhishma should have fought and protested against him for his "illegal and immoral" act of kidnapping 3 daughters of Kashiraj? I fear we should not judge that time and kings' ways from the ethics of our times. In a way, each character of MB paid price for his or her karma.

That court of Hastinapur where Draupadi was insulted represented all that was wrong with that time. When the bad guys are at their evil best, good guys lose their mind, protectors and elders confuse dharma and become mere spectators, when king is blind, and humanity in draupadi's form is insulted, Bhagwan has to come on earth to cleanse all the rot... only He can do it and he show us what is dharma and what is evil...