ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel
  • »
  • Books, Literature, and Writing»
  • Literature

Was Duryodhana a villain?

Updated on June 28, 2015

The history is always written in the favor of winning side. Those who are acquainted with India’s great epic Mahabharata, surely knows that the Pandava’s were ill-treated by Kaurava’s and that though Pandava’s were virtuous, evil spirited Kaurava’s…especially Duryodhana was responsible for the tragedy of Mahabharata. The epical story tells us that because of Duryodhana and his wicked brothers and friends millions of people died on the battleground.

No doubt that the present version of Mahabharata has been interpolated in the course of the time. For example original story that Vyasa wrote was named as “Jaya” (Victory) which consisted only about 8000 stanzas. It seems that original version mainly was focused on the battle between cousin brothers i.e. Kaurava’s and Pandava’s. In later course of the time, because of constant additions and interpolations the Mahabharata became an epic of almost about hundred thousand-stanzas.

Kaurava’s were defeated in the great war, Duryodhana met with treacherous death and his parents had to go in an exile to meet ultimate death…thus wiping out entire Kaurava bloodline.

The war, from all the counts that we get from the present epic was certainly annihilation of both the sides, although Pandava’s won it…to express upon us that the Pandava’s were virtuous and thus they won the war.

Anyway. Always it is not the case the way it has been presented before us. The Mahabharata poses more questions than answers…To state the few…

  1. If Pandava’s were virtuous how the five brothers could marry a single woman without her consent?
  2. How Yudhisthir, eldest of Pandava’s could stake Draupadi in dice game without seeking permission of his other brothers as they too were husband with equal right over her? Duryodhana’s entire behavior during this session is admirable as he always wanted to be sure what Pandava’s has to say on his actions though Pandava’s had already been his slaves after defeat in dice game.
  3. There is no proof that Pandava’s rule over Indraprastha was just and righteous than Kaurava rule over Hastinapur.
  4. Yudhisthira was king of Indraprastha till he ruled it before dice game and later after defeat of kaurava’s. But Duryodhana was never a king. He was just a prince till his death. He couldn’t be a king till death of his crowned father. It doesn’t seem from the epic that Duryodhana ever tried to grab the crown by assassinating his father.
  5. Pandava’s killed, not only army of their sworn enemy, but their own Guru, keens, own blood-brother..Karna…Grandfather treacherously in the battle. We don’t see any example of such treachery from Duryodhana’s side.
  6. There is no slightest mention in Mahabharata that Duryodhana ever ill-treated his subjects or public in general.
  7. But Pandava’s, with help of Krishna, mass-massacred entire Naga clan by setting fire to Khandav vana and shooting arrows at the terrified people running helter-skelter for rescue.
  8. Pandava’s loved dicing. Especially Yudhisthira, the man called most virtuous, who didn’t stop his gaming till he staked a woman and brothers he alone didn’t own.
  9. The fact is there is no instance in Mahabharata that Duryodhana ever engaged in dicing. He indeed was a just Prince who is not blamed even in Mahabharata for treating his subjects cruelly or unjustly.
  10. Even final duel he fought with Bheema, followed the ethical norms and it was Bheema who treacherously broke the rules of duel and killed him by smashing his thighs.

There are so many instances that shows Pandava’s were treacherous, had no right over the throne being illegitimate children, used the sympathies of their Guru’s to their benefit and killed them finally to establish their own rule.

The history is as such. We always prefer and glorify the side of the winners. We always fall to the propaganda of the winners. We hardly want to see the truth through the truth. We always want to neglect the obvious. We always want to see that is being shown…we never attempt to see that is hidden.

We need to understand more than what we really do understand.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Odyssey-Sanjay-Sonawani-ebook/dp/B00NJJVOKO/ref=sr_1_7/276-5160678-2906252?s=digital-text&ie=UTF8&qid=1411009661&sr=1-7

Comments

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • profile image

      Nitin 2 years ago

      Mahabharata was a war between 2 political parties; Pandavs being fascist and Kauravs being Democrats.

      Duryodhan wasn't a villian .. He was a just king and had more moral and ethical values than Kunti, pandavas and krishna (collectively), which was evident in mahabharat war where he and his army fought justly abiding all the rules whereas pandavs and krishna used deceit to win the war.

      He was the one who gave warriors like Karna their rightful place and accoladed them irrespective of their caste and creed and was against the prevailing caste system, whereas others including pandavs, draupadi and krishna himself were biased towards the caste system and mocked Karna amongst others.

      His only mistake, being enraged by the insults bestowed upon him and his friend Karna by draupadi which led him to molest draupadi (Although the actual assholes were the Pandavs & so called "Dharmraj" Yudhistra who pawned his wife in a game of gamble).

      And if you think only Draupadi was molested in this epic, then do read "what Krishna and his son Samba did with the son and daughter of Duryodhan". That was so fucked up, and that too from the behalf of that person who taught the Pandavs about Dharma & Karma.

      On the other hand, Pandavs, Kunti, krishna were unjust, unfair, tricksters and a big time posers and the epic is filled numerous examples of their treacheries. Even Shakuni can also be justified to his actions as he swore vengeance to seek revenge of death of his parents and family and destruction of his motherland.

      For me, Kunti is the main reason and one of the main villians ,alongwith Pandavas and Krishna, of Mahabharat.

    • profile image

      Ramya dhinesh 2 years ago

      except helping pandavas by cunning ways has anywhere The so called Lord Krishna fought against injustice? did he raise his voice for ekalavya or karna?

    • Vamshi Vijaykumar profile image

      Vamshi Vijaykumar 2 years ago

      Well mahabharat is a political Drama .. Becoz for every crime which was done by so called God Man krishna and Pandavas were given one or the other reason and the crimes done by kaurava potrayed as a crime .......To all those dharmic people i want to question about krishna and his dharma

      1. Point number one abandoning a child in river (Reason the women is a virgin it seems and she do not want to get a bad name it seems )

      2. Cutting off a student's thumb with out mercy (Reason he is not a legitimate student it seems )

      3. Married a women to five men and it seems that it is a Dharma it seems

      4. Gambled on kingdom and family with out there consent and blame hosts of cheating (This our god man (Krishna) did not for see i guess but comes to rescue at time)

      5. And lets talk about 1st accused in a mass murder called mahabharata ( This godman is known to be excellent in twisting the facts ... Best example of this is when Multiple Women were bathing he can go steal others clothes and sits on tree and watches them and that's not all plays music also ....But when others do same or more worse then that to one of his family members comes to rescue on time . So conclusion he can disrobe other women but when some one does to his family he comes all running saying that it is a crime . This guy krishna i do not think him as God i would rather say him a fake Gods man lets say like nityananda )

      To all this questions none of the dharmic people will answer and above of all they will curse me saying that i will rot in hell for saying bad about krishna ......I do not understand what good has happened after killing 100 Kauravas and there army Still there was caste system and it continued till now . Still there is no respect to women . And still there is crime .. Give me one good example what good Krishna did for society rather then taking sides on others family quarrels . And yet above of all What did he achive after that epic .

    • profile image

      Pawan 2 years ago

      There is nothing such as Jaya of 8000 verses.Ved Vyas wrote 100k verses for human beings,This can be found in the first chapter of Ved Vyas Mahabharat.Sauti at one place mentions 8800 verses but that is not for Jaya but for Vyas's kutas(Difficult Verses)

    • profile image

      Real truth 2 years ago

      It was all about Kingdom. There is no evidence whatsoever in epic that Duryothan was practicing Adharm. There is no discription in any part that kaurava were cruel or unjust to there subject. This is just the war for territory. It seen like all the unethical practice to win the war had been done by Pandavas and Krishna.

    • profile image

      Bill 2 years ago

      Duryodhana was no better than a devil, even evil individuals in the past have shown mild positive traits. Vlad the Impaler was also called noble by some despite being a monstrous individual.

    • profile image

      saroj 2 years ago

      sir how do know the unrighteous things kauravs did was from the interpolated version? there might be reasons as to y the women and five children were killed.

    • profile image

      ravi 2 years ago

      duryodhana was a bad guy he was overambitious that he never listened to his elders, when krishna came to his father's court he tried to capture him and who wants a friend like him see, for making friendship with him cost karna his life but today's fashion is to support negative characters that's why i think these above some people are supporting duryodhana.

    • profile image

      surekha 3 years ago

      If Pandavs are illegitimate, then even Drithirashtra is an illegitimate kid. He was not of Shantanu's lineage. He is the son of Ved Vyas if you see. In those ancient days, Niyog was in practice where the husband or mom in law can authorise a women to have birth via a Saint or Gandharv. In that way Pandavas, Thirithrashtra and Pandu were concieved. We need to study and understand those ancient culture indepth and we should have strong command over Shastra to comment and understand this epic.

    • profile image

      muruga 3 years ago

      Duryodhana s d real hero of mahabharath

    • profile image

      Simanta 3 years ago

      I agree with Sanjay. Pandavas were the actual adharmis. They were corrupt. Duryadhan was betrayed by his own generals as no one fought with all their might. In every steps Pandavas were saved by the politician called Krishna.

      In short, I do not see any Dharma in killing and I do not think Krishna was in the side of Dharma. It is like America throwing Atom Bombs in Hiroshima & Nagasaki and justifying their action.

    • profile image

      nali 3 years ago

      The fact that we take human form already means pain, sufferings and sins will follow us. Some suffer more than others due to deeds attached to our births. Both parties here suffered throughout their lives, to say Duryodhana was not a villain or a bad guy is invalid. However the Pandavas were not perfect either. On one side you have a person who from his childhood was exposed to negativity, so to expect bad actions from him is obvious. However the Pandavas who were sons of heavenly deities they should have known better in many occasions that their egotistical ways came across what is truly right or wrong such as marrying Drainage together. In the Judgement of God more sinful is to be educated in one thing yet be ignorant

    • profile image

      Whatever 3 years ago

      How come you have so much time to read and write all this? Anyway it's a good debate...

    • profile image

      rednam ray 3 years ago

      what about duryodhana ordering his brother Dushasana to act mischief towards Draupadi ,can you say that acts of duryodhana and his brother were innocent

    • profile image

      Shrikisna Yadav, U.P. 3 years ago

      I think while Mahabharata reach us about the life, so we should nit predict who was right or wrong but finally it tells that we should always follow Dharma.

      observations by Sanjay about Duryodhana does nit prove that he was follower of Dharma.

    • profile image

      neil ganguly 3 years ago

      Duryodhana was very sensitive and because of this he became angry so easily but there is no proof that he was an adharmi, pandavas were very treacherous as they insulted duryodhana ,dushasana and their brothers by saying that their father was blind anc so they were also blind, and moreeover how could bheema the pandava could take such a vow to kill all the kauravas who were his own cousins

    • profile image

      arunabh dutta 3 years ago

      and yes, there was many good qualities with duryodhana too....for example he did not discriminate karna on the basis of caste

      another example is following:

      Bhanumati and close friend of Duryodhana, Karna were playing a game of dice. The stake between them was substantial. As the game progressed, it was evident that Karna was winning and Bhanumati was losing. Karna could not suppress his delight. Just then Duryodhana entered his queen's chamber. Karna had his back to the door while Bhanumati was facing it. Seeing her husband coming, she was about to stand up. As she was just rising, Karna, thinking that she was trying to get away from the embarrassment of certain defeat in the game, snatched at her drape, studded with pearls.

      Tugged at by Karna's powerful hands, the thread snapped and all the pearls rolled on the floor. Queen Bhanumati was stunned and did not know what to say or do. She was afraid that, for no fault of hers, she would be misunderstood by her husband because of Karna's offensive and insensitive behavior. Seeing her shocked state and sensing that something was wrong, Karna turned round and saw his friend Duryodhana. He was also deeply shocked and distressed beyond words. Here he was, in the royal chamber, playing a game of dice with his friend's wife and, as if this was not enough, he had the audacity to catch her clothes, thus embarrassing and endangering her chaste reputation. He stood dumbfounded and transfixed. Surely, Duryodhana would not tolerate such immodesty. He readied himself for the inevitable punishment. As both she and Karna look down sheepishly, unable to meet Duryodhana's eyes, the Kaurava scion only asks: "Should I just collect the beads, or string them as well." Both Bhanumati and Karna had misjudged him. He had implicit faith and great love for his queen and greater was his faith on his friend Karna. He does not suspect, does not get angry with Karna but helps him in picking up the pearls.

      this shows how duryodhan trusts his wife and friend. duryodhan too had many good qualities but overall he was a adharmi and pandavas were on dharma's side

      moreover mahabharata is a long history of events covering many generations and inter-plotted events dealing with politics,war craft,fighting skill ,ambition,love ,revenge etc without any 100% perfect ideal character like that of ramayana and is a more realistic story which glorifies the fact that dharma wins over adharma...and in the epic pandavas are dharma's symbol while kauravas were adharma's symbol

    • profile image

      arunabh dutta 3 years ago

      and you told that kaurava's parents had to go to go to exile....who told you that...after the war dhritarahtra and gandhari along with kuniti, vidura went for sanyas not in exile...and moreover yuyutsu (son of dhritarashtra) was made the king of indraprastha after the war by the pandavas

    • profile image

      arunabh dutta 3 years ago

      duryodhan is not 100% negative as his mind was poisoned by shakuni and shakuni did so for his revenge. similarly dhritarashtra ill treated pandavas because inspite of being the eldest he could not become the emperor ...and similarly bhisma is also not 100% positive ....and pandavas were also not 100% ideal

      But still pandavas were righteous and were on dharma's side and so bhisma etc

      on the other hand duyodhan was a adharmi...and so shakuni

      and yeah, you may question about how righteous pandavas were and may criticize them....but you have no right to support duryodhan over pandavas :)

    • profile image

      arunabh dutta 3 years ago

      and one more thing, mahabharata is not glorifying winner's side. they are glorifying that dharma wins over adharma , and that truth always wina

    • profile image

      arunabh dutta 3 years ago

      immolating the five tribal boys and their mother was an accident. they did not know that the 5 boys and their mother was staying in the lakshagrah.

      and u are right, bhima ill-treated duryodhana. but the rivalry was started by duryodhan only...the rivalry started when bhima shake the tree in which duryodhana and his brothers were sitting and eating mangoes but this was provoked by duryodhana who verbally abused pandavas dead father. duruodhan's mind was poisoned by shakuni.

      and i forgot to mention the incident of khandav van....when the pandavas reached their it was the nagas who attacked first...takshak along with other nagas poisoned the citizens who were moving with the pandavas. but still pandavas took the oath not to kill any nagas...they did not destroy khandav van, arjun only destroyed the maya of the jungle..the jungle was made mayavi by mayasur....when pandavas defeated the nagas they did not kill them but only asked them to de-poison their people...and even when when takshak naga captured all their cows before rajsuya yagya they did not kill any naga..even after arjun rescued the cows and defeated takshak he did not harm him because they had taken an oath not to harm the naga population. moreover to mix up with the naga community, arjun married one naga prince

      I am not trying to say that duryodhan was 100% negative...actually his mind was poisoned by shakuni and shakuni did so because his sister gandhari had to marry a blind dhritarashtra

      and pandavas may not be 100% perfect ...but the truth is that dharma was in pandavas side and duryodhan was a adharmi

    • sanjay-sonawani profile image
      Author

      Sanjay Sonawani 3 years ago from Pune, India.

      arunabh dutta, you are referring to the interpolated portions of Mahabharata. You are forgetting how Bhima ill-treated kaurava's using his physical prowess. You are forgetting Pandava's did immolate a woman and five tribal boys with wicked intention to make it a show that instead Pandava's were dead. There are so many examples if taken Mahabharat as a whole as uncorrrupted.

    • profile image

      arunabh dutta 3 years ago

      i think nowadays it has become a fashion to support negative characters,

      1. some of the people who have commented even said that duryodhan was not cruel towards his subjects. but for your information when he was a teenage guy he abused and tortured the fisherman community and even dhritarashtra did not punished duryodhan and instead he gave exile to the fisherman community , upon which satyavati (who was from fisherman's community) called back pandavas from jungle afeter pandu's death.

      2. duryodhan poisoned bhima.

      3. at first pandavas were friendly towards kauravas but kauravas behavior forced them to hate them and subsequently bhima was bullying duryodhan

      4, but still pandavas forgave them until draupadi was molested for exanmple a. duryodhan poisoned bhim b.when the entire kuru princes returned after being educated by drona and was about to present their skill duryodhan tried to kill arjun by breaking the entrance gate c. duryodhan tried to burn the pandavas including kunti in the lakshagraha d.when pandavas returned to hastinapur with draupadi duryodhan abused draupadi ...but even after these incidents poandavas remained silent,

      5. duryodhan tried to capture krishna when he was a peace messenger.

      6.duryodhan was not loved by bhisma and dronacharya this only shows the personality of duryodhan, proof: bhisma did not want to fight for kauravas but he did because of his promise . bhisma even gave blessings to pandavas to win the war by saying "vijay bhava" . moreover, yudhisthir even took permission from bhisma ,drona and shalya before the war. yudhisthir even told before the war that before a dharma yudh they cannot do adharma and hence told that if bhisma orders them not to fight they will suurender. but bhisma blessed them with "vijaya bhava" gave them permission to fight and ordered them to kill him and establish justice...dronacharya told yudhisthir "o yudhisthir ! i have one last lesson to teach u. now,i m your enemy and not ur guru and u must fight with me with full of your power. if u don't fight for dharma and are unable to kill me it will be a shame on me.

      madra raj shalya told "by blessings are with you but my weapons are with duryodhana"

      THESE FACTS ONLY SHOW ON WHICH SIDE THERE WAS DHARAMA : YUDHISTHIR OR DURYODHANA

      7. and u have accused 5 pandavas of marrying one draupadi. but this was because kunti without looking asked them to divide draupadi among the five brothers. after this incidence they had only one way : yudhisthir would marry draupdai and rest of the brothers would take sanyas...bhim,arjun,nakul shahdev were ready to take sanyas but draupadi said she can't see 4 kauntae taking sanyas and hence is ready marry all of them. moreover, rishi vyasa had given consent to this marriage. he told that they can marry but in a single year only one brother can be intimate with draupadi . so u r wrong that pandavas married draupadi without her consent.

      8.duryodhana was the heir of hastinapur. this is because only a son of king can be king. and dhritaerashtra was a "working king" or a "karyakari raja" . there was no RAJYA ABHISHEK of dhritarahtra. some people without proper knowledge think that dhritarashtra was the king. he was the "karyakari raja" on behalf of pandu.

      pandu was done with rajya abhishek and hence was yudhisthir wa his heir...and after all yudhisthir was elder than duryodhana

      10. and dice game was not fair . the dice which was used by shakuni was made mayavi made up of the bone of his dead father

      *) but yes , yudhisthir was wrong in puttong his brothers and wife at stake in the dice game . but he was trapped by the rules laid down and by his own statements.

      *) after read the above comments i m surprised finding it ridiculous about how uninformed u guyz are...if u still have any doubt abot if duryodhan was more righteous or pandava and krishna were adharmi ask it i will clear your doubts

      9.some of u r accusing pandavas of killing drona and bhisma but they themselves gave permission to it

      10. and some of u r questioning the fairness of the battle. and to clear your doubts please read bhagwat geeta . i can't keep typing every thing.

    • sanjay-sonawani profile image
      Author

      Sanjay Sonawani 3 years ago from Pune, India.

      Raman P, when said that Pandva's had no right whatsoever on the Kuru kingdom. Partition of the kingdom in itself was wrong. You know why Bhishma adopted celibacy? Because he wanted there should be no partition in future. Getting back illegally given part to the Pandva's was not crime. And Duryodhana won it back from them, no matter even in a game of dice which was eagerly accepted by Yudhishthira and had agreed to the terms of dicing on his own.

      What proof do you have to show there was no love between kaurava's and Pandava's? Had it been the case in first place they wouldn't have got Indraprastha, karava's would not have welcomed them and arranged for their education. How childhood fights can be taken as a proof for enmity? Bhima used to beat Kaurava's , have you forgotten?

      Finally it was not the question of greed, but ethics...why to part with the kingdom again which was won back by the Kaurava's?

    • profile image

      Raman P 3 years ago

      No but he wanted Indraprastha by wrong means and why did Pandavas got vanvas and agyatvas by no fault of them.

      further i wish to say that Duryodhan had no love for his brothers(Pandavas) but Pandavas loved all Kauravas that is their fate of greed which made them to die one by one losing they(Kauravas) made use of all mighty mens by wrong means to achieve adharma but got none successful :)

    • profile image

      Amit S 3 years ago

      Pandavas are Yadu vanshi as they are descendants of Yadu in whose clan Kunti Krishna's fathers sister was born, Kauravas are descendants of Vyasa as Vidur,Pandu and Dhritarashtra were fathered by the sage,therefore Pandavas have very high level caste status even if they were not Pandu's sons they have claim on the throne and Kauravas with too much belief in Karna and Shakuni put their integrity in doubt, now regarding bloodline only Arjun's survived the war and Dushala and maybe children of Duryodhan's daughter Lakshmana and Samba who may have perished in Dwaraka ending or survived,it isn't of too much worth in this day and age of sperm banking yet what is wrong is wrong Pandavas should have been given back half the Kingdom as they were asking for it and requests should not be turned down as it can be terrible.

    • profile image

      sree 3 years ago

      Awesome..

    • sanjay-sonawani profile image
      Author

      Sanjay Sonawani 3 years ago from Pune, India.

      Thanks Prajakt Karanjkar, you are right...it ultimately was a game of proving prowess from both the sides.

    • profile image

      Prajakt Karanjkar 3 years ago

      I think, the whole Mahabharata epic was purely based on a theory of brothers who fought against each other for proving their prowess. But, after additions by many in to the Mahabharata, added extra things like good, bad and Dharma. We should accept the fact that the whole Mahabharata is purely based on one thing, Politics, with and against the people of their own blood. It is the story which strongly gives a message about how things can get fierce by one mistake of the king and the whole royal family. What say???

    • profile image

      Truth 3 years ago

      Its all abt human mind n experiences , u don't hv right to speak against Krishna, until n unless u don't reach. Highest level of consciousness n gain knwldg to depth. Duryodhana had many faults, so did Pandavas had, on earth no one cn b perfct. Sri Krsna only fghts fr truth n all ur responses , I cn notice r of half knowldg

    • profile image

      chandrakala.nayak 3 years ago

      In real duryodhana is a great warrior..he deserves respect...thr is no right fr pandavas over kingdom caz they r not son of pandu...y the hell shud suyodhana share land vt them...he fought bravely...vt out help of cunning krishna who s so called god....even a mouse can win war if god is vt it...what's the beuty of winning of pandavas..it was really duryodhan the legend

    • profile image

      Shinylife 3 years ago

      I think that the main people who are the cause of the war are shakuni and krishna, as they are the ones who are manipulating people and making them do things. Shakuni wanted to destroy the kuru dynasty because they ruined his beloved sister's life.

    • profile image

      Debashis 3 years ago

      Duryodhana never conquer any kingdom except not giving back the kingdom to Yudisthir after their 'Agghyatabas' as promised earlier. The majority of the kings of India supported him in the war. That show he was very popular.

    • profile image

      Debashis 3 years ago

      Duryodhana tried to poison Bhima because from the beginning Bhima used to bully his brother and some are merciless tortures.

      If you carefully read Mahabharata you will find Duryodhan hide inside a pond after the war from where he was found out by Krisha and asked to fight. Hidden inside a pond ie under water needed lot of yogic practice. This shows he was yogi. He did not marry many women. He is not a drunken prince either. He raised a lot a lot of questions about the birth of Pandavas and that's why he did not accept Yudisthir. Because he did not have the blood of Pandu.

      But what was told that Kauravs are very cruel , heartless people.

    • profile image

      chandrakala.nayak 3 years ago

      dhuryodhan is a real hero of mahabharat....if he was really bad he would not hv fought bravely in war and died....he s suyodhana....a best friend of karna....hats off to him

    • profile image

      kabyashree 3 years ago

      i totally agree with you if krishna had done everything for the sake of dharmma then why isn't the world in peace today?

    • profile image

      Prajwal 3 years ago

      1. Kunti was impatient and told arjuna that "whatever he has, may he share it with his brothers equally", only later realizing that he had a wife. Aso, at Pandavas residence Lord Krishna took Draupadi aside and said, "This awkward situation you find yourself in is of your own making. In your previous birth you had pleased Lord Shiva with your prayers. He granted a boon to you. You said that you wanted a husband and to ensure that your request was heard, you repeated it five times in all. Shiva then said that in your next life you would have five husbands."

      5. They did not know that he was their brother. Krishna and Kunti told Karna and the told Karna that if he switched sides, the kingdom would be his. He refused and fought for his friends, Duryodhana. Also, a Kshatriya's duty was to fight.

      6. Duryodhana tried to poison Bishma, as well as trying to disrobe Draupadi. By your logic, the presidency of Richard Nixon was stable and good, and he should have still been re-elected, despite the water-gate scandal.

      10. I would break the speed limit in order to help a dying person reach a hospital on time. The lower moral code had to be broken for the higher moral code.

    • profile image

      sainath 4 years ago

      I can surely say pandava's are not only great cheaters and also they atr culprits. If they have real courage to face kaurava's in the battle they couldn't do il-legal war that to with the help of krishna.

    • sanjay-sonawani profile image
      Author

      Sanjay Sonawani 4 years ago from Pune, India.

      Thanks Laberdar Sir!

    • profile image

      Lamberdar 4 years ago from Toronto

      Dear Sanjay ji,

      Good questions.

      Here is the most important point. Although Duryodhana's father Dhritrashatra had many fine qualities, he was blind and unable to see. This made him totally unsuited to be a king and leader, especially during those times when the king needed to control things himself. Dhritrashtra's opting to become the king was the biggest mistake on his part and that eventually led to internal conflicts resulting in the loss of his family and kingdom. There is a lesson here -- don't let a blind / incompetent person (who is totally dependent for help and guidance on others) to be your leader unless you want to go down the way of Hastinapur.

      Anyway, here is something good coming out of the story of Mahabharata ,

      “Gita as the multifaceted text” ......

      http://www.geocities.ws/lamberdar/gita.html

      Lamberdar

    • profile image

      Macineely 4 years ago

      I agree. Duryodhana was a virtuous king.

      The Pandavas (especially Bhima) were savage. They killed Drona, their own guru, which is a sin worthy of damnation. Karna was shot in the back, even though he requested Arjuna give him time to push his chariot up when it had become stuck, reminding him of how he spared the Pandavas' lives numerous times. Krishna had Arjuna shoot his own brother in the back!

      The slaying of Duryodhana was disgusting to say the least. He abided by the rules, but Bhima did not.

      Krishna does not deserve my respect, nor my reverence.

    • sanjay-sonawani profile image
      Author

      Sanjay Sonawani 5 years ago from Pune, India.

      Thanks Dhruva, Thanks Spreme Upbeat.

    • profile image

      Dhruva Ponugupati 5 years ago

      awsum articl sir

      duryodhan only succombed to sakhuni's politics or else there was ntng wrong within him just human faults

      in fact his friendship was karna is so great even today's generation of frenshp is compared to their's

    • jainismus profile image

      Mahaveer Sanglikar 5 years ago from Pune, India

      Dear Sanjayji,

      Thank you for writing such a great article.

      supreme upbeat, You are write.

    • profile image

      supreme upbeat 5 years ago

      No Duryodhana was not a villain rather he was a human being with human faults.