confused by karna's death

[Visitor 0]

Thank you stonehearted, you have provided the best answers, even though i think you didnt mean 'Devaki' but Kunti! Nevertheless the pieces are kinda starting to fall into place. I suppose Arjuna was acting as an instrument of Krishna. An unjust end to an unjust person!

 

But whatever happened to 'Karuna-sindhu'? If Karna requested a pause in fighting and with full faith became defenceless to unhitch the chariot, his death seems like an act of uncompassion. Would this not reflect back upon Arjuna and Krishna?

 

PS Treating women badly isnt the problem with my successors lol. They are all good in nature. And im sure that the society will do well under their management.

[Visitor 0]

In reply to:

"A rough example is this. Suppose during world war two you could stop the holocaust by telling a lie to someone. What do you do? Do you uphold the dharma of "satyam" (truthfullness), or do you abandon that dharma for the higher purpose of helping others?"

 

I dont completly agree with you there! An exmaple that i remember clearly from a Bhagavat Katha is that of a person running after a cow to kill it. The Cow runs past a sages ashram and the person asks the sage whether he saw which direction the cow ran. What should the sage reply? Should he speak the truth and account for the cow's death, or should he lie and fall from the path of satya?

 

The CORRECT answer is that he should tell the person the TRUE path but also stand in his way and say that to get to the cow he will have to fight the sage! In this way he protects the cow as well as staying on the path of satya. I recognise this as a life worthy of living.

[Jahnava Nitai Das 2]

 

The CORRECT answer is that he should tell the person the TRUE path but also stand in his way and say that to get to the cow he will have to fight the sage! In this way he protects the cow as well as staying on the path of satya. I recognise this as a life worthy of living.

 

 

You may think this is the correct answer, but it simply sounds like some "Gita-saram" printed on the boxes of sweets in Tamil Nadu (just popular phrases with no real Gita connection).

 

When one knows that one cannot win the battle and protect the cow, then what right does one have in allowing the cow to suffer simply for one's own pride of having followed "dharma". Such a thing would be ultimately adharma.

 

Arjuna could not defeat Karna. Karna had defeated all of the pandavas in battle individually and allowed them to live each time. With Bhima karna told him "why don't you go fight someone of your own intelligence level" and sent him off. Arjuna could have selfishly followed his external duties by following the rules of battle, but the entire world would suffer as a result - it would all be because he was selfish, only thinking about his own allegiance to dharma.

 

Again with the example of the holocaust, it is a simply question if you are honest with your self. Just theoretically, if one is put in a situation where there are only two options 1) Tell the truth and everyone dies, or 2) Tell a lie and everyone lives. Which do you choose.

 

Hitler comes to you and asks "Are these 6 million people jews", and if you answer yes he kills them, if you answer no, he lets them go. What do you do? Saying "I would answer yes they are jews, and then I would run to all the 6 million jails cells and unlock them" isn't one of the choices.

 

The question is simple, we are comparing two choices of dharma and seeing which is better, not comparing all the other possibilities than can exist. The two choices are "tell the truth and 6 million people are killed" or "tell a lie and all people are released".

 

In comparing these two particular acts of dharma, which is higher? Just be honest and say which you would do if these are the only two options available. Once you accept that breaking lower dharmas can be better than following them, then one has established dharma as a multi layered system, which is sometimes self-contradictory.

 

The dharma of satyam (truthfullness) is inferior to the dharma of ahimsa (non-violence); the dharma of ahimsa (non-violence) is inferior to the dharma of raksha (offering protection); etc. Thus one must act to uphold the highest dharma (parama-dharma), while following all lower dharmas that are not contradictory. But when a lower dharma contradicts a higher dharma, it should be rejected in favour of the higher dharma.

[Jahnava Nitai Das 2]

Also we should take into account the fact that Karna was given mukti. So from Krishna's perspective, where is there a victim of injustice?

[Jahnava Nitai Das 2]

And as far as universal lessons from this, I don't think anyone can justify acting unjustly from this example. With the pandavas the fate of the world was involved, Krishna was directly advising Arjuna to break the code of battle, and the "victim" attained mukti.

 

Compare that to our own situations and see if any of the three apply to us.

[sumedh 0]

Hare Krishna and dandavat pranam

 

 

"The lesson is: following order of Krsna is following Satya."

 

Thats true, but such a lame answer! can't you tell i'm looking for more indepth information? How do YOU relate to the karna-situation? If thats the only thing you've got to say as a reply then it means nothing more than a story to you! Learn to involve yourself within the Bhagvatam. It should be a personal thing! stop being a muppet!

 

 

 

Actually, as other devotees have said this is the complete and most profound answer but it can take long long time to understand it. Your other comments are really a poor choice.

 

Because dharma means the will of God and nothing else; that is the only definition of dharma and all other definitions like do good to others, perfect human sense of morality etc. are not only incorrect but self-contradictory in many situations.

 

Since you are looking for more in-depth information, i can only say to look at the meaning of dharma with greater depth. The dharma of material things is to work in accordance with the laws of material nature; why and for what reason? Our dharma is to surrender to the God; again why? Because dharma means the essential characteristic of a substance. Since everything emanates from Krishna and is His part and parcel, the only dharma of everything is to act in perfect accordance with His desires. Therefore vaishnava dharma or sanatana dharma as the complete surrender to God is called the only dharma of all the living entities, and Arjuna was only following his essential characteristic or "dharma". So actually "dharma" has nothing to do with our or anybody's judgements rather is the essential Truth as our true nature.

 

If you mean "dharma" as in setting an example for the judgement of others then as jndas prabhu has explained that is also satisfied in the actions and desires of God. However, that is strictly not a requirement for dharma. As you said "karuna-sindhu" is also very right and only Krishna knows how to let it flow best; because if we give even karuna to someone more than deserved or required then it will only be abused; so even if we are overflowing with karuna we have to apply it cautiously for abuse of precious things is also "charity in the mode of ignorance" as Lord Krishna has said.

[Guest guest]

Krsna is the absolute Truth.

[Guest guest]

When one on a self-realized platform understands there is no death and all this world is but a play.

Then even death can be more merciful than life.

These guys were heavy, unlike the warriors of today, it was a good day to die.

[Guest guest]

Draupadé was to be naked by the order of Karëa? It is uncivilized, unlawful. So Kåñëa remembered this. When Karëa was killed, it was not... He was not killed lawfully because he fell down from his chariot, and he was trying to repair the chariot, and Kåñëa advised Arjuna, ?This is the opportunity to kill him. Otherwise you cannot kill him. Kill him immediately.? So when Karëa protested, ?Arjuna, what you are doing? I am not fighting. I am repairing my chariot and you...? So Kåñëa said, ?Yes, you did unlawful action by making Draupadé naked. So you should be unlawfully killed. This is justice. This is justice to you.?

 

============ REF. Çrémad-Bhägavatam 1.8.24 -- Mäyäpura, October 4, 1974

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Yes, Krsna is the one who decides what is justice and what isnt