I’m going to tell my kids these stories at bedtime and in the bath. They’re absolutely brilliant stories. I’m not sure I can match the quality of this narration though, which is top notch.
Its clear the kauravas were sort of forced into this situation. Imagine having a bleak future & no throne back in that time along with a bully cousin whom apparently nobody tried to stop? Why did the elders here not say anything? This certainly proves how one can't take a side in Mahabharata since no one is actually pure or righteous here. Would the poisoning really happen if bheema wasn't left to openly bully?
It is very clear that details are being twisted and facts hidden in this episode to make the impression of Kauravas being victims. Which version of Mahabharata is he reading where Bheema bullied Kauravas I have read 2 versions which never mentioned this detail. Maybe I missed something. Also I read of one of the childhood friends of Kouravas which is not told here.
@@chandrakumardesaiI don’t think the podcast is claiming to be a word-for-word retelling of the Mahabharata, I think it’s more like an adaptation, like how a film will alter certain details of a book to make it work for the film medium. I certainly didn’t come to it expecting a full telling of the Mahabharata with all the details preserved. Just based on the run time it’s clear this is going to be abridged.
Bheema isn’t wicked though. It says he “bullied them, all in good humour though.” I think the impression we’re supposed to have is that he was a lot stronger than them - he tosses them like feather pillows while wrestling. And don’t forget - there’s a hundred of them! It’s not exactly a wrestling match in Bheem’s favour, and yet he wins every time. By modern standards it seems like he’s mean to them, but I think it’s more that he doesn’t know his own strength. He doesn’t understand why they climb a tree to get away from him. Also, elders weren’t supervising kids playing out in nature fifty years ago, let alone two thousand years ago. I didn’t personally feel any animosity towards Bheem. In fact I think he’s shown quite favourably compared to the Kaurava brothers who scheme and deceive in order to triumph over their cousin who, in many ways, is their physical superior. Sound pretty messed up by modern standards, but it’s an age of kingly lineages and battles. Being the best at wrestling vs cowardly hiding up a tree - who do you think has the best claim to the throne? Remember that in the time of the Mahabharata there was not automatic succession to the eldest son - it was up for grabs to any male in the family. The Kaurava brothers are rightly concerned that Bheem might be the most likely successor.
@@chandrakumardesaiI would also add that I think “bully” might be better understood here to mean “rough play” as it is said that it is “all in good humour”. I think the impression is more that the Kaurava brothers are weak and cowardly - they are easily defeated by Bheem when wrestling, and they hide up a tree to escape him. Then they poison him because they fear he will pose a threat to the planned succession - poison being a very cowardly and ignoble way to kill someone. The narrator clearly says that their scheme is a wicked one. Bheem comes off fine in this retelling, if a bit blustering, while the Kauravas come across as weak, cowardly, deceitful, and malicious. “Bully in good humour” means “play roughly” or “engage in horseplay” - he’s not trying to upset them.
Just for everyone saying how terrible it is that Bheema is a bully, the sequence of events depicted in the story is: The Pandava brothers are favourites in the palace and among the people of the region because of their “kindness, gentleness, respectfulness and humbleness”. Yudishtira, being the eldest, is expected to take the throne because he and he brother are beloved and because Yudishtira is the eldest, and the son of King Pandu. An historical note here is that succession was not automatic, and any male member of the family could make a claim. Duryodhona, however, wants the throne for himself, and his ninety-nine brothers also favour this outcome. Despite their being a hundred of them, the younger Pandava brother, Bheema, is easily able to overpower them. He demonstrates by wrestling that he can outmatch all of them. His “bullying” is “all in good humour”, and this coupled wit the description of him as “kind” and “gentle” suggests this is quite normal play amongst boys at the time. The Kaurava brothers, though, hide up a tree, they are so scared of him. This suggests they are cowardly. In the end (spoilers for the video) they poison Bheema because they know they can’t beat him in a fair fight. The Kauravas are shown to be wicked, whereas Bheema and his brother are shown to be strong, wise, and noble. So, no, the retelling doesn’t vilify Bheema, or depict the Kauravas as the good guys. A few people are getting too hung up on the use of the word “bullying” and ignoring: in good humour, kind, gentle, humble, etc. There’s plenty in the text here to convey who is behaving morally and immorally here, and I don’t understand why people are finding that so difficult when it’s right there in the story.
The pandavas were highly intelligent and righteous. They upheld Dharma so I don't understand why the narrator would say that they ate meat and fish. This is a misrepresentation of the pandavas.
It's in the texts After war dhridharstra was invited by Pandavs for dinner there Bheem while eating meat crunched on bone and laughed and mocked him saying this was the sound made when I broke your son's bones.
@@ganeshmungal3251 When maa sita requested rama for the golden deer she didn't want it as a pet. she wanted it's skin as a decoration to the palace in ayodhya. that is clearly mentioned in the original valmiki ramayan here i have mentioned the source of rama eating deer meat Else, if that best deer does not come into your capture while alive, oh tigerly-man, at the least its gorgeous deerskin will be remnant of it. Aranya kanda section 43 verse 19 “Famished (बुभुक्षितौ / bubhukshitau) they (Ram and Lakshman) there, then, (तौ तत्र /tau yatra) killed/hunted (हत्वा /hatvā) four species of large animals (चतुरो महामृगान् /chaturo mahāmrigān): wild boar (वराह /varaha ), white-footed antelope (मृश्यं/mrishyam), spotted deer (पृषतं /prishatam) and the great stag with black stripes (महारुरुम् /maharurum); ate (आदाय /adaya) the meat ( मेध्यं/medhyam) quickly (त्वरितं?tvaritam) and rested underneath a tree ( वासाय /vasaya…ययतुर्वनस्पतिम् / yayaturvanaspatim) in the evening time (काले/kālē).” (ayodhya kanda section 52 verse 102) If this isn't enough proof then I don't know what is
@@ganeshmungal3251 just incase you misunderstood dharma does not mean following a set a rules given by some priest. dharma is following one's duties without bad intentions. the dharma of a hunter is to hunt animals and just because he hunts/ kills animals doesn't make him a sinner. he is just following his dharma. and pandavas were princes nevertheless so they ought to eat meat just like any other royal family
This episode is trying to portray Bheem as a bully. This part does not base of Vaishampayana or Vyasa Mahabharata. There is a very sharp detail which I think is willfully ignored to falsely propogate few negative characters as heroes.
@@giridharkarre4067 Is this a challenge ? Or a honest request to learn ? If challenge, read Sambhavya Parva within AdiParva of Vaysa or Vaishampayana Mahabharata shlokas. If this is a request to learn, please reply, I have the soft copy version of Mahabharata with me. The Vaishampayana version which is second to Vyasa Mahabharata, which I will be more than happy to share.
@@giridharkarre4067 Is this a challenge ? Or a honest request to learn ? If challenge, read Sambhavya Parva within AdiParva of Vaysa or Vaishampayana Mahabharata shlokas. If this is a request to learn, please reply, I have the soft copy version of Mahabharata with me. The Vaishampayana version which is second to Vyasa Mahabharata, which I will be more than happy to share.
@@giridharkarre4067 Still looking for an easy option. Need a video ? This is what all these false narrative mongers invest on. We believe whatever is easily available. And all vested interests serve all false narratives in such easy and convenient ways that it is luring to buy. We need to remember this, lies need marketing and advertising and it also gets the advertisement. Truth does not need it. But bad thing is getting to truth takes hard work. Is your comment a challenge ? Or a honest request to learn ? If challenge, go read Sambhavya Parva within AdiParva of Vaysa or Vaishampayana Mahabharata shlokas. If this is a request to learn, please reply, I have the soft copy version of Mahabharata with me. The Vaishampayana version which is second to Vyasa Mahabharata, which I will be more than happy to share.
@@giridharkarre4067 Is this a challenge or request for learning more? Read Sambhavya Parva within AdiParva of Mahabharata. But why is my comment getting deleted? I am not bad mouthing or abusing or saying any harsh words. This is me commenting 4th time.
Great effort! Love the rendering. Thank you.
Very thrilling. Every parent should make their children listen to this.
I’m going to tell my kids these stories at bedtime and in the bath. They’re absolutely brilliant stories. I’m not sure I can match the quality of this narration though, which is top notch.
Thankyou for this amazing narration
Its clear the kauravas were sort of forced into this situation. Imagine having a bleak future & no throne back in that time along with a bully cousin whom apparently nobody tried to stop?
Why did the elders here not say anything?
This certainly proves how one can't take a side in Mahabharata since no one is actually pure or righteous here.
Would the poisoning really happen if bheema wasn't left to openly bully?
It’s not all black and white that’s for sure- I’m interested to learn more about the details finally reading Mahabharata is well overdue
It is very clear that details are being twisted and facts hidden in this episode to make the impression of Kauravas being victims.
Which version of Mahabharata is he reading where Bheema bullied Kauravas I have read 2 versions which never mentioned this detail. Maybe I missed something.
Also I read of one of the childhood friends of Kouravas which is not told here.
@@chandrakumardesaiI don’t think the podcast is claiming to be a word-for-word retelling of the Mahabharata, I think it’s more like an adaptation, like how a film will alter certain details of a book to make it work for the film medium.
I certainly didn’t come to it expecting a full telling of the Mahabharata with all the details preserved. Just based on the run time it’s clear this is going to be abridged.
Bheema isn’t wicked though. It says he “bullied them, all in good humour though.” I think the impression we’re supposed to have is that he was a lot stronger than them - he tosses them like feather pillows while wrestling. And don’t forget - there’s a hundred of them! It’s not exactly a wrestling match in Bheem’s favour, and yet he wins every time.
By modern standards it seems like he’s mean to them, but I think it’s more that he doesn’t know his own strength. He doesn’t understand why they climb a tree to get away from him.
Also, elders weren’t supervising kids playing out in nature fifty years ago, let alone two thousand years ago.
I didn’t personally feel any animosity towards Bheem. In fact I think he’s shown quite favourably compared to the Kaurava brothers who scheme and deceive in order to triumph over their cousin who, in many ways, is their physical superior. Sound pretty messed up by modern standards, but it’s an age of kingly lineages and battles. Being the best at wrestling vs cowardly hiding up a tree - who do you think has the best claim to the throne? Remember that in the time of the Mahabharata there was not automatic succession to the eldest son - it was up for grabs to any male in the family. The Kaurava brothers are rightly concerned that Bheem might be the most likely successor.
@@chandrakumardesaiI would also add that I think “bully” might be better understood here to mean “rough play” as it is said that it is “all in good humour”. I think the impression is more that the Kaurava brothers are weak and cowardly - they are easily defeated by Bheem when wrestling, and they hide up a tree to escape him. Then they poison him because they fear he will pose a threat to the planned succession - poison being a very cowardly and ignoble way to kill someone.
The narrator clearly says that their scheme is a wicked one. Bheem comes off fine in this retelling, if a bit blustering, while the Kauravas come across as weak, cowardly, deceitful, and malicious.
“Bully in good humour” means “play roughly” or “engage in horseplay” - he’s not trying to upset them.
Just for everyone saying how terrible it is that Bheema is a bully, the sequence of events depicted in the story is:
The Pandava brothers are favourites in the palace and among the people of the region because of their “kindness, gentleness, respectfulness and humbleness”. Yudishtira, being the eldest, is expected to take the throne because he and he brother are beloved and because Yudishtira is the eldest, and the son of King Pandu.
An historical note here is that succession was not automatic, and any male member of the family could make a claim.
Duryodhona, however, wants the throne for himself, and his ninety-nine brothers also favour this outcome. Despite their being a hundred of them, the younger Pandava brother, Bheema, is easily able to overpower them. He demonstrates by wrestling that he can outmatch all of them. His “bullying” is “all in good humour”, and this coupled wit the description of him as “kind” and “gentle” suggests this is quite normal play amongst boys at the time. The Kaurava brothers, though, hide up a tree, they are so scared of him. This suggests they are cowardly.
In the end (spoilers for the video) they poison Bheema because they know they can’t beat him in a fair fight.
The Kauravas are shown to be wicked, whereas Bheema and his brother are shown to be strong, wise, and noble.
So, no, the retelling doesn’t vilify Bheema, or depict the Kauravas as the good guys. A few people are getting too hung up on the use of the word “bullying” and ignoring: in good humour, kind, gentle, humble, etc. There’s plenty in the text here to convey who is behaving morally and immorally here, and I don’t understand why people are finding that so difficult when it’s right there in the story.
🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏❤❤❤
bheem is a bully 😢
Pranam hajur
The pandavas were highly intelligent and righteous. They upheld Dharma so I don't understand why the narrator would say that they ate meat and fish. This is a misrepresentation of the pandavas.
It's in the texts After war dhridharstra was invited by Pandavs for dinner there Bheem while eating meat crunched on bone and laughed and mocked him saying this was the sound made when I broke your son's bones.
Why? lord rama is righteous too and he ate deer meat when he was in exile?
@@Akshayagayatri. Really. Explain?. How do you know that?. Let's hear your explanation.
@@ganeshmungal3251 When maa sita requested rama for the golden deer she didn't want it as a pet. she wanted it's skin as a decoration to the palace in ayodhya. that is clearly mentioned in the original valmiki ramayan
here i have mentioned the source of rama eating deer meat
Else, if that best deer does not come into your capture while alive, oh tigerly-man, at the least its gorgeous deerskin will be remnant of it. Aranya kanda section 43 verse 19
“Famished (बुभुक्षितौ / bubhukshitau) they (Ram and Lakshman) there, then, (तौ तत्र /tau yatra) killed/hunted (हत्वा /hatvā) four species of large animals (चतुरो महामृगान् /chaturo mahāmrigān): wild boar (वराह /varaha ), white-footed antelope (मृश्यं/mrishyam), spotted deer (पृषतं /prishatam) and the great stag with black stripes (महारुरुम् /maharurum); ate (आदाय /adaya) the meat ( मेध्यं/medhyam) quickly (त्वरितं?tvaritam) and rested underneath a tree ( वासाय /vasaya…ययतुर्वनस्पतिम् / yayaturvanaspatim) in the evening time (काले/kālē).” (ayodhya kanda section 52 verse 102)
If this isn't enough proof then I don't know what is
@@ganeshmungal3251 just incase you misunderstood dharma does not mean following a set a rules given by some priest. dharma is following one's duties without bad intentions. the dharma of a hunter is to hunt animals and just because he hunts/ kills animals doesn't make him a sinner. he is just following his dharma. and pandavas were princes nevertheless so they ought to eat meat just like any other royal family
❤
This episode is trying to portray Bheem as a bully. This part does not base of Vaishampayana or Vyasa Mahabharata. There is a very sharp detail which I think is willfully ignored to falsely propogate few negative characters as heroes.
Can you explain or refer to any video regarding those small details which are missed?
@@giridharkarre4067
Is this a challenge ? Or a honest request to learn ?
If challenge, read Sambhavya Parva within AdiParva of Vaysa or Vaishampayana Mahabharata shlokas.
If this is a request to learn, please reply, I have the soft copy version of Mahabharata with me. The Vaishampayana version which is second to Vyasa Mahabharata, which I will be more than happy to share.
@@giridharkarre4067
Is this a challenge ? Or a honest request to learn ?
If challenge, read Sambhavya Parva within AdiParva of Vaysa or Vaishampayana Mahabharata shlokas.
If this is a request to learn, please reply, I have the soft copy version of Mahabharata with me. The Vaishampayana version which is second to Vyasa Mahabharata, which I will be more than happy to share.
@@giridharkarre4067
Still looking for an easy option. Need a video ? This is what all these false narrative mongers invest on. We believe whatever is easily available. And all vested interests serve all false narratives in such easy and convenient ways that it is luring to buy.
We need to remember this, lies need marketing and advertising and it also gets the advertisement. Truth does not need it. But bad thing is getting to truth takes hard work.
Is your comment a challenge ? Or a honest request to learn ?
If challenge, go read Sambhavya Parva within AdiParva of Vaysa or Vaishampayana Mahabharata shlokas.
If this is a request to learn, please reply, I have the soft copy version of Mahabharata with me. The Vaishampayana version which is second to Vyasa Mahabharata, which I will be more than happy to share.
@@giridharkarre4067
Is this a challenge or request for learning more? Read Sambhavya Parva within AdiParva of Mahabharata. But why is my comment getting deleted? I am not bad mouthing or abusing or saying any harsh words. This is me commenting 4th time.
❤❤
I don't know they are really ate meat and fish
It is real they ate meats, fish.
Do a Bengali version sir
Chup Bengali. Sabmai Bengali chahiye