hey can anyone solve this mistry how 100 kaurabs were born from the same mom and dad in mahabharat? Is it possible to have 100 kids in one life time,,i thought it takes atleast 9 months before a girl gets pregnant and she delivers a baby alive..

if i am mathematically correct age difference between duryodhan and his youngest bro should have been atleast 90 years even if his mom had been getting pregnant incessantly,,and in the war with pandaws and allies duryodhan should have been there with a walking stick while his youngest bro still in diaper and wanting to play all those wonderful toys,,,

so mahabharat does not make sense to me,,anyway if any of it is true then I would say dhritarastra is great,,,u sure make a match with Ron Jeremy...

Galaab, Ambalika was a sister of Amba and Ambika. And no she was not dasi or anything like that... Ambika and Ambalika were married to king of Hastinapur whereas Amba, after feeling degraded had even gone to Bhishma's Guru; Parshuramji. Bhisma eventually defeated Parshuramji as well. when he stood up against Bhisma ( a khstriya). It was not a war of hatered but of principle. Anyways, relation between Amba and Bhisma eventually(among other things) decided Mahabharat's war. coz withour Bhisma going down, the war would have never stopped, or Kauravs would have been vitorious.
*******************
"The brahma astra which is mention in mahabharat equal to atomic bomb of present era and only given to karan and arjun "
--> Brahma astra was not only with Karna & Arjun. It was with many other great warriors, such as Bhisma, Dhronacharya, Ashwothama ( rem he actually killed Abhimanyu's son inside Uttara's Womb, which krishna eventually made alive), Parshuram and few others. Yes it was supposed to be the most powerful " Achuk Astra" along with few other ones i.e: Pashupath Astra, Shakti astra ( which Indra gave to Karna.. which was so fierce that Krishna did not let Arjun come near Karna till he got rid of Shakti Ashtra, after killing Ghatochkach)..these three were achuk asktras.. aru pani hola ehehe
***********************
"He didnot take karma for granted coz he was rival of arjun but he saw it was not far for someone who is good warrior to be discrimated by Dronacharya..."
-----> Indeed he did not take Karna for granted. How could anyone? Karna was one of the most accomplised warrior of that era and perhaps of all the era (according to accolads from Krishna and many others). He was protected with "Kawach and Kundal" which no weapon could pierce, in other words making him almost invincible. He had defeated all the Kings of Bharat Varsha alone ( apart from the ones close to or related to Hastinapur). He was Guru bhai of none other than Bhisma and Dhronacharya. My point is - Duryodhan actually went to war pinning on Karna ( He himself have mentioned it many times). Its another thing that Bhisma actually never allowed him to participate in war till he was "Pradhan Senapati". Later he agreed that he did it to protect Arjun or Karna. And about Dhhuryodhan making Karna a King coz he did not see it as fair for someone being discriminated by DhronC is not true. When Karna went to DhronC he rejected it saying the school is only for Royals. But neither his son was royal nor could he ans baby Karna's question " Does mother Sarswati asks question about ones parents b4 giving sicha daan".. "Is sichaa " Dayee hein acharya?" And Duryodhan made karna a king only when he came to challenge Arjun when they were declaring Arjun as "swarwashrestha Dhanurdhar" in Hastinapur's trial of Yuvraj's (what they learned till now bhanera)... infacts thats when Kunti also realised that Karna was her son, the one she so heartlesslty threw away in the river. Seeing Karna's immense power and Birta, Duryodhan did a comendable and clever job to make him King so that he can challege Arjun as that trial was only for Chettriya and royal rajkumars. Anyways, what Duryodhan did for Karna, dictated Karna's whole life. Karna indeed was a great warrior, perhaps the greates of his generation ( He even defeated Arjun in Mahabharat, but did not kill him coz Surya asta bhayera but eventually fell victim to Yudh ko niyam Ulangaan by same Arjun the very next day, albeit Krishna's uksaune ma PHD degree bhayera..hahaha... Grrrrrrr... damn Krishna... Sabai Waha kai Khel ho. ehehe ..
..... I guess tats it for now.... perhaps more when i would get a lil tipsy..... Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhh its a saturday evening... :)....
By divine force..
IndisGuise:p
P.s: Kalankisthan... indeed i am often tiri miri by ur indept analysis of many things.. eheh well can not think of it right now... MM is ruling my sajha thoughts with ekdamm tiri miri tiri miri kura haru... some times i wonder.. nah let it be.. ahahhaha je hoss Jai hoss MM ko... hahahahha
Aiight Adios.

Indra indeed was a crooked fella. First off he had the whole "swarga" and hung out with hot apsaras, and boozing all the time. Then if any "rishi" or any warrior was doing a "tapsaya" to get "bardaan" inorder to conquer swarga, he would send one of those apsaras to distract them. Apsaras would do strip tease and what not to break the tapasya. One incident is when "viswamitra" was doing his tapsya, he sent Menaka, one of his best kept apsaras, to distract him. Eventually viswamitra was distracted.

Peace

In other words he was a P.I.M.P.

IndisGuise,

well, then can you please tell me who were the mothers of Dhritarastra, Pandu and Bidur? i'm cocksure they were brothers, or at least half brothers coz if you took their DNAs, you'd surely find resemblence with a common person, Vedvyas.

if bidur was born to a royal princess just like the other two, why is he always not compared with them. when talk of throne comes, it's always related to Dhritarastra and Pandu.... it'd be same if he was a real royal prince...... well, wish the royal massacre of nepal happened before Mahabharat period so that he could learn from history and as well shoot 'em and get the throne!

peace out!

GorkhaDogg , indeed Indra was a wimp.... damn.. with all the apsaras and all the wealth of Swarga... hmmm... he has sinned so many times... and to think of it.. he is King among Gods.
Gaalab, looks like you did not read what i said earlier.
Read again. If not the whole shit.. just this one ,"Rishi Vyas never said he is gonna sleep with them three times. It was after he told Satyawati about the reaction of buharis and its would be unfortunate outcome, Satyawati orders one of them to go again to vyas, but the buharis sends one of their dasi. (And ofcourse sexy dasi is all over vyas eheheh; and thus Bidur naam ko ankur futteko :p) "
If u read carefully, you would see that i mentioned that the Buharis " Ambika and Ambalika" sends one of their "Dasi".. and yes this dasi is the mother of "Bidhur". Indeed Dhritarastra ( Son of Ambika), Pandu (Son of Ambalika) and Bidhur are brothers, because they all came from "Vyas" ko pyas bata hehehe... I hope i answered you questions.
Jai Nepal
Indisguise:)

i was under the impression that 'INDRA' was a title, not a person. different ppl became INDRA at different times. proly no term limits on the title, but im guessing that as a person became indra longer, they got more and more decadent and careless, and eventually some dude with enough 'tapasya power' or some asur with a large enuff army would come along, take over, and voila, a new INDRA

Money Minded seems like as though he was a LIVE commentator of Mahabharata .

he says :there was a big war which is shown by Barren land of Khurushetra which extends to kilometers. There is still no sign of any vegetation.

--------No sign of vegetation ??? so they had biological and nuclear weapons too ??


he also says :. It has small hole from where water is coming which exactly fits the blade of arrow. There is big pond.

-----------NOW people ...if there is a tap like hole from where water comes out then naturally there will be a pond besides .ki kasho ho MM ji ?? I dont think any one us expected Disneyland beside that hole . 0)

Any way ...I MUST THANK YOU for your information hahahaha I MUST THANK YOU
I MUST THANK YOU ..........

---------NOW people ...if there is a tap like hole from where water comes out then naturally there will be a pond besides .ki kasho ho MM ji ?? I dont think any one us expected Disneyland beside that hole . 0)

Any way ...I MUST THANK YOU for your information hahahaha I MUST THANK YOU
I MUST THANK YOU ..........

tinku

After they die, Pandavs (except Yudhisthir) go to HELL for their own sins, whereas Kauravs go to HEAVEN because they were killed during the war and they achieved "veergati"...

laaa kalanki bro k bhaneko testo, maile bujhena, joke gareko ki sachikai bhaneko??

remember when they were walking towards heaven, one by one, sab pandav haru died, and yudhistir and that dog, who walked with him reached the heaven's door, then when he was asked to leave the dog alone to enter to heaven, he disagrees and turns out that dog was yudhisthir physical father, ani pheri they test him, by telling him that pandavas are in hell, and yudhistir says "if they are in hell i will also go to hell", tara it was just yudhitir's test on his moral principles.then after hearing yudhitir's answers and becoming happy with his answer, they tell him that they are REALLY IN heaven. IT was just an illusion to test him .

mahabharata is indeed a great epic on ethics, and greatest of all the characters is yudhitir. (yes, many ppl get fasinated by arjun, because he's the one with all the cool weapons), but yudhistir, for me is very interesting character, he was man with his own pricniples and high moral values. Every body was convinced that war was for good, and everybody else tried to convince him giving the expanation of moral values of a king and soforth, ( i dont know, there are many kthas abt this) but yudhitir always felt confused abt the war. he always sensed the war was wrong..and my point is, how can a guy not be convinced, of that war being right? even krisna said the war was for the right, and bhisma also lecutred him on many responsiblities of kings? such high respectable figure who he bowed to, agreed the war was for right, but yudhistir never did.

how can a blind man like dhritarasthra aim his thingy 100 times in the right spot, that amazes me rather

Interesting point there cool. Not only he was blind, but his wife Gandhari had also blindfolded herself. So we got 2 people here who can't see shit, but trying to get it on with each other. I think that explains the 100 sons mystery. Maybe everytime Dhritarastra though he was hitting Gandhari, he probaly did his dasis one by one, who in fear wouldn't say no. So if he did nine dasis per year and one Gandhari, then 100 sons came in a decade. Well not that bad huh?

Peace

Ha ha cool..k bhanya hola.

confused u r right but Yudhistir did made a blunder mistake..to put his own wife as a bet in the big gamble with Duryodhan. why wasnt he counted for that mistake???wasnt that a enough reason to make him unfit for Heaven??

We really have to go through in depth analysis of these things...but damn I dont have much time for them. can anybody enlighten me through sajha.

there is also a possiblity that dhritarasthra, being blind keep screwing up with someone else than gandhari who gave birth to 100 kauravs

Furious bro...first i was'nt there but i wish during the rein of great war of mahabharata. I was telling you guys what i saw and my analysis. Dude, if u thankful , i will come down to your bar and join you for jack daniel coke. If u r being sarcastic then i will buy bottle of veve cliquoe...promise.
I am giving u that for your amazing great sense of humour. It is quit surprising to see someone like you..hahahahhahhahaha anyways fun...i love that chinese actor..he is talented...what the fu..k is name?

Oh john aka gothalo....thank u re....la la welcome

Yudisthir was man with moral values but he was not flexible..I think if u have to be good king then u have to be flexible..ppl who live in there own moral values are stub born and perfectionist..This kind of ppl suffer in life because they can be broken easily..they see one way. He was talented and smart but his values was too bad. If he wanted he could have stop the war easily. The way he gambled the wife dropati, was not fare..it is disrespect for women. He is not satyabadi...at all. Why the heck was that when he was forced by krishna to say....aswathama was dead .infact elephant name aswastham was dead. The biggest dick head in mahabharat is krishna...he is chatur siyal...if he wanted everything should have been well. The blame goes to sakuni for no reason now

cooketa....have u heard practise makes perfect....if our ancestors has been having sex in dark room with lights off. what the heck is wrong to have sex being blind fold and blind. It is like same....has your mum seen your dad naked..answer is no. .but they still find the place and u r born. I am sure my mum and dad hasnot seem them naked either. By the way which gal in the world not like to be blindfolded and to have sex.

Gandhari started blind folded sex....dude

moneyminded, no need to bring my parents into this ok? I am offended

sorry to bring your parents.....dude..didnot mean to hurt you. I am telling truth dude. sorry..

It is written in several places in the Mahabharata that it is an "itihas" which exclusively means, "Thus occurred". The Aryan people to categorize "ancient" and "recent" events specifically coined the words "Puraana" and "Itihas". Both the words denote history that has occurred at different times.

It is mentioned in the Mahabharata (Adi parva, Adhyaya 62) that the annals of the Bharata-Dynasty are recorded in the work.

It has been clearly stated in the Adi parva, Bhishmaparva etc. that this is "itihas". If the intentions of the writer were to write a poem or a work of fiction, he would have stated it to be a "mahakavya" or "katha".

It would be absurd to say that the Mahabharata is not an "itihas" due to its poetic nature. It was a custom in those days to write everything in poetic form.

Veda Vyasa had decided to write down the "itihas" even before the initiation of the Mahabharata War. Therefore during the course of the War, Vyasa meticulously noted all the possible details. If it were a work of fiction, why would a person like Vyasa want to fill his work with such minute and unnecessary details?

A number of dynasties with their long lineage of kings have been presented in this work. More than 50 kings from King Barhi to Maharaja Pandu have been recorded. Additional information about the King, his wife, his scions, his relations, etc. have been accounted in great detail. If it were just fiction, only 4-5 kings would have sufficed to build the story on. Why such mind-boggling details?

The dynasties recorded in the Ramayana and the Mahabharata concur without a difference. Even the relationships between different kings and their dynasties in both the great "epics" match with each other. If both were mere "epics" written by two entirely different people at two different times, would everything match, even as regards the minor details?

Many events mentioned in the Ramayana and Mahabharata are the same. Eg.: The mother of (latter) King Sagar was poisoned by his step-mother so that her child would be aborted. But the child was born nevertheless, who was therefore named Sagar.

The cities established by certain kings have been noted in detail.

All the characters in the "epic" are well portrayed. Every single facet of their character and important events in their life were recorded. Are such detailed accounts important in a "Maha-kavya"?

The weapons mentioned in the Ramayana and the Mahabharata are somewhat the same. In fact, some weapons in the Ramayana are not mentioned in the latter "epic" Mahabharata. (eg. Soorya'stra, Yamya'stra, Shoolva'stra..etc.) [The mentioned weapons may have disappeared in the era between the two events taking place].

The Greek historian Megasthenes has stated that Chandragupta Maurya was the 138 King in the lineage of Lord Krishna. This means that Lord Krishna did exist in the bygone era and that Mahabharata did really occur.

Archaeological excavations have discovered the submerged city of Dwarka. This is the same Dwarka as mentioned in the Mahabharata.
[It has been reckoned that the city of Dwarka became submerged between 2000-3000 B.C.]

The astronomical recordings in the Mahabharata "epic" and other scriptures (Bhagavatam), give the correct positions of the planets and stars during that time. A work of fiction would not use such astrological detail.

It is written in several places in the Mahabharata that it is an "itihas" which exclusively means, "Thus occurred". The Aryan people to categorize "ancient" and "recent" events specifically coined the words "Puraana" and "Itihas". Both the words denote history that has occurred at different times.

It is mentioned in the Mahabharata (Adi parva, Adhyaya 62) that the annals of the Bharata-Dynasty are recorded in the work.

It has been clearly stated in the Adi parva, Bhishmaparva etc. that this is "itihas". If the intentions of the writer were to write a poem or a work of fiction, he would have stated it to be a "mahakavya" or "katha".