Mahabharata - Which was and should be Tamil's side - part 1

Mahabharata Unravelled (lesser known facets of a well known history) is a book written by Ami Ganatra ji that tries to bring to our attention several facts of the great ithihas which TV serials on Mahabharata failed to bring. The author has cited original and authentic sources to narrate those nuances and facts. Never once while reading the book did I feel bored. The reason is not just that the ithihas is close to my heart, but the primary reason is the simple yet interesting narration. I recommend this to everyone.

https://www.amazon.in/Bloomsbury-Mahabharata-Unravelled-Lesser-Known-Well-Known/dp/9354351271

I am writing this in 2 parts so that each part makes a 2 mins read.

1) Which side did Tamil (Tamil kings) take during Mahabharata?

Through out Tamil Nadu, we will be able to see many people supporting the Kauravas. For the most part, the support is just to oppose the side of staunch Hindus, the Pandavas side. Have we ever wondered which side our ancestors took? It's the Pandavas side.

2) Is Karna really worth veneration as opposed to Pandavas?

Karna is a great philanthropist. Many people benefited from his philanthropy. The punya thus earned made him invincible. No one was able to bring him down without taking away his punyas. One of the most important qualities attributed to Karna is his loyalty. We discussed about his philanthropy. No one can dispute it, but we need to bring his loyalty to Duryodana under scanner and debunk this quality often wrongly attributed to him. Loyalty is working for the success of the person who someone claims to be loyal to. Was Karna really loyal to Duryodana? Facts show otherwise.

(A) Karna thought Dronacharya was being biased in favor of Arjuna though he was as good in archery if not better than Arjuna. This started his lifetime of enmity towards Arjuna.

(B) Karna was humiliated when he came forward to demonstrate his skills when other princes were demonstrate theirs. This increased his hatred towards Arjuna. Karna was not invited in the first place. Though it can be argued that he was not given a fair opportunity, it was an exclusive royal ceremony to exhibit princes' talents in handling weapons. It was not an open competition. Though on one side, he was humiliated, he got Angadesh to rule from Duryodana.

(C) Duryodana planned to kill the Pandavas when they were in varanavrata. A brave kshatriya and a loyal friend should have never allowed his friend to pick an adharmic way to kill his enemies. Karna was so much blinded by his enmity towards Arjuna that he just fanned Duryodana's ego and supported his adharmic plans. A loyal friend corrects his friend when he takes a wrong path.

(D) Karna should have stopped his friend from playing the rigged dice game. Brave ones win over their enemies in war. Wars were considered to be opportunities to achieve greatness irrespective of the results. Karna let his friend choose meanness over greatness by supporting the rigged dice game instead of war.

(E) When Draupati's humiliation happened in the court of Hastinapura, Karna did not make any effort to prevent it and talk some sense into Duryodana. He not only fanned Duryodana's egos but also called Draupati a prostitute. Does a loyal friend let a woman lose her self respect in his friend's court? 

(F) When Pandavas were serving their vanavas, Duryodana wanted to demonstrate to the Pandavas that Kauravas were living luxurious and happy life while the Pandavas toiled in the harsh forest. To do that, Duryodana setup a royal camp in the forest near Pandavas camp. Kauravas ran into a battle with the Gandharvas. Karna got severely injured in the battle and ran away from the battlefield to save his life while Duryodana was still in the battlefield fighting a very powerful enemy. This is clearly not what a loyal friend would do. Trivia: Kauravas had to be saved by the Pandavas in that battle.

(G) After being saved by Pandavas, Duryodana's uncle Shakuni, surprisingly, insisted Duryodana to return the favor to Pandavas by giving back their kingdom. Had Karna allowed Duryodana to listen to Shakuni, the Mahabharata war could have been avoided, but he didn't. Whenever there was a chance to bring peace, Karna made sure to fan Duryodana's ego and spoil the chance for peace. 

(H) After Pandavas completed their thirteen years vanavasa, they sensed that Kauravas would not give their fair share of the kingdom. So they remained in Matsya desha where they spent the thirteenth year and sent messengers including Lord Krishna himself to give them back their kingdom. Had Duryodana given then, the war would not have happened. Pandavas, in their dharmic gesture to avoid war, were ready for just five villages. War would not have happened had Duryodana given that. Once again Karna fanned Duryodana's ego saying, "Why should Pandavas send messengers while being from Matsya desha? This means that they don't trust you. You should also not trust them and therefore you should not give them even a small bit."

What do you think? Was he loyal? If anything, the quality he showed was quite the opposite of loyalty. Tamils have always been able to reason and support the right side. Only recently has this craze for Karna reached its peak, for woke reasons. Let's learn to research the facts and be in the side of moral right.