Bhutta fans are such frustrated jerks that they claim that Sanjaya was a biased reporter. The main reason behind this claim is countless defeats of Karna in the Kurukshetra War but no single defeat of Arjuna. These Bhuttas are not capable of digesting countless defeats of karna by hands of Pandava warriors hence they are creating a funny excuse regarding it which is really a laughable claim and nothing more. By raising such stupid thing they also want to convey to the Indians that they don't believe in the authenticity of Vyssa's epic.
Let's expose their funny claim and save Vyasa's epic from all those frustrated jerks and Anti Hindus who are on the verge of destroying it's authencity.
EXCUSE No. 1) Bhima just made Karna chariotless in their first two encounters on 14th day and Sanjaya labelled it as Karna's defeat but when the Kaurava warriors made Bhima chariotless, then Sanjaya did not labelled it as Bhima's defeat.
DISROBING :- Let's see the narrative given by them to support their funny claim
Drona Parva, Chapter No. 104, Mahabharata CE, BORI, Dr. Bibek Debroy translation
With a broad-headed arrow, he dispatched the charioteer to Yama’s abode. In that battle, the maharatha deprived the four horses of their lives. O lord of the earth! With the horses slain, Karna descended from the chariot. The maharatha ascended Vrishasena’s chariot. Having vanquished Karna in the battle, the powerful Bhimasena let out a mighty roar that was like the thunder of rain clouds. O
descendant of the Bharata lineage! On hearing this roar, Yudhishthira was delighted, since he deduced that Karna had been defeated by Bhimasena.
First of all, where is it written that Sanjaya considered this battle as Karna's defeat just for becoming chariotless ? Did Sanjaya ever said that why did he consider this battle as Karna's defeat ? Then why these Bhuttas are using their own logic ? Fact is clear that a defeat can be considered on the basis of multiple things, for example see the proof below
Karna Parva, Chapter No. 40, Mahabharata CE, BORI, Dr. Bibek Debroy translation
“Having defeated Satyaki, the immensely strong Karna wished to save the king. In the battle, he advanced against Drona’s fierce slayer. Shini’s descendant quickly pursued him from the rear, showering down arrows, like an elephant goring another elephant from the rear with its tusks.
Here, Satyaki was neither weaponless, nor chariotless and it was Karna who left Satyaki not vice versa but still Sanjaya mentioned this battle as Satyaki's defeat. Which means Sanjaya was partial towards Karna ? Obviously No. It means a defeat can be considered on the basis of multiple things (eg-performance e.t.c) and only narrator can take decision about defeat of any warrior in a battle as it is his duty.
EXCUSE No. 2) BHIMASENA FLED FROM KARNA,BUT SANJAYA USED THE TERM 'AVOIDING' INSTEAD OF 'FLED',HENCE HE IS A BIASED REPORTER -
DISROBING :- The narrative given by Neo Buddhist Karnandus is :-
While Bhimasena looked on, Karna angrily killed many Chedi, Karusha and Srinjaya maharathas. Bhimasena avoided Karna, supreme among rathas, and advanced
against the Kourava soldiers, like a blazing fire amidst dead wood
First of all, Bhima's job in Kurukshetra was to kill the Kauravas,not Karna.Bhima had vowed to kill Kauravas while Arjun had vowed to kill Karna.
Now check the below incident -
>> Sanjay used the term 'Avoiding' and not 'Fled' for Duhshasana also when he was completely Mangled by Arjuna's arrows -
Bhishma Parva, Chapter No. 106, Mahabharata CE, BORI, Dr. Bibek Debroy translation
Your son pierced Partha with sharp
arrows. Partha became wrathful in that battle and fixed arrows to his bow. They were gold-tufted and sharpened on stone and he released them in the encounter. O great king! These penentrated the great-souled one’s body, like swans entering a pond. O great king! O descendant of the Bharata lineage! Your son was afflicted by the great-souled Pandava. He
avoided Partha in the battle and swiftly found refuge in Bhishma’s chariot.
Now Duhshasana was a Kaurava.As per the Logic of Bhuttas, Sanjaya reported against Kauravas.Then why didn't he use the term 'fleeing' here instead of 'avoiding' for Duhshasana when he is a Kaurava?
It means that Sanjay was not biased towards a particular side,he used these terms as per the situation,It's Sanjay who was present at the battlefield not the foolish Nangus
EXCUSE No. 3) AS PER BHUTTAS,ARJUN FLED FROM BHARGAVASTRA BUT BIASED SANJAY USED THE TERM AVOIDING THE BATTLE
DISROBING :-
The narrative used by them is,
Karna Parva, Chapter No. 45, Mahabharata CE, BORI, Dr. Bibek Debroy translation
Krishna told Arjuna, ‘The king has been severely wounded. O best among the Kuru
lineage! Let us reassure him first and you will kill Karna after that.’ Dhananjaya also wished to see the king who had been afflicted with arrows. On Keshava’s instructions, he abandoned the battle and
quickly departed on his chariot. Kounteya left, because he wished to see Dharmaraja.
Now if you read the complete chapter,it would be quite clear that Karna did not Shoot Bhargavastra on Arjuna but he shot it on the Cedis and Panchala army.Moreover,Arjuna was far away from Karna that time, fighting with Ashwathama.And in the Previous chapter,Karna had defeated Yudhisthira and wounded him seriously. So it must have been the plan of two Krishna's to meet Yudhisthir after Arjun-Ashwathama duel is over.
Moreover,in the same chapter,Arjuna also says that its not appropriate to leave the battlefield right now.But it was Shri Krishna and Bhima who urged him to leave the battle, meet Yudhisthira first then slay Karna.
Karna Parva, Chapter No. 45, Mahabharata CE, BORI, Dr. Bibek Debroy translation
O Bhima! Quickly go and find out about him. I will remain here and restrain the large numbers of the enemy.’ Bhima replied, ‘O magnaminous one! O bull among the Bharata lineage! You go and find out how the king is. O Arjuna! If I go there, these brave ones will say that I am frightened.’ At this, Arjuna told Bhimasena, ‘The samshaptakas are arranged in a counter-formation against me. Without
killing them, it is not possible for me to abandon these large numbers of the enemy.’
The useless Bhargavastra of Karna failed to give Arjuna a scratch.Neither did it killed any major warriors in Pandava army like Drishtdyumna,Shikhandi,Yudhamanyu, Uttamaujas who all were leading the Panchala army.It only killed soldiers and elephants.
So when Arjuna was not even engaged with Karna,then why the hell would Sanjaya say that Arjuna fled from Karna.Does that make any sense?
BTW As i said before, how narrators used to decide the result of any battle is not mentioned anywhere then it is completely useless and foolishness to raise question mark on their reporting.
In a nutshell,these idiots want to say that Veda Vyasa himself sanctioned the biased commentary of Sanjaya and wrote it in Mahabharata, thereby giving us a wrong impression of Kurkshetra war. By this logic,even Veda Vyasa is a biased author of Mahabharat. So Nangu fans should stop reading Mahabharata and create their own version of Mahabharata
AND STILL IF ITS NOT DONE,THEN LIKE EVERY LOSER THEY WILL CRY THAT HISTORY IS WRITTEN BY WINNERS.LMAO
RIGHTLY SAID - "A WINNER ALWAYS HAS A PROGRAM,A LOSER ALWAYS HAS AN EXCUSE"
-Avenger
