I have seen these things so many times. In TV serials, in my high school brief Mahabharata book and at many online resources:

Dronacharya didn't accept Karna as his disciple, as he was soot-putra. At this, Karna explains the truth, that low/high castes have nothing to do with your skills. You can learn anything and you have right to do so. Still Drona didn't agree.

Parshuram only accepted Karna as disciple when he said he is Brahmin. And at the end of his education, when the incident took place that revealed the truth, he said that a Brahmin can't have so much strength/patience, only a Kshatriya has such powers.

What is the truth? Did they have wrong beliefs? Or truth is something else?

This is so disappointing to me, as both of them were Avatars of Brahma and Vishnu. How can they believe like this?

  • 1
    Any source wherw Drona is mentioned as an avtar of Brahma?? As per MBH, Drona was born from a portion of rishi Vrihaspati...
    – YDS
    Commented Jul 5, 2019 at 17:35
  • 1
    I read on Wikipedia: *In the epic Mahabharata, Droṇa (Sanskrit: द्रोण, Droṇa) or Droṇāchārya or Guru Droṇa or Rajaguru Devadroṇa was the 3rd incarnation of Brahma and was royal preceptor to the Kauravas and Pandavas; an avatar of Brihaspati. *
    – Vikas
    Commented Jul 5, 2019 at 18:03
  • 1
    Please Read Mahabharata,It is very long of 200000 verses,Read as much as you can as Tv serials only potray wrong information. Mahabharata contains every situation a human can face and it portrays almost every value of Dharma. Commented Jul 6, 2019 at 15:44
  • tv series are not a source. Commented Jul 8, 2019 at 10:15

1 Answer 1


Drona did not deny Karna, the knowledge of archery. Karna could not excel Arjuna as he did not have the determination.

Then Drona endued with great prowess taught the sons of Pandu (the use of) many weapons both celestial and human. And, O bull of the Bharata race, many other princes also flocked to that best of Brahmanas for instruction in arms. The Vrishnis and the Andhakas, and princes from various lands, and the (adopted) son of Radha of the Suta caste, (Karna), all became pupils of Drona.

With his previous experience with Bhishma, Parasurama decided not to teach archery to Kshatriyas.

So if Karna learnt archery fraudulently, it was his mistake and he had to reap the consequences.

By the way the incarnation concept is a myth.

  • 4
    incarnation concept is a myth You're ruining it :( Everything is fake? Just a story like Harry Potter?
    – Vikas
    Commented Jul 5, 2019 at 17:04
  • 1
    I could not get you. What do you mean by ruining? @Vikas Kumar Commented Jul 5, 2019 at 17:13
  • 1
    I thought Mahabharata is true story and Krishna and other main characters' avatars were true story, not a myth.
    – Vikas
    Commented Jul 5, 2019 at 17:24
  • @VikasKumar: I never stated that Mahabharata is a false story. What I had stated that incarnation concept is a myth, as the incarnation stories were added at a later date. (hinduism.stackexchange.com/a/34975/3869) Commented Jul 5, 2019 at 17:48
  • 1
    @VikasKumar just one thing I will say. The belief system was never in hinduism. Hinduism never believed anything. If anyone wants to see Vishnu, or Shiva or Brahma, they go and do tapasya as per proper methods. Its not belief. its acceptance of reality. If you understand how Indian history was , and lifestyle before invasions correctly than reading British projected false things, you can understand Mahabharata, Ramayana are histories. Ithihasa meaning itself is history. Its about understanding and getting clarity. Not believing! Belief can swing either ways but understanding is permanent! Commented Jul 6, 2019 at 4:46

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .