Did Duryodhana really did wrong deeds or it was his victory to which he enjoyed
Answers
Answer:
No,Duryodhana it's a deeds his victory
I'm not sure about why you say Duryodhana did wrong to the Pandavas. Honestly in my opinion after a close reading of the text I find no wrong decision made by Duryodhana. Being the eldest heir to his father's kingdom he denied giving land out to his cousin's whose father was nothing more than a soldier in the army. Moreover he was well aware of the fact that their birth took place out of the wedlock (Pandu was punished and died in Vanavasa as a result of his carnal desires) and hence didn't have the same royal blood running in them as him. A similar case in modern times would lead us to consider the pandavas as illegitimate children. Even when he gave out land to them on persuasion of his father, they managed to make it a thriving city that attracted labour from the empire that belonged to the Kauravas. Through a game of gambling he had learnt the art of from his uncle Shakuni Duryodhana cleverly won back the land and property he had given out to the pandavas and managed to save the economy of his own empire. Funny thing, he won back the land no matter what means through- he never promised to return it after their years in exile and incognito. As a matter of fact even during the war, Bhima had to hit Duryodhana's thigh on Krishna's advice to win however Duryodhana being an equally able mace yielder followed the rules of war and never took sort to wrong means to hurt anyone or to gain anything. After all this, I find no reason why Duryodhana should have regretted his decisions, and probably that is the exact reason why he too never regretted any of his actions- because they weren't wrong.