As Duryodhana is about to die, he looks at Krishna malevolently. "I have been a good king," he says. "I have conducted myself as a Kshatriya should and have come by death in battle. I'll die and attain heaven, but you will live in grief and sorrow." He fell back and flowers rained from the heavens to drop gently on his pain-wracked body. The Pandavas, wincing with shame, turned away.  —From The Mahabharata by Meera Uberoi.

Legend has it that Yudisthira is angry that Duryodhana, the cause of much evil, has earned a place in heaven. Lord Indra explains that he has served his time in hell, and has also been a good king.

Duryodhana is seen as a villain in Indian mythology. He was jealous of the Pandavas and tried every means to destroy them. He also tried to humiliate Draupadi. Yet, there are Indians who revere and idolise Duryodhana. The biggest Duryodhana temple in Uttaranchal is located in Jakhol in the Tons valley. There are other temples to him in Osla, Gangar and Datmir in the state.

"There is always a fringe population that adores such characters. A lot of perceptions are based on folklore alone.
Very few have actually gone to the source books — Valmiki's Ramayana and Ved Vyasa's  Mahabharata. I don't see Duryodhana as a hero. I hold the traditional view."

"Duryodhana accepted Karna as a friend though he was a charioteer, so  he had good qualities too," says mythologist Devdutt Pattanaik.

"Duryodhana was intelligent and scholarly. But he tried to compete in an unhealthy manner with people far better than him, like Bhima. He fought for his self-esteem in a negative manner," says Swami Brahmavidananda Saraswati. 

The Mahabharata is a more nuanced  epic than the Ramayana, where good and evil are not two separate entities.

Mythologies across the world and over ages have either been to revered or been dismissed as folklore. Either way, we have read and been conditioned to judge historical, mythical figures based on the idea of good and evil. With changing times, however, writers, historians and students of mythology alike have challenged the pre-existing notions and beliefs.

One such idea is that Duryodhana was a bad guy. Ask anyone you want to, and this is the answer you get. People who have read/watched Mahabharata reaffirm this idea that he was indeed a villain.  The only problem here is we see what we have been made to see. The good and the bad are defined well in advance. Everything comes in packed boxes. A box of all things right and all things wrong. We pick a box as per our convenience. We are easily scared. Anything that threatens our convenience is bad or wrong.

Take the example of Duryodhana. Like every villain, he was a victim. Duryodhana, the eldest of Kauravas was born to Gandhari and Dhritarashtra. While  Dhritarashtra was born blind, Gandhari chose to remain blindfolded for her entire married life, accepting the fate she was tied to. 

Gandhari's brother was unhappy with her marriage to a blind man, but kept quiet. Consolation was that his sister was going to be the queen of Hastinapur post marriage. When the time came to choose the King, Dhritarashtra, who in spite of being the eldest son of the King Vichitravirya, was denied the throne of Hastinapur because he was born blind and Pandu was made the King instead. Shakuni, Gandhari's brother felt betrayed and swore to destroy Hastinapur's prosperity and peace.

Time changed, Pandu went to a forest for hunting and ended up killing a sage and was cursed that he would die the moment he touched any female. He decided to renounce the kingdom and live in the forest as a hermit with his two wives Kunti and Madri. Dhritarashtra was the king now. Pandu would never bear any children through his wives due to the curse and it was certain that Dhritarashtra's child will be the next king. But again, destiny had something else in store. Kunti's son was born first and as per the rules he would be made the king when he grew up.

This was the beginning of shaping up of Duryodhana's future. Pandu succeeding yet again agitated Dhritarashtra and Shakuni. Shakuni, the biggest manipulator, decided to create hatred in Duryodhana's head for his cousins Pandavas. Duryodhana and his brothers bullied Pandavas, tried to kill them, humiliate them from time and again. Shakuni always told Duryodhana how Pandu and his children were the reasons he would never be the king. How Dhritarashtra was incapable as a king as he was blind and if Duryodhana didn't get rid of Pandavas, he would lose the throne to Yudhishthira.

At each stage of his life, he was fed with hatred, jealousy and envy. When Yudhishtira became the king of Indraprastha and Draupadi's palace was created, Duryodhana was filled with envy. His humiliation upon hearing Draupadi laugh at him after falling into the trap of one of the illusions of the palace made him hate her and he decided to take his revenge. At first, he tried to duplicate Draupadi's palace and failed. It irked him further. He was ready to attack Indraprastha when Shakuni stopped him and said that he had a better idea that will not only make Duryodhana the king of Indraprastha, but also make Draupadi his servant.

Disrobing of Draupadi was the gravest sin that was committed by Duryodhana and supported by Karna. Some of the books say that Karna was the one who suggested that Draupadi should be disrobed while Duryodhana ordered her to sit on his lap. A lady could sit on the lap of only her father and husband. It was considered an insult if another man invited a lady to sit on his lap. After Dushassana's attempt to disrobe Draupadi, she cursed the Kauravas that all of them will be killed in the great war of Kurukshetra.

The war was fought, Duryodhana was manipulated by his Uncle Shakuni throughout the war. By this point, he was blinded by his ego and power. He didn't fear anything as he was confident that he would win the war. He had strength by his side. Greatest warriors had sworn to protect him. These warriors were invincible. But slowly they all died. On 17th day of the war, Duryodhana was left alone. All his brothers were dead, Karna was dead, Bhishma was on the bed of arrows, Drona was dead. Gandhari's latst ditched attempt to make Duryodhana invincible was manipulated by Krishna. That resulted into Duryodhana's defeat.

Draupadi cursed the Kauravas that they would die and rot in hell. But a lesser known fact is that Duryodhana goes to heaven after his death. When Balram comes to know how Bheem defeats Duryodhana in the mace fight, he curses Bheem to rot in hell for breaking the most important law of mace fighting that a fighter cannot hit his opponent below the waist. He tells Duryodhana that he will go to heaven as his death was caused by committing adharma.

If you think about his life, if you look at it from his point of view, he was nothing but a mere scapegoat even before he was born. His father supported all his actions, never stopped him from committing wrong. The blind king never bothered to create cordial relationship between his sons and the sons of Pandu who were his responsibility after Pandu's death. His Uncle Shakuni became the reason of his death just because he felt cheated when his sister was married to a blind man. The war of Kurukshetra was inevitable, but he became the key reason behind it. His entire life he was made to believe that he was being victimised. He was a mere puppet in the hands of those with ambitions, hatred, grudges and manipulations. Because he was born for that and because he was destined to be so.

Some chose the difficult path of trying to change what others thought about them. Parashurama chose to change the world in the 'right way' and became God. Most chose the easier route of 'Adharma' that caused wars and destruction. Their acts have been defined as results of their karma and every outcome has been called Niyati (destiny). If you believe in this theory, then not a single person was a villain or a saint. Karma chose them as scapegoats, and humans ended up hating or worshiping them. Just to ensure that people kept worshiping their gods, they introduced the concept of 'Destiny'.

Every era had a villain loathed by people. Gods were born to kill them. Every Indian epic talks about one (or more) such villains. These villains were as intelligent, knowledgeable, learned and strong as gods. But they were also the victims of injustice and partiality. Thus they chose the wrong path. Ravana, Karna, Hiranyakashyapu, Duryodhana, Shakuni – name them and you will find the references about why and how they were the bad guys. Many authors have written about Ravana and Karna and tried to justify their actions. Most of these books call them good guys. Jain Ramayana in fact talks about how Ravana ended up being reborn as their first tirthankara.

Mahabharata is probably the only Indian epic that has plenty of key characters that changed the course of history with black, white and grey shades. There have been plenty of books written by various authors about Krishna, Draupadi, Arjuna, Karna and the war of Kurukshetra. In each book, Duryodhana's adharma was highlighted. But what really made him a bad guy is overshadowed by his actions. Duryodhana was the reason why the great war of Kurukshetra took place. He manipulated in the game of dice with the help of his mama Shakuni due to which Pandavas lost everything including their wife Draupadi. But what was really his story? Why and how did he choose the path of Adharma over Dharma in spite of living among people who knew and preached Dharma.

Was he a bad guy? Maybe he was, but he was made one and not born one. Karma and Destiny played their parts in changing his life from what it could have been to what it was. He committed adharmas, but you cannot overlook what led him to commit those. Again, it's not a justification to one's actions. It can never be. He was a puppet, in the hands of what was already destined.
In Vedic times it was not that people had just one name. So both names were there and they were used in context. Duryodhan in and of itself is not a negative name. But there are certain places there where Dhrithrashtra refers him as Suyodhana. Suyodhana refers to the person who fights virtuously but Duryodhan it can mean the one who fights viciously or it can mean also the person who is very difficult to defeat in fight. Duryodhana in and of itself is not necessarily a negative name although from his behavior it can be associated with negative connotation of that name.

If he had any virtues one was his friendship with Karna. That also was selfishly motivated. Basically Karna was a virtuous person in many ways. He; at least in the initial part of the Mahabharata; in the Adiparvaupto the Sabhaparva; whenever Duryodhana makes any crooked plans and Duryodhana wants to accent to them, Karna opposes them.

But if we look at the Drupadi vastraharanlila in the Kurusabha, the one person who fairs the worst, who comes out as the biggest villains is Karna. It's Karna who suggests thatDraupadi be disrobed, its Karna who calls Draupadi a prostitute. It is Karna who opposes Vikarna as Vikarna says the match is unfair. Basically Karna becomes a pawn in the hands of Duryodhana for his powergames. Duryodhana wants to get an upper hand over the pandavas. He thinks I can better Bhima but who will deal with Arjuna. When he see Karna exhibiting his martial skills he thinks, yes Karna will become the nemesis of Arjuna and that's why he helps him not only helps but gives very eloquent speech. At that time some people are objecting that he is a Sutaputra. He says that can a jackal produce a lion? See the physique, see the prowess, the skill of this person, surely he must have sprung from the lords. He is not a son of a suta. And even he is, he has the prowess of a warrior and I will make him a king. So his helping Karna in the time of need, can be said to be a virtue in him.

At one level the fact that he had his ninety nine brothers who followed him throughout their lives that some people associate to his leadership skills. But we see that they followed him primarily because of fraternal devotion. Fraternal devotion is to follow elder brother. Like we see in pandavs also it is not they agreed with Yudhishtra when he wanted to gamble away Draupadi. Arjuna, Bhima neither of them agreed to him, Bhima was enraged but the culture was they followed the elder brother.

Duryodhana had this tendency to always find fault with others. When pandavas were getting upperhand, he was blaming Bhishma saying you are not fighting with your whole heart; you are partial with the pandavas. Same thing happened with Dronacharya and actually this unrelenting goading of Drona, you taught pandavas, you should be able to defeat. How are your students defeating you? This was that unrelenting goading by Duryodhanathat made Drona suggest the plan of killing of Abhimanyu by six warriors combined together.

Basically he not only himself was vicious but he spoiled many other persons.Karna was a prime example, the person who was quite virtuous but he was spoiled by the bad association of Duryodhana.

Towards the end of the Mahabharata in the Bhishmparva, when Bhishma has fallen and is about to die; Karna meets him on the eleventh morning and he apologizes for his harsh words. The tradition is if someone is going to die then don't bear bitter feelings for someone is going to die. So he goes and apologizes and he seeks his permission for entering the battle. At that time Karna says, 'the whole that I spoke in the sabha against Draupadi, I regret them throughout my life.' I spoke them only with a desire to please Duryodhana. Yes, he had some virtues but overall the balance was weighed towards vice.