1. Seeking wealth from Drupada and on refusal seeking revenge – Dronacharya is born a brahmin. Brahmins are traditionally associated with non-violence, spiritual wisdom, and teaching. Traditionally, Brahmins are expected to lead a life of simplicity, focusing on spiritual pursuits rather than material wealth. Emphasizing detachment from worldly possessions, Brahmins are often depicted as prioritizing knowledge, teaching, and religious duties over financial gain. Drona, despite being a Brahmin, seeks revenge, engages in warfare, and prioritizes personal honour and retribution over forgiveness and detachment.
2. A flawed Guru – Dronacharya is a flawed guru because he imparts knowledge with a condition relating to the fees that must be his on completion of the course: the defeat of Drupada.  A traditional guru imparts knowledge selflessly, driven by a sense of duty to educate and uplift their students, without attaching personal conditions to their teachings. The role of a guru is seen as a sacred responsibility, embodying spiritual and ethical integrity, and serving as a moral guide for the students. Despite being a learned and skilled teacher, Guru Drona places a condition on his teachings. He asks his students to defeat Drupada and capture him as a guru Dakshina, intertwining personal vendetta with his professional role. This demand is driven by personal motives—his desire for revenge against Drupada—rather than the educational or spiritual betterment of his students. By using his students to achieve his personal revenge, Drona exploits the trust and loyalty of his disciples, which is a significant deviation from the ethical standards expected of a guru. Drona’s manipulation of his students for his revenge mission raises ethical questions about his integrity and the morality of his teachings. Using education for personal gain weakens the sacred bond between teachers and students.
3. Nepotism and Favouritism – Arjuna was Guru Drona’s favourite student. Drona’s love for Arjuna was only second to his love for his son Ashwatthama. As his son, Ashwatthama received privileged treatment and access to knowledge and weapons that were not readily available to others. To ensure his students spent more time on tasks, he gave each one a narrow-mouthed vessel for fetching water, which took longer to fill. However, he gave his own son, Ashwatthama, a broad-mouthed vessel, allowing him to fill it quickly and return sooner. During this extra time, Drona taught Ashwatthama advanced weapon techniques. Similarly, he gave special trainings and weapons to his favourite student Arjuna.

Dronacharya’s favouritism towards Arjuna stems from Arjuna’s exceptional talent and dedication. Drona sees in Arjuna the ideal disciple, one who embodies the qualities of a perfect student, and thus invests more into him. This favouritism, however, breeds resentment among other students, particularly the Kauravas, who feel neglected and unfairly treated. This resentment creates discord and undermines the unity and morale of the students.

Dronacharya’s favouritism towards Arjuna and nepotism towards his son Ashwatthama underscore the enigma of his character, presenting a guru who, despite his wisdom and skills, succumbs to personal biases and emotions. This behaviour starkly contrasts with the ideal of a guru who should be impartial and above favouritism. Drona’s actions reveal the inherent contradictions and ethical challenges in balancing personal desires with professional responsibilities, highlighting the complex interplay of human emotions, moral dilemmas, and the pursuit of dharma.

• Guru Drona’s demand for Ekalavya’s thumb – Ekalavya, a young prince of the Nishadha tribe, seeks instruction from Drona, who rejects him due to his non-Kshatriya caste. Undeterred, Ekalavya retreats to the forest, fashions a clay image of Drona, and diligently practices, worshipping the image as his guru. Through sheer determination, he becomes a warrior of exceptional skill, rivalling the young Arjuna. One day, while Ekalavya is practicing, a dog barks, and without looking, he shoots arrows to seal the dog’s mouth without harming it. The Pandava princes encounter the dog and are astonished by the feat, prompting them to find Ekalavya, who claims to be Drona’s pupil. Worried that his promise to make Arjuna the greatest warrior is threatened, Drona visits Ekalavya with the princes. Despite being rejected by Drona, Ekalavya worships him as his guru. Drona, angered by Ekalavya’s claim and concerned about his growing prowess, asks for a guru Dakshina. Motivated by his favouritism towards Arjuna, Drona demands Ekalavya’s right thumb. Ekalavya, understanding the request would irreparably harm his archery, unhesitatingly cuts off his thumb and offers it to Drona.

Dronacharya’s rejection of Ekalavya due to his lower caste, combined with his demand for Ekalavya’s thumb to ensure Arjuna’s supremacy, encapsulates the paradox of his character. As a guru, Drona is expected to impart knowledge impartially and nurture talent regardless of social status. However, his actions reveal deep-seated biases, favouritism, and adherence to societal norms that conflict with the ethical ideals of his role. This paradox underscores the complexities and contradictions in Drona’s character, reflecting broader themes of caste discrimination, ethical dilemmas, and the multifaceted nature of human behaviour explored in the Mahabharata.

• Despite being Brahmana, Dronacharya takes part in the war. – The participation of Dronacharya, a Brahmin, in the Kurukshetra War presents a paradox, given the traditional roles and duties associated with his caste. This paradox stems from the conflicting demands of his professional responsibilities, personal loyalties, and the societal expectations of a Brahmin. Traditionally, people expect Brahmins to engage in spiritual, educational, and priestly duties, focusing on non-violence, teaching, and guidance rather than physical combat. Despite being a Brahmin, Drona is a master of martial arts and military strategy, a Skillset typically associated with Kshatriyas. He serves as the royal preceptor to the Kuru princes, teaching them the arts of war.

As a teacher and mentor to the Kuru princes, Drona feels a strong sense of loyalty to Hastinapura and its ruling family. This allegiance compels him to take part in the war to support the Kauravas. He justifies by saying, “A man is the slave of wealth, but wealth is not one’s slave. Bound I have been with (their) wealth by the Kauravas! It is for this, that like an eunuch I shall fight for the sake of the Kauravas”. Drona’s involvement in the war illustrates the conflict between his dharma (duty) as a Brahmin, which calls for non-violence and spiritual guidance, and his dharma as a teacher and protector of his students, which leads him into the battlefield. Through Drona’s character, the Mahabharata delves into the ethical and moral ambiguities faced by individuals, offering a nuanced exploration of duty, loyalty, and the human condition.

• Death of Abhimanyu – On the thirteenth day of the Kurukshetra war, Dronacharya, the formidable commander of the Kaurava army, unveiled a strategic labyrinth known as the Chakravyuha. Dronacharya designed this intricate formation to capture Yudhishthira, the eldest Pandava brother. Dronacharya knew well that only Arjuna, the greatest archer, and Krishna, the divine charioteer, possessed the knowledge to navigate its deadly twists and turns. Meanwhile, the Trigarta warriors, allies of the Kauravas, engaged Arjuna and Krishna in a fierce battle on a distant flank, effectively luring them away. This diversion allowed the main Kaurava army to tear through the Pandava ranks. Little did most know that Abhimanyu, Arjuna’s young son, had overheard the strategy during a training session. Though he knew how to enter the Chakravyuha, he was never taught the method of escape. Despite this limitation, Abhimanyu, fuelled by his loyalty and unwavering courage, volunteered to lead the Pandava charge into the formation at Yudhishthira’s request. Abhimanyu, a warrior of exceptional skill, carved a path of destruction through the Chakravyuha, single-handedly slaying countless Kaurava soldiers. Even the seasoned warrior, Dronacharya, marvelled at his prowess, showering him with praise. This, however, infuriated Duryodhana, the Kaurava prince, who saw Abhimanyu’s brilliance as a threat.  As Abhimanyu wreaked havoc within the formation, Jayadratha, the king of Sindhu, intervened. He single-handedly held back the remaining Pandava forces, effectively isolating Abhimanyu within the Chakravyuha. Unaware of the escape route, Abhimanyu continued his rampage, determined to break free. However, the tide of the battle began to shift. Duryodhana’s taunts spurred Dronacharya into compromising his own moral compass. He ordered the mightiest Kaurava warriors, including himself, to attack Abhimanyu simultaneously. This blatant violation of war etiquette, targeting a lone warrior surrounded by many, saw the Kauravas rain down arrows and disable Abhimanyu’s chariot, leaving him dismounted and vulnerable. Exhausted from his valiant stand and deprived of his chariot, Abhimanyu continued to fight on the ground. But ultimately, overwhelmed and outnumbered, he fell victim to a brutal attack by the Kauravas. The death of Abhimanyu marked a turning point in the war, igniting a fire of vengeance within the Pandavas. It also exposed the moral contradictions that plagued the battlefield, highlighting the ruthlessness that lurked beneath the surface of some warriors.
• Unethical actions as Commander-in-Chief – As the commander-in-chief of the Kaurava army during the Kurukshetra war, Drona resorted to several actions that can be considered unethical. These actions, while strategically effective, often raised questions about their adherence to the principles of dharma (righteousness). Drona often used his knowledge of divine weapons (astras) against common soldiers and ordinary warriors on the Pandava side.  The use of immensely powerful divine weapons against regular soldiers was considered overkill and against the spirit of fair combat. The Kurukshetra war was supposed to be fought according to certain ethical codes, known as Dharmayuddha, which included not attacking unarmed warriors, not attacking someone from behind, and not fighting after sunset. Drona, on several occasions, either directly violated these rules or condoned their violation by other Kaurava warriors. Such actions undermined the principles of fair combat and contributed to the war’s increasing brutality.