~| Whatever you want to argue about |~ - Page 19

Originally posted by: Chiillii

I have posted this elsewhere too.

If you ignore divinity. It becomes logically impossible for men to have only sons.

Today the male female ratio in India is 980:1000. Still quiet a lot of men find it difficult to get wives when polygamy is banned.

In that era polygamy was rampant amongst ruling class. If everyone was having legitimate wives and concubines where were these women coming from if everyone was only having sons.

Its toxic masxulinity and nothing else. Why was Niyog so common. Why were so many kids having divine origins.

A lot of women were getting married at 16 or even earlier. Its biologically a very young age to have a healthy child. Infant mortality is real.

Vasudev marries 6 sisters of devaki. She was th odlest at had her swaymvar at 16. Then how old must the rest would be. That is 7 sisters he marries. Plus Rohini. And then Kans conveniently kills 7 children. Devaki has the 8th krishna.

Vasudev had only 2 sons and later subhadra.

Krishna similarly must have had only 1 daughter for a long time. While his other wives suffered miscariages, still borns and death during childbirth

Hence he adopts Pradyumna from his uncle and Balram's only son samba as his own. Eventually satyabhama may have given birth to a son. Hence her exalted status when she was actually the thrid wife

Same with drupad. He may have had just shikhandi. Who turns out to be transgendered at birth. So he adopts Draupadi and Dhrishtadyumn..

Pradyumna is his son with Rukmini not balram , he did penance to lord shiv with Rukmini for 12 yrs

Originally posted by: deepikagupta9

Pradyumna is his son with Rukmini not balram , he did penance to lord shiv with Rukmini for 12 yrs

Harivamsa says Pradyumna was the son of Krishna's uncle, Gandusha. Krishna later adopted the boy. Pradyumna was not much younger than Krishna. Actually, Harivamsa says 4 of Rukmini's supposed sons were older than her.

Bhagavatham says Samba was Balram's son.

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

Harivamsa says Pradyumna was the son of Krishna's uncle, Gandusha. Krishna later adopted the boy. Pradyumna was not much younger than Krishna. Actually, Harivamsa says 4 of Rukmini's supposed sons were older than her.

Bhagavatham says Samba was Balram's son.

I don't understand about samba , I read he was partial incarnation of lord shiv , yet he did things which was morally wrong.

Regarding Pradyumna I always read about him of being lord krishna'son.

Acc 2 jain version he was kidnapped by sambrasur coz he was destinated 2 kill him , even incarnation of kamdev.

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

Harivamsa says Pradyumna was the son of Krishna's uncle, Gandusha. Krishna later adopted the boy. Pradyumna was not much younger than Krishna. Actually, Harivamsa says 4 of Rukmini's supposed sons were older than her.

Bhagavatham says Samba was Balram's son.

But I still don't understand the logic, why would they adopt so many adults. How does that help them

What about Kauravas. Were they not 100 brothers?? Them being 100 in number is the highlight of Mahabharata.

Sangam literature calls the war as the war of the hundred and the five.

So were there more sisters along with Dusshala? Dusshala could only steal a mention ahead of her sisters because her husband is a very important character in the epic

What about

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

But I still don't understand the logic, why would they adopt so many adults. How does that help them

What about Kauravas. Were they not 100 brothers?? Them being 100 in number is the highlight of Mahabharata.

Sangam literature calls the war as the war of the hundred and the five.

So were there more sisters along with Dusshala? Dusshala could only steal a mention ahead of her sisters because her husband is a very important character in the epic

What about

Adoption was done for many reasons including inheritance, protection. In Pradyumna's case, reason isn't given. Curiously, one of the 4 sons of Rukmini thus mentioned who were older than her includes someone called Panchala. What to make of it, I don't know.

Samba... if you read Balram's scene with Yamuna and the syamanthaka episode, you'll be able to put 2 and 2 together.

Dhritharashtra likely had concubines and/or other queens to account for 100 sons.

That is why i said if you can ignore divinity only then you can see the lack of logic.

Boons tapasya and curses were an excuse or cover up.

You can see how illogical it is that Arjun and Krishna are the same age. But in Draupadi swayamvar you have an adult krishna and an adult pradyumna with Aniruddha in attendance. How can a grandfather krishna be same age as unmarried Arjuna

On top of it Krishna did a 12 year penance to get pradyumna.

Harivansh mentions Krishna giving Rukmini's son charudeshna to his uncle as he had no sons of his own.

Pradyumna is called charudeshna at many places. Most likely Krishna had a daughter so he adopted his few years younger than him his cousin Pradyumna son of uncle Gandusha as his own son and heir.

But he is the younger son and Balram is older. Revati is an older woman that Balram marries to gain Dwarka. She may not have had children of her own because of her old age. Balram's no other wife is mentioned, so most likely Samba was born to him from a woman who was not his wife. Whom again Krishna adopts as his son.

That is why you have absolutely no bonding between samba and krishna. He keeps getting in trouble and Krishna never helps him, rather even curses him.once. it is always Balram rushing to help samba.

But if you believe in divinity and tapasya and boon and curse etc. Then everything is possible. There is no logic in divinity. Only magic

Then Draupadi can come out of fire. Krishna can become grandfather before Arjun even marries for first time

And 100 kouravas can come out of pots

Krishna can have 16108 wives and 10 sons from each.

Originally posted by: Chiillii

But if you believe in divinity and tapasya and boon and curse etc. Then everything is possible. There is no logic in divinity. Only magic

Then Draupadi can come out of fire. Krishna can become grandfather before Arjun even marries for first time

And 100 kouravas can come out of pots

Krishna can have 16108 wives and 10 sons from each.

It gets better. Shishupal, who was supposedly born when Krishna was in mid teens, was the groom for Rukmini out of whom Pradyumna was born. So Krishna would've been a bachelor for how long? Then, THAT Pradyumna is an adult who attends Panchali swayamvar with Aniruddha. Let's assume Aniruddha was a baby. Even then, Krishna would have to be in his 50s. Ie, Arjuna was in his 50s. Yudhishtira probably about 60.

Panchali was kumari chaapi. Ie, at least 13 at birth. Manusmriti rules say once puberty has started, wedding has to be AFTER 3 years. Else it has to be before puberty. So Panchali was 16 at the youngest at swayamvar.

So she married a 60 year old Yudhishtira who was supposedly unmarried until then?

Then, there is Subhadra. She was born after Krishna's return to Mathura. Even if we estimate her 20 years younger, it would still make her 35 at Panchali swayamvar.

If we take Arjuna's 12 year exile as 12 years and not the 13 months mentioned in summary of Adi Parva, that would make Subhadra a MINIMUM of 47 when she waa abducted.

With Divinity it is possible..Its magic after all.

It was also dwapar yuga. People lived for 400 years then.

So a 54 year old Arjun can marry 16 year old Draupadi and then 17 years or so later at the age of 70 again marry a 15 year old Subhdra.

Remember her swayamvar or marriage was not organized yet. So subhadra would not even be 16 when she was kidnapped.

And atleast 16 years later at the age of 86 have a 16 year old Abhimanyu get married to Uttara and get him killed on battlefield.

86 year old Arjun with a 16 year old Abhimanyu. But how is that possible. Didntn Arjun have gandiv for 36 years already when war started.

So unless you believe it was all divine magic. This is not logically possible.

So prepare your mind before reading Mahabharat and puranas. Do you believe in magic or do you believe in logic