Portrayal of Krishna in MB and SBh

Okay I am very curious to know your opinions on this one:

Suppose we take both the scriptures of Mahabharata and Srimad Bhagavatham at their face value.

Then, SBh was narrated to Parikshit, and MB was narrated to Janmejaya.

So taking into account this version of both the texts Krishna's divine form was narrated first to Parikshit and it would mean definitely Janmejay was also familiar with SBh's version of Krishna.

So, my question is, how was Krishna's human portrayal in MB was received by the general public AFTER he was already deified in MB?

Was this the reason Vaishampayan included sporadic bursts of divinity in Krishna's character (his appearance in the dice hall, hiding the sun before Jayadrath's death and all those magic stuff)

I'm looking forward to having your opinion on the public response part if this narrative.  😳

Neither dice hall nor hiding the sun is part of MBh. I honestly don't know where they came from. 

The dice hall credit should've gone almost entirely to Panchali and a small fraction to Arjuna, but both got eclipsed by the Krishna interpolation.

The Jayadratha killing was in major part Krishna's doing, because Krishna does seem to locate Jayadratha for Arjuna prior to sunset, but there was no magic involved as per text.

_________________________

MBh we have wasn't just recited to Janmejaya. It was the narration of a narration of a narration - Vyasa to Vaishampayana, Vaishampayana to Janmejaya, Ugrasravas Sauti to the rishis hundreds of years later😆. 

As for Janmejaya's lack of reaction to relative lack of magic, who knows? Maybe Parikshit was a believer and son was a skeptic. 😆

Well for me Lord krishna was never a human  , for me  he is always God  even in mahabharat     war  Lord krishna ki stuti hui hai 

But yes in mahabharat mein Lord krishna ka less description hai  but in  shreemadh bhagwat shree krishna ke  divine power ka more description hai

But here is link in of   kmg  version mahabharat where  Lord krishna did show divinity   in jaydraath power 

That Lord krishna   being hari with his ascetic powers created darkness

https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m07/m07142.htm

Here in this link Lord krishna told that he will shroud sun with his yoga

This content was originally posted by: proteeti

Okay I am very curious to know your opinions on this one:

Suppose we take both the scriptures of Mahabharata and Srimad Bhagavatham at their face value.

Then, SBh was narrated to Parikshit, and MB was narrated to Janmejaya.

So taking into account this version of both the texts Krishna's divine form was narrated first to Parikshit and it would mean definitely Janmejay was also familiar with SBh's version of Krishna.

So, my question is, how was Krishna's human portrayal in MB was received by the general public AFTER he was already deified in MB?

Was this the reason Vaishampayan included sporadic bursts of divinity in Krishna's character (his appearance in the dice hall, hiding the sun before Jayadrath's death and all those magic stuff)

I'm looking forward to having your opinion on the public response part if this narrative.  😳

Is Krishna's description in MB suggestive of him being mortal?  My readings of both SB and MB seems to suggest that they complement each other.  For instance, in Mausala Parva, the escalation b/w Satyaki and Kritavarma includes a reference to the latter's participation in the plot to murder Satyabhama's father Satyajit.  Nobody would know the latter story w/o a reading of SB.  Also, the story about the killings of Sishupala and Shalva, which are there in Sabha Parva and Vana Parva respectively, obviously suggest Krishna as divine (how would a mortal support the sudarshan chakra, which was used in killing both?)  Also, when Krishna had Arjun dismount from his chariot on day 18 after Duryodhan's defeat and it exploded, he explained that the only reason that chariot didn't crumble before was that Krishna (and presumably Hanuman as well) were in it.  Also in Swargarohan Parva, Arjun and Yudhisthir end up w/ Vishnu, which could only have happened by endorsing the avatar theory of Krishna as Vishnu

Now, there are contradictions b/w MB and SB: for instance, in SB, Kunti dies after hearing the news of Krishna's death, whereas in MB, Kunti died 11 years before that in the forest fire that also consumed Dhritarashtra and Gandhari.    But I wouldn't put too much currency on that, since MB itself has contradictions within itself eg Balarama told Arjun that he intended to be neutral when Arjun approached him in Udyog Parva, but in Shalya Parva, when Balaram arrived at the scene before Bhima-Duryodhan's final battle, it states that he wanted Krishna to dedicate Dwarka on the Kaurava side (wierd, since that would have put the entire Yadava nation against Subhadra's sasural)

After jadrath vadh    yudhistar did stuti of Lord krishna  calling Lord krishna supreme soul

https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m07/m07145.htm

Another thing in mahabharat in sabha parv  when arjun bheem laugh  at duryodhana when he fell down in  pool of water in Maya palace   there was no mention that yudhistar try to stop his brother not to laugh  but Lord krishna gave his approval to laugh at duryodhana 

But in  shree madh bhagavat it is mention that  yudhistar  did try to stop brother not to laugh but Lord krishna gave approval to laugh at duryodhana 

So ved vyas cut  part in mahabharat and  include in  shree madh bhagwat 

There is quote word of Lord krishna in  kmg version which means that Lord krishna saying to  arjun that u can't kill jaydrath until u kill 6 warrior before jaydrath   as jaydrath  was in middle of 6 warrior 

So Lord krishna  say to arjuna that he will hide sun using his yoga power then jaydrath will come  and u can strike him

This content was originally posted by: HearMeRoar

Neither dice hall nor hiding the sun is part of MBh. I honestly don't know where they came from. 

The dice hall credit should've gone almost entirely to Panchali and a small fraction to Arjuna, but both got eclipsed by the Krishna interpolation.

The Jayadratha killing was in major part Krishna's doing, because Krishna does seem to locate Jayadratha for Arjuna prior to sunset, but there was no magic involved as per text.

_________________________

MBh we have wasn't just recited to Janmejaya. It was the narration of a narration of a narration - Vyasa to Vaishampayana, Vaishampayana to Janmejaya, Ugrasravas Sauti to the rishis hundreds of years later😆. 

As for Janmejaya's lack of reaction to relative lack of magic, who knows? Maybe Parikshit was a believer and son was a skeptic. 😆

All that is true. But here, I am considering everything that is written to be true. In that case, Krishna shows his divinity on and off in both the texts. Only, he's a little more magical in SBh.

My question was pertaining to the people's reaction. After hearing SBh all people definitely started worshipping Krishna. But then Vaishampayan comes and goes on with MB where Krishna is comparatively less divine. What could have been the people's reaction? Why did MB become more popular, being 'released' after SBh?

Do you think it affected Krishna's portrayal in our current day in any manner (the order of the release of the texts)?

This content was originally posted by: surabhi01

Well for me Lord krishna was never a human  , for me  he is always God  even in mahabharat     war  Lord krishna ki stuti hui hai 

But yes in mahabharat mein Lord krishna ka less description hai  but in  shreemadh bhagwat shree krishna ke  divine power ka more description hai

But here is link in of   kmg  version mahabharat where  Lord krishna did show divinity   in jaydraath power 

That Lord krishna   being hari with his ascetic powers created darkness

https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m07/m07142.htm

Here in this link Lord krishna told that he will shroud sun with his yoga

That is all very true. And here I am considering both the texts right as they are, word for word.

Because before SrimadBhagavatham is recited to Parikshit by Shuka muni, Krishna was mostly remembered as a Pandava elder and well-wisher right. So much details on him wasn't available to the normal public.

They came to know about 'Krishna the avatar' only after SBh. But, in MB he comes off as comparatively less divine (I'm not saying poora human, but kind of beech mein somewhere).

You remember that part after the war when Arjun asks Krishna to repeat the Geeta Gyaan for him and Krishna says that he's forgotten it? This incident hins at that Krishna's Geeta was not something Krishna created for Arjun. Krishna seems to have learnt it somewhere, from a rishi. This therefore suggests that he was closer to being a human than a God.

My question was, how do you think the general public react to this? Why do you think people accepted this, after the supreme Godhead of SBh? 😳

This content was originally posted by: .Vrish.

Is Krishna's description in MB suggestive of him being mortal?  My readings of both SB and MB seems to suggest that they complement each other.  For instance, in Mausala Parva, the escalation b/w Satyaki and Kritavarma includes a reference to the latter's participation in the plot to murder Satyabhama's father Satyajit.  Nobody would know the latter story w/o a reading of SB.  Also, the story about the killings of Sishupala and Shalva, which are there in Sabha Parva and Vana Parva respectively, obviously suggest Krishna as divine (how would a mortal support the sudarshan chakra, which was used in killing both?)  Also, when Krishna had Arjun dismount from his chariot on day 18 after Duryodhan's defeat and it exploded, he explained that the only reason that chariot didn't crumble before was that Krishna (and presumably Hanuman as well) were in it.  Also in Swargarohan Parva, Arjun and Yudhisthir end up w/ Vishnu, which could only have happened by endorsing the avatar theory of Krishna as Vishnu

Now, there are contradictions b/w MB and SB: for instance, in SB, Kunti dies after hearing the news of Krishna's death, whereas in MB, Kunti died 11 years before that in the forest fire that also consumed Dhritarashtra and Gandhari.    But I wouldn't put too much currency on that, since MB itself has contradictions within itself eg Balarama told Arjun that he intended to be neutral when Arjun approached him in Udyog Parva, but in Shalya Parva, when Balaram arrived at the scene before Bhima-Duryodhan's final battle, it states that he wanted Krishna to dedicate Dwarka on the Kaurava side (wierd, since that would have put the entire Yadava nation against Subhadra's sasural)

Everything is fine in that. But don't you think Krishna in MB is somewhat less than what he is in SBh (not a mortal, just comparatively less divine). He walks and talks and acts like a human most of the time. Only, in specific occasions he becomes a God. Whereas in SB he never stops being a God. How do you think people took to that difference in portrayal of Krishna?

If we have to take SMB word to word correct, even then I do not think we can believe that Parikshit heard that from Shuka Muni

SMB has a complete list of of rulers of Magadh from Jarasangh to PushyaMitra Sunga and even later(in future tense). Strangely he uses the same word for Chandragupta Maurya (i.e in future tense) which he used for Sahdev. Although Sahdev had already become the king before the birth of Parikshit. Anyhow it has the complete list for Magadh but not for Hastinapur/Indraprasth, I am sure Parikshit would be more interested in the future of Hastinapur/Indraprasth than in the future of Magadh. 

Or did Muni want to tell him that more than thousand years later Magadh would become the central power of the country? But then why didn't he tell about the Islamic invasions too, that would have been more important and useful to the future generations

Any rational answer to this question is simply that SMB or at least much parts of it was a later addition

Anyhow coming to your question, I don't think it would have been difficult for the general public to accept a lesser divine Krishna in Mahabharata. Because the public has always made peace with a God Avtaar which hides His divinity from the general public.

They might have taken it as a plan of God to give importance to the Pandavas (that's why decided not to actively participate in the war) and thereby playing it low