Ram's 'Eka Patnivrat' vs. Krishna's 16,108 wives

Lola madam you knew that "Let me write the name of Shivang bhaiya, so that would force him to post". Lol. You know motivating factors very well don't you?😉 I agree with word to word you said and particularly with a few punchlines. "God on earth not God as man on earth".

This is a brilliant topic I must say Janaki. Enjoyed your first post and will be waiting to know about your theory as well. Let me try to compile first my thoughts.

I know it would not be authentic to quote but in the novel Munshi's Krishnaavataar, he has envisioned Krishna's character beautifully with human logic. He has portrayed human Krishna (Had Krishna been having human limitations of knowledge but incarnated as a greatest hero on the earth to reestablish dharma still in the same sense and not like in SK or BRC MB knowing everything about the future). He has written (his imagination I am writing and not mythological truth 😊 - he he seemingly two contradicting words together but truth for faithful devotees so I have used them together) that Krishna was not willing to marry due to his aim of dharmasansthaapan. He was not willing to marry at all as he knew that he wouldn't be able to give time and justice and happiness to his wives because all the time he would be busy in his political aim (and also due to the same reason he convinced Radhaji and left her ensuring that she is strong enough to accept that reasoning with great understanding to give freedom to the lover). And then started one by one all detailed stories of his every single marriage (he has covered 4 of them) where he was forced to marry to save the lives. Even there he followed the dharma of God. Sharnaagat vatsal. Yato dharmah tato Krishnah. Yato Krishnah tato dharmah. Wherever dharma is, Krishna is. And whatever Krishna does is/becomes dharma. Just a bit qualifying Lola's statement, I believe even Krishna's actions are there to set the examples (of course other than those miracle way of actions) but not for everyone in all situations in generalized way without knowing his intentions and subtle knowledge behind those intentions in a particular situation. Krishna is not for a man in general to follow but the essence of his actions are meant to be understood and interpreted to be set deep down in our conscience somewhere rather than to be followed in the same birth or immediately in the same birth. He followed polygamy when it was clearly essential and spontaneous to save those 8 Lakshmi's incarnations also who otherwise didn't want to live without marrying him (that way novel portrays). And even Ramji has lied on certain occasions when it was not inappropriate to lie - the examples that I have listed in the Orkut thread 'when saying lie is appropriate'. Ramji stuck to his words and his father's words and promise throughout and he could do that without any harm to anybody's dharma but completely own sacrifice. Krishna twisted truths and also showed readiness to break the promise not for own selfish motive but for higher nobler cause. So I still don't see any real difference between their stances but just in the situations faced, stories surrounded and different eras.

Coming to the topic specifically, I wouldn't like to make any generalized statement whether monogamy is ideal moral and polygamy is immoral or vice versa IN ALL situations (Because Dashrathji, Vasudevji, Pandu, Arjun all good characters followed that royal culture/tradition for political friendship reasons or reasons of continuing the dynasty and for that getting many successors to ensure at least one deserving successor - And even Krishnaji not just did but SAID to Arjun to marry Subhadra and others for strong friendships with kingdoms despite knowing about his marriage with Draupadi. And I also don't really think that Ramji must have the intention of setting any morality example while giving that promise but he just expressed his own level of love for only Sitaji. It may be or may not be. I can't be 100% sure about this. As against that promise, he himself guides Shoorpankha howsoever jokingly though to go and propose Lakshman for marriage.). Still if concluding theory statement of my opinion is required, then "In TODAY's society and cultures, generalized morale should be monogamy with exceptionally allowed circumstances or stories". So I am not advocating polygamy actually but Krishna's situational intentions (of course who am I to do that but for the topic of discussion).😊 It is situational and either is right as long as any action you do is done with the intention of doing good to someone without harming or hurting the other one. There are many love triangle bollywood movies also in which, in the end, we feel that two sisters/friends could have happily lived together with one husband logically and the director could have given out of the box climax like the movie 'Daag' or 'Gharwali bahaarwali' rather than typical suicidal climax in most common movies when one of them essentially has to die (many movies to list possibly it can be) or sacrifice without dying (like the movie 'Basera' or 'Judai'). Most would agree to this feeling while watching movies. So that way I would say it is up to whether the wives themselves accept it or not and how they are ready to share their love or luck. If they are not ready to share, the first right is of first woman obviously. Here the morality of the second woman coming in life is also to be checked rather than just morality of husband doing second marriage about how far she was aware and in what situation she married to a married guy (And what is the present culture of the society - time and place).

In case of Sitaji, from what I remember is that Ramji gave the promise to her by way of a gift. A gift of total concentration on just one person given to that person and openly declared in public to ensure the knowledge of others about his further unavailability or locking 😃. (And in our culture now, the moment a guy is married that is locked by default so other women should immediately get red signal without any such promise given or oath made or declaration made). And for him it proved to be of spiritual welfare decision all throughout and at no real place he had to break that promise for the better cause. Now if you compare this with Vasudevji, he had two wives and both proved to be useful for his dharma and welfare - one could stay with him in his support and one could stay safe and bring up their child. Had Ram also had two wives, one could be his sahdharmachaarini in vanvaas and other could stay to serve Kaushalya the way HE wanted. But that was not needed because other brothers had great serving wives anyway to serve Kaushalya ma.