Sleet of Emotional Quivers on RadhaKrishn Eternal Love CC # 8 - Page 6

Originally posted by: Krishnpriya

Scriptures regarding Krishna are so confusing. Those sages probably forgot to fact check their sources or may be down the years each gave the original works his own twists. I believe our scriptures went through many distortions during Mughal & British eras. The wake of bhakti movement too had its impact especially on Vaishnvaism. It was the time i guess Krishna became the epicenter of Hindu culture. What are your thoughts on Radha's existence ? Did ISKCON popularized her or Jayadev did that ?

During the bhakthi movement only Radha came to exist as one of the chief sakhis.

She was.first referred to by Vallabhacharya in central India. Then East India mein Jayadev. Bengal mein Chandidasa, Govindadasa, Vidyapati, SRICHAITANYA, Naraharidasa etc deified her.

SB names only Lalitha, Vrinda, Vishakha, Chandravali and Padma etc specifically npt Radha.

ISKCON mostly follows Vallabhacharya (check Lalita Madhava which has that Bhama is Radha's incarnation story).

South India ka I dont know much. I have not yet come across any old stuff with Radha

there.

Originally posted by: proteeti

Satrajit did something related to the treasory. Also he was a part of the democratic peoples' council of Dwarika. Krishna and Balaram represented the royal family there and yes Dwarika was a democracy.

Ps I do not think she was taught warfare. There is a stpry about her badgering Krishna to teach her so...

Krishna was like the representative head of a state with of course hell lot of power and influence. He was more of a kingmaker. Btw what happened to Mathura after Krish shifted to Dwarika also did he shift with all Mathura subjects or just the people related to royal affairs ? Cause Vrindavan people stayed at the same place right ? If the royal family abandoned Mathura then who took the charge of it ? Jarasandh ? What happened to the monarchy ?

Originally posted by: Krishnpriya

I want to see little Subhi with her bhaiyas and bhabis. She was so damn lucky. Ballu and Krish loved her so much. Apart from Abhimanyu's untimely departure, i don't think she faced any major difficulty in her life. What do you think about her personality ? She must be aware of her influence no ? Being Krishna's beloved sissy was such a big deal.

Apart from all this she was a very able administrator. She acted as regent for both Vajra of.Mathura and Parikshit after the departure pf Pandavas till they grew up.

She obviously knew her power over her brothers and through them her husband and the queen of Indraprastha. She was an avatar of Devi Durga na!

Originally posted by: Krishnpriya

Krishna was like the representative head of a state with of course hell lot of power and influence. He was more of a kingmaker. Btw what happened to Mathura after Krish shifted to Dwarika also did he shift with all Mathura subjects or just the people related to royal affairs ? Cause Vrindavan people stayed at the same place right ? If the royal family abandoned Mathura then who took the charge of it ? Jarasandh ? What happened to the monarchy ?

Ugrasena reamined Kimg only because he had the backing of KanhaDau. The Yadavas were a hot headed lot even then! They were both 0ffered the position of Viceroy but both rejected in favour of Vasudeva and instead took a lower but more influencial roles in the council.

Mathura was remotely ruled by Ugrasena. His rep. was Akrura. The next directly ruling king of Mathura was Vajra, Krishna's great grandson who is said tp have constructed mpst of the temples in Vrindavan.

Originally posted by: proteeti

Ooh I haven't read Harivamsa yet. Will have to. 😃

I have not read anything. Just searched for Bratini and was redirected to Satyabhama wiki and there this citation.

Originally posted by: Krishnpriya

How many wives did Vasudev have ? Polygamy ran through this family or what ! 🤪

At least 14

Originally posted by: Krishnpriya

Scriptures regarding Krishna are so confusing. Those sages probably forgot to fact check their sources or may be down the years each gave the original works his own twists. I believe our scriptures went through many distortions during Mughal & British eras. The wake of bhakti movement too had its impact especially on Vaishnvaism. It was the time i guess Krishna became the epicenter of Hindu culture. What are your thoughts on Radha's existence ? Did ISKCON popularized her or Jayadev did that ?

She was first mentioned in Brahma Vaivarta Purana according Bankim Chandra Chattopadhyay. She is also mentioned in SB

Ras Panchadhyay but there her name is not given.

Jaydev popularized her. Chaitanyadev was called joint avtar of RK. So she was very popular back then.

Originally posted by: Krishnpriya

Draupadi called him Sakha right ? Krishna have so many names man ! I personally love Manmohana.☺️ Suits him the best.

At least 108.

Originally posted by: vyapti

She was first mentioned in Brahma Vaivarta Purana according Bankim Chandra Chattopadhyay. She is also mentioned in SB

Ras Panchadhyay but there her name is not given.

Jaydev popularized her. Chaitanyadev was called joint avtar of RK. So she was very popular back then.

Yep Brahma Vaivarta. I Saw that one in RS Shri Krishnaa ke credit mein. Have been wanting to read it. Do you have a link to it?

Originally posted by: proteeti

During the bhakthi movement only Radha came to exist as one of the chief sakhis.

She was.first referred to by Vallabhacharya in central India. Then East India mein Jayadev. Bengal mein Chandidasa, Govindadasa, Vidyapati, SRICHAITANYA, Naraharidasa etc deified her.

SB names only Lalitha, Vrinda, Vishakha, Chandravali and Padma etc specifically npt Radha.

ISKCON mostly follows Vallabhacharya (check Lalita Madhava which has that Bhama is Radha's incarnation story).

South India ka I dont know much. I have not yet come across any old stuff with Radha

there.

So many saints so many theories. I'm quite skeptical about Radhe's existence. Why would the original author not mention her given her prominence in Krishna's life ? That's why i think of her as the symbolic representation of Gopikas' love and a female form of Krishna manifested purely for romantic passtimes. Her going to Dwarika etc sounds a bit dramatic. Krishna was very practical and above worldly attachments. I at times feel bad for Rukmini. In South India, Rukmini and Satyabhama are worshipped alongside Krishna. Rukmini has some prominence in parts of Maharashtra as Ruku/Rakhu Mai as she was the princess of Vidharbha. There is a temple dedicated to Rukmini in Dwarika though they don't get worshipped together for some reason.