Sleet of Emotional Quivers on RadhaKrishn Love CC#10/DT Nt Pg#41 - Page 73

Originally posted by: vyapti

Radha too is considered as Avatar of Laxmi along with Rukmini, if we consider Krishna as Avatar of Narayan.

In BrahamaVaivarta Puran it is different, I think. There Krishna-Radha are Supreme God and Goddess. Narayana-Laxmi are manifestation of Krishna Radha.

Oh ok. Thanks for the info. I wonder what exactly was Rukmini's importance in Krishna's life. I haven't read any sacred texts. Whatever I know, it's only from grandma's stories and serials and films and it does seem like she was the most loved and respected wife of Krishna and she was very matured and intelligent whose duties were mostly to take care of her family. I have even heard of a story where Rukmini was cursed by Sage Durvasa that sh will be separated from Krishna because she drank water before offering him. These rishis and their attitude problems! 😂 Also there are stories of Rukmini being jealous of Radha because Krishna never loved her the way he loved Radha.

Originally posted by: Life_Is_Dutiful

Oh ok. Thanks for the info. I wonder what exactly was Rukmini's importance in Krishna's life. I haven't read any sacred texts. Whatever I know, it's only from grandma's stories and serials and films and it does seem like she was the most loved and respected wife of Krishna and she was very matured and intelligent whose duties were mostly to take care of her family. I have even heard of a story where Rukmini was cursed by Sage Durvasa that sh will be separated from Krishna because she drank water before offering him. These rishis and their attitude problems! 😂 Also there are stories of Rukmini being jealous of Radha because Krishna never loved her the way he loved Radha.

No scripture Mentions about Rukmini being jealous of Radha (not even the later ones) it's only a folklore.

Coming to Rukmini practically she didn't play much important role in Krishna's life. The only wives who played important roles were Satyabhama and to some extent Jamvanti.

I don't think she could even be the first wife of Krishna. The only reason she is so important is because Pradyumna was her son and it were the progeny) of Pradyumna (Anirudh's son Vajra) who continued the lineage of Krishna

Originally posted by: Life_Is_Dutiful

Can someone here tell me, was Radha really Lakshmi's avatar as they depict in this serial? I had always thought Radha and Lakshmi are different and Sita and Rukmini are Lakshmi's avatars.

This show doesn't depict Radha as an incarnation of Lakshmi it rather shows the opposite.

It is like the BrahmVaivtra Puran thing along with ISCON where Krishna and Radha are the chief deities who stay in Golok. Vishnu and Lakshmi are a form of Krishna and Radha

Rukmini had no role whatsoever to play in life of Krishna except as mother to Pradyumna. I also have doubt either that she didn't exist or she was one of Krishna's junior wives because timelines simply don't match for her to be the 1st.

As FP said, Satyabhama and Jambavati are the only ones who actually played a role in Krishna's life story. Satyabhama on her own completely changes Krishna story in her absence. Jambavati's importance is also intertwined with the Syamantaka thievery during which Yadavas accused Krishna of being a thief and murderer.

Radha didn't exist in main Krishna texts and not in any supposed to have been composed during or immediately after Krishna's life. She does not appear in HV, MBh, or SB. Period. Where she appears is later puranas. Even there, she has zero role in any event that happened in his life.

Avatar assignation depends on which story you want to follow. For ex, KMG MBh calls Rukmini the incarnation of Lakshmi; it also calls Panchali Shri/Lakshmi several times. Critical edition MBh calls Panchali the incarnation of Lakshmi, and Rukmini as Lakshmi is not mentioned. I'm not sure why Satyabhama, who actually played a very important role, was relegated to Bhumi.

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

Rukmini had no role whatsoever to play in life of Krishna except as mother to Pradyumna. I also have doubt either that she didn't exist or she was one of Krishna's junior wives because timelines simply don't match for her to be the 1st.

As FP said, Satyabhama and Jambavati are the only ones who actually played a role in Krishna's life story. Satyabhama on her own completely changes Krishna story in her absence. Jambavati's importance is also intertwined with the Syamantaka thievery during which Yadavas accused Krishna of being a thief and murderer.

Radha didn't exist in main Krishna texts and not in any supposed to have been composed during or immediately after Krishna's life. She does not appear in HV, MBh, or SB. Period. Where she appears is later puranas. Even there, she has zero role in any event that happened in his life.

Avatar assignation depends on which story you want to follow. For ex, KMG MBh calls Rukmini the incarnation of Lakshmi; it also calls Panchali Shri/Lakshmi several times. Critical edition MBh calls Panchali the incarnation of Lakshmi, and Rukmini as Lakshmi is not mentioned. I'm not sure why Satyabhama, who actually played a very important role, was relegated to Bhumi.

When did Krishna Rukmini marriage happen?

Originally posted by: vyapti

When did Krishna Rukmini marriage happen?

That's the thing. It was clearly after Shishupal was an adult. Which means he'd have been in mid 20s. Krishna was at a minimum 11 years older than Shishupal. Which would put him at 36.

1. It is impossible to think Krishna wasn't married until then.

2. Krishna and Arjuna were of similar age. Even if consider Pradyumna as an adult adoption as Harivamsa says it was, Aniruddha was born by Panchali swayamvara. So Pandavas were pushing 40 by then and not yet married? If we consider Pradyumna Krishna's bio son, Pandavas would've been in their mid 60s!

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

That's the thing. It was clearly after Shishupal was an adult. Which means he'd have been in mid 20s. Krishna was at a minimum 11 years older than Shishupal. Which would put him at 36.

1. It is impossible to think Krishna wasn't married until then.

2. Krishna and Arjuna were of similar age. Even if consider Pradyumna as an adult adoption as Harivamsa says it was, Aniruddha was born by Panchali swayamvara. So Pandavas were pushing 40 by then and not yet married? If we consider Pradyumna Krishna's bio son, Pandavas would've been in their mid 60s!

I did not know that Aniruddha was born by Panchali Swayamvara. I am intrigued. Can you provide the link?

Originally posted by: vyapti

I did not know that Aniruddha was born by Panchali Swayamvara. I am intrigued. Can you provide the link?

https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m01/m01189.htm

Sankarshana (Valadeva), Vasudeva (Krishna) the mighty son of Rukmini, Samva, Charudeshna, the son of Pradyumna with Gada, Akrura, Satyaki, the high-souled Uddhava, Kritavarman, the son of Hridika, Prithu, Viprithu, Viduratha, Kanka, Sanku with Gaveshana, Asavaha, Aniruddha, Samika, Sarimejaya, the heroic Vatapi Jhilli Pindaraka, the powerful Usinara, all these of the Vrishni race, Bhagiratha, Vrihatkshatra, Jayadratha the son of Sindhu, Vrihadratha, Valhika, the mighty charioteer Srutayu, Uluka, Kaitava, Chitrangada and Suvangada, the highly intelligent Vatsaraja, the king of Kosala, Sisupala and the powerful Jarasandha, these and many other great kings--all Kshatriyas celebrated throughout the world--have come, O blessed one, for thee. Endued with prowess, these will shoot the mark. And thou shalt choose him for thy husband who amongst these will shoot the mark.'"

Even if Pradyumna merely brought baby Aniruddha along, it would still mean Krishna was a grandfather by Panchali swayamvara. And Pandavas were yet to be married?😆

I usually go by HV which says Pradyumna was Gandusha's son. He was adopted by Krishna, they were actually close in age.

Even then, considering Shishupal's age, Krishna would've been in mid 30s by Rukmini swayamvara, and the adoption was definitely after Rukmini swayamvara. Which means Panchali swaymavara would put Krishna in mid to late 30s. Once again, why were these men not married by then?

Balram married Revathi before Dwarka was built. The land for Dwarka was Anarta kingdom recieved in dowry from Revati's father kakudmi

Shishupal was born after Dwarka was built and Balram and Krishna visited him from Dwarka to bless him during his naming

Krishna kidnapped 16 year old Rukmini from her marriage to an adult Shishupal. If Rukmini was 16 there was no way Shishupal would be younger than her. Infact would be older. Let's assume he was 16 years old too

Krishna was just one year younger to Balram (Balram was 7th child of Devaki shifted into Rohini's womb and Krishna was born a year later)

If Balram was married before Dwarka was built why would Krishna remain unmarried for 16 years atleast specially when he is just a year younger.

As per timeline Jambavati was his first wife and Satyabhama second wife. Also because Satyabhama ran to Pandavas funeral at Varnavrat after Lakshagriha to seek her husband Krishna to punish Shathadhawa and Akrura who had killed her father for the syamantak Mani.

So Krishna was married atleast few months before Lakshagriha. Also as soon as Dwarka is ready Krishna sends Akrura to meet Pandavas at Hastinapur before Lakshagriha incident

So during Lakshagriha Krishna was already husband to Jambavati and Satyabhama and Dwarka was ready and Shishupal is a toddler probably 3 or 4 years old at this point

So how can a 16 year old Rukmini be Krishna's first wife