+* Dwapar Yuga: Doubts & Discussions *+ - Page 11 | Dwarkadheesh

CONTEST : IPL 2024 Prediction Game

First Previous

Page

Next Last

Frequent Posters

Vrish

@Vr15h

IF-Stunnerz

+ 5

Posted: 12 years ago

#101

vanadhi

After the death of Kamsa, Ugrasena offered the crown to Krishna, but the latter declined, and insisted that Ugrasena be re-instated. Krishna & Balaram then went to Ujjain for their gurukul, and returned after completion. So after Kamsa's death, Ugrasena decided that his succession would come from Krishna's line - I doubt that Balaram was even considered.

As for after Krishna's passing, I dunno about Udhav, but he was by no means the only survivor. Arjun took all surviving Dwaraka citizens out of the city b4 it submerged. On the way to Mathura, he was attacked by bandits and actually defeated, and a number of the Yadava womenfolk were seized by the bandits and taken away (married, whatever). After they all arrived @ Mathura, most of Krishna's widows ended their lives or went into vanvas, while Arjun crowned Vajra the ruler. Vajra was the grandson of Pradhyumna/Mayavati, and the son of Anirudha/Usha. So he went on to continue Krishna's dynasty.

Quote

varaali

@varaali

IF-Dazzler

+ 2

Posted: 12 years ago

#102

Uddhava was one of the few to whom Krishna revealed the impending holocaust. Uddhava plunged into grief at the thought of separation from one who has all along been his friend, philosopher and guide. Seeing his sorrow, Krishna instructs him on the nature of Self, mode of worship, etc... This has come to be known as Uddava Gita -and is as beautiful as Bhagavat Gita itself. It is somewhere in the eleventh chapter ( of SB), I think.

Krishna then entrusts him with the sacred idol of VIshnu which he himself had worshipped (yes yes, even though he was Vishnu incarnate himself, he still worshipped a Vishnu idol ...) That idol can be still seen today at Guruvayoor) I can elaborate this story if anyone is interested...

Quote

Looks like you are new here. Register for free, learn and contribute.

Debipriya

@Debipriya

Senior Member

Posted: 12 years ago

#103

Originally posted by: _Vrish_

Vanadhi

Excellent question!!! 👍🏼 I moved it to this thread, which is here to answer precisely these sort of questions, and which is a sticky for that very purpose!

Actually, Devaki was Ugrasena's daughter - Vasudev wasn't Ugrasena's son. But somehow (someone else can elaborate better), he was not in the line of succession of his father Shura, and when he married Devaki, it was followed by his being imprisoned by Kamsa. Somehow, I have no idea why, when Krishna got him released, he didn't return w/ Devaki, Rohini, Balaram & Krishna to his paternal kingdom.

By the conventional rules of succession of any kingdom, where a son succeeds his father, his son succeeds him and so on, Vasudev would have succeeded Shura, and Balaram would have been his successor (actually, had Devaki's first 6 babies lived, the eldest of them would have been the first in line in succession). Krishna would have been second in line after Balaram, but had Balaram had a son, that son would have been ahead of Krishna in succession hierarchy. I'm forgetting for the moment which kingdom Shura ruled, and who his successors were.

Had Kamsa had any sons by Asti or Prapti (daughters of Jarasandha), they would have been Ugrasena's rightful successors, not Krishna. Krishna being in the line of succession in Mathura always seemed a bit strange - it would be akin to Yudhisthir or Karna being made the successor to Kuntibhoj (actually, Kuntibhoj had a son Purujit) or Rama being in the line of succession of not Ayodhya, but Kaushalya's maayka South Kosala (today's Chattisgarh). Normally, daughter's descendents are successors to her husbands kingdom, not her father's.

Balaram was conceived by Vasudev & Devaki, but b'cos of the threat of getting killed by Kamsa, he was transferred from Devaki's womb to Rohini's by yogamaya (dunno the exact details of this). Since he was born to Rohini, he was universally recognized as Rohini's son. But he was older to Krishna, so would have trumped him as legitimate heir to any throne based on Vasudev. But afaik, he didn't have any sons, so next in line to him would have been Krishna, Pradhyumna, Samba, Charudeshna and so on.

All this is somewhat academic, since Balaram, Krishna and all his sons & grandsons never sat on the throne. After the fracticide @ Dwarka, after Arjun took all the survivors back to Mathura, since there was nobody else from the family surviving, Arjun crowned Vajra - son of Anirudha/Usha as the ruler of the Vrishnis & Andhakas.

^ Well, the typical 'succession thory' of the other states of Aaryavarta was not applicable to Yadavas, they had different set of rules regarding this. Actually Mathura or rather Yadavas did not have a proper king. The post was honourary. There was a 'council of chiefs' who looked after the matters of state and one among that council (may be the eldest or the wisest) was considered as a king during his life time. Ugrasena was from Andhaka Clan, Vasudev was from Shoora clan and Akrura was from Vrishna clan, if I remember correctly. All the leaders of these clans joined the 'council' which used to look after the state. This process is shown elaborately in RS SK. This is as far I know about it.

@ Varaali, yes Devaki was the daughter of Ugrasen's brother.

@ Vanadhi, The incidents which you have mentioned are there in K M Munshi's famous novel 'Krishnavataara', I guess you have read it there. (Or may be, some other source/ text are also there about the 'Naaglok yatra' by Uddhava). I really LOVE the novel but some of the incidents are imaginary there as stated by the writer himself in the Preface. He has incorporated many incidents in that novel to explain or describe the different facets of Shri Krishna or to analyse His lessons.

According to Shrimad Bhagwat, Uddhava went to Badrikashram and started meditating on the Lord, after Shri Krishna went to his abode.

That is as much I know about the questions raised here. I guess, Lola will be able to provide the detailed answers, whenever she can find the time to visit the thread.

Edited by Debipriya - 12 years ago

Quote

Vrish

@Vr15h

IF-Stunnerz

+ 5

Posted: 12 years ago

#104

^^^^ Weren't Akrura, Satadhandwa and Kritavarma all Andhakas? And weren't Satyaki, Vasudev Vrishnis? How about Bhoorishrava? I thought there were only 2 groups - the Vrishnis & Andhakas - didn't know about Shooras.

Quote

varaali

@varaali

IF-Dazzler

+ 2

Posted: 12 years ago

#105

@Debipriya,

The distinction b/w the Andhaka (Ugrasena,Devaka,etc) - Vrishnis ( Satyaka, Akrura...) and the Shooras (Vasudeva, Devabhaga,etc) is found in K M Munshi's ' Krishnaavatara'. Not sure if it is found in Harivamsa or any other work...

But the Srimad Bhagavatham clearly does not mention the Shoora line separately (ref ch 9) though it mentions the Andhaka and the Vrishnis

Even in the Bhagavad Gita Lord Krishna says " Among the Vrishnis I am Krishna..."

Quote

Gopi Patel

@xogopi1022

Goldie

Posted: 12 years ago

#106

My mom says that Radha is Krishna bhagwan. They are one in the same.

Quote

MagadhSundari

@MagadhSundari

IF-Rockerz

+ 4

Posted: 12 years ago

#107

Thanks all for the informative answers to all the questions in this thread so far, finally got a chance to browse through it and glad I did!

Although Vanadhi's question has been tackled already in bits and pieces, just wanted to give my take - or at least compile all those bits and pieces:

- as mentioned, Devaki is the daughter of Ugrasen's retired elder brother Devak, not Ugrasen. They all belonged to the Bhojvansh.

- Vasudev did not have his own kingdom, he was the son of the head of one particular faction of the Yaduvansh known as the Vrishnis. Mathura and surrounding villages were jointly ruled by all of those factions of the Yadav dynasty - Bhoja, Vrishni (alternatively known as both Shuras and Sainis - see the 24th adhyay of skand 9 in the Bhagavat), Andhaka, Madhu, Dasarhakas, and Kukuras (whose leader was the father of Rohini). Each one had its own head, and the heads maintained their designated clusters of villages along with participating in policymaking for the whole Yadav territory.

- The throne of the Yadav territory was traditionally occupied by the Bhojvanshi chief because of a boon granted during the Yayati-Devyani generation, the son from whom the Bhojvansh followed was particularly obedient and won his father's favor so much so that the throne was promised to descendents from his line only, as opposed to the other presumably less loyal sons. Ugrasen was willing to break this tradition and choose a successor from any faction based on merit, which is what got Kans riled up enough to overthrow him. Upon being freed by Krishna, Ugrasen offered him the throne not because he was the son of Devaki, but because he was the killer of Kans. Had Kans died at Balram's hands, the offer would have gone to him. the Upon Vaali's and Ravan's deaths, Shri Ram was eligible (and expected) to conquer both of their kingdoms but for well-known reasons he did not. What he did was an exception, but conquering the kingdoms once he killed their kings would have been the norm, and it was that norm by which Ugrasen was abiding. In fact, he didn't even offer, he just supposed - Kans was king, Kans was killed, Kans's killer gets to be king. He did not initially think of himself as having that right after having been overthrown; hence in spite of knowing that it would merely be symbolic Krishna had Ugrasen crowned again - to boost his confidence once again, and to sort of deny Kans's unfairly obtained and unrighteously executed reign that legitimacy it would have gotten had his death caused his killer to become king.

- Then what happened after the fracticidal war at Dwarika as far as the throne was concerned was out of desperation. There was only one survivor who was remotely interested, so there was no contest.

Did I miss anything?
Edited by lola610 - 12 years ago

Quote

varaali

@varaali

IF-Dazzler

+ 2

Posted: 12 years ago

#108

@lola160,

Weren't the Vidharbha kings ...Bhishmaka , et al also Bhojas ?

Quote

Vrish

@Vr15h

IF-Stunnerz

+ 5

Posted: 12 years ago

#109

Were Bhojas & Andhakas the same? Or was one the subset of the other?

Quote

mnx12

@mnx12

Channel Moderator

+ 9

Posted: 12 years ago

#110

Regarding Jarasandh- when Bheem & Jarasandh were wresling, inspite of lot's of efforts, he was not getting defeated, at that time bheem looked at Krishna for guidence. Krishna signed him to tear his body in two parts & throw each part in opposite directions 7 from the sangd of the wresling ground make a Shivling. Bheema just did that, after tearing Jarasandh's body in two different parts, he threw them in two different directions & immediately made a Shivling from sand, both the parts of Jarasandh's body came back to the groung to join again, but that sand Shivling, stopped them from joining, that is how Jarasandh dies.

I saw this forum yesterday & this thread today, so this post is not in the sequence of the questions, sorry for that.😊

Quote

1 ... 9 10 11 12 13 ... 23