Ram's 'Eka Patnivrat' vs. Krishna's 16,108 wives - Page 2

I see Ram and Krishna to be just the same in philosophy. If at all I see any difference between Ram and Krishna (in approaches), that is at just two places:

(1) One when Ramji cries for Dashrath, Kaushalya, Sitaji and unconscious Lakshmanji whereas Krishnaji shows emotions not for social relations but only towards Devotees (except Uddhav episode song 'Lai sandes hamaaro' but even here he actually knows his parents to be his devotees). Ramji crying for sorrows and greatness of Sitaji is still consistent but he crying for death or possible death of Dashrath and Lakshman is inconsistent behaviour (and therefore human behaviour allowing at own will maya to work) with his own consolations to Sugreev and Vibhishan and 2nd Adhyay of Geeta 'Aatmaa to martaa nahi'.

Edited by ShivangBuch - 13 years ago

Of Krishna's wives, only 8 of them were princesses, while 16,100 were captives of Narakasura, who adored his harem.  Since Krishna knew that they'd not be accepted in society @ large since they were probably defiled by Narakasura, Krishna married them to give them a status.

The other 8 princesses - some, like Rukmini desired to marry him and eloped, while others, like Satyabhama & Jambavati, were offered to him by their fathers.

One major difference b/w  Rama &  Krishna is that while Rama is Maryada Purushottam, and an exempliary model for all men, that's not true of Krishna - his divinity was unchallenged during his lifetime, and licenses he had weren't assumed to belong to people @ large.  It is said that Parikshit once asked this question of the Rishi who was doing his Naga yagna, and the rishi gave that very response - that men aren't allowed to do what Gods are - referring to Krishna's escapades w/ the Gopis.

Hey Guys,

A great topic Janaki! There are so many misconceptions when it comes to Lord Kishna's lie. It really saddens me when people (I mean society in general) that so many divine aspects of his life are not really known to people at least not the real reasons, motives, and intentions behind his actions. Like stealing makhan, to having so many wives, flirting with gopis and many more.

First I just wanted to clarify that Radha is not mentioned anywhere in 'Mahabharat'. Later on, when an author was writing a novel on krishna's life he mentioned this character so it is imaginary and later went on to be a common misconception.

Anyways, coming to the topic. This is not my theory but actually from our scriptures. So what happened was that this king (I can never remember the names when I really have to name them) he kidnapped 16, 000 women. Krishna freed all of them. And they went back to their respective families, but they weren't accepted because the king had kidnapped them. (basically the same thing that happened with sata-mata where she wasn't accepted by the people of ayodhya because she was kidnapped by ravan, the difference being that these women weren't married). So now they have to nowhere to go and they didn't want to live anymore. They were ready to give up and krishna married them to basically give them a new life and make a place for them in the society.

While at it, I wanted to clear a few things about gopis. Definitely agree with what shivang bhai said here
Just a bit qualifying Lola's statement, I believe even Krishna's actions are there to set the examples.

There was no such thing as lord Krishna stealing gopis' clothes or flirting with gopis. Firstly, to understand his actions we have to think about the state of the society at that time, I mean imagine the extent of it that he had to come down as human to re-establish and restore humanity. Gopis were people who took makhans (or may be something else) to everyone and along with that they would spread krishna/lord's messages. So that way they were spreading righteousness and that is essentially what krishna's wanted to do in the society and gopis were the medium.

Ramayans is clearly not my forte, but I am always there to answer any questions regarding Lord Krishna's life.
Edited by anchal2 - 13 years ago

Vrish-ji!!! thankyou! I couldn't remember the name of the king. It's narkasur.
Edited by anchal2 - 13 years ago

I used to feel like laughing, pitying, getting angry (all momentary emotions together) at people who give examples in movies of Shri Krishna whenever there is some context in the story of a boy playing with many girls simultaneously or involved in a love affair or trying his luck for love marriage. People talking about Lord Krishna sound so embarrassingly look ignorant over here but I have stopped feeling those emotions as well now. May Krishna only bless them with true knowledge. Whatever Krishna did was dharma. Greatest dharma with greatest spiritual or noble intentions always. No human can have the brain ever to interpret HIS actions with his limited doubtful unfaithful mind really. Only HE can grace us.

Yato Krishnah tato dharmah. Yato dharmah tato Krishnah.

Madhuraadhipaterakhilam madhuram.

I have edited my posts dear sisters. Last paragraph of previous post and few lines in bracket in 2nd/3rd para of the post previous to that. Anyway, the former was important for me to draw your attention to.

Originally posted by: ShivangBuch

I used to feel like laughing, pitying, getting angry (all momentary emotions together) at people who give examples in movies of Shri Krishna whenever there is some context in the story of a boy playing with many girls simultaneously or involved in a love affair or trying his luck for love marriage. People talking about Lord Krishna sound so embarrassingly look ignorant over here but I have stopped feeling those emotions as well now. May Krishna only bless them with true knowledge. Whatever Krishna did was dharma. Greatest dharma with greatest spiritual or noble intentions always. No human can have the brain ever to interpret HIS actions with his limited doubtful unfaithful mind really. Only HE can grace us.

Yato Krishnah tato dharmah. Yato dharmah tato Krishnah.

Madhuraadhipaterakhilam madhuram.

I have edited my posts dear sisters. Last paragraph of previous post and few lines in bracket in 2nd/3rd para of the post previous to that. Anyway, the former was important for me to draw your attention to.

Jai Shri Krishna.

word! very well said!

you're quote/phrase reminds me of the last shlok of geeta

Yatra Yogeshwar Krishno, Yatra Partho Dhanurdhara
Tatra Shreer Vijayo Bhootih, Dhruvaa Neetir Matir Mama

Translation: Where there is Yogeshwar Krishna and Dhanurdhar Arjuna, there exists prosperity, success and justice (victory of good over evil).

it's said that 'it's diffucult to follow Ram's ideals/life while it's difficult to understand Krishna's ideals/life.
Edited by anchal2 - 13 years ago

Originally posted by: anchal2

word! very well said!

you're quote/phrase reminds me of the last shlok of geeta

Yatra Yogeshwar Krishno, Yatra Partho Dhanurdhara
Tatra Shreer Vijayo Bhootih, Dhruvaa Neetir Matir Mama

Translation: Where there is Yogeshwar Krishna and Dhanurdhar Arjuna, there exists prosperity, success and justice.

it's said that 'it's difficult to follow Ram's ideals/life while it's difficult to understand Krishna's ideals/life'.

Edited by ShivangBuch - 13 years ago

Very well said Anchal and Shivang!👏👏👏👏👏👏👏 Those who speak wrongly about Krishna are truly ignorant, I feel pity for them instead of anger (though anger is always the first emotion I feel), because they cannot derive the happiness of loving Krishna.

@Janaki: exactly, like I've said it saddens me. I can only feel sorry for them.

Goddess radha is mentioned in bhagvatam yes (albeit not directly). There's an indirect reference, so you can take ir as the reference being Radha. In any case, Lord Krishna left vrindavan at the age of 10, so I cannot imagine the Krishna-Radha relationship as it is portrayed today.