Lord Krishna married none except Rukmini!? - Page 3

Originally posted by: Cool-n-Fresh

Ok.Something just struck my mind.

By studying the Life Events of Polygamous Kings popularly known in our history/Mythology,a question immediately springs up...'Are Polygamous relations healthy and harmonious?'

1) King Uttanapada could not give love to both of his sons.He was always under the influence of his second wife.Whatever she said he accepted;he never considered whether it was right or wrong.Even when he clearly saw that she was wrong, he was not bold enough to say so.

Finally he lost one of his sons(Uttama).He suffered a lot in his life.

2) Dasaratha had three wives: Kausalya, Sumitra, and Kaikeyi. Because of the youngest wife, Kaikeyi, Dasaratha had to suffer pain due to pangs of separation from Rama. Rama had to be sent into the exile because of boons granted to Kaikeyi.Ultimately, the separation led to the death of Dasaratha. So, the king of three wives had to suffer separation from his son, and ultimately had to even face death."

3) King Sagar's 60,000 sons, (born of Queen Sumati), and his son Asamanja (born of Queen Keshini) were then sent to find the horse. When the 60,000 sons found the horse at Kapiladeva's ashram, they thought he had stolen it. When they prepared to attack the meditating rishi (sage), Kapila opened his eyes. Because the sons of King Sagara had disrespected such a great personality, consequently, fire emanated from their own bodies, and they were immediately burned to ashes.Asmanja was a wild wicked young man who troubled women and had to be banished from the kingdom.

4) King Vasudev,was locked in the Prison immediately after his ceremony with Devaki and had to suffer a lot.His 6 sons were killed before him and he couldn't do anything.He was deprived from Father's love as his 7th and 8th sons were brought up in a different place.I think he spent almost 30 years in prison after his alliance with Devaki.

5) King Pandu - Know idea how his life would have been if Kunti was his only wife.His lust for Madri led to his death.A great suffering to his family.

6) King Shantanu lost his race(his line) only due to lack of self - restraint.The mistake he committed eventually led to great loss,wars and destruction.

7) Though Draupadi had 5 men she had none to support her during tough times.She was dishonoured in the Dice Hall.She faced many insults and had to spend many years in forest leaving her children and worked as a maid during the last year of exile to be spent incognito.Later she lost all her children in the great war.

Even Lord Krishna's entire clan perished due to Jambavati's son Samba,if we consider all the scriptures and tales available.But the topic of discussion is about Lord Krishna being Monogamous in householder life!?,hence couldn't include him in this analysis.

Recently I was going through the life history of Great Indian Warrior Chatrapati Shivaji Maharaj.The question of Shivaji's heir-apparent was complicated by the misbehaviour of his eldest son Sambhaji, who was irresponsible and "addicted to sensual pleasures." Unable to curb this, Shivaji confined his son to Panhala in 1678, only to have the prince escape with his wife and defect to the Mughals for a year. Sambhaji then returned home, unrepentant, and was again confined to Panhala.To my surprise there were various rumors regarding Shivaji's death.Shivaji's second wife, Soyarabai, had poisoned him so that his crown might pass to her 10-year old son Rajaram.After Shivaji's death, the widowed Soyarabai made plans with various ministers of the administration to crown her son Rajaram rather than her prodigal stepson Sambhaji.However, Sambhaji took possession of the Fort acquired control of Raigad, and formally ascended the throne.Rajaram, his wife Janki Bai, and mother Soyrabai were imprisoned, and Soyrabai executed on charges of conspiracy.

Originally posted by: peridot.

What does the mahabharata have to say about Krishna's wife or wives?

Was Rukmini his only wife?

What about satyabhama and other queens?

Does it indicate that scriptures were tampered and edited to suit society's prevailing morality and perspectives?

Which text would have the final word on Krishna's marital status?

Finally, monogamy has its advantages but so did polygamous relations in ancient times as marriages were a means of forming political alliances with powerful kingdoms by the rulers. Under those circumstances does it make sense to judge Krishna's rigteousness by the number of wives he had!?

When someone treats Krishna as an ideal is it possible to do so by emulating only a part of his various activities and that too out of context while ignoring all the rest that he stood for and represented?

Originally posted by: SRUJAconscience

I think all the analysis we made and we make in future on Krishna's marital Status is useless and has no point in benefit if one wholeheartedly believes that Krishna is God.At the sametime all the popular tales about Krishna we hear have nothing to do with his divinity.Krishna's supremeness is not judged by his marital status but people try to relate standards of life to him because they've realized that he is supreme. I think the main post is all about such an association.

Originally posted by: peridot.

Agreed. So what exactly was the point in posting this topic? 😕

I had already pointed out the fallacy in such a comparison.

I don't think it is a fallacy.Actually people explore various aspects of lord when they get mesmerized in devotion in one case this leads to relating his nature with his actions and some explore to fault him.I think the above article is of the first kind.The Author has used some excellent phrases for eg.

" Bhagwan Shrikrishna in all respect was free from all blemishes and was of very pure conduct. Such an ideal character endowed with all virtues, free from all sins never did exist and would hardly exist at anytime, anywhere, neither in this country nor any where in the world. He was a multi-faceted, accomplished and pure soul."

Clearly he's trying to connect various incidents he studied in those epics.Evidently there are many tales of Lord Krishna and many contradict at various points,some exist in few versions and others even don't have a mention in any of the epics.So it naturally aroused his curosity to find out answers.

It is a good topic for us to raise our spirit of inquiry and relate all that we heard of Lord Krishna.

Of course Krishna wouldnt be bothering about what people say about him much less about his marital status 😆 It is his "devotees" who feel bothered 😉 They either defend him or censure opinions which is not in accordance with "their own perceptions" about Krishna as God. In other words God is being confined to human perceptions or judgement. The limitations are obvious.

I agree with...Yes,God is being confined to human limitations.Observing him as a husband of 16,100 women is also a limitation imposed by us.😆Why only 16,100 women,he's the husband of every creature in this word.We say 'Lokadhipati','Lokeshwar','Jagannath'etc.he's the husband of the entire universe.But human minds are so subtle that they think that he's the husband of people who's physical body is feminine who are women in body in this worldly life.There are restrictions and confinement to one partner when you are a Husband in worldly life.But as 'God' Krishna has no restrictions of being the Husband of all souls in this universe as there is no gender and nothing physical for souls.

On the other hand, Krishna as an ideal person (in human form) should be subject to discussion if his devotees wish to emulate him in toto otherwise we could very well end up with some fans wanting to simply engage in polygamous relationships while ignoring the reasons/benefits it may have conferred at that time and in that context, ignoring other godlly qualities we attribute to Him.

Can you please detail what reasons/benefits you are referring to?

Originally posted by: peridot.

What does the mahabharata have to say about Krishna's wife or wives?

Was Rukmini his only wife?

What about satyabhama and other queens?

Does it indicate that scriptures were tampered and edited to suit society's prevailing morality and perspectives?

Which text would have the final word on Krishna's marital status?

Finally, monogamy has its advantages but so did polygamous relations in ancient times as marriages were a means of forming political alliances with powerful kingdoms by the rulers. Under those circumstances does it make sense to judge Krishna's rigteousness by the number of wives he had!?

When someone treats Krishna as an ideal is it possible to do so by emulating only a part of his various activities and that too out of context while ignoring all the rest that he stood for and represented?

Originally posted by: Cool-n-Fresh

You opened my eyes!SBP has nothing like 10 sons and 1 daughter.All the 16,100 women had only 10 sons each,no mention of daughters.Charumati was the name of Krishna and Rukmini's only daughter.

According to the head of a spiritual organization, Lord Krishna had a daughter by each of His wives numbering a total of 16100.Don't know on what basis this was predicted.He explains that each of the Lord's queens had one daughter, and that this mention of Charumati's marriage is an indirect reference to the marriages of all these princesses.😕

Ok my question.I'll be glad if it is answered.From where did One Lakh Sixty One Thousand Warrior Class Brides come?Who raised those 1,61,000 girls for Krishna's sons!?Were their names mentioned in any Purana?They too(Krishna's sons) must have prospered with 3 -4 wives or atleast 2 wives.

Was there any shortage of Brides!?