Posted:
Originally posted by: KrishnaPriyaa
The main issue comes from the misunderstanding of scriptures of Shri and Bhu. Shri and Bhu, along with Nila make Sri, which is Lakshmi. They show Lakshmi as one, and Bhu as the second wife, and only as Goddess Earth. So it is the scripture translation and dilution mistake, technically.
Mahalakshmi is one. She has different forms, but each of them aren't different from her. As you know, i prefer to see Mahalakshmi as one than her different forms, and what I've noticed is that the Shri-Bhu-Nila concept is shown more in the regional versions of epics, especially in South India, whereas all the main versions of the epics only reference Mahalakshmi as a whole. Bhudevi is shown separate, yes, but even that makes sense to me, as Bhudevi is the Goddess of Earth. Yes, she is so much more, but she mainly rules over the Earth and thus she has a separate form even while Mahalakshmi is shown as a whole, and the main epics do reference her as a part of Mahalakshmi. During the Narakasur Vadh chapter of Bhagawata, Satyabhama is referenced as Bhudevi who is then referenced as Mahalakshmi, so BP does acknowledge Bhama as Mahalakshmi.
As for the show, I just wish for them to acknowledge the ashtabharya as Mahalakashmi. Whether they say forms or ansh, it's the same thing for me, but as long as they do that at least once, it would remove misconception from viewers' minds and prevent people from calling Krishna a womanizer and other such names. As for Neha, most likely she will be shown as Rukmini, but even that is not a big matter as long as all the bharya are acknowledge as forms/ansh of Lakshmi.
But beyond all the divine stuff, I'd really like to see some human interaction between them all. I'd like to see them as lovely, elegant ladies who are each different and yet lovable in their own ways.
comment:
p_commentcount