Satyabhama & Other Women - Page 2

Good discussion going on regarding Satya and her dramatic display of arrogance through Tulabharam!  

Radha, his childhood friend, and lover stands for young, rebellious love, Rukmini for determined devotion, Satyabhama typifies an exacting, even possessive partner. The nature of Krishna’s relationship with his Satya is best described as fiery – a red among pastels as it were. This becomes evident from the many episodes in mythology! 

Satyabhama’s volatile temperament may be attributed to the fact that she is an incarnation of the earth goddess, Bhudevi. Unlike the playful yet docile Lakshmi, Bhudevi is a primal and wild woman archetype. Such women, even if married, submit to no one’s authority.

Though a co-wife among Krishna's principal spouses --Ashta Bharyas, Satya refuses to be a docile palace bound wife. As a true Arthangini, she decided to accompany him to the battlefield. Krishna indulged her,, knowing that she was not only a trained warrior but also a part of  a larger drama destined to unfold later. 

Satyabhama’s competitive spirit did not stop at the battlefield, and the fight for attention was a constant in her life. There are numerous stories of her rivalry witH Rukmini but they are crafted consistently to show how the former’s selfless love is better than Satyabhama’s possessiveness. A demanding woman is not idealised in patriarchal mythologies, but today’s feminists will admire her feisty spirit. The story of the Parijata tree is one such example.

Satyabhama demanded that her husband bring her those flowers. Krishna indulged her again and offered to bring her not just flowers but the entire Parijata tree. He takes her along on the Garuda and goes to Amaravati, where Satyabhama uproots the tree, and thereafter a big fight with Indra, then Krishna planted it in Satyabhama’s garden, and she is happy – at least for some time. She feels victorious, but her pride comes before a fall. The branches grow such that the flowers all fall in Rukmini’s garden and Satyabhama has to eat humble pie. In the Tulabharam incident too, Rukmini bests her. I think these stories are only for glorifying Rukmini's devotional love , rather than demeaning Satya's demanding love!

One can’t help but feel bad for Satyabhama whose manner of seeking love may seem selfish but is no less ardent. She is true to her nature and voices her need for love. She is neither shy nor patient and won’t be tamed by social expectations of that time. Satyabhama is a hard woman to love, but definitely a worthy one, that was proved by Krishna's adoration for her and yielding  to fulfill her every wish. 

Regarding the mytho serials and the depiction of a few characters more important and adorable than the other ones is .... maybe because of star value of a particular character, or the onesidedness  of the writer while depicting the story. Almost all the serials are trying to divert the story from Epic value to the popularity charts, trying to create interest to the modern viewers and as well described by the members here, making it like a Saas Bahu saga, fading the main essence of the spiritual values. 

Originally posted by: .Vrish.

I agree w/ your first point.  Satyabhama definitely had something positive about her, or else, Krishna could have just asked Satyajit to give her in marriage to one of the suitors he had promised earlier - Akrura, Satadhandwa or Kritavarma.  Instead, not only did Krishna marry her, but by some accounts, she seems to have been his favorite wife.  Not sure whether this was before or after her discussions w/ Draupadi in the forest.

But the thing that I don't get is the tendency of current serial makers to bismirch other positive people in the story.  In Krishna's case, it may be glorifying Rukmini alone, and making the other 7 look like vamps.  In Ram Siya ka Luv Kush, they made vamps/villains out of Kush & Luv's cousins, even though they were brought up in Ayodhya w/ the same values that Rama and his brothers were brought up w/.  In the ⭐️+ Mahabharat, they made it a point to make a vamp out of Madri for absolutely no reason.  In Devo ka Dev Mahadev, they needlessly made Kartikeya a quasi-negative character wrt Ganesh.  Every ancient family, according to them, have to fit their saas-bahu template.

In Krishna avatar, he made it a point to be available for every woman who wanted him - down to Narakasura's 16,100 captives.  He could have been satisfied w/ Rukmini, but he accepted the hand of every woman who was offered to him, be it by her father (Jambavati, Satyabhama, Satya), herself (Bhadra, Mitravindya) or swayamvar contests (Lakshmanaa).  Each of them had 10 sons, so even if Krishna was too busy, they had enough to have their hands full.

As for Rukmini, she did threaten to kill herself, not if Krishna didn't marry her, but rather, if she was forced to marry Sishupala.  Rukmi wanted that alliance to win Jarasandha's favor, even though Bheeshmaka was opposed to it.  In addition to Rukmini's wishes, there was also the fact that Vidharba, which was hitherto a vassal of Jarasandha, would be a pledged ally of Dwarka as a result of their princess being a Yadava kulvadhu.  Not that it worked in the case of Avantika.

The one positive thing that I'd say about these depictions is that it emphasizes the importance of monogamous relationships, particularly holding up Rama-Sita as an example

Wonderful post with very good points👏, covered all the imp aspects of that time's societal norms, political,  social and gender-based ideologies, . 🤗