Another thing mahabharat and shreemadh bhagwat was written in dwapar yug but both mahabharat and shreemadh bhagwat were narrated in kaliyug
Because kaliyug enter when parikshit was left alone in forest
Shreemadh bhagwat was narrated to parikshit then at time kaliyug has just started then a time people have more faith in God because at that time there was not much bad effect of kaliyug
And mahabharat was also narrated in kaliyug but it is not clear it is narrated just after parikshit death or after when kaliyug pass 30,,40years ?
If mahabharat is narrated just after kaliyug pass 1week mean just after parikshi death then at that time people might consider Lord krishna God in mahabharat text too but it is narrated after kaliyug pass 40years then kaliyug might showing his bad effect due to its passing age and due to bad effect of kaliyug people might have started doubt whether Lord krishna is God or not
Some how age of any yug also change people reaction , belief, thought about God
Excellent Q's, Pro!
OMG? I never knew this.
What was the need to narrate different scriptures to Parikshit and later on to his son Janmejaya ?
Wouldn't narrating the same one which his father heard suffice?
So far as I remember, Janmejaya was somewhat of a baby. I remember reading one part in my Bengali version where Parikshit before dying appoints his Proime Minister as the regent until Janmejaya grows up.
Also, Janmejaya specifically asks his ministers ke "What happened to my Dad that he died?" If he doesn't at all remember what happened he also probably doesn't remember SBh. Hence, the requirement of MB retelling later.
As far as why nobody else told him these stories: due to the prevailing oral tradition based education system, storytelling was high-end art. Not everybody could do it. So, it was always recommended that if you needed info/story/entertainment/anything you go to the sages who were professionally trained for this specific form of conversation/storytelling.
Most such Veda/Purana retelling used the 8-syllables in a quarter Anushtupa chhanda as the rhythm. (It is still used for Veda-patha today).
Just my two cents.
I do think the stories about Krishna's tryst with cream and butter and women is not true. Now one may ask then what about MB Krishna's childhood. I don't know but even if we take it as he was raised by Yashoda and Nandalal, then too stories where a young man steals clothes of women while they're bathing doesn't give much a pretty picture of Krishna. I don't think this whole picture goes with the Krishna we know in Mahabharat.
Now coming to Geeta and MB, Mahabharat we know today is a product of time and tales. In fact, as Dr Bhaduri clearly states it isn't written by one person is VYASA. Vyasa is more like a post IMO, and the whole epic was definitely not by Parashar's son aka Krishna Dwaipayana. That's why probably VYASA is said to be immortal. That's why Dr Bhaduri always mentions "Mahabharat's poet" in his writings, not Vyasa or any other name.
Hence, it is obvious that not all those who contributed to the epic are of the same opinion. Some stuck to Krishna's exceptional intelligence and some made a God out of him. Hence so many contradictions. Now, from my reading, I do feel initial narratives did not show Krishna as divine or an incarnation or having magical abilities. Later authors did add onto this, and Bhagwat Geeta is a much later piece of writing. Scholars including Iravati Karvye states that only first few chapters of the Bhagwat Geeta is part of the epic.
Hence, I believe painting figures like Ram and Krishna in divine light is the doing of later writers and authors and a result of the arrival of several Gods and Goddesses in Hinduism.
Having said that, time has done it's job. I too like to see things without divine perspectives and in a rational way. But apart from completely unbelievable things (hiding the sun, holding Govardhana in a finger, giving supply of saree from nowhere which are absolutely impossible) if we completely remove everything remotely unnatural, the epic loses its essence.
For example, the concept of Karma, reincarnation, rebirth, the importance of words and vows, values which today we cannot relate to should not be completely removed. Numerous authors today have given the epic it's form and the story that it is today. If we remove most of what it is today, then the story doesn't remain as fascinating as it is. Krishna is an exceptional figure, and he'll remain so and he doesn't NEED to be divine to be exceptional :)
Lords krishna is God but sometimes for for lok -riti aachar he behave as human like Lord krishna knew that pandav save from lakshagrah but still for lokaachar he went to bhishm drishthrasra and start crying that arey yeh to bahut bura hua
When Lord krishna went to indra prasth for rajsuya yag there he get bad omen something bad is happening in dwarika so he return to dwarika and see shalv is attacking dwarika. Shalva cut the neck of fake vasudev ( father of Lord krishna) Lord krishna really become sad like human when vasudev head was cut by shalv but he immediately come out of illusion and realise it was not real vasudev and then Lord krishna killed shalv by sudarshan disc
In rajsuya yag when it is said who should be selected for agrapuja then it sehdev who knows prabhav of Lord krishna., Sehdev ( madri son) know Lord krishna is God so he tell that Lord krishna ki agrapuja honi chahiye
There are two sehdev
One sehdev is madri son
And second sehdev is jarasadh son
After death of jarasadh jarasadh son sehdev was made kingEdited by surabhi01 - 3 months ago
Another thing Lord krishna already know 64 arts but to give nice sanskar to human kind that how human should behave how students should behave with guru Lord krishna went to Ujjain in sandpini aashram and with in 64 days Lord krishna learn all 64:arts
Here Lord krishna don't use his power unnecessary he show only power when it is required only
And here Lord krishna did not take incarnation just to show that he is God . He don't take a incarnation not just to kill demons
He take incarnation also because so that he can give some examples that how human should behave that is why he sometimes act like human and himself did duties like human to give msg to human kind what should be duty of human kind
Hi Radhika ( I think that's your name )
I've seen you in a lot of mytho forums and read your mytho stories especially centering lord Krishna ( all of them so well written and divine btw )
You seem to know a lot about mahabharat and lord Krishna's life, you even seem to know a lot of texts, so I am very curious to know about your opinion on this and the divinity of lord Krishna. I am still learning about mythology so it would help to know your opinion.
And also being a human and act like human is totally different . Here Lord Krishna act like human being sometimes, but that doesn't not mean he is really human being He is actually a God
Because human does not have power to give salvation to anyone. Only god has power to give salvation
When Lord Krishna killed many asur many asur get salvation when asurs killed by Lord Krishna . Lord Krishna has power to give salvation hence he is god
And Lord Krishna incarnation is not happen suddenly. It is already decided in satyug
1 when 5 bhrahman curse Jay Vijay ( gate keeper of Lord vishnu) that both will take birth three times as demons as first as hiranyasksh and hirankashyap then second as ravan and kumbhakaran and then third as Kansas and shishupal and it is already decided in three yug jay Vijay as demons will be killed by god (three incarnation of Lord vishnu) and then return to vaikunth
And even in satyug when Lord shiv burn kaamdev when rati start crying then Lord shiv gave her assurance in dwapar yug kaamdev as Pradyumm will born to Lord Krishna and rukmini
Pradyumm will be born from womb of rukmini and in dwarpar yug pradyumm was born from rukmini womb
Like when jarasandh was born at that time Lord Krishna did not take incarnation and how jarasandh was born with two different parts and how jarasandh body join by jara Lord Krishna everything know though Lord Krishna did not take incarnation at that time.. So how Lord Krishna know about jarasandh birth when Lord Krishna did not take incarnation. It is because god is, omnipresent
More over God act cannot be compare with human act
God act is above all human act . There is no if but apply when it comes to God actEdited by surabhi01 - 3 months ago
Topic started by proteeti
Last replied by surabhi01