Portrayal of Krishna in MB and SBh(Page 3)

Posted: 4 months ago

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 

Posted: 4 months ago

Thanks everyone for your valuable inputs. I really appreciate all POVs! So maybe people were too much free and gullible at the same time. smiley36

Edited by proteeti - 4 months ago
Posted: 4 months ago

Originally posted by Swetha-Sai

Excellent Q's, Pro! smiley20


OMG? smiley3 I never knew this. 

What was the need to narrate different scriptures to Parikshit and later on to his son Janmejayasmiley5

Wouldn't narrating the same one which his father heard suffice? smiley24

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).

Posted: 4 months ago

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 :) 

Posted: 3 months ago

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 king 

Edited by surabhi01 - 3 months ago
Posted: 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 

Posted: 3 months ago

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.

Posted: 3 months ago

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 act 

Edited by surabhi01 - 3 months ago


Related Topics

Topics Author Replies Views Last Post Reply
proteeti 30 1552 3 months ago surabhi01
proteeti 5 1076 1 months ago Luminescence
Krishna is too cool

NoraSM   58   1229

NoraSM 58 1229 4 months ago proteeti
Eloquent 76 1609 4 months ago HearMeRoar
Koeli 7 696 5 months ago proteeti

Topic Info

23 Replies 1533Views

Topic started by proteeti

Last replied by surabhi01