Rukmini Krishna : Lakshmi Narayan of Dwapar Yug - Page 4

Originally posted by: SarmaShru

That's true😆

Bold: That's foolish to believe that everyone is Lakshmi except one in the Ashtabharya group. People generally associate Ashtamahishis with Ashtalakshmi whereas the concept of Ashtalakshmi is relatively new. I believe they are called prime queens because Krishna married them prior to marrying the 16100 women at once😆 For me Rukmini,his first wife and chief queen is Mahalakshmi which is authenticated by various puranas. Satyabhama is considered as Bhudevi who is another consort of Narayana. Acharyas who wrote commentaries on Bhagavatam, Vishnu Purana etc. mentions his other wives as Lakshmi aveshas sometimes.

Actually one frnd told me Rukmini is said to be incarnation of chandravali who is considered rival of radha , satyabhama is considered incarnation of radha herself , she told it is mentioned in some book name lalita madhav .

It is said radha is not mentioned in any authentic texts related to krishna .

Radha is said to be niladevi 2 .

For Rukmini 2 their folktales that she & radha were one only .

So theories bahut hai .

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

She gave the same verse in Sanskrit dear. The name of Rukmini isn't mentioned, KMG did a mistake in translation that's something we have discussed multiple times

I consider both Krishna, Rukmini n Draupadi as humans who were raised to divine status due to their importance in changing the Bharat society so I am least interested in who was the  incarnation of Lakshmi (for I think there was none)

But your confusion about the mention of Rukmini is wrong here

I am not a Sanskrit scholar, I have checked the English translation by Pratap Chandra Roy and Hindi translation by Gita press. Both translates the verses same as KMG. What's wrong with the translation? Can you help me with the correct one?

Originally posted by: deepikagupta9

Actually one frnd told me Rukmini is said to be incarnation of chandravali who is considered rival of radha , satyabhama is considered incarnation of radha herself , she told it is mentioned in some book name lalita madhav .

It is said radha is not mentioned in any authentic texts related to krishna .

Radha is said to be niladevi 2 .

For Rukmini 2 their folktales that she & radha were one only .

So theories bahut hai .

Gaudiya Vaishnavas believe that Radhakrishna are the supreme dieties, who are superior to LakshmiNarayan, infact they believe that Krishna is the source of Narayan and Radha is the source of Lakshmi. So these, kind of stories where Rukmini is Chandravalli, Satyabhama is Radha, Krishna's wives are the expansions of Radha etc. are their sectarian beliefs. Radha being the incarnation of Niladevi or Rukmini&Radha being the same person  are pure folktales without no scriptural basis. 

Originally posted by: SarmaShru

I am not a Sanskrit scholar, I have checked the English translation by Pratap Chandra Roy and Hindi translation by Gita press. Both translates the verses same as KMG. What's wrong with the translation? Can you help me with the correct one?

The verse that Adya gave states that Narayan's Sri came to earth as the daughter in the Kul (clan)of Drupad

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

The verse that Adya gave states that Narayan's Sri came to earth as the daughter in the Kul (clan)of Drupad

I think KMG transalated the verses correctly but forgot to include 2 lines describing Rukmini. I have found Gita press version with complete verses and proper translation which describes Rukmini as a portion of Sri and Draupadi as a portion of Shachi. But can't upload the image as I don't have a Imgur account.

 śriyas tu bhāgaḥ saṃjajñe ratyarthaṃ pṛthivītale

bhishmakasya kule sadhwi rukmini nama namatha:

draupadi thwadh samjache shachibhagadananditha

dasya kule kanyā vedimadhyād aninditā

The parts given in bold are the omissions on KMG. I have simply written it as given in Gita press version (I know it's not the proper way to write Sanskrit in English,but for reference purpose) 

You can go to the following link to find the online version of the text

https://archive.org/details/MahabharatYear1Vol.1GitaPressGorakhpur/page/n225/mode/1up

The above mentioned verses are given in page no 226(page no as per the scroller given in the webpage).

Since i posted the verse let me clarify that CE removes the rukhmini portion which means that its a later addition . CE only mentions Krishna as Vishnu and drapaudi as laxmi. 

.

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

The verse that Adya gave states that Narayan's Sri came to earth as the daughter in the Kul (clan)of Drupad

That's why I said vedvyas created confusion , initially he referred her as shri , later told her nalayani by telling her past life story , some where mentioned her saraswati 2

Originally posted by: deepikagupta9

That's why I said vedvyas created confusion , initially he referred her as shri , later told her nalayani by telling her past life story , some where mentioned her saraswati 2

He mentioned her like Saraswati not an incarnation of Saraswati

Anyhow Rukmini is nowhere mentioned for sure BORI removed the portions of her name

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

He mentioned her like Saraswati not an incarnation of Saraswati

Anyhow Rukmini is nowhere mentioned for sure BORI removed the portions of her name

But nalayani is mentioned along with her past life