Sleet of Emotional Quivers on RadhaKrishn Eternal Love CC # 9 - Page 87

Originally posted by: Sweetypie34

In South india it's only krishna Rukmini..Radha is milk girl accordingly..But in north different sectors have diff story right

South Indian stories have Napinnai, a child bride of Krishna's in Gokul who is thought to be the inspiration for north Indian Radha. It might be right also. Child marriage was not uncommon back then as vedic rules for marriage make clear.

Then, there is the child exchanged for Krishna. Odissis say she was Subhadra. Harivamsa says she was Nidra/Ekanamsa/Kuhu (as per MBh, a daughter of Angirasa) who is portrayed as spouse to Krishna sometimes and sometimes sister. She lived in Mathura and was given a boy's education and freedom. She actually was stated to be involved in Krishna's undertakings.

Perhaps the showmakers took that concept from Ekanamsa and gave it to Radha.

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

South Indian stories have Napinnai, a child bride of Krishna's in Gokul who is thought to be the inspiration for north Indian Radha. It might be right also. Child marriage was not uncommon back then as vedic rules for marriage make clear.

Then, there is the child exchanged for Krishna. Odissis say she was Subhadra. Harivamsa says she was Nidra/Ekanamsa/Kuhu (as per MBh, a daughter of Angirasa) who is portrayed as spouse to Krishna sometimes and sometimes sister. She lived in Mathura and was given a boy's education and freedom. She actually was stated to be involved in Krishna's undertakings.

Perhaps the showmakers took that concept from Ekanamsa and gave it to Radha.

Haan I too hve heard..But Here iscon temple in tamilnadu only I c rk..

Also one temple here Rukmini marriage is celebrated in grandway

Originally posted by: Sutapasima

OMGEE don’t tell me that

Samba character itneee saaa real nayeee as per my knowledge

Between that creative dir is saying Padma Purana , krishna Champak..are these reliable books kya

As per me only bhagvatam about krishna is true about krishna

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

You're right that only Satyabhama appears in real time in MBh. Vyasa is not very kind to her, either. In the one major scene she has dialogue, she is portrayed as a petty, malicious brat.

Coming to Rukmini... Harivamsa states 4 of Rukimini's sons, including Pradyumna, were born BEFORE her and given by Krishna to his uncle Gandusha for adoption. Pradyumna was supposed to have grown up lightning speed and appearing similar to Krishna in age. Barring the supernatural, the above clues confirm Pradyumna was not Krishna's biological son. There seems to be adult adoption involved, possibly for inheritance purposes. Contrary to what we see now about Krishna, he was regarded as an interloper by the Yadavas. Perhaps the adoption was a move to reassure them power and money would remain with the clan/family.

Then, the Rukmini haran episode. In some versions, the Rukmavati haran is exactly the same. Yes, I'm aware they're different in northern recension. But put together with what northern recension itself states about Pradyumna, it's very likely Rukmini/Rukmavati were one and the same woman who married Pradyumna, not Krishna. Now, Krishna was involved in her rescue, which might have started rumors and led to the creation of a second woman to explain things.

In addition, she was not involved in any of Krishna's doings though she was supposed to be number one wife and is a flat character like someone created out of thin air. Even Jambavati had a personality. Satyabhama, too, of course. The other wives were too junior to be of importance.

Then why did Shishupala mention Rukmini?

Originally posted by: vyapti

Then why did Shishupala mention Rukmini?

Rukmini does get a mention in Shishupal Krishna conversation before his death.

Shishupal mocks Krishna saying what kind of man declares in a public place that his wife (Rukmini) was coveted by another man.

There is however a major problem with regards to timeline which indicates that Rukmini if at all she was married to Krishna was not his first wife.

Shishupal is born after Dwarka is built. That is given in the MBh as well as other Puranas. It is mentioned that Balaram and Krishna arrive in chedi from Dwarka to wish their aunt for his birth.

Rukmini swayamavar is fixed as she reaches 16 years of age. This is given in Harivansh. So Shishupal who needs to be older than her or at least the same age would be 16 or more.

Basically Rukmini becomes of marriageable age atleast 16 years after Dwarka is built

Most importantly Balram married Revathi and got land for Dwarka as dowry. He is just a year older than Krishna. So he is already married when Dwarka is ready

So why would Krishna need to wait for 16 plus years as bachelor to marry Rukmini first. As Rukmini was born after dwarka was built

Jambavati was his first wife most likely and Satya second Rukmini Infact must have been one of his last wives.

Originally posted by: vyapti

Then why did Shishupala mention Rukmini?

Shishupala didn't bring up Rukmini. Krishna did. Along with 2 other women. Shishupala only responded with a taunt.

If you see the quote below (from CE), Krishna doesn't claim she was his wife. Just states her name with the other 2 women assaulted by Shishupala.

My understanding is that once you hold a woman's hand, she's basically considered married to you. Krishna did rescue her.

Fact #1 Four of her supposed sons were older than her as per HV.

#2 Lac garh incident coincided with killing of Satyabhama's father. That part is mentioned in SB.

#3. A year or two later, Panchali swayamvara happened, and Pradyumna was there along with Aniruddha. Assuming Aniruddha was a baby, Pradyumna was a grown man, and Rukmavati was the mom of his son.

#4. Let us assume Krishna's wife adopted an adult older than her. But unless Rukmini and Rukmavati were super close in age like Pradyumna and Krishna, it also was not possible.

So I concluded they had to be the same woman, married to Pradyumna. Because timelines don't work out otherwise.

_________

‘Having heard these words, in the presence of all the kings and the Pandavas, Krishna

replied in a soft voice. “O kings! This son of a lady of the Satvata lineage38 is a great enemy

of the Satvata clan. Though we have never done him harm, the cruel-minded one always

seeks to injure us. O kings! Hearing that we had gone to the city of Pragjyotisha, this cruel

one came and burnt down Dvaraka, though he is my father’s sister’s son. When the royal ones

from Bhoja were sporting themselves on Mount Raivataka, he killed and captured all of them and took them to his own city. With certain evil in his heart, he wished to obstruct my

father’s sacrifice and stole the horse of the ashvamedha,39 though it was surrounded by

guards. The famous Babhru’s40 wife-to-be was travelling to the Souvira region to be married.

But out of delusion and desire, he abducted her. He was cruelly disposed towards his

maternal uncle, the ascetic Karusha and used his powers of maya to abduct Bhadra of

Vishala.41 For the sake of my father’s sister, I have borne a great deal of unhappiness.

However, it is fortunate that this is happening before all these kings. You are now witness to

the malevolence he bears towards me. Know also the deeds that he has performed secretly. I

can no longer pardon his offence today. He deserves to be killed only because of his insolence

in front of this assembly of kings. Desiring a speedy death, this fool once offered himself to

Rukmini.42 But the fool did not obtain her, the way a shudra cannot hear the Vedas.” Having

heard these words of Vasudeva, all the assembled kings began to censure the king of Chedi.

‘Having heard these words, the powerful Shishupala burst into laughter and uttered these

scornful words. “O Krishna! Are you not ashamed to recount this, especially before all these

kings? Rukmini was mine first.43 O Madhusudana! No self-respecting man but you will admit

before respectable ones that his wife had been someone else’s first. O Krishna! Pardon me.

Whether you pardon me or whether you show me respect, whether you bear friendship or

enmity towards me, what can you possibly do to me?” When he was talking in this way, the

illustrious Madhusudana, the destroyer of his enemies,

There is one other thing

Aniruddh marries Rukmi's granddaughter born to his son. Aniruddh marries his cousin.

And this marriage is arranged at the insistence of Rukmi himself who is very fond of Aniruddh his grandson.

All this is same in Harivansh and other Puranas

But Pradyumna Rukmavati marriage is the same as Krishna Rukmini marriage, he crashes her swayamavar and takes her against Rukmi's displeasure. But there is no battle here. Rukmi reluctantly agrees after Rukmavati garlands Pradyumna in swayamavar

Again story is consistent across.

Interesting that Rukmi who fought with Krishna to marry his sister reluctantly agreed for Pradyumna to marry his daughter and but actually arranges his grand daughter's marriage with Aniruddh happily.

Sister and daughter can be close in age though. We have an example in MB itself Bhima marries Shishupal's sister and Nakul marries Shishupal's daughter both around the same time just prior to Rajasuya

Why is Rukmini mentioned as Principal wife and not Satyabhama or Jambavati?

Originally posted by: vyapti

Why is Rukmini mentioned as Principal wife and not Satyabhama or Jambavati?

Satyabhama has always been considered the most important of the 8. She's called Krishna's favorite though Krishna really doesn't do anything to justify the idea except put up with her silliness.

Rukmini just has no role in any of what happened to Krishna.

The principal I think because the abduction happened before Krishna was married. Somehow, the same woman was split into 2 personalities. Otherwise .there were 2 abductions very close together from adoptive father and son, involving auntie and niece of the same household, to the point they had to occur within a year or two of each other.

Remember, Aniruddha had to be born by Draupadi swayamvara. And Satyabhama/Syamantaka episode was still going on at the time. Ie, Krishna was only on his 3rd wife by the time of Aniruddha's birth

factually Hear me Roar is correct on two parts

1. Aniruddh is Rukmavati and Pradyumna's son and a favourite of both Krishna and Rukmi. That is verified from multiple sources and multiple events.

So this part of Pradyumna marrying Rukmavati can be taken as canon.

2. Rukmini has absolutely no plot point in Krishna's life other than asking him to kidnap her from her home.

Satya had syamantak Mani war - where she gets Krishna to kill her father's murderer and is eventually responsible for bringing out in open Yadava fights, narkasur vadh, where in some versions she deals him the fatal arrow, as well as Yadava fratricide where she is present and rather instigates the fight..

As in plot points _ her presence and her actions takes the story forward.

As in you change Rukmini with any other princess say Mitravinda of Avanti, she is as devotional as her and Krishna marries her the same way by going against her brothers. The story of Krishna's life will not change.

But you take away Satyabhama, Krishna's life changes with just one incident. He doesn't get syamantak Mani and her dowry that made Dwarka richest kingdom of that time. Kritaverma doesn't become Krishna's enemy at heart and maybe doesn't join Duryodhana's side and Yadava fratricide doesn't happen. Balram doesn't get upset and go to Mithila and take Duryodhan as his student. Duryodhan remains a much weaker warrior

She was the literal Lakshmi as well because she is the one who brings all the wealth and syamantak Mani to Krishna and Yadava as her dowry.

Though Rukmini as Lakshmi or Radha as Lakshmi is the popular perception. In real terms both of them did not bring any wealth or money by themselves, neither did they manage the wealth like Draupadi did for Pandavas. The wealth and prosperity of Dwarka and dowry of Satyabhama was managed by Akrura.

Her marriage to Krishna sowed the seeds of Yadava acrimony and had implications for Mahabharata war and she adds fire to the final fight of Yadavas Fratricide.

That is Satyabhama's importance.

No offence to Rukmini or her love and devotion for Krishna or Radha or any other wives. But this is again canonical fact. Krishna's life story will be completely different if Satyabhama is not there. But if we remove Rukmini or Radha his life story doesn't change.

Interestingly Pradyumna does marry a mother figure, his wife Mayawati is supposed to have raised him at shambasur's palace. And married him once he kills the Asura.