Sleet of Emotional Quivers on RadhaKrishn Eternal Love CC # 9 - Page 92

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

There was no rule. It was just understood that Kuru Panchalas were the elite of all of them.

It actually is stated so in Karna Shalya Samvadha.

Yadavas tried to oust Jarasandha with the Yagya, but it didn't work.

Therefore, the alliance.

Between establishment of Dwaraka and Panchali swayamvara, there would have been 6 or 7 years at least. If Shishupala was born right after, it would be 10 plus years after Panchali swayamvara before he could do any swayamvara. IIRC, he is actually NOT mentioned in CE at Panchali event. Why wouldn't he be there if he were the king of Chedi?

4 or 5 years after swayamvara, Arjuna would kidnap Subhadra. Shishupala would've been 15 ish by then An year or so later, he came of age and was brought up to be Jarasandha's goon.

This would be the time Rukmini/Rukmavati also turned 16 since generally grooms are older. Pradyumna kidnapped her with Krishna's help.

Jambavati and Satyabhama are specifically stated to be married to Krishna by lac house.

So either Rukmini didn't exist, or she was one fo Krishna's junior wives..

It is the only way to make sense of the Rukmini timeline and Shishupala chronology.

Yes I read the Karna Shalya convo, but to me that actually seems like a way to please the king by Vaishampayan than an actual fact, Ramji did an Ashwamedh and he was an Ikshawaku, people did accept him wholeheartedly, and this definitely happened the supposed blessing/boon by Yayati because Yadus, Anus and the Purus the descandents of Yayati's sons were there since the time of RigVed itself (7&8th Mandalas). But maybe they were thought to be bluer blood

@bold but if Pradyumna n Rukmavati married after Draupadi Swayamwar then the presence of Anirudh at Panchali Swayamwar doesn't make sense because Anirudh was definitely Rukmavati's son and not of some orher's wife.

The chronology could fit only if Draupadi Swayamwar happened 16-17 years after Dwarika, Shishupal was born around the First year of Dwarika and he was being married around the age of 14 under Jarasandh's order

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

Samba wasn't trying to marry her. He simply raped her. Duryodhana imprisoned Samba. Balram came with army, and elders negotiated marriage.

Also, honorable for whom? The men, perhaps. I don't imagine a woman raped would be comforted by that.

But this actually makes me wonder were the people of Hastinapur so weak? Was it so easy for anyone to come from a different kingdom abduct a princess and molest her?

Samb wasn't so powerful either to have performed a Sunny Deolish act.

Also even for the smallest of things it's always Karna who has to complete the work, be it arresting Samb, abducting princess for Duryodhan, fighting the Gandharvas, was the royal army so weak? I mean even for namesake but Karna was a king, which king on this earth is required to work like a petty soldier (not even a proper commander)

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

..

Ok don't kill me for this, but I had sarcastically tweeted that RK might actually have Radha suggesting Krishna to help Draupadi n She might accompany to Kurukshetra.

And the creative head of RK liked my post. Both these things were later shown too

🤣

now they will show the villan bahu lashmana remember?

Originally posted by: Krishnapanchali

🤣

now they will show the villan bahu lashmana remember?

Yes that was what we were discussing. However I wanted them to show she avenging her r**e abduction n forced marriage, here she is being shown as an out n out villian

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

16108 or 16008?

But 16100 were rescues he married to give them a standing in society. Not real wives.

8 were women he married for various reasons, mostly political. Ruklmini - for Vidarbh (though I happen to believe she didn't exist), Jambavati - rescue (reason will remain unmentioned), Satyabhama - arranged/political, Yamuna - another rescue (Vyasa is very clear in Harivamsa Balram raped her, and Brahmavaivarta Purana corroborates this), rest - political.

IF there was a love in Krishna's life he couldn't marry for whatever reason, it does make sense he would be hankering after her.

A man in pain (or God), losing everything and everyone dear to him and still doing the right thing would've been an awesome portrayal. Sacrifice by the hero. But that is not what the showmakers went for. Here Krishna can have his cake and eat it, too. So the RK love story ended up looking silly.

Balraam did that to Yamuna !!! Why ???

Originally posted by: Chiillii

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.

Why did Krishna-Satyabhama marriage infuriate the Yadavas ? Krishna after all belonged to the same community.

How Satyabhama played a key role in bringing up the destructive war among Yadavas ?

Originally posted by: Krishnpriya

Why did Krishna-Satyabhama marriage infuriate the Yadavas ? Krishna after all belonged to the same community.

How Satyabhama played a key role in bringing up the destructive war among Yadavas ?

When Andhaka Vrishni and Bhoja Yadava moved to Dwarka. They were still a very loose confederation led by old Ugrasena. Kansa was a very strong king who had kept Bhoja (Kritaverma and family) Andhaka (Devaki's family) and Vrishnis ( Akrura, Vasudev, Satyaka (Satyaki's father) and Satrajit (Satyabhama's father) under check,

With Kansa's death Kritaverma and Akrura started eyeing the throne. One easy way was Satyabhama

Her father Satrajit was the Mr Ambani/Bill Gates and Warren Buffet rolled into one. He also had syamantak Mani Which apparently would keep on giving more money as you spend.

So Akrura, Kritaverma as well as his brother Shatadhanwa wanted to marry Satyabhama to get the Syamantak Mani.

Even Balram wanted the Mani, and Krishna too.

Because when the Mani goes missing along with Satrajit's brother who was wearing it, Krishna is accused of murdering him and taking the mani

One charachter is missing in this fight for Satyabhama that is Satyaki. He was little boy at the time so out of picture.

But Satyabhama in a twist of dramatic events ends up married to Krishna with Mani returned to Satrajit.

Everyone other than Krishna is pissed off, including Balram who remains quiet for the time being

When Krishna Balram and Satyaki are at Pandavas Lakshagriha funeral, Kritaverma, his brother Shatadhanwa and Akrura hatch a plan to take the Mani. Shatanandha kills Satarajit. Satyabhama finds out and runs to Krishna at Varnavrat.

He and Balram leave Satyaki there to complete the rituals and chase the three baddies.

Kritaverma hides, Akrura takes the Mani from Shatadhanwa quietly and runs away to his Mom's kingdom Kashi (Akrura's father was Ghar Jamai in Kashi).

Krishna catches up and kills Shatadhanwa but cannot find the Mani on him.

Eventually Balram and other Yadavas reach there. Balram had gone to get the army probably. When Krishna says I could not find the Mani, Balram doesn't believe him. He calls him a liar and decides to leave him and goes off to Mithila Of Sita fame (In some versions of Purana he has local princess married to him, so becomes Ghar Jamai for a while)

He also takes on Duryodhana as his disciple here to spite off Krishna. Balram Duryodhan friendship starts here and as Krishna moves towards Arjun Balram starts backing Duryodhana

After some time Krishna figures Akrura has the Mani. Vasudev, Hridika (Kritaverma and Shathadhanwa's father) make a deal and get Kritaverma and Balram back. Krishna then promises amnesty to Akrura and takes his sister Sundari/Sudeva as wife and/or daughter in law for Samba (conflicting mentions in different Puranas similar to Rukmini and Rukmavati) and makes him tell everyone that he had the Mani and not Krishna

But then to avoid Balram or Kritaverma gaining control of the Mani because Vasudev and Hridika were in cahoots now, Krishna smartly makes Akrura custodian of Mani and treasurer of Dwarka. Akrura since his daughter and or sister were already with Krishna was under his control..

During Yadava fratricide when Satyaki and Kritaverma start fighting Satyabhama adds fuel to the fire by reminding Pradyumna and Krishna how Kritaverma was part of the conspiracy to kill her father. Krishna does get angry but still holds on, Satyaki however beheads Kritaverma and gets beheaded by Kritaverma's clans men, Pradyumna already enraged goes after them with Samba and they both get killed by then Krishna is enraged and he starts killing everyone who comes his way. Satyabhama runs back to Dwarka with Uddhav I think

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

..

Ok don't kill me for this, but I had sarcastically tweeted that RK might actually have Radha suggesting Krishna to help Draupadi n She might accompany to Kurukshetra.

And the creative head of RK liked my post. Both these things were later shown too

The moral of the story is --- Swastik people are susceptible to grab sarcastic comments as their creative source! They don't know the difference between criticism and appreciation!🤪

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

Exactly why is milan between them needed

When exactly were there not together

Anyhow I am happy that the show is finally ending.

Hopefully Swastik never comes up with any other Historical/mythology shows

Why they are not seeing the TRPs and the widespread criticism from all sides for this misdeed of ruining a divine love story? The ugliest definition they've given by maintaining 7 feet distance between the eternal romantic pair?

Who is craving to see all these Samba, Anirudh, and other stories leaving aside the main characters Radha and Krishna who are interfering themselves in everyone's life?

Reading all the posts, interesting conversations between the highly knowledgeable members. ❤️❤️Let this RK story and the story distorters go to .... but I am happy for this celestial showers, their meaningless serial brought all learned and well-informed members to this place to present their different perspectives on various aspects in such a wonderful way. ⭐️

They deliberately ruined Satya and Rukmini's characters to highlight Radha's Mahanta !!😲

Many facts were distorted in this serial.

They deliberately skipped how Satyabhama killed Naraksur when Krishna pretended to be injured but showed Krishna killed Narakasur. They showed Krishna was not interested in marrying Rukmini but in reality, she is his main consort and most respected wives of Krishna.

They showed Satyabhama as an arrogant and immature woman, but in reality, as per Bhagwatam, she was a well-behaved lady with grace, with warrior traits. What's more shameful is that they showed Satyabhama as a flirtatious girl! 😲

Ayan and his mother were the carbon copy of modern-day Saas son combination! Being Krishna's most respectable maiden, Radha was treated for her mere human badhas perennially, up to the level of even Krishna was fed up!

They showed Rukmini as a mannerless normal girl who preferred to roam on Brindavan roads rather than waiting for her Krishna to come and abduct her from the clutches of her cruel brother! They showed Rukmini jealous of Satyabhama and Radha but that's not true. Why they are underestimating the beauty and divinity of Lakshmi in such a demeaning way?

The worst part is that they made Radha's marriage with Krishna look immoral but in reality, Radha married Krishna way before, not after marrying Ayan Here they are showing that Radha first married Ayan, then married Krishna in the name of ‘prem’, ( what sort of prem it is I have no idea! ) and is still continuing her marriage with Ayan. If they had to make Radha marry Krishna, first they should have shown Radha denouncing Ayan or marrying Krishna before. They made a joke of values in the name of TRP and gossip. They ruined the purity of Radha and Krishna's relationship.