Yashoda's Innocence! - Page 3

At that time when subhdra and Arjuna marrred at dwarika and after Arjun and subhdra get married both stay at dwarika for 1 year as Arjun did not complete 12 years repentance then at that time kunti and all pandavas were staying at indraprasth when Arjun and subhdra get married in dwarika

So here also kunti and vasudev ( devki husband)did not meet

Link of subhdra haran and then marriage to arjun from Shree madh bagwat as well from Mahabharata text

https://vedabase.io/en/library/sb/10/86/

https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m01/m01224.htm

In Mahabharata text they did not mention subhdra fell in love with Arjun while in Shree madh bhagwat it is mentioned that subhdra fell in love with Arjun when she saw Arjun for first time and wish in her heart that Arjun to become her husband when subhadra saw Arjun eating dinner

Mahabharata is pretty clear that Krishn advises Arjun to abduct Subhadra and take her away since he didn't know whom she would chose in case of a Swayamwar. "He didn't know" simply means that Arjun wasn't the love of Subhadra's life, if Krishna was God and Subhadra loved Arjun, he should have known it and simply advised a Swayamwar, in fact even begin a God isn't needed, a brother could judge it easily if he tries. It isn't that Krishnaji wasn't strong enough to have not convinced Balram and Vasudev, he pretty easily does it after abduction. Aside since her Swayamwar wasn't even arranged I think she would have been around 14-15 years of age since by the time girls' were 16 the Swayamwars were arranged. Let's be honest how many girls of 14-15 years age would know about love and fall in first site? Be it any Yuga, 14-15 agers aren't that mature. Even if we ignore all these and take that Subhadra in actually loved Arjun, still she never gave the consent for their relation. A consent by both parties in necessary for Gandharva Vivah, here Subhadra didn't give that consent. It was 100% an abduction. Not just that he got her pregnant before she was even 16. The later texts try to justify the act by various excuses. Just like we do it by taking a step further ahead.

We think Krishna n Arjun were Narayan and Nar, they can't err rather we want to believe this, but we forget they were Human Avtaars and Humans do err, they will behave the way the species they have taken an Avatar would do. Subhadra Haran was very much a Haran and if we consider abduction wrong (those days probably it wasn't though), they Krishna and Arjun are both culprits for it

Again when Pandavas were in forest after Lakshagriha, none of the Pandavas were married (excluding perhaps Yudhishtir since I don't know when he married Devika) and they had Samb/Lakshmana marriage? Lakshmana was abducted from her Swayamwar, she should have been mature enough by then, around 16 years of age, do we really want to believe that Duryodhan (who was younger to Yudhishtir/Bheem), had a daughter of marriageable age, when Yudhishtir/Bheem were just in the process of getting married? I don't think it's much logical. Sreemad Bhagwatam often messes the timelines.

Logic doesn't not work in any hari ( god katha) or in ancient text only faith is work in hari katha or in any ancient text

It is all because of faith that one believe that God reside in stone

Faith hai to stone mein bhi bhagwan hai aur faith nahi to bhagwan kahin bhi nahi hai

We have never seen God in reality but it is our faith that God is there and controlling word

And coming to Lord krishna whether he is God or not it is already written in sb that sometimes Lord krishna do behave as human being

It is already written in Shree madh bhagwat canto number 3 as describe by suk dev that some time Lord krishna behave as human being but he some time did that thing which human can't do

More over logic doesn't not apply in God acts only faith is apply in God act

And it is also written that actually it is difficult to understand God no one can understand God really . No one can really describe God

It is we are trying to just describe God that whether he is God or human or not

And coming to Lord krishna acts we can't question his act because he is God and he is free from any boundation

If he take incarnation it is only because it is his will not because someone curse him that is why he take incarnation

Curse is just excuses for Lord Vishnu to take incarnation on earth

He can nullify curse of 4 bhraman to Jay Vijay but he did not . He even said to jai Vijay that he nullify curse of bhraman but he will not because Jay Vijay disrespect bhraman and Jay Vijay have to suffer by taking birth in earth

. It is said to kill someone is sin but that is not apply to God because he made rule and he is owner of all love living beings

In geeta chapter 7 Lord krishna said that he knows everything but no one can know him

And in Upanishads and in Vedic scripture God is beyond scope our intellectual logic

https://www.holy-bhagavad-gita.org/chapter/7/verse/26

In Ramayana it is also written that God cannot be anaylize by mind or any other way

In short no one can understand actually

First Lord krishna born with four arm body so that vasudev and devki know his son is supreme personality as vasudev and devki were afraid of kans

And as baby Lord krishna told vasudev and devki that it is third time he is becoming their son

Lord krishna as baby remind to vasudev and devki that in previous birth they have become mother father of God

On request of vasudev Lord krishna change himself into human being

Here also faith matter, no logic can be apply here in matter of God

Whether we go by SB or MB, Subhadra and Arjuna didn't have a "love" marriage. It was a kidnap, but the whole love story theory came from the chapter later on when Subhadra meets Draupadi after her marriage, and she indicates that she loves Arjuna. Her behavior is not at all like that of Amba, who was averse to getting kidnapped like her sisters by Bhishma. But whatever may be her feelings, it was a kidnap, and as per Krishna's instructions, Arjuna returns to Dwaraka after kidnapping Subhadra and gets properly married to her once Krishna appeases Balarama. They did not have a gandharva vivaha. SB also describes how after the marriage, the Yadavas do follow the newlyweds to Indraprastha where they spend some months with their relatives there. Vasudeva is mentioned as part of the entourage, as is Balarama.

So the whole theory of Vasudeva and Kunti never meeting each other doesn't make sense to me. There were ample opportunities, even if the text doesn't explicitly describe their names.

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

Did Krishna Balram meet Pandavas before Draupadi Swayamwar?

I doubt it's specifically mentioned. Maybe Bheem since he took training from Balram but not others perhaps

Aside Krishna didn't know about Arjun's 12 years/13 months exile when he reached.

But yes they should have met during Rajsuya Yagya. Not sure about Subhadra marriage because they married during abduction

That would depend on when Draupadi's marriage took place wrt Krishna's various marriages. We know that Arjun was involved in Krishna's marriages w/ Bhadra, Mitravindya and Lakshmanaa. So if those marriages happened before Draupadi's, then the answer would be yes

Subhadra already fell in love with arjun even before arjun kidnap her

It is another thing subhdra never disclose her feelings

And we have go by what is written in text around 5000 years ago unless it is proove that some part of sb written by modern writer

If it is proove in vasudev never meeting devki before solar eclipse were written by modern writer then we can it is false

But there is no proof that it is written by modern written so we have to go what is written in text

Subhadra and arjun first went to indraprasth and then return to dwarika and get married so it was either bhram vivah or gandharv vivah

It cannot be pishach or rakshas vivah because subhadra too loved arjun and wanted him to as her husband

And in Kshatriya dharma abducting unmarried girl for purpose of marriage is allow and aplaudable it is written in Mahabharata and said by Lord krishna

In fact before abduction arjun fell in love with subhdra and even subhdra also fell in love with arjun and wanted as him husband

But only thing is that arjun was unaware of subhdra feeling and subhdra was unaware of arjun feeling before marriage

A marriage can be said to be Gandharva Vivah only when both the parties has given both consent and expressed their willingness.

Mahabharata is clear that Krishna wasn't sure on whom Subhadra will select in case of a Swayamwar, this clearly shows that Subhadra had never expressed her willingness towards the marriage with Arjun irrespective of her feelings towards him.

Hence what Arjun did was simply an abduction, Har/Rakshas Vivah. Pishacha Vivah has man abducting girl by treachery while Rakshas Vivah is abduction by force and Arjun did the latter.

Now whether or not we consider Abduction for marriage a right thing or not is something completely our decision. But Arjun had kidnapped

Subhadra was not even 16 at this time, because her Swayamwar wasn't scheduled, and Arjun got her pregnant,.

The entire Sreemad Bhagwatam and Mahabharata as we have now are in Classical Sanskrit and not in Vedic/Premitive Sanskrit which was then language 5000 years back, hence there is no proof that, the one we have has been written by Vyas/someone else 5000 years back and is not a later translation with additions/substraction into it

To prove SB is a later text,it has a list of rulers of Magadh from Jarasangh to PushyaMitra Sunga, what was the use of it? Parikshit would have anyday been more interested in the future of Hastinapur/Indraprasth than that of Magadh.

But let's ignore it maybe Sukn muni just thought of telling about Magadh's future. But he uses the same word "will succeed" Dhanand for Chandragupta Maurya as he does "will succeed" Jarasangh for Sahdev, although by the time of Parikshit, Sahdev had already succeeded Magadh's throne and then died, his son too had already succeeded.

That is a proof big enough that the book we have today wasn't the same as Vyas/narrated by Sukn muni