Dwarkadheesh - Bhagwaan Shree Krishna

   

+* Dwapar Yuga: Doubts & Discussions *+ (Page 29)

Post Reply New Post

Page 29 of 29

Page 1 Page 28
Page   of 29

ShivangBuch

Goldie

ShivangBuch

Joined: 31 August 2009

Posts: 1045

Posted: 16 March 2012 at 1:19pm | IP Logged
Originally posted by .Vrish.

I had no idea about the city/kingdom of Shonitpur.  Where did it come up?  In Gauhati, some stores still carry the name 'Pragjyotisha', so I'm not even sure that that's correct.  In fact, I think Pragjyotisha was the name of the kingdom, not just a city.  Sorta like Ujjain, Mithila, Vidarbha, et al.
Some words are also used as Pragjyotishpur so it can be ancient Guwahati city itself. Yes there are school-college-complex in Guwahati itself if we search in google and google map even. And Sonitpur is the district of Assam even today which can be seen in google map near Nagaland (kingdom of Nagas as Varaali mentioned) having capital Tezpur. And Bhaumasur can logically be the name of Narakasur that is not too strange. Moreover, Bhamasur was Banasur's friend and Narakasur was Banasur's neighbour. The distance between Guwahati to Tezpur is just 185 KMs. You can search google with the words 'Narakasur Bhaumasur Pragjyotishpur'.

Banasura being friends of Narakasura - sounds pretty unlikely, given that Banasura was simply vain, but not a tyrant.  If he was a descendant of Bali, chances are that he didn't mix w/ the usual evil demons, but simply got bored w/ all his power.  I haven't seen all of RS SK - Debi might be able to describe more about what they showed.  I only saw RS-SK from the start of the war onwards. Banasura's is the last track of the serial, which ends in him handing over Usha and Anirudha back to Krishna.
Narakasur had the history back to Varah avatar and Banasur had the history back to Vaman avatar as he was Bali's son. Both had supernatural powers. In fact their acceptance of friendship and leadership of Jarasandh and Kans is very strange rather than their internal friendship.

Yes I know that Debipriya could answer this question but she just came back to her hometown a few days ago and also she doesn't have the habit of observing and remembering such details of events and characters as her major focus and intention is to feel the devotion so I thought not to address her. If she knew the answer, she would have given it without specifically addressing her but I addressed you specifically because we once had such question about Jarasandh allies and Krishna's enemies.


Also, can you answer my other question above - the one about why Krishna asked for only Arjun to come and evacuate the denizens of Dwarka?  Analysis from Varaali, Debi and others are also welcome.
I think as we can see, facts contradict between sources so that itself is the first question which one to go with. Then the next question is what you have asked when we go with MB as you replied to Varaali.

The following 1 member(s) liked the above post:

varaali

Dear Guest, Being an unregistered member you are missing out on participating in the lively discussions happening on the topic "+* Dwapar Yuga: Doubts & Discussions *+ (Page 29)" in Dwarkadheesh - Bhagwaan Shree Krishna forum. In addition you lose out on the fun interactions with fellow members and other member exclusive features that India-Forums has to offer. Join India's most popular discussion portal on Indian Entertainment. It's FREE and registration is effortless so JOIN NOW!

.Vrish.

IF-Veteran Member

.Vrish.

Joined: 25 October 2008

Posts: 20800

Posted: 16 March 2012 at 1:47pm | IP Logged
Addressing the first part of your discussion, would Shonitpur then be anywhere near the kingdom of Kauravya (father of Uloopi)?  After all, Uloopi was a Naga, while Chitravahana was the ruler of Manipur, which was close enough that when Uloopi was depressed @ being abandoned by Arjun, she went to Manipur and spent her time w/ Chitrangada & Babruvahana.

Incidentally, how did Shonitpur come into the discussion - was that Banasura's kingdom?  If Bali had turned over his entire domains to Vamana, how could Banasura have had a kingdom anywhere on earth?  And how did he get to be its king, if his father Bali was very much alive?

Also, is there anything in any of the scriptures to suggest that Banasura was resentful @ Vishnu over Vamana depriving his father of his justly won possessions?  I find it strange that Bali was pretty devoted to Vishnu, while Banasura made it a point to make enemies w/ Krishna.  Bali would seem to have no influence w/ Banasura.

Yeah, I recognize that SB has an account very different from MB over the destruction of the Yadavas.  I'm reserving a discussion on the destruction of the Yadavas for the end of this serial, but this question was somewhat limited in scope - just went by what's in the Mahabharata.  I'd be just as interested to see what other scriptures, such as Hari Vamsa, have to say about it.

The following 1 member(s) liked the above post:

varaali

ShivangBuch

Goldie

ShivangBuch

Joined: 31 August 2009

Posts: 1045

Posted: 17 March 2012 at 7:00am | IP Logged
Originally posted by .Vrish.

Addressing the first part of your discussion, would Shonitpur then be anywhere near the kingdom of Kauravya (father of Uloopi)?  After all, Uloopi was a Naga, while Chitravahana was the ruler of Manipur, which was close enough that when Uloopi was depressed @ being abandoned by Arjun, she went to Manipur and spent her time w/ Chitrangada & Babruvahana.

Incidentally, how did Shonitpur come into the discussion - was that Banasura's kingdom?  If Bali had turned over his entire domains to Vamana, how could Banasura have had a kingdom anywhere on earth?  And how did he get to be its king, if his father Bali was very much alive?

Also, is there anything in any of the scriptures to suggest that Banasura was resentful @ Vishnu over Vamana depriving his father of his justly won possessions?  I find it strange that Bali was pretty devoted to Vishnu, while Banasura made it a point to make enemies w/ Krishna.  Bali would seem to have no influence w/ Banasura.

 

Yes. Shonitpur was Banasur's kingdom and it was right in between Nagaland (Uloopi) and Guwahati (Pragjyotishpur) and Nagaland is in north of Manipur. And of course he was the king so he had to have a kingdom on earth. Bali had given Tribhuvans to Vaaman (everything) and even presuming then that it was only the land he owned that he gave (as he was not the master of the universe and everything of all lokas), Banasur could still have his own kingdom. Why can't a person of Banasur's stature not have his own kingdom by his own strength or Shivji's grace? Did Krishna of Vasudev have any kingdom before killing of Kans? And moreover, a Brahmin wouldn't rule kingdoms himself nor he would have any possessions with him.

And even grandfather of Ravan was a sage yet Ravan was enemy of Vishnu. Banasur could have the ego and pride of his power and his devotion to Lord Shiv and also of his dynasty. But I agree with you in a sense that Prahallad and Bali were Haribhakt and he was Shivbhakt. That part is strangelooking to me also but still not that strange as I myself is devotee of Krishna and Ram while my family and community have devotion to Shiva and Shakti.


Edited by ShivangBuch - 17 March 2012 at 7:07am

The following 2 member(s) liked the above post:

varaali.Vrish.

varaali

IF-Dazzler

varaali

Joined: 17 July 2006

Posts: 2771

Posted: 29 March 2012 at 11:08am | IP Logged
Originally posted by .Vrish.


Incidentally, how did Shonitpur come into the discussion - was that Banasura's kingdom?  If Bali had turned over his entire domains to Vamana, how could Banasura have had a kingdom anywhere on earth?  And how did he get to be its king, if his father Bali was very much alive?



Yes, as Shivang has clarified, Shonitapur was Banasur's kingdom. According to Hari Vamsa, Banasur was once watching Kartikeya worshiping a shivling and felt how wonderful it would be to become Shiva's son. He undertakes a serious penance and at the end of it, Shiva is pleased and asks Uma to accept him (Banasur) as her son and Skanda's younger brother. Shiva also asks him to settle down in a city called Shonitapur.

And no, Bali was not alive when all this happened.


The following 1 member(s) liked the above post:

.Vrish.

varaali

IF-Dazzler

varaali

Joined: 17 July 2006

Posts: 2771

Posted: 30 March 2012 at 1:26am | IP Logged
I have a question - 

Mahabharata was first recited by Vaishampayana to Janamajeya during the latter's snake sacrifice. But, - this is what I find strange- Srimad Bhagavatham (which was composed after Mahabharata) was narrated by Shukdeva to Parikshit  (Janamajeya's father) .

Isn't it strange that the Vyasa's second work was revealed to the world before Mahabharata was? During his 24  year reign wasn't  Parikshit  ever curious to hear the history of his grandfathers? 

The following 1 member(s) liked the above post:

.Vrish.

.Vrish.

IF-Veteran Member

.Vrish.

Joined: 25 October 2008

Posts: 20800

Posted: 31 March 2012 at 11:19am | IP Logged
Well, both works may have been written well b4 they were narrated, and the fact that SB was narrated b4 MB was just incidental to events.
I too noticed that SB was narrated to Parikshit and MB to Janamejaya.  But one would have thought that since Parikshit lived for 36 years w/ the Pandavas, they would have told/taught him everything about what they did, how his father lived & died and all the details.  Why hear it from Vyasa when the Pandavas themselves were there to tell him everything?  In fact, until the age of 15, even Kunti was there in case he wanted to know about events b4 the Pandavas were born.

However, after the Ashwamedha yagna, Krishna left and never met the Pandavas again, so Parikshit wouldn't have been in a position to hear his story from him.  Although even then, he may have been in a position to hear Krishna's story from Subhadra and Arjun.  After all, even after the Pandava retirement, Subhadra and the other Pandava wives (except Draupadi, Uloopi & Chitrangada) did remain w/ Parikshit.  So Parikshit would have had all the time in the world w/ these grandparents of his to satisfy his curiosities, if he had any.

P.S.  Actually, wasn't Parikshit's reign 36 years?  Add that to 36 years that his grandparents ruled, and he would have been 72 years old when he died.

The following 2 member(s) liked the above post:

ShivangBuchvaraali

Vibhishna

Goldie

Vibhishna

Joined: 08 January 2009

Posts: 1947

Posted: 12 April 2012 at 8:19pm | IP Logged
As for Bali and Banasura, I think Bali's relatives inspired hate in his mind so that he might take vengeance for his father's defeat. Bali himself may have been a great devotee of Lord Vishnu - maybe the others of the clan were bitter about it and wanted to take it out on Vishnu when the couldn't change Bali's mind. Probably, they taught Banasura to hate Vishnu using his love for his father - just my guess - saying that Vishnu cheated Bali or something of that sort. Anyone who has been brainwashed thus will not listen to reason. Besides, I've always found the Rakshas clans praying to Lord Shiva and Lord Brahma for boons. I seldom find any demon praying to Lord Vishnu for a boon. So, it could have been that Bali was raised to worship Shiva rather than Vishnu.


As for the question of why Arjun was chosen to evacuate Dwaraka, I am not clear with the details. Some say that Arjun was visiting Dwaraka at that time and Krishna asked him to evacuate Dwaraka after telling him of the upcoming danger.  Some say that Krishna sent Daruka (his charioteer) to inform the Yadhavas and Arjuna (who was staying in Dwaraka at that time) of the calamity and to evacuate the city.

Some say Arjun came to Dwaraka to participate in the last rites of Balarama, Krishna and other Yadhavas and hence saved those who remained.

No idea what exactly happened. It seemed to me that choosing Arjun was a mere chance or maybe he was the only one who could have stalled the ocean till everyone was safe.

I think Bheema could have done it as well but maybe it was speed that was required more than brute strength. Perhaps Krishna decided that Arjuna was the best person to save his relatives.


As for varaali's question on Parikshit's curiosity, I agree with Vrish. Parikshit could've heard about his father and grandfathers from his own relatives. Also, Krishna was over 90 years old (93 or 96, I forgot the exact age) during the Mahabharat. Considering Parikshit's age when he was cursed, the events that happened during Krishna's birth would've been about or more than 150 years ago and none of the Yadhavas were there to give him the details. It is possible that Parikshit could've got the story from Devaki and Vasudeva but they hardly knew much about how Krishna grew up. Besides, to have a better understanding of what Krishna did and why, a sage could have explained better than anyone else.

But, more than all other reasons, it was the situation that was more important, While Parikshit was listening to Srimad Bhagavatham for salvation, the Mahabharata was recited to Janamejaya so that he would understand the power of fate in one's life and not blame anyone for what had happened.

The following 2 member(s) liked the above post:

ShivangBuch.Vrish.

Post Reply New Post

Go to top

Related Topics

  Topics Topic Starter Replies Views Last Post
+* DBSK: Episode Discussions *+

2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 39 40

...PARiNA... 317 16364 16 April 2012 at 12:35am
By .Vrish.
Rukmini's messenger in Kali Yuga varaali 7 988 23 July 2011 at 7:13am
By kinny_ranvir
11 July written update~War discussions lakshmi42 7 708 12 July 2011 at 5:33am
By Roark

Forum Quick Jump

Forum Category

Active Forums

Dwarkadheesh - Bhagwaan Shree Krishna Topic Index

Limit search to this Forum only.

 

Disclaimer: All Logos and Pictures of various Channels, Shows, Artistes, Media Houses, Companies, Brands etc. belong to their respective owners, and are used to merely visually identify the Channels, Shows, Companies, Brands, etc. to the viewer. Incase of any issue please contact the webmaster.