We have upgraded Pariprashnena! Login is done with email OR username + usual password now.
Any problem or doubt please email pariprashnena@gmail.com
Explanation of 10 million wives of Citraketu
-
During a Bhagavatam class I was asked for explanation. I obviously did not know if there is one.
SB 6.14.11 clearly states: Citraketu had ten million wives, but although he was capable of producing children, he did not receive a child from any of them. By chance, all the wives were barren.
The question was (from rather a senior devotee) who said that it came up on a previous class, and the estimate they did was rather alarming, for it takes a long time.
Any bona fide explanations? ysccd -
I dont know if that would be a 'bona fide explanation' but it is not hard to notice that Puranic language is full of obvious exagerrations to emphasize the point being made.
-
Most stories from the Bhagavatam that relate to the age of Satya Yuga are difficult to comprehend in this age of Kali, that is why I prefer to focus on Chaitanya Caritamrta. The pastimes of Lord Chaintainya took place in the age of Kali Yuga and many of the topics are so relevant even today. His protest marches, defying the Kaazi, his rejection of the caste system, relations between two opposing religions.
-
Taken literally, if he would try to have children with each of them, one per day, then it would take 10 000 000/365 = 27 397 years. So it would be theoretically possible for a superman in Satya yuga with lifespan of 100 000 years. Puranic Enc. gives no details on Citraketu's wives.VEDA:
But at what point was a woman declared "barren"? If, after the first copulation, she did not conceive a child (or a son, because daughters don't really seem to count?!)?[br]
And what about the length of the menstrual cycle for women back then?[br]
Also, it is common that in a female population that lives together, all females tend to menstruate by the same cycle.
[br]
[br]Anyway, the sheer logistics of actually trying to calculate how to impregante 10 000 000 women ... -
[quote][cite] ccd:[/cite]During a Bhagavatam class I was asked for explanation. I obviously did not know if there is one.
SB 6.14.11 clearly states: Citraketu had ten million wives, but although he was capable of producing children, he did not receive a child from any of them. By chance, all the wives were barren.
The question was (from rather a senior devotee) who said that it came up on a previous class, and the estimate they did was rather alarming, for it takes a long time.
[/quote]
This could be coming close to what was discussed in the room conversation from June 26, 1975 in Los Angeles, http://prabhupadabooks.com/d.php?g=162062 , about King Ugrasena and his four billion personal servants.
...
Devotee (1): But then because so many things they have to accept on faith without knowing, it then weakens their faith as to what they should accept and why should they accept Kṛṣṇa, who they can't see any more than King Ugrasena's four billion bodyguards.
Prabhupāda: Don't accept. Don't accept.
Devotee (2): But we want them to accept. The point is, if we say to a scientific man, "There was four billion," and if our statement is wrong...
Prabhupāda: But our position is that if some portion we cannot understand, it is our incapability.
Devotee (2): That is all right. But since we are...
Prabhupāda: That's all. Unless we have got this faith we cannot use these Purāṇas. In the Purāṇas there are many such statements.
Devotee (2): Yes, but we just want to understand.
Prabhupāda: Therefore many people, they do not accept Purāṇas. So what can be done?
...
Prabhupāda: You should do your business. That's all. Earn money and enjoy.
Devotee (2): No, I mean what should we do Kṛṣṇa consciously?
Prabhupāda: You give up Kṛṣṇa consciousness, I say. That is my advice.
Devotee (2): Why should we do that?
Prabhupāda: Then that I cannot say.
Devotee (1): Isn't there a middle of the road?
Prabhupāda: If you are finding so many faults, you give it up.
Devotee (1): No. We're not finding fault.
Prabhupāda: Then there is no other advance, alternative. No alternative. Either you accept or reject it.
Devotee (1): We accept, but we would like some instruction on...
Prabhupāda: No. I have no such knowledge to convince you.
Devotee (1): No, we accept Kṛṣṇa consciousness philosophy...
Prabhupāda: That's all right. Accept, or if you reject, reject.
Devotee (1): We accept.
Devotee (2): We want to apply it.
Devotee (1): We want to apply it to the world as it is now.
Prabhupāda: No no. You cannot. You are not authorized.
Devotee (1): Well, who is authorized?
Prabhupāda: The authorized... You are not authorized. Who is authorized, that is not your business.
... -
It is very dangerous to suspend critical thinking when studying the shastra. If you do, pretty soon you are redy to accept just about anything on your blind faith. At that point you are no longer STUDYING shastra. A study implies application of reason, logic, and critical analysis with respect to the subject of your study.
-
Then how do you view Srila Prabhupada's reply to those disciples who had troubles with understanding how King Ugrasena had four billion personal servants?
Even if we did manage to somehow get all the information to calculate how to impregnate ten million women or how a king could have four billion personal servants - what would that really help?
And what if our calculation would show that the numbers given in the scriptures are wrong? Would this be grounds for us not to take any scriptures seriously anymore?
Are we to set ourselves up as arbiters on what in scriptures is merely poetic exaggeration, and what is fact? -
Baker, the text doesn't elaborate so I don't want to speculate.
> But at what point was a woman declared "barren"? If, after the first copulation, she did not conceive a child (or a son, because daughters don't really seem to count?!)?
> And what about the length of the menstrual cycle for women back then?
This may be stated in dharmasastras or ayurvedic texts but I don't remember anything specific.
It's not true that daughters didn't count. If there was no son, daughter had to take care of e.g. funeral rites for parents. Look up Manusamhita for details.
> Also, it is common that in a female population that lives together, all females tend to menstruate by the same cycle.
There're still differences though.
> Anyway, the sheer logistics of actually trying to calculate how to impregante 10 000 000 women ...
To analyze these things by our present and limited experience and material logic can be misleading. The quoted conversation is one notorious example of this. I've met some devotees, or rather former devotees, who became victims of this approach. One of them just yesterday. -
> Anyway, the sheer logistics of actually trying to calculate how to impregante 10 000 000 women ...VEDA:
[br]
To analyze these things by our present and limited experience and material logic can be misleading.
I agree. Perhaps I should have added an ironic or sarcastic smiley to my post, I had thought it was apparent from my wording that I wasn't serious about the efficacy or accuracy of such calculations. :)
[br][br]The quoted conversation is one notorious example of this. I've met some devotees, or rather former devotees, who became victims of this approach.
I agree - trying to independently / neutrally / objectively verify scriptural statements is an endeavor doomed to failure. -
Then how do you view Srila Prabhupada's reply to those disciples who had troubles with understanding how King Ugrasena had four billion personal servants?Baker:
Baker... there is SO MUCH MORE to this conversation between Prabhupada and Kanupriya& Jamadagni, read about it, as it is very informative... anyway SP was a literalist when it came to shastra and demanded the same from his direct disciples (rather forcefully at times), but Thakura Bhaktivinoda was NOT, thus establishing more than a sufficien precedent for us, his grand-disciples. -
Imho, Prabhupada told them 'Forget about it and do your stuff' because papa is 'better' than aparadha.VEDA:
That is one possible take on this conversation. IMO it was a case of guru establishing a principle of obedience for those who claimed to be his disciples: "you do it my way, or you can hit the highway". -
Here is a link to what I consider a very thorough analysis of this incident: http://www.gaudiya-repercussions.com/index.php?showtopic=2911
-
“These things are not very important, we may not waste our time with these insignificant questions. There are sometimes allegorical explanations [in the Bhagavatam]. So there are many things which do not corroborate with the so-called modern science, because they are explained in that way. But where is the guarantee that modern science is also correct? So we are concerned with Krsna Consciousness, and even though there is some difference of opinion between modern science and allegorical explanation in the Bhagavata, we have to take the essence of Srimad-Bhagavatam and utilize it for our higher benefit, without bothering about the correctness of the modern science or the allegorical explanation sometimes made in Srimad-Bhagavatam.” (Letter 72-11-07)
I found this at http://www.swami.org/pages/sanga/2001/2001_44.php -
I would still like to know why you think Rama's older sister was "useless", and what you think she should have done?
I researched this a bit - Some accounts claim Lord Rama didn't have an older sister, and some say He did. Namely, that Rama's father first married a woman who was actually a relative of his, and the daughter they had, Santa, was handicapped, then given away to foster parents which healed the handicap.
I have also read that in brahminical culture, an older sister has the privilege to chastise her younger brother.
There are songs, sung from the women's perspective, where Rama behaves unruly, the women are upset, and Santa comes in to stand up for Sita.
Is this what you were referring to? -
SANTA. - Daughter of Dasaratha, son of Aja, but adopted by Lomapada or Romapada, king of Anga. She was married to Rishyasringa.
Shanta is said to be the daughter of Dasharatha and given to Romapada in adoption, and Rishyasringa marries her alone. -
Ref: The two most significant stories in the early books of Valmiki's Ramayana are the birth of Dasaratha's sons and Kaikeyi's evil plot to send Rama away to the forest. In the first story women have no role to play except as passive bearers of children; in the second, the evil nature of women is highlighted in the descriptions of Kaikeyi's adamant demands to have her son Bharata invested as the heir to the kingdom and to banish Rama to the forest for fourteen years.
The narrative in "Santagovindanamalu" ingeniously transforms both these events so that women acquire the credit for the birth of sons and the evil nature of Kaikeyi's demand is eliminated. First, according to this song, Kausalya advises Dasaratha that they should adopt Santa as their daughter. This daughter will bring good luck to the family and they will have sons. This is a powerful change indeed. The usual Brahmin family belief is that the firstborn should be a son. A firstborn daughter is greeted with disappointment, though it is not always openly expressed. This story suggests that a firstborn daughter is actually preferable because she, as a form of the goddess Laksmi, blesses the family with prosperity, which then leads to the birth of sons. Moreover, it is significant that the whole strategy is planned by a woman—whereas in the Valmiki Ramayana , for example, the sage Rsyasrnga performs a sacrifice for Dasaratha which leads to the birth of sons. What is interesting here is that Dasaratha listens to his senior queen's advice. Kaikeyi, however, initially refuses to go along because she will gain nothing from the plan. But Sumitra convinces Kaikeyi, who finally accepts the plan on the condition that Bharata, her son, will inherit the kingdom. Santa is duly adopted and brought to Ayodhya with great honors, where she is received as the very goddess of wealth. When she grows of age she is married to Rsyasrnga, again on the advice of Kausalya. The song then describes in fine detail the festivities of the wedding and the harmonious atmosphere of the palace, where the women are in control.-
Source(s):
http://www.valmikiramayan.net/bala/sarga11/bala_11_prose.htm
http://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft3j49n8h7&chunk.id=d0e7108&toc.depth=1&toc.id=d0e7108&brand=eschol -
So it's Shanta, not Satya. And she's the daughter of King of Anga adopted by Dasaratha as the first link says:
"A king named Dasharatha will be born into Ikshwaku dynasty who will be very virtuous, resplendent and truthful one to his vow." Said Sanat Kumara, the Sage."King Dasharatha will befriend the king of Anga and the king of Anga will beget a fortunate girl named Shanta.
Shanta is said to be the daughter of Dasharatha and given to Romapada in adoption, and Rishyasringa marries her alone. -
Well, you must remember that Krishna's powers are inconceivable.
Hey, imma tell something that Krsna done for me with my wives(which are a alot).
All given to me by him.
Instead of seeing them one at a time he put them in one body
and I enjoy the beauty all those different personalities at one time.
Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- All Discussions1,259
- Health59
- Other127
- Philosophy728
- Sadhana73
- Social217
- Tech55
In this Discussion
- Baker May 2010
- ccd May 2010
- jsmith May 2010
- Kula-pavana May 2010
- manasi_seva May 2010
- sg May 2010
- VEDA May 2010