#Paramatma | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

janaknandini-singh999 · 5 months

Note

so idk i felt like i could reach out to u for this, but like i was seeing one of ur posts about rukmini and i saw that apparently she did sati when shri krishna died, and I googled it and I found out in various places that yes, but idk that just made me really upset, like I understand the emotions but the concept itself makes me upset and i just couldn't believe that swayam devi rukmini and other wives actually did that u know, and if their lives were meant to be exemplary or teach us then what does it teach the Hindu people about sati u know and forcing it? like whenever smth like this that idk if i agree with or understand happens then I always try to trust that shri krishna intended it for a reason but here I really don't see the reason:( like surely it would have been stronger if rukmini were a pillar of comfort in the aftermath of shri krishnas death, or idk really even in srimad bhagavatam I was reading some lines about the raas lila and I just felt like, you know it showed the gopiyas and their love but on krishnas part I didnt feel like he was taking their love as seriously u know, or he seemed a little apathetic, idkkk I may be very quick to jump to conclusions about these things, and i shouldn't! but it's also why because shri krishna in my mind would also be deeply moved by these displays of love and also by the actions or happenings surrounding the people that love him, or people in general. which goes on I wanted to ask - what do you view shri krishna as? a historical figure, a mythological figure, an allegory for God/Brahman/Paramatma, someone who is emotional, someone who is perfect and does everything with a smile on his face?

and I just wish there were more stories of the divine feminine and all the female devis and their incarnations yknow? how do you feel about that? I'm sure they exist and must be lost somewhere, or I am not looking in the right place because I know things like the devi bhagavatam exist, but idk u must feel the divide between male and female gods, or is it that my perception is dependent on what I've come across growing up, or my perception of hindu society today?

for me, shri krishna was someone who existed in history, but he exists with such a fluidity that anyone who wishes to create a story of him that THEY find touching automatically becomes valid, because he is Bhagavan and so he changes with how his devotees perceive him or find love in him. which is why idk about radharani's 'existence' but I also feel her presence and I just intuitively *feel* that it doesn't matter if it is accurate or not, her identity as the divine counterpart and lover of shri krishna is so valid and touching yk

but I think my understanding of shri krishna can be very confusing to me sometimes because I am philosophical so I always question and critically look at things, so I question things like "if he is bhagavan, would he actually be like this, would he be like that" etc. I know I'm a seeker and my path must be jnana yoga and it's difficult but it's the way i find my way to bhakti. I'm a bhakt and emotionally attached now because i understand that I can never understand everything, and I naturally gravitate to being attached to shri krishna anyway despite all my questions, and I'm trying to embrace that.

sorry, I am aware I might seem arrogant or conceited questioning shri krishna bhagavan himself who is so huge and massive and I am sososoososooo tiny compared to him, as well as lakshmi devi and everyone else...there's no way I can understand everything, or even a small part of it.

it is just my own relationship with krishna i guess. or my own relationship with what I consider right and wrong.

please feel free to share your thoughts and views if you like 🙏🙏

sorry for the spam omg😭😭😭radhe radhe sakhi I appreciate you for listening so much!!!💙💙💙💙

Hey sakhi, first of all I'm glad you felt like reaching out to someone :') come heree yaar *hugs you tight and kisses your forehead and then hugs you again*

Now for the explanation - first things first I want you to know that whatever may have ensued in that yug was first of all majorly determined by patriarchy (yes, even when it came to krishna) and secondly, as a result, all of the texts were mostly manipulated to show the control of men over women. Now please keep that in mind as I continue..

Now that we have the power dynamics of gender out of our way let's get right into it: the sheer love between Krishna and his gopiyan and wives that no egoistic/materialistic mortal consumed by power and arrogance would ever be able to grasp in their entire life. It's the same reason why most people attack Radha for being worshipped with Krishna even though she was "just a lover" in their eyes. Now coming to back to it, in the simplest words, nothing existed for the wives of Krishna after he died. Their souls passed away with him - they had died anyway, it was just a matter of letting go of their bodies at this point after purging themselves through the purifying fire once and for all. Coz yes, to be very precise and blunt, all of their purposes had come to an end for this lifetime after Krishna passed away. Their purpose as Lakshmi's incarnations was to be Krishna's consort in his journey of dharma. This is something that can't be understood by most people because they start by directly comparing themselves to them. First of all, no you can't. Nobody in this yug (Kalyug) can have that sort of selfless, maddening devotion for anyone who isn't God (Kanha) Himself. So please don't equate yourself to them. It would just be wrong and simply... unjust? Also, again - it was a patriarchy so that was the picture painted for us too in the end. You wanna know something though? Radha was the only consort of Krishna who passed away before him. When she left her mortal body, she called out to Krishna to play his bansi for the last time in this lifetime for her as she peacefully passed away in his lap, listening to it and smiling. Krishna lost absolutely all hope after that. He broke down, broke his bansi in half and never played it for anyone ever again in his whole life after Radha passed on. His half soul had gone and taken along his dearest love with him. After that he just existed to complete his dharma, his purpose. His body otherwise had died. That was a kind of Sati for him, in his own heartbreakingly haunting way but nobody ever tells you that.

Coming to the portrayal, it's what the characters are moulded and shown to us that view our lens but really it should be debated when it comes to Gods because we are supposed to worship and follow their ideals. There are definitely a lot of divine goddesses in our religion. In fact, hinduism is the only religion that worships Goddess primarily as the eternal Shakti from which all beings are born (in most other religions there are just demi goddesses and gray/antihero goddesses). For example: greek mythology. That's probably again coz of the prevalant patriarchy. When Lilith (Adam's first wife) revolted against Adam for unequal power play, what did they do? Very conveniently painted her as the demoness queen aka the villain. Then ofc the stories that followed of her eating babies because she was jealous of Eve (the perfect submissive wife). Honestly how much should we even believe and how much discard? Next is Greek Mythology where the queen Goddess is Hera who is portrayed as a very angry Goddess and villainised almost every time, just because she stands up to her husband who sleeps with many others and doesn't care. She poisons other women in jealousy. What are these stories even trying to show? That what the man doing is alright and when it's a woman then it's "women are only women's enemies and they all just want to attack their poor husbands?" *cue men laughing together and mocking their wives*

It's a very gray area to touch upon and I don't wanna hurt sentiments but it's what it is. Coming back to Hindu - see, Krishna was a very tricky (and a trickster ;) part to portray. He was supposed to be mischievous but he was also supposed to be morally correct. Why else do we adore him sm? Because he resonates with us in this yug - he's cool and nice, a bsf, a father, a guide, a babygirl all in one. But look at his pov also na? That's a very difficult image to maintain, to be able to be loved and respected by all generations equally even with such a fluid identity. And since it's such a fluid identity, it was even easier to be tampered with by the brahmins who gave us the knowledge firsthand that was passed down by him. But just imagine - if even after all the (possible) manipulation of his character he still gives us the vibes of a genuine bestie, how loving would he actually be??? Like begaad kar bhi kuch nahi bigaad paaya jiska koi toh phir hum kya hi maaya hi uss kanhaiya ke saamne?

Btw another thing I wanted to point out, something that in turn is very personal to me, is my relationship with lord Ram. Can I just say that I had a sort of raging, blind hatred towards him? Ok, attack me as much as you like but let me first complete my case. Ofc as soon as I got to know that he left Sita ji because of a mere dhobi's accusation, I was furious beyond control. What was the point of even saving her if you had to do this??? What gives you the right of being called the perfect man (maryada purshottam) if you do this to the wife who devoted her entire life to you literally without any questions? How are you the best man in society when you don't even know the difference between right and wrong and get so easily swayed by other's influence and forget everything else? I was very much triggered and was one of those who saw it on the surface level and rebelled against it. Then something happened in my life which completely changed my perception. Tmi but let's just say I was Sita here (haha, so unironic) and I loved someone (let's call them Ram). We were perfect. Too perfect actually. And maybe it was something that things too beautiful are meant to end just as ravishingly because they left me. Not because of any other reason other than circumstance. It was also scarily similar to what happened to Ram when he actually left Sita. When it happened to me I grovelled and cursed and cried and cried. But despite everything, I could never blame this person. Because it wasn't their fault. They loved me when they left me but they had to do it. With a shock, I realized how much it was resonating now. I took it as a sign and this time I rampaged articles and articles on Ram Sita's relationship and finally found it out: Ram was distraught. He begged at Sita's feet that he doesn't want to leave. "No, my love. Not when I've finally been reunited with you after all this time." But Sita knew bettee. She quietly left the palace when he was sleeping at night and made her way into her beloved forest where she knew nobody would find her. It was for everyone's good. And Sita had made peace with it. They loved each other all the same. He never married again btw and something more which they don't tell you: Ram sculpted Sita's statue in his palace right next to his throne: a silent but crystal clear reminder to his people about who their rightful, true queen was and nobody could do anything about it. They were wrong, Siyaram weren't. But the tragic circumstances were unavoidable. Another legend that justifies it all is the curse of Asura Guru Shukracharya on Vishnu that he would be separated from Lakshmi in every birth (sitaram, radhakrishna).

To conclude though, I got my answer and I thanked Ram/Krishna/universe for it.

For those who attack and then those who justify sati of these women by merely looking at the surface level: tell them the tale of Sita who didn't need a man to tell her what her worth was. She didn't care whether she was in the palace or lost in the forest, though she always preferred the latter and was fortunate enough to live most of her life in it. She didn't budge when Raavan kidnapped her, didn't budge when a dhobi accused her of being impure, didn't budge when she went through everything because she knew she was right and because she was strong. To hell with those who didn't get that, she was her only validation, her only solace. Don't get the wrong idea that you can throw whatever struggle you want on a woman but be inspired that inspite of it all, she emerged victorious in her own eyes every time and then again and finally as a Goddess that everyone fell on their feet, crying and begging for forgiveness for ever doubting her.

Tell them the tale of Shakti, her beautiful roop Kaushiki who when spotted by the lake taking a bath mesmerized demons. The asura kings Shumbh Nishumbh laughed and said that such beauty could only be in their possession so they issued orders for her to marry either of them. Kaushiki simply smiled and said "I'll happily marry you. But only if you can defeat me in a battle. I'll only be of a man whose strength is equal to mine." The asura kings laughed louder "Such arrogance for the puny stature of a woman?"

The next thing they knew was duelling with Kaushiki and being killed.

Before the death blow a light emanated and that's when they realized who they had challenged. "Take me home, Mother." they were grateful to be slain by the hands of the ever kind goddess who merely smiled and granted their wish as their souls flew out their bodies.

Tell them the tale of Shakti and how only one Navratri used to celebrated (Ashwina Navratri) but then Ram was in Lanka and he had to rescue his wife. He couldn't find a way because his enemy was being protected by Shiv ji's blessings. The only one who could help him was the Goddess. But he couldn't wait for the next Navratri he didn't have time so he started a fast and worshipped Her for nine days (it later came to be known as Chaitra Navratri) She blessed him with strength and on the tenth day they celebrate Vijay Vijaydashami (Dussehra) when Ram was finally able to conquer evil.

p.s: please don't call yourself conceited and arrogant, dear sakhi. If you were then you would've just attacked his idealogy without the need to understand it. But you're questioning and that means you want to understand it. When we love someone we want to know their actions and why they did what they did which would eventually bring us closer to them. When we question, we learn. And we want to learn about things and people we love, right? :)

Well, Kanha we love like that and he would've never wanted his image to be as a dictator. Rather he'd be so happy and proud that you want to understand and get closer to him <3

I'm grateful to Kanha with all my heart that he picked me as a medium for such a beautiful sakhi soul as you 🙏✨️

33 notes · View notes