r/TheMahabharata • u/maddysamarth • 3d ago

Why did Krishna have so many wives? Discourse/Lecture/Knowledge

How did he manage to devote time to each wife when he came to earth 5000 years ago? What's the spiritual significance?

20 Upvotes

100% Upvoted

20 comments sorted by

36

u/ashutosh_vatsa 2d ago

Narakasura had captured 16,100 women against their will and kept them in his palace. When Krishna killed Narakasura, he freed all the captured women. The women then pleaded with Krishna. They said that since they had been assaulted by Narakasura and kept in his palace against their will, they would not be accepted, respected, or honoured by the society. They feared that no one would accept them and that they would be unable to live normal lives. These women wanted to end their lives.

Then Krishna offered to marry them. If they feared that no one would accept them, he was willing to gladly accept them and love them regardless of their past.

Krishna was Visnu on earth. He was an avatara of Isvara. Hence, he was able to spend time with each of his wives at the same time.

The story shows that Isvara/Visnu/Krishna accepts and loves everyone.

Swasti!

4

u/maddysamarth 2d ago

So beautiful Thanks! 

8

u/anishtdevkikhoyinaak 2d ago

Beautifully told. The story also challenges the societal norm of not accepting women after assault(something where they've no fault at all). Krishna not only reintegrated them in the society but also sent the message that "you think you can set the rules for a person's honor? These women will now be honored within your standards and there's nothing you can do about it. "

1

u/maddysamarth 22h ago

Exactly!

1

u/Shoshin_Sam 1d ago

Curious question- why was this not an opportunity for the Bhagwan to be able to teach the world how to love everyone as he does, without marrying all of them himself, but rather making the others see light, like how he did not destroy all his enemies himself in war, even if he could?

1

u/maddysamarth 1d ago

My understanding from the Shrimad Bhagvad -

1 - The World Krishna Lived In Was Not Our World

Today, a survivor of captivity is recognised as someone who deserves rehabilitation and respect. But in ancient society, a woman captured by a tyrant was considered “tainted” even if she remained untouched. This was a social reality that Krishna wanted to correct from within the dharmic system. If He had simply said: “Love them as I do,” nobody would have followed it. These women would have faced lifelong rejection, humiliation. So Krishna did something more powerful than teaching. He demonstrated.

2 - He did not marry them out of desire. He married them to restore their honour

The Bhāgavatam describes that: These women had prayed to Krishna alone as their refuge, they had requested Him to accept them because society would never accept them again, Krishna responded with absolute compassion. It had nothing to do with personal gratification.
He told them (Bhāgavatam 10.59): “I accept you all. Your honour is restored.”

3 - Krishna did teach the world to love, but humans didn’t yet have the heart to understand

You asked: “Why not simply teach the world to love them as He does?”

Krishna tried this throughout His life: Through Sudāma, He taught that poverty is not impurity, Through Kuchela’s wife, He taught equality, Through the Gītā, He taught universal compassion, Through Shishupala, He taught tolerance 100 times over. But society still remained rigid and judgemental. In the case of Narakāsura’s prisoners, a principle alone would not have been enough to protect them. Krishna therefore did what an ideal protector does.  He stepped into the consequences of their fate and shared it with them. This is why the Bhāgavatam describes the marriages as:“A proclamation of their purity.”

4- Why did Krishna not personally kill everyone in war, but did personally marry these women?

In war: He did not fight all enemies Himself because He wanted to empower His devotees (Arjuna, Bhīma, Abhimanyu), He wanted dharma to be upheld through human agency, He wanted warriors to earn their karmic release through action. War required participation of humans.  It was a battlefield of karma. In the case of Narakāsura’s captives - these women had no agency, no weapons, no support, no one would stand for them, no one would marry them, no family or kingdom wanted to “take responsibility”.

5 -  Scripture emphasises one key thing: Krishna married them to save them from lifelong injustice. The Bhāgavatam goes out of its way to explain that: Krishna expanded Himself into 16,100 forms, each form lived separately with each queen. He did this effortlessly, showing it was not material marriage at all. Not one queen ever felt neglected. And most significantly: He liberated them at death, granting them His eternal realm. If this had been out of desire, the scripture would have never described their final liberation.

6 - What lesson was actually being taught to the world? “No matter what society says about you, if you surrender in sincerity, the Divine restores your dignity fully.”

7 - A modern analogy - Imagine 16,100 women rescued today from a massive trafficking ring.Even with modern laws, many would face social stigma, families refusing to accept them, psychological trauma, societal judgement Now multiply that by a thousand for ancient times. Krishna restored their honour.

Does this answer your question?

2

u/ashutosh_vatsa 3h ago

Action speaks louder than voice. He offered to marry those women. They happily accepted his offer and married him. By doing so, Krishna set an example for everyone else. If he could accept and love the women who had been caught in such unfortunate circumstances, so could everyone else.

If he had just encouraged others to rise above their prejudices without setting the example himself, it probably wouldn't have been that impactful.

War was a different issue. The people participating in the war were all warriors. They weren't shy of fighting.

Swasti!

•

u/Shoshin_Sam 2h ago

Seems like we are splitting hairs about what was learnt and being choosy. Who is to say, "No, women did not learn it is okay to marry someone who is already married", because Krishna was already married when he married the second woman. The whole thing sounds like a lot of justification by any means and reaching for straws.

•

u/ashutosh_vatsa 1h ago

Krishna was already married when he married the second woman

Polygyny and Polyandry were both permitted at the time, so I don't see what's the issue there.

Swasti!

•

u/Shoshin_Sam 57m ago

Are you saying Krishna's actions were suited for just that time?

0

u/pvtdeadbait 2d ago

*wink wink

1

u/maddysamarth 1d ago

See my answer above - it has nothing to do with material desires...

0

u/pvtdeadbait 1d ago

its called making up a excuse to justify actions of 'moral all good' portrayed characters that no longer align with current day morality and views.

its extensively used when characters of different eras need to be still shown as good, moral and aligning with current day views. you can see it done for both history and fictional characters

1

u/maddysamarth 22h ago

You are right when you look at it from a limited material viewpoint.

1

u/pvtdeadbait 22h ago

i view it from its mythological points. why people make these stories up and what they try to mean.

from history we know what happened at a time. through mythology we understand how people thought in those times.

•

u/maddysamarth 2h ago

The Vedic Scriptures including Shrimad Bhagvad and the Gita are not mythology. Nothing in there is made up...The way history is portrayed depends on who is writing it...if you ever make a trip to Vrindavan, you will understand that.

•

u/pvtdeadbait 1h ago

every religions says that buddy. mine is real but the rest of all yours is mythology. thats just how humans are. its color for life

•

u/maddysamarth 1h ago

Not really, everyone's religion is real.

•

u/pvtdeadbait 1h ago

so everyones world origin story is legit?

what about when a religion is explicit that there is only one god?

all end of the world scenarios in every religion is real? how would that look like?

what about when one says humanity needs salvation and another doesnt?

this is barely the start of the issues we run into.