#kalyavana

[raat-jaaga-paakhi]

(D)Evolution of Rukmini-Harana

This I wrote while brainstorming in the beginning of this month to centre my brain on what we know of Rukmini, so I could write her with (dis)regard to the texts. And what I found out in my Ruk-foray, was simultaneously intriguing and repelling. Tagging my Mahabharata people, if you want to go on Rukmini’s journey through the scriptures and the later kavyas (ancient fanfiction, guys) and don’t mind my snarky commentary in between as I try to be as analytical as possible (Warning: Strong Opinions and Wtf Moments!) – @avani008 @parlegee @incurablescribbler @shaonharryandpannisim @ambitiousandcunning​ @glyphenthusiast​ @mayavanavihariniharini @allegoriesinmediasres @walburgablack​ @jigyask​ @heyifinallyhaveablog @1nsaankahanhai-bkr from the top of my head. Under the cut, for this is detailed. 

Mahabharata

Rukmini-Haran legend is outlined in several places: that Sabha scene we all seem to love unanimously, Krishna-Draupadi in exile, Arjuna describing Krishna’s feats, and in Udyoga parva when Rukmi comes to help in the war. Other times, she is mentioned as mother of Pradyumna (in fact, Pradyumna’s name is mostly replaced by “son of Rukmini”). Only details being: Rukmini was meant to be Shishupala’s, Krishna came, abducted her, fought off Rukmi who had taken an oath to not return without killing him, Rukmi builds Bhojakata due to his defeat. Rukmi is mentioned a few times to have learned battlecraft from a kimpurusha Druma (whose name is often written as Drona, eliciting confusion between Dronacharya of Hastinapur), from whom he gets Indra’s bow which is said to be equal to Gandiva and Sharnga.

- BORI CE Mbh, Translated by B. Debroy.

He comes with an akshauini to Pandavas’ camp where he is welcomed warmly enough, until he opens his big mouth and says, “Dudes, if you all are afraid of the Kauravas, I can help!” Insert big, smug smile. Krishna is present, but silent. Arjuna speaks, reminding Rukmi that he sought no help from anyone at multiple times (he goes harcore here *grins*), and wouldn’t need the same now, esp. from one like him. Disappointed Rukmi goes to Duryodhana’s camp where he’s rejected for, er, being the Pandavas’ reject and for his big mouth. Yeah. He, like Balarama, remains neutral. (Interesting that it’s Balarama who kills him, later.)

- BORI CE Mbh, Trans. By B. Debroy

There is no letter, no mention of a swayamvara, no love, nothing, sticking to Mahabharata’s rather dry style, which if stripped of its mystical elements would be a cold, clean historical narrative.

Apology: I am not giving any more screenshots (except for Bhaagavat, because it has some rather nice parts), for this would become…far too long to handle for even me. I promise you can take my word for it. 

Harivamsa

Considered an “appendix” (khila) to Mahabharata, it contains the legend of Rukmini in the greatest of details. @parlegee​ would love to hear that her fic kalyanakirti, where Rukmini and Krishna have an early meeting before the letter and all, does have some solid basis. The legend in narrated in two separate parts: swayamvara and harana. Sadly, the first part doesn’t get into the BORI CE Harivamsa, but that is made understandable by Dr. Bibek Debroy, who comments the Harivamsa editing is indiscriminate and lacking in quality w.r.t. cutting down events, as compared to the precise and thoughtful editing of Mahabharata proper, at the very beginning of his translation. Thus, the omission, I guess. I am giving a rundown for this is what we will refer back to as we compare the later versions. (For reference, go to Mahabharata Resources online.) 

Swayamvara part – 

Rukmi arranges for Rukmini’s swayamvara, calling his boys and excluding Krishna (ofc), of which Krishna gets wind and arrives in class with Garuda. He is welcomed—notedly not by the king, as opposed to rules of hospitality—by his relative/father Kaisika, outside of the capital of Vidarbh in Kaisika’s own city.

Quite strangely, Kaisika and his brother Kratha offer Krishna their city; there is even some messenger fanfare with Indra.

Comment: This seems like something of an interpolation to me (it’s politically and intellectually stupid okay – why would krishna need to abduct rukmini with such pains if a part of vidarbha was already his. he could have been more politically subtle and all. it’s just horrible statesmanship­), and part of the avatar-vaad or “make Krishna a god so that we can cloak his philosophies and ideas with the veil of god’s incomprehensible lilas so that no one can hope to emulate him and his decidedly non-brahmanical approach, and so they wait for his next appearance while the world burns” propaganda. Shut up, Medha, you’re going to be killed for this. Nah, brain, I will speak my truth.

Meanwhile, Jarasandha and his cronies come to know of Krishna’s arrival, get “afraid” and there is this huge-ass, strange, contradictory conversation. Jarasandha and Sunitha (read: shishupala. yeah, boi had this other, nicer name) are primarily of the view that Krishna is gonna fight them, while Dantavakra (hm, isn’t he another of krishna’s cousins?) opposes that. Shalva and the others also expressed their ideas. The exact point of this conversation is highly inscrutable because, (not) strangely, the conversation is shrouded by them praising and glorifying their arch-enemy as the “lord of the universe” and what-not. (wut? why do you all constantly fight him if you know “who he truly is” and so on? are you masochists, guys – i am seriously concerned. your opponent is apparently vishnu yet you go on fighting him knowing you’re gonna be defeated. what’s the point? medha, stfu) I mean, a professional, grudging admiration for a fellow warrior is fine, good even, but what’s this BS?

The next part is even more laughable, which I didn’t think was possible. They hear of Krishna’s “coronation” and except Rukmi, everyone attends it, even Jarasandha. Huh? Jarasandha who laughed in Krishna’s face in Mbh, called him a coward cowherd (love alliteration) outright so many times in both Mbh and HV . . . I don’t understand any of this. Is it fear for the one person you cannot seem to properly defeat? Are you trying to keep peace, because that’s ridiculous when you have gone on offence so many times. Is it that you are “honoured” to be part of such an important moment in your arch-enemy, who also happens to be “Vishnu’s poorna avatar”?

Then comes a truly interesting part – Bhishmaka and Krishna have a talk. Bhishmaka thinks it’s better to offer Rukmini to Krishna outright and that swayamvara is a stupid thing – whether it is this particular one Rukmi has arranged, or swayamvaras in general, is kinda unclear. For the sake of Bhishmaka, I will go with the first. He apologises to Krishna for not inviting him to the swaymvara for he is helpless against his ignorant son (I guess the ignorance relates to “the true form of Lord Krishna” here) and…hm, this is both exciting and…controversial? Krishna rebukes Bhishmaka quite strongly about letting Rukmi treat him as a doormat and what-not and I would be heart-eyes for he’s technically defending Rukmini in some weird, chauvinistic manner, but . . . is he? His tone is rather peculiar, if you read it. He ends his little tirade with saying that Rukmini is Lakshmi reborn and as such, meant only for him, and technically demands to dismiss the swayamvara. And then, he just…leaves with Garuda. Form your headcanons, guys. This is just too weird.

Bhishmaka is sweet-and-obedient little devotee now and does as he is told. Interestingly, this is before the formation of Dwaraka, for it is here, after the Rukmini’s swayamvara is postponed that Jarasandh and his cronies hatch the plot to use the foreigner Kalyavana to kill Krishna. (just now you attended the boy’s coronation ceremony, usually attended by allies and friends, and praised him as lord of all…make up your minds, guys)

Also, it is here that Rukmini makes up her mind to marry Krishna. Hm, a little meeting, particularly the one you wrote, Maya Di, is extremely likely!

Harana part –

After Kalyavana’s death, Jarasandha’s failure and Dwaraka’s formation, Jarasandha decides to have Rukmini married to Shishupala, just like that. Here is also said that Rukmi had gained celestial weaponry and the Brahmastra (woah!) from Druma and Parasurama respectively. Hm, looks like he was quite the excellent warrior. It isn’t specified if Parashurama only gave him the celestial weapons or taught him as well like he did with Karna – both are different things. But hey, why do people keep going to Parasurama specifically for Brahmastra? I feel bad for the big guy. [Also, here comes this strange issue, Parasurama is, by Karna’s words as well as popular perception, supposed to not hold any sort of guru-ness towards Kshatriyas, which is why the latter had to lie in order to learn from him, considering Suta is an inferior division of the main Kshatriya varna. But that’s topic for another day, Medha.]

Okay, so it is mentioned that Rukmini and Krishna both longed for Krishna, and though there’s no dialogue, it appears that Rukmi knew of this, for the text goes on to say why Rukmi won’t accept this marriage – his enmity with Krishna due to the latter killing his friend Kamsa who also happened to be son-in-law of beloved Jarasandha etc. The text says that with Jarasandha and Shishupala, also came the allied kings Dantavakra, Paundraka, and the kings of Anga and Vanga. [This…is markedly curious. Surely by this time in the epic, Karna was crowned Angaraja? For it not to be so, Krishna would have to be much, much older than the Pandavas, chronologically speaking, which is the headcanon of a popular modern writer Ashok K. Banker. But Yudhisthir and Bhima are considered Krishna’s elders many times in Mbh. There is also this strange friend/frenemy-ship between Karna and Jarasandha as they have a kind of stalemate in a fight and Jarasandha, pleased, offers Karna a city in Anga, Malinipuri, if I remember right. Does it mean that not all of Anga was under Hastinapur’s influence? Again, Medha, to dissect another day.]

Now, “to please their aunt” (Shishupala’s mother Shrutashrava), Krishna comes with Balarama and other Vrishni heroes, all welcomed by Kaisika and Kratha. Upon seeing Rukmini in her journey to pay obeisances to Goddess Indrani, Krishna, er, cannot control himself and decides to abduct her, in consultation with Balarama and others. To note that (i) even though the text expresses both their desires to be with each other, it seems like an impromptu decision to abduct Rukmini, almost as if in lust (at least, that’s what the text makes it sound like); (ii) there’s none of that “coming alone in a hurry after getting her letter” event, as per Harivamsa. He comes quite prepared, and even consults with the other Kshatriyas before going for it.

You know the drill now: Krishna abducts Rukmini as she finishes her prayers and Balarama defeats all the guards. Krishna then puts the responsibility of the war on Yadava heroes like Balarama, Satyaki, Kritavarma, Gada, Prasena (is this that same Prasena of Syamantaka incident?) etc. and sets out for Dwaraka with Rukmini. At all this, Jarasandha and his cronies Shishupala, Dantavaktra, Paundraka, kings of Anga (again!), Vanga, Kalinga and others decide to kill Krishna in a joint attack. There are small descriptions of these following duels – Satyaki vs Jarasandha, Akrura vs Dantavakra, Viprthu vs Shishupala. Shishupala, after being attacked by Atidanta, Gavesana and Brhaddurga (who are these people, gosh) kills Virpthu’s horses and beheads Brhaddurga. Balarama kills the king of Vanga and then attacks Jarasandha. All this results in the defeat of Jarasandha and his cronies.

Hearing this, Rukmi vows before Bhishmaka and if he can’t kill Krishna and bring Rukmini back, he won’t return to the capital Kundina. Note that the next part of his vow, bringing Rukmini back, isn’t mentioned in Mbh proper. He leaves, accompanied by Kratha (that devoted guy?), Amsuman, Srutarva, Venudari and Bhishmaka’s other unnamed sons.

Rukmi sees Krishna-Rukmini standing on the banks of Narmada (aw, what are these two love-birds doing on a riverbank, that’s so romantic… Medha, stop). [Also, as I argued with someone on Quora, had it been a forcible abduction, without Rukmini’s consent in any way whatsoever, considering the letter is not in HV, they wouldn’t be standing there on a riverbank, resting and doing hell-knows-what. It’s a logical fallacy, sorry.]  

Seeing them together, he gets even more pissed and wants to kill Krishna in a dwairatha (dual chariot) fight. Cool stuff. Both archers fight. Krishna kills his charioteer and cuts off his chariot-banner. [What’s the thing with this? Why even bother? If you are making a statement then stop, we know who’s gonna win. Even if you didn’t win the fight, the texts would still claim you the winner. Medha, stop, you are supposed to love the man. Yes, the man, not the god men have created as a horrible substitute for the real thing. Why am I saying this now? This is a very normal archery feat if we see Mahabharata’s war parvas.] He defeats all the Vidarbhan warriors and kills many. Rukmi is not a doormat. He retaliates, cutting off Krishna’s banner as well (the garuda one! wow, boi), hurts both Krishna and his charioteer with his arrows. [Aw, and people say Arjuna only won his duels because of Krishna being his charioteer. Dude, look at this. I mean, these people straight out claim him to be God Incarnate and yet, they can’t completely smoothly modify a fight scene to suit their purposes – how sweet. Stfu, Medha.] Krishna then cuts Rukmi’s bow. [The Vijaya one? Surely Rukmi is not fighting such a serious fight without it. If so, wow. You just cut Indra’s prized bow – you really have a strong issue with the guy, don’t ya? Yeah, I feel you.]

Rukmi picks up another (here’s to perseverance), which Krishna again cuts off and crushes Rukmi’s chariot. Now Rukmi rushes at Krishna with a sword (gotta give, guy’s relentless) which Krishna cuts off and uses a sharp weapon called naracha on him which hurts him enough to render him senseless. The remaining soldiers run away. Rukmini’s pity aroused, she pleads for Krishna to spare her brother. Krishna lifts her up and reasures her (awww *waves shipping flag, completely ignoring the falling at his feet part*), then assures poor Rukmi of his safety (who seems to have woken up from his swoon by now, poor boy must have been so tired…why am I feeling so bad for Rukmi? I hate the guy! Btw, I can so imagine Krishna being cheeky here). He returns to Dwaraka with Rukmini, accompanied by Balarama and other Yadavas and his wedding his celebrated there.

There are no later versions of the legend in other texts that tally with the first part (swayamvara) seen in Harivamsa. There’s no love letter, no shaving hair-and-moustache. Let me tell you guys here only, for I don’t want to repeat this, there is no Madhavpur Ghed in the texts I have encountered (and they’re quite a bunch, as you’ll see).

Note: The evolution or composition of Mahabharata and Harivamsa are considered by old and modern scholars alike to have gone parallely, so the insertions of Rukmi’s details, his guru Druma, his bow Vijaya, etc. which seem to exactly match Harivamsa, may have been addded after that part of Harivamsa was written.

Vishnu Purana (about 300 BC-450 CE)

Rukmini-harana is narrated very shortly here, whereas in Harivamsa, it takes up a few chapters, being one of the most prominent parts of the text, as compared to Krishna’s marriage to his other wives. The entire swayamvara part, from Krishna’s “coronation” to the postponement of the swayamvara is missing here. From the harana part as well, Rukmi and his celestial weaponry, worship of Indrani, consultation with Balarama and other Yadavas before abduction, seeing Rukmini-Krishna along Narmada, details of the fights, aren’t present. Again, no love letter (though, even this extremely short version of a few mere verses speaks of Krishna and Rukmini’s mutual love), no shaving. However, it doesn’t deviate from the “original” in Harivamsa as well; it only clips away the details as if deeming them unnecesary in the larger context.

Matsya Purana (about 200-500 CE) mentions her among the Ashtabharya, here listed as – Rukmini, Satyabhama, Satya, Nagnajiti, Gandhari, Subhima, Shaivya, Lakshmana. [argh, we’ll talk about this later. just know for one that this is clearly not a very…right list, and not only in popular perception. jambavati isn’t mentioned; satya, nagnajiti, gandhari and lakshmana are having an identity crisis amongst themselves. basically, the text(s) is (are) only sure about rukmini and satyabhama. pardonable, for they happen to be krishna’s most famous wives. i feel so bad.]

Bhaagavat Purana (about 500-1000 CE)

Oh, yeah, this one is interesting. Unlike Vishnu Purana, Bhaagavat is all about the details. (reminds me of amitabh sir in badla every time i say this word.) There are omissions as well, for Rukmi and his celestial weaponry, Bhishmaka’s lineage, etc. are not mentioned. Let me go by points of difference only, since the main story has been explained in Harivamsa.

We get to hear the names of Rukmi’s younger brothers, only mentioned in HV – Rukmaratha, Rukmavahu, Rukmakesa, Rukmamali. We come to know Rukmini heard of Krishna from bards and decided he would be her perfect match. (Despite Bhaagavat’s devotional fervour that distracts from the main events, I love its version so much better in so many places.) Similarly, hearing of Rukmini’s knowledge and beauty, our boy pines for her. The relatives shipped Rukmini/Krishna as well, but only Rukmi seems to be against it, who arranges her marriage to Shishu. Learning of this, Rukmini sends a faithful old brahmin to Dwaraka with her message, who is received respectfully by Krishna. In her message, she…well, makes me fangirl. Interspersed between what seems to be fanatically devotional love for her “lord”, Rukmini calmly devises a straight and firm plan for him to follow, from the going to the temple of Girija (not Indrani, here) and the Rakshasa vivaha, telling him “not to worry” and all, and also adds a little…threat, in the end, that if he doesn’t do so, she will give up her life by fasting. Neat.

- Srimad Bhaagavat Purana

Krishna, “in love and excitement”, says that he too has been spending sleepless nights pining for Rukmini. Aw.

- Srimad Bhaagavat Purana

Added this to say, here’s the implicit metaphor of Jarasandha and his cronies being the kindling and Rukmini the diew generated by churning them. (Why am I thinking of Samudra-manthan?)

Here, Krishna doesn’t bring Balarama or any other Yadava hero with him, straight going to Kundina on his chariot with his charioteer Daruka and the brahmin, and apparently reaches within one night (which is realistically impossible, except if he had something like Pushpaka, which is not so here). There’s lot of description of pre-wedding things, where the only thing striking me is the phrase “Rukmini with fine teeth”. (I can just imagine her baring her teeth at Rukmi’s back, uff.) As Shishu sets out from Chedi with Jarasandha and his cronies who have developed a “stratagem” to kill Krishna, Balarama comes to know of the plot and sets out after Krishna with the Yadava heroes, moved by his affection for his bro. Exasperated elder brother, here he is.

A despairing Rukmini is informed by the brahmin of Krishna’s arrival in Kundina, she thanks him. Bhishmaka comes to know of Krishna and Balarama’s arrival, whereas in Harivamsa, it was Kaisika who welcomed them. There’s also this huge gathering of Vidarbhans to see Krishna and they decide that only he is fit for their princess. That’s so sweet. After worshipping Goddes Ambika/Girija, asking for Krishna to be her husband, Rukmini returns very slowly from the temple, her beauty so bewitching that a few kings “fall down from their horses, elephants, chariots”. Omfg! Lol. Krishna abducts her in presence of all those kings, who rebuke themselves and shower arrows upon Krishna, seeing which Rukmini laments in fear. Krishna consoles her, the Yadavas march against the kings; Jarasandha, Shishu and their friends have to flee to save their lives. No details are given, as compared to HV. Here, is a very interesting segment, where Shishu laments about having “lost” Rukmini and Jarasandha consoles him in a strangely fatalistic manner:

- Srimad Bhaagavat Purana

Comment: Jara actually doesn’t sound insane or just fatalistic here, imo. He sounds...manipulative af. Don’t think that was the intent of the writers (more likely it was just to forwards the idea of fate and futility as opposed to true action), but that’s what it sounds like to me. Worthy opponent for Krishna, if you ask me.

Now, there’s that drill with Rukmi and his vow, except here, he’s said to have taken an akshauhini of men. When he sees Krishna-Rukmini (no Narmada river here), he verbally insults Krishna unlike prev. versions and then attacks him.

- Srimad Bhaagavat Purana

(Even the abuse here is mild, compared to Mahabharata. I mean, think of the dice game, the Shishupala-vadha parva and so on! But still, Bhaagavat retains class, even as it propounds avatar-vaad, fatalism and fervent devotion.)

The description of battle here is more intense and long-drawn (compared to the main Yadava battle fought against Jarasandha and his cronies), with Krishna cutting down Rukmi’s banner, and then breaking three of his bows. Rukmi uses various kinds of weapons on Krishna – Parigha, Pattisa, Tomara, Camra, Shula, Asi, Shakti, etc. but Krishna remains steadfast in his defence. Rukmi then picks up a sword and rushes at Krishna; there’s no mention of Krishna having killed his charioteer and crushed his chariot. Krishna descends to thebsword-fight and brandishing his own, breaks Rukmi’s sword too. Now you know the drill, falling at his feet and all, our Rukmini. (Don’t roll your eyes, Medha.) Now...it’s in Bhaagavat we see the disfiguring first, Krishna deciding to give him some sort of light punishment, shaving off his moustache, beard and hair unevenly.

There’s another alteration here, that Balarama comes to see this and rebukes Krishna for humiliating a relative. Rukmini is apparently inconsolable and he offers Rukmini a patronising (if sensible philosophically in many places) discourse, starting with a more political note of “the conduct of Kshatriyas is hard and merciless where brother kills brother” and continuing with a lengthy philosophical lecture of the body and the soul, as in in tune with Mahabharata’s Gita, to a marginal extent. Rukmini attempts to calm down, and they return to Dwaraka. The marriage is well-described, with the addition of kings with intimate relations invited – from Kuru, Srinjaya, Kekeya, Kunti races and Vidarbh as well! Hm. Interesting. As is the inconsolable Rukmini, described earlier, which finds no mention in earlier (or a few later versions). Is it so hard to imagine a “difficult woman”, in Nikita Gill’s terms? Does she have to be a wilting flower, even though it breaks off from her prev. characterisation? I mean, she can sure be miffed at it, but for her to be so disconsolate that Balarama out of all people has to offer a huge-ass philosophical advice. Sigh. Basically, Bhaagavat more or less presents it attractively by way of supplying more materials to the story (the greatest and most landmark being Rukmini’s letter), even while it ignores some other details (like Narmada).

Brahmanda Purana (about 400-600 CE) doesn’t delineate the main legend, but Rukmini, the princess of Vidarbha, is mentioned as Krishna’s principal wife, along with the names of their sons and daughter.

Padma Purana (about 400-1600 CE)

Points of difference:

Brothers’ names apart from Rukmi not mentioned.

To fulfil her desire to marry her “lord”, Rukmini worships the gods from childhood itself and keeps sacred vows. Hm, yeah, go ahead.

Here, her brahmin is called the son of a purohita who is received by both Krishna and Balarama. Rukmini’s words in her message are not there anymore (a format which will be followed by every later version except the kavyas) as opposed to the beautiful plan in Bhaagavat and, they both set out for Kundina. No army of Yadava heroes accompany them.

Rukmini goes to the temple by her chariot rather than by foot, at evening, none of which is mentioned in prev. versions. After the abduction, it is Balarama who singlehandedly routs all the kings headed by Jarasandha, using his plough (Langala) and Musala (…the same weapon they use in the fratricidal war of Mausala parva, incidently; so it has some other source than that “curse” where Samva delivers this “new weapon” called musala).

There’s no mention of Rukmi’s vow.

When Rukmi attacks Krishna, he laughs and defends himself with his bow Saranga, a bow presented by Indra. Keeping with both HV and Bhaagavat, dear Krishna obligingly cuts of Rukmi’s bow, his banner, his charioteer’s head and crushes the chariot. There’s Rukmi with his sword, and Krishna with a sharp knife.

Interestingly, there’s no objection or plea or falling at his feet from Rukmini, but Krishna still doesn’t kill him, letting him go by his own free will. That doesn’t stop him from laughing and shaving the hair on his head, though. The beard and moustache are forgiven.

Despite not having taken the vow, apparently the humiliation is enough for Rukmi to built Bhojkata in Vidarbh outside of Kundina, keeping with all prev. versions.

No Madhavpur again. What’s interesting here, is that Nanda and Yashoda and other cowherds are present in the wedding in Dwaraka, unlike popular perception which says Krishna never met his adoptive parents after having left Vrindavana.

Skanda Purana (about 600-1200 CE)

It is narrated to Yudhisthir by Markandeya about the significance of some Rukmini teertha. Points of difference:

Rukmini’s mother is mentioned to be “Mahadevi”. This could also be a title, since queens were also addressed thus. Rukmini is said to be her second child, younger to Rukmi and elder to the other brothers, whose names aren’t mentioned.

At her birth, there is this prophecy about her marriage to this four-armed divine person by a bodiless voice, kinda like Kamsa’s akashvani. Sure, go on. Marry her to Krishna right as she’s born, why don’t you? It’s destiny after all. Can I add that the previous love affair between Rukmini and Krishna is also not mentioned. 

Damaghosha, king of Chedi and Shishupala’s father goes to Bhishmaka with a marriage proposal, more in accordance with a marriage as we see it now as compared to the prev. versions (where Jarasandha and Rukmi are instrumental), as also the prevalent nature of marriage of those days w.r.t. Mahabharata.

These two develop attraction to each other just prior to the abduction, in the vein of Harivamsa, but Harivamsa does speak of mutual pining long before the abduction. 

The brahmin messenger, the role or even the name of Jarasandha, Rukmi’s fierce vow – nothing finds mention.

Unlike prev. versions, Krishna and Balarama are invited by Bhishmaka to Rukmini’s marriage. No other Yadava hero is mentioned to have accompanied, similar to Padma Purana.

It brings back the river Narmada, where Rukmini and Krishna were resting and Rukmi stumbled upon them, which is only found farther back in Harivamsa.

Now, the battle with Rukmi gets interesting here. There is no archery or even swordfight; rather, Krishna takes his chakra to battle. Fearful, Rukmini asks Krishna to bless her brother with the “divine eye”. Krishna obeys, “pleased” by Rukmini. Rukmi’s ignorance taken away, he offers auspicious prayers to Krishna, who, pleased at the brother this time, blesses him and speaks “blissful words”. Rukmi happily goes back to Kundina. No Bhojkata, no insult, no killing or fighting.

Even the marriage isn’t celebrated in Dwaraka, but on the very banks of Narmada, in the presence of pious sages and other brahmins.

A long explanation of the significance of Rukmini tirtha is given in details, which we don’t find in prev. versions and which I have no energy to go over, for it isn’t significant to either the topic, or even Rukmini in general.

In a nutshell, Skanda Purana takes a decided and marked departure from the martial, the political and the more realistic, to the more mystical realms that have surrounded Krishna and his actions. Do we see a pattern here?

Brahmavaivarta Purana (about 700-1500 CE)

God, I hate this one so much. In a nutshell, guys, it goes several steps ahead of Skanda Purana and goes for a classic social marriage, as is prevalent nowadays. There’s no abduction, no Shishupala, no love, no resistance from Rukmi, no agency from either the bride or the groom. Nothing.

[Instead of Rukmini-harana, or even Rukmini-swayamvara, the headings become “Rukmini Udvaah Prastaav varnan” (description of proposal of Rukmini’s marriage) and then, “Rukmini Vivaahe Yuddham” (fight in Rukmini’s marriage). Credit where credit’s due, I learnt from an online friend about the Sanskrit titles.]

No message is sent by Rukmini, but a brahmin messenger does go with a proposal of marriage. He is sent by Bhishmaka instead of Rukmini. What’s more, the letter was addressed to Ugrasena, and it’s not Krishna, or even Balarama, who receives the proposal. It is Ugrasena, stepping into the limelight where before he had no role to play except that of a figurehead and a tortured father as per the texts.

In Kundina (described in detail for the first time, with the classic mahajanapada-style ditch around it), Krishna and Rukmini have a nice social marriage, presided over by all the elders and kings, with Bhishma, Drona, Duryodhana etc. and the Pandavas in attendance. Again, no mention of Jarasandha, but there’s a fight between Balarama and Shishupala, Dantavakra, Rukmi and Shalva, ending in a sorta mysterious, inconclusive defeat.

How interesting is it, that Brahmavaivarta is a text dedicated to, er, Radha-Krishna, an idea that didn’t exist until the Bhakti movement. So they just decide that no, such a daredevil mariage between lovers won’t do. It has to be society forcing these two together (rather than apart, as we see in Mahabharata et al), because it is Radha and Krishna whose relationship is against society, the rebellion of rebellions in the name of true love nd devotion, blah-blah. Forgive my tone, please, but I am pissed off, ‘kay?

The concerted effort to make everything in Krishna’s life, except Radha (oh, because they are the Supreme in Goloka, which is even above Kailasa and Vaikuntha, and nothing can separate them and all), socially acceptable because he’s their “God” who can do no wrong except if in “true love for Radha” (when the dude clearly rebelled against society any chance he got) is ridiculous. Esp. this! Damn, don’t make my girl into this insignificant little thing. Harivamsa and Vishnu Purana were silent about Rukmini’s letter too, but at least both mentioned clear attraction and interest between Krishna-Rukmini.

Digressing: Also, why is Krishna such a sap here, suddenly? Or why does the Radha-Krishna pairing (which originally symbolises the Jeevatma-Paramatma or devotee-god relationship,) need Krishna to chase her ceaselessly and for all his actions to lead up to her, despite him advocating being a man of action in the real world? I am sorry for being so vocal; it’s probably just my pent-up frustration from that horrible Radha-Krishna serial where this Krishna (gosh, I can’t even call him that!) finds a reason to cry every single time. I would have forgiven it had they cut off the Vishnu’s avatar perspective and kept only the lover boy part, but they keep it and they still make him a crybaby. What’s worse…at the times he should actually feel bad, he’s “calm” af, looking as if he has transcended every human emotion, and just patronises people. Such hypocrisy. Look, I have nothing against men who cry; in fact, it’s heartening to have men strong enough to embrace their emotions, esp. publicly; similarly, there is nothing wrong with suppressing them (apart from the mental health issues it generates, but we are no one to judge). But people, when you are making an omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient character…keep the BS consistent at least?! (Sorry, civility.) 

Agni Purana (about 800-1100 CE) only mentions Rukmini as one of the eight principal wives.

[Devi-Bhaagavata Purana gives a brief outline sticking to what’s known. It says that in Rukmini’s swayamvara, Shishupala is specifically invited (this is the popular notion, and what I personally believed too, and still find myself going for). Krishna, with Ugrasena’s permission (not mentioned in prev. versions; as opposed to consulting with his fellow warriors in HV), takes Rukmini in Rakshasa vivaha. It also mentions that he later married Jambavati, Satya, Mitravinda, Kalindi, Nagnajiti, Bhadra, Lakshmana. (Satyabhama is not present. She seems to have been confused with Satya, whose other name is Nagnajiti, princess of Kosala.)

Kalki Purana goes for this elaborate Rukmini vrata which grants desired husband to a lady as a fruit of the vrata, where Rukmini is accorded deity status alongside Krishna, seemingly for the first time (not considering the temples dedicated to both). A woman named Sharmistha (strangely similar to Sharmistha of Yayati, Puru’s mother, who too hankered after Yayati) offers oblations to Rukmini-Krishna, saying a prayer: “O Lord, offerer of boons, accept the camphor, molasses and sandalwood with your beloved Rukmini, princess of Vidarbha. O lotus-eyed one, possesor of pitambara and four arms, supreme of gods. Please be satisfied with me and protect me with Rukmini.” It’s far longer, but this is the gist. Is this still Krishna we are speaking of? Huh, all these rituals and Krishna don’t sit well.]

I have only been able to catch hold of so many texts, and of the others, Markandeya Purana (about 250-700 CE) and Shiva Purana (about 1000-1400 CE) do not even mention Rukmini. Mudgala Purana only says Lord Krishna had 16,008 beautiful wives and washes its hands off. 

Note: Mathematician and Vedic shastra writer Baudhayana cites Rukmini/Krishna as an example of Rakshasa vivaha.

Sanskrit Literature

So after the Puranas kinda close off the (d)evolution with turning such interesting stuff to the dry social marriage w.r.t. to the parallel evolution of Radha-Krishna, where the concept of Krishna shifted completely from a socio-political persona with mild godlike touch to become a complete love god (as also the lord of the universe)… Rukmini rises again in later literature, of what, by modern standards, would be ancient fanfiction. Lol. There are loads of poetic descriptions (think Kalidasa) that embellishes the narrative – for example, the beauty of sunrise described for paragraphs onto paragraphs. (Yeah, I skimmed those. I was too interested in some Rukmini action. Will appreciate the poetry later.)

References are made to the Rukmini-haran incident in Shishupala-vadham by Magha in around 600 CE, in the 2nd canto, where Balarama, Krishna and Uddhava are in conversation, planning to kill Shishupala. (I hate this.) The entire canto is full of controversial speeches. Balarama refers to Krishna abducting Rukmini from her swayamvara and defeating Shishupala as being the latter’s prime reason for animosity, saying things like “women are the root of all enmity”.

It is referred to in Bhavabhuti’s Malati-Madhav as well, a love story between Malati and Madhav (son of a Vidarbhan minister), where in a convo between friends, a lady says something like “Purushottama Krishna accepted Rukmini, the mother of Kandarpa (Pradyumna being considered Kama’s rebirth), at her self-choice (swayamvara) ceremony”.

There is Bhagavata-Champu (don’t laugh) by Ananta Bhatta before 1500 AD and Sri-Gopala-Champu by Jiva Goswami. Both show their retellings to be derived from Bhaagavata purana (I’m so glad). In fact, in some places, like Rukmini’s letter and Balarama’s consolatory speech after Rukmi’s humiliation, the lines (as per the translated hardcopy in my home) seem to have been picked up directly from Bhaagavata. So it must be that the original Sanskrit lines were as well. The only thing that differs in Sri-Gopala-Champu is the premise of the story. Two messengers from Krishna tell the story to Nanda, Rukmini’s attributes coming up in the conversation. Radha and her fellow Gopis are mentioned as being present and eulogised. (Can no one let my girl have a moment?) But I love these few lines from the convo. The listeners speak thus (not the exact translation, but I don’t have the book rn):

“Although a girl, she is very intelligent and brave.”

“Is she a girl?” (Omfg, I laughed so much at this)

“No, never. She is a tense female elephant.” (The comparison is aimed to be praising of the confident, slow gait of an elephant in Sanskrit poetry, not in the modern way a woman might be called en elephant. Warriors and great women hav often been compared to elephants. There also seems to be an oxymoron as she is described as being tense or edgy, perhaps an allusion to being cautious…Hm, the spy headcanon, @avani008​ and @allegoriesinmediasres​? *grins excitedly* Oh, we’ll take anything, won’t we?)

“She is fearless, because she is a princess.”

Intelligent, brave, fearless, cautious…oh yeah, all my personal headcanons too.

Other Sanskrit works are as follows, to the best of my knowledge, some gathered from my grandparents and some from friends. I don’t know if their online versions are available, will have to see.

Bhaismi-Parinaya-Champu by prolific poet Ratnakheta Srinivasa Dikshita (South India) around late 16th century. also based on the Bhaagavata version. His son, renowned scholar Rajachuramani Dikshita wrote the Rukmini-Kalyana-Mahakavya (flourished in late 16th and early 17th centuries), possibly one of the most important Sanskrit works on the incident. This one, I unfortunately haven’t read, but have heard about from my late eldest grandfather. Two whole cantos take up Krishna’s mental affliction and pining in a pleasure garden of Dwaraka at the thought of his beloved Rukmini. Aw. Basically, Sanskrit poetry used to be all about elaborate descriptions and comparisons which would veer far, far away from the context, which in these times would be considered redundant and unnecessary. I agree, sort of. I would rather read about political machinations, rather than devotional poetry that distracts us from the issue at hand, thank you very much. Stfu, Medha.

We have Parvati-Rukminiya by astrologer poet Vidya Madhav in late 17th century, which narrates two marriages at a time – Shiva/Parvati and Krishna/Rukmini. Rukmini-Parinaya was written by Ram Varman of Trivancore in the middle 18th century.

Rukmini-Haranam-Mahakavyam, by Kashinatha Sharma Dvivedi, was published first in 1966 AD. (This one, my eldest grandmother straight up read to me, Bengal-ising it while she read. It was arduous, but I was old enough to bear the long hours.) Here, we find a few deviations from Bhaagavat – We find a long description of Rukmini straight up from birth to youth (yikes, that’s what I was attempting to do in my Yugantaram fic). It’s not a lot of characterisation, though – mainly dramatisation, if I remember correctly. (Unfortunately, I don’t know if we have that book any more.) The second canto has a description of Narada, who comes to Bhishmaka’s court bearing Krishna’s tales, which we don’t find in prev. versions, and who appears in the first canto of Magha’s Shishupala-vadham as well. In the third canto, Rukmini, hearing all this, falls in love and is treated by the royal physicians and offered consolation by her friends. (Here’s to one of my best-beloved lines of Hema’s Meerabai, ‘Is love an affliction, that you can cure?’) The next four cantos dramatise and stretch this love-struck Rukmini – with lovely descriptions of the moon, the seasons, the royal garden, etc. The next three cantos describe Rukmini’s marriage being fixed to Shishu by Rukmi, her sending the brahmin messenger to Krishna, a vivid description of Krishna’s beauty (as a young gal, I fell in love with that, yeah, I know, sorry) and an equally beautiful description of the dawn (which may be compared to the description of dawn in Shishupala-vadham by Magha… people are really fond of poeticising political and social issues to hide their significance behind glamour. Medha, stop). In the next canto, Krishna begins his journey to Vidarbha with obeisance to Lord Shiva, which isn’t present anywhere else. It is worth mentioning that the poet also starts his epic poem with salutations to Shiva as well, and states that he composed the entire poem with the grace of Lord Shiva. There’s a lot more descriptions, along with the deviation of Rukmini being guarded on orders of Shishupala rather than those of Rukmi, but the skeleton is all Bhaagavat. Sharma Dvivedi has been inspired heavily by Magha. It stands that his Rukmini-Haranam-Mahakavyam is the most successful rendering of the legend.

It has come to my knowledge that there are other Sanskrit literary works on these two as well but…I just don’t have the energy, sorry. There is a time and place for poetry and devotional fervour. Let me just say, with absolute relish on my side, that it is the Bhaagavat version that is preferred by our predecessors unanimously and all the Sanskrit literature is based on that. Personally, my go-to is Harivamsa and Bhaagavat as well, especially since they have the oldest layers of puranic text. I mean, just imagine, if all later retellings had been based on Brahmavaivarta rather than Bhaagavat. There would be no Rukmini-lovers at all! I mean, the first love does start from the most popular version, after all. It never fails to intrigue me, how legends undergo these modifications, and none of it is a coincidence.

Much love,

Medha