11th Aug 2011: Syamantak mani

Revati & Rukmini are shown with a pooja thali in Rukmini's hand. Revati mentions about tonight one should not see Moon, it may reasult in the person being accused as a theif. Rukmini trips, pooja thali falls off her hand. Revati assures her saying as long as Balaram & Kanha are there nothing wrong can happen, but Rukmini is worried.

A sewak comes & informs Balaram & Krishna, all the people of Dwarka have come on streets, Suryadev has come to Dwarka, another sewak comes & informs Suryadev has reached the palace. Krishna says he can't be Suryadev, if he comes to Dwarka, the city will burn due to his heat. A man having a glowing object around his neck is shown, blinding people's eyes withe glow of the gem, enters the sabhagriha. Everyone is affected by the glow except Krishan, who recognises him, tells him Satrajeet, remove that Shyamnstak mani(SM) from your neck, you can not fool me. Satrajeet says he wanted to test him. Krishna asks him from where he got SM. Satrajeet says he's worshiped Suryadev, this SM is given to him as the result of his tapah. Krishna tells him to give SM for Dwarka's raajkosh, this angers Satrajeet, heaccuses Krishna of being a thief & goes away from there, all thepeople present there are surprised by Krishna's actions. Later Barlaram tells Krishna , his behaviour will give wrong impression among people. Krishna says SM is very powerful gem capable of giving wealth, can cue from dieseas, can destroy many genertions if the owner doesn't deserve SM. For Satrajeet's welfare only he wanted to take SM away from him. Balaram understands his pt.

Krishna is playing his flute, sees disturbed Rukmini, he tells her not to worry about curse of Ramya, nothing bad will happen but Rukmini is not convinced.

Satrajeet is under the power of SM, becomes arrogant, misbehaves with his elder brother & wife. When asked by his wife, why is he in such a mood, he says today krishna asked this SM from him, hearing this his wife feels very happy. Satrajeet under the power of SM, says with this gem he can get every thing, he can become a king too.

Krishna goes to meet Ramya, asks her to forget that event & accept the gifts he's got for them from raaj pariwar & forgive them. he says whatever had happened was written in the destiny, that could not be avoided. Ramya refuses the gifts, saying if he can change the course of events, make her husband alive & remove this theft accusation from his family then she can forgive them. Now his destiny will make him perform such karmas, making the women of their house suffer too. 

Glad they got to the Syamantak Mani chapter, instead of subjecting us to more Amods, Ramans and fictitious Kritavarma tales.

 

I commented on the way they depicted Rukmini in the cant accept !  thread, so won't repeat that here.  Won't repeat much of what I said about Krishna asking him for it either, since it's there.

 

So after Balarama & Rukmi, the latest to be vilified is now Satrajit?  In the original story that I read, Satrajit was a devotee of Surya-dev, and did not do tapas for the gem.  Surya-dev one day gave it to him, and the next day, when he found that the gem released gold like ducks lay eggs, he was excited about it.  Can someone post a sacred-texts link to that story here?

 

So aside from the depiction of Krishna wanting this gem, they also fouled up by showing Satrajit desperate to keep something that was his.  Also, his treatment of his wife and brother was another wacko whack job on his character.  He scolds his wife for not waiting on him, and slaps her for questioning his decision to refuse Krishna's request to hand the gem over.  They seem to be setting it up so that there's no sympathy for him once he's killed.

 

About Raman & Ramaiya, I was glad that Krishna was critical of Raman's decision to kill himself.  While what Balarama did wasn't good, it was at least a correctable mistake, but by committing suicide, Raman only made a bad situation worse.  When Ramaiya asked Krishna whether he can restore color to her white sari or sindoor to her maang or let her observe wively vraths, I was thinking, sure, dye the sari, or put on the sindoor anyway, or observe those vraths anyway. 😈  But more seriously, I didn't get the logic here - how does Raman's suicide vindicate him?  Had he actually stolen it, he may still have commited suicide due to the fear of the consequences as a result of Balarama's sentence.  I was hoping that the real culprit would be found, and Raman would be posthumously vindicated.

 

So the abuse of Krishna goes on,and now, they've made Ramaiya look like she's the first one to curse Dwarka, and her curse will later be re-inforced by Gandhari, Kanva, Vishwamitra & Durvasa (unless they toss in some more curses to make it look too much for Krishna)

 

Anyway, next 2 weeks, presumably more devranis for Revathy, and _____ (co-wives - what's the Hindi word for it?) for Rukmini.  Speaking of which, Rukmini addressing Revathy as 'Bhabishri' was again wrong - in those times (and even now), a devrani always addressed her jethani as 'didi', not 'bhabi', since they belonged to the same family, addressed the same parents-in-law in the same way as their husbands.  In fact, addressing a jethani  as 'bhabi' is pretty recent.  A similar howler was Rukmini addressing Krishna as Giridhar and his other names.  That's okay for Arjun to address him as Janardhan, Giridhar, Kesav and so on, but not Rukmini - isn't she supposed to be addressing him as 'Aryaputra'?  Or did Priya have a real tough time pronouncing it? So in this serial, you have Devaki addressing Krishna as 'Prabhu', and Rukmini addressing him by name.  Next,  they'll show her addressing him as Krishna-ji 🤣

 

The only jewel that Krishna got for Yudhisthir, actually Draupadi's, was Ashwatthama's.  Otherwise, the Syamantaka gem was always w/ the Yadavas - it stayed w/ Akrura for the balance of Krishna's life.

 

 

I do know that the Swayamtaka Gem stayed within the Yadavas though, because after Satrajit gave Satyabhama to Krishna in marriage, he also gave the gem to him and Krishna handed it to Akrur for safekeeping.