1

In the Star Plus TV show, it has been shown that Krishna was exchanged with the daughter of Nanda. That girl child transformed into Yogamaya (a form of goddess similar to Durga having multiple hands) and reprimands Kamsa for his sins.

But, on the internet, in multiple places it is written that Subhadra was the daughter of Vasudeva.

It is indisputable that Subhadra (shown in the serial as Yogamaya) married Arjuna (an avatara of Lord Nara, who is Shiva). Since Shiva is the husband of Durga, Subadhra should be Yogamaya.

This means that Subhadra is the daughter of Nanda and not Vasudeva. This makes her not a blood sister of Krishna, just like Parvathy (not a blood relation) is also considered as sister of Vishnu. If she would’ve been the daughter of Vasudeva, her marriage with Arjuna would be a cross-cousin marriage which is forbidden in the Manusmriti.

Therefore I would like to confirm who’s daughter was Subhadra?

You can also read this answer on quora as a reference.

Summarising - Arjuna = Lord Nara = Shiva

Parvathy = Durga = Yogamaya

Since Arjuna's wife = Subhadra .

And Arjuna is Shiva .So, Subhadra should the Yogmaya , thus daughter of Nanda.

Adiyarkku
  • 11,038
  • 3
  • 42
  • 89
  • 2
    Does this answer your question? Who was mother of Subhadra? Rohini or Yashoda? – YDS Sep 02 '21 at 07:04
  • she was daughter of Vasudeva and Rohini.. She was sister of Balaram and step sister of Krishna...but this still comes in "cross-cousin marriage" -- apart from Arjuna, Krishna's son and grandson also married their maternal uncle's daughter..i think Narayana and Nara both are forms of Vishnu..where u read that Nara is Shiva's form? – YDS Sep 02 '21 at 07:15
  • @YDS I read it here - https://www.quora.com/Who-is-Yogmaya-and-how-is-it-related-to-Lord-Vishnu/answer/Swarnika-Mishra-5 –  Sep 02 '21 at 08:00
  • 1
    Since you’re new, if you’re satisfied with the answer, you can accept it by pressing the tick (✔️) sign below the voting arrows. This lets the site now that this is the answer which satisfies the question – Adiyarkku Sep 02 '21 at 08:04
  • @Archit , I liked your answer and upvoted it. But about this question , there are multiple confusion . So, I would like as many answers to come. Many questions related to Hinduism can never have final answers as there are multiple versions of the same story. For example - There are 1300 versions of Mahabharata. –  Sep 02 '21 at 08:09
  • 1
    @compaq yes sure :). Btw the Mahabharata written by Vyasa is the one to be trusted. Today I can write a Mahabharata where bhagavan himself fights the war, is that trustworthy? NO. Why is it not trustworthy? -> because it’s based on conjectures and not sourced from the original Mahabharata (seen by Vyasa live). Same goes for other theories. You will see how People come up with various theories that do not have scriptural backing. All authentic Vyasa literature agrees with the same fact. Eg. Devi Mahatmya, Harivamsa, MBH, SBhagavatam, indirectly DBhagavatam. Others inauthentic. – Adiyarkku Sep 02 '21 at 08:25
  • @Archit Yes, you are correct . But the thing is all mahabharat and puranas were in unwritten form till about 1000 AD. They were passed down orally and were only in the memory of people. Mahabharat is told only by Vyasa and not by anyone else. Only thing is when they were written in 1000 AD. There were some difference in multiple versions that came up. Even the most popular versions - NeelKanth , KMG and BORI differs on many things. Btw I will definitely accept your answer as the most trusted answer in few days in case no other answer comes up. –  Sep 02 '21 at 08:34
  • @compaq that is false information spread. All scriptures are the same. Over years minor changes if at all. Any scripture if at all has been spoiled during the colonial and immediate pre-colonial era. All these Bori and all are based on British era manuscripts (though they purport to use older ones too they don’t put material from them). The Vedas survived in pristine form. So also these too with minor changes. There are Puranic manuscripts in Nepal since before 800 AD but no one refers to those. – Adiyarkku Sep 02 '21 at 09:24
  • @Archit I gave 1000 AD as rough date. May be there are manuscript of 800 AD . But Mahabharata or Purana are definitely much older. Which thing you are calling false information ? –  Sep 02 '21 at 09:26
  • Let us continue this discussion in chat. –  Sep 02 '21 at 09:39
  • Isn’t Lord Nara a partial avatar of Lord Vishnu?(and not Lord Shiva) – Amethyst Sep 05 '21 at 17:12

1 Answers1

4

Subhadra and Yogamaya are two separate sisters of Shri Krishna. Of them, Subhadra was the daughter of Vasudeva and Rohini. She was not Yogamaya. On the other hand, Yogamaya, the daughter of Nanda is Shri Krishna’s other sister. She is Devi Ekanamśā or Devi Vindhyavasini. Both sisters have been described in the Harivamsa.

Subhadra

Subhadra has been described as the daughter of Rohini and Vasudeva, much younger to Balarama:

O king, the daughter of Bahlika and a lady from the Puru dynasty, named Rohini, is the first and most beloved wife of Vasudeva. He begot of her, his eldest son Rama (Balarama), Sarana, Shatha, Durdama, Damana, Shvabhra, Pindaraka, and Ushinara. O descendant of Kuru, Rohini also had a daughter by the name of Chitra, who is also renowned by the name of Subhadra, the wife of Arjuna.
Harivamsa Parva, Chapter 35, verses 4-6

In the next verse, the birth of Abhimanyu from Subhadra and Arjuna has also been affirmed.

Ekanamśa

From the story of Ekānamśā below, we can see that she is still unmarried, and the incarnation of Goddess (as she herself says in Devi Mahatmyam), very different from Subhadra.

The story in brief:

In the midnight, at the auspicious time of abhijit, Devaki, gave birth to Vishnu and Yashoda gave birth to a girl. Unknown to Yashoda, Vasudeva kept the boy with her and carried the girl to Devaki’s bed.
Vishnu Parva, Chapter 4, verses 14 & 26

When Kamsa is about to kill the baby:

Suddenly, she gave up the body of the new-born. With disheveled hair, adorned with celestial garlands and pastes, she addressed Kamsa. All her limbs were shining with garlands. She was adorned with a dazzling crown. The goddess remained a kanya forever. She was praised by all deva-s. In the night engulfed by darkness, she dazzled with her Bhutaganas. She danced, laughed and manifested with opposites. this Goddess is born from a portion of Prajapati (brahmA). Hence she is Ekānamśā - one and without having any portion (division) (with brahma). The Yogakanya appeared for the protection of keshava.
-Vishnu Parva Chapter 4, verses 37-47

As per Narada, this is the same goddess who lives on the Vindhya mountain, after killing Shumbha Nishmumha:

That girl of Yashoda, killed the danava-s, Shumbha and Nishumba in the forest, on the mountain of Vindhya. The place in the vindhya mountain is made by her splendour There, the beautiful goddess terrifies her enemies. Worshipped by the devatas the, the Goddess stays there, highly pleased.
-Vishnu Parva chapter 22.52-58

From the above it can be seen that Subhadra is the daughter of Rohini and Vasudeva and is in no way connected to or any incarnation the Goddess. On the other hand the Goddess Ekānamśā, daughter of Nanda and Yashoda, resides on the Vindhya mountains (Vindhyavasini) being worshipped by the devatas and is unmarried. They’re two separate sisters of Shri Krishna.

As regards your doubt on Manusmriti, we can see in the Mahabharata many people did not follow it. Also Nara is not Lord Shiva, he’s very much an incarnation of Lord Vishnu.

Adiyarkku
  • 11,038
  • 3
  • 42
  • 89
  • Wasn't Sumbha and Nishumbha killed by Parvathy ? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sumbha_and_Nisumbha –  Sep 02 '21 at 09:08
  • 1
    @compaq No. As per Devi mahatmya and Shiva Purāṇa, Shumbha and Nishumbha was killed by Devi Saraswati who emerged from the body of Devi Parvati - The shloka goes गौरीदेहसमुद्भवां त्रिजगतामाधारभूतां महापूर्वामत्र सरस्वतीमनुभजे शुम्भादिदैत्यार्दिनीम्। - oh Devi who emerged from Gauri’s body, the fundamental sustainer of the 3 worlds, the great primeval one, I worship that Saraswati, the killer of Shumbha and other daityas. Often taken as Parvati because Kaushiki Devi emerges from Parvati to kill daityas.In the case of Harivamsa above they say after killing Sumbha the same Devi resides on Vindhya – Adiyarkku Sep 02 '21 at 09:29
  • 1
    This is also stated in the Devi mahatmya that after the killing of Shumbha and Nishumbha the greatest goddess says that she will incarnate as the daughter of Yashoda and Nanda. (although she mentions she will kil Shumbha and Nishumbha again, that’s most likely a manuscript error.) it’s to be understood as the same Devi Parvati (ultimately) having killed shumbha has come as daughter of nanda Yashoda and now lives on Vindhya for a future leela. That’s why Harivamsa shloka says हत्वा शुम्भनिशुम्भौ द्वौ दानवौ नगचारिणौ - Having killed the daityas, she lives on Vindhya worshipped by devas. – Adiyarkku Sep 02 '21 at 09:33