Krishna married eight years old Rukmini and many prepubescent girls:

He claimed that Skanda Purana Book V, Section iii, Chapter 142, Verses 8-79 says Rukmini married Krishna when she was eight years old. But something is wrong here.

The Sanskrit words used there to say she has come to the age of eight years are “sA kAla paryAya Adashtavarsha”. Here sA means she, Kala means time, paryAya means lapse of a particular time. But in the term “Adashta varsha”, the word Ad (आद) is ignored while translating and only

ashtavarsha is translated as eight years old. But the prefix आद clearly here denotes some other thing like she has become twice eight years old or two plus eight(i.e., ten) years old. So, we can’t conclude that Rukmini’s age was eight when she married Krishna with this verse.

The author claimed that she hasn’t attained puberty at that time by quoting Srimad Bhagavatam 10.53.51 translated by J.M. Samyal and Gita Press. Now I have some objections here.

If the website agrees with their translations, can its author please explain me which Sanskrit words can be translated as “who was possessed of a shapely (slender) waist and had not yet attained puberty?” Because there are no such Sanskrit words as far as I know.

Now, let me tell you what is mentioned in Harivamsa Parva of Mahabharata regarding Rukmini, which is more authoritative than all Puranas:

Harivamsa Parva 2.59.38-40 “She had red lips and beautiful eyes. She was beautiful with full waist, thigh, hips and breasts.

She was a fully grown maiden with beautiful limbs and a white face like moon. Her nails were red. She was beautiful with eyebrows and abundant hair. She was most beautiful with full hips and breasts. She was sparkling with her smooth white teeth.”

Several verses before, the same chapter of Harivamsa Parva says she was sixteen years old according to the translation which I am using here. But that translation is wrong. But translation of verses 38-40 are correct, as I verified it (if you have any objection, please tell me).

So, Rukmini was a fully grown maiden when she married Krishna.

He also claimed that according to Brahma Vaivarta Purana 105.1-10 says she engaged in child sports. But the problem is, the author simply cherry-picked the verses without fully quoting it.

Let me tell you what Brahma Vaivarta Purana Chapter Krishna Janma Khanda, 105.1-10 clearly says:

“The king Bhishmaka witnessed his daughter engaged in sport like the ray of the moon with other girls, she possessed the luster of the full moon of the winter season,

her eyes were like the lotus flower of the winter season. She became youthful and fit for marriage.”

Now, please tell me where it is mentioned that she engaged in child sports? The only thing mentioned here is she played with other girls.

Now let me tell you what the same chapter says about whether Rukmini attained puberty or not:

Brahma Vaivarta Purana, krishna Janma Khanda 105.12 “My growing daughter has achieved the age of puberty, therefore a groom for her should be searched immediately.”

So this reference clearly proves that she attained puberty.

In addition to this, he also claimed that since after Krishna died, her 16100 wives were abducted by bandits and became prostitutes, which I admit.

But his claim that only young women can be abducted for carnal purpose so those wives should be young is absolutely baseless. Because those 16100 women have to become prostitutes for bandits because of a curse.

And they were no normal women, but Apsaras(celestial nymphs) in reality.  Apsaras can make their body to become fit for carnal purpose at any time. Trying to equate these kind of celestial beings with humans is absurd.

@miiranarayan @sikeNICKI
@SnXeha @idonlykpringles

#Copied
@_Jetspace

https://primitivehindu.wordpress.com/2019/07/19/response-to-pedophilia-in-hinduism/