Syamantaka gem of Krishna’s era isn’t similar to the Kohinoor, says Dr Asha Goswami
My assertion is with regard to such issue being raised quite recently by exclaiming that Kohinoor gem be identified with the Syamantaka gem of Shri Krishna’s times, since earliest reference of Kohinoor may be traced back to 3,000 years or so. On this ground, it may be linked with Shri Krishna’s times and be recognised as representing the replica or a reminiscence of Syamantaka gem or the same as the gem, which in the Puranas is said to have been always remained in possession of Akrura till the end of Krishnayuga, as in the whole clan of the Vrishnis, he was considered the only deserving person to possess it.
In this context I am constrained to point out that in the light of the Puranic evidence regarding peculiarities of this gem, the same can in no way be considered even similar to the present day Kohinoor. It is interesting to note that reference to this peculiar gem Syamantaka is made in the various episodes of the puranic Krishna saga.
One such reference regarding this gem shows it playing a major role in vindicating the personality of Shri Krishna, who had to bear a false scandal of theft of this precious Syamantaka gem on account of Satrajit, the real owner of the gem who had also blamed him of killing his brother Prasenajit and snatching the gem from him.
It is further narrated that after the whole matter was sorted out, to appease Shri Krishna, Satrajit had offered his most beautiful daughter named Satyabhama to him. It is also believed that Krishna had married Satyabhama on the same day along with Jambavati, daughter of Jambavan, who also like Satyabhama was given in marriage to Shri Krishna by her father along with the Syamantaka gem as a token of goodwill after being defeated in a dual fight which lasted 28 days.
According to a popular folk belief, a person who recites the puranic chronicle of Shri Krishna’s encounter with the Syamantaka gem is never affected with false accusations. The version goes that Syamantaka gem’s real owner was Satrajit, one of the senior members of the Vrishni family, to which also belonged Shri Krishna. Satrajit happened to receive the gem at the seashore as an award for his great devotion to the sun God, who is also stated to have personally granted the same gem to Satrajit.
Satrajit also used to share this gem with his younger brother Prasenajit. However, Shri Krishna wanted that Satrajit should present this gem to Ugrasena who was the head of the Vrishnis and Yadavas and a befitting person to possess the same. But in spite of Krishna’s best efforts, the gem remained with Satrajit who next passed it on to his brother Prasenajit who was wearing the gem just to show off the great opulence of his clan. When he went for a horse ride into the forest, he was killed by a lion, and further this lion with the gem was killed by Jambavan, the leader of the people with bear totem who took it away and gave the same to his children to play with.
At Dwaraka, when Prasenajit did not return, his brother Satrajit spread the rumour that Krishna had taken the jewel after killing Prasenajit. Krishna did not accept that scandal and in order to satisfy the public, he proceeded to investigate the matter. Some important persons of Dwaraka, including his elder brother Balarama, also sided with him.
While searching he found the body of Prasenajit and identifying the marks which finally merged into the foot prints of Jambavan led Krishna into a great cave where he found the gem in the hands of the nurse of Jambavan’s children. Seeing Krishna, they cried for help and Jambavan came and challenged Krishna for a fight.
Although Krishna was busy defeating Jambavan in the cave, the people of Dwaraka having waited outside the cave for long thinking that something undesirable might have happened to Krishna returned. While all at Dwaraka were worried about Krishna, he defeating Jambavan returned with the gem in the company with Jambavati. Krishna then gave the gem to Satrajit, who being afraid of Krishna as he had spread against him the false scandal of snatching the gem, returned it to him.
But according to the characteristics of this gem, neither Shri Krishna nor his brother Balarama were qualified to possess it since they lacked in some qualities which were mandatory for the persons deserving this jewel’s possession.
As Krishna had many wives, he was not qualified to have the gem, and similarly Balarama was very much addicted to wine and pleasure of senses, so he was also not fit to possess it. Hence in the long run finally the gem came in possession of Akrura since in the whole clan except him all lacked some qualities which were mandatory for the persons deserving the jewel’s possession. He was also asked to always remain in Dwaraka so that the prosperity of the region may be ensured.
Besides this narrative, the characteristics of the Syamantaka gem as given in the sources also are suggestive of the fact that it cannot be the same as the present day Kohinoor. For, according to the historical evidence, the Syamantaka gem was so efficacious that daily it used to yield large quantity of gold which could be counted as equal to 170 pounds.
Besides this, another peculiarity of the gem was that in whatever part of the earth this jewel was kept there was no possibility of any inauspicious occurrence such as pestilence, disease, attack by wild beasts, fire, drought, and famine. Its other characteristics were that it was the source of prosperity to the virtuous persons but if worn by ignoble person it could cause his death.
Thus on the basis of this data material regarding the Syamantaka gem of Shri Krishna’s era, it does not sound appropriate to consider it in any manner similar to the present day Kohinoor.
I would like to make an appeal to the specialists in the field of gemology to probe further and investigate tracing out such kind of gem called Syamantaka for the prosperity of subsequent eras of the Krishnayuga also.
The writer is a noted Indologist and an authority on Krishnaite studies