Clarification of slokas from Canto 11 of Bhagavata Purana

[Guest guest]

Here you can see what a Dvaita scholar (yes, he is from the sampradaya

that Gaudiyas claim to belong to) has to say about the matter.

 

"The context in this case clearly indicates that "varNaM" refers

only to color.

They also interpret with that meaning for the first 3 yugas.

 

When it comes to the 4th one:

 

"kR^ishhNavarNaM kalau kR^ishhNaM sAN^gopAN^gaM sapArshhadam.h

yaj~naiH saN^kIrtanaprAyairyajanti hi sumedhasaH"

 

as in other instances, only similar approach has to be taken.

 

"In Kaliyuga, the black colored Krishna, with beautiful limbs and

adorned

with jewels and attended by gods is worshipped by the wise thru

sacrifices

and chanting of His names".

 

This they make a pAThAntara

 

"kR^ishhNavarNaM tvishA kR^ishhNaM sAN^gopAN^gAstrapArshhadam.h

yaj~naiH saN^kIrtanaprAyairyajanti hi sumedhasaH"

 

and further interpret "tvishA kR^ishhNaM" as "tvishA.akR^ishhNaM"

and then translate akR^ishhNaM as "golden complexioned".

 

There are too many problems with this approach

 

1. The word "kalau" (indicating in Kaliyuga) is made missing.

2. In an off-the-track way kR^ishhNavarNaM is translated as

repeating the syllable Krishna

3. akR^ishhNam (not black) can be any color, but they make it

golden color only.

4. They attribute to Chaitanya only, where as it can be attributed

to any fair complexioned person, who chants Lord's name.

5. The whole meaning is a stretched, perverted meaning.

 

In this regard, for additional info see,

 

Dvaita List

 

(user and passwd are dvaita).

 

Regards,

 

Kesava Rao"

[Guest guest]

Dear all,

 

I think they refer to pita, yellow colour from

10.8.13.

 

Though the gaudiyas claim that they belong to Madhva

sampradaya,there is difference in interpretation of

the sastras.I think it better be left to them to sort out

between themselves.

 

Ramanuja dasi

Vedavalli Ranganathan

 

--- madhavaramanujadasa

<madhavaramanujadasa wrote:

 

> Here you can see what a Dvaita scholar (yes, he is

> from the sampradaya

> that Gaudiyas claim to belong to) has to say about

> the matter.

>

> "The context in this case clearly indicates that

> "varNaM" refers

> only to color.

> They also interpret with that meaning for the first

> 3 yugas.

>

> When it comes to the 4th one:

>

> "kR^ishhNavarNaM kalau kR^ishhNaM sAN^gopAN^gaM

> sapArshhadam.h

> yaj~naiH saN^kIrtanaprAyairyajanti hi sumedhasaH"

>

> as in other instances, only similar approach has to

> be taken.

>

> "In Kaliyuga, the black colored Krishna, with

> beautiful limbs and

> adorned

> with jewels and attended by gods is worshipped by

> the wise thru

> sacrifices

> and chanting of His names".

>

> This they make a pAThAntara

>

> "kR^ishhNavarNaM tvishA kR^ishhNaM

> sAN^gopAN^gAstrapArshhadam.h

> yaj~naiH saN^kIrtanaprAyairyajanti hi sumedhasaH"

>

> and further interpret "tvishA kR^ishhNaM" as

> "tvishA.akR^ishhNaM"

> and then translate akR^ishhNaM as "golden

> complexioned".

>

> There are too many problems with this approach

>

> 1. The word "kalau" (indicating in Kaliyuga) is made

> missing.

> 2. In an off-the-track way kR^ishhNavarNaM is

> translated as

> repeating the syllable Krishna

> 3. akR^ishhNam (not black) can be any color, but

> they make it

> golden color only.

> 4. They attribute to Chaitanya only, where as it can

> be attributed

> to any fair complexioned person, who chants Lord's

> name.

> 5. The whole meaning is a stretched, perverted

> meaning.

>

> In this regard, for additional info see,

>

> Dvaita List

>

> (user and passwd are dvaita).

>

> Regards,

>

> Kesava Rao"

>

>

>

>

>

>

 

 

 

 

 

____

for Good

Donate to the Hurricane Katrina relief effort.

http://store./redcross-donate3/