Should this Bhagavatm verse be modified/rewritten?

[Guest guest]

Vaishnava works and due credit is not given to the great Vaishnava saints of the

South.So, should an effort be made to rewrite the verse? has anyone raised this

before on this forum? if yes, what answers were given? if no, what do the

learned members think? please correct my understanding, if it is wrong. The

verse may include all devotees of the Lord, including Chaitanya and other

Vaishnava acharyas who appeared in Kali-yuga, but when taken in context, it

seems it is dedicated to the Alvars. in your service,Aravind.

SB -11.5.38-40

My dear King, the inhabitants of Satya-yuga and other ages eagerly desire to

take birth in this age of kali, since in this age there will be many devotees

of the Supreme Lord, Narayana. These devotees will appear in various places,

but will be especially numerous in South India. O master of men, in the age of

Kali those persons who drink the waters of the holy rivers of Dravida-desa,

such as the Tamraparni, Krtamala, Payasvini, the extremely pious Kaveri, and

the Pratici Mahanadi, will almost all be purehearted devotees of the Supreme

Personality of Godhead, Vasudeva.

 

SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it!

[Guest guest]

achintya, Aravind Mohanram <psuaravind>

wrote:

 

Are you suggesting that the *verse* should be rewritten, or only the

BBT purport to the verse? Please clarify.

 

> I was reading a book on Alvars ("Philosophy and Theistic Mysticism

> of The Alvars") and in that the verse from Bhagavata Purana,

11.5.38-

> 40 was cited as an evidence predicting the appearance of the 12

> Alvars, the great Vaishnava saints of South India.

 

While I suppose everyone is free to interpret according to their

standards of their respective traditions, I must point out that there

is absolutely *nothing* in the original Sanskrit that specifically

points to the Alvars.

 

I checked the

> BBT's version and to my disappointment found nothing mentioned

about

> the Alvars , although a little was mentioned about devotees in

> Lakshmi Sampradaya) - on the other hand, the verse has been used to

> glorify the advent of Chaitanya and His associates, which seems out

> of place to me - it is clear from the verse that it refers to the

> Alvars - all the rivers that are stated are in South India and the

> Alvars appeared near these rivers (indicated by 'kvacit kvacit').

 

This verse is saying two things:

 

1) That inhabitants of Satya-yuga wish to incarnate in Kali-yuga, and

that they will especially be prominent in South India

2) That those who drink the waters of these various rivers in South

India will be purehearted devotees of the Supreme Lord.

 

The verse does *not* say that these inhabitants of Satya-yuga will

*only* be born in South India, only that they will be more plentiful

there. The words "kvachit kvachit" indicate that they will be all

over, albeit more plentiful in South India (draviDeShu cha bhuurishaH)

 

> This is also confirmed by Sri Ramanuja's illustrious follower, Sri

> Vedanta Desika. It is my speculation that the purport has been

> written without knowledge of previous authorized Vaishnava works

and

> due credit is not given to the great Vaishnava saints of the South.

 

It is a fact that the BBT has not followed the Sri Vaishnava

commentary in many areas. Why? Because, simply put, Gaudiiyas are

under no compulsion to follow the commentaries of any other

Vaishnavas other than their own. And certainly not with regards to

the Bhaagavatam, which isn't even given its due by members of other

sampradaayas. Sri Vaishnavas actually give more emphasis to Vishnu

Puraana as a matter of tradition.

 

Prabhupada does quote from Viiraraaghavaachaarya, the Sri Vaishnava

Bhaagavatam commentator, from time to time in his Bhaktivedanta

Purports. This should not be seen as tacit approval of every

philosophical point in the other's commentary, but rather as liberal

& generous acknowledgement of shared points of view in some

instances. You can be certain that Viiraraaghavaachaarya does not

agree with the Gaudiiya commentary to SB 1.3.28, for instance.

Frankly, I'm not losing any sleep over it either.

 

> So, should an effort be made to rewrite the verse? has anyone

> raised this before on this forum? if yes, what answers were given?

if

> no, what do the learned members think? please correct my

> understanding, if it is wrong. The verse may include all devotees

of the Lord, including Chaitanya and other Vaishnava acharyas who

appeared in Kali-yuga, but when taken in context, it seems it is

dedicated to the Alvars.

>

 

When taken in context, it seems to indicate all of them in general,

but no one specifically. The BBT commentary mentions Jiva Gosvami's

opinion that "kvachit kvachit" refers to Lord Chaitanya, but even

this is only in passing. The majority of the BBT commentary does not

refer to the aachaaryas of any tradition, but rather to the

importance of associating with devotees and the significance of

Harinaama as as the only efficacious means to liberation in Kali

Yuga. The final paragraph, discussing the devotees who drink the

waters of the sacred rivers of South India, simply talks about how

one should not underestimate people living in such places simply

because they appear to be materially less well off.

 

yours,

 

K