SB 1.3.30

[Guest guest]

Hare Krishna,

 

Please clear my misunderstanding:

 

>From 1.3.6-25, Srila Suta Goswami mentions list of incarnations. He talks more

about incarnations in (1.3.26-27) and Krishna's supremacy in 1.3.28

 

But in 1.3.30 he further says that etad bhagavato rupam (all these forms) are

arupasya (no material form) and are maya-gunair (by the qualities of material

energy) viracitam (manufactured) with mahat-adibhih (ingredients of matter).

 

Srila Prabhuapda translates etad bhagavato rupam as "the universal form" instead

of "all these forms". And thus he explains that "the universal form" is

viracitam (manufactured) or imaginary. So implicit to the translation is all the

forms that have been just discussed (etad bhagavato rupam) are not imaginary.

 

How do defend that Srila Prabhupada's translation of etad bhagavato rupam as

universal form is correct and translating these words as "all the forms that

have been just described" is incorrect? The important word is etat which is used

to explain proximity in space/time. Furthermore, there is no mention or allusion

to universal form in this verse or previous verses.

 

In other words, I am looking for refutation of following impersonalistic

translation:

 

"All these forms (etad bhagavato rupam) are manufactured (viracitam) by material

energy (maya) with ingredients of matter (mahat-adibhih). Certainly (hi), the

Transcendence (cit-atmanah) has no material form (arupasya)"

 

Thank you,

 

Your servant

 

Vidyadhar