Guest guest Posted April 20, 2001 Report Share Posted April 20, 2001 yasminn ida.m yatash cheda.m tiShThaty apyeti jaayate | mR^iNmayeShv iva mR^ij-jaatis tasmai te brahmaNe namaH || As pots made completely of earth are situated on earth after being created and are transformed into earth again when broken, this cosmic manifestation is caused by the Supreme Brahman, situated in the Supreme Brahman, and annihilated in the same Supreme Brahman. Therefore, since the Supreme Lord is the cause of Brahman, let us offer Him our respectful obeisances (SB 6.16.22). some questions on this verse: 1) the analogy of the pots and the earth is interesting, when given in the context of the Supreme Lord and the material universe. In addition to it saying that the creation is dependent on the Lord, is the pot-earth analogy attempting to convey the underlying oneness between both, an example of achintya abedha? Srila Prabhupada does not comment on this verse. Do any other acharyas comment on this? 2) Does the usage of the word "Brahman" in the last sentence really mean the material universe? Or is it the brahmajyoti? What arguments support or refute each intepretation? S. HariKrishna Cleveland, OH Achintya List URL: achintya Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 20, 2001 Report Share Posted April 20, 2001 > yasminn ida.m yatash cheda.m tiShThaty apyeti jaayate | > mR^iNmayeShv iva mR^ij-jaatis tasmai te brahmaNe namaH || > 2) Does the usage of the word "Brahman" in the last sentence really mean the > material universe? Or is it the brahmajyoti? What arguments support or > refute each intepretation? I think the verse is just saying, "I offer obeisances unto Brahman." (tasmai te brahmane namah). The translation given by Srila Prabhupada may be one based on context of other verses, or just a precautionary measure. _______ Get your free @ address at Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 22, 2001 Report Share Posted April 22, 2001 > > yasminn ida.m yatash cheda.m tiShThaty apyeti jaayate | > > mR^iNmayeShv iva mR^ij-jaatis tasmai te brahmaNe namaH || > > > 2) Does the usage of the word "Brahman" in the last sentence really > mean the > > material universe? Or is it the brahmajyoti? What arguments support or > > refute each intepretation? > > I think the verse is just saying, "I offer obeisances unto Brahman." > (tasmai te brahmane namah). The translation given by Srila Prabhupada > may be one based on context of other verses, or just a precautionary > measure. Thanks for pointing that out. But what about the first question? The pot-earth analogy seems to be pointing to the underlying oneness between the Lord and His energies. But on the other hand, Srila Prabhupada does not comment about that. It would be interesting to know for sure, since some Vaishnavas do not accept any abedha at all. - Krishna Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 4, 2001 Report Share Posted May 4, 2001 On Fri, 20 Apr 2001, J.N. Das wrote: > > 2) Does the usage of the word "Brahman" in the last sentence really > mean the > > material universe? Or is it the brahmajyoti? What arguments support or > > refute each intepretation? > I think the verse is just saying, "I offer obeisances unto Brahman." > (tasmai te brahmane namah). The translation given by Srila Prabhupada > may be one based on context of other verses, or just a precautionary > measure. > Third canto also refers to the material creation as saguna-brahma. I don't recall the reference offhand. MDd Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.