Lord Nrsimhadeva's Appearance

[Guest guest]

I have a book by Satyaraja das called "Narasimha

Avatar" in which there is this to say about Lord

Nrsimha's pastimes:

 

I am somewhat familiar with Chaitanya Mahaprabu's

visit to Simhacalam and the authenticity that this

lends to it as a holy place where the Narasimha story

may have indeed taken place. On the other hand, His

Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, a

leading Gaudiya saint in the modern age, seemed to

acquiesce in regard to the Ahobalam narrative when a

disciple informed him that many Srivaishnavas hold

this to be the place of Narasimhadeva's pastimes and

that they base their belief on the Brahmanda Purana.

Still, Prabhupada and most Vaisnavas today concur that

the bulk of the Narasimha tale probably did not take

place on this planet. pp 4-5

 

I doubt that there can be any concensus reached as to

where Lord Nrsimhadeva actually appeared, especially

between the residents of Simhacalam and Ahobilam

With various sources stating different locales and

millios of years passed between then and now, I think

it might be tough to say for sure. But then, "ito

nrsimhah parato nrsimho, yato yato yami tato

nrsimhah." Lord Nrsimha is here and also there,

everywhere. Even in this pillar, whether it's in

Ahobilam, Simhacalam, or Lord Indra's palace (which

incidentally, SB 7th canto seems to indicate. If we

take the Srimad Bhagavatam as the authority, I would

say that His pastimes took place in the heavenly

planets. But I will *never* be able to scrape up

enough money to make a pilgrimage *there*!).

 

your servant in the service of Lord Nrsimhadeva,

Maharani dasi

 

 

 

 

Send your FREE holiday greetings online!

http://greetings.

[Guest guest]

On Sat, 22 Dec 2001, mary foye wrote:

> I have a book by Satyaraja das called "Narasimha

> Avatar" in which there is this to say about Lord

> Nrsimha's pastimes:

> I am somewhat familiar with Chaitanya Mahaprabu's

> visit to Simhacalam and the authenticity that this

> lends to it as a holy place where the Narasimha story

> may have indeed taken place.

It's been a while, but when I was there the Sri vaishnavas told me

that their sthala-puranam says it was where Hiranyakasipu had tortured

Prahlada. However, the two episodes would seem to go together. The Deity

atop Simhacalam is Varaha-Narasimha.

 

 

 

> Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, a

> leading Gaudiya saint in the modern age, seemed to

> acquiesce in regard to the Ahobalam narrative when a

> disciple informed him that many Srivaishnavas hold

> this to be the place of Narasimhadeva's pastimes and

> that they base their belief on the Brahmanda Purana.

It would be nice to know what Satyaraja Prabhu's sources are. His

statements contradicts what Kurma Prabhu wrote in his book (please

see the excerpt below).

 

 

 

> But then, "ito

> nrsimhah parato nrsimho, yato yato yami tato

> nrsimhah." Lord Nrsimha is here and also there,

> everywhere.

It definitely looks like you're in tune with Srila Prabhupada

here, because this is exactly what he said about the question too (from

"The Great Transcendental Adventure" by Kurma dasa, page 577):

 

****************************************************************************

"After Srila Prabhupada rose from his afternoon rest, Ugrasrava

arrived with photographic slides of his recent tour with Yasodanandana

Swami of sacred temple sites in South India. Srila Prabhupada agreed to

see them,

and soon Ugrasrava was setting up a projector and screen in Prabhupada's

main darsana room. It was quite a chilly evening, and so on Prabhupada's

request, more heaters were brought into the room. Meanwhile, Prabhupada

reclined on his chaise engaging in light conversation with the devotees

present.

 

Most of the slides were taken in places purported to be in

connection with the pastimes of the Lord's fierce half-man, half-lion

incarnation, Lord Nrsimhadeva. Various shots of Nrsimhadeva Deities, both

installed and self-manifesting, were shown. Prabhupada was mostly quiet,

but when slides of Ahovalam came up, Srila Prabhupada exclaimed, "I have

been to this place."

 

Ugrasrava waxed enthusiastic, "Yes, Srila Prabhupada, this is

Hiranyakasipu's palace."

 

Prabhupada shook his head. "This is not the place," he said

quietly, in a matter-of-fact manner. "Anyway... they worship like that."

 

Prabhupada did not elaborate, but it was obvious that he wanted to

avoid controversy. The very same topic had come up on a morning walk only

weeks before in Vrndavana. His conclusion then had been clear.

"Nrsimhadeva is everywhere, he had said. "Ito nrsimhah, parato nrsimha,

yato yato yami tato nrsimhah. Why Nrsimha should be confined: 'He was

here'? He is everywhere. And as He is everywhere, He is here also.

That's all."

 

Prabhupada was silent for the rest of the 'Indian Travelogue'-style

slide show. When Ugrasrava showed a batch of slides of ISKCON temples in

America, however, Srila Prabhupada's mood changed noticeably. It was

obvious that Srila Prabhupada was much more enlivened by and interested in

news of his world-wide society. The restaurant at the New York Temple

invoked his most enthusiastic response. "Oh! Our restaurant! How many

people?" Prabhupada maintained his interest until the end of the

presentation."

 

****************************************************************************

 

This is probably conclusive enough. Thanks for your comments.

 

MDd

[Guest guest]

> I doubt that there can be any concensus reached as to

> where Lord Nrsimhadeva actually appeared, especially

> between the residents of Simhacalam and Ahobilam

 

I'm not sure Simhaachalam was the issue -- the story in that regard was that

it was the place where Prahlaada was rescued by the Lord - it wasn't the

final appearance of Lord Narasimha when He slew Hiranyakashipu.

 

As far as Ahobilam vs the heavenly planets, there is no reason it can't be

both. Vedic time is cyclical, and many Puraanic events have kalpa bedha

(differences in different kalpas) with regard to exact locations, details,

etc. For example, Mahaabhaarata indicates that Paandavas attained the

heavenly planets at the end of their lives, but Bhaagavatam makes it clear

that they went to Vaikuntha. There is no contradiction -- in a previous age

they went to heavenly planets, but the most recent recurrence of the drama

had them getting liberation.

 

yours,

 

- K

[Guest guest]

As far as Ahobilam vs the heavenly planets, there is no reason it can't beboth.

Vedic time is cyclical, and many Puraanic events have kalpa bedha(differences

in different kalpas) with regard to exact locations, details,etc.

True..I too have heard some quotations from the Narasimha Purana regarding the

appearance of the Lord in a different Kalpa where Hiranyakashipu was a devotee

of Lord Shiva & swore Lord Vishnu as his enemy..even the form of the Lord is

said to have been different from the descriptions of Srimad Bhagavatham...well

I didn't go into details..but trust it is so...hence, the Lord does appear at

different places in different Kalpas..

Again, does anyone have any quotes from the shastras saying that Krishna appears

once in a day of Brahma as it is..& whether references to Krishna in sastras

other than S.B. are to different expansions of the Lord..

Thanks

Narasimhan...

 

Send your FREE holiday greetings online at Greetings.

[Guest guest]

In a message dated Tue, 25 Dec 2001 9:05:54 AM Eastern Standard Time,

ranganathan narasimhan <simhan74 writes:

 

> Again, does anyone have any quotes from the shastras saying that Krishna

appears once in a day of Brahma as it is

 

Haribol

 

This generally applies to all incarnations and sequence of events of the kalpa.

Specifically Rupa Gosvami in Laghubhagavatamrta calls the avataras listed in SB

1.3.1-26 "kalpa-avataras" meaning that they generally appear once per kalpa.

 

 

 

..& whether references to Krishna insastras other than S.B. are to different

expansions of the Lord..

>

 

Regarding the Mahabharata and Bhagavatam, is there any clarification from any of

our acharyas that Bhagavatam specifically relates the events of this kalpa?

 

Narada asked Vyasadeva to compile what he saw in his spiritual vision which is

what lead to the current edition of the Bhagavatam. How do we know that

Vyasadeva was given vision of the events of this kalpa rather than that of

another?

 

Madhvacharya apparently says that the events of Mahabharata specifically relate

to this kalpa. Do we have any evidence directly contradicting (or supportive

of)this?

 

ys

Gerald

[Guest guest]

achintya, Mrgerald@a... wrote:

> In a message dated Tue, 25 Dec 2001 9:05:54 AM Eastern Standard

Time, ranganathan narasimhan <simhan74> writes:

>

> > Again, does anyone have any quotes from the shastras saying that

Krishna appears once in a day of Brahma as it is

>

> Haribol

>

> This generally applies to all incarnations and sequence of events

of the kalpa. Specifically Rupa Gosvami in Laghubhagavatamrta calls

the avataras listed in SB 1.3.1-26 "kalpa-avataras" meaning that they

generally appear once per kalpa.

>

 

I think he would appreciate a specific quote, though, as I'm guessing

he needs to defends this point before someone who disagress.

Actually, I myself would like a specific quote, and I think this is

the second time Ranganathan asked for one. I actually have heard this

before (about Krishna appearing once in every day of Brahma), but I'm

not aware of any explicit shaastric pramaana substantiating this. I

think both of us would certainly like to know.

 

> Regarding the Mahabharata and Bhagavatam, is there any

clarification from any of our acharyas that Bhagavatam specifically

relates the events of this kalpa?

>

 

> Madhvacharya apparently says that the events of Mahabharata

specifically relate to this kalpa. Do we have any evidence directly

contradicting (or supportive of)this?

 

I'm not terrribly inclined to accomodate the contradictory

perspectives of other aachaaryas, respectable though they may be,

with our own. What exactly is Madhva's evidence to the effect that

Mahaabhaarata speaks of this kalpa's history? Keep in mind that the

Bhaagavatam states that the Paandavas got liberation. The

Mahaabhaarata, at least what I understand from popular abridged

editions, speaks of the Paandavas having obtained the heavenly

planets. Correct me if I am wrong.

 

The only quote that I am aware of that sort of addresses this is

something Jiva Gosvami wrote in Tattva-Sandarbha. I don't have my

copy with me now, but in the section discussing the authenticity of

the Puraanas and the proof of the Bhaagavatam's greatness, Jiva does

say that whenever contradictions exist between other Puraanas and the

Bhaagavatam, we are to accept the Bhaagavatam's version. Now, I

initially thought this was due to concerns over interpolation, but I

suppose it could also be related to kalpa-bedha.

 

Actually, one thing I would like to see developed is, how can we

treat the Puraanas as Fifth Veda, but at the same time reject certain

sections therein as incorrect?

 

- K

[Guest guest]

In a message dated Fri, 28 Dec 2001 2:40:36 PM Eastern Standard Time,

"krishnasusarla" <krishna writes:

 

> Specifically Rupa Gosvami in Laghubhagavatamrta calls

> the avataras listed in SB 1.3.1-26 "kalpa-avataras" meaning that they

generally appear once per kalpa.

> >

>

> I think he would appreciate a specific quote,

 

Is a quote from Rupa Gosvami's LB sufficient? Or is a sastric one needed?

 

> > Regarding the Mahabharata and Bhagavatam, is there any > clarification from

any of our acharyas that Bhagavatam specifically > relates the events of this

kalpa? Madhvacharya apparently says that the events of Mahabharata >

specifically relate to this kalpa. Do we have any evidence directly >

contradicting (or supportive of)this?

>

> I'm not terrribly inclined to accomodate the contradictory > perspectives of

other aachaaryas,

respectable though they may be, > with our own.

 

How is Madhvacharya's view contradictory? That is the point in question.

 

What exactly is Madhva's evidence to the effect that

> Mahaabhaarata speaks of this kalpa's history? Keep in mind that the >

Bhaagavatam states that the Paandavas got liberation. The> Mahaabhaarata, at

least what I understand from popular abridged > editions, speaks of the

Paandavas having obtained the heavenly > planets. Correct me if I am wrong.

 

The word "Heaven" in KM Ganguli's translation (1896, Calcutta)) is used for

Krishna's destination and the Pandava's destination. The Mahaprasthanika Parva

chapter 3, states "Sakra said, 'Thou (Yuthisthira) shalt behold thy brothers in

Heaven. They have reached it before thee. Indeed, thou shalt see all of them

there, with Krishna.'" In section 4 of Swargarohanika parva states "King

Yudhisthira proceeded to that place where the foremost ones of the Kuru's race

were. He beheld Govinda endued with this Brahma-form." Then at the beginning of

section 5 Vaisampayana says that not everyone attained "his own nature" and then

relates how some heroes ended up in the regions of the demigods. Nilakantha, the

commentator, understands this phrase "his own nature" as referring to final

liberation.

 

Therefore, Ganguli's translation of the Mahabharata indicates that they ended up

in Vaikuntha with Krishna.

This can be compared with a Sanskrit edition.

 

> the Puraanas and the proof of the Bhaagavatam's greatness Jiva does

> say that whenever contradictions exist between other Puraanas and the

> Bhaagavatam, we are to accept the Bhaagavatam's version. Now, I

> initially thought this was due to concerns over interpolation, but I

> suppose it could also be related to kalpa-bedha.

 

I don't see why you think Jiva Gosvami is referring to kalpa-bheda. Jiva is

pointing out that philosophy should be understood in terms of the Bhagavatam, so

any statements in the Mahabharata ( for example stating Krishna to be a portion

of Narayana) ought to be construed in a way consistent with the Bhagavatam.

If the Bhagavatam and Mahabharata both unequivocally claim to present the

current kalpa, then we ought to reject the latter. However, where is there a

single reference claiming that the pastimes of the Pandavas and Krishna of the

Bhagavatam relate (or don't relate) to this kalpa?

 

 

>

> Actually, one thing I would like to see developed is, how can we

> treat the Puraanas as Fifth Veda, but at the same time reject certain

> sections therein as incorrect?

 

In terms of the current question, I have not said that anything is incorrect.

 

 

Gerald