Maharaja Yudhisthira.

[Guest guest]

Dear devotees,

Please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada.

 

Was Maharaja Yudhisthira a devotee? Srila Prabhupada states in his

purport on SB that he was. However one senior devotee says, that he

wasn't. He says Yudhisthira was a karmi. He followed dharma very

strictly so that he could rise to the high planets. Maharaja Pandu was

on Indraloka and he told Lord Krsna to tell Yudhisthira about that;

let him make yajna so that he could join his father. So Lord Krsna

did. And that is where the root of Yudhisthira's desire for high

planets is.

 

(All these find their grounds in "Mahabharata".)

 

And also throughout "Mahabharata" we can see that Yudhisthira is too

attached to dharma. He serves dharma. When Lord Krsna with Satyabhama

came to Pandavas during their exile, Yudhisthira came to Krsna and

inquired: "How is your dharma, my little brother?" - "Well, I'm

trying...". On the contraty, Arjuna was very glad to see Krsna.

Crying, he embraced Krsna... And then Markandei Risi came. And it is

explained, that all of them didn't realize that Bhagavan was there.

Becausethey were undert influence of external energy. And also

Markandei Risi was brahmavadi and from his conversation with

Yudhisthira it is seen that Yudhisthira was brahmavadi too! He

accepted that point about impersonal Brahman as far as I remember. So,

those two didn't realize that Krsna Bhagavan was there. Actually,

Arjuna didn't realize either, but he was under influence of internal

energy; sakhya-rasa. And then Narada Muni came there. Of course, he

was the only one who was aware about Bhagavan.

 

Also that devotee made some kind of summary:

 

Yudhisthira was a karmi;

Arjuna was a devotee;

Bhuma was a servant of his senses and his wife;

Nakula and Sahadeva were just like leaves on the wind. The wind blows

-- they fly where it blows them.

 

Any comments?

 

--

Your servant,

Dennis. dennis_s

[Guest guest]

achintya, "dennis a. sushchenko" <dennis_s@m...> wrote:

 

However one senior devotee says, that he

> wasn't. He says Yudhisthira was a karmi. He followed dharma very

> strictly so that he could rise to the high planets. Maharaja Pandu

was

> on Indraloka and he told Lord Krsna to tell Yudhisthira about that;

> let him make yajna so that he could join his father. So Lord Krsna

> did. And that is where the root of Yudhisthira's desire for high

> planets is.

>

 

When I am faced with teachings of this nature, which appear at first

glance to contradict Srila Prabhupada's own teachings as well as the

teachings of shaastra, I simply request the evidence. Rather than

getting into questions about the speaker's character or

qualifications, the reasonable thing to do is ask for explicit

shaastric pramaanas.

 

I note that no such pramaanas are provided here, probably because

the devotee who supposedly spoke these things did not bother to

offer any. Of course, he says it is in the Mahaabhaarata, but how

are we to know? In fact, how is he to know? There are over a hundred

thousand verses in Mahaabhaarata, and without specific verse

numbers, we have no way of cross-examining the evidence, if indeed

he had any to offer.

 

To me, the most remarkable thing about Srila Prabhupada's

presentation is that he always quotes from shaastra. No one can

doubt his spiritual position, and yet he never uses his position as

a justification for anything he says. Rather, he always refers to

shaastric evidence.

 

I do not know who this devotee is who spoke these things, but unless

there is some explicit evidence he can offer to back his claims, I

do not feel obligated to believe in them.

 

> And also throughout "Mahabharata" we can see that Yudhisthira is

too

> attached to dharma. He serves dharma. When Lord Krsna with

Satyabhama

> came to Pandavas during their exile, Yudhisthira came to Krsna and

> inquired: "How is your dharma, my little brother?" - "Well, I'm

> trying...".

 

Again, we have no proof that such statements are in fact there in

Mahaabhaarata. No pramaanas are provided here. On the other hand,

here is how the Bhaagavatam describes Yudhishthira's relationship to

Lord Krishna:

 

raajan patirgururala.m bhavataa.m yaduunaa.m daiva priyaH kulapatiH

kva cha kin^karo vaH |

astvevaman^ga bhagavaan bhajataa.m mukundo mukti.m dadaati

karhichitsma na bhaktiyogam || bhaa 5.6.18 ||

 

Shukadeva Gosvaamii continued: My dear King, the Supreme Person,

Mukunda, is actually the maintainer of all the members of the

PaaNDava and Yadu dynasties. He is your spiritual master,

worshipable Deity, friend, and the director of your activities. To

say nothing of this, He sometimes serves your family as a messenger

or servant. This means He worked just as ordinary servants do. Those

engaged in getting the Lord's favor attain liberation from the Lord

very easily, but He does not very easily give the opportunity to

render direct service unto Him (bhaagavata puraaNa 5.6.18).

 

This was spoken to Yudhishthira Mahaaraaja. If Krishna is his

worshipable Deity, friend, etc and is engaged in his family's

service, then what question is there of finding fault in

Yudhishthira's character? It seems unlike that someone who was

simply "attached to dharma" would so easily win the favor of the

Lord in the way described above. What would the "senior devotee" you

mentioned have to say about that?

 

On the contraty, Arjuna was very glad to see Krsna.

> Crying, he embraced Krsna... And then Markandei Risi came. And it

is

> explained, that all of them didn't realize that Bhagavan was there.

> Becausethey were undert influence of external energy. And also

> Markandei Risi was brahmavadi and from his conversation with

> Yudhisthira it is seen that Yudhisthira was brahmavadi too!

He

> accepted that point about impersonal Brahman as far as I remember.

 

Statements like "as far as I remember" are even more reason to ask

for *explicit* scriptural evidence.

 

The comment about Yudhishitra being a brahmavaadi is unwarranted.

For those of you who are not aware, "brahmavaadi" as it is defined

in Gaudiiya Vaishnava discourses usually refers to a sage who

meditates on the impersonal aspect of the Lord, although

acknowledging the personal aspects as well (as opposed to a

maayaavaadi who holds that there is no real personal aspect).

 

The clincher is, many uses of the word "Brahman" actually

mean "Bhagavaan." Not every occurrence of "Brahman" necessarily

means "impersonal brahmajyoti." In the Govina-bhaashya, Brahman is

used throughout to denote the personal Godhead. Thus, if

Yudhishthira speaks some things about "Brahman," it does not

necessarily mean he is a "brahmavaadi."

 

regards,

 

- K