Guest guest Posted December 23, 2001 Report Share Posted December 23, 2001 Hi all This is from Nomadeva <<Wrong. Putana is the case of 'jIva-dvaya' (two Jivas in the same body) like Kamsa (Kalanemi and Bhrigu). Putana had a cursed Urvashi also in her body. It is Urvashi who was redeemed of her curse, not the demoness herself.>> The next is from Nicholas to Partha <<Another correspondent said I was wrong in my Putananarration but again I was (hopefully) just being faithful to the Bhagavata Purana account. Also since these avatars appear repeatedly the events intheir lives are not always identical and some accounts may refer to earlier incarnations of Rama or the avatar under discussion.>> I asked Nomadeva why he said wrong and because i did not get an answer, here i am giving the answer. In my opinion Christopher was quoting sastra or the Srimad Bhagavatam. How can crishtopher be wrong while quoting sastra? Perhaps nomadeva was quoting sastra as well, although i have so far not read that passage which it looks very interesting and possible because we have heard about similar descriptions from the Caitanya Caritamrita. If both authors have quoted sastra, non of them are wrong because sastra is beyond our mental or intellectual grasp. Sastras are difficult to translate or to understand and that is why we need a guide to them, but when an apparent contradiction appears there is an explanation. I have heard that the sastras apparently are wrong in regard to the explanation of lord Varaha. There are two different descriptions of Them. We have been told that the sastras describe two different Varahas appearing in different yugas. And that is why the apparent error. I am just trying to clarify the issue to newcomers. regards natabara 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.