Guest guest Posted November 10, 2002 Report Share Posted November 10, 2002 Hare Krsna, _/\o_ > in SB 10.8.7. purp. it is written: > ... It may be argued that although Gargamuni was priest of Yadu dynasty, > Nanda Maharaja also belonged to that dynasty. Nanda maharaja, however, was > not acting as a ksatriya. Therefore Gargamuni said: "If i act as your > priest, this will confirm that Krsna is the son of devaki." > > Does is mean that samskaras are not meant for vaysyas or what is the logic > behind gargamuni's argument? The elaborate answer is given in the following verses 10.8.8-9: the Gargamuni's performance of samskara would unnecessarily focus Kamsa's attention on Krishna. Iti artha. Your servant, bh. Jan www.veda.harekrsna.cz (Bhakti-yoga Vedic Encyclopedia Vedic Library) 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.