Question on Brahma-Vaivarta Puraana verse

[Guest guest]

Home Base: Sri Mayapur Candrodaya Mandir, Navadwip Dhama, Nadia, WB, INDIA

 

Dear Krishna Susarla,

 

Please accept my best wishes. All glories to Srila Prabhupada!

Thankyou for your question cited below with my comments.

> Hare Krishna. Dandavats.

>

> I have a question on the following verse from the Brahmavaivarta Puraana:

>

> ashvamedha.m gavaalambha.m sannyaasa.m palapaitR^ikam |

> devareNa sutotpatti.m kalau pa~ncha vivarjayet ||

>

> In this age of Kali, five acts are forbidden: the offering of a horse in

> sacrifice, the offering of a cow in sacrifice, the acceptance of the order

> of sannyaasa, the offering of oblations of flesh to the forefathers, and a

> man's begetting children in his brother's wife (brahmavaivarta puraaNa).

>

> I saw this verse quoted in one of Srila Prabhupada's books. I don't

> remember which one it was at this time. However, my question is in regards

> to the verse itself.

>

> This vese mentions five specific prohibitions in the Age of Kali.

> Presumably, the idea is that these acts were not prohibited in the past,

> or that their being prohibited was not obvious and Kali Yuga just happens

> to be the context.

 

Whether these acts were prohibited in former yugas or not cannot be

ascertained directly from this verse, but for sure they are prohibited in

Kali yuga. We know that some of these activities were not prohibited in

Dvarpara Yuga since they are mentioned in the Mahabharata.

 

> Well the verse mentions three rather abominable acts - the offering of a

> cow in sacrifice, offering of flesh oblations to the forefathers, and a

> man's begetting children in his brother's wife. Is the verse not implying

> that these acts were therefore okay prior to Kali Yuga? Otherwise, why

> specifically forbid them now? How can one justify offering of a cow in

> sacrifice or begetting children in a sister-in-law's womb? Are there

> scriptural injunctions that provide for such acts (just as there are for

> the ashvamedha yagna)? They seem like abominable acts in *any* Yuga.

 

Lord Caitanya explained to the Chand Kazi that in former yugas ASWAMEDHA and

GOMEDHA were performed by qualified brahmanas who were able to take an old

animal and sacrifice it after which by Mantra they would rejuvinate the same

animal with a fresh and new body. So there was no actual violence but an

old body was replaced with a new body. This was done to show the

effectiveness and power of vedic mantras. Like a visible experiment.

However since in Kali Yuga the brahmanas power has decreased and they are

not able to perfectly chant the mantras to successfully realize this

sacrifice, therefore it is prohibited.

 

As far as bearing a child in the brother's wife's womb, it was allowed in

Dvarpara Yuga and that is how Pandu, Dhrtarastra and Vidura were born. The

idea was that in previous yugas if someone couldn't bear any children due to

some personal reason then he could request his brother to conceive a child

in his wife, with the wifes permission. This was not done out of a desire

for sense gratification, but for the sake of continuing the family

traditions which require having a next generation. Since in the age of kali

the people are more materialistic and lusty this process would create

complications so is prohibited. In other words, people aren't pure enough

in Kali Yuga to do this kind of thing without getting attached, but in

previous Yugas it apparently was possible for them to do so.

 

> Furthermore, the verse mentions that acceptance of sannyaasa is also

> forbidden in Kali Yuga. Of course, we do not know the context of this

> verse, and the fact that it was quoted in Srila Prabhupada's books without

> a verse number leads me to believe that it is probably not to be found in

> any extant version of this Puraana.

 

This is a quite uncomplimentary assumption. Most readers don't require the

verse numbers of the Puranas and also various editions of Puranas use

different forms of numbering their verses. I cannot accept that just

because the BBT didn't publish the verse number it means that "it is

probably not to be found in any extant version of this Puraana". Unless you

have looked and didn't find it and mentioned that I don't appreciate your

diminishing the value of ISKCON's sacred literatures.

 

> But the verse itself simply prohibits

> the acceptance of sannyaasa. It does not make any specific accomadations

> for devotees. Therefore, is it not the case that Vaishnavas in Kali Yuga

> (including some ISKCON devotees) are violating this injuction? If devotees

> can violate Puraanic injunctions for one reason or another, then does that

> not cast doubt on the authority of the Puraanas as an integral part of the

> Veda?

 

Again the question comes what is the definition of sannyas. In regards to

the period when this was spoken sannyas referred to renouncing all kinds of

activities, or "karma sannyas". Going into the jungle and renouncing

everything. For Kali Yuga this kind of sannyas is prohibited. Lord Sri

Krishna Caitanya Mahaprabhu approved of tridandi sannyas where one utilized

his thoughts, words and activities in the service of Lord Sri Krishna as an

appropriate kind of sannyas for Kali Yuga. Therefore the vaisnavas perform

an active sannyas which allows them to perform various activities in

devotional service, but of course the must remain celibate.

 

> Thank you for taking the time to address these questions. I hope this

> meets you well.

>

> yours,

>

> -- Krishna Susarla

 

Thankyou for your questions.

 

I hope that this finds you in good health.

 

Your well wisher,

 

Jayapataka Swami