laksana-vrtti / mukhya-vrtti

[Guest guest]

> > Prabhupada gives an example somewhere of a justified interpretation that

> > the "house on the river" must be understood to mean the house on the

> > bank of the river. I can unfortunately not locate that passage just now.

>

> Yes, that's the first thing that came to my mind. But upon thinking about

> it for a sec I realized it was not a relative example. Such interpretation

> of sastra is an authorized one and gives a solid, permanent explanation.

> In the purport I quoted, Srila Prabhupada says "but one should not

> accept such explanations as permanent truths."

 

Right. So an allegory is not to be considered laksana vritti when used to

explain the absolute, permanent Truth. That's an interesting point.

 

ys, jdd