Did Krishna Die?

[Sonic Yogi]

 

Where does that say that when here in the material world, Krsna's personal body was a material one?

 

I read it 3 times, and can't find it.

 

so you are suggesting that Rukmini and the other Queens of Krishna entered an empty funeral pyre that contained no body?

 

The Sati rite is about entering the fire and embracing the dead body of the husband.

If there were no body in the funeral pyre then what body did the Queens of Dwaraka embrace upon entering the furneral pyre of Lord Krsna?

 

Are you saying that the Queens of Krsna just jumped into a bonfire that contained no body of their husband?

[Sonic Yogi]

let's face it kids, we are trying to conceive the inconceivable and of course the inconceivable will always win.

 

you can't put Krsna in a box and close the lid.

 

You gotta think outta the box.........................

[primate]

Because ordinary human perception is limited to the material world, and since human consciousness is basically ignorant of any spiritual dimension of reality, it seems that in order to be seen and heard by (other) human beings, Krishna must have had a material body. When we can perceive anything with our sense organs, it has to be of a material nature.

 

The original question was: Did Krishna die? It isn’t explicitly stated anywhere that Krishna did not die a material death. If Krishna did not die, I’m sure the Vedas would contain a clear statement about this remarkable fact. Isn’t it self-evident that Krishna died? Why would Krishna break his own rule: "that which is born shall die"?

 

Another question must be: Is the material world (including organic life) real, or is it a sensory illusion? If it is all an illusion, then material life and death are non-existent categories in reality, and the question "did Krishna die?" is irrelevant. Ultimately, we are all immortal Souls. No conscious entity actually dies. We are not our body.

[tackleberry]

Can't believe a simple question is being answered with needless metaphysical stuff. Krishna was a man who supposedly lived 5000 years ago, and he died like any other human being. He was cremated, and his wives also jumped into the pyre, as was the custom in ancient India.

[Kulapavana]

 

Is Srimad Bhagavatam authority enough?

 

What Srimad Bhahavatam is saying is that the wives of Lord Balarama and Lord Krsna exited this world through the funeral pyres. Of course they were thinking: "my husband's body is being cremated here. let me follow..."

 

It was all part of the leela.

 

IMO you should go back to reading Gita, Sonic-ji. Your foundations are weak.

[andy108]

 

What Srimad Bhahavatam is saying is that the wives of Lord Balarama and Lord Krsna exited this world through the funeral pyres. Of course they were thinking: "my husband's body is being cremated here. let me follow..."

 

It was all part of the leela.

 

IMO you should go back to reading Gita, Sonic-ji. Your foundations are weak.

 

Sonic, check that Bhagavatam Verse carefully. Keyword = INTERNAL POTENCY. The wives bodies were spiritual bodies also. Any FORM animated by the SPIRIT of Krsna or the SPIRIT of one of his NITYA eternal associates is purely spiritual although THAT FORM can appear to do ANYTHING Yogamaya wishes it to appear like it is doing, including falling to the ground as if "DEAD", or appearing to burn to ash.

 

But when Srila Prabhupada's individual spirit appeared to leave his body, we put that body into samadhi so it could continue radiating his spirit for the benefit of others.

 

And because you want to be right, where you can't, even KULA gets a chance to chastise you with sound basis.

 

Now that is a bad hair day.

[theist]

 

Another question must be: Is thematerial world (including organic life) real, or is it a sensoryillusion? If it is all an illusion,then material life and death arenon-existent categories in reality, and the question "did Krishna die?"is irrelevant. Ultimately, we are all immortal Souls. No consciousentity actually dies. We are not our body.

 

 

These are good points.

 

It is a real illusion. Your reflection in a mirror is a real reflection even though it is not the real you.

 

Birth and death only appear to real as long as one thinks the self is the body. But it is a real fact that the body has a birth and a death.

 

It's true that Krishna could not die from an arrow to His heel anymore than Christ died on the cross. They only appeared that way from our point of view.

 

The question at hand concerning Krishna is a little different though.

[Sonic Yogi]

Well, Prabhupada appeared to have a material body but really he didn't.

We thought he had a material body and it looked like he did, but really that body was all spiritual.

 

There is no difference if the Lord INCARNATES.

 

Krishna can only be seen by eyes smeared with the salve of love of Godhead.

Yet, he was visible to so many demons, non-devotees, karmis, yogis etc.

 

The only way they could see Krishna was because he appeared in a form that their material eyes could behold.

 

Krishna didn't have a material body.

Neither did Srila Prabhupada.

 

Prabhupada's body was purely spiritual.

 

In fact, many people that saw Krishna thought he was just a human being.

He didn't look like God to them.

He looked like a man.

[Sonic Yogi]

 

<center>Chapter 9. The Most Confidential Knowledge</center>

 

TEXT 11

 

 

avajananti mam mudha

manusim tanum asritam

param bhavam ajananto

mama bhuta-mahesvaram

 

 

SYNONYMS

 

avajananti--deride; mam--Me; mudhah--foolish men; manusim--in human form; tanum--body; asritam--assuming; param--transcendental; bhavam--nature; ajanantah--not knowing; mama--Mine; bhuta--everything that be; maha-isvaram--the supreme proprietor.

 

TRANSLATION

 

Fools deride Me when I descend in the human form. They do not know My transcendental nature and My supreme dominion over all that be.

 

PURPORT

 

From the other explanations of the previous verses in this chapter, it is clear that the Supreme Personality of Godhead, although appearing like a human being, is not a common man. The Personality of Godhead, who conducts the creation, maintenance and annihilation of the complete cosmic manifestation, cannot be a human being. Yet there are many foolish men who consider Krsna to be merely a powerful man and nothing more. Actually, He is the original Supreme Personality, as is confirmed in the Brahma-samhita (isvarah paramah krsnah); He is the Supreme Lord.

There are many isvaras, controllers, and one appears greater than another. In the ordinary management of affairs in the material world, we find some official or director, and above him there is a secretary, and above him a minister, and above him a president. Each of them is a controller, but one is controlled by another. In the Brahma-samhita it is said that Krsna is the supreme controller; there are many controllers undoubtedly, both in the material and spiritual world, but Krsna is the supreme controller (isvarah paramah krsnah) and His body is sac-cid-ananda, nonmaterial.

Material bodies cannot perform the wonderful acts described in previous verses. His body is eternal, blissful and full of knowledge. Although He is not a common man, the foolish deride Him and consider Him to be a man. His body is called here manusim because He is acting just like a man, a friend of Arjuna's, a politician involved in the Battle of Kuruksetra. In so many ways He is acting just like an ordinary man, but actually His body is sac-cid-ananda-vigraha--eternal bliss and knowledge absolute. This is confirmed in the Vedic language also (sac-cid-ananda-rupaya krsnaya): "I offer my obeisances unto the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Krsna, who is the eternal blissful form of knowledge." There are other descriptions in the Vedic language also. Tam ekam govindam: "You are Govinda, the pleasure of the senses and the cows." Sac-cid-ananda-vigraham: "And Your form is transcendental, full of knowledge, bliss and eternality."

Despite the transcendental qualities of Lord Krsna's body, its full bliss and knowledge, there are many so-called scholars and commentators of Bhagavad-gita who deride Krsna as an ordinary man. The scholar may be born an extraordinary man due to his previous good work, but this conception of Sri Krsna is due to a poor fund of knowledge. Therefore he is called mudha, for only foolish persons consider Krsna to be an ordinary human being because they do not know the confidential activities of the Supreme Lord and His different energies. They do not know that Krsna's body is a symbol of complete knowledge and bliss, that He is the proprietor of everything that be and that He can award liberation to anyone. Because they do not know that Krsna has so many transcendental qualifications, they deride Him.

Nor do they know that the appearance of the Supreme Personality of Godhead in this material world is a manifestation of His internal energy. He is the master of the material energy. As has been explained in several places (mama maya duratyaya), He claims that the material energy, although very powerful, is under His control, and whoever surrenders unto Him can get out of the control of this material energy. If a soul surrendered to Krsna can get out of the influence of material energy, then how can the Supreme Lord, who conducts the creation, maintenance and annihilation of the whole cosmic nature, have a material body like us? So this conception of Krsna is complete foolishness. Foolish persons, however, cannot conceive that the Personality of Godhead, Krsna, appearing just like an ordinary man, can be the controller of all the atoms and of the gigantic manifestation of the universal form. The biggest and the minutest are beyond their conception, so they cannot imagine that a form like that of a human being can simultaneously control the infinite and the minute. Actually although He is controlling the infinite and the finite, He is apart from all this manifestation. It is clearly stated concerning His yogam aisvaram, His inconceivable transcendental energy, that He can control the infinite and the finite simultaneously and that He can remain aloof from them. Although the foolish cannot imagine how Krsna, who appears just like a human being, can control the infinite and the finite, those who are pure devotees accept this, for they know that Krsna is the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Therefore they completely surrender unto Him and engage in Krsna consciousness, devotional service of the Lord.

There are many controversies amongst the impersonalists and the personalists about the Lord's appearance as a human being. But if we consult Bhagavad-gita and Srimad-Bhagavatam, the authoritative texts for understanding the science of Krsna, then we can understand that Krsna is the Supreme Personality of Godhead. He is not an ordinary man, although He appeared on this earth as an ordinary human. In the Srimad-Bhagavatam, First Canto, First Chapter, when the sages inquire about the activities of Krsna, it is stated that His appearance as a man bewilders the foolish. No human being could perform the wonderful acts that Krsna performed while He was present on this earth. When Krsna appeared before His father and mother, Vasudeva and Devaki, He appeared with four hands, but after the prayers of the parents, He transformed Himself into an ordinary child. His appearance as an ordinary human being is one of the features of His transcendental body. In the Eleventh Chapter of the Gita also it is stated, tenaiva rupena etc. Arjuna prayed to see again that form of four hands, and when Krsna was thus petitioned by Arjuna, He again assumed His original form. All these different features of the Supreme Lord are certainly not those of an ordinary human being.

Some of those who deride Krsna, who are infected with the Mayavadi philosophy, quote the following verse from the Srimad-Bhagavatam to prove that Krsna is just an ordinary man. Aham sarvesu bhutesu bhutatmavasthitah sada: "The Supreme is present in every living entity." (Bhag. 3.29.21) We should better take note of this particular verse from the Vaisnava acaryas like Jiva Gosvami instead of following the interpretation of unauthorized persons who deride Krsna. Jiva Gosvami, commenting on this verse, says that Krsna, in His plenary expansion as Paramatma, is situated in the moving and the nonmoving entities as the Supersoul, so any neophyte devotee who simply gives his attention to the arca-murti, the form of the Supreme Lord in the temple, and does not respect other living entities is uselessly worshiping the form of the Lord in the temple. There are three kinds of devotees of the Lord, and the neophyte is in the lowest stage. The neophyte devotee gives more attention to the Deity in the temple than to other devotees, so Jiva Gosvami warns that this sort of mentality should be corrected. A devotee should see that Krsna is present in everyone's heart as Paramatma; therefore every body is the embodiment or the temple of the Supreme Lord, and as such, as one offers respect to the temple of the Lord, he should similarly properly respect each and every body in whom the Paramatma dwells. Everyone should therefore be given proper respect and should not be neglected.

There are also many impersonalists who deride temple worship. They say that since God is everywhere, why should one restrict himself to temple worship? But if God is everywhere, is He not in the temple or in the Deity? Although the personalist and the impersonalist will fight with one another perpetually, a perfect devotee in Krsna consciousness knows that although Krsna is the Supreme Personality, He is all-pervading, as is confirmed in the Brahma-samhita. Although His personal abode is Goloka Vrndavana and He is always staying there, still, by His different manifestations of energy and by His plenary expansion, He is present everywhere in all parts of the material and spiritual creations.

[mahak]

Not to sound wierd, bu I quit reading Srimad Bhagavatam after the third wolume of canto 10.

 

But once, I heard Srila Prabhupada speak of the hunter who shot Krsna in the foot, heard of the curse by Gandhari, all these material concerns. Srila Prabhupada laughed at the controversy brought up by a Laguna beach hipster who knew the whole truth. He looked at the devotees, cited yogamaya, and said that the hunter shot the form witnessed by arjuna (Virata Rupa) which was the whole of creation, but only a quarter of reality. He also continued in this vein that Ravanasura never laid hands on Sitadevi, but rather stole a subform of Kalima who caused death just as she does to all who try to own her.

 

The question should be, "Do we die?", AND THE ANSWER IS THE SAME, NO WE DONT, ONLY PRIESTS AND FOOLS THINK WE DIE, BUT THE FIRST THING WE LEARN AT THE TIME OF ILLUSORY DEATH OCCURS IS THAT DEATH ITSELF IS MAYA, AN ILLUSION, AND LIFE GOES ON (AND ON AND ON AND ON) Not yelling, my finger slipped.

 

mahak