Guest guest Posted October 3, 2006 Report Share Posted October 3, 2006 Hare Krishna i wish to add some more from Bhawatgita As It Is by Srila Pabhupada The spirit of Bhagavad-gita is mentioned in Bhagavad-gita itself. It is just like this: If we want to take a particular medicine, then we have to follow the directions written on the label. We cannot take the medicine according to our own whim or the direction of a friend. It must be taken according to the directions on the label or the directions given by a physician. Similarly, Bhagavad-gita should be taken or accepted as it is directed by the speaker Himself. The speaker of Bhagavad-gita is Lord Sri Krsna. He is mentioned on every page of Bhagavad-gita as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Bhagavan. Of course the word bhagavan sometimes refers to any powerful person or any powerful demigod, and certainly here bhagavan designates Lord Sri Krsna as a great personality, but at the same time we should know that Lord Sri Krsna is the Supreme Personality of Godhead, as is confirmed by all great acaryas (spiritual masters) like Sankaracarya, Ramanujacarya, Madhvacarya, Nimbarka Svami, Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu and many other authorities of Vedic knowledge in India. The Lord Himself also establishes Himself as the Supreme Personality of Godhead in the Bhagavad-gita, and He is accepted as such in the Brahma-samhita and all the Puranas, especially the Srimad-Bhagavatam, known as the Bhagavata Purana (krsnas tu bhagavan svayam). Therefore we should take Bhagavadgita as it is directed by the Personality of Godhead Himself. In the Fourth Chapter of the Gita (4.1-3) the Lord says: imam vivasvate yogam proktavan aham avyayam vivasvan manave praha manur iksvakave 'bravit evam parampara-praptam imam rajarsayo viduh sa kaleneha mahata yogo nastah parantapa sa evayam maya te 'dya yogah proktah puratanah bhakto 'si me sakha ceti rahasyam hy etad uttamam Here the Lord informs Arjuna that this system of yoga, the Bhagavadgita, was first spoken to the sun-god, and the sun-god explained it to Manu, and Manu explained it to Iksvaku, and in that way, by disciplic succession, one speaker after another, this yoga system has been coming down. But in the course of time it has become lost. Consequently the Lord has to speak it again, this time to Arjuna on the Battlefield of Kuruksetra. Read more @ http://www.krishna.com/e-books/Bhagavad-gita_As_It_Is.pdf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 3, 2006 Report Share Posted October 3, 2006 Dear krishnadasa, You have miwsed the central point of my expalaton. I agree with all your quotations and do not say they are wrong. But as a vaisnava following the path of Sri Ramanuja what I mean to say isthat Krishna is synonymous with Narayana who Himself took all the other incarnations as well.The Bhgavath speaking about Krishna in the passage you quoted talks of Him as Narayana the prime cause of the world.So did Jayadeva and Narayana bhattadhri. WHA T i want to know ids why does the ISKcon give a particular form to the Lord and says Krishna alone is the supreme Godhaead. Do they meanm Devakisutha or the LOrd Narayana? If it is the latter I do not have any quarrel with them.Buddha was mentuioned in bhagavatha as the avatar but only of the 24 and not among the principal ten. Vaishanvites do not see any difference between the forms of the Lord whether He appearsas Krishna or Naasimha or Rama or Venkateswara as all are HIs disguises assumed to please His devotees If you think of Him as Narasimha He appears as that .He was Rama to Thyagaraja, Krishna to Jayadeva, Narsimha to Prahlada,The saints of south the azvars have sung about Him in all the forms at the same time making it clear that it is One supreme being, Lord Narayana.I mentioned about other deities just to show that God is one as He has said 'in whatever form you worship you worship me only. When He was saying to Arjuna 'imamvivasvathe yogam It was the supreme lord who is talking. If you call HIm Krishna instead of Narayana, no harm because both are the same.Krishnavathar is called poornavathara vbecause the Lord was present as Krishna in His full splendour unlike Rasma inwhich He came disguising His divinity. But then also therewere sages like vasishta and visvamithra who knew that it was Naryana wha has come in human form..Bhagavath describes Him in all His incarnations s the suptreme self only ,that absolute reality of the upanishads, which are the oldest being apourusheya. It says sadeva soumya idhamagra aseeth ekameva adhvitheetyam, which is called Brahman in the upanishads, Narayana in visishtadvaitha and Krishna in Bhagavatha, Rama in Ramayana.When Hirayakasipu cried "whereis Hari" the lord was present everywhere to make the words of HIs devotee true, who said "He is everywhere" His assuming the form of narasimha is because of HIs infinite mercy to prove the boon of Brahma given to Hiranya kasipu because Brahma was also His devotee. As Rama He need not have underwent all the travails in order to kill Ravana which He could have accomplished from Ayodhya itself,but again it was His infinte mercy to give refuge to all the rshis of dhandakaranya. His incarnations were mainly to protect and delight His devoteesand HIs destroying the wicked is only secondary.I do not criticise sri Prabhupadha's teaching as he was far far superior to people like us and we have not worthy to criticise him but I mean to say that if Krishna is synonymous with the supreme Godhead it is perfectly ok but I have every right to call Him Narayana if I so wish.because to me Krishna, narasimha , rama are all Lord Narayana only. Actually ther is a sloka in Mahabharatha-udhyogaparva, the author of which is vedavyasa,whose words cannot be doubted, krshirbhoovAchakah sabdhah 'Na'scha nirvrthivAchakah vishNusthadhbhAvayOgAcchakrshnO bhavathi ithi sAsvathah Which means the verb 'krshi' denotes th eearth meaning the ploughing in order to bring the riches out of it. The suffix 'Na' denotes bliss. Because Lord Vishnu is the cause of bliss rising out of the eath, He is called Krishna. This is the explanation of th eword Krishna in Vishnusahasranama.Nivrthi denoteds bliss through emancipation. Krishna is the Lord Narayana who is sacchidhAnadhAthmaka or eternal bliss to beaspired for by teh earthly beings.As the krshikarma or ploughingmakes the earth ready to bear the seed and to yield its wealth,so too, the Lord ploughs the mind of mantomake him worthy of enjoying the absolute bliss by enjoying Him who is exceedingly delightful through His leelas. Evam visdhah leelArasEna nithAnthanirvrthah krishnah, says parAsara bhaata in his commentary on Vishnusahasranama. krishnadasa77 <krishnadasa77 wrote: Sarojaji - Shree Guruvayurappa Sharanam!Thank you for your observations. I would just like to state a few comments on your observations. Please forgive me if I am saying something wrong.guruvayur , "sarojram18" <sarojram18 wrote:>> Regading the concept of ISKCON that Krishan alone is the supreme >self and not an avathara, sure He is and so is Rama Narasimha even >Siva Or Devi,because supremeself is Brahman whose manifestations are >all.>There is a scripture called Brahma-Samhita, which was found by Shree Chaitanya Mahaprabhu in a temple in South India. These are the prayers of Brahma to Shree Krishna when Brahma originally understood who he is and what his duties are. In that wonderful scripture, all the concepts with respect to avataras such as Rama, Narasimha is stated as:***ramadi murtishu kala niyamena tishthannanavataram akarod bhuvaneshu kintukrishna svayam sambhavad paramah puman yogovindam adi purusham tamaham bhajami"I worship Govinda, the primeval Lord, who manifested Himself personally as Krishna, and the different avataras in the world in the forms of Rama, Narasimha, Vamana, etc., as His subjective portions." -http://brahmasamhita.com/5/39/en ***Regarding your mentioning of Lord Shiva it is stated in Brahma-Samhita:***kshiram yatha dadhi vikara vishesha yogatsanjayate nahi tasya prathag asti hetohyah sabhutah samupaiti vishesha yogatgovindam adi purusham tamaham bhajami "Just as milk is transformed into curd by the action of acids, but yet the effect curd is neither same as, nor different from, its cause, viz., milk, so I adore the primeval Lord Govinda of whom the state of Shambhu is a transformation for the performance of the work of destruction." - http://brahmasamhita.com/5/45/en***And ragarding your mentioning about Durga Devi, it is stated:***srshti sthiti pralaya sadhana shaktir ekachayeva yasya bhuvanani bibharti durgaicchanurupam api sa ceshtate sagovindam adi purusham tamaham bhajami"The external potency Maya who is of the nature of the shadow of the cit potency, is worshiped by all people as Durga, the creating, preserving and destroying agency of this mundane world. I adore the primeval Lord Govinda in accordance with whose will Durga conducts herself." - http://brahmasamhita.com/5/44/en***If we read all these prayers of Lord Brahma in conjunction with what Krishna Himself says to Arjuna by saying that:***yepy anya devata bhakta yajante sraddhayanvitahtepy mama eva kaunteya yajanaty avaidhipurvakam"Whatever a man may sacrifice to other gods, O son of Kunti, is really meant for Me alone, but it is offered without true understanding." - http://www.asitis.com/9/23.html***and ***kamais tais tair hrta gyana yajante anya devatatam tam niyamam asthaya prakrtya niyatah svaya"Those whose minds are distorted by material desires surrender unto demigods and follow the particular rules and regulations of worship according to their own natures." - http://www.asitis.com/7/20.html***From the above statements of Krishna we can understand the statements of Brahma in Brahma-Samhita.>>Ithihasa and puraNa e4xisted earlier than all oher schools of >thought and what is said there has to be taken as authority. Finally >saying Krishan is an avathara does not ah nyway undermine His being >the supreme godhead because He is that.> But should'nt we take the instructions of Krishna in Bhagavad-Gita to be the oldest because we all know that Krishna is the origin of everyone and Krishna Himself confirms that He told the same Bhagavad-Gita to Vivasvan (Sun God) many millions of years before he again gave the same transcendental knowledge to Arjuna, as stated by Krishna:***imam vivaste yogam proktavan aham avyayamvivasvan manave prahva manur iksavake bravitThe Blessed Lord said: I instructed this imperishable science of yoga to the sun-god, Vivasvan, and Vivasvan instructed it to Manu, the father of mankind, and Manu in turn instructed it to Iksvaku. - http://www.asitis.com/4/1.html***> > Regarding Dasavathara our earliest scriptural authority is > srimadbhagavatha and vishnupurana according to which Krishna is > definitely an avathar. >According to Srimad-Bhagavatam Krishna is the source of all the other incarnations as mentioned in the famous verse:***ete camsa kala pumsah krishnas tu bhagavan swayamindrari vyakulam lokam mrdayanti yuge yugeAll of the above-mentioned incarnations are either plenary portions or portions of the plenary portions of the Lord, but Lord Shree Krishna is the original Personality of Godhead. All of them appear on planets whenever there is a disturbance created by the atheists. The Lord incarnates to protect the theists. - http://srimadbhagavatam.com/1/3/28/en****>I have not read Prabhupada's bhagavatha but > if Krishna is not an avathar how is the birth of Ksrishna as the >son of vasudeva and devaki is explained?>I will humbly advise you to please read Srila Prabhupada's translations and purport of Srimad-Bhagavatam, not only because he is scholarly, but mainly because the pure devotion and love he had for Krishna, because of which Krishna made Srila Prabhupada His instrument to establish the great movement called ISKCON (International Society for Krishna Consciousness).The birth of Krishna as the son of Vasudeva and Devaki is explained by Srila Prabhupada in the Krishna book (http://www.krsnabook.com) as follows:"...One may argue that the Supreme Personality of Godhead, who creates the whole cosmic manifestation simply by His glance, cannot come within the womb of Devaki, the wife of Vasudeva. To eradicate this argument, Vasudeva said, "My dear Lord, it is not a very wonderful thing that You appear within the womb of Devaki because the creation was also made in that way. You were lying in the Causal Ocean as Maha-Visnu, and by Your breathing process, innumerable universes came into existence. Then You entered into each of the universes as Garbhodakasayi Visnu. Then again You expanded Yourself as Ksirodakasayi Visnu and entered into the hearts of all living entities and entered even within the atoms. Therefore Your entrance in the womb of Devaki is understandable in the same way. You appear to have entered, but You are simultaneously all-pervading...."(http://krsnabook.com/ch3.html)>As for Jayadeva the reason he has > not mentioned Krishnavathara is not because he considered Him as > Supreme soul, whcih nodubt He is, not only as Krishna but also as > Narsimha ,Rama or any of His manifestations as mentioned clearly in > Ramayana and Bhagavatha, but Jayadeva was addressing Krishna in >his ashtapadi, 'Pralaya payOdhijale' and hence he mentioned Krishna >as the one who had been taking all the avatharas. as nNarayana >bhattadri did in Narayaneeyam. >So when a great saint and Pure devotee of Krishna like Jayadeva Gosvami himself recognises Krishna as the person who has been taking all the avataras, then should'nt we also accept his version? Please forgive me if I am saying something wrong - I stand here to be corrected by your wonderful wisdom and devotion.>He must have included Buddha for > sankhyaApooraNam, that is to complete the number to ten, perhaps by > that time Buddha has come to be accepted by the people as the tenth > avathara of Vishnu. That is only by popular belief and not >authorised by scriptures.in fact Bhagavatha mentions buddha >indirectly ...>Does it mean that the verse below are not authorised? Please do inform?SB 1.3.24: Then, in the beginning of Kali-yuga, the Lord will appear as Lord Buddha, the son of Anjana, in the province of Gaya, just for the purpose of deluding those who are envious of the faithful theist. (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/1/3/24/en)SB 1.3.25: Thereafter, at the conjunction of two yugas, the Lord of the creation will take His birth as the Kalki incarnation and become the son of Vishnu Yasha. At this time the rulers of the earth will have degenerated into plunderers. (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/1/3/25/en)> took 24 avatharas of which buddha is also one besides numerous > avatharas He took in order to save the world.(Ref.Bhagvath a-2nd > skandha-chapter 7) From time immemorial devotees of Lord Narayana > considered te ten avathars of the Lord as invluding Krishna >excluding Buddha .If you don't mind can you please provide which scripture states the same? As I said before I am asking these only to understand this topic.Thank you so much. And once again apologies to you and the wonderful devotees of the Guruvayur group, if I have said something wrong.~Krishnadasa. May god bless you, Dr. Saroja Ramanujam, M.A., Ph.D, Siromani in sanskrit. Get on board. You're invited to try the new Mail. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 4, 2006 Report Share Posted October 4, 2006 Ohm Namo Bhagavathe Vasudevaya; Ohm Namo Narrayanaya Dear Sarojaji, I also agree with you. WE can call him in any forms that we like. Like Bhagavan said to Melpathoor Bhattathiri - " I am Mara Prabhu and Amara Prabhu " . According to Bhagavan - Bhaktha and his devotion towards him is main. Peoples can call him any forms, he will take that form for that devotee. Prahlada said to his Father Hiranyakashibu - " My Bhagavan is every where, in all forms " . We accept Krishna as Poornavathara. WE can call him as child krishna, Gopala krishna, Partha saradhi like that too. In our astrological terms Bhagavan is situated in different temples in different forms. Guruvayoour - Unni Kannan, Ambalapuzha - Gopalakrishnan, Aaranmula - Partha Saradhi, Padmanabha Swami Temple - Anandashayi Vishnu like that. Regards Keerthi Kumar Ohm Namo Bhagavathe Vasudevaya; Ohm Namo Narrayanaya --- Saroja Ramanujam <sarojram18 wrote: > Dear krishnadasa, > You have miwsed the central point of my expalaton. I > agree with all your quotations and do not say they > are wrong. But as a vaisnava following the path of > Sri Ramanuja what I mean to say isthat Krishna is > synonymous with Narayana who Himself took all the > other incarnations as well.The Bhgavath speaking > about Krishna in the passage you quoted talks of Him > as Narayana the prime cause of the world.So did > Jayadeva and Narayana bhattadhri. WHA T i want to > know ids why does the ISKcon give a particular form > to the Lord and says Krishna alone is the supreme > Godhaead. Do they meanm Devakisutha or the LOrd > Narayana? If it is the latter I do not have any > quarrel with them.Buddha was mentuioned in > bhagavatha as the avatar but only of the 24 and not > among the principal ten. Vaishanvites do not see any > difference between the forms of the Lord whether He > appearsas Krishna or Naasimha or Rama or > Venkateswara as all are HIs disguises assumed to > please His devotees If you think of Him as > Narasimha He appears as that .He was Rama to > Thyagaraja, Krishna to Jayadeva, Narsimha to > Prahlada,The saints of south the azvars have sung > about Him in all the forms at the same time making > it clear that it is One supreme being, Lord > Narayana.I mentioned about other deities just to > show that God is one as He has said 'in whatever > form you worship you worship me only. When He was > saying to Arjuna 'imamvivasvathe yogam It was the > supreme lord who is talking. If you call HIm Krishna > instead of Narayana, no harm because both are the > same.Krishnavathar is called poornavathara vbecause > the Lord was present as Krishna in His full > splendour unlike Rasma inwhich He came disguising > His divinity. But then also therewere sages like > vasishta and visvamithra who knew that it was > Naryana wha has come in human form..Bhagavath > describes Him in all His incarnations s the suptreme > self only ,that absolute reality of the upanishads, > which are the oldest being apourusheya. It says > sadeva > soumya idhamagra aseeth ekameva adhvitheetyam, > which is called Brahman in the upanishads, Narayana > in visishtadvaitha and Krishna in Bhagavatha, Rama > in Ramayana.When Hirayakasipu cried " whereis Hari " > the lord was present everywhere to make the words of > HIs devotee true, who said " He is everywhere " His > assuming the form of narasimha is because of HIs > infinite mercy to prove the boon of Brahma given to > Hiranya kasipu because Brahma was also His devotee. > As Rama He need not have underwent all the travails > in order to kill Ravana which He could have > accomplished from Ayodhya itself,but again it was > His infinte mercy to give refuge to all the rshis of > dhandakaranya. His incarnations were mainly to > protect and delight His devoteesand HIs destroying > the wicked is only secondary.I do not criticise sri > Prabhupadha's teaching as he was far far superior to > people like us and we have not worthy to criticise > him but I mean to say that if Krishna is synonymous > with the supreme Godhead > it is perfectly ok but I have every right to call > Him Narayana if I so wish.because to me Krishna, > narasimha , rama are all Lord Narayana only. > Actually ther is a sloka in > Mahabharatha-udhyogaparva, the author of which is > vedavyasa,whose words cannot be doubted, > krshirbhoovAchakah sabdhah 'Na'scha > nirvrthivAchakah > vishNusthadhbhAvayOgAcchakrshnO bhavathi ithi > sAsvathah > Which means the verb 'krshi' denotes th eearth > meaning the ploughing in order to bring the riches > out of it. The suffix 'Na' denotes bliss. Because > Lord Vishnu is the cause of bliss rising out of the > eath, He is called Krishna. This is the explanation > of th eword Krishna in Vishnusahasranama.Nivrthi > denoteds bliss through emancipation. Krishna is the > Lord Narayana who is sacchidhAnadhAthmaka or eternal > bliss to beaspired for by teh earthly beings.As the > krshikarma or ploughingmakes the earth ready to bear > the seed and to yield its wealth,so too, the Lord > ploughs the mind of mantomake him worthy of enjoying > the absolute bliss by enjoying Him who is > exceedingly delightful through His leelas. Evam > visdhah leelArasEna nithAnthanirvrthah krishnah, > says parAsara bhaata in his commentary on > Vishnusahasranama. > > krishnadasa77 <krishnadasa77 wrote: > Sarojaji - Shree Guruvayurappa Sharanam! > > Thank you for your observations. I would just like > to state a few > comments on your observations. Please forgive me if > I am saying > something wrong. > > guruvayur , " sarojram18 " > <sarojram18 wrote: > > > > Regading the concept of ISKCON that Krishan alone > is the supreme > >self and not an avathara, sure He is and so is Rama > Narasimha even > >Siva Or Devi,because supremeself is Brahman whose > manifestations are > >all. > > > There is a scripture called Brahma-Samhita, which > was found by Shree > Chaitanya Mahaprabhu in a temple in South India. > These are the > prayers of Brahma to Shree Krishna when Brahma > originally understood > who he is and what his duties are. In that wonderful > scripture, all > the concepts with respect to avataras such as Rama, > Narasimha is > stated as: > > *** > ramadi murtishu kala niyamena tishthan > nanavataram akarod bhuvaneshu kintu > krishna svayam sambhavad paramah puman yo > govindam adi purusham tamaham bhajami > > " I worship Govinda, the primeval Lord, who > manifested Himself > personally as Krishna, and the different avataras in > the world in the > forms of Rama, Narasimha, Vamana, etc., as His > subjective portions. " - > http://brahmasamhita.com/5/39/en > *** > > Regarding your mentioning of Lord Shiva it is stated > in Brahma- > Samhita: > > *** > kshiram yatha dadhi vikara vishesha yogat > sanjayate nahi tasya prathag asti hetoh > yah sabhutah samupaiti vishesha yogat > govindam adi purusham tamaham bhajami > > " Just as milk is transformed into curd by the action > of acids, but > yet the effect curd is neither same as, nor > different from, its > cause, viz., milk, so I adore the primeval Lord > Govinda of whom the > state of Shambhu is a transformation for the > performance of the work > of destruction. " - http://brahmasamhita.com/5/45/en > *** > > And ragarding your mentioning about Durga Devi, it > is stated: > > *** > srshti sthiti pralaya sadhana shaktir eka > chayeva yasya bhuvanani bibharti durga > icchanurupam api sa ceshtate sa > govindam adi purusham tamaham bhajami > > " The external potency Maya who is of the nature of > the shadow of the > cit potency, is worshiped by all people as Durga, > the creating, > preserving and destroying agency of this mundane > world. I adore the > primeval Lord Govinda in accordance with whose will > Durga conducts > herself. " - http://brahmasamhita.com/5/44/en > *** > > If we read all these prayers of Lord Brahma in > conjunction with what > Krishna Himself says to Arjuna by saying that: > > *** > yepy anya devata bhakta yajante sraddhayanvitah > tepy mama eva kaunteya yajanaty avaidhipurvakam > > " Whatever a man may sacrifice to other gods, O son > of Kunti, is > really meant for Me alone, but it is offered without > true > understanding. " - http://www.asitis.com/9/23.html > *** > > and > > *** > kamais tais tair hrta gyana yajante anya devata > tam tam niyamam asthaya prakrtya niyatah svaya > > " Those whose minds are distorted by material desires > surrender unto > === message truncated === Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 4, 2006 Report Share Posted October 4, 2006 Thank you for your response.KEERTHI KUMAR V MENON <keerthibai wrote: Ohm Namo Bhagavathe Vasudevaya; Ohm Namo NarrayanayaDear Sarojaji,I also agree with you. WE can call him in any formsthat we like. Like Bhagavan said to MelpathoorBhattathiri - "I am Mara Prabhu and Amara Prabhu".According to Bhagavan - Bhaktha and his devotiontowards him is main. Peoples can call him any forms,he will take that form for that devotee. Prahlada saidto his Father Hiranyakashibu - "My Bhagavan is everywhere, in all forms".We accept Krishna as Poornavathara. WE can call him aschild krishna, Gopala krishna, Partha saradhi likethat too. In our astrological terms Bhagavan issituated in different temples in different forms.Guruvayoour - Unni Kannan, Ambalapuzha -Gopalakrishnan, Aaranmula - Partha Saradhi, PadmanabhaSwami Temple - Anandashayi Vishnu like that.RegardsKeerthi KumarOhm Namo Bhagavathe Vasudevaya; Ohm Namo Narrayanaya--- Saroja Ramanujam <sarojram18 > wrote:> Dear krishnadasa, > You have miwsed the central point of my expalaton. I> agree with all your quotations and do not say they> are wrong. But as a vaisnava following the path of> Sri Ramanuja what I mean to say isthat Krishna is> synonymous with Narayana who Himself took all the> other incarnations as well.The Bhgavath speaking> about Krishna in the passage you quoted talks of Him> as Narayana the prime cause of the world.So did> Jayadeva and Narayana bhattadhri. WHA T i want to> know ids why does the ISKcon give a particular form> to the Lord and says Krishna alone is the supreme> Godhaead. Do they meanm Devakisutha or the LOrd> Narayana? If it is the latter I do not have any> quarrel with them.Buddha was mentuioned in> bhagavatha as the avatar but only of the 24 and not> among the principal ten. Vaishanvites do not see any> difference between the forms of the Lord whether He> appearsas Krishna or Naasimha or Rama or> Venkateswara as all are HIs disguises assumed to> please His devotees If you think of Him as> Narasimha He appears as that .He was Rama to> Thyagaraja, Krishna to Jayadeva, Narsimha to> Prahlada,The saints of south the azvars have sung> about Him in all the forms at the same time making> it clear that it is One supreme being, Lord> Narayana.I mentioned about other deities just to> show that God is one as He has said 'in whatever> form you worship you worship me only. When He was> saying to Arjuna 'imamvivasvathe yogam It was the> supreme lord who is talking. If you call HIm Krishna> instead of Narayana, no harm because both are the> same.Krishnavathar is called poornavathara vbecause> the Lord was present as Krishna in His full> splendour unlike Rasma inwhich He came disguising> His divinity. But then also therewere sages like> vasishta and visvamithra who knew that it was> Naryana wha has come in human form..Bhagavath> describes Him in all His incarnations s the suptreme> self only ,that absolute reality of the upanishads,> which are the oldest being apourusheya. It says> sadeva> soumya idhamagra aseeth ekameva adhvitheetyam,> which is called Brahman in the upanishads, Narayana> in visishtadvaitha and Krishna in Bhagavatha, Rama> in Ramayana.When Hirayakasipu cried "whereis Hari"> the lord was present everywhere to make the words of> HIs devotee true, who said "He is everywhere" His> assuming the form of narasimha is because of HIs> infinite mercy to prove the boon of Brahma given to> Hiranya kasipu because Brahma was also His devotee.> As Rama He need not have underwent all the travails> in order to kill Ravana which He could have> accomplished from Ayodhya itself,but again it was> His infinte mercy to give refuge to all the rshis of> dhandakaranya. His incarnations were mainly to> protect and delight His devoteesand HIs destroying> the wicked is only secondary.I do not criticise sri> Prabhupadha's teaching as he was far far superior to> people like us and we have not worthy to criticise> him but I mean to say that if Krishna is synonymous> with the supreme Godhead> it is perfectly ok but I have every right to call> Him Narayana if I so wish.because to me Krishna,> narasimha , rama are all Lord Narayana only.> Actually ther is a sloka in> Mahabharatha-udhyogaparva, the author of which is> vedavyasa,whose words cannot be doubted,> krshirbhoovAchakah sabdhah 'Na'scha> nirvrthivAchakah> vishNusthadhbhAvayOgAcchakrshnO bhavathi ithi> sAsvathah> Which means the verb 'krshi' denotes th eearth> meaning the ploughing in order to bring the riches> out of it. The suffix 'Na' denotes bliss. Because> Lord Vishnu is the cause of bliss rising out of the> eath, He is called Krishna. This is the explanation> of th eword Krishna in Vishnusahasranama.Nivrthi> denoteds bliss through emancipation. Krishna is the> Lord Narayana who is sacchidhAnadhAthmaka or eternal> bliss to beaspired for by teh earthly beings.As the> krshikarma or ploughingmakes the earth ready to bear> the seed and to yield its wealth,so too, the Lord> ploughs the mind of mantomake him worthy of enjoying> the absolute bliss by enjoying Him who is> exceedingly delightful through His leelas. Evam> visdhah leelArasEna nithAnthanirvrthah krishnah,> says parAsara bhaata in his commentary on> Vishnusahasranama.> > krishnadasa77 <krishnadasa77 > wrote:> Sarojaji - Shree Guruvayurappa Sharanam!> > Thank you for your observations. I would just like> to state a few > comments on your observations. Please forgive me if> I am saying > something wrong.> > --- In guruvayur , "sarojram18"> <sarojram18 wrote:> >> > Regading the concept of ISKCON that Krishan alone> is the supreme > >self and not an avathara, sure He is and so is Rama> Narasimha even > >Siva Or Devi,because supremeself is Brahman whose> manifestations are > >all.> >> There is a scripture called Brahma-Samhita, which> was found by Shree > Chaitanya Mahaprabhu in a temple in South India.> These are the > prayers of Brahma to Shree Krishna when Brahma> originally understood > who he is and what his duties are. In that wonderful> scripture, all > the concepts with respect to avataras such as Rama,> Narasimha is > stated as:> > ***> ramadi murtishu kala niyamena tishthan> nanavataram akarod bhuvaneshu kintu> krishna svayam sambhavad paramah puman yo> govindam adi purusham tamaham bhajami> > "I worship Govinda, the primeval Lord, who> manifested Himself > personally as Krishna, and the different avataras in> the world in the > forms of Rama, Narasimha, Vamana, etc., as His> subjective portions." -> http://brahmasamhita.com/5/39/en > ***> > Regarding your mentioning of Lord Shiva it is stated> in Brahma-> Samhita:> > ***> kshiram yatha dadhi vikara vishesha yogat> sanjayate nahi tasya prathag asti hetoh> yah sabhutah samupaiti vishesha yogat> govindam adi purusham tamaham bhajami > > "Just as milk is transformed into curd by the action> of acids, but > yet the effect curd is neither same as, nor> different from, its > cause, viz., milk, so I adore the primeval Lord> Govinda of whom the > state of Shambhu is a transformation for the> performance of the work > of destruction." - http://brahmasamhita.com/5/45/en> ***> > And ragarding your mentioning about Durga Devi, it> is stated:> > ***> srshti sthiti pralaya sadhana shaktir eka> chayeva yasya bhuvanani bibharti durga> icchanurupam api sa ceshtate sa> govindam adi purusham tamaham bhajami> > "The external potency Maya who is of the nature of> the shadow of the > cit potency, is worshiped by all people as Durga,> the creating, > preserving and destroying agency of this mundane> world. I adore the > primeval Lord Govinda in accordance with whose will> Durga conducts > herself." - http://brahmasamhita.com/5/44/en> ***> > If we read all these prayers of Lord Brahma in> conjunction with what > Krishna Himself says to Arjuna by saying that:> > ***> yepy anya devata bhakta yajante sraddhayanvitah> tepy mama eva kaunteya yajanaty avaidhipurvakam> > "Whatever a man may sacrifice to other gods, O son> of Kunti, is > really meant for Me alone, but it is offered without> true > understanding." - http://www.asitis.com/9/23.html> ***> > and > > ***> kamais tais tair hrta gyana yajante anya devata> tam tam niyamam asthaya prakrtya niyatah svaya> > "Those whose minds are distorted by material desires> surrender unto > === message truncated === May god bless you, Dr. Saroja Ramanujam, M.A., Ph.D, Siromani in sanskrit. How low will we go? Check out Messenger’s low PC-to-Phone call rates. 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.