Krsna's two-handed form vs Cosmic form

[Avinash]

What is the meaning of "drstvAnasi"?

[gHari]

First pass:

 

dRSTvA - seeing

 

nasi - the nose

[Avinash]

Isn't it drstvAn + asi?

[Avinash]

Also nose is "nAsikA" and not "nasi".

[gHari]

What is the context of the word?

 

I searched the Vedabase but could not find the word, however all hundred references starting with dRSTvA were translated as either seeing or observing, and the five words starting with dRSTvAn were all split into dRSTvA = seeing, followed by a noun. The few 'nasi' references were translated as 'in the nose' or 'by the nose'. I'll try anasi laster. Perhaps the sanskrit forum here might attract some scholars. You need a catchy title to attract Jagat; like maybe 'What is dRSTvAnasi'. I have found some things before in this Sanskrit web dictionary: http://www.uni-koeln.de/phil-fak/indologie/tamil/mwd_search.html

[Avinash]

What is the context of the word?

 

Does the topic of this thread give you any clue?

 

Jagat ji,

Where are you?

[Avinash]

I did not. It is taken from Bhagwad Gita.

[gHari]

Did you invent the word?

[gHari]

You are a difficult man to serve. This is my last attempt at pulling teeth - I am no dentist I'm afraid, and this was two hours that need not have been wasted. I find four occurences of dRSTvA in Bhagavad-gita As It Is Chapter 11. If it ain't here, then you're on your own; but don't assume that Jagat too has hours to waste.

TEXT 20

 

dyAv A-pRthivyor idam antaraM hi

vyAptaM tvayaikena dizaz ca sarvAH

dRSTvAdbhutaM rUpam ugraM tavedaM

loka-trayaM pravyathitaM mahAtman

 

dyau--from outer space; A-pRthivyoH--to the earth; idam--this; antaram--between; hi--certainly; vyAptam--pervaded; tvayA--by You; ekena--alone; dizaH--directions; ca--and; sarvAH--all; dRSTvA--by seeing; adbhutam--wonderful; rUpam--form; ugram--terrible; tava--Your; idam--this; loka--the planetary systems; trayam--three; pravyathitam--perturbed; mahA-Atman--O great one.

 

Although You are one, You spread throughout the sky and the planets and all space between. O great one, seeing this wondrous and terrible form, all the planetary systems are perturbed.

 

<blockquote>PURPORT

DyAv A-pRthivyoH ("the space between heaven and earth") and loka-trayam ("the three worlds") are significant words in this verse because it appears that not only did Arjuna see this universal form of the Lord, but others in other planetary systems saw it also. Arjuna's seeing of the universal form was not a dream. All whom the Lord endowed with divine vision saw that universal form on the battlefield.

</blockquote>

 

TEXT 23

 

rUpaM mahat te bahu-vaktra-netraM

mahA-bAho bahu-bAhUru-pAdam

bahUdaraM bahu-daMSTrA-karAlaM

dRSTvA lokAH pravyathitAs tathAham

 

rUpam--the form; mahat--very great; te--of You; bahu--many; vaktra--faces; netram--and eyes; mahA-bAho--O mighty-armed one; bahu--many; bAhu--arms; Uru--thighs; pAdam--and legs; bahu-udaram--many bellies; bahu-daMSTrA--many teeth; karAlam--horrible; dRSTvA--seeing; lokAH--all the planets; pravyathitAH--perturbed; tathA--similarly; aham--I.

 

O mighty-armed one, all the planets with their demigods are disturbed at seeing Your great form, with its many faces, eyes, arms, thighs, legs, and bellies and Your many terrible teeth; and as they are disturbed, so am I.

 

TEXT 24

 

nabhaH-spRzaM dIptam aneka-varNaM

vyAttAnanaM dIpta-vizAla-netram

dRSTvA hi tvAM pravyathitAntar-AtmA

dhRtiM na vindAmi zamaM ca viSNo

 

nabhaH-spRzam--touching the sky; dIptam--glowing; aneka--many; varNam--colors; vyAtta--open; Ananam--mouths; dIpta--glowing; vizAla--very great; netram--eyes; dRSTvA--seeing; hi--certainly; tvAm--You; pravyathita--perturbed; antaH--within; AtmA--soul; dhRtim--steadiness; na--not; vindAmi--I have; zamam--mental tranquillity; ca--also; viSNo--O Lord ViSNu.

 

O all-pervading ViSNu, seeing You with Your many radiant colors touching the sky, Your gaping mouths, and Your great glowing eyes, my mind is perturbed by fear. I can no longer maintain my steadiness or equilibrium of mind.

 

TEXT 25

 

daMSTrA-karAlAni ca te mukhAni

dRSTvaiva kAlAnala-sannibhAni

dizo na jAne na labhe ca zarma

prasIda deveza jagan-nivAsa

 

daMSTrA--teeth; karAlAni--terrible; ca--also; te--Your; mukhAni--faces; dRSTvA--seeing; eva--thus; kAla-anala--the fire of death; sannibhAni--as if; dizaH--the directions; na--not; jAne--I know; na--not; labhe--I obtain; ca--and; zarma--grace; prasIda--be pleased; deva-Iza--O Lord of all lords; jagat-nivAsa--O refuge of the worlds.

 

O Lord of lords, O refuge of the worlds, please be gracious to me. I cannot keep my balance seeing thus Your blazing deathlike faces and awful teeth. In all directions I am bewildered.

 

 

TEXT 45

 

adRSTa-pUrvaM hRSito 'smi dRSTvA

bhayena ca pravyathitaM mano me

tad eva me darzaya deva rUpaM

prasIda deveza jagan-nivAsa

 

adRSTa-pUrvam--never seen before; hRSitaH--gladdened; asmi--I am; dRSTvA--by seeing; bhayena--out of fear; ca--also; pravyathitam--perturbed; manaH--mind; me--my; tat--that; eva--certainly; me--unto me; darzaya--show; deva--O Lord; rUpam--the form; prasIda--just be gracious; deva-Iza--O Lord of lords; jagat-nivAsa--O refuge of the universe.

 

After seeing this universal form, which I have never seen before, I am gladdened, but at the same time my mind is disturbed with fear. Therefore please bestow Your grace upon me and reveal again Your form as the Personality of Godhead, O Lord of lords, O abode of the universe.

 

<blockquote>PURPORT

Arjuna is always in confidence with KRSNa because he is a very dear friend, and as a dear friend is gladdened by his friend's opulence, Arjuna is very joyful to see that his friend KRSNa is the Supreme Personality of Godhead and can show such a wonderful universal form. But at the same time, after seeing that universal form, he is afraid that he has committed so many offenses to KRSNa out of his unalloyed friendship. Thus his mind is disturbed out of fear, although he had no reason to fear. Arjuna therefore is asking KRSNa to show His NArAyaNa form, because He can assume any form. This universal form is material and temporary, as the material world is temporary. But in the VaikuNTha planets He has His transcendental form with four hands as NArAyaNa. There are innumerable planets in the spiritual sky, and in each of them KRSNa is present by His plenary manifestations of different names. Thus Arjuna desired to see one of the forms manifest in the VaikuNTha planets. Of course in each VaikuNTha planet the form of NArAyaNa is four-handed, but the four hands hold different arrangements of symbols--the conchshell, mace, lotus and disc. According to the different hands these four things are held in, the NArAyaNas are variously named. All of these forms are one with KRSNa; therefore Arjuna requests to see His four-handed feature.

</blockquote>

 

[Avinash]

I fail to understand how the question posed by me requires somebody to waste his time. I wanted to know the literal meaning of the word drstvAnasi irrespective of the verses it appears in.

 

In one translation, I found the meaning as "you are seeing" and in another as "you have seen". I wanted to know which of the two is correct.

[Avinash]

And if you find that in order to give the answer to some post, you have to waste your time and you do not want to waste that, then it is quite OK not to answer that. I do not think that the question I have asked is against the rules of this forum. If jndas ji thinks that this question is against the rules of this forum, then I will accept his judgement without further arguments and I will request him to delete the thread.

[Tarun]

So where the context? Where in Gita?

First, u began your thread topic "KRSNa's 2-handed Form...

which belongs in KRSNa Talk Forum.

Next, u ask a grammatical vocab question..

That belongs in Sanskrit or Vedik Verses Forum.

asi => tat tvam asi = that u r - to be, 2nd person singular

dRSTvA = having seen; Anasi = not having eaten

Having foreseen no one had eaten...

we began to cook & distribute bhagavat-prasAd ourselves.

[Avinash]

There was a reason for not giving the exact verse. I wanted to know the meaning and then fit this meaning into the verse.

 

As I wrote above, in one Bhagwad Gita translation, I found the word translated as "you are seeing" and in another translation as "you have seen". Both of these translations are by eminent scholars. I wanted to know which of the two is correct. Or, does it depend on context?

 

Anyway, the verse is 11.52.

[gHari]

It seems that with all my childish bellyaching I missed two occurences of dRSTvA in chapter 11. I was really only frustrated when I couldn't find the context; since I am not a scholar, just a monkey with a computer (Hanuman ghari). It may not be in the Gita at all, or perhaps my translation is inaccurate.

TEXT 49

 

mA te vyathA mA ca vimUDha-bhAvo

dRSTvA rUpaM ghoram IdRG mamedam

vyapeta-bhIH prIta-manAH punas tvaM

tad eva me rUpam idaM prapazya

 

mA--let it not be; te--unto you; vyathA--trouble; mA--let it not be; ca--also; vimUDha-bhAvaH--bewilderment; dRSTvA--by seeing; rUpam--form; ghoram--horrible; IdRk--as it is; mama--My; idam--this; vyapeta-bhIH--free from all fear; prIta-manAH--pleased in mind; punaH--again; tvam--you; tat--that; eva--thus; me--My; rUpam--form; idam--this; prapazya--just see.

 

You have been perturbed and bewildered by seeing this horrible feature of Mine. Now let it be finished. My devotee, be free again from all disturbances. With a peaceful mind you can now see the form you desire.

 

<blockquote>PURPORT

In the beginning of Bhagavad-gItA Arjuna was worried about killing BhISma and DroNa, his worshipful grandfather and master. But KRSNa said that he need not be afraid of killing his grandfather. When the sons of DhRtarASTra tried to disrobe DraupadI in the assembly of the Kurus, BhISma and DroNa were silent, and for such negligence of duty they should be killed. KRSNa showed His universal form to Arjuna just to show him that these people were already killed for their unlawful action. That scene was shown to Arjuna because devotees are always peaceful and they cannot perform such horrible actions. The purpose of the revelation of the universal form was shown; now Arjuna wanted to see the four-armed form, and KRSNa showed him. A devotee is not much interested in the universal form, for it does not enable one to reciprocate loving feelings. Either a devotee wants to offer his respectful worshipful feelings, or he wants to see the two-handed KRSNa form so that he can reciprocate in loving service with the Supreme Personality of Godhead.

</blockquote>

 

TEXT 51

 

arjuna uvAca

dRSTvedaM mAnuSaM rUpaM

tava saumyaM janArdana

idAnIm asmi saMvRttaH

sa-cetAH prakRtiM gataH

 

arjunaH uvAca--Arjuna said; dRSTvA--seeing; idam--this; mAnuSam--human; rUpam--form; tava--Your; saumyam--very beautiful; janArdana--O chastiser of the enemies; idAnIm--now; asmi--I am; saMvRttaH--settled; sa-cetAH--in my consciousness; prakRtim--to my own nature; gataH--returned.

 

When Arjuna thus saw KRSNa in His original form, he said: O JanArdana, seeing this humanlike form, so very beautiful, I am now composed in mind, and I am restored to my original nature.

 

<blockquote>PURPORT

Here the words mAnuSaM rUpam clearly indicate the Supreme Personality of Godhead to be originally two-handed. Those who deride KRSNa as if He were an ordinary person are shown here to be ignorant of His divine nature. If KRSNa is like an ordinary human being, then how is it possible for Him to show the universal form and again to show the four-handed NArAyaNa form? So it is very clearly stated in Bhagavad-gItA that one who thinks that KRSNa is an ordinary person and who misguides the reader by claiming that it is the impersonal Brahman within KRSNa speaking is doing the greatest injustice. KRSNa has actually shown His universal form and His four-handed ViSNu form. So how can He be an ordinary human being? A pure devotee is not confused by misguiding commentaries on Bhagavad-gItA because he knows what is what. The original verses of Bhagavad-gItA are as clear as the sun; they do not require lamplight from foolish commentators.

</blockquote>

[Avinash]

When Arjuna thus saw KRSNa in His original form, he said: O JanArdana, seeing this humanlike form, so very beautiful, I am now composed in mind, and I am restored to my original nature.

 

Sri Prabhupada has given meaning of each word in the verse. When I read that, I could not find the Sanskrit equivalent of When Arjuna thus saw KRSNa in His original form

 

 

[shvu]

 

SP says,

 

"The original verses of Bhagavad-gItA are as clear as the sun; they do not require lamplight from foolish commentators."

 

And yet, he has written pages of commentaries on the verses.

 

Sri Prabhupada has given meaning of each word in the verse. When I read that, I could not find the Sanskrit equivalent of When Arjuna thus saw KRSNa in His original form

There are many instances of such additions in the BG as it is. Bit he is not the only one. I have seen other translators do the same, even if it is not to this extent.

 

Nothing like reading the sanksrit original. Any translator will knowingly or unknowingly bring in his own interpretation.

 

Cheers

 

 

[gHari]

The sanskrit word is there: "dRSTvAnasi".

 

I think that it just clarifies the stilted English word for word translation - nothing is really added; it only clarifies what human-like form is being viewed, and when it was viewed. Others might say "Upon seeing the form" or 'Having seen the form" to convey the timing and causal implications. The wording of a pure devotee is always better than that of a sanskrit scholar who does not know, in person, the ultimate goal of the Gita.

 

But in which Gita verse do you find the word in question? It's a simple question. Avinash, I don't understand your not revealing it in a straightforward fashion. I can't conceive of what might make me behave so discourteously.

 

Of course, my frustration is my own fault. I should not have become curious. I will remember to lose my interest, and like a turtle withdraws its limbs into its body, I now abandon this cruel world.

[gHari]

I just noticed that we were both posting early this morning at the same time, and I didn't see the final revelation of truth. Now the question becomes: why are the three translations of 11.52 not identical at the sanskrit devanagari level. One is "dRSTvedaM" while the other two are apparently "dRSTvAnasi".

 

There was no need for games; we are not idiots who would cheat you by not being honest in our translations for whatever reason you perceived. We could have been at this point days ago. Of course my searching through five hundred odd dRSTvA matches for something similar to your word on the CD would not have been necessary if I had studied sanskrit. Maybe now I will.

 

Of course, I still owed you a big one for your kind assistance earlier on the Sri Caitanya Bhagavata, so all my grumbling must seem like thanklessness to you. But I am still very grateful.

[Avinash]

My very dear gHari ji

 

As you must have noticed by now, I maid the context clear immediately after it was asked by Tarun ji. I fail to understand why you were trying to find the verses that contain drstVa and/or nasi? These two words are entirely different from drstvAnasi.

 

Are you trying to say that

drstvAnasi = drstvA + nasi?

 

The very fact that I asked the meaning of some word in Sanskrit shows that I am not at home in Sanskrit. But, on the basis of whatever knowledge I have, I can say that no rule of sandhi in Sanskrit allows us to combine the words drstvA and nasi to make a single word drstvAnasi. Please correct me if you think I am wrong.

[Avinash]

There was no need for games; we are not idiots who would cheat you by not being honest in our translations for whatever reason you perceived.

 

An idiot can not cheat others. One needs to be smart in order to cheat others. Anyway, I did not tell the context not because I feared that I would be cheated. As I have mentioned in one of my posts above, I have read two translators translating the word 'drstvAnasi' in entirely different ways. If initially itself I had told the context, then anyone who does not know Sanskrt would have consulted his copy of Gita translation and given me the meaning from there. For example, you might have given translation by SP. Somebody might have given by Chinmayananda, somebody from Gambhirananda and so on. As you can very well understand, this would not have answered my question. That is why I just asked the meaning of drstvAnasi so that somebody who knows Sanskrit could give me the meaning of word.

 

In case you are interested what two translations I am talking about, they are by Sri Prabhupada and Sri Gambhirananda.

[Avinash]

Of course, I still owed you a big one for your kind assistance earlier on the Sri Caitanya Bhagavata, so all my grumbling must seem like thanklessness to you. But I am still very grateful.

 

I may be wrong but I think that you are thanking me for something that somebody else has done. Are you sure that I assisted you on Sri Caitanya Bhagvata? I do not remember when I did that.

 

 

[Avinash]

Sri Prabhupada translates the word as 'you are seeing' and he concludes that Krsna was talking about his two handed form. I have a book by Sri Gambhirananda which contains translations of verses in Bhagwad Gita and also the translations of Sankaracarya's commentaries on these verses. He translates the word as 'you have seen' and he concludes that Krsna was talking about his cosmic form.

[Avinash]

It may seem that the first post in this thread has no relevance to the title of the thread and that the post belongs to Sanskrit forum. But, in reality the post has everything to do with the title of the thread and the post belongs to this thread, as will become quite clear now: -

 

Isn't it true that far more people saw Krsna's two handed form than those who saw His cosmic form? After all, the two handed form was also seen by Kauravas, and by many kings who used to fight Krsna. But none of them saw His cosmic form. Only Arjuna saw. Does it not make the cosmic form rarer?

[Shashi]

Originally posted by Avinash:

Isn't it true that far more people saw Krsna's two handed form than those who saw His cosmic form? After all, the two handed form was also seen by Kauravas, and by many kings who used to fight Krsna. But none of them saw His cosmic form. Only Arjuna saw. Does it not make the cosmic form rarer?

 

Masterji! I am just now thinking the cosmic form is being rarer as you say and therebuy most indigestable whereas the supreme form is being well done and therefour more relishable.

 

 

[This message has been edited by Shashi (edited 04-11-2002).]

[gHari]

Here is that 11.52 shloka. I guess the search missed it because of the extra 'a'. It seems here that Krsna is speaking of His eternal form, nitya-rupam. We are always seeing a miniscule portion of Krsna's universal form. I notice the word-for-word shows 'as you have seen'. I quickly read the few remaining verses of the chapter on-line but could not immediately find a conclusive proof. However, considering Arjuna's reaction to seeing the universal form, I would think that not everyone is clambering to see it - at least not the way Arjuna has just begged to again see Krsna's dearmost two-handed form of Syamasundara.

 

Yes, you did most kindly help me with the Sri Caitanya Bhagavata HERE.

 

<center>TEXT 52

 

zrI-bhagavAn uvAca

su-durdarzam idaM rUpaM

dRSTavAn asi yan mama

devA apy asya rUpasya

nityaM darzana-kAGkSiNaH

</center>

zrI-bhagavAn uvAca--the Supreme Personality of Godhead said; su-durdarzam--very difficult to see; idam--this; rUpam--form; dRSTavAn asi--as you have seen; yat--which; mama--of Mine; devAH--the demigods; api--also; asya--this; rUpasya--form; nityam--eternally; darzana-kAGkSiNaH--aspiring to see.

 

The Supreme Personality of Godhead said: My dear Arjuna, this form of Mine you are now seeing is very difficult to behold. Even the demigods are ever seeking the opportunity to see this form, which is so dear.

 

<blockquote>PURPORT

In the forty-eighth verse of this chapter Lord KRSNa concluded revealing His universal form and informed Arjuna that this form is not possible to be seen by so many pious activities, sacrifices, etc. Now here the word su-durdarzam is used, indicating that KRSNa's two-handed form is still more confidential. One may be able to see the universal form of KRSNa by adding a little tinge of devotional service to various activities like penances, Vedic study and philosophical speculation. It may be possible, but without a tinge of bhakti one cannot see; that has already been explained.

 

Still, beyond that universal form, the form of KRSNa with two hands is still more difficult to see, even for demigods like BrahmA and Lord Siva. They desire to see Him, and we have evidence in the SrImad-BhAgavatam that when He was supposed to be in the womb of His mother, DevakI, all the demigods from heaven came to see the marvel of KRSNa, and they offered nice prayers to the Lord, although He was not at that time visible to them. They waited to see Him. A foolish person may deride Him, thinking Him an ordinary person, and may offer respect not to Him but to the impersonal "something" within Him, but these are all nonsensical postures. KRSNa in His two-armed form is actually desired to be seen by demigods like BrahmA and Siva.

 

In Bhagavad-gItA (9.11) it is also confirmed, avajAnanti mAM mUDhA mAnuSIM tanum AzritaH: He is not visible to the foolish persons who deride Him. KRSNa's body, as confirmed by Brahma-saMhitA and confirmed by KRSNa Himself in Bhagavad-gItA, is completely spiritual and full of bliss and eternality. His body is never like a material body. But for some who make a study of KRSNa by reading Bhagavad-gItA or similar Vedic scriptures, KRSNa is a problem. For one using a material process, KRSNa is considered to be a great historical personality and very learned philosopher, but He is an ordinary man, and even though He was so powerful He had to accept a material body. Ultimately they think that the Absolute Truth is impersonal; therefore they think that from His impersonal feature He assumed a personal feature attached to material nature. This is a materialistic calculation of the Supreme Lord.

 

Another calculation is speculative. Those who are in search of knowledge also speculate on KRSNa and consider Him to be less important than the universal form of the Supreme. Thus some think that the universal form of KRSNa which was manifested to Arjuna is more important than His personal form. According to them, the personal form of the Supreme is something imaginary. They believe that in the ultimate issue, the Absolute Truth is not a person. But the transcendental process is described in Bhagavad-gItA, Chapter Four: to hear about KRSNa from authorities. That is the actual Vedic process, and those who are actually in the Vedic line hear about KRSNa from authority, and by repeated hearing about Him, KRSNa becomes dear.

 

As we have several times discussed, KRSNa is covered by His yoga-mAyA potency. He is not to be seen or revealed to anyone and everyone. Only by one to whom He reveals Himself can He be seen. This is confirmed in Vedic literature; for one who is a surrendered soul, the Absolute Truth can actually be understood. The transcendentalist, by continuous KRSNa consciousness and by devotional service to KRSNa, can have his spiritual eyes opened and can see KRSNa by revelation. Such a revelation is not possible even for the demigods; therefore it is difficult even for the demigods to understand KRSNa, and the advanced demigods are always in hope of seeing KRSNa in His two-handed form. The conclusion is that although to see the universal form of KRSNa is very, very difficult and not possible for anyone and everyone, it is still more difficult to understand His personal form as SyAmasundara.

</blockquote>