please comment on these Vedanta verses

[Guest guest]

Hare Krishna and all glories to Srila Prabhupada!!

 

in reading through the Vedanta Sutra, I came across the following from Chapter 2 Section 2 topic 8 :

 

Topic-8: Bhagavata View Refuted

42. (The Bhagavata view that Samkarsana and others originate successively from Vasudeva and others is wrong), since any origin (for the soul) is impossible.

43. And (this view is wrong because) an implement cannot originate from its agent (who wields it).

44. Alternatively even if (it be assumed that Vasudeva and others are) possessed of knowledge, (majesty etc.,), still the defect cannot be remedied.

45. Besides, (in this scripture) many contradictions are met with and it runs counter to the Vedas.

 

 

any comments on this?

Also, does anyone have commentary from the bhasya by Vidyabhusan?

 

thanks!!!

Haribol!

 

[Pankaja_Dasa]

 

 

No one understand Vedanta-sutra that is why Vyasa-deva compiled Bhagavatam.

 

That Bhagavata refutation is explained by Prabhupada in the Caitanya Charitamrta. www.vedabase.net Chaitanya Charitamrta Adi-lila 5.4.

This is my favourite quote from above:

 

The devotees accept all these expansions to be one, but why should they restrict oneness to these quadruple expansions? Certainly we should not do so, for all living entities, from Brahmä to the insignificant ant, are expansions of Väsudeva, as accepted in all the çrutis and småtis.

[shvu]

 

No one understand Vedanta-sutra that is why Vyasa-deva compiled Bhagavatam

 

 

I like that. In fact Baladeva VidyaBhushana's commentary contains only one line. He tells readers that no one, including himself can understand the Sutras, so please refer to the Bhagavatam instead.

 

Vyasa also knew that his sutras could not be understood by anyone and so he wrote the Bhagavatam. But instead of rescinding the sutras which no one could understand, he allowed them to be propogated (for fun, most likely). This is akin to a scenario where Microsoft would sell MS windows 2.x (from the 80s) and Vista, side by side. No reason, except to have some fun & confuse the general public.

 

It is also interesting to note that Vyasa - the man with divine vision - who predicted the arrival of Queen Victoria and the East India company, could not see the uselessness of the Sutras which he must have spent considerable time authoring.

 

Cheers

[Guest guest]

 

in reading through the Vedanta Sutra, I came across the following from Chapter 2 Section 2 topic 8 :

 

Topic-8: Bhagavata View Refuted

42. (The Bhagavata view that Samkarsana and others originate successively from Vasudeva and others is wrong), since any origin (for the soul) is impossible.

43. And (this view is wrong because) an implement cannot originate from its agent (who wields it).

44. Alternatively even if (it be assumed that Vasudeva and others are) possessed of knowledge, (majesty etc.,), still the defect cannot be remedied.

45. Besides, (in this scripture) many contradictions are met with and it runs counter to the Vedas.

 

 

Only the mayavadi commentary misrepresents Vyas' sutras to refute the Bhagavata view of Vyuha.

 

In his own commentary on Brahma sutras Srimad Bhagavatam, a refutation is nowhere to be found. Vyas himself in the Mahabharat validates the Bhagavata school, yet we are to believe in his sutras he refutes it?

[Guest guest]

which is why I was wondering if anyone has Srila VidyaBhusan's Govinda Bhasya. When VidyaBhusan was asked to give a commentary on the Vedanta Sutra, he initially declined, stating that Lord Chaitanya has maintained that the Srimad Bhagavatam is the commentary on the Vedanta. As you all know, after being pushed, VidyaBhusan wrote the entire Govinda Bhasya on the Vedanta Sutra in a few days!

Haribol!

[Guest guest]

I have the commentary and I can post it sometime.

 

The doctrine Vyasa is refuting is a doctrine of psuedo-vaishnavas, not real vaishnavas.

 

The name "bhagavata" of that sect is a name of a bogus group, just as the "sahajiyas" are a bogus group of devoteees of Mahaprabhu.

 

The main point is Vasudeva, Sankarashana, Pradyumna etc are eternal and Sankarsana doesn't actually get made from Vasudeva, rather he "expands" his eternal form with hundreds of faces, hands, arms etc - the Purusha of the Purusha sukta

[Guest guest]

You can read a mayavada commentary to this section here:

http://www.swami-krishnananda.org/bs_2/bs_2-2-08.html

 

Note that it is not all points of the Vaishnava or Bhagavata philosophy that is supposed to be incorrect. It is only the notion that "a jiva is created by Vasudeva". In fact, none of the genuine Vaishnava schools say that a jiva is ever created by Vasudeva (God). It is only a bogus school of "Bhagavata" thought that is being discussed.

[Guest guest]

cc adi 5.41

 

Vasudeva, Sankarshana, Pradyumna and Aniruddha constitute this second quadruple. They are purely transcendental

 

purport: Sripada Sankaracarya has misleadingly explained the quadruple form (catur-vyuha) in his interpretation of the forty-second aphorism of Chapter Two of the second khanda of the Vedanta-sutra (utpatty-asambhavat). In verses 41 through 47 of this chapter of Sri Caitanya-caritamrita, Srila Krishnadasa Kaviraja Gosvami answers Sripada Sankaracarya's misleading objections to the personal feature of the Absolute Truth.....

 

.....The scriptures known as the Pancaratra-sastras are recognized Vedic scriptures that have been accepted by the great acaryas. These scriptures are not products of the modes of passion and ignorance. Learned scholars and brahmanas therefore always refer to them as satvata-samhitas. The original speaker of these scriptures is Narayana, the Supreme Personality of Godhead. This is especially mentioned in the Moksha-dharma (349.68), which is part of the Santi-parva of the Mahabharata. Liberated sages like Narada and Vyasa, who are free from the four defects of conditioned souls, are the propagators of these scriptures. Sri Narada Muni is the original speaker of the Pancaratra-sastra. Srimad-Bhagavatam is also considered a satvata-samhita. Indeed, Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu declared, srimad-bhagavatam puranam amalam: "Srimad-Bhagavatam is a spotless Purana." Malicious editors and scholars who attempt to misrepresent the Pancaratra-sastras to refute their regulations are most abominable. In the modern age, such malicious scholars have even commented misleadingly upon the Bhagavad-gita, which was spoken by Krishna, to prove that there is no Krishna. How the Mayavadis have misrepresented the pancaratrika-vidhi will be shown below....

 

 

[Guest guest]

Sütra 15

 

 

ädhyänäya prayojanäbhävät

 

ädhyänäya—for meditation; prayojana—other purpose; abhävät—because of the absence.

 

 

Because of the absence of another purpose, it is for meditation.

 

Purport by Çréla Baladeva Vidyäbhüñaëa

 

 

This sütra means, "This parable is meant for meditation. This is so because of the absence of another purpose." The word "ädhyäna" here means “meditation". This is the meaning. In Taittiréya Upaniñad (2.1.2) it is said:

 

 

brahma-vid äpnoti param

 

 

"One who knows the Supreme attains the Supreme."

 

The Supreme is manifested in two ways: 1. in His original form, and 2. in the forms of His pastime incarnations. In His original form the Lord has the names Näräyaëa, Väsudeva, Saìkarñaëa, Pradyumna, and Aniruddha.

They whose intelligence is firmly anchored in the world of matter find it very difficult to meditate on the Lord, who is spiritual, blissful, and all-pervading. Therefore, in order that the conditioned souls may more easily understand the Lord, the Taittiréya Upaniñad describes the blissful Lord in this parable of "a bird whose head is pleasure". In this way the conditioned souls attain elevated spiritual intelligence and are able to meditate on the Supreme directly.

Meditation on the annamaya-puruña feature of the Lord is given in Taittiréya Upaniñad 2.1.2. Meditations on the präëamaya, manomaya, and vijïänamaya-puruñas are given in Taittiréya Upaniñad 2.2.1, and meditation on the Ananadamaya-puruña feature of the Lord is given in Taittiréya Upaniñad 2.5.1. These five aspects of the Supreme need not always been included in every meditation on the Supreme.

 

Here someone may object: The Supreme is one. There is no basis for your statement that the Supreme is five.

 

To this objection the answer is given: In the Gopäla-täpané Upaniñad it is said:

 

 

eko 'pi san bahudhä vibhäti

 

 

"Although He is one, the Supreme Lord appears in many forms."

 

In the Çruti-çästra it is said:

 

 

ekaà santaà bahudhä dåçyamänam

 

 

"Although He is one, the Supreme Personality of Godhead is seen to be many."

 

In the Catur-veda-çikhä it is said:

 

 

sa çiraù sa dakñiëaù pakñaù sa uttara-pakñaù sa ätmä sa pucchaù

 

 

"He is the head. He is the right wing. He is the left wing. He is the Self. He is the tail."

 

In the Båhat-saàhitä it is said:

 

 

çiro näräyaëaù pakño

dakñiëaù savya eva ca

pradyumnaç cäniruddhaç ca

san deho väsudevakaù

 

näräyaëo 'tha san deho

väsudevaù çiro 'pi vä

pucchaà saìkarñaëaù prokta

eka eva ca païcadhä

 

aìgäìgitvena bhagavän

kréòate puruñottamaù

aiçvaryän na virodhaç ca

cintyas tasmin janärdane

atarkye hi kutas tarkas

tv apramaye kutaù pramä

 

 

"Näräyaëa is the head. Pradyumna and Aniruddha are the right and left wings. Väsudeva is the torso. Or, Näräyaëa is the torso, and Väsudeva is the head. Saìkarñaëa is the tail. In this way the one Supreme Personality of Godhead is manifested in five ways. In this way the Supreme Personality of Godhead enjoys pastimes as both the limbs and the possessor of the limbs. The Lord's power and opulence have no limit. He is inconceivable. How can mere logic grasp Him? He is immeasurable. How can He be measured?"

 

=============

 

I'm sorry about the font being displayed, but it is taken directly from my edition of Govinda Bhasya and it will take me ages and ages to translate it to other fonts

 

- Muralidhar

[Guest guest]

Sri Ramanuja Acharya's translation of Vedanta, in discussion of the verses asked about here, is available at this address:

 

http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/sbe48/sbe48243.htm

 

[Guest guest]

thanks a lot for your post from the Govinda Bhasya! Are we to assume that Sri Krishna represent the complete Godhead manifested by the 5 features of Narayan, Sankarshan, Vasudev and Aniruddha?

 

Haribol!

[Guest guest]

thanks for this reference! From your initial reply, i thought it was CC 5.4 and couldnt find the reference. But in 5.41 its all there /images/graemlins/smile.gif

 

Hare Krishna!

[Guest guest]

If you read CC, in the Sanatana Siksa section, (teachings to Sri Sanatana Goswami) there is a complete description of the relation between Sri Krishna and all his manifestations.

 

Krishna is "svayam prakash" - the source of everything

 

Vasudeva is a part of Krishna

 

Sankarsana, Pradyumna and Anirudha emanate from Vasudeva but they are eternal - not created. They are like the limbs of a bird . This is explained in detail in the Govinda Bhasya commentary to Vedanta Sutra but since this runs to about 30 pages or more I cannot reproduce it all here.

 

Sankarsana is the source of the Jiva tattva. (see the other discussion on this site about "origin of the jiva")

 

Sankarasana and the jivas are not created.

 

Thus, the arguement of Sankara that the Bhagavata sect believe the jiva is created is factually wrong.

 

Note also, that in Vedanta Sutra II.2.42 we see that Vysasa himself did not mention the "Bhagavata" school of thought and say, "The Bhagavata school is wrong", rather he only said that "those who believe the jiva is created are wrong".

See http://www.swami-krishnananda.org/bs_2/bs_2-2-08.html

where Sivananda says that this verse of Vedanta is a refutation of Vaishnavism. But he is misconstruing the meaning of this verse. It is a fact that sankara and his followers such as Sivanananda are totally misunderstanding Bhagavata philosophy. They have put forward the false notion that Bhagavata philosophy says the jiva is created. Christians say the jiva is created, but not Vaishnavas.

 

These points about how Vaishnavas say the jiva is not created are clearly explained in Ramanuja's commentary to these verses: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/sbe48/sbe48243.htm

 

- Muralidhar

[Guest guest]

 

Vyas himself in the Mahabharat validates the Bhagavata school, yet we are to believe in his sutras he refutes it?

 

 

The scriptures known as the Pancaratra-sastras are recognized Vedic scriptures that have been accepted by the great acaryas. These scriptures are not products of the modes of passion and ignorance. Learned scholars and brahmanas therefore always refer to them as satvata-samhitas. The original speaker of these scriptures is Narayana, the Supreme Personality of Godhead. This is especially mentioned in the Moksha-dharma (349.68), which is part of the Santi-parva of the Mahabharata. Liberated sages like Narada and Vyasa, who are free from the four defects of conditioned souls, are the propagators of these scriptures.

 

 

http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/sbe48/sbe48246.htm

 

The author of the Sûtras (Vyâsa)--who first composed the Sûtras, the purport of which it is to set forth the arguments establishing the Vedânta doctrine, and then the Bhârata-samhitâ (i.e. the Mahâbhârata) in a hundred thousand slokas in order to support thereby the teaching of the Veda--himself says in the chapter called Mokshadharma, which treats of knowledge, 'If a householder, or a Brahmakârin, or a hermit, or a mendicant wishes to achieve success, what deity should he worship?' and so on; explains then at great length the Pañkarâtra system, and then says, 'From the lengthy Bhârata story, comprising one hundred thousand slokas, this body of doctrine has been extracted, with the churning-staff of mind, as butter is churned from curds--as butter from milk, as the Brahmana from men, as the Âranyaka from the Vedas, as Amrita from medicinal herbs.--This great Upanishad, <font color="brown">consistent with the four Vedas, in harmony with Sânkhya and Yoga</font color>, was called by him by the name of Pañkarâtra. This is excellent, this is Brahman, this is supremely beneficial. Fully agreeing with the Rik, the Yagus, the Sâman, and the Atharvân-giras, <font color="brown">this doctrine will be truly authoritative.'</font color>

 

[Guest guest]

Were these the devotees the ancient greeks met in india then wrote on a pillar 'i am devotee of vasudeva?' Is that them?

[Guest guest]

Yes they were.

 

Given that Vedanta Sutra speaks against the Jain and Buddhist philosophies, we might assume that it was written after those philosophies came into existence. Scholars suggest that this was around the time of christ. Bararayana, the author of Vedanta, was holding the chair of Vyasa, the Vyasasana - he was the "jagad-guru" or incarnation of Vyasa living in the world, in the era he wrote the Vedanta Sutra. That is to say he was not the same individual who wrote the earlier Vedas, but rather another empowered person. In Caitanya Caritamrta it states that in the future a new Vyasa will write the lila of Sri Chaitanya - a new incarnation of Vyasa will appear. And that of course was Vrindavan das Thakura.

 

Note that these devotees, the Bhagavatas, were monotheists, and that their tradition was existing prior to the Gupta period and prior to the beginnings of the pancopasana religion, in which Sri Vishnu is worshipped as one of the "five": Durga, Surya, Ganapati, Shiva and Sri Vishnu. This "pancopasana" system is mentioned in Brahma Samhita, but there it is explained that Krishna, Vishnu, is the supreme lord and not merely a "demigod".

 

- Muralidhar

[Pankaja_Dasa]

TRANSLATION

Kiräta, Hüëa, Ändhra, Pulinda, Pulkaça, Äbhéra, Çumbha, Yavana, members of the Khasa races and even others addicted to sinful acts can be purified by taking shelter of the devotees of the Lord, due to His being the supreme power. I beg to offer my respectful obeisances unto Him.

PURPORT

Kiräta: A province of old Bhärata-varña mentioned in the Bhéñma-parva of Mahäbhärata. Generally the Kirätas are known as the aboriginal tribes of India, and in modern days the Santal Parganas in Bihar and Chota Nagpur might comprise the old province named Kiräta.

Hüëa: The area of East Germany and part of Russia is known as the province of the Hüëas. Accordingly, sometimes a kind of hill tribe is known as the Hüëas.

Ändhra: A province in southern India mentioned in the Bhéñma-parva of Mahäbhärata. It is still extant under the same name.

Pulinda: It is mentioned in the Mahäbhärata (Ädi-parva 174.38), viz., the inhabitants of the province of the name Pulinda. This country was conquered by Bhémasena and Sahadeva. The Greeks are known as Pulindas, and it is mentioned in the Vana-parva of Mahäbhärata that the non-Vedic race of this part of the world would rule over the world. This Pulinda province was also one of the provinces of Bhärata, and the inhabitants were classified amongst the kñatriya kings. But later on, due to their giving up the brahminical culture, they were mentioned as mlecchas (just as those who are not followers of the Islamic culture are called kafirs and those who are not followers of the Christian culture are called heathens).

Äbhéra: This name also appears in the Mahäbhärata, both in the Sabhä-parva and Bhéñma-parva. It is mentioned that this province was situated on the River Sarasvaté in Sind. The modern Sind province formerly extended on the other side of the Arabian Sea, and all the inhabitants of that province were known as the Äbhéras. They were under the domination of Mahäräja Yudhiñöhira, and according to the statements of Märkaëòeya the mlecchas of this part of the world would also rule over Bhärata. Later on this proved to be true, as in the case of the Pulindas. On behalf of the Pulindas, Alexander the Great conquered India, and on behalf of the Äbhéras, Muhammad Ghori conquered India. These Äbhéras were also formerly kñatriyas within the brahminical culture, but they gave up the connection. The kñatriyas who were afraid of Paraçuräma and had hidden themselves in the Caucasian hilly regions later on became known as the Äbhéras, and the place they inhabited was known as Äbhéradeça.

Çumbhas or Kaìkas: The inhabitants of the Kaìka province of old Bhärata, mentioned in the Mahäbhärata.

Yavanas: Yavana was the name of one of the sons of Mahäräja Yayäti who was given the part of the world known as Turkey to rule. Therefore the Turks are Yavanas due to being descendants of Mahäräja Yavana. The Yavanas were therefore kñatriyas, and later on, by giving up the brahminical culture, they became mleccha-yavanas. Descriptions of the Yavanas are in the Mahäbhärata (Ädi-parva 85.34). Another prince called Turvasu was also known as Yavana, and his country was conquered by Sahadeva, one of the Päëòavas. The western Yavana joined with Duryodhana in the Battle of Kurukñetra under the pressure of Karëa. It is also foretold that these Yavanas also would conquer India, and it proved to be true.

Khasa: The inhabitants of the Khasadeça are mentioned in the Mahäbhärata (Droëa-parva). Those who have a stunted growth of hair on the upper lip are generally called Khasas. As such, the Khasa are the Mongolians, the Chinese and others who are so designated.

The above-mentioned historical names are different nations of the world. Even those who are constantly engaged in sinful acts are all corrigible to the standard of perfect human beings if they take shelter of the devotees of the Lord. Jesus Christ and Muhammad, two powerful devotees of the Lord, have done tremendous service on behalf of the Lord on the surface of the globe. And from the version of Çréla Çukadeva Gosvämé it appears that instead of running a godless civilization in the present context of the world situation, if the leadership of world affairs is entrusted to the devotees of the Lord, for which a worldwide organization under the name and style of the International Society for Krishna Consciousness has already been started, then by the grace of the Almighty Lord there can be a thorough change of heart in human beings all over the world because the devotees of the Lord are able authorities to effect such a change by purifying the dust-worn minds of the people in general. The politicians of the world may remain in their respective positions because the pure devotees of the Lord are not interested in political leadership or diplomatic implications. The devotees are interested only in seeing that the people in general are not misguided by political propaganda and in seeing that the valuable life of a human being is not spoiled in following a type of civilization which is ultimately doomed. If the politicians, therefore, would be guided by the good counsel of the devotees, then certainly there would be a great change in the world situation by the purifying propaganda of the devotees, as shown by Lord Caitanya. As Çukadeva Gosvämé began his prayer by discussing the word yat-kértanam, so also Lord Caitanya recommended that simply by glorifying the Lord’s holy name, a tremendous change of heart can take place by which the complete misunderstanding between the human nations created by politicians can at once be extinguished. And after the extinction of the fire of misunderstanding, other profits will follow. The destination is to go back home, back to Godhead, as we have several times discussed in these pages.

According to the cult of devotion, generally known as the Vaiñëava cult, there is no bar against anyone’s advancing in the matter of God realization. A Vaiñëava is powerful enough to turn into a Vaiñëava even the Kiräta, etc., as above mentioned. In the Bhagavad-gétä (9.32) it is said by the Lord that there is no bar to becoming a devotee of the Lord (even for those who are lowborn, or women, çüdras or vaiçyas), and by becoming a devotee everyone is eligible to return home, back to Godhead. The only qualification is that one take shelter of a pure devotee of the Lord who has thorough knowledge in the transcendental science of Kåñëa (Bhagavad-gétä and Çrémad-Bhägavatam). Anyone from any part of the world who becomes well conversant in the science of Kåñëa becomes a pure devotee and a spiritual master for the general mass of people and may reclaim them by purification of heart. Though a person be even the most sinful man, he can at once be purified by systematic contact with a pure Vaiñëava. A Vaiñëava, therefore, can accept a bona fide disciple from any part of the world without any consideration of caste and creed and promote him by regulative principles to the status of a pure Vaiñëava who is transcendental to brahminical culture. The system of caste, or varëäçrama-dharma, is no longer regular even amongst the so-called followers of the system. Nor is it now possible to reestablish the institutional function in the present context of social, political and economic revolution. Without any reference to the particular custom of a country, one can be accepted to the Vaiñëava cult spiritually, and there is no hindrance in the transcendental process. So by the order of Lord Çré Caitanya Mahäprabhu, the cult of Çrémad-Bhägavatam or the Bhagavad-gétä can be preached all over the world, reclaiming all persons willing to accept the transcendental cult. Such cultural propaganda by the devotees will certainly be accepted by all persons who are reasonable and inquisitive, without any particular bias for the custom of the country. The Vaiñëava never accepts another Vaiñëava on the basis of birthright, just as he never thinks of the Deity of the Lord in a temple as an idol. And to remove all doubts in this connection, Çréla Çukadeva Gosvämé has invoked the blessings of the Lord, who is all-powerful (prabhaviñëave namaù). As the all-powerful Lord accepts the humble service of His devotee in devotional activities of the arcana His form as the worshipable Deity in the temple, similarly the body of a pure Vaiñëava changes transcendentally at once when he gives himself up to the service of the Lord and is trained by a qualified Vaiñëava. The injunction of Vaiñëava regulation in this connection runs as follows: arcye viñëau çilä-dhér guruñu nara-matir vaiñëave jäti-buddhiù çré-viñëor nämni çabda-sämänya-buddhiù, etc. “One should not consider the Deity of the Lord as worshiped in the temple to be an idol, nor should one consider the authorized spiritual master an ordinary man. Nor should one consider a pure Vaiñëava to belong to a particular caste, etc.” (Padma Puräëa)

The conclusion is that the Lord, being all-powerful, can, under any and every circumstance, accept anyone from any part of the world, either personally or through His bona fide manifestation as the spiritual master. Lord Caitanya accepted many devotees from communities other than the varëäçramites, and He Himself declared, to teach us, that He does not belong to any caste or social order of life, but that He is the eternal servant of the servant of the Lord who maintains the damsels of Våndävana (Lord Kåñëa). That is the way of self-realization.

A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupäda

SB 2.4.19

[Guest guest]

 

Kiräta, Hüëa, Ändhra, <font color="brown">Pulinda</font color>, Pulkaça, Äbhéra, Çumbha, Yavana, members of the Khasa races and even others addicted to sinful acts <font color="brown">can be purified by taking shelter of the devotees of the Lord</font color>, due to His being the supreme power. I beg to offer my respectful obeisances unto Him.

 

Pulinda: It is mentioned in the Mahäbhärata (Ädi-parva 174.38), viz., the inhabitants of the province of the name Pulinda. This country was conquered by Bhémasena and Sahadeva. The Greeks are known as Pulindas, and it is mentioned in the Vana-parva of Mahäbhärata that the non-Vedic race of this part of the world would rule over the world. This Pulinda province was also one of the provinces of Bhärata, and the inhabitants were classified amongst the kñatriya kings. But later on, due to their giving up the brahminical culture, they were mentioned as mlecchas (just as those who are not followers of the Islamic culture are called kafirs and those who are not followers of the Christian culture are called heathens).

 

 

[Guest guest]

nitaipadakamala.com

 

ratrams ca jnanavacanam jnanam pancavidham smrtam

tenedam pancaratrams ca pravadanti manisinam

The word panca means five. The word ratra means jnana, or knowledge. According to authorities there are five kinds of knowledge.

n.b. These five kinds of knowledge are: 1) Vedic, 2) Yogic, 3) Knowledge which is a product of the world of birth and death, or experiential knowledge, 4) Knowledge by which liberation is attained, and 5) Knowledge by which one attains to the loving service of Sri Krsna. To explain these, saints and sages have composed scriptures known as Pancaratra : "treatise on five kinds of knowledge." (Narada Pancaratra, 1.2.44)

 

 

evam ekam samkhyayogam vedaranakameva ca

parasparanganyetani pancaratrastu kathyate

Literature which explains the five different kinds of Vedic literatures: 1)Samkhya-sastra, 2) Yoga-sastra, 3) theVedas, 4) the different branches of theVedas, and 5) the sub-branches of all of these literatures is known as Pancaratra. (Mahabharata-Santiparva, Moksa-Dharma 349th adhyaya )

 

 

jnanam paramatattvams ca janma-mrtyu-jarapaham

tato mrtyu-jayam sambhum samprapa krsnavaktratam

The best of innumerable Vaisnnavas, the death-conquering Shambu, heard the Pancaratra from the lotus mouth of Sri Krsna. The knowledge contained in Pancaratra puts an end to birth, death, old age and disease and reveals the Supreme truth. (Narada Pancaratra 1.2.45)

 

 

drstha sarvam samalokya jnanam samprapya sankarat

jnanamrtam pancaratram cakara narado munim

Srila Narada Muni, after studying all the sastras, heard this unparalleled transcendental knowledge from the lotus mouth of the best of devotees, Lord Siva, who heard it from Sri Krsna Himself. At that time he compiled the Pancaratra , which is the essence of nectar. (Narada Pancaratra 1.2.56)

 

 

pancaratrasya krtsnasya vakta tu bhagavan svayam

sarvesu ca nrpasresdha jnanesvebhesu drsyate

yathagamam yathajnanam nisdha narayanam prabhum

na caivamenam jananti tamobhuta visampate

tameva sastrakartaram pravadanti manisinam

nimsamsayesu sarvesu nityam vasati vai harim

sa samsayaddhetu balannadhyavasati madhavam"

atra pa-caratrameva garisthamacestha pancaratrasetyadau bhagavan svayamiti. daivaprakrtayastu tattatsarvavalokanena pancaratraprati padye sri narayana ei paryavasantityaha sarvasvati. asuramstu nindati na cainamiti. nimsamsyesviti tasmat jhatiti vedartha-pratipattaye pancaratramevadhyetavyamiti.

 

n.b. Jiva Goswami quotes the following verse from the Mahabharata in his Paramatma-Sandarbha. His comment follows the quotation.

"O best of Kings! This Narada Pancaratra was spoken by Bhagavan Himself. Having carefully scrutinized all the revealed scriptures of divine knowledge, and having divined their essential meanings, Lord Narayana established this truth, which is without material boundaries. O my Lord! Those who are ensconced in the mode of ignorance, and who are saturated with the qualities of ignorance can never understand this literature or the different kinds of truths it expounds. Throughout the scriptures that they have compiled, the great rsis glorify Lord Narayana. In those scriptures that are without doubt, Sri Krsna eternally resides. Of those scriptures that are filled with doubts and arguments, it is said to that Sri Krsna doesn't reside there."

n.b. This ends the quotation from Mahabharata. Jiva Goswai's comment follows.

"Pancaratrasya krtsnasya vakta tu bhagavan svayam," means that God Himself has spoken the Narada Pancaratra . It is therefore the best of all literatures. The line beginning with the word sarvesu means that Lord Narayana established Narada Pancaratra on the basis of divine reality, and that Narada Pancaratra is therefore supernaturally excellent among all revealed scriptures. The line beginning with the words na cainam explains that those whose nature is envious, and nondevotional, the demons or asuras , will never be able to understand this sublime literature. The line beginning nimsamsayesu explains that for one who properly studies the Narada Pancaratra all the imports of the Vedas will become clear, and he will become purified of all doubts in a very short time. (Paramatma-Sandarbha, 18, and Mahabharata )

[Guest guest]

is considered pancaratra?