[Next][Index]
Krishna is the Original Form
-
To: editor@rbhatnagar.ececs.uc.edu
-
Subject: Krishna is the Original Form
-
From: Satyabrata Pradhan <satya@mech.ubc.ca>
-
Date: Fri, 23 Dec 1994 20:41:30 UTC-0800
-
From satya@mech.ubc.ca Fri Dec 23 23: 21:48 1994
-
X400-Content-Type: P2-1984 (2)
-
X400-Mts-Identifier: [/PRMD=CA/ADMD=CDNnet/C=CA/;941223204130]
-
X400-Originator: satya@mech.ubc.ca
-
X400-Received: by /PRMD=CA/ADMD=CDNnet/C=CA/; Relayed; Fri, 23 Dec 1994 20:31:40 UTC-0800
-
X400-Received: by /PRMD=CA/ADMD=CDNnet/C=CA/; Relayed; Fri, 23 Dec 1994 20:41:30 UTC-0800
-
X400-Recipients: non-disclosure:;
Hi,
I am not a regular participant in this news group. But sometimes I take
some interest in reading certain articles. I have some questions based
on the following quotations. Thanks in advance for answering the questions.
Satya.
---------------------------------
In article <3dfpg7$8uo@ucunix.san.uc.edu>, susarla@great-gray.owlnet.rice.edu
(H. Krishna Susarla) writes:
|> Bhagavad-Gita 11.51 - 11.54
|>
|> "When Arjuna thus saw Krsna in His original form, he said: O
|> Janaardana, seeing this humanlike form, so very beautiful, I am now
|> composed in mind, and I am restored to my original nature."
|>
|> "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."
|>
|> "The form you are seeing with your transcendental eyes cannot be
|> understood simply by studying the Vedas, nor by undergoing serious
|> penances, nor by charity, nor by worship. It is not by these means
|> that one can see Me AS I AM."
|>
|> "My dear Arjuna, only by undivided devotional service can I be
|> understood as I am, standing before you, and can thus be seen
|> directly. Only in this way can you enter into the mysteries of My
|> understanding."
|>
|> Translations provided by his divine grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami
|> Prabhupada.
|>
|> Krishna clearly says within these verses that His original form is
-----------------
|> that of Lord Krishna (and not impersonal Brahman, or any of the other
|> Vishnu-forms). And the only way to see this form is by devotional service.
--------------- ------------------
The concept of Original Form appears only in the first paragraph
mentioned above which is not told by Lord. It does not appear in
any of the statements of Lord Krishna. Lord talks of His Form (not
His Original Form). Can one say that the concept of Original form
is Swami Prabhupada's interpretation?
One can easily say that "His form" (which is referred in the above
quotations) is that of "Lord Krishna", not anything beyond that.
Other things are only individual interpretations.
In the above verses, Lord Krishna does not say that His form is
not that of impersonal Brahman or any of the Vishnu-forms.
In the last unserlined statement, there are two things.
First is the objective, i.e. to see Lord's Form. And the
second is the way to reach the objective. Lord says that the
only way to see him is by devotional service. But, is there
only one objective, i.e. to see Lord, which is supreme?
If the answer is no, then devotional service is not the only
path that can be reccommended by a teacher. This is because,
when the objective changes the approach to achieve it may change.
Let us accept that the answer is "yes". Then why Lord Krishna advised
Arjuna to fight in the war rather than doing some devotional service?
Or, can one do devotional service by fighting?
|>
|> Mayavaadis can argue about it all they want, cry "oh, that's just *your*
|> interpretation," and whine about fundamentalism/fanatacism/any-other-ism,
|> but that's what the Gita says. Take it or leave it.
|>
In Gita, Lord Krishna does not talk anything about the arguments of MAyAvAdis.
In your opinion, can the above statement be your (not anything personal here)
interpretation?
The concept of "Take it or leave it" is neither told by Lord Krishna in Gita
nor an integral part of devotional service.
|>
|> Haribol!
|>
