Jagat

I sometimes translate French to English professionally. The last time I did a job, I thought I would try to use a translation program to see if it would help me in any way. I thought that it may not be perfect, but all I will have to do is edit and that at least some of the dirty work will have been done. It's hard to estimate if I gained any time at all. The odd sentence here and there was O.K. In most places, it was incomprehensible, much like Kailash's posts. These programs seem as yet to be quite incapable of recognizing context. So they consistently mistranslate words with multiple meanings, which any human being with a modicum of context sensitivity would never confuse. Jagat

The thing that mystifies me in all of this is why did Bhaktivinoda Thakur write this book in his own name in the first place? We are fairly certain that three books the Thakur published as ancient works were in fact composed by him. These three -- CaitanyopaniSad (1887), Prema-vivarta (1906) and Navadvipa-satakam (n.d.) have certain common characteristics – they were all connected to Chaitanya Mahaprabhu and the glorification of his birthplace. The motives seem fairly clear: the Thakur was trying to promote Mahaprabhu’s birthplace and he did it in a fashion time-honored in India. He simply wrote the material he needed and attributed it to someone who had historical credibility. Rather than attributing his works to Vyasa or Narottam Das Thakur as the counterfeiters of the past, however, he used the names of Jagadananda Pandit and Prabodhananda Saraswati. But what then made him think that Nabadwip-dhama-mahatmya could be distributed under his own name and still find credibility? As Shivu points out, the kinds of things we find in this book are in fact far more radical than anything found in any of the three above-mentioned texts. Madhva and Ramanuja are not the only names that are dropped in this book – there are also demigods, Vedic rishis, and other historical figures like Jayadeva, all of who have premonitions of Mahaprabhu’s appearance and spend time in his Dham. As such, this is a pretty typical “Mahatmya” style of text. Most Sthala-puranas introduce many puranic or Vedic personalities and ascribe to them activities and words that glorify the place in question. Had this book been written in Puranic Sanskrit two or three hundred years earlier, it may have been treated somewhat differently -- though I doubt that Shivu (or any other scholar) would give it any more credibility than he does now. As it is, however, the Thakur decided to publish it in Bengali and in his own name. This could only mean that he was either sufficiently confident of his social standing as a “realized Vaishnava” who could claim to have mystic visions of this sort and be believed, or that he never intended for it to be taken literally as history, but as a fanciful work in glorification of Mahaprabhu. The idea here, I believe, would be that in some dimension or alternate reality these events were not only possible, but historically true, even if they were not necessarily so in our universe. In this sense, we can compare it to Bhaktivinoda's other works like HarinAma-cintAmaNi, which the Thakur wrote as a conversation between Haridas Thakur and Chaitanya Mahaprabhu in Jagannath Puri, or Jaiva Dharma, which includes historical characters like Gopal Guru Goswami and Dhyana Chandra – a kind of historical fiction, as it were. There is a certain literary license that has been taken and may be forgiven, as long as we recognize and accept the genre. Bhaktivinoda Thakur did in fact publish many rare manuscripts of genuine Vaishnava literature, such as Sri Krishna Vijaya and many padyAvalis, etc. He was not the only one who yielded to the temptation of counterfeiting. Nevertheless, I personally find it problematic that someone who contributed so much to the Vaishnava religion, who worked so hard to instil a spirit of morality and honesty into Vaishnavism, whose life was in general a monument of commitment to service to Mahaprabhu and His principles, who in his worldly life was a justice and so presumably knew a thing or two about ethics and the law, saw fit to take such a chance. Furthermore, in view of his familiarity with scholarly historical method, it is hard to understand how he thought that he could get away with it. Perhaps he thought his personal probity put him above suspicion, but did he really think that a single manuscript found by chance in mysterious circumstances, only to disappear again after its publication, would not cause people to examine the published text more carefully? And if that text contains elements of language and content that not only point to a modern origin, but to the very person who claims to have discovered it, will our suspicions not be exacerbated? I can only say that in his enthusiasm to see Mahaprabhu’s birthplace be glorified and become a center of pilgrimage – as it has indeed become – the Thakur took a chance with his personal reputation and that of his religion. He succeeded in making Mayapur a magnet for pilgrims from around the world. His disciples, grand-disciples and great-grand-disciples have succeeded in creating a devotional environment that is quite extraordinary. Nevertheless, one cannot help but wonder at the masi-bindu that stains his otherwise sparkling white cloth. Can we not expect people to ask the question that naturally arises: How can a religion that needs lies to spread its message make any claims to be the truth? It does not give me pleasure to remind us that Bipin Bihari Goswami, whom we are accustomed to thinking of negatively as someone who was rejected for his caste consciousness and bad habits like tobacco smoking, publicly renounced Bhaktivinoda Thakur as his disciple shortly before dying in 1921. The reason he gave for this drastic act was precisely for “preaching falsehoods” connected to the birthplace of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu. It is easy to condemn Bipin Bihari Prabhu for having some self-interest in this matter, but the doubts that have been brought up in this thread tend to give justification to the Goswami. As I said, I find it rather painful to bring the matter up, and I do so in the full expectation of being heartily condemned, but I would like to see those who love the Holy Name and Chaitanya Mahaprabhu face this problem head on, much in the way that Roman Catholics have decided to accept the terrible things in their history – things which are many times worse than those we have mentioned here – and still find a way to justify their faith. Faith has to be honest to be genuine, and such honesty has to extend to our forefathers, even those to whom we have attributed the highest spiritual perfection. It is a shock to accept that our divinities may have had human failings, but is this not a necessary step to take in order to face our own failings? Human psychology is such that we often compensate for our own human frailties by placing faith in someone else. We say, “I am not perfect, but my guru is. I have no personal qualifications, but this does not matter because the parampara is perfect.” This is a psychological trick and results in ego inflation. By identifying with the guru and the parampara, we appropriate their perfection and their authority for ourselves. Unfortunately, this inflates into the kind of distorted personal psychology that is not only historically present in Iskcon, but can often be seen on forums like this one. Jagat [if anyone is interested in having more detailed information about the authenticity problems surrounding the three works mentioned above, let me know.] <small><font color=#dedfdf> [This message has been edited by Jagat (edited 07-06-2001).]

<font color=#666999>And to think that next month, the IOC is going to give China the Olympic Games! I think that there should be an international boycott, like with the Moscow games. Athletes should refuse, on principle, to go there. This is all about multinational corporations getting into the billion-person market. What's 1,700 in a population of 1,200,000,000? Peanuts. </font><hr> <h3>Amnesty International acuses China of “execution frenzy”</h3> Associated Press Beijing — China executed more people in the last three months than the rest of the world did in the past three years - 1,781 people put to death in a government campaign against crime, Amnesty International said Friday. The London-based rights group said China has put people to death not just for violent crimes, but also for bribery, embezzlement, fraud, pimping, stealing gasoline, selling harmful foods and drug offenses. “The campaign is nothing short of an execution frenzy, a huge waste of human life,” Amnesty said. Amnesty said its figures of at least 1,781 executions and 2,960 death sentences since Strike Hard was launched in April were tallied from publicly available reports. In contrast, Amnesty counted 1,751 executions in the rest of the world over the past three years. But only a fraction of death sentences and executions in China are publicly reported and the actual number of people put to death is far higher, the group said. Amnesty, which opposes use of the death penalty, released its report one week before the International Olympic Committee votes on whether Beijing will host the 2008 Summer Olympics, or one of four other cities, including Paris and Toronto. Critics say Chinese human rights abuses make Beijing unfit to host the games. Beijing officials say an Olympics would promote human rights in China. But they also argue that political considerations should not be used to judge Beijing's Olympic bid. Amnesty expressed fears that in their rush to produce results for the anti-crime drive, called “Strike Hard,” authorities risk executing innocent people. Police and prosecutors have been urged to cut corners to secure quick arrests and trials, it said. In southern Hunan province, police reported solving 3,000 cases in two days in April, Amnesty said. In southwestern Sichuan province, police said they apprehended 19,446 people in six days, it said. “The potential for miscarriages of justice, arbitrary sentencing and the execution of innocent people is immense,” the group said. Most executions take place after sentencing rallies in front of massive crowds in sports stadiums and public squares, it said. Orginally targeted at organized and violent crime, Chinese authorities have greatly expanded the scope of the Strike Hard campaign, Amnesty said. In Xinjiang, a restive western region of China where militant Muslims are fighting Chinese rule, authorities have executed people accused of separatism, the group said. Authorities in the prosperous southern province of Guangdong, next to Hong Kong, and other regions have executed people for fraud, forging currency and “disrupting the stock market” in an effort to curb economic crimes before China joins the World Trade Organization, Amnesty said. China expects to join the rule-making body for world trade by early next year at the latest.

I remember Srila Prabhupada in New Dwarka preaching to us on deviation, or changing the teachings of Krishna Consciousness to suit ourselves, or as one devotee would say, explaining the Bhagavad Gita “as I would like it to be,” not “as it is.” I remember this point as Srila Prabhupada stressed it in every class. In one class he told us, “Jumping, jumping, jumping over the head of the Spiritual Master just like monkeys; you will all become monkeys in your next life. That is what happens to disciples who deviate from the instructions of the spiritual master. They become monkeys in Vrindavan. There are already enough monkeys in Vrindavan." On my last visit to Shree Vrindavan Dham, I couldn’t help but notice the overpopulation of monkeys there these days and had to think, “Have that many of my godbrothers passed away already?” Each day Srila Prabhupada would go on his morning walk, but only a few devotees would be able to go with him. When Srila Prabhupada saw an old man jogging. he said, “For a young man this is life, but for an older man it means a quicker death because he is using up all his breaths.” Then Srila Prabhupada told us that at the time of birth, according to our karma, we are given a certain number of breaths. When we die, it appears to be from illness or any number of other things, but actually it means that we have simply used up all our allotted breathes. He explained that according to this principle, the yogis have been able to extend their lives through breath control. When bringing up these points, Srila Prabhupada would often preach about the worthlessness of a long life without Krishna consciousness, and he would give the redwood tree as an example of living so long without understanding the meaning of life. “What is the meaning of human life?” We would hear Srila Prabhupada ask us. "To know love and serve God Krishna there is no other purpose." We were told that on his walk Srila Prabhupada saw a retired man making some putts with his clubs on the grass in Santa Monica Park near the ocean. “What is he doing?” Srila Prabhupada asked the devotees. “Well, Srila Prabhupada, he is playing golf.” Srila Prabhupada asked, “What is its purpose?” The devotees replied, “To get the ball from one place to another.” Srila Prabhupada then gave his sour face look and said, “What a worthless waste of time! Old age is meant for spending our time in remembering Krishna and he is using it to push a ball!” New Dwarka in those days presented us with the appearance of a shooting star by the name of Ramesvara Prabhu. When I first came to New Dwarka, he was just another BBT brahmachari and was always seen with his godbrother partner Radhavallabha. As we took morning prasad, Ramesvara started to give us his talks with inside information on Srila Prabhupada’s whereabouts, ISKCON policy, book distribution, always hyping up the prabhus. I mean, the guy had it in the sales department. I remember one of his statements going something like this: “Lord Chaitanya is the most merciful and munificent incarnation ever. He has descended just to give us Love of Krishna and I’m going to take full advantage.” As he made this statement, he would almost squirm about, twisting his body. Each day he would do another performance that would outdo the last. I use to think someone would ask him to stop, but he was inspiring so he was encouraged. Ramesvara was on fire for many years. At morning prasad, he would jumping in to give a few messages and he had sankirtan scores right after Tulasi puja. He would jump up and give us his one-man ishtagoshti for about 20 minutes, always looking like he expected a senior devotee like Nara Narayan to tell him to sit down and shut up, and always doing his body squirm to emphasize points. He was good and he did get us going. In those days, I enjoyed his pep talks. Then Ramesvara was put in charge of the BBT; and after a short time, made a sannyasi; then after that, GBC of New Dwarka; and after that, a Divine Grace with his own Vyasasan -- all within four years. A mouse-cat-dog-tiger-mouse. So sad, so very sad. We also wanted to see him get the full mercy of Lord Chaitanya Toward the last days Srila Prabhupada was with us, in 1977, Srila Prabhupada would have one GBC stay with him as secretary each month. Ramesvara left and took his turn in about February of 1977. Satsvarupa followed him, and then the person who stayed till Srila Prabhupada's departure, because he wouldn’t let any other GBC replace him. We all heard about this from Ramesvara’s purports after Tulasi Puja. As soon as Srila Prabhupada became ill, we all knew about it, as Ramesvara told us almost everything he knew in his 20 minutes news flashes from the ISKCON grapevine, which was almost as fast as today’s Internet. When Ramesvara was secretary, he made notes of his time with Srila Prabhupada and would let us hear them in his nectar reports after Tulasi worship. Srila Prabhupada would order Ramesvara to eat from his plate after only taking a few things and tell him to fill up to his neck. He told us of how disappointed Srila Prabhupada was with his godbrothers and made a statement which he told us came from Prabhupada about them assisting him in his preaching, "If passing air would save your life, they would not do so." As long as one was fully engaged in service New Dwarka was a wonderful place and if not, it would quickly become not so transcendental. As one devotee Bhakta George complains, what it is now, it always was for the idle. Service is being blessed; losing service is being cursed. There always was and still is an eternal Watseka Mela going on in front of the temple apartments, sometimes in full view of Their Lordships. I was just there in May of this year and the Watseka Mela main topic now is: "His Holiness Narayan Maharaj: Do you or do you not approve of him?" These great purges, like those in China during the Cultural Revolution, which at first were followed by the people so reverently, in the end are not as important as they seem. There are always lots of topics flying around on Watseka Ave. It’s like that park in London where people stand on soapboxes and preach their philosophy. This goes on eternally on Watseka. Many new revolutionaries have been born or sprung up on that holy avenue. There was and still is the very far out and extraordinary devotee, Nara Narayan Vishwakarma Prabhu, whose input came in spurts from time to time in my days there, it’s still the same today. One day, in one of Ramesvara’s after Tulasi puja talks, we heard of the recent pastimes of Jayananda and how he was snuck out of a NYC hospital and taken to some place in Mexico for treatment and that he may come to New Dwarka. Very soon though Jayananda was there and the whole community met him. Ramesvara was very kind and served Jayananda with all respect and so did we all, understanding Jayananda to be a genuine saint. Though his body was in the final stages of Leukemia and his skin yellowed by the illness, Jayananda didn’t want to just sit and wait for death to overtake him. He cornered Ramesvara and told him it was a disgrace that we had such nice Jagannath Deities in New Dwarka, but still had no Rathayatra. Jayananda wanted the devotees to drive him around to see what would be a good route for such a festival. They first took him to Venice beach. When he saw the wide concrete walk there, he told them that the Rathayatra had to be held there. Jayananda personally went to all the city officials in his wheelchair and got all the permits for the festival. He then instructed a crew of devotees how to build the cart and observed them doing so until he was too sick to leave his room. One day, Mukunda Maharaj took me to met Jayananda. Jayananda was staying with Mukunda at his office in the downstairs apartments. The day after I was introduced to Jayananda, I saw him sitting in his wheelchair outside his room and went over to sit with him. We just sat together, not really speaking as he was a bit contemplative. The only thing Jayananda said to me was, "I’m very happy I will be living my body before Srila Prabhupada, because I don’t want to see ISKCON after His Divine Grace leaves." I was thinking then, “What is this? What is he saying to me? Will I see ISKCON after Srila Prabhupada leaves? What has he revealed to me?” Now of course his words have much more meaning to me than they did then. Jayananda understood what was going on within the hearts of many persons in ISKCON and without Srila Prabhupada to check them, he knew they would create all kinds of havoc that they have. This Dharma Mela is like a small temple. We can call ourselves a small society of devotees and we can either bring peace in our midst or chaos. Everyone should respect everyone else. Younger devotees should respect the older devotees and if anyone says he or she is more advanced, then they should be chastised by all of us. If someone preaches apasampradaya teachings, he needs to be exposed and this is done to protect the sincere followers, not for some ego magnification. It is better to reveal one’s identity or at least stick to one and tell us about yourself. If you like personalism, then be personal with us. To be impersonal is to be afraid of your spiritual identify and relationships. This was also learned in ashram life -- great tolerance. We should be very happy to hear from the older devotees and if we heard something that seems to be questionable, then we should request them to restate it and present it for our understanding. If we are new to Krishna Consciousness, we first just hear. I some time wonder how many are just readers out there and never speak up? Please speak up let us know you are there, we are ready to serve you in your spiritual search. We are not looking for any thing from you but your attention and reactions. We are very happy to also preach to the walls if necessary and do so all the time because we are Srila Prabhupada’s disciples and that’s what we do. Birds fly and devotees preach Krishna Consciousness. <small><font color=#dedfdf> [This message has been edited by Jagat (edited 07-06-2001).]

I remember Srila Prabhupada in New Dwarka preaching to us on deviation, or changing the teachings of Krishna Consciousness to suit ourselves, or as one devotee would say, explaining the Bhagavad Gita “as I would like it to be,” not “as it is.” I remember this point as Srila Prabhupada stressed it in every class. In one class he told us, “Jumping, jumping, jumping over the head of the Spiritual Master just like monkeys; you will all become monkeys in your next life. That is what happens to disciples who deviate from the instructions of the spiritual master. They become monkeys in Vrindavan. There are already enough monkeys in Vrindavan." On my last visit to Shree Vrindavan Dham, I couldn’t help but notice the overpopulation of monkeys there these days and had to think, “Have that many of my godbrothers passed away already?” Each day Srila Prabhupada would go on his morning walk, but only a few devotees would be able to go with him. When Srila Prabhupada saw an old man jogging. he said, “For a young man this is life, but for an older man it means a quicker death because he is using up all his breaths.” Then Srila Prabhupada told us that at the time of birth, according to our karma, we are given a certain number of breaths. When we die, it appears to be from illness or any number of other things, but actually it means that we have simply used up all our allotted breathes. He explained that according to this principle, the yogis have been able to extend their lives through breath control. When bringing up these points, Srila Prabhupada would often preach about the worthlessness of a long life without Krishna consciousness, and he would give the redwood tree as an example of living so long without understanding the meaning of life. “What is the meaning of human life?” We would hear Srila Prabhupada ask us. "To know love and serve God Krishna there is no other purpose." We were told that on his walk Srila Prabhupada saw a retired man making some putts with his clubs on the grass in Santa Monica Park near the ocean. “What is he doing?” Srila Prabhupada asked the devotees. “Well, Srila Prabhupada, he is playing golf.” Srila Prabhupada asked, “What is its purpose?” The devotees replied, “To get the ball from one place to another.” Srila Prabhupada then gave his sour face look and said, “What a worthless waste of time! Old age is meant for spending our time in remembering Krishna and he is using it to push a ball!” New Dwarka in those days presented us with the appearance of a shooting star by the name of Ramesvara Prabhu. When I first came to New Dwarka, he was just another BBT brahmachari and was always seen with his godbrother partner Radhavallabha. As we took morning prasad, Ramesvara started to give us his talks with inside information on Srila Prabhupada’s whereabouts, ISKCON policy, book distribution, always hyping up the prabhus. I mean, the guy had it in the sales department. I remember one of his statements going something like this: “Lord Chaitanya is the most merciful and munificent incarnation ever. He has descended just to give us Love of Krishna and I’m going to take full advantage.” As he made this statement, he would almost squirm about, twisting his body. Each day he would do another performance that would outdo the last. I use to think someone would ask him to stop, but he was inspiring so he was encouraged. Ramesvara was on fire for many years. At morning prasad, he would jumping in to give a few messages and he had sankirtan scores right after Tulasi puja. He would jump up and give us his one-man ishtagoshti for about 20 minutes, always looking like he expected a senior devotee like Nara Narayan to tell him to sit down and shut up, and always doing his body squirm to emphasize points. He was good and he did get us going. In those days, I enjoyed his pep talks. Then Ramesvara was put in charge of the BBT; and after a short time, made a sannyasi; then after that, GBC of New Dwarka; and after that, a Divine Grace with his own Vyasasan -- all within four years. A mouse-cat-dog-tiger-mouse. So sad, so very sad. We also wanted to see him get the full mercy of Lord Chaitanya Toward the last days Srila Prabhupada was with us, in 1977, Srila Prabhupada would have one GBC stay with him as secretary each month. Ramesvara left and took his turn in about February of 1977. Satsvarupa followed him, and then the person who stayed till Srila Prabhupada's departure, because he wouldn’t let any other GBC replace him. We all heard about this from Ramesvara’s purports after Tulasi Puja. As soon as Srila Prabhupada became ill, we all knew about it, as Ramesvara told us almost everything he knew in his 20 minutes news flashes from the ISKCON grapevine, which was almost as fast as today’s Internet. When Ramesvara was secretary, he made notes of his time with Srila Prabhupada and would let us hear them in his nectar reports after Tulasi worship. Srila Prabhupada would order Ramesvara to eat from his plate after only taking a few things and tell him to fill up to his neck. He told us of how disappointed Srila Prabhupada was with his godbrothers and made a statement which he told us came from Prabhupada about them assisting him in his preaching, "If passing air would save your life, they would not do so." As long as one was fully engaged in service New Dwarka was a wonderful place and if not, it would quickly become not so transcendental. As one devotee Bhakta George complains, what it is now, it always was for the idle. Service is being blessed; losing service is being cursed. There always was and still is an eternal Watseka Mela going on in front of the temple apartments, sometimes in full view of Their Lordships. I was just there in May of this year and the Watseka Mela main topic now is: "His Holiness Narayan Maharaj: Do you or do you not approve of him?" These great purges, like those in China during the Cultural Revolution, which at first were followed by the people so reverently, in the end are not as important as they seem. There are always lots of topics flying around on Watseka Ave. It’s like that park in London where people stand on soapboxes and preach their philosophy. This goes on eternally on Watseka. Many new revolutionaries have been born or sprung up on that holy avenue. There was and still is the very far out and extraordinary devotee, Nara Narayan Vishwakarma Prabhu, whose input came in spurts from time to time in my days there, it’s still the same today. One day, in one of Ramesvara’s after Tulasi puja talks, we heard of the recent pastimes of Jayananda and how he was snuck out of a NYC hospital and taken to some place in Mexico for treatment and that he may come to New Dwarka. Very soon though Jayananda was there and the whole community met him. Ramesvara was very kind and served Jayananda with all respect and so did we all, understanding Jayananda to be a genuine saint. Though his body was in the final stages of Leukemia and his skin yellowed by the illness, Jayananda didn’t want to just sit and wait for death to overtake him. He cornered Ramesvara and told him it was a disgrace that we had such nice Jagannath Deities in New Dwarka, but still had no Rathayatra. Jayananda wanted the devotees to drive him around to see what would be a good route for such a festival. They first took him to Venice beach. When he saw the wide concrete walk there, he told them that the Rathayatra had to be held there. Jayananda personally went to all the city officials in his wheelchair and got all the permits for the festival. He then instructed a crew of devotees how to build the cart and observed them doing so until he was too sick to leave his room. One day, Mukunda Maharaj took me to met Jayananda. Jayananda was staying with Mukunda at his office in the downstairs apartments. The day after I was introduced to Jayananda, I saw him sitting in his wheelchair outside his room and went over to sit with him. We just sat together, not really speaking as he was a bit contemplative. The only thing Jayananda said to me was, "I’m very happy I will be living my body before Srila Prabhupada, because I don’t want to see ISKCON after His Divine Grace leaves." I was thinking then, “What is this? What is he saying to me? Will I see ISKCON after Srila Prabhupada leaves? What has he revealed to me?” Now of course his words have much more meaning to me than they did then. Jayananda understood what was going on within the hearts of many persons in ISKCON and without Srila Prabhupada to check them, he knew they would create all kinds of havoc that they have. This Dharma Mela is like a small temple. We can call ourselves a small society of devotees and we can either bring peace in our midst or chaos. Everyone should respect everyone else. Younger devotees should respect the older devotees and if anyone says he or she is more advanced, then they should be chastised by all of us. If someone preaches apasampradaya teachings, he needs to be exposed and this is done to protect the sincere followers, not for some ego magnification. It is better to reveal one’s identity or at least stick to one and tell us about yourself. If you like personalism, then be personal with us. To be impersonal is to be afraid of your spiritual identify and relationships. This was also learned in ashram life -- great tolerance. We should be very happy to hear from the older devotees and if we heard something that seems to be questionable, then we should request them to restate it and present it for our understanding. If we are new to Krishna Consciousness, we first just hear. I some time wonder how many are just readers out there and never speak up? Please speak up let us know you are there, we are ready to serve you in your spiritual search. We are not looking for any thing from you but your attention and reactions. We are very happy to also preach to the walls if necessary and do so all the time because we are Srila Prabhupada’s disciples and that’s what we do. Birds fly and devotees preach Krishna Consciousness. <small><font color=#dedfdf> [This message has been edited by Jagat (edited 07-06-2001).]

<center>LESSON TWO</center> <hr><font color=#FF00FF>For July 6, 2001.</font><hr> <center>dRSTvA tu pANDavAnIkaM vyUDhaM duryodhanas tadA AcAryam upasaMgamya rAjA vacanam abravIt</center> ANVAYA: tadA tu rAjA duryodhanaH pANDavAnIkam vyUDham dRSTvA, AcAryam upasaMgamya, vacanam abravIt. GRAMMATICAL COMMENTS <font color=#5F9F9F> 1. tadA means “then.” <center><table border=5><font size=-2><tr><td>Adverb<td>Time<td>Place<td>Manner</tr> <tr><td>interrog.<td>kadA<td>kutra<td>katham<td></tr> <tr><td>trans..<td>when?<td>where?<td>how?<td></tr> <tr><td>relative<td>yadA<td>yatra<td>yathA<td></tr> <tr><td>trans.<td>when<td>where<td>as<td></tr> <tr><td>correlative<td>tadA<td>tatra<td>tathA</tr> <tr><td>trans.<td>then<td>there<td>so<td></tr> <tr><td>universal<td>sadA<td>sarvatra<td>sarvathA</tr> <tr><td>interrog.<td>always<td>everywhere<td>in every way<td></tr> </table></center></font> The same pattern is found in pronouns, as you will see. Doubling the relative pronoun adds an “ever.” yadA yadA “whenever”; yatra yatra “wherever,” etc. 2. rAjA duryodhanaH “King Duryodhana.” The -aH is, as we have already seen, the nominative masculine ending. Duryodhana is the subject of this sentence. rAjA is the nominative of rAjan. There are a few words that decline in the same way, like Atman, which has AtmA as its nominative form. 3. pANDavAnIkaM vyUDham. vyUDham is a <u>passive</u> past participle, “arranged (in battle formation).” It has the same root as the noun vyUha as in catur-vyUha. These words are the object of the first verb in the sentence. 4. dRSTvA “having seen.” This is our first encounter with the gerund. This is a very important element in Sanskrit syntax. Sanskrit doesn’t use verbs the way we do in English, nor do most other Indian languages, which follow the Sanskrit model. In English, we will use two finite verbs in the same sentence and join them with “and.” “I ate and ran.” In Sanskrit, we would say “Having eaten, I ran.” khAditvA gataH. Gerunds are pretty simple. They end in -tvA if they have no prefix, and -ya if they have one. upasaMgamya is of the latter kind. upa + saM + /gam + ya. gam is the basic verb root, “to go.” This is a very important verb. “upa” indicates closeness, “sam” together. So it means “coming up to” or “meeting.” AcAryam again is the object. 5. vacanam. “word or statement.” This is the object of the verb that follows. It is a neuter noun, but when they end in -a, singular neuter and masculine nouns are exactly the same. They are only different in the nominative. 6. abravIt “he spoke,” is another verb in the imperfect tense. It has that a marker before the root, like in akurvata. This is another fairly irregular verb, so I won’t get into it here. This is in the active voice. </font> So, King Duryodhan, saw the Pandava army arranged in battle formation, he went to Dronacharya, and said (this) statement. <small><font color=#dedfdf> [This message has been edited by Jagat (edited 07-05-2001).]

<center>LESSON TWO</center> <hr><font color=#FF00FF>For July 6, 2001.</font><hr> <center>dRSTvA tu pANDavAnIkaM vyUDhaM duryodhanas tadA AcAryam upasaMgamya rAjA vacanam abravIt</center> ANVAYA: tadA tu rAjA duryodhanaH pANDavAnIkam vyUDham dRSTvA, AcAryam upasaMgamya, vacanam abravIt. GRAMMATICAL COMMENTS <font color=#5F9F9F> 1. tadA means “then.” <center><table border=5><font size=-2><tr><td>Adverb<td>Time<td>Place<td>Manner</tr> <tr><td>interrog.<td>kadA<td>kutra<td>katham<td></tr> <tr><td>trans..<td>when?<td>where?<td>how?<td></tr> <tr><td>relative<td>yadA<td>yatra<td>yathA<td></tr> <tr><td>trans.<td>when<td>where<td>as<td></tr> <tr><td>correlative<td>tadA<td>tatra<td>tathA</tr> <tr><td>trans.<td>then<td>there<td>so<td></tr> <tr><td>universal<td>sadA<td>sarvatra<td>sarvathA</tr> <tr><td>interrog.<td>always<td>everywhere<td>in every way<td></tr> </table></center></font> The same pattern is found in pronouns, as you will see. Doubling the relative pronoun adds an “ever.” yadA yadA “whenever”; yatra yatra “wherever,” etc. 2. rAjA duryodhanaH “King Duryodhana.” The -aH is, as we have already seen, the nominative masculine ending. Duryodhana is the subject of this sentence. rAjA is the nominative of rAjan. There are a few words that decline in the same way, like Atman, which has AtmA as its nominative form. 3. pANDavAnIkaM vyUDham. vyUDham is a <u>passive</u> past participle, “arranged (in battle formation).” It has the same root as the noun vyUha as in catur-vyUha. These words are the object of the first verb in the sentence. 4. dRSTvA “having seen.” This is our first encounter with the gerund. This is a very important element in Sanskrit syntax. Sanskrit doesn’t use verbs the way we do in English, nor do most other Indian languages, which follow the Sanskrit model. In English, we will use two finite verbs in the same sentence and join them with “and.” “I ate and ran.” In Sanskrit, we would say “Having eaten, I ran.” khAditvA gataH. Gerunds are pretty simple. They end in -tvA if they have no prefix, and -ya if they have one. upasaMgamya is of the latter kind. upa + saM + /gam + ya. gam is the basic verb root, “to go.” This is a very important verb. “upa” indicates closeness, “sam” together. So it means “coming up to” or “meeting.” AcAryam again is the object. 5. vacanam. “word or statement.” This is the object of the verb that follows. It is a neuter noun, but when they end in -a, singular neuter and masculine nouns are exactly the same. They are only different in the nominative. 6. abravIt “he spoke,” is another verb in the imperfect tense. It has that a marker before the root, like in akurvata. This is another fairly irregular verb, so I won’t get into it here. This is in the active voice. </font> So, King Duryodhan, saw the Pandava army arranged in battle formation, he went to Dronacharya, and said (this) statement. <small><font color=#dedfdf> [This message has been edited by Jagat (edited 07-05-2001).]

Whoops. Bodhayan Maharaj already sent me the answer! zrI-zyAmasundaraM kRSNaM rAdhAlingita-vigraham yazodA-nandanaM naumi zrI-gopI-jana-vallabham Thanks for thinking, though, Tarunji.

Brahma Prabhu, I don't believe for a moment that you are not educated. I think you show the true characteristic of the learned man, "vidyA dadAti vinayam" -- "Education makes one a perfect gentleman." You also write very well. Your servant, Jagat

<font color=#FF00FF>Since we started on the Gita, I thought I would go through the Bhagavad Gita for Sanskrit beginners. Please give some feedback. I don't know if we'll get through the entire Gita, but a chapter or two will get us through a lot of the basics. I think we can have a test every Sunday or something.<hr></font> <center>dharma-kSetre kuru-kSetre samavetA yuyutsavaH mAmakAH pANDavAz caiva kim akurvata saMjaya</center> ANVAYA: saMjaya, yuyutsavaH mAmakAH pANDavAH ca eva dharma-kSetre kuru-kSetre samavetAH kim akurvata? Sanjaya, desiring to fight my sons and the Pandavas assembled on the religious field of Kurukshetra. What did they do? GRAMMATICAL COMMENTS: Since I am assuming that most people will be beginners, I will give detailed notes. At the beginning, this may be quite extensive. As we go along, we will be trying to avoid repetition. <font color=#5F9F9F>1. yuyutsavaH. There are many kinds of declension in Sanskrit. Usually you are obliged to memorize these. You are welcome to do so and if you want to follow this, then keep your declension tables at hand. What we have here is the nominative plural of a masculine adjective ending in –u, yuyutsu. There are many nouns that follow this declension, starting with viSNu, etc. Yuyutsu is interesting because it is derived from the root /yudh meaning “to fight.” It comes from the desiderative form of the verb. You are probably familiar with mumukSu “desiring liberation,” or bubhukSu “desiring to enjoy,” or zuzrUSu, “desiring to hear” (also “desiring to serve”). 2. mAmakAH and pANDavAH are also nominative plurals of masculine nouns ending in –a. This is the most common declension and more than half of all nouns follow this system. So this declension should definitely be memorized. (I will give the full declension later.) yuyutsavaH is an adjective describing these two nouns. “My sons and the Pandavas want to fight.” 3. dharma-kSetre kuru-kSetre. Masculine AND neuter nouns ending in –a share most of the same conjugation. Here we have the locative case, which as its name shows, indicates location, “in” or “at.” kSetra is neuter, as you can see in chapter 13, the nominative singular is kSetram. 4. samavetAH is also an adjective agreeing with the two nouns. Now this is also derived from a verb. It is a very important form called the past participle. In Sanskrit, we can often avoid using a finite verb (i.e., one that is conjugated) by using a declined verb form that agrees with the noun. What is interesting about past participles is that they are usually passive, but are sometimes used actively, like here, and with other verbs meaning “to go” and their derivatives. The verb root here is /i, “to go.” The actual p.p. is itaH. Here the prefixes “sam” and “ava” have been added to make samaveta. The prefix sam as you probably know, often means “together” as in <u>saM</u>-kIrtanam. 5. kim “what?”. This is an interrogative pronoun in the neuter gender. These pronouns have a special kind of declension that is similar in part to the nouns ending in –a. tataH kim “What next?” They can stand by themselves, or modify a noun. e.g. kiM kSetram “What (or which) field?” 6. akurvata “did”. This is a not very common form of the verb kR meaning “to do.” This is one of the most important verbs in Sanskrit, and though it follows a not very common conjugation, it should eventually be learned. It is in the imperfect (past) tense, third person plural, middle voice (Atmanepada). This is just to introduce the terms. I will explain them later.<small><font color=#f7f7f7> [This message has been edited by Jagat (edited 07-05-2001).]

<font color=#FF00FF>Since we started on the Gita, I thought I would go through the Bhagavad Gita for Sanskrit beginners. Please give some feedback. I don't know if we'll get through the entire Gita, but a chapter or two will get us through a lot of the basics. I think we can have a test every Sunday or something.<hr></font> <center>dharma-kSetre kuru-kSetre samavetA yuyutsavaH mAmakAH pANDavAz caiva kim akurvata saMjaya</center> ANVAYA: saMjaya, yuyutsavaH mAmakAH pANDavAH ca eva dharma-kSetre kuru-kSetre samavetAH kim akurvata? Sanjaya, desiring to fight my sons and the Pandavas assembled on the religious field of Kurukshetra. What did they do? GRAMMATICAL COMMENTS: Since I am assuming that most people will be beginners, I will give detailed notes. At the beginning, this may be quite extensive. As we go along, we will be trying to avoid repetition. <font color=#5F9F9F>1. yuyutsavaH. There are many kinds of declension in Sanskrit. Usually you are obliged to memorize these. You are welcome to do so and if you want to follow this, then keep your declension tables at hand. What we have here is the nominative plural of a masculine adjective ending in –u, yuyutsu. There are many nouns that follow this declension, starting with viSNu, etc. Yuyutsu is interesting because it is derived from the root /yudh meaning “to fight.” It comes from the desiderative form of the verb. You are probably familiar with mumukSu “desiring liberation,” or bubhukSu “desiring to enjoy,” or zuzrUSu, “desiring to hear” (also “desiring to serve”). 2. mAmakAH and pANDavAH are also nominative plurals of masculine nouns ending in –a. This is the most common declension and more than half of all nouns follow this system. So this declension should definitely be memorized. (I will give the full declension later.) yuyutsavaH is an adjective describing these two nouns. “My sons and the Pandavas want to fight.” 3. dharma-kSetre kuru-kSetre. Masculine AND neuter nouns ending in –a share most of the same conjugation. Here we have the locative case, which as its name shows, indicates location, “in” or “at.” kSetra is neuter, as you can see in chapter 13, the nominative singular is kSetram. 4. samavetAH is also an adjective agreeing with the two nouns. Now this is also derived from a verb. It is a very important form called the past participle. In Sanskrit, we can often avoid using a finite verb (i.e., one that is conjugated) by using a declined verb form that agrees with the noun. What is interesting about past participles is that they are usually passive, but are sometimes used actively, like here, and with other verbs meaning “to go” and their derivatives. The verb root here is /i, “to go.” The actual p.p. is itaH. Here the prefixes “sam” and “ava” have been added to make samaveta. The prefix sam as you probably know, often means “together” as in <u>saM</u>-kIrtanam. 5. kim “what?”. This is an interrogative pronoun in the neuter gender. These pronouns have a special kind of declension that is similar in part to the nouns ending in –a. tataH kim “What next?” They can stand by themselves, or modify a noun. e.g. kiM kSetram “What (or which) field?” 6. akurvata “did”. This is a not very common form of the verb kR meaning “to do.” This is one of the most important verbs in Sanskrit, and though it follows a not very common conjugation, it should eventually be learned. It is in the imperfect (past) tense, third person plural, middle voice (Atmanepada). This is just to introduce the terms. I will explain them later.<small><font color=#f7f7f7> [This message has been edited by Jagat (edited 07-05-2001).]

The Madala Panji ascribes the building of the first Jagannath temple to a King Yayati Keshari. This king is said to have been in personal contact with Shankaracharya. Now historians have had a great deal of trouble finding a Yayati Keshari in Orissan history, at least one living during the early 9th century. They generally point to the Somavamshi ruler, Yayati I (922-955), as being the king in question. This fellow was not known to history as “Keshari”, however. In the book Lord Jagannath and Nepal by Aniruddha Das, this Yayati was a Nepali king of the <u>7th century</u>. <blockquote>“Yayati desired that Sankaracharya, who was a great sage, should be the chief of Purushottam Kshetra and that he should establish a Pith on the sandy upland between the Kalpa Vriksha and the sea, where a Sivalinga was already existing (Govardhan Math). He further stated that this piece of land from Ugrasen Mandap, i.e., the antarvedi, to the sea shore be named as Bali Sahi. Sankaracharya replied that he had made Yayati the second Indradyumna and therefore he should install Lord Mahadeva in the form of Balabhadra; the spouse of Mahadev, Yogamaya in the form of Subhadra; and Purushottam as Lord Jagannath. Sudarshan Chakra, the weapon of Lord Krishna should be installed as the deity Sudarshan. For Balabhadra and Subhadra it is necessary to have two Vishnusilas [salagrams]with the symbols of Vaishnavism. On the direction of Sankaracharya one Bharati Acharya was deputed to Nepal to meet with Kind Sankardeva. The Raja agreed to make a gift of Salagram and two were brought to Puri.”</blockquote> Evidently, if these dates for the Nepali king are correct, and this is indeed the Yayati Keshari of the Madala Panji, it might give credence to this earlier date for Shankara.

Is this distinction widely accepted? I haven't seen any change in Shankara's dates in current scholarly literature. Flood (1996: 231) writes: "The dates of Shankara cannot be firmly established but some scholars date him between 788 and 820. He certainly cannot have lived before the middle of the seventh century as he refers to the Mimamsaka theologian Kumarila and the Buddhist Dharmakirti who can be dated to that century."

Which of the two founded the four Dhams?

The Gita says that your previous life's activities result in your next birth. If you are the child of a doctor, will your chances of becoming one not be greater than for someone who is born as a pig farmer (to give a random example)? A young man of Indian heritage here in Canada won the Rhodes scholarship this year. He is becoming a doctor. No less than 11 members of his family were doctors! It is a question of predisposition. The trouble comes when we try to lock people into their birth positions. This doesn't give them room to improve their lot. But most people of every culture will agree that birth, though not a perfect predictor of what one IS, is an important place to start. Yours, Jagat.

I never thought I would see the day, but I guess it was inevitable - <a href=http://www.geocities.com/galva108/> Gay and Lesbian Vaishnava Association</a>.

<font color=#6699FF>This is poem is composed entirely of actual quotes from George W. It was compiled and arranged by Washington Post writer Richard Thompson. Given the state of today's poetry could it win an award?</font><hr> <center><h3>MAKE THE PIE HIGHER</h3> by George W. Bush I think we all agree The past is over. This is still a dangerous world. It's a world of madmen And uncertainty And potential mental losses. Rarely is the question asked Is our children learning? Will the highways of the Internet Become more few? How many hands Have I shaked? They misunderestimate me. I am a pitbull on the pant leg Of opportunity. I know that the human being And the fish Can coexist. Families is where our nation Finds hope, Where our wings take dream. Put food on your family! Knock down the tollbooth! Vulcanize Society! Make the pie higher! Make the pie higher!"

That is creative hermeneutics. I have no objection, as everyone does that to some extent. The argument is basically: the S.U. speaks of a theistic god for whom it uses epithets normally associated with the god Shiva. The theistic principle is more important than the names. Jagat

That is creative hermeneutics. I have no objection, as everyone does that to some extent. The argument is basically: the S.U. speaks of a theistic god for whom it uses epithets normally associated with the god Shiva. The theistic principle is more important than the names. Jagat

<center>kAlo'smi loka-kSaya-kRt pravRddho lokAn samAhartum iha pravRttaH Rte'pi tvAM na bhaviSyanti sarve ye'vasthitAH pratyanIkeSu yodhAH</center> I will start by putting the text into proper Sanskrit prose word order (subject-object-verb) and taking the sandhi out. This is called "anvayaH" or putting things in order. <hr> 1. (aham) loka-kSaya-kRt pravRddhaH kAlaH asmi. "I am (aham asmi) time, which is the destroyer of worlds and has grown mature (pravRddhaH)." These two adjectives, loka-kSaya-kRt and pravRddhaH, as well as pravRttaH at the end of the second line, are all in the masculine nominative case, because they have to agree with the noun they modify, kAlaH. (If anyone has a problem with the idea of gender or adjective-noun agreement, let me know.) Different commentaries have different understandings of pravRddhaH. Basically it means "(much) increased" or "(very) mature", like vRddha means old. It would appear to mean "ripe" as in "the time is ripe" for all good karma to come to fruition. 2. lokAn samAhartum iha pravRttaH iha here. pravRttaH means "taking up an action." It comes from the same place as pravRtti in pravRtti-mArga. Taking up what? You need an infinitive, so samAhartum, "to completely take away." Basically, "destroy" is good. This is what saMhAra means, which is used in creation, maintenance and destruction. (vizva-saMhAra means destruction of the universe.) The extra "A" doesn't change this meaning. lokAn is the accusative plural of "worlds." That is what is being destroyed. 3. Rte'pi tvAM na bhaviSyanti sarve ye'vasthitAH pratyanIkeSu yodhAH ye yodhAH pratyanIkeSu avasthitAH [te] sarve na bhaviSyanti tvAM Rte api "All the soldiers (yodhAH) who (ye) are standing (avasthitAH) in the opposing armies (pratyanIkeSu), they (te) all ((sarve) will not be (na bhaviSyanti), except for you alone (tvAM Rte'pi)." That's all the time I have.

<center>kAlo'smi loka-kSaya-kRt pravRddho lokAn samAhartum iha pravRttaH Rte'pi tvAM na bhaviSyanti sarve ye'vasthitAH pratyanIkeSu yodhAH</center> I will start by putting the text into proper Sanskrit prose word order (subject-object-verb) and taking the sandhi out. This is called "anvayaH" or putting things in order. <hr> 1. (aham) loka-kSaya-kRt pravRddhaH kAlaH asmi. "I am (aham asmi) time, which is the destroyer of worlds and has grown mature (pravRddhaH)." These two adjectives, loka-kSaya-kRt and pravRddhaH, as well as pravRttaH at the end of the second line, are all in the masculine nominative case, because they have to agree with the noun they modify, kAlaH. (If anyone has a problem with the idea of gender or adjective-noun agreement, let me know.) Different commentaries have different understandings of pravRddhaH. Basically it means "(much) increased" or "(very) mature", like vRddha means old. It would appear to mean "ripe" as in "the time is ripe" for all good karma to come to fruition. 2. lokAn samAhartum iha pravRttaH iha here. pravRttaH means "taking up an action." It comes from the same place as pravRtti in pravRtti-mArga. Taking up what? You need an infinitive, so samAhartum, "to completely take away." Basically, "destroy" is good. This is what saMhAra means, which is used in creation, maintenance and destruction. (vizva-saMhAra means destruction of the universe.) The extra "A" doesn't change this meaning. lokAn is the accusative plural of "worlds." That is what is being destroyed. 3. Rte'pi tvAM na bhaviSyanti sarve ye'vasthitAH pratyanIkeSu yodhAH ye yodhAH pratyanIkeSu avasthitAH [te] sarve na bhaviSyanti tvAM Rte api "All the soldiers (yodhAH) who (ye) are standing (avasthitAH) in the opposing armies (pratyanIkeSu), they (te) all ((sarve) will not be (na bhaviSyanti), except for you alone (tvAM Rte'pi)." That's all the time I have.

<center>mahAn prabhur vai puruSaH sattvasyaiSa pravartakaH sunirmalAm imAM prAptim IzAno jyotir avyayaH</center> First of all, Upanishadic Sanskrit is not always purely classical in form. The Svetasvatara is a late, classical Upanishad. There are 11 major Upanishads, but their language is quite different. The Brihad Aranyaka and Chandogya have the most archaic language, being somewhere between classical and pure Vedic and closer to the language found in the Brahmanas, which are considered to be the first set of scriptures that followed the Vedas themselves. But one of the things that can be observed in all the Upanishads is that sometimes a purely correct grammatical reading is impossible. That will be shown in these verses. Second, this verse has to be read in context, because both the one preceding it and the one following it are thematically connected and consist mostly of nominatives. <hr><font color=#669999>Nominative is the "subject" case. The subject of a sentence is always in the nominative. Words in apposition to the subject are also put in the nominative. -- "He is a boy." saH bAlakaH. -- "She is a girl." sA bAlikA -- "It is a mountain." tat parvatam <hr></font> The first verse -- <center>sarvAnana-ziro-grIvaH sarva-bhUta-guhAzayaH sarva-vyApI sa bhagavAn tasmAt sarva-gataH zivaH </center> ANVAYAH: <font color=#666666>sa bhagavAn sarvAnana-ziro-grIvaH sarva-bhUta-guhAzayaH sarva-vyApI. tasmAt zivaH sarva-gataH</font> "That Lord [is possessed of] all face-head-neck, [is] hidden in the cave (heart) of every living being; [is] all-pervading. Therefore Shiva is all pervading." GRAMMAR COMMENTS: <font color=#9999FF>There are different classes of compound word in Sanskrit. Most of them are pretty straightforward, so it is not really necessary to give a complicated explanation. But there is one kind, called bahu-vrIhi that is found here: "sarvAnana-ziro-grIvaH", which carries the idea "one who possesses or has all these things." Krishna is called pItAmbara, "yellow-dress" because he wears a yellow cloth.</font> So right away in this verse, we see that the name of Shiva has been found. The Svetasvatara Upanishad has several references to Shiva and none to Vishnu. So though it is a real favorite of theists (it is the most overtly theistic Upanishad), it is not at all Vaishnava in mood. The following verse also has a common name used for Shiva, IzAnaH. <center>mahAn prabhur vai puruSaH sattvasyaiSa pravartakaH sunirmalAm imAM prAptim IzAno jyotir avyayaH</center> ANVAYAH: <font color=#969696>eSaH mahAn prabhuH vai puruSaH IzAnaH jyotiH avyayaH sunirmalAm imAm prAptim [prati] sattvasya pravartakaH </font> <font color=#9999FF>Usually what happens when we do the anvaya is to group the words in the different cases together. You have to be somewhat careful, but certainly when the Sanskrit is simple, it works. Here we have many nominatives, so I have just grouped them at the beginning of the sentence.</font> "This (eSaH) great (mahAn) master (prabhuH) [is] certainly (vai) the soul/spirit (puruSaH), the controller (IzAnaH - also a name of Shiva), the imperishable light (jyotir avyayaH). He is the director (pravartakaH) of existence (sattvasya) towards (prati) this (imAm) most pure (sunirmalAm) attainment (prAptim). GRAMMAR COMMENTS: <font color=#9999FF>sattvasya is in the genitive case, the possessive, which basically translates as "of." pravartakaH is connected to pravRtti in the Gita verse we had earlier. Nouns that have "ka" at the end are usually (not always) some kind of agent noun. Someone or something that does something. So here it is "one who engages us or makes us act." (The "us" is understood.) The word prati, "towards," is supplied by the commentators. What justifies this addition? Well we have a problem. We have a phrase in the accusative without any verb or preposition governing the accusative case. The best we can do is say that God is engaging our being (sattva) and directing it towards "this" most pure attainment.</font> CONCLUSION: Certainly the words mahAn prabhuH, though evocative of our beloved Mahaprabhu, hardly justify our interpreting this verse as being a predictor of Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu. Indeed, a straightforward reading leads us to confirm that Shaivaite theists wrote this in glorification of their iSTa-devatA. Sorry if that was a bit dense. Please let me know if this is at all helpful to anyone. If it is not, then I will desist.

<center>mahAn prabhur vai puruSaH sattvasyaiSa pravartakaH sunirmalAm imAM prAptim IzAno jyotir avyayaH</center> First of all, Upanishadic Sanskrit is not always purely classical in form. The Svetasvatara is a late, classical Upanishad. There are 11 major Upanishads, but their language is quite different. The Brihad Aranyaka and Chandogya have the most archaic language, being somewhere between classical and pure Vedic and closer to the language found in the Brahmanas, which are considered to be the first set of scriptures that followed the Vedas themselves. But one of the things that can be observed in all the Upanishads is that sometimes a purely correct grammatical reading is impossible. That will be shown in these verses. Second, this verse has to be read in context, because both the one preceding it and the one following it are thematically connected and consist mostly of nominatives. <hr><font color=#669999>Nominative is the "subject" case. The subject of a sentence is always in the nominative. Words in apposition to the subject are also put in the nominative. -- "He is a boy." saH bAlakaH. -- "She is a girl." sA bAlikA -- "It is a mountain." tat parvatam <hr></font> The first verse -- <center>sarvAnana-ziro-grIvaH sarva-bhUta-guhAzayaH sarva-vyApI sa bhagavAn tasmAt sarva-gataH zivaH </center> ANVAYAH: <font color=#666666>sa bhagavAn sarvAnana-ziro-grIvaH sarva-bhUta-guhAzayaH sarva-vyApI. tasmAt zivaH sarva-gataH</font> "That Lord [is possessed of] all face-head-neck, [is] hidden in the cave (heart) of every living being; [is] all-pervading. Therefore Shiva is all pervading." GRAMMAR COMMENTS: <font color=#9999FF>There are different classes of compound word in Sanskrit. Most of them are pretty straightforward, so it is not really necessary to give a complicated explanation. But there is one kind, called bahu-vrIhi that is found here: "sarvAnana-ziro-grIvaH", which carries the idea "one who possesses or has all these things." Krishna is called pItAmbara, "yellow-dress" because he wears a yellow cloth.</font> So right away in this verse, we see that the name of Shiva has been found. The Svetasvatara Upanishad has several references to Shiva and none to Vishnu. So though it is a real favorite of theists (it is the most overtly theistic Upanishad), it is not at all Vaishnava in mood. The following verse also has a common name used for Shiva, IzAnaH. <center>mahAn prabhur vai puruSaH sattvasyaiSa pravartakaH sunirmalAm imAM prAptim IzAno jyotir avyayaH</center> ANVAYAH: <font color=#969696>eSaH mahAn prabhuH vai puruSaH IzAnaH jyotiH avyayaH sunirmalAm imAm prAptim [prati] sattvasya pravartakaH </font> <font color=#9999FF>Usually what happens when we do the anvaya is to group the words in the different cases together. You have to be somewhat careful, but certainly when the Sanskrit is simple, it works. Here we have many nominatives, so I have just grouped them at the beginning of the sentence.</font> "This (eSaH) great (mahAn) master (prabhuH) [is] certainly (vai) the soul/spirit (puruSaH), the controller (IzAnaH - also a name of Shiva), the imperishable light (jyotir avyayaH). He is the director (pravartakaH) of existence (sattvasya) towards (prati) this (imAm) most pure (sunirmalAm) attainment (prAptim). GRAMMAR COMMENTS: <font color=#9999FF>sattvasya is in the genitive case, the possessive, which basically translates as "of." pravartakaH is connected to pravRtti in the Gita verse we had earlier. Nouns that have "ka" at the end are usually (not always) some kind of agent noun. Someone or something that does something. So here it is "one who engages us or makes us act." (The "us" is understood.) The word prati, "towards," is supplied by the commentators. What justifies this addition? Well we have a problem. We have a phrase in the accusative without any verb or preposition governing the accusative case. The best we can do is say that God is engaging our being (sattva) and directing it towards "this" most pure attainment.</font> CONCLUSION: Certainly the words mahAn prabhuH, though evocative of our beloved Mahaprabhu, hardly justify our interpreting this verse as being a predictor of Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu. Indeed, a straightforward reading leads us to confirm that Shaivaite theists wrote this in glorification of their iSTa-devatA. Sorry if that was a bit dense. Please let me know if this is at all helpful to anyone. If it is not, then I will desist.

mahAn prabhur vai puruSaH sattvasyaiSa pravartakaH sunirmalAm imAM prAptim IzAno jyotir avyayaH An analysis of this verse on the Sanskrit thread.

Dandavats Prabhuji, Sorry to be so late in getting back to you. I just got back a couple of days ago from Puri and am trying to catch up with my email and editing. Radhanath Swami and 2,000 devotees (mostly from Bombay) came to Puri for Ratha-yatra. Chandramali Swami, Mahanidhi Swami, Sukadeva Maharaja, Padmanabha Goswami (Yogeswar Prabhu), Parivrajak Swami and Deena Bandhu Prabhu (ACBSP) all came. Radhanath Swami got a special cordon pass that allowed him inside the inner area by the carts while the pahandi was going on. He kindly brought me with him. The kirtans were wonderful. Door Darshan (the all-India TV station) gave a lot of coverage to our ISKCON kirtan. There was a lot of nice association, wonderful kirtans and prasadam. We sold two or three hundred books and magazines (almost exclusively Krishna Kathamrita. The Bombay devotees really like KK). We also got around a hundred requests from devotees who want to to Bindu. After Rathayatra, Radhanath Swami asked me to take everyone around on parikrama which we did for two days. Afterwords, on the request of Deena Bandhu Prabhu, we took him to Gadeigiri and then Satyabhamapur. He was very enlivened and so was I. He is very nice association. I hope that all is well for your bhajan. I'll get back to you soon. I'm just catching up on my email. Your servant, Madhavananda Das<font color=#f7f7f7><small> [This message has been edited by Jagat (edited 07-04-2001).]