sumedh

Hare Krishna please accept my dandavat pranam Please could someone tell the procedure of installing Deities (of Sri Sri Radhe Krishna) at home. Is there a difference when installing at a Temple and at home? thanks

Hare Krishna and dandavats ISKCON is not an organization as you think (and i am not formally a part of it) rather in the higher sense refers to all those who follow previous Acharyas -- i take your good luck wish in its true sense. To put it again, the Advaitins *only* consider the statements of Upanishads, Vedanta, Bhagavad Gita and reject statements from puranas in formulating their theory and since they contain statements directly from Srila Vyasadeva, Srila Sukadeva and other authorities it can only mean to imply that they are concocted (unless they wish to claim that these authorities are mistaken). In doing so they also gloss over the fact that only about 6% of these texts remain now and formulating and supporting a theory of Supreme Truth based on it is not very prudent.Kurma Purana (52.19-20): eka-vimsati-bhedena rg-vedam krtavan pura sakhanam satenaiva yajur-vedam athakarot sama-vedam sahasrena sakhanam prabibheda sah atharvanam atho vedam bibedha navakena tu "Previously the Rg Veda was divided into 21 sections, the Yajur Veda into 100 sections, the Sama Veda into 1,000 sections and the Atharva Veda into 9 divisions." In addition, many advaitins (and some western scholars) consider the Bhagavat purana to be composed about 1000 years ago in South India by Vopadeva; this has been expressed by Srila Prabhupada here http://srimadbhagavatam.com/1/1/1/en "Some Mayavadi scholars argue that Srimad-Bhagavatam was not compiled by Sri Vyasadeva. And some of them suggest that this book is a modern creation written by someone named Vopadeva." for example. If now this is no longer the case with the present Advaitins then it is welcome, but the fundamental difference of philosophy remains so they will not be considered authorized by the vaishnava sampradayas in any case. Regarding "Advaitins having no sampradaya" (which actually means Advaitins have no authorized sampradaya) the answer is given before and expressed so in the interview of Srila BhaktiSiddhanta. Please present your definition else such a statement is only a slander.

Hare Krishna and dandavats It is quite a problem when you refuse to follow the links that are provided, before formulating your response; case in point the interview of Srila BhaktiSiddhanta and the links to statements of acharyas of Madhva sampradaya. Since you do not understand the meaning of sampradaya as we understand it viz. Sat-sampradaya, you seem to hold the opinion any disciplic succession constitutes a sampradaya. So unless we have a common understanding of the meaning of sampradaya, the claims of a bona-fide sampradaya can be made for or against any of the existing sampradaya. Apart from gaudiyas, the same claims could be made for the Madhva-Sampradaya and other three vaishnava sampradayas; so proving Gaudiyas to be in line with Madhva makes no difference (which has been done by many of our acharyas; see http://www.gosai.com/dvaita/madhvacarya/Madhvacarya-Gaudiya.html for example, which provides answers to the points raised by madhavites which you repeatedly put forward) as the question then shifts to the validity of Madhva and other sampradayas. Actually, our claim that advaitins do not belong to any sampradaya is not at all ugly; ugly is the attempt of advaitins to describe the Supreme Lord as having no personality and that He comes under the influence of Maya implying that Maya is greater than the Supreme Lord and their attempt to imply that Vedantic siddhanta is advaitism, trying to make Vedantin synonymous with advaitin. Considered by whom? You? No, an insignificant person like me holds no position to make such a statement. Read the link http://www.harekrsna.com/philosophy/bmgs/acaryas/bhaktisiddhanta/writings/sct1.htmagain. Yes, many tattvavadis do not consider gaudiyas to be in line and many do. Similiarly, even many apa-sampradayas from Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu claim Srila BhaktiVinoda/BhaktiSiddhanta etc. are not in line; then what does this prove. How would you consider opinion of some tattvavadis conclusive? No, their conclusions are directly in line with the Naimisharanya school from Srila Suta Gosvami. You are right about the fact that gaudiyas place greatest importance to Srimad Bhagavatam compared to other vaishnava schools, but the issue is not the Book rather the conclusion of Bhagavata purana that Sri Narayana is the Supreme Brahman/Super Soul/Supreme Lord and jivas are His infinitisemal parts. Regarding the Bhagavata purana, what is your position on this matter and then it can be discussed; do you claim advaitins considers puranas as authentic. Advaitins do not take the statements of any of the puranas as authentic, let alone bhagavata purana, and base their philosophy on Upanishads, Vedanta and Bhagavad Gita; what is your position in this regard. This is simply not reading. May i request you not to put in the reply hastily without reading the links, so that i do not have to cut-paste from those.From http://www.gosai.com/dvaita/madhvacarya/pejavara.html Pejavara Swami "The message of Jagad-guru Madhvacarya and the message of Caitanya Prabhu are the same. Their messages are identical. And in this way, it is a confluence. Caitanya Prabhu actually gave what Madhvacarya gave, and thus I belong to Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu's line. Therefore, I feel proud that Swami Prabhupada, who actually belongs to our sampradaya, has done such a wonderful job by distributing Krsna consciousness all over the world." From http://www.gosai.com/dvaita/udupi/asta_matha/sriroor_english.html Shiroor Swami "Sri Chaitanya Sampradaya is a branch of Madhwa philosophy. there are historic proofs to substantiate this fact." From http://www.gosai.com/dvaita/udupi/asta_matha/kaniyoor_english.html Sri Vidyavallaba Tirtha Swamiji "Some argue that there is no relationship between "Chaitanya prabhu parampara" and "Sri Madhwacharya parampara." We wish to put forth our opinion on the matter. According to our views, Sri Chaitanya prabhu having embraced "virakti," approached Sri Vysatheertha, who belongs to the Madhwacharya's traditional Vyasaraya Mutt. Sri Vyasatheertha graced him offering "deeksha" to him and commanded him to spread the philosophic ideals fo Sri Madhwacharya." Again, i repeat the same things that there are differences in the philosophy between the gaudiyas and madhva sampradaya, just as there are differences in the four vaishnava sampradayas (and for this reason gaudiya sampradaya is called Brahma-Madhva-Gaudiya sampradaya instead of just Madhva sampradaya) but their central point is the same (as i mentioned above). If you regard the differences in the vaishnava sampradayas on the same level as that of the difference between advaita and vaishnava schools then what can be done. The point is elementary in that any disciplic succession does not become sampradaya, and that those whose sole aim is service at the feet of Supreme Lord (whether the disciplic succession is connected by diksha or siksha) are in the sampradaya and not others -- such is our understanding. You are trying to make it appear that its okay for anybody to claim to be in sampradaya if they are linked in some way or the other, irrespective of their philosophy. No, the first written reference is from "Sri Gaura ganodesa dipika" by Srila Kavi Karnapura who is a direct disciple of Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu. As stated before, whether or not there is a physical succession link does not make much difference to the point since the advaitins are considered out of the sampradaya by definition (as the gaudiyas understand it). You may present your own definition of a sampradaya (apart from any disciplic succession connected to Vyasadeva in some way irrespective of philosophy which is not acceptable) but our understanding is clear and that was being referred to in the original posts. The questions of disciplic links in gaudiya sampradaya have been dealt with in the link given earlier. not me, this has been dealt with in some (rather huge) detail by various vaishnava acharyas. If you want to read it, i will be willing to provide you links/material on this matter.At one point you do not claim to profess advaita philosophy, and at other you want me to refute advaita by discussing with yourself -- i do not know what to make out of this.

Hare Krishna and dandavats You didn't read the post, did you? rather you read only what you wanted to read. Let me repeat "they are considered out of the sampradaya since they do not accept the final conclusions of Vedas as expressed in Srimad Bhagavatam"; the advaitins consider Srimad Bhagavatam as concocted and unauthorized. The philosophy has some differences in the four vaishnava sampradayas, but their basis is authorized Bhagavata commentry on Vedanta sutra.Let us see, whether your opinion of gaudiya vaishnavas not being in the Madhava sampradaya matters, or whether the opinion of Acharyas from Madhava sampradaya matters; see http://www.gosai.com/dvaita/madhvacarya/pejavara.html or http://www.gosai.com/dvaita/udupi/index.html or http://www.gosai.com/dvaita/udupi/asta_matha/pejavara-prabhupada.rm, for example. That is a fact. This linking to Srila Sukadeva is a later phenomenon only (this was never put forward by Shankaracharya) which was done after challenge from bona-fide vaishnava schools. Also, you would do well to research the meaning of Sat-Sampradaya, and by definition advaitins are out of it. Point is moot since you do not claim to profess advaita philosophy. If you have something substantial to say then there can be a discussion.

Hare Krishna please accept my dandavat pranam "When we know that we are Atma and we are free from bondages, why should we chant mantra and other things to attain salvation" Not very clear about the question but here's the opinion of vaishnava sampradayas. This question only arises for those who consider salvation as the end. But those who have taken the path of Bhakti-yoga know that Bhakti is both the means and the end, whereas salvation as in sayujya mukti (merging into the Brahman) is considered a spiritual dead end (or spiritual death). The material world being a perverted reflection of the spiritual realm, the spiritual activities are described as eternal. Thus Bhakti is the eternal nature of a jiva and is what is meant by "svarupa siddhi" i.e. true nature of jiva which has become covered due to innumerable lives in the material world. Chanting is the same as associating with Krishna/Narayana personally, but in the neophyte stages one cannot recognize this fact; coming to the point of realizing this fact is the perfection of chanting when pure love of Godhead manifests. The following appears in Brahma-Samhita 5.1 "isvarah paramah krishna sac-cid-ananda vigrahah anadir adir govindah sarva karana karanam" Krishna who is known as Govinda is the Supreme Godhead. He has an eternal blissful spiritual body. He is the origin of all. He has no other origin and He is the prime cause of all causes.

Hare Krishna and dandavat pranam It has been revealed by Srila BhaktiSiddhanta Saraswati that Gaura Kishore Babaji is an eternal associate of Sri Krishna (Guna manjari), so i guess the rule that expertise in shashtras is somewhat proportional to the amount of learning etc. does not apply.

Hare Krishna and dandavats It is true that the advaita philosophy has been existing since time immemorial. To refute the other five schools of philosophy (which includes the advaita one) Srila Vedavyasa established the Vedanta siddhanta. Some advaita schools try (as you have given in the link but have a hard time linking gaudapada with Srila Shukadeva whose conclusions are expressed in the Bhagavata) to link to Vedavyas, in particular those of the Kashi school, but they are considered out of the sampradaya since they do not accept the final conclusions of Vedas as expressed in Srimad Bhagavatam. Only the followers of Naimisharanya school are considered in the sampradaya since they consider Srimad Bhagavatam as final conclusions. In fact, only the vaishnava sampradayas consider all the scriptures as authentic; the advaita proponents consider Srimad Bhagavatam as concocted as you must be well aware. This (and other points) are dealt here http://www.harekrsna.com/philosophy/bmgs/acaryas/bhaktisiddhanta/writings/sct1.htm by Srila BhaktiSiddhanta Saraswati. So it is "vaishnava propaganda" if you want to believe that way. The feat of Sripad Shankacharya was to interpret the Brahma Sutra so as to show it as expounding the advaita siddhanta, even to the extent of claiming that Vyasadeva is mistaken. There are philosophical differences in the bona-fide Vaishnava schools (so are there differences in different advaita schools) but the fundamental priciple is the same viz. Sri Narayana is Supreme Brahman, Supreme Soul, Supreme Lord and jivas are His fragmental infinitesimal parts. In my opinion, if you want to discuss this point then we better place arguments rather than sarcasms.

Hare Krishna and dandavat pranam Here are some more links http://www.geocities.com/priitaa/christ_and_krishna.htm http://www.geocities.com/priitaa108/christ_and_krishna_pt3.htm http://www.geocities.com/priitaa108/christ_and_krishna_pt2.htm and http://www.salagram.net/Jesus-Went-To-India.htm

Hare Krishna Hiranyakashyapu, Ravana and Shishupala are the same person, and so are Hiranyaaksha, Kumbhakarana and Dantavakra who are Jaya and Vijaya. Srimad-Bhagavatam 3.16 gives the full story. In particular, please see this http://srimadbhagavatam.com/3/16/26/en in which it is clearly stated Jaya-Vijaya did not fall down.

Hare Krishna please accept my humble obeisances It is indeed a broad question which i would be unable to put in such few words as the posts here would allow. In fact, those who seriously pursue such questions have been glorified as being very rare in the scriptures. I found these introductory booklets -- Perfect Questions Perfect Answers, The Science of Self-Realization, and The journey of Self-discovery, as very nice for such questions and they are reasonably small. They are available in the books section of this website for download (you may first need to download the fonts avaibable on the books page for proper rendering). The recommended order of reading for the big books is: Bhagavad Gita, then Srimad Bhagavatam, then Chaitanya Charitamrta and Brahma Samhita and its recommended to not jump the order. They are all available for download but are huge books and most prefer to have hard-copies; i find the small books convenient enough to read on computer, though.

Hare Krishna and dandavat pranam Nowadays, different philosophers tend to have different definitions of jnana so could you please specify what you mean by it. Recently the trend has been to equate jnana with advaitism which is completely at odds with bhakti, so in that sense they are not complementary. To be a true devotee perfect knowledge is of course necessary.Consider, for example, the commentary on Vedanta Sutra (sutra means big philosophy in small number of words, so cannot be understood without authorized commentary) by Sri Vyasadeva Himself which is Srimad Bhagavatam, and that by those of advaita schools including Sri Shankaracharya. They are worlds apart. So probably you know why i ask this question. Actually, i read some of their writings which are essentially advaita interpretations or Bhagavad Gita and other scriptures. His guru Swami Sivananda is credited with synthesizing the four yoga paths (karma, jnana, bhakti, raja), all of which in his words lead to the same goal i.e. union with Brahman or God (though he seems to have more preference for raja yoga i.e. ashtanga yoga). Clearly, this is completely at odds with what Srila Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada and all other acharyas preach.

Hare Krishna Not conditioned but to the one who derives pleasure in the self. Please see the atmarama sloka http://srimadbhagavatam.com/1/7/10/en

Hare Krishna The fact that the person starts comparing the supernatural powers to show the superiority of Buddhists' position clearly shows that they have also an interest in such powers inspite of his claim otherwise. It is clear from the whole passage that they are interested in voidism to get rid of sorrow etc., and in powers both of which are essentially material in nature. Interesting that he talks of voidism and their approach to it which actually gives supernatural powers !!! So what is their explanation for where these powers come from in the first place when everything is void and they are aiming for it. There are many grave flaws in this, if we really want to dissect it. His quote of Brahma converting is a big suspect because we know that he is a God-realized soul (from Brahma-Samhita); we need to read the original verses to find out (it is possible they interpreted someone as being Brahma on their whims). Even if it is true we find nothing of sort in the vast Vedic literature, so there is little or no supporting evidence for such a thing. In fact just to complete the delusion of Buddhists such a thing may have been put in by Lord Buddha. The destination of Buddhists has been positively confirmed as being merging into Pradhana by all Acharyas. Also interesting is the fact that most of Buddhists, Jains, Tantric pratitioners talk of upto Brahma/Satya loka and other heavens only (or atmost Siddha Loka); nothing of true spiritual life. Anyways, devotees don't have anything to do with these supernatural powers etc. and its clear that their position to prove themselves superior is on the material platform only and have no logical arguments from the position of Absolute Truth as such (e.g. he never says why is voidism ultimate -- just only that it is the final destination in Buddhism which tantric people cannot reach). Finally Buddha Himself never talked of such powers, so this is only a later addendum by some to prove their superiority.

Hare Krishna and dandavat pranam Almost so, just that instead of purification in Vedic concept it means fruits of previous sinful activities (and so after the period in hell being free from them); just as sinful activities are material so also is the "purification" and cannot compare to purification due to devotional service. In other words, as such no benefit is there for the living entity in such a "purification". The descriptions of various hellish planets and their location are given in Srimad Bhagavatam 5.26 (e.g. http://srimadbhagavatam.com/5/26/en) When the period stipulated for punishment is over, the living being then take bodies (reincarnates) in accordance with its level of consciousness. In the words of Lord Chaitanya and all acharyas, these circles for living entities in this material world has been going for billions of billions of births (yes, all of us have been to hells innumerable number of times). No, this is not the way it works (though some philosophers interpret things this way, it is condemned by Acharyas). The material nature punishes or rewards us accordingly. Why on earth would anyone subject oneself to such huge tortures only due to some regrets; everyone wants to be happy no ??? Much, much more than that. Since we have been in material from time immemorial, our accumulated karma (prarabdha) is also very, very large and by the calculation of visiting heavens/hells/other bodies will take time immemorial (and meantime we will have more karma and so on). Taking the shelter of Lord, not only frees one from all this but is gradually elevated to the spiritual platform; chanting offenselessly even once makes us liberated -- one of the glories of Holy Name.If someone turns away from God after taking His shelter, the Lord will bring him to His shelter sooner or later. Lord Krishna says that an unsuccessful yogi takes birth in the family of pious persons where he continues the previous endeavour with greater determination. The verdict of all is that even a small effort will save us from the greatest danger (of entering into the circle of birth-death in this material world). This was the subject of enquiry of King Pariskshit after hearing about the hells from SB 6.1 http://srimadbhagavatam.com/6/1/en Anyway, devotees don't worry about these things (or any other material consideration) since they have surrendered to Krishna. There is a nice story related to this. Once Lord Krishna was (pretended to be) ill, so much that all physicians and others could not know the reason. Sri Narada Muni came to see the lotus feet of Lord. When he came to know of this, he asked Sri Krishna of the cure of the disease. Sri Krishna replied that there was only one cure -- to bring the dust from feet of His pure devotee. Sri Narada was perplexed and could not imagine giving the dust of feet to the Lord. He inquired from all in Dwarka and no one consented to do this. When Sri Krishna was informed of this, He asked Narada to go to Vraja dhama where he will be able to get it. Sri Narada went to Vrindavana and asked for dust of feet, then everyone was ready to give saying 'O, my Krishna is ill and needs it, please take it quickly'. Sri Narada then enquired that were they not afraid to do this as one may even go the hell for such imputence. 'We have been there innumerable number of times. What difference will it make if we go there once more for Krishna' was the reply. Overwhelmed, Sri Narada first put the dust on himself. (I have not got the exact story and the quotes are from my side only, so please forgive me for putting "words in their mouths")

Hare Krishna and dandavats prabhuji in my opinion this is too far stretched. What about the opinion of people in other nations? The other nations have such deep rooted suspicion/hatred of US that it can't jump from being an active perpetrator of war to the role of holy kshatriya. It will require so much groundwork to come even close to Parikshit ideal. Only when it first sets its policies in correct order, then the leaders taking guidance from Spritual Masters undo the damage done by its policies, then set its own house in order ... and when the other nations have complete confidence in the US and the permanence of its correct policies can such a role be contemplated on.Till then such attitude will only be hypocrisy and will be seen such by others.

Hare Krishna and dandavats As Max prabhuji mentioned, abortion is murder. Actually, the question of belief does not arise because by any rational standard abortion is murder; just because someone is not to be seen as having full body does not make the crime less heinous but more just a killing a small child is condemned. It is all the more heinous because mostly the parents themselves participate in that and so as Srila Prabhupada says such persons are paid back in full kind by the nature.

Hare Krishna and dandavats Govindaram prabhuji, i was under the impression that caffeine etc are intoxicants, thus in the tamasic category and violate the 4 regs; onions/garlics are in rajasic category. The temporary effect of onion/garlic may be dulling, and temporary effect of intoxicants may be stimulating but they lead to increase of the respective (tamasic/rajasic) nature. please correct me if this is wrong.

Hare Krishna all glories to Srila Prabhupada, Lord Gauranga and Vaishnavas! It is necessary because of the large number gods being available nowadays; that people should know that there is a standard for someone to be declared an avataar of Supreme Lord; that it is not based on the whims of the so-called god and/or his/her followers and that all the incarnations of Supreme Lord are predicted in the Vedic texts. It is also necessary so that people know that the conclusions of Vedic texts as presented by Lord Gauranga constitute the most perfect religion and thus anyone who preaches other conclusions must be rejected. No one is talking of miracles or of love, we must first talk of faith. If this helps establish the faith completely in the words of Lord Gauranga and the successor acharyas then only the question of love arises. What need of miracle seeking when the greatest miracle of the whole existence unfolds before our eyes every moment? If i could have placed my love (whatever that is) to the service of Lord then it would have been done without delay, but i am not at all capable; the only thing i know is that i have to pray to Lord and follow His words as expressed through Guru to approach this greatest benediction. I doubt i will be able to recognise the Supreme Lord anyways and will need to take the shelter of sadhu-shastra for that.

Hare Krishna Achutya means the infallible and is a name of Lord Krishna

Hare Krishna I was in some error again. When yogamaya is born to Yashoda she was alongwith her expansion mahamaya, so in that way Durga is also sister of Krishna. N.B. The above piece was not by Srila Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura but from Srila Bhaktivedanta Prabhupada's Srimad Bhagvatam translation.

Hare Krishna What i wrote above "Thus both Durga and Subhadra are sisters of Krsna." is not entirely correct. The one born from Yashoda is Yogamaya and before Kamsa she appears as Durga (which is a partial expansion or covering potency). It should then be: Yogamaya and Subhadra are sisters of Krishna; Subhadra is herself an expansion of Yogamaya as posted above.

Hare Krishna From Additional notes for SB chapter 10.1 ... The word karyarthe refers to one who attracted the pregnancy of Devaki and bewildered mother Yasoda. These pastimes are very confidential. The Supreme personality of Godhead ordered yogamaya to bewilder His associates in His pastimes and bewilder demons like Kamsa. As stated previously, yogamayam samadisat. To give service to the Lord, yogamaya appeared along with mahamaya. Mahamaya refers to yaya sammohitam jagat, "one who bewilders the entire material world." From this statement it is to be understood that yogamaya, in her partial expansion, becomes mahamaya and bewilders the conditioned souls. In other words, the entire creation has two divisions--transcendental, or spiritual, and material. Yogamaya manages the spiritual world, and by her partial expansion as mahamaya she manages the material world. As stated in the Narada-pancaratra, mahamaya is a partial expansion of yogamaya. The Narada-pancaratra clearly states that the Supreme Personality has one potency, which is sometimes described as Durga. The Brahma-samhita says, chayeva yasya bhuvanani bibharti durga. Durga is not different from yogamaya. When one understands Durga properly, he is immediately liberated, for Durga is originally the spiritual potency, hladini-sakti, by whose mercy one can understand the Supreme Personality of Godhead very easily. Radha krsna-pranaya-vikrtir hladini-saktir asmad. The mahamaya-sakti, however, is a covering of yogamaya, and she is therefore called the covering potency. By this covering potency, the entire material world is bewildered (yaya sammohitam jagat). In conclusion, bewildering the conditioned souls and liberating the devotees are both functions belonging to yogamaya. Transferring the pregnancy of Devaki and keeping mother Yasoda in deep sleep were both done by yogamaya; mahamaya cannot act upon such devotees, for they are always liberated. But although it is not possible for mahamaya to control liberated souls or the Supreme Personality of Godhead, she did bewilder Kamsa. The action of yogamaya in presenting herself before Kamsa was the action of mahamaya, not yogamaya. Yogamaya cannot even see or touch such polluted persons as Kamsa. In Candi, in the Markandeya Purana, Eleventh Chapter, Mahamaya says, "During the twenty-eighth yuga in the period of Vaivasvata Manu, I shall take birth as the daughter of Yasoda and be known as Vindhyacala-vasini." The distinction between the two mayas--yogamaya and maha-maya--is described as follows. Krsna's rasa-lila with the gopis and the gopis' bewilderment in respect to their husbands, fathers-in-law and other such relatives were arrangements of yogamaya in which mahamaya had no influence. The Bhagavatam gives sufficient evidence of this when it clearly says, yogamayam upasritah. On the other hand, there were asuras headed by Salva and ksatriyas like Duryodhana who were bereft of devotional service in spite of seeing Krsna's carrier Garuda and the universal form, and who could not understand Krsna to be the Supreme Personality of Godhead. This was also bewilderment, but this bewilderment was due to mahamaya. Therefore it is to be concluded that the maya which drags a person from the Supreme Personality of Godhead is called jadamaya, and the maya which acts on the transcendental platform is called yogamaya. When Nanda Maharaja was taken away by Varuna, he saw Krsna's opulence, but nonetheless he thought of Krsna as his son. Such feelings of parental love in the spiritual world are acts of yogamaya, not of jadamaya, or mahamaya. This is the opinion of Srila Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura.

Hare Krishna and dandavats SB 10.1.56 atha kala upavrtte devaki sarva-devata putran prasusuve castau kanyam caivanuvatsaram "Each year thereafter, in due course of time, Devaki, the mother of God and all the demigods, gave birth to a child. Thus she bore eight sons, one after another, and a daughter named Subhadra." Kamsa did not do anything to Subhadra because the eighth male child was supposed to kill him. SB 10.4.9 sa tad-dhastat samutpatya sadyo devy ambaram gata adrsyatanuja visnoh sayudhasta-mahabhuja "The child, Yogamaya-devi, the younger sister of Lord Visnu, slipped upward from Kamsa's hands and appeared in the sky as Devi, the goddess Durga, with eight arms, completely equipped with weapons." PURPORT "Kamsa tried to dash the child downward against a piece of stone, but since she was Yogamaya, the younger sister of Lord Visnu, she slipped upward and assumed the form of the goddess Durga. The word anuja, meaning "the younger sister," is significant. When Visnu, or Krsna, took birth from Devaki, He must have simultaneously taken birth from Yasoda also. Otherwise how could Yogamaya have been anuja, the Lord's younger sister?" This also explains the statements that Yashodanandana-Krsna never leaves Braja-bhumi -- He is born from Yashoda; Krsna in Mathura and Krsna in Dwarka are His different forms. When Vasudeva brought Krsna from Mathura to Nanda's house the two forms merged. Thus both Durga and Subhadra are sisters of Krsna. SB 10.4.13 iti prabhasya tam devi maya bhagavati bhuvi bahu-nama-niketesu bahu-nama babhuva ha "After speaking to Kamsa in this way, the goddess Durga, Yogamaya, appeared in different places, such as Varanasi, and became celebrated by different names, such as Annapurna, Durga, Kali and Bhadra."

Hare Krishna and dandavat pranam I recently read this very nice interview of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati here http://www.harekrsna.com/philosophy/bmgs/acaryas/bhaktisiddhanta/writings/sct1.htm It nicely explains in brief a number of common points of confusion among modern day hindus.

Hare Krishna and dandavats mahak prabuji, her efforts would have been laudable but for her past record which put a question mark on her integrity. Her dealings with italian businessmen, citizenship issue (not that this matters much) etc. Please read this http://sify.com/news/politics/fullstory.php?id=13456082 for an illustration of the issues that we have with her becoming Prime Minister. Now that she has become a martyr and attained a "high moral ground" by refusing it, the next time Congress forms a government she can easily become the Prime Minister with any opposition non-consequential.