Avinash

Since we are praising Lord Siva, this portion of a recent lecture by Srila Bhaktivedanta Narayana Maharaja seems appropriate:

I read the complete lecture and I liked it a lot. I think that we also need to study Siva Puran to know who Sadashiva is.

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

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

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

12.2 The Blessed Lord said: He whose mind is fixed on My personal form, always engaged in worshiping Me with great and transcendental faith, is considered by Me to be most perfect.

The sanskrit verse used is mayi which means unot Me and not 'on My personal form'.

In 12.3, it is stated that the worship is to the avyakta - impersonal aspect. And they also acheive Krishna in the end after some struggle. But they are not most perfect as indicated above.

The verse 12.3 calls this approach as more difficult, not as worse. Of course, it is easier to concentrate on some form rather than on formless.

We might prove to be great pundits giving logical arguments. But we fail to recognise that our argument are based on our perceptions of the present world.

This is true with all arguments. This is true even with the argument that Ved Vyasa wrote Bhagwtam as Suta speking it.

Are you trying to say that Vyasa wrote about future because he knew that Suta would be talking to sages in future? I am not trying to say that it is not possible. I just want to be clear about what you are saying.

Who is Paul Hacker? (Being a software prefessional, I find his surname as very dangerous )

The point is karthik_v that many take all 100,000 verses to be the original scripture written by Vyasa when it most certainly is not.

I agree with this. We know that now also there are many people who have the habit of making modifications in scriptures. Most of them claim that they are just presenting the stories in a different way. But after many years, people may start considering these interpolations as authentic. It is quite possible that interpolations happened in the past too, if we believe that Vyasa wrote Mahbharata a few thousand years back.

Let me give an example from Bhagwat Puran. According to Bhagwat Puran Sukdev told Parikshit that he had learnt Bhagwatam from the former's father Ved Vyasa. This means that Ved Vyasa had written Bhagwatam before the dialog between Sukdev and Parikshit mentioned in Bhagwatam took place. But Suta swami (while talking to Saunak and other sages) considered the dialog betwen Sukdev and Parikshit as Bhagwatam. There must have been somebody who wrote the dialog betwen Suta swami and Saunak. This is the Bhagwatam that we read currently. So, we find that there are at least the following four Bhagwatams (there may be more): -

1. Taught by Ved Vyasa to Sukdev.

2. Told by Sukdev to Parikshit.

3. Told by Suta Swami to Saunak and other sages.

4. The Bhagwatam as we read curently.

These four may be the same in basic teachings (of course that would depend upon what we consider as basic). But the exact contents of the four can not be same.

Who wrote the Bhawatam mentioned in (4)?

Two, Mahabharat happened in a different plane or dimension and not on this physical earth.

If we believe this, then many incidents mentioned in Mahabharata, Puranas should be assumed to have happened somewhere other than Earth. To take just one example, Bharatvarsa mentioned in Mahabharata can not be the India or any other place on this planet. If that is the case, how are we justified in glorifying the past of this country by quoting verses from our scriptures?

I did not. It is taken from Bhagwad Gita.

Shvu,

As I checked your message by clicking on Edit icon, you have used .com instead of .org for link, and hence the link does not work.

This thread is growing real fast!!

This is 100th post.

I am the best, I am the best, no one can be greater than me!!

Should you not use "Me" rather than "me"?

What is the context of the word?

Does the topic of this thread give you any clue?

Jagat ji,

Where are you?

My older son says I should learn to cook attractively (not just chapatis + steamed veggies) so my younger son can become more intersted in KC.

I am lucky. I can't cook anything. Not even tea. But nobody asks me to learn.

I have cataracts, I kept wondering why all of a sudden I couldn't do tiny kind of work like making little Deities necklaces. Anyway I looked up the causes on the internet and pollution and computers also contribute. I notice if I am staring at the screen my eyes get really blurry. I understand there are computer glasses that protect your eyes.

Yes, there are anti-glare screens. Have you got such a screen for your computer? Anyway, this will not be sufficient. How is cataract treated easily? I think operation is done. Did you go for that?

I got kind of daunted by it, didn't have a flow, then got real sick.

What are you doing for the treatment? Take proper rest, food, medicines. Please stop doing fasting and all that. You can resume those once you are fine. Eat what your doctors advise you without breaking your head trying to find out if it is good or bad. Take medicines even if they taste bad. (Close your eyes and gulp in one shot). Right now, you have to think about yourself. If you are physically not well, how can you do anything properly?

a journalist friend of mine in scarborough uk did google web search on hate your friends and got 1,470 odd hits or something.does this speak for itself?

I did google search on "love your friends" and I got 2510 hits.

Then I did search on "love your enemies" and I got 29100 hits.

If the horses were running very very fast, then according to relativity theory, their lengths were reduced.

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

One who restrains the senses and organs of action, but whose mind dwells on sense objects, certainly deludes himself and is called a pretender. (Bhagwad Gita 3.6)

Isn't it drstvAn + asi?

What is the meaning of "drstvAnasi"?

Translations of 5.36.66 to 5.36.75:

Lord Govind absorbed in Himself His Vasudev form of Parabrahm and meditated on It. That foremost of men merged His mind into Paramatma and got situated in turiya state. In order to keep the words of Durvasa, He sat down as a yogi, legs on His knees. Meanwhile, the hunter Jara, who had attached the remnant of the iron object at the end of his arrows came there. O great sage (Maitrya), on seeing the feet that looked as if they were of a deer, that hunter pierced it while standing at a distance. But on coming closer, he saw a person of four hands. On seeing this, he fell on His feet and said repeatedly, "Be pleased, be pleased! Out of ignorance I have committed this sin, thinking that there was a deer. I am being burnt by sin; please protect me."

Then the Lord said to him, "O hunter, do not be afraid even a little. By My grace, go to the abode of gods. As soon as these words were spoken by God that, an aerial cart came there. The hunter ascended to that and, by the grace of Lord, went to heaven. After he had left, the Lord merged His soul into Vasudev form of Visnu who is undestroyable, un describable, sublime, unborn, immortal, and all pervading. By transcending the three modes of material nature, He left His human body.

_________

"Krsna did not leave his body" means that He went to His abode with the body in which He was present on Earth.

Please read verses 66 to 75 of Chapter 37 of 5th Canto of Visnu Puran. I found something strange there. It is often said that Krsna did not leave his body. But these verses say that He gave up his human body.

At least the USA is on India's side to deal with the radical Islamasists.

Do you think so?