The purpose of the Mahabharata

[theist 1]

Your friend the great sage Kṛṣṇa-dvaipāyana Vyāsa has already described the transcendental qualities of the Lord in his great work the Mahābhārata. But the whole idea is to draw the attention of the mass of people to kṛṣṇa-kathā [bhagavad-gītā] through their strong affinity for hearing mundane topics.

 

PURPORT

The great sage Kṛṣṇa-dvaipāyana Vyāsa is the author of all Vedic literature, of which his works Vedānta-sūtra, Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam and Mahābhārata are very popular readings. As stated in Bhāgavatam (1.4.25), Śrīla Vyāsadeva compiled the Mahābhārata for the less intelligent class of men, who take more interest in mundane topics than in the philosophy of life.

[...]

[Guest Melvin1]

 

Your friend the great sage Kṛṣṇa-dvaipāyana Vyāsa has already described the transcendental qualities of the Lord in his great work the Mahābhārata. But the whole idea is to draw the attention of the mass of people to kṛṣṇa-kathā [bhagavad-gītā] through their strong affinity for hearing mundane topics.

 

PURPORT

The great sage Kṛṣṇa-dvaipāyana Vyāsa is the author of all Vedic literature, of which his works Vedānta-sūtra, Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam and Mahābhārata are very popular readings. As stated in Bhāgavatam (1.4.25), Śrīla Vyāsadeva compiled the Mahābhārata for the less intelligent class of men, who take more interest in mundane topics than in the philosophy of life.

[...]

 

Theist, is there something wrong with your pc? Because I see squares between the word K & a- katha and sage K & a-dvaipayana Vyasa. I also have noticed it( flaws) in some of Ranjeetmore`s views. What gives?

[theist 1]

No idea soul. I don't see squares.

[theist 1]

 

Your friend the great sage Kṛṣṇa-dvaipāyana Vyāsa has already described the transcendental qualities of the Lord in his great work the Mahābhārata. But the whole idea is to draw the attention of the mass of people to kṛṣṇa-kathā [bhagavad-gītā] through their strong affinity for hearing mundane topics. sb 3.5.12

 

 

This verse nicely illustrates the distinction to be drawn between narrative and essence.

 

"Take the essence"

[yogesh 0]

Nothing wrong. I do not see square. Hi Mel maybe you need to download some updates I suppose.

 

And I know Theist is not square

 

Hare Krishna/Krsna

 

Jay Sirla Prabhupada

[Guest Melvin1]

 

No idea soul. I don't see squares.

 

Maybe my browser doesn`t support the font you used in your texts( primate told me this in another thread, It`s Krsna not Krishna). But why it`s only the words Krsna?

[mahak 0]

a read good stuff, lewis perdue, lee child, even law thrillers by lescroart, but this is entertainment only. Then ya slip into the trance of reading mahabharata and ramayana, and all this stuff is not novel, its true, and its true to the very depths of the self.

 

and then one can really say he is entertained, with drama, romance, with thrills, horror, great comedy. what a cool author those great gods vyasa and valmiki. They knew the cravings of the self, so they give us real enteretainment.

 

I wont say the version i read, but a great storyteller, because once an idiot godbrother of mine said that it was horrendous. I personally think that dude is horrendous, because the mahabharata is not limited by author or translator, it reveals itself to the self. Prabhupada taught me, gave me all the tools I need, therefore, a little story flaw will not ruin me.

 

all glories to the very best of classic literature. proves to me that jesus and hercules are the same person, both the son of god taking human foprm. mahak

[theist 1]

Well good stories of course. Literally true as history or not , it remains that their purpose was to draw attention to the Bhagavad-gita.

 

Stories without the Gita and we miss the point.

Gita without the stories and the purpose is still fulfilled.

 

 

Your friend the great sage Kṛṣṇa-dvaipāyana Vyāsa has already described the transcendental qualities of the Lord in his great work the Mahābhārata. But the whole idea is to draw the attention of the mass of people to kṛṣṇa-kathā [bhagavad-gītā] through their strong affinity for hearing mundane topics. sb 3.5.12

 

 

[mahak 0]

Haribol.

 

When I say TRUE, I dont necessarily refer to accepted truth, but rather what rings true to the self.. Some actual truth (such as swine flu being the threat, making everyone forget the torture carried out by american nazis) doesnt ring true to the self, so Im not taking that so-called truth in (nor the injection of aborted fetuses to save myself in the economic stimulus for the pharmaceuticals). But I can fully accept that a man with the head of an elk married the awesome princess. Why? Am I so naive?. Not necessarily, when the uncanny pictures of the bulldog owner looking exactly like the bulldog, or the poodle lady looking like a poodle are a cause of wonder. Not when I see the mutations all around me, of folks who actually look like they have sprouted horns. The head transplant performed by siva to his son Ganesha? How different is this than folks getting ten years added to their lives because they have been given the kidney of a pig.

 

So, Im not about proving fantastic stories, Im speaking to TRUTH that rings true to the self, and that self is me, not others.

 

Hare Krsna, ys, mahaksadasa

[theist 1]

Mahaksa,

 

I am not sure I am being clear on my position. Rather these stories are factually true as in history on the temporal plane or not is not my concern or debate.

 

According to the verse quoted above the point of the stories is to draw attention to the Bhagavad-gita which contains transcendental knowledge and is therefore the essence.

 

If we absorb the bhagavad-gita without reading the rest of the Maha-bharata we still perfect our lives.

 

But if we memorize the whole of the Maha-bharata and fail to absorb (realize) the Bhagavad-gita then we still have missed the point.

 

We should be cognizant of the distinction.

 

Haribol

[mahak 0]

Agreed. In fact, the book I spoke of that the jerk made bad comments about had no good gita section. This is why he was so perturbed. But my point is that a vaisnava, meaning one who has at least philosophically accepted the version of the acaryas (meaning that Bhagavad Gita is the essence of the whole science of vaisnavism), such a person can find value in mahabharata. Naturally, human beings must absorb themselves in ideas, thoughts, information, etc. So, if a devotee decides to find out the particulars of what has led to the song of God, by all means, reading mahabharata, the histories, puranas, ramayana, all of these writings can be of great pleasure to those who never can get enough krsna katha. A devotee will not take careless minimizations of krsna to heart, because they will find that every single character of these literatures worship krsna, even if the author does not. This includes karna and duryodhana as well, because they were both fixed up, and their roles were defined (for us to actually understand when we study the rasas and sub-rasas as composed by the goswamis.)

 

We are speaking of pleasure, and the shastra speaks of pleasure as well, because if there was no pleasure in these literary works, then there would be no use of the verse you cite regarding "drawing" folks to the absolute truth of Srimad Bhagavad Gita.

 

But without studying Gita under the guidance of a Vaisnava Acarya, the mahabharata may not be of any value, but nothing else has value in such a case either.

 

Hare Krsna, ys, mahaksadasaq

[theist 1]

Mahak,

 

Gotcha bro. We are walking the same tracks in the same direction. I am also drawn to the stories. Rather literal histories or not is irrelevant to me because they illustrate the perfection of devotion and often the struggles one must go through to get to that point.

 

I remember how I used to think memorizing the story of Ganendra's predictament with the crocodile was "knowing" it even though I had no understanding of his prayers, praise & surrender to Vishnu.

 

Here's another verse from the 12th canto along these same lines.

[theist 1]

Sukadeva Gosvami said: O mighty Pariksit, I have related to you the narrations of all these great kings, who spread their fame throughout the world and then departed. My real purpose was to teach transcendental knowledge and renunciation. Stories of kings lend power and opulence to these narrations but do not in themselves constitute the ultimate aspect of knowledge. SB 12.3.15

[mahak 0]

Haribol, theist. Nice citation, regarding the story of kings. From a western perspective, the kebra nagast, the story of the succession of kings of abyssinia, from Solomon thru Mother Mary, is a true wonder. It encompasses the theism of Lord Jesus Christ, yet is not really dogmatic scripture. If one is in tune with the teachings of Lord Jesus Christ, kebra nagast has great meaning, yet is just history otherwise.

 

Mahabharata has fantastic stories, but history can be traced therwe. Descriptions of how the world is in a point of time is often done acc ording to how folks write. This is why Im attracted to Velavkovski, because he has the theory of another planet resting atop the great himalaya, and he goes on to explain the fantastic stories of the Puranas is really about the historical proximaty of this planet to the Earth, how gods traveled back and forth, etc.

 

But history is history, and mahabharata as history is cultural description. Add God, and its just as probhupada said, that we put a ONE in front of our collection of zeroes, then we have something.

 

Haribol, yo brah, mahak

[theist 1]

Kebra nagast is outside of my experience. However from experience I cannot discount the other world theory. During the days of physchedelic adventurism I came torealize that the very matter that makes up the computer I am typing on is being used in some way as part of a whole other dimension by residents of that plane. Whose to say this same energy is not shared infinitely in a similar fashion with an unlimited hosts of others.

 

Time and space as I know them has lost all but the most superfical relevance as in ,"I have a dr.s appoint on the 27th", type of situation. Krishna's maya i incomprehensible and astounding.

[jaswant 0]

 

Your friend the great sage Kṛṣṇa-dvaipāyana Vyāsa has already described the transcendental qualities of the Lord in his great work the Mahābhārata. But the whole idea is to draw the attention of the mass of people to kṛṣṇa-kathā [bhagavad-gītā] through their strong affinity for hearing mundane topics.

......................

<TABLE style="WIDTH: 521pt; BORDER-COLLAPSE: collapse" cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width=694 border=0 x:str><COLGROUP><COL style="WIDTH: 521pt; mso-width-source: userset; mso-width-alt: 22208" width=694><TBODY><TR style="HEIGHT: 14.25pt" height=19><TD id=td_post_1136291 style="BORDER-RIGHT: #d4d0c8; BORDER-TOP: #d4d0c8; BORDER-LEFT: #d4d0c8; WIDTH: 521pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #d4d0c8; HEIGHT: 14.25pt; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" width=694 height=19>

HARE KRISHNA !!

nice topic !!

 

i have a "technical" doubt , plse expl

 

I think the above was said to MAITRIYA MUNI by VIDUR..??

<TABLE style="WIDTH: 521pt; BORDER-COLLAPSE: collapse" cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width=694 border=0 x:str><COLGROUP><COL style="WIDTH: 521pt; mso-width-source: userset; mso-width-alt: 22208" width=694><TBODY><TR style="HEIGHT: 14.25pt" height=19><TD id=td_post_1136291 style="BORDER-RIGHT: #d4d0c8; BORDER-TOP: #d4d0c8; BORDER-LEFT: #d4d0c8; WIDTH: 521pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #d4d0c8; HEIGHT: 14.25pt; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" width=694 height=19>It was after the great war--SHRI KRISHNA just left the material world---

The pandavas was still rulling at the time....

 

My question is when was the mahabharat written ?...

was it not after the pandavas left the world ??...

 

and than after the mahabharat , the bhagavat puran was

written...

 

 

yours

jaswant

 

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

[theist 1]

jaswant,

 

Good question. I wish I had an answer for you but I don't. Scholars seem to have a wide variety of views on when the Mahabharata was written. It's all beyond me.

 

As for myself I have long given up being concerned about the dates for writing such scriptures, or if it is literal history, allegory, as in paroksa, or a mix of both, or if some contradictions are found within the text.

 

We are really after the timeless transcendental knowledge contained within that exists independently and has the potency to deliver us from death and rebirth, hence the referrenc to Bhagavad-gita as the essence.

[mahak 0]

Mahabharata was recited to King Janamejaya, the son of King Pariksit, after Pariksit left the world. Janamejaya was attempting to rid the world of all snakes, but the great reptilian Naga race (Human Beings who live underground) begged for mercy for Takshaka, the snakebird who ended Pariksit's life. On this occasion, janamejaya heard the completed mahabharata, and when that was over, he heard Ramayana, because he was interested in the brother of Bhimasena (Hanumanji) who was mentioned in both epics.

 

King Pariksit was the first King of this Kali yuga, lived less than 100 years. Therefore, it can be assumed that Janamejaya's Yajna to rid the world of snakes took place about 100 years into this present age, which is calculated to have begun 5,000 years ago, prior to most cultures other than Australian, Gilgameshis and Sumerians.

 

The Author of Mahabharata is not yet away from this realm. Although he went with Vidura, Kuntidevi, and Dhritarastra and Gandhari to the end of their lives, he attends great festivals to this day (some say).

 

So, mahabharata is 5,000 years old, and Ramayana is 800,000 years old, as Kusa and Lava, the sons of Lord Ramachandra and residents of the asrama of the author Sri Valmiki, recited this poem to Lord Rama prior to when Ayodhya returned (en masse) to the abode of Sri Sri Sita Rama.

 

Hare Krsna, ys, mahaksadasa

[jaswant 0]

HARE KRISHNA !!

Thanks MAHAK & THEIST ,

 

I just thought how did Vidur come to know of the mahabharat..i just assumed that it was "written" by Vyas after the Pandavas left this

realm...so when he spoke to Maitreya muni, at that time the mahabharat

was not yet written.....but theist , as you say...this qustions is just mundane...but it would be nice to know...i do not need the exact dates

but like first was the ramayan than bharat than puraans...more or less

 

thanks again

 

yours

 

jaswant

[theist 1]

Haribol jaswant,

 

Yes I am also curious about all such things but I have become so frustrated with the variety of answers that I decided to just let it pass. If scholars can't agree than who am I?

 

I am resigned to remain ignorant on a whole lot of things. This is not to suggest that others should follow my path of tiny brain power though.

[kaisersose 0]

 

HARE KRISHNA !!

Thanks MAHAK & THEIST ,

 

I just thought how did Vidur come to know of the mahabharat..i just assumed that it was "written" by Vyas after the Pandavas left this

realm...so when he spoke to Maitreya muni, at that time the mahabharat

was not yet written.....but theist , as you say...this qustions is just mundane...but it would be nice to know...i do not need the exact dates

but like first was the ramayan than bharat than puraans...more or less

 

thanks again

 

yours

 

jaswant

 

All these texts have evolved over a long period of time, borowing from various sources & losing older material.

 

The Mahabharata itself says it originally was just 8000 verses, and then progressively increased to its present size.

 

It is hard, if not impossible to fix authors, start and end dates for such texts.

 

Cheers

[Amlesh 1]

Watch BR Chopra's Mahabharata serial, it is enough.