shvu 1 Report post Posted December 12, 2000 Here is an interesting verse from the Bhagavatam. O Great King ! I have narrated to you the stories of many who lived to make their names famous in their life time and then to pass away and become a memory soon after. These narratives are only the literary device I have used with a view to instil into you the importance of renunciation and realisation. They have no significance in themselves and are not to be taken as literal facts. 12.3.14 The Bhagavatam itself admits that not all the stories are facts. Which means one cannot take it as a historical authority. Cheers Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shvu 1 Report post Posted December 12, 2000 Which makes sense, because the Puranas were originally chanted during intervals while performing a Yagna [sacrifice]. It was to glorify the cosmic Lord. Of course, the Puranas then would have been in a different form and more smaller. Later Vyasa out of compassion for the Non-Brahmins who were not allowed to read the Vedas, came up with Puranas for the common man in the form of stories. An easy way to inspire awe to the Lord, devotion and renunciation. Similar to the Pancha tantra for morals. And since then, these Puranas have evolved into their present form to reflect the current devotional beliefs of all the people who added to it later on. Cheers Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
animesh 0 Report post Posted April 14, 2001 <HTML> <HEAD> <META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=windows-1252"> <META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="Microsoft Word 97"> <TITLE>I found this in Srimad Bhagwatam (2</TITLE> </HEAD> <BODY> <DIR> <DIR> I found this in Srimad Bhagwatam (2.6.30)</P> Narayane bhagwati tadidam vishwamahitam</P> Griheetmaayorugunah sargdaawgunah swatah</P> This universe rests on the support of Narayan, who, though devoid of all attributes, assumes innumerable attributes at the dawn of creation by His maya.</P></DIR> </DIR> </BODY> </HTML> Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gauracandra 1 Report post Posted April 15, 2001 Just to clarify, the original verse to this posting was concluded to be a bad translation. The analysis of this can be found on these forums under the heading "Ancient Kings - Real or Imaginary?". Gauracandra Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
animesh 0 Report post Posted April 15, 2001 ___________ Just to clarify, the original verse to this posting was concluded to be a bad translation. ___________ Yes, that is true. Jndas ji has clarified it in some other thread. But I chose this thread because the topic is Srimad Bhagvatam and I wanted to quote something from that. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shvu 1 Report post Posted April 16, 2001 To clarify: Although the translation above was not literal, the meaning remains unchanged. This was clarified on that thread too. Cheers Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shvu 1 Report post Posted April 16, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR> Narayane bhagwati tadidam vishwamahitam Griheetmaayorugunah sargdaawgunah swatah This universe rests on the support of Narayan, who, though devoid of all attributes, assumes innumerable attributes at the dawn of creation by His maya. - SB 2.6.30 <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Excellent! Cheers Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jahnava Nitai Das 2 Report post Posted April 16, 2001 I hate to bring up an old topic, but the verse at the begining of this thread was just a plain out false translation. The sanskrit did not contain anything about the stories "only being literary devices", nor that "they had no significance", nor that they "are not to be taken literally". In other words, the entire translation is a fabrication. I don't think I need to repost that old thread to remind everyone. <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR> Although the translation above was not literal, the meaning remains unchanged. This was clarified on that thread too. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> The meaning given above has no connection with the sanskrit verse. It was the opinion of the author interpolated into the translation. Anyway, better to talk about the most recent verse posted by Animesh. Lets see if we can have some positive discusion. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jahnava Nitai Das 2 Report post Posted April 16, 2001 Narayana is aguna or nirguna, indicating that he is free from the influence of the three modes of nature (Sattva, Rajas and Tamas). Ramanuja comments on the word nirguna, that Narayana is actually the reservoir of unlimited auspicious qualities, each free from the influence of sattva, rajas and tamas. For the purpose of creation, maintenance and destruction, Narayana accepts the qualities of sattva, rajas and tamas in the personalities of Vishnu, Brahma and Shiva. Though these personalities control the respective gunas, they themselves are not under the influence of these qualities. The word 'svatah' indicates Sri Narayana's omnipotence. He is completely self-sufficient. That the universes rest on the Lord has been confirmed by Lord Krishna in the Gita: mattah parataram nanyat kincid asti dhananjaya mayi sarvam idam protam sutre mani gana iva "There is no truth superior to Me. Everything rests upon Me as pearls are strung on a thread." Thus the Lord is the foundation of all existence, including the material manifestation. By His avyakta-murti, the Lord pervades the entire existence. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jahnava Nitai Das 2 Report post Posted April 16, 2001 This chapter of Srimad Bhagavatam is the same description as found in the purusha-sukta prayers. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted August 18, 2004 before pasting any comment on whether bhagvatam is based on facts or fiction clarify us ur constitutional position and the disciplic succession.u do not have the authority to paste garbage like this Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
theist 1 Report post Posted August 18, 2004 TRANSLATION Sukadeva Gosvämi 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. My question would be then what does it matter if they are literal or not? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
