Re: Krishna/Vishnu in Bhagavatam
From the Bhakti List Archives
Anand Karalapakkam • Wed Apr 26 2000 - 11:54:10 PDT
SrI:
SrI Lakshminrusimha ParabrahmaNE namaha
SrI Lakshminrusimha divya pAdukA sEvaka SrIvaN SataKopa-
SrI nArAyaNa yateendra mahAdESikAya namaha
Dear devotees,
namO nArAyaNa.
SrI Martin Gansten wrote :
> For evidence on Krishna being an avatara of Vishnu, we need not
> go outside the Bhagavatam itself (though corroborative evidence
> could be collected from other Puranas, Mahabharata, and Agamas;
> and I believe Sri Anand has already given a few references of
> this latter kind). For instance, Bhag.10.1.2 reads:
> yadoz ca dharmaziilasya nitaraa.m munisattama /
> tatraA.MZENAAVATIIR.NASYA VI.S.NOR viiryaa.ni za.msa na.h //
> The direct meaning here is 'of Vishnu, descended through a part
> (amsha) [of Himself]'. Sri Bhaktivedanta Swami (doubtless
> following earlier GV acaryas) takes the instrumental (a.mzena)
> as indicating association: 'along with a part', which he
> interprets as referring to Balarama. Even if this is accepted,
> however, it does not change the fact that Krishna is here
> referred to as 'Vishnu descended'.
VishNu purANam (5.1.2) gives the same account in the following
way and makes the point explicitly very clear again :
< Sage MaitrEya asks Sage ParASara > :
amSAvatArO brahmarshE yO(a)yam yadukulOdbhavaha |
vishNOstam vistarENA(a)ham SrOtum icchAmi tattvataha ||
" O Brahma Rishi ! I desire to hear the accurate, detailed
account on this amSAvatAra of ViSNu born in yadu kula(race).
( bhavaha = birth; tattvataha = true account, as it is ).
This ofcourse doesn't mean that KrishNa is an "amSAvatAra"
like Sage VyAsa, who was a jivAtma empowered by Lord. We very
well know from other pramAnas that Lord KrishNa is none other
then Lord ViSNu Or Lord NArAyaNa. This is what asserted by
the likes of BhIshma and Brahma (verses quoted earlier by
SrI HarikrishNa) through their verses. The purport is :
KrishNa is not merely human being who was playing at GOkula etc
and He is certainly the Supreme Lord NArAyaNa ie. God Himself.
---------------------
The account of the birth of Lord KrishNa in SB itself is
very clear on this issue.
After Lord VishNu appeared with His foou arms etc, SrI VasudEva
recognized Him to be the Supreme Lord and offered glorifications
/prayers. Then, DEvaki offered her glorifications/prayers.
In SB 10.3.28, DEvaki requests Lord VishNu to make His form
(which denotes Supreme Lord and meditated upon by yOgis)
invisible to the general public { "...........rUpam cEdam
paurusham dhyAna-dhishNyam mA pratyaksham mAmsa druSAm
krushIshThAha" }.
In the next verse (10.3.29), she says that she is afraid
of Kamsa and is in anxiety, and requests the Lord to do
something so that Kamsa will not understand that Lord VishNu
Himself has been born. Kamsa already knew that Lord VishNu is
after killing Him, soon after Sage NArada briefed him about
these things (SB 10.1.65-66 : " ...............dEvakyA garbha
sambhUtam vishNum ca sva vadham prati|| ....). Thats why DEvaki
wanted Lord VishNu to make His identity unknown to others.
She then requests (10.3.30) :
"upasamhara viSvAtmannadO rUpam alaukikam |
Sankha Cakra gadA padmaSriyA jushtam catur-bhujam ||"
Trans. by Sri BhaktivEdAnta SwAmi of ISKCON :
"O My Lord, You are the all-pervading Supreme Personality of
Godhead and Your transcendental four-armed form, holding
conchshell,disc, club and lotus, is unnatural for this world.
Please withdraw this form [and become just like a natural
human child so that I may try to hide You somewhere] ".
DEvaki is adding one more reason here. Not only that Kamsa
will find Him out, but also that this form is un-natural for
a child in this world.
Another point to be noted is that, Lord is glorified as
"ViSvAtma" ie. all-pervading aatma, who is the aatma for
everything. Though the Lord is the "aatma" which is all
pervading, He has taken a four handed form and its being
addressed here. This also enables us to understand the
distinction between the aatma (Lord Himself) and divine
form of Lord.
She elaborates her request in the next verse (SB 10.3.31) :
"ViSvam yad etat .....purushap param parO bhavAn ........"
Trans. by Sri BhaktivEdAnta SwAmi :
"At the time of devastation, the entire cosmos, containing
all creatures moving and non-moving entities, enters Your
transcendental body and is held there without difficulty.
But now this transcendental form has taken birth from my
womb. People will not be able to believe and I shall become
an object of ridicule".
Thus, she desparetly pleads Lord VishNu to make His
identity unknown to the people and take a form resembling
a human child. She doesn't say, "Get back Your Original
form of KrishNa" etc here. Also, Kamsa identified God (ie.
Vishnu) with the four-handed form only and its well known
to him and many of the people.
Lord VishNu then narrates about the past two lives of
VasudEva and DEvaki, in which He Himself was born to them.
Lord then says (SB 10.3.45) :
"etad vAm darSitam rUpam prAg-janma-smaraNaya mE |
nAnyathA mad-bhavam jn~yAnam martya-liNgEna jAyatE ||"
Trans. by Sri BhaktivEdAnta SwAmi :
"I have shown you this form << of VishNu >> just to remind
you of My previous births. Otherwise, if I appeared like an
ordinary human child, you would not believe that I << the
Supreme Personality of Godhead, VishNu >> has indeed
appeared".
This makes extremly clear that Supreme Lord is identified
with four handed form and the human form with two hands
is only now going to be taken by Him.
SB 10.3.46 says that " ......bhagavAn aatma maayayA ....
babhUva prAkruta: SiSuhu" ie. Lord by His sankalpa (divine
will) became a human child (ie. took the two handed form).
Here, SrI BhaktivEdAnta Swami adds : "In other words, He
transformed Himself into His original form : krushNAstu
bhagavAn swayam".
Well, there is no indication in the original texts even
remotely regarding this. There were plenty of oppurtunities in
these chapters of SB to say that Lord transformed into His
original form. But, this has never been said and the reasons
given are in the contrary ie. Lord transformed Himself into
the two handed form like a human, since the four handed form
would make people understand that He is the Supreme Lord. Also,
in SrI VishNu purANam which describes the birth of Lord
KrishNa, there is no mention of Lord VishNu getting back His
original form ; rather it is clear that Lord VishNu is taking
an avatAra ie. vibhava avatAra. Infact, it states Lord KrishNa
as Lord VishNu's amSAvatAra, which is quoted above.
There is no doubt that Lord KrishNa is a vibhava avatAra
of Lord NArAyaNa (VishNu). Already many pramAnas have been cited
from pAncarAtra, SrImad BhAgavatham and SrI VishNu purANam.
Sri Martin Gansten wrote :
> I think an independent observer would agree that the direct
> meaning (mukhyartha) of these and similar Bhagavatam verses is
> that Vishnu has appeared in the form of Sri Krishna, rather than
> vice versa.
Absolutely ! I too agree with you.
adiyEn rAmAnuja dAsan,
anantapadmanAbhan.
krishNArpaNam.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Get your money connected @ OnMoney.com - the first Web site that lets
you see and manage all of your finances all in one place.
http://click.egroups.com/1/3012/2/_/716111/_/956777157/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------
- SrImate rAmAnujAya namaH -
To Post a message, send it to: bhakti-list@eGroups.com
Visit http://www.ramanuja.org/sv/bhakti/ for more information
- Next message: Venkat Nagarajan: "Question on English Translations of books on NyAya"
- Previous message: donoven kelley: "self-introduction"
- In reply to: Martin Gansten: "Krishna/Vishnu in Bhagavatam"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
