tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15485481.post5363111627134692784..comments2024-03-07T19:16:51.653+01:00Comments on madangopal: Primary Bhakti Rasasadvaitadashttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11562361400492002096noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15485481.post-80708209662013421622019-09-29T13:59:45.790+02:002019-09-29T13:59:45.790+02:00But Krishna also has a catur-buja form as describe...But Krishna also has a catur-buja form as described in 3.2.10. so what's wrong in saying they have rati for Kṛṣṇa?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15485481.post-66363873323271889122007-08-10T17:22:00.000+02:002007-08-10T17:22:00.000+02:00I must add myself that in the Bhagavata it is ment...I must add myself that in the Bhagavata it is mentioned that with each of His 16,108 queens Krishna had 10 sons and 1 daughter. So it is possible to become Krishna's daughter too.advaitadashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11562361400492002096noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15485481.post-66371943442803414422007-08-10T17:20:00.000+02:002007-08-10T17:20:00.000+02:00I consulted my friend Krishnadas on your question ...I consulted my friend Krishnadas on your question on BRS 3.2.166 and this is what he replied:<BR/> <BR/><I>You are right Bhanu Swami's translation is not correct (or at least I think that what I have produced is better :-)).<BR/><BR/>deha-sambandhitayA svAbhAvikyA yo mAnaH svabhAvata evAtibAlye’pi tadIyatAbhimAnaH tasmAd yA gurudhIr mamAyaM gurur lAlaka iti buddhiH sA gauravam ucyate / tanmayI yA tasmin lAlake prItiH sA gaurava-prItir ucyate iti / tatra yadyapi lAlaka-dhIr atibAlya eva kevalA guru-dhI-mizrA tu prauDha-dazAyAM dRzyate tathApi kAraNa-kAryAtmakayos tayor abheda eveSTaH / evam eva tatra tatra kvacid ityuktaM kintu yathAyogyaM bheda evAvagantavya iti.<BR/><BR/>"On account of natural bodily connection one naturally identifies as His even at a very tender age (atibAlya, it must mean something like infancy). Therefore, considering Him one's parent, i.e. the consciousness that "This is my parent who caresses me", is called gaurava. When such a consciousness awakens in the child the priti is called gaurava prIti. Even though the child of a tender age perceives Krishna only as the one who caresses, this consciousness is mixed by the thought that Krishna is the parent at a more mature age. Yet, because of the relation between cause and effect the two (varieties of gaurava priti on acccount of the difference in age) should be seen as non-different. Thus it is mentioned at some places but difference should be understood to exist if it is proper."<BR/><BR/>Actually, I am not sure about the phrase tatra tatra kvacid ityuktam. I don't know what is really refered to and whether I translated it properly.<BR/><BR/>I hope this will help.</I>advaitadashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11562361400492002096noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15485481.post-83649458368179064892007-08-10T17:19:00.001+02:002007-08-10T17:19:00.001+02:00I was hoping you could clarify something for me in...I was hoping you could clarify something for me in BRS. It appears as though those in gaurava-priti-rasa (BRS 3.2) may not literally be the children of Krsna, but that only such a conception is adopted. However, other verses do seem to suggest that one may actually be "born" the child of Krsna. The translation of the final paragraph of the commentary to BRS 3.2.166 is particularly confusing for me. Are those in gaurava-priti-rasa born the children of Krsna or not? Perhaps it's me, but the end part of the commentary's translation seems somewhat vague in this regard.<BR/><BR/>On a related note, the verses leading up to the dicussion of gaurava- priti sthayi bhava continually use lalya to denote the devotee's self- identification as a son of Krsna. And, all the examples of this category are male. Is it possible to be a daughter of Krsna in this rasa? It seems the only females mentioned in connection to this rasa identify themselves as sisters of Krsna.<BR/><BR/>Thanks for the clarification.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15485481.post-83779896198909097852007-07-23T16:08:00.000+02:002007-07-23T16:08:00.000+02:00Very good question. The fault lies with Bhanu Swam...Very good question. The fault lies with Bhanu Swami. The verse (3.1.11) says santa syuh krsna tat prestha karunyena ratim gatah : "The shantas attained rati by the grace of Krishna and his devotees" . The word Krishna only applies to Krishna who bestows shanta rati, not that the rati is towards Krishna himself, because that would contradict verses 8-10. I will add this point to the blog of that part of the book.advaitadashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11562361400492002096noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15485481.post-21330172847907455812007-07-23T16:06:00.000+02:002007-07-23T16:06:00.000+02:00Radhe RadheHere is a question that I have from the...Radhe Radhe<BR/><BR/>Here is a question that I have from the second volume of Bhanu <BR/>Swami's BRS translation:<BR/><BR/>Sri Rupa Gosvamipada states that the visaya for those in santa-rasa <BR/>is caturbhuja (BRS 3.1.8). The following verse describes caturbhuja <BR/>as paramatma and param brahman, so I presumed that this was <BR/>caturbhuja Visnu. However, the the next verse then describes santa- <BR/>bhaktas who have attained rati for Krsna. Perhaps you can see how I <BR/>am confused about this.<BR/><BR/>Furthermore, if santa-bhaktas can attain rati for Krsna, why does <BR/>Krsna dasa kaviraja state that there are four kinds of devotees as <BR/>recipients for the four varieties of prema (Cc Adi 4.42)?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com