I'm reading "Krishna: The Beautiful Legend of God" In Chapter 3 it says that Vasudeva is Krishnas Father. But in Chapter 5 is says Nanda is Krishnas father. Also that Vasudeva and Nanda are seperate people. Can someone explain this to me?
I'm reading "Krishna: The Beautiful Legend of God" In Chapter 3 it says that Vasudeva is Krishnas Father. But in Chapter 5 is says Nanda is Krishnas father. Also that Vasudeva and Nanda are seperate people. Can someone explain this to me?
Pranams,
Sri Krishna initially appeared before Devaki and Vasudeva in the prison of Kamsa. Thus, Vasudeva was His "father" according to the pasttime while Nanda, whom He was taken to as an infant, was His "adopted father." According to this point of view, which is reflected in the bhAgavatam, Nanda and Yashoda were unaware that Krishna was substituted for their baby daughter. Yashoda was so fatigued after labor that she did not know she had given birth to a daughter, who was replaced with Krishna by Vasudeva acting under the influence of His Yoga-maya.
According to an esoteric point of view held by (some?) Gaudiya-Vaishnavas, Sri Krishna actually appeared to both Nanda and Vasudeva simultaneously, and thus is every bit the son of Nanda as He is of Vasudeva. This point of view appears to be based on some Gaudiya Vaishnava commentators and is not found in the Puraanas as far as I know.
To be honest, I'm not sure why anyone would go to the trouble of claiming the latter. Being the unborn Naaraayana Himself, technically no one is His father unless He choses someone as such. For me, Nanda is no less a father to Sri Krishna than Vasudeva was. The text is very clear that Sri Krishna was not born in the womb of Devaki as a common being would be under the influence of karma. He is always unborn and free of karma. Thus, whether He is Vasudeva's son or Nanda's son seems a bit esoteric. He is the son of both.
regards,
Philosoraptor
"Wise men speak because they have something to say. Fools speak because they have to say something." - Plato
Trisilex,I'd suggest you read the vishnu purana or the bhagavatam directly instead of going to secondary sources.You can download both from this forum's extensive library(click on the button marked library at the top of the page).
Philosoraptor,the section this qn is posted in makes it clear tge OP is new to hinduism.Perhaps your reply could have reflected that more instead of bringing gaudiyas into the picture.
namastE astu bhagavan vishveshvarAya mahAdevAya tryaMbakAya|
tripurAntakAya trikAgnikAlAya kAlAgnirudrAya nIlakaNThAya mRtyuJNjayAya sarveshvarAya sadAshivAya shrIman mAhAdevAya ||
Om shrImAtrE namah
sarvam shrI umA-mahEshwara parabrahmArpaNamastu
A Shaivite library
http://www.scribd.com/HinduismLibrary
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks