Re: Appearance of narayana,siva from krishna with pramanas(proofs) from tantra,purana
namaste Krsna Das.
Here is the significance and comprehensive definition of the term 'AmnAya':
"The word AmnAya refers to the various aspects of God. The words of Veda are given many names and have also told us in many ways this aspect of the divine. The word AmnAya has got a special meaning in the context of the Veda. AmnAya is comprehensive and signifies that there is a continuous and uninterrupted practice consisting of shravaNa, manana and nididhyAsana, that is to listen, to think over and then to digest or absorb. These three aspects are together called by one comprehensive word AmnAya. If one does not involve oneself in AmnAya or in the uninterrupted practice of listening and digesting, then it will not be possible for him to recognise the identity of that with this because he is usually immersed in family matters and other domestic problems." --BhagavAn shrI Sathya Sai Baba, Summer Showers in Brindavan 1974, part 2
It should thus be obvious to everyone, even to an ISKCONite, that although the word 'AmnAya' refers to all texts derived from the Vedas, there is a hierarchical order for obtaining pramANa from them and that order can only be 'shravaNa, manana and nididhyAsana', in other words, 'sruti, smRti and the itihAsa-purANAdi'.
Chaitanya and PrabhupAda have accepted the Vedas as the first among the pramANas as I have quoted in my post #9.
Originally Posted by
Krsna Das
Even today, when we try to preach the essense of Bhagwatam and Caitanya Caritamrita, the non devotees simply cannot accept these as pramana. Why? because Lord does not manifest himself (or the knowledge of his real self) to non-devotees -
(naham prakasah sarvasya yoga maya samaavritah - I do not manifest my real spiritual form to everybody, for I hide it by my Yoga-maya [so they are never able to comprehend it , even though they may be scholars in sastra] - Geeta)
(Lord does not want non-devotees to handle Vedas )
shrI KRShNa and his GItA are common to all Hindus; they are not the inherited or acquired property of the ISKCONites alone. A Hindu need not be a VaiShNava or a Gaudiya or an ISKCONite or of any other related sampradAya to be a KRShNa-bhakta.
That said, the interpretation of the GItA verse 7.25 as 'KRShNa would not manifest to non-devotees' is mischevous, which is typical of the ISKCONites.
KRShNa does not talk about his devotee or other devotees in that verse; only about 'mUDha'--deluded people. This means that he would not become manifest even to all of his devotees, as seen during the time he lived as an avatAra of MahAviShNu, and it also seems to be the case presently!
Originally Posted by
Krsna Das
BTW, Why are you so much disturbed by this sidhhanta of ours?
Any siddhAnta that seeks to revile another is unacceptable to the majority Hindus. So long as it is within the four walls of the ashram it might be alright, but if someone seeks to preach it as a mission reviling other sampradAyas, gods and devotees, it would certainly be debated.
shrI KRShNa being a God common to all Hindus, most Hindus would naturally be interested in the interpretations of 'Bhagavad GItA as it was' not in the GItA as it is made out to be today!
रत्नाकरधौतपदां हिमालयकिरीटिनीम् ।
ब्रह्मराजर्षिररत्नाढ्यां वन्दे भारतमातरम् ॥
To her whose feet are washed by the ocean, who wears the Himalayas as her crown, and is adorned with the gems of rishis and kings, to Mother India, do I bow down in respect.
--viShNu purANam
Bookmarks