Daily Archives: October 15, 2016

Chapter 4 Simple

4.4 aparam bhavathO janma

Published by:

SrI:  SrImathE SatakOpAya nama:  SrImathE rAmAnujAya nama:  SrImath varavaramunayE nama:

Chapter 4

<< Chapter 4 verse 3

SlOkam – Original

arjuna uvAcha
aparam bhavathO janma param janma vivasvatha: |
katham Ethadh vijAnIyAm thvam Adhau prOkthavAn ithi ||

word-by-word meaning (based on puththUr krishNamAchArya swAmy’s thamizh translation)

bhavatha: janma – your birth
avaram (aparam) – is later (in time)
vivasvatha: janma – sUrya’s birth
param – is earlier (in time)

(In such a case)
thvam – you
Adhau – in the beginning of the manvanthra
prOkthavAn – taught (sUrya)
ithi Ethath – this (contradictory) principle
katham vijAnIyAm – how will I know (as truth)?

Simple Translation (based on puththUr krishNamAchArya swAmy’s thamizh translation)

arjuna asked to krishNa – Your birth is later in time and sUrya’s birth is earlier in time; in such a case, how will I know (as truth) that you taught sUrya in the beginning of the manvathra since this principle [of your teaching someone who is born much earlier than you] is contradictory?

Rendering based on ALkoNdavilli gOvindhAchArya swAmy’s English translation of gIthA bhAshyam

‘Your birth is recent; but the birth of Vivasāan is prior; (then) how You were the Teacher in the beginning, is what I desire to know.’

(Arjuna):— Judged by the march of time, Your birth is recent. You are verily our contemporary, on this earth. According to time-calculation, Vivasvān is old by twenty-eight cycles of four Yugas each1. The explanation of this anomalous anachronism that You were the First Speaker, is what I wish to know.

A question here arises, as to why a doubt of this kind should be expressed by Arjuna, inasmuch as it must have been easy for him to have known the possibility for Kṛishṇa to have been the First Speaker (or Teacher), by the fact of previous Incarnations; because it is said that noble souls remember the events of past incarnations2. That, besides, Arjuna knew perfectly well that the Son of Vasudeva (Kṛishṇa) was no other than the universal Lord Himself, goes without saying, as there is such evidence of that knowledge, as:—

“You are the Supreme Brahm, the Sublime Glory, the Superbly Holy, The Spirit (purusha) Eternal and Divine, the First Lord, the Birthless, the Omnipresent. So declared You, all the Rishis, Devarshi3 Nārada, Asita, Devala, Vyāsa. And You Yourself have declared to me (so).”(Bh: Gī: x-12,13

Not unfrequently, were Bhīshma and others also heard to say, during the Rājasūya4 and other Yāgas performed by Yudhistḥira5, thus:—

‘Kṛishṇa alone is the Origin and the End of the Universe. All this Universe composed of the movable and of the immovable (things), is verily for Kṛishṇa’s sake.6’

In this verse, the expression ‘for Kṛishṇa’s sake’ (Kṛishṇasya hi kṛite) is to connote that all the Universe is subordinate (or disposable property=śesha) to Him.

What then is to be understood by Arjuna’s question?

Arjuna certainly knew that the son of Vasudeva (Kṛishṇa) was no other than the Blessed Lord (God) Himself. And his question was put purposely in order to have an exposition (from Kṛishṇa, for the information of all,) of the meaning of Avatāras, viz.

  1. Whether the Avatāras of Him, Who is
    1. The Antidote to all evil, (Heya-pratyanika7),
    2. The Abode of all perfections (Kalyāṇaikatāna8)
    3. The Lord of all, (Sarveśvara9)
    4. The Omniscient, (Sarvajña10)
    5. The Infallible-willed, (Satya-sankalpa11), and
    6. The Fulfilled of all desires (Avāpta-samasta-kāma12), are like the karma-determined births of devas, men etc.?13
  2. Whether the Avātaras are real, or illusory like magic (indrajāla) ?
  3. Under what circumstances do the Avatāras take place?
  4. What is the nature of the body that is assumed?
  5. At what times do they take place?

>> Chapter 4 verse 5

archived in http://githa.koyil.org

pramEyam (goal) – http://koyil.org
pramANam (scriptures) – http://granthams.koyil.org
pramAthA (preceptors) – http://acharyas.koyil.org
SrIvaishNava education/kids portal – http://pillai.koyil.

  1. A Mahā-kalpa is the life-period of Brahmā, which is one hundred (Brahmā) years. Each day of the year is called a Kalpa. A Kalpa consists of fourteen Manvantaras.
    Each Manvantara is equal to 71 3/7 Mahāyugās, a Mahāyugā being a group composed of the four Yugas, amounting to 4,320,000 human years. Fifty years of Brahmā have now passed away. We are in his fifty-first year, seventh Manvantara (presided by Vaivasvata-Manu = Manu the Son of Vivasvat). Of the 71 3/7 Mahāyugas, the present Mahāyuga is the twenty-eighth, of which the present Yuga is Kali, the first quarter of which is now closing (5000 years). The discourse between Kṛishṇa and Arjuna, was in Dvāpara, the preceding Yuga to Kali, or more than 5000 years ago. ↩
  2. Cp. Manu:- ‘Jāti-smaraṇa-vṛittantaḥ jātim smarati paurvikī’. ↩
  3. For notes on Devarshi Nārada, etc., see Gītā. X-12–13. ↩
  4. A great sacrificial ceremony performed at the time of the coronation of emperors. This is described in the Sabhā-parva, Mahā-bhārata. ↩
  5. The eldest brother of the five Pānḍus, Arjuna being the 3rd younger. The eldest son of Kunti. Lit, “the Steadfast in battle”. ↩
  6. ‘Kṛishṇa eva hi lokānām utpattir api ch-āvyayah, Kṛishṇasya hi krite bhūtam idam viśvam charā-charam’. Mahābhārata, Sabhāparva, 38.23 ↩
  7. There is sense in the sequence of the attributes of God, as used here. Vedāntāchārya glosses thus in his Tātparya-chandrika:— (a) ‘God must be free from evil,’ otherwise He cannot remove others’ evil. (b). ‘God must be the Abode of all perfections’ for, unless He is so, He cannot make others perfect. Being perfect, his Incarnations are for others. (c). ‘God must be the Lord of all’, for if He were not, some other Lord over Him must have forced Him to birth. (d). ‘God must be Omniscient for if He were parviscient or nescient, we must suppose Him not to know what is good and what is bad, and He may out of ignorance fall into the fire, like a child, and burn Himself! (e). ‘God must be True-willed’, for otherwise, He must will one thing but do another, and He could not thus be trusted. (f.) ‘God must be all-satisfied’, for if He were in want, His Incarnation may have to be attributed to some want having to be satisfied. Hence the Incarnation of One Who has these enumerated attributes, it is established, must be for the deliverance of creatures. If it be asked why He may not simply will away salvation, instead of ‘descending’ into matter, the reply is, whatever He does, He does as His pleasure, for. (g.) ‘He is Independent.’ ↩
  8. There is sense in the sequence of the attributes of God, as used here. Vedāntāchārya glosses thus in his Tātparya-chandrika:— (a) ‘God must be free from evil,’ otherwise He cannot remove others’ evil. (b). ‘God must be the Abode of all perfections’ for, unless He is so, He cannot make others perfect. Being perfect, his Incarnations are for others. (c). ‘God must be the Lord of all’, for if He were not, some other Lord over Him must have forced Him to birth. (d). ‘God must be Omniscient for if He were parviscient or nescient, we must suppose Him not to know what is good and what is bad, and He may out of ignorance fall into the fire, like a child, and burn Himself! (e). ‘God must be True-willed’, for otherwise, He must will one thing but do another, and He could not thus be trusted. (f.) ‘God must be all-satisfied’, for if He were in want, His Incarnation may have to be attributed to some want having to be satisfied. Hence the Incarnation of One Who has these enumerated attributes, it is established, must be for the deliverance of creatures. If it be asked why He may not simply will away salvation, instead of ‘descending’ into matter, the reply is, whatever He does, He does as His pleasure, for. (g.) ‘He is Independent.’ ↩
  9. There is sense in the sequence of the attributes of God, as used here. Vedāntāchārya glosses thus in his Tātparya-chandrika:— (a) ‘God must be free from evil,’ otherwise He cannot remove others’ evil. (b). ‘God must be the Abode of all perfections’ for, unless He is so, He cannot make others perfect. Being perfect, his Incarnations are for others. (c). ‘God must be the Lord of all’, for if He were not, some other Lord over Him must have forced Him to birth. (d). ‘God must be Omniscient for if He were parviscient or nescient, we must suppose Him not to know what is good and what is bad, and He may out of ignorance fall into the fire, like a child, and burn Himself! (e). ‘God must be True-willed’, for otherwise, He must will one thing but do another, and He could not thus be trusted. (f.) ‘God must be all-satisfied’, for if He were in want, His Incarnation may have to be attributed to some want having to be satisfied. Hence the Incarnation of One Who has these enumerated attributes, it is established, must be for the deliverance of creatures. If it be asked why He may not simply will away salvation, instead of ‘descending’ into matter, the reply is, whatever He does, He does as His pleasure, for. (g.) ‘He is Independent.’ ↩
  10. There is sense in the sequence of the attributes of God, as used here. Vedāntāchārya glosses thus in his Tātparya-chandrika:— (a) ‘God must be free from evil,’ otherwise He cannot remove others’ evil. (b). ‘God must be the Abode of all perfections’ for, unless He is so, He cannot make others perfect. Being perfect, his Incarnations are for others. (c). ‘God must be the Lord of all’, for if He were not, some other Lord over Him must have forced Him to birth. (d). ‘God must be Omniscient for if He were parviscient or nescient, we must suppose Him not to know what is good and what is bad, and He may out of ignorance fall into the fire, like a child, and burn Himself! (e). ‘God must be True-willed’, for otherwise, He must will one thing but do another, and He could not thus be trusted. (f.) ‘God must be all-satisfied’, for if He were in want, His Incarnation may have to be attributed to some want having to be satisfied. Hence the Incarnation of One Who has these enumerated attributes, it is established, must be for the deliverance of creatures. If it be asked why He may not simply will away salvation, instead of ‘descending’ into matter, the reply is, whatever He does, He does as His pleasure, for. (g.) ‘He is Independent.’ ↩
  11. There is sense in the sequence of the attributes of God, as used here. Vedāntāchārya glosses thus in his Tātparya-chandrika:—(a) ‘God must be free from evil,’ otherwise He cannot remove others’ evil. (b). ‘God must be the Abode of all perfections’ for, unless He is so, He cannot make others perfect. Being perfect, his Incarnations are for others. (c). ‘God must be the Lord of all’, for if He were not, some other Lord over Him must have forced Him to birth. (d). ‘God must be Omniscient for if He were parviscient or nescient, we must suppose Him not to know what is good and what is bad, and He may out of ignorance fall into the fire, like a child, and burn Himself! (e). ‘God must be True-willed’, for otherwise, He must will one thing but do another, and He could not thus be trusted. (f.) ‘God must be all-satisfied’, for if He were in want, His Incarnation may have to be attributed to some want having to be satisfied. Hence the Incarnation of One Who has these enumerated attributes, it is established, must be for the deliverance of creatures. If it be asked why He may not simply will away salvation, instead of ‘descending’ into matter, the reply is, whatever He does, He does as His pleasure, for. (g.) ‘He is Independent.’ ↩
  12. There is sense in the sequence of the attributes of God, as used here. Vedāntāchārya glosses thus in his Tātparya-chandrika:— (a) ‘God must be free from evil,’ otherwise He cannot remove others’ evil. (b). ‘God must be the Abode of all perfections’ for, unless He is so, He cannot make others perfect. Being perfect, his Incarnations are for others. (c). ‘God must be the Lord of all’, for if He were not, some other Lord over Him must have forced Him to birth. (d). ‘God must be Omniscient for if He were parviscient or nescient, we must suppose Him not to know what is good and what is bad, and He may out of ignorance fall into the fire, like a child, and burn Himself! (e). ‘God must be True-willed’, for otherwise, He must will one thing but do another, and He could not thus be trusted. (f.) ‘God must be all-satisfied’, for if He were in want, His Incarnation may have to be attributed to some want having to be satisfied. Hence the Incarnation of One Who has these enumerated attributes, it is established, must be for the deliverance of creatures. If it be asked why He may not simply will away salvation, instead of ‘descending’ into matter, the reply is, whatever He does, He does as His pleasure, for. (g.) ‘He is Independent.’ ↩
  13. Cp. ‘Devatve deva-deheyam manushyatve cha mānushī.’ Vishṇu Purāṇa, I-9-145. ↩
Chapter 4 Original

4.4 aparaṁ bhavato janma (Original)

Published by:

SrI:  SrImathE SatakOpAya nama:  SrImathE rAmAnujAya nama:  SrImath varavaramunayE nama:

Chapter 4

<< Chapter 4 verse 3

Simple

arjuna uvāca
aparaṁ bhavato janma
paraṁ janma vivasvataḥ
katham etad vijānīyāṁ
tvam ādau proktavān iti

‘Thy birth is recent; but the birth of Vivasāan is prior; (then) how Thou wert the Teacher in the beginning, is what I desire to know.’

(Arjuna):— Judged by the march of time, Thy birth is recent. Thou art verily our contemporary, on this earth. According to time-calculation, Vivasvān is old by twenty-eight cycles of four Yugas each1. The explanation of this anomalous anachronism that Thou wert the First Speaker, is what I wish to know.

A question here arises, as to why a doubt of this kind should be expressed by Arjuna, inasmuch as it must have been easy for him to have known the possibility for Kṛishṇa to have been the First Speaker (or Teacher), by the fact of previous Incarnations; because it is said that noble souls remember the events of past incarnations2. That, besides, Arjuna knew perfectly well that the Son of Vasudeva (Kṛishṇa) was no other than the universal Lord Himself, goes without saying, as there is such evidence of that knowledge, as:—

“Thou art the Supreme Brahm, the Sublime Glory, the Superbly Holy, The Spirit (purusha) Eternal and Divine, the First Lord, the Birthless, the Omnipresent. So declared Thee, all the Rishis, Devarshi3 Nārada, Asita, Devala, Vyāsa. And Thou Thyself hast declared to me (so).”(Bh: Gī: x-12,13

Not unfrequently, were Bhīshma and others also heard to say, during the Rājasūya4 and other Yāgas performed by Yudhistḥira5, thus:—

‘Kṛishṇa alone is the Origin and the End of the Universe. All this Universe composed of the movable and of the immovable (things), is verily for Kṛishṇa’s sake.6’

In this verse, the expression ‘for Kṛishṇa’s sake’ (Kṛishṇasya hi kṛite) is to connote that all the Universe is subordinate (or disposable property=śesha) to Him.

What then is to be understood by Arjuna’s question?

Arjuna certainly knew that the son of Vasudeva (Kṛishṇa) was no other than the Blessed Lord (God) Himself. And his question was put purposely in order to have an exposition (from Kṛishṇa, for the information of all,) of the meaning of Avatāras, viz.

  1. Whether the Avatāras of Him, Who is
    1. The Antidote to all evil, (Heya-pratyanika7),
    2. The Abode of all perfections (Kalyāṇaikatāna8)
    3. The Lord of all, (Sarveśvara9)
    4. The Omniscient, (Sarvajña10)
    5. The Infallible-willed, (Satya-sankalpa11), and
    6. The Fulfilled of all desires (Avāpta-samasta-kāma12), are like the karma-determined births of devas, men etc.?13
  2. Whether the Avātaras are real, or illusory like magic (indrajāla) ?
  3. Under what circumstances do the Avatāras take place?
  4. What is the nature of the body that is assumed?
  5. At what times do they take place?

>> Chapter 4 verse 5

archived in http://githa.koyil.org

pramEyam (goal) – http://koyil.org
pramANam (scriptures) – http://granthams.koyil.org
pramAthA (preceptors) – http://acharyas.koyil.org
SrIvaishNava education/kids portal – http://pillai.koyil.org

  1. A Mahā-kalpa is the life-period of Brahmā, which is one hundred (Brahmā) years. Each day of the year is called a Kalpa. A Kalpa consists of fourteen Manvantaras.
    Each Manvantara is equal to 71 3/7 Mahāyugās, a Mahāyugā being a group composed of the four Yugas, amounting to 4,320,000 human years. Fifty years of Brahmā have now passed away. We are in his fifty-first year, seventh Manvantara (presided by Vaivasvata-Manu = Manu the Son of Vivasvat). Of the 71 3/7 Mahāyugas, the present Mahāyuga is the twenty-eighth, of which the present Yuga is Kali, the first quarter of which is now closing (5000 years). The discourse between Kṛishṇa and Arjuna, was in Dvāpara, the preceding Yuga to Kali, or more than 5000 years ago. ↩
  2. Cp. Manu:- ‘Jāti-smaraṇa-vṛittantaḥ jātim smarati paurvikī’. ↩
  3. For notes on Devarshi Nārada, etc., see Gītā. X-12–13. ↩
  4. A great sacrificial ceremony performed at the time of the coronation of emperors. This is described in the Sabhā-parva, Mahā-bhārata. ↩
  5. The eldest brother of the five Pānḍus, Arjuna being the 3rd younger. The eldest son of Kunti. Lit, “the Steadfast in battle”. ↩
  6. ‘Kṛishṇa eva hi lokānām utpattir api ch-āvyayah, Kṛishṇasya hi krite bhūtam idam viśvam charā-charam’. Mahābhārata, Sabhāparva, 38.23 ↩
  7. There is sense in the sequence of the attributes of God, as used here. Vedāntāchārya glosses thus in his Tātparya-chandrika:— (a) ‘God must be free from evil,’ otherwise He cannot remove others’ evil. (b). ‘God must be the Abode of all perfections’ for, unless He is so, He cannot make others perfect. Being perfect, his Incarnations are for others. (c). ‘God must be the Lord of all’, for if He were not, some other Lord over Him must have forced Him to birth. (d). ‘God must be Omniscient for if He were parviscient or nescient, we must suppose Him not to know what is good and what is bad, and He may out of ignorance fall into the fire, like a child, and burn Himself! (e). ‘God must be True-willed’, for otherwise, He must will one thing but do another, and He could not thus be trusted. (f.) ‘God must be all-satisfied’, for if He were in want, His Incarnation may have to be attributed to some want having to be satisfied. Hence the Incarnation of One Who has these enumerated attributes, it is established, must be for the deliverance of creatures. If it be asked why He may not simply will away salvation, instead of ‘descending’ into matter, the reply is, whatever He does, He does as His pleasure, for. (g.) ‘He is Independent.’ ↩
  8. There is sense in the sequence of the attributes of God, as used here. Vedāntāchārya glosses thus in his Tātparya-chandrika:— (a) ‘God must be free from evil,’ otherwise He cannot remove others’ evil. (b). ‘God must be the Abode of all perfections’ for, unless He is so, He cannot make others perfect. Being perfect, his Incarnations are for others. (c). ‘God must be the Lord of all’, for if He were not, some other Lord over Him must have forced Him to birth. (d). ‘God must be Omniscient for if He were parviscient or nescient, we must suppose Him not to know what is good and what is bad, and He may out of ignorance fall into the fire, like a child, and burn Himself! (e). ‘God must be True-willed’, for otherwise, He must will one thing but do another, and He could not thus be trusted. (f.) ‘God must be all-satisfied’, for if He were in want, His Incarnation may have to be attributed to some want having to be satisfied. Hence the Incarnation of One Who has these enumerated attributes, it is established, must be for the deliverance of creatures. If it be asked why He may not simply will away salvation, instead of ‘descending’ into matter, the reply is, whatever He does, He does as His pleasure, for. (g.) ‘He is Independent.’ ↩
  9. There is sense in the sequence of the attributes of God, as used here. Vedāntāchārya glosses thus in his Tātparya-chandrika:— (a) ‘God must be free from evil,’ otherwise He cannot remove others’ evil. (b). ‘God must be the Abode of all perfections’ for, unless He is so, He cannot make others perfect. Being perfect, his Incarnations are for others. (c). ‘God must be the Lord of all’, for if He were not, some other Lord over Him must have forced Him to birth. (d). ‘God must be Omniscient for if He were parviscient or nescient, we must suppose Him not to know what is good and what is bad, and He may out of ignorance fall into the fire, like a child, and burn Himself! (e). ‘God must be True-willed’, for otherwise, He must will one thing but do another, and He could not thus be trusted. (f.) ‘God must be all-satisfied’, for if He were in want, His Incarnation may have to be attributed to some want having to be satisfied. Hence the Incarnation of One Who has these enumerated attributes, it is established, must be for the deliverance of creatures. If it be asked why He may not simply will away salvation, instead of ‘descending’ into matter, the reply is, whatever He does, He does as His pleasure, for. (g.) ‘He is Independent.’ ↩
  10. There is sense in the sequence of the attributes of God, as used here. Vedāntāchārya glosses thus in his Tātparya-chandrika:— (a) ‘God must be free from evil,’ otherwise He cannot remove others’ evil. (b). ‘God must be the Abode of all perfections’ for, unless He is so, He cannot make others perfect. Being perfect, his Incarnations are for others. (c). ‘God must be the Lord of all’, for if He were not, some other Lord over Him must have forced Him to birth. (d). ‘God must be Omniscient for if He were parviscient or nescient, we must suppose Him not to know what is good and what is bad, and He may out of ignorance fall into the fire, like a child, and burn Himself! (e). ‘God must be True-willed’, for otherwise, He must will one thing but do another, and He could not thus be trusted. (f.) ‘God must be all-satisfied’, for if He were in want, His Incarnation may have to be attributed to some want having to be satisfied. Hence the Incarnation of One Who has these enumerated attributes, it is established, must be for the deliverance of creatures. If it be asked why He may not simply will away salvation, instead of ‘descending’ into matter, the reply is, whatever He does, He does as His pleasure, for. (g.) ‘He is Independent.’ ↩
  11. There is sense in the sequence of the attributes of God, as used here. Vedāntāchārya glosses thus in his Tātparya-chandrika:—(a) ‘God must be free from evil,’ otherwise He cannot remove others’ evil. (b). ‘God must be the Abode of all perfections’ for, unless He is so, He cannot make others perfect. Being perfect, his Incarnations are for others. (c). ‘God must be the Lord of all’, for if He were not, some other Lord over Him must have forced Him to birth. (d). ‘God must be Omniscient for if He were parviscient or nescient, we must suppose Him not to know what is good and what is bad, and He may out of ignorance fall into the fire, like a child, and burn Himself! (e). ‘God must be True-willed’, for otherwise, He must will one thing but do another, and He could not thus be trusted. (f.) ‘God must be all-satisfied’, for if He were in want, His Incarnation may have to be attributed to some want having to be satisfied. Hence the Incarnation of One Who has these enumerated attributes, it is established, must be for the deliverance of creatures. If it be asked why He may not simply will away salvation, instead of ‘descending’ into matter, the reply is, whatever He does, He does as His pleasure, for. (g.) ‘He is Independent.’ ↩
  12. There is sense in the sequence of the attributes of God, as used here. Vedāntāchārya glosses thus in his Tātparya-chandrika:— (a) ‘God must be free from evil,’ otherwise He cannot remove others’ evil. (b). ‘God must be the Abode of all perfections’ for, unless He is so, He cannot make others perfect. Being perfect, his Incarnations are for others. (c). ‘God must be the Lord of all’, for if He were not, some other Lord over Him must have forced Him to birth. (d). ‘God must be Omniscient for if He were parviscient or nescient, we must suppose Him not to know what is good and what is bad, and He may out of ignorance fall into the fire, like a child, and burn Himself! (e). ‘God must be True-willed’, for otherwise, He must will one thing but do another, and He could not thus be trusted. (f.) ‘God must be all-satisfied’, for if He were in want, His Incarnation may have to be attributed to some want having to be satisfied. Hence the Incarnation of One Who has these enumerated attributes, it is established, must be for the deliverance of creatures. If it be asked why He may not simply will away salvation, instead of ‘descending’ into matter, the reply is, whatever He does, He does as His pleasure, for. (g.) ‘He is Independent.’ ↩
  13. Cp. ‘Devatve deva-deheyam manushyatve cha mānushī.’ Vishṇu Purāṇa, I-9-145. ↩