CC Madhya 15.264: Difference between revisions
m (1 revision(s)) |
(Vanibot #0054 edit - transform synonyms into clickable links, which search similar occurrences) |
||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{ | [[Category:Sri Caitanya-caritamrta - Madhya-lila Chapter 15|C264]] | ||
<div style="float:left">'''[[Sri Caitanya-caritamrta|Śrī Caitanya-caritāmṛta]] - [[CC Madhya|Madhya-līlā]] - [[CC Madhya 15|Chapter 15: The Lord Accepts Prasādam at the House of Sārvabhauma Bhaṭṭācārya]]'''</div> | |||
<div style="float:right">[[File:Go-previous.png|link=CC Madhya 15.263|Madhya-līlā 15.263]] '''[[CC Madhya 15.263|Madhya-līlā 15.263]] - [[CC Madhya 15.265|Madhya-līlā 15.265]]''' [[File:Go-next.png|link=CC Madhya 15.265|Madhya-līlā 15.265]]</div> | |||
{{CompareVersions|CC|Madhya 15.264|CC 1975|CC 1996}} | |||
{{RandomImage}} | |||
==== TEXT 264 ==== | ==== TEXT 264 ==== | ||
<div | <div class="verse"> | ||
ṣāṭhīre kaha—tāre chāḍuka, se ha-ila ‘patita’ | :ṣāṭhīre kaha—tāre chāḍuka, se ha-ila ‘patita’ | ||
‘patita’ ha-ile bhartā tyajite ucita | :‘patita’ ha-ile bhartā tyajite ucita | ||
</div> | </div> | ||
| Line 12: | Line 16: | ||
==== SYNONYMS ==== | ==== SYNONYMS ==== | ||
<div | <div class="synonyms"> | ||
ṣāṭhīre | ''[//vanipedia.org/wiki/Special:VaniSearch?s=ṣāṭhīre&tab=syno_o&ds=1 ṣāṭhīre] [//vanipedia.org/wiki/Special:VaniSearch?s=kaha&tab=syno_o&ds=1 kaha]'' — inform Ṣāṭhī; ''[//vanipedia.org/wiki/Special:VaniSearch?s=tāre&tab=syno_o&ds=1 tāre] [//vanipedia.org/wiki/Special:VaniSearch?s=chāḍuka&tab=syno_o&ds=1 chāḍuka]'' — let her give him up; ''[//vanipedia.org/wiki/Special:VaniSearch?s=se&tab=syno_o&ds=1 se] [//vanipedia.org/wiki/Special:VaniSearch?s=ha&tab=syno_o&ds=1 ha]-[//vanipedia.org/wiki/Special:VaniSearch?s=ila&tab=syno_o&ds=1 ila]'' — ''he has become; ''[//vanipedia.org/wiki/Special:VaniSearch?s=patita&tab=syno_o&ds=1 patita]'' — fallen; ''[//vanipedia.org/wiki/Special:VaniSearch?s=patita&tab=syno_o&ds=1 patita] [//vanipedia.org/wiki/Special:VaniSearch?s=ha&tab=syno_o&ds=1 ha]-[//vanipedia.org/wiki/Special:VaniSearch?s=ile&tab=syno_o&ds=1 ile]'' — when one has fallen; ''[//vanipedia.org/wiki/Special:VaniSearch?s=bhartā&tab=syno_o&ds=1 bhartā]'' — ''such a husband; ''[//vanipedia.org/wiki/Special:VaniSearch?s=tyajite&tab=syno_o&ds=1 tyajite]'' — to give up; ''[//vanipedia.org/wiki/Special:VaniSearch?s=ucita&tab=syno_o&ds=1 ucita]'' — ''is the duty. | ||
</div> | </div> | ||
| Line 19: | Line 23: | ||
==== TRANSLATION ==== | ==== TRANSLATION ==== | ||
<div | <div class="translation"> | ||
“Inform my daughter Ṣāṭhī to abandon her relationship with her husband because he has fallen down. When the husband falls down, it is the wife’s duty to relinquish the relationship. | “Inform my daughter Ṣāṭhī to abandon her relationship with her husband because he has fallen down. When the husband falls down, it is the wife’s duty to relinquish the relationship. | ||
</div> | </div> | ||
| Line 26: | Line 30: | ||
==== PURPORT ==== | ==== PURPORT ==== | ||
<div | <div class="purport"> | ||
Śrīla Sārvabhauma Bhaṭṭācārya considered that if Amogha were killed, the killer would suffer sinful reactions for killing the body of a brāhmaṇa. For the same reason, it would have been undesirable for the Bhaṭṭācārya to commit suicide because he also was a brāhmaṇa. Since neither course could be accepted, the Bhaṭṭācārya decided to give up his relationship with Amogha and never see his face. | Śrīla Sārvabhauma Bhaṭṭācārya considered that if Amogha were killed, the killer would suffer sinful reactions for killing the body of a ''brāhmaṇa''. For the same reason, it would have been undesirable for the Bhaṭṭācārya to commit suicide because he also was a ''brāhmaṇa''. Since neither course could be accepted, the Bhaṭṭācārya decided to give up his relationship with Amogha and never see his face. | ||
As far as killing the body of a brāhmaṇa is concerned, Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam ([[SB 1.7.53]]) gives the following injunction concerning a brahma-bandhu, a person born of a brāhmaṇa father but devoid of brahminical qualities: | As far as killing the body of a ''brāhmaṇa'' is concerned, [[Srimad-Bhagavatam|''Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam'']] ([[SB 1.7.53-54|SB 1.7.53]]) gives the following injunction concerning a ''brahma-bandhu'', a person born of a ''brāhmaṇa'' father but devoid of brahminical qualities: | ||
:śrī-bhagavān uvāca | :śrī-bhagavān uvāca | ||
| Line 35: | Line 39: | ||
:ātatāyī vadhār-haṇaḥ | :ātatāyī vadhār-haṇaḥ | ||
“The Personality of Godhead Śrī Kṛṣṇa said, ‘A brahma-bandhu is not to be killed, but if he is an aggressor, he must be killed.’” | “The Personality of Godhead Śrī Kṛṣṇa said, ‘A ''brahma-bandhu'' is not to be killed, but if he is an aggressor, he must be killed.’” | ||
Quoting from the smṛti, Śrīla Śrīdhara Svāmī comments on this quotation from Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam: | |||
Quoting from the ''smṛti'', Śrīla Śrīdhara Svāmī comments on this quotation from ''Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam:'' | |||
:ātatāyinam āyāntam api vedānta-pāragam | :ātatāyinam āyāntam api vedānta-pāragam | ||
:jighāṁ santaṁ jighāṁsīyān na tena brahma-hā bhavet | :jighāṁ santaṁ jighāṁsīyān na tena brahma-hā bhavet | ||
“‘An aggressor intent on killing may be a very learned scholar of Vedānta, yet he should be killed because of his envy in killing others. In such a case, it is not sinful to kill a brāhmaṇa.’” | “‘An aggressor intent on killing may be a very learned scholar of Vedānta, yet he should be killed because of his envy in killing others. In such a case, it is not sinful to kill a ''brāhmaṇa''.’” | ||
It is also stated in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam ([[SB 1.7.57]]): | |||
It is also stated in [[Srimad-Bhagavatam|''Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam'']] ([[SB 1.7.57]]): | |||
:vapanaṁ draviṇādānaṁ sthānān niryāpaṇaṁ tathā | :vapanaṁ draviṇādānaṁ sthānān niryāpaṇaṁ tathā | ||
:eṣa hi brahma-bandhūnāṁ vadho nānyo ’sti daihikaḥ | :eṣa hi brahma-bandhūnāṁ vadho nānyo ’sti daihikaḥ | ||
“Cutting the hair from his head, depriving him of his wealth and driving him from his residence are the prescribed punishments for a brahma-bandhu. There is no injunction for killing the body.” | “Cutting the hair from his head, depriving him of his wealth and driving him from his residence are the prescribed punishments for a ''brahma-bandhu.'' There is no injunction for killing the body.” | ||
As far as Ṣāṭhī, the daughter of Sārvabhauma Bhaṭṭācārya, was concerned, she was advised to give up her relationship with her husband. Concerning this, Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam ([[SB 5.5.18]]) states, na patiś ca sa syān na mocayed yaḥ samupeta-mṛtyum: “One cannot be a husband if he cannot liberate his dependents from inevitable death.” If a person is not in Kṛṣṇa consciousness and is bereft of spiritual power, he cannot protect his wife from the path of repeated birth and death. Consequently such a person cannot be accepted as a husband. A wife should dedicate her life and everything to Kṛṣṇa for further advancement in Kṛṣṇa consciousness. If her husband abandons Kṛṣṇa consciousness and she gives up her connection with him, she follows in the footsteps of the dvija-patnīs, the wives of the brāhmaṇas who were engaged in performing sacrifices. The wife is not to be condemned for cutting off such a relationship. In this regard, Śrī Kṛṣṇa assures the dvija-patnīs in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam ([[SB 10.23.31-32]]): | |||
As far as Ṣāṭhī, the daughter of Sārvabhauma Bhaṭṭācārya, was concerned, she was advised to give up her relationship with her husband. Concerning this, [[Srimad-Bhagavatam|''Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam'']] ([[SB 5.5.18]]) states, ''na patiś ca sa syān na mocayed yaḥ samupeta-mṛtyum:'' “One cannot be a husband if he cannot liberate his dependents from inevitable death.” If a person is not in Kṛṣṇa consciousness and is bereft of spiritual power, he cannot protect his wife from the path of repeated birth and death. Consequently such a person cannot be accepted as a husband. A wife should dedicate her life and everything to Kṛṣṇa for further advancement in Kṛṣṇa consciousness. If her husband abandons Kṛṣṇa consciousness and she gives up her connection with him, she follows in the footsteps of the ''dvija-patnīs'', the wives of the ''brāhmaṇas'' who were engaged in performing sacrifices. The wife is not to be condemned for cutting off such a relationship. In this regard, Śrī Kṛṣṇa assures the ''dvija-patnīs'' in [[Srimad-Bhagavatam|''Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam'']] ([[SB 10.23.31|10.23.31-32]]): | |||
:patayo nābhyasūyeran pitṛ-bhrātṛ-sutādayaḥ | :patayo nābhyasūyeran pitṛ-bhrātṛ-sutādayaḥ | ||
:lokāś ca vo mayopetā devā apy anumanvate | :lokāś ca vo mayopetā devā apy anumanvate | ||
:na prītaye ’nurāgāya hy aṅga-saṅgo nṛṇām iha | :na prītaye ’nurāgāya hy aṅga-saṅgo nṛṇām iha | ||
:tan mano mayi yuñjānā acirān mām avāpsyatha | :tan mano mayi yuñjānā acirān mām avāpsyatha | ||
“My dear dvija-patnīs, rest assured that your husbands will not neglect you on your return, nor will your brothers, sons or fathers refuse to accept you. Because you are My pure devotees, not only your relatives but also people in general, as well as the demigods, will be satisfied with you. Transcendental love for Me does not depend upon bodily connection, but anyone whose mind is always absorbed in Me will surely, very soon, come to Me for My eternal association.” | “My dear ''dvija-patnīs'', rest assured that your husbands will not neglect you on your return, nor will your brothers, sons or fathers refuse to accept you. Because you are My pure devotees, not only your relatives but also people in general, as well as the demigods, will be satisfied with you. Transcendental love for Me does not depend upon bodily connection, but anyone whose mind is always absorbed in Me will surely, very soon, come to Me for My eternal association.” | ||
</div> | </div> | ||
__NOTOC__ | |||
<div style="float:right; clear:both;">[[File:Go-previous.png|link=CC Madhya 15.263|Madhya-līlā 15.263]] '''[[CC Madhya 15.263|Madhya-līlā 15.263]] - [[CC Madhya 15.265|Madhya-līlā 15.265]]''' [[File:Go-next.png|link=CC Madhya 15.265|Madhya-līlā 15.265]]</div> | |||
__NOTOC__ | |||
__NOEDITSECTION__ | |||
Latest revision as of 21:57, 19 February 2024
A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada
TEXT 264
- ṣāṭhīre kaha—tāre chāḍuka, se ha-ila ‘patita’
- ‘patita’ ha-ile bhartā tyajite ucita
SYNONYMS
ṣāṭhīre kaha — inform Ṣāṭhī; tāre chāḍuka — let her give him up; se ha-ila — he has become; patita — fallen; patita ha-ile — when one has fallen; bhartā — such a husband; tyajite — to give up; ucita — is the duty.
TRANSLATION
“Inform my daughter Ṣāṭhī to abandon her relationship with her husband because he has fallen down. When the husband falls down, it is the wife’s duty to relinquish the relationship.
PURPORT
Śrīla Sārvabhauma Bhaṭṭācārya considered that if Amogha were killed, the killer would suffer sinful reactions for killing the body of a brāhmaṇa. For the same reason, it would have been undesirable for the Bhaṭṭācārya to commit suicide because he also was a brāhmaṇa. Since neither course could be accepted, the Bhaṭṭācārya decided to give up his relationship with Amogha and never see his face.
As far as killing the body of a brāhmaṇa is concerned, Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (SB 1.7.53) gives the following injunction concerning a brahma-bandhu, a person born of a brāhmaṇa father but devoid of brahminical qualities:
- śrī-bhagavān uvāca
- brahma-bandhur na hantavya
- ātatāyī vadhār-haṇaḥ
“The Personality of Godhead Śrī Kṛṣṇa said, ‘A brahma-bandhu is not to be killed, but if he is an aggressor, he must be killed.’”
Quoting from the smṛti, Śrīla Śrīdhara Svāmī comments on this quotation from Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam:
- ātatāyinam āyāntam api vedānta-pāragam
- jighāṁ santaṁ jighāṁsīyān na tena brahma-hā bhavet
“‘An aggressor intent on killing may be a very learned scholar of Vedānta, yet he should be killed because of his envy in killing others. In such a case, it is not sinful to kill a brāhmaṇa.’”
It is also stated in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (SB 1.7.57):
- vapanaṁ draviṇādānaṁ sthānān niryāpaṇaṁ tathā
- eṣa hi brahma-bandhūnāṁ vadho nānyo ’sti daihikaḥ
“Cutting the hair from his head, depriving him of his wealth and driving him from his residence are the prescribed punishments for a brahma-bandhu. There is no injunction for killing the body.”
As far as Ṣāṭhī, the daughter of Sārvabhauma Bhaṭṭācārya, was concerned, she was advised to give up her relationship with her husband. Concerning this, Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (SB 5.5.18) states, na patiś ca sa syān na mocayed yaḥ samupeta-mṛtyum: “One cannot be a husband if he cannot liberate his dependents from inevitable death.” If a person is not in Kṛṣṇa consciousness and is bereft of spiritual power, he cannot protect his wife from the path of repeated birth and death. Consequently such a person cannot be accepted as a husband. A wife should dedicate her life and everything to Kṛṣṇa for further advancement in Kṛṣṇa consciousness. If her husband abandons Kṛṣṇa consciousness and she gives up her connection with him, she follows in the footsteps of the dvija-patnīs, the wives of the brāhmaṇas who were engaged in performing sacrifices. The wife is not to be condemned for cutting off such a relationship. In this regard, Śrī Kṛṣṇa assures the dvija-patnīs in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (10.23.31-32):
- patayo nābhyasūyeran pitṛ-bhrātṛ-sutādayaḥ
- lokāś ca vo mayopetā devā apy anumanvate
- na prītaye ’nurāgāya hy aṅga-saṅgo nṛṇām iha
- tan mano mayi yuñjānā acirān mām avāpsyatha
“My dear dvija-patnīs, rest assured that your husbands will not neglect you on your return, nor will your brothers, sons or fathers refuse to accept you. Because you are My pure devotees, not only your relatives but also people in general, as well as the demigods, will be satisfied with you. Transcendental love for Me does not depend upon bodily connection, but anyone whose mind is always absorbed in Me will surely, very soon, come to Me for My eternal association.”