KEY TAKEAWAYS FROM HH HARIVILAS MAHARAJ’S MORNING BHAGAVATAM CLASS ON SB 3.1.37:
- Vidura knew the strength of Bhīma. Whenever Bhīma was on the battlefield, his steps on the path and the wonderful playing of his club were unbearable for the enemy.
- Powerful Bhīma did not take steps against the sons of Dhṛtarāṣṭra for a long time.
- Vidura’s inquiry was whether he had yet released his anger, which was like that of a suffering cobra. When a cobra releases its venom after long-cherished anger, its victim cannot survive.
- When the sons of Dhṛtarāṣṭra tried to disrobe Draupadī in the assembly of the Kurus, Bhīṣma and Droṇa were silent, and for such negligence of duty they should be killed.
- Kṛṣṇa showed His universal form to Arjuna just to show him that these people were already killed for their unlawful action. That scene was shown to Arjuna because devotees are always peaceful and they cannot perform such horrible actions.
- Monist philosophers like Śaṅkarācārya and his followers want to establish that God and the living entity are one, and instead of worshiping the Supreme Personality of Godhead they present themselves as God.
- Such persons do not accept the philosophies of the Vaiṣṇava ācāryas, which are known as śuddhādvaita (purified monism), śuddha-dvaita (purified dualism), viśiṣṭādvaita (specific monism), dvaitādvaita (monism and dualism) and acintya-bhedābheda (inconceivable oneness and difference).
- Māyāvādīs do not discuss these philosophies, for they are firmly convinced of their own philosophy of kevalādvaita, exclusive monism.
- Accepting this system of philosophy as the pure understanding of the Vedānta-sūtra, they believe that Kṛṣṇa has a body made of material elements and that the activities of loving service to Kṛṣṇa are sentimentality.
- They are known as Māyāvādīs because according to their opinion Kṛṣṇa has a body made of māyā and the loving service of the Lord executed by devotees is also māyā. They consider such devotional service to be an aspect of fruitive activities (karma-kāṇḍa).
- According to their view, bhakti consists of mental speculation or sometimes meditation. This is the difference between the Māyāvādī and Vaiṣṇava philosophies.
SB 3.1.37 TRANSLATION:
[Please tell me] whether the unconquerable Bhīma, who is like a cobra, has released his long-cherished anger upon the sinners? The field of battle could not tolerate even the wonderful playing of his club when he stepped on the path.
SB 3.1.38 TRANSLATION:
[Please tell me] whether Arjuna, whose bow bears the name Gāṇḍīva and who is always famous amongst the chariot warriors for vanquishing his enemies, is doing well. He once satisfied Lord Śiva by covering him with arrows when Śiva came as an unidentified false hunter.
Vidura knew the strength of Bhīma. Whenever Bhīma was on the battlefield, his steps on the path and the wonderful playing of his club were unbearable for the enemy. Powerful Bhīma did not take steps against the sons of Dhṛtarāṣṭra for a long time. Vidura’s inquiry was whether he had yet released his anger, which was like that of a suffering cobra. When a cobra releases its venom after long-cherished anger, its victim cannot survive.
Revealing verse ..
Previously when Draupadi was disrobed in the assembly of august hall.. It was the worst kind of insult for pandavas.. No boday said anything.. Pandavas hands were tied.. They lost their wife in the gambling as shakuni was cheating… Bhima was ready to kill Karna and shakuni..but Yudhistra forbade him to do that. The reason pandavas were able to prevail in all the travails.. Is because they referred to the elder brother and did not break the ranks… bunch of sticks cannot be broken.. One stick can be broken.. Respecting superior authorities is very imp.. We are living in Kali yuga.. Karmis and even in devotees they want to argue.. You cannot cooperate if someone is doing sinful
Is yudhistra doing the right think by not protecting Draupadi.. But out of his respect for his Father like man Dhritarashtra.. (There are diff etiquettes in the vedic tradition.. The god brothers should be respected the same way as the guru.. ) We see that there is restraint of Bhima and Arjuna .. both of them were ready to kill Shakuni and Karna..
Bhima held back from his anger..
Bhishma was sinful for not acting when Draupadi was disrobed. .. if you are on the wrong side you will be tainted.. With the sin
BG 11.49
You have been perturbed and bewildered by seeing this horrible feature of Mine. Now let it be finished. My devotee, be free again from all disturbances. With a peaceful mind you can now see the form you desire.
In the beginning of Bhagavad-gītā Arjuna was worried about killing Bhīṣma and Droṇa, his worshipful grandfather and master. But Kṛṣṇa said that he need not be afraid of killing his grandfather. When the sons of Dhṛtarāṣṭra tried to disrobe Draupadī in the assembly of the Kurus, Bhīṣma and Droṇa were silent, and for such negligence of duty they should be killed. Kṛṣṇa showed His universal form to Arjuna just to show him that these people were already killed for their unlawful action. That scene was shown to Arjuna because devotees are always peaceful and they cannot perform such horrible actions. The purpose of the revelation of the universal form was shown; now Arjuna wanted to see the four-armed form, and Kṛṣṇa showed him. A devotee is not much interested in the universal form, for it does not enable one to reciprocate loving feelings. Either a devotee wants to offer his respectful worshipful feelings, or he wants to see the two-handed Kṛṣṇa form so that he can reciprocate in loving service with the Supreme Personality of Godhead.
Bhishma & Drona are Good guys but were duty bound and were on the wrong side..
Duty bound – forced to do something wrong..
Telling the truth oath – Sage.. who did tapasya and tells truth to dacoits and becomes the cause of death of people… he goes to hell..
We have to be very careful about what vows we take..
Telling the truth oath by Yudhisthira – Aswathama elephant is dead — Yudhistra did not lie as per krsna’s instruction .. because of that he had to go to hell for a few moments..
Bhishma was on the bed of arrows. .. he waited like that till the end of the battle of kurukshetra.. He did not speak the truth until he became the bones.. Until the flesh that was formed due to eating the food from Krsna.. He was duty bound.. Very difficult situation.. Dharma sankatha.. Whenever you are in doubt ask guru..
All questions have been answered.
SB 3.1.38
[Please tell me] whether Arjuna, whose bow bears the name Gāṇḍīva and who is always famous amongst the chariot warriors for vanquishing his enemies, is doing well. He once satisfied Lord Śiva by covering him with arrows when Śiva came as an unidentified false hunter.
Lord Śiva tested Arjuna’s strength by picking a quarrel with him over a hunted boar. He confronted Arjuna in the false dress of a hunter, and Arjuna covered him with arrows until Lord Śiva was satisfied with Arjuna’s fighting. He offered Arjuna the Pāśupati weapon and blessed him. Here Vidura inquired about the great warrior’s well-being.
So we see that Arjuna – Unparalleled brave and expert fighter.. He only fights for legitimate reasons…
CC ADI 7.101
“Dear Sir, there is no objection to Your being a great devotee of Lord Kṛṣṇa. Everyone is satisfied with this. But why do You avoid discussion on the Vedānta-sūtra? What is the fault in it?”
Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura comments in this connection, “Māyāvādī sannyāsīs accept that the commentary by Śrī Śaṅkarācārya known as Śārīraka-bhāṣya gives the real meaning of the Vedanta-sūtra. In other words, Māyāvādī sannyāsīs accept the meanings expressed in the explanations of the Vedānta-sūtra by Śaṅkarācārya, which are based on monism. Thus they explain the Vedānta-sūtra, the Upaniṣads and all such Vedic literatures in their own impersonal way.” The great Māyāvādī sannyāsī Sadānanda Yogīndra has written a book known as Vedānta-sāra, in which he writes, vedānto nāma upaniṣat-pramāṇam. tad-upakārīṇi śārīraka-sūtrādīni ca. According to Sadānanda Yogīndra, the Vedānta-sūtra and Upaniṣads, as presented by Śrī Śaṅkarācārya in his Śārīraka-bhāṣya commentary, are the only sources of Vedic evidence. Actually, however, Vedānta refers to the essence of Vedic knowledge, and it is not a fact that there is nothing more than Śaṅkarācārya’s Śārīraka-bhāṣya. There are other Vedānta commentaries, written by Vaiṣṇava ācāryas, none of whom follow Śrī Śaṅkarācārya or accept the imaginative commentary of his school. Their commentaries are based on the philosophy of duality. Monist philosophers like Śaṅkarācārya and his followers want to establish that God and the living entity are one, and instead of worshiping the Supreme Personality of Godhead they present themselves as God. They want to be worshiped as God by others. Such persons do not accept the philosophies of the Vaiṣṇava ācāryas, which are known as śuddhādvaita (purified monism), śuddha-dvaita (purified dualism), viśiṣṭādvaita (specific monism)(Ramanujacharya), dvaitādvaita (monism and dualism) (Nimbarka) and acintya-bhedābheda (inconceivable oneness and difference) (Chaitanya MahaPrabhu). Māyāvādīs do not discuss these philosophies, for they are firmly convinced of their own philosophy of kevalādvaita, exclusive monism. Accepting this system of philosophy as the pure understanding of the Vedānta-sūtra, they believe that Kṛṣṇa has a body made of material elements and that the activities of loving service to Kṛṣṇa are sentimentality. They are known as Māyāvādīs because according to their opinion Kṛṣṇa has a body made of māyā and the loving service of the Lord executed by devotees is also māyā. They consider such devotional service to be an aspect of fruitive activities (karma-kāṇḍa). According to their view, bhakti consists of mental speculation or sometimes meditation. This is the difference between the Māyāvādī and Vaiṣṇava philosophies.
CC ADI 7.114
“Śaṅkarācārya, who is an incarnation of Lord Śiva, is faultless because he is a servant carrying out the orders of the Lord. But those who follow his Māyāvādī philosophy are doomed. They will lose all their advancement in spiritual knowledge.
Māyāvādī philosophers are very proud of exhibiting their Vedānta knowledge through grammatical jugglery, but in the Bhagavad-gītā Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa certifies that they are māyayāpahṛta-jñāna, bereft of real knowledge due to māyā. Māyā has two potencies with which to execute her two functions — the prakṣepātmikā-śakti, the power to throw the living entity into the ocean of material existence, and āvaraṇātmikā-śakti, the power to cover the knowledge of the living entity. The function of the the āvaraṇātmikā-śakti is explained in the Bhagavad-gītā by the word māyayāpahṛta-jñānāḥ. (BG 7.15)
Why the daivī-māyā, or illusory energy of Kṛṣṇa, takes away the knowledge of the Māyāvādī philosophers is also explained in the Bhagavad-gīta by the use of the words āsuraṁ bhāvam āśritāḥ, which refer to a person who does not agree to the existence of the Lord.
If you learn all these – Immediately you will detect this is a mayavadi..
Why are there diff commentaries in Vaishnava sampradayas if they all know that Krsna is supreme. They all accept Krsna as the supreme.. The founders of those sampradayas wrote those commentaries to instruct or teach their disciples..