United States or Saint Vincent and the Grenadines ? Vote for the TOP Country of the Week !
Satram is explained by Nilakantha to mean here 'false disguise. I think, however, such an interpretation to be far-fetched. It evidently means 'forest', the use of 'pravisteshu' in connection with it almost settles the point. This sloka is not correctly printed in any of the texts that I have seen. Any other reading would certainly be incorrect. I have not consulted the Bombay text.
In this sloka the word Vajra is used as associated with the thunder and therefore, as thunder is accompanied by lightning so the bows of the warriors are the lightning-marks of this particular Vajra. The word is Uttaradhus which seems to be very doubtful. Yenarjunastena, Yena is yatra and tena is tatra, as Nilakantha rightly explains. The meaning is "who would be there where Arjuna would be."
And seeing that tenant of the earth quickly pursuing those tenants of the air, the ascetic, O Kaurava, addressed him in this Sloka, O fowler, it appears very strange and wonderful to me that thou, that art a treader of the earth, pursuest yet a couple of creatures that are tenants of the air. The fowler said, "These two, united together, are taking away my snare.
Of the next sloka, 'Because the Lord has knowledge for his essential nature, the meaning is 'Because of the Lord who abides as the Self of all individual souls, the essential nature is knowledge only while bodies divine, human, &c., have no part in it , therefore all non-intelligent things, bodies human and divine, hills, oceans, &c., spring from his knowledge, i.e. have their root in the actions springing from the volitions of men, gods, &c., in whose various forms the fundamental intelligence manifests itself.
My hairs have stood on their ends, and I am fainting with fear at the very sight of these smiters, the Kurus arrayed in order of battle." This sloka is not correctly printed in any of the texts that I have seen. The Burdwan Pandits read tat-samim. This I think, is correct, but then asasada in the singular when the other verbs are all dual seems to be correct.
The meaning is 'when the works which are the cause of the distinction of things are destroyed, then all the distinctions of bodies, human or divine, hills, oceans, &c. all which are objects of fruition for the different individual souls pass away. Non-intelligent matter, as entering into various states of a non-permanent nature, is called 'non-being'; while souls, the nature of which consists in permanent knowledge, are called 'being. On this difference the next sloka insists . We say 'it is' of that thing which is of a permanently uniform nature, not connected with the idea of beginning, middle and end, and which hence never becomes the object of the notion of non-existence; while we say 'it is not' of non-intelligent matter which constantly passes over into different states, each later state being out of connexion with the earlier state.
The next sloka sums up the whole doctrine; the words 'true and untrue' there denote what in the preceding verses had been called 'being' and 'non-being'; the second half of the sloka refers to the practical plurality of the world as due to karman.
Lomasa said, 'Having proceeded thus far, Vandin stopped. Thereupon Ashtavakra supplied the latter half of the sloka. And seeing Ashtavakra speaking and the Suta's son silent, and pensive, and with head downcast, the assembly broke into a long uproar.
As our sastra distinctly teaches that the highest Brahman, i. e. Vishnu, is free from all imperfections whatsoever, comprises within himself all auspicious qualities, and reveals his power in mighty manifestations, the view of the world's reality cannot possibly be erroneous. Hence also the sloka last referred to does not sublate the reality of the world. Up.
I take it that in both places the word has been used in the same sense. This is a very difficult sloka. I am not sure that I have understood it alright. Both Nilakantha and Arjuna Misra are silent. Instead of depending, however, on my own intelligence, I have consulted several friends who have read the Mahabharata thoroughly. The grammatical structure is easy.
Word Of The Day