[Advaita-l] Raslila

[bhaskar.yr at in.abb.com]

Namaste Bhaskar-ji,

I clearly said that the rAmAyaNa and the mahAbhArata have a historical
"core" with some embellishments.

praNAms Ramesh prabhuji
Hare Krishna

Kindly let me know what is the problem in reading the purANa-s also with
the same spirit...In what way it loses its credibility if you remove the
embellishments in them??

RK prabhuji:

But SrI laxmI emerging from the ocean during the samudra-ma.nthana
certainly *cannot* be interpreted literally as a historical event. I
dont think any traditional acArya does so.

bhaskar :

neither any traditional achArya ask us to believe it is a story not a
historical event...they do give symbolical explanation of these events but
that does not mean it does not happened at all!!

RK prabhuji:

What does "pUrNamadaH pUrNamidam....." mean literally?
Nothing much. Without the aid of the  bhAShya-s and traditional
interpretations to guide you, you are not going to make much progress
just by reading "pUrNamadaH...".

bhaskar :

Infact, we have an overstretched discussion about this shAnti maNtra &
shankara bhAshya on this bruhadAraNyaka shAnti maNtra on the other
list...if you dont mind pls. give your insights on this maNtra off the
list...so that we can discuss..

RK prabhuji:

Also, we have had many discussions on this list about the jurisdiction
of pramANa-s. If the  veda says "fire is cold" it cannot be
interpreted literally. This has been discussed ad nauseam on this
list. The same/similar principles should apply when deciding what is
historical and what is not.

bhaskar :

Again, the yardstick which you have used to ascertain both texts can be
used to prove either way..

RK prabhuji:

And yes, we have to be "choosy". That is what viveka is all about.

bhaskar :

true, but this vivEka should not lead us to subjective predilictions.

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
bhaskar