[Advaita-l] Re: Lord Krishna lived for 125 years

[Raghavendra N Kalyan]

Dear Aravind,
 
I agree with you that Krishna cannot be thought of as having "died" like a bonded jIva. Krishna himself says that it is not a correct idea to think of him as the material body. However, if the mahAbhArata or any purANa refers to Krishna's passing away as "death" (now this is something which I dont know and have not verified), there is nothing wrong in using the word as long as one understands it as "the end of an incarnation" rather than death in the normal sense. I think the Swamiji also might have sanctioned the word in a similar sense.
 


 
Message: 2
Date: Thu, 9 Sep 2004 10:37:39 -0700 (PDT)
From: Aravind Mohanram 

Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Lord Krishna lived for 125 years
To: A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta

Message-ID: <20040909173739.58936.qmail at web51406.mail.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

My objection was directed towards the language used in describing the appearance and disappearance of the Lord. "Death" as is generally understood is a change of material body - the Lord does not have a material form as is clear from many scriptures. My objection is not directed towards the Swamiji who carried out the study or his methodology which I'm confident is authentic and I'm also in general agreement with his date. 

There is no need to bring in ISKCON here - what I presented was a common-sense argument supported by scripture - and as u urself said in ur email the study wasn't advaitic in content anyways - seems like u r contradicting urself.

Aravind.


		
---------------------------------
 ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun!