|| Indian Mythology:: Doubts & Discussions ||

First Previous

Page

Next Last

Frequent Posters

Druids

@Druids

Explorer

Posted: 10 years ago

#471

Originally posted by: Surya_krsnbhakt

Lord Ayyappa is the son of Lord Shiva and Lord Vishnu, not the avatara of Vishnu.
The ninth avatara of Vishnu varies with regions, but generally it is Buddha.
In the Srimad Bhagavatam, it is given that Lord Buddha incarnated to delude the evil minded people away from the idea of slaughter by banning animal sacrifice, so that they could at least move an inch towards dharma. (Of course, there it is Anjana Devi's son, while Siddhartha Gautama was Mayadevi's son.)

No Sir. In the south, Lord Ayappa is the ninth avatar of Vishnu.

Our scriptures have been tampered with, that's all I can say.

Quote

Druids

@Druids

Explorer

Posted: 10 years ago

#472

Originally posted by: Radhikerani
I had another question. This has been on my mind for many days.
If Balram was an incarnation, and knew at least half of what was going on, then why did he like Duryodhan so much?
You'd say, he was an excellent fighter, most probably the type Balram liked. Fine, I agree and I have absolutely no problem with this. But how could he continue with his liking after what Dury did to the Pandavas in the Dyut Sabha?
Yeah, he was being fair when he intervened in the last fight between Dury and Bheem, but I don't the way he ticks of Krishna just before the war.
So, please help, anyone?

Lord Balaram was not an incarnation. There won't be two incarnations of Lord Vishnu at the same time.

Quote

Looks like you are new here. Register for free, learn and contribute.

proteeti

@sambhavami

Stunner

+ 12

Posted: 10 years ago

#473

^^I never said he was an incarnation of Lord Vishnu. Balram was an incarnation of Shesh Naag, who was a part of Lord Vishnu. 😊

Quote

Surya Sundarraj Sriram

@Surya_krsnbhakt

Dazzler

Posted: 10 years ago

#474

Originally posted by: Druids

No Sir. In the south, Lord Ayappa is the ninth avatar of Vishnu.

Our scriptures have been tampered with, that's all I can say.

I am from the south. So probably... regional variants? Because in Sabarimalai, he is Hariharasutan. It even is the main line of Harivarasanam - Hariharatmajam Devam Ashraye.

The bold word means Son of Hari and Hara.

Quote

Surya Sundarraj Sriram

@Surya_krsnbhakt

Dazzler

Posted: 10 years ago

#475

Originally posted by: Radhikerani
I had another question. This has been on my mind for many days.
If Balram was an incarnation, and knew at least half of what was going on, then why did he like Duryodhan so much?
You'd say, he was an excellent fighter, most probably the type Balram liked. Fine, I agree and I have absolutely no problem with this. But how could he continue with his liking after what Dury did to the Pandavas in the Dyut Sabha?
Yeah, he was being fair when he intervened in the last fight between Dury and Bheem, but I don't the way he ticks of Krishna just before the war.
So, please help, anyone?

You know, Balarama never scolded Krsna. All those scoldings were just for outside show.

What exactly does he say to tick off Krsna?

Because even in Srimad Bhagavatam, he scolds Krsna many times, but all of them are in jest. Like for example, when he scolds Krsna for humiliating Rukmi.

Quote

Surya Sundarraj Sriram

@Surya_krsnbhakt

Dazzler

Posted: 10 years ago

#476

Originally posted by: Druids

Lord Balaram was not an incarnation. There won't be two incarnations of Lord Vishnu at the same time.

Technically he was Ananta Sesha's incarnation, who is an amsavatara of Mahavishnu. So Balarama is also Vishnu's avatara. Even if you see from ISKCON's point of view, Balarama was Sankarshana's amsa, while Krsna is the original Supreme Personality of Godhead, so it is possible for two avataras of God to be on earth at the same time.😊

Quote

proteeti

@sambhavami

Stunner

+ 12

Posted: 10 years ago

#477

Originally posted by: Surya_krsnbhakt

You know, Balarama never scolded Krsna. All those scoldings were just for outside show.
What exactly does he say to tick off Krsna?
Because even in Srimad Bhagavatam, he scolds Krsna many times, but all of them are in jest. Like for example, when he scolds Krsna for humiliating Rukmi.

Oh! So he doesn't actually!
He says something like, why don't you stop the war and blah blah...but then, wasn't he a little biased toward Dury? (Just a question!)

Quote

Surya Sundarraj Sriram

@Surya_krsnbhakt

Dazzler

Posted: 10 years ago

#478

Originally posted by: Radhikerani

Oh! So he doesn't actually!
He says something like, why don't you stop the war and blah blah...but then, wasn't he a little biased toward Dury? (Just a question!)

The Leelas of Balarama and his brother are not understandable; even then I shall try to answer.

So, during the Kurukshetra war, the kings of all the kingdoms of India as well as foreigners had come to battle. Balarama was a little disappointed by the fact that all because of the evil intentions of his student, this whole war was taking place. He also knew that the very purpose of their incarnations were to eradicate all the evil kings, who had gathered here in one place. But he also had another task to fulfil - the pilgrimage of Bharatavarsha, blessing the sages in Naimisharanya and granting liberation to Romaharshana (the narrator of the Puranas). He also didn't want to witness the battle between his own cousins and students. So, as a pretext, he acted as if angry with Krsna, so that Duryodhana would have a sufficient enough reson for Balarama's inaction. In the meantime, Balarama was able to grant Moksha to Romaharshana and complete his pilgrimage.

According to Srila Prabhupada, he killed Romaharshana out of anger, but in either anger or pleasure, death at the hands of Balarama is equal to Moksha.

Edited by Surya_krsnbhakt - 10 years ago

Quote

proteeti

@sambhavami

Stunner

+ 12

Posted: 10 years ago

#479

Oh! So this is the nice little plot of the natkhat brothers! Thank you so much for clarifying Bhaiya, or else I would've continued to be a little upset with my darling Dau Bhaiya!

Quote

Semanti Chakraborty

@DharmaPriyaa

Dazzler

+ 2

Posted: 10 years ago

#480

Regarding Balaram, I too have a confusion. To me he does seem to be an innocent mind who believes in every word even they are Duri's words. In Van Parva I have seen both him and Krishna weeping to see Pandavas in grief. There Balaram even suggested Yudhi to stop exile at midway and start war with the help of Yadav army. But when the exile ended, the same Balaram scolded Yudhi in Udyoga Parva in front of all. There he said that Duri, Shakuni did not do anything wrong. Then Satyaki protested and Balaram became silent. I cannot understand this part. How did his POV change? Who changed it? Duri? I mean did Duri meet Dau and tell him something (lie of course) and Dau believed in them innocently? Otherwise I don't see any valid reason behind it. Also the fact that he did not protest against Satyaki's words shows me that he actually knew the real fact beforehand but somehow his knowledge was twisted in between. This makes my doubt stronger.
Please do not misunderstand me, I am a devotee of Lord Shesh. This is just a question from my researcher mind. I know that he was doing his leelas but why was this acting necessary?

Quote

1 ... 46 47 48 49 50 ... 56

|| Indian Mythology:: Doubts & Discussions || - Page 48

Related Topics

Explore Topics