Category:Commentator
commentator | commentators | commentator's
Subcategories
This category has only the following subcategory.
C
Pages in category "Commentator"
The following 45 pages are in this category, out of 45 total.
A
- All the commentaries in the market, they are simply presentation of the particular commentator's personal view. That is not Bhagavad-gita. If you want to understand Bhagavad-gita, then you should understand as they are said
- Ananta, Sankarsana, belongs to the second catur-vyuha, or quadruple expansion. This is the opinion of experienced commentators
- As soon as the original purpose (of Bhagavad-gita) was scattered by the motives of the unscrupulous commentators, there arose the need to reestablish the disciplic succession. BG 1972 purports
B
- Because the commentators do not know this science of Krsna, they hide Krsna and divide His personality from His mind or from His body. Although this is sheer ignorance of the science of Krsna, some men make profit out of misleading people
- Because we are doubtful, we are presenting Krsna in a different way. And there are so many commentators, so many swamis, they put Krsna in a different way. But Krsna is Krsna. Law of identity. You cannot comment on the Krsna's personality
- Bhagavad-gita cannot be interpreted by foolish commentators. It must be studied through the parampara system, acarya upasanam. One must worship the acarya and learn from him what is Bhagavad-gita. Acaryavan puruso veda
D
- Daksa is described here (in SB 4.4.30) as most hardhearted and therefore unqualified to be a brahmana. Brahma-dhruk is described by some commentators to mean brahma-bandhu, or friend of the brahmanas
- Despite the transcendental qualities of Lord Krsna's body, its full bliss and knowledge, there are many so-called scholars and commentators of Bhagavad-gita who deride Krsna as an ordinary man. BG 1972 purports
I
- In the Bhagavad-gita Lord Krsna stresses in many verses that He is the Supreme Personality of Godhead. But despite Lord Krsna's stressing this point, many so-called scholars and commentators still deny the personal conception of the Lord
- In this verse (SB 4.5.12) Daksa has been described as mahatma. The word mahatma has been commented upon by different commentators in various manners
- In those days, Svarupa Damodara and Raghunatha dasa Gosvami lived with Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu, whereas all other commentators lived far away from Him
O
- Omkara is also called the deliverer (tara). SB begins with the omkara vibration: om namo bhagavate vasudevaya. Therefore omkara has been described by the great commentator Sridhara Svami as tarankura, the seed of deliverance from the material world
- One great commentator explained that desire for liberation is the most obstructive stumbling block on the path of God realization
- One should not be deviated by unscrupulous commentators. BG 1972 purports
S
- So-called scholars and commentators do not believe that Krsna was factually a historical person whose presence on the Battlefield of Kuruksetra is recorded in the history of Mahabharata
- Some commentator says that when he (Ajamila ) chanted "Narayana," then all his reaction of sinful life immediately disappeared and he remembered real Narayana. Because he, in his boyhood, was trained up as a Vaisnava by his father
- Some commentators on the Gita say that one who worships a demigod can reach the Supreme Lord, but here it is clearly stated that the worshipers of demigods go to the different planetary systems where various demigods are situated. BG 1972 purports
- Some commentators say that due to being touched by the lotus feet of Krsna, the tree immediately became alive
- Some say that Krsna is the incarnation of Visnu who lies in the ocean of milk. Srila Rupa Gosvami in his Laghu-bhagavatamrta and his commentator, Sri Baladeva Vidyabhusana, have discussed these points fully and have established the exact truth
- Some unauthorized commentators try to identify the individual soul with the Supersoul, and the monists think this to be liberation, but they do not understand the real purpose of the Patanjali system of yoga. BG 1972 purports
- Sometimes commentators say that the word kuruksetra in the first verse of the Bhagavad-gita refers to one's body, but we do not accept this
- Sometimes unscrupulous commentators distort the meaning of what is clearly stated here (in BG 9.34): that all devotional service should be offered to the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Krsna. BG 1972 purports
- Still there are so many stubborn commentators on Bhagavad-gita who consider the Supreme Absolute Truth and the living entities to be one and the same. BG 1972 purports
T
- The original verses of Bhagavad-gita are as clear as the sun; they do not require lamplight from foolish commentators. BG 1972 purports
- The so-called learned commentator says, "It is not to the Krsna person, but it is the Absolute Truth which is within Krsna." That means he is dividing Krsna from the Absolute Truth. He does not know what is Krsna
- There are commentators and people who have taken it that everyone is perfect, and that they can interpret scripture in their own way. As far as we are concerned, we agree to read the Bhagavad-gita according to the instructions given in the Gita itself
- There are many commentators, they deviate from Krsna. I do not know why. That is their nefarious motive
- There are many unscrupulous and ignorant commentators on Ramayana who present the younger brothers of Lord Ramacandra as ordinary living entities
- There is no difference in Krsna, the Supreme Lord, between Himself and His body. But, because they do not know this science of Krsna, the commentators hide Krsna and divide His personality from His mind or from His body. BG 1972 purports
- These rascal so-called commentators, they want to avoid Krsna. Therefore this Krsna consciousness movement is a challenge to these rascals. It is a challenge that "You want to make Krsna without Krsna. This is nonsense
- They (so-called scholars and commentators) feel compelled to write commentaries on Bhagavad-gita and other historical records
- This important verse (SB 4.9.29) has been discussed by many stalwart commentators. Why was Dhruva Maharaja not very pleased, even after achieving the goal of life he desired?
U
- Unfortunately, Bhagavad-gita has been misinterpreted by so many commentators that people have misunderstood the Bhagavad-gita. Actually, Bhagavad-gita means to develop Krsna consciousness, and we are trying to do that
- Unfortunately, unscrupulous commentators divert the mind of the reader to that which is not at all feasible. Such commentators do not know that there is no difference between Krsna's mind and Krsna. BG 1972 purports
- Unintelligent commentators on the Gita try to divert the mind of the reader to other subjects, but there is no other subject in Bhagavad-gita but devotional service. BG 1972 purports
W
- We have presented Bhagavad-gita As It Is. We do not create meanings by concoction. Sometimes commentators say that the word kuruksetra in the first verse of the Bhagavad-gita refers to one's body, but we do not accept this
- When a lady takes an ordinary bath it is called mala-snana, and when she takes a full bath, including the head it is called sirah-snana. At this time she needs sufficient oil to smear on her head. That is the direction of the commentators of smrti-sastra
- While commenting on this particular verse, we have in our presence the statement of a great modern politician who has recently died and left his will, which discloses his poor fund of knowledge of the codes of God mentioned by Maharaja Pariksit
- Why the external energy acts in this way may be considered as follows, as analyzed by great commentators like Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura and Srila Jiva Gosvami