Go to Vanipedia | Go to Vanisource | Go to Vanimedia


Vaniquotes - the compiled essence of Vedic knowledge


King Puranjana was a representative of King Pracinabarhisat, and Narada Muni was reminding King Pracinabarhisat of his forefather, Maharaja Prthu, who never chastised a brahmana or a Vaisnava: Difference between revisions

(Created page with "<div id="compilation"> <div id="facts"> {{terms|"King Purañjana was a representative of King Prācīnabarhiṣat, and Nārada Muni was reminding King Prācīnabarhiṣat of h...")
 
No edit summary
 
Line 11: Line 11:
{{toc right}}
{{toc right}}
[[Category:Puranjana]]
[[Category:Puranjana]]
[[Category:Was]]
[[Category:Representative]]
[[Category:Representative]]
[[Category:Pracinabarhi]]
[[Category:Pracinabarhi]]
Line 18: Line 17:
[[Category:Forefathers]]
[[Category:Forefathers]]
[[Category:Prthu]]
[[Category:Prthu]]
[[Category:Who]]
[[Category:Never]]
[[Category:Never]]
[[Category:Chastising Devotees of God]]
[[Category:Chastising Devotees of God]]
[[Category:Vaisnava - Devotees of God]]
[[Category:Brahmana or Vaisnava]]
[[Category:Intellectual Class - Brahmana]]
[[Category:Narada and Pracinabarhisat]]
[[Category:Srimad-Bhagavatam, Canto 04 Chapter 26 Purports - King Puranjana Goes to the Forest to Hunt, and His Queen Becomes Angry]]
[[Category:Srimad-Bhagavatam, Canto 04 Chapter 26 Purports - King Puranjana Goes to the Forest to Hunt, and His Queen Becomes Angry]]
[[Category:Srimad Bhagavatam, Canto 04 Purports]]
[[Category:Srimad Bhagavatam, Canto 04 Purports]]

Latest revision as of 05:40, 30 May 2023

Expressions researched:
"King Purañjana was a representative of King Prācīnabarhiṣat, and Nārada Muni was reminding King Prācīnabarhiṣat of his forefather, Mahārāja Pṛthu, who never chastised a brāhmaṇa or a Vaiṣṇava"

Srimad-Bhagavatam

SB Canto 4

Even though they (Vaisnavas and Brahmanas) may sometimes appear to violate the laws, they are not to be punished by the king. This instruction was given to King Prācīnabarhiṣat by Nārada Muni. King Purañjana was a representative of King Prācīnabarhiṣat, and Nārada Muni was reminding King Prācīnabarhiṣat of his forefather, Mahārāja Pṛthu, who never chastised a brāhmaṇa or a Vaiṣṇava.

O hero's wife, kindly tell me if someone has offended you. I am prepared to give such a person punishment as long as he does not belong to the brāhmaṇa caste. But for the servant of Muraripu [Kṛṣṇa], I excuse no one within or beyond these three worlds. No one can freely move after offending you, for I am prepared to punish him.

According to Vedic civilization, a brāhmaṇa, or one who is properly qualified to understand the Absolute Truth—that is, one belonging to the most intelligent social order—as well as the devotee of Lord Kṛṣṇa, who is known as Muradviṣa, enemy of a demon named Mura, is not subject to the rules and regulations of the state. In other words, upon breaking the laws of the state, everyone can be punished by the government except the brāhmaṇas and Vaiṣṇavas. Brāhmaṇas and Vaiṣṇavas never transgress the laws of the state or the laws of nature because they know perfectly well the resultant reactions caused by such law-breaking. Even though they may sometimes appear to violate the laws, they are not to be punished by the king. This instruction was given to King Prācīnabarhiṣat by Nārada Muni. King Purañjana was a representative of King Prācīnabarhiṣat, and Nārada Muni was reminding King Prācīnabarhiṣat of his forefather, Mahārāja Pṛthu, who never chastised a brāhmaṇa or a Vaiṣṇava.

One's pure intelligence, or pure Kṛṣṇa consciousness, becomes polluted by material activities. Pure consciousness can be revived by the process of sacrifice, charity, pious activities, etc., but when one pollutes his Kṛṣṇa consciousness by offending a brāhmaṇa or a Vaiṣṇava, it is very difficult to revive. Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu has described the vaiṣṇava-aparādha, or offense to a Vaiṣṇava, as "the mad elephant offense." One should be very careful not to offend a Vaiṣṇava or a brāhmaṇa. Even the great yogī Durvāsā was harassed by the Sudarśana cakra when he offended the Vaiṣṇava Mahārāja Ambarīṣa, who was neither a brāhmaṇa nor a sannyāsī but an ordinary householder. Mahārāja Ambarīṣa was a Vaiṣṇava, and consequently Durvāsā Muni was chastised.

The conclusion is that if Kṛṣṇa consciousness is covered by material sins, one can eliminate the sins simply by chanting the Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra, but if one pollutes his Kṛṣṇa consciousness by offending a brāhmaṇa or a Vaiṣṇava, one cannot revive it until one properly atones for the sin by pleasing the offended Vaiṣṇava or brāhmaṇa. This was the course that Durvāsā Muni had to follow, for he surrendered unto Mahārāja Ambarīṣa. A vaiṣṇava-aparādha cannot be atoned for by any means other than by begging the pardon of the offended Vaiṣṇava.