Go to Vanipedia | Go to Vanisource | Go to Vanimedia


Vaniquotes - the compiled essence of Vedic knowledge


SB 01.07.53-54 brahma-bandhur na hantavya... cited

Expressions researched:
"atatayi vadhar-hanah" |"brahma-bandhur na hantavya" |"kuru pratisrutam satyam" |"mayaivobhayam amnatam" |"pancalya mahyam eva ca" |"paripahy anusasanam" |"priyam ca bhimasenasya" |"yat tat santvayata priyam"

Srimad-Bhagavatam

SB Canto 1

SB 1.7.53-54, Translation and Purport:

The Personality of Godhead Śrī Kṛṣṇa said: A friend of a brāhmaṇa is not to be killed, but if he is an aggressor he must be killed. All these rulings are in the scriptures, and you should act accordingly. You have to fulfill your promise to your wife, and you must also act to the satisfaction of Bhīmasena and Me.

Arjuna was perplexed because Aśvatthāmā was to be killed as well as spared according to different scriptures cited by different persons. As a brahma-bandhu, or a worthless son of a brāhmaṇa, Aśvatthāmā was not to be killed, but he was at the same time an aggressor also. And according to the rulings of Manu, an aggressor, even though he be a brāhmaṇa (and what to speak of an unworthy son of a brāhmaṇa), is to be killed. Droṇācārya was certainly a brāhmaṇa in the true sense of the term, but because he stood in the battlefield he was killed. But although Aśvatthāmā was an aggressor, he stood without any fighting weapons. The ruling is that an aggressor, when he is without weapon or chariot, cannot be killed. All these were certainly perplexities. Besides that, Arjuna had to keep the promise he had made before Draupadī just to pacify her. And he also had to satisfy both Bhīma and Kṛṣṇa, who advised killing him. This dilemma was present before Arjuna, and the solution was awarded by Kṛṣṇa.

Sri Caitanya-caritamrta

CC Madhya-lila

CC Madhya 15.264, Purport:

Śrīla Sārvabhauma Bhaṭṭācārya considered that if Amogha were killed, the killer would suffer sinful reactions for killing the body of a brāhmaṇa. For the same reason, it would have been undesirable for the Bhaṭṭācārya to commit suicide because he also was a brāhmaṇa. Since neither course could be accepted, the Bhaṭṭācārya decided to give up his relationship with Amogha and never see his face.

As far as killing the body of a brāhmaṇa is concerned, Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (1.7.53) gives the following injunction concerning a brahma-bandhu, a person born of a brāhmaṇa father but devoid of brahminical qualities:

śrī-bhagavān uvāca
brahma-bandhur na hantavya
ātatāyī vadhār-haṇaḥ

"The Personality of Godhead Śrī Kṛṣṇa said, "A brahma-bandhu is not to be killed, but if he is an aggressor, he must be killed.""

Quoting from the smṛti, Śrīla Śrīdhara Svāmī comments on this quotation from Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam:

ātatāyinam āyāntam api vedānta-pāragam
jighāṁ santaṁ jighāṁsīyān na tena brahma-hā bhavet

""An aggressor intent on killing may be a very learned scholar of Vedānta, yet he should be killed because of his envy in killing others. In such a case, it is not sinful to kill a brāhmaṇa.""

Page Title:SB 01.07.53-54 brahma-bandhur na hantavya... cited
Compiler:SunitaS
Created:11 of Sep, 2011
Totals by Section:BG=0, SB=1, CC=1, OB=0, Lec=0, Con=0, Let=0
No. of Quotes:2