May Acyuta, the creator of the three worlds, be satisfied with whatever pious work we may have done and show His mercy by taking the hand of Vaidarbhī.

↑

▷ Содержание

⇐ ПредыдущаяСтр 1029 из 2832Следующая ⇒

COMMENTARY

Bhīṣmaka is described as generous (mahā-matiḥ) because he was contented in his heart, knowing that Kṛṣṇa had come to marry his qualified daughter. Therefore he elaborately worshiped Kṛṣṇa.

|| 10.53.35 ||

evaṁ rājñāṁ sametānāṁ yathā-vīryaṁ yathā-vayaḥ

yathā-balaṁ yathā-vittaṁ sarvaiḥ kāmaiḥ samarhayat

TRANSLATION

Thus it was that Bhīṣmaka gave all desirable things to the kings who had assembled for the occasion, honoring them as befitted their political power, age, physical prowess and wealth.

|| 10.53.36 ||

kṛṣṇam āgatam ākarṇya vidarbha-pura-vāsinaḥ

āgatya netrāñjalibhiḥ papus tan-mukha-paṅkajam

TRANSLATION

When the residents of Vidarbha-pura heard that Lord Kṛṣṇa had come, they all went to see Him. With the cupped palms of their eyes they drank the honey of His lotus face.

COMMENTARY

The phrase papus tan-mukha-paṅkajam means, “The people drank the incomparable sweetness of Kṛṣṇa’s lotus face.” This indicates the unlimited quantity of honey contained in this lotus, and how wonderful it was that many parties could drink from just one lotus at the same time.

|| 10.53.37 ||

asyaiva bhāryā bhavituṁ rukmiṇy arhati nāparā

asāv apy anavadyātmā bhaiṣmyāḥ samucitaḥ patiḥ

TRANSLATION

[The people of the city said:] Rukmiṇī, and no one else, deserves to become His wife, and He also, possessing such flawless beauty, is the only suitable husband for Princess Bhaiṣmī.

COMMENTARY

This verse combines statements made by different citizens of Vaidarbha. Seven statements have been combined in one: (1) For Him alone and no other; (2) As a wife, not as an enjoyable object; (3) Rukmiṇī alone and no one else; (4) This certainly must be, and should not be avoided; (5) He alone and no one else; (6) For Rukmiṇī and no one else; (7) He is perfectly suited (samucitaḥ), not at all unsuitable.

These seven statements have the negative qualifier “no one else” (na aparā) “nor nothing else” applied to each statement. Some said, “Rukmiṇī and no one else deserves to be Kṛṣṇa’s wife. Others said, “She should be Kṛṣṇa’s wife and nothing else, such as an object of enjoyment.” Others said, “Rukmiṇī alone and no one else should be Kṛṣṇa’s wife.”

In this way also four other statements could be made: “Rukmiṇī should certainly be Kṛṣṇa’s wife, there is no question about it.” “Kṛṣṇa and only Kṛṣṇa should be Rukmiṇī’s husband.” “Kṛṣṇa should be the husband of Rukmiṇī only.” “Kṛṣṇa must be the husband of Rukmiṇī.” To say it is a fault of contradiction because of the impossibility of combining seven statements in one is not correct because the authorities say: sambhavaty eka-vākyatve vākya-bhedo hi gauravam, “A divergence of statements can be spoken within one statement when it expresses the importance of the subject.”

|| 10.53.38 ||

kiñcit su-caritaṁ yan nas tena tuṣṭas tri-loka-kṛt

anugṛhṇātu gṛhṇātu vaidarbhyāḥ pāṇim acyutaḥ

TRANSLATION

Познавательные статьи:



Психологические особенности спортивного соревнования

Приготовление дезинфицирующих растворов различной концентрации

Занятость населения и рынок труда

Социальный статус семьи и её типология