In the 7th Canto of Śrīmad Bhāgavatam, Śrī Prahlāda speaks two verses to his demoniac father Hiraṇyakaśipu, which, in brief, contain the essence of... Read More
After explaining the nature of Kṛṣṇa, who is equal in honor and dishonor, Śrī Nārada explained that Śrī Kṛṣṇa does not see a difference between people who approach Him out of enmity, or without enmity, with fear, affection, or desire to enjoy Him (kāma):
In the Seventh Canto of Śrīmad Bhāgavatam, there is a very interesting dialogue recited by Śrī Śukadeva Gosvāmī about the liberation of Śiśupāla who was killed by Kṛṣṇa during Yudhiṣṭhira Mahārāja’s Rājasūya-yajña. Śiśupāla was Kṛṣṇa’s cousin, but hated ...
Commentary on Paramātmā Sandarbha, Anuccheda 93.6 by Satyanarayana Dasa: The second objection raised by Vidura was that if the avatāras and their activities of sustaining the creation are not directly performed by Bhagavān, then they cannot be part of His svarūpa, as had been established in Bhagavat Sandarbha.
By Satyanarayana Dasa – Continuation from Paramātmā Sandarbha, Anuccheda 93.6:Translation: Furthermore, [the fact that Bhagavān does not personally act to sustain the universe] does not disprove that the avatāras are endowed with the intrinsic potency. The sole purpose of Bhagavān is to
Continuation from Paramātmā Sandarbha, Commentary on Anuccheda 93.5 by Satyanarayana Dasa -Another example of bhakti impelling a bhakta to act in an apparently mundane way is found in the Tenth Canto in the story of the twin Arjuna trees. In that narration, the sage Nārada curses the sons of Kubera who were enjoying water sports with young damsels while completely intoxicated and naked.
Continuation from Paramātmā Sandarbha, Commentary on Anuccheda 93.5 by Satyanarayana Dasa --Śrī Jīva now responds to the second objection regarding the accusation of Bhagavān's being biased. Earlier he established that Bhagavān acts only to give delight to His devotees, which seemingly implicates Him in bias.