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.
On January 25th 2015, thousands of renounced Vaishnavas and other guests gathered at Jiva Institute to commence the official installment of Babaji Sri Satyanarayana... Read More
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.
By Satyanarayana Dasa - Continuation from Paramātmā Sandarbha, Anuccheda 93.5: Bhagavān Has No Experience of Material Misery. Translation: With regard to the second objection [that Bhagavān is subject to favoritism], we say the following: One engages in giving delight to others for two possible reasons: to attain what one desires from the other, or sometimes just to fulfill the other’s desire. The first option is not relevant to the
By Satyanarayana Dasa - Continuation from Paramātmā Sandarbha, Anuccheda 93.4: Devotees are Self-Satisfied - Translation: [An objection is raised] It is not to be conjectured that since the Lord gives bliss to His devotees and they to Him, He [or His devotees] must not be self-satisfied; nor that since He gives pleasure to His devotees while neglecting others, He must be subject to another form of bias. The answer to the first objection is that although the sages have bodies endowed with the power of pure sattva and have thus attained the very heights of self-satisfaction, when we see the Lord’s affection towards these devotees it can be understood that this quality is a consequence of His self-satisfaction and not opposed to it.