Question is answered
The end.
The battle between humans and Gods was all but finished, with the decimation of humans. This battle had raged for a long time. It should have been an occasion of joy, but no such expression was discernible on the visage of Gods. Indeed their faces were clouded by expressions ranging from consternation to, even grief. They had a difficult decision to make.
The prisoner.
Indra Sabha was silent. Everyone was awaiting the arrival of prisoner. After some time, main door opened and Krishna, King of vanquished humans entered, chained but defiant. Everyone was looking at him with a mixture of awe and resentment, Krishna oblivious to gaze of gathering or weight of shackles walked towards Indra with assured stride.
Indra spoke in voice tinged with pain, "O Krishna, blessed as you were with might and knowledge, proficient both in arms and Vedas, just in rule, righteous in deeds and thoughts, you who thwarted Asuras from Swarg Why oh why, you, on whom gods bestowed their greatest favours, became a Rakshas yourself ? Were the Gods wrong, or their grace flawed. Why, have thou fallen.
Krishna replied, "O Indra, Lord of Lords, Purveyor of Supreme wisdom, I was blessed with wisdom and might, I, born of divine grace, fought wars against every creature, contemplated upon Vedas, perfected Ragas and Mudras, I built the most beautiful temples and palaces. I won lands and hearts, I conquered the creation. After that, O DevaRaj, what else can any creation aspire for, but to conquer its creators. What else is the will if not conscious reaching beyond divine, manifest striving to supplant Nirguna? What else is Brahmana if not meeting of immanent with transcendent?"
Indra smiled. He had the answer now.
7 comments:
I don't quite understand, gaurav. What is this "supplanting" the nirguNa, and how does it explain the "motive" of the nirguNa? Is there an assumption of separation between nirguNa and the creation? Sorry but I am quite weak in understanding stories, movies and allegories.
Motive of Nirguna ? I didn't say about motive of Nirguna I said about motive of manifest.
Is there speration? Now that should left to advaita and dvaita to decide, but there is perception of seperation between what is explainable and what is hidden.
By the way you didnt answer what I asked in other post :-)
Well, I thought you were implying that kRShNa's point of view was correct - that is to say, there was a possibility of the manifest to "supplant" the nirguNa - doesn't the word "supplant" indicate separation?
As for the other post, I didn't get the question even :-(
Frog,
Yes it does, atleast in human perception there is difference between what can be observed and what can not be.
The question in other post is there is something interesting in this post, like trivia. What is it.
Well, in human perception I doubt there is anything nirguNa in the first place. the creator at the realm of human perception is Ishvara/Adyashakti, not nirguNa. Of course this is the vEdAntic point of view, I don't know if you are making some other assumption.
Frog,
I used perception in a broad sense.
By perception I mean not only faculty of observation throuhg sense, but also self awareness.
The only reason we need religion is because we are self aware and want answer for our existence.
Post a Comment