kalyan_kc at HOTMAIL.COM
Wed Apr 30 17:33:32 CDT 2003
>Narayana lied to the Asura-s during Mohini avatAram. For that matter,
>Krishna, the butter thief is well publicised. Would that still lower the
>status of nArAyana? There are many instances in the Ramayana - for example,
>when Rama gets very angry after the abduction of Sita and wants to destory
>the entire world - thereby displaying krOdha.
Are you serious? nArAyaNa is all-knowing. He gives to people what they
deserve. Now this is getting wierd. Me trying to defend nArAyaNa from a
>Can you accusse Bhishma of Adharma, since he sided with the Kauravas?
Bhisma was bound by his vow. Had he sided with pandavas, it would have been
>Krishna, before the war clearly states that one could either have him on
>their side or his army, in which Balarama was a part of. Duryodhana
Krishna's case already explained. Krishna knows the future. Let us not
As for Balarama, since it required positive efforts on the part of Krishna
to prevent him, we cannot say that he is on the side of dharma.
>These two points:
>*the manifestation of Aadhisesha. BALARAMA AVATARA was not a _PURNA
>AVATARA_, say some scholars.
>*BalarAma avatAram (8th in the list) is not taken by PerumAL Himself
>directly. BalarAma is an avatAram of AdisEsha only. But, Lord invested more
>potencies unto AdisEsha for performing some leelAs as BalarAma.
Which means Balarama's case is closed.
PS In case you dont like to accept Buddha, there is a much better candidate
for that avatar. It is Vyasa. You will find the following right in the
beginning portion of the vishNu sahasranAma-----
vyAsAya vishNu rUpAya vyAsa rUpAya vishNave
Find a partner. For life. http://www.shaadi.com/ptnr.php?ptnr=hmlql
Meet at Shaadi.com
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list