How, What, Which, And Why Of His Avataras

Out of the six questions that the rishis of Naimisharanya asked Suta, we have covered already three.
What is the greatest goal?
How to achieve this?
Why has Bhagawan now taken avatara as the son of Devaki and Vasudeva?
Now the fourth question -
तस्य कर्माण्युदाराणि परिगीतानि सूरिभिः ।
ब्रूहि नः श्रद्दधानानां लीलया दधतः कलाः ॥
Tell us about his leelas.
What is leela?
How is leela different from common acts?
In common acts, an effort is involved.
Whatever is done in a joyful mood, without effort, casually is called leela.
अनायासेन हर्षात्क्रियमाणा चेष्टा लीला।
His leelas are so many.
His leelas to benefit the world are so many.
They have benefited the world directly and indirectly as well.
Each avatara has a central theme associated with it.
They are not even just about the leelas of his avatara.
Everything, creation of the universes, their maintenance, dissolution they are all his leelas only.
It is not that they have not been told before.
They have been told before also.
By scholars such as Narada.
But we are not satisfied.
We want to hear them again and again.
The tongue can be satisfied.
The stomach can be satisfied.
But the ears eager to hear about his leelas can never be satisfied.
Not just about Krishnavatara, we want to hear about the other avataras also.
अथाख्याहि हरेर्धीमन्नवतारकथाः शुभाः
लीला विदधतः स्वैरमीश्वरस्यात्ममायया
There can be four questions related to avataras.
How did a particular avatara occur?
What was the form of the avatara?
Which is the place where the avatara took place?
Why did Bhagawan take that avatara?
Hearing the answers to these questions itself will benefit the listener.
What were the means with which Bhagawan took these avataras?
Atmamaya, his own maya shakti, by his own desire.
He was not under any compulsion.
He decided to take avatara.
He took using his own maya shakti.
He was not dependent on any external agency for this.
Rishis are addressing Suta धीमन्, intelligent, wise.
Only the intelligent can understand the intricacies of his avataras even partially.
वयं तु न वितृप्याम उत्तमश्लोकविक्रमे
यच्छृण्वतां रसज्ञानां स्वादु स्वादु पदे पदे
There are only three instances that can make you stop listening to the stories of his leelas.
One - there is something better to do.
That's not possible.
There is nothing better than this.
Two - his stories are no longer available.
That is also not possible.
To the discerning, they are also available.
Three - lack of interest.
Nothing can be done about it.
There are people who don't enjoy music.
Can you make them enjoy music?
No.
You will come to know whether you like it or not only if you listen to it.
You mug up as many recipes as you want.
Unless you actually cook and taste the dish you will not know whether you like it or not.
The dish may be there sitting in front of you.
You may be seeing it with your eyes.
But unless that dish comes in contact with your taste buds, you will not know whether you savor it or not.
In the same way, you may have heard so much about Bhagavata.
But you have to actually listen to it.
Then only you will know, whether you have it in you, whether you can enjoy it.
But those who have an interest in Bhagawan, every step they become more and more interested, they enjoy more and more.
They just don't get satisfied enough.
As ignorance gets removed from your mind more and more, you start enjoying it more and more
His leelas are his vikrama.
Vikrama means they are about his action.
They are about Bhagawan in action.
The 20th shloka
कृतवान् किल वीर्याणि सह रामेण केशवः
अतिमर्त्यानि भगवान् गूढः कपटमानुषः
We want to listen to all that he did.
All that the kapatamanusha did.
He is doing kapatya with us.
He is cheating.
He makes it look like he is a human being.
But whatever he does is superhuman.
His adventures are along with Rama, Balarama.
This is interesting.
Balarama is an aveshavatara of Bhagawan.
Bhagawan is purnavatara.
At the same time, at the same place both acting together, an aveshavatara and an avatara acting together, performing miracles has never happened before.
There was an encounter between Parashurama and Shree Rama.
But they have not acted together.
Here, Krishna and Balarama have done so many things together.
There is something about the divya nama keshava being used here.
In Narasimha Avatara, Bhagawan killed Hiranyakashipu, a devotee of Brahma.
In Ramavatara, Bhagawan killed Ravana, a devotee of Shiva.
But in Krishnavatara he didn't do anything of that sort.
कश्च ईशश्च केशौ
केशयोरवं अमृतं यस्मादिति केशवः
कः means Brahma.
ईशः is Shiva.
Together they are केशौ.
Bhagawan is like nectar for them in this avatara.
He did nothing in this avatara that they may feel bad about.
So this is the fifth question, tell us about what all did he do?

Knowledge Bank

Importance of effort in spirituality

The Ganga cannot descend to earth unless a great ascetic like Bhagirath, with intense penance and unwavering determination, invites her with utmost devotion. Similarly, rainfall does not grace the earth until Indra, the wielder of the thunderbolt, releases the waters withheld in the skies. This highlights that without sincere effort and readiness, one cannot attain the Self (Atman). The Atman chooses only those who genuinely seek it and are prepared to strive for it.

What is the problem with Western translations of Vedic texts?

Due to cultural gaps, Western translators do not understand the original context of the Vedic texts. The evolution of Hinduism affects the translation of the Vedic texts, often distorting the original meanings. Hinduism transitioned from Vedic rituals to later spiritual traditions. This shift changed how many terms like 'light' and 'darkness' were understood. Over time, cultural changes also led to a loss of the original context, making it difficult for later interpreters to capture the Vedic nuances. Additionally, the language evolved, with Classical Sanskrit differing from the older Vedic Sanskrit, leading to potential misunderstandings. Movements like Bhakti introduced new interpretations, adding emotional connotations that were not present in the Vedic period. The interaction with other philosophies further merged ideas, overshadowing the original Vedic meanings. As a result, translations often reflect these later influences, rather than maintaining the original qualitative distinctions intended in the Vedic texts.