Canto & Chapters
General History (31 Chapters)
Chapter 130v
Chapter 1
Chapter 230v
Chapter 2
Chapter 330v
Chapter 3
Chapter 430v
Chapter 4
Chapter 530v
Chapter 5
Chapter 630v
Chapter 6
Chapter 730v
Chapter 7
Chapter 830v
Chapter 8
Chapter 930v
Chapter 9
Chapter 1030v
Chapter 10
Chapter 1130v
Chapter 11
Chapter 1230v
Chapter 12
Chapter 1330v
Chapter 13
Chapter 1430v
Chapter 14
Chapter 1530v
Chapter 15
Chapter 1630v
Chapter 16
Chapter 1730v
Chapter 17
Chapter 1830v
Chapter 18
Chapter 1930v
Chapter 19
Chapter 2030v
Chapter 20
Chapter 2130v
Chapter 21
Chapter 2230v
Chapter 22
Chapter 2330v
Chapter 23
Chapter 2430v
Chapter 24
Chapter 2530v
Chapter 25
Chapter 2630v
Chapter 26
Chapter 2730v
Chapter 27
Chapter 2830v
Chapter 28
Chapter 2930v
Chapter 29
Chapter 3030v
Chapter 30
Chapter 3130v
Chapter 31
Canto 11, Chapter 20
Chapter 20
Verse 5 (SB 11.20.5)
SB 11.20.5 • मूल श्लोक
गुणदोषभिदादृष्टिर्निगमात्ते न हि स्वत: । निगमेनापवादश्च भिदाया इति ह भ्रम: ॥ ५ ॥
Transliteration
guṇa-doṣa-bhidā-dṛṣṭir nigamāt te na hi svataḥ nigamenāpavādaś ca bhidāyā iti ha bhramaḥ
Synonyms (Word-for-Word)
guṇa — piety; doṣa — sin; bhidā — the difference between; dṛṣṭiḥ — seeing; nigamāt — from Vedic knowledge; te — Your; na — not; hi — indeed; svataḥ — automatically; nigamena — by the Vedas; apavādaḥ — nullification; ca — also; bhidāyāḥ — of such distinction; iti — thus; ha — clearly; bhramaḥ — confusion.
Translation
“My dear Lord, the distinction observed between piety and sin comes from Your own Vedic knowledge and does not arise by itself. If the same Vedic literature subsequently nullifies such distinction between piety and sin, there will certainly be confusion.”
Bhaktivedanta Purport
By Śrīla PrabhupādaIn the Bhagavad-gītā (15.15) Lord Kṛṣṇa states, vedaiś ca sarvair aham eva vedyaḥ: “By all the Vedas I am to be known. Indeed, I am the compiler of Vedānta, and I know the Veda as it is.” Vedic knowledge emanates from the breathing of the Personality of Godhead; therefore, whatever Lord Kṛṣṇa speaks is Veda, or perfect knowledge. The Vedic literatures are full of descriptions of piety and sin, but Lord Kṛṣṇa’s statement that one should transcend piety and sin is also to be understood as Vedic knowledge. Śrī Uddhava has understood this point and therefore requests Lord Kṛṣṇa to clear up an apparent contradiction. Ultimately, the material world gives the living entities a chance to satisfy their perverted desires and at the same time gradually achieve the liberation of going back home, back to Godhead. Thus material piety must be considered a means and never an absolute end, since the material world itself is not absolute, being temporary and limited. The Personality of Godhead is Himself the reservoir of all virtue and goodness. Those persons and activities that please the Lord are to be considered virtuous, and those that displease Him are to be considered sinful. There cannot be any other permanent definition of these terms. If one becomes a mundane moralist, forgetting the Supreme Lord, one’s position is certainly imperfect, and one will not achieve the ultimate goal of piety, going back home, back to Godhead. On the other hand, there is great fear among moralists that if the distinction between piety and sin is minimized, people will commit many atrocities in the name of God. In the modern world there is no clear understanding of spiritual authority, and moral men consider any appeal to transcend morality to be an invitation to fanaticism, anarchy, violence and corruption. Thus they regard material moral principles as more important than directly trying to please God. Because this point is controversial, Uddhava is anxiously requesting the Lord to give a clear explanation.