Appreciating Prabhupada’s presentation of the Bhagavatam part 2

Podcast: Video:

Disclaimer: This transcript was generated using AI and may contain occasional errors or inaccuracies.

We will be discussing today about the Bhagavatam as its importance in our tradition and as presented by Srila Prabhupada. So, I'll be having a PowerPoint which I'll be using to direct the overall structure. But we'll also taking, we will take you one section from the Bhagavatam, the section from which Prabhupada quoted the most.

And we'll also be discussing some things from the Markini Bhagavad Dharma, which is Prabhu, which is the song which Prabhupada composed on the Jaladuta as he contemplated the mission, the massive mission that he had of spreading Krishna consciousness in the Western world. So, let's begin. And as we move forward with each section, as I said, we will go back and look at some verses periodically.

But let's start with some context. So, as was mentioned in the information about the program, we'll be discussing these four points. Historical significance of the Bhagavatam, then prominence of the Bhagavatam in the Gaudiya tradition.

Then we'll discuss about. So, we could say the first is in the broad body of Indian literature, what is the significance of the Bhagavatam? Then within that, what is the special significance of the Bhagavatam within the Gaudiya tradition? And then taking that further, we look at what was Prabhupada's expertise in expanding the Bhagavatam tradition globally. And then, now these three, we are not just going to cover them linearly.

I will cover them linearly. But we'll also go over them cyclically. That means once we understand Prabhupada's diligence, then we will get a better understanding of the significance and prominence of the Bhagavatam also.

And then, of course, while talking about Prabhupada's diligence, I'll be focusing on relevance. So, these are four broad themes, not necessarily discussed linearly, but they will be linear as well as cyclic. We'll go through all of these themes.

So, now we look at the first point. So, what is the significance of the Bhagavatam? The first point is that the Vedic literature is very vast. Now, the precise estimate of how vast the Vedic literature is, there are different opinions about it.

But essentially, it's quite clear that it is not a small book. It is not a small set of literature. It's some estimation, there are million, million verses over there.

So, we start with that. And now, it's not just these million verses, they talk about hundreds of topics. The topics range from how to go about our daily life and how to pursue transcendence, which is which is completely beyond the ambit of daily life.

So, we could say this is the domain of Artha, our daily life and Paramartha is transcendence. So, interestingly, in the broad, now the Vedic literature have given rise to six systems of philosophy. So, the six systems of philosophy are broadly considered to be theistic systems.

And theistic means that these systems focus on the understanding of, they accept the Vedas and from the acceptance of the Vedas, they move forward and discuss how one can actually understand the system of thought, how we can actually understand the broad body of Vedic knowledge. So, I am not sure whether you are able to see these slides. So, let's look at this.

Okay. So, broadly speaking, when we look at philosophy, now in India, there are lots of literature primarily. So, with respect to philosophy, there are two distinct approaches.

One approach is that we accept the reality of everyday experience and seek a deeper reality through them, a deeper understanding through them. So, what I am experiencing right now is real. So, okay, I am seeing this hand, I am seeing this phone.

So, the phone is real and I am touching the phone and experiencing some weight in my hand that is real. If I taste some food, the experiences that we have are real. However, there are layers to reality and we need to go deeper to find what is the deepest reality.

So, the whole idea is philosophy. Philosophy means it is the search for truth. The Bhagavatam also, the first verse what it says, satyam param dhimahi, what is the ultimate reality, supreme reality, satyam param.

So, it is not saying that there is only one satya. There are many satya but there is a param satya. So, one approach is that we accept the reality of everyday experiences and then we start seeing, okay, what is below this reality.

So, this is broadly the approach of Aristotle in the West and this is the approach that led to the development of science. So, Newton saw the apple falling and he accepted, yes, this apple has really fallen. But what made this apple fall? There is something invisible beyond the visible.

So, science, in one sense, operates at least fundamentally on the basis that our observations with our senses are real. But based on that, it often comes up with subtler invisible principles. So, Aristotle is, in some ways, his approach found modern science.

So, that is one approach and we will discuss how the Bhagavatam integrates both these approaches. The other approach is reject the reality of everyday experiences and seek the reality beyond them. Means whatever we are experiencing, this is all illusion.

This is a deception and what is there beyond is the actual reality. So, Plato, in the western tradition, in the Greco-Roman tradition, he represents this approach. Now, if you see in our tradition, in the Indian tradition, Bhaskara is an Imam Sagar commentator and Bhaskara represents this approach.

Sorry. And Shankaracharya represents this approach. That the reality, there is no reality to our everyday experiences.

They are all illusory. They are all false. So, now if you will see, we won't have time to go into it.

But the first words of the Srimad Bhagavatam, Tejo vari mridam itha vinimayo yathati sargo amrusha. So, Jiva Goswami and Sridhar Swami, both of them interpret this verse in different ways. So, Sridhar Swami interprets the words to say that the world is unreal, but it appears real because of the arrangement of the Lord, because of the presence of the Lord.

And whereas, Jiva Swami says that this world is real, but the deepest reality is the Supreme Lord. Now, and this world is real and the world has its reality because the Lord is the supreme reality. So, Bhagavatam, in one sense, integrates both approaches.

So, we can, in one sense, reject our everyday experience. And so that is, we could say the path of Jnana. This whole world and everything that I experience in the world is just Maya.

Give it up and then seek transcendence. The other is, look at the world and try to gain a deeper understanding of the world. In the Bhagavatam, we have the virata rupa, the second canto, the virata rupa that is described.

That is an example of, okay, what I'm seeing is real, but there is a deeper reality beyond this. So, both these approaches, if you consider the extreme with respect to these approaches, is that there is Advaita Vedanta in the broad Vedic tradition, which says that nothing about the material world is real. That every single thing that we are experiencing is simply false, is simply illusory.

So, nothing about the material world is real. That's one extreme. The other extreme is, what was Charvakaism.

Charvaka was the infamous materialistic philosopher in the Vedic tradition, because in the Indian tradition broadly, and he holds that nothing except the material world is real. Everything else is false. He says swarga is false, punar janma is false, there is no next life, there is no next world.

Therefore, just enjoy in this world. Now, of course, that is an oversimplification of Charvaka philosophy, but essentially it is true. So, now in between is broadly the Vedantic philosophy and specifically, we are looking at the Gaudiya Vaishnava philosophy.

That the Gaudiya Vaishnava philosophy is, there are levels of reality. There is a spiritual reality, there is a physical reality, there is a mental reality. There are various levels of reality and ultimately we are meant to ascend to the spiritual level of reality.

But the Bhagavatam does not reject the reality of the material world. It is just real because it has come from the Lord and it is sustained by the Lord. So, why are we discussing all this right now? The point of discussing all this is to recognize what actually is going on in this whole discussion.

So, within, if you consider, how are there these such wide and almost contradictory systems of philosophy coming up? Because they all interpreted the Vedic literature in different ways. So, Indian philosophy can be said to have these two broad divisions. There is what is called as orthodox and the other is heterodox.

So, orthodox means that which those which accepted the Vedas and these are six systems of philosophy. The Bhagavatam mentions these in its first canto when in the chapters 4, 5, 6, where we ask those respondences described there. So, these are the six systems of philosophy which emerged and they all accept the Vedas.

However, what do the Vedas actually teach? These six systems of philosophy interpret them in different ways. They interpret each philosophy in a particular way. So, they take the same text, but this text means this and this text brought together with this text means this.

So, now there are of course, there are some heterodox philosophies and these are Jainism, Buddhism and Charvakism. Now, sometimes they are called as atheistic philosophies. Within the Vedic tradition, the word atheistic refers more to the rejection of the Vedas.

Aastikya refers more to accepting the Vedas. So, Aastikya refers to rejecting the Vedas. If you go to Jain temples, you will find there are many images over there.

They have appropriated many of the Hindu images. But their idea is, okay, you want to ultimately attain the Jain conception of Moksha, of liberation. But to get toward that intermediate level, you can worship all these Devatas and then eventually you can attain Moksha.

So, what happens is all these schools of philosophy, they take the Vedic literature as the base, but they interpret it in different ways. So, perhaps one of the most outrageous examples of such interpretation or misinterpretation is the book called the Jain Ramayana. So, the Jains, they recognize that these books, whether the Vedas or the Ramayana, the Mahabharata, these books have enormous influence in India.

So, we cannot reject these books. So, what do we do? We say, yes, these books tell a truth, but the higher truth to which you can gradually go when you go through these books and go beyond these books is the Jain conception of enlightenment. So, in the Jain Ramayana, more or less the story of the Ramayana is the same.

But what they do is throughout his forest stay, when Ram meets various sages, he is meeting Jain sadhus, not Vedic sages, but Jain sages and they all give him instruction. Sadhu Updesh in the great truth of Jainism and eventually when Sita is taken by the earth at that time, according to Jain Ramayana, Ram becomes renounced, he becomes enlightened and then he becomes a Jain. He adopts Jainism and that's how he attains enlightenment.

Now, this is a preposterous retelling and modern day Jainism is quite celebrated or quite well known but as far as it is known for its non-violence and its pacifism. But still the principle remains that there were quite aggressive philosophical debates and discussions that would happen and overall these philosophies had a huge amount of influence. Like Jainism, Buddhism, Charvakism, all three are atheistic.

So, they all wrote their own books which are quite strongly atheistic, rejecting the Vedas and rejecting the idea of God as the ultimate reality. Krishna also mentions this as a demoniac idea when he says Aneeshwaram. This is Asatyam Aptishtante Jagad Ahur Aneeshwaram.

In 1680, he talks about this. So, anyway, we do not want to go too much into this. The point we are discussing this is that the Bhagavatam gives us a truth that integrates and culminates the best thoughts within these various systems of thought.

So, it is the Bhagavatam. It is the culmination. So, now if you consider, I do not want to go into these six systems of philosophy.

Let us skip this for the time being. It is too technical. But so within these six systems of philosophy, one philosophy is Vedantic and Vedantic philosophy is based on the Vedanta Sutra primarily and Vedanta Sutra, it actually involves the idea that there is one ultimate reality which exists at the end of the Vedas.

So, it can refer to both literally and conceptually. Literally at the end of the Vedas, there are the Upanishads. So, Vedanta focuses a lot on the Upanishads.

Even the Vedanta Sutra is actually an analysis of what do the Upanishads mean. So, Vedanta literally it means what exists at the end of the Veda, that Upanishad, what is its meaning? We are trying to explore that. We are developing our philosophy based on that.

And conceptually, Veda means knowledge. So, Vedanta in that sense means the summit of knowledge, the conclusion of knowledge. So, Vedanta says that the highest reality is Brahman.

And now what is the nature of that Brahman? So, the oneness without differentiation is the Advaitic idea. And oneness with differentiation is the personalist idea. So, now the Bhagavatam, there are places where it seems to support Advaitavada.

And that's why Sridhar Swami has also commented on it. Sridhar Swami nominally belonged to Advaitic Sampradaya. But the point is the Bhagavatam gives a very deep and philosophical understanding which accepts the premise of Advaita but then gives the conclusion that there is a personal divinity who is non-different from the world.

So, that we accept that there is oneness but there is differentiation also. This understanding is most thoroughly developed in the Gaudiya Vaishnava philosophy. So, now, what is the point of, why are we talking about the Bhagavatam over here? So, all the systems of philosophy were there and they had all their different teachings.

And what happens is, all of these, not all of these were written primarily by Vyasadeva but they were developed based on the writings of Vyasadeva. So, Vyasadeva, what happens is, in the Vedas, he does give the ultimate reality but the ultimate reality is not given as clearly as, it's not given so clearly that it can be easily understood. And that's why there is often a possibility for misinterpretation.

And therefore, what we have is, Vyasadeva's mature realization, the Bhagavatam depicts that he's satisfied only with the ultimate reality and only with, not the ultimate reality, but only with pure glorification of that ultimate reality. Pure means only for the desire of that ultimate reality, only for the desire of pleasing that ultimate reality, of loving that ultimate reality. Dharma projeta kaitavotra paramo nirmatsaranaam sataam.

I push aside Dharma, which is kaitava, which teaches anything other than pure devotion to the ultimate reality. And that ultimate reality, the Bhagavatam will reveal in due course to be Krishna. So, as I said, we'll come to this over a period of time.

We'll discuss more about the Bhagavatam as we talk about Prabhupada's presentation of the Bhagavatam. But the Bhagavatam also, it reveals divinity in progressive ways. So, in the second canto, we have the Virata Rupa in the second canto and then we have, that is, immanence.

Immanence means God present within nature. So, God in material nature or God in material nature, that is a universal form. And to transcendence is God beyond material nature or ultimate reality beyond material nature.

And that is described in the vision of Krishna in Vrindavan, beyond this material world. So, in this way, the Bhagavatam, it starts, like earlier I said that this point that we start with sensory perception and we go deeper. The other is, there is a world which is completely different from the world of sensory perception.

And you seek that world. So, the Bhagavatam integrates both these things. Now, let's look at the preeminence of the Bhagavatam in the Gaudiya tradition.

So, in the Gaudiya tradition, if we go into the history of the broad development of philosophy in the Indian philosophy. So, there were various Acharyas who explained the Vedanta Sutra in different ways. Shankaracharya explained in Advaitic way.

Then we had Ramacharya explained in a Vishishtadvaita way. So, like that there is a progression. So, the Gaudiya tradition, among all the various traditions, the Gaudiya tradition considers the Bhagavatam the most important.

Each tradition decides one particular book that is important. So, for Shankaracharya, it is not just one book, it is some sections of books. For him, the Mahavakyas are the most important.

Then the Shri Sampradaya, they consider the Vishnu Purana to be the most important. In the Gaudiya Sampradaya, the Bhagavat Purana, the Bhagavatam is considered to be the most important. So, now what specifically is in our tradition the Bhagavatam so important? So, the previous section, I discussed briefly and we will come back to this again in future.

But the point is that in the vast body of Vedic literature, the person from whose writings this whole vast body of literature came, that person remains discontented till he speaks the Bhagavatam. So, therefore, the Bhagavatam is the mature fruit. It is the richly developed fruit that is being relished over here.

Kalitamphala. And that is what the Bhagavatam depicts. It is what the Bhagavatam relishes, offers us for relishing.

So, that is the historical significance of the Bhagavatam. So, any reflections or questions at this point? Is Param Sathya the absolute truth or the highest truth? It can be both. When we say the highest truth, the highest truth is also absolute.

But the absolute doesn't mean that everything else doesn't have reality. Because the Vedic Bhagavatam's understanding rather is that the all of reality is a manifestation of the absolute truth. But there are two ways of looking at it.

That we can say there is a hierarchy of reality. There is a hierarchy of reality and then Krishna is the highest reality. So, for example, we have the concept in the Bhakti Samudra Sindhu of different living beings having different qualities.

So, the Jivas exhibit 50 qualities. At the most Brahmaji, then 55 qualities with Shiva, 60 qualities is with Vishnu and 64 with Krishna. So, here from this perspective, what is happening is Krishna is having the highest reality.

He is exhibiting the maximum qualities. So, everybody has their reality. But Krishna is the highest reality.

So, in that sense, he is the absolute truth. But, sorry, he is the highest reality. In a hierarchy of reality, he is the highest reality.

And then on the other hand, so what differentiates these levels? That is how much of the highest reality is manifested. So, we Jivas also manifest Krishna, but we are parts of Krishna. We are fragmental parts of Krishna.

So, Krishna's infinitude is manifested very fractionally through us. So, that is how we are, you could say finite reality. He is the infinite reality.

Now, the other approach is that there is absolute reality means when Hiranyakashipu asks Prahlad, what is the source of your strength? What is the source of your strength? So, what is replied over there? Now, Prahlad is not just being cheeky when he is replying that the source of my strength is the source of your strength and the source of the source of your strength also. That means that he is the source of the strength of Brahma. Your strength is not your own strength.

But it is the strength of, it is coming from Vishnu, it is coming from the Supreme Lord. And in that sense, that is the absolute truth. So, let's put it this way.

Param Satya when you talk about the highest truth is God. God is the best of all beings and absolute truth means God is the basis of all being. All being, being means existence that nothing can exist without Him.

So, both are real. Both are real. That if you consider living beings to be a hierarchy and God exists at the highest level.

But that doesn't mean that other living beings can gradually climb up and they can replace God. So, God is the best of all beings means that say, if we have the ATP, the tennis tennis ranking systems are there and there is one player who is number one in the world. And the others are two, three, it can go to thousand, ten thousand, whatever.

Now, this top player is at the top. But others if they improve and they defeat the person at the top, they can go to the top. So, is God the best of all beings? He is yes.

But is that all He is? No. Actually, He is at the top of all beings and it's like all other people who have other abilities they get their ability from Him. Therefore, none of them can displace Him.

None of them can replace Him. So, that is God is the basis of all being, the best of all beings and He is the basis of all being. So, I hope that addresses the question.

Okay, there are a lot of questions here now. What are the Satsangarbha's in relationship with the Bhagavatam? See, it's a little complicated, but let me try to explain over here. Okay.

So, what happened is that the in our tradition, okay, let's let I'll answer this question a little later when we come. Let me go to the Gaudiya Vaishnava tradition a little bit and then I'll come to Satsangarbha. Okay.

So, I'll explain the Bhagavatam, but I'll explain that in due course. Give me a few minutes. Then, what is the other question? Is Ramanujacharya, they consider Vishnupurana, the ultimate and naturally they consider Vaikuntha to be the ultimate.

In the Gaudiya tradition, they consider Goloka Vrindavan that is considered to be the ultimate. How does inanimate and non-moving relate to the absolute truth? Everything is the emanation of the absolute truth. Everything comes from the Supreme Lord.

That in the beginning, I alone existed. Now, in the middle, I alone exist. In the end, also I alone will exist.

So, all of these things to be coming from Krishna. So, all of reality does emanate from Krishna. Then, now why do different Sampradayas, they disapprove of this? Well, they don't disapprove of this.

They also worship Krishna, but they read the scriptures differently. So, scriptures can be understood in different ways and there are differences of Rasa and those differences of Rasa don't have to be exaggerated inordinately. Whether somebody worships Vishnu or Krishna or Narayan or Narasimha, they can still become liberated.

They can still obtain the ultimate truth. So, I think at this place, we don't have to differentiate, we don't have to get in technicalities or differences. The difference is not in terms of Tattva.

Therefore, Vishnu-Murtis are also capable of giving liberation. It is just the intimacy of the relationship is more within Krishna. So, it is important for us to know when to emphasize that Krishna and Vishnu are non-different and when to emphasize that Krishna and Vishnu are different.

So, if somebody is based on the Bhagavad Gita and the Bhagavatam, is a Vaishnava, is practicing Bhakti, but they are practicing Bhakti in a devoted way, directed towards some deity other than Krishna, towards some form of Vishnu, then that is not an issue that has to be made into a big thing. It depends on the disposition of the person. In Chaitanya Leela, we have Chaitanya Mahaprabhu going to South India.

At that time, there is this Ram Bhakta constantly chanting the name of Ram. He is agonized that Sita has been abducted away from Ram and Lord Chaitanya. There are two devotees actually like that and by associating Lord Chaitanya, both of them become devotees of Krishna.

On the other hand, in the same Chaitanya Charita Amrit, there are two associates of Lord Chaitanya. There is one lesser known associate Anupam, who is one of the brothers of Rupa and Sanatana Goswami and then there is Murari Gupta, who is quite a prominent associate and whose biographies, karchas are the basis of all the biographies of Lord Chaitanya. So, both of them were great devotees of Lord Ram and Lord Chaitanya celebrated their devotion to Ram.

He delighted in their devotion to Ram. He glorified Murari Gupta, how firm is your devotion. So, we don't have to emphasize the difference too much.

Chaitanya Mahaprabhu did not get into a debate with Murari Gupta about why are you worshipping this. There are matters of the heart and we need to recognize that Rasa is a very important reality. Of course, we will see that subtle differences still there that within the Gaudiya tradition, we have the Advaita Parivar, we have the Nityananda Parivar, we have the Gadadhar Parivar.

So, they are all initiating gurus. But within the Gaudiya Sampradaya, Murari Gupta is not an initiating guru. Why? Because the Gaudiya Sampradaya focuses on worshipping Krishna as the ultimate Aradha Deva.

So, Murari Gupta is worshipping Ram. So, his devotion is accepted. His devotion to Lord Chaitanya is also valued.

His biographies are valued. But he doesn't become initiating guru in our tradition. Samambonam simply means that which is the ultimate good, that is the highest reality.

Okay. That which is the highest reality. Bonam usually refers to good and samam means the highest.

So, I will come back to the Sandarbha soon. So, pre-eminence or prominence of the Bhagavatam in the Gaudiya tradition. So, it is described in the Gaudiya tradition.

It is Sarva Pramana Chakravarthi Bhuta. Yogoswami uses this word that what is the Bhagavatam's position? It is the emperor of the all the Pramanas. There are various Pramanas and among them the Bhagavatam is the highest.

Now it's an elaborate analysis. He gives why Bhagavatam is the highest. In fact, he used four different strands of analysis to explain why the Bhagavatam is the highest.

And one strand of analysis, of course, it is spoken by Vyasadev. In his maturity, after he has written all the other literature, then he is writing the ultimate literature. That is one reason.

Another is that he, this is spoken to a person who is about to die. When people are in the world, they have various desires and they pursue various things. But when they are about to die, at that time the most important thing is what is valued.

So, you could put it why the preeminence of the Bhagavatam. So, if you want to talk about it. So, one is that Vyasadev's mature realization.

The other is that focuses on handling, on dealing with life's ultimate reality. Different people may have different ideas of what is the ultimate reality. But one ultimate reality nobody can deny is death.

So, it focuses directly on that. Then it starts with universal questions about human welfare. It doesn't start, if you see the questions of the sages in the Bhagavatam.

For example, the Shiva Purana, there are many other Puranas. They start with, please describe the glories of Shiva. Please glorify the glories of this particular Devata.

Please glorify the glories of this person. But the Bhagavatam starts with, if you consider, one start is what is the duty of a person about to die. The other start is that with Suta Goswami speaking in answer to the question of the sages, Namisharanya.

And what are those questions? Those questions are about universal welfare. What is the ultimate good Shreyasparam for the living beings? What is it that especially in this dark age of Kali will benefit people? So, he gives various frames for explaining why the Bhagavatam is the highest. Now, the important thing is within the Vedic tradition, within the Gaudiya Vaishnava tradition, Chaitanya Mahaprabhu considered the Bhagavatam to be the most important book.

Now, why the most important book? Because of various reasons. One reason being that it focuses on the importance of devotion to Krishna. And we'll understand that more better in terms of the understanding of the Gaudiya tradition.

So, let's come to that. So, now in one sense, why is the Gaudiya tradition focusing on the Bhagavatam? Because in the Bhagavatam, there is the maximum description, most detailed and most devotional description of Krishna Leela is there. There are other books also, other Puranas also which talk of Krishna Leela.

The Mahabharata also describes Krishna's pastimes. But the Mahabharata's focus is more on the activities of the Pandavas. And within those activities, there is also a description of the activities of Krishna as he assists them.

But in the Bhagavatam, the focus is singularly on Krishna. The Krishna Leela is described in the Bhagavatam. The longest philosophical section in the Bhagavatam is arguably the Uddhava Gita.

Uddhava Gita is Krishna Shiksha. So, both of them are there over here and it's very special and very sacred. So, in this way, the singular focus on the Bhagavatam, in the Bhagavatam on Krishna.

And then what happens is, so the Gaudiya tradition, it is focused on worshipping Krishna and Krishna pervades the Bhagavatam. There is from the first canto till the twelfth canto, the names of Krishna, the remembrance of Krishna, the pastimes of Krishna, they are at least hinted at, they are described, if not directly described, but at least indirectly pointed to. There are references there throughout.

And in fact, in the first canto, there's a detailed prelude, if we consider from 1.7 to 1.16. We have seven, ten chapters, which largely are described Krishna Leela. Of course, in that chapter about Vidura instructing Dhritarashtra and Dhritarashtra's annunciation, their Parikshit's birth. But they're all in the background.

They're all going on in the background with Krishna being present on the planet and Krishna going here, Krishna going there, Krishna interacting with the devotees. So, there is a detailed prelude. Just like if you have a trailer of a movie, that in the trailer, the idea, the best part of the movie is given so that people will watch the full movie.

So, in the first canto, the trailer of Krishna's endearing pastimes are given so that people are attracted to watch the full movie, to read the full Bhagavatam and they come to the 10th canto. So, now in the Bhagavatam, we find there's a weird description of Krishna in Vrindavan and especially we have the Rasa Panchadhyay. And the Rasa Panchadhyay is considered to be the five chapters of the Rasa Leela in the Bhagavatam.

This is 10th canto, 29 to 33 chapters. And this is considered the heart of the Bhagavatam. And huge amount of poetry and literature and a whole vibrant tradition of living devotion has sprung around the Rasa Panchadhyay.

And the Rasa Panchadhyay talks about the glory of the Gopis, the Gopis love for Krishna and it points, it hints at the love of the love of the Brajivas, love of Radharani for Krishna. So, it's pointed out. So, now, so this is what is described in the Bhagavatam.

Now, the Gaudiya tradition, what does the Gaudiya tradition mean? So, Gaudiya in an external or esoteric sense, it refers to the geographical area where the tradition emerged, that's the Gaudadesh. So, it appeared in Gaudiya, that's why it's called Gaudiya tradition. But now we may say the Gaudiya tradition has spread far over the all across the world.

It is not just in the Gaudadesh. So, is the name Gaudiya appropriate? To actually, so the Gaudiya tradition also refers, Gaudiya is a variant of the word Gur. Gur means sweet.

So, different words can be derived in different ways. So, Gaudiya can be a variant of Gauda, where it refers to geographical area. Gaudiya can also be a variant of Gur.

Gur means jaggery. So, jaggery is available in various parts of the world, various parts of India, but is described to the jaggery in, the jaggery in Bengal is considered to be especially sweet. And if any of you have been to Mayapur and you have purchased the jaggery over there, it's extraordinary.

It's like chocolate. So, similarly, bhakti is widespread. Bhakti is not just in the Vaishnava tradition, but actually all over the world there are expressions of devotion toward God in various theistic traditions.

But the special sweetness of devotion is manifested by Radharani in her relationship with Krishna, in her remembrance of Krishna while she is separated from him. And in that sense, that is the supreme manifestation of devotion. It is this devotion that is special.

So, Gaudiya refers to the sweetness of the devotion of Radharani for Krishna, that is revealed by Lord Chaitanya. That which is not given for a very very long time is now being described. So, now what is happening is the Bhagavatam points to the devotion of Radharani toward Krishna.

And now our topic is, we appreciate the Bhagavatam and then we appreciate how Prabhupada has presented the Bhagavatam to us. So, the Bhagavatam, it describes Radharani's devotion for Krishna. And what is Radharani's devotion? That she is the person who has pleased Krishna the most.

Therefore, when Krishna leaves all the gopis, he stays with her. So, her devotion is completely selfless. Completely selfless means actually she gets nothing in return for her devotion.

In fact, not even the status of his name or his association. See, generally speaking, when we do something for someone, we expect something in return from them. So, the gopis offer themselves to Krishna and among them Radharani offers herself the most to Krishna.

Now, they don't become his wedded wives. So, they don't get his name. And okay, they don't get his name.

At least they can meet Krishna, even if secretly. But no, they can't even do that because Krishna leaves Vrindavan and goes away. So, here it is demonstrated that in one sense, you get nothing in return for your devotion.

Still, you maintain your devotion. That is the greatness of devotion. Of course, it's not that they don't get anything because they're offering themselves to Krishna.

Krishna is manifesting himself in their hearts like in no one else's heart. So, they do get that reciprocation internally. But externally, it is as if they get nothing.

So, dharma projeta kaitavotra, that desiring to love Krishna so that he will give us something to us in return. That is not the mood of the Bhagavatam. That is not at all the mood of Radharani's devotion.

So, it is not immoral. It is, see, there is dharma and there is paradharma. So, many people will mistake paradharma to be adharma, that which is above normal morality, that which is transmoral.

Some people will mistake it to be immoral. So, they may think it is below dharma. So, immoral means that one doesn't have moral strength.

That means when temptations come, that person succumbs to those temptations. That's immoral. But transmoral means that one follows a morality that transcends normal virtues, that transcends virtue.

That is transmoral. That is Radharani's devotion for Krishna. So, now in the Gaudiya Vaishnava tradition, what is happening is that the centrality of bhakti to Krishna in the mood of Radharani.

So, in every school, there may be many different aspects of the philosophy. But there are two common things. There is path and there is purpose.

So, there is path and purpose. So, sadhan, this is, you could say this is path, sadhan, and then we have purpose. Purpose is what is it to be achieved.

The purpose is Krishna, that is sadhya, and the path is, the sadhan is bhakti, and specifically we seek for bhakti in the mood of Srimati Radharani. So, now this brings us to the answer to the earlier question, which is going to be this, that in the Gaudiya Vaishnava tradition. So, what is this? In the Vedic tradition, you could imagine that a very vast body of knowledge is there.

So, it's like a vast mind and in the mind, you have the most precious jewel that is there. That most precious jewel is the Bhagavatam. Because in the Vedic literature, it would be like a vast mind.

The Bhagavatam is the precious jewel within that. And Chaitanya Mahaprabhu has descended to show us, see when jewel is found in the earth, it is not shining. It has, different people may mistake it to be different things.

So, now it's not that somebody has to do anything to the jewel, to the precious stone. The precious stone has its natural effulgence. It just has to be revealed.

So, what Chaitanya Mahaprabhu said is that the Vedanta Sutra is giving that truth, which is presented more explicitly in Srimad Bhagavatam. That which is hidden in the Vedanta Sutra, that which is not clear in the Vedanta Sutra, that is given the Srimad Bhagavatam. Now, he called it the natural commentary.

Why the natural commentary? Because it is given by the same author in his maturity. So, Sarvashastra Siromani, I mentioned earlier. Now, with this context, let's come back to the question about Sandarbhas.

So, see when Chaitanya Mahaprabhu described the, he said this is natural commentary. The challenge was that would everyone accept that? You see, in different traditions, there are different sources of authority and the same authority is not going to be accepted by everyone. So, natural commentary.

So, what does natural commentary mean? It means, suppose, say, a dense class given on one day and then same topic explained more accessibly the next day. So, for example, dense here means a very complicated class. Somebody gives a talk and in that talk, they take a lot of concepts and then the audience is okay.

What you spoke yesterday, we didn't really understand it. Can you make it a little more understandable? Sure, I'll do that. Now, when the next day they give a class, it is not that, okay, yesterday I made this one statement and this is what the statement means.

This is what the statement means. They're not going to go sentence by sentence on the class that they give on the previous day and then explain sentence. So, they'll just approach the subject in a different way and they approach the subject in a different way that is more accessible.

So, natural commentary is not equal to literal commentary. Literal commentary means what? That the, not that each sentence from previous class is elaborated. So, because the Bhagavatam is a natural commentary, not a literal commentary.

Literal commentary means what? Say for example, Prabhupada's Bhagavad Gita commentary is there. So, there is the Bhagavad Gita verse and for each verse Prabhupada is given an explanation. That is a literal commentary.

So, when the natural commentary is said to be there, then the question comes up, okay, you are saying that, okay, this book, the Bhagavatam is the commentary, natural commentary on the Vedanta Sutra. So, but then the question comes up, the Bhagavatam's teachings seem to be quite different from the teachings of the Vedanta Sutra. The Vedanta Sutra focuses primarily on Brahman and the Bhagavatam clearly focuses on Krishna.

So, how exactly is this the natural commentary? So, not everybody accepted that authority. So, because Chaitanya Mahaprabhu had said that there is no need for a commentary. Now, those who are his followers, they will accept his authority.

But you cannot expect those who are not his followers to accept that authority. So, for example, say if we are going to, so here we could put, say, persuasion requires acceptance of shared authority. So, what does this mean? That if I am going to persuade you about something or you are going to persuade me about something.

So, we both need to accept some authority. So, unless both of us share some authority, say, currently certain political upheavals have happened in Afghanistan. Now, what do they mean for us? What is the danger for us immediately? So, I may feel that it is a big danger.

You may feel that there's not a big danger. But these are just our opinions. So, what do we base it? Now, are there some sources, maybe some devotees who are learned in this field, some people who are accomplished, who are well-versed in contemporary affairs as well as Dharmic truths, they are authority.

So, then we refer to them and then, okay, this is what I thought, this is what I thought, this is authority. So, if two people don't accept any authority shared, then there is no way for discussion to happen. So, if say somebody is, if there's a Christian and a Muslim, they are talking and the Christian quotes the Bible and the Muslim quotes the Quran and that is what they are going to do that there is no discussion going to happen because I'm just going to quote my book and I don't accept the authority of your book and you don't accept the authority of my book.

There has to be some acceptance of shared authority. So, for example, if we are speaking to scientifically minded people and we are going to talk about the explaining the concept of the soul to scientifically minded people. So, if you're going to do that, can you just quote Gita and Prabhupada? The Gita says that actually the body is not our essential identity, the soul is and that's what Prabhupada says.

Now, that will not work. No, that is just your religious text saying that. So, then if for them their authority, no, this won't work.

Now, maybe afterwards they develop faith, then that may work for them. But maybe here we will need scientific research, scientific researchers who talk about past life memories, who talk about near the experiences, who talk about how life and consciousness can't be explained in terms of the materialistic framework. So, when that person accepts scientists' authority, accepts science's authority and we share, okay, let's say what science is saying, then there is some communication possible, there's some persuasion possible.

So, what happened is for the Goswamis, they faced a significant challenge. Chaitanya Mahaprabhu said that Bhagavatam is a natural commentary on the Vedanta Sutra. But those who did not accept Chaitanya Mahaprabhu's authority, how are they going to accept his conclusion? So, how are they going to accept his conclusion? They will not.

And because Chaitanya Mahaprabhu had said that there is no need to write, there is no need to write a commentary on the Bhagavatam, so they couldn't write a commentary also. So, what do they do at that time? That became a challenge for them. They couldn't write a commentary on the Vedanta Sutra, not Bhagavatam.

Now, why was the commentary on the Vedanta Sutra needed? Because at that time, why commentary on Vedanta Sutra? Because the Vedanta Sutra is a part of the Prasthanatray. That every tradition had to establish its credentials by writing a commentary, a Vedanta Sutra commentary. That's how a tradition, yes, this is our authority.

This is how we understand the Vedanta Sutra. So, but when the Goswamis could not do that, so what did the Goswamis do? Especially Jiva Goswami, he does something quite brilliant. Now, of course, Sandarbhas do many many things.

But what he is doing in part of the Sandarbhas is that he is taking, select, Sandarbha means thread. So, there are different meanings of the word Sandarbha also, but let's take the meaning of thread over here to understand this. He takes, selects verses from Bhagavatam that explain themes from Vedanta Sutra.

So, for example, there is Chattu Shruti Tika. Chattu Shruti Tika is what? So, he is taking the first four Sutras, first four Vedanta Sutras, Athato Brahma Jijnasa, Janmadyasyatah, Shastrayonitvat and Pattusamanvayat. And he shows how Bhagavatam verses can explain these four Sutras.

And similarly, the Vedanta Sutra can be explained using the Bhagavatam. So, then what he does is, he selects Bhagavatam verses and builds up a whole using selected Bhagavatam verses or you could say systematically selected, systematically selected or systematically arranged Bhagavatam verses. He establishes the foundational truths of Gaudiya Vaishnavism.

So, that's how the Vedanta Sutra is basically like a, basically taking the verses of Bhagavatam as threads and using, sometimes we can use threads and with the threads we can make a beautiful design. So, there is Tattva Sandarbha, there is Krishna Sandarbha, there is Piti Sandarbha, there is Bhakti Sandarbha, like that there are various Sandarbhas and each of those one-one core truth of the Gaudiya Vaishnav tradition, he is weaving it and he's making that beautiful pattern and he's explaining it. So, he had to do that because he had to establish the credentials of the two things.

He had to establish the credentials of the Gaudiya tradition for those who are Vedantic followers and secondly he had to establish the credentials of the Vedic tradition of the Gaudiya tradition as being naturally derived from the Bhagavatam. So, he did both those things and thus he brought credentials for the, he brought respectability in the intellectual and spiritual elites of the time for the Gaudiya tradition. So, did devotees go against Torchaitanya Mahaprabhu writing the Sutra commentary? That is an important example of how sometimes Niyamagraha can destroy a tradition.

So, what had happened was all the Sandarbhas were written in the 16th century roughly. They were written in 16th century but by the time of 17th century things had changed substantially and in the court of Jaipur, Vrindavan was still the headquarters of devotion but Vrindavan had been devastated by the Muslims. So, Vrindavan was in one sense the spiritual headquarters but the functional headquarters was Jaipur because the Jaipur king was a prominent patron of Vaishnavas in particular.

So, what happened is there before Govindji was brought from Vrindavan to Jaipur, there was Ramananda Sampradaya and Ramananda Sampradaya's followers, they worshipped Lord Ram and Ram was the prominent deity of the kingdom and when Govindji came and Govindji's beauty won the heart of the participants, won the heart of the king and his royal family. Then they all started building a beautiful temple for Lord Govindji and they started worshipping him and in one sense all the patronage shifted from, a significant amount of patronage shifted to Gaudiya Vaishnavism. So, the Ramanandis became enraged by that and they decided that how do we get the, win the king back to us.

So, they decided that we will falsify the credentials of Gaudiya Vaishnava itself. So, they said this Gaudiya Vaishnava, this is not a bona fide tradition at all. Why? Because you do not have any commentary on the Vedanta Sutra.

It is a very complicated, whatever the challenges were there, there were many challenges. They said where is the basis for saying that Krishna is supreme instead of Vishnu, where is the basis for worshipping Radharani with Krishna and not Rukmini with Krishna, because Krishna is married to Rukmini and not Radha and what is the basis for for yours, calling yourself a Sampradaya also. So, at that time Baldevidya Bhushan realized, he was sent by Vishnachigatakur and he realized that unless he wrote a commentary, Gaudiya Vaishnavism itself would be rejected.

Now, according to some later Gaudiya Vaishnavas, it is said that Baldevidya Bhushan is the reincarnation of Sarvambhattacharya and Sarvambhattacharya heard Chaitanya Mahaprabhu s explanation of Vedanta Sutra and Baldevidya Bhushan came back to that. Baldevidya Bhushan, when he came back as Baldevidya Bhushan, he explained it. Now, some people say that now there was another attendant who heard Chaitanya Mahaprabhu explain Sarvambhattacharya and that attendant came as Baldevidya Bhushan and of course there are others who say that Baldevidya Bhushan is himself a different eternal associate and he came afterwards.

But the point is that Niyamagraha, the Niyamagraha means sticking to the sticking to the letter of the law at the cost of the spirit of the law. So, that is undesirable. So, we need to understand what is the purpose of this law.

So, what is the purpose of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu saying that the Bhagavatam is a natural commentary? It was not to ban writing commentaries on the Vedanta Sutra. It was to establish the glory of the Bhagavatam. But when the whole parampara which was actually glorifying the Bhagavatam, which was based on the Bhagavatam, that whole tradition itself was being challenged.

Then sometimes the disciple or the follower has to fulfill the mission of the teacher by doing something different from what the teacher has taught. So, there is no evidence that Chaitanya Mahaprabhu explicitly forbade. So, he did never write a commentary on the Vedanta Sutra.

He says there is no need for a commentary. But later a need came up. So, if a need came up, what do you do? So, Chaitanya Mahaprabhu said it was redundant at his times.

But later time it is not redundant. So, we can't take the words literally. So, we have to understand the purpose of the words and then honor the purpose of, fulfill the purpose of the words appropriately.

Yes, correct. A good example of Gaurakrishna Swamiji's disciples wanting to drag his body through after his disappearance. So, the story is that he said that after I die, I want my body to be bathed in the dust of Vrinda, dust of the Dham.

So, some of his followers wanted to, some of the followers wanted to actually do it physically and he said no, that is a mood, that is a bhav. Don't drag it like that. Okay.

Now, as devotees, is it important to study the Sandarbhas? Why not? It is our tradition's literature. It is our tradition's quite important literature and yes, we can learn, appreciate the scholarship of Gaudiya, of Jiva Goswami. We can understand, we can get a better, much deeper appreciation of the Bhagavatam.

So, it is wonderful to study the Sandarbhas. Now, is it essential? It depends on our particular service. So, if we are preaching to people who accept the authority of the Bhagavatam, but they have different understandings of what the Bhagavatam teaches, then to clarify the understanding of the Bhagavatam, studying of the Sandarbhas is extremely helpful.

However, if we are primarily reaching out to people who don't accept any scripture, authority of any scripture at all and our primary service is to help them appreciate the need of scripture and gradually come to accept the authority of scripture, then we need to focus on those, on learning those teachings or learning that aspect of the philosophy, which can help people develop that faith, which can help people come to the study of scripture. So, different devotees may be differently inspired. So, one could be, if somebody, we ourselves feel very attracted, nourished by a particular book, then we can read their book and be nourished by that.

Another is, it is our personal inspiration. The other second is our service requirement. If our service requires that, we can read that.

So, it depends. And the Bhagavatam itself is very vast and reading that itself also takes a good amount of time. So, that's the Sandarbhas.

Now, how can we know in our lives what the spirit and what the letter of the law? That is, as is mentioned, Niyamagraha. It is not Niyamagraha, it is Niyamagraha. Niyamagraha means, Agraha is not accepting at all, it is rejecting the rule.

But Niyamagraha is insisting on the rule. So, that requires actually a deeper understanding of what is it that the Acharyas want to do? What is it that is the purpose of the Acharyas? What is the purpose of the author of the book? So, for example, the fifth canto cosmology in Bhagavatam. Now, Parikshit Maharaj is about to depart from the world.

So, when he is about to depart from the world, at that time Parikshit Maharaj's purpose is not to get a PhD in cosmology. Parikshit Maharaj's purpose is to see how through the understanding the cosmos, his remembrance of the Lord can be increased. And the Bhagavatam also says that is the purpose.

So, if somebody takes the literal word of the Bhagavatam's description of cosmology and puts that in conflict with modern cosmology, then what are we doing? We are doing Niyamagraha. The Bhagavatam is for a different purpose. The modern science is for a different purpose.

So, we have to keep the purpose in mind clearly. When you put science and scripture, when you put scripture and science in competition with each other, we end up devaluing scripture and we end up devaluing science also. Science is primarily meant to help us function in this world.

Scripture also can help us function in the world, but it's primarily meant to help us get out of this world. So, both of them have their own domains. So, if we put science and scripture in competition, we are devaluing scripture.

Scripture can give us something which science can't do. No amount of the best medical science can grant immortality, can grant eternal existence, can grant love for Krishna. So, now scripture may also contain some material knowledge and material science can also have some spiritual pointers and that overlapping areas can be addressed.

But that's why focusing on the purpose is very important. The more we understand the purpose, then specific statements, specific quotes, they can be addressed appropriately. Okay.

So, any other reflections or questions? So, now let's move to what Prabhupada's presentation of the Bhagavatam. As I said, when I come to this, we'll be discussing some of it today and we'll come back to this point once again. So, now we know.

Okay. So, this screen is not being shared here. Okay.

So, the many questions here. Let us see what we can take. After coming to the Krishna consciousness movement, we understand the highest philosophy and why do devotees sometimes go to other sampradayas? There are many reasons.

First reason is that just saying that we have the highest philosophy is not enough. We need to actually be able to establish how it is the highest philosophy. So, if some devotees have that particular need, then they need to, within our movement, we need to have those kind of, they need to interact with those scholars who can actually explain that, okay, this is what this philosophy is based on, this is what this is teaching, this is what its conclusion is, and this is what this philosophy is teaching.

So, simply saying this is the highest philosophy, that is not particularly persuasive. Everybody can blow their own trumpet like that. So, we need to actually connect devotees, those devotees who have questions like this, with devotee scholars who can address their intellectual concerns.

If their concerns are actually intellectual, but sometimes when devotees may go to other groups, other traditions or whatever, it may not be because of the philosophy alone. It may just be because they may have had bad experience with this is with devotees. They may find that devotees are too judgmental, too fanatical.

They may have some problems with the institution and they may feel that I want a less institutionalized form of spirituality. So, it's quite rare that a person leaves Krishna consciousness because of the philosophy, because they find some better philosophy somewhere. Now, people may claim that I left because I found a philosophy unsatisfactory, but if you actually discuss with them, there are some other grievances over there.

So, if those grievances could be addressed, then people may not go away. And even after that, the soul always has free will. So, there is the mind, the soul is surrounded by the subtle body, there's a mind and the intelligence.

The mind can distract by giving rise to desires and the intelligence can distract by giving rise to doubts. So, the soul has free will and that free will can be misdirected both by desires coming from the mind and by doubts coming from the intelligence. And either way, if the soul chooses to go along with those, then Krishna doesn't stop that.

Krishna may give guidance, but if a person wants to go in a particular direction, follow a particular desire or follow a particular doubt, Krishna is not going to forcibly stop them. That is not who Krishna is. Krishna gives us free will.

So, free will doesn't just mean free will to follow our desires. It also means free will to follow our doubts. So, just because somebody has the, we can say bhakti offers the highest happiness, then why do people still go towards worldly desires? Although those pleasures are lower.

Well, there could be various reasons, but ultimately it's free will. So, we can compare it with desires. Now, maybe bhakti offers the highest happiness, but they were not provided proper resources so that they could experience any higher happiness.

Maybe they were surrounded with people who, they were in a devotional atmosphere where they hardly experienced any higher taste. So, rather than saying bhakti offers the higher taste, it is the responsibility of the leaders of the movement to create an atmosphere where that higher taste can be experienced. Raghupath says that the deities need to be decorated in such a way that when people's minds are agitated, when they come to the temple and behold the deities, they feel peaceful.

So, just as if the higher taste is not made accessible, then people may not feel that higher taste and they may go away because some other taste is better. The highest philosophy is not made accessible, then people may go away. So, the soul's free will is always there and we need to recognize that it is both the individual's responsibility to use the free will properly and it is also the leaders or the institutions, institutions leader's responsibility to provide as many facilities as possible for that soul to use the free will properly, to be inspired to use the free will properly.

Now, what are the questions? Now, Radharani, there are a lot of questions here. I think we'll have to move ahead. Let's take one or two questions, then we can move ahead.

So, Radharani cannot survive without Krishna's service and he gets topmost happiness. I think it should be she over here. So, Radharani cannot survive without Krishna's happiness.

She gets topmost happiness which seems greater than Krishna's happiness. So, how is it selfless? So, there is a difference between happiness as the purpose of service and happiness as the result of service. So, or that means Radharani doesn't serve Krishna so that she'll get happiness.

Radharani serves Krishna because Krishna is so lovable and because she loves Krishna so much. Now, because Krishna is Sarvasuka Sagar, He is the ocean of all happiness, when her consciousness connects with Krishna through her remembrance and through her service, she naturally gets happiness. But her concern is not to be happy.

So, it is selfless. Now, selfless doesn't have to mean joyless. Selfless doesn't have to mean that it has to be joyless.

Selfless means that joy, one's own pleasure, one's own joy is not the purpose for doing that service. Now, and it's not that Krishna wants us to be miserable in our service to Him. No, that is not at all what Krishna wants.

Krishna wants each one of us to be happy. He wants us to be joyful. It's just that he wants each one of us to find higher happiness and thereby give up lower pleasures.

So, how do we do that? For that, sometimes we have to be selfless. So, selfless actually means that what the self thinks right now to be the highest, this is not actually the highest. There is something higher and that is what I am pursuing in my life.

That is what I wish to seek. So, in that sense, this Radharani does get the highest happiness but she's not seeking that and that's why it's considered selfless. So, Bhagavatam is for a person who is about to die and Ramayana and Mahabharata are for other purposes.

So, if we take guidance from the Mahabharata and the Ramayana, will we not be prepared at the time of death? Well, this is creating unnecessary polarities. Unnecessary polarities means that it has to be A or B. It is digital logic. So, like when the former US president launched this war against terror, he said that if you are not fighting against terror, then you are fighting.

If you are not fighting the war against terror, then you are fighting the war for terror. That's a false polarity. There could be many, there were many thoughtful people.

They said, yes, terror has to be opposed, terrorism has to be opposed. But is war the best way to oppose terrorism? Is the war the best way to control terrorism? So, there are creating artificial polarities is unnecessary. So, yes, we want to remember Krishna at the time of death and we can use all the resources possible.

Right now, we are having the class in English right now. So, we all learnt English and that's why we are able to understand this class. I am able to speak, you are able to understand the class.

So, because we learn English, does that mean that we wasted that much time and instead we could have simply studied Bhagavatam and could have remembered the Bhagavatam? Well, no, we can use the knowledge of the language and what is the purpose of using that knowledge of the language? So, the purpose is ultimately to use it to serve Krishna, to remember Krishna. So, devotees study the Bhagavatam and the Mahabharata and the Ramayana. But what do we study in the Mahabharata and the Ramayana? We study, we focus on those principles in the Ramayana and the Mahabharata that assist us in our devotion.

So, the Mahabharata has many different teachings, especially because the Mahabharata is far bigger than the Ramayana. So, as devotees, we are not interested in every single teaching of the Mahabharata. For that matter, as devotees, we are not even interested in every single teaching of the Bhagavatam.

Bhagavatam has so many descriptions of Payo Vrata and things like that. As devotees, we are not doing the Payo Vrata. So, yes, we can study the books and the books have a lot of wisdom and they give us practical guidance for living.

So, yes, we want to prepare for death, but we may die today, but we may not die today also. So, if you are not going to die today, then we have to prepare for our life as you are going to live. So, we can say that all these books, all these sacred books, they are resources for us to deepen our devotion, to deepen our convictions, to get more and more guidance by which we can ultimately attain life's supreme purpose.

So, if you see, look at all the followers of Lord Chaitanya, they all knew that, they all knew that, they all knew the Vedic scriptures and we see that Nityan Prabhu and Chaitanya Mahaprabhu in the childhood, they would enact Lord Ram's pastimes. So, they knew about Ramlila and Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, they all quoted many other scriptures and they knew, actually, it seems Chaitanya Charitamrita, in Chaitanya Charitamrita, Krishna Daskaraj Goswami quotes from something like 50, around 50 different books. So, he is writing a book and he is primarily quoting from the Bhagavatam, but he is quoting from many other books also.

So, they are all being used to glorify Lord Chaitanya, glorify Lord Krishna. There is no need to create artificial polarity like this. Yes, if somebody gets too caught in the detailed study of the Mahabharata and gets into the technicalities of specific practices at specific times and then that they get caught in that and then they go be diverted from the remembrance of Krishna, then it could be a problem.

But these are books from our own tradition. They may not be from the Gaudiya tradition, but the Gaudiya tradition is a part of a broader tradition. So, why not enrich ourselves with the wisdom of these books? So, Prabhupada said that sannyas is a must.

How do we get the spirit of these rules? Well, in general, Prabhupada was not a person who nuanced his speech. When Prabhupada was explaining one point, he would go all the way and emphasize that point. When Prabhupada wanted to explain another point, he would go all the way and explain that point.

So, that is why we need to look at the broad body of Prabhupada s literature, Prabhupada s literary contributions. I am a part of the Shastric Advisory Council and under the GBC s request, we prepared a whole paper on hermeneutics and there is a course on hermeneutics that is also available. Hermeneutics basically means understanding Shastra.

How do we understand Shastra? How do we understand Prabhupada s words? So, one principle over there is don't just take one statement in isolation. If you want to understand one position of Prabhupada, look at all that Prabhupada said on this book about it. So, Prabhupada says if somebody is troubled by sex desire, then my standing instruction to all my disciples is that they should get married.

Another place Prabhupada says that if you are troubled by sex desire, marriage is no solution. Everybody is troubled by sex desire and even if you get married still you'll be troubled. So, you have to learn to tolerate.

So, it seems Prabhupada has given two opposite instructions. It depends on context. So, we need to really recognize the context.

So, Prabhupada says sannyas is a must. Well, okay. Let us look at what context he has said it.

Did he insist that every single disciple of his has to take sannyas? Did he condemn those of his brothers who hadn't taken sannyas? Did he condemn all the sages in the past who not just kings but even sages? Many of the sages didn't take sannyas. They had their wives and they departed to the higher abodes with their wives. So, Prabhupada said sannyas is a must.

But then Prabhupada also taught for the scripture that it is generally the Brahmanas who take sannyas. The Pandavas, they retired from the world. They retired from the world but they didn't take.

So, they took vanaprastha but they didn't take sannyas. So, Prabhupada, what to say of certain sannyas, Prabhupada even said that Brahmin diksha is not necessary. So, then that second diksha is not necessary.

Then why third diksha is necessary? So, how do we get the spirit from his books? That's why we need to pray to Prabhupada. Read him extensively. Don't just take one quote and start quoting that.

Read Prabhupada extensively. Try to hear what Prabhupada's teachings are from different devotees and try to gain a holistic understanding. So, to get the spirit of the books, most important, my understanding is always keep in mind what Prabhupada wanted.

Prabhupada wanted everyone to be Krishna conscious. So, all other musts that may be there, they are all subordinate to the point of Prabhupada wanting everyone to be Krishna conscious. So, that's why we have to see focus on Prabhupada's purpose.

Not so much on this statement of Prabhupada, that statement of Prabhupada, this action of Prabhupada, that action of Prabhupada. Because Prabhupada was dynamic. Prabhupada was responding to situations.

Prabhupada was guiding different people. Prabhupada was a living Acharya. Prabhupada was not like a robot who was simply pressing a button and spouting out verses.

Prabhupada was literally, Prabhupada was actually compassionately looking at people and being guided by Krishna to give answers and to respond in a way that was best for the person over there. That's why it's important, very, very important that rather than simply quoting Prabhupada, we need to try to understand the purpose of Prabhupada and see how we in our personal life and in our outreach can help others fulfill the purpose of Prabhupada. So, what to speak of Prabhupada saying that initiation is a must, sorry, sannyas is a must.

Most of the life members that help Prabhupada big time in building the temples and Prabhupada was immensely grateful to them. Prabhupada didn't even insist that they take first initiation. Prabhupada in his last days, he offered a special gift.

It was his own necklace or something from his own personal paraphernalia. He said give this to George Harrison. Prabhupada remembered him and he had not even taken first initiation.

So, Prabhupada had come to give us Krishna and all the musts that we may have said, they are all meant to help us in reaching Krishna. So, for different people, some must may be important, some must may not be important. So, if we start obsessing on the letters, on the specific words of Prabhupada, then all that will happen is we will become fanatical and we will dissipate all our energy in arguing with each other.

So, I was in Texas. Texas is considered to be the hotbed of aggressive evangelical Christianity. They are out to convert people.

So, devotees were driving me for a program in front of the car and he said that the Bible says it. I accept it. That settles it.

The Bible says it. That was three statements. The Bible says it.

I accept it. That settles it. Oh really? Okay.

The Bible says that on Sunday, if anybody does any work, that person should be punished. So, are you going to punish all the people who are working on Sundays? The Bible says that anybody who commits adultery, that person should be stoned to death. Are we going to do that in today's world? There is one Christian only who has written a book.

I think the book, I forget the name of the book, but the theme of the book is living the Bible literally for one year. Take the statements of the Bible and literally, I am going to apply them in my life. It is just not possible.

It is a hilarious book. It is a ludicrous book. It comes in situations.

Just can't live literally. Prabhupada himself didn't live literally every scriptural conjunction. The Manusmriti and the Dharmashastra says sannyasis shouldn't travel abroad.

Prabhupada traveled abroad. So, if we get caught in the letter of scriptures, we will end up destroying, we will end up causing so much conflicts. Now that doesn't mean Prabhupada's purpose is to be, that Prabhupada's words are not important.

Of course, they are important. That doesn't mean Prabhupada's examples are not important. They are important.

However, they all need to be seen in the light of Prabhupada's purpose. Thank you. So, there are some questions which I don't see directly relevant to the topic.

And since we have already spent a I'll kindly, I'll please keep those questions for later and we'll move ahead. So, now we talk about Prabhupada's diligence in expanding the Bhagavatam tradition globally. So, what is happening over here is that if you consider this is the Bhagavatam commentary, it was his magnum opus.

He spent more time on his Bhagavatam commentary than on anything else. And in fact, if you consider how Prabhupada wrote his Bhagavatam commentary also, it's remarkable. Generally speaking, suppose we go and suppose we have a great desire for sharing Krishna Bhakti and we go to a particular town, we go to a particular village or we go to a particular city and then we may give a few talks, we may try to share Krishna Bhakti and see how much is the interest.

And then we may decide, okay, you know, there's a good amount of interest over here. Then from the weekly program, we say, okay, you know, let's, there are a good number of people coming. Let's try to have a base over here.

People can come more frequently also if they want. Then let's have a small center. Then we can have a proper temple.

Then we can have a big temple. So, but suppose somebody goes to a place and nobody has come for a program. But it is, we are going to build a multi-crore temple over here.

Wow! Really? Really? Okay. Is that sound? Is that realistic? We may have some second thoughts about doing something like that or somebody does like that. So, this is very courageous.

This is very ambitious. So, Prabhupada's writing the Bhagavatam commentary was like that. Prabhupada, if you consider, Prabhupada's extraordinary ambition.

So, he was a person who, in the 1955-1960s, roughly, till 1960s, yeah, Prabhupada was an unknown, was an unknown spiritual teacher or author. He had had no noteworthy success. Back to Godhead, we know he tried to distribute, but people were not interested.

He would request people to buy, but people do not really take it. He had tried to establish a League of Devotees that had not worked out. He had tried various things.

It did not work out much and Prabhupada wanted to speak in English. Now, one reason it had not worked out was that Prabhupada was writing and speaking English. And India, still in the British, they educated some people so that they could work in the British government.

But most Indians did not speak English. So, the language was a big barrier in Vrindavan and in Delhi. So, it was just that Prabhupada did not get much audience.

And at that time, so he had no finances, he had no followers, he had no reputation. And at that time, Prabhupada decided to take up this project, this massive project of translating and commenting on the whole Bhagavatam. And it's just staggering to imagine it.

As an author, generally, whenever I write a book, I think, okay, who is the audience? How will we be able to publish the book? Do we have the funds for publishing the book? Do we have some resources for distributing the book? That's a common sense approach. And that's how most people should approach it. But Prabhupada, he had no funds even to get the paper to print the Bhagavatam.

He would struggle to print even the BTG, which is relatively smaller. And yet, Prabhupada, at that time, decided to embark on this multi-volume project. Prabhupada, at that time, actually planned smaller volumes.

And he planned 50 volumes at Bhagavatam. So, now, we have 12 cantos and 18 volumes. But when Prabhupada initially published it, Prabhupada published actually the first canto in three volumes.

So, his plan itself was mind-boggling. How did Prabhupada have such, what is the, yet planned, yet he planned a 50-volume series. And we could say, okay, he planned a 50-volume series.

But Prabhupada could have been in a hurry, let me complete this, this is such a big book. And Prabhupada could have decided, let me just keep short purports so that I can keep translating, taking it ahead. See, every long purport that Prabhupada is writing, it is taking that much of his time.

And that means for him to complete the Bhagavatam is going to require that much more effort. So, we see here Prabhupada's extraordinary faith in the Bhagavatam. That he had that deep conviction that this Bhagavatam is what is going to equip me to go abroad.

It is the Bhagavatam is what is going to help me to, sorry. So, Prabhupada felt that the Bhagavatam was his ammunition for going to the west. In fact, if you look at the history in 1961, Prabhupada started and between 61-62, roughly in that period you can say, the dates vary because we don't have precise historical record of every single thing.

But we could say in the period 1961-62, Prabhupada completed the first volume of Canto 1. Then in the next year, whatever it is, in 62 or 62-63, Prabhupada completed the second volume. And then next year, Prabhupada completed third volume. So, when Prabhupada had this, the three volumes are not three cantos, they are three volumes of Canto 1 itself.

So, when he completed that, Prabhupada felt, now I am ready to go to the west. This is my ammunition. These are my resources.

And of course, when Prabhupada did something ambitious, it also provided something, it was remarkable and it was appreciated. Prabhupada was the first translation commentary on the Bhagavatam. The Bhagavatam is the foremost book for the Bhakti tradition and the Gaudiya tradition.

But even beyond, the Bhagavatam is considered a very important book. The Bhagavat Kathas are widespread. So, when Prabhupada made this ambitious project to translate the Bhagavatam, now Prabhupada's Bhagavatam, the result, it was the first English commentary, first comprehensive English commentary.

There are many who had translated the Bhagavatam, but first comprehensive commentary on the entire Bhagavatam. And it was a record. Because it was a record, soon what happened was, the Indian Prime Minister and President, both, the Prime Minister at that time was Lal Bahadur Shastri and the President was, our former President was Radhakrishnan.

See, they both gave very positive reviews for the book because Prabhupada had actually had that courageous confidence that this will make a significant difference. Even in India, Prabhupada did not become a very, like a best-selling author. He was still an unknown author.

But he had done a significant achievement, a landmark achievement that had not been done in the history of the Indian tradition, a translation commentary on the Bhagavatam. And with that, Prabhupada, so in one sense, that gave, Prabhupada had both, he got both spiritual resources and we could say material credibility. The Bhagavatam, material credibility was when Prabhupada was in the West.

He would say, this is the book I have written. And people would be impressed. Oh, this is some strange old man.

He has written a whole book. And they would take the book and they would say, the Prime Minister of India, the President of India appreciated this. Oh, that's impressive.

So Prabhupada labored tirelessly and Prabhupada took the Bhagavatam with him when he went abroad. In fact, Prabhupada was so immersed in the consciousness of the Bhagavatam that he even said at that time that, I think I will not be able to complete this whole thing today. And we will discuss the Markiniya Bhagavad Dharma and the other things a little later.

But let's look at some points over here. At one time when Prabhupada was in the early days, when he was planning to go abroad, 1964-65, things were very finalized and people would ask him, Swamiji, I heard you are planning to go to America. And Prabhupada was so unassuming, said, no, I am not going to America.

Bhagavatam is going to America. Prabhupada considered himself not so much a teacher of Bhagavatam as simply a carrier of the Bhagavatam. So now Prabhupada's propagating Krishna consciousness was historic.

It is a prophetic propagation. What is prophetic means? I thought I did this play of words, Prabhupada's prophetic propagation. So pra pra pra, that sound comes thrice.

So what is happening over here is, there is a prophecy and Prabhupada's, by propagating the Bhagavatam, fulfilled that prophecy. Now what are the prophecies? There is a traditional prophecy that Bhakti Devi will travel to the west and Bhakti will travel beyond the ocean and she will flourish and she will bring flourishing to human society all over the world. And Lord Chaitanya had made the prophecy that Krishna's holy name will spread all over the world and Prabhupada fulfilled those prophecies.

Now we could also say that there was also one more prophecy, if you put it over here, as personal prophecy was, personal means not his prophecy, but prophecy about him, that the astrologer had said that he is, astrologer on his birth had said that he will, he will cross the oceans, he will build, he will spread, he will become a deliverer of the world, he will build hundred temples. So Prabhupada fulfilled that. So now Prabhupada, in one sense Prabhupada's mission was fulfilling all these.

So he was, he was actually fulfilling a prophecy. He was himself a very resourceful, courageous and devoted and not resourceful, courageous, expert preacher. But he also knew that behind him, assisting him, empowering him was his whole tradition.

In fact, before Prabhupada went abroad, it is said that he spent time in Mayapur, he spent time in Vrindavan, especially Vrindavan he spent time and he got the blessings of the Goswamis, so that he could fulfill their mission, he would carry their message further. And in Prabhupada, he went abroad. We see that when he was confronting the American coastline, he is singing the song Markine Bhagavad Dharma.

The song itself is what? How to preach the Bhagavatam, Markine Bhagavad Dharma. And when he's talking about that song, in that song, we'll discuss the song and we'll discuss that some of the teachings of the Bhagavatam in our next session. But what is Prabhupada thinking that I have come here to preach the message of the Bhagavatam and he is quoting the Bhagavatam also.

Prabhupada is not thinking that I'm going to do something miraculous. You see, I'm going to simply repeat the Bhagavatam. Now, of course, repeat doesn't mean Prabhupada simply recited the Sanskrit verses.

No, repeat means is present in a way that is intelligible. And Prabhupada prayed to Krishna, please make my words intelligible to them. So, but Prabhupada saw himself as the messenger of the Bhagavatam, as a carrier of the Bhagavatam.

And he presented the Bhagavatam. He said, this is what I'm going to do. So, he said, he's not thinking he was alone.

He's thinking that Krishna is with me because Krishna is manifesting as the Bhagavatam. It is you. It is your avatar, Krishna.

And if somebody hears this, one who hears this again and again, that person will become dhir, that person will become sober. This was Prabhupada's focus on the Bhagavatam. So, this was Prabhupada, we'll talk about the book, the Dharma book in the next session.

But Prabhupada's extraordinary vision was that he foresaw a global living Bhagavatam tradition when it seemed to be declining, even its home place India. That it is not that if you see, consider most Indian temples, even now and even a few decades ago or half a century ago, the temples were mostly places for rituals. People would go there for darshan, people would go there for puja.

But teaching of the Bhagavatam, that would happen occasionally. Bhagavat kathas would periodically happen at the time of festivals and other things. But it is Prabhupada who, now you remember Prabhupada translated the first canto of the Srimad Bhagavatam and the first volume in 1960s, when he was still an unknown Swami.

League of Devotees had not worked. He was not with the Gaudiya Mutt. He was on his own.

And Prabhupada translates Nityam Bhagavata as by attending the Bhagavatam class daily. By daily attendance in the Bhagavatam class. Well, where is this daily Bhagavatam class going on? It was not going on anywhere.

But Prabhupada had that vision that it will happen. And Prabhupada said time is separating us. There are temples and temples are filled with devotees.

What are the devotees doing in the temples? Yes, they are dancing and there are beautiful deities. They are worshipping the deities. Along with that, they are hearing the Bhagavatam.

So, we are a part of the Bhagavat tradition. And what Prabhupada foresaw, what Prabhupada envisioned, he, through his disciples, it has been fulfilled. Now, through his followers, it has been fulfilled.

I'll make this one point, which is a very important one, which we'll conclude now. That some people feel that, you know, Prabhupada, he want to translate the Bhagavatam and it was not completed. So, was it an incomplete mission? Prabhupada departed in the middle of the 10th canto.

Not in the middle, in the first part of the 14 chapters he completed. No, actually, in one sense, Prabhupada's departure also demonstrates the truth. That it is not a mission that is going to ever be completed.

And it is not a mission that is left incomplete. Rather, it is a mission unending. Prabhupada's purpose was not just to translate and comment on the Bhagavatam.

Yes, Prabhupada's purpose was that, but it was much more. It was to inspire generations and generations of devotees to continue speaking on the Bhagavatam, to continue sharing the glory of the Bhagavatam. And in one sense, what Prabhupada started, he empowered his followers to complete.

So, Prabhupada continued speaking on the Bhagavatam, hearing the Bhagavatam, remembering the Lord till his disappearance. If you see that, the document of the final test, you know, Prabhupada is so weak that he can barely speak. His lips are not moving.

There is hardly any sound coming out. And the devotees are holding the dictaphone right close to his mouth and Prabhupada is commenting. His body may be weak, but his consciousness is clear.

And Prabhupada continued glorifying the Bhagavatam. So, yes, we don't have his commentaries for the later, last 11th and 12th cantos. And yes, that we can say that's a great loss from one perspective.

But from another perspective, that Prabhupada demonstrated Parikshit Maharaj's example. This is Parikshit Maharaj hearing the Bhagavatam, absorbed in the Bhagavatam, departed from the world. Similarly, Prabhupada absorbed in the Bhagavatam, departed from the world.

And just as Parikshit Maharaj's legacy was continued on by Janmaija and other kings. So, Prabhupada's legacy is continued on by the followers of Sri Prabhupada. So, the glorification of the Bhagavatam continues on even after departure of Prabhupada.

And that is the glory of the tradition that he inaugurated. So, he didn't just glorify the Bhagavatam, but he created a tradition that can continue relishing the Bhagavatam and sharing the Bhagavatam for thousands, for millennia to come, for who knows how long this legacy will continue by the Lord's mercy, by Sri Prabhupada's mercy. This is Prabhupada's gift to us.

And in the next session, we'll discuss more specifically about now what was Prabhupada's mood, what sections of Bhagavatam did Prabhupada emphasize, how did Prabhupada comment, what was Prabhupada's vision of what he was doing, what was Prabhupada's expectation of what he was going to achieve through the Bhagavatam. We'll discuss this and we'll get a deeper appreciation of Prabhupada's comment purports in the next session or Prabhupada's overall presentation of the Bhagavatam in the next session. So, I'll summarize.

Today we discussed about the theme of appreciating Prabhupada's presentation of the Bhagavatam. And for the first, I discussed the importance of the Bhagavatam itself. So, in the Indian tradition, there is a huge amount of literature with a million, million verses.

And within this vast tradition, there is also not just a large number of literature, but a large number of divergent schools of thought also. So, two approaches to philosophy, accept the reality of everyday experience and seek a deeper understanding. Other is, reject the reality of everyday experience and seek some higher understanding.

So, we have both these extremes. So, Charvakaism says that only our everyday experience is real, nothing else is real. And Advaitism, Shankaraism says that our everyday experience is not real at all.

But within that there are levels of reality and that is what the Bhagavatam also teaches. So, the Bhagavatam is the ripened fruit of all that has come from the Vedic literature. So, there are many divergent schools of thought that emerge and the Bhagavatam is the culmination of all those schools of thought.

It is spoken by Vyasadeva, it is maturity, it is written by him. So, the Bhagavatam in that sense gives the Samambonam, the ultimate reality. And in the Gaudiya tradition, the Bhagavatam is especially important because the Gaudiya tradition focuses on Krishna as Sadhya and Bhakti to Krishna in the mode of Radharani as the Sadhana.

And the Bhagavatam is the book also which systematically and consistently focuses on Krishna and it is Krishna Shiksha in the 11th canto, Krishna Leela in the 10th canto and there is reference to Krishna in all the cantos and there is an elaborate prelude like a trailer in the first canto. So, and especially there is a Ras Panchadhyay which points toward the glory of Radharani. And then throughout the Bhagavatam also Bhakti is repeatedly emphasized and we will discuss that theme of how Bhakti is emphasized throughout the Bhagavatam in our next session.

But the Sadhana and Sadhya that are the emphasis of the Gaudiya tradition, they are what are emphasized in the Bhagavatam. And the Bhagavatam is the Sarva Pramana Chakravarti, the emperor of all Pramanas for various reasons. It establishes, it focuses on the highest reality and the purest path to attain the highest reality.

It addresses universal questions. It focuses on the ultimately important question that when death comes, what is the key thing to do in our life? And in this way, from various perspectives, we can understand the universal relevance of the Bhagavatam. Then we discuss how historically because Shaitani Mahaprabhu said it is a natural commentary, but it is not a literal commentary.

So, there are some problems. So, Shaitani Mahaprabhu had to resolve the problem by writing the Sandarbhas. And Baldev Devotion had to resolve the controversy by to establish authenticity of the Gaudiya Sampradaya by writing a commentary on the Vedanta Sutra.

So, there we discuss the concept of Niyamagraha. And then we discuss Prabhupada's diligence in establishing a living Bhagavatam tradition. So, Prabhupada's magnum opus when he was an unknown author with no money to publish, no publishers, no followers, no potential buyers, nothing at all.

No track record of significant success in publishing. At that time, Prabhupada had this super ambitious vision of making a 50 volume translation of the commentary of the Bhagavatam. And just the first volume in first canton three volumes when he was able to complete, he felt so delighted by that.

He felt so empowered by that, that he was able to, that he said this is the ambition I need. And then further he got the endorsements or reviews, favorable reviews by eminent leaders of India and that gave him material credibility also. And Prabhupada didn't think I am going abroad, rather the Bhagavatam is going abroad and it is I who am the, it is I who am simply the carrier, the messenger of the Bhagavatam.

And Prabhupada's focus was on that. We'll just speak the Bhagavatam in a way that people can understand and that will transform them. And Prabhupada foresaw a living Bhagavatam tradition.

And Prabhupada's apparent leaving the Bhagavatam translation incomplete actually indicates the ongoing unending nature of the Bhagavatam and its glorification. That Prabhupada, he showed through his own example how to keep doing it at the time till the last moment of one's life. And how by his inspiration, that same glorification of the Bhagavatam, the spreading of the Bhagavatam's wisdom will continue even beyond him.

Thank you very much. Hare Krishna. So is there any one quick question? We discuss and then we can end.

So we'll continue in the next session. We'll be discussing the Markina Bhagavad Dharma song and the Dharma, the chapter 1.2 of the Bhagavatam, which Prabhupada emphasized especially. And we'll get a deeper understanding of how Prabhupada has presented the Bhagavatam expertly.

Thank you very much.