Prostitutes in Krishna’s Dwarka: How to understand Bhagavatam 1.11.19? – Chaitanya Charan

Podcast:

Video:

Transcript

This is an AI-generated transcript and may contain some errors.
Now you can record it. So thank you very much for coming today. And we’ll continue our discussion on the first entry into the show with part of the chapter 11.
And here. I discussed yesterday about a quick overview of the part with them first. And then I discussed about the.
So we discussed how the first kind of the part of them is setting the scene for the entire bar with them. And in that scene, this is the last chapter, one level last chapter, Krishna actually appears before the 10th candle in action, not in recollection. And then I discussed briefly.
So. It’s strange. OK, I think.
You’ve got something wrong there. So I discussed about the first section was Krishna being welcomed into Dwarka by the prayers and Krishna reciprocating lovingly with everyone. So.
Now, as Krishna enters into Dwarka at that time, he enlivens all of Dwarka. And then later on, he interacts with his queens in a discreet way. So I’ll talk about those two sections today.
And the way I do this is I’ll focus on some verses which are either significant in terms of conveying a devotional point or significant in terms of in some ways they may raise some questions or controversies. Yeah. OK.
So. This is not OK. OK.
Is it better? Yeah, it’s something is something is some system. Krishna Krishna Krishna Krishna. Is it better now? Thank you.
So as Krishna was coming in, what happened was that he was entering in and. So. Yesterday, I stopped at the point where all of the cause is saying that he could not live without you and be delighted to let you have you back.
And that there is the remembrance of Krishna, but the perception of Krishna is still even more relishable. And that’s what they are longing for over here. Now, as they enter, there’s a customary description of how Krishna was welcomed grandly, however, arrangements to welcome him.
And that signifies respect. You know, a very special person is coming. We arrange for their marriage, for their respect.
But for their welcome, by respecting, by arranging properly. Now, most of the things seem very, very soothing and standard in one sense. There are Brahmanas reciting verses.
There are people coming out and Krishna is reciprocating with them. But there’s one verse here, which suddenly raises the question. This is 19th verse.
So. So. He refers to hundreds.
What? Thousand. So. So.
Refers to prostitutes. So hundreds of prostitutes. So they also came out.
They were also eager for the darshan of the Lord. And then how they were beautifully decorated and how they were delighted to see Krishna. That is described.
So. Now, this description raises a question. Are you guys have many questions? So let’s start with it.
What question does it raise in a very obvious sense? Yes. Why are there prostitutes in Dwarka? Anything else? Okay. Okay.
Why should they be talking about it? Also, why is the beauty described? Okay. Okay. That’s it.
I hope I’m grateful that. Yeah, I’m grateful. You.
Yeah, you can hear me now. That’s better. Okay, good.
So it seems that all mics in my association become humble. Huh? Yeah, but it reflecting me that you are disservice to me. So I’m good.
I’m glad you at least you didn’t have the humility. You just go on in the class. You ask the question of what is the question? Okay.
So the question was, why is there a reference to what? That thing, the reference to prostitutes here. It raises several questions. So to understand this.
There are two main points, which I will mention and then we will elaborate on these points. So when we want to understand scripture, it’s vital to recognise the difference between what is descriptive and what is prescriptive in scripture. Descriptive means it says how things are at the time and prescriptive.
This is how things should be. And these two are not the same. Even at the time of scripture, whenever it is spoken, it is not that society was ideal.
Say, for example, Krishna himself says, when does he come to speak the Bhagavad Gita? When there is Dharmasyaglani. By the power of time, there is degradation. And that’s the time when Krishna comes.
So the society that is there when Krishna is coming, it’s not necessary that everything in that society is ideal. It’s not necessary that the social descriptions of those times are prescriptive. And this is how we should live.
So let’s take a very clear example and then we’ll go into a little bit hazy territory. Say, for example, if we consider the Chaitanya Charita Amrita, Mahabharata primarily lives in two places. Which are the two main places? Navdeep and Jagannath Puri.
And in Jagannath Puri, Mahabharata every day goes to meet one particular associate and offers him Jagannath Prasad. Who is that associate? Now, why does Mahabharata go to his house? Or his Siddha Bakul place? He is not allowed to come to the temple because he was born in the Malikshya family. Now, is this descriptive that Tharidasa was not allowed to enter the Jagannath temple? Is this descriptive or is it prescriptive? Descriptive, isn’t it? Prabhupada strongly opposes.
He says, he is Jagannath. Why are you making him Bharatanath? He is the lord of the universe. Now, there are reasons historically that when invaders came and they saw for them either the worship of Jagannath was so opulent, they said, no, you won’t stop this.
Or it was that it was so weird. It’s just like, Jagannath is made of wood, so it’s like that. It’s the emblem of what the Abrahamic tradition considers idolatry.
At least if somebody looks like a human being, it’s different. It doesn’t even look like a human being. This is like primitive kind of worship.
So many of the invaders, they criticised it. Some of the invaders also devastated it. So there are historical reasons why certain groups of people are not allowed over there.
But those are not necessarily universal or scriptural or essential. So this is the difference between the descriptive and the prescriptive. So everything in scripture is not the teaching of scripture.
This is an important point to understand because otherwise, we may get lost in things which are not really relevant. So just to elaborate this point further, between the descriptive and the prescriptive, we see this in many places. So, for example, in scripture, it is described how they would destroy sacrificial arenas.
They would destroy the sacred things. So now, is that something which, if you are to follow scripture, you are supposed to do that? Obviously not. That we can easily understand because that is demons doing it.
And demons actions are not to be done. So there we can clearly understand this is descriptive and this is not at all prescriptive. In fact, the prescriptive is opposite of that.
But there are times when scripture describes something without any context to nuance or qualify or aid us in understanding. So that means this is just a passing description. Now, as far as Mahaprabhu himself is concerned, if you read the Chaitanya Charitamrita itself, neither Mahaprabhu nor Krishnadaskar Rajgoswami actually speak disapprovingly of that social arrangement.
That at that time, that was just the norm and they accepted it. So Mahaprabhu, in one sense, we could say is a more of a reformer than a revolutionary. A reformer is a person who slow changes.
Okay, you got this house, you know, this paint doesn’t look very good. Can you change the paint of this portion? Well, whether the comment is literal is up to you. So then somebody will say, okay, you know, maybe the floor is in a different floor.
You know this, you know this, reformer is gradual changes. And the last comment is definitely not literal. A revolutionary will come and say, you know, just blow up this house and build a new one.
So Mahaprabhu in many ways is a reformer, not a revolutionary. So he chose his battles and fought certain battles and let certain battles not be fought. So from the Chaitanya Charitamrita itself, we may not get understanding that this is prescriptive.
Mahaprabhu doesn’t insist on it. So it’s not prescriptive. Mahaprabhu doesn’t give an instruction.
He never tells Hidastapu, you should not go near. That’s the accepted norm, he accepts it. That’s the social norm, he accepts it.
So in some cases, the difference between descriptive and prescriptive may not be so clear. Especially when certain actions are not opposed or condemned. Then either they are done by villainous characters or they are not criticised by those who are saintly or devoted or virtuous.
Then it might lead to a little confusion. So at that time, when we have to understand this, we have to go a little deeper into what is going on. Whenever a point is spoken, if in a class a point is spoken or in the scripture a point is given, see there is the point and there is the point of the point.
The point of the point means why is it being spoken. Sometimes it may happen that we understand the point but we don’t understand the point of the point. Some scriptures, some teachers, some speakers are a little disorganised.
Or sometimes, to put it in a more polite way, their organisation is incomprehensible to the audience. So you spoke this point and you spoke this point and you spoke this point. What are you trying to say? So we need to understand the point of the point.
This is an interesting example. But what is the example for? Sometimes we have some humour in the class. And humour is good in the sense that at least it keeps the audience awake.
Humour also activates the brain. But the problem could be that you remember the humour and you forget the point which is illustrative of humour. So that’s why there is a point and there is a point of the point.
And if we can get the point of the point, then the point starts making sense. Now sometimes what happens is the point and the point of the point may not only be different from the audience’s perspective, but they may be completely tangential. Like once I was speaking this Damodar Leela to a Western audience.
And then I spoke it. And this one woman, she was getting very agitated. It is described in the past time, how mother was chasing Krishna and how she caught him.
And she tied him up. And then as I was describing this, this is child abuse. How can you tie a child like this? It’s now, that is not the point.
So what happens is, here the point of the whole past time is how Yashoda Mai loves Krishna and how Krishna is conquered by her love. That love is so great that he allows himself to be born. But what happens is, sometimes the point may be so inflammatory that people don’t get to the point of the point.
So this pastime, it’s a very sweet pastime, but it actually can leave a very sore taste in some people’s mouth. So in the Western world, this idea of tying is actually, it’s considered a very big intrusion on people’s freedom. So when I have these crutches, so in India, I’ve got crutches, which were, which have like straps around it, which you can use to, so even if I’m not holding the crutches, still they stay in arms.
But when I had gone to Australia, my crutches broke at that time, so I wanted to buy crutches. They said, we don’t provide crutches with straps, because the straps are considered like restraints. And they are like intrusion on a person’s freedom.
So I said, you know, they’re a facility for me, they don’t intrude on people’s freedom. I said, they make things easier, but for them, it’s tougher. So what happens is, there is a cultural context, in which certain points may be pursued in certain ways.
So that’s why the point and the point of the point, the two can be, may not always go together. And that’s why understanding both is important, otherwise just the point stays in the mind and then, how can we speak like this, how can we do like this, what’s going on over it? So there’s the point, and there’s the point of the point. So in fact, there are three things, we need, when we are hearing, we understand the point, then we understand the point of the point, by not sharing the same.
Okay. So there is the point, and there is the, okay, yeah, we understand the point, then we understand the point of the point, and then we understand the point in the light of the point of the point. So understand the point, that is, okay, that, okay, what is the point of the point, that her love is so great that even God gets conquered by it.
Okay, and in that point, the point of the point, the point in the light of the point of the point. Okay. So, okay, this is not, in that culture, in that time, that way of discipling children was normal.
So it is, it may not be normal now, it may not be acceptable now, and we are, it’s not that we are imposing yet, just because parents who, devotee parents who hear Krishna’s Damodarla pastime, they are going to tie their children. No, that’s not, that’s understood. That’s not, that’s not prescriptive.
So there’s a difference between the descriptive and the prescriptive. And so, sometimes, so when we are speaking about scripture, it’s very important that we be aware of how certain points may be perceived by the audience. Because sometimes the point and the point of the point may be lost, say, I think just now this, what is that Artemis III was being launched by NASA, that space launch, which is also one devotee wrote to me, says, Prabhupada said the man did not go to the moon.
So how was the space launch going? I said, I have a whole class on this, maybe today evening, I’ll speak. Actually, that was not the only statement that Prabhupada made, Prabhupada made many different statements on that issue. He says, okay, they went to the moon, but what did they get, they just got a pile of rocks.
Prabhupada said, in the Bhagavad Gita introduction, Prabhupada says that they went to the moon, we have endeavoured a lot to rise to the moon, let us endeavour to raise our consciousness also. So Prabhupada’s point was not that man did not go to the moon, Prabhupada’s point was that don’t get excited by too excited by these things, the real improvement in life will happen when we raise our consciousness. Prabhupada’s movement that he started was the International Society for Moon Conspiracy Exposure to Moon, that was not Prabhupada’s mission, Prabhupada’s mission was the International Society for Krishna Consciousness, so for enhancing Krishna Consciousness, Prabhupada used different points.
And one point was when people were very excited by this, he said that don’t get too excited by it, don’t get distracted by it, don’t think that this is going to solve all of humanity’s problems. That was the point, the real solution to humanity’s problems will come by raising human consciousness. Prabhupada was not anti-science, in fact the first book that Prabhupada wrote was Easy Journey to Other Planets, and do you know who that book is dedicated to? Prabhupada is dedicated to the scientists of the world, scientists of the world.
So the point is that normally Prabhupada would dedicate his books to Bhakti Transmitter Akhora or Spiritual Master, he is dedicating it to scientists. When you dedicate it to someone, that means there is a sign of respect, they are important members of society. So Prabhupada was by no means anti-science.
So when we look at Prabhupada’s statement about the moon, which we will not look at right now, but the point is, sometimes the point may be so inflammatory that we may miss the point at the point. The point of the point is focus on raising human consciousness, don’t get too excited or distracted by other things. So similarly, here, what is the point? Coming back to our discussion here, when I just said the prostitutes were king, so the point is the all-attractiveness of Krishna, that even those who are prostitutes, they are attracted to him.
And even they come running toward Krishna, and they want to have his darshan. So his attractiveness is such that it attracts everyone. That is the point of this description.
So everyone is attracted, everyone is delighted, everyone is celebrating. So Krishna’s universal attractiveness is demonstrated in the prostitutes. So that is the key point over here.
That even if they are prostitutes, despite their particular profession, their particular activities, that did not stop Krishna’s attractiveness from manifesting in their heart and attracting them. So the whole point of the Bhagavatam is to describe how Krishna is all-attractive. Krishna is a supremely worthy object for us to focus our consciousness on.
The whole purpose of the Bhagavatam is to ultimately help Parikshit Maharaj to remember Krishna, to fix his consciousness on Krishna. So in that light, what happens is that the focus of this particular pastime is on describing how Krishna was attracted, attractive for everyone. Now, okay, having said this, still the question may come up, that the point is still a problem.
I get the point of the point, but still the point is a problem. So in that case, there are multiple ways to understand this. So the varmukhya does not necessarily, there are different understandings of this.
And I’ll share various understandings and then you can, even in spiritual life, there is a lot of room for individuality. That means that it is not a scriptural understanding always one zero. There can be multiple kinds of understanding and some understanding will make sense to us, will click to us.
So varmukhya, some people who say that, some people means it could be traditional scriptural commentators or it could be contemporary Sanskrit scholars or contemporary scholars. Varmukhya does not necessarily have to refer to prostitute. It refers to women who were dedicated to the arts, like dancing, singing and music.
And these, they would never get married. And in that sense, they were not like other women’s society. Now, there was this long tradition, which was there in Jagannath temple, which got perverted, which is called Devi Dasis.
So now, originally, the idea was that if somebody wants to, if somebody wants to really learn music, really learn, really learn dancing or skills like this, people can do it nicely to some extent, if they have innate talent, with some practise, they can always do it better. But if somebody really wants to do it at a super excellent level, it requires exclusive dedication, exclusive dedication. So then what happens is, though for preserving those art forms, continuing those art forms, in the past, the tradition was that the art and culture was all centred around the temple, around the Lord.
That’s why Yuktaahara Viharasya. Vihara means what? Recreation or entertainment. So entertainment itself is not bad.
Now the word Yukta can mean two things. It can mean regulated, but Yukta is also a variant of yoga. So Yukta means connected.
So the idea is Yuktaahara Viharasya means when you eat food, don’t just eat food like a pig. Eat remembering that this is manifested by the mercy of the Lord. Offer prayers.
Be conscious of Krishna. And then even Sopna Avabodhas, even when we sleep, we offer prayers before sleep. We offer prayers after waking up.
So similarly, recreation, let your recreation be connected with the Lord. Connected with higher reality. The verse is not specific about the personal divinity, but higher reality.
Let art be uplifting. So if you see, before the modern times, whether it is in India or even in the West, now the West primarily means America. Previously the West meant Europe.
So if you consider in Europe, the art was largely sacred. Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci, all of them. Most of the celebrated arts are in some sacred context.
Not all, but most of them. So the idea is that Yukta Viharasya. That even entertainment was meant to be spiritually connected.
And that’s how the temples would be places where those who were dedicated to the arts, they would live and they would cultivate those arts exclusively. So that means they were not prostitutes, but they were women who were not married, who were devoted to the arts. And those women would be referred to, like Devi Das is one name referred to.
It’s a respectful name referred to. So that’s one understanding of this. And of course the system of Devi Das also eventually became degraded.
That there is always the possibility for any system which is meant for good to become corrupted. So it is not that it was always ideal, but the purpose was noble. And it did preserve the tradition for a long time.
But over a period of time, it did become corrupted, at least in some places. So that’s one understanding. That this does not literally mean prostitutes means women, people who sell their bodies.
That’s not the meaning of that. That’s one understanding. The second understanding is that, we could say, if you have a pendulum, there is a conservative understanding.
There are no prostitutes there. This only means women who were the Devi Das. Then you could say that they could have the other pendulum, the liberal understanding.
It is that even in a place like Dwarka, it is not necessary that every single person would be equally devoted to the Lord. There were devotees. But are all of them equally devoted to the Lord? Is every single one a pure devotee in the sense of having the same level of devotion? And even if you say Dwarka, it is a city, it is still a capital.
People will visit there from other places. And, in one sense, there will always be people who will have desires that cannot be fulfilled within the normal boundaries of society. And rather than such people preying on those who are normal members of society, there is arrangement in society for that.
And when that happens, that is now, that is also a part of society. That is not something which is recommended. That is not something which is mandated.
But that is what it is. And we see that the Bhagavatam also describes Pingala in the 11th Canto. And again, in the Bhagavatam itself, if you read the text carefully, there is no negative description by the narrator.
Oh, she was a terrible person. No, she says that I am engaged in this terrible profession. So the idea is that there is a need in many societies, in most societies, for some activities.
Just like we say that in the Vedic tradition, meat was allowed. It’s not a recommendation, but it’s a concession. Recommendation means you should do this.
Concession means you want to do it, I’ll let you do it. There is some arrangement for you to do it. So that’s a concession.
So even in that society, not everybody necessarily was equally pure. And for those people who had particular kind of desires, they were fulfilled. There were arrangements for fulfilling those desires.
And it could be that this is not necessarily meant for people who were in Dwarka. See, one thing that would happen is that in the past, while there is always good and bad, there is always virtue and vice. But at the very least, vice was frowned upon.
Vice was seen as wrong, as bad, as unhealthy. And in that sense, that itself created a certain level of hesitation, pause, in engaging it. Because there would be some amount of social disapproval associated with it.
But the problem in Kalyuga is often sin is glamorised. Instead of being frowned on or reproached, it is glamorised. Say, for example, in the movie, if there are some suggestive scenes or even explicit scenes, then the way it is phrased is, there are many bold scenes.
Now, what is the implication? You say that is bold. Somebody who does not do that is cowardly. Change of vocabulary is often the precursor to change of culture.
So the terms we use are important. So the values are changed. Instead of calling something as illicit or wrong, we say adult entertainment.
Now, what does adult mean? When you get an adult, you get a licence. When you get an adult, you get voting rights. When you become an adult, you watch this kind of entertainment.
No, it is not adult entertainment. It is adulterous entertainment. So what happens is, sometimes the euphemistic words are used.
Harsh reality is described in politer terms, which is actually meant to cover the reality. So there will always be people who are virtuous and there will always be people who have vices. That is going to be there in human society.
The danger in Kalyuga is that often sin is glamorised. So here, if you see, it is not that the prostitutes are glamorised. Their attraction to Krishna is being praised.
So even if we take that liberal understanding, that yes, there were prostitutes. And they don’t have to be prostitutes who are meant for people in Dwaraka. It’s a capital, it’s a big city.
There are people who visit there. If you go to Vrindavan now, in Vrindavan, it’s very difficult to meet a Vrajavarsi. What I mean by that is, many of the people who own the businesses in Vrindavan, they are people who have emigrated from elsewhere.
And they don’t have the mood of Vraja. They don’t appreciate the mood of Vraja. Now, you may say, okay, Vrajavarsi, how do you define a Vrajavarsi? Well, there are many ways of defining it.
One is, anybody who lives in Vrindavan is a Vrajavarsi. Another is, anybody who is born in Vrindavan is a Vrajavarsi. You could say that anybody who actually appreciates Vrindavan is a Vrajavarsi.
And appreciates Vrindavan, not because it’s a big commercial opportunity. I cannot imagine so many tourists coming over. Appreciates Vrindavan for its spiritual wealth.
That is a Vrajavarsi. So, if we go to Vrindavan and we meet only commercial people or commercially minded people who are just out to get our money, you say, what kind of sacred place is this? What kind of sacred people are here? And those people are there. But they, if you are going to Vrindavan, don’t focus on them.
Focus on those who are Vrajavarsis in the third sense. Those who appreciate Vrindavan. And they are there.
Many people are there like that also. So, we could say that there is the conservative understanding that they were actually just women who were artistic and unmarried virgins. Or there were women who were there for addressing the needs of a particular social class of society.
But in between is, you could say there could be both. So, the point is that when such statements come, neither Shukde Goswami feels the need to explain it. Here it is Shukde Goswami.
When Shukde Goswami feels the need to explain it, nor the Shana Kadhi Rishis. They feel the need to question it. So, that means it’s not that big an issue for them.
And we could say that they are much more serious about raising consciousness. They have decided, they have dedicated themselves to perform a Yajna for countering the effects of Kali Yuga. And while countering the effects of Kali Yuga, they are singularly focused on doing that which will purify them, that which will elevate them.
So, if they were finding this objectionable, they would have immediately paused. Why are you describing this? In fact, you will see in the first canto itself, they do this. When it is described, when later on, when basically Shukde Goswami describes that there was this man dressed in black he was beating a cow and tormenting a wolf.
So, immediately the sage says, stop it. This is unpalatable. We want to hear about Hari.
If this is related to Lord Hari, then continue speaking this. So, it’s not that they are just passive hearers. They are active listeners.
They are asking questions when it’s appropriate. So, if it is not such a big issue for them, we don’t have to make it such a big issue. So, the point is to focus on the point at the point.
And if we understand this, you know, I’m a part of Shastric Advisory Council and we have designed a whole course on hermeneutics. So, hermeneutics is basically the way to understand scripture. You say, I just read scripture and understand scripture.
Well, yes and no. When you read scripture, reading is important for understanding. But there are principles which we need to consider to understand things properly.
There are many principles in that. One of the principles is to consider the context. If, say for example, the moon issue.
Prabhupada has made multiple statements on a particular issue. We don’t have to absolutise one statement. You know, different devotees can have different positions.
Maybe they went to the moon, maybe they didn’t go to the moon. If a devotee believes that people went to the moon, that’s not a problem. It’s not that when a devotee is at the end of their life and they’re going to the spiritual world, JVJ will ask you, do you believe man went to the moon? That’s an irrelevant issue, isn’t it? So, we don’t have to make something which is not central to scripture, central to people’s access to scripture.
So, similarly, this point is not a very central point in scripture. And the point of the point is everyone is attracted to Krishna. In Dwarka, whatever be the reason, whatever be the context, even they are attracted to Krishna.
And even they come to Krishna. Are there any questions about this right now? There are many questions, I presume. So, probably the point of the point could also be based on our personal understanding.
Because the speaker may be making a point and the people who are listening, everyone based on their concept, they can make a point. This is the point of the point. Okay, that’s a good point.
Laughter Laughter Okay. Okay, let me see if I have an illustration for this. Many Prabhujis don’t understand the point of the point.
Laughter I think that is everywhere, the point of the point. It’s easy in relationships that in relationships it’s very easy. One person is saying one thing, another person is understanding another thing.
But when in close relationship there is a lot at stake, then it becomes a problem. It becomes a bigger problem. Okay, there are three things over here.
First let me explain and then I’ll see if I can find a slide for this. Let’s see, there is scripture is not static. It is dynamic.
That means that a particular point there is quoting in context and there is quoting out of context. But there is in between the two Quoting beyond the context. It is not out of the context.
I’ll explain what I mean by this. Quoting in context. This is the words, this is spoken before, this, this, this and this is what it means.
That’s quoting in context. And quoting out of the context means we take a point and use it to teach something that is contradictory to scripture. It is out of context in one sense it is opposite to the opposite to the intent of the speaker opposite to the overall intent of the message.
So it is out of context. But there is quoting beyond the context and scripture has that versatility. So for example, most famously, when in the Ramananda Raya Samvat there is this discussion of various levels so there actually Sarva Dharmaan Parityajya is quoted at a very little lower level and Srilaya Shruti Muddha Siddhi before that is a little higher.
So why is Sarva Dharmaan Parityajya quoted at an intermediate level? This is Sarva Dharmaan Parityajya Krishna is saying, Mahaprabhu is saying do Parityajya of this statement. Do give up this statement. Go higher.
So the point is in that context when that verse is stated the focus is not on Maam Ekam Sharanam Nitya. It is on Sarva Dharmaan Parityajya because the previous level is do your varnashram duties and the next level is give up your varnashram duties. So that’s good but the point is after giving up varnashram duties what are you going to do? That is the key point.
So many times scriptures can be quoted beyond the context and that’s what makes scripture alive scripture relevant. So Prabhupada would often quote say for example there if you look at the sequence what it means is that we contemplate on tempting objects. We develop attachment and then from attachment craving comes irresistible craving comes There is a lecture by Prabhupada where Prabhupada takes Sangat to mean association and he says according to your association your desires will develop.
Is this valid? Is this bona fide? Now Prabhupada is saying this. So we say how can it not be bona fide? Okay but is this what Krishna meant? In that context that may not be the meaning immediately but that’s a valid meaning. It is scriptural teaching that Sangat Sanjayate Kama If you associate with drunkards, Prabhupada says we’ll become a drunkard and association desires will develop cravings will develop So it is fine to quote a scripture for a point beyond the context and that’s what makes scripture valid relevant So now we have to be careful that the point of the point that we are taking is not against what the speaker is saying or what the book is saying That we have to be careful about Okay? Thank you Yes Swamiji Swamiji I want to also just share that in this past time when the Varahmukhas are actually coming out and they are appreciating Krishna and welcoming him the other members of the society the Dwarkavasis, everybody who is out there nobody is opposing them and you can see that there is this mood of cooperation of everybody coming together to glorify Krishna There is no abandoning there is no rejection, there is no neglection of that certain class of society which exists, there is more of an acceptance and there is yes something that is there, it is part of society it is something that is according to the norms, there is nothing against anything and everybody is now coming together to glorify Krishna That’s a very good point that nobody else hey you are coming here all those people are there, women are closing the eyes of their children nothing like that so actually if you see this is a very good point you made even in the Chetan Charita Amrit when it is described in Puri in the last section of the Antanila last 10 chapters are completely Mahaprabhu’s ecstasy but there there is a description of the fisherman how Mahaprabhu gets caught in the fisherman’s net there is no mention that Krishna is engaging in a terrible profession he is killing animals, killing fish and eating, no that’s a part of human society so yes that’s something which is so the idea of stigmatising people and looking down on them because of their profession for example untouchability what is there in Indian society it has come more from tradition than from scripture and Krishna himself differentiates when he is asking the Rajivasis, Nanda Maharaj during this puja of Indra is it a scriptural worship or is it a traditional worship so everything traditional is not necessarily scriptural scriptural is what is taught in scripture traditional is what has been going on for a long time so that’s why there is this when there is this fear that in trying to reach out to people today there might be some deviation so yes deviation can come from the contemporary society but deviation can come even from the tradition in the whole caste system caste by birth there is a deviation from the tradition so we have to be very careful that when we are practising bhakti that we don’t bring our preconceptions based on our culture and our tradition into bhakti and impose them this is the right way to do things some of those traditions may be valid some of them may not be so it is true the stigmatisation was not a major part of the broad Vedic tradition some people say that in India the lower castes were so much exploited and discriminated against and that it is because they are discriminated against that this is a terrible system well ok maybe if the lower castes were so discriminated against then why did they stay on in their Hindu religion or whatever the Vedic tradition the word Hinduism might not have been there why did they stay on they could have all gone to Buddhism they could have all gone to Jainism there are other religions which came up at that time they could have all gone to Islam they could have all gone to Christianity but they have not done that the discrimination was there but that was not the defining characteristic of society that was not the primary lived experience of people yes we live this way they live that way we live here they live there but just because there is a distance and difference doesn’t mean there is discrimination different people live differently so sometimes we so yes stigmatisation is not definitely not a part of scripture and that is not a prominent part of the tradition although it might have become in some places at some times thank you yes Mathew can you also state that the souls are attracted to Krishna what the women are doing is just for their body keeping up with their body yes that is true the question is can we say that the souls are attracted to Krishna and the women are doing something which is just required for sustenance yes that is possible so I was talking primarily from the perspective that in society there are some people who have these kind of cravings and need to be fulfilled but from the perspective of those who are doing it is it that they are doing it willingly and happily or is it they are doing it because they have no alternatives so it is quite likely that it is a lot latter especially in society so while there is no stigmatisation but there is certainly social approval and disapproval of certain things and that is important so that people our conscience alone is not always enough to keep us on the right path so that’s why social disapproval of wrong things or bad things is important so that we don’t go on the wrong track suppose we get angry and we feel so angry that we want to use some foul words now if we are in a cultured society we may be angry but even our anger will be within the limits of the cultured society we may not use certain words which are obnoxious so that is good why let such kind of language come under so ideally our own conscience prevents us, our own culture, our own discipline our own conscience prevents us from using those words but sometimes our conscience may not be enough because the urges may hit us very strongly so there is social approval and disapproval of certain actions and that is valuable but from social disapproval of certain actions to stigmatisation of certain classes of people that is very different so it’s not that society is completely relative but it is that people were not stigmatised so in that case from the individual’s perspective it’s a reasonable inference that the fact that they were attracted to Krishna indicates that they were not consumed by sensual passions if somebody is consumed by sensual desires then they will not be able to focus on higher reality so the fact that they were attracted to Krishna means that might have been a part of their life and society might have defined them by that particular role, profession but that was not who they essentially were in their self understanding their heart was not in that so that’s also an important point I guess in a sense that Papa said has become becomes a governing factor without discrimination yeah that’s true that’s true when and why and where Papa said yes sometimes if you don’t understand the point of the point that problem is increasingly coming in our movement because Prabhupada said a statement is used often to hammer down certain points I was just talking with once a Prabhupada disciple he was telling me that I was asking what is the greatest danger to our movement’s future what is what is the greatest danger to our movement’s future he said Prabhupada said you know that we can use Prabhupada’s statements to actually harm Prabhupada’s mission so all of Prabhupada’s statements it’s not just Prabhupada made those statements from today’s perspective you take any leader 50 years ago, 100 years ago 30 years ago their statements can seem problematic but does that mean that those leaders have to be condemned and rejected no, it’s not like that so there will be some problems with certain statements which Prabhupada made in today’s context in his context what he made the problems might be there in today’s context so we have to remember Prabhupada’s purpose was the international society for Krishna Consciousness and if you look at this so we have to come back to the point of the point so what was the point of everything that Prabhupada said to help people become Krishna Conscious so in our hermeneutics we have discussed about in different ways you don’t have to go to hermeneutics look at Prabhupada himself what did Prabhupada say were the purposes of ISKCON if you see the 7 purposes of ISKCON they are very universal to correct the imbalance of values in human society to bring people closer to each other and closer to Krishna Prabhupada doesn’t mention any of his socially controversial teachings or any of his controversial points in the 7 purposes of ISKCON so any statement which Prabhupada makes we have to see how it is fulfilling the purpose of Prabhupada and if it is not then it is important for us to understand it and explain it in a way that fulfils the purpose of Krishna Prabhupada or at least does not obstruct the fulfilment of the purpose of Krishna Prabhupada otherwise we will be coming to Niyamagraha that means insisting on the letter of the law while forgetting or even defeating the purpose of the law so that’s a very important point thank you for making that so one last question let’s stop with this so you were talking about how there is different levels of devotion amongst the residents there so we know the narration when Krishna wanted to leave he wanted to leave the earth of his own family because they were so invisibly powerful but in those purports it says first of all they were always thinking of Krishna while doing everything sitting and working and eating but then also it said they were indifferent and even some were inimical and puffed up from being Krishna’s direct sons the sons of Krishna so they had that praticidal war so how can it be that they are all of these things and of course it wouldn’t be all of the sons because he had an awful lot of sons ok so there are various descriptions of the residents of Dwarka for example constantly thinking about Krishna while eating, while walking, while working while sleeping sometimes it is said that they were puffed up and they got intoxicated and they fought and they killed each other so there are various descriptions how do we understand this in general Bhagavatam is sometimes we forget that it is poetry it is the art form and in poetry there are in poetically conveying things there is an implicit understanding when something is to be taken literally and when not to be taken literally so so for example all the Dwarkavasis were chanting were always observing Krishna now does all mean every single one all the time does it mean even the non-human beings so all could be a poetic expression rather than a literal statement because we also see that there is some Dwarka when the rumours started spreading that Krishna has killed all Satrajit Satrajit Nayan what happened was Dwarkavasis also started suspecting Krishna had to do emergency action to restore the reputation so what does that mean that means that even if we say somebody is a pure devotee pure devotee it’s it could be an elastic term in the sense that it could mean some devotee in whose heart impurity can never enter or it could mean some devotee in whose heart presently there is no impurity but that does not mean future impurity cannot come or it could also mean as Prabhupada said that potential pure devotee it could mean pure devotee means that in their heart there is no attraction to impurity there may be presence of impurity right now and they are fighting against it sometimes they may succumb to it but they are not actively pursuing impure desires so for example sensual desire or lust may be present but they are not cultivating sensual fantasies they are not consuming content that will trigger their sensual desires so purity pure devotee can mean many different things so if you take the second meaning so that at present there is no impurity in their hearts but yes circumstances may change and sometimes impurities may come so we understand that life is dynamic consciousness doesn’t always stay the same that’s why it’s a relationship with Krishna so pure devotion it is both a journey and a destination something you wish to achieve but it is a constant expression of the heart so it is something you have to constantly keep expressing and manifesting as we become purified the influences that take us away from Krishna will become less influential less forceful and that means choosing Krishna will become easier but for the soul the option to choose something other than Krishna is always there Hare Krishna Prabhu, Dhanvat Pranam This is Parikshit Priyadas and we have three devotees online who have the questions in case if you have some time is that ok Prabhu? I have time for questions not for answers Vijaya Mataji can you go ahead please Hare Krishna Babaji thank you so much for such a nice class Babaji I have a question so we said that the point of the point is universal attraction for Krishna but we see that some people are envious of Krishna so was it a poetic expression ok when I said the point of the point is to illustrate the universal attractiveness of Krishna but you say some people are averse to Krishna also well so I was making the point that in Dwarka at that particular point everybody was attracted to Krishna that’s what is being illustrated over here so context so in that context that point is there now apart from that you could also make another point that even those who seem to be averse to Krishna they are actually attracted to an opulence of Krishna so when Duryodhana is attracted to the kingdom Krishna said everything attractive manifests a spark of my splendour so when he is attracted to kingdom also he is attracted to a part of Krishna but that attraction to a part of Krishna part of Krishna’s opulence is taking him away from Krishna so there is nothing attractive in this world which exists outside Krishna but everything attractive comes from Krishna but everything attractive may not take us to Krishna so some people who are averse to Krishna they are attracted to something which is not taking them towards Krishna but taking them away from Krishna ok yes Madhav Prabhu do you want to go ahead next yes hi Krishna Prabhu there were a couple of points that I missed one was that you said that you wanted to discuss three things the point and I think the third thing was the context to understand the point in the light of the point of the point so to understand the point in the light of the point of the point that’s the third thing yes I’ll just share the screen right now so so basically what I did was the point was there are these varamukhyas also who came running out to behold Krishna the point of the point was that everyone is attracted to Krishna and then we see the point in the light of the point of the point so then I gave the conservative understanding and the liberal understanding so that’s how I did the third part is it clear now actually I’m sorry it’s actually not ok so because understand the point of the point up to that I understand why did a person make this point but then after that now the third once you understand that point I’ll give the example of the moon mission so the point of Prabhupada’s everything was to raise people towards Krishna consciousness to inspire people to raise their consciousness so then in that light how do we see Prabhupada’s moon statements we see them as ok don’t get excited by it don’t let your consciousness get consumed by it focus on purifying and elevating your consciousness so that is we see the point in the light of the point of the point let’s consider the point of the point is a little confusing it is just a play of words sometimes play of words doesn’t work so well so let’s take the point and then the purpose of the point the point, purpose and once you understand the purpose then you revisit the point in the light of the purpose yes, yes, that’s clear Prabhu thank you and then also the other thing was when you were you used verse 1866 to illustrate the fact that sometimes something can be taken out of context sometimes things can be taken beyond the context right so out of context means that you use a statement and use it in a way that is contrary to let’s say the point that is being made the purpose and then when you take it beyond the context this is where I am confused I think you used 1866 to illustrate how you can take a point beyond its context so I am not sure how what that means to take it beyond the context let me think of some other example beyond the context means that say in the Bhagavad Gita Krishna says that that he tells Arjuna that now Krishna is telling that your essential identity is spiritual now why is he telling this to Arjuna over there because Arjuna is caught between his identity as a Kshatriya and Arjuna as a Kurnandana so there the point of Krishna is to emphasise that Arjuna because you are a spiritual being don’t get caught in the duties associated with these identities focus on a higher purpose but in today’s world we may take the point that that Krishna talks about how our essential identity is spiritual to make some other point say for example we may say the Bhagavad Gita says that consciousness does not come from the brain it does not originate in the brain because consciousness is a symptom of the soul and the soul is different from the body so this is not the point that Krishna is making in the Bhagavad Gita but it’s a valid usage of that point that consciousness does not come from the brain is there a specific reference in the Bhagavad Gita for this well no, the Bhagavad Gita doesn’t talk about the brain, it talks about buddhi which is different from the brain but if you want to bring the Bhagavad Gita’s wisdom in a dialogue with today’s world then we can definitely say the Bhagavad Gita says that consciousness does not originate in the brain but what is the basis for that we’ll say that which pervades the entire body that is indestructible that comes from a non-material source so this is quoting beyond the context it’s quoting beyond the context so if somebody is depressed because of maybe they are overweight or they are not so good looking and then I was once giving a class and there was one I was speaking about how we are not the body and there was one person in the audience who was very overweight he said thank god I am not the body so now Krishna didn’t speak you are not the body to relieve people from the dejection that might come because they don’t have a very attractive body but if that is raising them above ordinary consciousness that is getting them out of their depression that’s a valid usage so that’s quoting beyond the context but interestingly that person said I am not my body but I am a Gujarati laughter so sometimes people will not get the point actually they will just use the point for their own purposes so quoting beyond the context means that we see that scripture offers wisdom for a particular purpose at a particular time but the wisdom can be used for many purposes beyond that purposes yes so that is the point of quoting beyond the context thank you so much we have one last question Madhav Prabhu do you want to go ahead Hare Krishna Dandavar Pranam Special Koti Pranam to Shaitan Sharan Prabhu thank you so much for giving opportunity so my question is actually more or less like what I get take home message from first of all I would like to say that we are looking everyone whether devotee, non devotee is looking for the bliss we are even material world every effort is focused towards bliss and immortality of course which is not real but we can be immortal soul never dies so in fact we are immortal if we consider that Bhagavad Gita the true concept so with that said I don’t want to go too much detail but you with your talk and actually in living name Sachinandana Maharaj’s book he talks about devotee of Krishna association is very very infectious so his customs if you are there you will get infected Prabhupada talks about Prasadam you get infected so in summary Prabhuji you gave tremendous bliss the way you talk make us laugh and laugh I can see a devotee pure giving that providing the bliss in first place thank you so much I had a small take home message you talked about this word prostitute but also it can have many meanings you described that of course it is a negative connotation when one talks about word prostitute but the problem is even many successful materialist CEOs big leaders in current time even they use word positive thinking positive make everything out of negative never put that try to look for that little positive thing sorry to interrupt you I am getting your points but I am not getting the point of your word ok I am sorry I am very bad communicator but what I am saying that even you talked about that main context actually what is the goal of that Dwarka Leela everybody is included being attracted that’s the main goal so why people were they mention this is the truth this is the reality prostitute is there for various reasons sorry to interrupt you let me ask some fundamental thing is this a question or is this a comment it is all of those it is it is on your line not even understanding a question of questions it is in that line so I don’t understand that’s why it is all of those thank you Hare Krishna Jai Jai Jai Jai