Bali M rejects Shukracharya, yet Vamana respects him – Why?

Sukracarya was rejected by Bali maharaja, as he did not give him the highest teachings of Full Surrender to Lord. At the same time Sukracarya has merits of his own:

a.   Lord Vamana respects Sukracarya and asks him ‘What was the fault in Bali in his sacrifice?’ Lord is giving darshan to him and asking him is not ordinary… (SB-8.23.14)

b.   Sukracarya seems to be aware about the glory of the lord. As he says – “if your holy name is chanted then all deficiences are made complete”. (SB-8.23.16)

c.   He obeys the order of the Lord and makes for the deficiency in the sacrifice of Bali. (SB-8.23.16-17)

d.   It seems that the wrong advise and the curse which Sukracarya gave to Bali was personally inspired by the lord and it was the plan of the lord to show the glory of Bali’s surrender and to show on him his special mercy. (SB-8.20.14) (SP also says in purport that Sukracarya was not inspired by the lord for devotional service…)

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

Question, what exactly is the position of Shukracharya? At one level he is rejected by Bali Maharaj because Bali Maharaj is stopped by Shukracharya from surrendering to the Lord. But then the Lord respects him quite a bit and the Lord only asks him later what was wrong with his, what was the sacrifice of Bali Maharaj and then Shukracharya says that actually the names of God, if they are chanted, then whatever problems will be there, they will be removed, whatever deficiencies might be there. So he exhibits devotional knowledge and it does seem to be indicated that his act was inspired by the Lord.

But then Prabhupada says in a purport that the Lord did not inspire him to devotional service. So is he a devotee or what is the situation of Shukracharya? Answer, Shukracharya is a Brahmana. He is the priest of the Asuras and he has scriptural knowledge including the knowledge of the ultimate goal of scriptures, that is the pure devotion to the Supreme Lord.

However, he is primarily situated at the Karmakanda level. So that means although he knows what is the conclusion, he is attached to something lower. Now how may that happen? It's not that just because of knowledge one gets attracted to something.

There has to be the elevation of consciousness also. So Shukracharya is actually talked about as one of the Vibhutis of Krishna in the 10th chapter of the Bhagavad Gita. So he is no ordinary person.

At the same time, he is not a pure devotee. He has devotional knowledge but he is concerned primarily with the Karmakanda section of the scriptures and that's why he performs yajnas for the Asuras by which they can actually become more and more powerful. That's why we'll see in the Bhagavad Gita also when Krishna talks about the qualities of the different Varanas.

He talks about the quality of a Brahmana. He doesn't talk about bhakti as a quality. So astikya as we know refers generically to faith in the scriptures.

Now it need not necessarily be faith in the conclusion of the scriptures. So it may not be focused on that conclusion. In the Ramayana also we see that Ravana has his Brahmanas called Yatudhanas and they perform yajna for his attaining victory against Ram.

So we wonder how can Brahmanas work against the cause of the Supreme Lord. Now the point here is that not all Brahmanas are at the same level. So we know that the scriptures also give sattvic, rajasic, tamasic.

That scriptures also give not just bhakti but gyanakanda, karmakanda. And then for all this teaching and administering, there are Brahmanas required. Now those Brahmanas who say do tamasic rituals, they're not necessarily in goodness.

They're not necessarily devoted to the Supreme Lord. So that's why there can be Brahmanas who are not devotees. They have faith in the Vedic scriptures in the sense that they follow some Vedic scriptures like doing yajna and teaching yajna and keeping others on the path of at least some level of dharma.

They're considered Brahmanas. Shukracharya is that kind of Brahmana. And as far as the Lord respecting him, yes, actually it is said that if we see the overall Bhagavatam's mood is that Brahmanas are respected.

That the Lord does not too strongly criticize Brahmanas even when they do something wrong. And that's why when the Kumaras curse Jaya and Vijaya, actually the curse is quite disproportionate. But the Lord rather than be angry with the Kumaras, he says that actually he asks forgiveness on behalf of his servants.

And similarly, Krishna also talks about this. He instructs in the Nrga pastime how the Brahmana should be respected. He instructs his own family members.

So the overall the Bhagavatam is very respectful to Brahmanas. And the Bhagavatam in that sense demonstrates that people in general should respect Brahmanas. And then of course, it demonstrates also the other way that the Brahmana should also be proper.

And that is demonstrated in Shukracharya's pastime even through the Durvasamani pastime. The Brahmana need to be devoted. But the point is the Bhagavatam talks from both ways.

One way is that if the person is just doing Brahmanical duties, even if the person is not a Brahmana, not a devotee, still the Brahmana should be respected. And the Lord demonstrates that through his regard for Shukracharya. At the other level, it also demonstrates that Brahmana should be devotees.

And the fact that Bali Maharaj rejects Shukracharya and rejects, and that is not condemned. It is actually glorified as an act of surrender. It indicates that while the Brahmana at that level should also be appreciated, but they are not the topmost.

And the one should become the topmost level of Brahmana and that is the devotee. Now as far as the Lord, Prabhupada is saying, the Lord did not inspire him to do devotional service. What does that mean? Actually, in his Govinda Bhashya commentary on the Vedanta Sutra, Baladeva Vidyabhushan mentions that there are the six systems of philosophy.

And these six systems, actually there are different sages who are actually enlightened sages, but they are deluded by the illusory of the energy of the Lord, so that they propagate these different philosophies. So, now these philosophies are originally progressive, culminating in Vedanta, but eventually they became competitive. And that's why in the Vedanta Sutra, Baladeva Vidyabhushan refutes the various philosophies.

He refutes Sankhya, he refutes Mimamsa, he refutes Yoga and all these philosophies. He establishes that Vedanta is the conclusion of the Vedic scriptures. So, among the six systems of philosophy, the other sages are considered to be also wise sages, but they, by the arrangement of the Lord, have been deluded.

So, yes, we could say that here Shukracharya was also deluded by the arrangement of the Lord, so that he could, the glory of Bali Maharaj could be demonstrated. So, we don't, generally when we are dealing with scripture, we, based on the behavior of the characters, we don't evaluate their character, we try to evaluate what we can learn from it. Because once you start evaluating their character, then it becomes problematic because often they are great souls and it is very difficult to decide what is right and what is wrong.

And that's why we see Prabhupada in the pastime of Parvati cursing Chitraketu, he sometimes takes the side of Parvati and sometimes he takes the side of Chhatraketu. He says Parvati should be, you know, she has to defend the honor of her husband and she should not tolerate insult to her husband. And then he takes the side of Chitraketu.

Chitraketu actually meant no harm, it was glorifying, but because Parvati couldn't understand it. So, she didn't have, when none of the sages and Lord Shiva himself did not take any action, why did she have to take any action? So, Prabhupada takes it both ways. Why? Because with respect to scripture, the important point is not to decide who is right and what is wrong, but to decide what is right and what is wrong.

So, because the characters are often orchestrated by the Lord, so we don't say this character is right and this character is wrong. We try to decide what will be the right course of action for us and what will not be the right course of action for us. So, we can learn both principles that we should not be short-tempered and burst out at others as did Parvati.

And at the same time, we should also learn that we should defend the honor of our venerable seniors and all that as did Parvati. And we can also learn that we have to be careful that when we are dealing with seniors, we do not act in a way which will be misunderstood or disrespectful. Vishitra Ketu's laughing was misunderstood or disrespectful.

So, basically, rather than trying to analyze who is right and who is wrong, we should focus on learning what is right and what is wrong for me. And that way, we will avoid getting much, avoid a lot of confusion in our study of scripture. Thank you.

Hare Krishna.