Bhagavatam study 93 1.17.24-30 Avoid both extremes of taking everything in scripture only literally or only metaphorically

This particular situation has come about. So, these are the four feet of religion, austerity, cleanliness, daya is mercifulness, satyam is truthfulness. So, these four are the feet and in Krita, in Satyuga, all these four feet were healthy and strong.
But because of irreligiosity, three of them are broken. And what are the three, what are the, earlier he says, smaya sangama daistava. Smaya refers to pride or arrogance.
Sanga refers to bad association, specifically illicit sexual association. Madais refers to intoxication. So, now there is a, the Bhagavatam, there is, there is a literal narrative and there is a non-literal significance of that narrative.
There are two extremes, sometimes that we may just not take anything, we may just say nothing is literal, everything is simply metaphorical. Or sometimes we may say everything is literal and nothing is metaphorical. Both are extremes.
So, there is, the Bhagavatam is describing a literal history that Parishad Maharaj met this cow and bull. At the same time, the bull also represents something. And in that sense, now a bull’s feet, literally the feet are not, if a bull’s, any particular bull we have, it’s not that the bull’s feet are representing the four limbs of dharma, but this is represented or conveyed in a particular way through the description over here.
So, there is a non-literal description also within the Bhagavatam and that also needs to be acknowledged. So, we have to look at the purpose of the Bhagavatam and based on appreciating that purpose, then we can understand what is to be spoken, what is for what purpose, whether something is to be taken literally or something is to be taken non-literally. There is no simplistic way to understand this.
The way to understand this is actually simply by, rather by looking at the overall context and the overall purpose. Where is this coming and in what context is it coming? So, once we understand this, in what context is it coming and for what purpose is this whole thing being spoken? So, the four feet, they represent dharma and they are the four pillars of dharma and they need to be, these things need to be taken care of for dharmic living. If somebody is not living dharmically, now it is interesting that these are not exclusive.
Exclusive means, is it not? It is not that only these three activities break the limbs of dharma. There can be other activities also which should break the limbs of dharma. So, other activities, say if somebody commits violence, sometimes some people may, Vishwajit Thakur says that, has commentary that, and other sins.
So, other sins. So, madais, madai is one, singular, madais is plural. So, the plural over there indicates there are others also.
So, sometimes there may be some crimes. So, for example, we talk about the four regulative principles working against four pillars of dharma. But then somebody may ask, what about murder? Murder of human beings, where is it mentioned? So, obviously, that is a grievous crime and that is definitely going to be a heavier dharmic activity.
So, it may not be mentioned here specifically. So, for example, there may be sexual assault, there may be rape. It may not be mentioned here.
But if it is obviously implied, if even if even consensual connection, if it is not within the boundaries of dharma, if that is considered wrong, then if it is forced assault is there, then that is obviously terribly wrong. It is much much worse. So, this list is indicative.
It is not exhaustive. It is not that just this activity alone will lead to breaking this pillar of dharma. There is a broad correlation that is given.
But there are various other activities also which may cause the pillars of dharma to get broken. And an underlying principle is that dharma has gone down now. The pillars of dharma have been broken, which is symbolized by the breaking of the bull’s feet.
Text 25, इदानिम् धर्मपादस्ते सत्यं निर्वर्तयेद्यतः तम् जिग्रिष्यत्यधर्मोयं अनृतेनाधिताकलि अनृतेनाधिताकलि इदानिम् धर्मपादस्ते So, one foot of yours remains now. धर्मपादस्ते And that one foot is all that is there. So, truth is there.
सत्यं निर्वर्तयेद्यतः That foot is dharma, is satya. तम् जिग्रिष्यत्यधर्मोयं अनृतेनाधिताकलि But Kali, by increasing untruth, desires to break even that foot. अनृत means untruthfulness.
So, it is said over here that if now the symbolism is being explained, what the non-literal significance of this is being explained. So, it is said that this bull was struggling to balance himself on one foot because his three feet were already broken. And Kali was attacking with a stick and trying to break that foot also.
So, that’s what is being explained over here. Breaking that one foot means that even truthfulness, which is the last pillar, that is also now being broken down. That also is being threatened.
And trying to destroy that. So, Kali is actually a very powerful person who can completely distort and destroy all good within people. And we see in today’s world, how normal responsible people can just get lost completely.
A big problem in today’s world is, say, addiction. People who are otherwise normal, responsible, sensible, they become addicted to something. They become addicted to alcohol, to drugs, to smoking, to certain unhealthy behaviors.
There can be substance addiction and there can be behavioral addiction. So, say, incessant net surfing, surfing something inappropriate on the net or even video gaming for hours and hours. These are all unhealthy.
And people just become good for nothing once they become addicted. Just ruin their lives completely. So, when such a thing happens, when people get ruined, we should understand that ultimately this is all the influence of Kali.
Kali is acting in grievous ways and is creating enormous suffering for people. So, now he is responding to what Kali had, what Bhoomi had said earlier. So, as we mentioned earlier that Parikshit spoke to Dharma, the bull, and then he spoke to Bhoomi, the cow, when he was asking and assuring.
Now again, he’s spoken with Dharma, now he’s turning to Bhoomi and he’s speaking to her. Oh, Bhoomi Devi, you are here. And certainly when you were there, when Bhagavata, when the Lord was here.
So, your Urubhara, your great burden was there by the actions that he performed directly and through others. And he actually not only removed this burden for you, but also he marked your body, marked the earth with his auspicious footprints. In this way, he had actually brought good fortune to you.
So, normally, whenever somebody very powerful is there, they can do enormous amount of good to others. And other people may not have the capacity to do that level of good. Prabhupada says that when an Acharya descends, the Acharya brings order amidst disorder.
And when the Acharya departs, then from order, disorder rises. Because just nobody has the potency that the Acharya has. So, to some extent, some amount of disruption is just unavoidable.
But just because some amount of disruption is unavoidable, that doesn’t mean that all kinds of disruption is acceptable. Even the followers of the Acharyas, they have to, according to their Adhikar, according to their capacity and they have to take responsibility and make sure that overall things go on. Just because disorder is unavoidable, that does not mean any kind of disorder is acceptable.
So, for example, if somebody is a very expert driver, then they can go smoothly through even difficult roads and crowded situations. Somebody who is not that expert a driver, they may suddenly have to brake, their ride may involve jerks, stops, jolts, it may not at all smooth ride as it was when the driver was expert. But that doesn’t mean that the driver has to go and hit other cars, driver has to take the car into a ditch or the driver has to take the car off a cliff and everybody dies.
There is excellent driving and there is acceptable driving and then there is unacceptable driving. So, all of us, even if we cannot be at the level of excellence, we need to be at the level of acceptability. That means that the order, the level of order that Krishna maintained, even if Krishna has departed and that level of order can’t be maintained, that doesn’t mean any and every atrocity will be accepted.
That’s the mood with which Parikshit Maharaj is going to speak to Bhumidevi. And actually, he is referring to Bhumidevi in the third person. That means he is speaking to Bhumidevi, but also he is speaking to the bull and he is saying, he is referring to her in third person, she is speaking like this, Shochatyashrukalasadmi durbhavage pojjita sati abrahmanyan rupavyajah shudra bhokshyantimamiti.
Now, she who is Sati, Sati is the chaste one, Shochatyashrukalasadmi, she is lamenting and she is in so much distress that tears are coming from her eyes. Durbhava, durbhaga, as if she has become most unfortunate, pojjita, she has become forlorn. Forlorn is a very poetic and tragic word.
When somebody is all alone with nobody to help them, such a person is considered to be forlorn. And she has become forlorn because she feels as if there is no one there, abrahmanya, that there is no brahmanical rule, there is no brahmanical culture, there are no proper brahmanas, the brahmanical rulership has gone off. Rupavyajah means those who are devourers, they are posing as kings, shudra bhokshyantimamiti.
And she is thinking that now the shudras who are posing as rulers, they are going to bhokshyanti, they are going to exploit me, they are going to enjoy me, they are going to abuse me, they are going to hurt me. So, he is depicting the condition. Now, what is the point over here of saying this? We may say that all this is obvious, isn’t it? Yeah, it is obvious, but Parikshit Maharaj is being empathic over here.
He is assuring them that he has a sense of their suffering. Generally speaking, we may sometimes say that I can understand what you are going through. Now, it is very, very difficult actually for one person to understand what another person is going through.
Again, we have to see, we want to be empathic, but the statements of empathy that we go through, that we say also have to be appropriate. Somebody has lost a loved one, someone has lost their spouse, somebody has lost their child, somebody has lost their parent, somebody is in great grief. If we have not gone through that grief, then it is very difficult for us to say that I can understand what you are going through.
We can say, we can be empathic and say you must be, you must be feeling very lonely, you must be feeling shattered. So, we can try to use some words which indicate that we have a sense of the gravity of their suffering. But if you just say I can understand what you are going through, then that might be presumptuous sometimes.
Because some people may be in such afflicted situation that they may feel that by saying I understand what you are going through, they may feel as if we are minimizing their suffering. How can you understand? Have you gone through this? Then you have to tell no, I have gone through something else. The point is whether we want to start getting in autobiographical mode there and tell our story, we want to be with them to help them.
So, what form of expression will help them, we have to see and we have to do that. So, here Parishad Maharaj is acknowledging the past fortune and the present misfortune of the of the cow, of Bhoomidevi. So, you know, if somebody is very poor, that is a distressful situation.
But somebody who had been very wealthy in the past and now they have become very poor, then that is far more undurable, that is far more distressing. So, the earth just recently was so fortunate, supremely fortunate that the Lord was there with her. But now she has become so unfortunate that people are doing anything and everything with her.
So, it is a very serious situation. So, in this way he expresses empathy. It is interesting that Parishad Maharaj, even after hearing this, he will continue and take action on Kali.
So, he doesn’t exempt Kali thinking that, oh, we don’t know what is the cause of suffering. So, we can’t blame this Kali. No, the instrument is also the person who is doing wrong that they are also wrong and they need to be corrected.
So, just because a particular instrument is not the actual cause, that doesn’t mean the instrument is blameless. It just means that we don’t have to obsess with the instrument. But sometimes we may have to take some action, especially if somebody is doing a culpable criminal activity.
Sometimes it is, don’t be angry with the instrument of your karma. That is true. But generally that is talked for minor offenses.
Say, if you are in a close relationship with someone and that person tends to be forgetful, that person tends to be insensitive, not that they are doing something criminal, but just they don’t act in a way which we would want them to. And they disappoint us, they hurt us. Then in those situations, we can say that, don’t be angry with the instrument of our karma.
Just learn to tolerate it. What if somebody is doing something criminal and hurting us terribly? Now, we say, we walk along the road from our home to a train station to catch a train, and then somebody tries to knock us over in their car. Somebody tries to kill us.
Then we can’t say that this is the instrument of their karma, this is the instrument of my karma. Now, we also have our dharma to do. And there, if we die, we won’t be able to do our dharma only.
So, we have to act responsibly. And acting responsibly means sometimes tolerating and sometimes mitigating, sometimes taking action to resolve this issue. So, Parikshit Maharaj will take that action now.
So, now, in this way, dharma and mahi, mahi refers to earth. So, in this way, dharma and mahi, the cow and the bull and cow, he pacified both of them. And he was means a warrior who can fight simultaneously with a thousand enemies, with thousands of enemies.
And Nishatam, he took up his sword, his weapon, to kill Kali, who was the cause of our dharma. It’s interesting. There is a klesha bija, which was said is unknown.
Kali said, sorry, dharma said that, I don’t know what is the cause of our klesha, of my klesha. But here Kali is referred to as So, hetu can represent a cause, it can represent an instrument. So, here it is used one of the hetave, adharma hetave, is a root cause.
So, there can be multiple levels of root causes. We could say a seed is the root cause of the growth of this plant, which is true. But then we can also say that, okay, who planted that seed over there? If somebody malevolently planted that seed, then the root cause of that bad growth over there is not just the seed, it is the planter of that seed.
They are the root cause. Or we can go further and why did they plant like that? Maybe because they have enmity with us because of XYZ. And that enmity is the cause.
So, we could go to causes and analyze the causes at multiple levels. So, in this case, it is said that Kali is the person who makes people do adharma, who tempts people and torments people in such a way that they give up their dharmic tendencies. And that is unwanted, that is unhealthy, that is undesirable.
And therefore, I decided to punish Kali who was very adharmic. When he understood that now Parashit has become ready to kill me, he just put aside his dress as a king. He just took it off.
No, no, no. He fell at the feet of Parashit. He put his head on his feet.
And he fully surrendered being overcome by fear. Now, Kali is adharmic, but he is not foolish. Even demons, unless they are very proud and intoxicated, they actually understand which enemy is how strong and they know which enemy they can fight with and which enemy they cannot fight with.
So, now, here it appears actually that there is a lot of adharma, Kali is shrewd and he is using shrewdness. He understands that I am no match to Parashit. And therefore, let me just submit to Parashit.
If I don’t submit, I will be ruined. I will be killed and thus he immediately surrenders. So, he puts aside his weapons, he puts aside his royal dress and he falls at the feet of Parashit Maharaj.
Text 30. When he saw that this person, Kali, has fallen at his feet, Veera. He was a hero.
Kripaya dheena vatsalaham. He was compassionate to the fallen. He was and Sharanya.
He was qualified to actually take shelter of the surrenders, to give shelter to surrenders. Navadishlokaya. He decided not to kill that person.
Shlokaya. Shlokaya means one whose glories are worth being sung. Aha cheda mahasaniva.
And smiling he spoke. So let us see, we will discuss in future verses what Parishad Maharaj spoke. And we will look at this principle of how Kshatriyas, if somebody surrenders to them, they are meant to offer surrender.
If somebody surrenders, then they are not meant to be punished. That is Kshatriya principle. And Parishad Maharaj will honour the Kshatriya principle by not punishing the king.
So actually speaking, it is important for every one of us to act according to our dharmic position. So Parishad Maharaj is dharmically competent enough to punish the miscreants and he is competent enough to even give surrender at that, not punish the killing, but then deal with them appropriately. So how Parishad Maharaj will deal with the situation is something which we will