Chronological and Conceptual flow of the Bhagavatam (SB 3.22.8)

Hare Krishna. So today morning we are discussing from the third canto of Srimad Bhagavatam.

So I'll take this class in two parts. First, I'll talk of the significance of this particular pastime of Swayambhuva Manu within the flow of the Srimad Bhagavatam. And then we will look at the specific context of this particular purport and its relevance in our lives, especially within ISKCON.

So the Srimad Bhagavatam has 335 chapters, out of which 90 chapters are in the 10th canto, which is the largest canto. And the Bhagavatam is a set of nested conversations. At the outermost level, it is Vyasadeva speaking to all of us.

He's narrating in a written format the event that happened in Naimisharanya. Then beyond that, within that conversation, so first is Vyasadeva with us, second is Suta Goswami with us in Naimisharanya, and third is Sukadeva Goswami telling Pariksit Maharaj. This conversation starts in the second canto and it goes on till almost the fifth chapter of the twelfth canto.

And then after that Suta Goswami takes over and explains further. Then this particular conversation that is happening is the fourth level conversation. It is between Vidura and Maitreya, which starts in the third canto of the Bhagavatam, the first chapter.

And within this conversation, the fourth level conversation, there is a fifth level conversation that is between Swayambhu Manu and Kardamuni. So now actually speaking, when Vidura speaks with Maitreya, or rather Maitreya speaks to Vidura, Vidura asks questions, then that is the central inner development of the Bhagavatam. The Bhagavatam essentially describes universal history and while describing universal history, it tells various important incidents which may have happened at other times also.

That means, if you look at the third canto, it starts with the meeting of Vidura with Uddhava first, then Vidura goes to Maitreya and Maitreya starts describing. So from 3.89 onwards, the whole process of creation starts. And then basically after that whatever is happening is a description of how the creation unfolds.

Brahmaji appears, Brahmaji offers his prayers, then Shiva appears, then Rudra, then after that Kumaras appear. And then while describing the Kumaras, then it is also described how the Kumaras go to heavens, go to Vaikuntha and there they fall, there because of not treating them respectfully, the Jaya and Vijaya, the doorkeepers of Vaikuntha fall off. And in that the 15th chapter, the description of the kingdom of God comes.

But the essential narrative is the dynastic description, the description of the various dynasties as they come down from the start of the creation. So first Brahma, then Brahma's progeny, that is first is Kumaras, then Kumaras, Shiva, and then after that it goes on. And then it comes to the Prajapatis, one of whom is Kardama.

So the Bhagavatam basically focusses on describing the events within the lives of various Manus. So the description of Swayambhuva Manu and his descendants, that starts from the third canto and goes on till the end of the seventh canto. In the seventh canto, the first chapter is prayers of Swayambhuva Manu and there Swayambhuva Manu Yajnavatar appears and then he liberates him.

So that means Swayambhuva Manu and his descendants, that description is going on with the description of the dynasties of the universe. That is in the seventh chapter. Then after that, several Manus are described rapidly.

In fact, the 14 and 15 chapters of the eighth canto there is a description of future Manus and there is also the system of universal management. So basically, Swayambhuva Manu gets the maximum description in the Srimad Bhagavatam. And after that, in the eighth canto, rapidly the various Manus are described.

And then after that, the current Manu starts off. The current Manu is who? Vaivasvata Manu. And then in Vaivasvata Manu's lineage, who all have appeared, so it is while describing Vaivasvata Manu's lineage, then in the tenth canto we have the past times of Lord Ramachandra in chapter 10 and 11.

Then there are various other past times. And then while going on while describing his descendants, the ninth canto, last chapter, is a summary of the activities of Krishna. And that is expanded in the tenth canto as well as the eleventh canto.

Eleventh canto doesn't have so many past times of Krishna. That's why more or less the past times of Krishna end with the tenth canto. In the eleventh canto, there are some description of, say, the sacrificial fire sacrifice performed by Vasudeva, a little bit is there.

And then the major section of the eleventh canto is the instructions of Krishna. So actually the Sanskrit of the tenth canto is also significantly different from the Sanskrit of the remaining Bhagavatam. It is sweeter and the whole mood is more intimate.

Eleventh canto is primary, chapters 7 to 30 is Uddhava Gita. And that is actually the biggest philosophical section of the Bhagavatam. And that is where Krishna expands on what he has told Arjuna in the Bhagavad Gita, in his Uddhava Gita.

And then after that, in the twelfth canto, there is a description of future Manu's. And that is where the forecasts come up. And that is where the predictions of Kali Yuga are given.

And then eventually there is a description of how this Kali Yuga is so dark. But within this dark Kali Yuga also, there is the opportunity by practising Harinam Sankirtan to become liberated. So in this way, the whole Bhagavatam essentially is a description of the lives of various Manus.

So as first Parikshit Maharaj Shuddha Goswami asks, so first I described how the Bhagavatam unfolds. What it describes is third to seventh canto Swayambhuva Manu, then remaining Manus, till Vyavastha Manu, eighth canto, ninth canto, tenth canto, eleventh canto is Vyavastha Manu, and twelfth canto is remaining Manus, after Vyavastha Manu. So this is the sort of chronological.

But everything doesn't go chronologically. Within the chronological description, if there is a conversation between say a particular king and a sage, the sage may tell some other pastime. So the Ajamil pastime is not necessarily from this Yuga.

It's from some other time. And there also it says clearly, that Pura, I'm telling this earlier, from another pastime told earlier. So this is the chronological development of the Bhagavatam.

Now let us look at the conceptual development. Chronological means with respect to time. So the dynasties are being described with respect to Manu Manus.

Now conceptual development of the Bhagavatam is, that the Bhagavatam starts first with the questions of the sages of Naimisharan. And their essential question is, what is the best of all dharmas? And the answer to that is, that Bhakti, Paravadharmai, Save, Ito Bhakti Radhokshaji. And then that answer is elaborated through the living experience of Shukadeva Goswami.

So actually, the Bhagavatam is essentially a conversation between Shukadeva Goswami and Pariksit Maharaj. But then in the Bhagavatam, why do we need so much description of suddenly, say the Pandavas retiring timely, and then the destruction of Dwarka. In fact, we don't get Krishna's pastimes in so much detail till the 10th canto afterwards.

The first canto has some pastimes of Krishna. We start from roughly the 8th, 9th chapters. 7th chapter is son of Drona punished.

There Krishna enters. And in more or less the 16th, 15th, 16th chapter, Krishna disappears. So why is this given suddenly in the first canto? Actually, the first canto is setting the scene for the discussion between Pariksit Maharaj and Shukadeva Goswami.

So in the 7th chapter, briefly, Shukadeva Goswami's qualifications are described by how he moves from impersonal realisation to personal realisation. And the remaining chapters from the 8th chapter till the end of the first canto are basically an unfoldment of the description of the glory and the qualification of Pariksit Maharaj. So why the pastimes of Krishna and Arjuna and Dwarkawasis are described? They are all described to show how dear Pariksit Maharaj was and how qualified he is.

So the whole pastimes of Krishna which are given, in a sense, they serve as a prelude for what will come in the 10th canto. But in the conceptual development of Bhagavatam, they are setting up the qualifications of the conversationalists. So the question was, what is the highest dharma? And Pariksit Maharaj and Shukadeva Goswami will tell that this was revealed earlier also and there it was revealed in a different way.

The question was not the highest dharma which Pariksit Maharaj asks to Shukadeva Goswami, it is the most urgent dharma. What is the duty of a person about to die? And of course, when it is most urgent, we just put aside everything else and focus on the most important priorities. So the essential question is the same, but the way it is phrased and the context in which it is situated is different.

So conceptually, the question of Pariksit Maharaj to Shukadeva Goswami and the question to Shukadeva Goswami is the same. And the Bhagavatam also tells us the same point. See, the Bhagavatam first verse ends with dhimahi and the third verse ends with pipatrasamalayam.

So actually dhimahi is meditation. Dhimahi, meditation, is more or less the work of the impersonalists. They meditate.

Whereas pipatrasamalayam, relish the rasa, that is what devotees do. So essentially, the first three verses of the Bhagavatam take us on a journey from dhimahi to pipatrasamalayam, from meditation to relishing. And actually that is also the journey of Shukadeva Goswami.

Shukadeva Goswami was an impersonalist who was doing dhimahi, meditation on the impersonal Brahman. But from there he goes to pipatrasamalayam, relish. So the concept of rasa is not there directly in the Vedantic literatures as an emphasis.

Of course, rasa vaisaha is there in the Shrutis, but it's not emphasised. So the Bhagavatam in a conceptual sense is telling that the highest dharma which Shukadeva Goswami will recite to Pariksit Maharaj is pipatrasamalayam, relish the rasa. So this is how conceptually things are moving forward.

Now in the second canto, when Parikshit Maharaj and Shukadeva Goswami are conversing, so the Bhagavatam sticks to the level of rasamalayam gradually. So in the second canto, prominently what is described in terms of progressive development is there are the various incarnations that are described. Then there is the universal form that is described, the Lord and Supersoul is described.

So the Bhagavatam talks about how one can move from the impersonal conception to the personal conception. That's the essential conceptual journey of the Srimad Bhagavatam. As Shankaracharya says that, now what is the use of meditating on some letters at the moment of death? Vajagovinda, worship Govinda.

So the Bhagavatam talks about while taking the person from the journey from impersonal to Brahman, impersonal Brahman to personal Bhagwan, it explores various conceptions of God. So Bhagavatam talks about matter in three sections, matter and material world. Second canto universal form, third canto Sankhya and fifth canto cosmology.

And these are three prominent places where the Bhagavatam analyses matter elaborately. And all these three analysis, if we read them carefully, they are preceded and succeeded. That means they begin and they end with a description that this contemplation will help one to fix one's mind on the absolute truth.

So the purpose of studying matter is to appreciate the glory of the Lord who is beyond matter. So the Virata Rupa is more a conceptual tool. So there is no Virata Rupa Loka in the spiritual world.

So Virata Rupa is a conceptual tool for conceiving the greatness of God. The system of Sankhya is an analytical tool to break down the material world into its constituent elements and to understand eventually how the Lord is beyond all these material limits. And the fifth canto cosmology is a meditational tool for contemplating how everywhere in the universe ultimately dharma is being practised and Lord Vishnu or Lord Krishna are being glorified.

So in the cosmology in the fifth canto, I was a part of the cosmology team at one time. So we look at the verses from 15th chapter, 25th chapter. If you look at it, the precise descriptions of cosmology are very few there.

Even when this Loka is here, this Loka is here to describe, but immediately the focus shifts to describing, okay, what the people at Loka do. For example, if they're offering prayers, here they're worshipping this form of the Lord, there they're worshipping this form of the Lord. Some dimensions are given, but the focus is not cosmology per se.

The focus is to show how dharma and devotion pervade the whole of the cosmos. That is the focus. And by understanding that we all will be inspired to also become dharmic and become devoted.

The purpose of the cosmology is not to ourselves become scientists and try to understand the cosmology. In fact, this is a approximate example, but actually constructing a planetarium from the 5th canto cosmology description is as difficult as constructing a map of America after reading Leela Amrit. Leela Amrit does give some geography.

Okay, Prabhupada travelled from here to there, he went from here to there, and when he went, it took 12 hours, or here there was a temple. But the primary description is about devotional activities. And it's a background knowledge that is assumed to be known.

So, of course, there is some more description also, there is some more description also, but Shukdev Goswami is not primarily describing cosmology. His purpose is to describe how dharma and devotion pervades all of the cosmos. So in this way, the Bhagavatam proceeds.

And now after describing these three material conceptions, which can lead us to the absolute truth, conceiving the Lord in relationship with the material world, then the remaining Bhagavatam focusses on the descent of the Lord in the material world. How the Lord descends into this world and performs various pastimes. And these pastimes are described generally in relationship with the particular dynasties within say Swayambhu Manu's descendants.

For example, now, coming back to, so this is the conceptual flow. So first we are described, we are told how we can conceive the Lord in relationship with the material world. Then we are described how the Lord descends to the material world as the various avatars.

And the 10th canto will describe the highest manifestation of the Lord descending to the material world. So in this way, the whole Bhagavatam is taking us towards meditation on Krishna. So Krishna is the centrepiece of the Bhagavatam.

The 90 chapters of the Srimad Bhagavatam, 10th canto, are the heart, the most important part of Srimad Bhagavatam. And everything else is preparing us for that. No, it's throughout actually.

That means third canto also, in this chapter we had Varahadev coming. So but basically, this is interspersed. There are avatars and there is connection of the Lord with the material world.

But the most detailed description of any avatar that is there in the Bhagavatam is of Krishna. So now coming back to the flow of the Bhagavatam chronologically. Here, what is being talked about will be Swayambhu Manu primarily.

So here in this chapter, first Swayambhu Manu decides that his daughter is to be married and he'll go to Kardamoni. At the end of this chapter, he will come back to his kingdom and it is described that now he will feel that I have fulfilled my duties and he will live absorbed in devotion. And we will return back to Swayambhu Manu in the later cantos when Priyavrata and Uttanapada are there.

So fourth canto will describe. So how the Bhagavatam will flow now is, Swayambhu Manu's description more or less ends with this chapter. How he ruled, how he dealt with the brahmanas, how he got his daughter married in the exemplary way and then how he lived a devotional life.

And after this chapter onwards, from 23rd chapter onwards, the life of the daughter of Swayambhu Manu, that is Devahuti will be described. And that in her description, the description of appearance of Kapila and instructions of Kapila will come. And that is actually the second biggest philosophical section of the Bhagavatam, Kapila's instructions.

Then after that, the third canto will end with this. The fourth canto will describe, so he had how many sons? He had Devahuti and Akuti were two daughters and Uttanapada and Priyavrata were the two sons. So then after that, Akuti will be described.

And while describing Akuti, then the Daksha pastime comes. Because there the connection goes into detail that Sati gets married, she comes in Akuti's dynasty, she gets married to Shiva. Daksha pastime comes.

And after that, Uttanapada's dynasty will be described. And Uttanapada's dynasty goes on. In that, the Dhruv Maharaj pastime comes, Prithu Maharaj pastimes comes and then after Puranjan pastime also comes in that.

Then Uttanapada's dynasty ends. So then the Bhagavatam goes back. In the fifth canto, there will be Priyavrata's description.

And then Priyavrata's dynasty will go on. And that's how the Bhagavatam flows. So now here, in this particular pastime, which is Swayambhuva Manu's description.

So what has happened is that Swayambhuva Manu has now come to to seek his hand for a marriage with his daughter. In fact, in the whole Bhagavatam, this chapter, the 21st, 22nd, 23rd chapter to some extent, this is actually the most elaborate description of any marriage. Even Krishna's marriages are not described so elaborately.

Of course, Krishna's kidnapping of Draupadi of Rukmini is there. It's almost two chapters. But that is more of dramatic action.

However, here, the culture is illustrated in quite a detailed way. And we will see here, when Swayambhuva Manu appears, our first Kardama Muni glorifies him. He says, you Kshatriyas are the protectors of the universe.

And without you, Dharma cannot be maintained. And then, actually, Swayambhuva Manu and they both glorify each other. And after this, Swayambhuva Manu is making a request.

So actually, in Vedic culture, the Kshatriyas and the Brahmanas are the two centres of power. The Kshatriyas are the centres of material power, and the Brahmanas are the centres of spiritual power. And when both of them work together, then the society is taken care of both materially and spiritually.

And that is the general theme of the Bhagavatam. That is the general spirit of Vedic culture, that the Brahmanas and Kshatriyas work together. But there are times when these two centres of power sometimes conflict with each other.

And when this conflict happens, then the Bhagavatam or the Vedic literature, they describe how this conflict can lead to disorder and even disaster. So for example, sometimes the conflict can happen because of the arrogance of the kings. Say, Vishwamitra Muni, before he becomes a Muni, he is a king.

And then he comes and tries to take away the cow from Kavashishtha. And then that leads to violence, and then all his sons get killed, and then he just renounces the kingdom. So this sort of conflict can happen.

In other places, we see that the Brahmana can be proud. Where we see this in the case of Durvasa Muni. Durvasa Muni, he very presumptuously curses Ambarish Maharaj.

Of course, the dialectic in this particular past time is not so much of a Brahmana and Kshatriya, as it is a Yogi and a Vaishbhakta. So the Yogi happens to be a Brahmana and the Bhakta happens to be a king. But the primary focus is the difference between the Yogi and a Bhakta.

But still, this is how the conflicts can happen. In the next canto, we will see the conflict between King Vena and the Brahmanas. So there Vena is imputed.

So generally speaking, the Bhagavatam is not critical of the Brahmanas, except when the Brahmanas are defiant of the Vaishnavas. In general, even when Shukracharya opposes the plan of Bali Maharaj, there is no description of Lord Vamanadeva chastising Shukracharya in any way. Lord Vamanadeva respectfully deals with Shukracharya and tells him, you are very learned and you please tell what was wrong in the sacrifice.

So basically, the Lord generally deals with Brahmanas respectfully. But if the Brahmanas become disrespectful to Vaishnavas and the Vaishnavas happen to be king, then we see that the Lord tells Durvasa Muni, even I can't protect you. You have to go and take shelter of Vambarish Maharaj himself.

So here, there is this very respectful and harmonious interaction between a Brahmana and a Kshatriya, between these two centres of power. And we see Shri Prabhupada, his purports always focus on telling us how things are relevant to us. I have read books on translation and discussed with various translators of how they translate.

You know, two languages to translate from one language to another is always very difficult because each language and each word within that language has its own associations. Each word, for example, there is a famous saying in English. It comes from the Bible, the flesh is, the spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak.

What it means is that one wants to become spiritual, but the temptations of the flesh are dragging a person down. So in the history of computing, people try to computerise everything. So you have a sentence, just find the words that are equivalent to that and translate.

So using automatic computer programme, when they translated, the spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak. They translated in Russia, the sentence became, the vodka is strong, but the meat is rotten. Vodka is a Russian spirit, Russian wine.

So the spirit is strong, the spirit is willing became, the vodka is strong and the flesh is weak became the meat is rotten. So the whole meaning got lost completely. So translation is never a matter of literal accuracy.

So whenever a translator is translating, there are two things which have to be balanced. One is precision and the other is relevance. Precision means keeping things literally precise, accurate, and relevance is making things intelligible, applicable or accessible to the audience.

So there is precision and relevance and Srila Prabhupada in general, in his translations focusses on relevance more than precision. Srila Prabhupada focusses more on precision, not on precision, but on relevance, because ultimately the scriptures are books to be lived and for books to be lived, people have to see how they are relevant to my life. Now, if we look at the literal context here, there's a discussion between a Brahmana and a Kshatriya and actually the Brahmana and Kshatriya are going to become related.

So the Brahmana is going to become the son-in-law and the Kshatriya is going to become the father-in-law. So in a sense, we could see that this relationship of all the Brahmana and Kshatriya, the Brahmana is higher than Kshatriya. In this particular relationship, when the physical relationship is said, then only the son-in-law is considered inferior, lower to the father-in-law.

And that was the logic which Daksha used to expect that Shiva should offer respects to me. So Shiva was spiritually far more exalted, but he thought that he is married to my daughter, so therefore he should offer respects to me. But Srila Prabhupada is taking this in a general way and he's talking about how the Brahmana is the spiritual master and everyone is a disciple.

So Srila Prabhupada is using this context to give us instructions of how the spiritual master and the disciple should interact. So Srila Prabhupada is telling us how this particular context is relevant to us. And now when he's describing that, he explains, now technically speaking, Karda Muni is not the spiritual master of Swayambhu Manu.

But the dynamic between Brahmana and Kshatriya is in the sense that the Brahmana are the instructors. So Srila Prabhupada is taking that and describing that when a disciple goes to a spiritual master, when a disciple asks some favour, the disciple should please the spiritual master. He should satisfy the spiritual master by service and by words, by words of appropriate glorification.

And then he can make some request from the disciple, from the spiritual master. So now, Srila Prabhupada's books are written with the relationship of the spiritual master and the disciple as the central pivot of spiritual life, as the central pivot of spiritual life. Now what has happened is after Srila Prabhupada departed from the world, and at least his physical presence, then we have something very extraordinary, something which is in many ways unprecedented in our Gaudiya tradition.

If we look at the history of Gaudiya Vaishnavism, generally speaking, there was no institutionalisation. Now broadly, institutions are said to be of three kinds. Now they call it soft, medium and hard.

What that means is, the soft institutions are those where there is practically speaking, just overall agreement of purpose and mission, overall agreement of doctrine, but there is no practical control over the scope of the organisation. So that is that soft organisation. There is overall agreement of doctrine, but there is no practical control over the actions of anyone.

So traditionally, after Chaitanya Mahaprabhu departed, Gaudiya Vaishnavism was like this. After Chaitanya Mahaprabhu departed, it is described that when Chaitanya Mahaprabhu and the first Kheturi festival was held, so the Narottam Vilas and other books describe that Vaishnavas came from four different places. So the successors of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu were there, the Goswamis in Vrindavan, the descendants of Advaitacharya Nithyananda Prabhu in Bengal.

Then the successors in Puri, Ramananda Raya and their followers, and then there were the South Indian Vaishnavas. So South Indian Vaishnavas, it is described in Chaitanya Chandrodaya Natak by Kavi Karnapur, that actually at one time, the whole kingdom of Karnataka was a Vaishnava state and many many devotees came from there. But over a period of time, the people went back to their earlier ways and Shri Bhaktsananda Thakur, when he went to South India, he said that actually all that Chaitanya Mahaprabhu has done, we have to do it again in our preaching.

But anyway, the point here is that there were four different Vaishnavas who came for this Kheturi festival and if we look at the way they lived, they had their own individual ways. Now we also know that Narottam Thakur has his own Kirtan style and the Gaudiya Vaishnavas. If you look at it, the Gaudiya Vaishnavas in Vrindavan all wrote in Sanskrit.

The Gaudiya Vaishnavas in Bengal all wrote in Bengali. And Chaitanya Charita Amrit is practically the only book in Bengali history, where the original book is in Bengali. Sorry, Chaitanya Charita Amrit is the only book where the original book is in Bengali and a commentary on that was written in Sanskrit by Vishwanath Chakraborty Thakur.

So normally we have a book in Sanskrit, a commentary in a vernacular language. So Chaitanya Charita Amrit was written by Krishnadas Kiriraj Goswami, who was in Bengal, who was born and brought up in Bengal and he knew, if you see the Vaishnavas in Bengal primarily wrote books on past times. Chaitanya Bhagwat, Chaitanya Mangal and all those books, they are past times.

And the Vaishnavas in Vrindavan, they wrote books on Siddhanta, the Sandarbhas, Bhakti Rasamrith Sindhu, Durgam Sammanitika and all the other books. So the Siddhanta and the Leela both were brought together by a Vaishnava who was in Bengal and went to Vrindavan, that is Krishnadas Kiriraj Goswami. So Krishnadas Kiriraj Goswami, Chaitanya Charita Amrit is not just a book, a biography, a book of biography.

It is actually a book of theology in the style of a biography. That is elaborate theology. Now whenever any philosophical discussions come up, it's like the chronology is going on, Krishnadas Kiriraj Goswami puts a pause button and he does a blow up, a zoom and he elaborates.

So there are these five great conversations which Srila Prabhupada published as TLC, Teachings of Lord Chaitanya, the discussions with Ramanandaraya, Prakashananda Saraswati, Sarovam Bhattacharya and Rupa Goswami and Sanatana Goswami. So these are actually in a sense the theological heart of not just Chaitanya Charita Amrit but also of Gaudiya Vaishnavism. So why am I talking about Chaitanya Charita Amrit? Because Chaitanya Charita Amrit was a book which was accepted by all walks of Gaudiya Vaishnavas over a period of time and that became the doctrinal guide for all Gaudiya Vaishnavas.

So there was no institutional structure. Chaitanya Mahaprabhu himself did not institute an institutional structure. So there was soft Vaishnavism.

Soft institutional structure means there was just a broad doctrinal agreement that was there between the Gaudiya Vaishnavas. Now when even till Bhaktivinoda Thakur's time, Bhaktivinoda Thakur had many Namahat programmes and he created an institutional structure but he did not, we know that we have the marketplace of the holy name that he describes in his Godhrum Kalpatavi and other books but there also he did not create a structure per se in the sense that he did not monitor the structure. So although there was a structure, the structure still remained soft.

It was from Bhaktisiddhanta Thakur's time that we had a further institutionalisation where the structure was more of a medium structure. Medium institutionalisation means there is not just a broad doctrinal agreement but there is one central authority who decides all major issues. All major issues are decided.

So that one central authority was Bhaktisiddhanta Thakur and Vishal Prabhupada also had a medium institutional structure where he himself was the central authority who would decide everything. Now everything major but Vishal Prabhupada also gave a lot of room for individual creativity and dynamism. Now beyond that is the hard institutional structure.

The hard institutional structure is where there is a central authority who decides not only, there is not only broad doctrinal agreement, there is not only a central authority who makes major decisions but a central authority who decides practically everything and hard institutions, the advantage is that we can have absolute fidelity, absolute faithfulness. But the problem is it is not sustainable when it expands. It is not sustainable when it expands for two reasons because firstly the burden on the authority becomes too much.

To decide everything is nearly impossible and secondly is that people's creativity becomes different. So Vishal Prabhupada was categorically against a hard institutional structure. Now in the history of ISKCON at one time the devotees, Prabhupada had appointed a GBC and the devotees appointed a GBC.

They appointed one devotee who had a lot of expertise in management as a GBC, I won't take any names over here, as a GBC secretary and they decided that we in order to make ISKCON more efficient, we will centralise all the management of ISKCON and the main thing they decided to centralise was the finances. They said all the money from all the temples should come to a central authority and the central authority will give out the money to all the temples based on the projects that they are doing. When Prabhupada got this news, what was Prabhupada's reaction? Prabhupada suspended the GBC.

Prabhupada said this is nonsense and he sent a direct letter to temple presidents telling that the GBC has taken certain decisions which are against my will and till further future information don't take any instruction on the GBC. If you have to consult, consult me directly. Then the GBC members came and apologised.

They said Prabhupada we felt that we will be able to manage ISKCON better this way. So Srila Prabhupada said your big big management formulas are not going to work. He said actually we don't want centralisation.

So Srila Prabhupada in a sense made ISKCON like a joint nuclear family. What do we mean by joint nuclear family? It's a joint you know joint families where all family members live together. Nuclear families where all families live separately.

So every temple is like a nuclear family and Srila Prabhupada arranged for largely managerially, financially the temple should be independent. So each temple has its own finances, each temple makes its own vision and each temple develops its own projects. So managerially and financially each temple is separate.

However doctrinally and ritually, doctrinally means with respect to philosophy and ritually means with respect to practises. Doctrinally and ritually Srila Prabhupada wanted standardisation all over ISKCON and he said the purpose of the GBC which he appointed was not primarily to get into the nitty-gritties of the management. It was to oversee the spiritual standards of the movement.

So the spiritual standard basically means a doctrine, the siddhan should be taught properly and the sadhana, the rituals should be done properly. So doctrinally and ritually there is overall coordination but managerially and financially each institution is different. So now while talking about all this here in this context is Srila Prabhupada is talking about the interaction between the spiritual master and disciple.

Now post Srila Prabhupada, at least post his manifest presence before us, we have a situation where we have, GBC recently published a paper called the parallel lines of authority and soon now there's a resolution that all devotees in ISKCON who are going to get initiated, this is going to be mandatory reading for all prospective initiated devotees and of course for all initiated devotees also. So what is this concept of parallel lines of authority? Srila Prabhupada made the gurus, those who took up the responsibility of INSIN after him as his spiritual successors. And the GBC, the management body was like his managerial success.

So roughly speaking, the way Srila Prabhupada envisioned, it was the spiritual masters will play a brahminical role, whereas the GBC will play a kshatriya role. But things are not so simple. Why? Because if you see in the traditional culture, the brahmanas, they have spiritual power, but they don't have any material power, they don't have any finances, they don't have any direct followers.

All these are with the king. People are attracted primarily to the king. So he has his servants, he has control over the kingdom, he has control over the finances.

Now in ISKCON, what has happened is that devotees, because when we read Prabhupada's books, we don't talk about, all that we hear is surrender to the spiritual master. So what happens in ISKCON is that the money and the people, they go to the spiritual master, not to the, so they go to the brahmanas, not to the managers, the kshatriyas. So that creates a sort of confusion and often conflict.

So how kshatriyas and brahmanas are going to be divided within ISKCON. So that is a thing which we will learn over a period of time as we gain experience and we gain deeper insight into Srila Prabhupada's vision. But as of now, the understanding that is there is that every temple is the area where a particular administration is working and the gurus who come, the gurus are like the brahmanas, the gurus should work in cooperation with the temple management.

So otherwise everything becomes conflicted and the temples often have devotees who are more connected with their own spiritual masters than with the temple and then with the process of Krishna consciousness as is taught in the temples. This is not necessarily bad, it is always natural that individuals will get inspiration from other individuals and the disciples will get inspiration from the spiritual master. But the reality of our movement is such that spiritual masters sometimes have hundreds and thousands of disciples and in a practical sense, the spiritual master cannot administer to the needs of the disciples in a down to earth way and that is usually done through the temples.

So therefore, the temples cannot be sidelined and they are very important as a part of our institutional growth and our institutional structure. So the whole idea is that over a period of time, the brahmanical roles and the kshatriya roles will become more and more clear. Now there is some proposal right now that the GBC may be divided into two tier, whether a brahmana GBCs and a kshatriya GBCs.

So the brahmana GBCs will have nothing to do with management, no management at all. They will be purely spiritual inspiration and kshatriya GBCs will be mainly in front. They will also do preaching, you will see.

So also when he comes back, he gives instructions to the citizens and we will see Puthu Maharaj also when he comes back after the 99 horse sacrifices, he also comes and gives instructions. Now of course, we cannot really say that anybody in ISKCON is a kshatriya or belonging to a particular varna because ultimately everybody is transcendental or everybody is aspiring for transcendence. And when Sri Prabhupada also talked about varnashram, he was not talking primarily about dividing society into varnas, brahmana, kshatriya, vaishya, shudra.

The primary focus of Srila Prabhupada's talking about varnashram was to create a suitable material environment for the practise of spiritual life. Now if you look at Srila Prabhupada's statements, from 66 to around 70, consistently in his lectures, letters and conversations, Srila Prabhupada is saying that actually varnashram is not practical now. He said the varnashram has become caste system in India, it has become exploitative and all that we need to do is we can just transcend by practising Krishna consciousness.

But from 70 onwards, sannyas became an institution within ISKCON. There was only one sannyasi before that, Keith had become Kirtanananda Maharaj and others, Prabhupada started giving sannyas more and then from 70 onwards, the sannyasis had some difficulties and then there were grahasthas, grahasthas also started having their problems and all these came to Srila Prabhupada and then Srila Prabhupada said that actually for us to practise Krishna consciousness in a sustained way, we need a supporting framework and that supporting framework is varnashram. So the varnashram is like, say practising Vaishnava dharma is like walking on a tightrope and varnashram is like a safety net below.

So actually speaking, Srila Prabhupada's goal in asking for varnashram, the varnashram is also division into Brahmana and Kshatriya. So we cannot really divide, we cannot say that a particular Vaishnava is a Kshatriya and not a Brahmana or we can say that a particular Vaishnava is a Vaishya or a Shudra. All of them are aspiring for transcendence.

The purpose is not to analyse and categorise. The purpose of varnashram ultimately was cooperation, that everybody should cooperate so that everybody can live harmoniously materially and make advancements spiritually. So the nitty-gritty, if one goes into technicalities, that can lead to problems, that can lead to endless conflicts.

But when one understands the principle that ultimately we are here to cooperatively serve Krishna and whoever can serve Krishna in whatever the best capacity, they should serve Krishna accordingly. So here in this purport we see the cooperation between the Brahmana and the Vaishnava, the Brahmana and the Kshatriya and it is that spirit of cooperation. So both are here in a sense, Swayambhu Manu is a devotee and he wants to glorify the Lord.

In fact, later on it is described that Kardam Muni asked Swayambhu Manu, it doesn't come in the translations, Chakravarti path says in his purport, that when Swayambhu Manu, Kardam Muni gets the question, how did you know that I wanted to get married, he's a brahmachari. So he said actually the Lord told me and the Lord also came and told Kardam Muni that you will be able to get married. So the whole arrangement that has been the cooperation, it is not just an ordinary marriage.

Why is there so much description of this marriage? Because from this marriage the Lord appeared and the Lord himself appeared and both of them, the Brahmana and Kshatriya are cooperating here for the manifestation of the Lord. Similarly, ultimately within Krishna consciousness, we have different departments, different devotees, different natures, different services, but all of us need to cooperate so that Krishna will manifest over here as Vrindavan Chandra has manifested to attract so many thousands and thousands of people and that was Srila Prabhupada's vision that all of us we cooperate so that we can have Krishna manifesting and attracting our hearts and attracting the hearts of everyone else. Thank you very much.

What are the aspects of modern day meditation that would lead you? What are the aspects of modern day education and knowledge that can take us towards God? Actually, if we look at the history of modern knowledge or modern science, all the pioneers of all the fields were people who believed in God. We look at Newton, Boyle, even Einstein and Kelvin, all these who are founders of modern branches of knowledge, they were all believers in God. So, essentially sometimes we say that there is a conflict between science and religion.

However, the conflict is not primarily between science and religion. It is an eternal conflict that is between materialism and spirituality. Unfortunately, what has happened is science has been hijacked by materialists.

The science in and of itself is just a tool for acquiring knowledge. Science is just a tool for acquiring knowledge. Science is neither atheistic nor theistic in and of itself.

Science is basically like a map. Like a map is a model of the territory. Similarly, science is a model of the world.

Now in the model, certain features are like when we draw a map, we take certain features. We focus on geographical dimensions and we neglect all other features. We neglect the people over there, the personality of the people, looks of the people, the behaviour of the people, we neglect all that.

So, just as a map is a selective model of the territory, similarly science is a selective model of reality. In science, we focus on materially measurable parameters. Emotions, consciousness, these are not materially measurable.

Not only emotions and consciousness, even material aesthetics, they are not materially measurable. For example, if we have a gulab jamun, we say it is delicious. Okay, tell me how delicious is it? Tell me on a metre, how delicious is it? I cannot measure the sweetness of a gulab jamun.

So, even material, within material knowledge also, there is aesthetics and we could say there is analytics. So, science is primarily analytical and science in and of itself has zero aesthetics to it. Because science just puts aside aesthetics.

Because science historically has evolved to focus on materially measurable parameters. So, that is why science is a map of the territory. It is a selective map which neglects material aesthetics, which neglects emotions, which neglects consciousness and which ultimately neglects God.

Because all these, none of these are materially measurable. So, this does not mean that now the map itself has got nothing against people. Similarly, science has got nothing against God or soul or anything like that.

But science is a map which focusses only on these things. So, now what atheists have done is, they have taken over science and they have said that actually what science tells is the totality of reality. And many people believe this.

It is like saying the map is the territory. So, this idea that science gives all knowledge and that science is in a sense omniscient, science is God, science knows everything. This is actually not science.

Because there is no scientific proof for the idea that science gives us all of knowledge. So, the idea that science is omniscient is unscientific. So, the idea that science is omniscient is unscientific.

Because there is no scientific tool for understanding this. So, that is why the whole idea of atheists is that if you can make science omniscient, then within the framework of science, the way it has selected its parameters, there is no room for God directly over there. So, that is why often science is equated with atheism.

But this is not science, this is scientism. Scientism is the monopoly of science. And if we understand clearly, what Srila Prabhupada wanted was that, for example, in 1522, he said that a person who is a scientist should use his science to prove the existence of God and to glorify God.

So, what we can do is, within the map of science, we can show how there are pointers from which we can infer the existence of spiritual reality. So, we have, for example, a design argument. We can't prove God through science.

But there are inferences which are reasonable, which are valid. Similarly, from the existence of consciousness, we can infer the existence of Atma. So, when we have these spiritual inferences respectively established through the scientific body of knowledge, then we will be able to show how material knowledge also leads towards higher realities, towards spiritual reality, towards God.

Because the way science has progressed right now, more and more science is revealing that there is complexity at every level. The original idea of science was, we have complexity at the level of the world, and we will have simplicity at the lowest level. And simplicity can have come by chance.

So, the whole of the world is made of ultimately atoms and molecules, and atoms and molecules are very simple structures. So, atoms could have come by chance. But now what science has found is that although complexity gives way to simplicity, but then that simplicity gives way to complexity again.

Because the atoms are themselves so complex. They are so, within the atom itself, there is a whole universe, which is just not easily comprehensible. So, that way, if we look at the verdict of science, science can say that simplicity can come by chance.

But complexity coming by chance is something which is not an idea that any rational mind can accept. So, more and more, actually speaking, 100 years ago, many atheists had predicted that in 50 years, religion will be dead. But all over the world today, there is a resurgence of religion.

There may not be exactly pure devotional service or spirituality, but religion is resurging all over the world. And why is that happening? Because people are finding that without religion, without spirituality, life essentially is meaningless. So, within material knowledge, we can have a lot of analysis and control and manipulation of matter.

But ultimately, as far as meaning and purpose of life is concerned, science doesn't offer us anything about that. So, by talking about how material knowledge is limited, and within that limit also, we can have certain inferences. Albert Camus was a famous atheist, and he wrote a book called The Myth of Sisyphus, in which he said, the only philosophical question in life is when to commit suicide.

Life is meaningless, life is filled with suffering. The only question is when to commit suicide. So, if we just have the materialistic view of life, life ultimately becomes meaningless.

What am I? I am just a set of particles which are just moving around endlessly and meaninglessly. There is no point to existence. So, in that sense, by two ways, one is by pointing out in a respectful way, the limitations of science as a body of knowledge, and then pointing out the validity of inferences that talk about spiritual dimension of life.

And we can help people to also move towards, move from science or move from material knowledge towards spirituality. But that is hardly done in today's educational system. And that's why we also need, as Prabhupada wanted, that devotees should also present Krishna consciousness scientifically, logically, coherently, so that even material knowledge, actually speaking, is observing the material world in its complexity and delicacy and intricacy.

Ralph Waldo Emerson said that all that I see increases my faith in him whom I can't see. All that I see increases my faith in him whom I can't see. So, Emerson, Ralph Waldo Emerson.

So, in this way, actually, we can infer and point to the existence of God and spiritual truths, even from material knowledge. But that is a body of knowledge that has to be worked at in a systematic and sustained way. Any comments? So, what about making the planetary in the fifth canto? Well, first point is Bhagavatam says even Brahmaji cannot understand the structure of the universe.

So, we were discussing in our team, even if we had Brahmaji in our planetary team, still we would have difficulty. So, how that is being done now is that along with the Bhagavatam, there is another body of literature called Jyotishi Shastras, like Bhakti Sahasra Thakur commented on Surya Siddhanta. Siddhanta is a book on cosmology.

So, these give a further detailed knowledge of cosmology. But the way they describe cosmology is significantly different from the way Puranas describe cosmology. So, there are some devotees who are doing research and establish some correlation between Siddhantic cosmology and Puranic cosmology.

So, devotees are trying to understand what he did, recover what he did and then build a planetarium based on that. So, just based on the Bhagavatam, building up a cosmology is very difficult. So, when we take the Bhagavatam and integrate it with knowledge from the other Puranas, if possible, and primarily from the Siddhanta Shastras, then we can have some kind of description.

But still, it is going to be a challenge. And as it progresses, we will need some special revelations from Krishna in the sense that how everything is to be integrated together and it is to be demonstrated. But Bhagavatam combined with other literature, it is possible that we can depict it in some way that is also intelligible.

See, the way we want to depict the cosmology is that it should at least be intelligible to the common man. It may not be acceptable to them. But how does this make sense? I do not believe it, but at least it should be made in such a way that it makes sense.

This is one way of looking at the universe. So, that is a challenge which is still being negotiated. But by integrating the various literature, it is possible to do that.

See, what was Srila Prabhupada's purpose in describing cosmology? In general, the 5th Canto cosmology has not been emphasised by any previous Acharya in our tradition. Bhaktivinoda Thakur talked about Adbhuta Mandir. But in his Adbhuta Mandir, there is no reference to cosmology per se.

So, he said that there will be a wonderful temple that will manifest in Mayapur. But he did not talk about cosmology over there. So, Srila Prabhupada was the first Acharya to emphasise cosmology.

And Srila Prabhupada also actually urged us to, he wanted it, but he also urged adequate caution. And Srila Prabhupada said, how do we build this? Devotee asked Srila Prabhupada said, you go and find a Pandita, you go to South India, you go to traditional Brahmins and find a Pandita who can depict it. So, Srila Prabhupada wanted it to be done because it would form a theistic alternative to the atheistic cosmology that is there in the world today.

Srila Prabhupada wanted that to be depicted so that there could be a respectable alternative worldview available for people. So, it is a part of his outreach. It is an important part of his outreach.

But at the same time, it has to be done with adequate caution and preparation. And when devotees asked Srila Prabhupada for further details, Srila Prabhupada said, no, this is a technical matter. You ask those who have studied it.

And the devotees tried to go and contact various scholars and get it done. And then some scholars came all the way to Mayapur and they said, we have never done it this way. So, basically, Srila Prabhupada's intention was to offer a visual demonstration of an alternative cosmology so that the atheistic cosmology that is pervading the minds of people today could be challenged and countered.

So, the work is challenging and by Srila Prabhupada's mercy and Lord Gauranga Mahaprabhu's mercy, it will become manifest gradually. So, we often see that some kind of a series is going on around the world where there are very serious offshoots with people. This is from Saraswati.

It looks to be tangential to the actual conversation that is going on. So, whether it is those offshoots are the focus, because although they are offshoots, they have many motivations and teachings for us. They are not the focus of the Bhagavatam.

They are just incidentally occurring. Are there certain pastimes which are offshoots? Are they within the chronology or not? Now, Sanatana Goswami in his Vaishnava Toshani has done a sort of critical reconstruction of the 10th canto of Srimad Bhagavatam and there he describes that the pastimes of the 10th canto are not described in chronology. Actually, the chronology is more or less faithful, linear till the 55th chapter.

55th chapter is the marriage of Krishna to Akumar in the 10th canto. Till there it is more or less linear. But afterwards, the whole subsequent description is thematic.

Because you will see after that there is the description of the Pandavas going to the forest and at that time Krishna is fighting with Shalva and then there is the battle of Kurukshetra. And then after that in the 81st, 82nd chapter, then you will have the 86th chapter. Arjuna kidnapping Subhadra.

Now, actually Abhimanyu has already been killed in the Kurukshetra battle. So, how can Arjuna be kidnapping Subhadra afterwards? So, Sanatana Goswami explains that actually Shukadeva Goswami is presenting the subject in a devotional strance. And his speaking, especially the 10th canto in specific, but along with that in the Bhagavatam in general, is more based on spontaneous spurti.

Spontaneous memory recollection. Spurti is a word that is used in Durgam Sangamunitika, that is Yuga Swami's commentary on the Bhaktaswami Sindhu. His spurti is a spontaneous memory of the Lord that arises in the heart of a devotee by the will of the Lord.

So, we try to recollect Krishna, that is smaran. But Krishna giving his memory is spurti. So, Shukadeva Goswami is speaking not based on sparan, but on spurti.

And because he speaks based on spurti, then there is not necessarily a linear flow to the whole thing. And then he gives, okay, this past time happened here, this past time, he gives a construction of that. So, in some cases, the Bhagavatam may not be always linear, either chronologically or conceptually.

But there is an emotional continuity to it. It is a trance of Shukadeva Goswami, through which he is speaking it. But Chakravarti Pada, in his commentary, he does a lot of analysis to describe how the Bhagavatam is actually chronological.

So, in our Sampradaya, before Srila Prabhupada, only two Acharyas have commented on the full Bhagavatam. The first commentary was by Srinath Chakravarti, who wrote a book called Chaitanya Manjusha. And from there we have the famous Aradhyo Bhagavan Vajresthaniyas.

But his commentary is very brief. The most systematic commentary is by Chakravarti Pada. And he does a lot of explanation of the analysis of the Bhagavatam.

So, specific places, if we feel there is offshoots, then we can look at his commentary to see what is the connection. And many places we do find connections, which he describes by his realisations. But there are a few places where, because of spurti, there are memory associations also.

So, why is it that in the Bhagavatam, Krishna's appearance in Vrindavan is not described, it is described as Krishna appeared in Mathura. See, no book can give a comprehensive account of all the pastimes of the Lord, no matter how much detail it is, because the Lord's pastimes are unlimited. And in general, the Lord gives revelations about his pastimes to different devotees at different times also.

So, if we see there is a progression, like Prabhupada translated three primary books. So, the way he presented it, three concentric circles which lead up to a pyramid. So, in our canon of books, canon of books means the books which are given to us by Srila Prabhupada, Bhagavad Gita is like the broad Vedic book, where Srila Prabhupada tells us his broad Vedic values.

And the whole of Bhagavad Gita, Srila Prabhupada uses the word Radharani only once. And that is in the beginning, in the prayer, Tapta Kanchena Gaurangi Radhe Vrindavani. So, that is not the focus.

Prabhupada is using Bhagavad Gita as a Vedic book. So, that is like the ground level. Then the second circle is the Bhagavatam.

So, the Bhagavatam is a Vaishnava book. And then Chaitanya Charitamrita talks, it is the Gaudiya Vaishnava book. So, it is a pyramid that is moving upwards.

So, there is a progression, we know Bhagavad Gita talks about the identity of God, the Bhagavatam talks about the activity of God and Chaitanya Charitamrita talks about the mentality of God, the mind of God. So, there is a progression. So, each book has a particular level of progression, revelation within it, in that progression.

So, now, as I said, it is not that Prabhupada is not talking about Radharani, even Krishna does not talk about Radharani explicitly in the Bhagavad Gita, because that book has a particular focus. And there is a particular revelation that is given over there. Similarly, the Bhagavatam, although it establishes Krishna's supremacy, and it talks about Krishna in Vraja, and that is the sweetest part of the Bhagavatam in many ways, but still, it is not a book that is elaborately describing Vraja.

If you see the number of chapters in the Bhagavatam, which are in Vrindavan, are 40. Actually, it is not even 40. It starts from the fifth chapter, more or less, when Krishna comes to Vrindavan.

And in the 40th chapter, Akrura leaves and Akrura prays to Krishna in that Yamuna river, are the 40th chapter. So, basically, there are 35-36 chapters. So, we cannot expect an exhaustive description of all the details of Vrindavan that are there.

And in general, Krishna has arranged that the glory of Vraja, the glory of Radharani, the glory of the Gopis of Vrindavan, that he has arranged it to be revealed primarily through Chaitanya Mahaprabhu and through the Gaudiya Vaishnava tradition. Definitely, before Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, there was Jayadeva Goswami, who in his Gita Govind does talk about Radharani's special position. And there are references to Radharani in Brahma Purana, Brahma Madhava Purana and Padma Purana, three Puranas.

But along with that, the systematic description of the glories of Vrindavan, of Radharani and the Gopis, that emphasis is done by Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu and the Gaudiya Vaishnavas in his tradition. So, we understand that actually, this is a plan of the Lord. There is a progressive revelation and the revelation of the Vraja glories are done through the Gaudiya Vaishnava tradition by the Lord.

So, it is hinted at in the Bhagavatam, but it is elaborated on by the Gaudiya Vaishnava tradition, by the will of the Lord. Thank you very much. Which point to? Which strongly point to Bhagavatam.

It's not just when we say it's a further revelation, it does not mean that it is not based on the Bhagavatam. The seed is there in the Bhagavatam very strongly. In fact, you know, I don't have time here.

Jiva Goswami actually takes the analysis, Jiva Goswami, see Gopal Champu is a book which is like an elaboration of the 10th Canto of Bhagavatam. So, now there, he does an elaborate analysis. He takes the same Sanskrit verses about say the appearance of Krishna, appearance of Balram and he analyses those verses and he sees the Sanskrit is so subtle and it actually points how Krishna appeared in Vrindavan also.

So, that possibility is hinted at even in the verses of the Bhagavatam. Like the word Aradhito is there in the Ras Panchadya section, which points towards Radharani. So, there are very strong pointers towards the esoteric aspects which are revealed in Gaudiya Vaishnavism within the Bhagavatam itself.

So, those are subsequently revealed by the Gaudiya Vaishnava tradition, but it is very solidly based on the Bhagavatam. Thank you very much.