Does God have favorites?

So, today morning we are discussing from the 10th canto, 61st chapter, where the chapter's title, theme, will come later. You know, the division of the Bhagavatam, or for that matter of any scripture, into chapters is something which was not done in the original narration. It is not that when Krishna was speaking the Bhagavad Gita, nao atahad vithiyo adhyaya that now I'm starting the second adhyaya, now the second adhyaya is complete.

It is a flowing narration. So, because it is a flowing narration, that's why the division of chapters has been done by subsequent editors. So, Vyasa, when he put it down into writing, at that time, he did the division.

And in general, in the traditional division, there is never a nomenclature. So, there is just the division. This chapter gets over, this chapter starts.

That's why if you look at, say, the Sandarbhas, or any of the pre-modern commentaries on the scripture, they usually don't contain the chapter title. They just say, iti bhagavatam dvadasho adhyaya. So, the commentators often don't even bother to give the specific verse number.

And they don't give the chapter title also. Chapter titling is something that has been done later. And in fact, Prabhupada himself was also quite open to revision of chapter titles.

If we see the previous Acharyas, if we even read Bhagavad Gita, the chapter titles in Balde Vidya Bhushan's Gita Bhushan are different from what is then Vishnu Acharya Thakur's Sararth Varshini. And they are different from what is then Prabhupada's Bhagavad Gita as it is. In fact, if you go further, we'll find that the chapter titles in Krishna book are different from the chapter titles in Tenth Canto of Srimad Bhagavatam.

So, then I had to go to Arjuna Dayan Maharaj to ask about this. So, he said that actually Prabhupada had prepared, Prabhupada translated the first 14 chapters. And in the first 14 chapters itself, Prabhupada was open to chapter title modification.

He did not just take the exact titles from the Tenth Canto, from the Krishna book. So, there are some chapters where, especially if we go to 18-19 chapters, I won't go into the details right now. But sometimes a chapter has two distinct themes.

So, one Acharya may focus on one theme and another Acharya may focus on another theme. So, for example, if you look at the first chapter, in general, if you look at, there are about, first chapter of the Bhagavad Gita, if you look at it, there are, as of now, within the tradition, means within the four Vaishya Sampradayas, there are, as far as they are available now, there are 73 commentaries available. So, there are many more which are not, the manuscripts are also not available right now, within the Vaishya Sampradaya itself.

So, out of the 73, around, roughly 50, 36 commentaries use the first half of the Bhagavad Gita's first chapter to give a title. That means, Sainya Niriksha Yoga. Roughly the other half, use the second half, and they call it as Arjuna Vishada Yoga.

So, that means, the titling of the chapters is often dependent on what the particular commentator considers as the important message within that particular chapter. So, now, especially when a flowing story is being recited, the tenth canto is basically a recitation of a story. So, if we see here, the theme of this particular chapter, that Lord Balram slays Rukmi, that has not yet approached at all.

In fact, that theme, that is a specific pastime, which will come much later, after what is going on currently, is the description of the genealogy of Krishna, of the progeny of Krishna. So, in fact, that particular pastime will happen, it's organically related in terms of chronological flow, that after describing his sons, when Krishna will describe the marriages of his sons, at that time, this particular pastime will happen. So, that's how, at one level, the genealogy, and then the specific chronological event, they are connected.

In the later part of the Srimad Bhagavatam, especially after Krishna leaves Vrindavan, the Bhagavatam is not necessarily chronological. It is more of sphurti-based, it's based on the inspirational remembrance that is rising in the heart of Sukhdev Goswami, that he speaks pastimes. So, that's why, between the chronology, for the sons to be born, and afterwards the sons to get married, a lot of events have happened in between.

But here, it's just moving from that way, it's not chronological movement. It is more of conceptual or thematic movement that is happening here. So, now here, it is described that Krishna had ten sons from each of his wives.

So, in the Rig Veda, it is described that every human being has three primary duties. The Vedas, if we see, they do not focus on para-dharma. They do not focus primarily on the relationship with the Absolute Truth.

Because they are focussing on dharma-arthakama. In fact, there are some Hindu atheists, whatever that word means, it's like oxymoron, somebody being a Hindu atheist. But they quote an infamous passage from the Rig Veda, which says that, you know, is there a Supreme Being or is there not? Does he know or does he not know? No one knows.

So, they say that actually the Vedas themselves open to atheism also. They argue for this. The point is, not that the Vedas are supporting atheism in any way, but the point is in the Vedas themselves, because karma-kanda is the emphasis, so the point is not to know the Absolute Truth.

No, we know primarily about the Vedanta Sutra. The Vedanta Sutra begins with Athato Brahma Jijnasa. Like that there are sutras for each of the six systems of thought.

So there is Mimamsaka Sutra. And Mimamsaka Sutra begins with Athato Dharma Jijnasa. Because the primary focus over there is, now the word dharma in Indian philosophy has been analysed to have 376 meanings.

And these are authentic meanings as they are found in the scriptures itself. So Prabhupada focused on one particular meaning. But if we look at the Bhagavad Gita, Prabhupada said that dharma refers to our innate nature.

But that is not the only sense in which the word is used in Bhagavad Gita. Because if dharma meant only our innate nature, then Krishna's direct instructions, sarva-dharman parityajya, will make no sense. How can we give up our nature? So the point which I am making here is that each sutra or each set of thought has a particular emphasis.

So the particular emphasis is that, say in Mimamsa Sutra, it is Athato Brahma Dharma Jijnasa. So what is dharma? And dharma refers to essentially those activities by which one can get artha and karma. That is what dharma is referred to.

So the point I am making over here is that from the Vedic perspective, there are three duties which are considered important. And those are the duties to the sages, the duties to the gods and the duties to the ancestors. So the duties to the sages are that a person studies the message that they have got, that the sages have given us.

They study the scripture and serve the sages. The duty to the devatas is that one performs yajnas. And devata, the duty to the ancestors, is that one begets progeny and continues the dynasty.

And that is why we will see repeatedly in the Puranas as well as the Itihasas, if a king is not able to beget progeny, the king is in great anxiety. Because it is a dharmic duty to be completed. So Krishna, as I mentioned in my class last time, when Krishna descends to this world, he demonstrates the contemporary definition of success.

Because if people are to be attracted, nobody is attracted to somebody who has nothing outstanding about them, oneself. So people are attracted to that which is outstanding. So Krishna demonstrates how he is outstanding.

And he demonstrates how he is outstanding in the contemporary terms. So now from the Vedic definition of success, for a king to have many sons is a sign of great success. That means a person has been able to expand one's dynasty in a very successful way.

So this Krishna is begetting ten sons from each of his primary queens. That's what is mentioned over here, some of them are mentioned over here. This is how Krishna is demonstrating the contemporary Vedic definition of success.

So Krishna of course demonstrates transcendental love also, which he does in the Vrindavan pastimes. Now I will focus on this particular, in this particular verse, on this last line. That they were especially regarded or favoured by Krishna.

So it's referring here to Samba and other sons of Jambavati who were favoured by Krishna. So the topic I will discuss is, does God have favourites? Does God have favourites? And I will discuss this in four divisions. First I will talk about the philosophical implications of God's favouritism or non-favouritism.

Then I will discuss about the analysis of this in terms of rasa, in the transcendental realm. Then I will discuss about how in our practical life, favouritism can lead to undesirable results. And in this world, when we are practising devotional service, we are in the material world, we are practising spiritual life.

So there can be the positive results of transcendental favouritism and there can be negative results of mundane favouritism. So how do we negotiate our way through that while living in this world? That will be the last part we will discuss. So firstly from the philosophical point of view, favouritism is a word which has strongly negative connotations.

Like it is right there with things like nepotism. Nepotism is somebody favours one's relatives. If a person becomes a minister, then all the relatives get jobs or get some positions or get some perks.

So nepotism is considered in bad taste. Similarly, favouritism is also considered to be in bad taste. Now that, why is favouritism considered to be in bad taste? Because you like someone, so you favour that person.

That's partiality. There should be equal opportunity. And we understand that in a sense that if in a class there are students, and if a teacher likes a student, and because of that the teacher gives more marks to the student.

Even if the student doesn't actually do well in the exam. This is bad. This is favouritism.

So there is one thing that favouritism that arises from partiality. And that is definitely unfair because that leads to discrimination against some people based on, not based on the person's qualifications, but based on just a person's, the examining or the authority person's preferences. That is undesirable.

And at one level, God does not have any favourites. He does not have any favourites. He is equipoised towards all living beings.

Samoham. Sama is Samyata, is what Krishna recommends in the Bhagavad Gita repeatedly. In fact, this Samoham Sarvabhuteshu comes in 9.29. But before that, Krishna has said in 5.19 that if people acquire Samya, then they can become liberated.

In fact, if one has acquired Samya, then one is already liberated. nirdosham hi samam brahma tasmad brahmanite sthitah ihaiva tair jitah sargo ihaiva, in this world itself, jitah sargo One has conquered over material existence if yesham samye sthitam manah those who are situated in Samya, those who are situated in equanimity. Prabhupada translates Samya as sameness.

So, samye sthitam manah nirdosham hi samam brahma So here he says that the Samya, those who have Samya, they are flawless, nirdosham. And then, they are samam brahma. They are equivalent to Brahma.

That means, what is implied is, Brahma is also sama. Brahma, the absolute truth is also Samya. It is characterised by Samya.

tasmad brahmanite sthitah And because they are like Brahma, so therefore they are situated in Brahma right now. So essentially Krishna says that sameness or equal-mindedness in dealing with things, dealing with people, that is a characteristic of that qualifies one for liberation. So this is in the fifth chapter.

In the sixth chapter, Krishna talks about sameness with respect to things and sameness with respect to people. In 6.8, he talks about sameness with respect to things. He says, That person sees stone, pebbles and gold equally.

And then in 6.9, Krishna states, next level, to see things equally is tough. But it's possible. If a person is detached from things, a person can see things equally.

But even tougher is to see people equally. And that's why Krishna in the next verse says that seeing people equally is higher. One who has sama buddhi towards all these different kinds of people.

One who is a friend, one who is an intimate friend, one who is a nominal friend, one who is an enemy, one who is neutral, one who is a mediator, one who is envious, one who is pious, one who is sinful, one who is virtuous. If one is equally disposed towards them, such a person is higher, is better. So essentially, there is repeated mention by Krishna that being equipoised towards things and towards people is a desirable spiritual qualification on the path of progress.

So in general, if we consider the spiritual progression to be like a movement on the ordinate, on the y-axis, there is negative axis, there is zero, and there is positive axis. So on the negative axis, there is favouritism that comes from partiality. And that is undesirable.

Even from the normal life's point of view, it is undesirable. And even from the point of a spiritual growth, it is undesirable. And so from that negative axis, one comes to zero.

One develops samatha. But in the transcendental realm, there is another kind of favouritism that arises not from partiality, but from personality. From personality means that Krishna is a person.

And as a person, he has his personal preferences. And that's why Krishna loves cows. Now one of the things that people outside the Hindu tradition just can't understand is why do you Hindus consider cow to be so holy, so sacred? In fact, this incomprehension about the sanctity of the cow has expanded to become a metaphor.

So holy cow, anything that is irrationally valued, that is referred to as a holy cow. So it's become a phrase in English language. So for example, say during the prior to the… Okay, this is going to history.

Before the Bolshevik revolution in Russia, there were some fights between the two warring Russian groups. And there was some remote part of Siberia which was of no value to anyone. But still thousands and thousands of soldiers were devoted to that and they're trying to protect that area.

No strategic value, no economic value, no population demographic value, no value. But so it is said that particular area is the holy cow of both these parties. That means what? There is no rationality beyond for valuing this, but still it's valued.

So the idea of a holy cow is just not comprehended. Why? Because the holiness of the cow is appreciated primarily in the Vedic tradition in terms of the personality of Krishna. Krishna is a person and he loves cows.

And that's why devotees or not even necessarily even devotees, in general pious Hindus, they value cow. It is because Krishna values cows. Now for people who are not within the circumference of appreciating Krishna's personality, for them to understand why we appreciate cows can be very difficult.

And for that reason, we may give secondary reasons. For helping them to appreciate, we may give secondary reasons. We may say that, yes actually, Prabhupada, actually many people nowadays use the economic reason.

Cow can be so valuable and this and that and that. And how cow dung, cow urine, all that is very valuable. Prabhupada took a slightly different tone.

He focused on the emotional value. Cow gives milk. It's like a cow is like a mother.

Therefore, the point is, therefore, you should value cows. So there is one Christian preacher who has systematically critiqued all of the teachings of Prabhupada. He has written a whole book criticising this.

So one of the arguments, one by one he takes this, he says that this worship of the cow reflects the irrational mentality of Hindus to worship the creation instead of the creator. To worship the creation instead of the creator. You may say that you equate the cow with the mother.

But, the cow does not have the affection that the mother has. The mother loves the child and the mother gives her milk because she loves the child. Now, the cow's milk is taken out and it is eaten by someone else.

And the cow's love is not for the human being who is taking the milk. The cow's love is for her own calf. So for humans to treat the cow as a mother is just a sentimental imagination.

Because there is no maternal bond between the cow and the humans who are drinking her milk. So here, this particular reasoning, the flaw in the reasoning is that in the Christian tradition there is a big divorce between the creation and the creator. That God is considered so transcendental that he cannot be depicted or he cannot be perceived in anything in this world.

So that's why in the Hindu tradition there is one of the commandments that thou shall not make any graven image of God. That is, don't depict God because God cannot be depicted by any means. So this divorce between the creation and the creator, now of course, this is not there within all Christian denominations although there are many prominent Christian denominations.

But the point is, it's not that devotees when they hold a cow sacred, it's not that they are replacing the creator with the creation and making the creation the object of worship. There are, even if you want to go from a purely philosophical perspective, it is not, nowhere in any temple will you find that the cow is replacing Krishna on the altar. So, it is not misdirection of worship from the creator to the creation.

Rather, the cow represents the intimate connection of the creation with the creator. We don't just see the creation as a gift of the creator. That is true.

Yes, if the world and its resources were not there, then we would not be able to live in this world. Even if we had been created but the world had not been created, then we would not be able to survive. So at one level, the creation is the gift of the creator to the creatures.

But the appreciation of the cow is not just at that level. Krishna's affection for the cow arises from his personality and the cows in this world which are manifestations of the surabhi cows which are there with Krishna in the spiritual world, they demonstrate to us the intimate bond that is there between Krishna and his creatures. So, we have to understand that the cow is not just valuable economically, the cow is valuable not just maternally, the cow is valuable because she is valuable to Krishna.

We value the cow because she is dear to Krishna. And the value of the cow is not because we are replacing the creation with the creator, but we are recognising the connection of the creation with the creator not just in utilitarian terms from our perspective. Oh, the creation is a big gift for us.

No, we are recognising the connection of the creation with the creator in terms of the creator's personal nature and personality. So because Krishna loves cows, so we love cows. Now, is this Krishna's favouritism? No, Krishna loves cows, so does that mean that Krishna doesn't love elephants, Krishna doesn't love dogs, Krishna doesn't love all the other creatures? There is, in the transcendental realm, if there is no personality, there cannot be any personality without personal preferences.

Now, what do we mean by personality? Now, is it just how a person looks? If it were just looks, then we could say a statue has personality. You know, how much personality does a statue have? It's not just looks, it's also the actions, and not just the actions, the actions represent a person's inclinations. So, a person's likes and dislikes in this world, likes and dislikes go together.

Iccha and Dvesha. Likes and dislikes are what go together. Whereas, in the transcendental realm, what is there is not likes and dislikes, like and like more.

There is like, like more, and like most. Just like we have Krishna in Dwarka, is perfect. Krishna in Mathura is more perfect.

Krishna in Vrindavan is the most perfect. So, it is not, at the transcendental realm, there is no negative side to the duality. Even the negative is positive.

That means, rather than saying this is like and this is dislike, it's all is like, but within like, there are gradations of like. So, before we go, understand this point of Krishna's personal preferences, let's look at the human-divine relationship from the other perspective. We are looking at, before we can appreciate it from the divine perspective, let's try to understand it from the human perspective.

So, Prabhupada talks about in the 13th chapter of the Gita, he hints at it, there is a Upanishadic approach, there are two ways to understand the absolute truth. One is, three ways broadly actually, one is we look upwards and try to understand broadly the nature of the cosmos. Second is we look outwards and try to look at nature.

So, we look upwards, we try to use philosophically, infer first cause. We look outwards, that means we look at nature and then we try to understand. From nature, from the creation, we try to understand something about the creator.

And the third is look inwards. That means we look at our own nature and because we are creations of God, so, by understanding our nature, we can get some understanding of Krishna's nature also. So, in the transcendental relationship, it is described that one of the defining characteristics of the Bhakti Marga is the concept of Ishta Daivat.

Ishta Daivat means what? That there is God who has many manifestations and devotees, based on their transcend… when devotees become purified and come to their transcendental… their transcendental nature becomes awakened, then they are attracted to a particular form of the Lord. Yad Yad Dhyat Urugaya Vibhavayanti Tattadvapuhupraniyase Sadanugrahaya Brahmaji, in his prayers for creative power, while he is appreciating the Supreme Lord, he says, Yad Yad Dhyat with whatever inclination, with whatever intelligence to Urugaya Vibhavayanti Urugaya, that Lord who is glorified in wonderful ways, Vibhavayanti they try to worship him, they try to appease him, Tattadvapuhupraniyase Tattadvapuhupraniyase that particular form, praniyase, is manifested. Sadanugrahaya Sadanugrahaya out of being merciful to the devotees.

So what this means is that Krishna does not consider it in any way a defect. See, if somebody is, if Brahmaji is offering his prayers to the Lord and what he is saying, you are so merciful that according to the way the devotee desires to worship you, you manifest a corresponding form. So what is he saying? He is saying that you are so sensitive that you reciprocate with the devotee's desire.

And that means this desire, Vibhavayanti, this particular form of worship is something which the Lord appreciates and reciprocates with. So, when, say, a devotee's Ishwadayivat is Krishna, that does not mean that the devotee dislikes Ram. It does not mean that the devotee dislikes Vishnu.

It's just that, like, more like and most like. And we see this, Chaitanya Mahaprabhu respects this. There are two examples of this.

One is of Murari Gupta, who was a worshipper of Ram. And similarly, there was the brother of Rupan Sanatana Goswami, who was also the worshipper of Ram. And Chaitanya Mahaprabhu actually appreciates both of them.

So the point here is, even in the transcendental realm, devotees have their personal nature. And based on their personal nature, there will be personal preferences. And Krishna appreciates those preferences.

So similarly, now, in this human-divine relationship, let's shift to the other perspective. You know, if we can have our personal preferences accommodated within the transcendental realm, then can Krishna's personal preferences not be accommodated? Surely they can, and they should be accommodated. So, Krishna's personal preferences are actually what make his personality tangible, concrete, actual.

If Krishna did not have any personal preferences, then there is no special opportunity to express one's affection. You know, if we want to do something special for some devotee, then, you know, maybe that devotee's birthday is there, and we want to offer something to him. If we want to find out, maybe we want to give some prasad, try to find what prasad item does the devotee like.

We want to give that prasad to that devotee. So the point is, that when a person, if somebody says, no, whatever you give me, that's fine. Yes, that's okay, but you tell me what you like.

He says, no, no, whatever you give me, it's okay. Then, yes, that is at one level, we can see detached, but then, there is no special opportunity to express one's affection in a special way. So if we find out, okay, what this person likes, and we offer that, then there is a special furthering of the tie in the relationship that happens.

So same way, Krishna's personal nature and his personal preferences lead to greater affection, greater opportunity for reciprocation and a deeper bonding, deeper relationship. So this is from the point of view of the philosophical understanding, that Krishna's, if Krishna has any favourites, that is not because of his partiality, that is because of his personality. Partiality means you are good, you are bad.

Personality and preference means good, better, best. It's not good and bad. So, of course, this is a much more elaborate subject.

I'll have to rush through some of the points which I wanted to discuss. So now, is it that one is from the point of view of appreciating philosophically, but what about emotionally? Do the devotees who are, say, in the good category for Krishna, is it that they feel that we miss out something because we are not in the best category? Is it in the spiritual world that Krishna is Gopal? So does that mean the deer or the peacocks or the parrots? If you know Krishna doesn't love us? No, it's not like that. Because Krishna is omnipotent.

And because he is omnipotent, he can keep everyone satisfied in whatever relationship they are. So the devotees don't crave for something else. And the, not only the devotees not crave for something else, even devotees themselves don't engage in this one-upsmanship.

No, I am in a higher rasa than you. It's not that the devotees are competing like that. We see this very beautifully depicted in the Brihadbhagavatamrit, in the second part where the Gopakumar goes to the spiritual world.

So when he goes to, first to Vaikuntha, then to Ayodhya, then to Dwarka, and eventually comes to Vrindavan. So, it's interesting that in Vaikuntha, in Dwarka, in Ayodhya, all three places, the devotees over there, of those particular forms of Vishnu, Rama, and Dwarka, Krishna, all those devotees consider their worshipable Lord to be the be-all and end-all. In fact, the devotees in Vaikuntha think that Krishna is the incarnation of Vishnu.

Vishnu is the be-all and end-all. And, Sanatana goes, Swami, it is not minimising. No, actually they are illusion.

It is Krishna who is the highest. He doesn't do that. There is room in the transcendental realm for transcendental subjectivity.

And that subjectivity is based not on some illusions created by subjective perception. They are based on the arrangement of Krishna for having personal reciprocation with everyone. That is Krishna's perfection by which he enables everyone to be satisfied.

So, in the Raga Vartama Chandrika, it is explained that there are two different kinds of devotees even in the Madhuryas. I will not go into terminology here. Simply we will put it.

We have Gopis and we have Manjuris. So, the Gopis are those who directly reciprocate with Krishna. And, the Manjuris are those who observe.

So, now, is it that those who are observing are missing out? They are not as intimate with Krishna as those who are actually interacting with him? So, Chakravarti Pal explains that those who are observing, Krishna arranges that by which they can get greater happiness. How is it? Because they can experience both from the Gopis' perspective and from Krishna's perspective. So, you observe, Oh, how much Krishna is loving this Gopi? How much this Gopi is happy? How much Krishna is happy? So, the point is that nobody misses out on anything because of Krishna's personal preferences.

Krishna is Rasaraj and he ensures that everyone is transcendentally satisfied. So, now, how does all this play out in our lives? Is the spiritual master equal to all? Prabhupada asked this question. I said, Do you love all your disciples equally? Prabhupada said, Yes.

And then he added, But if someone comes forward to take up responsibility, I reciprocate. If someone comes forward to take up responsibility, I reciprocate. What does it mean? That the personal reciprocation is not something which should be equated with partiality.

A father may love all of one's children equally. But if there are some children who are very responsible, who share the father's load, who take up the father's responsibilities, share in the family, naturally the father will feel special affection for that particular child. So, there is there is the point that Krishna or the spiritual masters, spiritual masters actually offers all equal facilities to everyone.

But also there is the principle of reciprocation. And we see that Prabhupada, in his final days, several devotees asked him to appoint a successor. Not devotees, several of the Hindu well-wishers, life members and others.

Who will be your successor, Swami? Prabhupada gave different answers, but one answer he gave several times was that, Whoever wants to be. Whoever wants to be my successor. Prabhupada did not consider a succession in material terms.

Who gets the property of his scorn? Who gets to become a trustee of his scorn? What is the legacy that the spiritual master gives to the disciple? The legacy is the desire to serve and glorify Krishna. Prabhupada did not get anything of the Gaudiya Math. But all he got was the desire to glorify Krishna.

And from that desire to glorify Krishna, everything else manifested. Temples manifested, books manifested, devotees manifested. So that is the essential legacy of the spiritual master, the desire to serve Krishna.

That's why Prabhupada said, Whoever wants to accept my legacy, my legacy is waiting for them. Another point may come up here, from the point of view of reciprocation, that is fine. That, yes, whoever takes up more responsibility, that person will get more association with the spiritual master, more opportunity for associating, serving, things like that.

But there can be, when we are in this world, our spiritual personality is not yet being awakened. But we also have to use our material subhava in Krishna's service. So we will serve according to whatever nature we have, whatever talents we have.

And it may well happen that when we are trying to do some, when we are trying to serve Krishna, and we are in a particular project, where the leader of the project, whoever it may be, or we may be in a particular department, or in a particular situation, where the leader has a particular focus. So we may have a set of talents that are different from what is required for that project. And someone else may have some talents which are exactly suited for that project.

So it may not be that we don't want to take up responsibility, but it's just that we don't have the competence to take up that kind of responsibility, which is required in that particular project. So it may appear that, oh, I am not getting the association of some devotee whose association I want. Because, oh, this devotee cares so much for this devotee, I don't care for.

We may find that because of this, some, we may feel left out, or we may feel neglected. So here, there are two different things to be understood. When such thing happens, it can cause heartburn unless we understand our philosophy properly.

First is that Bhakta Vinod Thakur says, Rupa Goswami also says this in the Bhakta Sangha Sindhu, that we don't just need Sangha, we need Sajatiya Asha Snigdha Sangha. Sajatiya Asha. Sajatiya Asha means those who have the same category of desire that we have, Snigdha, affectionate.

Sajatiya Asha Snigdha Sangha. So the association that we need is of affectionate devotees who have similar desires. It's interesting now, is it that our desire should be similar to our authority or we should find an authority whose desires are similar to ours? What does it mean? With the same category of desire, what does it actually mean? So in general, especially in the early stages of our spiritual life, it is difficult for us to find out what our nature is.

Because generally, one of the characteristics of the mode of passion is to always think that the grass on the other side is greener. So every service is better than the service that I am doing. Why? Because when we actually start doing a service, we find out that there are so many challenges in doing that service.

So many things to be done. And as compared to that, somebody else is doing some other service. You know, it's such a nice service.

It's so nice. You can do so many things. But then actually when you go into that service, then we find out, oh, there is so much to do.

I never knew. So what happens? When we are in passion, usually the nature of passion is at one level, we say passion, we want to do a lot. But actually, passion, it's not just that we want to do a lot.

We want the world to know that I am doing a lot. So it is not that I am doing a lot. It is not whether the world knows I am doing a lot.

That is what is more important, passion. And because of that, we are too eager for results. We want something to be done visibly.

And so, the point which I am making here is, when there is too much passion, Rajoguna, at that time we can't perceive actually what our nature is. So in general, it is best for us to serve according to whatever instructions we get. Whatever services we are given, we do that.

But, Prabhupada says in the introduction of Nectar of Instruction, that by the practise of Bhakti, one will come to the mode of goodness. And once one comes to the mode of goodness, then how to advance further will be revealed from within. What that means is that, once we come to goodness, we will start understanding what is our nature.

Okay, these are my strengths. These are my limitations. And these are the things which I can serve best.

So, over a period of time, as we keep practising Bhakti, we will recognise that there are certain things which I can do well, there are certain things which I can't do so well. And then, we will have some choices to make, some decisions to make. If we want some devotee's association and we feel very deprived because of not getting that devotee's association, then we will have to work to develop the particular kind of talents so that we can assist that devotee in whatever service that those particular devotees are doing.

Then we can get the association. But if you feel that, oh my nature is too different and I just don't have the talents for doing this service. I don't have the abilities, I don't have the nature to do this service.

Then, we don't have to feel deprived. Now, Krishna's movement is a very big movement. And we can find other devotees who have the same category of interest.

Now this does not mean that we necessarily have to make some radical changes in our life. But it's just that we have to find out where we can serve in a way where the contributions that we are making are valued. And when we find that, then we can move onwards.

So I'll conclude this with one incident from my life. I primarily see my service to Krishna as writing. Now, 10-12 years ago, or maybe 15 years ago, there were not many writers in our movement.

Not even in the first generation, what to speak of in the second generation. And when I started writing, what is going to happen by writing? Nothing is going to happen practically. You don't see any visible results generally by writing.

So, since my childhood, I used to read in Times of India this column called Speaking Tree. It's about spiritual wisdom over there. So then when I started writing regularly, I just found out the editor of Speaking Tree's address and I wrote some articles.

And then, now Times of India is India's biggest paper. According to some surveys, it is the world's biggest paper. Because of course India is one of the… India has among the largest English-speaking populations in the world.

So anyway, my article got published. And for me, it was like a childhood dream come true. I was so happy.

And then, I told other devotees in the temple, you know, my article has got published in Speaking Tree. So one devotee looked at me and said, how can trees speak? So, you know, I told several devotees, none of the devotees, what is so big about it? They couldn't appreciate it at all. So then, I was very discouraged.

It is… I thought it is not just because my dream was fulfilled, but I just thought at that time, as far as I knew, no other Iskcon devotee had written an article in Speaking Tree. So I was the first. So I thought that even from our movement's point of view, it is Krishnadevaraya that is coming for the first time.

There was no appreciation. Still, I kept writing. And then, once, Jaidev Maharaj had come to Pune.

So, after his class, he had guided me sometime in writing. So after my class, I had made a… after his class, I went to meet him. And I compiled… I had compiled at that time, maybe 10-15 articles in Speaking Tree and maybe 20-30 articles in some other newspapers.

So I compiled all of them into a simple spiral bound publication… spiral bound file and I showed it to Maharaj. And Maharaj was so happy, smiling on his face and he read it and he he said… he actually went through several articles and he said this is good, he would have written it like this. He started reviewing and his suggestion, he was very happy.

And then, I told Maharaj that Maharaj, you know, I would like to write more, but there are so many other services I have managed. Maharaj said, let others do management. You write.

So he said, I will talk with Radhe Shamproo if you want. So then, I did not say anything. I just… then afterwards, after about a month, I had come to Chowpatty and then Govind Pru told me that Jayadvait Maharaj has given me some books for you from America.

So I was stunned. So then, there are 4-5 books on writing. So I had asked Maharaj at that time, how can I improve my writing? And Maharaj gave me a long list of 25-30 books.

Now most of those books at that time, there was no Amazon and everything. No books were available in India. So, Govind Prabhu told me that actually, later on, Maharaj sent some 5 books to Govind Prabhu.

Then I went from here to Juhu. Then Bhima Prabhu called me. Bhima Prabhu told me, Jayadvait Maharaj sent 5 books to me, through me.

Then afterwards, I met Rasraj Prabhu. Rasraj Prabhu said, Maharaj sent 5 books for you through me. So, by that way, all the 25 books, he sent to me.

And because… why he sent from different people? Because nobody's weight should become too much. Just to barrage the weight. And then Rasraj Prabhu told me that, actually Maharaj was in Berkeley and both of us went together to the market and we shopped all these books.

So, I was so touched at that time. And next time when I met Jayadvait Maharaj, I told, I was thankful. I am very grateful to you, Maharaj.

I was so encouraged. Maharaj said, that Prabhupada told me that, when I was doing editing for him, Prabhupada told me, do your editing and train others. So, he said, I am simply carrying on Prabhupada's instruction.

So, the point which I was making over here is that that all of us have to find out some circle which, where if we have particular talents and there is a particular definition of success within that talents, then we have to find out those who appreciate that definition of success. Then we will blossom in our bhakti. So, rather than thinking that I am neglected or nobody cares for me.

Because in this world, everybody is finite. Even the pure devotee has only 24 hours in a day. So, it is not that time is going to expand for a pure devotee.

So, everybody has some limitations. And because of that, we can't expect everyone to have all interests and to take interest in everybody. So, if we have certain inspirations, we have certain ways, certain things in which we can serve Krishna, then rather than feeling that, oh, nobody appreciates me, these devotees are partial, they pay more attention to this devotee, not to me.

We should find out who has similar interests. And then, develop a relationship over there. So, rather than thinking of this, sort of as favouritism, as resulting from partiality, we can see it is because of personality.

And different devotees have different personalities. And accordingly, they will have different ways in which they want to serve Krishna. So, of course, if we are developing a very intimate relationship with some senior devotee, we can always take blessings from our shiksha guru or our spiritual counsellor or a guide.

But the point is, there is no need for us to feel, to let ourselves feel neglected or rejected, or to feel, let ourselves get a negative perception of our authority by thinking that they don't care for me. Rather, it is our responsibility to find out how we can best serve Krishna, and then develop the connections by which we can inspire ourselves and rise in our spiritual life. So, rather than thinking of this as, rather than thinking of any kind of favouritism as partiality, we can see it as an outgrowth of personality.

So, we all have our nature, others have their natures, and we have to find out where these natures can intersect, and can serve comfortably in that nature. So, at the transcendental level, there is no difference. Now, whether a person is serving the deities in the pujari department, very close to the deities, or whether someone is travelling everywhere, and spreading the glory of the deities, so that people will come to the temple.

Krishna can have an intimate relationship with everyone, at the transcendental level. But when things are manifest in the material world, there will be differences, and we need to not see those differences materially, and feel discriminated against. We should see those differences also as opportunities by which we can adjust and learn to serve Krishna.

So, Kunti Maharani says, She says, Ganga flows to the ocean, let my consciousness flow towards you. So, it is our responsibility to find out how our consciousness can flow towards Krishna. At one level, it is a prayer that Kunti Maharani is offering, and that is good.

But along with that, it is our responsibility also. So, if we have such emotional blockages, thinking that devotees don't care for me, that, oh, senior devotees don't pay attention to me, those will be blockages which are stopping our consciousness from going towards Krishna. So, it is our responsibility to find out how can the consciousness go towards Krishna.

If there is a blockage here, find somewhere from somewhere else. You know, go above, go below, go round, somewhere go ahead. Keep moving around.

By going above doesn't mean that we are jumping over the authority. Going above means we just find a way ahead. So, I phrase this verse as a chiasmus.

Chiasmus is basically a devotee holds nothing back and nothing holds a devotee back. So, nothing holds a devotee back. Yes, there may be obstacles.

We find out some other way in which we keep serving Krishna and keep moving, letting our consciousness move on towards Krishna. And actually, if we take up the responsibility to keep our consciousness moving on towards Krishna, then our personality will develop. Personality, not in the sense of glamour or flamboyance, but personality in terms of our own personal nature and attributes.

Krishna has made all of us unique and there is a reason why we are unique. Now, Krishna, we can all serve Krishna in distinctive ways. And if we focus on taking inventory and finding out what we are good at and trying to see how we can make good things out of it, then our own personal nature will grow.

So, it is, I'll conclude with a small saying that, you know, what we are is God's gift to us. What we become is our gift to God. So, rather than feeling jealous or I am like this, I am not like that, we accept that what I am is God's gift to me.

But from what I am, I can improve, I can contribute. What we become is our gift to God. And this is the nature of the personal relationship between Krishna and us.

So, I'll summarise. I started by talking about how nomenclature of chapters depends on individual emphasis of the commentators. Then we discussed about how within the Vedic definition of success, having children is considered a duty and Krishna demonstrates how he is successful within that definition of success by having so many children.

Then we discussed about how does God have favourites. So, we discussed from the favouritism that arises from partiality is undesirable. But favouritism that arises from personality is an attribute of personal nature.

It is an opportunity for a more personal intimate connection. And we discussed about the relationship between the cow and Krishna as an example of this. Then in the transcendental realm, every devotee feels fully satisfied in whatever relationship one has with Krishna.

We discussed how Manjuris get as much satisfaction as the Gopis are getting. In fact, they can get more satisfaction. So, nobody feels left out.

Nobody feels that they are missing anything. And then we discussed in the material world, when we are practising devotional service, yes, there can be favourites which a spiritual master has. But that favourites is not because that spiritual master neglects someone else.

It is like good, better, best. So, those who take up more responsibility, spiritual master will naturally reciprocate more. And if we want reciprocation, then either we have to develop the abilities by which we can take up more responsibilities to get the association of that devotee whose association we want.

Or, we find out another Sajati, Asha, Srinivasa. We find out that circle of association wherein we can find those who share our definition of success. And I concluded lastly by talking about how we shouldn't let the feelings that I am neglected or rejected become like a blockage, become like a dam that blocks our consciousness from moving towards Krishna.

But rather we find whichever way we can keep moving onwards towards Krishna. What we are is Krishna's gift to us. And what we become is our gift to Krishna.

Thank you very much.