Does Krishna interfere with the laws of material nature for a devotee?
Does Krishna not interfere with the logometrical nature or he interferes to the extent of our surrender? Actually, laws of material nature is a very broad term. What do we mean by that? For example, one law of material nature is that everybody is going to grow old, get deceased and die.
Whether we are devotees or non-devotees, that law is going to act on everyone. So, it's not that Krishna is going to interfere with that. Similarly, we could say that if I put my hand in fire, that's a law of material nature.
Even if I am a devotee, it is that I demand that Krishna should not put my hand in fire. Krishna should cause my hand to not get burnt. Well, you could say Krishna can do that.
He might do it for say Pahala, then he was put into the fire by the demons. But that is exceptional. A devotee doesn't demand that way.
So, we could say, as far as the laws of material nature, there are some aspects of the laws which are universal. And Krishna doesn't interfere with that. I am just talking about laws of material nature in terms of there is a particular way in which this world functions.
So, old age, disease, death could be there. Or simply, you could also say that, if I have diabetes, there is somebody who very lovingly cooks food filled with sweet for me. And out of service attitude towards them, I take them.
I will simply be taking them, that's a devotee, I don't want to displease this devotee. Well, the service attitude is good, but still my body may have a reaction. So, what I am talking about here is that, if our actions in this world entail some consequences, a devotee doesn't demand that Krishna intervene and stop those reactions from coming.
A devotee is intelligent, a devotee is thoughtful to understand that certain reactions will come and certain actions I need to do, so that I can avoid those reactions. So, some laws of nature in terms of certain actions being associated with certain reactions, that is going to happen. No, not every, every, I say some.
Say, for example, if on a cold night, if, you know, I have got a bad cold, but I decide I want to go for Mangal Aarti. I don't wear warm clothes, I go out in the cold, that may aggravate my cold. So, I have to use my, you could say my common sense, my intelligence to act in such a way, not thinking that I have immunity from the laws of nature.
Now, we use the word laws of nature also in terms of karmic reactions. At one level, I can also say that my eating sugar filled food when I have got diabetes, that's bad karma. It's not exactly sinful, but in that situation, it's not advisable.
It will have its reaction. So, when we use the word karma, we usually talk in terms of moral, moral things. Something is morally right, something is morally wrong.
But it could be something practically right and practically wrong also. To eat sweets when somebody has got diabetes is not morally wrong, but it's practically harmful. So, actions produce reactions.
So, we, as devotees, we don't demand that Krishna interrupt the law of action-reaction so that he protects us. So, we choose our actions wisely, both from the moral perspective and the practical perspective. Having said that, as far as the past karma is there, what we have done and the reactions to that, Krishna, he does protect us from them.
Now, it is that devotees may have subjective ways of looking at it. That means, we have to see what way of looking at it is most favorable for our bhakti. So, if I see that, okay, this pain is coming to me because it's a reaction to my past karma.
And then I have to take shelter of Krishna, I have to absorb myself in Krishna, that's how I can go beyond this pain. So, then here we see the karma as something separate from Krishna. Now, that karma is just a law of the world and that's happening, coming upon me.
And Krishna is, so we could say Krishna is not the cause of our suffering, Krishna is the cure for our suffering, if you take shelter of him. This is one way of looking at it, where we, in a conceptual sense, separate karma and Krishna. Of course, ultimately it's under Krishna only.
It's under Krishna only. But it's not that Krishna is personally doing it. This is a law of material nature, which just works on its own.
And if this, the other understanding could be that, okay, I am in Krishna's, I have now surrendered to Krishna as much as I can, and I am in Krishna's care. And Prabhupada says, at some places, you know, Parikshit Maharaj saw that Krishna has come as a takshaka. That Krishna is coming as a takshaka to free me from this body and take me to him.
In one lecture also he says, a devotee feels Krishna has come as this pain to detach me from the body. Now, if a devotee can, if that can make one Krishna conscious, then that's great. That means we can see this pain is actually, it's not different from Krishna, it is Krishna.
And that is also very high level of Krishna consciousness. But sometimes we may see this is a problem, this is a pain, and if we start thinking this Krishna is coming as this pain, then we may become resentful of Krishna. Now why is Krishna doing this to me? I can't be used to this.
So we have to see which way of looking at things is uncool for our bhakti. If you see in the Bhagavatam, there are different approaches in, say, how people deal with things. So, not just in Bhagavatam, in the broad Vedic literature, there are times when a problem comes and the devotee tries to solve that problem.
Like Arjuna, he fights his way of surrendering to Krishna by raising his bow to fight. Draupadi, her way of surrendering to Krishna is raising her hands in surrender to him. Now you take care.
So similarly, these two are different ways of surrendering. Similarly, there are different ways of looking at the problem. So, sometimes it may be more favorable for our devotion to see that this is simply the law of karma acting and Krishna is here, Krishna is a shelter for me.
Sometimes it may be that, you know, it is Krishna coming as this problem. He is coming here to detach me from this. So, that can also be a vision.
But we have to see which way of looking at things is favorable for the nourishing of our devotion. If I start thinking, Krishna is coming as this problem and then, where do I take shelter? What do I take shelter of now? So, it is, okay, I will give another example and illustrate this. Now, say somebody, we say at one level, one regulative principle is no intoxication.
So, we see alcohol as maya. I am not going to give up alcohol. But in Prabhupada also said that if somebody is unable to give up alcohol, let them think that the taste of alcohol is Krishna.
Just like the taste of water is Krishna, the taste of wine is also Krishna. And in that way, they will become Krishna conscious one day. They will be Krishna conscious at that time itself and they can become Krishna conscious eventually.
So, I would say in Krishna consciousness, there are different ways of being Krishna conscious. Just like if we go to a temple, we may offer obeisances to all the deities, but we may have a personal connection with one deity. Some devotees pray a lot to Radharani, some may pray to Krishna, some may pray to Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, some may pray to Nityananda, who is most merciful.
Now, they are all God, but we may personally connect with one. So, just as we can worship different forms of Krishna, similarly, in a particular situation, there can be different ways of being Krishna conscious. So, both are true, that it is Krishna only who is coming, but it is also Krishna who is beyond all this and this is simply happening in material nature.
So, whichever way of being Krishna conscious is favorable for our devotion, whichever inspires us to take shelter of Krishna more, that is what we accept. So, you said Krishna's mercy is.