Does seeing natural laws instead of Deities’ reciprocation amount to shallow Krishna consciousness?

Hare Krishna question is it shallow understanding of Krishna consciousness to see in miracles only the natural laws and not the deity's reciprocation answer I will be answering this purely as a philosophical question and although this question has originated from the context of whether the pancha tattva shed tears or whether it was condensation whatever I am going to speak has no is not a statement about that issue at all and it is a purely philosophical answer that I will be giving and I don't mean to make any judgment or any statement about the exalted devotees who are serving pancha tattva in various ways I respect those devotees and I am discussing this I respect those devotees very deeply and I am discussing this issue primarily as a philosophical issue does seeing natural laws instead of deity's reciprocation amount to a shallow understanding of Krishna consciousness yes it can but not always if we are not able to if we don't see the deity's reciprocation, yes it can be a superficial understanding but if we don't look at natural laws by that also we may be superficially misled we may be misled because of a superficial vision so I will give some examples which, let me start with some examples from Bhaktisiddhansa Thakur of how the practice of deity worship was exploited by caste brahmanas for their own ulterior motives so he gives the example of how he gives the stories an example about how some pujaris they show a shaligram and then when people offer nuts they use the same shaligram to break the nuts and then they eat the nuts for themselves so they have no reverence and similarly he tells the story of how a pujari locked the deity room and then was eating the bhoga himself and then he was caught because of a mistake so the point is that there is this by Prabhupada's mercy and Krishna's mercy may not be happening in ISKCON but there is a lot of exploitation that happens malpractices that happen because of the supposed surrounding deity worship now there have been allegations that there was a dharu auction for getting the dharu for Jagannath in this year for the Nau Kalevara irrespective of whether they are true or not there is no doubt that the whole practice of deity worship has been exploited by greedy priests for their own purposes and nothing can make big money for those priests as much as the claim that a particular deity has performed a miracle so people with vested agendas can claim miracles have happened and gullible people will believe it without considering whether natural explanations are available or not now we see in our tradition also when Raghunandan Thakur when he was a boy he offered the bhoga to deity and the deity ate the bhoga and when his mother was told mother was surprised and the mother told father Mukunda Das and Mukunda Das said he was not sure maybe is this a child he has hidden secret naughty and may not have control over his senses so that means here in the first instance Mukunda Das did not immediately accept the claim of the miracle he did he did a test what was the test the test was that he asked Raghunandan to offer again and while offered again he watched secretly and then he saw the deity coming down from the altar and taking food and that was the time he accepted it as a miracle so certain amount of certain amount of preservation accepting miracles is evident in this past time even for even among a devotee family with one devotee with regards to another devotee Mukunda Das with regard to his son Raghunandan so now if we blindly neglect all natural explanations what can happen now some of the scenarios that I will depict over here they have happened in certain certain caste certain Brahmin run caste Brahmin run temples and they can be quite distressing for our devotional sentiments but these are the realities that can happen so suppose there is a Pujari and there is a cook and then the Pujari goes to offer some food made by the cook and there is a grudge between the Pujari and the cook so the cook, the Pujari keeps a glass of juice right next to the sill near the altar and the jar spills at that time the Pujari says that your cooking is so lousy you are such a poor and pathetic devotee the lord has rejected your food the lord has rejected your food so now this would be terrible if we don't look at natural causes was the was the glass kept close to the border because of which it fell off the natural cause is gravity if we don't look at the natural cause then we will be we will be naive and gullible and further say somebody keeps a bhoga over there, a Pujari keeps a bhoga and then finds afterwards the chapati is half eaten the ladoo is half eaten over there and now there are unfortunately this is very regrettable but there are temples in India where there are rats in the altar and suppose we believe that all this bhoga was eaten by the deity when it was actually eaten by a rat so now is refusing to look whether there is a rat or not in the area is that a sign of deep Krishna consciousness, a deep bhakti not necessarily so like this if we just don't look at natural causes then we may end up ascribing to Krishna things which have natural causes originating in carelessness or vested interests so it's a our acharyas have worked Shila Bhakti Swamiji Thakur and Bhakti Vinod Thakur before that and Shila Prabhupada have worked tirelessly often incurring the wrath of wrath of the smart brahmins and those who consider themselves traditional Gaudiya Vaishnavas but who are sahajiyas to try to protect Krishna bhakti from such material exploiters or from sahajiyas so that's why now looking at natural causes is not in and of itself reflective of a superficial or shallow understanding of Krishna consciousness yes if we if we hear from guru sadhu shastra that this particular event is a miracle then there is no need for us to look for natural causes and if there is a particular situation where there is no explicit statement from shastra and the Vaishnavas who are involved have different opinions take different positions then to label one position as superficial and label another position as deep reflects more of a individual principle, individual preference rather than philosophically sound understanding so we if we are not to let the whole system of deity worship be exploited by either materialistic materialistic priests who are out to make money by claiming miracles for their deities or by sahajiyas who often want to promote their own glory or settle their own scores and use deity for their own purposes then we need to have a basic level of critical inquiry and as I said there are from bhakti sadhu thakur's example as well as mukund das example there are adequate precedence in our tradition for not accepting miracle not immediately jumping to the conclusion that the deities are reciprocating but looking for alternative explanations so alternative explanations looking for natural explanations can in certain situations be reflective of superficial understanding so for example if there is a miracle that has happened and that has been declared to be so by guru sadhu shastra unanimously then to try to reduce it to natural laws yes that is definitely a shallow understanding so somebody who claims that Krishna did not lift a mountain Krishna just lifted a small boulder and later on people exaggerated it this is definitely against guru sadhu shastra and if somebody claims like this that is a shallow understanding of Krishna consciousness but in current situation when there is no unanimous statement by guru sadhu shastra about a particular event then we do need some basis some level of critical thinking to evaluate whether a particular event is attributable to natural laws or it is attributable to the deities reciprocation thank you so surrender is often talked.