Gopi Gita Appreciation part 6 The Monks Podcast 172 with Madhavananda Prabhu and Amarendra Prabhu

Podcast:

Summary podcast:

Video:

Transcript

This is an AI-generated transcript and may contain some errors.
Thank you very much for joining once again for the Monks Podcast.
And we continue our Gopi Geetha series. Madhavananda Prabhu, can you start? Please start with the Mangalacharan. So we are moving forward today to the fourth verse.
And now we are discussing the themes of the first verse of Muruga’s introduction. And then we discussed in the second verse about the pain of separation, which is so in many ways, and feel worse than death. And then we discussed about the various demons and what they signify in what their relevance is to this particular pastime as well as general details.
Relishable details about their pastime. So now here, the previous verse ends with Rakshitamoham, that you have protected us so many times. How are you not protecting us now? Let’s come to the next verse.
Amarendra Prabhu, would you like to recite this? Okay, probably. So beautiful, thank you. So here, I’ll just give like a broad understanding and then we can go into specifics.
So the Gopis are saying, in the previous verse, you protected us from all those demons. How can you not protect us now? That is the implication. So now, as they are thinking of Krishna protect us from all those demons.
So this Krishna, who is Krishna? In one sense, they are saying, you, Nakalu Gopika, you are certainly not the son of Yashoda. So there is this fascinating shifting between awareness of Krishna’s greatness and focus on his sweetness. So Bhavan is more like a respectful second person.
Bhavan, so you, oh gracious one, At, as we say in Hindi, you are not the son of Yashoda. Then who are you? You’re the indwelling super soul who sees everything in everyone’s heart. And then if you are indwelling, then how come you are manifested outside? He said that this is, you have come at the request of Brahmaji.
For the protection of the universe. And then again, that sweetness comes in Sakha. Although he’s the Paramatma, but Sakha, friend.
So you have arisen in this world like the sun in the Satavata dynasty. And immediate implication is that Krishna, so that each of these verses actually a call to Krishna to come back. So the idea over here could be that Krishna, you have come to relieve the distress of the world.
So we are also part of the world. So please remove our distress also. Vishwa Gupta, please protect us also.
Could also be that you are the indwelling super soul in everyone’s. You see, you are the inner seer. So you can see our distress.
So please come back to us. So the overall mood is that they’re aware of Krishna’s position, but they’re using that awareness of Krishna’s position to actually increase the fervency of their request to Krishna to return. It could be just a quick introduction.
Madan, would you like to speak something? Yeah, there’s a bunch of different main topics that I see in this verse. One of the first things, the very first word in the verse is very important, not. And that sets off the whole verse that you’re not.
And Jiva Goswami’s commentary says that that there’s an indication this verse is very tricky. And that’s one of the topics. And we’d like to speak something about what our chariots say, but also we’d like to see it in our own particular light.
And one of the first things that I find striking about this verse is that the Gopis were saying, they’re telling Krishna, you’re not the son of Yashoda. Rather, Bhavan, you in honorary way, Akiva, Devi, Narmada, Radha, Madhuri, you’re the super soul in everyone’s heart. And if someone’s a little thoughtful in our Gaudiya Vaishnava literature, they may be very surprised by the statement from the Gopis.
Because there’s none of the inhabitants of bread speak like this. Why do they speak this? But sometimes they speak in similar way when they’re grieving. When they’re feeling some separation from Krishna.
Narayan Bhatta Goswami, who’s a disciple of Gopal Bhatta Goswami, some say of Sanatana Goswami, he’s a little controversial in his history, Gaudiya’s claiming, and also some of the Vaishnavas did. He says that the Gopika Nandana means Gopika Anandayati Iti Na. That Nandana, he takes not, we can take it literally as being the son of, but he says that Nandana means someone who brings delight to.
So he’s saying Gopika Anandayati Iti Na. That you’re not bringing any happiness to us Gopis. And in that sense also, it doesn’t say directly, you showed it, it says Gopika.
That you’re not the son of Yashoda, we can say, but Gopika just means of the Gopis. So another sense can be Balamacharya makes this comment. He says that if you were actually Yashoda’s son, if you were really the son of a Gopika, then we’re also Gopikas, and we’d be able to control you like she does.
So not Gopika Nandana, you’re not. And it’s such a, it’s a very, very big subject. I’d like, if I can, just to touch on this for a moment.
First of all, Gaudiya Vaishnavas, our strong conception, when you get deeper into our theology, is that Krishna is the son of Yashoda. The Harivamsa Purana says that Krishna was directly born from Yashoda. That was his Janmalila, his avirbhava, his appearance, and there’s an important distinction between those two words, avirbhava and janma.
His avirbhava was in the prison of Kamsa. But the Brahmaviharata Purana says, chiteta nadi, that umbilical cord was cut at the time of Krishna’s janma. In Gokula.
So that’s proof that Krishna is the son of Yashoda. So there’s some controversy about this. On the 46th chapter of the 10th Canto, later on, we’ll hear Uddhava, when he goes to see Nanda Maharaj, and he wants to speak to him, he wants to console him.
One of the first things that he tells him is, urvayo eva naivayam ahma jo bhagavan. Krishna’s not your son. Rather, ahma jo bhagavan, he’s the soul of everyone.
This is the same thing the gopis are saying in this verse today, that you’re antar-atma-trik, you’re the super soul in everyone’s heart. Uddhava’s telling Nanda Maharaj, ahma jo bhagavan hari. And my Guru Maharaj gets into a very elaborate discussion, as do many of our acharyas, saying that Nanda Maharaj basically told Uddhava, what are you, crazy? How can you say that our son is bhagavan? We know who bhagavan is, and he doesn’t accept that.
It’s a long discussion. And a similar point is also made in the 85th chapter of the 10th canto. Now, this is spoken by Vasudeva and Kuruksetra.
And when Krishna and Balaram come before him, he tells them, he starts offering prayers. And he says, univam nana suto saksha pradana purusesva. He says, you’re not our sons.
Rather, you’re bhagavan. You’re the supreme personality of God, of both of you. So, it’s very interesting.
And again, our acharyas, they point out that this is the difference between Nanda Maharaj and Vasudeva. Nanda Maharaj, you can’t tell him that Krishna’s not your son. You can’t tell him that he’s bhagavan.
But Vasudeva, without being asked, he immediately says, he starts offering prayers to Krishna and Balaram, saying you’re not our son. But here, the gopis are saying the same thing to Krishna. That nagopika nandana.
You’re not the son. I’ll be sure. The same exact thing that Uddhava later says, and later on Vasudeva says.
So, I don’t want to, we can unpack that quite a bit. It’s a big, big subject. But this is, to me, this raises a big question here.
Why the gopis are saying like this? And I would like to personally present some topics, some thoughts on this thing. How do we understand, as a main point of relevance for all of us, we can read our previous satcharitas and they’re saying, yes, it’s very sweet that the gopis are chastising Krishna. But does that mean that I should come before the deity and start shaking my finger at the deity and say, you know, you’re really a bhagmash.
You’re really a rascal. You’re like this and this. How do we understand that? And we hear so many statements in Vedic literature about harsh words.
So, how do we understand this mood of the gopis? I’m not focussing on this right now, but I’m just presenting some questions about it that I see. I don’t want to talk on them because I really want to hear the two of you. But the first thing I see in this are these questions.
Fascinating. Yeah, Amarindu, I can respond to them, but I think you are much more. Please, please go ahead.
I’m very happy and very eager to hear from you, Prabhupada. So, okay. So, my first understanding would be that it’s like when you say no to something, what are you saying yes to? So, it’s when they’re saying that, are they specifically saying no to Krishna’s birth in Vrindavan? Or are they simply saying that, Krishna, you are not a human being like us.
They are focussing. It’s like there’s always a tension between, whenever the Lord descends, or even in Vrindavan, a tension between His humanity and His divinity. So, whether, so that means there are two questions.
Is Krishna ordinary child or extraordinary person? Is He human? Is He divine? And if He is divine, okay, where did He appear? So, at least from the first half, first part of the verse, it seems that they are saying that you are not human, you are divine. That’s the emphasis. So, it’s how are you able to kill all these demons? Because you are the Supreme Lord.
But then, if that is the only point, then later on, they are saying that, you are appearing in the Sathya Udaya dynasty. So, it could be that that brings a concern which you have raised. So, it’s like, there is this statement that, where is it? In CC, you can tell me if you remember this reference, that there is this section where there is this Asura Mohan Leela, he talks, Krishna’s Krishna talks about this also.
So, it says that, you can always find references for hidden scriptural truths. But if you want contrary, you can find references for that also. So, he says that, what essentially, Jim Goswami also says in Sandarbhas is that, that if somebody wants to take some other perspective, then there are references in scripture for that.
If somebody wants to say that Krishna comes from Vishnu, there are references for that. Now, we can try to explain those experiences references, but if somebody wants to hold on to that conviction, then there is room in scripture for that. So, that’s my small understanding over here that the Gopis are here referring just like deferring to conventional understanding for those who want to, who want to go along with that understanding.
Madan, do you want to respond to that? Or am I the only one who can speak? I’m getting ready to explore because I want to hear what other people explore. Maybe I think there’s some microphone which is on mute, if that can. Oh.
Yeah, okay. So, maybe we can go through the verse once more. Maybe if it’s possible, probably if you could screen share.
So, the first thing again that my eyes go to is the poetic genius of the first syllable matching with the seventh syllable. Again. So, it starts off with the syllable na and then again starts off with the syllable na after the pause.
And in the second line, we see starting with the A. And after the pause, again, it is starting with an A. And in the third line, it starts with starting with a V. And after the pause, it is again starting with a V. And in the fourth line, starting with an S or a S. And again, it is with a S after the pause. So, the first syllable in the first phrase and the first syllable after the pause is the same, which is the first and the seventh syllable in each line. And interestingly, the genius continues.
The second syllable is the same in each line. It’s K. It’s K again. Again.
Again. So, with all the Tattva Siddhanta, with Vraj, Gopi Bhav, Madhuriya Prem exploding in separation, we find the poetic genius just aligning, taking shelter of the lotus feet of the Gopis. So, that’s the first point to start off with.
Then, the general understanding of the verse, Na means no. As Sripad Madhavananda Prabhu was saying, it’s a negation at the start. So, Na means no.
Kalu is translated as indeed or definitely. The Sanskrit equivalent would be Nishchitam, which would mean definitely. So, no, definitely.
So, definitely not. That’s the first two words. Gopika Nandano Bhavan.
Oh, you respected person, Krishna. Now, they could have just said Twam because they’re not giving a speech here. And it’s very interesting.
You call the word Bhavan is used in the sense of the respected one. So, when emotions are exploding of the heart, for someone whom you can leave your responsibilities and run in the middle of the night, in the middle of the forest, and who leaves you to burn in the fire of separation, to use the word Bhavan could be more of sarcasm than etiquette. Oh, OK.
So, not indeed or not. Definitely not. You are definitely not Gopika Nandano, the son of Gopika.
Here, Gopika refers to Mother Yashoda. You’re definitely not the son of Mother Yashoda. So, Krishna is asking, then what do you think I am? Who do you think I am? What’s my identity? Akhila.
Akhila means everyone. Sarva Praninam. All living beings.
Dehinam. Those who live in the body, embodied beings. Akhila Dehinam.
Antaratma Drik. You are the seer. Drik means Drishti, to see.
Antaratma, sitting inside as the super soul, you see from within for all living beings. So, you are the super soul, my lord. You are definitely not the son of Yashoda.
Till now, we thought you were the son of Yashoda. That’s our mistake. But now we have realised that you are actually God.
You are the super soul. Vikhanasaarthito. Vikhanasa or Vikhanasa.
The word Vikhanasa here refers to Brahmaji. Vikhanasa. That’s one of the names of Brahmaji.
Brahmaji has so many names and this is one of the names. And Arthita means Prarthita. We know the word Prarthana.
Arthita. Prarthita, which means to pray. So, Brahmaji prayed for you.
He took, Mother Earth came to him in the form of a cow and then he took everyone to the milk ocean and prayed for your appearance. Why? Vishwa Guptaye. Vishwa means the universe and Guptaye means for the pleasure of protecting the world.
So, to clear off all the miscreants and to protect the world, Brahmaji himself prayed for you. That’s your position, Krishna. That’s your position.
That’s your position. You are the Supersoul. You’re not the son of Mother Yashoda.
And Sakha or Sakhe, oh friend, just to fulfil that prayer of Brahmaji, Sakhe, oh Sakhe, Udayivan. You rose like the sun. You always exist, but you just rose.
Where Satvatam Kula. Kula means family. In the family of great devotees, you appeared.
This is your position. So, this is the prayer from the Dakshinya side. That my dear Lord, dear Krishna, dear Shamsundar, you are, it seems that if we thought that you are the son of Yashoda, but actually you’re not the son of Yashoda.
You’re God. You’re the Supersoul sitting in everyone’s heart and Brahmaji prayed so that you can come and protect the whole world. And my Lord, you have appeared just fulfilling that prayer.
So now, you are free to do what you like. But just like Brahma prayed and you came, we are trying to follow Brahmaji and we are also praying. So, please come for us as well.
So, that’s the Dakshinya mood that it takes a devotee to pray. And when one Brahmaji prays, you appear. So, all the gopis here following Brahmaji, we are praying.
So, why don’t you please come? That’s the submissive call. But on the Vamya side, it’s the exact opposite. It’s the exact opposite.
Complete sarcasm is intended here. What is the meaning? You definitely cannot be the son of Yashoda. Why? Because Yashoda Rani has a very soft heart.
She has a very soft heart. And Prabhupada writes in the Purport, not as a blanket statement, but many times we see that the son follows the character of the mother and the daughter follows the character of the father. That’s why we see the fathers have more affection for the daughter and mothers have more affection for the son.
So, following that principle, Krishna, you cannot be the son of Yashoda. Because when one Damodar cried, her heart was melting. One person has a problem, mother Yashoda comes out to help them.
And look at the word used, gopika. Gopi means cowherd girl or a gopi, but ka means soft hearted. Mother Yashoda has such a soft heart.
You cannot be her son, Krishna, because you have a very hard heart. You’re heartless. We are all crying on the banks of the Yamuna.
And if you were mother Yashoda’s son, you would have come out long, long ago. We are into the fourth wars and you still haven’t come out. You definitely cannot be the son of Yashoda.
There’s some problem here. Mother Yashoda has a very soft heart and her son is expected to have a soft heart like her. But you don’t seem to have that soft heart.
So, na khalu gopika nandano bhavan. You definitely cannot be the son of mother Yashoda from the contrary mood. Then what do you think I am? Asked Krishna, who do you think I am? Akhila dehina mantarat mudrik.
You definitely are the Supersoul. Krishna said, Achha, you think I’m the Supersoul? Why? The Gopis said, because the Supersoul has two characteristics. The first is he can see you, but you can’t see him.
The Supersoul can always see us, but we can’t see the Supersoul. The Gopis said that that is perfect. You hiding behind the bushes, you can see us, but we can’t see you.
So definitely you’re the Supersoul. And the second characteristic of the Supersoul, whether we cry or whether we laugh, whether we dance, whether we drown, whether we burn in fire, the Supersoul never feels pity and comes out and help. He never helps.
So the Gopis said, we are drowning in the ocean of our tears and burning in the fire of separation. Still, you are like the Supersoul, watching us, observing us, but not coming out to help. So both those characteristics of the Supersoul are qualified.
You qualify for both of them. You should actually be the Supersoul. Krishna, congratulations.
You are the new Supersoul elected in Vrindavan because you have both those characteristics. You can hide and see us, but we can’t see you. And we are crying and burning in separation, but you feel no pity and you don’t come out.
It’s a complete sarcasm there. So much more also, but we’ll pause here. I want to hear other perspectives.
It’s fascinating. So Sattvata basically, instead of referring it to the Sattvata dynasty, Sattvata can refer here to the Sattvata devotee, Sattvata Pungava. Sattvata can refer to devotees also.
It’s beautiful. So every single verse, it’s amazing that it can be read from at least these two perspectives. Is there any section in the Bhagavatam like that? Any other section where each verse is read from two perspectives? I haven’t seen.
There are some words which can be read from three, four perspectives like that. Vande Mahapurushithi Charanaravindam. It refers to Lord Ram, Krishna and Lord Chaitanya.
But an entire section being read in two different ways. Is there anything like that, that you are aware? Sripad Madhavananda from? What comes to my mind when you ask that question is that we understand the Bhagavatam through the vision of our consciousness. And although it may not have been expressed, and the answer is no, like I’m not aware person in any such thing.
But it certainly could be there because Pratyushloki Pratyakshita Nathakoya, every verse has unlimited different meaning. It depends on the view of the person. Yeah, that is true.
But still the idea that one section can be explained from the perspective of two different people. It’s almost like sometimes in a movie or something, when one person is speaking something, often while that person is speaking, you show the reaction of this person, this person, this person. And it is that way, how that person’s speech is impacting different people.
That is shown. But sometimes you take it from the other perspective. When one person is speaking, and then while that person is speaking, that person is actually considering different people who are hearing.
How is this person going to impact this person? How is it going to impact this person? And when there are two people who are close to each other, like some statement might seem a straightforward statement to one person, but it could be like a sarcastic statement or there is a hidden meaning for somebody else. And then they may just nod a little bit. That’s what we are saying over here.
So there are even in ordinary conversations, sometimes there are subtexts and multiple layers to the conversation. But here it’s a boom. So that way that’s always there, that feature and in scripture, it can be so much deeper.
But the idea that there are, this Gopi Gita is also special in the sense that it is multiple people speaking, but we have like one voice speaking. Gopya Uchu is there. There are some sections like that in the Bhagavatam, but are there any other sections where like a number of people are speaking and one person is spoken in one voice? We have after the Hiranyakashyapu’s killing, Devata speaking, but it is not described that Devata speak.
It is this Devata, Indra speaks this and then Varuna speaks this and like that it is described. In the Garbha Stuti, it is more generic in the third chapter of the first canto, not the 10th canto rather, that it’s all the Devatas are speaking, but it’s not described which Devata is speaking which verse. That could be an example.
But I don’t think there is any reading that this verse is spoken, this prayer is spoken by this Devata or this prayer is spoken by this Devata. Is there anything like that, that that kind of reading has been there? My mind goes to the Pranayagita, a small snippet example of which we tried to cover in the first episode of our series, where we said how Krishna speaks Rajni Esha Ghora Rupa, Ghora Sattvani Veshita, where Krishna is saying, but at the same time, he has different messages for different Sakhis. He is the Stribi Sumadhyama, Na Ihastheyam.
So to other Gopis, he says, don’t stay here. But to Radharani’s camp, he says, stay here, you stayed here. So in that way, Krishna’s words, each of those verses, in those 10 verses that Krishna speaks to the Gopis, just before the Pranayagita, in the 10th canto, they all have multiple meanings, at least two meanings.
And Shila, Vishnu, Chakravarti, Thakur and others have given two opposite meanings, where Krishna says, all of you should go and perform the dharma of taking care of your husbands. But then the other meaning, depending on the grammatical construct, Krishna is such an expert orator that he says, oh, now that you have come to me, there’s no need of going and serving your husbands. So there’s very beautiful, tasty, opposite, contrary meanings.
And it takes someone like Vishnu, Chakravarti, Thakur to actually enter and discover, discover meaning, discover, discarding the cover. He discards the cover of the general understanding and discovers newer, newer, sweeter meanings. As beauty lies in the eye of the beholder, Shila, Vishnu, Chakravarti, Thakur’s eye is certainly very beautiful, filled with love.
He can even give a Madhuriya perspective to the verses of Isopanishad. You’ve given a chance. Oh, Purnamada, Purnamidam.
This is complete. That is complete. The Vrajalila is complete.
The Sakhis are complete. The Nikunjas are complete. Yeah, he does that to the Gita also quite a bit.
Yomam, Pashyati Sarvatra, that verses in the Gita’s context, talking about yogic realisation. The yoga is, when he talks about the Gopis seeing Krishna everywhere, the 6.30 in the Gita. That’s beautiful.
There’s a fundamental principle that we see here, which I don’t want to run past. With so much wonderful Brahmacharasa. But the fundamental principle is that the Bhagavatam can be understood, it’s accepted to be understood in many different ways.
In Krishna’s words, have many, many different means. And that has a big implication about the society. It’s a very broad-minded, very inclusive society.
And it’s not a society where they insist that it’s my way or the highway. Or as I saw a bumper stick in America once who said that Jesus said it, I believe it, and that settles it. Of course.
Yeah. The understanding of what Jesus said. So implicit in this whole discussion from our Acharyas is that it’s okay.
People can have different understandings. And that’s allowed. That’s encouraged.
That’s Vrindavan. If everybody has the same understanding, we call that Brahma. And we’re not big followers.
We’ve been not big appreciators of that. Yeah. So now this one.
So Madanpuri, you want to respond to what Amendapur said earlier about these two different meanings? Or was there a response? I don’t think Amandapur, you respond. Did you actually respond to that point that why are they denying Krishna that you are not a son of Yashoda? Or do you want to pursue that further? So basically, there’s some expression of Aishwarya Gyan here. And both Srila Jiva Goswami and Srila Vishwanath Chakravarti Thakur have spoken about it.
Srila Vishwanath Chakravarti Thakur, actually the book is right here. Let me read this section. Srila Vishwanath Chakravarti Thakur in his Raghavartam Chandrika has mentioned a very interesting point in this regard.
Okay, there we go. Srila Vishwanath Chakravarti Thakur, he says, So very beautifully Srila Vishwanath Chakravarti Thakur has mentioned this in the Raghavartam Chandrika. He says, that the fact that this person is God, Krishna is God.
Having, although known that the fact, the reality that he is God. Srila Vishwanath Chakravarti Thakur is basically making the point that generally, when the understanding is there that Krishna is God, the bhav comes down to servitude. Generally, that’s what is seen.
Like Arjuna sees the universal form and instead of being the friend, he falls on his knees and offers prayers. Mother Devaki, she goes to embrace Krishna, but when Krishna smashes and breaks the teeth of Kamsa Maharaj, Mother Devaki offers obeisances and she’s praying instead of embracing Krishna. So in outside Vrindavan, we see motherly love.
Mother Devaki falls down to servitude on seeing Krishna’s Aishwarya. And Arjuna’s friendship comes down to servitude in from Sakhya to servitude. But in Vrindavan, Srila Vishwanath Chakravarti Thakur he mentions, he calls this very beautifully.
He says that although the Gopis know that Krishna is God and you see the start of the verse and the end of the verse talks about his divinity. So you are certainly God because who else can be the super soul? So you’re certainly God and Kalu word has been there. So that doesn’t mean we think, we opine.
I think so people say the word Kalu means Nishchitameva. This is certainly true. To save the world, to protect the world, Brahmaji had to come and pray.
So they are certainly convinced, but still irrespective of all of these terms, they use the word Sakhya. Which means their mood doesn’t fall down to servitude. Srila Vishwanath Chakravarti Thakur has said that even if there’s complete display of Krishna’s opulence, nobody in Vrindavan believes that he’s God.
They say that Brahmaji came. It seems like you’re the super soul, but actually, oh friend, you’re everything to us. You’re our friend.
So this is what Srila Vishwanath Chakravarti Thakur talks about Aishwarya and Madhuri in this point. He says, no amount of Aishwarya Gyan or display of opulence can Sthairyameva, Sviyabhavasya Sthairam. He says Vishwanath Chakravarti Thakur says the self-manifested mood of the gopis is Thairyam, is Thira, is steady, and there’s no fluctuation in that mood.
And also we see the same thing in the Mridubhaksan Leela. Mother Yashoda catches Lala eating Krishna, eating dirt. And when she sees the universe in the mouth, Krishna tried to test her.
You know, I want to see what you respond. You thought I ate dirt, but I have actually eaten the whole universe. Now I want to see what you say to that.
And Mother Yashoda started praying that I think my child has eaten something evil. My Lord, please help him. Praying to Vishnu.
So when Krishna saw that Mother Yashoda’s bhaav is not fluctuating in any way and not disturbed or agitated by the display of opulence, he’s completely bound by her. So this is to show that although you have the strength from the third wars to kill Kaliya or to subdue Kaliya, to kill Aghasura, to kill Arishtasura, to kill Vatsasura, to lift up Govardhan, continuing from the third wars, although you’re so powerful, still for us, you are Sakha. You are our friend.
That’s the point of Srila Vishwanath Chakravarti. Srila Jiva Goswami has said something phenomenal in the Brihat Krama Sandarbha. I feel it’s so beautiful.
It’s, you know, it’s almost hitting the ball out of the park. Srila Jiva Goswami writes that actually the gopis don’t believe that Krishna is God. This Akhila Dehi Naam Antaraatma Drig and Vikhanasarthito Vishwa Guptaye that Brahmaji had to pray and actually he’s the super soul.
Gopis don’t believe in that. But then why are they saying it? It’s only because in the astrological reading of the chart, Baguri Rishi, Garga Muni and Purnamasi Devi, they read this thing out. That seems like he’s the super soul.
Seems like Brahma prayed for his appearance and gopis just overheard it, says Srila Jiva Goswami. And therefore, they’re adding that. But it’s very interesting.
He says, although they heard it, they are using that information to actually express their mood. And he gives a very beautiful example. He says, if there’s a beggar, if there’s a Bhiksha, Yachaka Riti, he uses the term Yachaka Riti, which means just like a beggar in this world, the beggar may come to a donor and say, oh, there’s nobody like you.
You are actually God. You are like the king. You are like Bali Maharaj.
You are like Karna. Oh, you are the most magnanimous person. The beggar may come and say these things, but the beggar doesn’t think that the person is actually a king.
He doesn’t think this person is actually Karna. He doesn’t think this person is actually God or this person is Bali Maharaj. And not as the donor believe that.
Then why does the beggar say it? Why is the beggar saying this? Only so that he can get big donation. The beggar comes and says, you are the king. Now the donor is not the king.
And the donor knows he’s not the king. The beggar knows that this is not the king. But why does the beggar say that? Only to get a big donation.
So the Gopis have heard from Purnamasi Devi and Bhaguri Rishi and Gargacharya that Krishna is God. They don’t believe it. But they’re coming and saying this to the donor Krishna.
Why? So that they can get a big donation. And what is that donation? Krishna Darshana Lalasa. They can get the donation of Krishna’s Saksha Darshan.
So because the Gopis, all that they want are alms in the begging bowl of their heart. They want the alms of Krishna’s audience. And therefore they are ready to make all these pompous claims that, oh, actually you’re the super soul.
Oh, actually Brahmaji prayed. You don’t believe it. The chart says so.
But we are glorifying the donor thinking that the donor may be happy. Krishna may be happy. And he may come out and give some alms in the form of his personal darshan.
So therefore, to put that contrast, the Gopis say that you’re not the son of Yashoda. Actually, you’re the super soul. It’s just so that they can impress the donor and they can get this big check in the form of Krishna’s Saksha Darshan, Krishna’s direct audience.
Beautiful. Madan Guru. Oh, nice.
Thank you. So many wonderful things in this verse. It’s also interesting as Amaranda Prabhu touched on a little earlier, the name they use for Lord Brahma.
They address him as Vikunasa. And that comes from the same word as Vaikunasa or it means a Rishi or someone who studies the Vedas. So why are the Gopis speaking like that? Vikunasa also means someone who digs.
In Balavacharyaji, he comments that it means Viseshya Kanatitya Sarvata Vedartha Pichadaka. That someone who’s dug in the Vedas and they created this Vaikunasa system by Lord Brahma. And that’s how you’re worshipping the Lord.
So the Gopis, what are they saying here? Nakalu, definitely not. Nakalu Gopika Nandanobhavan. You’re definitely not the son of mother Yashoda.
Rather, Akiva Dehinam Atmaratma Atmadrik. You’re the super soul in the heart of everyone. And the reason why you came.
Vikunasa Atmaratma Atmadrik. That you came because Lord Brahma, who’s Vikunasa, who’s the Muni, the Rishi, who’s worshipping the Vedas. He’s praying for you.
So this is a kind of irony. This is a kind of sarcasm that the Gopis are using. That you’re not really a Brijbasi.
Because if you’re a Brijbasi, as Amarnath Babu was saying, then you’re a cup. You would be very sweet. You’d be very soft.
You’re not like that. You’re just a very formal person. You’re like the Yantrayami.
The Yantrayami, he doesn’t take sides. He’s impartial to everyone. And we can see that you’re like that because we’re suffering.
Although we’re saying that you’re our Sakka, you’re our friend. You’re not actually, the word na. Again, Jiva Goswami says that the word na negates everything.
And there’s four different negations in the verse. Nakalu Gopika Nandanobhavan. You’re definitely not the son of Yashoda.
Rather, you’re acting like the super soul. Because if you’re really the son of Mother Yashoda, then Nandana, as Vallabha Charita says, Gopika Nandana, you would bring us some happiness. And your heart wouldn’t be hard, like Mother Yashoda’s heart is so soft, if you’re really her son.
And Akila Dehinam Ahantaratmatrik. Actually, you’re not the Paramatma. Because the Paramatma, he has a better behaviour than you.
The Paramatma knows everyone’s happiness and distress. But you don’t understand the pain that we’re feeling in our hearts. And then they say, na vighnasarthito vishwaguptaye.
That vighnasarthito vishwaguptaye, that Brahma prayed me to come. So that vishwaguptaye, which has two meanings in that too, vishwaguptaye means, guptaye means to protect, but guptaye also means to hide. Anyway, they’re saying that it’s not true that Lord Brahma came to pray to you to come and protect us.
Because if you would actually do that, then you would have protected us. You would have protected everyone. So again, the na applies there.
And the fourth na, na udinivam sakvatam kuli. You definitely didn’t appear in the dynasty of devotees, sakvatas, as Amarandhapu was saying. And why do we say this? Because we don’t see any qualities of a devotee in you.
Devotees are very, very soft-hearted. Such a beautiful thing. And it’s so important when we read this, we can read these things as artists, we can read these things as devotees, which ultimately we should do.
But on a lower level, also we should understand that the Bhagavatam accepts so many different understandings. That is bona fide. The gopis can be thinking different ways about Krishna.
It’s not that although Krishna is led by a tattva, although he’s one, still he’s understood in an unlimited different ways by different devotees. And that’s the strength also of our society, the sangha, that we can accept different understandings. Of course, we have certain limitations and certain rules and things that we give that things should be following the acharyas.
But our acharyas are repeatedly saying, I saw recently an interview with Krishna, which is named, Prabhupada’s French disciple, very senior devotee, the author, who wrote some books about Prabhupada. And Yogeshwar Prabhu was commenting that someone came to Srila Prabhupada and said, Prabhupada, I had this idea for a great book, a hundred levels, a hundred ways to approach Krishna. And Prabhupada said, this is nonsense.
And the devotee was astonished. He said, this is very nice. And there’s a hundred different obstacles, a hundred different degrees in our approach in Krishna.
Prabhupada said, no, this is nonsense. It’s unlimited. You’re seeing it in a particular way.
There’s so many different ways. So that’s a very basic point from these verses, but it’s a really important point. Yeah, thank you for reminding me of that.
It’s basically, nowadays there is this whole idea, self-help genre. Seven steps to controlling your anger or five steps to becoming free from addiction or something like that. So this devotee wanted to present from that perspective, Krishna Consciousness.
So Prabhupada was saying that, you can’t hide. It’s a personal relationship. It’s not like a linear, you take the steps and now you are done.
It’s much deeper, more personal. So that nice application of this to the context of these prayers. Sometimes in the Bhagavatam, we may overlook the fact that because it’s Sanskrit, it’s philosophy, it’s actually a person speaking and they’re speaking to express their heart and underlying that whole communication is a relationship.
So relationships are complex and that there can be multiple layers of meaning within that. And a statement is being spoken. It’s wonderful.
So that idea that when we say that there cannot be, there should not be too many, that we cannot mandate. This is the only way. At the same time, I think there are also some boundaries.
Isn’t it that, say, for example, at least in the Bhagavad Gita, there are some verses which seem to have an Advaitic reading, but then our Acharyas explain how it is not Advaitic or sometimes some words which are clearly Krishna is talking about in 934, and then if a commentator says that this is not referring to me, this is not referring to Krishna himself, it is referring to the unborn within Krishna. And Prabhupada is quite, you could say, enraged with that kind of reading. So we could say that while there can be many, many meanings, but that doesn’t mean that every meaning is right.
So it’s almost like you can even have infinite meanings, but it’s like infinite doesn’t mean all. It’s almost like that. It’s a little erotical.
There can be infinite meanings. That doesn’t mean that this verse means everything. There is this logical paradox or you can say that if anything can mean anything, then nothing means nothing.
Then even nothing doesn’t mean nothing. Nothing has any meaning, basically. So we are, you could say, very expansive and inclusive, but inclusive doesn’t mean that it’s completely indefinitive, that it’s completely vague.
In the 47th chapter of the 10th Canto, there is a phrase, which Uddhava is describing how the gopis are thinking and this is Jiva Goswami, Vaisnava Tosin, he explains that. They’re thinking of the gopis. Manasa Svatantriyena.
That the gopis, their manasa, their thinking is Svatantra. It’s independent. They’re independent thinkers.
And we were recently speaking some about this and how our Acharyas repeatedly, even Srila Prabhupada in the very early days when he was giving class on 26th Second Avenue, he told the devotees, don’t just accept this because I said it. Just because Swamiji said it, but you should think about it. So independent thinking is very important.
But as you’re pointing out also, we don’t tell a four-year-old child to be an independent thinker. That I’m telling you, don’t go out on the street and play in the cars, but you should be an independent thinker. Maybe you do want to do it.
No, there’s certain rules, especially there for young persons and we call it Vaibhakti and we have to follow what Gurudeva has given us. But ultimately, this is a very important principle. In Bhakti Vishwanath, in his commentary in the 12th chapter of the Gita, he says that there’s a Vyasa, Manan and Smaran.
In the beginning, a Vyasa, Yoga, Yudhtena, we practise, we do something in a mechanical way. And we do it because we’re told this is the rule. And in such people also, they think Shastra says and this is the way it is and that’s all there is to it.
But when we become a little more purifying, we go beyond the platform of Vyasa, we come to the platform of Manana. We start thinking, why do the Gopis say this? Why does Krishna say this? What does it mean here? And from that Manana then comes Smaran. Smaran means Marna in some Vaishnavas.
Marna means death. Smaran means remembrance. We want to remember Krishna.
We want Krishna to come to us when we’re chanting. But that Smaran comes when we’re Marna, when our material life is dead. And it comes when our material life dies and we start practising Manana.
We start practising this independent thinking. And if you look in that 47th chapter of the Bhagavatam, what is that independent thinking? Uddhava goes on to explain that basically the independent thinking of the Gopis is that they’re not like the people I’m used to in Mathura who all want something from Krishna or maybe they’re worshipping Krishna because he’s our homeboy, he’s our family member. But they’re worshipping Krishna for Krishna’s pleasure.
Their independent thinking means they’re independent from anything material and it’s completely spiritual. Thank you. So just to put this in a little more objective terms, I like the metaphor of say a child cannot go about like interpreting independently or something like that.
In writing also, I do a bit of writing. So what they say is that first you need to learn the rules and then sometimes the normal rules are suspended by expert writers. But if somebody who doesn’t, for the sake of style and in fact all figures of speech, all literary devices are in some ways suspension of the rules.
And we’re not using a literal object, we’re using a non-literal thing. So but the idea is that style is built on the rules. Style is not built before the rules.
So if somebody doesn’t follow the basic rules of grammar and says this is just my style of writing. Well, no, this is not your style of writing. This is simply your ignorance about how to write.
So in that sense, maybe if you want to have objective parameters, we could say that broadly that the tattva, the ultimate philosophical or siddhanta shouldn’t be contradicted. That is something which is quite important. Another we could say that rasa should be overall compatible.
There should not be a reading which completely makes a… There can be some different rasas, but the rasa should be overall compatible. So are there any other broad parameters? Because broader parameters, what are the boundaries for interpreting or finding multiple meanings? Any thoughts on this? The person commenting must be pure. Otherwise, with a contaminated impure mind, his interpretations will also be temporary.
Because a child who can jump two feet can only jump two feet. But a child who’s sitting on the shoulder of a seven foot father can reach a fruit on the branch of a tree. So there’s one thing, as much as the mind can expand and imagine and contemplate and put pieces together, even with grammatical rules.
And there’s one thing when there is a descent into the heart. So tadviddhi pranipatena pariprasnena sevaya then upadekshanti te jnanam jnaninas tattva-darshina. The descent into the heart happens when there is fertility of the consciousness, surrender to Sri Guru, naam bhajan, and when there is substantial chetodarpanam arjanam, then there could be anandam buddhi vardhanam.
But before that, it could be mental gymnastics. But I’m not sure how deep it is in spiritual realisation. Ultimately, I think this is going to be, there is a certain level of subjectivity to it.
Because how are you going to assess purity also? At a gross level, you can assess purity that person is not doing impure activities. Purity is also, it is a little, it is a little, it is going to be difficult. See, in western, this is a big subject, I’ll quickly mention.
In western education, ethical thoughts. Now, how do you decide what is the right action and wrong action? So, there are three ways of broadly looking at it. One is category, deontology, that this is a category of right and this is a category of wrong.
That’s a deontological ethics. The second is consequentialist ethics. And what is the result? If you do this, if the result is good, then the action can be considered to be good.
And the third is what they call as virtue ethics. And virtue ethics is considered the closest to our tradition, where we don’t just look at the action that is being done or just the consequence of the action, but we look at the character of the person doing the action. And although the action could be normally considered objectionable, but because the correct person is virtuous, therefore, that action is not considered, not to be considered objectionable or at least not to be seen in the same light as done by any other person.
So, we have this principle where Lord Shiva brings Bhang or Krishna performs the Gopi, Rastila with the Gopis, but that is not meant to be imitated. So, that’s something like virtue ethics. So, what you are saying is also that who can interpret scripture or who can give multiple reading of scripture is, that person needs to have, here we could say purity is a virtue.
So, I just some thought about this. Even Srila Rupa Goswami, he says, In the essence of all instructions, Rupa Goswami could have just said, finished, that chant the holy name and remember sequentially of Krishna and live in Vrindavan. That could be perfect.
But then he adds a very interesting term. He says, But that Anuragi Jananugami serve under a lotus, serve the lotus feet or under the guidance of a liberated soul. So, that everything that you realise can be reconciled with his realisations.
Somebody who has gone that path, he definitely knows what the twists and turns and the exits of that path are. So, if we serve under a great soul and we chant and we read and we hear and we’re getting realisations, we can always discuss, we serve, we hear and we reconcile and we ask, then the superior will be able to tell us that maybe this is premature at this point or maybe this could be speculative or maybe just keep it to yourself. This is a great revelation.
This is a very beautiful reciprocation of Krishna’s mercy. But just keep it within yourself. Don’t put it out for sublimation in public.
Keep it to yourself. Let the pressure of, let the internal pressure of pleasure explode. Don’t give it out so quickly.
So, we need that column, that superior, even for doing, let’s say, PhD, for writing a thesis on any subject matter, you need a guide. Who will guide us on that path? There’s this enough level of and enough independence of choosing the topic and the area of research. But then there’s always that person who’s going to put everything into the proper frame of understanding and the boundaries, we could say.
It’s very interesting. My mind goes to the 10th canto of Bhagavatam where the section is Krishna is drinking forest fire. And right there in that chapter, Srila Sanatana Goswami, in his commentary, he says that, I approve of devotees to take favourable meanings out of this pastime.
Something very rare that he generally doesn’t do. So, well, then the question could be, who can do it? Maybe someone who has systematically studied from the first canto up to the 10th canto has now gained the tattva and siddhanta in his heart in sadhu sangha. Then he can favourably interpret.
And also, I believe the interpretation should be something that increases and whets our appetite for Krishna seva vasana, for the increased desire to serve Krishna. Otherwise, it is not accepted. Although it could be beautiful, but then we say, well, how much of that is in line with the aim of bhakti, which is to attend the lotus feet of Radha and Krishna and Vrindavan.
Like I could interpret, like Srila Prabhupada used to say that I could interpret, these are the five senses and this is the mind and this is the intelligence. Great. But how does that help me? Realise and serve Krishna.
So there’s a constant tug of war between how much we can do on our personal ability and how much we can do through divine intervention. It’s almost like airlifting. You see, the car can’t do much.
It can go on a freeway, on a highway, but in case of traffic, the car can’t do much. It can’t, it’s just stuck. But if there’s an aeroplane or let’s say an helicopter, a helicopter can airlift the car when needed.
So our ability is like a car. We can go, we can do great wonders, but what are we going to do when we are stuck in traffic, the traffic of our anarthas and the blocks of our mental speculative thoughts. But when we have a great soul who can airlift us, we can do way more than our ability.
Again, I don’t know if I’m right or wrong. Sripad Madhavananda Prabhu and Chaitanya Charan Prabhu, both of you can correct me, I’m just sharing what I’m feeling inspired at this point. Mahendra, it’s reminding me of some statements from Bhaktivinoda Thakur and Krishna Samhita.
First of all, there’s always two different understandings of things. He has some people understand in a very mechanical kind of way and that’s all they can understand. And then there’s people who are more broad-minded.
One is on the platforms I mentioned before, the Vyasa, the practise, and the other is on the platform of Manana. And those persons on the platform of Manana, Krishna in the Gita says, don’t disturb the mind of those people who are just doing a Vyasa. Bhaktivinoda Krishna Samhita, he says that sectarianism, it’s a natural byproduct of the absolute truth.
And every have the absolute truth, you’re going to have some sectarianism. Because Acharyas, they come and they teach according to the people they’re speaking to. Just like we were speaking before this session started, that you may have a leader who has a group of followers who are all swans.
And then another leader has a group of followers who are all pigs. And they both care for their followers and they want to help them. But the instructions they’re going to give are definitely going to be different.
And then Bhaktivinoda, he says that, he goes on to explain that so there’s Acharyas, they speak according to the particular community. But then what happens is naturally the community followers, they like a particular instruction. They think my instruction is the best.
And when they see that somebody else has a different instruction, they can’t accommodate that. That’s especially for the persons who are on the platform of Abhyasa. And as a society, we should therefore be led by Brahmins and Vaishnavas who are coming to the platform of Manana and who are being guided not just by speculation, as Mammaranda Prabhu and yourself are pointing out, they’re being guided by Guru, by Sadhu, Shastra and Guru in that sequence.
We want to hear from a proper source and we want to try to understand them. And they can guide society, they can understand, OK, there’ll be different understandings about this. And some people really need to have Anashram Dharma and they need to have certain rules and regulations because that’s the way their minds work.
And that’s fine. There’s no problem with that. We want to encourage them.
But there’s other understandings also. We want to preserve those things. So a general principle is that there’s a phrase you use in the Agni Puranam, Vak Palushas.
Vak Palushas means, to use harsh words, Vak Palushas, it means to speak in a harsh way. In the Agni Puranam, when it speaks about system of Anashram and that rules, it says this is a fault, this is a crime. And if someone speaks in a harsh way, then you should, they’re meant to be fined.
They should be punished. But we can also understand that some people, as we’re seeing here, the gopis are speaking in a harsh way to Krishna. So someone who’s just on the platform of a Vyasa, they can’t understand that.
I remember, I’ll just tell you a little personal story. When I was about six or seven years old, my father was teaching in high school and he was also the coach for the swimming team. And their team won some event one time.
And I was a little boy, I was there and all the team members, they picked up my father and they were going to throw him in the swimming pool. And that was an expression of their respect and love and appreciation for him, that we won the event and we won it. And I was a little boy, I didn’t understand.
And I started hitting them, those older boys, I started hitting them on their legs and things and protesting, don’t do that to my father. I couldn’t understand what they’re, actually, they were wanting to glorify him, express their affection. But because I was on a lower platform of understanding socially, I couldn’t see that.
So society means both things. We’re going to speak in a social way that we should understand and appreciate some people need this abyss or some people need these rules and regulations of vanashram, which are given by Guru. But other people, they can think about it.
So that thinking ultimately, what does Shiva Prabhud want? He told in one letter to, famous letter, what’s the letter I’m thinking of? Chaitanya Chandrabhu, you know, he’s a GBC at that time in Los Angeles. No, no, no, Krishna. Anyway, he wrote a letter to him, famous letter, I’m telling my mind.
Prabhud said that the purpose of the Krishna conscious movement is to train people to be independent thinkers. Yeah. So that’s, that’s the purpose of the Krishna conscious movement.
But it’s not that when we first joined, yeah, I’m just an independent thinker. We have to understand the Buddha. And shushu shoshu the dana shavasthi, the katharuchi, that katharuchi, that inspiration comes.
Samaha saviour vipra, when we render service to Guru, then that will naturally come to us. We’ll understand what is right. Anyway, we shouldn’t criticise the Gopis for having harsh words to Krishna, even though in the 17th chapter of the Gita, Krishna says, don’t speak in a harsh way.
But here we see the Gopis are speaking in a harsh way. And repeatedly throughout Vedic literature, harsh words are rejected. But Krishna likes harsh words.
And there’s so many examples of that. In the Linga Mata, there’s a couple of examples that I like very much. Krishna is watching a drama in Dwaraka.
A very amazing thing. He’s sitting in Dwaraka next to Uddhava. And Narayaguni has come with a group of Gandharvas.
And they’re putting on a drama for the pleasure of Krishna. And the drama is about Krishna. There’s an actor playing Krishna.
And they’re doing brajlila. And Krishna’s watching all this. And the actress who’s playing Jatila, she starts chastising the actor who’s playing Krishna.
And she calls him a black snake. You’re coming here to attack these girls. Who do you come here to bite? And Krishna, the actor Krishna, addresses her as lamboshti.
You fat-lipped one. I’m coming here to bite the ghost of pisachi, the witch of brats like you. And Krishna’s watching this with Uddhava.
And Krishna, he says such a nice thing with the Goswami. He says, parushya vagapi yatha pramodiyati. He says that, my dear friends, he says that the stuti, the stuti api mahamanyam, the prayers of the munis, those words don’t appeal to me in the same way that these harsh words of the old ladies of Braj appeal to me.
So this is one reason, I think, also why the gopis are addressing Lord Brahma’s vikarna, so that you’re this muni. And that muni, he’s speaking, you’re Krishna, you’re his follower. You like that kind of, you like something which is very in a box in a particular way.
You like those words, which are very Shastra. But the gopis, they’re speaking in a way against that. In a transcendental way, they’re chastising Krishna.
Krishna gets pleasure from that. Beautiful. Thank you.
Let me screen share for a moment. I can share a very beautiful statement from Srila Prabhupada, which is a nice example of that. Can I do that? Was it Balimardhan Prabhu that you’re thinking of? Balimardhan, he was a guy, his name was right in the tip of my tongue.
It’s a beautiful letter. I can share that with you. Krishnakunda Mataji is saying, Karandhar Prabhu.
She’s right, Karandhar. Thank you, Krishnakunda. She saved the day.
Can I share? Yeah, me too. So this is a statement Srila Prabhupada made in a public lecture, in the Nectar Devotion lecture in Bombay on 10th of January, 1973. Prabhupada said, Krishna wants to be controlled by Yashoda Maya.
Krishna wants to be defeated by his friends. Krishna wants to be refused Radharani’s darshan. When Radharani is angry, she refuses to allow Krishna to see her.
And she tells the sakhis, don’t allow Krishna to come here. Then Krishna flatters the sakhis, kindly let me go. No, sir, you cannot go.
This is Krishna. Krishna gets pleasure from that. So we should understand that chastisement, the harsh words, is a crime in Vedic culture.
But we should understand the difference, as Amaranda Prabhu is speaking about, the difference between Aishwarya and Madhuraja. Otherwise, you’ll always become very, very confused. And the gopis, they’re speaking in a very sweet way, in a way that brings pleasure to Krishna.
I’m speaking so much, I want to stop there and let one of you reflect on that. So are there any others? And this, we could always discuss so much more, but are there any, we wanted to, Amaranda Prabhu, we wanted to finish by 11 o’clock, we had mentioned. We have 10 minutes now.
I know the enthusiasm, you’ll want to go a long time. But are there some things which you would like to add before we conclude, specifically this verse? Sure. My mind is very fascinated by the word that they have used, that is sakhe, which means friend.
And our acharyas have poured, literally rain showers of nectar, nectarean interpretations of why they have called Krishna sakhe. So there are reasons from both camps, from the camp of submission and from the camp of contrary mood. So Shrila Vishwanath Chakravarti Thakur writes from the contrary mood.
And he says that Krishna, Brahma prayed for your appearance. That’s very interesting. Chakravarti Pat doesn’t say to protect the world or to maintain the world.
He said, what did Brahma want you to do? He wanted you to increase progeny in this world. Because Brahma is the creator, his department is creation. And he prayed for you to help him in the creation process.
So what did Krishna do? Chakravarti Pat writes, what did Krishna do? Vishwa gupta ye. Now the word gupta ye, Vishwa gupta ye has two meanings. One is to protect the world or the other thing is to hide from the world.
Gupta, to hide. So one meaning is to protect the world, prayed by Brahmaji, you appear to protect the world. Or another meaning, to fulfil the desire of Brahmaji to increase the progeny in this world, you hid from the world.
And how did you hide from the world? Satwatam kule, by appearing in a cowherd community. You hid from the world. And now the gopis are saying, so what was your game plan? Your plan was, you will hide from the world and do things by which nobody will be able to understand that you’re God.
Because if everyone understands you’re God, they will worship you, they will perform bhakti and from bhakti, they will get mukti and by mukti, they will go back home, back to Godhead. So what about the progeny here? So Chakravarti Pat writes, Krishna made a master plan according to the gopis, by which I will trick the whole creation. Nobody will know I am God.
Naturally, nobody will worship me. And if they don’t worship me, they continue to remain here for all times to come. Fulfilling the desire of Brahmaji that the progeny continues to increase and they just continue to be in the cycle of birth and death.
And the gopis are saying, and we helped you in this plan of Krishna. We helped you in this plan. Brahmaji wanted you to increase the progeny and therefore naturally, you hid from the world and just had bird feathers on your head and ran barefoot.
And what did you do? You did everything contrary to what God would do. You ate dirt. You stole butter.
You stole clothes. And you even displayed parakiya bhav by dancing with all of us. And what did we do? We partook in that master plan.
Sakha. We showed our friendship to you by helping you hide yourself from public so that people don’t know you. They don’t recognise you.
They don’t worship you. And by not worshipping you, they continue to be here and they’ll not be liberated. So we helped you, Krishna, in hiding.
But now we ourselves want you not to hide. We helped you hide from the world. Why are you now hiding from us? We played our role of friendship in the master plan that you had in hiding from the world.
But from us, why do you want to hide? Why don’t you just come and express your friendship with us? So that feeling of their heart is Sakha. We showed our friendship. That’s one meaning.
Another meaning of the word Sakha is Saukhya Rasa Saagara Nimagnam which means that Krishna who has previously drowned them in the ocean of joy. That is Sakha. Sakha means Saukhya.
Saukhya Saagara. Sukha Saagara, the ocean of joy and Ananda. So they use the word Ananda twice in the same verse.
Nakhalu Gopika Anandano Bhavan. So one meaning of the word is Gopika Anandana, son of Gopika, Yashoda or Gopika Anandayati as Sripad Madhavananda Prabhu was previously explaining. He who gives pleasure to the Gopis.
But now Nakhalu. He definitely doesn’t give pleasure to us. Nor does he enjoy our association.
Alas, alas, alas. Look at our splite. So Gopika Anandana can also, one meaning is the son of Gopika, mother Yashoda or another meaning is Gopika Anandana.
The word Ananda is hidden there, which means joy in the first line. And the last line has the word Sakha, which means Saukhya Rasa Saagaram, the ocean of joy. So between the first line and the last line, which has joy in the first line, joy in the last line, there is only tears of distress.
Previously you drowned us. Oh, you Krishna, who drowned us in the ocean of joy. Now you are drowning us in the ocean of distress.
That’s the second meaning to the word Sakha. The third meaning to the word Sakha is very interesting. The word Na goes with everything.
Nakhalu Gopika Anandana, you’re not the son of Yashoda. Na Akhila Dehinam Antaratmadrig, you cannot be Paramatma. You cannot be the son of mother Yashoda, because if you were the son of mother Yashoda, you would have a soft heart like her.
You cannot be the Paramatma because the Paramatma understands the crying and weeping of the Jivatma. You can’t understand even that. And Vikhanasarthito Vishwaguptaye Na, you were not called by Brahmaji.
You don’t think yourself to be so great. And Na Sakhe, which means you cannot be our friend, because if you were our friend, you would have shown your friendship. We, unfortunately, till now thought that you were our friend.
So that Na goes with everything. So when they say Sakhe, it actually means the exact opposite, A Sakhe. Oh, he who takes pleasure in giving pain to us.
So that Sakhe call is connected with the first syllable Na. So Na Sakha, not our Sakha. You cannot be our Sakha, because Brahmaji prayed for you to protect everyone.
And if Brahmaji’s words have to be kept true, you have to protect the whole world, including us. Forget about protecting. You are getting joy in seeing us suffering.
Paradukhe Sukhi Sada Mithya Bhashi. I should have looked even at what Thakur has said. So that Sakhe is sarcasm there.
It’s not friend. It’s A Sakhe. He who’s not our friend.
And the fourth meaning of the word Sakha, it’s very interesting. The word Sa means Saha, he. He who.
And Kha means come, sky. Bhumir Apaha Anala Vayu Kam Mano Buddhi Re Vacha. The word Kam means sky.
He who is like sky. Why? Why is he like the sky? Because the sky seems to be there everywhere, but no one can see the sky and it is unattached. The sky element is there in glass.
It’s there in a cup. It’s there in a box, but it’s not attached to the box. The sky element, the ether element or the air element is there in a box, but it’s not attached to the box.
It’s there in a pot. As soon as you break the pot, it’s there in thin air. It’s not attached that.
So Krishna Sakha, I think you are like the sky. You seem to be there everywhere in Vrindavan. Everyone’s talking about you.
But we are not able to see you and you don’t seem to be attached to us the way we are attached to you. You are a rain cloud, which is in the sky, but even the cloud is not attached to the sky. So you are a moving cloud.
You are a sky. You have all those qualities. Like the cloud, you’re moving from one person to another and you forget the previous residence.
And like the sky, you can see us, but we can’t see you. You’re there everywhere, but you don’t belong to anyone. This is our unfortunate plight.
Hey Sakha, Oh Krishna. So with a lot of devotion, these interpretations have been, the nectar has come down through our Acharya commentaries. Beautiful.
Madhavanthu, you want to add any concluding words? No, I’m good. I really liked that. Thank you very much for bringing out those points about Sakha.
It’s really beautiful. Just in its essence, the Gopis are telling Krishna by saying Sakha, according to Sanatana Goswami, that your head’s in the clouds. You can’t really understand us.
So the Gopis are expressing that. Nice session today. Thank you both.
Thank you. So I’ll try to summarise. So we discussed this.
Could I quickly add one more point Prabhuji? So actually the word Vikhanasarthito has one more interpretation given by our Acharyas. So one meaning is Brahmaji, but then Brahma also took an incarnation as the Vikhanasa Muni. And Vikhanasa Muni was the one who gave the Vaikhanasa philosophy.
And he was the guru of Marichi, Atri, Bhrigu and Kashyapa Muni. He was the spiritual master of all four of them. And he has laid down strong rules on how a vanaprasthi should live in the forest.
He should live off fruits and natural berries and not depend on anyone, live a very austere life. So the Gopis are saying, Krishna, you are acting as if you’re following the principles given by Vikhanas Muni. The rules set by Vikhasana Muni of how to live in the forest and hide away from everyone.
It seems as if you’re following that, but you don’t have to. You’re going deep into the forest as if you’re following all those rules. Vishwa Guptaye, you’re trying to hide from everyone.
But at the same time, by the rule of Sanskrit, Vikhanasarthito Vishwa Guptaye can also break as Vikhanasarthito A Vishwa Guptaye. Vishwa Guptaye means to protect the world and A Vishwa Guptaye means to destroy the world. You are living exact opposite life, Krishna.
Brahmaji prayed so that you appear and protect the world. And you are trying to follow the rules set by Vikhanas Muni and going in the forest. But by that A Vishwa Guptaye, you are destroying the worlds of our lives.
Oh Sake, why are you doing this? Please appear. Please appear and give us your darshan from Chandravali’s side. Please appear and have our darshan from Radharani’s side.
Our bodies are brimming with ecstatic love. And if you hide in the forest, you will not get darshan of this Mahabhav. You have to wait for Gauravatar to come.
So now you come out of the groves and you have darshan of Radharani as she’s crying and weeping and faltering and there’s change of colour and there’s a lump of emotion on the throat. So Chandravali’s side, we want to see you. But Radharani’s side, it’s better you come out and have darshan as our bodies are erupting like thorns on a cactus plant.
The hair is standing on end as we are crying and weeping in ecstatic love. So you will benefit because you don’t know what bhakti is. You don’t know what devotion is.
So why don’t you come and have darshan of your devotees as they’re experiencing devotion. Trishyatam. May this scene, may this whole scene of Brahjalila be seen by the devotees in their hearts.
So these were some concluding thoughts. Amazing. Okay.
Thank you, bro. So it’s really difficult to summarise these talks. But basically we discussed about Nakhalu Gopika.
This was today and the idea that the Gopis are saying in Gaudiya Vaishnavism, it’s understood in our tradition, understood that Krishna did appear in Vrindavan. He’s Yashoda’s son. So the question came up, how is it that they are saying he’s not Yashoda’s son.
So it is more of Aishwarya Gyan, a tinge of Aishwarya Gyan being exhibited over here. And then the no can apply to all the four things. That actually you are not Gopikanandan and it’s, you are not the Parmatma.
You are not, you’re not descended to relieve the distress of the world. And you are not our Sakha. So this is more in the, more in a sarcastic kind of tone that they are speaking.
And these kind of half seeming words are also very pleasing to Krishna. In fact, they are more pleasing than some lofty praises. Let me discuss the understanding of the verse from both perspectives.
The left side Gopis and the right side. And then the idea that this is the explicit poetic composition that each verse can be understood from different perspectives. And when I give the pre-Pranayagrit Krishna speech can also be understood like that.
So we discussed the boundaries of how multiple meanings can be read. It’s not that there’s only one meaning and that has to be absolute. At the same time, it is, we need a certain level of maturity and purity.
A child has to learn to grow up before they can walk. So we want to become independently thoughtful. At the same time, that doesn’t mean that we reject Guru Sadashastra.
Rather, it is by their blessing that we become independently thoughtful. And in this particular verse, the Gopis are describing in one sense that Krishna, you are, you are, you are actually a friend when you are actually meant to give us happiness, but you’re not giving us happiness. You are causing great distress to us.
The few points, I think there are many more, but I don’t want to go beyond the time we had planned. So thank you very much. Any concluding remarks you want any of you want to make before we stop? So I look forward to associating once again in the near future.
Hare Krishna. Thank you so much. Thank you for kindly having me.
Hare Krishna. Thank you.