QA on Ramayana Comparative Religion and miscellaneous topics

Transcript

This is an AI-generated transcript and may contain some errors.
Hare Krishna. Yes. Hare Krishna.
Okay, the mic is already there. Why there are so many versions of Ramayana? Why are there so many versions of Ramayana? Yes. As I mentioned, one reason is that there is no one book which can describe all the pastimes of the Lord.
Because the Lord’s pastimes in themselves are unlimited. So that’s why one book is not adequate. So different books will describe various details which may not have been focused on in the earlier books.
Of course, this does not necessarily mean that these versions can be classified into three broad categories. One is that the versions which give additional details of the story that happened in Valmiki Ramayana. That means, like I said Lakshman Rekha, it’s not mentioned but it’s not incompatible with what is described in Valmiki Ramayana.
That is one. That’s why there are versions which describe additional details. Second is, there may be versions which Lord Ram’s pastimes are eternal.
Lord Ram has a role in the spiritual world and he keeps appearing in the universes in different millenniums. So sometimes, some pastimes may seem to be different from what is given in Valmiki Ramayana. For example, the narration of how Lord Ram kills Ravana.
In some places it is said that the arrow is shot in the chest. Some other places it is said that it is shot in the navel. So there are slight differences in that.
So these may not be directly inconsolable with the Valmiki Ramayana versions. Valmiki Ramayana clearly says that it’s in the chest. But these can refer to other millennia.
Because when the Lord performs pastimes, in different millennia, the broad storyline remains the same but the details vary. The details vary. So, there may be some versions of Ramayana which are overall compatible with the broad philosophical teachings of the Ramayana.
But the storylines are slightly different from what we have in Valmiki Ramayana. They could be referring to another millennium. A third possibility is that there are certain versions of Ramayana which are not bona fide.
That is also possible. Because there are many people who have taken the Ramayana story and distorted it according to their imagination. So they may call it Ramayana.
Like there is this whole genre of literature called Jain Ramayana. Jain Ramayana. So, it is such a perverse thing.
This is not a criticism of Jainism. But what they have done is that when Lord Ram goes into the forest, all along in the forest, he is meeting Jain sadhus. And then Jain sadhus are giving him good advice.
But he is so attached, he doesn’t listen to their advice. And then finally he wins back Sita and then he loses Sita. At that time, he becomes detached.
And then he goes to Jain sadhu and takes Diksha and becomes a Jain. And that is the end of the Ramayana. So, this is a total distortion.
It is a monstrous distortion. So, this is basically, in the Jain tradition, they have just misappropriated the popularity of the Ramayana and used it as a tool to propagate Jainism. So, that story, that Jain Ramayana is not considered authentic by any Ramayana.
Jains have their own interpretation, that is fine. But this is not considered one of it. So, the various versions of Ramayana can fall in these three categories.
Embellishing Valmiki Ramayana’s details. Second is, describing pastimes of Lord Ram, which are authentic but happened in other millennia. And third is, concocted stories.
So, how do we know the difference? That is why it is safe to always hear in Devotee Association. So, now, within the Devotee Association itself, the devotees have, Srila Prabhupada did not give us the Ramayana, he did not have the time to do that, but he had expressed the desire. So, now, Krishna Dharmaprabhu is one devotee who has retold the Ramayana in contemporary language.
It is a very beautiful rendition of Valmiki Ramayana. Bhaktivkas Maharaj has coordinated English rendering of the Valmiki Ramayana. And there are some devotees who are working on a project to do a verse-by-verse translation of Valmiki Ramayana with a commentary.
So, if that works out, then that will become like a one-stop all-source for us. So, that will happen gradually. But till then, generally, we can refer to the books on Ramayana, the renditions of Ramayana that are given by devotees, or we can hear classes.
And if we have in our tradition heard something somewhere earlier, then we always need to cross-check whether the story is bona fide, what is its implication, and how? It needs to be understood. Is that clear? In different millennia, is it written by different persons, or is it written by Valmiki? Valmiki will always write the Ramayana, but subsequent revelations may be different. Subsequent revelations, that means, when Valmiki writes it, we have to understand clearly, the Ramayana is not a novel that is written by an author.
It is more like a report or a record of what happened historically. So, in each millennia, it is Valmiki only who records it, he is the primary Adhikavi. But if the pastimes happen differently, then they are revealed to him differently, and when they are revealed to him differently, he records them differently, and that’s how we get different reports.
Clear? Yeah. Any other question? What is the authenticity of Ramcharitmanas? Okay, what is the authenticity of Ramcharitmanas? Krishnadevaraya Prabhupada referred several times to it, and there are several places where Krishnadevaraya Prabhupada also quotes from it. So, in that sense, it’s an authentic source.
At the same time, there are a few places, Tulsidas himself was a great devotee of Lord Ram, but in that area, in the Varanasi area, the version of Vaishnavism that was there, that was slightly mixed with Advaita Vata. Slightly mixed. It is not that the Valmiki Ramayan is impersonalistic.
Actually, Valmiki Ramayan has a lot of intense bhakti verses in it also. And they are very powerful, some of the sections. But at the same time, some places, there are a few sections which might seem hazy.
So, that’s why, if we have a clear philosophical understanding about what is what, and then if a person reads Tulsi Ramayan, Tulsi Ramcharitmanas, then that person will not get a misunderstanding. In fact, the devotional feelings can be nourished also. But, because, in and of itself, there are intense bhakti verses in Tulsidas Ramayan, Ramcharitmanas, and there are also verses which can give credence to impersonal sort of ideas.
So, that’s why we are a little careful. But overall, it’s not a question of authenticity of it. It is a very popular book.
It is an intensely devotional book. And it has been quoted by many other great Ram bhaktas also. So, in that sense, the question is not about the authenticity of the book.
The question is what understanding do the readers get? So, that’s why there is crystal clear philosophical understanding. And with that understanding, if one reads the book, then it’s clear. Then one will not get any monistic or impersonalist misconceptions.
So, in that sense, as devotees, we will always prefer Valmiki Ramayan. And that’s what we will normally quote. But if there are some special verses which illustrate certain points, then we can quote Tulsi Ramayan also.
Ramcharitmanas also. But the primary focus of our study should, if you want to study the Ramayan, primary focus should be Valmiki Ramayan. At the same time, if somebody else, especially somebody who is not directly practising devotional service within Krishna consciousness, if that person is reading Tulsi Ramayan, then there is no need to make an issue out of that.
Because many people’s devotional lives has been nourished, especially in North India. There is a whole tradition of Ram Bhakti, very powerful tradition, that has grown around the Ramcharitmanas. That’s it.
We just have to be careful that we get a proper philosophical understanding. That’s the important thing. Yes, please.
You were telling about that Ramayan, you are surrounded by yes men. So, in that regard, I have a question. Many times when we are serving as a leader, we will likely get surrounded by yes men also.
And sometimes, if somebody is not cooperative, then it really sometimes inhibits or makes us work very difficult. Where should we draw the line? Because, suppose our partner is not cooperative, then so, I want to say that we have to have cooperative also. Correct, correct.
Otherwise, it becomes a small country. Yeah, actually, see, as I mentioned, the question is that, if we are surrounded by yes men, we may do wrong things, but at the same time, if we are working in a team where we have to get things done, and if the people who are working don’t cooperate, then we can’t get things done. It becomes an obstacle.
So, in general, we should always cooperate with our authorities. That’s the training that we should give to devotees. At the same time, whenever major decisions are to be taken, major action plans are outlined, as devotees, we should always be able to give a scriptural basis for that.
And that’s how the subordinates can be made to understand how it is sound. And if still, they have some doubts or reservations, then maybe we can consult with our equals, with our seniors. And some people, they, there are just, some people cannot get along with some people.
That is how people are. We just cannot, it’s not possible that, although we can say, have a have a sort of nominal relationship with them. We don’t have a hostile relationship.
But to have a working relationship, not just an intimate relationship, it will not always be possible. So then, if some person, they’re finding that that person is just, he can’t, he’s not able to work with us, then maybe it is most advisable that that person be given some other guide, and that person can go on. And otherwise, over a period of time, if people observe results coming, people observe the integrity of a person, then they also understand.
So, this is not at all meant to, the idea of meeting surrounded by just men should not be used by subordinates to justify their adamance or their stubbornness or their obstinance. That is not at all the point. In general, if there is a spiritual basis given, our epistemology is Guru, Sadhu and Shastra.
So, if we are quoting Shastra to explain the basic of what we are doing, we are consulting other devotees. There is Shastra and there is Sadhu. If we are providing the epistemological basis for what we are doing, then there is no reason to object.
So, the objection could be either spiritual or it could be personal. One person cannot get along with another person. If that is the case, then better to shift the authority and then continue working.
You were saying that Ramayana tells somebody to recite Jain Ramayana. So, then we hear that in Islam, in Quran also there is a lot of perversion. So, then they may even question us that what is the authenticity of Ramayana itself.
Anybody can write it. How do we say that Valmiki’s Ramayana is bona fide? Firstly, I didn’t say that Quran is interpolated. Actually, the Muslims very strongly feel that Quran is not interpolated.
But the point is, they themselves have admitted, it is well known that there were two verses which were included, two sets of verses which were included in the Quran and then they were removed because they were called as Satanic verses by Muhammad. And some things might have been added in the 40 or so years after the death of Muhammad and before the compilation of the Quran. So, basically the Muslims don’t make the claim that Quran is interpolated.
But there is a very real possibility that was there. Because after 40 years it happened, in the writing down, after the death of Muhammad and during his life, only for 20-25 years, at various times he was given the Quran. So, that means almost 75 years period was there between the speaking and the writing.
So, surely things could have been changed. But that is not an issue we need to take up with others. Prabhupada did not, this is called as textual criticism.
Textual criticism means to say whether what is written in this text is what was originally spoken or not. So, Srila Prabhupada did not, especially with respect to Bible or Quran, he did not go into textual criticism. He focused primarily on talking about universal principles and showing how those universal principles are elaborated in greater detail in the Hindu scriptures.
So, now regarding the Ramayan versions, yes there are many Ramayan versions. But in general the Valmiki Ramayan is a standard book. And we see that there are commentaries in the Valmiki Ramayan that go back for hundreds and hundreds of years.
So, going out of commentary at least several hundred years. So, that commentary is also quoting previous commentaries. And we see that these commentaries also the same versions of Valmiki Ramayan are there, that are there today.
So, that way we can understand that overall the what is there is authentic. And see, the scriptures have to be understood in a tradition. So, no Vaishnav tradition has accepted the Jain Ramayan, nor has any Vaishnav tradition rejected the Valmiki Ramayan or questioned the Valmiki Ramayan.
So, therefore overall there is no need to doubt about the authenticity of the Ramayan. Because ultimately that way every book can be doubted. Every book can be doubted.
For example, we get a printed book. Somebody might change some value in between. It can happen even today.
So, it’s always, the possibility is always there. And from a historical point of view, if one wants to go literalistically, you can’t deny that possibility. Nor can we prove that it has happened, nor has it not happened.
But the essential principle is that there is Guru Sadhu Shastra. And what is authenticated by Guru Sadhu Shastra is considered authentic. Okay.
… … … … How do we consider something as Shastra? Valmiki got a revelation and that was written down. In the Sarva Sammadhini, Sarva Sammadhini is a appendix to Shat Sandarvas. Shat Sandarvas are very important philosophical books as well as Jiva Goswami.
So, in these books, he has more or less done an overview of the Vedic literature and explained how Srimad Bhagavatam gives their essence. And then how pure devotional service to Krishna is the essence of the Srimad Bhagavatam. So, in that sense, he has philosophically overviewed the books to establish pure devotional service to Krishna as the ultimate conclusion of the Vedic scriptures.
So, he has subsequent concerns, arguments against it, he has addressed in Sarva Sammadhini. So, there he quotes the Vedic sources to describe that there are various Brahmanas. Deksha Hanuman Shastra is one.
But he expands these into sub-categories. So, it becomes ten total. So, Hanuman can have Upaman.
Upaman is analogy. Hanuman can have Arthapatti. Arthapatti is a proposition.
And then there is also one of the Brahmanas he called as Arsha Vigya Vakya. Arsha Vigya Vakya means the seers of the truth. He calls it Vaidush Praktyaksh.
Vaidush Praktyaksh means that which is Vaidush is the enlightened people. Praktyaksh is seeing. So, the enlightened people, what they see to somebody at the level of Samadhi and from that level what a person sees, that is considered an absolute truth.
So, now how do we know if somebody is Vaidush? Anybody can claim that I am a Vaidush. He says this. So, the criteria of Vaidush and whether a person is Vaidush, enlightened, that has to be understood from what is considered traditional scripture.
So, the four Shrutis, the four Vedas are considered traditionally scriptures. And there it is described what are the Puranas and the Itihasas are mentioned as a Pancham Shruti. The Pancham Veda in the Shrutis.
And there many of the sages who we talk about as learned, as enlightened, they are also mentioned. So, scripture is the final authority. And within scripture, if certain characteristics are described of enlightened souls and certain souls are mentioned as enlightened then what they believe is also considered a scripture.
So, in that sense because the Itihasas include the Ramayana, Itihasas is mentioned in the Chandogya Upanishad itself where it is talking about Asya Mahato Nishyam actually from the breathing of the Supreme Lord comes out the Vedas and the Pancham Veda. Therefore, that is also considered as a scripture. So, first is scriptural basis, scriptural reference to the enlightened status of a person, the enlightened characteristics of a person and then what that person speaks if that is overall in agreement with what is called as scriptures then that is also considered as a scripture.
Just like we have the second offence is to commit an offence to blaspheme the Vedic literature or literature in pursuance of the Vedic version. So, that’s how it is. I heard that there is some contamination period like Ramayana somebody died in 12 days or 10 days, they cannot go inside temple or usually, so how to understand is it Vedic or like if family sometimes somebody dies they cannot go inside.
So, what is that? So, when somebody dies, there is a contamination period during which people are not allowed to go in the temple. So, in general there are certain activities which are considered in Vedic culture to cause impurity. So, for example, when we respond to Niji, that is considered to cause impurity.
Similarly, when women have their periods it is considered impurity. Similarly, when a person dies, actually the contact with corpses anyway it is considered impurity. So, now when we have to render service to the lord we have to have a pure body and a focused mind.
So, when these sort of events have happened, it is difficult to focus on the lord to do quality service. You may take shelter of the lord because we need a shelter but that time to render service is not easy. So, people are not deprived of shelter of the lord.
They can associate with devotees, they can chant the names of Krishna, they can there are a lot of religious rituals which have to be done Shraddha Sarga is to perform that period itself and that is enjoyed. So, that means death is actually a time when people feel impelled to connect with God more. And that’s why there are many rituals there can be karma karma rituals for a better next life destination or there can be vaishnava rituals for connecting with the absolute truth of Krishna.
There are always those sort of functions are given. But when we consider specific activity that require pure and focused mind it is generally considered difficult to have that in that time. So, those rituals are not allowed.
Those activities are not allowed. So, deity worship is generally if a person, somebody died in the family, then deity worship is not allowed in that family. That family member can’t come and do deity worship.
So, this is the normal traditional understanding within the mainstream Indian culture. Now, the Vaishnava Acharyas for large extent go along with this. But they don’t absolutise the essence of this.
Because the Vaishnava principle is Yuktavairagya. So, Srila Prabhupada did not deny this but Srila Prabhupada did not emphasise this. So, if some family member passed, Srila Prabhupada could encourage people to take shelter of Krishna.
Taking shelter of Krishna means coming to the temple. That is wonderful. So, in general these sort of decisions that means there are devotional principles and there is what is considered to be normal social pious conventions.
So, if these two are sometimes not in agreement, then in general, the Vaishnava Acharyas give specific devotional principles. But that doesn’t mean we reject these things. So, in general if we are a part of a society where there is some sort of conventional culture people expect that if somebody has passed away in a family, then that member should not come to a temple.
And if that is a predominant consideration, then that can be taken into consideration. Now, this happens in the temple in America, you know, generally nobody knows about these things, nobody bothers about these things. But if something like this happens in temple in Vrindavan or Mayapur, then there are always people who observe this.
Srila Prabhupada explains in a fourth kind of report that how in Vrindavan temple when they were doing the temple inauguration, he said we would be happy to do the inauguration just by doing kirtans. But the local priests wanted that they fire sacrifices be performed and elaborate rituals be performed. He said the lord does not come just because the rituals are performed.
The lord comes because he is called by devotion. The most prominent way to call him by devotion is achanti, the holy name. But Prabhupada said because they wanted it, so we do.
So, this is called as deference to local tradition. Deference. Deference means respect for local tradition.
Sri Jagannath Mahaprabhu, he himself would go and give prasad to Sanatana Goswami, Rupa Goswami and Haridas Thakur. But out of deference to local tradition, he did not break the convention of Jagannath Puri temple that non-Hindus should not be allowed in the temple. He did not break that.
So, sometimes the Vaishnavacharyas show deference to local tradition. So, if that is shown, that is perfectly okay. So, I think that is something.
So, this, after the death, whether a person should come to the temple or not, that is not absolutely possible and that can be decided by the local authority about time, place and circumstances. So, in my understanding, in our voices, we don’t exactly have deity. So, there should not be any such principle like that.
Now, temples, local temple authorities can decide that. Yes. Swamiji, you state that in Ramayana, mainly Ram is put as an ideal human being, not as a supreme God.
Then, is there any verses where it shows that Ram himself is Vishnu in Ramayana, Valmiki Ramayana? Good question. I wanted to address this. Are there any verses in the Valmiki Ramayana which show that Ram is Vishnu? Yes.
Actually, the start of the Ramayana begins with the Devatas going to Vishnu and saying that there is Adharma and please save us and then Dashrath performs the Yajna and then and then there is a description that Vishnu says I will be descending to the Yajna of Dashrath and then all of you should also descend as associate and all of you for Manaras because there is a long story that Ravana was cursed that he could be, he bet Manaras would destroy him. So, he had tried to incite Nandi and Nandi said you have called me a monkey. So, monkeys will become the cause of your destruction.
So, he got that curse. So, at the start, there is a clear reference that Vishnu’s incarnation is about to happen and that’s why this whole subject is worth discussing. Similarly, I stop at the point when Ravana was killed.
But after Ravana was killed, the Devatas appear and Devatas actually glorify Lord Ram, they thank Lord Ram and then later on when Sita’s testing happens and she comes out of the fire unscathed. So, at that time the Devatas say actually this Leela you are performing but you are the Supreme Lord Vishnu and you know that Sita is pure. So, like that there are references not directly Lord Ram saying I am Vishnu.
In fact, Lord Ram because he is playing a role of ideal human being he will even do Yajnas, he will do rituals, he will do whatever is expected of an ideal Dharmic person in the Vedic culture. But if you look at the background, that’s why I said although it is not explicitly mentioned, it is never far away from the inference. So, that means if you look at the framing, beginning and end, it is clear that he is Vishnu.
Within the story, you can easily infer it. But explicitly it is not mentioned. Clear? So, sometimes people have this question that some people say Lord Ram worships some Devatas, Lord Ram worships Shiva, for example Rameshwaram.
So, why did he do that? Actually there are two reasons. Firstly, as I said, Lord Ram is being depicted as an ideal human being. As an ideal human being, he is expected to do Dharmic rituals.
And more importantly, Shiva is there at the end when Ravana is killed. He comes and says he praises Lord Ram. It is good that Ravana was a scourge of the world.
Scourge is a source of destruction for the world. And it is good that you have freed the world from this curse. And you have descended to this world for this.
And all people are grateful to you for that. So, if you look at the overall context of the Ramayana, there is no misconception who is supreme. But Lord Ram, because he is playing the role of an ideal human being, he does the activity of Dharma.
And one of the activities is worshipping the Devatas. So, he worships Lord Shiva also. And yes, the principle of worship doesn’t prove anything.
You will see that in the Ramayana, Sudama is being worshipped by Lord Krishna. He is doing Aarti for him. That is the Sudama God.
So, we cannot take one incident out of the context. The Devi-God worship that is there, that is just to exemplify Lord Ram acting as an ideal human being. Yes, any other questions? Yeah, where are the mics? Sometimes people say that Rama is actually a story to show to people that it shows the ideal character of what should be the ideal character of a human.
So, how to convince them logically and scientifically? How to convince people logically and scientifically that this is not Ramayana, this is a story told to convey ideal character. Ultimately, it is through the experience of the potency. It is through the experience of the potency of transformation that will happen.
Ordinary moral stories may just give some moral inspiration. But they cannot in themselves bring about purification. There may be some stories of some what you say Arabian tales and this and that.
So many tales are there. If you take the names of names of the characters in that you have Allah-Din-Qajin you chant Allah-Din, Allah-Din, Allah-Din you will not get purified by that. So, actually at ultimate level, it is the purification that happens by the chanting of the stories.
That’s one thing. At an immediate level when a person is beginning anew how should we go ahead? Firstly, Prabhupada presented things in such a way that first the philosophy should be presented, then the past tense. That is one of the main challenges where many Indians and Hindus often find especially Krishna Leela sometimes Ram Leela also are little difficult to take seriously because often their introduction is first through stories and then they come to the philosophy.
So, when we come to the stories and that is what is actually increasingly happening with the commercialisation of the devotional classics. The commercialisation means now there are movies made on the Ramayana there are TV serials made, Jai Veer Hanuman and this sort of things like that. But they may depict the things sometimes faithfully sometimes they may twist things just for the sake of commercial entertainment purposes.
But overall rarely is the approach to show the person as God. No philosophy is given. So, because of that things become a little difficult.
People get confused. So, Srila Prabhupada’s approach was don’t bring the past tense prematurely. So, what do we do in India? Where people already know the past tense in our presentation like we see in our voice.
We don’t introduce Ramayana and Mahabharata. First we have to discuss some course. So, then we have Bhagavad Gita courses.
Then gradually by this, people when they get a philosophical understanding then they approach the past tense. Then they will be able to understand there is much more than moral stories to this. So, if people are asking this sort of question, that means they don’t have that level of faith then don’t go into that.
Focus on philosophical education. You think it is a story like that, it doesn’t matter. But even at that level there is deep wisdom.
Let’s look at that history. If you see Bhagavad Gita, Mahabharata is some story. How can you ultimately prove that something is not just historical, it’s transcendental.
It’s like Shabda is self-evidence. Shabda cannot be proved by Pratiksha Hanuman, because Pratiksha Hanuman is subordinate. You cannot prove Shabda by Pratiksha Hanuman.
It’s like Bhakti Sahaja Thakur tells a story that somebody, it’s night and somebody wants to use a torch to see the sun. So, a torch is useful in the darkness, but a torch cannot show the sun. So, similarly if we are saying logically, scientifically, that means we are using Pratiksha Hanuman to try to prove Shabda.
That is not possible. So, therefore by Pratiksha Hanuman, we can make people understand the soundness of the philosophy. That is what is done in Discover Yourself course.
Existence of God, existence of soul, eventually the law of karma. We show their logical soundness, and then if we want further detail, then we come to the direct scriptural books, which also have been in the past. So, that’s why people need to get the philosophy, then by philosophy they practise, they experience the transformation, then they will understand these are not just moral stories.
Clear? Where is the mic? Lust is the biggest problem. Is Ramayan depicting lust as the biggest problem? We have many anarthas, and in general, if we look at the main storyline of Ramayan, Ravan is lust person. Ravan had greed, Ravan had pride, Ravan was quite arrogant.
He couldn’t listen to anyone else. So, obstinacy actually means arrogance. But, if we look at it specifically the way it is depicted in Ramayan, it was all centred around lust.
It was extremely lusty. So, that’s why lust is considered prominent. But, in general, all anarthas need to be battled with.
And we need to follow the process of devotional service, we need to get the mercy of the Vaishnavas, then we will be able to overcome antithanarthas. So, because Ravana himself personifies lust to a large degree, that’s why we focus on lust. But the broad principles that are depicted, they apply to all anarthas.
Does that answer the question? You told that they pop out just like a head of Ravana. Once it is cut off, then again it comes out. Is it seen that when we fight against other anarthas, like during chanting, how we can understand that those anarthas have been eliminated or it is still we have to work to come out of those anarthas? How can we know some anarthas are eliminated or we still have to work? Well, it just depends on whether we are agitated or not.
For example, we might have been attached to, say, eating meat earlier. Now, if somebody brings meat, does it tempt us? There’s actually no devotee who has, no matter how much it falls down, very few devotees ever go back to meat-eating. It is too higher a taste.
It’s too much. Actually, when meat comes, at least for meat, we can do what Yamunacharya does. Shushu tu nishti vanamchala.
Spit at the thought. So, what does that mean? Earlier, we might have got saliva, our mouth has started watering. But now it has changed.
That means, it’s the same stimulus but the response has changed. That means the process is working. So, if earlier there was agitation, now there is no agitation, that means that anartha has more or less gone.
So, if there is still agitation, that means we have to work on it. But, in general, we shouldn’t be too anartha-conscious. Whether I have to still work on the anartha or this anartha has gone.
We just keep practising devotional service and in that process, the anarthas will go away. Sometimes, if some anartha is troubling us a lot, then we may have to specifically plan how to deal with it. But even while doing that, the focus should not be on anartha.
The focus has to be on Krishna itself. But, maybe to counter this anartha, for example, if I am attracted to female forms, then I may take some pictures of beautiful deities of Krishna, keep them with me. If I am too greedy about something, then I may think how I can spiritually become possessive about something and don’t feel that spiritual possessiveness.
So, we may plan to intensify specific forms of devotional service that can help us to counter specific anarthas. But, the central focus should always be on the practise of devotional service. You shouldn’t be too anartha-conscious.
Because, that consciousness is draining. Actually, it is contemplation of Krishna that is energising. But, contemplating on the anarthas that is draining.
It tyres us out. So, we don’t have to bother too much. And, suppose… And, you should never test whether I have become free from anarthas.
No. Suppose if… Have I become completely free from the desire for meat? So, I will bring the meat right near my nose and see. Don’t do such a thing.
So, sometimes, we may think, I have not watched any provocative programmes for a long time. Let me see, does it affect me or not? Well, it’s like Lust is a tiger. The tiger has gone to sleep.
And, we say, is it asleep or is it dead? I will find out. So, I will pinch the tiger. Well, if he is asleep, let him sleep.
You know, by pinching, all that is going to happen is, if he is dead, nothing is going to happen. But, if he is asleep, he will wake up and he can devour us. So, in general, if you are too anartha-conscious, it drains our energy and we might unnecessarily provoke trouble for ourselves also.
So, let me just focus on being Krishna-conscious. The other agitators, plan how to deal with them. Is it clear? Yes, very well.
Yeah. I want to confirm that, we have a story that why these monkeys helped Ram for fighting because he got cursed from Narad Muni. Is that story true? Yes, it is true.
There was once, Narad went for Narendra’s daughter attracted to some prince and they never met. So, Narad went. This is one type of story I heard.
So, it is true or false? As far as I have read it, I have not heard it. So, I will tell you the story that is there in the Ramayana itself. That is that when Ramana was going around conquering the universe, he thought, I will conquer Kailash also.
So, at the entrance of Kailash, there is Nandi. Nandi was guarding Lord Shiva’s place. And Nandi is a bull.
But Ramana was so insolent that he saw him and he thought he is like a monkey. Hey monkey, you get out of the way. And Nandi was so angry.
Nandi told him, if you consider monkeys so insignificant, monkeys will become the cause of your destruction. And that is how monkeys joined that army. Of course, Prabhupada emphasised another principle.
He emphasised that Lord Ram used monkeys to illustrate that how even if monkeys are not generally considered very exalted species. When we say monkeys, Prabhupada also tells, monkeys have a lot of they keep a dozen wives and things like that, Prabhupada would say. That means they have a lot of uncontrolled desires.
We say our mind is like a monkey. So that means restless. Monkeys are considered positive in that connotation.
But Lord Ram used monkeys to indicate that when we come to the Lord’s service, the Lord can use anyone and everyone to do glorious things. And that is the glory of the Lord that he can utilise even that which is normally considered not very useful or glorious. If you see Lord Ram’s pastimes, they are monkeys, they are vultures.
Vultures are considered to be the lowest. Among birds also. Eagles are noble.
Peacocks are noble. Vultures are actually considered tamasik. But this vulture was glorious.
And similarly, bears are not considered very glorious. Jamban was a bear. So in that sense, the potency of devotional service and of the Lord to engage even people who are lowly and make them do glorious things.
That is the important thing. Any other questions? Yeah, where is the mic? Wherever it goes. Actually, the question is we have Swarupa in Vaikuntha.
Everybody has Swarupa in Vaikuntha. But some devotees go to Vaikuntha. But some devotees go to Vaikuntha.
So what would you say? Some devotees go to Goloka. Some devotees go to Vaikuntha. But Swarupa might still be in Goloka.
So how will it happen? Is that your question? In general, for all the rasas, the Dasya Bhava is what is common. The Dasya Bhava. Service attitude is what is common.
Whether a person is in Vaikuntha in Aishwarya Ras, whether a person is in Goloka Madhuri Ras, the Dasya Bhava is very common. And once a person gets the Dasya Bhava, from that point onwards, our conditioned nature gets removed. And our original nature starts getting awakened.
So once our original nature starts getting awakened, we will naturally become attracted to the form of the Lord with whom we have an original relationship. That means, even if somebody comes to say the Gaudiya Vaishya Sampradaya, where we are focussing on Goloka. But if somebody has a natural bhakti for Lord Ram, then that attraction will surface.
And by that attraction, the person will go to Ayodhya. So we had, as seen in the Shri Prabhupada Mahavishnu Maharaj, he was very attracted to Lord Ram. And he chanted the Hare Krishna Mahamantra, served Shri Prabhupada faithfully.
But then he was focussing on Ram Maharshi. And when he had to depart, he chose that he wanted to depart in Nasik. And then when Samadhi was made, it was made in Nasik, because that’s in the place of Lord Ram.
So that is perfectly fine. So basically, eventually when we are pure, that natural attraction which we originally have in our original form towards Krishna, that will become our default attraction. So whatever is natural for us eternally or originally, that will by default become our natural attraction.
So therefore, as sadhakas right now, we should not prematurely worry about the eventual surupa. Right now we focus on giving up the parurupa. Parurupa is the external form.
This body and the body’s conditioned nature that we have, when we give up that, the natural attraction will automatically emerge. So it won’t happen that way. That somebody goes to the spiritual world, he finds a misfit here.
It doesn’t work like that. Krishna will take care of that. Krishna will take care that our natural attraction will direct us.
Bhagavatam also assures that. yad yad dhiya turgaya bhavayanti tattva dvapoktaniyase sadhanubrahaya yad yad dhiya turgaya vibhavayanti yad yad dhiya, dhiya means consciousness, intelligence, awareness. Turgaya is O lord who has glorified vibhavayanti, yad yad dhiya whatever way a devotee is attracted to you tattva dvapoktaniyase sadhanubrahaya tattva dvapoktaniyase that kind of form you manifest out of sadhanubrahaya for the sad is the devotee, anugraha is mercy out of mercy for the devotee.
So that is Krishna’s assurance. Baldevidya Bhushan also in his Govinda Bhashya which is a commentary on Vedanta Sutra elaborately analyses this in the last sutra Anavarti Sabda and he describes that actually a soul will by the practise of his devotional service, awaken his natural desires and the lord is benevolent the lord will guide also the soul so that the soul will attain to a position that will be eternally, ecstatically expandingly happy for the person that’s how we don’t have to worry about the sorrow right now we focus on cultivating Dasya Bhava and eventually we will be taken by Krishna and by our pure original spiritual desires to where our sorrow lies yeah yes, do some devotees do service in Vaikuntha and Goloka if some devotees have an intense attraction towards two forms then this is something because the desire is pure to serve the lord accommodates the desire so that is the mercy of the lord right, the lord is a devotee of the pure desire, the lord will extend to accommodate that desire so that may happen also but you know instead of thinking of two let’s think of one at least at our stage in a few years I have to go back to the spiritual world eventually specific things will come up later but Krishna is there, important point is Krishna accommodates that’s why there are some associates who are there in both vilas, eternally and if we also have an eternal attraction towards a two, we can be also part of two but right now we don’t focus on too much of these advanced things as I said because it’s premature for us we may have some attraction right now say for example Ram Dina but much of that attraction might be culture, because maybe since childhood we are brought up in a culture where Ram kathas were discussed my parents had some pictures of Ram at home, so we feel attraction to the lord Ram, so if we feel attraction at our stage we can use that attraction to become more Krishna conscious but we shouldn’t assume that our cultural attraction to a particular form is indicative of our eternal soul it may not be, it may be it doesn’t matter, our important point is practise the prasad roshan service and come to the Dasa Sibha, then everything else is very neat that will be a little technical we can discuss this, maybe separately let’s focus on, that is a specialised topic we can discuss that later let’s focus yeah, so what do you mean? yeah, so what is the question? is there an example of some devotee who is in both Goloka and Vaikuntha well in general, not exactly Vaikuntha but we have Murali Gupta and Hanuman so he is in both, actually in the Laghu Bhagwat Tamil they describe that in the spiritual world Vaikuntha is here, then Ayodhya is there and then Goloka is there so that’s because the intimacy of the relationship is more in Vaikuntha although there is great affection but that is more Aishwarya Bhava in Ram, still there is Aishwarya Bhava Ramlila but it is less, more intimacy is there Krishnila is maximum so at least we have examples of Ramlila and Krishnila, so the principle is true, then we have several examples of devotees who are playing roles in Gaurlila Ramlila and Krishnila also, we have Lalita Vishasakhi Ramayana Raya and others so let’s see if there are examples also ok, how was original Sita not taken in the Ramayana there is a Uttarkhand and this we are talking about Valmiki Ramayana Uttarkhand is the appendix so many stories are described Agastya and other Rishis come along and they tell Lord Ram about Himrajit and about others it is there that it is mentioned it is not mentioned in the Yudhakhand about that only a celibate could have killed Indraji, could have killed Himrajit celibate means, actually Lakshmana was not a celibate, he was married but during the period of Panvas, he was celibate that’s how he had the power so in the Uttarkhand, subsequent stories are given, so Vaidyavati story comes over there so Vaidyavati was the daughter of a sage and since her childhood she was innately attracted to Lord Vishnu and she was performing austerities so that she would have Lord Vishnu as her husband and when she was in the Himalayas alone performing austerities as a yogini so at that time Ramana was wandering along through the sky and when he saw, as soon as he saw, a demon means he sees a woman, he thinks she is meant for my enjoyment only so immediately he came there and he started first trying to allure her and then try to force her so when she strongly refused and she told, I am devoted to Lord Vishnu he started laughing, Vishnu he considered as his enemy, so he decided to ravish her and he caught her hair, so when he caught her hair to drive her along, so when he caught her hair she used her hair, she had mystic powers she used mystic powers and with her hands she smoothed her hand like a knife and cut off the hair and Ravana was pulling and he was just left with the hair in his hands and Vaidyavati said that my body actually it was not her body because only her hair had been touched, he said my body has been defiled by the touch of a wild one like you therefore this body is not fit for offering to Lord Vishnu so I will end my body he said I will come back again and I will become the cause of your destruction so this much is told in the Valmiki Ramayana and then the fire comes up and she gets destroyed and then later in other Puranas, this Purva Purana and other Puranas the stories elaborate that actually there is a whole there is Maya Sita story so that before the before the abduction of Sita at that time during the Lakshman Rekha period when Lakshman Rekha is made so in different Yugas this happened differently so there are slightly different versions of it but basically before the abduction there is a change so then the real Sita disappears and she goes to Agni and she stays with Agni and then at that time when Vedavati has apparently burned and destroyed her body she has invoked fire so when she has invoked fire so she has entered into the fire she has taken shelter of Agni as a means of eventually attaining Vishnu so then at the time of the exchange of Sita then the real Sita she goes and she goes to stay with Agni his wife is called Swapa so she comes and she takes Sita away and she places Vedavati over there and this Vedavati that is kidnapped and then Vedavati lives with Ramana and she becomes the cause of the destruction because Lord Ram comes to reclaim her and then when Lord Ram does the Agni Pariksha of Sita at that time Vedavati enters into the fire when she enters into the fire at that time Agni accepts her and then the real Sita comes out and then Lord Ram and Sita are reunited so that is the basic story is it clear? yes where is the mic? Hare Krishna Guruji in that lecture you were telling two words about other religions in other religions different representatives of God they come and preach according to different level of the truth but still there are some serious fallacies that you were pointing out like the concept of Satan is there and the concept like some religions point out that some of these religions also will get into dying for some religious matter like that so I was my question is that Guruji why is some serious teaching at different level is ok but why so many serious fallacies are there if they are representatives of God why are there some serious fallacies in other religions if they are also traditions coming from God firstly they are not necessary fallacies the idea of 73 versions as I said that is not directly in the it is a misinterpretation of the Quran but the broad principle is karma kanda karma kanda is that one by worshipping God by dharma one gets artha and kama so kama means sense gratification so in the heavens even in the Vedic culture one goes to the heaven one can enjoy with dapsaras so the specific figure and the exaggerated imagination and especially the distorted focus on that distorted focus means you are using that as a justification for killing innocent people that is what is terrible so here the original scriptural principle is valid by dharma you get artha and kama but when it is misapplied, misinterpreted and perverted then it becomes a problem but the broad principle is karma kanda what was the second thing you said concept of satan concept of satan so in general in the bible there are some verses which seem to indicate that satan is to be taken metaphorically satan is not to be taken literally satan is to be taken metaphorically but the mainstream christian tradition does take satan literally they consider satan to be a literal person so now again the challenge is that as i told earlier the amount of philosophy that is there in the bible and the quran that is quite less and because of that when i say the amount of philosophy in the bible and the quran is less that doesn’t mean christians are unphilosophical there have been many intelligent christians many philosophical christians who have adopted christianity and then when they have done that then they have tried to integrate the broad principles of bible with other philosophies that were existing at their period so for example saint augustine was in 3rd-4th century very prominent saint in christian tradition and he synthesised the biblical philosophy with the pre-existing greek philosophy of socrates and plato then later on in the mediaeval period 11th-12th century there was thomas aquinas who is also considered a very prominent theologian so he tried to synthesise the christian philosophy with the philosophy of aristotle so in the greek philosophy there is two broad strands of thought like socrates and plato had one tradition and aristotle had another tradition so now much of what is there today called as christian philosophy actually is not present in the bible it is it is basically bible is a moral stories so many things come in from elsewhere so for example in christianity many christians have the idea that animals have no souls and that they use the idea to kill animals but that doesn’t come from the bible that is a rationalisation of other ideas that’s why when the fallacies are there, the fallacies could either be distortions of original valid principle or they could be importing of something which is not valid into what was originally valid is it clear so whenever there is decline of religion when krishna comes does this refer only to sanatana dharma it is not only to sanatana dharma because in a sense sanatana dharma also includes the other religions from an absolute point of view the same god who is coming to give this message but so in that from that point of view christianity islam would also be called as sanatana dharma their expression of sanatana dharma which are no longer so properly connected with the original source but from the historical or cultural point of view we can say that whatever is the culture that is in practise in india, that is sanatana dharma so first i will qualify the term that you used, is it clear what i said because even christianity islam from sanatana krishna, so they can also be called as sanatana dharma, because they are expressions of god’s legacy only to humanity, but from the cultural, historical point of view the tradition that is in india we can call it sanatana dharma, because that is the most direct and living expression of the teachings of krishna so krishna may not come to revive specific traditions so if christianity goes down, it is not that krishna will come again to revive christianity, he sent jesus and then he gave some teachings over there but then krishna will in broad principle, he will keep giving teachings so if you look at, like chaitanya mahaprabhu has come, buddha came earlier and then kalki will come at the end so in this revival itself we see that there are three personalities who are there three manifestations of the lord, which is quite significant so in that sense, krishna makes spiritual knowledge available always, but because this is kaliyuga so relatively speaking the availability the interest of people is lesser and that’s why so much religion will not be there, but krishna always makes spiritual knowledge available for those who are interested that is the broad principle clear so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so it is described that that which was never offered before that is now being offered by lord chaitanya mahaprabhu not offered for a very very long time so because chaitanya mahaprabhu has offered a very special process that’s why even the most fallen people can get the highest. Otherwise it is not possible and even when we say that the most fallen people can get the highest, that doesn’t mean that the highest becomes the lowest.
The most fallen people also have to practise the process by which they can come to the highest. Isn’t it? So, usually Prabhupada is given the highest teachings but still we have to follow the four religious principles, we have to have a level of commitment. So, we shouldn’t think that is giving the highest to the lowest is easy and it will always work.
Even to make it work, it is time. You can see when we say the process is easy or the highest knowledge is given, what does it mean? It means the pathway has become easier. So, I had to go on top of a mountain, there is an easier pathway to go up but still I have to climb up.
Still I have to climb up. Every one of us has to become purified individually. So, the easiness of the process is not a substitute for purification.
The easiness of the process may make purification easier but still purification is something which every one of us has to do individually and even when Chaitanya Mahaprabhu has come and given us such an easy process, it is not that everybody will take it. Even there is going to be a 10,000 year golden age, 10,000 year golden period but even if there is a golden period, that doesn’t mean that everybody will become devotees. Many people will become devotees but it’s Kali Yuga, many people will not become devotees.
So, we need to understand that the Vedic scriptures and ultimately Krishna offers multi-level spirituality. So, we have been given a path which can take people from here right to the top but we will see that even with this easy process and topmost destination, not everybody will take it up. So, then okay somebody is here, you can come from here to here, somebody from here to here, ultimately they will come there itself and if they practise whatever tradition they are practising purely, this is given by God, eventually they will come to that destination.
So, it’s not that one process will be suited for everyone. Even if it is the easiest process, even if it is often the highest destination, still not all souls will take it up and that’s why there will be variety in the religious paths and that’s not necessarily a bad thing because not everybody can, like I told the other day when Prabhupada said, Muslims are doing the Namaz, they are worshipping God in their way. We can be happy about that.
We don’t have to become insecure, we don’t have to impose our way of worshipping. They are getting elevated that way. So, Krishna will offer variety of paths and what we do when we want to share Krishna consciousness, when we are doing that sort of compacted religious study, is that we reinforce our faith in what we are practising and we equip ourselves to present this to others.
But even when we present this, not everybody will accept it. For them, there have to be other paths available. Is it clear? So, you mean those who are following these other practises, whatever are there, and if they are sincerely following, that means they are making progress? Yes, of course.
There are great saints in the Christian tradition, even in Islam there are many people, the Sufi saints, they are completely devoted to God. There is a Sufi lady saint, not Fatima, what is her name, she has a very beautiful prayer. It is a very personal prayer.
She is saying, Oh Allah, if I want to see you to enjoy the pleasures of heaven, then forever keep those pleasures away from me. If I want to see you to save myself from the fires of hell, then let me burn in the fires of hell. But if I want to see you out of love for your beautiful form, then please don’t hide that form from me.
This is just almost like, I don’t want anything else, my dear Lord. So, there have been exalted devotees in all traditions and ultimately, we cannot legislate whom Bhakti Devi graces. We cannot minimise whom Krishna will give his mercy to.
So, a soul who is sincere and tries to love Krishna, wherever that soul may be, that soul will develop love for Krishna. So, what we are pointing about here is that the logical and the philosophical fallacies, I won’t use the word fallacies, I will use the word inadequacies. They are not wrong, they are inadequate.
The logical and philosophical inadequacies, they can obstruct people in developing intellectual conviction. But if somebody can develop a devotional conviction, then this doesn’t matter. This doesn’t matter.
So, intellectual conviction is helpful for us to practise the process by which after purification we will develop that love, a devotional conviction. But is intellectual conviction absolutely essential? Not absolutely essential. For those of us who have intellectual nature, we tend to have a lot of intellectual doubts.
So, then for us it’s essential. But there can be people who have natural faith, maybe they have practised Bhakti in previous life and they are continuing on, or maybe they got very good upbringing by which faith is deep rooted in them. It’s not the kind of philosophical discussions we have over here.
Now, it’s called as village programmes. We don’t do this sort of programmes over there. We don’t have that kind of doubts.
We don’t need to discuss that over there. So, the logical and philosophical inadequacies may make it difficult for people to develop intellectual conviction. But that is not necessarily an obstacle in devotional advancement.
People can surely become devotionally advanced. Ruji, I was talking about those kind of persons, they are intellectual, but they are following some wrong teachings, but they are sincerely following it. So, are they also going to make progress or they are just like that? Okay, those who are intellectuals and they are following a particular process, which is maybe, you know, are you saying the wrong process? I wouldn’t consider Islam as Christianity as wrong process.
They are bona fide processes. Some people may have wrong approaches to them. For example, some religions, their main preaching is through demonization of other religions.
Demonization is, you know, this is bad, this is bad, this is bad. And that sort of preaching, if that is their focus, see ultimately every spiritual aspirant, that person has to develop an inner relationship with God. And that person may also want to propagate externally the message of God as he understands it to others.
So, if in that external propagation one is blaspheming bona fide traditions of God, one is violating other spiritual rites and devotional principles, that will definitely be an obstacle. But if one is teaching as one understands those teachings, and one is practising sincerely, one can surely develop spiritual advancement. That way, we can’t even legislate that everybody who comes to Krishna Consciousness will make spiritual advancement.
Ultimately, it will depend on whether we practise it or not. Sometimes in temples, we may have an employee who is an employee for 25 years, but he is not chanting Hare Krishna. So, he is in ISKCON, but is he in Krishna Consciousness? No, he is just in Salary Consciousness there.
So, we can’t legislate just because somebody has come to a path, he is going to be wrong, or somebody has come to a path, he is going to be right. Ultimately, what we do with the path is important. Whether we practise the path properly.
Somebody may be working as a peon in IIT. That doesn’t mean the person will get an IIT degree. Isn’t it? So, why we come to religious traditions is extremely important.
I will tell one incident about this. So, once Radhanath Maharaj was one of our prominent spiritual leaders. So, he was in Kumbh Mela.
At that time, there was a question and answer booth which ISKCON had. And one Hindu person came along and he asked Maharaj this question. He said, Swamiji, which religion were you born in? The Maharaj said, I was born in Chud tradition.
He said, then why did you convert to our religion? Maharaj said, actually all religions are ways to God. All religions are ways to God. And we can go back to God in Chud tradition.
He said, okay, if all religions are ways to God, then you could have gone back to God by practising a Jewish tradition only. Why did you convert to our religion? Maharaj explained some things to him, but he was insistent on that point. Why did you convert to our religion? Finally, when Maharaj did not address that question, he said, Isn’t it because our religion is greater than your religion? Then Maharaj said, Maharaj became very assertive.
He said, you know, I accepted Krishna as the lord of my heart, not because Hinduism is superior or because Judaism is inferior, but because Krishna attracted my heart like no one else. Because Krishna attracted my heart like no one else. So ultimately it’s not a matter of egoistic superiority and inferiority.
It’s a matter of devotional attraction. If our religion makes us proud and we start becoming egoistic over others, then that is unfortunate. We will become proud, but we will not make spiritual advancement by that.
I know many Christians who are so devoted to Jesus. They think Jesus died for me. And they feel a burning sense of gratitude and devotion to Jesus because of that.
So ultimately the question is of whether we are developing a devotional attraction. And our intellectual analysis is meant to aid that devotional attraction. So in other places, when Radhakumar met Pradipa Bhatia, the earlier president of India, he gave him his book, she asked him the same question.
So Maharaj said that actually, this he writes in his new book, which is going to come out soon, so that he describes it. Actually, all religions talk about God and all religions pass it back to God. But I found that in Hinduism, there was far greater detail than what was there in other traditions.
So what I talked about, Sambandhapithi, these are all support systems. Greater knowledge about God is a support system. Greater clarity of the process is a support system.
Greater vividness in the description of the ultimate goal, Sambandhapithi, all these are support systems. The support systems are not the process. Support systems aid in the process.
There are so many people, there are scholars who have done PhD in Krishna, but they may not even believe in that Krishna is God. So they have a lot of knowledge about Krishna, but they have the support system, but they are not climbing up the mountain only. On the other hand, somebody who is in Christianity, there is not much knowledge of God available, but with whatever knowledge is available, he is climbing up.
He may be way, way up the mountain. So when we were talking about certain, so ultimately, the philosophical clarity that is there, that is a support system. So that is not, and the lack of philosophical clarity, just means that there is a support system that is lacking.
That doesn’t mean the path is fallacious or wrong. It might mean that path is more difficult for some people. But just because we have an easier path to climb up the mountain, doesn’t mean that just by being on that easier path, we have already reached the peak.
So all that we are saying is that in the Krishna conscious tradition, there are more support systems available. But these support systems should not make us feel proud, because it is not we have done anything to get the support systems, nor have we created the support systems. So we just receive them by causeless mercy.
So actually a devotee feels this as a matter of responsibility, not a matter of pride. Krishna has given something to me, let me make it available to as many people as are interested. We will not force people, we will not cast our path down other people, but at least people should know.
We should know that this is what is available in the Krishna conscious tradition, that they want to take it up voluntarily. If they don’t, that is their choice. So ultimately we are following Krishna.
Deliberate deeply and decide what you want to do. That is our understanding also. We present in this Krishna conscious path, that all the support systems are available, now you decide what you want to do.
Does that answer your question? Yes, please. We see that to judge any feature from the authentic point of view, we always depend on previous commentaries, commentaries of hundreds of years, thousands of years. So regarding Bhagavatam, we see that we find commentaries of Madhavacharya, and all other Vaishnava Sampradaya, even Shri Sampradaya Akali also, but we don’t find any commentary of Ramanujacharya on Bhagavatam.
So what is your answer? Why he didn’t leave? Is there any answer? Why did Ramanujacharya not comment on the Srimad Bhagavatam? Actually, Ramanujacharya’s focus was primarily on refuting Advaita Vata. And because Shankaracharya had not commented on Bhagavatam, he did not feel the need to comment on Bhagavatam. So primarily he focused on Gita, what is Gita Bhashya, because Shankaracharya wrote the Gita Bhashya, so he responded to that.
And then he commented on Vedanta Sutra, that is Shraddhika Bhashya. So he wrote Shri Bhashya. And so these were the primary philosophical works that he did.
And apart, in fact, actually speaking, Ramanujacharya, he wrote elaborately on the Gita, he wrote elaborately on the Vedanta Sutra, and he himself did not even comment on the definitions. Ramanujacharya, one of his disciples, he commented on the definitions. And that’s how the Prasthantraya, the three main books which I was supposed to comment on, Shri Sampradaya commented on.
So Ramanujacharya, he did write extensively on Vishnupura. Because at that particular point in the historical tradition, from Brahman to jump to Krishna, to take people from the level of Brahman, to the level of Krishna requires a huge jump conceptually. So from Brahman, take people to Vishnu.
That’s why he focused on Vishnupura. But if you look at overall teachings of Ramanujacharya, the essential principles of the Bhagavatam are there in his teachings. So they are not missing.
Ultimately, every Acharya has a particular mission which is given by the Lord. And every Acharya is responding to a particular historical situation while executing that mission. That’s why the principles of the Bhagavatam are there.
But the specific books that I commented on, he chose based on historical situation to focus on certain books. Answer the question? Yes, please. After you can go ahead.
We see the Lord Ram, as he came and appeared in this world, he exhibited the qualities of a normal human being. And we are supposed to follow in the path that he achieved all the qualities of a human being. But also in the next story we see that he did not do much in the path of self-realisation.
Mostly we see he followed the path of Karma. He did the activities honestly, in a normal way. But we don’t see him much stressing on Bhakti.
However, we see he is running after women and waging a war against women for protecting Sita. On the opposite side, we see when Chaitanya Mahaprabhu came here, he was having a beautiful wife and then he left that. He accepted the long road of life to establish the principles of Bhakti.
So, both are simply personality of Godhead, but they are stricken with different aspects of a human being. Lord Ram did not seem to focus on self-realisation much. He mostly focused on the path of Karma, fighting wars and regaining his wife.
Lord Chaitanya Mahaprabhu took Sannyas and exhibited pure devotional service. So again, every incarnation has his mission. So, Lord Ram came in a Kshatriya family.
Whereas, Lord Chaitanya Mahaprabhu came in a Brahmana family. That makes a big difference in the specific mission that is to be executed. Because Kshatriya, if you see that way, you could have argued that Arjuna wanted to renounce the world and practise self-realisation.
And Krishna told him, you should not do that. You fight the war. So, does that mean that Krishna is discouraging self-realisation over there? No.
Krishna is telling how you can practise self-realisation while being in the world. So, Lord Ram’s teachings are interspersed. For example, Ram and Lakshman, they console Vibhishan and Mandodhar.
Vibhishan, after Ravana has passed away, they console Sugri, Tara and Angada after Vali has died. So, at that time, it’s very clear that they have a sound understanding of all the philosophies. So, that means, there is no lacking in philosophical knowledge or awareness.
And there is also the ability to present it in a way by which people can be guided. As far as the personal practise is concerned, what they will practise will depend on the service, the role that they have played. So, there is a lot of description in the Ramayana of not just Karmakandarjuna, but Saravanaki is there also.
For example, when Lavakush comes along, actually, also at the Uttarkhand after the whole Ramayana is over, when Lavakush comes to Ayodhya, at that time there is a religious festival going on in Ayodhya, and when they start reciting the pastimes of the Lord, then all other rituals are put aside and everybody starts hearing. And then Lord Ram invites him to come, and then Lord Ram also sits down and hears whatever they are reciting. So, similarly we see Dakshat Maharaj, he is ready to offer his own son also for the sake of a sage.
So, they are exhibiting adherence to dharma and not just ordinary dharma, lofty dharma also, Saravanakirtanam and sacrifice, but within a Kshatriya mode. So, that is how a person in the world is supposed to live. So, in voice training, we focus primarily on giving brahmacharya training, and then after that brahmacharyas, they can become grahasthas, they can continue as brahmacharyas.
Most devotees are likely to become grahasthas. So, then they will adopt the way of, this training will be the foundation, afterward they will adopt accordingly, according to their inclination, and according to the family environment, professional requirements. So, it will vary.
So, on the other hand, Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, when he came to teach pure devotional service directly, Lord Ram did not directly come to teach pure devotional service. Lord Ram demonstrated the principle of dharma, which is permeated with devotional principles also, but that is not the emphasis. So, Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, because Lord Ram, when he came, you see, wherever he went, there might be some rakshasas somewhere, but overall, there were dandakaranyas, chitrakootas, there was very culture, there were sages performing austerities, and there were people who would go to sages and receive spiritual knowledge.
So, in that sense, the main adharma that was there at that time, was needed to be countered by Kshatriyas. The main adharma that is there now, okay, we could say Kshatriyas are also required today, but the primary problem is the lack of knowledge. So, because even if we get Kshatriyas and Kshatriyas are not enlightened, they will create further chaos.
So, Chaitanya Mahaprabhu focused on sharing spiritual knowledge or sharing the process by which people can easily come to spiritual knowledge. So, the needs are different and the roles that they are playing are different. And that’s why what they do will be different.
Is it clear? Yes, sir. Where is the mic? Okay, you can ask and you can go there. Okay, yes, sir.
I mean, these three incarnations are different, Chaitanya Mahaprabhu’s incarnation, Krishna’s and Rama’s incarnation. So, and as far as our Acharyas, Gauda Vishnu’s Acharyas are concerned, they have written extensive commentaries on Krishna’s incarnation, and especially tantra and prabhavati, which is like in what sense inaccessible for us because we don’t focus much on. At our condition state, we don’t focus much on tantra.
So, then, like, what we need to do is that Ram’s commentaries, we don’t have much extensive commentaries on Ramayana, and Prabhupada also did not comment on Ramayana. So, like, on which incarnation do we need to focus? Is it on Chaitanya Mahaprabhu’s incarnation we focus on something else or Baba’s and we directly access Baba’s information? So, which incarnation do we focus on as we don’t have access to Ramayana commentaries in our tradition, although we have, our 10th Canto is a little more advanced for us to access. Actually, it is not that 10th Canto is too advanced.
Akshashila Prabhupada gave 10th Canto to new people as the Krishna book. So, in that sense, Krishna book is accessible to us. And even in the 10th Canto, there are only some chapters which focus on Madhuravas.
How many? Maybe 11 or 12 chapters, and among them also, the 5th chapter, Panchadhyayas, are focused exclusively. Others belong to exclusive focus. So, surely we can read 10th Canto, and we can read 10th Canto commentaries, and we can develop a devotional relationship with our main Aradhya Devi, Krishna.
Chaitanya Mahaprabhu was teaching us to worship Krishna. So, in that sense, reading Krishna book or reading 10th Canto and 10th Canto commentaries, So, Sri Prabhupada has given us a philosophical foundation, and generally speaking, the Bhagavatam uses variety. There are so many incarnations, and gradually we can focus on Krishna by going through the various incarnations about whom there is commentary in the Bhagavatam.
But if we feel a special need to focus on the pastimes of Krishna, then there are many other books from our tradition, non-esoteric. There is Gopal Champur, Rana Vrindavan Champur. These are not very advanced books.
Again, in those books also, we may not read the esoteric pastimes, but there are many other pastimes also, which are quite beautiful. So, Shivram Maharaj has written a series of books called Krishna in Vrindavan. That he has written specifically keeping his con-devotees in mind.
So, after consulting our spiritual guides, if we feel a specific need, then reading those books are also fine. Our focus should generally be Krishna. Lord Ram, when there are festivals, and when there are special occasions, surely we will discuss about Lord Ram.
But generally our focus is Krishna, and of course, Chaitanya Mahaprabhu. There is so much. There is Chaitanya Bhaga, Chaitanya Mangal.
Actually, there are so many books about Chaitanya Mahaprabhu also. Bhaktivinoda Thakura has written books about Navdeep Dham, where also David saw the Chaitanya Mahaprabhu’s glories. So, if we are going to focus specifically on preaching through the Ramayana to people who are in Ram culture, then we need to read Ramayana commentaries.
But otherwise, we have more than enough of Krishna commentaries, and we shouldn’t think that they are too advanced. It just depends on what is our requirement either for our preaching or for our personal nourishment. So, if we feel, and if our spiritual guides also see the same view, then we can read it.
Sri Prabhupada ultimately did not want us to be… Sri Prabhupada came to connect us with the parampara, not to just connect us with him. So, our Acharya’s commentaries, Sarvartha Darshini by Vishnu Acharya Thakur, is a beautiful commentary. And his commentaries are not very esoteric.
So, surely we can read those commentaries. Can you answer the question? Yes. Yes, come here.
Sri Prabhupada said Maharaj said that just chant Hare Krishna and do not offer devotional service. And Prabhupada also said just chant Hare Krishna and follow the order of the Vedic systems. So, I was thinking that going back to God is so easy.
I think that, yes, I have chanted Hare Krishna and I have done devotional service, and we found that many purifications have happened. At the end, a complete purification will happen when we see what we did at the Godhead. So, I think that it’s very easy.
Yes. If I chant Hare Krishna and follow the Vedic principles, we can go back to Godhead. This seems very easy.
So, is going back to Godhead so easy? Yes and no. Yes, it is easy, but at the same time, to keep chanting 16 rounds for all our life is not easy. Especially, if in future, if we can stay in a devotional culture or in devotee association, it will be easy.
But if somehow, we are not able to stay in devotional culture, it becomes difficult. And ultimately, we have to understand that it is not that Krishna is interested in making coming back to Godhead difficult. Krishna’s interest is not in making things difficult for us.
Krishna’s interest is only in that we should desire to go back to Godhead. It is not that we go back to Godhead and we wonder what is the cricket match score in India. So, it is ultimately, the process of devotional service is not meant to make life difficult for us.
It is basically meant for us to choose and nourish our devotional desires. So, when I chant Hare Krishna, I am choosing to serve Krishna. And when I keep doing that, my devotional desire increases.
So, we should see devotional service as a facility to purify our desires, to choose and nourish our devotional desires. And if our devotional desire becomes our strongest desire at the time of death, then surely we can go back to Godhead. But along the journey of life, there will be many challenges will come, many temptations will come.
So, we will have to withhold those temptations, withstand those temptations and keep moving forward. So, we shouldn’t think that it has to be very difficult. Going back to Godhead has to be very difficult.
Krishna is only interested in seeing the purity and intensity of our desire. And devotional service is a means of showing that. Is it clear? Yes, behind.
Hare Krishna. Yeah. Guru, as like in Bhagavad Gita, Krishna teaches, Krishna actually teaches the knowledge of Bhagavad Gita.
And in Chaitanya Chakra, Chaitanya Mahaprabhu has also given the sikshashtakam shloka. So, these are like the teachings of the Ramayana. So, what is the teachings of the Ramayana? What are the teachings of Ramayana just as we have Bhagavad Gita of Krishna, Sikshashtakam and Chaitanya Mahaprabhu? Actually, Lord Ram’s teachings are scattered.
They are not there at one place in the Ramayana. As I said, Lord Ram, because he was playing the role of a Kshatriya, he never played the role of a spiritual teacher. Actually, even Lord Krishna did not play, if you look at the whole Mahabharata, he does not play the role of a spiritual teacher directly.
He is surely a counsellor, a vice counsellor for the Pandavas. But, because Arjuna faces a specific emergency over there, that’s why Krishna speaks the Bhagavad Gita. So, normally Kshatriyas, it is not necessary that they act as spiritual teachers all the time.
But, as I said, three incidents I mentioned. One is the death of Bali. Second is the death of Ravana himself.
And third is when Lord Ram himself exiled, at that time he talks with Lakshman, he talks with Sita, he talks with his mother, Kaushalya. So, all these times he gives very deep philosophical instructions. So, there are instructions.
But, because he is a Kshatriya, he doesn’t have to play the role of being a guru specifically. Is it clear? Yes. Yes.
At the end of the Ramayana, what happened? It is described that when Lord Ram decided that his pastime is supposed to end, then he left from Dwaraka to go towards Chandrali. In the Vedic culture, when a person is preparing to depart from the world, the person goes towards the north, towards the Himalayas. So, then he went towards the north.
And when he went towards the north, all the citizens came with him. And then, actually they all, through the means of the Ganga, they returned back to the spiritual world. So, that’s how Lord Ram took everybody, all the residents of the Yodhya, back to the spiritual world.
So, basically, like a Kshatriya came, he departed from the kingdom, went towards the north, and then, using the river as a means, he went back to the spiritual world. We see that Mahabharata and Ramayana, they return like in a forecast manner or simultaneously? Whereas, we see that in the story, he is coming. Sometimes he is giving darshan to Pandavas.
And in the Bhagavad Gita Ramayana also, Bhagavad Gita is coming while love-push fast times are going on. And if these things have happened, like it is in a simultaneous manner, then we see that in Mahabharata, it was started from Shantanu, King Shantanu. Then it was going on like many generations past from King Shantanu.
Then, was it like if Ganesha was riding the whole episode, then it was very difficult to keep him riding. Because he was riding a very fast fast way. So, how did he how did kept him riding for those many years? Sometimes, we have heard that some Kushukas were there and he was interpreting.
He was taking some time to interpret. Okay. So, basically, how exactly were Ramayana and Mahabharata written? Because for me, the authors also seem to be characters in the story itself.
So, first of all, this was Ramayana. The Ramayana, it is described in the Ramayana itself that it was written at a time when Lord Ram was there on the planet. So, first thing to understand is, it is not that Lord Ram was unknown before that.
See, Valmiki himself became purified by chanting the name of Ram only. So, it was known clearly that Ram is God. And when we say that Narad Muni told him the description.
So, in general, when great sages have questions, the questions are just seeds for re-contemplation on what is already known. It is not that they are just discovering something new. They are just relishing what it is.
So, it is not that Valmiki was ignorant about Lord Ram. But when he asks a question, who is the ideal human being, Narad Muni answers and then Valmiki contemplates. So, the incidents are happening parallel.
So, it is described that when Valmiki, when this particular meeting happens between Valmiki and Narad Muni and after that Valmiki contemplates, that is a time when Lord Ram has returned, he has become the king and when Sita has gone to basically, Lord Ram has become the king. That means more or less the major part of the Ramayana is over. At that time, Valmiki Rishi sees this and then after that Sita comes to the ashram of Valmiki and love-push and Valmiki as he has got that vision, that sort of impetus from Dayapur Rishi, then he has done his contemplation, then he got there is an incident described by which he got the metre, the word structure in which he should write the Ramayana.
Then he starts composing it. Then he goes to love-push and then he goes, love-push goes for Lord Ram’s pleasure also. That means Valmiki Rishi was existing Rishi and when Lord Ram goes around in the forest, he meets him also.
So, that’s how Valmiki comes as a character within it. That means the incidents have happened then in some of those incidents Valmiki Rishi is also participant because he is living in the forest, Lord Ram comes and meets him. But later on in the mystical vision, Valmiki Rishi sees not just his interaction but a broad outline of the past tense and he records all of them.
This is how Ramayana is written. About the Mahabharata, Mahabharata is described, it is written after the event. So, the central dialogue of the Mahabharata is the discussion between Vaishampayan Rishi and Janmaijay.
Janmaijay is the son of Pariksit. So, Janmaijay asks, please tell me about the incidents that happened when the Supreme Lord had said about the Pandavas and everything. And that conversation is one of the major framing conversations through which the whole discussion happens.
So, naturally because Vyasadev is a participant in that, so Vyasadev is described over there. But eventually, so here there is a storyline that happens which involves Vyasadev. Now, this whole story comes, which is happening chronologically.
It is narrated in a discussion by Vaishampayan to Janmaijay. And then this discussion is recorded by Vyasadev. So, there is a linear chronology, then there is a discussion and then the discussion becomes a framework for writing the book.
So, that’s how Vyasadev is the author as well as the character. Now, when this thing is happening, when Vyasadev is narrating to Ganesha. So, Ganesha is actually empowered.
He is especially empowered. So, within the tradition it is very clear that Ganesha was able to write flawlessly. There was no question of interpretation or anything.
Vyasadev was speaking in a flowing way and he had actually asked the Lord, please give me somebody who can write. I just speak like an ocean. And then Ganesha was writing.
So, he was empowered that way. So, that’s how, that’s the chronology. You are clear? We see that in Bhagavad Ganapati, it is already written that in the first one, we have proposed the Mahabharata.
Correct. Directly prediction Maharaj and this is over. Surya Goswami said it.
Just a minute. It’s already one o’clock. So, I think, it’s an important question.
Maybe we will answer it in the next class. Next class will become Acharya Tittu. But anyway, future time, whenever we have, it’s already beyond Prasadam time.
So, we will discuss this later. Keep this question in mind. We will discuss it.
Thank you very much. Shri Prabhupada Ki Jai. Gaura Bhatta Binda Ki Jai.
Itai Gaura Prema Vande Guru.