The Monk’s Podcast 80 with Krishna Kshetra Maharaja – Churning the Bhagavatam – Dashavatara 3 – Varaha

Podcast

Video:

Transcript

This is an AI-generated transcript and may contain some errors.
Hare Krishna, Krishna Chitra Maharaj, please accept my humble obeisances. Thank you very much. Hi, please accept my humble obeisances, Chaitanya Charan Prabhu.
Thank you Maharaj. Nice to be back with you. Thank you very much for being here.
It’s been, it’s really one of the first times when I’m doing a monk’s podcast on the same, on a similar subject, on a theme going on multiple sessions and it’s, it creates some amount of sort of eagerness among the readers and also stimulates thought in the direction which I’m also finding it absorbing. So thank you for that. And it’s also giving me also something to focus some meditation on, especially now in this Kartik month, Dasavatar is a nice meditation.
Yes, Maharaj, definitely. So today I think we are to discuss Varahadev, no, Vamanadev. No, Varahadev.
Varahadev, sorry, yeah, Varahadev, I just got the words wrong. So Varahadev. So, you know, I, in the Srimad Bhagavatam classes here in Govardhaniko village, they are doing a study of the full, all that Srimad Bhagavatam, so they’re having like covering four chapters or three chapters per day in one and a half hours.
So during this COVID time, they thought of having a different kind of Bhagavatam class where. So it’s high speed, turbo Bhagavatam, turbo Bhagavatam, yeah, so, but still they’re having good attendance for the Bhagavatam classes and right now, the now the seventh canto is going on. So they had asked me to speak maybe a month or month or two ago on the third canto on the section on this Varahadev pastime.
So I had studied it at that time. And do you have some framework you would like to take or should I suggest something? How we take the discussion? Well, the frame, if we’re talking about frames, I think the frame story of the cursing of Jaya and Vijaya is one principle. Another theme, I think, is the saving of the earth, which is relevant nowadays with climate change and eco disaster and so on.
Yes, Maharaj. There’s a lot to discuss on both themes, you know, because there’s something like predestination and so maybe you could take both one by one, if that’s okay with you. One by one, yes.
So I’ll start with a question that comes to my mind. Currently, I’m writing a book on the Ramayana where I’m analyzing something like a human nature, analyzing human nature based on the Ramayana. So now, so I just wrote an article for Back to Godhead on like, are some people incorrigible? So was Ravana, for example, was he incorrigible? There are so many efforts given to, efforts made to make him see sense, but he didn’t.
Same thing with Duryodhana. So now at one level, we understand that everybody has free will and they can misuse their free will. So if somebody is cursed to be demoniac, then is cursed to be a demon, then does that mean that their sense of agency is taken away because of that? Or does it mean that they just have a sense of, they have that kind of inclination? And that means that they will be pushed to act in that way, but they can counter push if they want.
So a curse from a previous life, how much does it control? Does it control a person’s situations? Does it control a person’s disposition? Does it control other person’s decisions also? So, I mean, it raises some philosophical questions broadly. Well, we could also bring this question, so to say, from the other side. We see a person behaving in some nasty way.
And we wonder what is the cause? And the modern way to look at cause, of course, begins with this life. And then it’s always a question of how much is nature and how much is nurture, right? Yes. And it seems the modern leftist thought goes more and more toward nurture itself.
So it’s like social engineering is said to be the, what is the, I read a very succinct statement about the difference between say the left and the right or capitalism and communism. It says that the idea within communism is that people are born good, society makes them bad. Whereas, you know, in capitalism, the idea is people are born different and society sometimes accentuates their differences.
So, yeah, I think nature nurture is a fundamental issue. Yes, Maharaj. Yes.
So you can say one of the common answers to this question in our literature, especially in the Puranas, is the cause can be traced to a previous life. And in this case, the question of the curse, the idea of the curse is interesting. For one thing, it’s interesting.
The whole notion of cursing is interesting because it suggests the power of speech, what they call speech act. Yeah. Speech act is when if someone says something, it actually makes that statement creates a reality.
And the example is given of the judge on the bench giving a sentence to someone on trial. So the making of that statement determines that person’s life imprisonment. OK, that’s it.
And that comes just from a speech. You can say that’s a kind of speech act. Or on the positive side, the priest tells the couple, I pronounce, at least in the West, I pronounce you man and wife.
So now, boom, they’re married just by that pronunciation. So a curse is something like that. I pronounce you condemned to take birth in the material world, etc.
And so it points to the power of language. And of course, it points to the power of another agent. To affect our lives for someone.
And of course, cursing is one side. The other side is blessing. I bless you that you X, Y or Z. So in the case of Hiranyaksha, Hiranyakashipu, who are Jai and Vijai in their previous life, they are cursed by the four Kumaras to take birth as demons.
And Lord Vishnu comes and Lord Narayana says, oh, thank you. Actually, this is my desire. And why is it the Lord’s desire? Because he always has multiple purposes.
One of them is to have some good wrestling, some good fights. That’s what’s going to be described in some detail in this Varaha Leela. But to your question, that’s the ongoing question, which nobody seems to have a completely comprehensive answer to.
It’s a species of the question of destiny versus free will, isn’t it? Yes, that’s true. So I was just making some notes when you’re typing, when you’re speaking. So I was just thinking that, as I mentioned, the three things, the situations, like if you look at our lives, there are some situations we face, there are some dispositions we have, and there are some decisions we make.
So in the both examples that you gave of speech acts, I had also heard the word performative utterance for that, an utterance which leads to performance. They both, in one sense, create situations. Say, you are sentenced to prison for life or whatever.
So now, at least in the second, first example of judge, it’s primarily the situation that is controlled. Now, we could say in that situation, the convict might associate with other prisoners, that might also affect the disposition. But that act itself is only constraining the situation.
Now, if we consider with respect to marriage, it is a situation, it is more in terms of legally and socially a particular situation is created. And depending on how seriously the couple takes their marriage vows, a certain disposition may also be created at that time. So, now, it seems that disposition depends not so much on the utterance of those words, but it depends on, we could say, prior disposition of the couple itself.
So whether how seriously, how sacred or how serious they consider the marriage vows to be. Then to that extent, the ceremony of marriage will be, the wedding ceremony will be taken that much seriously by them. But it doesn’t seem to directly affect the disposition.
And we could say the decisions, well, the situations do affect our decisions, but it’s more like we could say they affect the range of the decisions. They’re not the specific decision itself. So, in the sense that if somebody is in jail, they can’t go out of the jail.
But what do they do in the jail? They quarrel with others or they learn something. They do some constructive courses and they come out. So that kind of decisions are up to them.
So, actually, yeah, please. Now you finish and then I have an interesting example for prison that I just heard. So I was thinking about when people are cursed.
So there is definitely a dramatic change at the physical level. So now we could place the physical also in the situation, which you can be the circumstance situation also with the body, the soul is in. So with the body, it seems a certain kind of disposition comes with it.
So now here there is a case of Rutrasur who seems to behave just like a demon up to a particular point and then suddenly his devotional tendency awakens. So that is, as far as I have read, I haven’t seen any distinctive explanation for how the devotional tendency suddenly awakens. Maybe it is just he’s confronting death and then that time it happens.
So it does seem that the disposition also is affected to some extent because here senior situation is not the situation alone. It’s also the body. So that also raises some other questions.
But I would like to hear what you want to say about the prison. Then we can move forward. Just a few days ago, discussing with His Holiness Chandramouli Swami, you may know he has been doing a lot of preaching in prisons over the years.
Oh, yes. I have seen some of his books. The Holy Jail and quite inspiring.
Yes, he’s published, I think, two books on the subject. So he told a story of one convict who was sentenced to capital punishment to death for some terrible crime. I don’t know, murdering someone, whatever.
And this person encountered Srila Prabhupada’s books and devotees and they had some meetings and he got into Bhagavad Gita. And the time came for him to, he was on death row. There was no going back.
So it was his day to go to whatever it is, the electric chair. And the guards reported that they had never experienced anything like this. He went cheerfully.
Oh, amazing. He went completely ready to go. It was like, yes, this is what I deserve and this is going to purify me.
And the next life can only be better. That was his mood. So that’s an interesting, profound transformation, you can say.
These are going to purify me. That’s a big, that’s a remarkable thought to have. Yeah, okay.
So as for Ravana, yeah, as I remember, in some version, it said that he had 10 heads and nine of them were trying to advise him to give up this idea of taking Sita, but he wouldn’t listen. So even with all the good advice, so that’s a strong case for disposition being unchangeable. But then there’s his brother, Vibhishana.
And as we know, Vibhishana surrenders to Lord Rama. He gives up Ravana. He sees that Ravana is a hopeless, hopeless case.
And he then goes over and surrenders to Rama. So it seems like from that perspective, the Ramayana is saying there’s both possibilities. Of course, Vibhishana, he didn’t have any curse on his head, which pushed him to behave in a particular way.
So although he did have a, he did have a demoniac birth. That means there is a, there is birth in a demoniac species. And so it seems that doesn’t necessarily by itself create a demoniac disposition completely.
Right, because Prahlad is the example of, he’s the counterexample to disposition being completely determined for the demonic, so-called demonic species. Oh, yes, he’s a sterling example. I think Krishna also in the Gita says that Prahladana, Prahladana must be Daityanam, that among the Daityas, I am Prahlad.
He is one of the opulences. But again, the 16th chapter, when Krishna talks about the divine and the demoniac natures, he uses the, after listing the qualities, he says, Abhijato Si Bharato or Abhijato Si Pandava. That the divine and the godly and the ungodly people are born with these particular natures.
So these are the qualities they are born with. So now if you talk about qualities, then they are associated with disposition. So again, we could say probably disposition also is a complex thing and there could be some inclination in that direction, but it might not be that forceful an inclination.
It could be, but it seems Vibhishan, he didn’t have any demoniac inclination at all. Prahlad also, it is, if there was any tension in their lives, it was not the inner tension between their dark side and their virtues and their vice. The tension was there, whether they could go against the demoniac situation, they were in the demonic relations that they had.
So they were almost like complete exceptions, we could say. So in like almost a society where everybody is dark and they were white. Yeah, now I’m just thinking about Hiranyaksha to bring it back to our avatar of the day.
Hiranyaksha was just reading before he meets Varaha, he sort of bursts out after being born and he’s already in this fighting mood, looking for trouble. But it mentions in one verse that he wanted to fight to please his brother. He wanted to please Hiranyakshipu and therefore he was fighting.
And I was thinking, this Hiranyaksha, how evil or non-evil is he? He’s a troublemaker, he doesn’t care about anyone in certain ways, but is he really evil? I wonder. He seems to be very straightforward for one thing. Straightforward in the sense, I think when he goes to Varuna also, he says that I want somebody to fight with me, I want to show my prowess.
I want to fight somebody, you’re a good person to fight, let’s fight. This is an interesting point, maybe about 10 or 12 years ago, in one of our temples, we had got some, it was a part of the fundraising initiative. So, they had got some professional team of drama makers, drama doers and they had done the fundraising, they had done the drama of Krishna Leela, Krishna birth, for the first time they had done that.
And so, there they had depicted Kamsa as performing lots of atrocities on the common citizens. So, stealing away the land from people, capturing women and abusing them and doing all kinds of things. Now, I had not read that in the Bhagavatam or for that matter in the Acharya’s commentaries also.
So, in general, the characters we see, the evil characters in our scriptures, are they evil because they are particularly against the godly and God or are they evil because they are doing terrible things in society? Now, some of them are definitely doing disruptive things. Ravana abducted many women, he destroyed kingdoms and he killed and ate sages and his associates were doing that. So, with Ravana, that is true.
But with Duryodhana, there is not much description that Duryodhana was actually exploitative of the citizens. There are some scholars… No, it’s more the opposite. It’s more the opposite.
It’s said that Duryodhana was a very good leader, isn’t it? Well, he definitely had some amount of leadership skills. In fact, I saw one book, the whole book was about the leadership qualities of Duryodhana. It was a little counterintuitive.
But he was able to keep his 99 brothers with him. He was able to form a big alliance with many kings. That’s how he got a big army.
But then you could also make the point that maybe he still wanted to… Because the Pandavas were still alive, so he didn’t manifest his demoniac nature because he wanted the citizens to be with him. And when there will be no challenge to his power, then his evil nature might have come out more. But that’s hypothetical.
I was just going to say that’s very hypothetical. So, some characters, we do know they are evil. But Hiranyaksha… So, in that sense, the 7th canto, if you see Hiranyakashipu, he actually makes a plan to destroy the fire sacrifices and to disrupt society in general, which would cause the devatas to also get disturbed.
So, he seems to be much more of a social disruptor than Hiranyaksha. Although it is mentioned that Hiranyaksha says at one point, we will kill Vishnu. And by killing Vishnu, all of the brahminical, all the devas, all the brahmins, all whatever they do will be finished.
So, he does seem to have a similar plan as Hiranyakashipu. That’s true. So, one doesn’t really get a sense of why.
The only thing I saw with Hiranyaksha, his only motivation seems to be to please his brother. Why does he so much want to please his brother? We don’t get any background to that. And there is also, just to go back a little bit, there is the curse which was there, and also because of which they were born.
And it’s also said that Diti and Kashyapuni united at a wrong time. That also affected their disposition. So, multiple factors do affect it.
So, we don’t know what all would affect where. There’s a sense of convergence of influences, isn’t there? The different things come together. Oh, a convergence, that’s a good question.
It starts with the four Kumaras wanting to come to Vaikuntha, the obstruction, the curse, then there’s Diti. And so, these things kind of converge to make this event. And that leads into another consideration of this story that eventually comes to the appearance of Varaha, and that is Svayambhuva Manu.
So, I would say Svayambhuva and his wife, what is her name? Atri? No, that’s Prithu’s wife. Yeah, Chaturupa. So, I was thinking, in a sense, Svayambhuva and Chaturupa are sort of opposites of Diti and Kashyapa.
They are, well, Svayambhuva is also opposite of the four Kumaras, and Prabhupada mentions that in a purport. He mentions how the four Kumaras were disobedient to Lord Brahma, for good reason, but they were disobedient. And Svayambhuva is obedient.
Brahma wants him to procreate, and he’s very submissive to that will of Brahma. And he just has this one doubt, he expresses in a very humble way, um, where should I, where should I propagate this species? The earth is, there’s no earth. Where, what am I supposed, where am I supposed to go? Oh, that’s true.
So, anyway, the, but the point was that Diti, in her passion, insists that let us unite now, because now is my desire. And Svayambhuva is, Manu is, in a sense, the opposite of that. He is, he is self-restrained, and he wants to first have the right situation for, for the propagation.
So, this then leads to the appearance of Varaha. That’s interesting. And Svayambhuva, Manu, if we consider, from there’s Devahuti, and Devahuti and Kardam also perform austerities.
And then there’s the appearance of Kapila over there. Yeah, it’s almost opposite trajectories. Yes.
So, you know, when you mentioned the point of convergence, so I think that’s, that is the level of understanding we can get. Specifically, which factors cause how much? I don’t think we could ever put a, put a percentage on or a figure on that. Calculations.
Yeah. I, I was asked one question. Apparently, there’s some book on karma and destiny, which is quite popular in India, which says that something like they put a mathematical figure, 25% of your, who you are is determined by your past lives, 25% is determined by your upbringing, 25% is your association and 25% is your free will.
So, it seems very convenient, but I don’t think things are that simple. So, Krishna says, gahana karma nogati. So, but we could say all those are factors.
So, Hiranyaksha, now, when he wants to please his brother also, that, that itself is indicative that, that whom we want to please also indicates, not only it influences, but also indicates our disposition. But does he want to please him simply because he’s his brother? Or does he want to please him because they both share the similar values? And currently, he happens to be in that position of authority, where as a younger brother, he has, he offers him some deference and some respect. So, that- But you can also say, putting aside question of disposition and so on, that this suggests that there is at least a grain of virtue to desire to please anyone in a general sense is not a bad thing, it’s a good thing.
It’s, it’s a very human, human, we may say, thing or desire to please another. And we can also look at it in terms of filial piety, if you like. I forget now, which one is the older and which is the younger? I think Hiranyaksha comes, is born second or first? Yeah, it’s conceived first, but he was born second.
So, Hiranyaksha is the older brother. Okay. So, from that perspective, Hiranyaksha is being a pious younger, younger brother.
Yes. And that’s the idea of filial piety is, of course, they’re very strongly in Asian traditions generally, including China, especially China. There’s five different relationships in classical Chinese for, and they’re all hierarchical.
So, one of them is, I think, senior, older brother, younger brother. And the younger brother’s position is always to satisfy the older brother, or at least to respect. So, from that perspective, you can say, you know, Hiranyaksha is not a bad guy.
Oh, okay. So, it’s filial piety. It’s two words or it’s one word, filial piety, or both are there? Filial, one word, F-I-L-I-A-L, filial.
Yeah, filial piety. Okay. I was, I had not heard of that word.
I thought it’s filial piety. Something like, okay, filial piety, makes sense. So, in one sense, the example on the positive side of this is, say, Lakshman and Ram or Bharat and Ram.
Devotion to virtue leading to like manifestation of virtue among the younger brothers also. So, on the other hand, from that perspective, you can also understand for Vibhishan to go against Ravan was quite a demanding, quite a bold and difficult thing to do. Indeed.
Yeah. So, you think in Chinese culture also as an Indian culture, this filial piety is important. I hadn’t heard the term, but that concept is very much there.
Yeah, in Confucian tradition, especially, it’s considered foundational. Society is founded upon this principle of, I forget the Chinese term for it, but it’s this hierarchical recognition. The king and the servant, it’s very patriarchal also.
The husband and the wife, the father and the son. I think the father-son relationship is considered to be the core, and then from that come the other hierarchical relations. Oh, okay.
But there’s some subtleties to the Chinese tradition. So, for example, the son is allowed to, in fact, expected to give good advice to the parents if he or she feels that the parents are doing something which is not good, which is not for their benefit, whatever, then he should advise them. But he can never go against ultimately whatever the parents decide.
So, it’s a very strong idea in that tradition. Oh, okay. So, in one sense, the Bhagavatam is a bit subversive, where it goes against all conventional hierarchies, where Prahlad gives advice and not just only advice, but also goes against Hiranyakashipu.
Indeed, but of course, the way Prahlad does it is, he never overtly defies his father, does he? When his father asks him questions, he just answers honestly. Yeah, that’s true. In a sense, Prahlad’s example is a good example of how to differ without being disrespectful.
Yeah. You know, best of king, best of demons. Yes.
You’re the best. The best of the demons. So, filial broadly refers to broadly family and one’s clan, isn’t it? So, maybe something parallel to it could be what the Bhagavata calls about as Kula Dharma.
And Arjuna is concerned, how can I, if I kill my elders, if I kill my relatives, the Kula Dharma will be destroyed. So, I don’t know, at least in the Hindu context, I have not seen the word filial piety used, but Kula Dharma is quite a prominent consideration in the Mahabharata. Yeah.
Yes, Maharaj. So, the point you are making is, we can see virtue even in somebody who is considered to be demoniac. So, Hiranyakashipu had the virtue of being a filial, some amount of filial piety.
Yes. Well, we had last, I guess it’s a year and a half ago now, we had Nrsingha Chaturthi Festival in Germany. And there were several of us giving the morning lecture one after another, including myself and also His Holiness Kadamakananda Swami.
And we got into this sort of spontaneous debate, which became quite entertaining and humorous. But I was trying to defend Hiranyakashipu and say, we have to look at his background, we have to consider and so on. And he also had emotions, feelings, I was making some arguments like that.
And then Kadamakananda Swami said, no, no, no, no, no, I don’t buy it. He said, he was completely demoniac, and therefore he had to be killed. There was nothing nice about him.
So, it became like a courtroom, sort of, we started having like a debate. And from that, I got the idea, which I have yet to pursue. I started to make some notes, but I would like to write a drama.
And the drama would be focused on Hiranyakashipu, and maybe also Hiranyakashipu, after both of them have been killed, and before they take birth again as Ravana and Kumbhakarna. And they are in the court of Yamaraja. And the discussion is, where should they go, or what happened, and where should they go, and what is the just punishment for them, and so on.
And there could be lawyers and some arguing. There can be the priest of the demigods, Brihaspati, and like that. So, a lot of what we read, in one sense, in the Puranas and the epics, Mahabharata, Ramayana, one could say that these are, despite their details, they’re still leaving gaps.
There’s still something not described, something not given full attention. Yes, I think that’s very much there. And that’s what’s left out, it seems to me, what’s left out is left for us to reflect on.
Yes, Maharaj. First of all, this is a beautiful idea to use. We had discussed earlier a podcast about using our imagination in Krishna’s service.
So, it’s a brilliant idea. And there are many narratives of the Ramayana, as well as, and especially of the Mahabharata, which are from the perspective of the characters on the dark side. So, one of the most popular and influential renditions of the Mahabharata, at least in Maharashtra, and also in Mrityunjaya, which tells everything from Karna’s perspective, and how life was always unfair to him.
And it creates a lot of empathy for those characters. So, I haven’t seen till now, somebody who is faithful to a tradition, a devotee, or an exponent of dharma writing on these, then we could concede good where there is good. But at the same time, point out where there is bad.
There is one tendency to paint these characters entirely black. And the other tendency would be to exempt them from all wrong. I would say, you know, it is so many things unfair happened to them.
That’s why they did this. Prahlad doesn’t seem to do either. He seems to withhold all judgment on his father, isn’t it? He just wants the best for him.
So, he requests Nrsingadev afterward. Of course, now we’re getting into the next avatar. If we continue this thread of discussion, there’s a lot to discuss at that time also.
And maybe we could look at specific verses and discuss at that time. So, if you consider the convergence explanation, so we could say there are two negative influences for his demoniac nature. One is the curse from the Kumaras.
And the second is his birth at the inauspicious time. And there is, we could say, I don’t know if you want to use it. His conception.
Yes, conception. Their conception at an inauspicious time. Yeah, not birth, conception, right? And then there is, we could say, a positive factor which leads to his negative behavior, that is filial piety.
So, sometimes loyalty can be misdirected. And so, we appreciate the loyalty, but at the same time, we recognize that the effect of that loyalty has not been, is not necessarily healthy. So, it’s interesting when I read that past time that it’s, he challenges Varuna and after he says, oh, you will, I’m not fit for fighting with you, but you will soon find someone who will destroy your pride.
And so, Varuna is the lord of the gods. So, he’s the lord of the waters. And it’s interesting, the avatar who manifests over there manifests in water.
So, it does seem that the very area where he is, he’s claiming this is my turf or he’s trying to dominate the overlord of that particular area. The supreme lord appears over there. He says, okay, you like this water business, so I will appear this way.
Why not? That’s true. Beautiful. And then I think he was the one, oh, an amphibious beast.
I was just going to say, but the word that is translated as amphibious beast, which comes again a few verses later, is vanagochara, which of course means one who goes in the forest or one whose terrain, one whose place is the forest. It comes again, I noted it somewhere. But it’s just interesting that he’s referred to that Prabhupada.
I don’t know if it was Prabhupada or if it was Pradyumna Prabhu in the word for word translation. That’s one of those things. But it kind of fits because he’s in and out of the water, so to say.
Yeah. So, it seems as boars, they don’t constantly live in the water. So, no.
We have boars, right? I’m living right now in a place which is directly adjacent to a fairly large forest and we see boar tracks all the time in the forest. There are boars here. Oh, okay.
So, I just look, I just found that verse. Yes, it’s jahasa chaaho vanagocharom rugaha. So, yes, vanagocharom.
So, when he, when they encounter each other in water and most of the fights seems to happen in the water or at least by the water. Hmm. It’s not exactly clear, I think.
Yeah, there’s not much description of, say, water splashing and everything. They meet in the water, maybe they come out because it’s more a description of, of the dodging the blows and like that, the weapons being hurled and weapons being caught. There’s no description of the water getting disrupted.
Weapons being lost. Yeah, that’s true. So, probably they came out of the water, they met each other in the water.
So, you know, here we had discussed a theme. If I can go to the next theme, or you want to add something on this? Yes. No, let’s go ahead.
Yeah. About the earth and protecting the earth. So, here there is this whole idea of the literal and the metaphorical and somewhere in between the reality.
So, yes, one of your favorite topics. I don’t know if it’s my favorite, but I think for a rational, if you have to observe the Leela from a rational perspective, that does come up. So, yes, I was currently, I was currently studying the 5th Kanto cosmology and the Bhagavatam doesn’t say that, at least it doesn’t use the literal word that Rahu and Ketu, for example, they devour or they eat sun and moon at the time of eclipse.
It just says that they obscure it or cover the influence depending on how Sanskrit is translated. So, in this case, the earth, it is, there is a very literal or physical description that the earth had fallen down into the ocean and the earth was lifted up and it was balancing in the snout. So, and is also some sort of description that apparently Hiranyaksha had disrupted the balance of the earth by taking a lot of gold from it.
He was, he had Hiranyaksha, he had an eye for gold. That’s one reading I had that he was very greedy for gold. That’s nice.
Eye for gold. Okay. Yes.
Yeah. So, because of that, the earth’s balance had got disrupted and the earth had fallen down into the ocean. So, to what extent is this to be taken literally? Because if the earth had fallen, then had everybody on the earth been killed at that time, they had gone under the ocean or just for a few moments? Yes, I mean to say how literal.
I don’t feel like it’s necessary to think in too literal terms here because it is hard to imagine what would that mean. But at the same time, from Bhaktivinoda Thakur, we get the sense with Krishna’s pastimes of killing the demons that they are allegorical and at the same time they’re no less actual. We don’t have to have one or the other.
There can be both. Yes. So, in any case, it’s also interesting that Hiranyaksha at one point says, there’s a lot of verbal exchange.
There’s a lot of insulting that goes on between Hiranyaksha and Varaha as a sort of, I think, somewhat formulaic. What’s the word I want? It’s kind of a ritual. Before you have a fight, first you insult each other.
Yeah. And by insulting, you get the other person angry and the other person gets you angry and then you can really have a good fight. So, one of Hiranyaksha’s insults, as I remember, is, this is our territory, the earth belongs to us, us meaning the demons.
We are in charge of the lower area, the lower spheres, realm. This earth is entrusted to us, the inhabitants of the lower regions and you cannot take it from my presence and not be heard by me. Yes.
That’s very interesting. And on the side of insults saying, oh, an amphibious beast. So, that’s interesting.
It’s a kind of insult. Prabhupada also used the word rascal. Is there a word for rascal? Oh, I don’t know.
You mean, is he translating some Sanskrit words? I don’t know. You rascal, you have been nourished by our enemies to kill us. I don’t think there’s a, okay, mudha it is there.
I know very well one time, you know how many times Prabhupada would say fools and rascals? Yes. And one time he said something about fools and rascals and then he paused and he said, fool means rascal. Okay.
So, in a sense, at least the way the word. So, there’s no excuse, you know, you may say, oh, I’m just foolish. No, you’re a rascal.
So, if you do consider, at least in today’s usage, the word fool seems to be a little, not as strong as rascal, unless, of course, rascal is used in a more of a mischievous sense. Oh, you’re such a rascal. He’s such a rascal.
But so, I heard that in Prabhupada’s time, when Prabhupada learned his English in Scottish Church College in 1920, rascal at that time was not that stronger term. It was more like an affectionate form of reproach. Well, I think it is today as well.
Oh, it’s today. I think it is. Yeah, I don’t know.
You don’t hear the word rascal in public discourse. Yeah, that is true. You don’t hear the word rascal.
So, it’s a little bit quaint. Quaint, okay, yeah. There was a comedy series on television when I was a kid.
I think it was from before I was a kid called something, The Little Rascals. It was about three boys who would always get into trouble, you know, and some humorous thing was happening. Oh, okay.
So, I just look at this. It says rascals are mischievous, but their intentions are to have fun rather than to be cruel. A clown is a rascal, but a robber is not a rascal.
A robber is a criminal. Okay, it seems even now that the same thing is true. Yeah, so there is this problem for Swayambhuva, Manu, that there is no place.
And one very broad thing we may want to think about with the Bhagavatam is the problem of creation. Lord Brahma has a lot of trouble doing his job, which is creating the world, creating the universe. And there are always these reversals.
Hmm. And one of the reversals is this. And of course, that’s the function.
One of the functions of the avatars in general is to solve such problems. Okay. To fix things so that the creation and its purpose can go on in its proper way.
So dharma can be practiced. So there’s no question of practicing dharma because there’s no place to do it. And Swayambhuva, Manu, is very polite in his presenting this problem to Lord Brahma.
And then Lord Brahma, what does Lord Brahma do? He thinks about it. Hmm, what to do? Hmm. And there’s no sense given that Lord Brahma, because his body is constituted of buddhi, isn’t it? He is the embodiment of intelligence.
So he can think of something to do. But he doesn’t seem to exactly think of what to do. Rather, the Lord just appears.
But where does he appear? He appears in a very strange place. He appears through the nostril of Lord Brahma. Now, here I have to confess, I thought of an interesting connection to the four kamaras as they’re attempting to enter Vaikuntha.
As we know, there’s a famous verse, when Lord Narayana comes, as soon as the four kamaras see Lord Narayana, what happens? So, antargata svavivarena, entering into their nostrils, through their own nostrils, is the aroma of the tulsi mixed with sandal at the lotus feet of the Lord. That entry into their nostrils is their experience. That’s their first powerful experience of the Lord, which has the result of sankshobham.
It’s transformative, it agitates for change. Sankshobham, aksharajusham api. Although attached to impersonal Brahman.
So, this is their conversion story. And it all happens because of their nostrils. Of course, they were attempting to enter Vaikuntha and they were obstructed, so they could not enter, but the Lord entered them.
And now we have Lord Brahma thinking what to do, what to do. And what happens? The Lord emerges from his nostril. Oh, that’s a striking correlation.
I think it’s another example of divine humor also. Like, who would have thought to appear in that way? Only the Lord would think to appear out of the nostrils of Lord Brahma. And, you know, he’s having some fun.
That’s amazing. So, this aspect of the Lord appearing through the nostrils, it’s not exactly described in this section, is it? In this section, it is just Varahadev is already there. Now, the description of his appearance goes back to, I think, 9th or 10th chapter, I think.
Chapter 13. Oh, before the chapter about the Kumaras going up. Okay, it’s a nested story.
It’s the appearance of Varahadev, yeah, right. That’s the name of the chapter itself. Okay, yeah.
So, I was wondering whether there are any living beings that reproduce through the nose. I don’t think there’s anything like that. No, I don’t think so.
And to me, the point is that whereas the only thing that comes out of our nose is something not very nice. You know, we blow our nose and get rid of it. But when it comes to Lord Brahma and the Lord, then it’s a different story.
Yeah. The Lord himself comes. But he’s coming in this very strange form.
Of a wild pig. And I like to sort of joke with devotees that if we’re presenting ourselves to people who are not familiar with that tradition, it might be difficult for them to appreciate that you start out by saying, yes, we worship God as a wild pig. Oh, God.
This is even more wild. People talk about, what is the word for zoomorphism? They talk about a monkey God, Hanuman. But a boar God would be a little too, stretching things a bit too much.
That’s a bit too much, yeah. A tortoise God, boar God, fish God. Hmm.
But in cultural conceptions, is a boar considered positive in any culture? Like pigs are considered a little bit unclean and at least in the Vedic culture. I don’t know how it is in other cultures. Actually, pigs can be very clean.
But they wallow in the mud because it keeps them cool. And of course, because they will eat practically anything, therefore, they’re generally considered unclean. But from one source I read, the boar, I think this is in India, is given credit for showing humanity how to plow.
Because one thing that boars do is they dig up because they eat roots. In fact, we experienced that right here where I’m staying. One night they came and they dug up one small area just outside our main courtyard.
But in one night, the whole field of, I don’t know, say 200 square meters, maybe more, was completely dug up by the boars. 200 square meters. Amazing.
Oh, okay. So then that also, we could say, correlates with Varaha Dev’s attraction for the earth. Varaha is often considered to be the consort of the earth or earth is considered to be his consort either way.
Consort, yes, yes. And of course, Varaha is… Yeah, there’s also a description that he was sniffing the earth. So which is also related with that, burrowing the earth.
He was what? Nursing? Sniffing, sniffing the earth. Oh, sniffing, yeah. Yes.
You were saying something, Maharaj? Just that Varaha Dev is… There are Varaha temples in India and Varaha deities. And in Mathura, there are two Varaha deities. I’ve always wanted to go and see them, but I never managed.
But these are said to be, at least one of them, established by Shatrughna, the brother of Rama. Oh, okay. I had no idea about this.
This is in Mathura, the temple? There’s, I think, two temples. And years ago, one devotee who had done a bit of research said that there’s a very ancient community of Brahmins in Mathura, and their Ishta Devata is Varaha Dev. Oh, okay.
And this got me wondering, now comes… I have to always do some speculating. So here’s my speculation about our Gaudiya Vaishnava book of ritual is the Haribhakti Vilasa. And there are a lot of mysteries about this book.
I spent some time studying it, and there are some fairly strange things about it. But one thing I came to suspect is that Gopal Bhatt Goswami and Sanatana Goswami compiled this book for one purpose, was to show the local Brahmins, these Mathura Brahmins, that we can be just as involved in ritual as you are. We can do as much ritual, if not more than you do.
Okay. Because they could very well have been considered by the local Brahmins. Oh, who are these upstarts coming from where? Coming from Bengal.
Oh, come on, there’s no brahminical culture in Bengal. Of course, Gopal Bhatt came from South India. Anyway, that’s my speculation.
But about deities of Varaha, there’s also Varaha Nrsimha at Singachalam on the east coast, south of Puri. That deity is combined Varaha and Nrsimha. Yes, that’s beautiful.
And a sort of explanation of that is, that’s right on the coast. And as I remember the story they tell, I visited there decades ago. The story is that this is the place where the minions of Hiranyakashipu attempted to kill Prahlad by throwing him over the cliff into the sea.
And he was saved, they say, by the Lord in this form, the combined form of Varaha and Nrsimha. Oh, yeah, I heard the stories of Varaha and Nrsimha. Again, now we could associate Varaha with some kind of water association, because when he was thrown into the water, he was saved over there.
Yes, fascinating. Also, I just came across this a few days ago, because I wanted to be thinking about Varaha, Dev. Maybe you can look this up on the internet.
There’s a very large stone Varaha murti in a place called Eran. If you go to Wikipedia… Yes. …and search Eran, E-R-A-N, it’s a town in central India.
And if you scroll down, I think you’ll see an image. I’m just coming to that. This very, very large image of Varaha.
Amazing. I think I shared it just now. Can you see? Yes.
The mandapa of the temple is Vishnu. No, if you scroll further down… This is a Varaha temple, okay. Oh.
Yes, there. Colossal. Eran, colossal boar statue.
How big is it? Now, quite big. I don’t know how big, but I think… It’s huge, yes. Yeah.
So, there’s some kind of tradition of worshiping Varaha, Dev, which goes back to very ancient times. Now, notice also what looks like inscriptions on the side of the murti. Well, one thing also, you can see Bhudevi is there in the form of a female figure.
Oh, okay. And she’s kind of holding on, it looks like, to his tusk or something. Mm-hmm.
And then there are, you can sort of see lines, parallel horizontal lines along the body. And I don’t know if they’re inscriptions or what, but the point is, if you remember, in the appearance of Varaha, Dev, in the Bhagavatam, he is worshiped by the sages and the demigods as being the personification of the yajna. Mm-hmm.
And it describes in the Bhagavatam, it identifies several features of Varaha, Dev, of his physical form as being different aspects, different items or elements of the sacrifice. Oh, okay. I thought, is that a specific description for Varaha, Dev, or is it a generic description for any manifestation of the divine? No, no, it’s Varaha, Dev.
Oh, okay. I don’t know if I can find now. I can look for it.
This is in the prayers Brahmaji is offering. Yeah, I found it. It’s in chapter 13.
Yeah, I found it. I’m just sharing it, Maharaj. Okay.
Rishaya Uchu. So, it’s a 34th verse onwards. It’s there on the shared screen also, in case you want to see that, Maharaj.
Yes, it’s not just one verse. It goes on from there. Yeah, it’s three, four, five verses.
Your semen is sacrificed called Soma Yajna. Oh, yeah. So, it’s all about sacrifice.
So, there’s this association of Varaha with Vedic sacrifice. That’s interesting. And it would be interesting to do more research to see what is that association.
It’s like he is a kind of Virat Rupa of the sacrifice. Yeah. But where is that all trailing back to? I don’t know if that’s something.
It could be something in the Brahmanas, the Shatapata Brahmana or something. Yes, I had, when I had read this, I had thought of Virat Rupa, but I did not think of this idea that Virat Rupa of Yajna or something like that. That’s very striking.
Now, I once did a study of the various prayers or descriptions of the universal form in the Bhagavatam, a comparative study. But I didn’t find anything about sacrifice to that this extent, like going over several verses. There’s a general description that he is a Yajna Bhoka or Yajna Purush.
Like that, generic descriptions are there, but this is very specific. Yes. And there’s another thing about Varaha Dev’s appearance.
He appears first from the nostril, and he’s described as being the size of a thumb. Oh, that’s similar to, almost similar to Matsya. Matsya is very small and then he becomes large.
And then he expands. So, we have, I think we’re going to have altogether three expanding avatars. There’s Matsya, there’s Varaha, and there’s going to be also Vamana.
Vamana, yes. Now, I don’t know, at least there are not many Matsya temples, isn’t it? Varaha temples to be more, seem to be more than Matsya. Yes.
Just look at one, there seems to be Matsya Narayan temple in Chennai. It seems to be a recent temple built by, at least like a recent temple. It doesn’t seem to be a traditional temple.
So, if we consider the avatars, which all are worshipped regularly. We don’t even have a Matsya appearance day, isn’t it? From what I know. That’s celebrated amongst the fish.
Among the fish. Okay, that’s beautiful. That’s true.
So, we have Varaha Mahadwarasi. Yeah, Varaha Mahadwarasi. We have that big festival.
Maharaj is going back to your point of sacrifice. This also seems to be a part of the subversive thread that normally pigs or boars would be kept away from a sacrifice. That they would consider to be contaminating sacrifice.
But here, the lord in the form of a pig or of a boar is considered to be the object of sacrifice, the personification of the object of sacrifice. So, which is remarkable. It is.
And if you think about object of sacrifice, that sounds like, okay, so boars would be animals that are victims of sacrifice. But as I understand, Vedic sacrifice, when they do sacrifice animal, it’s always a domestic animal, not a wild animal. Interesting.
Yeah, it may be a horse. Okay. Horse, cow, goat.
And what else? There’s five. One is Purusha, human sacrifice. There’s a big debate about that.
Was that ever done or it’s just, you know, token mentioned? There is no description of dogs being sacrificed also. All the domestic animals are there. Dog sacrifice? I don’t know.
I never heard of that. Dogs, as I understand in traditional Indian culture, they are liminal animals. They’re not exactly domesticated and they’re not wild.
They’re kind of in between. Oh, okay. They live around humans and of course, they benefit from humans.
But they’re not exactly in, of course, now in modern, following the West, they’ve become domesticated and we have people with dogs in their apartments and so on. Yeah. But the more traditional condition of dogs in India is what we see mainly in the villages, right? The dogs of the village, they’re just.
That’s true. And it’s interesting, somebody was mentioning to me that there’s not much mention of cats in the scriptures, like cats and dogs are popular pets now. So, dogs are lauded at least for their loyalty, although obedience, but cats are not mentioned much that way.
Isn’t it? No, I don’t know about pet cats. That’s interesting. Right.
But I think he has a pet dog, no? Yeah, I also remember reading about that in Gopal Champu. He does seem to have pet. Yes.
That’s interesting. So, now going to the, I mean, talking about the boar, would you like to talk about the theme of, say, saving the earth? A little bit? In relation to ecology, environmental concerns, I just think it’s nice to reflect on how the Lord saves the earth, because we may feel a sense of helplessness with respect to, I feel a sense sometimes in my lower moments, that what we’re doing as a species to the earth planet is so disastrous that there’s only one way that this can be fixed, and that is if the Lord himself comes. And of course, we understand the Lord has come and he has given the process for saving the earth, namely, Sankirtana.
And that is therefore what we do, and Lord Chaitanya is therefore who we worship first and foremost. But I just find it inspiring to also think of Rahadev as coming in this very special and surprising form and expanding himself and then effortlessly lifting the earth from its condition of, we can say, degradation and danger. That’s beautiful.
So, we could focus on the broad principle rather than the specifics of the earth going into the water and being lifted up. So, the broad principle is that the earth is so dear to the Lord that he rescued it. And so, the Lord can do the same thing again.
Yes, yes, and he’s full of surprises. So, we can hope for something wonderful to happen. And of course, he is saving the earth, who is Bhumi, who is also, if I’m not mistaken, the same as Varahi or the consort of Varahadev.
So, he’s very much interested to save, just as Ram saves Sita, so Varaha saves Bhumi. Hmm. And that takes us back to the fight with Hiranyaksha because that’s mentioned in one verse explicitly that the fight was as if they were fighting over the princess.
I forget how it’s put. They’re fighting over the, it’s two men fighting over a woman, the sort of primordial reason that men fight is competition for a woman. And Hiranyaksha thinks he’s somehow going to enjoy Bhumi.
That’s fascinating. Yeah, I remember reading that also now. It’s a very striking point because if we put aside the, we could say the morphological forms, then there are very, even the characters, even the demons seem to have a lot of human emotions.
So, whether it’s the devatas or the asuras, they also face human challenges. Their forms might be different. They might have certain abilities which we humans don’t have.
But broadly speaking, one way we can relate with them is because many of the emotions that they have or the challenges they face, they are quite human challenges. I think you earlier also made that point about humanizing, humanizing even the characters on the dark side to understand them better. Yeah.
So, when the Lord fights here, it’s, so it’s interesting, Bhumi here is not described as talking anything or expressing anything. It’s Brahmaji. Yeah, Brahmaji who is expressing, he’s urging the Lord, appreciating the Lord, urging him to please finish the demon, please.
And then it seems that Varahadev casts the affection filled glance at Brahma. So, Bhumi seems to be quite, in this case, we could say passive. And there’s no discussion of the Bhumi being personified over here.
Like, say, in the first canto, where she and Dharma, the bull and the cow come together. There is no description like that here. And so, is there any explicit description about the Bhumi being a circle or a sphere? Being a globe.
Globe, yeah. I’m assuming that Bhumi is a globe, which kind of goes against the flat earth people, but what to do? No, it’s mentioned that Varaha goes down, he picks up the earth from the ocean and he sets it, isn’t it? He sets it to float on the Garbhodaka ocean, isn’t it? Yeah, he keeps it in such a way that it floats. Somehow, it seems to infuse his potency or something in that, by which he floats.
Now, I suppose you could say, well, it could be a flat object, but I find that difficult to imagine. I think of it more as a globe. That’s true, that’s true.
So, when the Lord receives or rather rescues and protects the earth and he fights the demon, so we could, in a general sense, say that this is like an inspiration for us to also, on behalf of the Lord, fight against the forces that are disrupting the earth or disturbing the earth’s balance. So, there is this verse in the Bhagavatam where it says that Swair Dorabhir Aschana Dharmam, at the force Krishna, he countered the forces of dharma sometimes by his own arms and sometimes by the arms of his devotees. So, Swair Dorabhir and I think and Prabhupada also in one purport, he gives a very fascinating explanation, that verse is there in the Gita, that everywhere are my hands and legs, everywhere my eyes and ears and nose.
So, he says that actually, one explanation is that it’s a super soul, another explanation is that there are countless devotees and representatives of the Lord and through them the Lord is present everywhere. So, in that sense, we could also act as representatives of the Lord to try to counter the disruptive influences. And here is the challenge to do it in the right mood, to be in a spirit of Prahlad who absolutely refused to get involved in political thinking of friends and enemies.
I was meditating on this today because I come in this life from the US, from America and they’re having this election and it’s a real sort of fingernail biting situation. And everyone is very emotional about it. And I was just thinking this morning, on one side, I’m also feeling kind of emotional, but on the other, I’m feeling that after all, we’re aspiring to be like Prahlad Maharaj who refused.
That was his special quality that he refused to be like his father who was thinking only in terms of politics of friends and enemies. Prahlad wouldn’t have anything to do with it. No friends, no enemies, completely neutral.
So, saving the earth and being arms to save the earth as agents, as instruments of the Lord is certainly a good thing. Now, how to do that without immediately getting tied up in some politics in which we see only friends and enemies? That’s one of the reasons, you know, Prabhupada also said that I’ll be maybe, I’ll be the guru of the king. I won’t be the king.
To some extent, if you become, if you get enmeshed in politics, then avoiding that kind of vision would be very difficult. So, yeah, regarding the environment, it’s a big subject and I will just mention a couple of things. Somehow this issue has become, at one level, environmental consciousness is good.
It’s very good. It indicates, like earlier you said, a desire to take care of something beyond oneself, a desire to please or desire to take care. So, that’s the expansion of consciousness.
But in some ways, it has become almost like another religion where some people who are out to save the environment, they can also become a bit extremists. This is what we have to do and anybody who is not concerned about the environment, it’s almost like you are a condemned sinful person. How can you be so, so, so selfish, so unconcerned, whatever.
So, in a sense, like for some people, environmental consciousness may be the way to spiritual consciousness because it is expanding the consciousness. But sometimes and for some people, environmental consciousness may become like a substitute for spiritual consciousness. Shrinking, yeah.
Oh, yeah, shrinking, yeah. So, in a sense, if we focus on spiritualizing consciousness, then environmental awareness will come in a way that will be actually healthy. Otherwise, it can become another form of another ism, as Prabhupada says in the Aishwarya Puja.
Yeah, and I think the essential principle to keep it spiritual is again what Prabhupada how many times would say that Krishna is the proprietor of everything. So, if we can help people to understand that point, there is a proprietor. It’s not us.
Because the general, when the eco-saviors come who are not Christian conscious, their thinking is, it’s mundane because they’re thinking we have to save the earth for us. Yeah. If we don’t save it for us, then we are lost.
But the Krishna conscious perspective is, it is Bhumi, and Bhumi is to be cared for as a mother. And just for Krishna, we do, because she belongs to Krishna. And then Krishna will provide for us as a result.
True. And, you know, in this sense, if from that perspective, say that the Lord is reciprocating with Brahma, and quite often it is that the earth and she’s in trouble, she goes to devatas, and they all go to Brahma. So, Brahma often seems, Brahmaji often seems to be the medium between, say, the rest of the universe and the Lord who is transcendental to the universe.
So, there are, if we consider Brahma to be broadly like a devotee, and in this past time, the earth is playing more of a passive role. So, it is the devotees, they, it is that, as devotees, we try to either take care of the earth or pray to the Lord on behalf of the earth. And then through that, it is we also reciprocate with the Lord.
So, we are not just reciprocating with the environment, but we are also reciprocating with the Lord. So, environmental consciousness actually becomes included within devotional reciprocations with the Lord. Yeah.
Yes, that’s nice. And on the other side, this brings me to a verse that I found striking in Canto 3, Chapter 19, the killing of the demon here on Yaksha, verse 24. There’s a, there’s a humor here also.
When the demon saw his magic forces dispelled, he once again came into the presence of the personality of Godhead Kesava, and full of rage, tried to embrace him within his arms to crush him. But to his great amazement, he found the Lord standing outside the circle of his arms. That’s beautiful.
This comic situation, we can picture it, of this big demon. He wants to embrace the Lord to crush him. And where is he? Oh, he’s over there.
But also, his wanting to praise him, I’m sorry, his wanting to embrace him from the Bhagavad sort of absolute perspective. It means he’s attracted to the Lord. He wants to serve the Lord.
He wants to approach the Lord. He wants to embrace the Lord. Even he wants to, you know, it’s like Putana wants to poison the Lord, but she’s giving something.
I was thinking of this in terms of what you were saying about the environmentalists, let’s say the fanatic who is not God conscious, but only thinking we humans are going to save the planet. In a sense, they’re not far away from Hiranyaksha. They will embrace the Lord to crush him, and in the process, they miss him altogether.
That’s beautiful. They try to catch, but they don’t catch him at all. And in one sense, it’s like the idea that the Lord can, the Ushopanishad says that Manaso Jayam, that he cannot be reached by the mind.
He’s situated at one place, but he cannot be reached even by those who move at the speed of the mind. Even Munipungavananda, Brahmasamhita also says that. I think there is also the story of Kalayavan in the 10th canto, where Krishna is just walking casually.
He’s chasing him, but he’s not able to reach Krishna. But it never struck me that he wanted, so he wanted to embrace so that he could crush, but he completely missed out. Interesting, quite extraordinary.
I think the Gopis also pray that, not the Gopis, the Nagapatnis pray that, you know, how is it that you get, that this Kali has got the privilege of having his, having your lotus feet on his head. So, this is a privilege that hardly anyone gets. So, he almost gets the privilege of embracing the Lord over here.
He tries, but he misses. He misses, yeah. With respect to this humor, what you said, there are so many places which I never thought of it from a humorous perspective.
It is funny if you try to visualize it. So, it’s almost like the fight goes on for quite some time, and then when he has to end it, he ends it very casually. All these weapons being used.
He just kind of slaps him on the chin or under the ear or something. Yeah, under the ear. And then he’s finished.
And for that matter, I would say that the whole, the way this fight is described, the general feel I get from it is, it’s a kind of ritual fight. You don’t really get a sense of, there’s some really heavy thing going on here. I mean, it’s a fight to the death, and yet, you already know in advance that Krishna’s, that Varahandeva is going to win.
The demigods don’t know that, and they’re very worried, but their worry strikes me as also pointing to their ignorance, which points to their, you know, sort of foolishness in a way. They don’t know what’s going, they don’t understand what’s going on. Hmm.
It’s described, I think, even in the 10th canto, that, is it Aghasura, when Krishna is fighting with Aghasura, the deities are peeking out from the clouds, but they’re also going behind the clouds. They’re afraid that if Aghasura wins, then Aghasura will be angry with them for cheering his opponent. Yeah.
So, in one sense, the scriptures narrated from the perspective of the omniscient narrator. So, we know more than the characters in the epics also, in one sense. So, we know that he’s going to win.
I’m just now writing about this one article on the subject of reading the Bhagavatam as what I’m calling religious reading, which involves repeated reading. And in repeated reading, we already know what happens. Okay.
Repeated reading or hearing, sort of including altogether. We already know what’s going to happen, but we want to hear it again. And you could ask, why do we want to hear it again, if we already know? We want to hear it again because, well, two things.
One is it’s a reenactment. There’s a sense that it’s happening again, or it’s still happening. It’s ongoing.
And we want to hear it again because we know that there’s something about it that even we’ve heard before, now we’re going to notice something that we didn’t notice before. Some aspect of what happens will come fresh. Yeah, that’s true.
Actually, I was reading, at one level, this applies even to some books which are considered like classic literature. Say, some novels like of Shakespeare or Jane Austen or whatever, people read them again and again and again. And they get, I don’t know what reenactment, it’s like, in great books, you can find so many layers of wisdom.
But in books about Krishna, it’s not just layers of wisdom. We also discover manifestations of Krishna over there, or nuances about how to relate with Krishna. So, you could say information is just like a preliminary aspect in that reading.
There is so much more than information. Yes. So, I was reading a little bit about the word myth.
Although the word myth, in myth and mythology, we have a negative connotation to it. We don’t say that it’s not mythology, but the way it is used in the academy, it’s not so much that it is unreal, that it is more that it has some foundational value for some culture, for some tradition, often some, when they use the word, say Hindu mythology or something like that, it’s the idea that these stories are like mental homes for a particular tradition or a particular culture or civilization. And they keep going back to that again and again.
So, in one sense, we could also say that how much somebody is connected to a culture or tradition could be seen not just by what kind of dress they wear or what kind of food they eat, but how much the culture’s foundational stories have become like their mental home. And I think the way we are churning, this also helps us to reside more and more in Krishna Leela. Yes.
The idea that myth is false, it goes back to Plato. Plato was questioning, what are all these stories, these crazy stories from Homer and Hesiod? But then Plato, he didn’t say therefore down with myth, he created his own new myths. You know, the story of the cave, the men in the cave and so on.
Anyway. Yeah, that’s true. So, there’s a lot of discussion about what is myth.
First of all, how does it function in relation to society? It’s often discussed in relation to ritual. There’s a whole debate about which comes first, ritual or myth. And then others say, well, why do you want to say one or the other? They’re both, they’re inseparable.
But there’s a sense in which myth is touching a deeper reality. Yes. And one way I like to think of it is that if we imagine a wheel of a cart, as it’s rolling along the ground, it’s touching the ground at very limited space as it moves.
And so, we have the transcendent realm, which is represented by this wheel, which is turning and it’s touching this world in different points of time and space. And we perceive those points of time and space. And Prabhupada would often insist, this is history, it’s not myth, it’s history.
So, okay, yes, it’s history and that there is a real connection with historical time. And at the same time, it’s transcendental, it’s beyond this world, it’s beyond our very limited perceptions. And so, it’s not only history, it’s super history.
This is a beautiful metaphor. So, if I understand right, when you’re talking about the wheel, that is not the samsara chakra. This is you’re talking about the wheel of transcendence.
And where the wheel is touching the earth, that is material existence. So, some aspect of this, some aspect of say, the paramartha, the spiritual world, that comes in contact with the earth at particular times. Time and place.
Time and place. Yeah, beautiful. It’s just an analogy.
Analogies always have their limits, but it’s helpful. It’s beautiful. So, we accept that there is a historical aspect.
And at the same time, we also talk that we assert that there is a trans-historical aspect to it. And yes, exactly. So, then we could also say that when Krishna manifests at a particular time in history or geography, then his manifestation will probably take on some of the characteristics of that particular place and time.
Yes. If Lord Chaitanya is manifesting in Bengal, he’s not going to speak English at that time. He’s going to speak Bengali.
So, like language and so many other things like that. But still, what he’s giving is transcendental, beyond whatever is the reason. Yes.
So, I would like to suggest, I should end soon, but I would like to read one more verse if you want to find it. I think it’s a nice verse to end on. It’s Canto 3, Chapter 19, verse 31.
Okay. Sri Maitreya continued, After thus killing the most formidable demon Hiranyaksha, the Supreme Lord Hari, the origin of the boar species, returned to his own abode, where there is always an uninterrupted festival. The Lord was praised by all the demigods headed by Brahma.
So, that uninterrupted festival, Akhandita Utsavam, of the spiritual realm, that is this wheel that I spoke of. Within that wheel, that festival is going on. Akhandita Utsavam, that’s beautiful.
Brahma Samhita says, every walk is a dance, every talk is a song. So, Akhandita Utsavam. Yes.
I think Prabhupada also said that if he had the resources, every day we could have a festival. So, Akhandita Utsavam, beautiful, very nice verse. So, it’s a conclusion to the past time, but it’s also a very sweet meditation on the Lord and his nature and his abode.
A lot is there in this verse. Yes. Thank you.
It’s beautiful, very nice note to conclude it on Maharaj. Should I try to summarize quickly in a couple of minutes, in a few minutes? That’s your expertise, please. I don’t know.
We did discuss a lot of things today. So, we broadly started this discussion by talking about, Varahadev and I discussed two main things. One is the role of the past in shaping one’s life and one’s choices.
The second we discussed about Bhumidevi and role of protecting the earth. So, in the first part, we started by talking about speech acts, where the act itself leads to some action, like a judge or a priest pronouncing marriage. And so, similarly, we have curses and benedictions, both acting in that way.
And then we discussed that, what all is affected by the curse? Is it just the situations, the dispositions, the decisions? So, to some extent, it’s multiple things, multiple levels the effect might be there. And it’s very difficult to make it discrete. But if you look at it from this life’s perspective, and what made somebody behave in a particular way, then we could say there’s a convergence of factors from this life as well as previous life.
And we talked about Hiranyak. Why was Hiranyak so violent? So, there is no description that he was specifically evil against people in general. But he wanted to aggrandize, increase the power of his brother and please him.
So, that filial piety was a nice concept you mentioned. That we could say that is a virtue within him. But it was misdirected because his brother was a demon.
And there are negative influences coming for him from two levels. One is that Jai Vijay had been cursed as per the plan of the Lord so that he could have some maushal lila, some fighting. And then there’s also conception of the two brothers happening at an auspicious time because of Deity’s insistence.
So, all that contributed to his arrogant or violent, bellicose disposition. And then he seems to, as you said, very straightforward. He challenges Varuna and in the water body itself Boar appears.
And then we talked a little bit about the subversive conception of Divinity as Varaha. So, he is worshipped, in fact he is considered as the personification of sacrifice. Although normally Boars would not be, Boars would seem to be contaminating sacrifice or in some cultures, not necessarily in the Indian culture, that Boars might be sacrificed.
There are normally it’s cows or buffalos or some other animals like goats and other horses that are sacrificed. And there in that connection, we discussed more about this whole concept of how, normally you said domestic animals are what are sacrificed and dogs and cats. We had interesting to see dogs are liminal, cats don’t seem to be mentioned so much.
And the Boar, although the word amphibious beast is used, it’s more like one animal, one Gochar, one wandering in the forest. And in that connection, discuss about Varaha, when he manifests, he has his affection for the earth, can also be associated with the fact that Boars dig into the earth and they find edible food over there. So, his, now the earth itself is passive here and so when the Lord Varaha reciprocates with Brahmaji while rescuing the earth and then we discussed a little bit about the principle of rescuing the earth or protecting the earth.
Today we can feel helpless sometimes seeing the sheer magnitude of forces that are disrupting the environment. But just as the Lord intervened to protect, so we can also be hopeful that the Lord can intervene. At the same time, we can also act as the arms of the Lord for doing our part.
And then when we are acting as the arms of the Lord, we need to be careful to have the mentality of Prahalad that we don’t see friends and enemies. Now, even the environmental issue has become very politicalized in the US presidential elections. So, we need to avoid that friend and enemy mentality.
You also mentioned about Prahalad being an exception, Prahalad and Vibhishan being exceptions. Although born in a demonic family, they’re not demoniac. And he was, although he stood firm to his principles, he was never directly disrespectful to his father.
So, then toward the, we also discussed some cultural aspects. We went to, we saw in Wikipedia, some beautiful pictures of Varaha Dev, Varaha Narasimha temple and other, this giant colossal Varaha temple in Elam, as we mentioned. So, it seems that there is Bhoomidevi with him as his consort.
And toward the end, we discussed about this, when Bhoomidevi is to be protected, we don’t want environmentalism to become like another religion. Rather, we want if we are practicing Krishna consciousness, spiritually conscious, then naturally we will have environmental consciousness. And our consciousness in taking care of the environment is not that it is for us to live and enjoy.
It is, he’s the Lord’s consort and she’s our mother. And that’s why we need to care for her as a part of our service to the Lord. And we also discussed a few verses.
So, there’s some places there is humor, where he tries to hug the Lord, embrace the Lord to crush him, but the Lord disappears. And then this concluding verse, which you mentioned about how he is the original boar, he comes to the earth and he goes back and there’s a Khandi Totsavam, there is an eternal festival going on in the spiritual world. And in that connection, you mentioned about the idea of myth.
So, myth is, it is like a, there is something that is historical, but something much more than history. If you take the metaphor of the veal, the veal is the veal of the spiritual world where eternal festivals are happening. And sometimes those festivities, sometimes that divine Leela, it touches the ground, it touches the earth and it’s manifest for us to relish.
So, we accept that the myths are historic, what is called as myths, we consider Leelas are historical, but they are also trans-historical. And if they become our mental homes, then we can become absorbed in Krishna and that can be actually a very sweet way of being spiritually, devotionally conscious. So, thank you very much, Maharaj.
Very good. A lot of things. It’s very relishable to have your Sangha and to have so much stimulation of thought.
Thank you. My pleasure. So, next time up is Nrsingadev.
Yes, we will need to have multiple sessions, but we’ll see how it goes. Thank you very much Maharaj for your association and your sharing your wide ranging as well as deep going nectary. You go deep into Shastra as well as you like a broad knowledge about various things.
It’s wonderful. Thank you very much. We are churning,