While Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu was touring East Bengal, His wife, Lakṣmīdevī, was bitten by a serpent or by the serpent of separation, and thus she left this world. When the Lord returned home, He saw that His mother was overwhelmed with grief because of Lakṣmīdevī’s death. Therefore at her request He later married His second wife, Viṣṇupriyā-devī. This chapter also describes the Lord's argument with Keśava Kāśmīrī, the celebrated scholar, and the Lord's criticism of his prayer glorifying mother Ganges. In this prayer the Lord found five kinds of literary ornaments and five kinds of literary faults, thus defeating the paṇḍita. Later the Kāśmīrī Paṇḍita, who was known to have been victorious all over the country, submitted himself to the goddess of learning, and by her order he met Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu on the morning of the next day and surrendered unto Him.
Fault (CC)
Sri Caitanya-caritamrta
CC Adi-lila
Simply hearing submissively will free one's heart from all the faults of ignorance, and thus one will achieve deep love for Kṛṣṇa. This is the path of peace.
Therefore we find that the joy of the gopīs nourishes the joy of Lord Kṛṣṇa. For that reason the fault of lust is not present in their love.
Instead of being envious that Kṛṣṇa consciousness is spreading all over the world by the grace of Lord Caitanya, those who are jealous should be happy, as indicated here by the words parama ullāsa. But because they are kaniṣṭha-adhikārīs or prākṛta-bhaktas (materialistic devotees who are not advanced in spiritual knowledge), they are envious instead of happy, and they try to find faults in the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement. Yet Śrīmat Prabodhānanda Sarasvatī writes in his Caitanya-candrāmṛta that when influenced by Lord Caitanya's Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement, materialists become averse to talking about their wives and children, supposedly learned scholars give up their tedious studies of Vedic literature, yogīs give up their impractical practices of mystic yoga, ascetics give up their austere activities of penance and austerity, and sannyāsīs give up their study of Sāṅkhya philosophy. Thus they are all attracted by the bhakti-yoga practices of Lord Caitanya and cannot relish a mellow superior to that of Kṛṣṇa consciousness.
In the Twelfth Canto (3.51) it is said:
- kaler doṣa-nidhe rājann asti hy eko mahān guṇaḥ
- kīrtanād eva kṛṣṇasya mukta-saṅgaḥ paraṁ vrajet
- (SB 12.3.51)
In the Age of Kali there are many faults, for people are subjected to many miserable conditions, yet in this age there is one great benediction—simply by chanting the Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra one can be freed from all material contamination and thus be elevated to the spiritual world.
"Dear Sir, there is no objection to Your being a great devotee of Lord Kṛṣṇa. Everyone is satisfied with this. But why do You avoid discussion on the Vedānta-sūtra? What is the fault in it?"
A neophyte devotee has very little taste for hearing from the authorities. Such a neophyte devotee makes a show of hearing from the professional man to satisfy his senses. This sort of hearing and chanting has spoiled the whole thing, so one should be very careful about the faulty process. The holy messages of Godhead, as inculcated in the Bhagavad-gītā or in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, are undoubtedly transcendental subjects, but even though they are so, such transcendental matters are not to be received from the professional man, who spoils them as the serpent spoils milk simply by the touch of his tongue.
“Śaṅkarācārya is not at fault, for it is under the order of the Supreme Personality of Godhead that he has covered the real purport of the Vedas.
In the Brahma-sūtra, Second Chapter, the first aphorism is as follows: tad-ananyatvam ārambhaṇa-śabdādibhyaḥ. Commenting on this sūtra in his Śārīraka-bhāṣya, Śaṅkarācārya has introduced the statement vācārambhaṇaṁ vikāro nāmadheyam from the Chāndogya Upaniṣad (6.1.4) to try to prove that acceptance of the transformation of the energy of the Supreme Lord is faulty. He has tried to defy this transformation of energy in a misguided way, which will be explained later. Since his conception of God is impersonal, he does not believe that the entire cosmic manifestation is a transformation of the energies of the Lord, for as soon as one accepts the various energies of the Absolute Truth, one must immediately accept the Absolute Truth to be personal, not impersonal. A person can create many things by the transformation of his energy.
Śrīpāda Śaṅkarācārya has tried to mislead the readers of the Vedānta-sūtra by misinterpreting the words ānanda-mayo ’bhyāsāt, and he has even tried to find fault with Vyāsadeva. All the aphorisms of the Vedānta-sūtra need not be examined here, however, since we intend to present the Vedānta-sūtra in a separate volume.
All the demigods are servants of Kṛṣṇa; they are not equal with Kṛṣṇa. Therefore even if one goes to a temple of the pañcopāsanā, as mentioned above, one should not accept the deities as they are accepted by the impersonalists. All of them are to be accepted as personal demigods, but they all serve the order of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Śaṅkarācārya, for example, is understood to be an incarnation of Lord Śiva, as described in the Padma Purāṇa. He propagated the Māyāvāda philosophy under the order of the Supreme Lord. We have already discussed this point in text 114 of this chapter: tāṅra doṣa nāhi, teṅho ājñā-kārī dāsa. "Śaṅkarācārya is not at fault, for he has thus covered the real purport of the Vedas under the order of the Supreme Personality of Godhead." Although Lord Śiva, in the form of a brāhmaṇa (Śaṅkarācārya), preached the false philosophy of Māyāvāda, Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu nevertheless said that since he did it on the order of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, there was no fault on his part (tāṅra doṣa nāhi).
Transcendental literature that strictly follows the Vedic principles and the conclusion of the Purāṇas and pāñcarātrika-vidhi can be written only by a pure devotee. It is not possible for a common man to write books on bhakti, for his writings will not be effective. He may be a very great scholar and may be expert in presenting literature in flowery language, but this is not at all helpful in understanding transcendental literature. Even if transcendental literature is written in faulty language, it is acceptable if it is written by a devotee, whereas so-called transcendental literature written by a mundane scholar, even if it is a very highly polished literary presentation, cannot be accepted. The secret in a devotee's writing is that when he writes about the pastimes of the Lord, the Lord helps him; he does not write alone.
He always accepted the good qualities of Vaiṣṇavas and never found fault in them. He engaged his heart and soul only to satisfy the Vaiṣṇavas.
It is a qualification of a Vaiṣṇava that he is adoṣa-darśī: he never sees others' faults. Of course, every human being has both good qualities and faults. Therefore it is said, saj-janā guṇam icchanti doṣam icchanti pāmarāḥ: everyone has a combination of faults and glories. But a Vaiṣṇava, a sober man, accepts only a man's glories and not his faults, for flies seek sores whereas honeybees seek honey. Haridāsa Paṇḍita never found fault with a Vaiṣṇava but considered only his good qualities.
This verse cited by Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu applies to human beings, not to animals. As indicated in the previous verse by the words manuṣya-janma, these injunctions are for human beings. Unfortunately, human beings, although they have the bodies of men, are becoming less than animals in their behavior. This is the fault of modern education. Modern educators do not know the aim of human life; they are simply concerned with how to develop the economic condition of their countries or of human society. This is also necessary; the Vedic civilization considers all aspects of human life, including dharma (religion), artha (economic development), kāma (sense gratification) and mokṣa (liberation). But humanity's first concern should be religion. To be religious, one must abide by the orders of God, but unfortunately people in this age have rejected religion, and they are busy in economic development. Therefore they will adopt any means to get money. For economic development one does not need to get money by hook or by crook; one needs only sufficient money to maintain his body and soul. However, because modern economic development is going on with no religious background, people have become lusty, greedy and mad after money. They are simply developing the qualities of rajas (passion) and tamas (ignorance), neglecting the other quality of nature, sattva (goodness), and the brahminical qualifications. Therefore the entire society is in chaos.
Raghunātha Bhaṭṭa Gosvāmī supplied all the ornaments of the Govinda Deity. He never talked of nonsense or worldly matters but always engaged in hearing about Kṛṣṇa twenty-four hours a day. He never cared to hear blasphemy of a Vaiṣṇava. Even when there were points to be criticized, he used to say that since all the Vaiṣṇavas were engaged in the service of the Lord, he did not mind their faults. Later Raghunātha Bhaṭṭa Gosvāmī lived by Rādhā-kuṇḍa in a small cottage. In the Gaura-gaṇoddeśa-dīpikā (185) it is said that Raghunātha Bhaṭṭa Gosvāmī was formerly the gopī named Rāga-mañjarī.
It was the desire of Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu that His cult be spread all over the world. Therefore there is a great necessity for many, many disciples of the branches of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu's disciplic succession. His cult should be spread not only in a few villages, or in Bengal, or in India, but all over the world. It is very regrettable that complacent so-called devotees criticize the members of the International Society for Krishna Consciousness for accepting sannyāsa and spreading the cult of Lord Caitanya all over the world. It is not our business to criticize anyone, but because they try to find fault with this movement, the real truth must be stated. Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu wanted devotees all over the world, and Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura and Śrīla Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura confirmed this. It is in pursuit of their will that the ISKCON movement is spreading all over the world. Genuine devotees of Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu must take pride in the spread of the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement instead of viciously criticizing its propaganda work.
Crying, the child inquired from His mother, “Why are you angry? You have already given Me dirt to eat. What is My fault?
Then Śacīmātā would take her son on her lap and pacify Him, and the Lord would be very much ashamed, admitting His faults.
There is a nice description of the faults of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu in His childhood in the Caitanya-bhāgavata, Ādi-khaṇḍa, Chapter Three, where it is said that as a child the Lord used to steal all kinds of eatables from the houses of neighboring friends. In some houses He would steal milk and drink it, and in others He would steal and eat prepared rice. Sometimes He would break cooking pots. If there were nothing to eat but there were small babies, the Lord would tease the babies and make them cry. Sometimes a neighbor would complain to Śacīmātā, "My child is very small, but your child puts water in his ears and makes him cry."
Vṛndāvana dāsa Ṭhākura has previously elaborately described this. That which is clear need not be scrutinized for good qualities and faults.
Satisfied by the statement of Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu, the brāhmaṇa (Keśava Kāśmīrī) explained the quoted verse. Then the Lord said, "Now kindly explain the special qualities and faults in the verse."
Not only did Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu pick out this one among the one hundred verses and remember it although the brāhmaṇa had recited them like the blowing wind, but He also analyzed its qualities and faults. Not only did He hear the verse, but He immediately made a critical study of it.
The brāhmaṇa replied, "There is not a tinge of fault in that verse. Rather, it has the good qualities of similes and alliteration."
In the last line of the verse quoted by Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, the letter bha is repeated many times, as in the words bhavānī, bhartur, vibhavati and adbhuta. Such repetition is called anuprāsa, or alliteration. The words lakṣmīr iva and viṣṇoś caraṇa-kamalotpatti are instances of upamā-alaṅkāra, for they exhibit metaphorical beauty. The Ganges is water, and Lakṣmī is the goddess of fortune. Since water and a person are not actually similar, the comparison is metaphorical.
The Lord said, “My dear sir, I may say something to you if you will not become angry. Can you explain the faults in this verse?
"There is no doubt that your poetry is full of ingenuity, and certainly it has satisfied the Supreme Lord. Yet if we scrutinizingly consider it we can find both good qualities and faults."
Taking a humble position, Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu said, “Because I am not on your level, I have asked you to teach Me by explaining the faults and good qualities in your poetry.
"Certainly I have not studied the art of literary embellishments. But I have heard about it from higher circles, and thus I can review this verse and find in it many faults and many good qualities."
The poet said, "All right, let me see what good qualities and faults You have found."
The Lord replied, “Let Me speak, and please hear Me without becoming angry.
“My dear sir, in this verse there are five faults and five literary ornaments. I shall state them one after another. Kindly hear Me and then give your judgment.
In the verse beginning with mahattvaṁ gaṅgāyāḥ there are five literary ornaments and five examples of faulty composition. There are two examples of the fault called avimṛṣṭa-vidheyāṁśa and one example each of the faults viruddha-mati, punar-ukti and bhagna-krama.
Vimṛṣṭa means "clean," and vidheyāṁśa means "predicate." It is a general rule of composition to establish a subject first and then give its predicate. For example, according to Sanskrit grammar if one says, "This man is learned," his composition is in order. But if one says, "Learned is this man," the composition is not in order. Such a flaw is called avimṛṣṭa-vidheyāṁśa-doṣa, or the fault of unclean composition. The subject matter to be known of the verse is the glorification of the Ganges, and therefore the word idam ("this"), or what is known, should have been placed before instead of after the glorification. The subject matter already known should be placed before the unknown so that its meaning will not be misconstrued.
The second instance of avimṛṣṭa-vidheyāṁśa-doṣa occurs in the words dvitīya-śrī-lakṣmīr iva. In this composition the word dvitīya ("second") is vidheya, or unknown. Placing the unknown first to make the compound word dvitīya-śrī-lakṣmīr is another fault. The words dvitīya-śrī-lakṣmīr iva were intended to compare the Ganges to the goddess of fortune, but because of this fault the meaning of the compound word was bewildering.
The third fault is that of viruddha-mati, or contradictory conception, in the words bhavānī-bhartuḥ. The word bhavānī refers to the wife of Bhava, Lord Śiva. But since Bhavānī is already known as the wife of Lord Śiva, to add the word bhartā, "husband," thus forming a compound meaning "the husband of the wife of Lord Śiva," is contradictory, for thus it appears as if the wife of Lord Śiva had another husband.
The fourth fault is punar-ukti, or redundancy, which occurs when the verb vibhavati ("flourishes"), which should have ended the composition, is further qualified by the unnecessary adjective adbhuta-guṇā ("endowed with wonderful qualities"). The fifth fault is bhagna-krama, which means "broken order." In the first, third and fourth lines there is anuprāsa, or alliteration, created by the sounds ta, ra and bha, but in the second line there is no such anuprāsa, and therefore the order is broken.
“In this verse the fault of avimṛṣṭa-vidheyāṁśa occurs twice, and the faults of viruddha-mati, bhagna-krama and punar-ātta occur once each.
“Because you have placed the known subject at the end and that which is unknown at the beginning, the composition is faulty, and the meaning of the words has become doubtful.
“Not only is there the fault avimṛṣṭa-vidheyāṁśa, but there is also another fault, which I shall point out to you. Kindly hear Me with great attention.
“Here is another great fault. You have arranged the word "bhavānī-bhartṛ" to your great satisfaction, but this betrays the fault of contradiction.
“It is contradictory to hear that Lord Śiva's wife has another husband. The use of such words in literature creates the fault called viruddha-mati-kṛt.
“The statement by the word "vibhavati" ("flourishes") is complete. Qualifying it with the adjective "adbhuta-guṇā" ("wonderful qualities") creates the fault of redundancy.
“There is extraordinary alliteration in three lines of the verse, but in one line there is no such alliteration. This is the fault of deviation.
“Although there are five literary ornaments decorating this verse, the entire verse has been spoiled by these five most faulty presentations.
“If there are ten literary ornaments in a verse but even one faulty expression, the entire verse is nullified.
“"As one"s body, although well-decorated with ornaments, is made unfortunate by even one spot of white leprosy, so an entire poem is made useless by a fault, despite alliteration, similes and metaphors.’
“I have simply discussed the five gross faults and five literary embellishments of this verse, but if we consider it in fine detail we will find unlimited faults.
“Even in the poetic compositions of such great poets as Bhavabhūti, Jayadeva and Kālidāsa there are many examples of faults.
In Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (1.5.11) it is said:
- tad-vāg-visargo janatāgha-viplavo
- yasmin prati-ślokam abaddhavaty api
- nāmāny anantasya yaśo ’ṅkitāni yat
- śṛṇvanti gāyanti gṛṇanti sādhavaḥ
"In explaining the glories of the Lord, inexperienced men may compose poetry with many faults, but because it contains glorification of the Lord, great personalities read it, hear it and chant it." Despite its minute literary discrepancies, one must study poetry on the merit of its subject matter. According to Vaiṣṇava philosophy, any literature that glorifies the Lord, whether properly written or not, is first class. There need be no other considerations. The poetic compositions of Bhavabhūti, or Śrīkaṇṭha, include Mālatī-mādhava, Uttara-carita, Vīra-carita and many similar Sanskrit dramas.
Yamunākarṣaṇa-līlā is the pastime of attracting the Yamunā. One day, Śrī Baladeva wanted the Yamunā River to come before Him, and when the river Yamunā refused, He took His plow, wanting to dig a canal so that the Yamunā would be obliged to come there. Since Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu is the original form of Baladeva, in His ecstasy He asked everyone to bring honey. In this way, all the devotees standing there saw the yamunākarṣaṇa-līlā. In this līlā, Baladeva was accompanied by His girlfriends. After drinking a honey beverage called Vāruṇī, He wanted to jump into the Yamunā and swim with the girls. It is stated in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (10.65.25–30, 33) that Lord Baladeva asked the Yamunā to come near, and when the river disobeyed the order of the Lord, He became angry and thus wanted to snatch her near to Him with His plow. The Yamunā, however, very much afraid of Lord Balarāma's anger, immediately came and surrendered unto Him, praying to the Lord, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and admitting her fault. She was then excused. This is the sum and substance of the yamunākarṣaṇa-līlā.
In the Vedic scriptures there are concessions for meat-eaters. It is said that if one wants to eat meat, he should kill a goat before the goddess Kālī and then eat its meat. Meat-eaters are not allowed to purchase meat or flesh from a market or slaughterhouse. There are no sanctions for maintaining regular slaughterhouses to satisfy the tongues of meat-eaters. As far as cow-killing is concerned, it is completely forbidden. Since the cow is considered a mother, how could the Vedas allow cow-killing? Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu pointed out that the Kazi's statement was faulty. In the Bhagavad-gītā (18.44) there is a clear injunction that cows should be protected: kṛṣi-gorakṣya-vāṇijyaṁ vaiśya-karma svabhāva-jam. "The duty of vaiśyas is to produce agricultural products, trade and give protection to cows." Therefore it is a false statement that the Vedic scriptures contain injunctions permitting cow-killing.
CC Madhya-lila
“Jagāi and Mādhāi had but one fault—they were addicted to sinful activity. However, volumes of sinful activity can be burned to ashes simply by a dim reflection of the chanting of Your holy name.
“The nectar from the lips of Lord Kṛṣṇa and His transcendental qualities and characteristics surpass the taste of the essence of all nectar, and there is no fault in tasting such nectar. If one does not taste it, he should die immediately after birth, and his tongue is to be considered no better than the tongue of a frog.
“My dear Kṛṣṇa, Your mind is always restless. You cannot remain in one place, but You are not at fault for this. You are actually the ocean of mercy, the friend of My heart. Therefore I have no reason to be angry with You.
"It is not your fault; it is the verdict of the scriptures. You cannot understand the Supreme Personality of Godhead simply by scholarship."
“The false arguments and philosophical word jugglery of your disciples are not faults of theirs. They have simply received the benediction of Māyāvāda philosophy.
"Out of paternal affection for Me, he wants to protect Me and see that I follow the regulative principles of a sannyāsī. What fault is there in this?"
“Śaṅkarācārya's theory states that the Absolute Truth is transformed. By accepting this theory, the Māyāvādī philosophers denigrate Śrīla Vyāsadeva by accusing him of error. They thus find fault in the Vedānta-sūtra and interpret it to try to establish the theory of illusion.
Thus Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu criticized Śaṅkarācārya's Śārīraka-bhāṣya as imaginary, and He pointed out hundreds of faults in it. To defend Śaṅkarācārya, however, Sārvabhauma Bhaṭṭācārya presented unlimited opposition.
“Actually there is no fault on the part of Śaṅkarācārya. He simply carried out the order of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. He had to imagine some kind of interpretation, and therefore he presented a kind of Vedic literature that is full of atheism.
In this Age of Kali, hari-kīrtana is very, very important. The importance of chanting the holy name of the Lord is stated in the following verses from Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (12.3.51–52):
- kaler doṣa-nidhe rājann asti hy eko mahān guṇaḥ
- kīrtanād eva kṛṣṇasya mukta-saṅgaḥ paraṁ vrajet
- kṛte yad dhyāyato viṣṇuṁ tretāyāṁ yajato makhaiḥ
- dvāpare paricaryāyāṁ kalau tad dhari-kīrtanāt
"The most important factor in this Age of Kali, which is an ocean of faults, is that one can be free from all contamination and become eligible to enter the kingdom of God simply by chanting the Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra. The self-realization that was achieved in the Satya millennium by meditation, in the Tretā millennium by the performance of different sacrifices, and in the Dvāpara millennium by worship of Lord Kṛṣṇa can be achieved in the Age of Kali simply by chanting the holy names, Hare Kṛṣṇa."
Actually the Lord was controlled by the good qualities of all His devotees. On the pretense of attributing faults, He tasted all these qualities.
All the accusations made by Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu against His beloved devotees actually showed His great appreciation of their intense love for Him. Yet He mentioned these faults one after another as if He were offended by their intense affection. The personal associates of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu sometimes behaved contrary to regulative principles out of intense love for the Lord, and because of their love Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu Himself sometimes violated the regulative principles of a sannyāsī. In the eyes of the public, such violations are not good, but Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu was so controlled by His devotees' love that He was obliged to break some of the rules. Although accusing them, Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu was indirectly indicating that He was very satisfied with their behavior in pure love of Godhead. Therefore in verse 27 He mentions that His devotees and associates place more importance on love of Kṛṣṇa than on social etiquette. There are many instances of devotional service rendered by previous ācāryas who did not care about social behavior when intensely absorbed in love for Kṛṣṇa. Unfortunately, as long as we are within this material world, we must observe social customs to avoid criticism by the general populace. This is Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu's desire.
Therefore, to prevent them from accompanying Him and becoming unhappy, Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu declared their good qualities to be faults.
The Lord wanted to tour all the places of pilgrimage alone and strictly observe the duties of the renounced order.
Rāmānanda Rāya continued, “"Occupational duties are described in the religious scriptures. If one analyzes them, he can fully understand their qualities and faults and then give them up completely to render service unto the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Such a person is considered a first-class man."
The analysis of different types of love of Godhead has been made by expert ācāryas who know all about devotional service on the transcendental platform. Unfortunately, inexperienced and unauthorized persons in the mundane world, not understanding the transcendental position of pure love, try to find some material fault in the transcendental process. This is simply impudence on the part of spiritually inexperienced people. Such faultfinding is symptomatic of unfortunate mundane wranglers.
When the gopīs sometimes saw Kṛṣṇa in the form of Nārāyaṇa, they were not very much attracted to Him. The gopīs never addressed Kṛṣṇa as Rukmiṇī-ramaṇa. Kṛṣṇa's devotees in Vṛndāvana address Him as Rādhāramaṇa, Nandanandana and Yaśodānandana, but not as Vasudeva-nandana or Devakī-nandana. Although according to the material conception Nārāyaṇa, Rukmiṇī-ramaṇa and Kṛṣṇa are one and the same, in the spiritual world one cannot use the name Rukmiṇī-ramaṇa or Nārāyaṇa in place of the name Kṛṣṇa. If one does so out of a poor fund of knowledge, his mellow with the Lord becomes spiritually faulty and is called rasābhāsa, an overlapping of transcendental mellows. The advanced devotee who has actually realized the transcendental features of the Lord will not commit the mistake of creating a rasābhāsa situation by using one name for another. Because of the influence of Kali-yuga, there is much rasābhāsa in the name of extravagance and liberal-mindedness. Such fanaticism is not very much appreciated by pure devotees.
In the conjugal pastimes of Kṛṣṇa, Kṛṣṇa is the hero (nāyaka), and Rādhikā is the heroine (nāyikā). The first business of the gopīs is to chant the glories of both the hero and the heroine. Their second business is to gradually create a situation in which the hero may be attracted to the heroine and vice versa. Their third business is to induce each of Them to approach the other. Their fourth business is to surrender unto Kṛṣṇa, the fifth is to create a jovial atmosphere, the sixth to give Them assurance to enjoy Their pastimes, the seventh to dress and decorate both hero and heroine, the eighth to show expertise in expressing Their desires, the ninth to conceal the faults of the heroine, the tenth to cheat their respective husbands and relatives, the eleventh to educate, the twelfth to enable the hero and heroine to meet at the proper time, the thirteenth to fan the hero and heroine, the fourteenth to sometimes reproach the hero and heroine, the fifteenth to set conversations in motion, and the sixteenth to protect the heroine by various means.
The word apavitra anna refers to food that is unacceptable for a Vaiṣṇava. In other words, a Vaiṣṇava cannot accept any food offered by an avaiṣṇava in the name of mahā-prasādam. This should be a principle for all Vaiṣṇavas. When asked, "What is the behavior of a Vaiṣṇava?" Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu replied, "A Vaiṣṇava must avoid the company of an avaiṣṇava (asat)." The word asat refers to an avaiṣṇava, that is, one who is not a Vaiṣṇava. Asat-saṅga-tyāga,—ei vaiṣṇava-ācāra (CC Madhya 22.87). A Vaiṣṇava must be very strict in this respect and should not at all cooperate with an avaiṣṇava. If an avaiṣṇava offers food in the name of mahā-prasādam, it should not be accepted. Such food cannot be prasādam because an avaiṣṇava cannot offer anything to the Lord. Sometimes preachers in the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement have to accept food in a home where the householder is an avaiṣṇava; however, if this food is offered to the Deity, it can be taken. Ordinary food cooked by an avaiṣṇava should not be accepted by a Vaiṣṇava. Even if an avaiṣṇava cooks food without fault, he cannot offer it to Lord Viṣṇu, and it cannot be accepted as mahā-prasādam.
Veṅkaṭa Bhaṭṭa further explained, "Mother Lakṣmī, the goddess of fortune, is also an enjoyer of transcendental bliss; therefore if she wanted to enjoy herself with Kṛṣṇa, what fault is there? Why are You joking so about this?"
Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu replied, “I know that there is no fault on the part of the goddess of fortune, but still she could not enter into the rāsa dance. We hear this from the revealed scriptures.
“"Occupational duties are described in the religious scriptures. If one analyzes them, he can fully understand their qualities and faults and then give them up completely to render service unto the Supreme Personality of Godhead. A person who does so is considered a first-class man."
The same principles can be applied to demoniac persons, even though they be in the sampradāya of Lord Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu. Without receiving the Lord's special power, one cannot preach His glories all over the world. Even though one may celebrate himself as a learned follower of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, and even though one may attempt to preach the holy name of the Lord all over the world, if he is not favored by Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu he will find fault with the pure devotee and will not be able to understand how a preacher is empowered by Lord Caitanya. One must be considered bereft of the mercy of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu when he criticizes the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement now spreading all over the world or finds fault with this movement or the leader of the movement.
From the spiritual point of view, a sannyāsī is strictly forbidden to see materialistic people, especially a king who is always engaged in counting pounds, shillings and pence. Indeed, the meeting between a sannyāsī and a king is always considered abominable. A sannyāsī is always subjected to public criticism, and a small fault on his part is taken seriously by the public. People actually expect a sannyāsī to preach and not take part in any social or political matters. If a sannyāsī is subject to public criticism, his preaching will not be fruitful. Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu specifically wanted to avoid such criticism so that His preaching work would not be hampered. It so happened that while the Lord was talking to His disciples at that time, the devotee Dāmodara Paṇḍita was present.
"As soon as the general public finds a little fault in the behavior of a sannyāsī, they advertise it like wildfire. A black spot of ink cannot be hidden on a white cloth. It is always very prominent."
“According to the śāstras, there is no discrepancy in a sannyāsī’s eating at another's house. But for a householder brāhmaṇa, this kind of eating is faulty.
“Kṛṣṇa, You are certainly a refined gentleman with all good qualities. You are well-behaved, softhearted and merciful. I know that there is not even a tinge of fault to be found in You. Yet Your mind does not even remember the inhabitants of Vṛndāvana. This is only My misfortune, and nothing else.
This is characteristic of a pure Vaiṣṇava. He is never envious if another devotee receives the mercy and strength of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu. A pure Vaiṣṇava is very happy to see a person elevated in devotional service. Unfortunately, there are many so-called Vaiṣṇavas who become envious to see someone actually recognized by Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu. It is a fact that no one can preach Caitanya Mahāprabhu's message without receiving the special mercy of the Lord. This is known to every Vaiṣṇava. Yet there are some envious people who cannot tolerate the expansion of this Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement all over the world. They find fault with the preacher who has spread this movement and do not praise him for the excellent service he has rendered in fulfilling Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu's mission.
“Since there is no fault at all in Kṛṣṇa's pastimes, why does the goddess of fortune become angry?”
The thirty-three vyabhicārī-bhāvas, bodily symptoms manifest in ecstatic love, are as follows: (1) nirveda, indifference; (2) viṣāda, moroseness; (3) dainya, meekness; (4) glāni, a feeling that one is in a faulty position; (5) śrama, fatigue; (6) mada, madness; (7) garva, pride; (8) śaṅkā, doubt; (9) trāsa, shock; (10) āvega, intense emotion; (11) unmāda, craziness; (12) apasmāra, forgetfulness; (13) vyādhi, disease; (14) moha, bewilderment; (15) mṛti, death; (16) ālasya, laziness; (17) jāḍya, invalidity; (18) vrīḍā, shame; (19) avahitthā, concealment; (20) smṛti, remembrance; (21) vitarka, argument; (22) cintā, contemplation; (23) mati, attention; (24) dhṛti, forbearance; (25) harṣa, jubilation; (26) autsukya, eagerness; (27) augrya, violence; (28) amarṣa, anger; (29) asūyā, jealousy; (30) cāpalya, impudence; (31) nidrā, sleep; (32) supti, deep sleep, and (33) prabodha, awakening.
Whenever Śrīmatī Rādhārāṇī leaves Her house, She is always well dressed and attractive. It is Her womanly nature to attract Śrī Kṛṣṇa's attention, and upon seeing Her so attractively dressed, Śrī Kṛṣṇa desires to touch Her body. The Lord then finds some fault in Her and prohibits Her from going to a river crossing and stops Her from picking flowers. Such are the pastimes between Śrīmatī Rādhārāṇī and Śrī Kṛṣṇa. Being a cowherd girl, Śrīmatī Rādhārāṇī regularly carries milk in a container and often goes to sell the milk on the other side of the Yamunā. To cross the river, She has to pay the boatman, and the spot where the boatman collects his fares is called the dāna-ghāṭi. Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa stops Her from going, telling Her, "First You have to pay the fee; then You will be allowed to go." This pastime is called dāna-keli-līlā. Similarly, if Śrīmatī Rādhārāṇī wants to pick a flower, Śrī Kṛṣṇa claims to be the garden's proprietor and prohibits Her. This pastime is called kila-kiñcita. Rādhārāṇī’s shyness arises due to Śrī Kṛṣṇa's prohibitions, and ecstatic loving bodily symptoms called kila-kiñcita-bhāva are manifest at this time. These ecstatic symptoms are explained in the following verse, which is from Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī’s Ujjvala-nīlamaṇi (Anubhāva-prakaraṇa 39).
Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu continued, ""O my Lord, O unconquerable one, O master of all potencies, please exhibit Your internal potency to conquer the nescience of all moving and inert living entities. Due to nescience, they accept all kinds of faulty things, thus provoking a fearful situation. O Lord, please show Your glories! You can do this very easily, for Your internal potency is beyond the external potency, and You are the reservoir of all opulence. You are also the demonstrator of the material potency. You are also always engaged in Your pastimes in the spiritual world, where You exhibit Your reserved, internal potency, and sometimes You exhibit the external potency by glancing over it. Thus You manifest Your pastimes. The Vedas confirm Your two potencies and accept both types of pastimes due to them.""
At this time the Bhaṭṭācārya had a son-in-law named Amogha, who was the husband of his daughter Ṣāṭhī. Although born in an aristocratic brāhmaṇa family, Amogha was a great faultfinder and blasphemer.
Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu pacified Sārvabhauma, saying, “After all, Amogha, your son-in-law, is a child. So what is his fault? Why are you fasting, and why are you angry?
Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu said, “Amogha is a child and your son. The father does not take the faults of his son seriously, especially when he is maintaining him.
At the beginning of winter, there is a ceremony known as the Oḍana-ṣaṣṭhī. This ceremony indicates that from that day forward, a winter covering should be given to Lord Jagannātha. That covering is directly purchased from a weaver. According to the arcana-mārga, a cloth should first be washed to remove all the starch, and then it can be used to cover the Lord. Puṇḍarīka Vidyānidhi saw that the priest neglected to wash the cloth before covering Lord Jagannātha. Since he wanted to find some fault in the devotees, he became indignant.
Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu then said, "If you abandon His service, it will be My fault. It is better that you remain here and render service. That will be My satisfaction."
The Paṇḍita replied, “Do not worry. All the faults will be on my head. I shall not accompany You but shall go alone.
Those who find fault in the Western Vaiṣṇavas should consider this statement from Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam and the commentary on this verse by Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī. In this regard, Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī has stated that to become a brāhmaṇa one has to wait for purification and undergo the sacred thread ceremony, but a chanter of the holy name does not have to wait for the sacred thread ceremony. We do not allow devotees to perform sacrifices until they are properly initiated in the sacred thread ceremony. Yet according to this verse, an offenseless chanter of the holy name is already fit to perform a fire ceremony, even though he is not doubly initiated by the sacred thread ceremony. This is the verdict given by Devahūti, the mother of Lord Kapiladeva, when He was instructing her in pure Sāṅkhya philosophy.
“While finding fault with You, he uttered Your name three times, saying "Caitanya, Caitanya, Caitanya."
Sanātana Gosvāmī said, "You are the supreme ruler of Bengal and are completely independent. Whenever someone commits a fault, you punish him accordingly."
It is said that the relationship between the Nawab of Bengal and Sanātana Gosvāmī was very intimate. The Nawab used to consider Sanātana Gosvāmī his younger brother, and when Sanātana Gosvāmī showed a very strong intention to resign, the Nawab, feeling familial affection, essentially said, "I am your elder brother, but I do not look after the state management. My only business is attacking other states with my soldiers and fighting everywhere as a plunderer. Because I am a meat-eater (yavana), I am used to hunting all kinds of living beings. In this way I am destroying all kinds of living entities in Bengal. While engaged in this destructive business, I am hoping that you will tend to the administration of the state. Since I, your elder brother, am engaged in such a destructive business, you, being my younger brother, should look after the state management. If you do not, how will things continue?" This talk was based on a family relationship, and Sanātana Gosvāmī also replied in an intimate and joking way. Essentially he told the Nawab, "My dear brother, you are the independent ruler of Bengal. You can act in whatever way you like, and if someone commits a fault, you can punish him accordingly." In other words, Sanātana Gosvāmī was saying that since the Nawab was accustomed to acting like a plunderer, he should go ahead and take action. Since Sanātana was not showing much enthusiasm for performing his duty, the Nawab should dismiss him from his service. The Nawab could understand the intention of Sanātana Gosvāmī’s statement. He therefore left in an angry mood and ordered Sanātana Gosvāmī’s arrest.
“"O Lord, although the living entities who have accepted material bodies are spiritual and unlimited in number, if they were all-pervading there would be no question of their being under Your control. If they are accepted, however, as particles of the eternally existing spiritual entity—as part of You, who are the supreme spirit whole—we must conclude that they are always under Your control. If the living entities are simply satisfied with being identical with You as spiritual particles, then they will be happy being controllers of so many things. The conclusion that the living entities and the Supreme Personality of Godhead are one and the same is a faulty conclusion. It is not a fact."
This verse, which is also from Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (10.87.30), was spoken by the personified Vedas.
As stated in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (12.3.51):
- kaler doṣa-nidhe rājann asti hy eko mahān guṇaḥ
- kīrtanād eva kṛṣṇasya mukta-bandhaḥ paraṁ vrajet
"My dear King, although Kali-yuga is full of faults, there is still one good quality about this age. It is that simply by chanting the Hare Kṛṣṇa mahā-mantra, one can become free from material bondage and be promoted to the transcendental kingdom." Thus in Kali-yuga one worships Lord Kṛṣṇa by chanting Hare Kṛṣṇa, Hare Kṛṣṇa, Kṛṣṇa Kṛṣṇa, Hare Hare/ Hare Rāma, Hare Rāma, Rāma Rāma, Hare Hare. To propagate this movement, Lord Kṛṣṇa personally appeared as Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu. That is described in the following verse.
“"My dear King, although Kali-yuga is full of faults, there is still one good quality about this age. It is that simply by chanting the Hare Kṛṣṇa mahā-mantra, one can become free from material bondage and be promoted to the transcendental kingdom."
As mentioned above, this verse is Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam 12.3.51.
“"O great learned devotee, although there are many faults in this material world, there is one good opportunity—the association with devotees. Such association brings about great happiness. Due to this good quality, our strong desire to achieve liberation by merging into the Brahman effulgence has become weakened."
This is a quotation from the Hari-bhakti-sudhodaya.
The qualifications of a bona fide disciple are described in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (11.10.6) as follows:
- amānya-matsaro dakṣo nirmamo dṛḍha-sauhṛdaḥ
- asatvaro ‘rtha-jijñāsur anasūyur amogha-vāk
The disciple must have the following qualifications. He must give up interest in the material bodily conception. He must give up material lust, anger, greed, illusion, madness and envy. He should be interested only in understanding the science of God, and he should be ready to consider all points in this matter. He should no longer think, "I am this body," or, "This thing belongs to me." One must love the spiritual master with unflinching faith, and one must be very steady and fixed. The bona fide disciple should be inquisitive to understand transcendental subject matter. He must not search out faults among good qualities, and he should no longer be interested in material topics. His only interest should be Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Personality of Godhead.
“You should recommend the avoidance of mixed Ekādaśī and the performance of pure Ekādaśī. You should also describe the fault in not observing Ekādaśī. One should be very careful as far as these items are concerned. If one is not careful, one will be negligent in executing devotional service.
Prakāśānanda Sarasvatī said, “We can understand the faults You have pointed out in the Māyāvāda philosophy. All the explanations given by Śaṅkarācārya are imaginary.
Subuddhi Rāya put Hussain Khān in charge of digging a big lake, but once, finding fault with him, he struck him with a whip.
When Subuddhi Rāya consulted some other brāhmaṇas, they told him that he had not committed a grievous fault and that consequently he should not drink hot ghee and give up his life. As a result, Subuddhi Rāya was doubtful about what to do.
This is another instance of Hindu custom. One brāhmaṇa would give advice condoning a particular fault, and another would give advice to the contrary. Typically, lawyers and physicians differ, giving one kind of instruction and then another. Due to the brāhmaṇas' different opinions, Subuddhi Rāya became further perplexed. He did not know what to do or what not to do.
CC Antya-lila
"(Śrīmatī Rādhārāṇī said to Her constant companion Viśākhā:) "My dear friend, if Kṛṣṇa is unkind to Me, there will be no need for you to cry, for it will not be due to any fault of yours. I shall then have to die, but afterwards please do one thing for Me: to observe My funeral ceremony, place My body with its arms embracing a tamāla tree like creepers so that I may remain forever in Vṛndāvana undisturbed. That is My last request.""
This verse is Vidagdha-mādhava 2.47.
“"When one hears praise from his beloved, he outwardly remains neutral but feels pain within his heart. When he hears his beloved making accusations about him, he takes them to be jokes and enjoys pleasure. When he finds faults in his beloved, they do not diminish his love, nor do the beloved"s good qualities increase his spontaneous affection. Thus spontaneous love continues under all circumstances. That is how spontaneous love of Godhead acts within the heart.’
This verse from the Vidagdha-mādhava (5.4) is spoken by Paurṇamāsī, the grandmother of Madhumaṅgala and mother of Sāndīpani Muni.
“"My dear friend the flute, you are actually full of many holes or faults. You are light, hard, juiceless and full of knots. But what kind of pious activities have engaged you in the service of being kissed by the Lord and embraced by His hands?"
This verse (Vidagdha-mādhava 4.7) is spoken by Candrāvalī-sakhī, the gopī competitor of Śrīmatī Rādhārāṇī.
Summarizing this chapter, Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura says that one should derive from it the following lessons. (1) Although Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, is an incarnation of mercy, He nevertheless gave up the company of one of His personal associates, namely Junior Haridāsa, for if He had not done so, pseudo devotees would have taken advantage of Junior Haridāsa's fault by using it as an excuse to live as devotees and at the same time have illicit sexual connections. Such activities would have demoralized the cult of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, and as a result, devotees would surely have gone to a hellish life in the name of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu.
“Although the boy's mother is completely austere and chaste, she has one natural fault—she is a very beautiful young girl.
All Indians should help the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement in its progress, to the best of their ability. Then they will be considered real followers of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu. Unfortunately, even some so-called Vaiṣṇavas enviously refuse to cooperate with this movement but instead condemn it in so many ways. We are very sorry to say that these people try to find fault with us, being unnecessarily envious of our activities, although we are trying to the best of our ability to introduce the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement directly into the countries of the yavanas and mlecchas. Such yavanas and mlecchas are coming to us and becoming purified Vaiṣṇavas who follow in the footsteps of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu. One who identifies himself as a follower of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu should feel like Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, who said, ihā-sabāra kon mate ha-ibe nistāra: "How will all these yavanas be delivered?" Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu was always anxious to deliver the fallen souls because their fallen condition gave Him great unhappiness. That is the platform on which one can propagate the mission of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu.
By no means could he find any fault in the character of Haridāsa Ṭhākura. Therefore he called for local prostitutes and began a plan to discredit His Holiness.
This is typical of atheistic men, but even among so-called religionists, sādhus, mendicants, sannyāsīs and brahmacārīs, there are many enemies of the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement who always try to find faults in it, not considering that the movement is spreading automatically by the grace of Lord Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, who wanted it spread all over the world, in every town and village. We are trying to fulfill the Lord's desire, and our attempt has become fairly successful, but the enemies of this movement unnecessarily try to find faults in it, exactly like the old rascal Rāmacandra Khān, who opposed Haridāsa Ṭhākura.
Wherever an advanced devotee is insulted, for one man's fault the entire town or place is afflicted.
"None of you are at fault," he said. “Indeed, even this ignorant so-called brāhmaṇa is not at fault, for he is accustomed to dry speculation and logic.
“My dear Haridāsa and Sanātana, I think of you as My little boys, to be maintained by Me. The maintainer never takes seriously any faults of the maintained.
When a father maintains a child and the child is maintained by the father, the father never takes seriously the faults of the child. Even if they actually are faults, the father does not mind them.
Although Gadādhara Paṇḍita Gosāñi was not in the least at fault, some of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu's devotees showed affectionate anger toward him.
Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam has many ṭīkās, or commentaries, following the paramparā system, but Śrīdhara Svāmī’s is first. The commentaries of all the other ācāryas follow his. The paramparā system does not allow one to deviate from the commentaries of the previous ācāryas. By depending upon the previous ācāryas, one can write beautiful commentaries. However, one cannot defy the previous ācāryas. The false pride that makes one think that he can write better than the previous ācāryas will make one's comments faulty. At the present moment it has become fashionable for everyone to write in his own way, but such writing is never accepted by serious devotees. Because of false pride, every scholar and philosopher wants to exhibit his learning by interpreting the śāstras, especially the Bhagavad-gītā and Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, in his own way. This system of commenting in one's own way is fully condemned by Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu. Therefore He says, "artha-vyasta" likhana sei. Commentaries written according to one's own philosophical way are never accepted; no one will appreciate such commentaries on the revealed scriptures.
"I can tolerate whatever He says, bearing it upon my head. He will automatically be merciful to me after considering my faults and attributes."
The following summary of the Eighth Chapter is given by Śrīla Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura in his Amṛta-pravāha-bhāṣya. This chapter describes the history of the Lord's dealings with Rāmacandra Purī. Although Rāmacandra Purī was one of the disciples of Mādhavendra Purī, he was influenced by dry Māyāvādīs, and therefore he criticized Mādhavendra Purī. Therefore Mādhavendra Purī accused him of being an offender and rejected him. Because Rāmacandra Purī had been rejected by his spiritual master, he became concerned only with finding faults in others and advising them according to dry Māyāvāda philosophy. For this reason he was not very respectful to the Vaiṣṇavas, and later he became so fallen that he began criticizing Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu for His eating. Hearing his criticisms, Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu reduced His eating, but after Rāmacandra Purī left Jagannātha Purī, the Lord resumed His usual behavior.
A large quantity of the remnants of food from Lord Jagannātha was brought in for distribution. Rāmacandra Purī ate sumptuously, and then he wanted to find faults in Jagadānanda Paṇḍita.
Because Rāmacandra Purī was interested only in finding faults, he could not understand the transcendental qualities of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu. His only concern was finding faults, but still he could not find any.
At last he found a fault. "How can a person in the renounced order eat so many sweetmeats?" he said. "If one eats sweets, controlling the senses is very difficult."
When they met, the Lord would offer him respectful obeisances, considering him a Godbrother of His spiritual master. Rāmacandra Purī’s business, however, was to search for faults in the Lord.
Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu had heard rumors about Rāmacandra Purī’s blasphemy. Now He directly heard his fanciful accusations.
Rāmacandra Purī could find no faults in the character of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, for He is situated in a transcendental position as the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Ants are generally found everywhere, but when Rāmacandra Purī saw ants crawling in the abode of the Lord, he took it for granted that they must have been there because Caitanya Mahāprabhu had been eating sweetmeats. He thus discovered imaginary faults in the Lord and then left.
Ants generally crawl about here, there and everywhere, but Rāmacandra Purī, imagining faults, criticized Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu by alleging that there had been sweetmeats in His room.
“Even where there are hundreds of good qualities, a critic does not consider them. Rather, he attempts by some trick to point out a fault in those attributes.
After hearing this explanation, Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu replied with affectionate anger. "Gopīnātha Paṭṭanāyaka does not want to pay the King the money that is due," the Lord said. “How then is the King at fault in punishing him?
“His only fault is that he owes some money to the government. If he is killed, however, what profit will there be? The government will be the loser, for it will not get the money.
“What is the fault on the part of the King? He wants the government's money. However, when they are punished for failing to pay the government its due, they come to Me to release them.
Raghunātha Bhaṭṭa never did anything harmful to a Vaiṣṇava. In other words, he was never inattentive in the service of the Lord, nor did he ever violate the rules and regulations of a pure Vaiṣṇava. It is the duty of a Vaiṣṇava ācārya to prevent his disciples and followers from violating the principles of Vaiṣṇava behavior. He should always advise them to strictly follow the regulative principles, which will protect them from falling down. Although a Vaiṣṇava preacher may sometimes criticize others, Raghunātha Bhaṭṭa avoided this. Even if another Vaiṣṇava was actually at fault, Raghunātha Bhaṭṭa would not criticize him; he saw only that everyone was engaged in Kṛṣṇa's service. That is the position of a mahā-bhāgavata. Actually, even if one is serving māyā, in a higher sense he is also a servant of Kṛṣṇa. Because māyā is the servant of Kṛṣṇa, anyone serving māyā serves Kṛṣṇa indirectly.
“My dear friend, if you say, "Just try to control Your senses," what shall I say? I cannot become angry at My senses. Is it their fault? Kṛṣṇa's beauty, sound, touch, fragrance and taste are by nature extremely attractive. These five features are attracting My senses, and each wants to drag My mind in a different direction. In this way the life of My mind is in great danger, just like a horse ridden in five directions at once. Thus I am also in danger of dying.
“‘The vibration of Your flute, accompanied by Your glance, which pierces us forcibly with the arrows of lust, induces us to ignore the regulative principles of religious life. Thus we become excited by lusty desires and come to You, giving up all shame and fear. But now You are angry with us. You are finding fault with our violating religious principles and leaving our homes and husbands. And as You instruct us about religious principles, we become helpless.
“O misbehaved Providence! If you reply to Us, "Akrūra is actually at fault; why are You angry with me?" then I say to you, "Providence, you have taken the form of Akrūra and have stolen Kṛṣṇa away. No one else would behave like this."
“But this is the fault of My own destiny. Why should I needlessly accuse you? There is no intimate relationship between you and Me. Kṛṣṇa, however, is My life and soul. It is We who live together, and it is He who has become so cruel.
"Yet why should I be angry with Kṛṣṇa? It is the fault of My own misfortune. The fruit of My sinful activities has ripened, and therefore Kṛṣṇa, who has always been dependent on My love, is now indifferent. This means that My misfortune is very strong."
| Page Title: | Fault (CC) |
| Compiler: | Visnu Murti |
| Created: | 25 of Jun, 2011 |
| Totals by Section: | BG=0, SB=0, CC=125, OB=0, Lec=0, Con=0, Let=0 |
| No. of Quotes: | 125 |