View source for At one of the programs, somebody raised the question that we cited that Lord Siva is worshiping Krsna, that he is a Vaisnava. So that person replied that Lord Rama also worshiped Siva. So he wanted to know the explanation

<div id="compilation">
<div id="facts">
{{terms|"At one of the programs, somebody raised the question that we cited that Lord Siva is worshiping Krsna, that he is a Vaisnava. So that person replied that Lord Rama also worshiped Siva. So he wanted to know the explanation"}}
{{notes|}}
{{compiler|MadhuGopaldas}}
{{complete|ALL}}
{{first|22Jul11}}
{{last|22Jul11}}
{{totals_by_section|BG=0|SB=0|CC=0|OB=0|Lec=0|Con=1|Let=0}}
{{total|1}}
{{toc right}}
[[Category:Questions asked to Srila Prabhupada]]
[[Category:Questions asked to SP... 1975]]
</div>
<div id="Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" class="section" sec_index="5" parent="compilation" text="Conversations and Morning Walks"><h2>Conversations and Morning Walks</h2>
</div>
<div id="1975_Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" class="sub_section" sec_index="8" parent="Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" text="1975 Conversations and Morning Walks"><h3>1975 Conversations and Morning Walks</h3>
</div>
<div id="MorningWalkDecember231975Bombay_0" class="quote" parent="1975_Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" book="Con" index="267" link="Morning Walk -- December 23, 1975, Bombay" link_text="Morning Walk -- December 23, 1975, Bombay">
<div class="heading">Sometimes Kṛṣṇa is chastised by Mother Yaśodā. So how is that? The Supreme Personality of Godhead is being chastised by Mother Yaśodā? Similarly, He likes to worship His devotee... Sometimes the father takes the child on his shoulder. Does it mean the child is more important than the father? They say the Vālmīki Rāmāyaṇa, there is no such incidence as Rāmacandra worships Śiva. It is later on, interpretation. But even if He does so, what is the wrong here?
</div>
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Morning Walk -- December 23, 1975, Bombay|Morning Walk -- December 23, 1975, Bombay]]: </span><div class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Girirāja: A question was raised about Lord Rāma worshiping Śiva.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Hm?</p>
<p>Girirāja: At one of the programs, somebody raised the question that we cited that Lord Śiva is worshiping Kṛṣṇa, that he is a Vaiṣṇava. So that person replied that Lord Rāma also worshiped Śiva. So he wanted to know the explanation.</p>
<p>Lokanātha: You explained yesterday.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Sometimes Kṛṣṇa is chastised by Mother Yaśodā. So how is that? The Supreme Personality of Godhead is being chastised by Mother Yaśodā?</p>
<p>Girirāja: He likes to be chastised. It's part of the relationship.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Similarly, He likes to worship His devotee. Sometimes the father takes the child on his shoulder. Does it mean the child is more important than the father? They say the Vālmīki Rāmāyaṇa, there is no such incidence as Rāmacandra worships Śiva. It is later on, interpretation. But even if He does so, what is the wrong here?</p>
<p>Harikeśa: That later-on Rāmāyaṇa has caused some havoc.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Hm?</p>
<p>Harikeśa: That later-on interpretation?</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Yes, the Śaivaites, they want to make Lord Śiva the exalted Supreme Person. In South India there is good propaganda. That is always going on.</p>
<p>Lokanātha: When Lord Śiva says in Purāṇas that mukti-pradapaḥ sarveṣāṁ viṣṇu... (sic)</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Hm?</p>
<p>Lokanātha: Purāṇa, the same Lord Śiva says there is no other liberated besides Viṣṇu.</p>
<p>Devotee: ...engagement, one devotee commented that the reason that Lord Rāma worshiped Lord Śiva was because He wanted to kill Rāvaṇa and Rāvaṇa was a devotee of Śiva, so Lord Rāma worshiped Śiva in that respect.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Hm? What is that?</p>
<p>Harikeśa: He said that because Lord Śiva was, ah, excuse me, Rāvaṇa was a devotee of Lord Śiva, that in order that Lord Rāmacandra could kill Rāvaṇa, He worshiped Śiva.</p>
<p>Kīrtanānanda: He wanted to take permission of him, so they say. Rāma wanted to take permission from Śiva...</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: So Śiva is so rascal that he gave permission? That means they are trying to prove Śiva is a rascal. (devotees laugh) Because he gave permission to kill his devotee. Then what is the use of his, of one becoming Śiva's devotee? If such a rascal that one can take his permission to kill his devotee, so what is the use of becoming a devotee of such a rascal? Huh?</p>
<p>Harikeśa: He protected Bāṇāsura.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Huh? What is that? That means that proving that Śiva is a rascal. He gave permission to kill his devotee. Then what is the use? Then nobody should become Śiva's devotee. That is the conclusion. Because he gives permission to somebody else to kill his devotee. They are trying to prove Lord Śiva is a rascal. What do you think? Huh? If I want your permission, please give me your permission, I shall kill your son, and if you say, "Yes, I give my permission," then are you not a rascal? By this example they are making Lord Śiva a rascal, that he has no common sense even.</p>
<p>Indian man: (Hindi)</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: No, if this proposition is there, that Lord Śiva gives permission for killing his devotee, then who will become his devotee? Huh? Is it not?</p>
<p>Indian man: Yes.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: No sane man will become his devotee. All the manufactured foolish statements, just see. Any commonsense man will immediately say, "Then Śiva is a rascal; he cannot give protection to his devotee." What do you think? Huh?</p>
<p>Kīrtanānanda: Of course, Śrīla Prabhupāda, does one have to give protection to their devotee if they break the law? Just like if you have a child, and he murders someone, isn't he supposed to be punished? So if someone goes against the Supreme Personality of Godhead, even if you are a devotee, shouldn't Śiva concur?</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: No, no. That is another thing. This proposal, that because Lord Rāmacandra approached Lord Śiva to kill Rāvaṇa, and he gave permission, although Rāvaṇa was his great devotee. Then what is the use of becoming devotee of Lord Śiva? He gives permission. Huh? Is that very reasonable proposal? If I ask your permission that I shall kill your son, will you give permission? No. Then? So Lord Śiva gives permission to Lord Rāmacandra, "Yes, You can kill Rāvaṇa," then what is the use of becoming his devotee?</p>
<p>Harikeśa: I think Dr. Patel would say that it's not fair, you have fired the opposition.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Eh?</p>
<p>Harikeśa: It's not fair. You have completely destroyed the opposition. (Prabhupāda laughs) There is no question of fight.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: The actual fact is that Lord Śiva did not give permission, but he did not go to protect Rāvaṇa, because he knew that it was impossible to give him protection. That is summarized in Bengali, rākhe kṛṣṇa māre ke, māre kṛṣṇa rākhe ke. If Kṛṣṇa kills somebody, wants to kill somebody, nobody can give him protection. That is the conclusion. And if Kṛṣṇa protects somebody, nobody can kill him. Just like Prahlāda Mahārāja. Huh? He was protected by Lord Nṛsiṁha-deva. Who can kill?</p>
<p>Kīrtanānanda: Why did Lord Śiva try to protect Banasura?</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Huh?</p>
<p>Kīrtanānanda: Didn't Lord Śiva try to protect Banasura?</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Yes. You must try, when your son is in danger, you must try. That is natural. That is not uncommon. You can save or not save, that is a different thing. But it is you duty, if somebody is under your protection, you must try to save him, even at the risk of your life. That is real protector.</p>
<p>Lokanātha: Do you have plans, Śrīla Prabhupāda, to comment on Rāmāyaṇa in future?</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Hm? First of all finish my Bhāgavatam, then we shall talk of other things.</p>
<p>Indian man: Lord Brahmā took away the cows and the cowherd boys that Kṛṣṇa was playing with. At that time Kṛṣṇa expanded Himself just to (indistinct) about a year or so that these cows are all Kṛṣṇa expansions, but the gopīs were so much (indistinct) to (indistinct) Kṛṣṇa's (indistinct). Now he started, he doubted that gopīs are (indistinct) with Kṛṣṇa because these cowherds and ah, they are part and parcel of Kṛṣṇa only, so he was not...</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Hm. That is called, they were playing the role of human being. (pause)</p>
<p>Indian man: ...would be nearing the portion where that (indistinct) is there. I told Girirāja prabhu, when you were sick, that fever is there, you were having fever, so I...</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: No, I had no fever.</p>
<p>Indian man: When you went to Vṛndāvana? Some...</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Oh, yes.</p>
<p>Indian man: So I was telling my wife, she said that you read that Bhāgavatam, where that Bāṇ(āsura) is there, that Śiva means having, producing jvārā, fever, so Viṣṇujvārā is cold only, so that Viṣṇujvārā will bring down the fever. So you were just reading more Bhāgavatam only, when you are sick. Anybody who is suffering from fever means you read such and such a portion, so it should come down.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: No, Viṣṇu should not be utilized for curing your fever. (laughter) That is not bhakti. That is business.</p>
<p>Indian man: So you are always reaching for bhakti point. That is too high for mundane people to reach.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: That is bhakti, high, highest. Bhaktyā mām abhijānāti ([[Vanisource:BG 18.55|BG 18.55]]). If you have real bhakti, then you can understand Vaiṣṇava. To know Viṣṇu-avan manasā-gocara: it is very difficult.</p>
:manuṣyāṇāṁ sahareṣu
:kaścit yatati siddhaye
:yatatām api siddhānāṁ
:kaścid māṁ vetti tattvataḥ
:([[Vanisource:BG 7.3|BG 7.3]])
<p>To understand Viṣṇu—very, very difficult. And.... If, but you can understand Viṣṇu by bhakti. So bhakti is so easy thing.</p>
<p>Kīrtanānanda: How about if a disciple wants to use the help of Viṣṇu for the spiritual master?</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Huh?</p>
<p>Kīrtanānanda: A disciple wants to take the aid of Viṣṇu for serving the spiritual master.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Hah. That is nice. That is for curing Viṣṇu's representative. When we were in danger, there was so much obstruction for constructing the temple, and we prayed to Kṛṣṇa that it should stopped. We prayed to Kṛṣṇa, "Please give your protection." That is for Viṣṇu's purpose. (break) ...Bhagavad-gītā, arto 'rthārthī jijñāsur: when one is in distress, he comes to Kṛṣṇa. So that is not pure bhakti. Pure bhakti means, "I shall not take a farthing from Kṛṣṇa; I shall give everything to Kṛṣṇa." That is pure. "I shall not take any return from Kṛṣṇa." Prahlāda Mahārāja says, "I am not a merchant, that for my service I take some return for it." No. But sometimes when, since we are not pure devotees, we have no other alternative than to beg Kṛṣṇa for some material benefit. That is also good. They have said, catur-vidhā bhajante māṁ, sukṛtinaḥ, that pious. Although they are not pure devotee, but they are pious. But the duṣkṛtinaḥ, they do not approach Him. That is the difference.</p>
:catur-vidhā bhajante māṁ
:janāḥ sukṛtino'rjuna
:arto 'rthārthī jijñāsur
:jñānī ca bharatarṣabhā
:([[Vanisource:BG 7.16|BG 7.16]])
<p>They are also good, pious. And one who does not go to Viṣṇu for any reason, they are most sinful. Here, although he goes to Viṣṇu for some material benefit, he is pious. Na māṁ duṣkṛtino mūḍhāḥ prapadyante narādhamāḥ ([[Vanisource:BG 7.15|BG 7.15]]). Those who are impious, sinful, they do not go. (comes to a part of beach covered by waves) So I will have to jump like this?</p>
<p>Harikeśa: No, we made the wrong turn.</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>