Incident (SB cantos 1 - 6)

Expressions researched:
"incidence" |"incidences" |"incident" |"incidental" |"incidentally" |"incidently" |"incidents"

SB Preface and Introduction

SB Introduction:

The Lord's early life was recorded by one of His chief devotees and contemporaries, namely Śrīla Murāri Gupta, a medical practitioner of that time, and the latter part of the life of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu was recorded by His private secretary Śrī Dāmodara Gosvāmī, or Śrīla Svarūpa Dāmodara, who was practically a constant companion of the Lord at Purī. These two devotees recorded practically all the incidents of the Lord's activities, and later on all the books dealing with the Lord, which are above mentioned, were composed on the basis of kaḍacās (notebooks) by Śrīla Dāmodara Gosvāmī and Murāri Gupta.

SB Introduction:

When the Lord was on the lap of His mother, He would at once stop crying as soon as the ladies surrounding Him chanted the holy names and clapped their hands. This peculiar incident was observed by the neighbors with awe and veneration. Sometimes the young girls took pleasure in making the Lord cry and then stopping Him by chanting the holy name. So from His very childhood the Lord began to preach the importance of the holy name. In His early age Lord Śrī Caitanya was known as Nimāi. This name was given by His beloved mother because the Lord took His birth beneath a nimba tree in the courtyard of His paternal house.

SB Introduction:

The brāhmaṇa then began to cry, but since everyone was fast asleep, no one could hear him. At that time the baby Lord appeared before the fortunate brāhmaṇa and disclosed His identity as Kṛṣṇa Himself. The brāhmaṇa was forbidden to disclose this incident, and the baby returned to the lap of His mother.

There are many similar incidents in His childhood. As a naughty boy He sometimes used to tease the orthodox brāhmaṇas who used to bathe in the Ganges. When the brāhmaṇas complained to His father that He was splashing them with water instead of attending school, the Lord suddenly appeared before His father as though just coming from school with all His school clothes and books. At the bathing ghāṭa He also used to play jokes on the neighboring girls who engaged in worshiping Śiva in hopes of getting good husbands.

SB Introduction:

While they were engaged in such worship, the Lord naughtily appeared before them and said, "My dear sisters, please give Me all the offerings you have just brought for Lord Śiva. Lord Śiva is My devotee, and Pārvatī is My maidservant. If you worship Me, then Lord Śiva and all the other demigods will be more satisfied." Some of them refused to obey the naughty Lord, and He would curse them that due to their refusal they would be married to old men who had seven children by their previous wives. Out of fear and sometimes out of love the girls would also offer Him various goods, and then the Lord would bless them and assure them that they would have very good young husbands and that they would be mothers of dozens of children. The blessings would enliven the girls, but they used often to complain of these incidents to their mothers.

SB Introduction:

The Muslim magistrate of Navadvīpa took up the complaints of the brāhmaṇas seriously, and at first he warned the followers of Nimāi Paṇḍita not to chant loudly the name of Hari. But Lord Caitanya asked His followers to disobey the orders of the Kazi, and they went on with their saṅkīrtana (chanting) party as usual. The magistrate then sent constables who interrupted a saṅkīrtana and broke some of the mṛdaṅgas (drums). When Nimāi Paṇḍita heard of this incident He organized a party for civil disobedience. He is the pioneer of the civil disobedience movement in India for the right cause. He organized a procession of one hundred thousand men with thousands of mṛdaṅgas and karatālas (hand cymbals), and this procession passed over the roads of Navadvīpa in defiance of the Kazi who had issued the order. Finally the procession reached the house of the Kazi, who went upstairs out of fear of the masses. The great crowds assembled at the Kazi's house displayed a violent temper, but the Lord asked them to be peaceful.

SB Introduction:

This incident shows clearly that the Lord was not a so-called timid Vaiṣṇava. A Vaiṣṇava is a fearless devotee of the Lord, and for the right cause he can take any step suitable for the purpose. Arjuna was also a Vaiṣṇava devotee of Lord Kṛṣṇa, and he fought valiantly for the satisfaction of the Lord. Similarly, Vajrāṅgajī, or Hanumān, was also a devotee of Lord Rāma, and he gave lessons to the nondevotee party of Rāvaṇa. The principles of Vaiṣṇavism are to satisfy the Lord by all means. A Vaiṣṇava is by nature a nonviolent, peaceful living being, and he has all the good qualities of God, but when the nondevotee blasphemes the Lord or His devotee, the Vaiṣṇava never tolerates such impudency.

After this incident the Lord began to preach and propagate His Bhāgavata-dharma, or saṅkīrtana movement, more vigorously, and whoever stood against this propagation of the yuga-dharma, or duty of the age, was properly punished by various types of chastisement.

SB Introduction:

There are a number of instructive points to he observed in this incident of the two brothers. In this Kali-yuga practically all people are of the quality of Jagāi and Mādhāi. If they want to be relieved from the reactions of their misdeeds, they must take shelter of Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu and after spiritual initiation thus refrain from those things which are prohibited in the śāstras. The prohibitory rules are dealt with in the Lord's teachings to Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī.

SB Introduction:

Out of sheer foolishness they asked the Lord why He was chanting the names of the gopīs and advised Him to chant the name of Kṛṣṇa. The Lord, who was in ecstasy, was thus disturbed by these foolish students. He chastised them and chased them away. The students were almost the same age as the Lord, and thus they wrongly thought of the Lord as one of their peers. They held a meeting and resolved that they would attack the Lord if He dared to punish them again in such a manner. This incident provoked some malicious talks about the Lord on the part of the general public.

SB Introduction:

After consulting with Keśava Bhāratī, the Lord left Navadvīpa for Katwa to formally accept the sannyāsa order of life. He was accompanied by Śrīla Nityānanda Prabhu, Candraśekhara Ācārya, and Mukunda Datta. Those three assisted Him in the details of the ceremony. The incident of the Lord's accepting the sannyāsa order is very elaborately described in the Caitanya-bhāgavata by Śrīla Vṛndāvana dāsa Ṭhākura.

SB Introduction:

The Lord stayed at Śrī Advaita Prabhu's house for a few days, and knowing well that the Lord was leaving His hearth and home for good, Śrī Advaita Prabhu sent His men to Navadvīpa to bring mother Śacī to have a last meeting with her son. Some unscrupulous people say that Lord Caitanya met His wife also after taking sannyāsa and offered her His wooden slipper for worship, but the authentic sources give no information about such a meeting. His mother met Him at the house of Advaita Prabhu, and when she saw her son in sannyāsa dress, she lamented. By way of compromise, she requested her son to make His headquarters in Purī so that she would easily be able to get information about Him. The Lord granted this last desire of His beloved mother. After this incident the Lord started for Purī, leaving all the residents of Navadvīpa in an ocean of lamentation over His separation.

SB Introduction:

In the meantime the companions of the Lord, who reached the temple a little after Him, heard of the Lord's transcendental feats and of His being carried away by the Bhaṭṭācārya. The pilgrims at the temple were still gossiping about the incident. But by chance, one of these pilgrims had met Gopīnātha Ācārya, who was known to Gadādhara Paṇḍita, and from him it was learned that the Lord was lying in an unconscious state at the residence of Sārvabhauma Bhaṭṭācārya, who happened to be the brother-in-law of Gopīnātha Ācārya. All the members of the party were introduced by Gadādhara Paṇḍita to Gopīnātha Ācārya, who took them all to the house of Bhaṭṭācārya where the Lord was lying unconscious in a spiritual trance.

SB Introduction:

On His return to Purī, all the anxious devotees of the Lord got back their life, and the Lord remained there with continued pastimes of His transcendental realizations. The most important incident during that time was His granting audience to King Pratāparudra. King Pratāparudra was a great devotee of the Lord, and he considered himself to be one of the servants of the Lord entrusted with sweeping the temple. This submissive attitude of the King was very much appreciated by Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu. The King requested both Bhaṭṭācārya and Rāya to arrange his meeting with the Lord. When, however, the Lord was petitioned by His two stalwart devotees, He flatly refused to grant the request, even though it was put forward by personal associates like Rāmānanda Rāya and Sārvabhauma Bhaṭṭācārya.

SB Canto 1

SB 1.5.17, Purport:

He thought of this stag when he died. As such, in the next birth he became a stag, although he did not forget the incident of his previous birth. Similarly, Citraketu also fell down due to his offenses at the feet of Śiva. But in spite of all this, the stress is given here to surrendering unto the lotus feet of the Lord, even if there is a chance of falling down, because even though one falls down from the prescribed duties of devotional service, he will never forget the lotus feet of the Lord. Once engaged in the devotional service of the Lord, one will continue the service in all circumstances. In the Bhagavad-gītā it is said that even a small quantity of devotional service can save one from the most dangerous position. There are many instances of such examples in history. Ajāmila is one of them. Ajāmila in his early life was a devotee, but in his youth he fell down. Still he was saved by the Lord at the end.

SB 1.8.10, Purport:

This incident took place after the death of Abhimanyu, the husband of Uttarā. Abhimanyu's widow, Uttarā, should have followed the path of her husband, but because she was pregnant, and Mahārāja Parīkṣit, a great devotee of the Lord, was lying in embryo, she was responsible for his protection. The mother of a child has a great responsibility in giving all protection to the child, and therefore Uttarā was not ashamed to express this frankly before Lord Kṛṣṇa. Uttarā was the daughter of a great king, the wife of a great hero, and student of a great devotee, and later she was the mother of a good king also. She was fortunate in every respect.

SB 1.9.28, Purport:

Incidents mentioned in the Vedic literatures, such as the Purāṇas, Mahābhārata and Rāmāyaṇa are factual historical narrations that took place sometime in the past, although not in any chronological order. Such historical facts, being instructive for ordinary men, were assorted without chronological reference. Besides that, they happen on different planets, nay, in different universes, and thus the description of the narrations is sometimes measured by three dimensions. We are simply concerned with the instructive lessons of such incidents, even though they are not in order by our limited range of understanding. Bhīṣmadeva described such narrations before Mahārāja Yudhiṣṭhira in reply to his different questions.

SB 1.9.41, Translation:

At the Rājasūya-yajña (sacrifice) performed by Mahārāja Yudhiṣṭhira, there was the greatest assembly of all the elite men of the world, the royal and learned orders, and in that great assembly Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa was worshiped by one and all as the most exalted Personality of Godhead. This happened during my presence, and I remembered the incident in order to keep my mind upon the Lord.

SB 1.10.16, Purport:

Shyness is a particular extra-natural beauty of the fair sex, and it commands respect from the opposite sex. This custom was observed even during the days of the Mahābhārata, i.e., more than five thousand years ago. It is only the less intelligent persons not well versed in the history of the world who say that observance of separation of female from male is an introduction of the Mohammedan period in India. This incident from the Mahābhārata period proves definitely that the ladies of the palace observed strict pardā (restricted association with men), and instead of coming down in the open air where Lord Kṛṣṇa and others were assembled, the ladies of the palace went up on the top of the palace and from there paid their respects to Lord Kṛṣṇa by showers of flowers.

SB 1.11.16-17, Purport:

The commander in chief of the Vṛṣṇi dynasty and a great devotee of Lord Kṛṣṇa. Akrūra attained success in devotional service to the Lord by the one single process of offering prayers. He was the husband of Sūtanī, daughter of Ahūka. He supported Arjuna when Arjuna took Subhadrā forcibly away by the will of Kṛṣṇa. Both Kṛṣṇa and Akrūra went to see Arjuna after his successful kidnapping of Subhadrā. Both of them presented dowries to Arjuna after this incidence. Akrūra was present also when Abhimanyu, the son of Subhadrā, was married with Uttarā, mother of Mahārāja Parīkṣit. Ahūka, the father-in-law of Akrūra, was not on good terms with Akrūra. But both of them were devotees of the Lord.

SB 1.12.2, Purport:

Unfortunately, by the instigation of the fallen age of Kali, an unfortunate brāhmaṇa's son was employed to condemn the innocent Mahārāja Parīkṣit, and so the King had to prepare himself for death within seven days. History will ever record this unfortunate incident of how a great king was killed by the unkind intrigue of the fallen son of a brāhmaṇa. Mahārāja Parīkṣit is especially famous as one who is protected by Viṣṇu, and when he was unduly cursed by a brāhmaṇa's son, he could have invoked the mercy of the Lord to save him, but he did not want to because he was a pure devotee. A pure devotee never asks the Lord for any undue favor. Mahārāja Parīkṣit knew that the curse of the brāhmaṇa's son upon him was unjustified, as everyone else knew, but he did not want to counteract it because he knew also that the age of Kali had begun and that the first symptom of the age, namely degradation of the highly talented brāhmaṇa community, had also begun.

SB 1.13.13, Translation:

Compassionate Mahātmā Vidura could not stand to see the Pāṇḍavas distressed at any time. Therefore he did not disclose this unpalatable and unbearable incident because calamities come of their own accord.

SB 1.13.50, Purport:

Due to the growth of the asuras, the mass of people who are generally devoted to the Lord by nature and the pure devotees of the Lord, including the demigods in higher planets, pray to the Lord for relief, and the Lord either descends personally from His abode or deputes some of His devotees to remodel the fallen condition of human society, or even animal society. Such disruptions take place not only in human society but also among animals, birds or other living beings, including the demigods in the higher planets. Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa descended personally to vanquish asuras like Kaṁsa, Jarāsandha and Śiśupāla, and during the reign of Mahārāja Yudhiṣṭhira almost all these asuras were killed by the Lord. Now he was awaiting the annihilation of His own dynasty, called the Yadu-vaṁśa, who appeared by His will in this world. He wanted to take them away before His own departure to His eternal abode. Nārada, like Vidura, did not disclose the imminent annihilation of the Yadu dynasty, but indirectly gave a hint to the King and his brothers to wait till the incident happened and the Lord departed.

SB 1.15.7, Purport:

Mahārāja Drupada well knew that only Arjuna or alternately Karṇa could successfully carry out the plan. But still he wanted to hand his daughter to Arjuna. And in the assembly of the princely order, when Dhṛṣṭadyumna, the brother of Draupadī, introduced all the princes to his grown-up sister, Karṇa was also present in the game. But Draupadī tactfully avoided Karṇa as the rival of Arjuna, and she expressed her desires through her brother Dhṛṣṭadyumna that she was unable to accept anyone who was less than a kṣatriya. The vaiśyas and the śūdras are less important than the kṣatriyas. Karṇa was known as the son of a carpenter, a śūdra. So Draupadī avoided Karṇa by this plea. When Arjuna, in the dress of a poor brāhmaṇa, pierced the difficult target, everyone was astonished, and all of them, especially Karṇa, offered a stiff fight to Arjuna, but as usual by the grace of Lord Kṛṣṇa he was able to emerge very successful in the princely fight and thus gain the valuable hand of Kṛṣṇā, or Draupadī. Arjuna was lamentingly remembering the incident in the absence of the Lord, by whose strength only he was so powerful.

SB 1.15.11, Purport:

This incident proves that the Lord is the greatest mystic, and therefore He is known as Yogeśvara. Another instruction is that every householder must offer food to the Lord, and the result will be that everyone, even a company of guests numbering ten thousand, will be satisfied because of the Lord's being satisfied. That is the way of devotional service.

SB 1.15.16, Purport:

Every time he was refused by Draupadī. He tried to take her away forcibly on his chariot, and at first Draupadī gave him a good dashing, and he fell like a cut-root tree. But he was not discouraged, and he was able to force Draupadī to sit on the chariot. This incident was seen by Dhaumya Muni, and he strongly protested the action of Jayadratha. He also followed the chariot, and through Dhātreyikā the matter was brought to the notice of Mahārāja Yudhiṣṭhira. The Pāṇḍavas then attacked the soldiers of Jayadratha and killed them all, and at last Bhīma caught hold of Jayadratha and beat him very severely, almost dead. Then all but five hairs were cut off his head and he was taken to all the kings and introduced as the slave of Mahārāja Yudhiṣṭhira. He was forced to admit himself to be the slave of Mahārāja Yudhiṣṭhira before all the princely order, and in the same condition he was brought before Mahārāja Yudhiṣṭhira. Mahārāja Yudhiṣṭhira was kind enough to order him released, and when he admitted to being a tributary prince under Mahārāja Yudhiṣṭhira, Queen Draupadī also desired his release. After this incident, he was allowed to return to his country.

SB 1.15.49, Purport:

So by his pious activities in the devotional service of the Lord he was able to always remember the lotus feet of the Lord, and thus he became washed of all contamination of a śūdra-born life. At the end he was again received by the denizens of Pitṛloka and posted in his original position. The demigods are also associates of the Lord without personal touch, whereas the direct associates of the Lord are in constant personal touch with Him. The Lord and His personal associates incarnate in many universes without cessation. The Lord remembers them all, whereas the associates forget due to their being very minute parts and parcels of the Lord; they are apt to forget such incidents due to being infinitesimal. This is corroborated in the Bhagavad-gītā (4.5).

SB 1.16.5, Translation:

Śaunaka Ṛṣi inquired: Why did Mahārāja Parīkṣit simply punish him, since he was the lowest of the śūdras, having dressed as a king and having struck a cow on the leg? Please describe all these incidents if they relate to the topics of Lord Kṛṣṇa.

SB 1.18.38, Purport:

The boy was not happy because he committed a great mistake, and he wanted to be relieved of the burden on his heart by crying. So after entering the hermitage and seeing his father in that condition, he cried loudly so that he might be relieved. But it was too late. The father regretted the whole incident.

SB 1.18.41, Purport:

Since Śamīka Ṛṣi was an experienced, good brāhmaṇa, he did not approve of the actions of his condemned son. He began to lament for all that his son had done. The king was beyond the jurisdiction of curses as a general rule, and what to speak of a good king like Mahārāja Parīkṣit. The offense of the King was most insignificant, and his being condemned to death was certainly a very great sin for Śṛṅgi. Therefore Ṛṣi Śamīka regretted the whole incident.

SB 1.18.46, Purport:

In the śāstras the duties of all castes and orders of society are prescribed. All the qualities of a kṣatriya mentioned in the Bhagavad-gītā (18.43) were present in the person of the Emperor. He was also a great devotee of the Lord and a self-realized soul. Cursing such a king, when he was tired and fatigued with hunger and thirst, was not at all proper. Śamīka Ṛṣi thus admitted from all sides that Mahārāja Parīkṣit was cursed most unjustly. Although all the brāhmaṇas were aloof from the incident, still for the childish action of a brāhmaṇa boy the whole world situation was changed. Thus Ṛṣi Śamīka, a brāhmaṇa, took responsibility for all deterioration of the good orders of the world.

SB 1.18.49, Purport:

The whole incident is now cleared up. Mahārāja Parīkṣit's garlanding the sage with a dead snake was not at all a very serious offense, but Śṛṅgi's cursing the King was a serious offense. The serious offense was committed by a foolish child only; therefore he deserved to be pardoned by the Supreme Lord, although it was not possible to get free from the sinful reaction. Mahārāja Parīkṣit also did not mind the curse offered to him by a foolish brāhmaṇa. On the contrary, he took full advantage of the awkward situation, and by the great will of the Lord, Mahārāja Parīkṣit achieved the highest perfection of life through the grace of Śrīla Śukadeva Gosvāmī. Actually it was the desire of the Lord, and Mahārāja Parīkṣit, Ṛṣi Śamīka and his son Śṛṅgi were all instrumental in fulfilling the desire of the Lord. So none of them were put into difficulty because everything was done in relation with the Supreme Person.

SB 1.18.50, Purport:

The transcendentalists are the empiric philosophers, the mystics and the devotees of the Lord. Empiric philosophers aim at the perfection of merging into the being of the Absolute, mystics aim at perceiving the all-pervading Supersoul, and the devotees of the Lord are engaged in the transcendental loving service of the Personality of Godhead. Since Brahman, Paramātmā and Bhagavān are different phases of the same Transcendence, all these transcendentalists are beyond the three modes of material nature. Material distresses and happinesses are products of the three modes, and therefore the causes of such material distress and happiness have nothing to do with the transcendentalists. The King was a devotee, and the ṛṣi was a mystic. Therefore both of them were unattached to the accidental incident created by the supreme will. The playful child was an instrument in fulfilling the Lord's will.

SB 1.19.3, Purport:

Cow protection means feeding the brahminical culture, which leads towards God consciousness, and thus perfection of human civilization is achieved. The age of Kali aims at killing the higher principles of life, and although Mahārāja Parīkṣit strongly resisted the domination of the personality of Kali within the world, the influence of the age of Kali came at an opportune moment, and even a strong king like Mahārāja Parīkṣit was induced to disregard the brahminical culture due to a slight provocation of hunger and thirst. Mahārāja Parīkṣit lamented the accidental incident, and he desired that all his kingdom, strength and accumulation of wealth would be burned up for not being engaged in brahminical culture, etc.

SB 1.19.4, Purport:

As a devotee of the Lord, he could understand that the cursing of the brāhmaṇa boy, although unwise, was a blessing upon him, being the cause of detachment from worldly affairs, both political and social. Śamīka Muni also, after regretting the incident, conveyed the news to the King as a matter of duty so that the King would be able to prepare himself to go back to Godhead. Śamīka Muni sent news to the King that foolish Śṛṅgi, his son, although a powerful brāhmaṇa boy, unfortunately had misused his spiritual power by cursing the King unwarrantedly. The incident of the King's garlanding the muni was not sufficient cause for being cursed to death, but since there was no way to retract the curse, the King was informed to prepare for death within a week. Both Śamīka Muni and the King were self-realized souls. Śamīka Muni was a mystic, and Mahārāja Parīkṣit was a devotee.

SB Canto 2

SB 2.1.8, Purport:

Lord Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu instructed a learned brāhmaṇa to study Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam from a personal bhāgavata. Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is based on the transcendental name, form, attributes, pastimes, entourage and variegatedness of the Supreme Person, and it is spoken by the incarnation of the Personality of Godhead, Śrīla Vyāsadeva. Pastimes of the Lord are executed in cooperation with His pure devotees, and consequently historical incidences are mentioned in this great literature because they are related to Kṛṣṇa. It is called brahma-sammitam because it is the sound representative of Lord Kṛṣṇa—like the Bhagavad-gītā. Bhagavad-gītā is the sound incarnation of the Lord because it is spoken by the Supreme Lord, and Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is the sound representative of the Lord because it was spoken by the incarnation of the Lord about the activities of the Lord.

SB 2.7.7, Purport:

When Lord Śiva was engaged in severely austere meditation, Cupid, the demigod of lust, threw his arrow of sex desire. Lord Śiva, thus being angry at him, glanced at Cupid in great wrath, and at once the body of Cupid was annihilated. Although Lord Śiva was so powerful, he was unable to get free from the effects of such wrath. But in the behavior of Lord Viṣṇu there is no incident of such wrath at any time. On the contrary, Bhṛgu Muni tested the tolerance of the Lord by purposely kicking His chest, but instead of being angry at Bhṛgu Muni the Lord begged his pardon, saying that Bhṛgu Muni's leg might have been badly hurt because His chest is too hard. The Lord has the sign of the foot of bhṛgupāda as the mark of tolerance.

SB 2.7.8, Purport:

When he was only five years old, Prince Dhruva, a great devotee and the son of Mahārāja Uttānapāda, was sitting on the lap of his father. His stepmother did not like the King's patting her stepson, so she dragged him out, saying that he could not claim to sit on the lap of the King because he was not born out of her womb. The little boy felt insulted by this act of his stepmother. Nor did his father make any protest, for he was too attached to his second wife. After this incident, Prince Dhruva went to his own mother and complained. His real mother also could not take any step against this insulting behavior, and so she wept. The boy inquired from his mother how he could sit on the royal throne of his father, and the poor queen replied that only the Lord could help him. The boy inquired where the Lord could be seen, and the queen replied that it is said that the Lord is sometimes seen by great sages in the dense forest. The child prince decided to go into the forest to perform severe penances in order to achieve his objective.

SB 2.7.12, Purport:

During one day of Brahmā there are fourteen Manus, and at the end of each Manu there is devastation up to the earthly planets, and the vast water is fearful even to Brahmā. So in the beginning of the would-be Vaivasvata Manu, such devastation would be seen by him. There would be many other incidents also, such as the killing of the famous Śaṅkhāsura. This foretelling is by the past experience of Brahmājī, who knew that in that fearful devastating scene, the Vedas would come out of his mouth, but the Lord in His fish incarnation not only would save all living entities, namely the demigods, animals, men and great sages, but would also save the Vedas.

SB 2.7.32, Purport:

Lord Kṛṣṇa therefore advised the inhabitants of Vrajabhūmi not to offer any sacrifices to the heavenly King Indra. But Indra, not knowing Lord Kṛṣṇa in Vrajabhūmi, was angry at the inhabitants of Vrajabhūmi and tried to avenge the offense. But, competent as the Lord was, He saved the inhabitants and animals of Vrajabhūmi by His personal energy and proved definitely that anyone directly engaged as a devotee of the Supreme Lord need not satisfy any other demigods, however great, even to the level of Brahmā, or Śiva. Thus this incident definitely proved without a doubt that Lord Kṛṣṇa is the Personality of Godhead and that He was so in all circumstances, as a child on the lap of His mother, as a boy 7 years old, and as an old man of 125 years of age. In either case He was never on the level of the ordinary man, and even in His advanced age He appeared a young boy 16 years old. These are the particular features of the transcendental body of the Lord.

SB 2.7.33, Purport:

The pastimes of the Lord are known to the experts who are able to see past, present and future, and Brahmājī, being one of them, foretold what would happen in the future. The killing of Śaṅkhacūḍa by the Lord is a more recent incident, after the rāsa-līlā, and not exactly a simultaneous affair. In the previous verses we have seen also that the Lord's engagement in the affairs of the forest fire was described along with His pastimes of punishing the Kāliya snake, and similarly the pastimes of the rāsa dance and the killing of Śaṅkhacūḍa are also described herein. The adjustment is that all these incidents would take place in the future, after the time when it was being foretold by Brahmājī to Nārada. The demon Śaṅkhacūḍa was killed by the Lord during His pastimes at Horikā in the month of Phālguna, and the same ceremony is still observed in India by the burning of the effigy of Śaṅkhacūḍa one day prior to the Lord's pastimes at Horikā, generally known as Holi.

SB Canto 3

SB 3.1.8, Purport:

Mahārāja Yudhiṣṭhira was the rightful heir to his father's kingdom. But just to favor his own sons, headed by Duryodhana, Dhṛtarāṣṭra, Mahārāja Yudhiṣṭhira's uncle, adopted various unfair means to cheat his nephews of their rightful share of the kingdom. At last the Pāṇḍavas demanded only five villages, one for each of the five brothers, but that was also refused by the usurpers. This incident led to the War of Kurukṣetra. The Battle of Kurukṣetra, therefore, was induced by the Kurus, and not the Pāṇḍavas.

SB 3.1.40, Purport:

When Mahārāja Pāṇḍu died, both his wives, namely Kuntī and Mādrī, were prepared to embrace the fire, but Mādrī requested Kuntī to live for the sake of the younger children, the five Pāṇḍavas. This was agreed upon by Kuntī at the added request of Vyāsadeva. In spite of her great bereavement, Kuntī decided to live, not to enjoy life in the absence of her husband, but only to give protection to the children. This incident is referred to here by Vidura because he knew all the facts about his sister-in-law Kuntīdevī. It is understood that Mahārāja Pāṇḍu was a great warrior and that he alone, with the help of bow and arrow, could conquer the world's four directions. In the absence of such a husband, it was almost impossible for Kuntī to live on even as a widow, but she had to do it for the sake of the five children.

SB 3.2.16, Translation:

When I think of Lord Kṛṣṇa-how He was born in the prison house of Vasudeva although He is unborn, how He went away from His father's protection to Vraja and lived there incognito out of fear of the enemy, and how, although unlimitedly powerful, He fled from Mathurā in fear—all these bewildering incidents give me distress.

SB 3.2.19, Purport:

It is a fact that persons who are trying to understand the Supreme Truth by their personal endeavors of mental speculation or mystic powers of yoga achieve the same goal as others who are personally killed by the Lord. Both achieve the salvation of merging in the brahma-jyotir rays of the transcendental body of the Lord. The Lord was merciful even to His enemy, and the success of the King of Cedi was observed by everyone who was present in the assembly. Vidura was also present there, and therefore Uddhava referred the incident to his memory.

SB 3.2.25, Purport:

Although there is no difference between the Lord's pastimes of appearance and disappearance, the devotees of the Lord do not generally discuss the subject matter of His disappearance. Vidura inquired indirectly from Uddhava about the incident of the Lord's disappearance by asking him to relate kṛṣṇa-kathā, or topics on the history of Lord Kṛṣṇa. Thus Uddhava began the topics from the very beginning of His appearance as the son of Vasudeva and Devakī in the prison of Kaṁsa, the King of the Bhojas, at Mathurā. The Lord has no business in this world, but when He is so requested by devotees like Brahmā, He descends on the earth for the welfare of the entire universe. This is stated in Bhagavad-gītā (4.8): paritrāṇāya sādhūnāṁ vināśāya ca duṣkṛtām/ dharma-saṁsthāpanārthāya sambhavāmi yuge yuge.

SB 3.2.28, Purport:

If anyone wants to enjoy the childhood pastimes of the Lord, then he has to follow in the footsteps of the residents of Vraja like Nanda, Upananda and other parental inhabitants. A child may insist on having something and cry like anything to get it, disturbing the whole neighborhood, and then immediately after achieving the desired thing, he laughs. Such crying and laughing is enjoyable to the parents and elderly members of the family, so the Lord would simultaneously cry and laugh in this way and merge His devotee-parents in the humor of transcendental pleasure. These incidents are enjoyable only by the residents of Vraja like Nanda Mahārāja, and not by the impersonalist worshipers of Brahman or Paramātmā. Sometimes when attacked in the forest by demons, Kṛṣṇa would appear struck with wonder, but He looked on them like the cub of a lion and killed them.

SB 3.3.3, Purport:

Princess Rukmiṇī, the daughter of King Bhīṣmaka, was actually as attractive as fortune itself because she was as valuable as gold both in color and in value. Since the goddess of fortune, Lakṣmī, is the property of the Supreme Lord, Rukmiṇī was actually meant for Lord Kṛṣṇa. But Śiśupāla was selected as her bridegroom by Rukmiṇī's elder brother, although King Bhīṣmaka wanted his daughter to be married to Kṛṣṇa. Rukmiṇī invited Kṛṣṇa to take her away from the clutches of Śiśupāla, so when the bridegroom, Śiśupāla, came there with his party with the desire to marry Rukmiṇī, Kṛṣṇa all of a sudden swept her from the scene, stepping over the heads of all the princes there, just as Garuḍa carried away nectar from the hands of the demons. This incident will be clearly explained in the Tenth Canto.

SB 3.3.15, Translation:

When they quarrel among themselves, influenced by intoxication, with their eyes red like copper because of drinking (madhu), then only will they disappear; otherwise, it will not be possible. On My disappearance, this incident will take place.

SB 3.3.17, Purport:

The embryonic body of Parīkṣit which was in formation after Uttarā's pregnancy by Abhimanyu, the great hero, was burned by the brahmāstra of Aśvatthāmā, but a second body was given by the Lord within the womb, and thus the descendant of Pūru was saved. This incident is the direct proof that the body and the living entity, the spiritual spark, are different. When the living entity takes shelter in the womb of a woman through the injection of the semen of a man, there is an emulsification of the man's and woman's discharges, and thus a body is formed the size of a pea, gradually developing into a complete body. But if the developing embryo is destroyed in some way or other, the living entity has to take shelter in another body or in the womb of another woman.

SB 3.3.28, Purport:

The word uru-rasam is also significant here. Hundreds of delicacies can be prepared simply by the combination of grains, vegetables and milk. All such preparations are in the mode of goodness and therefore may be offered to the Personality of Godhead. As stated in Bhagavad-gītā (9.26), the Lord accepts only foodstuffs which are within the range of fruits, flowers, leaves and liquids, provided they are offered in complete devotional service. Devotional service is the only criterion for a bona fide offering to the Lord. The Lord assures that He positively eats such foodstuffs offered by the devotees. So, judging from all sides, the Yadus were perfectly trained civilized persons, and their being cursed by the brāhmaṇa sages was only by the desire of the Lord; the whole incident was a warning to all concerned that no one should behave lightly with brāhmaṇas and Vaiṣṇavas.

SB 3.4.3, Purport:

The Lord's family members were either incarnations of His plenary expansions or demigods from the heavenly planets, and thus before His departure He separated them by His internal potency. Before being dispatched to their respective abodes, they were sent to the holy place of Prabhāsa, where they performed pious activities and took food and drink to their heart's content. It was then arranged for them to be sent back to their abodes so that others could see that the powerful Yadu dynasty was no longer in the world. In the previous verse, the word anujñāta, indicating that the whole sequence of events was arranged by the Lord, is significant. These particular pastimes of the Lord are not a manifestation of His external energy, or material nature. Such an exhibition of His internal potency is eternal, and therefore one should not conclude that the Yadus and Bhojas died in a drunken state in an ordinary fratricidal war. Śrī Jīva Gosvāmī comments on these incidents as magical performances.

SB 3.4.9, Purport:

Maitreya was one of the disciples of Maharṣi Parāśara, the father of Vyāsadeva. Thus Vyāsadeva and Maitreya were friends and mutual well-wishers. By some fortunate accident, Maitreya reached the place where Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa was resting. To meet the Lord is not an ordinary incident. Maitreya was a great sage and a learned scholar-philosopher but not a pure devotee of the Lord, and therefore his meeting with the Lord at that time may have been due to ajñāta-sukṛti, or some unknown devotional service. Pure devotees always engage in pure devotional activities, and therefore their meeting with the Lord is natural. But when those who are not up to that standard meet the Lord, it is due to the unforeseen fortune of accidental devotional service.

SB 3.4.11, Purport:

At that time an expansion of Uddhava, acting as one of the Vasus, desired to become an associate of the Lord. The Lord knew this because He is present in the heart of every living entity as Paramātmā, the Superconsciousness. In everyone's heart there is the representation of the Superconsciousness, who gives memory to the partial consciousness of every living entity. The living entity, as partial consciousness, forgets incidents of his past life, but the Superconsciousness reminds him how to act in terms of his past cultivation of knowledge. Bhagavad-gītā confirms this fact in various ways: ye yathā māṁ prapadyante tāṁs tathaiva bhajāmy aham (BG 4.11), sarvasya cāhaṁ hṛdi sanniviṣṭo mattaḥ smṛtir jñānam apohanaṁ ca (BG 15.15).

SB 3.4.16, Purport:

Pure devotees of the Lord are not very much concerned with philosophical speculation in regard to transcendental knowledge of the Lord. Nor is it possible to acquire complete knowledge of the Lord. Whatever little knowledge they have about the Lord is sufficient for them because devotees are simply satisfied in hearing and chanting about the transcendental pastimes of the Lord. This gives them all transcendental bliss. But some of the pastimes of the Lord appear contradictory, even to such pure devotees, and thus Uddhava asked the Lord about some of the contradictory incidents in His pastimes. The Lord is described as having nothing to do personally, and it is actually so because even in the creation and sustenance of the material world, the Lord has nothing to do. It seems contradictory, then, to hear that the Lord personally lifts the Govardhana Hill for the protection of His unalloyed devotees. The Lord is the Supreme Brahman, the Absolute Truth, the Personality of Godhead appearing like a man, but Uddhava had doubts whether He could have so many transcendental activities.

SB 3.4.29, Purport:

Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī and Śrīla Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura have very elaborately explained this incident of the Lord's disappearance in their commentaries, quoting various authentic versions of Vedic literatures. We purposely do not include them all here to avoid an increase in the volume of this book. The entire matter is explained in Bhagavad-gītā, as quoted above: the Lord reserves the right of not being exposed to everyone. He always keeps Himself out of the vision of the nondevotees, who are devoid of love and devotion, and thus He puts them still further away from the Lord. The Lord appeared on the invitation of Brahmā, who prayed before the Kṣīrodakaśāyī Viṣṇu, and therefore when the Lord appeared, all the forms of Viṣṇu amalgamated with Him, and when the mission was fulfilled, all of them disintegrated from Him in the usual course.

SB 3.5.10, Purport:

The story of the Battle of Kurukṣetra may be interesting for the mass of people, but to a person like Vidura, who is highly advanced in devotional service, only kṛṣṇa-kathā and that which is dovetailed with kṛṣṇa-kathā is interesting. Vidura wanted to hear of everything from Maitreya, and so he inquired from him, but he desired that all the topics be in relationship with Kṛṣṇa. As fire is never satisfied in its consumption of firewood, so a pure devotee of the Lord never hears enough about Kṛṣṇa. Historical events and other narrations concerning social and political incidents all become transcendental as soon as they are in relationship with Kṛṣṇa. That is the way to transform mundane things into spiritual identity. The whole world can be transformed into Vaikuṇṭha if all worldly activities are dovetailed with kṛṣṇa-kathā.

SB 3.7.5, Purport:

The consciousness of the living being is always present and never changes under any circumstances, as above mentioned. When a living man moves from one place to another, he is conscious that he has changed his position. He is always present in the past, present and future, like electricity. One can remember incidents from his past and can conjecture about his future also on the basis of past experience. He never forgets his personal identity, even though he is placed in awkward circumstances. How then can the living entity become forgetful of his real identity as pure spirit soul and identify with matter unless influenced by something beyond himself? The conclusion is that the living entity is influenced by the avidyā potency, as confirmed in both the Viṣṇu Purāṇa and the beginning of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam.

SB 3.7.16, Purport:

A living entity's unlawful desire to become one with the Lord in every respect is the root cause of the entire material manifestation, for otherwise the Lord has no need to create such a manifestation, even for His pastimes. The conditioned soul, under the spell of the external energy of the Lord, falsely suffers many unfortunate incidents in material life. The Lord is the predominator of the external energy, māyā, whereas the living entity is predominated by the same māyā under the material condition. The false attempt of the living entity to occupy the predominating post of the Lord is the cause of his material bondage, and the conditioned soul's attempt to become one with the Lord is the last snare of māyā.

SB 3.12.28, Purport:

One should, however, take serious note of this incident. The human being is a social animal, and his unrestricted mixing with the fair sex leads to downfall. Such social freedom of man and woman, especially among the younger section, is certainly a great stumbling block on the path of spiritual progress. Material bondage is due only to sexual bondage, and therefore unrestricted association of man and woman is surely a great impediment. Maitreya cited this example on the part of Brahmā just to bring to our notice this great danger.

SB 3.13.10, Purport:

When the four previous sons of Brahmā, the sages Sanaka, Sanātana, Sanandana and Sanat-kumāra, refused to obey their father, Brahmā was mortified, and his anger was manifested in the shape of Rudra. That incident was not forgotten by Brahmā, and therefore the obedience of Manu Svāyambhuva was very encouraging. From the material point of view, the four sages' disobedience to the order of their father was certainly abominable, but because such disobedience was for a higher purpose, they were free from the reaction of disobedience. Those who disobey their fathers on material grounds, however, are surely subjected to disciplinary reaction for such disobedience. Manu's obedience to his father on material grounds was certainly free from envy, and in the material world it is imperative for ordinary men to follow the example of Manu.

SB 3.13.27, Purport:

As the residents of the upper three planetary systems offered their prayers to the Lord, it is understood that His body expanded throughout the sky, beginning from the topmost planet, Brahmaloka, or Satyaloka. It is stated in the Brahma-saṁhitā that His eyes are the sun and the moon; therefore His very glance over the sky was as illuminating as the sun or the moon. The Lord is described herein as mahīdhraḥ, which means either a "big mountain" or the "sustainer of the earth." In other words, the Lord's body was as big and hard as the Himalayan Mountains; otherwise how was it possible that He kept the entire earth on the support of His white tusks? The poet Jayadeva, a great devotee of the Lord, has sung of the incident in his prayers for the incarnations:

vasati daśana-śikhare dharaṇī tava lagnā

śaśini kalaṅka-kaleva nimagnā

keśava dhṛta-śūkara-rūpa jaya jagadīśa hare

"All glories to Lord Keśava (Kṛṣṇa), who appeared as the boar. The earth was held between His tusks, which appeared like the scars on the moon."

SB 3.15.4, Purport:

Because Brahmā is almost on an equal footing with the Personality of Godhead, he is addressed here as the god of the demigods, and because he is the secondary creator of this universe, he is addressed as the sustainer of the universe. He is the head of all the demigods, and therefore he is addressed here as the head jewel of the demigods. It is not difficult for him to understand everything which is happening in both the spiritual and material worlds. He knows everyone's heart and everyone's intentions. Therefore he was requested to explain this incident. Why was the pregnancy of Diti causing such anxieties all over the universe?

SB 3.15.26, Purport:

Modern mechanical space vehicles are unsuccessful because they cannot go to the highest region of this material creation, and they certainly cannot enter the spiritual sky. But by perfection of the yoga system one not only can travel through material space, but can surpass material space and enter the spiritual sky. We learn this fact also from an incident concerning Durvāsā Muni and Mahārāja Ambarīṣa. It is understood that in one year Durvāsā Muni traveled everywhere and went into the spiritual sky to meet the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Nārāyaṇa. By present standards, scientists calculate that if one could travel at the speed of light, it would take forty thousand years to reach the highest planet of this material world. But the yoga system can carry one without limitation or difficulty. The word yoga-māyā is used in this verse. Yoga-māyā-balena vikuṇṭham. The transcendental happiness exhibited in the spiritual world and all other spiritual manifestations there are made possible by the influence of yoga-māyā, the internal potency of the Supreme Personality of Godhead.

SB 3.15.49, Purport:

The four sages now offer their humility to the Personality of Godhead because of their having been haughty in cursing two other devotees of the Lord. Jaya and Vijaya, the two doorkeepers who checked them from entering the Vaikuṇṭha planet, were certainly offenders, but as Vaiṣṇavas, the four sages should not have cursed them in anger. After the incident, they became conscious that they had done wrong by cursing the devotees of the Lord, and they prayed to the Lord that even in the hellish condition of life their minds might not be distracted from the engagement of service to the lotus feet of Lord Nārāyaṇa. Those who are devotees of the Lord are not afraid of any condition of life, provided there is constant engagement in the service of the Lord. It is said of the nārāyaṇa-para, or those who are devotees of Nārāyaṇa, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, na kutaścana bibhyati (SB 6.17.28).

SB 3.16.2, Purport:

To commit an offense at the feet of a devotee of the Lord is a great wrong. Even when a living entity is promoted to Vaikuṇṭha, there is still the chance that he may commit offenses, but the difference is that when one is in a Vaikuṇṭha planet, even if by chance one commits an offense, he is protected by the Lord. This is the remarkable fact in the dealings of the Lord and the servitor, as seen in the present incident concerning Jaya and Vijaya. The word atikramam used herein indicates that in offending a devotee one neglects the Supreme Lord Himself.

SB 3.16.4, Translation:

To Me, the brāhmaṇa is the highest and most beloved personality. The disrespect shown by My attendants has actually been displayed by Me because the doormen are My servitors. I take this to be an offense by Myself; therefore I seek your forgiveness for the incident that has arisen.

SB 3.16.12, Purport:

From this statement we can understand how anxious the Lord is to get his servitor back into Vaikuṇṭha. This incident, therefore, proves that those who have once entered a Vaikuṇṭha planet can never fall down. The case of Jaya and Vijaya is not a falldown; it is just an accident. The Lord is always anxious to get such devotees back again to the Vaikuṇṭha planets as soon as possible. It is to be assumed that there is no possibility of a misunderstanding between the Lord and the devotees, but when there are discrepancies or disruptions between one devotee and another, one has to suffer the consequences, although that suffering is temporary. The Lord is so kind to His devotees that He took all the responsibility for the doormen's offense and requested the sages to give them facilities to return to Vaikuṇṭha as soon as possible.

SB 3.16.27, Purport:

The transcendental abode of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, as stated in Bhagavad-gītā and confirmed in this verse, is self-illuminated. In Bhagavad-gītā it is said that in the spiritual world there is no need of sun, moon or electricity. This indicates that all the planets there are self-illuminated, self-sufficient and independent; everything there is complete. Lord Kṛṣṇa says that once one goes to that Vaikuṇṭha planet, he never returns. The inhabitants of Vaikuṇṭha never return to the material world, but the incident of Jaya and Vijaya was a different case. They came to the material world for some time, and then they returned to Vaikuṇṭha.

SB 3.16.29, Purport:

As explained in connection with text 26, all the incidents that took place had the approval of the Lord. Ordinarily, there is no possibility that the four sages could be so angry with the doorkeepers, nor could the Supreme Lord neglect His two doorkeepers, nor can one come back from Vaikuṇṭha after once taking birth there. All these incidents, therefore, were designed by the Lord Himself for the sake of His pastimes in the material world. Thus He plainly says that it was done with His approval. Otherwise, it would have been impossible for inhabitants of Vaikuṇṭha to come back to this material world simply because of a brahminical curse. The Lord especially blesses the so-called culprits: "All glories unto you." A devotee, once accepted by the Lord, can never fall down. That is the conclusion of this incident.

SB 3.16.32, Purport:

It is clear from this verse that all the incidents took place at the entrance of Vaikuṇṭhaloka. In other words, the sages were not actually within Vaikuṇṭhaloka, but were at the gate. It could be asked, "How could they return to the material world if they entered Vaikuṇṭhaloka?" But factually they did not enter, and therefore they returned. There are many similar incidents where great yogīs and brāhmaṇas, by dint of their yoga practice, have gone from this material world to Vaikuṇṭhaloka—but they were not meant to stay there. They came back. It is also confirmed here that the Lord was surrounded by many Vaikuṇṭha airplanes. Vaikuṇṭhaloka is described here as having splendid opulence, far surpassing the splendor of this material world.

SB 3.16.36, Purport:

Brahmā showed the demigods that the situation created by the darkness, for which they were disturbed, was the desire of the Supreme Lord. He wanted to show that even though these two attendants were coming in the forms of demons, they were very powerful, greater than the demigods, who could not control them. No one can surpass the acts of the Supreme Lord. The demigods were also advised not to try to counteract this incident, because it was ordered by the Lord. Similarly, anyone who is ordered by the Lord to perform some action in this material world, especially preaching His glories, cannot be counteracted by anyone; the will of the Lord is executed under all circumstances.

SB 3.17.1, Purport:

The demigods, who are denizens of higher planets, are also very much afraid of incidents such as the universe's becoming dark, and so they consulted Brahmā. This indicates that the quality of fear exists for every living entity in the material world. The four principal activities of material existence are eating, sleeping, fearing and mating. The fear element exists also in the demigods. On every planet, even in the higher planetary systems, including the moon and the sun, as well as on this earth, the same principles of animal life exist. Otherwise, why are the demigods also afraid of the darkness? The difference between the demigods and ordinary human beings is that the demigods approach authority, whereas the inhabitants of this earth defy authority. If people would only approach the authority, then every adverse condition in this universe could be rectified. Arjuna was also disturbed on the Battlefield of Kurukṣetra, but he approached the authority, Kṛṣṇa, and his problem was solved. The conclusive instruction of this incident is that we may be disturbed by some material condition, but if we approach the authority who can actually explain the matter, then our problem is solved. The demigods approached Brahmā for the meaning of the disturbance, and after hearing from him they were satisfied and returned home peacefully.

SB 3.19.23, Purport:

At Hiraṇyākṣa's last moment, his mother, Diti, remembered what her husband had said. Although her sons would be demons, they would have the advantage of being killed by the Personality of Godhead Himself. She remembered this incident by the grace of the Lord, and her breasts flowed blood instead of milk. In many instances we find that when a mother is moved by affection for her sons, milk flows from her breasts. In the case of the demon's mother, the blood could not transform into milk, but it flowed down her breasts as it was. Blood transforms into milk. To drink milk is auspicious, but to drink blood is inauspicious, although they are one and the same thing. This formula is applicable in the case of cow's milk also.

SB 3.19.32, Purport:

Here the sage Maitreya admits that he explained the incident of the killing of Hiraṇyākṣa by the Supreme Personality of Godhead as a straight narration; he did not manufacture anything or add interpretation, but explained whatever he had heard from his spiritual master. Thus he accepted as bona fide the system of paramparā, or receiving the transcendental message in disciplic succession. Unless received by this bona fide process of hearing from a spiritual master, the statement of an ācārya or preceptor cannot be valid.

SB 3.20.2, Purport:

The incident referred to here is that Vidura left the protection of his elder brother Dhṛtarāṣṭra, went traveling everywhere to sacred places and met Maitreya at Hardwar. Śaunaka Ṛṣi here inquires about the topics of the conversation between Maitreya Ṛṣi and Vidura. Vidura's qualification was that he was not only a friend of the Lord but also a great devotee. When Kṛṣṇa tried to stop the war and mitigate the misunderstanding between the cousin-brothers, they refused to accept His counsel; therefore Kṣattā, or Vidura, was unsatisfied with them, and he left the palace. As a devotee, Vidura showed by example that anywhere that Kṛṣṇa is not honored is a place unfit for human habitation. A devotee may be tolerant regarding his own interests, but he should not be tolerant when there is misbehavior toward the Lord or the Lord's devotee. Here the word aghavān is very significant, for it indicates that the Kauravas, Dhṛtarāṣṭra's sons, lost the war because of being sinful in disobeying the instructions of Kṛṣṇa.

SB 3.21.3, Purport:

Here we are speaking of Svāyambhuva Manu, but in Bhagavad-gītā we hear about Vaivasvata Manu. The present age belongs to the Vaivasvata Manu. Svāyambhuva Manu was previously ruling, and his history begins from the Varāha age, or the millennium when the Lord appeared as the boar. There are fourteen Manus in one day of the life of Brahmā, and in the life of each Manu there are particular incidents. The Vaivasvata Manu of Bhagavad-gītā is different from Svāyambhuva Manu.

SB 3.22.13, Purport:

Another feature of this incident is that Svāyambhuva Manu was the emperor, but he went to offer his qualified daughter to a poor brāhmaṇa. Kardama Muni had no worldly possessions—he was a hermit living in the forest—but he was advanced in culture. Therefore, in offering one's daughter to a person, the culture and quality are counted as prominent, not wealth or any other material consideration.

SB 3.22.17, Purport:

It is suggested that private airplanes or helicopters were also current in those days. The Gandharva Viśvāvasu, while flying in the sky, could see Devahūti playing ball on the roof of the palace. Ball playing was also current, but aristocratic girls would not play in a public place. Ball playing and other such pleasures were not meant for ordinary women and girls; only princesses like Devahūti could indulge in such sports. It is described here that she was seen from the flying airplane. This indicates that the palace was very high, otherwise how could one see her from an airplane? The vision was so distinct that the Gandharva Viśvāvasu was bewildered by her beauty and by hearing the sound of her ankle bangles, and being captivated by the sound and beauty, he fell down. Kardama Muni mentioned the incident as he had heard it.

SB Canto 4

SB 4.3.15, Purport:

Therefore one may feel sorry in the absolute world, but the manifestation of so-called pain is always full of bliss. For instance, once Lord Kṛṣṇa, in His childhood, was chastised by His mother, Yaśodā, and Lord Kṛṣṇa cried. But although He shed tears from His eyes, this is not to be considered a reaction of the mode of ignorance, for the incident was full of transcendental pleasure. When Kṛṣṇa was playing in so many ways, sometimes it appeared that He caused distress to the gopīs, but actually such dealings were full of transcendental bliss. That is the difference between the material and spiritual worlds. The spiritual world, where everything is pure, is pervertedly reflected in this material world. Since everything in the spiritual world is absolute, in the spiritual varieties of apparent pleasure and pain there is no perception other than eternal bliss, whereas in the material world, because everything is contaminated by the modes of material nature, there are feelings of pleasure and pain. Therefore because Lord Śiva, although a fully self-realized person, was in charge of the material mode of ignorance, he felt sorrow.

SB 4.4.24, Purport:

The perfection of yoga is that one can give up one's body or release oneself from the embodiment of material elements according to one's desire. Yogīs who have attained perfection are not subject to death by natural laws; such perfect yogīs can leave the body whenever they desire. Generally the yogī first of all becomes mature in controlling the air passing within the body, thus bringing the soul to the top of the brain. Then when the body bursts into flames, the yogī can go anywhere he likes. This yoga system recognizes the soul, and thus it is distinct from the so-called yoga process for controlling the cells of the body, which has been discovered in the modern age. The real yoga process accepts the transmigration of the soul from one planet to another or one body to another; and it appears from this incident that Satī wanted to transfer her soul to another body or sphere.

SB 4.8.8, Purport:

The great sage Maitreya wanted to describe the pious activities of the kings. Priyavrata was the first son of Svāyambhuva Manu, and Uttānapāda was the second, but the great sage Maitreya immediately began to speak of Dhruva Mahārāja, the son of Uttānapāda, because Maitreya was very eager to describe pious activities. The incidents in the life of Dhruva Mahārāja are very attractive for devotees. From his pious actions, one can learn how one can detach himself from material possessions and how one can enhance one's devotional service by severe austerities and penances. By hearing the activities of pious Dhruva, one can enhance one's faith in God and can directly connect with the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and thus one can very soon be elevated to the transcendental platform of devotional service. The example of Dhruva Mahārāja's austerities can immediately generate a feeling of devotional service in the hearts of the hearers.

SB 4.8.16, Translation:

This incident was unbearable to Sunīti's patience. She began to burn as if in a forest fire, and in her grief she became just like a burnt leaf and so lamented. As she remembered the words of her co-wife, her bright, lotuslike face filled with tears, and thus she spoke.

SB 4.8.25, Purport:

When Dhruva Mahārāja was talking with his mother, Sunīti, of all the incidents that had taken place in the palace, Nārada was not present. Thus the question may be raised how Nārada overheard all these topics. The answer is that Nārada is trikāla-jña; he is so powerful that he can understand the past, future and present of everyone's heart, just like the Supersoul, the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Therefore, after understanding the strong determination of Dhruva Mahārāja, Nārada came to help him. It may be explained in this way: The Supreme Personality of Godhead is present in everyone's heart, and as soon as He understands that a living entity is serious about entering devotional service, He sends His representative. In this way Nārada was sent to Dhruva Mahārāja. This is explained in the Caitanya-caritāmṛta. Guru-kṛṣṇa-prasāde pāya bhakti-latā-bīja: (CC Madhya 19.151) by the grace of the spiritual master and Kṛṣṇa, one can enter into devotional service. Because of Dhruva Mahārāja's determination, Kṛṣṇa, the Supersoul, immediately sent His representative, Nārada, to initiate him.

SB 4.12.32, Purport:

Therefore as soon as Dhruva Mahārāja thought of his poor mother, he was assured by the associates of Viṣṇu that Sunīti was also going to Vaikuṇṭhaloka, in another plane. Dhruva Mahārāja had thought that he was going alone to Vaikuṇṭhaloka, leaving behind his mother, which was not very auspicious because people would criticize him for going alone to Vaikuṇṭhaloka and not carrying with him Sunīti, who had given him so much. But Dhruva also considered that he was not personally the Supreme. Therefore, if Kṛṣṇa fulfilled his desires, only then would it be possible. Kṛṣṇa could immediately understand his mind, and He told Dhruva that his mother was also going with him. This incident proves that a pure devotee like Dhruva Mahārāja can fulfill all his desires; by the grace of the Lord, he becomes exactly like the Lord, and thus whenever he thinks of anything, his wish is immediately fulfilled.

SB 4.12.33, Purport:

This incident proves that the śikṣā- or dīkṣā-guru who has a disciple who strongly executes devotional service like Dhruva Mahārāja can be carried by the disciple even though the instructor is not as advanced. Although Sunīti was an instructor to Dhruva Mahārāja, she could not go to the forest because she was a woman, nor could she execute austerities and penances as Dhruva Mahārāja did. Still, Dhruva Mahārāja was able to take his mother with him. Similarly, Prahlāda Mahārāja also delivered his atheistic father, Hiraṇyakaśipu. The conclusion is that a disciple or an offspring who is a very strong devotee can carry with him to Vaikuṇṭhaloka either his father, mother or śikṣā- or dīkṣā-guru. Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura used to say, "If I could perfectly deliver even one soul back home, back to Godhead, I would think my mission—propagating Kṛṣṇa consciousness—to be successful."

SB 4.13.37, Purport:

The word udāra-dhīḥ is significant in this connection. The wife of the King, Sunīthā, was not fit to accept this benediction, yet the King was so liberal that without hesitation he offered to his wife the boiled rice in milk prasāda received from the yajña-puruṣa. Of course, everything is designed by the Supreme Personality of Godhead. As will be explained in later verses, this incident was not very favorable for the King. Since the King was very liberal, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, in order to increase his detachment from this material world, willed that a cruel son be born of the Queen so that the King would have to leave home. As stated above, Lord Viṣṇu fulfills the desires of the karmīs as they desire, but the Lord fulfills the desire of a devotee in a different way so that the devotee may gradually come to Him. This is confirmed in the Bhagavad-gītā (dadāmi buddhi-yogaṁ taṁ yena mām upayānti te). The Lord gives the devotee the opportunity to make progress further and further so that he may come back home, back to Godhead.

SB 4.15.9-10, Purport:

There is a system by which one can detect an incarnation of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Nowadays it has become a cheap fashion to accept any rascal as an incarnation of God, but from this incident we can see that Lord Brahmā personally examined the hands and feet of King Pṛthu for specific signs. In their prophecies the learned sages and brāhmaṇas accepted Pṛthu Mahārāja as a plenary partial expansion of the Lord. During the presence of Lord Kṛṣṇa, however, a king declared himself Vāsudeva, and Lord Kṛṣṇa killed him. Before accepting someone as an incarnation of God, one should verify his identity according to the symptoms mentioned in the śāstras. Without these symptoms the pretender is subject to be killed by the authorities for pretending to be an incarnation of God.

SB 4.19.34, Purport:

Sometimes the saintly or very religious person also has to meet with reversals in life. Such incidents should be taken as providential. Although there may be sufficient cause for being unhappy, one should avoid counteracting such reversals, for the more we become implicated in rectifying such reversals, the more we enter into the darkest regions of material anxiety. Lord Kṛṣṇa has also advised us in this connection. We should tolerate things instead of becoming agitated.

SB 4.20.18, Purport:

Indra decided to fall down at the lotus feet of King Pṛthu, but the King was so magnanimous a Vaiṣṇava that he did not want Mahārāja Indra to fall down at his feet. Instead, King Pṛthu immediately picked him up and embraced him, and both of them forgot all the past incidents. Both King Indra and Mahārāja Pṛthu were envious and angry with each other, but since both of them were Vaiṣṇavas, or servants of Lord Viṣṇu, it was their duty to adjust the cause of their envy. This is also a first-class example of cooperative behavior between Vaiṣṇavas. In the present days, however, because people are not Vaiṣṇavas, they fight perpetually among one another and are vanquished without finishing the mission of human life. There is a great need to propagate the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement in the world so that even though people sometimes become angry and malicious toward one another, because of their being Kṛṣṇa conscious such rivalry, competition and envy can be adjusted without difficulty.

SB 4.22.7, Purport:

When something uncommon happens in one's progressive spiritual life, it should be understood to be incurred by ajñāta-sukṛti, or pious activities beyond one's knowledge. To see personally the Supreme Personality of Godhead or His pure devotee is not an ordinary incident. When such things happen, they should be understood to be caused by previous pious activity, as confirmed in Bhagavad-gītā (7.28): yeṣāṁ tv anta-gataṁ pāpaṁ janānāṁ puṇya-karmaṇām. One who is completely freed from all the resultant actions of sinful activities and who is absorbed only in pious activities can engage in devotional service. Although Mahārāja Pṛthu's life was full of pious activities, he was wondering how his audience with the Kumāras happened. He could not imagine what kind of pious activities he had performed. This is a sign of humility on the part of King Pṛthu, whose life was so full of pious activities that even Lord Viṣṇu came to see him and predicted that the Kumāras would also come.

SB 4.22.36, Purport:

By studying such incidents, we can understand the full meaning of īśa-vidhvaṁsitāśiṣām. The Lord does not bestow material blessings upon the devotees, for they may be entrapped again in this material world by continuous birth, death, old age and disease. Due to materialistic opulences, persons like Rāvaṇa become puffed up for sense gratification. Rāvaṇa even dared kidnap Sītā, who was both the wife of Lord Rāmacandra and the goddess of fortune, thinking that he would be able to enjoy the pleasure potency of the Lord. But actually, by such action, Rāvaṇa became vidhvaṁsita, or ruined. At the present moment human civilization is too much attached to economic development and sense gratification and is therefore nearing the path of ruination.

SB 4.23.31, Purport:

The supreme Vaiṣṇava is the spiritual master, and he is nondifferent from the Supreme Personality of Godhead. It is said that sometimes Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu used to chant the names of the gopīs. Some of the Lord's students tried to advise Him to chant the name of Kṛṣṇa instead, but upon hearing this Caitanya Mahāprabhu became very angry with His students. The controversy on this subject reached a point that after this incident Caitanya Mahāprabhu decided to take sannyāsa because He was not taken very seriously in His gṛhastha-āśrama. The point is that since Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu chanted the names of the gopīs, worship of the gopīs or the devotees of the Lord is as good as devotional service rendered directly to the Lord. It is also stated by the Lord Himself that devotional service to His devotees is better than service offered directly to Him. Sometimes the sahajiyā class of devotees are interested only in Kṛṣṇa's personal pastimes to the exclusion of the activities of the devotees. This type of devotee is not on a very high level; one who sees the devotee and the Lord on the same level has further progressed.

SB 4.24.14, Purport:

Sometimes great sages and ascetics enter the Himalaya Mountains in order to find seclusion from the turmoil of the world. It appears, however, that all the Pracetās, the sons of Prācīnabarhi, entered the depths of the ocean to perform austerity in a secluded place. Since they performed austerities for ten thousand years, this incident took place in the Satya-yuga, when people used to live for a hundred thousand years. It is also significant that by their austerity they worshiped the master of austerity, Śrī Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Personality of Godhead. If one wants to perform austerities and penances in order to attain the supreme goal, one must attain the favor of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. If one achieves the favor of the Supreme Lord, it is to be understood that he has finished all kinds of austerities and penances and has attained efficiency in their execution.

SB 4.25.32, Purport:

By this incident we can understand that when a man is aggressive and begins to woo a woman, the woman becomes attracted to the man. This process is described in the Bhāgavatam (5.5.8) as puṁsaḥ striyā mithunī-bhāvam etam. This attraction is enacted on the platform of sexual life. Thus the sex impulse is the platform of material engagement. This conditional life, the platform of material sense enjoyment, is the cause of forgetfulness of spiritual life. In this way a living entity's original Kṛṣṇa consciousness becomes covered or converted into material consciousness. Thus one engages in the business of sense gratification.

SB 4.29.67, Translation:

Sometimes in a dream we see something never experienced or heard of in this life, but all these incidents have been experienced at different times, in different places and in different conditions.

SB 4.29.68, Purport:

The activities of the living entity in the body of a dog may be experienced in the mind of a different body; therefore those activities appear never to have been heard or seen. The mind continues, although the body changes. Even in this life-span we can sometimes experience dreams of our childhood. Although such incidents now appear strange, it is to be understood that they are recorded in the mind. Because of this, they become visible in dreams. The transmigration of the soul is caused by the subtle body, which is the storehouse of all kinds of material desires. Unless one is fully absorbed in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, material desires will come and go. That is the nature of the mind—thinking, feeling and willing.

SB 4.30.13, Purport:

Every businessman is afraid of his associates because this material world is the field of activities for all kinds of envious people who have come here to compete with the opulence of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Thus Indra was very much afraid of the severe austerities performed by the great sage Kaṇḍu, and he sent Pramlocā to break his vows and austerities. A similar incident took place in the case of Viśvāmitra. From other incidents in the śāstras, it appears that Indra has always been envious. When King Pṛthu was celebrating various sacrifices, outdoing Indra, Indra became very envious, and he disturbed King Pṛthu's sacrifice. This has already been discussed in previous chapters. King Indra became successful in breaking the vow of the great sage Kaṇḍu, who became attracted by the beauty of the heavenly society girl Pramlocā and begot a female child. This child is described herein as lotus-eyed and very beautiful. Being thus successful in her mission, Pramlocā returned to the heavenly planets, leaving the newborn child to the care of the trees. Fortunately, the trees accepted the child and agreed to raise her.

SB 4.30.48, Purport:

That is to say, he became the son of the Pracetās. Not only that, but because of his disrespecting Lord Śiva, he had to undergo the tribulation of taking birth from within the womb of a woman. In the Dakṣa-yajña arena, he was once killed by Lord Śiva's servant, Vīrabhadra. Because that was not sufficient, he again took birth, from the womb of Māriṣā. At the end of the Dakṣa-yajña and the disastrous incidents there, Dakṣa offered his prayer to Lord Śiva. Although he had to give up his body and take birth from the womb of a woman impregnated by the semen of a kṣatriya, he received all opulence by the grace of Lord Śiva. These are the subtle laws of material nature. Unfortunately, people in this modern age do not know how these laws are working. Having no knowledge of the eternity of the spirit soul and its transmigration, the population of the present age is in the greatest ignorance. Because of this, it is said in Bhāgavatam (1.1.10): mandāḥ sumanda-matayo manda-bhāgyā hy upadrutāḥ. The total population in this age of Kali-yuga is very bad, lazy, unfortunate and disturbed by material conditions.

SB Canto 5

SB 5.8.27, Translation:

At the time of death, the King saw that the deer was sitting by his side, exactly like his own son, and was lamenting his death. Actually the mind of the King was absorbed in the body of the deer, and consequently—like those bereft of Kṛṣṇa consciousness—he left the world, the deer, and his material body and acquired the body of a deer. However, there was one advantage. Although he lost his human body and received the body of a deer, he did not forget the incidents of his past life.

SB 5.8.27, Purport:

After quitting his body, a person gets another body according to his mental condition at the time of death. At death, a person always thinks of that subject matter in which he has been engrossed during his life. According to this law, because Bharata Mahārāja was always thinking of the deer and forgetting his worship of the Supreme Lord, he acquired the body of a deer. However, due to his having been elevated to the topmost platform of devotional service, he did not forget the incidents of his past life. This special benediction saved him from further deterioration. Due to his past activities in devotional service, he became determined to finish his devotional service even in the body of a deer. It is therefore said in this verse, mṛtam, although he had died, anu, afterwards, na mṛta janmānusmṛtir itaravat, he did not forget the incidents of his past life as others forget them. As stated in Brahma-saṁhitā: karmāṇi nirdahati kintu ca bhakti-bhājām (Bs. 5.54). It is proved herein that due to the grace of the Supreme Lord, a devotee is never vanquished. Due to his willful neglect of devotional service, a devotee may be punished for a short time, but he again revives his devotional service and returns home, back to Godhead.

SB 5.9.3, Translation:

Due to his being especially gifted with the Lord's mercy, Bharata Mahārāja could remember the incidents of his past life. Although he received the body of a brāhmaṇa, he was still very much afraid of his relatives and friends who were not devotees. He was always very cautious of such association because he feared that he would again fall down. Consequently he manifested himself before the public eye as a madman—dull, blind and deaf—so that others would not try to talk to him. In this way he saved himself from bad association. Within he was always thinking of the lotus feet of the Lord and chanting the Lord's glories, which save one from the bondage of fruitive action. In this way he saved himself from the onslaught of nondevotee associates.

SB 5.12 Summary:

Jaḍa Bharata also told about his own previous birth and informed the King that by the grace of the Lord he still remembered all the incidents of his past life. Due to the activities of his past life, Jaḍa Bharata was being very cautious and was therefore assuming the characteristics of a deaf and dumb man to avoid mingling with the material world. Association with the material modes of nature is very powerful. The bad association of materialistic men can be avoided only in the association of devotees. In the association of devotees, one is given an opportunity to render devotional service in nine different ways-śravaṇaṁ kīrtanaṁ viṣṇoḥ smaraṇaṁ pāda-sevanam arcanaṁ vandanaṁ dāsyaṁ sakhyam ātma-nivedanam (SB 7.5.23). In this way, in the association of devotees, one can pass over material association, cross over the ocean of nescience and return home, back to Godhead.

SB 5.12.14, Purport:

The incident herein described is very significant. In a previous verse it is stated, vinā mahat-pāda-rajo-'bhiṣekam: one cannot attain perfection without smearing the dust from the lotus feet of an exalted devotee on his head. If one always follows the orders of the spiritual master, there is no question of falling down. As soon as a foolish disciple tries to overtake his spiritual master and becomes ambitious to occupy his post, he immediately falls down. Yasya prasādād bhagavat-prasādo yasyāprasādān na gatiḥ kuto 'pi **. If the spiritual master is considered an ordinary man, the disciple surely loses his chance to advance further. Despite a very rigid life in devotional service, Bharata Mahārāja did not consult a spiritual master when he became overly attached to a deer. Consequently he became strongly attached to the deer, and, forgetting his spiritual routine, he fell down.

SB 5.13.26, Purport:

There are many stories and incidents in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam that are described figuratively. Such allegorical descriptions may not be understood by unintelligent men; therefore it is the duty of the student to approach a bona fide spiritual master for the direct explanation.

SB 5.18.23, Purport:

"To this Vyeṅkaṭa Bhaṭṭa replied, 'I cannot enter into the mystery of this incident. I am an ordinary living being. My intelligence is limited, and I am always disturbed. How can I understand the pastimes of the Supreme Lord? They are deeper than millions of oceans.'

SB 5.18.27, Purport:

The truth is that the many millions of human beings, animals, birds and trees—indeed, all living entities—are maintained solely by the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Eko bahūnāṁ yo vidadhāti kāmān: one person, the Supreme Lord, is supplying the necessities of life for all other living entities. To challenge the authority of Nārāyaṇa, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, is the business of asuras (demons). Yet sometimes suras, or devotees, are also bewildered by the illusory energy and falsely claim to be the maintainer of the entire universe. Such incidents are described in the Tenth Canto of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, where Śukadeva Gosvāmī tells how Lord Brahmā and King Indra became puffed up and were eventually chastised by Kṛṣṇa.

SB Canto 6

SB 6.1.20, Translation and Purport:

In this regard, learned scholars and saintly persons describe a very old historical incident involving a discussion between the order carriers of Lord Viṣṇu and those of Yamarāja. Please hear of this from me.

The Purāṇas, or old histories, are sometimes neglected by unintelligent men who consider their descriptions mythological. Actually, the descriptions of the Purāṇas, or the old histories of the universe, are factual, although not chronological. The purāṇas record the chief incidents that have occurred over many millions of years, not only on this planet but also on other planets within the universe. Therefore all learned and realized Vedic scholars speak with references to the incidents in the Purāṇas. Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī accepts the Purāṇas to be as important as the Vedas themselves.

SB 6.1.20, Purport:

"Devotional service of the Lord that ignores the authorized Vedic literatures like the Upaniṣads, purāṇas and Nārada Pañcarātra is simply an unnecessary disturbance in society." A devotee of Kṛṣṇa must refer not only to the Vedas, but also to the purāṇas. One should not foolishly consider the Purāṇas mythological. If they were mythological, Śukadeva Gosvāmī would not have taken the trouble to recite the old historical incidents concerning the life of Ajāmila. Now the history begins as follows.

SB 6.2.16, Purport:

In this regard, Śrīla Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura describes an incident that took place when Sāmba was rescued from the punishment of the Kauravas. Sāmba fell in love with the daughter of Duryodhana, and since according to kṣatriya custom one is not offered a kṣatriya's daughter unless he displays his chivalrous valor, Sāmba abducted her. Consequently Sāmba was arrested by the Kauravas. Later, when Lord Balarāma came to rescue him, there was an argument about Sāmba's release. Since the argument was not settled, Balarāma showed His power in such a way that all of Hastināpura trembled and would have been vanquished as if by a great earthquake. Then the matter was settled, and Sāmba married Duryodhana's daughter. The purport is that one should take shelter of Kṛṣṇa-Balarāma, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, whose protective power is so great that it cannot be equaled in the material world. However powerful the reactions of one's sins, they will immediately be vanquished if one chants the name of Hari, Kṛṣṇa, Balarāma or Nārāyaṇa.

SB 6.2.39, Purport:

The word mukta-sarvānubandhanaḥ indicates that after this incident, Ajāmila, not caring for his wife and children, went straight to Hardwar for further advancement in his spiritual life. Our Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement now has centers in Vṛndāvana and Navadvīpa so that those who want to live a retired life, whether they be devotees or not, can go there and with determination give up the bodily concept of life. One is welcome to live in those holy places for the rest of his life in order to achieve the highest success by the very simple method of chanting the holy name of the Lord and taking prasāda. Thus one may return home, back to Godhead. We do not have a center in Hardwar, but Vṛndāvana and Śrīdhāma Māyāpur are better for devotees than any other places. The Caitanya Candrodaya temple offers one a good opportunity to associate with devotees. Let us all take advantage of this opportunity.

SB 6.3.3, Translation:

Śrī Śukadeva Gosvāmī replied: My dear King, when the order carriers of Yamarāja were baffled and defeated by the order carriers of Viṣṇu, they approached their master, the controller of Saṁyamanī-purī and master of sinful persons, to tell him of this incident.

SB 6.3.34, Purport:

Since this incident, the Yamadūtas have given up the dangerous behavior of approaching devotees. For the Yamadūtas, a devotee is dangerous.

SB 6.6.1, Purport:

After the incidents concerning the loss of his many sons, Dakṣa repented his misunderstanding with Nārada Muni. Lord Brahmā then saw Dakṣa and instructed him to beget children again. This time Dakṣa was very cautious to beget female children instead of male children so that Nārada Muni would not disturb them by urging them to accept the renounced order. Females are not meant for the renounced order of life; they should be faithful to their good husbands, for if a husband is competent for liberation, his wife will also achieve liberation with him. As stated in the śāstra, the results of a husband's pious activities are shared by his wife. Therefore a woman's duty is to be very chaste and faithful to her husband. Then without separate endeavor she will share in all the profit the husband earns.

SB 6.7.1, Translation:

Mahārāja Parīkṣit inquired from Śukadeva Gosvāmī: O great sage, why did the spiritual master of the demigods, Bṛhaspati, reject the demigods, who were his own disciples? What offense did the demigods commit against their spiritual master? Please describe to me this incident.

SB 6.10.11, Purport:

As indicated by the words pare bhagavati brahmaṇy ātmānaṁ sannayan, Dadhīci placed himself, as spirit soul, at the lotus feet of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. In this regard, one may refer to the incident of Dhṛtarāṣṭra's leaving his body, as described in the First Canto of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (1.13.55). Dhṛtarāṣṭra analytically divided his gross material body into the five different elements of which it was made—earth, water, fire, air and ether—and distributed them to the different reservoirs of these elements; in other words, he merged these five elements into the original mahat-tattva. By identifying his material conception of life, he gradually separated his spirit soul from material connections and placed himself at the lotus feet of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. The example given in this connection is that when an earthen pot is broken, the small portion of the sky within the pot is united with the large sky outside the pot.

SB 6.13.22-23, Translation:

In this very great narrative there is glorification of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Nārāyaṇa, there are statements about the exaltedness of devotional service, there are descriptions of devotees like Indra and Vṛtrāsura, and there are statements about King Indra's release from sinful life and about his victory in fighting the demons. By understanding this incident, one is relieved of all sinful reactions. Therefore the learned are always advised to read this narration. If one does so, one will become expert in the activities of the senses, his opulence will increase, and his reputation will become widespread. One will also be relieved of all sinful reactions, he will conquer all his enemies, and the duration of his life will increase. Because this narration is auspicious in all respects, learned scholars regularly hear and repeat it on every festival day.

SB 6.16.14, Purport:

It is also to be noted that the ladies who had committed the sinful act of administering poison to the child were very much ashamed, and according to the directions of the brāhmaṇas, they had to undergo atonement for killing the child. Any woman who has ever performed such an infamously sinful act must atone for it, but no one now is doing that. Under the circumstances, the women responsible must suffer in this life and the next. Those who are sincere souls, after hearing this incident, should refrain from such child-killing and should atone for their sinful activities by taking to Kṛṣṇa consciousness very seriously. If one chants the Hare Kṛṣṇa mahā-mantra without offenses, all of one's sinful actions are surely atoned for immediately, but one should not commit such deeds again, for that is an offense.

SB 6.16.56, Translation:

If one's dreams during sleep are merely subject matters witnessed by the Supersoul, how can the living entity, who is different from the Supersoul, remember the activities of dreams? The experiences of one person cannot be understood by another. Therefore the knower of the facts, the living entity who inquires into the incidents manifested in dreams and wakefulness, is different from the circumstantial activities. That knowing factor is Brahman. In other words, the quality of knowing belongs to the living entities and to the Supreme Soul. Thus the living entity can also experience the activities of dreams and wakefulness. In both stages the knower is unchanged, but is qualitatively one with the Supreme Brahman.

SB 6.17.18, Translation:

Deluded by ignorance, the living entity wanders in the forest of this material world, enjoying the happiness and distress resulting from his past deeds, everywhere and at all times. (Therefore, my dear mother, neither you nor I am to be blamed for this incident.)

SB 6.17.40, Purport:

The historical incidents in the purāṇas, such as the history of Citraketu explained in the Bhāgavata Purāṇa, are sometimes misunderstood by outsiders, or nondevotees. Therefore Śukadeva Gosvāmī advised that the history of Citraketu be heard from a devotee. Anything about devotional service or the characteristics of the Lord and His devotees must be heard from a devotee, not from a professional reciter. This is advised herein. Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu's secretary also advised that one learn the history of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam from a devotee: yāha, bhāgavata pada vaiṣṇavera sthāne. One should not hear the statements of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam from professional reciters, or else they will not be effective.