The conditioned soul is always overpowered by the modes of material nature, and consequently he is simply concerned with material benefits and auspicious and inauspicious material things. In other words, the mind, which is the leader of the senses, is absorbed in material activities life after life. Thus he continuously gets different types of bodies and suffers miserable material conditions. On the basis of mental concoction, social behavior has been formulated. If one's mind is absorbed in these activities, he certainly remains conditioned within the material world. According to different opinions, there are eleven or twelve mental activities, which can be transformed into hundreds and thousands. A person who is not Kṛṣṇa conscious is subjected to all these mental concoctions and is thus governed by the material energy. The living entity who is free from mental concoctions attains the platform of pure spirit soul, devoid of material contamination. There are two types of living entities-jīvātmā and Paramātmā, the individual soul and the Supreme Soul. That Supreme Soul in His ultimate realization is Lord Vāsudeva, Kṛṣṇa. He enters into everyone's heart and controls the living entity in his different activities. He is therefore the supreme shelter of all living entities. One can understand the Supreme Soul and one's position in relationship with Him when one is completely freed from the unwanted association of ordinary men. In this way one can become fit to cross the ocean of nescience. The cause of conditional Life is attachment to the external energy. One has to conquer these mental concoctions: unless one does so, he will never be freed from material anxieties. Although mental concoctions have no value, their influence is still very formidable. No one should neglect to control the mind. If one does, the mind becomes so powerful that one immediately forgets his real position. Forgetting that he is an eternal servant of Kṛṣṇa and that service to Kṛṣṇa is his only business, one is doomed by material nature to serve the objects of the senses. One should kill mental concoctions by the sword of service to the Supreme Personality of Godhead and His devotee (guru-kṛṣṇa-prasāde pāya bhakti-latā-bīja (CC Madhya 19.151))"
Opinion (SB cantos 5 - 12)
Srimad-Bhagavatam
SB Canto 5
All the learned scholars have given their opinion. The mind is by nature very restless, and one should not make friends with it. If we place full confidence in the mind, it may cheat us at any moment. Even Lord Śiva became agitated upon seeing the Mohinī form of Lord Kṛṣṇa, and Saubhari Muni also fell down from the mature stage of yogic perfection.
This Kāmadeva, who appears as Kṛṣṇa's son named Pradyumna, is viṣṇu-tattva. How this is so is explained by Madhvācārya, who quotes from the Brahmāṇḍa Purāṇa: kāmadeva-sthitaṁ viṣṇum upāste. Although this Kāmadeva is viṣṇu-tattva, His body is not spiritual but material. Lord Viṣṇu as Pradyumna or Kāmadeva accepts a material body, but He still acts spiritually. It does not make any difference whether He accepts a spiritual or a material body; He can act spiritually in any condition of existence. Māyāvādī philosophers regard even Lord Kṛṣṇa's body as material, but their opinions cannot impede the spiritual activity of the Lord.
When Devarṣi Nārada descended to instruct Sārvaṇi Manu, he described the opulence of Bhārata-varṣa, India. Sārvaṇi Manu and the inhabitants of Bhārata-varṣa engage in devotional service to the Supreme Personality of Godhead, who is the origin of creation, maintenance and annihilation and who is always worshiped by self-realized souls. In the planet known as Bhārata-varṣa there are many rivers and mountains, as there are in other tracts of land, yet Bhārata-varṣa has special significance because in this tract of land there exists the Vedic principle of varṇāśrama-dharma, which divides society into four varṇas and four āśramas. Furthermore, Nārada Muni's opinion is that even if there is some temporary disturbance in the execution of the varṇāśrama-dharma principles, they can be revived at any moment. The effect of adhering to the institution of varṇāśrama is gradual elevation to the spiritual platform and liberation from material bondage. By following the principles of varṇāśrama-dharma, one gets the opportunity to associate with devotees. Such association gradually awakens one's dormant propensity to serve the Supreme Personality of Godhead and frees one from all the basic principles of sinful life. One then gets the opportunity to offer unalloyed devotional service to the Supreme Lord, Vāsudeva. Because of this opportunity, the inhabitants of Bhārata-varṣa are praised even in the heavenly planets. Even in the topmost planet of this universe, Brahmaloka, the position of Bhārata-varṣa is discussed with great relish.
In the Purāṇas there are two different opinions concerning Lord Rāmacandra. In the Laghu-bhāgavatāmṛta (5.34-36) this is confirmed in the description of the incarnation of Manu.
The Viṣṇu-dharmottara describes that Lord Rāmacandra and His brothers—Lakṣmaṇa, Bharata and Śatrughna—are incarnations of Vāsudeva, Saṅkarṣaṇa, Pradyumna and Aniruddha respectively. The Padma Purāṇa, however, says that Lord Rāmacandra is an incarnation of Nārāyaṇa and that the other three brothers are incarnations of Śeṣa, Cakra and Śaṅkha. Therefore Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa has concluded, tad idaṁ kalpa-bhedenaiva sambhāvyam. In other words, these opinions are not contradictory. In some millenniums Lord Rāmacandra and His brothers appear as incarnations of Vāsudeva, Saṅkarṣaṇa, Pradyumna and Aniruddha, and in other millenniums They appear as incarnations of Nārāyaṇa, Śeṣa, Cakra and Śaṅkha. The residence of Lord Rāmacandra on this planet is Ayodhyā. Ayodhyā City is still existing in the district of Faizabad, which is situated on the northern side of Uttar Pradesh.
A Vaiṣṇava is always firmly situated in transcendental bliss because of engagement in devotional service. Although he may appear to suffer material pains, his position is called transcendental bliss in separation (viraha). The emotions a lover and beloved feel when separated from one another are actually very blissful, although apparently painful. Therefore the separation of Lord Rāmacandra from Sītādevī, as well as the consequent tribulation they suffered, is but another display of transcendental bliss. That is the opinion of Śrīla Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura.
Śrī Śukadeva Gosvāmī said: My dear King, in the opinion of some learned scholars, eight smaller islands surround Jambūdvīpa. When the sons of Mahārāja Sagara were searching all over the world for their lost horse, they dug up the earth, and in this way eight adjoining islands came into existence. The names of these islands are Svarṇaprastha, Candraśukla, Āvartana, Ramaṇaka, Mandara-hariṇa, Pāñcajanya, Siṁhala and Laṅkā.
As stated herein, the sun extends for 10,000 yojanas, and the moon extends for twice that, or 20,000 yojanas. The word dvādaśa should be understood to mean twice as much as ten, or twenty. In the opinion of Vijayadhvaja, the extent of Rāhu should be twice that of the moon, or 40,000 yojanas. However to reconcile this apparent contradiction to the text of the Bhāgavatam, Vijayadhvaja cites the following quotation concerning Rāhu; rāhu-soma-ravīṇāṁ tu maṇḍalā dvi-guṇoktitām. This means that Rāhu is twice as large as the moon, which is twice as large as the sun. This is the conclusion of the commentator Vijayadhvaja.
There are two classes of men absorbed in the material concept of life. Out of ignorance, a man in the first class thinks his body to be his self, and therefore he is certainly like an animal (sa eva go-kharaḥ). The person in the second class, however, not only thinks his material body to be his self, but also commits all kinds of sinful activities to maintain his body. He cheats everyone to acquire money for his family and his self, and he becomes envious of others without reason. Such a person is thrown into the hell known as Raurava. If one simply considers his body to be his self, as do the animals, he is not very sinful. However, if one needlessly commits sins to maintain his body, he is put into the hell known as Raurava. This is the opinion of Śrīla Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura. Although animals are certainly in the bodily concept of life, they do not commit any sins to maintain their bodies, mates or offspring. Therefore animals do not go to hell. However, when a human being acts enviously and cheats others to maintain his body, he is put into a hellish condition.
SB Canto 6
The word asaṁsṛti is very important in this connection. Saṁsṛti refers to continuing on the path of birth and death. Asaṁsṛti, on the contrary, refers to nivṛtti-mārga, or the path of liberation, by which one's birth and death cease and one gradually progresses to Brahmaloka, unless one is a pure devotee who does not care about going to the higher planetary systems, in which case one immediately returns home, back to Godhead, by executing devotional service (tyaktvā dehaṁ punar janma naiti (BG 4.9)). Parīkṣit Mahārāja, therefore, was very eager to hear from Śukadeva Gosvāmī about the path of liberation for the conditioned soul.
According to the opinion of the ācāryas, the word krama-yogopalabdhena indicates that by first performing karma-yoga and then jñāna-yoga and finally coming to the platform of bhakti-yoga, one can be liberated. Bhakti-yoga, however, is so powerful that it does not depend on karma-yoga or jñāna-yoga. Bhakti-yoga itself is so powerful that even an impious man with no assets in karma-yoga or an illiterate with no assets in jñāna-yoga can undoubtedly be elevated to the spiritual world if he simply adheres to bhakti-yoga. Mām evaiṣyasy asaṁśayaḥ. Kṛṣṇa says in Bhagavad-gītā (8.7) that by the process of bhakti-yoga one undoubtedly goes back to Godhead, back home to the spiritual world. Yogīs, however, instead of going directly to the spiritual world, sometimes want to see other planetary systems, and therefore they ascend to the planetary system where Lord Brahmā lives, as indicated here by the word brahmaṇā. At the time of dissolution, Lord Brahmā, along with all the inhabitants of Brahmaloka, goes directly to the spiritual world. This is confirmed in the Vedas as follows:
In this regard, Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī comments that bhakti may be divided into two divisions: (1) santatā, devotional service that continues incessantly with faith and love, and (2) kādācitkī, devotional service that does not continue incessantly but is sometimes awakened. Incessantly flowing devotional service (santatā) may also be divided into two categories: (1) service performed with slight attachment and (2) spontaneous devotional service. Intermittent devotional service (kādācitkī) may be divided into three categories: (1) rāgābhāsamayī, devotional service in which one is almost attached, (2) rāgābhāsa-śūnya-svarūpa-bhūtā, devotional service in which there is no spontaneous love but one likes the constitutional position of serving, and (3) ābhāsa-rūpā, a slight glimpse of devotional service. As for atonement, if one has caught even a slight glimpse of devotional service, all needs to undergo prāyaścitta, atonement, are superseded. Therefore atonement is certainly unnecessary when one has achieved spontaneous love and, above that, attachment with love, which are signs of increasing advancement in kādācitkī. Even in the stage of ābhāsa-rūpā bhakti, all the reactions of sinful life are uprooted and vanquished. Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī expresses the opinion that the word kārtsnyena means that even if one has a desire to commit sinful actions, the roots of that desire are vanquished merely by ābhāsa-rūpā bhakti. The example of bhāskara, the sun, is most appropriate. The ābhāsa feature of bhakti is compared to twilight, and the accumulation of one's sinful activities is compared to fog. Since fog does not spread throughout the sky, the sun need do no more than merely manifest its first rays, and the fog immediately disappears. Similarly, if one has even a slight relationship with devotional service, all the fog of his sinful life is immediately vanquished.
In this regard Śrīla Śrīdhara Svāmī expressed his verdict as follows: etac ca tad-upalālanādi-śrī-nārāyaṇa-namoccāraṇa-māhātmyena tad-bhaktir evābhūd iti siddhāntopayogitvenāpi draṣṭavyam. "According to the bhaktisiddhānta, it is to be analyzed that because Ajāmila constantly chanted his son's name, Nārāyaṇa, he was elevated to the platform of bhakti, although he did not know it." Similarly, Śrīla Vīrarāghava Ācārya gives this opinion: evaṁ vartamānaḥ sa dvijaḥ mṛtyu-kāle upasthite satyajño nārāyaṇākhye putra eva matiṁ cakāra matim āsaktām akarod ity arthaḥ. "Although at the time of death he was chanting the name of his son, he nevertheless concentrated his mind upon the holy name of Nārāyaṇa." Śrīla Vijayadhvaja Tīrtha gives a similar opinion:
mṛtyu-kāle deha-viyoga-lakṣaṇa-kāle mṛtyoḥ sarva-doṣa-pāpa-harasya harer anugrahāt kāle datta-jñāna-lakṣaṇe upasthite hṛdi prakāśite tanaye pūrṇa-jñāne bāle pañca-varṣa-kalpe prādeśa-mātre nārāyaṇāhvaye mūrti-viśeṣe matiṁ smaraṇa-samarthaṁ cittaṁ cakāra bhaktyāsmarad ity arthaḥ.
Directly or indirectly, Ajāmila factually remembered Nārāyaṇa at the time of death (ante nārāyaṇa-smṛtiḥ (SB 2.1.6)).
There are three classes of men—the lowest (adhama), those in the middle (madhyama), and the best (uttama). The lowest (adhama) think that there is no difference between God and the living entity except that the living entity is under designations whereas the Absolute Truth has no designations. In their opinion, as soon as the designations of the material body are dissolved, the jīva, the living entity, will mix with the Supreme. They give the argument of ghaṭākāśa-paṭākāśa, in which the body is compared to a pot with the sky within and the sky without. When the pot breaks, the sky inside becomes one with the sky outside, and so the impersonalists say that the living being becomes one with the Supreme. This is their argument, but Śrīla Madhvācārya says that such an argument is put forward by the lowest class of men. Another class of men cannot ascertain what the actual form of the Supreme is, but they agree that there is a Supreme who controls the activities of the ordinary living being. Such philosophers are accepted as mediocre. The best, however. are those who understand the Supreme Lord (sac-cid-ānanda-vigraha (Bs. 5.1)). Pūrṇānandādi-guṇakaṁ sarva jīva-vilakṣaṇam: His form is completely spiritual, full of bliss, and completely distinct from that of the conditioned soul or any other living entity. Uttamās tu hariṁ prāhus tāratamyena teṣu ca: such philosophers are the best because they know that the Supreme Personality of Godhead reveals Himself differently to worshipers in various modes of material nature.
Prajāpati Dakṣa condemned Nārada Muni because Nārada, a brahmacārī who could beg from door to door, had made sannyāsīs of Dakṣa's sons, who were being trained to be gṛhasthas. Dakṣa was extremely angry at Nārada because he thought that Nārada had done him a great injustice. According to Dakṣa's opinion, Nārada Muni had misled Dakṣa's inexperienced sons (asādhv akāry arbhakāṇām). Dakṣa regarded his sons as innocent boys who had been misled when Nārada showed them the renounced order of life. Because of all these considerations, Prajāpati Dakṣa charged that Nārada Muni was asādhu and should not have adopted the dress of a sādhu.
Sometimes a saintly person is misunderstood by gṛhasthas, especially when he instructs their young sons to accept Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Generally a gṛhastha thinks that unless one enters gṛhastha life he cannot properly enter the renounced order. If a young man immediately adopts the path of the renounced order in accordance with the instructions of Nārada or a member of his disciplic succession, his parents become very angry. This same phenomenon is occurring in our Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement because we are instructing all the young boys in the Western countries to follow the path of renunciation. We allow gṛhastha life, but a gṛhastha also follows the path of renunciation. Even a gṛhastha has to give up so many bad habits that his parents think his life has been practically destroyed. We allow no meat-eating, no illicit sex, no gambling and no intoxication, and consequently the parents wonder how, if there are so many no's, one's life can be positive. In the Western countries especially, these four prohibited activities practically constitute the life and soul of the modern population. Therefore parents sometimes dislike our movement, just as Prajāpati Dakṣa disliked the activities of Nārada and accused Nārada of dishonesty. Nevertheless, although parents may be angry at us, we must perform our duty without hesitation because we are in the disciplic succession from Nārada Muni.
This mentality of Prajāpati Dakṣa still continues even today. When young boys join the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement, their fathers and so-called guardians are very angry at the propounder of the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement because they think that their sons have been unnecessarily induced to deprive themselves of the material enjoyments of eating, drinking and merrymaking. Karmīs, fruitive workers, think that one should fully enjoy his present life in this material world and also perform some pious activities to be promoted to higher planetary systems for further enjoyment in the next life. A yogī, however, especially a bhakti-yogī, is callous to the opinions of this material world. He is not interested in traveling to the higher planetary systems of the demigods to enjoy a long life in an advanced materialistic civilization. As stated by Prabodhānanda Sarasvatī, kaivalyaṁ narakāyate tridaśa-pūr ākāśa-puṣpāyate: for a devotee, merging into the Brahman existence is hellish, and life in the higher planetary systems of the demigods is a will-o'-the-wisp, a phantasmagoria with no real existence at all. A pure devotee is not interested in yogic perfection, travel to higher planetary systems, or oneness with Brahman. He is interested only in rendering service to the Personality of Godhead. Since Prajāpati Dakṣa was a karmī, he could not appreciate the great service Nārada Muni had rendered his eleven thousand sons. Instead, he accused Nārada Muni of being sinful and charged that because Nārada Muni was associated with the Supreme Personality of Godhead, the Lord would also be defamed. Thus Dakṣa criticized that Nārada Muni was an offender to the Lord although he was known as an associate of the Lord.
It is said, vṛddhatvaṁ vayasā vinā: one may be senior without being advanced in age. Even if one is not old, one gains seniority if he is senior in knowledge. Viśvarūpa was junior in relationship to the demigods because he was their nephew, but the demigods wanted to accept him as their priest, and therefore he would have to accept obeisances from them. The demigods explained that this should not be a cause for hesitation; he could become their priest because he was advanced in Vedic knowledge. Similarly. Cāṇakya Paṇḍita advises, nīcād apy uttamaṁ jñānam: one may accept education from a member of a lower social order. The brāhmaṇas, the members of the most elevated varṇa, are teachers, but a person in a lower family, such as a family of kṣatriyas, vaiśyas or even śūdras, may be accepted as a teacher if he has knowledge. Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu approved of this when He expressed this opinion before Rāmānanda Rāya (CC Madhya 8.128):
- kibā vipra, kibā nyāsī, śūdra kene naya
- yei kṛṣṇa-tattva-vettā, sei 'guru' haya
It does not matter whether one is a brāhmaṇa, śūdra, gṛhastha or sannyāsī. These are all material designations. A spiritually advanced person has nothing to do with such designations. Therefore, if one is advanced in the science of Kṛṣṇa consciousness, regardless of his position in human society, he may become a spiritual master.
The Kalki avatāra is the fierce incarnation who vanquishes the class of the atheists born in this age of Kali. Now, in the beginning of Kali-yuga, many irreligious principles are in effect, and as Kali-yuga advances, many pseudo religious principles will certainly be introduced, and people will forget the real religious principles enunciated by Lord Kṛṣṇa before the beginning of Kali-yuga, namely principles of surrender unto the lotus feet of the Lord. Unfortunately, because of Kali-yuga, foolish people do not surrender to the lotus feet of Kṛṣṇa. Even most people who claim to belong to the Vedic system of religion are actually opposed to the Vedic principles. Every day they manufacture a new type of dharma on the plea that whatever one manufactures is also a path of liberation. Atheistic men generally say, yata mata tata patha. According to this view, there are hundreds and thousands of different opinions in human society, and each opinion is a valid religious principle. This philosophy of rascals has killed the religious principles mentioned in the Vedas, and such philosophies will become increasingly influential as Kali-yuga progresses. In the last stage of Kali-yuga, Kalkideva, the fierce incarnation of Keśava, will descend to kill all the atheists and will save only the devotees of the Lord.
All the members of the assembly were exalted brāhmaṇas and self-realized souls, but they did not say anything about the conduct of Lord Śiva, who was embracing the goddess Pārvatī on his lap. Citraketu nonetheless criticized Lord Śiva, and therefore the opinion of Pārvatī was that he should be punished.
"Wherever there is Kṛṣṇa, the master of all mystics, and wherever there is Arjuna, the supreme archer, there will also certainly be opulence, victory, extraordinary power, and morality. That is my opinion." Yogeśvara is the Supreme Personality of Godhead, the master of all mystic yoga, who can do anything and everything He likes. This is the omnipotence of the Supreme Lord. For one who pleases the Supreme Lord, no achievement is wonderful. Everything is possible for him.
SB Canto 7
Nārada Muni continued: By devotional service one cannot achieve such intense absorption in thought of the Supreme Personality of Godhead as one can through enmity toward Him. That is my opinion.
"I am a worse sinner than Jagāi and Mādhāi and am even lower than the worms in the stool." A pure devotee always thinks himself more deficient than everyone else. If a devotee approaches Śrīmatī Rādhārāṇī to offer some service to Kṛṣṇa, even Śrīmatī Rādhārāṇī thinks that the devotee is greater than She. Thus Nārada Muni says that according to his opinion the enemies of Kṛṣṇa are better situated because they are fully absorbed in thoughts of Kṛṣṇa in terms of killing Him, just as a very lusty man always thinks of women and their association.
The essential point in this connection is that one should be fully absorbed in thoughts of Kṛṣṇa, twenty-four hours a day. There are many devotees in rāga-mārga, which is exhibited in Vṛndāvana. Whether in dāsya-rasa, sakhya-rasa, vātsalya-rasa or mādhurya-rasa, all the devotees of Kṛṣṇa are always overwhelmed by thoughts of Kṛṣṇa. When Kṛṣṇa is away from Vṛndāvana tending the cows in the forest, the gopīs, in the mādhurya-rasa, are always absorbed in thoughts of how Kṛṣṇa walks in the forest. The soles of His feet are so soft that the gopīs would not dare keep His lotus feet on their soft breasts. Indeed, they consider their breasts a very hard place for the lotus feet of Kṛṣṇa, yet those lotus feet wander in the forest, which is full of thorny plants. The gopīs are absorbed in such thoughts at home, although Kṛṣṇa is away from them. Similarly, when Kṛṣṇa plays with His young friends, mother Yaśodā is very much disturbed by thoughts that Kṛṣṇa, because of always playing and not taking His food properly, must be getting weak.
Otherwise, if the Supreme Lord does not give one protection, one must suffer in spite of the presence of his father and mother. Another example is that sometimes a patient dies in spite of a good physician and good medicine. Thus without the protection of the Lord one cannot live, with or without parents.
Another point in this verse is that fathers and mothers have protective feelings for their children even in bird and beast society, not to speak of human society. Kali-yuga, however, is so degraded that a father and mother even kill their children in the womb on the plea of their scientific knowledge that within the womb the child has no life. Prestigious medical practitioners give this opinion, and therefore the father and mother of this day kill their children within the womb. How degraded human society has become! Their scientific knowledge is so advanced that they think that within the egg and the embryo there is no life. Now these so-called scientists are receiving Nobel Prizes for advancing the theory of chemical evolution. But if chemical combinations are the source of life, why don't the scientists manufacture something like an egg through chemistry and put it in an incubator so that a chicken will come out? What is their answer? With their scientific knowledge they are unable to create even an egg. Such scientists are described in Bhagavad-gītā as māyayāpahṛta jñānāḥ (BG 7.15), fools whose real knowledge has been taken away. They are not men of knowledge, but they pose as scientists and philosophers, although their so-called theoretical knowledge cannot produce practical results.
In political affairs, when a person disobediently agitates against the government, four principles are used to suppress him—legal orders, pacification, the offer of a post, or, finally, weapons. When there are no other arguments, he is punished. In logic, this is called argumentum ad baculum. When the two seminal brāhmaṇas Ṣaṇḍa and Amarka failed to extract from Prahlāda Mahārāja the cause for his having opinions different from those of his father, they called for a stick with which to chastise him to satisfy their master, Hiraṇyakaśipu. Because Prahlāda had become a devotee, they considered him to be contaminated by bad intelligence and to be the worst descendant in the family of demons. As it is said, where ignorance is bliss, it is folly to be wise. In a society or family in which everyone is a demon, for someone to become a Vaiṣṇava is certainly folly. Thus Prahlāda Mahārāja was charged with bad intelligence because he was among demons, including his teachers, who were supposedly brāhmaṇas.
In this verse, Hiraṇyakaśipu inquires from his son what he has learned from his guru. Prahlāda Mahārāja's gurus were of two kinds—Ṣaṇḍa and Amarka, the sons of Śukrācārya in the seminal disciplic succession, were the gurus appointed by his father, but his other guru was the exalted Nārada Muni, who had instructed Prahlāda when Prahlāda was within the womb of his mother. Prahlāda Mahārāja responded to the inquiry of his father with the instructions he had received from his spiritual master, Nārada. Thus there was again a difference of opinion because Prahlāda Mahārāja wanted to relate the best thing he had learned from his spiritual master, whereas Hiraṇyakaśipu expected to hear about the politics and diplomacy Prahlāda had learned from Ṣaṇḍa and Amarka. Now the dissension between the father and son became increasingly intense as Prahlāda Mahārāja began to say what he had learned from his guru Nārada Muni.
Since there must always be a difference of opinion between demons and devotees, Hiraṇyakaśipu, when criticized by his son Prahlāda Mahārāja, should not have been surprised that Prahlāda Mahārāja differed from his way of life. Nonetheless, Hiraṇyakaśipu was extremely angry and wanted to rebuke his son for deriding his teacher or spiritual master, who had been born in the brāhmaṇa family of the great ācārya Śukrācārya. The word śukra means "semen," and ācārya refers to a teacher or guru. Hereditary gurus, or spiritual masters, have been accepted everywhere since time immemorial, but Prahlāda Mahārāja declined to accept such a seminal guru or take instruction from him. An actual guru is śrotriya, one who has heard or received perfect knowledge through paramparā, the disciplic succession. Therefore Prahlāda Mahārāja did not recognize a seminal spiritual master. Such spiritual masters are not at all interested in Viṣṇu. Indeed, they are hopeful of material success (bahir-artha-māninaḥ). The word bahiḥ means "external," artha means "interest," and mānina means "taking very seriously." Generally speaking, practically everyone is unaware of the spiritual world. The knowledge of the materialists is restricted within the four-billion-mile limit of this material world, which is in the dark portion of the creation; they do not know that beyond the material world is the spiritual world. Unless one is a devotee of the Lord, one cannot understand the existence of the spiritual world. Gurus, teachers, who are simply interested in this material world are described in this verse as andha, blind. Such blind men may lead many other blind followers without true knowledge of material conditions, but they are not accepted by devotees like Prahlāda Mahārāja. Such blind teachers, being interested in the external, material world, are always bound by the strong ropes of material nature.
There is always a difference of opinion about the Absolute Truth. One class of transcendentalists concludes that the Absolute Truth is impersonal, and another class concludes that the Absolute Truth is a person. In Bhagavad-gītā, the Absolute Truth is accepted as the Supreme Person. Indeed, that Supreme Person Himself, Lord Kṛṣṇa, instructs in Bhagavad-gītā, brahmaṇo hi pratiṣṭhāham (BG 14.27), mattaḥ parataraṁ nānyat (BG 7.7). "The impersonal Brahman is My partial manifestation, and there is no truth superior to Me." That same Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, acted as the supreme friend and relative of the Pāṇḍavas, and sometimes He even acted as their servant by carrying a letter from the Pāṇḍavas to Dhṛtarāṣṭra and Duryodhana. Because Kṛṣṇa was the well-wisher of the Pāṇḍavas, He also acted as guru by becoming the spiritual master of Arjuna. Arjuna accepted Kṛṣṇa as his spiritual master (śiṣyas te 'haṁ śādhi māṁ tvāṁ prapannam (BG 2.7)), and Kṛṣṇa sometimes chastised him. For example, the Lord said, aśocyān anvaśocas tvaṁ prajñā-vādāṁś ca bhāṣase: (BG 2.11) "while speaking learned words, you are mourning for what is not worthy of grief." The Lord also said, kutas tvā kaśmalam idaṁ viṣame samupasthitam: "My dear Arjuna, how have these impurities come upon you?" Such was the intimate relationship between the Pāṇḍavas and Kṛṣṇa. In the same way, a pure devotee of the Lord is always with Kṛṣṇa through thick and thin; his way of life is Kṛṣṇa. This is the statement of the authority Śrī Nārada Muni.
The faithfulness of the goddess of fortune is the ideal for a chaste woman. The Brahma-saṁhitā (5.29) says, lakṣmī-sahasra-śata-sambhrama-sevyamānam. In the Vaikuṇṭha planets, Lord Viṣṇu is worshiped by many, many thousands of goddesses of fortune, and in Goloka Vṛndāvana, Lord Kṛṣṇa is worshiped by many, many thousands of gopīs, all of whom are goddesses of fortune. A woman should serve her husband as faithfully as the goddess of fortune. A man should be an ideal servant of the Lord, and a woman should be an ideal wife like the goddess of fortune. Then both husband and wife will be so faithful and strong that by acting together they will return home, back to Godhead, without a doubt. In this regard, Śrīla Madhvācārya gives this opinion:
- harir asmin sthita iti
- strīṇāṁ bhartari bhāvanā
- śiṣyāṇāṁ ca gurau nityaṁ
- śūdrāṇāṁ brāhmaṇādiṣu
- bhṛtyānāṁ svāmini tathā
- hari-bhāva udīritaḥ
A woman should think of her husband as the Supreme Lord. Similarly, a disciple should think of the spiritual master as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, a śūdra should think of a brāhmaṇa as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and a servant should think of his master as the Supreme Personality of Godhead. In this way, all of them will automatically become devotees of the Lord. In other words, by thinking this way, all of them will become Kṛṣṇa conscious.
Prahlāda Mahārāja, you are certainly a self-realized soul and a devotee of the Supreme Lord. You do not care for public opinion or so-called scriptures. For this reason I have described to you without hesitation the history of my self-realization.
A person who is actually a devotee of Kṛṣṇa does not care about so-called public opinion and Vedic or philosophical literatures. Prahlāda Mahārāja, who is such a devotee, always defied the false instructions of his father and the so-called teachers who were appointed to teach him. Instead, he simply followed the instructions of Nārada Muni, his guru, and thus he always remained a stalwart devotee. This is the nature of an intelligent devotee. The Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam instructs, yajñaiḥ saṅkīrtana-prāyair yajanti hi sumedhasaḥ (SB 11.5.32). One who is actually very intelligent must join the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement, realizing his own self as an eternal servant of Kṛṣṇa, and thus practice constant chanting of the holy name of the Lord—Hare Kṛṣṇa, Hare Kṛṣṇa, Kṛṣṇa Kṛṣṇa, Hare Hare/ Hare Rāma, Hare Rāma, Rāma Rāma, Hare Hare.
SB Canto 8
The demons thought that the front of the snake was auspicious and that catching hold of that portion would be more chivalrous. Moreover, Daityas must always do the opposite of the demigods. That is their nature. We have actually seen this in relation to our Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement. We are advocating cow protection and encouraging people to drink more milk and eat palatable preparations made of milk, but the demons, just to protest such proposals, are claiming that they are advanced in scientific knowledge, as described here by the words svādhyāya-śruta-sampannāḥ. They say that according to their scientific way, they have discovered that milk is dangerous and that the beef obtained by killing cows is very nutritious. This difference of opinion will always continue. Indeed, it has existed since days of yore. Millions of years ago, there was the same competition. The demons, as a result of their so-called Vedic study, preferred to hold the side of the snake near the mouth. The Supreme Personality of Godhead thought it wise to catch hold of the dangerous part of the snake and allow the demons to hold the tail, which was not dangerous, but because of a competitive desire, the demons thought it wise to hold the snake near the mouth. If the demigods were going to drink poison, the demons would resolve, "Why should we not share the poison and die gloriously by drinking it?"
O demons, as monkeys, jackals and dogs are unsteady in their sexual relationships and want newer and newer friends every day, women who live independently seek new friends daily. Friendship with such a woman is never permanent. This is the opinion of learned scholars.
The Supreme Personality of Godhead, who is very merciful to the poor, will fulfill all of your desires, for devotional service unto Him is infallible. Any method other than devotional service is useless. That is my opinion.
O mother of the demigods, in My opinion almost all the chiefs of the demons are now unconquerable, for they are being protected by brāhmaṇas, whom the Supreme Lord always favors. Thus the use of power against them now will not at all be a source of happiness.
This particular devastation actually took place not during the night of Lord Brahmā but during his day, for it was during the time of Cākṣuṣa Manu. Brahmā's night takes place when Brahmā goes to sleep, but in the daytime there are fourteen Manus, one of whom is Cākṣuṣa Manu. Therefore, Śrīla Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura comments that although it was daytime for Lord Brahmā, Brahmā felt sleepy for a short time by the supreme will of the Lord. This short period is regarded as Lord Brahmā's night. This has been elaborately discussed by Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī in his Laghu-bhāgavatāmṛta. The following is a summary of his analysis. Because Agastya Muni cursed Svāyambhuva Manu, during the time of Svāyambhuva Manu a devastation took place. This devastation is mentioned in the Matsya Purāṇa. During the time of Cākṣuṣa Manu, by the supreme will of the Lord, there was suddenly another pralaya, or devastation. This is mentioned by Mārkaṇḍeya Ṛṣi in the Viṣṇu-dharmottara. At the end of Manu's time there is not necessarily a devastation, but at the end of the Cākṣuṣa-manvantara, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, by His illusory energy, wanted to show Satyavrata the effects of devastation. Śrīla Śrīdhara Svāmī also agrees with this opinion. The Laghu-bhāgavatāmṛta says:
SB Canto 9
The King said: "To transgress the laws of respectful behavior toward the brāhmaṇas is certainly a great offense. On the other hand, if one does not observe the breaking of the fast within the time of Dvādaśī, there is a flaw in one's observance of the vow. Therefore, O brāhmaṇas, if you think that it will be auspicious and not irreligious, I shall break the fast by drinking water." In this way, after consulting with the brāhmaṇas, the King reached this decision, for according to brahminical opinion, drinking water may be accepted as eating and also as not eating.
Śukadeva Gosvāmī continued: Once while Lord Rāmacandra was walking at night incognito, hiding Himself by a disguise to find out the people's opinion of Himself, He heard a man speaking unfavorably about His wife, Sītādevī.
SB Canto 10.1 to 10.13
There have also been many demons who had no hope of salvation, yet Kaṁsa attained salvation by the supreme will of the Lord. Not to speak of Kaṁsa, even Pūtanā attained salvation and reached the level of the Lord's mother. Parīkṣit Mahārāja, therefore, was very eager to hear about the Lord, who has inconceivable qualities by which to give liberation to anyone. Parīkṣit Mahārāja, at the point of his death, was certainly interested in his liberation. When such a great and exalted personality as the Lord behaves like an ordinary human being although possessing inconceivable qualities, His behavior is called māyā. Therefore the Lord is described as māyā-manuṣya. This is the opinion of Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī. Mu refers to mukti, or salvation, and ku refers to that which is bad or very obnoxious. Thus muku refers to the Supreme Personality of Godhead, who saves one from the bad condition of material existence. The Lord is called mukunda because He not only saves the devotee from material existence but offers him transcendental bliss in love and service.
As for Keśava, ka means Brahmā, and īśa means Lord Śiva. The Personality of Godhead captivates both Lord Brahmā and Lord Mahādeva, or Śiva, by His transcendental qualities. Therefore He is called Keśava. This opinion is given by Sanātana Gosvāmī in his Vaiṣṇava-toṣaṇī commentary.
On the other hand, there were asuras headed by Śālva and kṣatriyas like Duryodhana who were bereft of devotional service in spite of seeing Kṛṣṇa's carrier Garuḍa and the universal form, and who could not understand Kṛṣṇa to be the Supreme Personality of Godhead. This was also bewilderment, but this bewilderment was due to mahāmāyā. Therefore it is to be concluded that the māyā which drags a person from the Supreme Personality of Godhead is called jaḍamāyā, and the māyā which acts on the transcendental platform is called yogamāyā. When Nanda Mahārāja was taken away by Varuṇa, he saw Kṛṣṇa's opulence, but nonetheless he thought of Kṛṣṇa as his son. Such feelings of parental love in the spiritual world are acts of yogamāyā, not of jaḍamāyā, or mahāmāyā. This is the opinion of Śrīla Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura.
Śūrasenāṁś ca. The son of Kārtavīryārjuna was Śūrasena, and the countries he ruled were also called Śūrasena. This is noted by Sanātana Gosvāmī in his Vaiṣṇava-toṣaṇī commentary.
Some of the chief devotees, such as Akrūra, stayed with Kaṁsa to satisfy him. This they did for various purposes. They all expected the Supreme Personality of Godhead to appear as the eighth child as soon as Devakī's other children were killed by Kaṁsa, and they were eagerly awaiting His appearance. By remaining in Kaṁsa's association, they would be able to see the Supreme Personality of Godhead take birth and display His childhood pastimes, and Akrūra would later go to Vṛndāvana to bring Kṛṣṇa and Balarāma to Mathurā. The word paryupāsate is significant because it indicates that some devotees wanted to stay near Kaṁsa in order to see all these pastimes of the Lord. The six children killed by Kaṁsa had formerly been sons of Marīci, but because of having been cursed by a brāhmaṇa, they were obliged to take birth as grandsons of Hiraṇyakaśipu. Kaṁsa had taken birth as Kālanemi, and now he was obliged to kill his own sons. This was a mystery. As soon as the sons of Devakī were killed, they would return to their original place. The devotees wanted to see this also. Generally speaking, no one kills his own nephews, but Kaṁsa was so cruel that he did so without hesitation. Ananta, Saṅkarṣaṇa, belongs to the second catur-vyūha, or quadruple expansion. This is the opinion of experienced commentators.
Another meaning of viśvātmā is "the only lovable object for everyone." Because of forgetfulness of this object, people are suffering in this material world, but if one fortunately revives his old consciousness of loving Kṛṣṇa and connects with Viśvātmā, one becomes perfect. The Lord is described in the Third Canto (3.2.15) as follows: parāvareśo mahad-aṁśa-yukto hy ajo 'pi jāto bhagavān. Although unborn, the Lord, the master of everything, appears like a born child by entering the mind of a devotee. The Lord is already there within the mind, and consequently it is not astonishing for Him to appear as if born from a devotee's body. The word āviveśa signifies that the Lord appeared within the mind of Vasudeva. There was no need for a discharge of semen. That is the opinion of Śrīpāda Śrīdhara Svāmī and Śrīla Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura. In the Vaiṣṇava-toṣaṇī, Śrīla Sanātana Gosvāmī says that consciousness was awakened within the mind of Vasudeva. Śrīla Vīrarāghava Ācārya also says that Vasudeva was one of the demigods and that within his mind the Supreme Personality of Godhead appeared as an awakening of consciousness.
Nonetheless, because of their enmity, our opinion is that the demigods should not be neglected. Therefore, to uproot them completely, engage us in fighting with them, for we are ready to follow you.
The jāta-karma ceremony can take place when the umbilical cord, connecting the child and the placenta, is cut. However, since Kṛṣṇa was brought by Vasudeva to the house of Nanda Mahārāja, where was the chance for this to happen? In this regard, Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura desires to prove with evidence from many śāstras that Kṛṣṇa actually took birth as the son of Yaśodā before the birth of Yogamāyā, who is therefore described as the Lord's younger sister. Even though there may be doubts about the cutting of the umbilical cord, and even though it is possible that this was not done, when the Supreme Personality of Godhead appears, such events are regarded as factual. Kṛṣṇa appeared as Varāhadeva from the nostril of Brahmā, and therefore Brahmā is described as the father of Varāhadeva. Also significant are the words kārayām āsa vidhivat. Being overwhelmed with jubilation over the birth of his son, Nanda Mahārāja did not see whether the cord was cut or not. Thus he performed the ceremony very gorgeously. According to the opinion of some authorities, Kṛṣṇa was actually born as the son of Yaśodā. In any case, without regard for material understandings, we can accept that Nanda Mahārāja's celebration for the ceremony of Kṛṣṇa's birth was proper. This ceremony is therefore well known everywhere as Nandotsava.
According to the opinion of experienced medical practitioners, diabetes is a result of voracious eating, and tuberculosis is a disease of undereating. We should desire neither to be diabetic nor to be tubercular. Yāvad artha-prayojanam. We should eat frugally and keep the body fit for advancing in Kṛṣṇa consciousness. As recommended elsewhere in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (1.2.10):
- kāmasya nendriya-prītir
- lābho jīveta yāvatā
- jīvasya tattva-jijñāsā
- nārtho yaś ceha karmabhiḥ
The real business of human life is to keep oneself fit for advancement in spiritual realization. Human life is not meant for making the senses unnecessarily strong so that one suffers from disease and one increases in an envious, fighting spirit. In this age of Kali, however, human civilization is so misled that people are unnecessarily increasing in economic development, and as a result they are opening more and more slaughterhouses, liquor shops and brothels. In this way, the whole civilization is being spoiled.
SB Cantos 10.14 to 12 (Translations Only)
My dear girls, understanding that simply for My sake you had rejected the authority of worldly opinion, of the Vedas and of your relatives, I acted as I did only to increase your attachment to Me. Even when I removed Myself from your sight by suddenly disappearing, I never stopped loving you. Therefore, My beloved gopīs, please do not harbor any bad feelings toward Me, your beloved.
In my opinion, Kṛṣṇa and Balarāma must be two exalted demigods who have come to this planet to fulfill some great mission of the demigods. Such was foretold by Garga Ṛṣi.
Śukadeva Gosvāmī said: Having thus heard the statements of Devarṣi Nārada, and understanding the opinions of both the assembly and Lord Kṛṣṇa, the great-minded Uddhava began to speak.
Only one who has conquered all opponents in every direction can perform the Rājasūya sacrifice, O almighty one. Thus, in my opinion, conquering Jarāsandha will serve both purposes.
The Supreme Personality of Godhead used the Yadu dynasty, which was protected by His own arms, to eliminate the kings who with their armies had been the burden of this earth. Then the unfathomable Lord thought to Himself, "Although some may say that the earth's burden is now gone, in My opinion it is not yet gone, because there still remains the Yādava dynasty itself, whose strength is unbearable for the earth."
By chanting the holy name of the Supreme Lord, one comes to the stage of love of Godhead. Then the devotee is fixed in his vow as an eternal servant of the Lord, and he gradually becomes very much attached to a particular name and form of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. As his heart melts with ecstatic love, he laughs very loudly or cries or shouts. Sometimes he sings and dances like a madman, for he is indifferent to public opinion.
My dear Lord, O Supreme Soul, for those whose minds are attached to sense gratification, and especially for those bereft of devotion unto You, such renunciation of material enjoyment is most difficult to perform. That is my opinion.
By interaction of My energies different opinions arise. But for those who have fixed their intelligence on Me and controlled their senses, differences of perception disappear, and consequently the very cause for argument is removed.
All the great sages repeatedly declare that such worship brings the greatest benefit possible in human life. This is the opinion of Nārada Muni, the great Vyāsadeva and my own spiritual master, Bṛhaspati.
That which did not exist in the past and will not exist in the future also has no existence of its own for the period of its duration, but is only a superficial designation. In My opinion, whatever is created and revealed by something else is ultimately only that other thing.
| Page Title: | Opinion (SB cantos 5 - 12) |
| Compiler: | Visnu Murti, RupaManjari |
| Created: | 19 of Nov, 2012 |
| Totals by Section: | BG=0, SB=54, CC=0, OB=0, Lec=0, Con=0, Let=0 |
| No. of Quotes: | 54 |