19851001 Bhagavad-gītā 9.1

Following is a lecture given by His Holiness Jayapatākā Swami on October 1st 1985 at New Talavan. The Class begins with reading from the Bhagavad Gītā Chapter 9 Text 1.

 

śrī-bhagavān uvāca

idaṁ tu te guhya-tamaṁ

pravakṣyāmy anasūyave

jñānaṁ vijñāna-sahitaṁ

yaj jñātvā mokṣyase ’śubhāt

 

 

(His Holiness Jayapatākā Swami reads the translation and purport)

The Supreme Personality of Godhead said: My dear Arjuna, because you are never envious of Me, I shall impart to you this most secret wisdom, knowing which you shall be relieved of the miseries of material existence.

 

Purport:

 

As a devotee hears more and more about the Supreme Lord, he becomes enlightened. This hearing process is recommended in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam: “The messages of the Supreme Personality of Godhead are full of potencies, and these potencies can be realized if topics regarding the Supreme Godhead are discussed amongst devotees.” This cannot be achieved by the association of mental speculators or academic scholars, for it is realized knowledge. The devotees are constantly engaged in the Supreme Lord’s service. The Lord understands the mentality and sincerity of a particular living entity who is engaged in Kṛṣṇa consciousness and gives him the intelligence to understand the science of Kṛṣṇa in the association of devotees. Discussion of Kṛṣṇa is very potent, and if a fortunate person has such association and tries to assimilate the knowledge, then he will surely make advancement toward spiritual realization. Lord Kṛṣṇa, in order to encourage Arjuna to higher and higher elevation in His potent service, describes in this Ninth Chapter matters more confidential than any He has already disclosed. (end of purport)

 

His Holiness Jayapatākā Swami: So here, several very important points have been brought up so far. That the more we hear about Kṛṣṇa, more we hear from the Śrīmad Bhāgavatam, Bhagavad Gītā, the authorized scriptures,  then the more we become enlightened. These topics are supposed to be especially heard in the association of devotees.

 In Navadwipa, during the time of Lord Chaitanya, there was a non-devotee by the name of Devānanda Pandit who does  discuss the Śrīmad Bhāgavatam, but he would discuss it from a materialistic point of view, from an academic point of view. So, Lord Chaitanya, He never went to that... to that assembly. They would criticize Kṛṣṇa in many ways, so they discussed it in a very dry way, the topics of the Bhāgavatam.

 

So, one day, Śrīvas Pandit, he went to Nava… to  that side of Navadwip to Kuliyagram. The other side of river is known as Kuliyagram where the present day city of Navadwipa is, on the other side of the river from Māyāpur. And there, well he heard that the Bhāgavatam was being spoken. So he thought, “Let me just sit down for a second and listen.” So he heard about a particular topic about Kṛṣṇa, he started meditating on that topic; he became very ecstatic and he became stunned.

 

He was just sitting there and tears were coming from his eyes and Devānanda Pandit…. See people were looking at him - what is going on here?

 

So Devānanda Pandit said, “What is this? He is creating a disturbance; pick him up and throw him in the street”.

 

So the students went and they picked up, that time Srinivas Pandit was totally stunned. They picked him up, carry him out, and then threw him in the street, and then he came to his consciousness. Did not really affect him much. He just went on. Sorry that he created the disturbance.

 

When Lord Caitanya heard, He was very offended that they have insulted a bonafide devotee. And He forbade His followers that they should not go and listen the Bhāgavatam class from people who are not authorized, from people who are not qualified to represent the opinion of the previous ācāryas.

 

So... In fact, Mukunda Das, he went trying once listen some lecture, and this was so disturbing to Lord Caitanyawho warned him many times not to go. That he told… (aside) its Govinda das? I forget.

 So He told His secretary follower that, “You tell Mukunda Dutta that he cannot come and see Me. He is forbidden from coming to see Me, forever”. So, then Mukunda Das tried to... Mukunda Dutta tried to see the Lord. Even though, Mukunda Dutta was the son of Vasudev Dutta, he was a kind of great, big sankirtan leader. Because of his tendency of listening to non-authorized people, he was banned from Lord Chaitanya’s group.

 

 So then, the other followers they tried to  (inaudible 6:50) that the…, but Lord Caitanya wouldn’t entertain. Said, “I don’t want to see the face of someone who is listening to the māyāvādīs and to these sahajiyās and so on.”

 So then, Mukunda Dutta, he sent in a message, “When will I be able to see You, Lord?” He kept asking this. So then, Lord Chaitanya… Because  he was fasting, he felt very frustrated. He couldn’t... He was being banned; he was feeling very bad.

 

So, Lord Caitanyasaid that, “You cannot see me for… What was it?  1 crore births, 10 million births. You tell him that.”

 

So they went out and told him that, “You cannot see Lord Caitanyafor 10 million births”.

Mukunda Dutta, then he jumped up (loudly) “Haribol! Haribol!, Gaur Haribol! Haribol! I will be able to see Lord Chaitanya. Haribol! I thought I will never see him. Haribol! Haribol! Haribol!”

He’s jumping up and down in ecstasy. (inaudible) But it is 10 million births, when he thought is one thing is he will never see Lord Chaitanya. “At least after 10 million, I am assured. He promised I will be able to see Him. (laughter) Haribol! Haribol!”

 

 So then Lord Caitanya said, ‘”What is all the commotion going outside?” (laughter) So they went, and they came back and said ,”Well. this is what happened. He is dancing because You promised You will see him after 10 million births, when he was hopeless he would never be able to see You again.”

 

 Then Lord Caitanyasaid, “All right bring him in.”

 

 But, there are very few instances where we see Lord Caitanya rejecting the devotees, and this is one of the instances. Sometimes, we hear devotees say that “Well, it is alright to read other books, to read other philosophies and hear other people”. But, it is not something that has just come from ISKCON’s time, it’s not. It is something that came right from the very time of Lord Caitanya.

 

In fact, he said, “māyāvādi-bhāṣya śunile haya sarva-nāśa.” That if you hear the discussions from Māyāvādīs impersonalists, then your spiritual life is destroyed. And sarva-nāśa, nasa means destruction. Sarva-nāśa is the complete destruction, Annihilated is the proper word. It is annihilated, not simply destroyed; it is annihilated. And this has been the theme handed down.

 

Bhaktivinod Thakur, he expanded that apart from these Māyāvādīs, there are also many apasampradāyas - aul, baul, kartta bhaja, nara nārī, churi dhari, gaurāṅga nagarī, sakhi bekhi and so on. I can’t remember all of them. Churi dhari - these guys who wear the long beards and walk around, think they are fakirs or some great. This is one type.

Then there is sakhi beki -  the one who dress up like Gopīs and wear sarees. And then there is auls and bauls. Bauls think that the body is pure. Their body is a temple, so whatever it does is pure including all of its organic kind of functions.

 

So sometimes just to show that, they put stool on as tilak and things like that. That is the lighter of the some of the things that they do and then anyway…

 So, in all these kind of thing where they get point of the philosophy, and they take it and they go off. But because it (inaudible) was, somehow it appears to be something like Vaisnav, but they get (inaudible 11:04) and attention because of not strictly following the line of Caitanya Mahāprabhu, line of Gauḍīya, Brahmā Mādhava Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇavism.

So it’s always been restricted that we do not associate with such...If they are Vaishnavas, if they are chanting, we may from a distance respect them in our heart. But we don’t even bow down to them or associate with them. What to speak of sit and with oral reception take into our consciousness what they are speaking. We don’t do that because it is just like someone walks up to you, and he has got some food and the food drops on the ground, not prashad, just like you know ordinarily (inaudible 11:55) and it’s like in the middle of a dirty street, it is not prashad, it is not even, just drops on the ground. It’s all dirt, picks it up and say, “You’re going to eat it.”

 Obviously, you are not going to eat that because it may be polluted. In India, most of the Cholera and Typhoid comes from these open fruit vendors who sit on the side of the road and countless flies and the insects just fly and land on it. And then just you now… You know, how  flies do it? They spit on it, and they create all these horrible diseases from their saliva. And so people eat that open cut fruit that has been sitting out there for long time, and they get Cholera.

 

And the Government‘s never able to control of them. They never strictly can control these open fruit sellers or have any kind of like standard for that. But those people who buy, you know,  whole fruit and cut in their home, they are not more or less... people are a little conscientious. They don’t usually come down with these type of diseases.

So, just as we are so careful in eating, no we don’t just take in anything. You know, normally conscientious person won’t just eat any garbage, but...especially if it is impure, if it not clean or just like you don’t take any.  Nowadays, people don’t take  this blood transfusion, unless they have had the blood checked for all this AIDS or what not. To see whether it is really okay.

So similarly, we have to protect our consciousness. We shouldn’t just take in any kind of rubbish into our brain. Especially, if it is dealing… It is more dangerous when it deals with spiritual things because we get a little bit of misconception about our sambandha, abhidheya, you know, prayojana, about our relationship with Kṛṣṇa - how to engage in our worship or service to Kṛṣṇa and what is ultimate objective of life.

 

If we get little bit off on those things, then everything is a mess; everything is haywire. So, you know, a person, he may have some material misconception about how far it is from New York to New Orleans; this doesn’t  matter. Or history of America of something, these things are really... they don’t really relate with our eternal situation.

 But if we get misconceptions in spiritual matters, that can be very very dangerous. Because the whole basis on which we are functioning comes into question or comes into a kind of confusion through the misconceptions.

 

So, this happened to Mukunda Dutta. He went there; he listened and Lord Caitanyamade an example out of him. So, Prabhupāda had explained that he had given us all  knowledge we needed within his books. Actually we didn’t have to go outside to study other literatures. And he also gave a system that- all right, there are a few other literatures that could be translated in the future. Although it wasn’t  ( inaudible 15:19) qualified, there was no harm. Actually he gave a system how the BBT would go on doing that activity.

 

 Now, this is not just being, you know, in any way restrictive or dogmatic. It’s just very very pragmatic. It is just as we don’t eat food cooked by unclean people, we don’t want to hear things which are not spoken by someone authorized by the disciplic succession, in terms of spiritual subject matters. Initially, a person may want to go and analyze who is the bonafide disciplic succession. That right is any individual’s to find out who is the bonafide spiritual master, who is the bonafide spiritual movement.

Once they have been able to focus in or to select or to find - alright this is a bonafide disciplic succession; this is pure spiritual knowledge. Then immediately, they should then stop taking other types of input into their consciousness, which may create aberrations or confusions or pollutions or various inebrieties and problems.

This is paramparā. This is authorized. This is not only just something that is promoted by Lord Chaitanya, it is also given in the Vedas:

 

avaiṣṇava-mukhodgīrṇaṁ

pūtaṁ hari-kathāmṛtam

śravaṇaṁ naiva kartavyaṁ

sarpocchiṣṭaṁ yathā payaḥ

 

 That to hear the words of a non-vaishnava is equivalent to taking milk which has been touched by the lips of the serpent.  Doesn’t mean just hearing hari kathā; hearing from him even the glories... “The glories of Hari”.

 

Not that if you just go out, and someone says to you that, “What time is it?” on the street, and he happens to be from another sampradāya, tell him off. Because he asked, what time is it?

 

Those words are going to come in. But to sit down from him and listen to Hari kathā, and then take that as being the absolute truth, that is the dangerous thing. You can be respectful to anyone but to take…

 

When  we  hear spiritual knowledge, we open up our mind. Prabhupāda said,” We should have our mind be like a slate and the guru should be writing on it.” Anyone who is a bonafide speaker, we actually open our consciousness and we listen. Unless some warning signals come out, you know, which normally does not arise from a bonafide movement or from a bonafide speaker, then we take that. We try to digest it. We try to understand it. If there is any misunderstanding… If we don’t understand something, we ask a question. And then we try to again repeat that to others.

But, when we are hearing something from someone who is not right, from the very beginning is not fully authorized, then naturally there is a big danger that he may introduce some subtle or gross misconceptions which can create kind of a spiritual habit.

 

 It is just like some of these satellites they send in outer space. If one of the computers goes off or one of the sensors malfunctions, the whole thing starts to go. If one our spiritual understanding starts to become off, we start to see things in a wrong perspective that can lead us along a whole tangent, which will take us away from Kṛṣṇain the long run. So these things have to be guarded from.

 Therefore, we strictly follow the system of hearing from the proper speakers who are pure Vaiṣṇavas, who are following into a disciplic succession, who are speaking only from sādhu, shastra and guru. We don’t want to hear people say, “Well, I think.” Like sometimes they turn on some of  the stations in the radio and you hear, “Well, I think.” That what this really means is.

 

Prabhupāda said that actually a spiritual speaker doesn’t have the volition to say, “ I think. “ That means that if someone says that I think, it’s my opinion - that is actually not absolute knowledge. Just like a lawyer in a courtroom. When he is presenting a legal point, he doesn’t say, “Well I think that this is…”  He may say but that’s not very strong.

That’s not holding the… That’s not accepted in a... at least between an appeal court with the judges and that. Maybe it is good for the jury’s and things like that, an emotional appeal. But, in actually, a point where its points of war being discussed -  the lawyer has to say that this is the law; this is the precedences.

 

In a similar way, our law is the Vedas and our precedences are the lives of pure devotees and great devotees and incarnations of Godhead and so on. These two things form our reference points. Everything we do, everything we say, every understanding we have is derived from the words of the Vedas or the bonafide scriptures. And those have been further brought into focus when they have been applied in the lives of certain pure devotees like Prahlad, Dhruva or ācāryas in our line.

These things are very important. When we deviate from that, then we get into trouble. Then we open the door to a speculation and experimentation and various other kinds of materialistic concepts which are hit and miss. As a result then... That result of that is rather not definite, you see.

 

Actually what happened in Ayurvedic medicine, so far that I have been explained by certain Ayurvedic doctors, Kavirājas, not our Kavirāj but... Kavirāj means that is what they call the doctors who follow ayurvedic medicine. That during the Mughal period… Before the Mughal period, by ayurvedic science, medical science, they could perform operations by mantra. Say they find,”Oh no, this person has a defective liver; there is a tumour.” Somehow, by mantra they could operate. By mantra and even by  [Not Clear - 00: 22:19].

They would operate, and they would perform various very technical operations with the combination of instruments and mantras. When the Mughals took over India, they banned this thing. They said it was like witch craft or something, and those kavirājas had to go underground. And there was such a period of about 800 years of Mughal reign, that many of these kind of subtle sciences of Āyurveda got lost, kind of paramparā was by enlarge broken.

 

So today Āyurveda is no longer know how... Although it is written, but no one has been able to again duplicate, so far that I know, this type of surgery and other things. And even many of the exact details on how to make the different medicines were lost, but the books were there. So they take in the books, and then what happens is different type of institutions or kavirāj read the book.

They try, just like you got the recipe book, you know that one person takes the recipe book and cook something. Does not always just come out like someone who has learnt how to cook it  from his mother or something. It is a little different. You can read a recipe book,and if 5 people can cook the same recipe - each one is different, slight, slight difference is there.

 

So that’s what the present situation of Ayurvedic medicine, is that in many cases people read the recipes and do it. But it is not always exactly  (inaudible 24:04) Say supposed to be the same preparation chyavanprash for the cold in the winter and you take that and each one tastes little different, has different effects slightly. One seems more powerful, but it is all supposed to be the same menu, the same recipe.

 

So this is kind of what happens when you lose that link of how to do things. When you just follow only the book, then in initial stages there is a little difficulty. That way, we are very fortunate that great ācāryas like Bhaktivinoda Thakur and Gaur Kishore, Bhaktisiddhānta Saraswati Thakur, Śrīla Prabhupāda, they have not only handed down and translated the scriptures into modern languages, but they have also practically shown how these are to be applied, how they are to be understood.

In India, you have a certain number of learned scholars in the Vedas who don’t have faith in Vishnu or Kṛṣṇa or even in the words. Now, interesting enough, this is also.. I have personally seen,  [Not Clear - 00:25:27] Christian priests - Roman Catholic priests, South America, is very common who don’t believe in god as commonly is understood. They have other conceptions.They believe that in liberation in a political sense, and there’s debates on this thing.

 

There are some that think that God as a father is impersonal. There are so many people there. And, there are some of them actually are atheists, but they believe in teaching like do good for their neighbors. They are like practically...maybe KGB. I don’t know what they are. There are people like that. Although they are wearing the garb of religious people, they have their own conceptions and ideas which they have introduced, which are not substantiated by the scriptures and previous people.

Not only in Hindu or the Vedic, modern Hindu religion or the Vedic cultures have come down but even other religions in the other parts of the world. So, there is also... I mean, that was there in this Devānanda Pandit that although he was a professor of the Bhagavat, he didn’t really have faith in Kṛṣṇa.

There is a story about that. Rāmānuja, his guru was a māyāvādī, and he was reading a śloka from the Bhāgavatam which described Kṛṣṇa having... that His cheeks were just beautiful rose color like the color of lotus. But when this guru read this sanskrit verse... Sometimes, in Sanskrit there are different words that if you… Like in Nectar of Devotion there we have some examples of that.

Well like  Kṛṣṇa ask Rādhārāṇī, how are you? Where is your house? You know, where is your bhāsa? Bhāsa means house; it means words. It means scent. It means... So many meanings are there. So, in this way she got some different meanings, and there was some humorous exchange. But, sometimes in one word, you can take a word and divide it up, and it has different meanings.

So he took the word, the  (inaudible 27:50) word was there that said Kṛṣṇa who has a face like a lotus  with red cheeks and that.  And then he divided it up and said, “Kṛṣṇa has a face just like the red cheeks of the arse of certain monkey”. Rāmānujācārya heard that as a brahmachari student, and he started crying. Just to hear that he started crying, and his guru says, “What are you crying for?” He said, “How can you say such a horrible thing about our Lord?” And from this point…

Basically  from that point Rāmānuja became a Vaishnava acaraya, and he, you know, preached against this impersonalist philosophy. But he defeated his so called guru at that point, showing how it was a wrong utilization of the Sanskrit language. It meant that Kṛṣṇa has lotus face and just like a glowing lotus, it was so brilliant and had you know…

Although He is śyāma color, there was reddish tinge and things like that. He defeated him but, you know, in the doing he had to hear this horrible offensive things. You get these kinds of māyāvādī philosophers.

I know this one contemporary māyāvādī who actively preaches in India that Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra is very powerful. But the real power is not in the words Kṛṣṇa, Hare, Ram. It is in the little voids that are between the name. The power is in the void. (laughter)

Just between those particular words the voids are more powerful. So I mean, they get away with stuff like that. People say, “Wow! That’s pretty far out.” Because people don’t really know anymore, they are a little bit out of touch. So this sounds pretty interesting, you know. It is kind of a mind blower, but anyone hear this,  call it ridiculous.

 First of all this is the way we chant Japa, there are no gaps anyway, and this is totally ridiculous. There is nowhere in the scriptures. It is just totally, you know... But they get away with this kind of thing. They do not refer to scriptures; they just say anything. So, therefore, we strictly avoid that policy. We strictly follow this principle of following sādhu, shastra and guru, following the previous authorities, following the scriptural and the devotional examples which are given.

 So, Devānanda pandit, unfortunately, he was one of these so called spiritual masters who wasn’t... Although, he is preaching in the bhāgavatam, of all sacred literatures, but he himself was not a Vaishnava. Therefore Lord Caitanyaforbids us. According to the scriptures, we should not hear from such people. Now, Śrīvas was chastised by Lord, why did you go there? But nonetheless, Lord Caitanyawas very angry at Devānanda pandit.

 One time Lord Caitanyawas going to other side of the river doing  harinām with His devotees, and He saw Devānanda Pandit. He stopped the harinām, and He started to chastise Devānanda that “You have insulted a pure devotee. You are not the real pandit of the Bhāgavatam. You don’t understand the Bhāgavatam at all,” and so on. Just like,  lashed  him in public.

Devānanda pandit became, he became..., his initial response, you know, was natural organic response. He became very angry and puffed up and he stomped off. Then he was very fortunate, I think it was also may be Gopīnāth ācārya, or it was something similar. He had a relative also. Maybe he was not  Gopīnāth but like Sārvabhauma and Gopīnāth. I am not sure if it was the same or whether someone else. I forget exactly who his relative was.

But... maybe... I forget who he was.

 Anyway he was fortunate to have a relative who was an associate of Lord Chaitanya, and he preached to him that “Actually, everything Lord Caitanyasaid is right, and you should understand.” Because he was like a relative, somehow, he had a relationship that he could introduce the matter in such a way that actually, Devānanda Pandit could see, by that association of the Vaishnava. See, as long as he was envious, he was envious against Kṛṣṇa, envious against Lord Chaitanya.

 Even Lord Caitanyaeven God Himself instructed him but because of his envy, he could not accept. When he got association with a pure Vaishnava, and he was to some extent cured from that envy, he was preached to, and he was cured from that envious outlook. Then he could realize that “I have made a big mistake. I have offended a Vaishnava. I don’t really understand what is the Bhāgavatam? I haven’t really... I am lecturing on it, but I am just knowing it from academic supervision. I haven’t learned it from a pure devotee, and I haven’t really digested it in a proper way.”

So then, he searched out Lord Caitanyaor somehow he met him again. Yeah, he met him again, and this time he wanted to be forgiven by Lord Chaitanya. Lord Caitanyarefused, and he had to be also forgiven by Śrīvas. [Not Clear - 00:33:22] actually found out Śrīvas, and he took pardon from Śrīvas. And then he was forgiven by Lord Caitanyain that Kuliyagram. Therefore, it is called vaishnav apradh, [Not Clear - 00:33:41]. The place where you can get forgiven from a Vaishnav aparadh is in the Navadwip Dham in that area.

 So thereafter, Lord Caitanya blessed him and he became an associate of Lord Chaitanya, and he actually became a qualified lecturer of the Bhāgavatam. So these things are discussed here. That to understand the Gītā or the Bhāgavatam, it is necessary to understand in the association of devotees, not mental speculators, not academicians or māyāvādīs or anyone else. But, in the association of devotees who by listening, by applying the knowledge, by hearing it from other authorities, they come to  (inaudible 34:28) realize. They understand that in a realized way  pratyakṣa (inaudible 34:36).

 

In conclusion, here Prabhupāda says (reading from the BG 9.1 purport): “ Now, this first verse has specific significance. The words idaṁ jñānam (“this knowledge”) refer to pure devotional service, which consists of nine different activities: hearing, chanting, remembering, serving, worshiping, praying, obeying, maintaining friendship and surrendering everything.” ( reading ends)

It’s interesting how servitude has been described as obeying. It is the position of servant is to obey the master.

(continues reading from the BG 9.1 purport) “By the practice of these nine elements of devotional service one is elevated to spiritual consciousness, Kṛṣṇa consciousness. At the time, when one’s heart is thus cleared of material contamination, one can understand this science of Kṛṣṇa. Simply to understand that a living entity is not material is not sufficient. That may be the beginning of spiritual realization, but one should recognize the difference between activities of the body and the spiritual activities by which one understands that he is not the body.“ ( reading ends)

 

One thing is that one may, theoretically, “Yes, I am not the body.” But just to say I am not the body is not enough. Next thing is how to act although we are living in a material body. How to act in spiritual activities? How to differentiate which are the activities of the body? Which are the activities performed by the body which are actually spiritual activities. There is a difference.

(continues reading from the BG 9.1 purport) The Sanskrit word anasūyave in this verse is also very significant. Generally the commentators, even if they are highly scholarly, are all envious of Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Personality of Godhead.  (reading ends)

 

As our Devānanda Pandit was admittedly at one point.

 (continues reading from the BG 9.1 purport) Even the most erudite scholars write on Bhagavad-gītā very inaccurately. Because they are envious of Kṛṣṇa, their commentaries are useless. The commentaries given by devotees of the Lord are bona fide. No one can explain Bhagavad-gītā or give perfect knowledge of Kṛṣṇa if he is envious. One who criticizes the character of Kṛṣṇa without knowing Him is a fool. So such commentaries should be very carefully avoided. For one who understands that Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme Personality of Godhead, the pure and transcendental Personality, these chapters will be very beneficial.

 Thus end the Bhaktivedanta purport of text number 1 chapter 9 of Śrīmad Bhagavad-gītā as it is. In the chapter en title ‘The Most Confidential Knowledge’.

Hare Kṛṣṇa.

Are there any questions?

Devotee: Sometimes we find amongst Vaiṣṇavas in the Gauḍīya line differences of opinion, (inaudible 37:53) according to time and circumstance. So in our paramparā devotees need to know very clearly how to establish the line of authority.

Mahārāja: Yes, so Prabhupāda was very emphatic on the point that Lord Caitanyahad predicted or had explained that  - kali kaler dharma nāma sankirtan, krishna kripa bine nāhi tāra pravachana.

In the age of kali, the yuga dharma is chanting the holy name of Kṛṣṇa, is spreading the harinām sankirtan and establishing that and spreading that all over the world is not a material achievement, but it is a symptom that the person is empowered by Kṛṣṇa.

Lord Caitanyaclearly says, “krishna kripa bine nāhi tāra pravachana.” That without the mercy of Kṛṣṇa, it is not possible to spread Kṛṣṇa consciousness.

So that in terms of our present day, when you have all other things being equal, in terms of well same sampradāya, same basic, you know, Gauḍīya vaishnav, like that. That one person is saying this is the proper realization, and other person may say different application. Who is right?

The person that established this Kṛṣṇa consciousness all over the world, that person obviously should be recognized having received the mercy of Kṛṣṇa. In this regard every sober minded person accepted that His Divine Grace Abhay Charanaravinda Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupāda had undoubtedly received the mercy, the complete mercy of the previous ācāryas, of Lord Chaitanya, Kṛṣṇa.  And therefore because he had the mercy… it is not material.That is a spiritual asset. It is a spiritual qualification.

Therefore, that signifies that others should give up their petty differences and actually fall in line with Śrīla Prabhupāda’s vision which is proven.

Just like 2 doctors -  1 doctor says real disease is this, another doctor says disease is there. One doctor puts his cure first, it does not do anything. The other doctor gives his medicine, it is cured.

(inaudible 40:52) which doctor is right? The one that cured the patient is obviously right. So what is dharma? Dharma is the medicine to cure the disease  (inaudible 41:05) existed in the world and in this age the disease is of kali-yuga. The  cure is spreading the harinām sankirtan but that has to be applied according to kāla deśa patra.

When we have 2 doctors, and one doctor is saying, “Well,  this I understood it from my spiritual master. This is how it has come down. This is how you do it.” 

And he does it, and it works and people are made into devotees all over the world, and they are fixed up in Kṛṣṇa Consciousness. That is a very... This is the absolute truth. That in fact, his realization of the practical application of the philosophy is in fact the correct one. And  others who have not been able to achieve any success with their ideas, they should concede, rather than just stubbornly stick to their position, in spite of not being able to make any progress.

This is actually in terms of… Spiritually there is a difference in ambition which is the proper kāla deśa patra. And  even within ISKCON, Prabhupāda established, “Alright there are  two Vaishnavas. They may be both vaishnavas. But as preachers if one is able to expand book distribution or expand the preaching or do something, well then others would want to know how they do it, how they do it.” He has got some realization and that way we find that someone was successful, the other devotees would go to visit (inaudible 42:44), hear from them and try to learn. That is the Vaishnava way of realizing kāla deśa patra applications.

But when a person got other desires, trying to remain in some kind of exclusive situation or whatever, then may be some other motives which may have or just stubbornness or something. They don’t want to take advantage or actually follow the successful formulas. Then naturally they remain alienated from what has become the main stream of Lord Chaitanya’s movement. Does not mean they are not Vaishnavas. Unfortunately, they are not following the approved formulas.

Anything add to that Maharaj? Pretty deep subject. (Inaudible 43:48)

Devotee: Generally in the scriptures, especially in the Bhāgavatam  (inaudible 43:59) that as far as the actual siddhānta they actually don’t disagree. In other words, even within the realm of Vaishnav activities, there is always room for disagreement. But ultimately if the siddhānta is agreed upon, then there is no real disagreements.

His Holiness Jayapatākā Swami: Example of that?

Devotee: That in the First canto, Chapter 3, it mentions that... I think it is actually a part that Jīva Goswami mentions that this is just dissolution at the end of every kalpa, and according to Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa, he mentions that sometimes... There is a disagreement; there isn’t necessary a dissolution  at the end of every kalpa. So, Prabhupāda doesn’t even give his opinion about that. He just mentions (inaudible 44:48) two opinions.

So, this is on different point (inaudible 44:54). Obviously those two Vaishnavs don’t disagree that Kṛṣṇa is a Supreme Personality of Godhead. But as far as when someone disagrees with his spiritual master, then according to Prabhupāda... Of course, in the CaitanyaCharitamrita that if one disagrees from... deviates from disciplic succession, then he becomes  asāra or  useless.

Whatever he is saying, ultimately doesn’t have any effect anyhow. In other words, that the potency of this... That if one of... We actually have no potency in ourselves, but if we were fixed in the order of our spiritual master and meditating on it and actually executing it, then by the meditation upon the orders of the spiritual master, then we derive the potency of the disciplic succession.

It is said in the verse (BG 2.41) :

      vyavasāyātmikā buddhir

ekeha kuru-nandana

bahu-śākhā hy anantāś ca

buddhayo ’vyavasāyinām

  That the spiritual master’s light... The spiritual master’s order has to be taken as one’s life and soul. Because of his  meditating upon the order of spiritual master and is actually fixed in his mind, the actual spiritual master himself, that actually through...By that the whole disciplic succession including the Supreme Personality of Godhead is actually present. And when the Supreme Lord and his representatives are present, then one is actually able to perform devotional service in such a way that there is actually some result.

Which is why Vidura came back through a long pilgrimage, Mahārāja Yudhiṣṭhira nearly praised, praised him (SB 1.13.10):

bhavad-vidhā bhāgavatās

tīrtha-bhūtāḥ svayaṁ vibho

tīrthī-kurvanti tīrthāni

svāntaḥ-sthena gadā-bhṛtā

 

 

He praised that “You actually become a holy place of pilgrimage because you are carrying Supreme Personality of Godhead within your heart.” That  we as 1/10000th size of tip of the hair in size as spirit souls, we have no potencies practically speaking,  without the mercy of Spiritual master and Kṛṣṇa. Without the disciplic succession and Kṛṣṇa, we have no potency. But with them we have so much potency to fulfil the desires of spiritual master and Kṛṣṇa.

So one has to really see what the orders of the previous ācārya was and one who is actually fulfilling them. Then we can actually know that the spiritual master and Kṛṣṇa are personally present. And who is not  (inaudible 47:31), we can understand Kṛṣṇa and spiritual master aren’t present. Something else is present.

His Holiness Jayapatākā Swami: Sometimes in those commentaries,  one commentator is separate from another by 100, 200, 500 even 1000 years. And, so, when in one topic a person may say ,”Well, someone [Not Clear - 00:47:58], what are the  [Not Clear - 00:48:00] after manu changes, manvantara.”

 

Then 100 years later someone says well, such and such time it appears that from the scripture, this and this happened. Then the person says well,  (inaudible 48:17) the dissolution. There may be an exception that sometimes there’s no dissolution.

 So in a sense, there are not really contradicting. But what it is doing is, one person may be giving an explanation which is general and broad without... Just  like we say bones are impure in the scriptures. But then it also says that conch is pure but  that’s a bone. So sometimes in the Vedas there are some exceptions. So everything… It doesn’t put it all in one place. Just like that example. So there’s a manvantara  change, then there’s a dissolution. But there might be a manvantara where there isn’t a dissolution for some extraordinary reason, which the subsequent ācārya knew, had evidence from Vedas.

 So really, in reality it is not contradicting. He is not really saying that there isn’t a dissolution after every Kalpa, after every  manvantara. But…. In one sense, he is admitting it - there is a dissolution at that time, but sometimes there’s an exception. Ad this is that place where the Vedas say that under this particular manvantara, under  this situation, there was not a dissolution.

 

So that way they actually are continuing to respect because one subsequent ācārya cannot disrespect the previous ācārya. But sometimes, on a kind of a… It’s like, as it comes down you sometimes get finer and finer details that come out. Give a deeper... They don’t actually go against the previous but what they are doing is just... It is just like you have the constitution in America, and they make amendments which actually don’t change necessarily.

Sometimes, they don’t for like say the Supreme Court makes the ruling on those. They are not actually changing what is the law, but they are just giving an insight into how it is applied or something like that.

 

 So, just like that the previous ācārya gives some instruction, and the subsequent ācārya, he may be facing certain question or certain doubt that is arisen because there is something said in another part of the Vedas, and then he brings that into focus that how this is to be understood, and that is to be understood.

So you  [Not Clear - 00:50:51] appear to be contradiction, but actually it is for the refinement of the understanding rather than actually having a really intrinsic disagreement on the Bhāgavatam. At least within the ācāryas like that you don’t find that type of direct any kind of disagreement.

In fact, when Vallabha Ācārya wanted to disagree with Śrīdhar Swami, then Lord Caitanya accused him of being unfaithful, unchaste to the original commentator. Even the subsequent commentator may have realized some aspects of the Bhāgavatam in greater depths, they don’t disrespect or overtly contradict. Keeping respect with the original commentator, then they show how in this particular area it can be seen even in a greater depth.

 

It is just like someone may be looking 30 power microscopic blood, and he sees these things and someone else has a 100 power microscope and looks. That they have even a greater kind of in depth. So it is not actually contradictory. It is just a question of how one layer of depth they are looking at. So you find some of these ācāryas like Visvanath Cakravartī Thakur when he looked at things, sometimes it was nearly with like a high power microscope type of vision, and he would find out very specific points which in reality don’t contradict the previous but they give a more deeper refinement of the understanding. Because also expressed also way... This is the way Prabhupad explained that amongst the previous ācāryas like that, there is no basic disagreement.

So, I think it is time get ready for taking rest for our service tomorrow. We take rest not  because we are  sleep lovers, but because the body needs to be rested, mind need to rest  so then we can again serve with full force tomorrow.