Go to Vaniquotes | Go to Vanipedia | Go to Vanimedia


Vanisource - the complete essence of Vedic knowledge


720328 - Lecture BG 07.11-13 - Bombay

From Vanisource

His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada



720328BG-BOMBAY - March 28, 1972 - 35:06 Minutes



Prabhupāda:

. . . kāma-rāga-vivarjitam
dharmāviruddho bhūteṣu
kāmo 'smi bharatarṣabha
(BG 7.11)

(I am the strength of the strong, devoid of passion and desire. I am sex life which is not contrary to religious principles, O Lord of the Bhāratas (Arjuna))

(break) (pause)

Kṛṣṇa says, balaṁ balavatāṁ. Balavat means one who has got strength—strong man. But that strength is Kṛṣṇa. We have, every one of us, we have got some strength, but this strength . . .

(aside) They are talking. Ask them to go away. Chelo. (break)

We are moving our hands, moving our legs, talking, but because all these strength are Kṛṣṇa, they are under Kṛṣṇa's control. It is not in our control, although we are thinking that it is my strength. Just like a wrestler . . . in Vṛndāvana, there was—eh, not was; he is still living—one wrestler. He became bāljī. So he was very proud of his strength, and he was quarreling with anyone, and everyone was afraid of his encroachment. But at the present moment that man is paralyzed; he cannot even talk. So all his strength is finished now.

So here Kṛṣṇa says, balaṁ balavatāṁ cāhaṁ: "I am the strength." So long Kṛṣṇa allows you to use the strength, you can become proud of your strength. But as soon as He withdraws, then you are useless. This is Kṛṣṇa conscious. If anyone understands this philosophy that, "I possess this strength, I possess this wealth, I possess this beauty, I possess such and such education, riches—but they are all Kṛṣṇa's gift. Actually I do not possess anything. Kṛṣṇa has given them to use, and He has given the privilege to me to use it. But I must know that these things are possession of Kṛṣṇa," this is Kṛṣṇa consciousness sense. Therefore because we are wrongly thinking that, "I am the proprietor of this thing; I possess this thing," this is māyā. When you come to the conclusion that "I do not possess anything; everything belongs to Kṛṣṇa. I am simply allowed to use it, that's all . . ." Everything. We are claiming, "This is our country," "This is my land." Actually it is not so. The land belongs to Kṛṣṇa. He has already explained it, bhūmir āpo 'nalo vāyuḥ (BG 7.4):

"Earth, water, fire, air, they are My differentiated energies." So when we claim that, "The land belongs to me," that is called māyā, that that land does not belong to me or you—it belongs to Kṛṣṇa. We are allowed to use it for some time. We come here naked, and we pass, go away, naked. The things which we are proud of possessing, they remain there. This is Kṛṣṇa conscious.

balaṁ balavatāṁ cāhaṁ
kāma-rāga-vivarjitam
(BG 7.11)

Therefore kāma-rāga-vivarjitam. Kāma means lust, and rāga means attraction. Vivarjitam means "devoid of." I have got some strength, but if I become attached to it, that "It is my strength, it is my money," this is kāma-rāga. Lust. Kāma means lust—to enjoy: "It is my money. It is mine, it is mine." Ahaṁ'yam mameti (SB 5.5.8):

"I am such and such a big man, and I have got such and such things," this is called ahaṁ mama, "My strength." No. It is not your strength. If you know that it is not your strength, it is Kṛṣṇa's strength, it should be used for Kṛṣṇa, then it is kāma-rāga-vivarjitam.

Actually that is a fact. This is the instruction given by Kṛṣṇa. Arjuna was a strong man. He could fight. So he understood that "This mine, fighting strength, is Kṛṣṇa's. So if Kṛṣṇa wants to use it for His purpose, why shall I not? I was refusing to use this strength, thinking that, "This is my strength. Why shall I use it for my relatives?' " That is illusion. When he understood that, "The strength belongs to Kṛṣṇa, and Kṛṣṇa wants it. Now you use it for Him," so he decided, "Yes."Kāma-rāga-vivarjitam. If Kṛṣṇa is the master and we are simply Kṛṣṇa's servants, so when the master orders, the servant must do it. That is bhakti. That is Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Ānukūlyena kṛṣṇānu-śīlanaṁ (CC Madhya 19.167).

Ānukūlyena means favorable. We have got something, little strength given by Kṛṣṇa. Actually, Kṛṣṇa . . . I am also Kṛṣṇa's. I am part and parcel of Kṛṣṇa. So in minute quantity I have got all the qualities of Kṛṣṇa. So whatever I have got, if we use it for Kṛṣṇa's service, that is perfection of life, kāma-rāga-vivarjitam.

Therefore bhakti means sarvopādhi-vinirmuktaṁ (CC Madhya 19.170).

The whole world is suffering on account of this misunderstanding. Everything belongs to Kṛṣṇa, but we have formed different parties, and everyone is claiming that, "This is my land." "India is our," "Pakistan is our," "America is our." That is called illusion, māyā. Nothing belongs to you. Everything . . . Īśāvāsyam idaṁ sarvam (Īśo mantra 1).

Everything Kṛṣṇa's. So this is ignorance. So Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement means to drive away this ignorance. That is called sarvopādhi-vinirmuktaṁ tat-paratvena nirmalam (CC Madhya 19.170). We should not indulge in falsely claiming,

sarvopādhi-vinirmuktaṁ
tat-paratvena nirmalam
kāma-rāga-vivarjitam
(CC Madhya 19.170, BG. 7.11)

and

dharmāviruddho bhūteṣu
kāmo 'smi bharatarṣabha
(BG 7.11)

Dharmāviruddha. Dharma aviruddha. Now this dharma, religious principles, that means it is with reference to the human society, because religious principles are not to be found in the animal society. They have no religion. Just like dogs: the dogs, as soon as he finds one dog, male dog finds another female dog, immediately he wants to take . . . indulge it, because it is animal. She . . . he is lusty, he wants to have sex with the opposite sex, never mind what it is—a small dog or big dog—because they are animals. But if a man does so, that is dharmāviruddha. According to the human social convention, one must have a married wife, and there is process. Not like the cats and dogs—as soon as one is lusty, he rapes. No. So that kind of lust—actually that is not lust; that is duty.

Putrārthe kriyate bhāryā. Bhāryā means wife, and putra means son. For begetting a son, a wife is accepted—not for enjoying sex life. At the present moment it has become so. Wife means legalized prostitute. They say marriage is legalized prostitution, because they are habituated to prostitution, so it becomes legalized. But actually the dharma, religious principle, means putrārthe kriyate bhāryā Putraḥ piṇḍaṁ prayojanam. That is Vedic injunction. So Kṛṣṇa says dharmāviruddho kāma: "When this lusty affair is sanctioned by religious principle, that kind of lust I am." That means if you beget son according to the religious principle, that is Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Otherwise, if you become unnecessary lusty and attack your wife or somebody, that is sinful. So human life is so responsible life, little deviation will make me responsible for resultant action. So dharmāviruddho kāmo 'smi sarva bhūteṣu bharatarṣabha.

ye caiva sāttvikā bhāvā
rajasas tāmasāś ca ye
matta eveti tān viddhi
na tv ahaṁ teṣu te mayi
(BG 7.12)

Sattvic, rajasic, tamasic: goodness, passion and ignorance. Kṛṣṇa says: "Either goodness or passion or ignorance, they are all from Me,"ye caiva sāttvikā bhāvā. Matta eveti tān viddhi: "They are from Me." Just like it is described that adharma is the back side of God. Adharma means irreligious—that is back side of God. If God is absolute, then just like we have got this front side and this back side, the back side we cannot see. Or back side, suppose if there is attack, then I try to protect my front side first. I give preference to the front side, not to the back side. These are the example. So we consider back side is inferior than the front side. But when it is with reference to Kṛṣṇa, He's absolute, so how the back side can be inferior than the front side? Back side, it is said in the Vedic literature, adharma is the back side of God, Kṛṣṇa. So here also it is said:

matta eveti tān viddhi
na tv ahaṁ teṣu te mayi
(BG 7.12)

Even the opposite number dharma, or adharma, for Kṛṣṇa everything is one, because He is absolute. Although materially "This is good," "This is bad," we consider, but for Kṛṣṇa there is no such distinction. He is absolute. Another example can be given, that we use electricity for heater and at the same time cooler. The heat and cool, they are opposite number, but to the electrician he knows how to build the electricity power to make one thing cool and another thing hot. Therefore Kṛṣṇa is viruddha-dharma sāmanja (Āmnāya Sūtra 6):

He can adjust two opposite things. So in other words, dharma and adharma, they are, in material consideration, there are two different opposite things. But when it is used for Kṛṣṇa, then it is absolute. Then it is absolute.

Just like, for example, Kṛṣṇa asking Yudhiṣṭhira Mahārāja in the Kurukṣetra battlefield. Yudhiṣṭhira Mahārāja, Yudhiṣṭhira Mahārāja was elder brother, elder cousin-brother of Kṛṣṇa. So he requested, "My dear elder brother, you go to Droṇācārya and say that, 'Your son is dead.' " Because it was a benediction for Droṇācārya that unless he is shocked by the death of his son, he will never die. So he was not dying. So Kṛṣṇa asked Yudhiṣṭhira. He was very pious man, and Droṇācārya would believe him, because, "Droṇācārya . . . here Yudhiṣṭhira is speaking, then surely my son has died." Therefore Kṛṣṇa requested him to go and tell this lie that, "Your son is dead." Now we may think that Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, He is advising Yudhiṣṭhira Mahārāja to speak lie, it is practically opposite from religious principle. But Kṛṣṇa wants it—we must do it. Never mind, there is no such consideration. That is Kṛṣṇa consciousness. But not that we should manufacture our Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Actually, when Kṛṣṇa or His representative wants to do something, we must do it. That is Kṛṣṇa consciousness. So Yudhiṣṭhira Mahārāja hesitated to speak lies—that was considered as disobedience to the Lord. That's a long story.

Similarly, we find that Kṛṣṇa performed rāsa-līlā at dead of night. All the village girls, they assembled there. So young girls coming out of home to meet another young boy at dead of night, it is against Vedic principles. This is not allowed. This question was raised by Parīkṣit Mahārāja that, "How Kṛṣṇa danced with the girls who were others' wife?" That is not allowed. According to Vedic social convention nobody can dance with others' wife, unless she's married. So this question was raised by Parīkṣit Mahārāja, and it was answered that "What Kṛṣṇa does, one should not even think of it, the Kṛṣṇa's has perform this rāsa-līlā dance; therefore I can also do it." There are many rascals, they imitate that. The answer is, tadīya saṅga doṣāya These girls, they wanted Kṛṣṇa as their husband. Kṛṣṇa is so beautiful, they prayed to Kātyāyanī that, "Please give us Kṛṣṇa as our husband." So actually this was not possible. Kṛṣṇa . . . generally our Hindu system, or Vedic system, is that the boy must be elderly than the girl. But they were of the same age; sometimes Kṛṣṇa was younger. But they wanted. So Kṛṣṇa satisfied their desire by dancing with them, that's all. But we cannot imitate this. We cannot dance with others' wife. That is not possible.

So Kṛṣṇa gave them the chance that some way or other, kāma, lobha, bhayat—some way or other, if someone becomes attached to Kṛṣṇa . . . just like Kaṁsa: he was attached to Kṛṣṇa out of fear, bhaya. He understood that "There is . . . my sister's son, whose name will be Kṛṣṇa, He will kill me." So he was always thinking of Kṛṣṇa: "Oh, Kṛṣṇa may now come and kill me." So after all, he was thinking of Kṛṣṇa—but out of fear. This is not bhakti, but he was thinking of Kṛṣṇa. He was Kṛṣṇa conscious; therefore he got salvation. Although he was thinking of Kṛṣṇa as enemy, but because he was thinking of Kṛṣṇa, he got salvation. Not elevation to the Vaikuṇṭha planet, but salvation. Salvation means merge into the brahman effulgence. So śāstra says, kāma, bhayat, lobha: either by lust or by greediness or by inimical feeling, somehow or other if you become Kṛṣṇa conscious, then you are benefited. Somehow or other.

So Kṛṣṇa can adjust all opposing elements. That is Kṛṣṇa. But in ordinary dealing we should . . . we must discriminate that, "This is good; this is bad," "This is religious; this is irreligious." But when it is in relations with Kṛṣṇa, all these opposite elements become adjusted. This is the term. Therefore Kṛṣṇa says dharmāviruddho kāma: "Which is sanctioned by religious principle, such lusty affairs I am."Ye caiva sāttvikā bhāvā: and all the bhāvā, the goodness, passion and ignorance, they are all emanation from Kṛṣṇa. So even things which are considered to be in the modes of ignorance, tamasic, tamas . . . from ordinary point of view, the gopīs' going to Kṛṣṇa at dead of night, that is tamasic, but when it is in connection with Kṛṣṇa it transcends all these qualities, sattvic, rajasic, tamasic. We should not imitate these things, but this is the conclusion of the śāstra: He can adjust. Tadīya saṅga doṣāya. The philosophy is, one who is very powerful, no faults can be there. Sometimes a very powerful king, he does something not sanctioned by this law, but still its accepted. There are so many things. Tadīya saṅga doṣāya. We have heard that sometimes Mahatma Gandhi ordered one calf to be killed. The calf was suffering, and Gandhi ordered him that, "Kill him. He is suffering." So now for ordinary man it comes to cow-killing, but he was powerful, so nobody takes into consideration.

So there are . . . if it is possible for an ordinary man to do something extraordinary which is not sanctioned by the society, what to speak of Kṛṣṇa, He is fully independent, sva-rāṭ. He can do anything what He likes, still He is God, good, pavitraṁ. Apāpa-viddham (Īśo mantra 8).

In the Upaniṣads it is said: "God cannot be contaminated by any sinful activity." Why it is said sinful activities? Sometimes we see that God is doing something which is sinful, but He will not be contaminated. Apāpa-viddham. He is turning into goodness. Just like the gopīs came at night to Kṛṣṇa because He was beautiful. So actually they came in lust, but because Kṛṣṇa, it is in relationship with Kṛṣṇa, the gopīs became the greatest devotee of the world. Ramyā kācid upāsanā vraja-vadhū-vargeṇa yā kalpitā (Caitanya-mañjusā).

This is recommended by Lord Caitanya, who was so strict, but He recommended that gopīs' love for Kṛṣṇa, there is no comparison. So because it is relationship with Kṛṣṇa. But we cannot do that—then we are abominable. These things are to be understood, that Kṛṣṇa says:

ye caiva sāttvikā bhāvā
rajasas tāmasāś ca ye
matta eveti tān viddhi
(BG 7.12)

Again He says, tribhir guṇa-mayair jagat (BG 7.13):

"But those who are not Kṛṣṇa conscious, for them these things are illusion," tribhir guṇa-mayair, these three kinds of material modes of nature. Tribhir guṇa-mayair mohitaṁ. They are captivated, mohitaṁ. Nābhijānāti mām ebhyaḥ param avyayam. These three qualities, or modes of material nature, is working within this material world, and everyone is bewildered by these qualities. Some of them are bewildered by the quality of goodness, some of them are by passion, some of them by ignorance, or some of them by the mixture. In this way . . .

(break) . . . they cannot understand Kṛṣṇa. They cannot understand Kṛṣṇa. It is not that a person . . . just like this morning I was discussing in the beach—a person is in the modes of goodness, that does not mean that he is advanced spiritually. He may be a very good man in the estimation of this material world—very pious, moral—but that is not qualification that he will understand Kṛṣṇa. That is not possible. And sometimes you find one man is very much abominable, in the lowest stage of human society, in ignorance—but he can understand Kṛṣṇa. That is possible.

So this material convention is not a check for understanding Kṛṣṇa. This is another department. Ahaituky apratihatā (SB 1.2.6):

If we follow the principles of devotional service, then these material impediments cannot check; it will go, ahaituky apratihatā. But generally, who is not Kṛṣṇa consciousness, even if he is on the modes of goodness he cannot understand. Mohitaṁ. It is said, mohitaṁ nābhijānāti. Nābhijānāti. Nābhijānāti mām ebhyaḥ param avyayam: "I am the Supreme Absolute, and because they are covered by these modes of material nature, they cannot understand Me." But we see, we see actually there are many big, big philosophers, learned scholars, but they do not understand Kṛṣṇa. We have seen in Dr. Radhakrishnan's book: he does not understand Kṛṣṇa, and he writes commentary on Bhagavad-gītā, and he concludes that Bhagavad-gītā is mental speculation. Just see. Although he is born of a brāhmaṇa family, he's nice scholar, learned scholar, but because he's not trained up in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, he cannot understand what is Kṛṣṇa.

So, so long we are under the influence of this material modes of nature, there is no possibility of understanding Kṛṣṇa. Either it may be goodness or passion or ignorance or mixed up—we have to transcend; we have to go above the material modes of nature. And how it is this possible? That is recommended, that is instructed by Kṛṣṇa:

māṁ ca yo 'vyabhicāreṇa
bhakti-yogena sevate
sa guṇān samatītyaitān
brahma-bhūyāya kalpate
(BG 14.26)

If you engage yourself under the direction of śāstra and the spiritual master, in the devotional modes of devotional service, then you become advanced, transcendental to all these tribhir guṇa-mayair.

Thank you very much.

Devotees: Hare Kṛṣṇa. (end)