SB 7.14.42

Giriraj Swami: 

oṁ namo bhagavate vāsudevāya
oṁ namo bhagavate vāsudevāya
oṁ namo bhagavate vāsudevāya 

We read from Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, Canto Seven, Chapter Fourteen, “Ideal Family Life.” 

TEXT 42  

nanv asya brāhmaṇā rājan

kṛṣṇasya jagad-ātmanaḥ

punantaḥ pāda-rajasā

tri-lokīṁ daivataṁ mahat

TRANSLATION

My dear King Yudhiṣṭhira, the brāhmaṇas, especially those engaged in preaching the glories of the Lord throughout the entire world, are recognized and worshiped by the Supreme Personality of Godhead, who is the heart and soul of all creation. The brāhmaṇas, by their preaching, sanctify the three worlds with the dust of their lotus feet, and thus they are worshipable even for Kṛṣṇa.

PURPORT by Srila Prabhupada 

As admitted by Lord Kṛṣṇa in Bhagavad-gītā (18.69), na ca tasmān manuṣyeṣu kaścin me priya-kṛttamaḥ. The brāhmaṇas preach the cult of Kṛṣṇa consciousness all over the world, and therefore, although they worship Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, the Lord also recognizes them as worshipable. The relationship is reciprocal. The brāhmaṇas want to worship Kṛṣṇa, and similarly Kṛṣṇa wants to worship the brāhmaṇas. In conclusion, therefore, brāhmaṇas and Vaiṣṇavas who are engaged in preaching the glories of the Lord must be worshiped by religionists, philosophers and people in general. At the Rājasūya-yajña of Mahārāja Yudhiṣṭhira, many hundreds and thousands of brāhmaṇas were present, yet Kṛṣṇa was selected to be worshiped first. Therefore, Kṛṣṇa is always the Supreme Person, but by His causeless mercy He recognizes the brāhmaṇas as dearmost to Him.

Thus end the Bhaktivedanta purports of the Seventh Canto, Fourteenth Chapter, of the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, entitled “Ideal Family Life.”

TRANSLATION

My dear King Yudhiṣṭhira, the brāhmaṇas, especially those engaged in preaching the glories of the Lord throughout the entire world, are recognized and worshiped by the Supreme Personality of Godhead, who is the heart and soul of all creation. The brāhmaṇas, by their preaching, sanctify the three worlds with the dust of their lotus feet, and thus they are worshipable even for Kṛṣṇa.

COMMENT 

In yesterday’s verse, we read that the brahmans are the best of all human beings. And they’re worshipable as representatives of the Supreme Lord. [Unintelligible 00:07:30] they are extensions of the body of the Supreme Lord or representations of the Supreme Lord. But today we read that the brahmans or the Vaishnavas are worshipable by the Supreme Lord. The Supreme Lord is always the Supreme even when He worships the brahmans or Vaishnavas. And Srila Prabhupada gives the example that in Maharaja Yudhisthira’s Rājasūya-yagna, the chief person was to be selected to be worshipped first. And although so many brahmans were present—brahmans and others—they selected Krishna to be worshipped first as the chief person. 

So Krishna is always the Supreme. But still out of His causeless mercy, or out of His affectionate heart, He worships His devotees. This reciprocal relationship between Krishna and the devotees is explained by Krishna Himself in the Ninth Canto of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam when the sage Durvasa Muni committed an offense against the king Ambarish Maharaja. As a result of his offense, Durvasa Muni was being pursued by Krishna’s chakra. And to escape the punishment for his offense, he went all the way to Lord Brahma, the father of the universe. Lord Brahma said, “I cannot help you. You better approach Lord Vishnu.” And Durvasa Muni was such a powerful mystic that he was actually able to approach Lord Vishnu in Vaikuntha. But Lord Vishnu said, “Actually, even I cannot help you. You have offended My devotee, and only he can help you. I cannot help you.” 

And Lord Vishnu explained the reciprocal relationship between Him and His devotees. And, not just reciprocal in a business sense that, “I give you something, and you give me something.” But reciprocal in terms of affection and attachment. So I will read some of these verses spoken by the Supreme Lord. 

Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam Canto Nine, Chapter Four, “Ambarīṣa Mahārāja Offended by Durvāsā Muni.”

TEXT 63 

śrī-bhagavān uvāca

ahaṁ bhakta-parādhīno

hy asvatantra iva dvija

sādhubhir grasta-hṛdayo

bhaktair bhakta-jana-priyaḥ

TRANSLATION

The Supreme Personality of Godhead said to the brāhmaṇa: I am completely under the control of My devotees. Indeed, I am not at all independent. Because My devotees are completely devoid of material desires, I sit only within the cores of their hearts. What to speak of My devotee, even those who are devotees of My devotee are very dear to Me.

COMMENT 

Now reading today’s verse from the Seventh Canto of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, at least I, and I’m confident that all of us, thought of Srila Prabhupada that he sanctified the entire universe by his preaching, by the dust of his lotus feet. And I believe we can safely say that he had a direct relationship with Krishna. He was a direct servant of Krishna. So one might think that what the verse says applies to a devotee of the caliber of Srila Prabhupada, who actually did spread Krishna consciousness throughout the whole world and sanctified the three worlds—ebe jaśa ghuṣuk tribhuvana. But here in the Ninth Canto, Lord Vishnu says that not only are His devotees dear to Him, but the devotees of His devotees are also dear to Him. The servant of the servants are also dear to the Supreme Lord. Then Lord Vishnu says,

TEXT 64

O best of the brāhmaṇas, without saintly persons for whom I am the only destination, I do not desire to enjoy My transcendental bliss and My supreme opulences. 

COMMENT

He says, He can’t, He has no desire to live without His devotees. He can’t enjoy without His devotees. Of course, from a certain perspective Lord Vishnu is ātmārāma, He is self-satisfied. But to expand His pleasure, He expands Himself, eko bahu śyāma. And in particular, He expands Himself as Srimati Radharani to enjoy pleasure, hlādinī-śakti. But what really gives Him pleasure is devotion or bhakti. And even if we imagine Krishna with Radharani alone, the pleasure of His pastimes would not be manifest. They’re manifest in relationship with all of the devotees who are engaged in the service of Krishna. 

TEXT 65

Since pure devotees give up their homes, wives, children, relatives, riches and even their lives simply to serve Me, without any desire for material improvement in this life or in the next, how can I give up such devotees at any time? 

COMMENT

Now, reading this verse, we might think as I thought, Have I given up my home? Of course wife, no question, children, well, disciples, relatives, riches? Apparently not. I mean probably any one of us who reads this will think not. But our conception of giving up is not necessarily negation of them or renunciation of them in the negative sense, but it’s engaging them. Not considering ourselves to be the proprietor of one’s hearth at home, wife, and children, but to consider them to belong to Krishna, and consider oneself to be Krishna’s servant. And to consider oneself to be the servant in relation to Krishna of one’s wife and children. 

Gurur na sa syāt, pitā na sa syāj—One should not become a guru or a father, or a mother, or a husband, or any worshipable person unless one is able to deliver one’s dependents from the repetition of birth and death. So we are reading here that brahmans are worshipable. And in particular gurus, mothers, fathers, and husbands, and wives, they have specific responsibilities to deliver those by whom they are worshiped, or by whom they are followed, by whom they are served. So we are not talking about—of course, it may come at a certain stage but—we are not talking about walking out of the home, leaving behind the home and wife and children. But we are talking about relating to them in a Krishna conscious way, as servants of Krishna, and as servants of them. And if we do that—and I believe to some extent all of us are trying to do that—we do qualify to some degree to be dear to Vishnu.

Since pure devotees. . . And of course, we know that one can be a pure devotee in any position of life. Gṛhe thāko vane thāko—one can be a renunciate who lives in the forest. Or one can be a householder. He can still be a pure devotee. 

TEXT 65

Since pure devotees give up their homes, wives, children, relatives, riches and even their lives simply to serve Me, without any desire for material improvement in this life or in the next, how can I give up such devotees at any time? 

TEXT 66

As chaste women bring their gentle husbands under control by service, the pure devotees, who are equal to everyone and completely attached to Me in the core of the heart, bring Me under their full control. 

TEXT 67

My devotees, who are always satisfied to be engaged in My loving service, are not interested even in the four principles of liberation [sālokya, sārūpya, sāmīpya and sārṣṭi], although these are automatically achieved by their service. What then is to be said of such perishable happiness as elevation to the higher planetary systems?

COMMENT

And here we come to a very famous and beautiful verse. 

TEXT 68 

sādhavo hṛdayaṁ mahyaṁ

sādhūnāṁ hṛdayaṁ tv aham

mad-anyat en a jānanti

nāhaṁ tebhyo manāg api

TRANSLATION

The pure devotee is always within the core of My heart, and I am always in the heart of the pure devotee. My devotees do not know anything else but Me, and I do not know anyone else but them. 

COMMENT

So this is the beautiful, loving, reciprocal relationship between the Lord and the devotees. And that is mentioned in this verse that the brahmans, the Vaishnavas, the preachers—they are worshipable even for Krishna. One famous example—of course there are so many examples in Krishna-līlā—but one famous example of the Lord worshipping His devotee, which is sometimes misunderstood, is when Lord Ramachandra worshipped the deity of Lord Shiva in Rameswaram, when He was on His way to Lanka to kill Ravana and reclaim Sita.

People sometimes misunderstand. In India, we meet Shaivites who say that Shiva is the Supreme, and the proof is that Lord Ramachandra worshiped him on His way to Lanka. But the fact, of course, is that Vishnu was Supreme, Krishna, Rama—They’re all viṣṇu-tattva. And that the Lord takes pleasure in serving the devotee and worshiping the devotee. There was one incident in Calcutta. Acyutananda Swami had met our landlord at Three Albert Road, Mr. Singh Rai. And Mr. Singh Rai had his own philosophy which almost everyone does. And his idea was that Lord Chaitanya is the origin of Radha and Krishna. And Lord Chaitanya is greater than Radha or Krishna. So Acyutananda Swami was—well, he had his doubts about Mr. Singh Rai’s philosophy—but still he approached Srila Prabhupada. Oh, yes, yes, yes, yes. And Mr. Singh Rai had said, “Yes,” that Lord Chaitanya is greater than Radha and Krishna. Of course, He is the combination, combined form of Radha-Krishna. He said He is greater than Radha and Krishna just like rasagullā is greater than milk and sugar.

Those who have been following my lectures here over a period of time will know that rasagullā are a favorite topic that somehow tend to make their way into my discourses. But anyway, Acyutananda Swami asked Srila Prabhupada. And, Srila Prabhupada said that Radha and Krishna come first. And he said the same example, first milk and sugar exist, and then they combine, and become rasagullā. And then Acyutananda Swami asked, “Well, who is greater? Lord Chaitanya or Krishna?” And Srila Prabhupada paused, and then he said, “Radharani. Radharani is the greatest.” And he pointed to a picture on the wall. It’s one of those very nice Banerjee prints which showed Srimati Radharani sitting on an elevated platform, and Krishna was at Her feet begging Her to forgive Him for His offense. And Prabhupada said, “Srimati Radharani is the greatest.” And then he pointed to another picture which showed Krishna carrying the shoes of Nanda Maharaja on His head. And then Srila Prabhupada said that the devotees are the greatest because Krishna serves the devotees.

So that is the Lord’s mercy. He doesn’t need them in any material sense for sure. He doesn’t need them in any way. But He reciprocates their loving devotion and service. And as much as the devotees are attached to Him, the Lord is attached to the devotees. And as much as they want to worship Him and serve Him, He wants to worship and serve them. So although Lord Shiva is a demigod, he is a Vaishnava—vaiṣṇavānām yathā śaṁbhuḥ—he is the greatest of Vaishnavas within the material world. And therefore Lord Ramachandra worshiped him. And when this question would come up that Lord Shiva is supreme and therefore Lord Rama worshiped him, Srila Prabhupada would answer that Krishna likes to serve His devotees; He likes to worship His devotees. And these are some examples. Another is Krishna driving the chariot of Arjuna. Krishna voluntarily became the servant of His devotee. Krishna washed the feet of Sudama Brahmana, Krishna worshipped His devotee.

There is another theory, which Srila Prabhupada strongly refuted, that Ravana was a devotee of Lord Shiva. And Lord Ramachandra was going to kill him. So before killing him, He wanted to take permission from Lord Shiva. And therefore He worshipped him at Rameswaram. And Srila Prabhupada said that people who make this claim, in effect, want to say that Lord Shiva is a rascal, Mahadev, that Lord Shiva Mahadev was a rascal. But of course he is not. Not at all. They are saying in effect that he is a rascal. That he would give permission to someone to kill his devotee. “Oh yes, Ravana is my devotee. But that’s all right. You can kill him, I don’t mind if you kill my devotee.” Only a rascal would think like that or speak like that. 

The fact is that because Lord Krishna’s supreme, Vishnu or Rama, Lord Shiva was unable to save Ravana. Srila Prabhupada would quote that when the fight was going on Parvati said to Lord Shiva that, “Ravana is your devotee. He is in trouble. Why don’t you do something to help him?” And Lord Shiva replied that “When Lord Rama wants to kill him, what can I do? Lord Rama is the Supreme.” So that is the position.

Now many of the pastimes in which there is glorification of devotees in the context of offenses against devotees. Durvasa, he had offended King Ambarish. And in response to his offense, Lord Vishnu glorified the devotees. There was another incident, which is very instructive, in which King Citraketu apparently offended Lord Shiva. King Citraketu was such an exalted devotee that he had a personal darshan of the Lord. The Lord personally gave him a special airplane in which he could travel throughout the universe. And so King Citraketu was traveling in his celestial airplane with some celestial ladies, chanting the glories of the Lord. They happened to pass by Kailash, well, where Lord Shiva was, well, actually it’s another name is used to describe the place, in a forest. And in the forest, there is a great assembly of denizens of the higher planets, and sages or saintly persons. And in the midst of that assembly, Lord Shiva was sitting with Parvati on his lap and had his arm around her. 

And when Citraketu who was friends with Lord Shiva saw this, he was astonished that how could Lord Shiva who’s the greatest of all renunciants, and who is the teacher of religious principles to the entire universe, how could he be sitting in an assembly of sages with his wife on his lap? With his arm around her? Even ordinary people don’t do such things in public. If they want to do that, they do it in private. So he was astonished. And he commented on it. And Parvati took offense. She thought that King Citraketu had committed an offense against her husband, who was a great Vaishnava. He is a great Vaishnav. And she cursed him to take birth as a demon. When Citraketu heard the curse, he descended from his airplane, approached Parvati and said, “My dear mother, I gladly accept your curse. I take your curse on my head.” 

Then Lord Shiva spoke to glorify the position of devotees. And he said that,

nārāyaṇa-parāḥ sarve
na kutaścana bibhyati
svargāpavarga-narakeṣv
api tulyārtha-darśinaḥ (SB 6.17.28)

. . . that devotees who have taken complete shelter of Lord Narayana are not afraid of anything. For them, heaven and hell and liberation are the same. So devotees are engaged in the service of the Lord. Srila Prabhupada remarks that devotees don’t live in heaven or hell or care for liberation. Because wherever they are, they engage in the service of the Lord. So they’re situated in Krishna consciousness. They’re not situated in any physical location. And for them, these relative positions are all insignificant because they’re temporary. So they tolerate reversals and remain steadfast in Krishna consciousness.

Lord Shiva spoke many nice verses in glorification of Vaishnavas. And Lord Shiva himself is a Vaishnava—vaiṣṇavānām yathā śaṁbhuḥ.  So actually there was no offense. There was an incident where Dakṣa actually did offend Lord Shiva. And Srila Prabhupada quotes Srila Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura that Dakṣa actually did commit an offense because he refused to recognize Lord Shiva’s position as a Vaishnava, he refused to recognize his greatness. Whereas king Citraketu did appreciate Lord Shiva’s greatness. He was just surprised at how he could behave in such a way. But he had no doubt about Lord Shiva’s position as a great Vaishnav and teacher. And another point here is that although for Lord Shiva there was no fault—he is an Isvara, he is like the sun; the sun can enter a dirty place and evaporate urine, but the sun does not become contaminated, so he is powerful, he can do that—but ordinary people if they do such a thing, which is a transgression of etiquette, if they do such a thing, they’ll be ruined. They’ll suffer, they’ll be punished.

So that was also a consideration that although Lord Shiva was powerful, he was an Isvara. He could do it. There was no problem for him. But it was an example which if followed by ordinary people could bring them harm. That was one consideration. Another consideration was that King Citraketu had some pride because as it’s mentioned in that section of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam he thought that he had more control of his senses than Lord Shiva. And therefore because of pride, he dared to instruct him. So it was a complex situation because all were devotees.

Shiva was a great devotee. King Citraketu was a great devotee. He and Shiva were friends. They had both had direct relationships with the Supreme Lord. And Parvati also is a devotee. Now there is a hidden purpose in this whole incident, which is that Lord Krishna wanted to bring King Citraketu back home, back to Godhead sooner. So He arranged for him to be cursed so that he would pass one lifetime as a demon, and at the end of that lifetime go back home—back to Godhead. Because even in the body of the demon, he would still retain his spiritual knowledge and application of spiritual knowledge, jnana and vijñāna. So even though he had the body of the demon, he had the consciousness of the devotee. And at the end of that one lifetime, he could go back home—back to Godhead.

And there are other examples. Jaya and Vijaya—that’s a little different—but still they were given the choice of that also in relation to an offense. They were given the choice of passing seven lives as devotees, or three lives as demons. So they chose three lives as demons. But there was also a hidden purpose there that the Lord wanted to fight. Janmādy asya yataḥ—He is the origin of everything. So whatever propensities are there in the living entity also exist in the Supreme Lord. So we have the propensity to fight. So the Lord also has a desire to fight sometime. But who can fight with the Lord? Only a devotee. Srila Prabhupada gave the example of a king. Sometimes the king will like to fight. But who’s going to fight with the king? No one would dare. So the king has professional wrestlers. And so they fight. Or sometimes the king wants to enjoy a good laugh even at his own expense, so who’s going to make a joke against the king? No one would dare to. So the king will have a court jester. And he, not only does he have the liberty to joke with the king, it’s his duty, or it’s his service to joke with the king.

Like once, one of the emperors of India, he had a very wise court jester named Birbal. There is so many humorous exchanges between them. But once the king said to Birbal, and Birbal was just standing a few feet away from him. The king said to him, “What’s the difference between you and an ass?” And Birbal replied, “About three feet.” So no one can make a joke like that, but the king, he could have his head cut off. So the king has a jester who does it. Similarly the king wants to fight, he has a wrestler. So the Lord wanted to fight, who’s going to fight with the Lord? And Jaya and Vijaya they’re very strong. They were the gatekeepers. You might have seen in India—of course, it’s partly a show—they’ll have these big gatekeepers with turbans and everything. 

So Jaya and Vijaya thought, Well, we are the gatekeepers to Vaikuntha, we are the most qualified for this service. we are really big and strong.” And so they voluntarily agreed to become demons out of love for the Lord, to fulfill the Lord’s desire to fight. And then there is the example of king Parīkṣit. He was cursed by a young brahman boy, an impudent brahman boy, to be killed in seven days by the bite of a snake bird. But he accepted it. And there too the idea was to bring him back to Godhead sooner. So King Citraketu as a powerful Vaishnav could have counteracted Parvati’s curse, but he chose not to. He accepted her curse on his head. And she presented herself as his mother. She is Durga, Parvati, the mother of the universe. 

And Srila Prabhupada says that a mother will chastise her child. And he gave the example of mother Yasoda that she chastised her son Krishna when He stole butter. This is the pastime that we are celebrating in the month of Damodara that Mother Yasoda, out of maternal affection, punished Krishna to prevent Him from further mischief. So in the same way mother Parvati, in her mind, thought that she should punish King Citraketu to prevent him from committing further offenses. And King Citraketu accepted it.

Now this pastime was cited by His Holiness Tamal Krishna Goswami. Just like this was a sort of complex situation. It was quoted by him in relation to some action that the GBC took when he was in Texas in, I guess, around 1980. They ordered him to leave his home and go to India to Mayapur. And that was from a certain point of view a very traumatic reversal. And he accepted it as that. And again it’s so complex that there is different points of view. But he accepted it as Krishna [‘s will]. He was a devotee, so he accepted it as Krishna [‘s will]. But he compared it to the cursing of Citraketu by Parvati that although it was Krishna’s desire for His own reason, still King Citraketu did not deserve to be cursed by Parvati. So even though it was Krishna’s will, still Citraketu did not deserve to be cursed by her. But still he took it as Krishna’s will. And he accepted it like king Citraketu.

Then from the other side, because I wasn’t a GBC member then, but I was very attached to Tamal Krishna Goswami. And I was hearing things. In those days, there was no internet, thank God. So I didn’t really know what was happening, but I was hearing little things that something was happening. And the first authority, the first GBC member whom I met was His Holiness Jayapataka Swami. And Jayapataka Swami said that. . . He was appreciating Tamal Krishna Goswami, he was glorifying Tamal Krishna Goswami. He said that in one’s devotional service, there are bound to be reversals. There are bound to be upheavals. So the test of a devotee is not that he never has any reverses. The test is how he responds to them. And he thought that Tamal Krishna Goswami had responded in a most exemplary way, in a perfect way as a Vaishnav, by accepting it as Krishna’s will manifest through the GBC body. So he accepted the order of the GBC body.

And I thought that was a very nice conclusion presented by His Holiness Jayapataka Swami. But still we should be careful. I think the lesson for us is that we should be careful. We should not become proud. Definitely. I mean that’s a no-brainer, I guess I have no brain because I always am proud. But we should be humble. I mean, no one can—and this was sort of another instruction from the story of King Citraketu—that no one can be under the shelter of the lotus feet of the Lord unless he or she is humble. So Parvati thought, He is become proud. He is dared to instruct even Lord Shiva. And Lord Brahma, the four Kumaras, the denizens of the higher planets, the saints, and sages who were in the assembly, no one saw fit to instruct Lord Shiva, but Citraketu thought, It was on him to instruct Lord Shiva, to correct Lord Shiva. So she thought, He is proud. How can he be under the lotus feet of the Lord, unto the shelter of the lotus feet of the Lord if he is proud? So to humble him, she cursed him to take birth as a demon. 

So that’s one instruction: we should be humble. Another instruction which I’m deriving from it, this isn’t something I’ve read in particular. But another lesson is that even with friends, even with people whom we are close to. . . Shiva and Citraketu were friends; they used to joke with each other. And they were both direct servants of the Lord on a similar platform. But even with friends, family members, people with whom we have an intimate relationship, if they’re Vaishnavas which they are—I mean no one here would have an intimate relationship with someone that’s not a Vaishnava—we still have to be careful. Sometimes because of familiarity, sometimes we lose sight of the fact that we are dealing with the Vaishnav. “I know this is my wife, this is my son, this is my daughter, this is my husband.” And allowing that relationship to become more prominent in our minds, we can forget that we are actually dealing with a Vaishnav. And on the human level, there might always be differences between husband and wife, parents and children, friends and friends. But we can’t just focus on those differences on the human level and forget that we are actually dealing with Vaishnavas. Because if we forget, then we can commit an offense.

Especially, we get proud, and then we think something different about the other person on the human level. And then we can commit an offense. But of course, Vaishnavas are ready to forgive. But still we have to approach them. You have to ask for forgiveness. Otherwise, it is difficult having familiar relationships with Vaishnavas. I mean it’s wonderful. Certainly much better than having familiar relationships with non-devotees. But we have to be careful in those relationships that we are conscious of the fact that we are dealing with Vaishnavas. And that in addition to certain principles that govern human interaction, there are also spiritual principles. And those are most important. And those spiritual principles are that we should be humble—tṛṇād api sunīcena taror api sahiṣṇunā amāninā mānadena kīrtanīyaḥ sadā hariḥ. And if we do offend the other person. . . Of course this is also true on the human level, but it’s really important on the spiritual level, that we have to approach them, admit our mistake, and ask for their forgiveness. Otherwise not only does our human interaction, or our material side of the relationship become disturbed, but our spiritual life becomes disturbed. Even Srila Prabhupada mentioned it on occasion. Even Srila Prabhupada said that the one thing that troubled him as a spiritual master is that he had to correct his disciples. And they’re all Vaishnavas. He didn’t want to offend Vaishnavas. But of course, it was his duty. And parents too. Sometimes they say, “This is. . . this hurts.” They tell the child, “This hurts me more than it hurts you.” But they have to do it. Mother Yasoda had to bind Krishna. She felt she had to correct Him.

So in those positions of responsibility that we discussed earlier, spiritual master, father, mother, husband, or any position of relative strength and authority over another person, we have to be responsible. And part of our responsibility, part of the way a superior gives protection to a dependent is through good instruction. Sometimes we have to do that, it’s our duty. But we should never feel that we are superior. In commenting on that verse tṛṇād api sunīcena, Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura says that someone may be in a position of authority and have to instruct others. Preachers do, they travel, they deliver the message of Krishna, they’re instructing others. And they may be criticizing them directly or indirectly. And spiritual masters do so with their disciples who are devotees. 

But Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura says specifically in relation to that verse tṛṇād api sunīcena that if one thinks that because one is in a position to instruct others or correct others that he is superior. If one has the conception, ”Oh I’m superior. I’m on a higher platform. I can instruct Vaishnavas. I can correct Vaishnavas,” that is a violation of the principle, tṛṇād api sunīcena. It should never enter the heart that just because one’s in a position to instruct others, in particular Vaishnavas, that one thinks, I’m in a position to instruct Vaishnavas. Because I’m superior, they should listen to me. Or any such nonsense. We should always be humble and respectful. And if it happens that we have to instruct them, and correct them, do so in a mood of love and affection and care. And then it will be beneficial for all concerned. If that pride enters that false ego, then we can commit offenses that will disturb our spiritual life and our relationships with our devotee friends, family, and colleagues. 

So, I think the purport here is that if Vaishnavas are worshipable even by the Supreme Lord, then what to speak of us? If Krishna Himself is serving Vaishnavas and worshipping Vaishnavas, then what to speak of us? And not just the devotees who are direct servants of the Lord, but even the devotees of such devotees, they’re also dear to the Lord. We should always keep that in mind when we deal with them. 

I’ll conclude. So it’s the same point but with a slightly different note that once Srila Prabhupada was giving a class in Detroit. And a child started to cry, make noise, and disturb the class. So Srila Prabhupada said that the child should be kept quiet so as not to disturb the class. So the mother started to chastise the child. Srila Prabhupada said that in Vedic culture, children cannot be punished. So then the husband of the mother began to rebuke the wife, “Why are you chastising the child?” Srila Prabhupada said, “In Vedic culture, women are not to be punished.” So then the temple commander started to chide the husband. And Srila Prabhupada said, “In Vedic culture, brahmans are not to be punished.” And then Prabhupada said, “In our society, everyone’s either a brahman, or a woman, or a child. So in our society, no one can be punished.” Srila Prabhupada ki jaya! Nitai-Gaura premānande. . . Hari Haribol!

Are there any questions or comments? Oh, Archana-siddhi Mataji. Hare Krishna.

Devotee: [unintelligible 01:08:02]

Giriraj Swami: Yes, a very good question. Archana-siddhi Mataji says in this case Tamal Krishna Goswami took the GBC’s action as Krishna’s [will] and accepted it. But could it be that a superior authority, even the GBC body could make a mistake, and instead of accepting it as Krishna’s [will], one could see it as a mistake and try to correct it. The answer is yes. The answer is yes. I think of one example with His Holiness Mukunda Goswami. He is a very mild, gentle person. A perfect gentleman. Tamal Krishna Goswami said, “He is a perfect gentleman.”

So one year in his absence, the GBC body decided—I’m not even sure what the details were,—but I think they decided to take away the Hare Krishna monthly from him, something. They decided to take away his service, part of his service. And being mild and gentle, he tried to accept it as Krishna’s mercy. But the more he thought about it, the more it bothered him because it was his service. And he spoke to some friends. And they also encouraged him that he should express himself. And in the end he did. He wrote a letter. And he said that he is writing in the mood of service. It’s not like he is attached for his own sake to the service. But he feels that he is the best one to do the service. And he felt that was the plain truth. So he wrote to the GBC. And they accepted his letter and reversed their decision. 

So that is permissible. It’s desirable. I mean it really depends on the situation because an authority might not take into consideration certain facts when they make a decision. And it’s a service to point out the facts to them. Or they may not know how it’s going to affect a person. And if the person says, “This is how it’s going to affect me,” which they didn’t realize when they made the decision, they might reconsider. I think that’s a very important point. It’s not that everything that a superior does is necessarily inspired by Krishna. Or even if it is inspired by Krishna, the recipient of it might also be inspired by Krishna to express himself or herself. And that combination, thesis-antithesis could lead to a synthesis, that’s better than either. Like rasagullā, better than milk or sugar. But in that synthesis, it becomes wonderful. Thank you very much. All glories to Srila Prabhupada! Hare Krishna.