SB 4.21.28–29 – Following Mahajanas, Srila Prabhupada

Giriraj Swami: Hare Krishna. We read from Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, Canto Four, Chapter Twenty-One, Instructions by Mahārāja Pṛthu, Texts Twenty-Eight and Twenty-Nine.

oṁ namo bhagavate vāsudevāya

oṁ namo bhagavate vāsudevāya

oṁ namo bhagavate vāsudevāya

Please repeat.

TEXT 28

manor uttānapādasya
dhruvasyāpi mahīpateḥ
priyavratasya rājarṣer
aṅgasyāsmat-pituḥ pituḥ

Please repeat. I would just read Text Twenty-Nine.

TEXT 29

īdṛśānām athānyeṣām
ajasya ca bhavasya ca
prahlādasya baleś cāpi
kṛtyam asti gadābhṛtā

TRANSLATION

This is confirmed not only by the evidence of the Vedas but also by the personal behavior of great personalities like Manu, Uttānapāda, Dhruva, Priyavrata and my grandfather Aṅga, as well as by many other great personalities and ordinary living entities, exemplified by Mahārāja Prahlāda and Bali, all of whom are theists, believing in the existence of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, who carries a club.

PURPORT by Srila Prabhupada

Narottama dāsa Ṭhākura states that one has to ascertain the right path for his activities by following in the footsteps of great saintly persons and books of knowledge under the guidance of a spiritual master (sādhu-śāstra-guru-vākya). A saintly person is one who follows the Vedic injunctions, which are the orders of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. The word guru refers to one who gives proper direction under the authority of the Vedic injunctions and according to the examples of the lives of great personalities. The best way to mold one’s life is to follow in the footsteps of the authorized personalities like those mentioned herein by Pṛthu Mahārāja, beginning with Svāyambhuva Manu. The safest path in life is to follow such great personalities, especially those mentioned in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. The mahājanas, or great personalities, are Brahmā, Lord Śiva, Nārada Muni, Manu, the Kumāras, Prahlāda Mahārāja, Bali Mahārāja, Yamarāja, Bhīṣma, Janaka, Śukadeva Gosvāmī and Kapila Muni.

COMMENT

The previous verse explains that. . . I can read it very briefly, very quickly.

TEXT 27

My dear respectable ladies and gentlemen, according to the authoritative statements of śāstra, there must be a supreme authority who is able to award the respective benefits of our present activities. Otherwise, why should there be persons who are unusually beautiful and powerful both in this life and in the life after death?

COMMENT

So, in today’s verse, the word, “This is confirmed” refers to the fact that there is a supreme authority who is in control of everything including the destinies of the living entities, and he awards them whatever is due to them, and thus, there are differences in different bodies and minds and intelligence.

So, today’s verse, or two verses, include the names of many great devotees, and it was heartening for me, personally, to be able to recite these names again and again. And we went through the list three or four times, and we also got to hear it repeated in the translator’s corner, and hearing the names of the devotees was very encouraging.

Once, in the Boston temple on 40 North Beacon Street, in greater Boston, during the middle of the night or wee hours of the morning, the temple was attacked by a gang of hooligans. They broke into the temple and they started beating the devotees. They had chains and weapons and it was a very fearful situation. Somehow, someone called the police, and the hooligans were stopped before they caused too much damage. But they did do as much damage as they could to the temple, and they also injured some of the devotees.

So eventually, the hooligans were brought to trial in court, and one of the devotees who was asked to testify was named Nandakishore. He is a very nice, humble, simple devotee, and the lawyer defending the hooligans was a very tricky and aggressive type of lawyer. And so, he tried to sort of fluster Nandakishore and sort of trick him, bewilder him, and make him say wrong things that would discount his testimony. And basically, make it look like we were making up the whole story against the defendants, which of course was not the case.

So, Nandakishore was very nervous, and he made him come up in the witness box and promise to tell the truth. And the lawyer was asking him questions in a very tricky and cunning and aggressive way, and Nandakishore was just feeling so helpless. But then, the lawyer asked who was present at the time of the attack. And then, Nandakishore started to recite the names of the devotees, “Satsvarupa, Murari, and Madan Mohan,” and he started reciting all the different names of God that Prabhupada had given to the devotees. And just by reciting the different names, all of his fear went away.

All of his fear went away and he felt completely assured and confident, and the same thing happened to me reading these names of the devotees at the beginning of the class. So then, the lawyer, he was trying to paint a picture of us as a weird cult, and so he had come up with some definition of Krishna from some dictionary. Something like the Hindu God of love, sort of suggesting that we worshiped a God of love and boys and girls were mixing and reveling in pastimes of love and worship of the Hindu God of love.

Then, Nandakishore, who was now empowered having recited all the names of the devotees which were names of Krishna and His great devotees, he sort of raised his hand to the judge, he said, “Your honor, can I cite my authority?” The judge said, “Yes.” And then, he said

īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ
sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ
anādir ādir govindaḥ
sarva-kāraṇa-kāraṇam

“Krishna, who is known as Govinda, is the Supreme Controller. He has an eternal blissful spiritual form. He is the origin of everything, but He Himself has no origin, and He is the prime cause of all causes.”

And that was a very profound statement, and it highlights the verse and purport today on authority, on following authorities. Whose authority do you accept? Do you accept the authority of some cheap dictionary? I mean, I don’t know. Anyway, it was a long time ago. Maybe that was what they thought Krishna was. Or do you accept the authority of Brahma, the creator of the universe, one of the twelve mahājanas?

So, this is our process. We accept superior authority beginning from Krishna, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and the Bhagavad-gītā, which is the essence of the Vedas. But in broad terms, we accept sādhu-śāstra-guru-vākya, the instructions of sadhu, shastra, and guru. And as Srila Prabhupada explains, shastra means the Vedic scriptures, sadhus are those who live their lives according to Vedic injunctions, and guru is one who. . . Of course, he also lives his life according to the instructions of shastra, but he also teaches and guides others in terms of the instructions of the Vedas and the examples of sadhus.

So, this is a very good system of checks and balances. In the government of the United States, there are three branches: the executive branch, the legislative branch, and the judicial branch, and they are meant to check each other. So, sādhu-śāstra-guru are three authorities, and if they all say the same thing, then we can assume that that statement is the truth. But as Srila Prabhupada says, shastra is the central point because sadhus and gurus are ultimately submissive to shastra. And therefore, Srila Prabhupada would say that it’s very easy to be a guru because you just repeat what is in shastra.

Krishna says, “Surrender to Me,” and the guru says, “Surrender to Krishna.” It’s very easy, you don’t have to make up anything or imagine anything or speculate anything, and you just have to follow the instructions. It’s very simple because the servant, he doesn’t have to worry about the instruction, he just follows the instruction. So, the life of a servant with a proper master, and here we are talking about the Supreme Master, Krishna, and His representative, is very easy. The servant has no consideration of personal gain and loss. He just follows the order of the master and he has faith that the master will take care of him, protect him, and maintain him.

And that was Srila Prabhupada’s mood in relation to the order of his spiritual master, that he should preach the message of Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu in English to the world. And ultimately, he didn’t consider personal gain or loss, he just executed the order, and in that process, he was empowered by Krishna in wonderful ways. And for us in ISKCON, our most immediate mahājana, our most authoritative example, is that of Srila Prabhupada himself. We just follow Srila Prabhupada. So, it’s very easy.

But there is a very interesting phenomenon that has taken place after Srila Prabhupada left. It took place after his spiritual master, Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura left, and it took place after Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu Himself left. And that is that people concoct different types of philosophies and practices in the name of the acharya. And so, after the disappearance of Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, there were so many deviant sects that developed in Bengal and Orissa, all claiming to be followers of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu. And after Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura left, there were also differences amongst the disciples, and they broke into different camps and fought. But they all claimed to derive their authority from Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura.

And sometimes we find the same thing in devotees who claim to be followers of Srila Prabhupada, and they have different theories, different philosophies, different ideas, but they claim that it’s coming from Srila Prabhupada. They are following Srila Prabhupada the right way, and everyone else is not. But our job in sifting through these different theories is made easier by this three-fold process, sadhu-śāstra-guru-vākya.

The person who’s claiming, “Prabhupada wanted this, Prabhupada wanted that,” is this confirmed by shastra, is this confirmed by the previous acharyas? That’s the question. They may say, “Well, Srila Prabhupada was such a great acharya that he could change everything. He doesn’t have to follow the previous acharyas, he doesn’t have to follow the scriptures.” But that’s not what Srila Prabhupada taught us again and again and again, as we read last week about Maharaja Pṛthu’s speech. It was very clear and unambiguous, and Srila Prabhupada was also very clear and unambiguous. When it came to what he really wanted, he left no doubt about it.

So, in terms of the basic principles, we have Srila Prabhupada, but we have our whole paramparā, which he represents, sadhus, sadhu-marga, and we also have the Vedic literatures, shastras. But sometimes, we as sincere followers of Srila Prabhupada, may wonder in a particular case what would Srila Prabhupada actually want. Things come up all the time. Every day, we make small and big decisions, and in making those decisions, we will want to consider what would Srila Prabhupada want, what would our previous acharyas want, what would Krishna want? We would want to know what Krishna would want, and how do we decide? Now, this is a very important question.

Now, I will cite one example from Śrī Caitanya-caritāmṛta to illustrate this process. Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu had come to Mathura, just down the road. He had come to Mathura, He had gone to take His bath in Vishram ghat, and He had gone to the temple of Kesavaji, which is the name of the temple at the birthplace of Lord Krishna, Krishna Janmabhoomi, the original Deity of Kesava.

And He was dancing in ecstasy, as usual, and an elderly brahman, a very a sort of elderly, meek, and humble brahman started to dance in ecstasy with Him. And dancing together, they both shed tears of love; love for Krishna and love for each other. And after chanting and dancing for some time, they sat down with each other to talk. You can imagine how happy each was to have met the other, and the brahman was so spiritually advanced and intelligent, he said to Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, “I presume that You must have some connection with Srila Madhavendra Puri, because no one can manifest such ecstatic love for God without some connection with Sri Madhavendra Puri.”

And then, Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu’s servant, Balabadra Bhattacharya, explained the connection, that Mahaprabhu was a disciple of Isvara Puri, who was the disciple of Madhavendra Puri. And the brahman said that some years earlier, he had met Madhavendra Puri, and although the brahman was a sanadya brahman, which is considered a lower-class person, which I’ll explain in a minute, Madhavendra Puri had accepted him as his disciple and had even taken food at the brahman’s home.

And so, the brahman invited Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu to come to his home, and he said he would give all facility, and Balabhadra Bhattacharya could cook the meal. Now, although the sanadya brahman was a brahman, his community of brahmans ministered to vaishyas, and some of the community of vaishyas that he ministered to were considered very low class because they ate meat and drank wine. And although he was a brahman, but because he ministered to such fallen people, the whole community was considered somewhat tainted by their association with degraded people. And therefore, it was a rule that sannyasis would not eat food cooked by a sanadya brahman.

And so, the brahman, following the custom, in natural humility said, “Your assistant Balabhadra Bhattacharya can come and cook for You.” And Chaitanya Mahaprabhu said, “No! No! Why should I have him cook for Me? You can cook for Me because Madhavendra Puri has taken food from you, and he is a mahājana. We are following him, so if he has taken food cooked by you, I will also take food cooked by you.”

Now, there are a lot of instructions in this incident. The first is that someone may be born in a lower caste or community, but he can be accepted by a pure Vaishnava and elevated to the standard where the pure Vaishnava will accept food cooked by him, or in other words, elevated to the standard of being a pure Vaishnava himself. So, there may be, I mean, not really, as Krishna says in the Bhagavad-gītā, cātur-varṇyaṁ mayā sṛṣṭaṁ guṇa-karma-vibhāgaśaḥ, there are so many statements in the scriptures that one’s position in varna and ashram is not determined by birth but by guna, one’s qualities, and karma, one’s activities, not janma.

And many statements in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam [Unintelligible 00:38:03], Narada Muni says that if someone is born in a higher-class family but has the symptoms of someone in the lower class, he should be accepted as belonging to the lower class, and someone born in a lower-class family, if he has the symptoms of someone of the higher class, he should be accepted as belonging to the higher class. So, there are many statements, but even if we take it that there is something in the shastra about birth, we have the example of Madhavendra Puri. He accepted someone from a lower caste and elevated him to a higher position.

So, when Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu was discussing with the brahman, he said that there are many different scriptures, and they say different things, and there are many different saintly persons, and they also say different things. So, how do we know the true path of religion? This is a very important question, and the answer is mahājano yena gataḥ sa panthāḥ, that we follow the mahājanas. We follow the path shown by the mahājanas.

Yes, tarko ‘pratiṣṭhaḥ. Tarko means logic and reason, that is an inconclusive argument. It actually means argument. Argument is inconclusive. You may put forward a strong argument, but someone might come along and defeat that argument with another argument, and then someone may come and defeat that argument with another argument. Then, śrutayo vibhinnā. There are many different scriptures that say different things, and nāsāv ṛṣir yasya mataṁ na bhinnam, there are so many rishis, and by definition, they have to differ with the opinion of other rishis. So then, how do we ascertain the truth of religious principles? Dharmasya tattvaṁ nihitaṁ guhāyāṁ mahājano yena gataḥ sa panthā. The real truth of religion is situated in the heart of the pure devotee. And therefore, it is so important for us to know about Srila Prabhupada, not just what he said, but what he did, and how he behaved in different situations.

I’m not sure why, but one incident just came to mind. We mentioned how Srila Prabhupada came to America on the order of the spiritual master, and he did it. He had no money, but he was given free passage by Srimati Sumati Morarjee on one of her cargo carriers. So, years later, after Prabhupada had gotten the Juhu land, he was invited by Srimati Morarjee to a beautiful bungalow just near the Juhu land, and it was a very nice meeting.

And before Srila Prabhupada left for America, he was staying at Scindia Steam Navigation company’s workers colony in Andheri, and every day, he would come from Andheri to Sumati Morarjee’s bungalow, and they would sit outdoors. She has a very beautiful garden with lots of palm trees. And he would read to her. So, at this reunion, she said, “Swamiji. You remember every day you used to come and read to me from Ras Panchadhyayi, the five Chapters of the Bhāgavatam about the rāsa-līlā?” And Prabhupada smiled, and everyone was very happy. It was really very nice. Prabhupada asked her to continue to support us, and she pledged her health. It was very nice. The next morning, on the morning walk, Brahmananda Prabhu asked Srila Prabhupada, “Is that true that you would come every day and read to her from the five Chapters about the rasa dance?” Prabhupada made a face, shook his head, and said, “No. I read from my First Canto.”

But at that moment, when there was such an exchange of affection and good will, he didn’t want to contradict her, but he accepted her mood of devotion and support and affection. So, that’s instructive. Sometimes we might be in a situation where someone is saying something that’s not exactly correct, and do we have to contradict it? Well, it depends on the situation and what it is.

There was another instance, this was very unusual, if I might say. I went through a period in 1972, quite early in my Krishna consciousness, where I was systematically evaluating everything I said to make sure that it was true. Somehow, I just felt that I had to reform my speech or purify my speech. So, everything I said was true, I never said anything that was false. Somehow, I was preoccupied with this, and at that time, we were still struggling to get the Juhu land and get permission to build.

So, Srila Prabhupada was staying in the home of Kartikeya Mahadevia in Bombay. And somebody came to meet Srila Prabhupada to complain that he had seen one of the brahmacharis on Juhu beach with a young lady engaged in activities that were not proper for a brahmachari, not proper for anyone to do in public, and certainly not proper for anyone to do with anyone other than his wife. And the man was very upset, and he complained to Srila Prabhupada. And Srila Prabhupada said, “I am aware of that situation, and I have expelled him from our society. We cannot keep such people with us. He is gone.”

Now, I was not aware that Prabhupada had done that. And the next time I went to Juhu, there was that brahmachari, and now, about forty years later, he is still there as a brahmachari. He is an unusual type of brahmachari, but he is there. And I took it that somehow, Prabhupada knew that I had been preoccupied with this idea of being truthful. And I mean, speaking lies is an anartha, but being too preoccupied with being truthful, I think was another anartha.

And so, Prabhupada, he just cut through that by showing that our dharma is certainly not to be untruthful, but it’s also not exactly our dharma to be truthful. It’s our dharma to serve Krishna, and although generally, we do speak the truth, Rupa Gosvami advises that although devotees are in principle transcendental, they should live their lives in the mode of goodness like brahmans, satyam saucham. The first qualities are to be truthful and clean. But still, when it comes to Krishna’s service, His pleasure, His service, and His pleasure takes priority over any other consideration.

Of course, the movement has on occasion, or individuals or leaders have on occasion aired in the direction of lying too much, and cheating too much, and they got in trouble for it. And Prabhupada didn’t like that. Now, taking this issue of cheating, that comes up too. In fact, recently, one of the authorities of ISKCON in India asked me what Prabhupada's position on a certain type of cheating was, you could say, cheating the government. I don’t want to say too much more here, he wanted to know Prabhupada's position.

So, this reminded me of an instance where the leader of the movement in Germany had been collecting huge amounts of money in the name of feeding poor people in India, huge amounts of money, but he wasn’t sending the money for the purpose. I mean, he might have sent a few token donations to ISKCON Food Relief just to show something. And he had amassed a huge fortune. And eventually, somehow, the authorities in Germany, I mean, they were looking for an excuse to try to shut us down, and they raided the castle. The devotees were living in a beautiful castle in Germany, they raided it. And then they froze all the bank accounts, confiscated all the money, and it was a scandal. It wasn’t just the money, but the reputation of the movement was completely ruined. And Srila Prabhupada obviously was very upset.

And so, the devotee, in defense of himself, the leader in Germany, in defense of himself said, “But I thought you could do anything for Krishna.” And Srila Prabhupada quoted a saying, perhaps a Chanakya maxim, that if someone is very expert, he can protect himself in any situation, but he said if you are not expert, you should not imitate an expert person.

And he told the story of an island in the Mediterranean, one of those islands or maybe Italy, where everyone was basically engaged in smuggling. That was the main business on the island. So, one man got caught, and he was brought to trial and the judge found him guilty and sentenced him. And the man complained, “Your honor, everyone on this island engages in smuggling, it’s not just me. Everyone does it. Everyone knows that everyone does it.” The judge replied, “I’m not punishing you for smuggling, I’m punishing you for getting caught.”

So, Srila Prabhupada was making the point that if you are expert in Krishna’s service and you can actually do it without getting caught, all right, but if you are not an expert, don’t be a rascal. Prabhupada used this word. If you are a rascal, you don’t do it. And generally, we shouldn’t, but I’m citing these examples to illustrate this principle of mahājano yena gataḥ sa panthā, how to serve Krishna in this world as a sincere follower of Srila Prabhupada.

So, niyamāgrahaḥ ṣaḍbhir bhaktir vinaśyati. Bhakti is destroyed by six things, and one of them is niyamagrahah or two. Niyamāgrahaḥ can mean following the rules and regulations like a fanatic without really understanding the purpose, or niyamāgrahaḥ can mean, depending on how it’s divided, agraha or aāgraha. It can mean disregarding the rules and regulations and acting whimsically or independently, and both are obstructions to bhakti. So, the only way we can avoid this type of obstacle is to know what the purpose of everything that we are doing is. The purpose is to be Krishna conscious and to spread Krishna consciousness. And how to apply that basic principle is demonstrated to us most vividly and most immediately by Srila Prabhupada and other of his close followers, but mainly Srila Prabhupada. He is the authority for all of us.

And so, it’s important to know how Srila Prabhupada dealt with different situations. And so, there are many books, Śrīla Prabhupāda-līlāmṛta, so many books are coming out that tell us how Srila Prabhupada dealt in different situations, and that can help us to know how we should deal in similar situations. And we really have to know this, otherwise if we don’t, then we should work under the guidance of someone who does. Otherwise, we’ll make mistakes.

Srila Prabhupada told another story of a veterinarian who had an apprentice, and he was going around and treating different animals, and he came to a horse that had a huge enlarged throat. So, the veterinarian took a hammer and hammered at the horse’s throat, and the lump went away, the swelling went away. So, the veterinarian had an apprentice who became puffed up. “This is easy, I can do what the doctor is doing. I’ll become independent. I’ll do my own veterinarian practice.” So, he started doing the same thing, and whenever he was called, he would take a hammer and beat the poor creature, and most of them were severely injured, and some of them died.

So, the news reached the veterinarian about what his former apprentice was doing. So, he called him and he said, “What are you doing? You are harming the animals, and in some cases, you are killing them.” And the apprentice said, “Well, I’m just doing what I saw you do.” So, the veterinarian said, “You fool, that was a special case. That horse had swallowed a watermelon, and that’s why he had a big lump in his throat. So, I took the hammer to break the watermelon into small pieces, so he could swallow them. That was a special case. You can’t go around hitting every animal with a hammer.”

So, we have to understand time, place, and circumstance. What response is appropriate in what situation. The same response won’t be appropriate in every situation, and for that, we have to really go deeply into the characteristics and activities of Srila Prabhupada and other mahājanas, Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu. But that was a different time in a different culture, but still, they are eternal principles for those who are more mature and more expert. Because we want to make a positive contribution, we don’t want to just sit in a corner and chant Hare Krishna. I mean, we do want to sit in the corner and chant Hare Krishna, but that’s not all we want to do. We also want to do something for the benefit of others like Srila Prabhupada, like Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, like our recent acharyas. And to do that, we have to have some degree of confidence. Otherwise, we can make things worse.

I’ve heard sincere devotees question whether they are being offensive or not when they are afraid to invite people to a temple. Unless they are there to sort of personally escort the person, they don’t know what might happen. The person may come to the temple, and some proud fanatic will come up and say, “You don’t do this, you don’t do that, you can’t do this, you can’t do that. Don’t you know? What’s the matter with you?”

So, we want to play a meaningful role in the mission, but we don’t want to make things worse due to our immaturity or fanaticism. So, anyway, it’s a big topic, but if we are not at the stage where we really know how to deal properly with people, it’s better that we don’t. It’s better we do some other service and support on the mission, and let the people who are more experienced, more expert deal with the people, so whoever comes has a positive experience and wants to come again. Hare Krishna.

So, are there any questions or comments? Yes?

Devotee: Hare Krishna. Thank you very much for [Unintelligible 01:02:49]?

Giriraj Swami: That is a very good question. My first approach would be to say that Srila Prabhupada said that intelligence means to see the same thing from different angles of vision. You might have heard when I was a child, eight or ten years old, my uncle gave me a book of poems, and one of the poems, it was my favorite poem and I learned it by heart. It was called, “The blind man and the elephant.” “It was six men of Indostan, to learning much inclined, who went to see the elephant, though all of them were blind, that each by observation, might satisfy his mind.”

And it describes how one blind man grabbed the trunk, and he said, “The mighty elephant is like the trunk of the tree.” And another blind man grabbed the tail, “The elephant is like a rope.” And another one ran into the body, “The elephant is like a wall.” And one got the tusk, and he said, “The elephant is like a spear.” And it describes how long into the night, the six blind men were arguing about the true nature of the elephant. But each one only had a part of it and not the whole thing. I think I didn’t catch it as a child. Later, as a devotee, I went back and read the poem, and it seems to be a comment on philosophers approaching the Absolute Truth, that they may get a part of it, but not all of it. And therefore, it’s useless for them to argue about it. Brahman, Paramātmā, and Bhagavān. They are all there. It’s not that God is light, but He is not in the heart, or He is in the heart, but not in Goloka Vrindavan.

So, Srila Prabhupada may say things that appear different because he is seeing something from a different angle of vision, like Arjuna’s weakness. Sometimes Prabhupada said, this is karpanya-dosa, this is miserly weakness, and sometimes he said this is Vaishnava compassion. So, it’s looking at it from a different angle.

Just recently, maybe because we recently had a japa retreat in Varshana, so maybe I was more attuned to it, but just recently, listening to his lectures every day, I heard one lecture in which Prabhupada said, “Our goal is just to be able to chant Hare Krishna, day and night, but because you can’t do that, I’ve created so many other engagements to keep you busy.” And then, two days later, I heard a tape in which Prabhupada said we have to chant and hear about Krishna, and the best way is to go out and preach, but if you are not able to go out and preach, you can stay back in the temple and chant Hare Krishna.

So, it’s seeing it from a different angle of vision, and both are true. That’s the whole point, both are true. If you are a kaniṣṭhā and you are not able to preach, better you just stay back and chant Hare Krishna. Or it could be the other way; if you don’t have enough taste to chant, if you are too much of a sudra, then you should work hard. But ultimately, we want to be able to chant and preach, obviously. And in the Bhagavad-gītā, someone brought up Krishna says, “You become perfect by doing your work, your dharma. You attain perfection by doing your work.” And then He says, sarva-dharmān parityajya mām ekaṁ śharaṇaṁ vraja, “Give up all dharma and just surrender to Me.”

And Srila Prabhupada explained that different instructions are meant for different people at different levels. Not everyone can just give up everything and surrender to Krishna. So, they can stay in their position and become perfect by doing their dharma in varnashrama-dharma. But if one is able, he can give up his position in varnashrama-dharma and surrender fully to Krishna, or one can surrender fully to Krishna but act as if one were in the varnashrama-dharma system to set a good example for others. There are so many different situations.

But I think it’s also possible, I mean, I might be taking a little chance here, but I don’t think I’m saying anything wrong, because even a pure devotee is working with a physical body and mind, things might come out different. I don’t remember the example, but I heard a tape in which Prabhupada said something wrong, but I knew he knew. I mean, if I knew, definitely, Prabhupada knew. But if you are speaking, sometimes things come out different just because somehow, you are utilizing a physical body. So, it didn’t bother me, I knew it from a certain point, you could say, no problem. But I didn’t think he made a mistake because I knew that he knew the truth, but it’s just that with the mind and body, things come out different.

I’ve heard devotees who’ve listened very carefully to one of Prabhupada’s japa tapes and found that he didn’t pronounce every word to every mantra properly, and one of my godbrothers, a very good devotee, a very thoughtful devotee, HH Ganapati Swami Maharaja, he asked me about it. And he also asked another godbrother, and we both gave the same answer, that it’s the same thing, because Prabhupada is using this physical body made of senses, which is clumsy, so the mantra might not come out the way it is. But internally, Prabhupada was hearing the pure name, he was relishing the pure name. And so, that’s really where it is.

I mean, I may have something in mind, but I might say something different, but I know what was in my mind. To give a very simple example. Anyway, I might tell the server, “Can you bring me more dal?” And I might have a big bowl of dal, and he'll say, “You already have dal.” I meant rice, in my mind, I knew I wanted rice, but somehow, it came out as dal. So, that happens. It happened with Srila Prabhupada. It doesn’t diminish my faith in Srila Prabhupada at all. “He made a mistake, he is a conditioned soul, liberated souls don’t make mistakes.” I don’t think like that because in his mind, he knew what he wanted to say. It just came out different.

The thing about Dhṛtaraṣṭra, the same thing, because of his offenses, he was disqualified. But Vidura’s mercy overrode his disqualification. Even what we read, I didn’t bring it up, and I don’t want to bring out too much now, because otherwise, I get too bewildered, but there appear to be contradictions. Mature devotees could resolve those contradictions. But coming to you, other than sort of it being an intellectual question or a philosophical question, does it present a problem? If you read that Prabhupada said Dhṛtaraṣṭra was disqualified from going back to Godhead because of his offenses, and then later you read he was eligible to go back to Godhead by following the instructions of the pure devotee, does that trouble you?

Devotee: [Unintelligible 01:17:05].

Giriraj Swami: Well, as a reader, I think you’ve got both messages right, that vaiṣṇava-aparādha is very serious, and you should avoid it at any cost. And the other message is also important, that if by chance, one does commit an offense or make a mistake, if one takes shelter of a pure devotee’s instructions, then by the mercy of the pure devotee, he can be delivered. I mean, definitely, mercy is more powerful. I mean, mercy is higher than justice, so definitely, that’s possible, but we should also not take advantage of it, try to take advantage of it. Otherwise, that’s an offense, namno balad yasya hi papa-buddhir, it becomes a variation of committing sin under strength of chanting, then it doesn’t work. But if by chance you make a mistake or commit an offense and sincerely repent and resolve never to make the same mistake again and try your best, then you can be forgiven and delivered.

I’ll just conclude with one little incident on this point, because again, it’s acintya-bhedābheda-tattva. Things can be inconceivably, simultaneously the same and different. So, I’ve told this before, but at the Ardh Khumba-mela in Allahabad in 1971, there was a big dispute between two of Prabhupada’s disciples, both good disciples. One of them said that there is no difference between Krishna and Balarama, except that Balarama is white and Krishna is black. And there is a verse like that in the Caitanya-caritāmṛta that there is no difference, the only difference is the color. But the other devotee, Yamuna devi, she said, “No, there is a difference because Krishna is the only enjoyer of Srimati Radharani.”

So, they were arguing back and forth, and Tamal Krishna Goswami, who was the GBC secretary, took the matter to Srila Prabhupada, and he said, “Srila Prabhupada, Madhudvisa Prabhu says there is no difference between Krishna and Balarama except that Krishna is black and Balarama is white.” And Srila Prabhupada said, “Yes, he is right.” And then he said, “But Yamuna devi says there is another difference, because Krishna is the only enjoyer of Radharani.” And Prabhupada said, “Yes, she is also right.” And Tamal Krishna Goswami said, “Srila Prabhupada, they are both saying different things, they both can’t be right.” And Prabhupada said, “Yes, you are also right.” So then, Tamal Krishna Goswami said, “Well, which is right?” And Srila Prabhupada said, “You decide.”

Hare Krishna. Srila Prabhupada ki jaya!