# Back to Godhead Magazine #57 *2023 (03)* Back to Godhead Magazine #57-03, 2023 PDF-View Welcome Lord Kṛṣṇa’s display of His universal form is for many people the most striking and memorable part of the *Bhagavad-gītā*. Beholding that form, the awed and frightened Arjuna asks Him who He is. Robert Oppenheimer, on seeing the detonation of the first nuclear weapon, famously quoted Kṛṣṇa’s reply: “Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds.” (Gītā 11.32) Kṛṣṇa was proving that He is God, a truth that Arjuna already knew and had acknowledged in the previous chapter. He asked Kṛṣṇa to show His universal form to convince others of His divinity. In this issue, Caitanya Caraṇa Dāsa discusses how the *Gītā’s* description of Kṛṣṇa’s revelation helps us somewhat comprehend the incomprehensible. Our book excerpt in this issue presents a subsequent chapter of the *Gītā*—Chapter 15—in poetic form by Kalakaṇṭha Dāsa and Swarūpa Kṛṣṇa Dāsa. It is based on Śrīla Prabhupāda’s *Gītā*r-gān, a Bengali versification of the *Gītā* written in 1962. As Śrīla Prabhupāda and his spiritual predecessors have shown, every chapter of the *Gītā* is meant to bring us to the conclusion that taking shelter of Lord Kṛṣṇa is the only solution to all our problems. Vraja Vihārī Dāsa’s “Freedom from the Crocodile’s Jaws” presents a graphic example of that essential truth. Hare Kṛṣṇa. —*Nāgarāja Dāsa, Editor* Q&A *Chanting the holy names of God like the Hare Kṛṣṇa mahā-mantra involves doing the same activity repeatedly. Isn’t that boring?* No. Let’s understand why. For most people, their daily life is boring. In fact, people often watch TV not because the TV programs are so interesting, but because their daily lives are so boring. Why does life seem boring? Because we are intrinsically spiritual beings and our most essential need is love. The experience of loving and being loved is the ultimate foundation of all happiness. An activity or a relationship becomes boring or burdensome to the extent that love is absent from it. Even if we somehow invest our love in it, often the lack of adequate reciprocation disappoints us. That’s why we continually try out new things: new video games, new gadgets, new clothes, new cars, new houses, new jobs, even new spouses. Though all these new concoctions disappoint us eventually, we get addicted to the intoxicating pleasure offered by their initial newness. Because of this addiction to newness, we presume that doing the same activity repeatedly, as in chanting, would be boring. But this presumption overlooks something essential: love. A mother offers her milk to her baby hundreds of times. Does she find it boring? Obviously not—at least not when the mother loves the baby. When the mother offers her love through her milk, the more the activity is repeated, the deeper becomes her love and the greater her fulfillment. Similarly, when we chant the holy names of God, we will not find the chanting boring if we chant lovingly. When we offer our love to God, Kṛṣṇa, by chanting His holy names, He reciprocates by flooding our hearts with His unlimited, oceanic love. So every instance of chanting takes us deeper into that delightful ocean of divine nectar, and thus the more we chant lovingly, the more we find chanting relishable. The mother-baby analogy illustrates how a repetitive activity doesn’t have to be boring. But, like all analogies, it has limitations. By chanting we don’t nourish God; He nourishes our heart with His supreme love. Also, the intensity of the mother-baby relationship dwindles as the baby grows up and needs other food, and as the mother’s milk stops. The intensity of the soul-God relationship, on the other hand, becomes ever-increasingly intense as our devotion for God deepens. In fact, when we develop a taste for the divine love that becomes accessible by chanting, we can find inner delight in all situations—including deadly boring ones. Then we realize that chanting leads not to boredom, but to freedom from all boredom. *Different religions claim their God to be the real God. Sometimes certain people claim to be incarnations of God. Some consider God personal, others impersonal. Who actually is God?* God has nowadays largely become an object of nañve sentiment and blind faith. But knowledge of God is a precise and profound science. As science begins with a definition of the object under study, let’s begin with the definition of God. The Vedanta-sūtra (1.1.2) gives a definition that agrees broadly with the conception of God in the major world religions: “God is the source of everything.” Just as there is one source of illumination for the whole world, called sol in Spanish, sūrya in Hindi, and sun in English, similarly there is one source of all existence, called Allah in the Islamic tradition, Jehovah in the Judeo-Christian tradition, and Kṛṣṇa in the Vedic tradition. On a superficial reading, the Vedic texts may seem polytheistic, thus making the Vedic gods appear to be like the pagan gods whose worship the Semitic religions forbid. But a deep and guided study of the Vedic scriptures reveals that, though they contain multifaceted rituals for multilevel forms of worship, they are conclusively monotheistic. That’s why the epithets to glorify Kṛṣṇa in the Vedic tradition (e.g., *Bhagavad-gītā* 10.32: “Of all creations I am the beginning and the end and also the middle”) are strikingly similar to the biblical eulogies of God (e.g., Revelations 22:13: “I am the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end.”) In the *Bhagavad-gītā* Lord Kṛṣṇa demonstrated His Godhood by displaying to Arjuna His universal form, wherein rests everything and everyone in existence: the planets, stars, and universes as well as all living beings—celestial, terrestrial, and subterrestrial. If those who claim to be God cannot similarly display that they are the source of everything, we can safely reject their claim. If God is the source of everything, then He must be the source of both the personal beings and the impersonal things seen in this world. To be their source, He must Himself have both these aspects. The Vedic texts reconcile these two apparently contradictory aspects through the example of the sun. The sun has form as a celestial globe and is formless as its widespread effulgence. Similarly, God has a form as the Supreme Person, Kṛṣṇa, and is formless as the all-pervading effulgence known as Brahman or brahma-jyoti. Just as the sun globe is the source of the sunlight, Kṛṣṇa is the source of the Brahman, as is confirmed in the *Gītā* (14.27): “And I am the basis of the impersonal Brahman . . . . Founder's Lecture: Brahminical Culture: The Key to Peace *Śrīla Prabhupāda explains why the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement promotes the protection of cows and brahminical culture.* Los Angeles—December 4, 1968 The creation of a peaceful, prosperous human society requires raising a least a small percentage of the population to the spiritual platform. > cintāmaṇi-prakara-sadmasu kalpa-vṛkṣa- > lakṣāvṛteṣu surabhīr abhipālayantam > lakṣmī-sahasra-śata-sambhrama-sevyamānaṁ > govindam ādi-puruṣaṁ tam ahaṁ bhajāmi “I worship Govinda, the primeval Lord, the first progenitor, who is tending the cows yielding all desire in abodes built with spiritual gems and surrounded by millions of purpose trees, and who is always served with great reverence and affection by hundreds of thousands of Lakṣmīs, or gopīs.”—Śrī Brahma-saṁhitā 5.29 We are worshipers of the original Absolute Personality of Godhead, Govinda. Go means “senses,” go means “cow,” and go means “land.” And vindam means one who gives pleasure—the pleasure potency of these three things: senses, cows, and land. In the *Bhagavad-gītā* (5.29) it is said that the proprietor of all land, the maintainer of all land, the one who gives pleasure to the people of all lands is Govinda, Kṛṣṇa. And He is the protector of the cows and is pleasing to the cows. You have seen many pictures of Kṛṣṇa where He is showing love for a cow. Why is the cow loved by Him? Why not another animal? Because cow protection is the most important business of human society. In the offering of obeisances to Kṛṣṇa it is said, namo brahmaṇya-devāya go-brāhmaṇa-hitāya ca: “I offer my respectful obeisances unto the Supreme Person, who is the protector of the brāhmaṇas and the cows.” The first qualification is that He protects the brāhmaṇas and the cows. Next He protects the whole world: jagad-dhitāya. And kṛṣṇāya: He is Kṛṣṇa. Then govindāya: He is Govinda. The example is set by the Supreme Personality of Godhead that human civilization will advance only on the basis of brahminical culture and cow protection. As soon as there is falldown from brahminical culture, and as soon as there is discrepancy in the protection of cows, there will be no more peace in the world. Therefore it is specifically said, go-brāhmaṇa-hitāya ca: “Unto Him who protects the cows and the brāhmaṇas.” This Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement is for the protection of brahminical culture and cows. When these two things are done, then automatically the peace of the world will come. This is a characteristic of Vedic literature: pick up the essence of things, and then all other things follow. An example is the *yoga* system. *Yoga* indriya-saṁyamaḥ. The *yoga* system is meant to control the senses. This is the primary factor in practicing *yoga*. We have five senses for acquiring knowledge and five working senses. Of all the senses the tongue is considered to be the most powerful sense. Vaiṣṇavas therefore try to control the tongue. They do not allow the tongue to eat everything and anything. No. The title Svāmī or Gosvāmī means one who has control over the senses. Generally, people are servants of the senses. When instead of becoming a servant of the senses a man becomes a master of the senses, then he is called Svāmī. Svāmī is not about the dress, the clothing. The dress is superfluous. Everywhere in ordinary life there is some uniform dress to understand “He is such and such.” But actually, Svāmī means one who has control over the senses. And that is essential to brahminical culture. *Brahminical Qualifications* Brahminical culture means truthfulness, cleanliness, controlling the senses, controlling the mind, simplicity, tolerance, full knowledge, practical application of knowledge in life, and faith in God. Anywhere people practice these qualifications, brahminical culture will be revived. It is not restricted to a particular country or a particular society. It is not that a particular class of men are brāhmaṇas. No. *Bhagavad-gītā* does not say that. *Brahma-karma svabhāva-jam* (18.42). Svabhāva-jam means natural activities. This Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement is for training brahmacārīs. Brahmacārī means practicing the brahminical culture. There must be a portion of the population well versed in brahminical culture. In a garden, if there is one nice flowering plant, such as a rose plant, with good scent, the whole garden becomes fragrant, scented. Similarly, we do not expect that the whole population of human society will take to this brahminical culture; but if even one percent of the population accepts this brahminical culture, Kṛṣṇa consciousness, then the whole world will be peaceful. Not even one percent, less than one percent. It is so nice. The Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement is a very scientific movement. Unless you raise the population from the animal propensities, how can you expect peace? Do you think there is any peace in the dog society, in the cat society? No, it is not possible. You keep some dogs. They meet. As soon as they meet together there will be howling—“gow, gow, gow, gow.” So I you a create a dog society, then you cannot expect peace. You have to create brāhmaṇas as a certain percentage of the population. Then there is the possibility of peace. In the sky the numerical strength of the stars is greater, but there is one moon, and that one moon is sufficient to illuminate the sky. Ekaś candras tamo hanti na ca tara sahasrasaḥ. Millions of millions of stars are twinkling, but they cannot dissipate the darkness. You see. Only one moon, only one sun. So try to make some percentage of the population actually brāhmaṇas. *Cow Protection* And protect the cows. Actually, we are taking so many advantages from the cows. We get milk, and from milk we can make hundreds of vitamin-rich palatable foods. Such a nice animal—faithful, peaceful, and beneficial. And if after taking milk from it we kill it, does that look very good? Even after their death, the cows supply their skin for your shoes. The cow is so beneficial. You see. Even after death. While living, it gives you nice milk. You cannot reject milk from human society. As soon as a child is born, milk is immediately required. For the old man, milk is life. For the diseased person, milk is life. For the invalid, milk is life. Therefore Kṛṣṇa is teaching by His practical demonstration how He loves this innocent animal, the cow. Human society should develop brahminical culture on the basis of protecting cows. The brāhmaṇa takes milk preparations and develops the finer tissues of the brain. With a good brain you can understand subtle matters in philosophy, in spiritual science. No ordinary man can understand the scientific intricacies taught in a scientific college. Students require some preliminary qualification to enter the scientific college. They require some preliminary qualification to enter the law college, the postgraduate classes. Similarly, to understand the subtle or finer implications of spiritual science, one has to become a brāhmaṇa. Without becoming a brāhmaṇa it is not possible. *Classification by Quality and Work* Therefore in the *Bhagavad-gītā* (4.13) it is said, *cātur-varṇyaṁ mayā sṛṣṭaṁ *guṇa-karma-vibhāgaśaḥ**. There are four classes of men created by God—*cātur-varṇyam*. How are they divided? How is the classification made? *Guṇa-karma-vibhāgaśaḥ*: by classification of quality and work. Not by birth. In India, of course, this classification of *guṇa-karma-vibhāgaśaḥ* was originally planned from the Vedic age. But later on a class of men, without any qualification, without any practical work, claimed, “I belong to such and such class.” Therefore India’s falldown was inevitable. So *Bhagavad-gītā* says, “Not like that.” *Bhagavad-gītā* says that these classes of men, *cātur-varṇyam*—the brahminical class, the *kṣatriya* class, the *vaiśya* class, and the *śūdra* class—are everywhere. Not only in India but throughout the universe. In every country, in every nation, in every society there must be some people who have the brahminical tendency. From your country we have picked up some boys and girls who are inclined to adopt this way of life. So this Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement is simply picking up the brahminical class of boys and girls. Not that we are taking account, “Oh, who is your father? Is your father a brāhmaṇa?” No. We don’t take account like that. His father may be anything; it doesn’t matter. But if he has the tendency to accept this Kṛṣṇa consciousness, we immediately welcome: “Come on.” And we teach him this brahminical qualification—to become brahmacārī, not to indulge in illicit sex life, not to take a nonvegetarian diet. *Vegetarian vs. Nonvegetarian* We don’t exactly recommend a vegetarian diet. We are vegetarian and we restrict from a nonvegetarian diet, but we recommend Kṛṣṇa prasādam. We have no quarrel with the nonvegetarians, because the vegetable also has life. The plants, the grass, the trees, the fruits, the flowers, they also have life. They are not dead. So simply becoming vegetarian is no great qualification. Somebody is taking meat and somebody is taking vegetables; it does not make any difference. But we are taking vegetables not because we are vegetarians; we are taking vegetables as Kṛṣṇa prasādam, remnants of foodstuff offered to Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇa says in the *Bhagavad-gītā* (9.26), > patraṁ puṣpaṁ phalaṁ toyaṁ > yo me bhaktyā prayacchati > tad ahaṁ bhakty-upahṛtam > aśnāmi prayatātmanaḥ “If somebody offers Me some foodstuff prepared from vegetables and fruits and grains”—grains are also fruits—“with love and devotion, then I eat.” Therefore we offer these things to Kṛṣṇa. Here we have offered fruits, not because we are vegetarian but because Kṛṣṇa wants this. If you invite a friend, you ask him, “My dear friend, what do you like to eat?” So if he says, “I like this,” you immediately supply it. This is the sign of love. Similarly, because Kṛṣṇa says, “If somebody offers Me fruits, flowers, grains, milk, with devotion and love, I will eat,” and because we are pledged to Kṛṣṇa, we offer these things to Kṛṣṇa and then we eat. That is our process. *Offering Food in Sacrifice* We have no quarrel with nonvegetarian or vegetarian. No. Because the vegetable has also got life. And in the *Bhagavad-gītā* (3.13) it is stated, yajña-śiṣṭāśinaḥ santo mucyante sarva-kilbiṣaiḥ. You have to eat after offering the food in sacrifice. Sacrifice means to worship the Supreme Lord. That is called sacrifice. So if anyone eats the remnants of sacrificial foodstuff, then he is freed from all kinds of sins. The purport is that those who are vegetarian are thinking, “We are better than the nonvegetarians,” but it is not the fact. Either you eat vegetables or nonvegetables, you are liable to be punished because you are accepting something without offering it to the supplier. That is the law. We must acknowledge at least that “This foodstuff is supplied by the Supreme Lord and we are obliged to Him.” In Christian Bible also they pray, “O God, give us our daily bread.” So one should accept that it is supplied by God. If one does not even accept this obligation, then he is sinful, certainly. One who offers sacrifice and then takes the foodstuff becomes freed from the sinful activities. In eating there is sinful activity. Bhuñjate te tv aghaṁ pāpā ye pacanty ātma-kāraṇāt: anyone who is simply cooking for himself is simply eating sins. (Gītā 3.13) These are the statements of *Bhagavad-gītā*. Therefore it is our duty to offer foodstuff to the Lord and then take it. “My Lord, You have supplied such nice foodstuff for my maintaining my life, so You first of all taste it, and then I shall eat it.” It is very nice. This is Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Kṛṣṇa is not going to take away the foodstuff that your offer. But if you simply accept that He is eating it, then you become freed from the implication of sinful activities. *Killing with Every Step* We are in such a position that in every step there is sinful activity, every step. This world is so made. The Buddhist philosophy, the Jain philosophy, they advocate nonviolence. But how can one be nonviolent? We are walking on the street. There are so many ants and small germs, and they are being killed. We are breathing, and so many animals are being killed. We are drinking water, and so many animals are being killed. How is it possible to become nonviolence? It is not possible. Therefore in every step we have to act in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, or God consciousness. Then there is indemnity from the sinful activities. That is recommended in the *Bhagavad-gītā* (3.9). Unless you act in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, or God consciousness, or as ordered by Kṛṣṇa, or God, then you become bound up by the reaction. > yajñarthāt karmaṇo ’nyatra > loko ’yaṁ karma-bandhanaḥ > tad-arthaṁ karma kaunteya > mukta-saṅgaḥ samācara “Therefore, My dear Arjuna,” Kṛṣṇa instructs Arjuna, “simply act for Kṛṣṇa, or God, tad-artham, not for any other purpose. Don’t create your action; simply act according to the direction of the Lord. Mukta-saṅgaḥ samācara. Then you will be freed from the reaction of your act.” There are many examples. A soldier, when he is killing on the battlefield on the order of the higher authorities of the government and the commander-in-chief, is not liable for killing. He is, rather, rewarded. The same man, if he kills somebody on his own account, is hanged. Immediately he becomes liable to the law. *Simply Act for Kṛṣṇa* Therefore our whole life should be so modeled that we shall simply act for God, or Kṛṣṇa. That is Kṛṣṇa consciousness. The activities in Kṛṣṇa consciousness are called *bhakti*, devotional service. And how they are discharged is very nicely explained in many Vedic literatures and in the *Bhagavad-gītā*. Especially in the Nārada Pañcarātra it is stated, > sarvopādhi-vinirmuktaṁ > tat-paratvena nirmalam > hṛṣīkeṇa hṛṣīkeśa- > sevanaṁ bhaktir ucyate One has to become freed from all designations. What is a designation? “I am American,” “I am Indian,” “I am a brāhmaṇa,” “I am a kṣatriya,” “I am this,” “I am that.” These are all designations. Actually, I am spirit soul. I have got this designation on account of my accepting this material body, but I am not this body. This is the first instruction in the *Bhagavad-gītā*. Spiritual instruction begins from this platform, that “I am not this body.” Because the bodily concept of life is animal life. The dog thinks, “I am this body”; the cat thinks, “I am this body.” But if a human being thinks, “I am this body,” then what is the difference between that human being and cats and dogs? A human being must try to understand, “What am I?” This is called knowledge. He must come to the understanding ahaṁ brahmāsmi, “I am spirit soul.” Socrates realized this. When he was asked by the judge, “Mr. Socrates, how do you want to be entombed?” he answered, “First of all, capture me; then you entomb me. You are seeing my body. You have no vision that I am the soul.” This is the right vision. *Bhagavad-gītā* (5.18) says therefore, > vidyā-vinaya-sampanne > brāhmaṇe gavi hastini > śuni caiva śva-pāke ca > paṇḍitāḥ sama-darśinaḥ Paṇḍitāḥ means one who is learned. He sees everything equally because he does not see the body; he sees the spirit soul. Somebody may be very high, or somebody may be very, very low, or an animal. But paṇḍitāḥ, one who is learned, sees the spirit soul. Paṇḍitāḥ sama-darśinaḥ. He knows that this body is only a dress. Suppose a gentleman has come to this meeting. If he is not properly dressed, that does not mean he should be hated. Similarly, one who is paṇḍita, learned, does not discriminate between man and animal because they have got different dresses. No. As far as maintenance of the body is concerned, the animal eats, the man eats; the animal sleeps, the man sleeps; the animal mates, the man also mates. The quality or degree of mating or eating may be different, but eating is there, sleeping is there, mating is there, and defending is there. But what is the difference between man and animal? Man knows, at least he should try to know, “What am I? What is God? What is this world? What is our interrelation?” This is man’s business. This is called athāto brahma-**jijñāsā*.* In the Vedānta-sūtra the first sūtra, aphorism, is atha ataḥ brahma-*jijñāsā*: “This human form of life is meant for inquiry about the spirit, the Supreme Spirit, Brahman.” That is the beginning of spiritual education. Spiritual education means first to understand what I am, then what God is, what this world is, what our interrelation is, what God’s position is, what my position is, how I shall deal with God. These things are spiritual education, and human life is meant for that purpose. Nature gives a chance to the living entity in this developed consciousness of a human being to understand these things. And if one is fortunate enough to understand that he is spirit soul, that he is Brahman, then the *Bhagavad-gītā* (18.54) gives the definition of such a man: brahma-bhūtaḥ prasannātmā. As soon as he comes to the understanding of the spiritual platform, then he becomes joyful, immediately freed from all anxieties. Joyfulness means freedom from all anxiety. Brahma-bhūtaḥ prasannātmā na śocati na kāṅkṣati. He has no more hankering and no more lamentation. Samaḥ sarveṣu bhūteṣu: and he sees everyone on the spiritual platform, equally. Then the life of devotion, service to the Lord, begins. *Cleansed of Designations* This is the process of understanding the Supreme Personality of Godhead. The process recommends that one should become freed from the designations because accepting designations means ignorance. We have to transcend this position of designations. Sarvopādhi-vinirmuktaṁ tat-paratvena nirmalam. By reviving our lost relationship with the Supreme Lord, we become cleansed. That is the brahminical stage. Nirmalam means cleansed. And when your consciousness is cleansed, then only can you render service to the Lord. Hṛṣīkeṇa hṛṣīkeśa-sevanam. Otherwise not. As long as our consciousness is not clean, as long as our consciousness is polluted, there is no possibility of rendering service to the Lord. Hṛṣīkeṇa hṛṣīkeśa-sevanam. Hṛṣīka means senses purified by being freed from designations. When one is purified in connection with activities of Kṛṣṇa, or God, then one can render service to the Lord, Hṛṣīkeṣa. That is called *bhakti*. *Bhakti* is nothing artificial. It is the activity of the healthy stage. When a man is diseased, his activities differ from those of a man who is cured and healthy. To make someone healthy does not mean to kill the patient, but to cure him of the disease. That is real treatment. The whole treatment of human society should be like that: to cure the person from the disease of forgetfulness of his relationship with God. Then, when he is cured, when he is in a healthy state, there will be no more trouble in the world. Peace and prosperity can be established when people are no longer in the designated stage, when they are free. It is not expected, however, that cent percent of the population of the world will be free from all contamination. But if even only a certain percentage, a most insignificant percentage, is free of contamination—one percent, or less than that, one in millions—then the face of the world will change. This Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement is just trying to turn the face of the people towards the Supreme Lord. This process is not a sectarian process. Just as students can be picked up from any society, similarly a person inclined to understand the science of God can be picked up from any society. There is no question of designation. It is not that it is meant for the Hindu or meant for the Christian or meant for the Buddhist. Anyone who is interested in the science of God is welcome in this Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement. Thank you very much. Presenting the Correct Thing This conversation took place in Allahabad, India, on January 18, 1971. Guest (1): We believe in an incorporeal God. Śrīla Prabhupāda: Who says, “incorporeal”? Who says? Guest (1): It is scripture—jyotir liṅga, “incorporeal.” Śrīla Prabhupāda: You are bringing in something else besides *Bhagavad-gītā*. You should know that we are preaching *Bhagavad-gītā*. So this jyotir liṅga—all these theories—they are not in *Bhagavad-gītā*. They may be in other literature, but we are particularly interested in preaching *Bhagavad-gītā*. Because *Bhagavad-gītā* has been wrongly preached all over the world by nonsense commentary, we want to rectify that. Therefore our society is specifically named “Kṛṣṇa conscious.” Guest (1): What is wrongly preached about the *Gītā*? Śrīla Prabhupāda: Yesterday, for instance, I went to that *Gita* Samiti [*Gita* Society]. There is a lamp [on display]. Why is there a lamp instead of Kṛṣṇa? Guest (1): I don’t know. Śrīla Prabhupāda: You do not know. Therefore I say there is wrong preaching. Why is there a lamp in place of Kṛṣṇa? Does Kṛṣṇa say this? Guest (1): The *Gita* Samiti people must evolve with this idea because . . . Śrīla Prabhupāda: No, no. The *Gītā* is spoken by Kṛṣṇa. So why is there no picture of Kṛṣṇa? Guest (1): They didn’t put the picture. Śrīla Prabhupāda: Yes. That means they have not understood Kṛṣṇa. Therefore, this so-called Gita Society is not bona fide. Suppose there is a political meeting. You keep Gandhi’s photo or Jawaharlal Nehru’s photo, because they are political leaders. Yet in this Gita Samiti they are preaching *Bhagavad-gītā*, and there is not a single picture of Kṛṣṇa. This is misguided. They are wrongly representing *Bhagavad-gītā*. So our position is to rectify that wrong propaganda about *Bhagavad-gītā*. Guest (2): What is that wrong propaganda? Śrīla Prabhupāda: That is one instance. And there are many other instances. In the Ninth Chapter there is the verse man-manā bhava mad-bhakto mad-yājī māṁ namaskuru. [Kṛṣṇa says to Arjuna, “Engage your mind always in thinking of Me, become My devotee, offer obeisances to Me, and worship Me.”] One respected scholar says, “It is not to the person Kṛṣṇa [but to the unborn within Kṛṣṇa that one must surrender].” Where does the scholar get this nonsense idea? Guest (1): V—has also said that . . . Śrīla Prabhupāda: They are all nonsense. Anyone who deviates from the original text of the *Gītā* is nonsense. Guest (2): Swamiji, by declaring other interpretations nonsense … Śrīla Prabhupāda: You cannot interpret! First of all, my proposal is that you cannot interpret. Guest (2): We’ll come to that. But if I say that you are not interpreting correctly, that does not make me correct. I must be correct also. Śrīla Prabhupāda: I am correct as long as I present the correct thing. If I present Kṛṣṇa as He is, then I am correct. Guest (2): Swamiji, most respectfully, how do you judge that “I am correct”? Śrīla Prabhupāda: Because I am presenting what Kṛṣṇa says. First of all, you answer this: What is the standard of correctness? You cannot create correctness. When Kṛṣṇa says man-manā bhava mad-bhaktaḥ—”Just surrender unto Me, become My bhakta [devotee]—how can you say, “It is not to Kṛṣṇa [one must surrender]?” Is this not nonsense? If I say, “Give me a glass of water” and you say, “It is not to Swamiji [that the glass of water should be given],” isn’t that an interpretation? Guest (1): But surrender is what Jesus Christ says, Mohammed says, everyone says. Śrīla Prabhupāda: Let others surrender to Christ. But why don’t you surrender to Kṛṣṇa? Guest (1): That is true, but . . . Śrīla Prabhupāda: That is true, but you do not know how. Guest (1): Your way of thinking and your purpose is that Lord Kṛṣṇa should be the Lord of the whole universe, so . . . Śrīla Prabhupāda: Yes, Lord Kṛṣṇa is the Lord of the universe. Guest (1): So that is what you want to say to me? Śrīla Prabhupāda: Yes. Prayer My Lord, I submit the following prayer at Your holy feet. I do not pray to You for physical leisure, for learning, wealth, or followers. I do not pray for heaven or salvation. I do not pray for any of these opulences. In whatever birth I take, wherever my karma leads me, let me sing the glories of Your holy name birth after birth. This alone is my cherished hope, my aspiration, my prayer at Your lotus feet: Let causeless and uninterrupted devotion awaken within my heart and flow towards You. Let me love Your lotus feet as much as I now love sense gratification; transfer my affection from the objects of the senses to Your lotus feet. In danger or success, good fortune or disaster, let me remain in equipoise. And let my affection for You increase day by day by the influence of the holy name. Whether I live as bird or beast, in heaven or in hell, let the humble Bhaktivinoda always cherish *bhakti* in his heart of hearts. —Śrīla Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura Gītāvalī, Śikṣāṣṭakam, Song Four Letting Go of the False Ego *Who is the real “I” behind our intuitive sense of “I-ness”?* By Brajanātha Dāsa Great souls show us how to transcend the energy of the Lord that makes us forget who we truly are. In normal parlance, the word ego can refer to egotism and arrogance and thus carries negative connotations. The Sanskrit word ahaṅkāra, sometimes translated as “ego,” refers to the subtlest of all material elements, the instrument through which the soul misidentifies with the body and mind. More precisely, *Bhagavad-gītā* commentators refer to this sense of identification as “false ego” to contrast it with the true sense of I-ness, which comes from the soul, the source of consciousness. The same *Gītā* section that deems the false ego to be ontologically real (7.4) also deems the soul to be real (7.5). Kṛṣṇa states that both the false ego and the soul are His energies. The false ego is one of the eight elements that make up His material energy, and the soul is a part of His spiritual energy. Kṛṣṇa later coveys unambiguously that the soul is eternally existent, being an eternal integral part of Him (15.7). That the soul is real and eternal implies that our sense of I-ness is real and eternal. So to become enlightened, we don’t need to give up our sense of I-ness; we just need to shift its focus from the body and the mind to the soul. Some voidist or nihilist philosophers claim that our sense of I-ness is the cause of all our illusion and tribulation, so it needs to be dissolved. By rejecting wholesale the sense of I-ness, they leave themselves defenseless against the question “When we give up I-ness, who will relish enlightenment?” No one is free of the false ego. It exists for both devotees and nondevotees, especially those nondevotees Lord Kṛṣṇa calls “demons” (asuras). But the difference is that devotees take shelter of the Lord to fight with the false ego, whereas demons take shelter of their lower qualities, such as false ego, lust, and anger (16.18), going against the desires of the Lord. The demonic think that by exhibiting and expanding their false ego, they can make their subordinates cower in fear. However, taking shelter of the false ego inevitably backfires. Even if subordinates stay silent temporarily, they remain resentful and eventually rebel. *How to Tell the False Ego to Go* In the *Bhagavad-gītā* Lord Kṛṣṇa explains that our essential identity is that we are eternal spiritual beings, parts of the all-attractive Supreme Being, Kṛṣṇa Himself. Our true identity is foundational to all our functional identities based on age, sex, nationality, profession, economic bracket, and so forth. When we practice *bhakti-yoga* diligently and connect with Kṛṣṇa, we gain increasing realization of our foundational identity. When we find security and satisfaction in our core identity, we become more immune to the false ego’s temptations for gratification through our various other identities. By thus going toward our core identity, we can tell the false ego to go. By basing our sense of I-ness in the soul, we open the door to enlightened, eternal, ecstatic life. Because pure devotees of the Lord depend on Kṛṣṇa, they have no confusion about false ego. Materialistic people also have no confusion, because they do not dependend on Kṛṣṇa. But sādhakas, those of us in the stage of devotional service in practice, may occasionally be challenged by confusion because we sometimes think of ourselves as servants of Kṛṣṇa and at other times identify ourselves as the mind and the senses. Kṛṣṇa puts us in this painful situation of confusion to help us understand the false ego and remind us how far the false ego takes us away from Him. But by mercy gained though submissive surrender to the spiritual master, we can come to the realization that Kṛṣṇa will reveal Himself and remove all obstacles on the path of devotional service. Being submissive to the spiritual master entails being stripped of our false ego. The death of the false ego is our ultimate death in the material world. The death of the body is painful, so we can imagine how painful is the death of the false ego, which doesn’t give up without a fight. But if we take shelter of *guru* and Kṛṣṇa, surrendering our free will, the false ego will be curbed. This means engaging our free will within the domain of Kṛṣṇa’s laws, instead of acting independently under the influence of false ego and the modes of material nature. No matter how sincere we are in devotional service, while we are still working within materially conditioned bodies there is every possibility of acting from the platform of the false ego. One manifestation of false ego is subtle pride. But the Lord is so kind that if false ego as subtle pride is hindering our spiritual advancement, He intervenes to curb that pride, as shown in the following examples. *Traces of False Ego in Great Souls* *Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam* relates how Bali Mahārāja and his soldiers once ousted Indra from his rule of the heavenly planets. When Lord Viṣṇu, disguised as Vāmanadeva, a brāhmaṇa boy, appeared before Bali Mahārāja to recover Indra’s opulence, He asked for three paces of land according to the measurement of His steps. The charitably minded Bali Mahārāja offered to give Him anything—even a planet of his own—but Vāmanadeva declined the offer, saying He wanted only what He could cover in three steps. Ultimately, in just two steps the Lord took away everything from Bali Mahārāja, who then surrendered himself at the lotus feet of the Lord and asked Him to place the third step on his head. For this deed, Bali is famed as the exemplar of full surrender unto the Lord. Bali Mahārāja had a little trace of false ego connected with his position as the emperor of all the worlds. While offering three steps of land to the Lord, Bali was proud that he could offer so much more. But his pride was not the same as the pride of defiance that constitutes the conditioned soul’s resistance against the authority of the Lord. Bali is a mahājana, one of the leading spiritual authorities glorified in the *Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam*, and he demonstrated surrender to the Lord. If his false ego had been a significant obstacle, then he would have resisted surrender, or in other words, pride would have interfered with his surrender. So any little pride or apparent false ego found in Bali was an insignificant remnant of the influence of the material modes of nature, and by the mercy of Kṛṣṇa as Vāmanadeva, that little trace was cleansed away. The story of Sudāmā Vipra, told in chapters eighty and eighty-one of the Tenth Canto of *Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam*, is another beautiful narration. Sudāmā was a poverty-stricken brāhmaṇa (vipra), and though he had nothing, he was quite content, being free of material desires. At the request of his wife, who desired some relief from their poverty, he visited the Lord in His palace in Dwarka. Before he left home, his wife begged some simple chipped rice from neighbors to offer the Lord as a gift. When Sudāmā hesitated to offer the paltry rice to the Lord, He grabbed it anyway and ate a fistful of it. When He was about to have a second fistful, His wife Rukmiṇī Devī stopped Him because (unbeknown to Sudāmā) she had already awarded Sudāmā immense wealth at his home and had nothing more to give except herself. The Lord generally does not bestow material blessings upon His devotees, because they may be entrapped again in the material world, characterized by continuous birth, death, old age, and disease, yet He gave immense wealth to Sudāmā. In his commentary on this episode, Śrī Jīva Gosvāmī mentions that Sudāmā’s last trace of illusion lay in the subtle pride of being a renounced brāhmaṇa. This trace was destroyed by his contemplating the Supreme Lord’s submission to His devotees. The Lord’s bestowing wealth on Sudāmā was the Lord’s way of reciprocating Sudāmā’s love. Kṛṣṇa thought, “I cannot repay Sudāmā’s exclusive love for Me, but let Me give him some material opulence.” Kṛṣṇa acts in a very personal way with those He favors, and not everyone’s spiritual needs are the same. If He takes away a particular person’s wealth, the goal is not simply to take away the wealth, but to enrich that person in spiritual understanding. Others may not need it. For example, His pure devotees are not attached to wealth. For them, whether they have it or not is irrelevant. Some of them have wealth, while others don’t. Kṛṣṇa’s special mercy and His giving of wealth do not necessarily go together, as the way His special mercy manifests depends on the particular devotee. Both giving and taking away can be His mercy. *False Ego Returns* Indra, the king of heavenly planets, is a devotee of the Lord, though not a completely pure devotee. He knows that Kṛṣṇa is supreme, but due to false ego he is possessive of his rule of the celestial kingdom. This impurity was on display during the govardhana-līlā *(Bhāgavatam* 10.25), when he became furious because the Vrajavāsīs, the residents of Vrindavan, accepted Kṛṣṇa as their Lord and offered Him a sacrifice originally intended for Indra. The punishment Indra inflicted on the Vrajavāsīs was way beyond reasonable for the supposed offense the Vrajavāsīs had committed. For example, if we do not pay our utility bill, the city just disconnects the supply and does not punish us. Indra could have done something like that rather than attacking the Vrajavāsīs with a storm meant to destroy Vrindavan and every living thing in it. Indra’s action shows the pitfall of material opulence for one who is not completely pure. Attachment, pride, and anger all arise from material lust, which at its root is the desire to be the Lord. Indra exhibited this in its fullest sense because he holds the exalted position of lord of the heavens. Instead of representing Kṛṣṇa, the ultimate Lord, as his agent, Indra became independent-minded and wanted to enjoy in opposition to Kṛṣṇa. When this kind of attachment happens, one becomes angry and bewildered, and finally with lost intelligence one performs a destructive act. Indra was especially angry because he saw that the Vrajavāsīs canceled his pūjā not simply because of laziness or some small material pride but because they accepted Kṛṣṇa as the Lord of their hearts. Indra saw this as a direct threat to his cherished position. When we are too attached to position or material opulence, we become proud, and when someone threatens our status quo, we become territorial and angry and lose our sense of discrimination *(Gītā* 2.63). That’s what happened to Indra, and hence he behaved the way he did. This display of Indra’s anger is very instructive for us. We too may sometimes lose our centeredness and find fault with others, damaging their reputation. We may do this because we see others as our competition or better than ourselves. This episode teaches us to keep our false ego and pride in check and practice humility. In the end, that is what saved Indra from further problems. He bowed down to Kṛṣṇa in humility, and Kṛṣṇa forgave him. *Three Prongs of False Ego* Our false ego often acts like a trident that pierces us with three prongs: grandiosity, blame, and shame. Grandiosity: When we set out to achieve something, our false ego makes us believe we are extraordinary and entitled to blaze our way to success. Such grandiosity often makes us look down on others who we think are not as talented as we are. By such condescension, the false ego makes us difficult for others to live with. And by distancing us from others, it makes us lonely and unhappy even when our grandiose dreams come true. Blame: When we can’t actualize our grandiose dreams, the false ego tries to protect itself by blaming others. When we keep looking for scapegoats and refuse to take responsibility for our shortcomings and mistakes, we can’t grow; instead, we stagnate or even degrade, thereby setting ourselves up for misery. Shame: When the false ego can’t find anyone to blame, it starts imploding. It beats us down, making us believe we are worthless, useless, and hopeless. By pitting us against ourselves, shame strips us of our energy for self-improvement and makes us depressed or even suicidal. In the *Bhagavad-gītā* Lord Kṛṣṇa explains that we are parts of a whole far bigger than ourselves: the all-attractive supreme, Kṛṣṇa Himself. We have intrinsic self-worth because we are eternally loved by Him as His precious parts, irrespective of whether we succeed or fail in our endeavors. By humbly acknowledging that we are parts and not the whole, and by playing our role in a mood of devotional service, we can find inner security and satisfaction, thereby transcending the false ego’s delusions. Bali, Sudāmā, and Indra reached that stage very quickly. Each of them, in different ways, had the direct company of the Lord. Certainly they are not ordinary souls; they are great souls assisting Kṛṣṇa in His pastimes and thus teaching us, among other things, lessons about the false ego in relation to our all-important spiritual life. *Brajanātha Dāsa, PhD, and his wife, Suvarṇa Rādhā Devī Dāsī, PhD, both disciples of His Holiness Rādhānāth Swami, live in Longmont, Colorado, with their two daughters. They are active in book distribution and in serving Śrī Śrī Rādhā-Govinda at ISKCON Denver.* The Universal Form as Revealed in the *Bhagavad-gītā* *For our benefit, Arjuna asks Lord Kṛṣṇa to show His form that pervades and encompasses the universe.* By Caitanya Caraṇa Dāsa “The *Bhagavad-gītā’s* revelation of the universal form is arguably among the greatest mystical or supernatural visions in world theology.” The term universal form essentially refers to a form that shows Kṛṣṇa’s presence, power, and purpose spread across the entire universe. The universal form pervades the universe from within or encompasses it from without, or both. Kṛṣṇa doesn’t have any such form that exists eternally in the spiritual world; He sometimes reveals it in this world as a temporary vision to some special souls. In the *Bhagavad-gītā* Arjuna asks Kṛṣṇa to show him His universal form. Why does Arjuna want to see it? Because he desires to have visual confirmation of Kṛṣṇa’s previous verbal declaration “I sustain the whole universe with just a fragment of Myself” (10.42). Why does Arjuna desire this visual confirmation? For his benefit—and for ours. In the Gītā Arjuna represents Everyman (and Everywoman). Most of us understand something better when in addition to hearing about it, we also see it. Therefore, for our benefit Arjuna requests Kṛṣṇa to show His glories through His universal form. The universal form in the *Gītā* is a revelation, meaning that it is a top-down vision—the topmost divinity, Kṛṣṇa, makes it visible to humanity through humanity’s representative, Arjuna. Kṛṣṇa also offered similar revelations to a few others: His mother Yaśodā, the Kuru prince Duryodhana, and the sage Uttanka. What about the rest of us, who are not fortunate enough to behold such a revelation? Can we see God’s might spread throughout the universe? Yes, by treating the universal form as a bottom-up meditative tool for conceptualization, as described in *Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam*. We can envision various objects within nature and even various celestial bodies in the universe as different parts of the body of the universal form (2.5.36). Because that form is a conceptualization, it may be conceived slightly differently by different seekers, hence some minor differences in the descriptions of the universal form in different sections of the Bhāgavatam. *The Special Vision* The universal form is a revelation, which essentially means it is something not normally accessible to us humans, but made accessible by divine intervention. How might that intervention happen? In many ways, all of which involve Kṛṣṇa using His omnipotence to temporarily suspend the normal ways in which material nature functions. Let’s consider some possible ways. First, Kṛṣṇa may make Himself visible in a form that our normal eyes can see. Second, He may empower our eyes to see something they can’t normally see. Third, by suspending our normal vision of things around us, He may empower us to see something we can’t normally see. That could be figuratively called “giving a different set of eyes” *(Gītā* 11.8). Kṛṣṇa’s revelation of the universal form to Arjuna does seem to fall in this third category. While Arjuna was beholding the universal form, he couldn’t see any of the normal things present on the battlefield; he just saw the universal form everywhere (11.16). In contrast, Kṛṣṇa’s revelation of the universal form in the Kuru assembly seems to fall in the first category. That revelation was seen not just by Duryodhana but also by everyone in the Kuru assembly. Why this difference in ways of revealing? Possibly because those revelations were meant for different purposes. In the Kuru assembly, Kṛṣṇa’s purpose was to avoid war. Through His fearsome revelation of the universal form, He wanted to warn not just Duryodhana but also His supporters; if they saw the might of who would be on the opposite side, maybe they would stop Duryodhana. Hence, Kṛṣṇa’s revelation to everyone. At Kurukshetra, Kṛṣṇa had a specific purpose in revealing His universal form: to persuade Arjuna to fight. Hence, His revelation only to Arjuna. *The Triple-narrative Structure* The *Bhagavad-gītā* uses a distinctive structure for introducing the universal form. First Kṛṣṇa explains to Arjuna what He will be showing; then Sañjaya explains to Dhṛtarāṣṭra what is being shown by Kṛṣṇa; finally Arjuna describes what he is seeing. While Kṛṣṇa and Sañjaya describe the vision in four verses each, Arjuna describes it much more elaborately, in sixteen verses. Why does the *Gītā* use this triple descriptive framework? To help us gain a sense of a vision that is otherwise incomprehensible. When something is difficult to understand, it’s helpful to have that thing described or explained from different perspectives. In general, if someone claims to have seen something supernatural, it’s natural that most people will be suspicious. But if multiple people see the same thing, that increases the credibility of the vision. Beyond that, if we want to know more about what was actually seen, then we can try to integrate the details of the sight as described by different people. The *Bhagavad-gītā’s* revelation of the universal form is arguably among the greatest mystical or supernatural visions in world theology. In this vision, the entire universe is shown from one place—it’s as if a glimpse of omniscience is offered to us. Of course, in the immediate context of the *Gītā*, Kṛṣṇa’s description to Arjuna of what He is going to reveal is meant to help Arjuna understand the upcoming vision. By preceding revelation with description, Kṛṣṇa underscores and utilizes a key principle in human cognition. We don’t see things just with our eyes; we see things also with our intelligence, which helps us make sense of what we see with our eyes. To help us better appreciate the vision of the universal form, the *Gītā* describes it thrice: in Kṛṣṇa’s words, in Sañjaya’s words, and in Arjuna’s words. *The Thrilling Turns Chilling* What Arjuna says while beholding that cosmic theophany (11.15–31) gives us a sense of his perceptions and concomitant emotions. Initially, Arjuna observes and marvels at the all-pervasiveness of the universal form, while noting that it is so effulgent as to be difficult to observe. As the majestic sight fills him with awe, suddenly his emotion changes to fear (11.25). Then the fear becomes so overwhelming that he begs to know what he is seeing (11.31). After offering some prayers, he begs that the vision be stopped (11.46). To better understand what causes Arjuna’s emotional turbulence, consider a metaphor. Suppose we are watching a science-fiction movie in our home theater with some acquaintances. In the movie, a gigantic being suddenly appears and spreads across the entire screen. While we are watching, that being starts emanating fire from its mouth and scorching everything around it. Then it starts drawing things nearby into its fiery mouth. As we are watching, that being suddenly appears in the very place we are in and starts devouring the people around us. Shocked, we try to stop the movie, but the remote doesn’t work. We would be terrified, even petrified. Arjuna’s perceptions and reactions are similar. What Arjuna sees initially as the majestic universal form soon starts devouring the warriors assembled on the very Kurukshetra battlefield where Arjuna is. This is Kṛṣṇa’s cosmically destructive form of time, kāla-rūpa. That the kāla-rūpa perturbs a valiant warrior of Arjuna’s caliber underscores its unbearable scariness. This vision reveals the all-round nature of God’s omnipotence: no one can inspire devotion like Him (in His form as Kṛṣṇa), and no one can induce fear like Him (in His form as time). For Arjuna, the sight of the majestic universal form is thrilling, but the sight of the destructive kāla-rūpa is chilling. *Arjuna’s Intriguing Question about the Identity of His Vision* While beholding the universal form he has himself requested and already identified, Arjuna suddenly asks a somewhat strange question: “Who am I seeing?” Or put more simply, “Who are You?” (12.31) Why does Arjuna ask for the identity of a vision he has already identified? Because the vision contains something he hadn’t asked for or expected. He had requested to see the form that pervades all of space, but Kṛṣṇa also revealed a vision that pervades time; that is, the vision showed what would happen in the future. What Kṛṣṇa showed extra was the *kāla-rūpa*, the form of God as time. This form displayed the fate of those on the battlefield: everyone except the Pāṇḍavas would be destroyed. Because this vision was so ghastly, it unnerved Arjuna. His alarm was all the more so because this destructive vision was utterly unexpected. When he had asked to see the universal form, it was primarily so that Kṛṣṇa could visually depict His glories, specifically those glories Arjuna had described in the *Gītā’s* previous chapter. Essentially, he wanted aids for increasing his remembrance of Kṛṣṇa. But the sudden change in the nature of the vision from showing divine majesty to showing massive devastation left him understandably alarmed. Thus, what he asked to be identified was this unfamiliar feature in the vision before him. And that’s why Kṛṣṇa answered by identifying that form as time (11.32). *The Only Prayer in the Gītā* Prayers are a natural and prominent feature amid human-divine interactions. Yet they don’t occur much in the *Bhagavad-gītā*, even though it is a human-divine interaction. Why this absence? Because the Gītā is a conversation centered on a philosophical search for the truth, and Arjuna and Kṛṣṇa already have an intimate friendly relationship that frequently overshadows the usual prayerful mode of human-divine interaction. Nonetheless, one section of the *Gītā* features Arjuna’s prayers—and that too in a highly reverential mode. This section of eleven prayers (11.36–46) occurs immediately after Arjuna realizes who his friend is: not just the all-pervading divinity manifest as the universal form but also the all-devouring divinity manifest as omnipotent time. Prayer is a spontaneous human response on encountering the awe-inspiring splendor of God. Naturally, Arjuna exhibits this response to the theophany of the universal form. He wants to offer his obeisance to this form as we might do on beholding the deity in a temple. But he perceives that the universal form is present everywhere, on all sides; therefore he offers hundreds of obeisances in all directions (11.40). He also fervently apologizes for his previous overfamiliar way of dealing while interacting with Kṛṣṇa as a friend (11.41–44). Do Arjuna’s prayers alter the *Gītā’s* mood? Contextually, yes; overall, no. Yes because these prayers are an integral part of the revelation of the universal form, which largely features the mood of awe and reverence. No because that mood doesn’t go beyond this chapter. Arjuna’s newfound reverence for Kṛṣṇa doesn’t prevent him from continuing to ask pertinent questions, and Kṛṣṇa doesn’t use His awe-inspiring revelation to force Arjuna to submit to His will. The philosophical discussion continues over the next seven chapters and culminates in Arjuna’s freely chosen resolve to harmonize with Kṛṣṇa’s will (18.73). *Arjuna’s Request to Stop the Vision* Toward the end of the *Bhagavad-gītā’s* eleventh chapter, when Kṛṣṇa’s revelation of His universal form turns too fearsome for Arjuna to bear, Arjuna requests Kṛṣṇa to stop that vision. Though this request of Arjuna’s might have been initially triggered by fear, it is fueled primarily by a far higher motive: love. His fear had been allayed when Kṛṣṇa had assured Arjuna (11.33) that the kāla-rūpa would not destroy him (or his brothers). It was love that had motivated Arjuna to ask Kṛṣṇa to show His universal form. To more fully manifest Kṛṣṇa’s glory for the world to know, Arjuna wanted Kṛṣṇa to demonstrate His verbal declaration that He sustains the entire universe (10.42). And Kṛṣṇa had shown His expanse across cosmic space and His dominance over cosmic time. Once Arjuna’s purpose had been thus served, he no longer had any interest in that universal form; he loved Kṛṣṇa and naturally wanted Kṛṣṇa to manifest Himself in a personable form he could lovingly relate with (11.45), not in a blazing form he could barely see. Arjuna’s mood is echoed in Śrīla Prabhupāda’s alluding to the universal form as “a godless display of opulences” (11.8, Purport). When God Himself is displaying His opulence, how can that display be considered godless? Because devotees like Arjuna and Prabhupāda are attracted to the opulences of Kṛṣṇa that stimulate and facilitate personal interactions with Him. Devotees can’t see in the opulences of the universal form the God they love, because opulences that feature only might and light are not conducive to such reciprocation . Hence, Prabhupāda deems such opulence godless, and Arjuna desires to see that form no more. *The Most Special Form* The universal form revealed by Kṛṣṇa in the *Bhagavad-gītā’s* eleventh chapter is a stunning sight. Yet Kṛṣṇa declares that His two-handed form is so rare and elusive that even the gods (devatās) long to see it (11.52). Can’t the gods see Kṛṣṇa’s form when He descends to the world? Not exactly, because they don’t always see (understand) Kṛṣṇa; they sometimes mistake Him to be an ordinary human being. Interestingly, Kṛṣṇa reveals His four-handed Viṣṇu form briefly while returning from His universal form to His two-handed form (11.50). The gods know that Viṣṇu form as the supreme divinity who maintains the universe. They petition Viṣṇu whenever confronted with an unmanageable cosmic disturbance. But even when He responds, they don’t always get to see Him; they merely get to know His plan through their leader, Brahmā. Thus even the Viṣṇu form is rarely seen by the gods. And the Kṛṣṇa form is declared to be so rarely seen as to evoke longing among them. Why is that? Viṣṇu is like God in the office, and Kṛṣṇa is like God at home: same person, different personalities. And because God is omnipresent, He can be present both in the office and at home simultaneously. On the few occasions when the gods, as cosmic administrators, get to see God, they see His office form, practically never His home form. Hence their longing, especially when they understand what is special about Kṛṣṇa’s form: Kṛṣṇa as God manifests a personability, reciprocity, and intimacy that no other manifestation of God does. While reverting to His two-handed form from His universal form, Kṛṣṇa reminds Arjuna of his special fortune to be able to relate regularly with such a rarely seen form. More appealing than God’s omnipresent form, which evokes awed submission, is His humanlike form, which inspires loving reciprocation. *Caitanya Caraṇa Dāsa serves full time at ISKCON Chowpatty, Mumbai. He is a BTG associate editor and the author of more than twenty-five books. He has two websites: gitadaily.com and thespiritualscientist.com (the source for BTG’s “Q&A”).* Monster Mother *The first demon to attack Kṛṣṇa represents pseudo gurus who destroy young spiritual lives.* by Gaurāṅga Darśana Dāsa When we are sincere in seeking the shelter of Kṛṣṇa, He will divert us from fake *gurus* and direct us toward authentic *gurus* of *bhakti*. Lord Kṛṣṇa displays His mercy to an unimaginable extent in Vrindavan, His divine abode, which accompanies Him when He enacts His pastimes on earth. For example, when He as present here five thousand years ago, He gave the position of a mother to a monster who came to kill Him. She was Pūtanā, a rākṣasī, a cannibal whose business was to search for infants, kill them, and suck their blood. She represents the fake guru or the fickle mind that distracts spiritual seekers from the goal of *bhakti-yoga*. *Uninvited yet Unobstructed* As a witch accustomed to black arts, Pūtanā the baby-snatcher flew in the sky and landed in Gokula (Vrindavan). She had been deputed by evil Kaṁsa to kill babies born in the previous ten days, as he had learned that the child destined to kill him had just been born. Although ugly, Pūtanā had the power to change her form into that of a beautiful woman, which she did before entering Gokula. Seeing her, the innocent women there thought that the goddess of fortune had come to see her husband, Nārāyaṇa, who was being worshiped in the house of Nanda Mahārāja. Everyone trusted her spontaneously, beyond doubt. Her heart was fierce and cruel, but she presented herself like a very affectionate mother. She was therefore like a sharp sword in a soft sheath. Pūtanā entered Nanda Mahārāja’s house without anyone’s permission but also without obstruction. Overwhelmed by her beauty and her apparently motherly love, even Yaśodā and Rohiṇī didn’t stop her. She went into the inner chambers and saw baby Kṛṣṇa sleeping in bed, His unlimited power covered like fire under ashes. As if afraid of her, He closed His eyes. Pūtanā understood that the child wasn’t ordinary, but, bent upon fulfilling her purpose, she took on her lap the person who was to be her own end, just as a fool places a sleeping snake on his lap, thinking it to be a rope. The fierce rākṣasī had smeared a dangerous poison on her breast to kill Kṛṣṇa, and she started feeding her breast milk to Him. The poison was so intense that even touching it could cause death. Kṛṣṇa took hold of her breast, squeezed it hard with His tender yet thunderboltlike hands, and sucked out both the poison and her life. Though Kṛṣṇa presents Himself as an infant as a part of His pastimes, His powers remain the same. However powerful a demon may be, he or she cannot overpower God. Kṛṣṇa manifested anger toward Pūtanā because she had planned to kill many children of Gokula. The power of His anger sucked out her impure and evil propensities along with her life, just as someone with an axe cuts down a tree. Kṛṣṇa’s anger, however, was temporary, because it got transformed into the greatest mercy within no time. His anger is only to rectify and reform demoniac people, not to take revenge on them. As the supreme well-wisher of all, His ultimate disposition toward anyone is mercy. Pūtanā screamed out in severe pain, “Please leave me! Get away from me!” Perspiring, her eyes wide open and her arms and legs flailing, she cried loudly again and again. As all directions vibrated, people fell down, fearing that thunderbolts were about to fall upon them. She could not maintain her disguise as a beautiful woman and reverted to her original form as a witch. Everyone realized that she was a rākṣasī. No one can perpetually control or cheat people. One’s power ultimately gets nullified by higher powers, and one’s real colors get revealed to the world. *Punished but Purified* Those who want to harm God or godly people are themselves ruined. Thus Pūtanā lost her life. She fell down in the pasture and smashed all the trees within twelve miles. (These trees were part of a garden belonging to Kaṁsa.) It was remarkable that only the trees were crushed and not the village’s houses or cowsheds. Adult gopīs rushed to see what had happened to infant Kṛṣṇa. They found Him fearlessly playing on Pūtanā’s huge body and immediately picked Him up. The simple-hearted gopīs then took precautions and performed rituals to invoke protection for the child Kṛṣṇa. Mother Yaśodā gave Kṛṣṇa her milk and then laid Him in His bed. By Kṛṣṇa’s touch, Pūtanā’s body was sanctified, and she was freed of all sinful reactions and material contamination. When her body was being burnt by the Vrajavāsīs, the smoke that emanated was fragrant like aguru incense. Kṛṣṇa’s transcendental touch spiritualizes matter and purifies the bodies and hearts of even the most wicked demons. *Reward for an Imitation Offering* Pūtanā always hankered for the blood of infants, and she desired to kill Kṛṣṇa. Although Kṛṣṇa disapproved of Pūtanā’s attitude, He rewarded her for pretending to have the sentiments of a mother. She imitated the dress and emotions of a mother, but her intent was most malicious. Kṛṣṇa’s sucking her breast and embracing her body, just as a child does with his mother, was also an imitation. But because of this imitation, Kṛṣṇa elevated her to the position of a nurse and maidservant to assist mother Yaśodā in Goloka Vṛndāvana. How can one find a person more merciful than Kṛṣṇa? In this connection, Uddhava, an exalted devotee and cousin of Lord Kṛṣṇa, praises Him as follows: > aho bakī yaṁ stana-kāla-kūṭaṁ > jighāṁsayāpāyayad apy asādhvī > lebhe gatiṁ dhātry-ucitāṁ tato ’nyaṁ > kaṁ vā dayāluṁ śaraṇaṁ vrajema “Alas, how shall I take shelter of one more merciful than Him [Lord Kṛṣṇa], who granted the position of mother to a she-demon [Pūtanā] although she was unfaithful and she prepared deadly poison to be sucked from her breast?” *(Bhāgavatam* 3.2.23) Kṛṣṇa’s nature is to find some opportunity to show His mercy even on demoniac people. If anyone contacts Kṛṣṇa somehow or other, even with a negative attitude, Kṛṣṇa purifies that person and bestows His causeless mercy. If Pūtanā could attain such a result by neglectfully and enviously making an offering to Kṛṣṇa, what is to be said of mother Yaśodā, the gopīs, and the cows, who for His satisfaction offered their milk to Kṛṣṇa with sincerity, affection, love, and joy? Sukadeva Gosvāmī, the great speaker of *Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam*, glorifies Lord Kṛṣṇa’s unparalleled mercy in this way: > padbhyāṁ bhakta-hṛdi-sthābhyāṁ > vandyābhyāṁ loka-vanditaiḥ > aṅgaṁ yasyāḥ samākramya > bhagavān api tat-stanam > yātudhāny api sā svargam > avāpa jananī-gatim > kṛṣṇa-bhukta-stana-kṣīrāḥ > kim u gāvo ’numātaraḥ “The Supreme Personality of Godhead, Kṛṣṇa, is always situated within the core of the heart of the pure devotee, and He is always offered prayers by such worshipable personalities as Lord Brahmā and Lord Śiva. Because Kṛṣṇa embraced Pūtanā’s body with great pleasure and sucked her breast, although she was a great witch she attained the position of a mother in the transcendental world and thus achieved the highest perfection. What then is to be said of the cows whose nipples Kṛṣṇa sucked with great pleasure and who offered their milk very jubilantly with affection exactly like that of a mother?” *(Bhāgavatam* 10.6.37–38) Service rendered to Lord Kṛṣṇa, whether directly or indirectly, knowingly or unknowingly, becomes successful. The Lord’s mercy is unparalleled, unimaginable, inconceivable, and beyond human logic. *Pūtanā’s Previous Life* According to the Garga-saṁhitā, in her previous life Pūtanā was Ratnamālā, the daughter of Bali Mahārāja (Brahma-vaivarta Purāṇa mentions that she was Bali’s sister). Seeing the charming form of Lord Vāmana as a dwarf brāhmaṇa boy in Bali’s sacrifice, Ratnamālā felt for the Lord a mother’s love for her son. She thought, “What a wonderful boy? If I had a beautiful son like Him, then I would offer Him my milk.” The Lord sanctioned her spontaneous desire. However, when Vāmanadeva took away the entire kingdom of Bali, Ratnamālā’s loving mood changed into one of hatred. “If I have him as my son,” she thought, “I shall kill him by feeding him poison!” Thus at the end of Dvāpara-yuga she became Pūtanā, and the Lord allowed her to fulfill her desire to feed Him poison But she couldn’t kill him even though she tried, and by Lord Kṛṣṇa’s touch she attained liberation. Pūtanā had two brothers, named Bakāsura and Aghāsura, who later also attacked Kṛṣṇa in Vrindavan. Kṛṣṇa kindly liberated them too. *What Does Pūtanā Represent?* Śrīla Prabhupāda quoted the following verse from the Purāṇas to describe the rarity of a bona fide *guru*. > guravo bahavaḥ santi > śiṣya-vittāpahārakāḥ > durlabhaḥ sad-gurur devī > śiṣya-santāpa-hārakaḥ “O Devī, there are many *gurus* who are expert in plundering the wealth of their disciples. But it is very difficult to find a bona fide guru who can remove the miseries of the disciple.” Pūtanā appeared as a loving mother externally but was a dangerous demon internally. Thus she represents a pseudo guru, or a so-called teacher who seems to be genuine but is actually inauthentic and deviant. Pseudo *gurus* may appear in multiple forms. Instead of teaching their students pure *bhakti*, they teach them about sense gratification or impersonal liberation. They even misinterpret the scriptures to suit their own concocted ideologies, which they teach to common people in the name of spirituality. Those who wish to be cheated will come in contact with such pseudo *gurus* because they do not aspire to follow a true spiritual path but just want to make a show of spirituality to pursue their material goals. Pseudo *gurus* and their followers both miss the opportunity to uplift and purify themselves in the human form of life. *Let’s consider three types of pseudo gurus.* 1. Teachers who favor sense gratification (bhukti). Some money and basic enjoyment are the common needs of people in this world. We should responsibly earn our livelihood by honest means and live happily, abiding by the laws of nature. But being greedy, foolish people desire excessive material wealth and undue enjoyment, and to attain money and pleasure, they seek *gurus* who suggest shortcuts that only seem religious or spiritual. These fake *gurus* often seek wealth and enjoyment for themselves by way of the ignorant masses who approach them for the same. They misdirect such people with *mantras* or rituals for attaining material wealth, fame, influence, and so on. However, ultimately all material prosperity is temporary and can be lost at any moment. 2. Teachers who favor liberation (mukti). Some people are frustrated with sense gratification and thus develop spiritual inclinations. Unfortunately they sometimes approach *gurus* who direct them toward impersonal liberation. These *gurus* teach detachment from material enjoyment and emphasize liberation (mokṣa), i.e., merging into the effulgence of God (Brahman), as all in all. However, detachment from material enjoyment has to be accompanied by attachment to spiritual enjoyment. And the ultimate spiritual enjoyment of the soul is in the eternal activity of loving service (*bhakti*) to Kṛṣṇa, and not just merging into His effulgence to be inactive. Thus *gurus* who direct people toward impersonal liberation cheat them and deprive them of their real fortune of the loving company of God in His eternal abode. 3. The distracted mind. Sometimes one’s materially contaminated mind also acts as a pseudo *guru*. The mind carries millions of material impressions from past lives and is the storehouse of unlimited material desires for selfish enjoyment. The mind presents mundane reasoning and manifests as a so-called spiritual guide within. Trusting the deviant and distracted mind, a spiritual seeker gives in to its desires and obsessions. The right course of action recommended for a devotee, however, is to sharpen one’s intelligence with spiritual knowledge presented in the scriptures. With deliberate spiritual intelligence one must control the fickle mind, focus it on one’s spiritual practices, and thus come closer to God. Sincere spiritual seekers must diligently protect themselves from falling into the clutches of pseudo *gurus* who manifest outwardly and inwardly. And one must seek shelter of the real *gurus*, who appear inwardly as the Supersoul (Kṛṣṇa as Paramātmā in our hearts) and outwardly as pure devotees. One must learn the science of *bhakti* from pure devotees who are bona fide teachers, or *ācāryas*. If we are sincere in seeking shelter of Kṛṣṇa, He will divert us from fake *gurus* and direct us toward authentic *gurus* of *bhakti*. Under the guidance of such *gurus*, we can easily attain the lotus feet of Kṛṣṇa in His eternal abode. *This article is based on *Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam*, Canto 10, chapter 6, and the commentaries on that chapter by Śrīla Prabhupāda and Śrīla Viśvanātha Cakravartī. It is also inspired by Śrīla Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura’s Śrī Caitanya-śikṣāmṛta and an article by Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī published in the Harmonist (January 1932). *Gaurāṅga Darśana Dāsa, a disciple of His Holiness Rādhānāth Swami, is dean of the Bhaktivedanta Vidyapitha at ISKCON Govardhan Eco Village (GEV), outside Mumbai. He is the author of twenty-seven books, including the Subodhini series of study guides, children’s books such as* Bhagavatam *Tales, and other self-enrichment books. He conducts online and residential scriptural courses for both children and adults. He also oversees the deity worship at GEV.* Hidden Curricula and Aural Reception *Aspiring devotees must be ever vigilant to protect themselves from subtle messages harmful to the practice of bhakti-yoga.* By Harivaṁśa Dāsa *Diagnosing impurities in the process of hearing.* What do teachers teach? Is it only the items of an intended syllabus—a collection of information, lessons, and learning activities? No. It is generally something more. Along with the explicit curriculum, students pick up unwritten and unofficial—often unintended—norms, values, beliefs, and perspectives transmitted through the teacher in a particular social environment. Educators call it the “hidden curriculum.” For instance, in a course on world history, students learn the timeline of various events which shaped the twentieth century. This is termed the explicit curriculum. However, depending on their own as well as their teacher’s biases, students may develop affinity for or prejudice towards one particular race, color, or nationality. This would be the hidden curriculum. Often, more than the list of items in the intended syllabus of explicit curriculum, learners tend to absorb the beliefs and perspectives of the hidden curriculum. It is as though their receptivity is better tuned towards the latter. And this generally happens without any intellectual assessment. It occurs almost imperceptibly. Why? *Bhagavad-gītā* (3.42), in describing the psychophysical anatomy of human existence, says that the intelligence and the mind are subtler and finer than the senses. First our senses perceive aural or visual information. Then the subtler and finer organs of intelligence and mind sift continuously through the various layers of received aural or visual input. Ideally, intelligence should be the discriminating faculty because it is situated at a level higher than the mind, our emotional faculty. But in our conditioned state, the mind reigns supreme. “As a strong wind sweeps away a boat on the water, even one of the roaming senses on which the mind focuses can carry away a man's intelligence.” (Gītā 2.67) Thus, before the intelligence can even analyze, argue, and attest, the mind—impelled by the existing storehouse of saṁskāras, or impressions—latches on to one or the other of the sifted layers of beliefs, views, and perspectives. Either new impressions are created or previous ones strengthened. The hidden curriculum thus gets successfully downloaded into our psychophysical systems. Since the hidden curriculum is connected with our minds, it stays with us a long time. Thus, what one holds prominent in life might be due more to the impressions influenced by the hidden curriculum than by the data dictated by the explicit curriculum. *Ideas Generate Consequences* This phenomenon is not restricted to the field of teaching. In almost every stream of life, such as politics, entertainment, and sports, hidden curriculum has a significant bearing on its recipient. Furthermore, it may not always be unintentional. In fact, in our world of clever and subtle marketing and advertising, hidden curriculum has become an intended industry, a well-crafted niche for individual or collective agendas. Hence, newspapers, books, movies, people, and the internet carry their own set of hidden curricula with them all the time. Certainly this is not very wholesome. Unless one is alert with a keen sense of discrimination, it is only a matter of time before repeated exposure to these floating ideas and beliefs from people or the media replace the preexisting ones in the recipient’s mind. And then these absorbed ideas generate their own consequences. Take the example of modern technological education, which claims to cruise in a secular course by not dealing with matters of tradition and religion. Yet it carries beneath its veneer an antireligious ethos of the infallibility of human control over nature, where there is no need of a supreme controller, or God. This hidden curriculum trickles almost unfailingly into the mind of a young student just beginning his or her engagement with the competitive world of education and vocation. Hence, no wonder why so many students with a religious upbringing dispense with the idea of God after just months in a college or university. Not only at the individual level, but also at the collective level, society sees consequences. The widespread distaste in our current century for any affiliation with tradition, religious authority, and absolute truth did not just spring out of thin air. Yes, there were leadership abuses. But in part this distaste can also be traced to a series of ideas, such as those of Marxism and Existentialism, posited by European philosophers in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Although it might have taken decades to trickle down, now these ideas have almost become solidified in the twenty-first-century mind. *Hidden Obstacles in Spiritual Life* Spiritual practitioners, including those on the *bhakti-yoga* path, are certainly not immune to this phenomenon. Factually the danger to the recipient here is several notches higher. This is because much of the hidden curriculum caught from society or social media is about either material enjoyment or disbelief in spiritual principles, both of which go against the very grain of spiritual life. Furthermore, spiritual practice in the current age has no longer remained a solitary and passive affair. Most practitioners have responsible jobs and positions in society. Daily they have perhaps more active engagement with the professional world than with their spiritual communities. Being away from a spiritual atmosphere already dwindles the enthusiasm to practice spirituality. In addition, the active handshake with the material energy lets in doubts, views, and ideas which if not addressed may altogether gnaw away any spiritual inclination whatsoever. Then there are spiritual activists who in a mood of compassion actively share spirituality with society. Their general principle of yukta-vairāgya, or appropriate renunciation, is to utilize the creations of science and technology such as social-media platforms and communication portals in the service of God and humanity. Such portals are also known to enhance entanglement with matter because while their utilization for the service of humanity is like removing a thorn with a thorn, there is danger of both thorns settling in. Take the example of Kṛṣṇa devotees who as a writers subscribe to nondevotional reading materials for ideation and inspiration. Even after being sure that there is no explicit content of vulgarity and violence unwholesome to their spiritual contemplation and practice, they cannot rule out the presence of certain hidden curricula at loggerheads with the basic tenets of faith in Kṛṣṇa and His devotees. The aspiring devotee may end up being enamored by the flowery language, the sophistry of composition, and other skills and techniques, developing disproportionate affinity for the author and his or her trade. The conduit is now wide open for the download of hidden curricula. For it is not only a receptive ear, but mostly importantly a wide-open heart, into which the unspoken curricula are dumped and consequently stored. This caution has a precedent in *Bhagavad-gītā* itself. In the first chapter, Arjuna has laid out his conundrum and is ready to be educated in the sublime science of the self. Right at the outset, in the next chapter, Kṛṣṇa warns Arjuna that he has to avoid getting caught by the flowery language of the Vedas (2.43) and must strive to get past it (2.53) to reach transcendence, the real goal. *A Bewildered Servant* In fact, a recipient whose ear is not well trained and well guarded can be dissuaded from the path of spiritual perfection even in the association of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. At least one such example stands out in the pages of *Śrī* *Caitanya-caritāmṛta*, the book on the life and teachings of Śri Caitanya Mahāprabhu, the combined incarnation of *Śrī* Rādhā and *Śrī* Kṛṣṇa, who appeared in this age as a devotee to show the ideal life of pure spiritual absorption. Balabhadra Bhaṭṭācārya acted as Mahāprabhu’s assistant during His only visit to Vrindavan. It was not that Balabhadra Bhaṭṭācārya was unaware that Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu was the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Kṛṣṇa Himself. Yet on at least one recorded occasion he got bewildered by the repeated claims of local Vrindavan residents that they had seen Kṛṣṇa Himself appearing in Kālīya-daha, or Kālīya Lake. Residents said that Kṛṣṇa had appeared again in Kālīya Lake and that at night He was dancing on the multiple hoods of the serpent Kāliya, which were bedecked with blazing jewels. (*Caitanya-caritāmṛta, Madhya* 18.94) This they repeatedly told Mahāprabhu after they came back from visiting Kālīya-daha for three successive nights. They were convinced. Mahāprabhu just laughed. Balabhadra Bhaṭṭācārya requested Mahāprabhu to be excused from his services for one night so that at least once he could go and see Kṛṣṇa face to face. But Mahāprabhu chided him, saying that although he was a learned scholar, he was being swayed by the statements of ignorant men. Mahāprabhu told him that the scriptures reveal that Kṛṣṇa does not appear in Kali-yuga in such an explicit way. It was better for Bhaṭṭācārya to just control himself. *(Caitanya-caritāmṛta*, *Madhya* 18.99–102) The next morning, Mahāprabhu’s assessment was vindicated when some respectable gentlemen explained the whole scenario. In fact, it was only a fisherman, who would light a torch at night to catch fish in Kālīya Lake. The darkness and the waves generated the illusion. The boat became Kāliya, the fisherman Kṛṣṇa, and the torch jewels on Kāliya’s hood. *(Caitanya-caritāmṛta*, *Madhya* 18.104–106). What happened with Balabhadra Bhaṭṭācāryā is an illustration of hidden curriculum at work. In his reverence, he would have opened his heart to the understanding which simple residents of Vraja developed toward this episode of Kṛṣṇa’s supposed new incarnation. Mahāprabhu himself addressed him as a learner scholar, and therefore Balabhadra Bhaṭṭācāryā should have known that Krṣṇa’s incarnation was not to be expected in this way, that too in Kali-yuga. During their journey to Vrindavan through Jharikhanda Forest, he had seen the divine potency of Mahāprabhu: His mere glance and words had made wild animals dance in the ecstasy of chanting the divine holy names. Never before was it heard or seen that tigers and deer could embrace, kiss, and wildly chant the holy names. Furthermore, Balabhadra Bhaṭṭācārya had himself eulogized Mahāprabhu as none other than the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Kṛṣṇa. *(Caitanya-caritāmṛta*, *Madhya* 17.77–80) Where did all that evaporate? One can surmise that by and by, the continuous exposure to misinformation bewildered Bhaṭṭācāryā’s original understanding. Mahāprabhu, on the other hand, was not at all moved by the foolish arguments of the locals about the reappearance of Kṛṣṇa. So not only did Bhaṭṭācāryā forget the transcendental position of Mahāprabhu, but he did not even care to check with Mahāprabhu about the truth of the situation. It was only Mahāprabhu who stopped him from acting foolishly. *Guarded Aural Reception* Thus a spiritual practitioner must exercise much caution. The conduit for the hidden curriculum is a receptive ear. Also received through the ear are the three basic aspects of transcendental knowledge: how we relate to the world of divinity *(sambandha-jñāna)*, or knowledge of the connection; what we do to attain that spiritual reality *(abhidheya-jñāna)*, or knowledge of the process; and what exactly is the desired objective *(prayojana-jñāna)*, or knowledge of the supreme goal. For a progressive spiritual march, therefore, a sincere practitioner needs unadulterated information in all three aspects. Only then can these be applied without doubts or ambiguity. And it is only then that the process of hearing manifests its true potency. Hence, there is a need to guard aural reception from the unintentional and intentional varieties of hidden curricula which adulterate the pure and sublime *sambandha-jñāna*, *abhidheya-jñāna*, and *prayojana-jñāna* received through scriptures. *Diagnostic Questions* Right questions lead to right diagnosis. To diagnose whether we’ve been infected by hearing traces of the hidden curricula of material enjoyment and spiritual doubts, we can ask the following two straightforward questions: Is there a gap in my contact with transcendental vibrations? One of the telltale signs of the existence of anything other than strong spiritual faith and inclination towards spiritual life in our hearts is dwindling contact with transcendental vibrations. The perfect triangulated process of contacting transcendental vibration—hearing from the spiritual master *(guru)*, well-situated saintly persons *(sādhu)*, and authorized scriptures *(śāstra)—is* the very bedrock of our spiritual life. In the words of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, such hearing and then subsequent chanting *(śravaṇādi)* is like watering the seed of the creeper of devotional service. *(Caitanya-caritāmṛta*, *Madhya* 19.155). Offenses hinder the practitioner’s proclivity towards hearing and chanting, as does adulteration by the hidden curricula of material enjoyment and spiritual confusion. This diagnosis itself hints at the solution. Practitioners need to significantly increase their contact with the simple yet powerful devotional process of hearing and chanting. They can certainly do this through the media of their own preference—writing, reading, hearing, singing, deity worship—and themselves see the reversals and wonders. *Whose association do I pine for?* The second telltale sign is the shift in our preference in the matter of association. It is rightly said that we can know a person from the association he or she keeps or desires. Humans are social beings. Like birds of the same feather which flock together, humans of the same nature associate together. Even introverts and recluses, if not always, once in a while desire to find their type to be with. We become what we associate with. More things are imperceptibly caught than explicitly taught. In our dealings with the material energy to conserve our bodies, even spiritual practitioners need to associate with professional and social worlds. But in what proportion? We must ask ourselves: Is it just the modicum in order to do the needful, or is it way too much? Hence in diagnosing the effects of hidden curricula, we can honestly check our inclination to associate. Does our heart long to associate with like-minded devotees? Do we long to participate with enthusiasm in spiritual retreats, festivals, and discussions? Or is it more out of formality, because our heart is really somewhere else? Here too diagnosis hints at a remedy: that we remake our association. In conclusion, like electromagnetic waves, hidden curricula are all around. And they are being released with enchanting levels of persuasion. If the *bhakti-yoga* practitioner casts caution to the wind, the potential for bewilderment in even the maturest of persons in the best association cannot be ruled out. Eternal vigilance in terms of hearing is the symptom of a serious spiritual practitioner. *Harivaṁśa Dāsa is an author, translator, and researcher. He has held a full-time faculty appointment in the School of Technology and Computer Science (STCS) at Tata Institute of Fundamental Research (TIFR), Mumbai, and affiliate appointments at the University of Washington and Stanford University.* The Song of the *Bhagavad-gītā* *Book Excerpt: Gītār-gān: Singing the Song Divine* An English versification of Śrīla Prabhupāda’s Bengali versification of the *Gītā*. by His Divine Grace A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada translation by Kalakaṇṭha Dāsa and Swarūpa Kṛṣṇa Dāsa [Excerpted from Gītār-gān: Singing the Song Divine, available at sweetsongbooks.com, amazon.com, bookdepository.com, and the Kṛṣṇa.com Store.] In 1962, working alone with a manual typewriter, Śrīla Prabhupāda took time off from his translation of the massive *Śrimad-Bhāgavatam* to condense the *Bhagavad-gītā’s* seven hundred verses into simple rhyming Bengali couplets. This book, called Gītār-gān, was first published in full in 1973 and is still widely popular throughout Bengal and Bangladesh. To further reveal this gem in English, Svarūpa Kṛṣṇa Dāsa of Kolkata painstakingly translated each word of Gītār Gān to English. Using those synonyms, I converted the Bengali couplets to English. Our combined efforts comprise the first full translation of Gītār-gān in English. If you’re familiar with *Bhagavad-gītā* As It Is, you’ll recognize dozens of fresh nuances and insights in *Gītār-gān*. To the extent that we have accurately presented it, *Gītār-gān* will uplift you through the brilliant heart and mind of Śrīla Prabhupāda, an exemplary teacher and lover of the *Bhagavad-gītā* who wanted the Gītā read, heard, and sung.—Kalakaṇṭha Dāsa *Chapter 15: The Yoga of the Supreme Person (puruṣottama-yoga)* > 1) śrī-bhagavān kahilen: > veda-vāṇī karma-kāṇḍī saṁsāra āśraye I > nānā yoni prāpta haya kabhu mukta naya II 1 > saṁsāra ye vṛkṣa sei aśvattha avyaya I > ūrdhva-mūla adhaḥ-śākhā nāhi tāra kṣaya II 2 > puṣpita vedera chanda se brahmera patra I > mohita se veda-vākya jagata sarvatra II 3 *śrī-bhagavān*—th*e* Supr*e*m*e* P*e*rsonality of Godh*e*ad; *kahil*e*n*—said; *v*e*da-vāṇī*—cont*e*nts of th*e* V*e*das; *karma-kāṇḍī*—on*e* who pursu*e*s fruitiv*e* activiti*e*s; *saṁsāra*—lif*e*; *āśray*e**—in taking sh*e*lt*e*r; *nānā*—various; *yoni*—sp*e*ci*e*s; *prāpta*—attain*e*d; *haya*—th*e*r*e* is; *kabhu*—*e*v*e*r; *mukta*—lib*e*rat*e*d; *naya*—not; *saṁsāra*—lif*e*; y*e*—that; *vṛkṣa*—tr*e**e*; s*e*i—that only; *aśvattha*—*banyan* tr*e**e*; *avyaya*—*e*t*e*rnal; *ūrdhva-mūla*—roots abov*e*; *adhaḥ*—downwards; *śākhā*—branch*e*s; *nāhi*—not; *tāra*—of that; *kṣaya*—d*e*struction; *puṣpita*—flow*e*ry; v*e*d*e*ra—of th*e* V*e*das; *chanda*—hymns; s*e*—such; brahm*e*ra—of th*e* Brahmajyoti, th*e* *e*n*e*rgy of th*e* Lord; *patra*—l*e*av*e*s; *mohita*—und*e*r illusion; s*e*—that; v*e*da—of th*e* V*e*das; *vākya*—topics; *jagata*—univ*e*rs*e*; *sarvatra*—*e*v*e*rywh*e*r*e*. Lord Kṛṣṇa continued: Those men who read the Vedas with the goal of fruitive gain shall reappear in lower species, ever to remain. Their life is like an endless banyan, never falling down, its roots protruding skyward and its branches to the ground. The flowery Vedic hymns comprise this tree’s confusing leaves that fabricate illusions universally believed. > 2) vṛkṣera se śākhāli ūrdhva adhaḥ-gati I > guṇera vaśete yāra yathā vidhi-mati II 4 > se vṛkṣera śākhā yata viṣayera bhoga I > nija karma anusāre yata bhava-roga II 5 > baddha-jīva ghure sei vṛkṣa ḍāle ḍāle I > manuṣya-loka se bhuñje nija karma-phale II 6 *vṛkṣ*e*ra*—of th*e* tr*e**e*; *s*e**—that; **śākhā*li*—branch*e*s; *ūrdhva*—upwards; *adhaḥ*—downward; *gati*—growth; *guṇ*e*ra*—of th*e* thr*e**e* mod*e*s of mat*e*rial natur*e*; *vaś*e*t*e**—und*e*r influ*e*nc*e*; *yāra*—tho*s*e** who; *yathā*—wh*e*n; *vidhi-mati*—as p*e*r rul*e*s; *s*e**—that; *vṛkṣ*e*ra*—of th*e* tr*e**e*; *śākhā*—branch*e*s; *y*ata**—as many; *viṣay*e*ra*—of th*e* obj*e*cts of th*e* *s*e**n*s*e**s; *bhoga*—*e*njoym*e*nt; *nija*—own; *karma*—activiti*e*s; *anusār*e**—according to; *y*ata**—as many; *bhava-roga*—mat*e*rial mi*s*e**ri*e*s; *baddha-jīva*—condition*e*d soul; *ghur*e**—wand*e*r; *s*e**i—that only; *vṛkṣa*—tr*e**e*; *ḍāl*e**—in branch; *ḍāl*e**—aft*e*r branch; *manuṣya-loka*—th*e* world of human soci*e*ty; *s*e**—that; bhuñj*e*—*e*njoy; *nija*—own; *karma*-phal*e*—in fruits of actions. With dictates from the modes of nature giving them nutrition, the branches from this tree extend in up and down positions. Each branch provides conditioned souls sense objects to enjoy along with many miseries they never can avoid. Conditioned souls meander through the branches of this tree pursuing worldly pleasure in mundane society. > 3, 4) kṣudra-buddhi manuṣya se sīmā nāhi pāya I > ananta ākāśe tāra ādi anta naya II 7 > kivā rūpa se vṛkṣera tāhā nāhi bujhe I > ananta-kālera madhye jīva yuddha yujhe II 8 > se aśvattha vṛkṣa haya sudṛḍha ye mūla I > se mūla kāṭite haya śata śata bhula II 9 > anāsakti eka astra se mūla kāṭite I > sei se ye dṛḍha astra saṁsāra jinite II 10 > kāṭiyā se vṛkṣa-mūla satyera sandhāna I > bhāgya-krame yāra haya tāte avasthāna II 11 > se yāya vaikuṇṭha-loke phire nāhi āse I > e vṛkṣera mūla yathā se puruṣa pāśe II 12 > se ādi puruṣe adya kara se prapatti I > janmādi se yāhā hate prakṛti pravṛtti II 13 kṣudra—small quantity; buddhi—intelligent; manuṣya—human being; se—that; sīmā—limit; nāhi—not; pāya—receive; ananta—no end; ākāśe—in the sky; tāra—of that; ādi—beginning; anta—end; naya—not; kivā—whatever; rūpa—form; se—that; vṛkṣera—of the tree; tāhā—such persons; nāhi—not; bujhe—understand; ananta—no end; kālera—of time; madhye—amidst; jīva—living being; yuddha—fight; yujhe—get engaged in; se—that; aśvattha—banyan; vṛkṣa—tree; haya—is; sudṛḍha—strong; ye—that; mūla—root; se—that; mūla—root; kāṭite—to cut; haya—there is; śata—thousands; śata—and thousands; bhula—of errors; anāsakti—detachment; eka—one; astra—weapon; se—that; mūla—root; kāṭite—to cut; sei—that only; se—such; ye—that; dṛḍha—strong; astra—weapon; saṁsāra—the world; jinite—to live; kāṭiyā—after cutting; se—that; vṛkṣa—tree; mūla—root; satyera—of truth; sandhāna—in search; bhāgya-krame—out of fortune; yāra—whose; haya—there is; tāte—in that; avasthāna—attainment; se—such person; yāya—goes; vaikuṇṭha-loke—in the spiritual planet called Vaikuṇṭha; phire—return; nāhi—not; āse—come; e—this; vṛkṣera—of tree; mūla—root; yathā—when; se—that; puruṣa—the Supreme Lord; pāśe—next to; se—such; ādi—primeval; puruṣe—in the Supreme Personality of Godhead; adya—seek; kara—do; se—that; prapatti—surrender; janmādi—creation and others; se—that; yāhā—whatever; hate—from; prakṛti—nature; pravṛtti—the beginning. As men of lesser intellect can neither see the end of endless skies above them nor from where the skies begin, conditioned souls cannot conceive the true form of this tree, condemning them to struggle in its grip perpetually. The roots of this great tree cannot be cut by any force and thousands of mistakes arise when fools attempt that course. The single weapon of detachment only can succeed in cutting down this strongly-rooted worldly banyan tree. On having cut this tree, the soul is fortunate and blessed to search out and attain reality and truthfulness. Such souls attain Vaikuntha planets, never to return, for God Himself is by this banyan’s root, they come to learn. And thus the wise surrender to the Lord who manifests all things at any time that anything at all exists . > 5) nirabhimāna nirmoha saṅga-doṣe mukta I > nityānitya buddhi yāra kāmanā nivṛtta II 14 > sukha duḥkha dvandva mukta jaḍa mūḍha naya I > vidhijña puruṣa pāya se pada avyaya II 15 nirabhimāna—without false prestige; nirmoha—without illusion; saṅga-doṣe—in faults of association; mukta—liberated; nityānitya—eternal and temporary; buddhi—intelligence; yāra—whose; kāmanā—desire, lust; nivṛtta—disassociated, detached; sukha—happiness; duḥkha—distress; dvandva—duality; mukta—liberated; jaḍa—gross; mūḍha—foolish; naya—not; vidhijña—knowledgeable; puruṣa—the Supreme Personality of Godhead; pāya—attain; se—that; pada—situation; avyaya—eternal. Released from false prestige, deceit, and bad association, detached from lust, discerning fixed and changing situations, the soul untouched by joy or sorrow leaves the worldly modes and reaches, in surrender, the eternal Lord’s abode. > 6) se ākāśe jyotirmaye sūrya vā śaśāṅka I > āvaśyaka nāhi tathā kimbā se pāvaka II 16 > sekhāne praveśa hale phire nāhi āse I > nitya-kāla mora dhāme se jana nivāse II 17 se—that; ākāśe—in the sky; jyotirmaye—illuminating; sūrya—sun; vā—or; śaśāṅka—moon; āvaśyaka—necessary; nāhi—not; tathā—there; kimbā—or; se—that; pāvaka—fire, electricity; sekhāne—there; praveśa—entry; hale—if happens; phire—return; nāhi—not; āse—come; nitya-kāla—forever; mora—My; dhāme—in planet; se—such; jana—person; nivāse—resides. No sunshine is required to illuminate that place, and nor is fire, voltage, or the moon in outer space. My infinite abode is such that if one enters in, one never wants to see a mundane residence again. > 7) yata jīva mora aṁśa nahe se apara I > sanātana tāra sattā jīva-loke ghora II 18 > ekhāne se mana āra indriya-bandhane I > karṣaṇa karaye kata prakṛtira sthāne II 19 yata—as many; jīva—living entities; mora—My; aṁśa—part and parcel; nahe—not; se—such beings; apara—of anyone else; sanātana—eternal; tāra—of such beings; sattā—nature; jīva-loke—in the world of conditioned life; ghora—dark; ekhāne—in this place; se—that; mana—mind; āra—and; indriya—senses; bandhane—in bondage; karṣaṇa—struggle; karaye—doing; kata—so much; prakṛtira—of material nature; sthāne—in place. The numberless eternal souls are spirit sparks of Mine, existing in this world where they are physically entwined. Their restless minds and senses keep them tightly wrapped and bound and struggling to find some joy where little can be found. > 8) bāra bāra kata deha se ye prāpta haya I > eka deha chāḍe āra anye praveśaya II 20 > vāyu gandha yathā yāya sthāna sthānāntare I > karma-phala sūkṣma sei deha dehāntare II 21 *b*āra**—again; *b*āra**—and again; *kat*a—so many; *deha*—bodies; *se*—such living entity; ye—that; *prāpta*—attains; *haya*—there is; *eka*—one; *deha*—body; *chāḍe*—leaves; *āra*—and; *anye*—in another; *praveśaya*—enters; *vāyu*—air; *gandha*—fragrance; *yathā*—just like; *yāya*—moves; *sthāna*—one place; *sthānāntare*—to another place; *karma-phala*—fruits of activities; *sūkṣma*—subtle; *se*i—that only; *deha*—body; *dehāntare*—at end of body. Accepting situations born from mother after mother, the fallen souls seek pleasure in one body or another. As wind moves many fragrances, the spirit soul collects conceptions of enjoyment in this body and the next. > 9) śarīrera anusāra śravaṇa darśana I > sparśana, rasana āra ghrāṇa vā manana II 22 > se śarīre jīva kare viṣaya sevana I > baddha-jīva kare sei saṁsāra bhramaṇa II 23 śarīrera—of the body; anusāra—according to; śravaṇa—hearing; darśana—vision; sparśana—touch; rasana—taste; āra—and; ghrāṇa—smell; vā—or; manana—think; se—that; śarīre—in the body; jīva—living entity; kare—do; viṣaya—objects of senses; sevana—service; baddha-jīva—conditioned soul; kare—do; sei—that only; saṁsāra—world; bhramaṇa—moving around. Enjoying mind and senses, with desires at the helm, the soul proceeds to see and taste and touch and hear and smell. Conditioned souls thus hanker for, according to their birth, a set of sensate objects as they roam about the Earth. > 10) mūḍha-loka nā vicāre ki bhāve ki haya I > utkrānti sthiti bhoga kāra vā kothāya II 24 > yāra jñāna-cakṣu āche gurura kṛpāya I > bhāgyavāna sei jana dekhivāre pāya II 25 *mūḍha-loka*—foolish people; *nā*—not; *vicāre*—judge; *ki*—how; *bhāve*—in method; *ki*—what; *haya*—there is; *utkrānti*—quitting; *sthiti*—situation; *bhoga*—enjoyment; *kāra*—whose; *vā*—or; *kothāya*—where; *yāra*—whose; *jñāna-cakṣu*—eyes of knowledge; *āche*—available; *gurura*—of a spiritual master; *kṛ*pāya**—by mercy; bhāgya*vā*na—fortunate; *sei*—such only; *jana*—person; dekhi*vā*re—to see; *pāya*—able. Repeated births and deaths are all these foolish souls attain. Enchanted by their bodies, they see nothing more to gain. But if one has a kindly *guru*, all of this can change, for birth and death are evident to one whose eyes are trained. > 11) kata yogī vaijñānika ceṣṭā bahu kare I > ātma-jñāna abhāvete vṛthā ghuri mare II 26 > kintu yevā ātma-jñānī ātmāvasthita I > dekhite samartha haya śuddha avahita II 27 *kata*—so many; *yogī*—transcendentalists; *vaijñānika*—scientific; *ceṣṭā*—endeavor; *bahu*—many; *kare*—do; *ātma-jñāna*—knowledge of self-realization; *abhāvete*—due to non-availability; *vṛthā*—unnecessary; *ghuri*—encircle; *mare*—die; *kintu*—but; *yevā*—when; *ātma-jñānī*—one who is self-realized; *ātmāvasthita*—situated in the self; *dekhite*—to see; *samartha*—qualified; *haya*—is; *śuddha*—pure; *avahita*—awareness. So many *yogis* use techniques that lack this point of view. Rebirth and death encircle them, no matter what they do. But those who are self-realized, whose consciousness is pure, begin to see the soul as their enlightenment matures. > 12) ei ye sūryera teja akhila jagate I > candrera kiraṇa kimbā āche bhāla-mate II 28 > āmāra prabhāva sei ābhāsa se haya I > āmi yāke ālo di-i se ālo pāya II 29 ei—this; ye—that; sūryera—of the sun; teja—splendor; akhila—whole; jagate—in the world; candrera—of the moon; kiraṇa—ray; kimbā—or; āche—situated; bhāla-mate –properly; āmāra—My; prabhāva—influence; sei—that only; ābhāsa—illuminated; se—that; haya—there is; āmi—I; yāke—whoever; ālo—enlightenment; di-i—provide; se—such being; ālo—enlightenment; pāya—receive. The endless, brilliant sunshine that pervades the whole creation, and all the splendid moonbeams in their proper situation, can only give their light because of My authority. The light of anyone enlightened also comes from Me. > 13) ei ye pṛthivī yathā vāyu-madhye bhāse I > āmāra se śakti dhare savete praveśe II 30 > āmi se auṣadhi yata poṣaṇa karite I > candra-rūpe raśmi-dāna kari se tāhāte II 31 ei—this; ye—that; pṛthivī—world; yathā—where; vāyu—air; madhye—within; bhāse—floats; āmāra—My; se—that; śakti—energy; dhare—holds; savete—in everything; praveśe—enters; āmi—I am; se—that; auṣadhi—herbs and vegetables; yata—as much; poṣaṇa—maintain; karite—to do; candra—moon; rūpe—in form; raśmi—ray of light; dāna—supply; kari—doing; se—that; tāhāte—in that. This planet and its atmosphere remain afloat in space due only to My energy and all-pervading grace. The many herbs and vegetables are able to survive because of rays of moonlight that I steadily supply. > 14) āmi vaiśvānara hai deha-mātra vasi I > prāṇāpāna vāyu-yoge bhakṣya dravya kaṣi II 32 āmi—I; vaiśvānara—My plenary portion as the digesting fire; hai—am; deha-mātra—the body only; vasi—situated; prāṇāpāna—the outgoing and the down-going energy; vāyu-yoge—due to interaction of air; bhakṣya—that which is eaten; dravya—foodstuff; kaṣi—digest. As well, I am the life air as it enters and retreats, enabling all beings to digest the food they eat. > 15) sabāra hṛdaye āmi, sanniviṣṭa antaryāmī, > āmā hate smṛti jñāna mana I > āmi se jāgāi kāre, āmi se bhulāi tāre, > āmā hate haya apohana II 33 > yata veda pṛthivīte, āmāra se tallāsete, > āmi hai saba veda-vedya I > āmi se vedānta-vit, āmi ye vedānta-kṛt, > vedāntera kathā śuna adya II 34 *sabāra*—of everybody; *hṛda*ye**—in the heart; *āmi*—I am; *sanniviṣṭa*—situated; *antaryāmī*—Supersoul; *āmā*—Me; *hate*—from; *smṛti*—remembrance; *jñāna*—knowledge; *mana*—mind; *āmi*—I am; *se*—that; *jāgāi*—make aware; *kāre*—someone; *āmi*—I; *se*—that; *bhulāi*—make forgetful; *tāre*—such being; *āmā*—Me; *hate*—from; *haya*—there is; a*pohana*—forgetfulness; *yata*—as many; *veda*—Veda; *pṛthivīte*—in the world; *āmā*ra—My; *se*—that; tallā*se*te—in *se*arch; *āmi*—I; *hai*—am; *saba*—all; *veda*-vedya—the knowable from the Vedas; *āmi*—I am; *se*—that; *vedānta-vit*—the knower of the Vedānta; *āmi*—I am; *ye*—that; *vedānta-kṛt*—the compiler of the Vedānta; *vedāntera*—of Vedānta; *kathā*—subject; *śuna*—hear; *adya*—now. Established deep in every heart, as Supersoul I then impart a person’s knowledge and their memory. I help a person recollect or force a person to forget. Forgetfulness itself has come from Me. In this world, all the Vedic texts direct the seeker to reflect and gradually come to knowing Me. Eventually I alone by all the Vedas can be known, for I compiled and know them. Listen, please. > 16) baddha mukta puruṣa se haya dvi-prakāra I > dui nāme paricita se kṣara akṣara II 35 > baddha jīva yata haya tāra kṣara nāma I > akṣara kūṭastha jīva nitya mukta-dhāma II 36 baddha—conditioned; mukta—liberated; puruṣa—living entities; se—such; haya—there is; dvi-prakāra—two types; dui—two; nāme—in names; paricita—known; se—such beings; kṣara—fallible; akṣara—infallible; baddha—conditioned; jīva—living entity; yata—as many; haya—there is; tāra—of such being; kṣara—fallible; nāma—called; akṣara—infallible; kūṭastha—in oneness; jīva—the living entity; nitya—always; mukta-dhāma—liberated abode. Each living entity exists in one of two positions; the free souls live in My abode, while others are conditioned. The liberated souls possess infallibility, while others remain fallible until they live with Me. > 17) tāhā hate ye uttama puruṣa pradhāna I > īśvara se paramātmā thāke sarvasthāna II 37 tāhā—these two; hate—from; ye—that; uttama—Supreme; puruṣa—Personality; pradhāna—main; īśvara—controller; se—such; paramātmā—Supersoul; thāke—resides; sarvasthāna—every place. Besides these two there is the Greatest Personality, the Supersoul, controlling and pervading everything. > 18) kṣara vā akṣara hate āmi se uttama I > ataeva ghoṣita nāma puruṣottama II 38 kṣara—fallible; vā—or; akṣara—infallible; hate—from; āmi—I am; se—that; uttama—transcendental; ataeva—therefore; ghoṣita—declared; nāma—name; puruṣottama—Supreme Person. Because I am that transcendental Personality, infallible and fallible do not apply to Me. > 19) ye more bujhila śreṣṭha se puruṣottama I > sakala sandeha chāḍi haila uttama II 39 > se jānila sarva veda nirmala hṛdaya I > he bhārata! sarva-bhāve se more bhajaya II 40 ye—one who; more—about Me; bujhila—understands; śreṣṭha—Supreme; se—such; puruṣottama—the Supreme Personality of Godhead; sakala—every; sandeha—doubt; chāḍi—leaving; haila—to be; uttama—topmost; se—such person; jānila—knows; sarva—every; veda—Veda; nirmala—pure; hṛdaya—heart; he—O; bhārata—son of Bharata; sarva-bhāve—in every way; se—such person; more—to Me; bhajaya—renders devotional service. The one who understands Me as the Personal Supreme is free of doubts and knows Me as the best of everything. That person, having understood the Vedic paradigm, will serve Me well, in heartfelt pure devotion, all the time. > 20) ei se śāstrera gūḍha marma kathā śuna I > tumi se niṣpāpa hao śuddha tava mana II 41 > ihā ye bujhila bhāgye hala buddhimāna I > he bhārata! kṛta-kṛya se hala mahāna II 42 ei—this; se—that; śāstrera—of the revealed scriptures; gūḍha—confidential; marma—deep meaning; kathā—topic; śuna—hear; tumi—you; se—that; niṣpāpa—devoid of sins; hao—be; śuddha—pure; tava—your; mana—mind; ihā—this; ye—whoever; bujhila—understands; bhāgye—in fortune; hala—to be; buddhimāna—intelligent, wise; he—O; bhārata—son of Bharata; kṛta-kṛya—the most perfect in one’s endeavors; se—such person; hala—to be; mahāna—perfect. Please hear these deep and secret śastric topics and begin to act with a fresh mind that’s purified and freed of sin. O son of Bharat, one who knows these secrets, blessed and wise, achieves perfection in the course of any enterprise. > bhaktivedānta kahe śrī-gītāra gān I > śune yadi śuddha bhakta kṛṣṇagata-prāṇa II *bhaktivedānta*—of His Divine Grace A. C. Bhaktivedānta Swāmi Prabhupāda; *kahe*—speaks; *śrī-gītār*—of Śrimad Bhagavad-Gītā; *gān*—song; *śune*—after hearing; *yadi*—if; *śuddha*—pure; *bhakta*—devotee; *kṛṣṇagata-prāṇa*—absorbed in Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Bhaktivedānta Swāmi thus recites śrī-gītār gān to please the pure devotees always rapt in Kṛṣṇa’s song. *iti śrī-gītār* *puruṣottama-yoga* *nāmaka pancadaśa adhyaya samāpta I* *iti*—at last; śrī-gītār—of *Śrimad Bhagavad Gītā;* *puruṣottama-yoga—*The *Yoga* of the Supreme Person; nāmaka—named; pancadaśa—fifteenth; adhyaya—chapter; samāpta—ends. Thus ends the fifteenth chapter of *Śrimad Bhagavad Gītā*, named *puruṣottama-yoga*, or The *Yoga* of the Supreme Person. Kalakaṇṭha Dāsa began practicing **bhakti*-yoga* under Śrīla Prabhupāda’s guidance in 1972. Since then he has become an accomplished practitioner and teacher, sharing *bhakti* with thousands through lectures, seminars, and books, including A God Who Dances, The Saint Within, and several others. He specializes in translating Sanskrit and Bengali poetry for English-speaking audiences and in establishing ISKCON ashrams (hostels) for young **bhakti*-yoga* practitioners in North America. *Swarūpa Kṛṣṇa Dāsa has actively practiced* bhakti-yoga *since 1994. Since 2002 he has been a leading bhakti-yoga teacher in Kolkata. In addition to Śrīla Prabhupāda’s Gītār Gān, he has translated (from Bengali to English) Śrīla Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura’s Śaraṇāgati and Harināma Cintāmaṇi and numerous quotations by Śrīla Bhakti Siddhānta Sarasvatī, and (from English to Bengali)* Bhakti Vṛkṣa *course modules. He currently helps design introductory* bhakti-yoga *courses for students of ISKCON’s Mayapur Institute*. Jāhnavā Ṭhākurāṇī: Heroine Supreme *The wife of Nityānanda Prabhu was a leading figure in the movement Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu after His departure.* By Satyarāja Dāsa After Nityānanda Prabhu’s departure from this world, his wife played a leading role in Caitanya Mahāprabhu’s movement. “If a woman is perfect in Kṛṣṇa consciousness [she can be *guru*]. . . . Just like Jāhnavā Devī, Lord Nityānanda’s wife, she was ācārya. . . . She was controlling the whole Vaiṣṇava community.”—Śrīla Prabhupāda The Kṛṣṇa conscious tradition has always viewed men and women in an equitable way. This holds true even if male and female devotees have sometimes known the usual difficulties facing all embodied souls. After all, humans have foibles, and this will manifest in a plethora of ways, regardless of their underlying philosophy. But the philosophy of Kṛṣṇa consciousness is that all beings are spirit souls, and on that level there is no difference between us. Moreover, the ultimate Deity of the Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇava tradition, founded by Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, is Rādhārāṇī, the female absolute, and the greatest devotees are the gopīs, the female cowherd maidens of Vraja, whose single-minded love remains the preeminent model for all practitioners in the tradition. Indeed, the earliest Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇavas recognized female leaders who stood strong amid their male counterparts. Of all these women, who admittedly were few in comparison to the men, Jāhnavā Devī, the wife of Śrī Caitanya’s chief associate, Nityānanda Prabhu, is prominent.1 In the sixteenth century she was a preeminent *guru* in the Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇava tradition. As Prabhupāda confirmed in conversation with the late Joseph T. O’Connell, renowned professor emeritus in the Department of Religion at the University of Toronto: [inset] O’Connell: Is it possible, Swamiji, for a woman to be a *guru* in the line of disciplic succession? Prabhupāda: Yes. Jāhnava Devi was—Nityānanda’s wife. She became. If she is able to go to the highest perfection of life, why is it not possible to become *guru*? But not so many. Actually one who has attained the perfection, she can become *guru*. But man or woman, unless one has attained the perfection . . . Yei krsna-tattva-vetta sei *guru* haya [*Caitanya-caritāmṛta, Madhya* 8.128]. The qualification of *guru* is that he must be fully cognizant of the science of Kṛṣṇa. Then he or she can become *guru*. Yei krsna-tattva-vetta, sei *guru* haya. [break in the recording] In our material world, is it any prohibition that woman cannot become professor? If she is qualified, she can become professor. What is the wrong there? She must be qualified. That is the position. So similarly, if the woman understands Kṛṣṇa consciousness perfectly, she can become *guru*.2 [end inset] *Who Is Jāhnavā Devī?* In the literature of the sixteenth and seventeenth century, Jāhnavā is commonly referred to as Īśvarī, the female form of īśvara, or God. She is also sometimes known as Śrīmatī and Ṭhākurāṇī, indicating not only her divine status as Nityānanda Prabhu’s wife (Nityānanda is Balarāma) but also the fact that she was considered a leader among the Gauḍīyas of her time. Regarding background, Sūryadāsa Sarakhela and his four brothers were great devotees of Śrī Caitanya and Nityānanda Prabhu, and they lived a few miles from Navadvīpa in an area called Śāligrāma, though they eventually relocated to Ambikā-kālanā. Sūryadāsa was employed as an accountant/treasurer (sarakhela) in the Muslim government of the time. He and his wife, Bhadrāvatī, were blessed with two beautiful daughters, Vasudhā and Jāhnavā, who was the younger of the two. According to the Gaura-gaṇoddeśa-dīpikā (65–66), in their prior incarnations these two girls were the wives of Balarāma: Vāruṇī and Revatī. Additionally, the same text informs us that Vasudhā and Jāhnavā were incarnations of Anaṅga Mañjarī, Rādhārāṇī’s younger sister, a fact to which we will return.3 Since the two girls are eternal śaktis of Lord Balarāma, they became the wives of Nityānanda Prabhu, His incarnation in Caitanya-līlā. Polygamy was common at the time in Bengal. But more to the point in our present context, when the Lord descends He often appears with a triad of associates: two consorts and His transcendental place of residence—i.e., the energies Śrī, Bhū, and Nīlā (or Līlā). Śrī is the personification of His direct potency, Bhū is an expansion of that potency, and Nīlā refers to the land that replicates the spiritual world. For Nityānanda, these manifest as Jāhnavā, Vasudhā, and Ekacakrā/Navadvīpa. Jāhnavā did not bear any child, whereas Vasudhā gave birth to two: a girl, Gaṅgā, who was the personification of the Ganges River, and a boy, Vīrabhadra. In the Gaura-gaṇoddeśa-dīpikā (67) Vīrabhadra is mentioned as an incarnation of Kṣīrodakaśāyī Viṣṇu. Vasudhā passed away prematurely, and the children were raised by Jāhnavā. Both the Prema-vilāsa and the Nityānanda-vaṁśa-vistāra tell us that when Vīrabhadra sought a spiritual master, he approached Sītā Ṭhākurāṇī, the wife of Śrī Advaita, the third member of the Pañca Tattva (“five principal spiritual truths”), along with Mahāprabhu, Nityānanda Prabhu, Gadādhara, and Śrīvāsa Ṭhākura. She told him that he should look for a *guru* closer to home, and Vīrabhadra understood this to mean his own mother. But he was unconvinced that Jāhnavā would be an appropriate *guru* for him, especially because of their familial closeness. Nonetheless, one day he saw her as she was completing her bath. While she was drying her hair, her wet *sari* slipped below her shoulders. To conceal her nakedness, she produced two extra arms to catch the dangling cloth. Vīrabhadra was startled by this show of divinity—four arms, like Vishnu!—and immediately asked her to initiate him.4 He soon grew into a significant leader in the Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇava community. Vīrabhadra was not Jāhnavā’s only important disciple. She had numerous followers, many of whom would take initiation from her and go on to lead the Vaiṣṇavas of Bengal. Significant among them was Rāmacandra Gosvāmī, grandson of Vaṁśīvadana Ṭhākura, who took care of both Śacī Devī and Viṣṇupriyā Devī, Mahāprabhu’s mother and wife, respectively, after Mahāprabhu’s departure from the world. Jāhnavā adopted Rāmacandra as her son, and he received special treatment as her youngest, so much so that she allowed him to accompany her on her last trip to Vraja. There he witnessed her dynamic leadership and studied the *bhakti* scriptures under her able guidance. He later founded the Baghnapada branch of Gosvāmīs, now famous throughout Bengal. It is these Gosvāmīs who gave Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura his title Bhaktivinoda, which means “the pleasure of devotion.” It is said that Jāhnavā’s most significant contribution to the Gauḍīya tradition was the organization and systematization of Caitanya’s Vaiṣṇavism as it labored to consolidate diverse theological views while still in its infancy. At the time, many tangential teachings threatened to dilute the pure message of the Six Gosvāmīs, such as Gaura-pāramyavāda and Gaura-nāgaravāda, whose divergent theories are too complex to describe here. She was able to accommodate these variations within the scheme of the pure teachings of the Six Gosvāmīs. This took place during the famous Kheturī festival of the 1570s or ’80s, the first major celebration of Mahāprabhu’s appearance in this world. It was a major ecumenical council attended by all prominent Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇavas of the period, including Narottama Dāsa Ṭhākura, Śrīnivāsa Ācārya, and Śyāmānanda Prabhu. Jāhnavā was not only considered the guest of honor, but predominated as the leading Vaiṣṇava of the festival, venerated by all. Everyone was in awe of her learning, spiritual stature, and natural Vaiṣṇava qualities. *Jāhnavā in Vrindavan* After the ceremony at Kheturī, Jāhnavā went to confer with the Gosvāmīs of Vrindavan. Even while she journeyed there—let alone while in Kṛṣṇa’s holy land itself—her exploits were transformative for many. She converted newcomers, had loving exchanges with deities, and so on, not unlike Mahāprabhu Himself during His stay in Vrindavan. Once she arrived, she studied under the Gosvāmīs and endeared herself to all. Even the most exalted Vaiṣṇavas came to accept her as the preeminent authority on spiritual practice. The area at Rādhā-kuṇḍa where she bathed became known as Jāhnavā Ghāṭa, with a small shrine in honor of her sitting place, called Jāhnavā Mā Baiṭhaka. To this day those who perform parikramā under the guidance of advanced Vaiṣṇavas visit this holy spot. Her pastimes in Vrindavan further established her divine status, and the scriptures talk about her stay in the holy land at some length. A couple of colorful events should suffice in giving a taste for her activities there. One day, while at Rādhā-kuṇḍa, Jāhnavā heard the alluring melody of Kṛṣṇa’s flute. Startled, she looked here and there, hoping to spy the source of the sound. Finally, she saw the graceful threefold-bending form of Kṛṣṇa sweetly playing on His instrument beneath a kadamba tree, surrounded by Rādhārāṇī and the gopīs. She became transfixed, feeling inexpressible spiritual ecstasy. On another occasion, when she was brought to Rāma-ghāṭa, the area along the banks of the Yamunā where Balarāma enjoyed a rāsa dance with His beloved companions, her spiritual rapture increased a thousandfold. This was because Nityānanda-Rāma (Balarāma) is her eternal consort, and the area of Rāma-ghāṭa thus naturally enhanced her already incomparable love for Him. While Jāhnavā’s journey to Vrindavan is detailed in all the standard biographies of the period,5 there is some question as to whether she traveled there two or perhaps three times. The question arises because when she attended the Kheturī festival, she was already seen as someone who could adjudicate the siddhānta of the Gosvāmīs, reconciling it with prevailing theories in Bengal. It is thus understood that she had gone to Vrindavan and studied under Rūpa, Jīva, and so on, and there is indeed evidence for this in the texts. But that would have been her first trip. She is then said to have traveled to Kṛṣṇa’s holy land after Kheturī, and this is the journey detailed most clearly. However, it is described that she went back to Bengal after this visit as well. Consequently, another journey to Vrindavan is implied, for she is said to have merged into the famous Gopīnātha deity of Vraja when she departed this world. In other words, she returned again after her stay in Bengal. This part is unclear, and she may have indeed stayed after that second visit. According to Bengali historian Ramakanta Chakravarti, [inset] On the first occasion, Jāhnavā Devī went to Vṛndāvana as a learner. She attentively listened to the discourses of Sanātana and Rūpa and met the other gosvāmins. The leading gosvāmins recognized her as an outstanding leader of the Bengali Vaiṣṇavas. Rūpa Gosvāmin himself is said to have explained to her the basic tenets. . . . Her specialty consisted in the fact that she probably went to Vṛndāvana twice, and established the connection between the Vaiṣṇavas of Bengal and Vṛndāvana. She also worked tirelessly for the unification of various Bengali sub-sects localized in different regions of West Bengal.6 [end inset] Religious scholar Joseph T. O’Connell, with whom, it may be remembered, Prabhupāda spoke about Jāhnavā, gives an overview of her accomplishments: [inset] [Jāhnavā] began to give initiation and spiritual instruction to her own disciples, both male and female. . . . She proved to be an extremely able and effective policy-maker and seems to have been the single most energetic leader of the Caitanya Vaiṣṇava community of her generation. . . . She twice made the arduous trek to Vrindavan where she was received with respect by the scholarly Gosvāmīs. She seems to have been instrumental in having Śrīnivāsa Ācārya commissioned to go to Vrindavan to learn the theology and practices of the Gosvāmīs and propagate their mode of *Rādhā-Krsna-*bhakti** upon returning to Bengal. Jāhnavā shared with Narottamadās responsibility for organizing the important mahotsava festival at Kheturī, on which occasion the dispersed branches of Caitanya Vaiṣṇavas came together and agreed to propagate *bhakti* according to the Vrindavan pattern. . . . Her role was one of leadership in making the Vrindavan Gosvāmīs’ orthodox theology dominant in mainline Vaiṣṇava circles in Bengal.7 [end inset] In other words, from a historical point of view Jāhnavā was among the most important figures in the early Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇava tradition. It was she who first emphasized the teachings of the Six Gosvāmīs in Bengal, the homeland of the Gauḍīya tradition, and encouraged Śrīnivāsa Ācārya to go to Vraja to study among the Gosvāmīs in Vrindavan; she was also instrumental in encouraging Śrīnivāsa, Narottama, and Śyāmānanda to return to Bengal with the Gosvāmīs’ books, so that Bengali Vaiṣṇavas might become well grounded in the scriptures; indeed, she was behind the movement’s first ecumenical conference at Kheturī, thus affording a sense of harmony and solidarity in the early days of the tradition. But despite all of this, Jāhnavā’s name will always be linked to Vrindavan in particular. This is due to her relationship with the highly intimate deities of Rādhā-Gopīnātha, considered to be among the most esoteric forms of Kṛṣṇa in the Gauḍīya tradition because they represent prayojana-tattva, or the ultimate attainment of Kṛṣṇa consciousness. To this day her deity form stands alongside Rādhā-Gopīnātha in Vrindavan and Jaipur. She accompanies Rādhā-Gopīnātha in Vrindavan not only because she is so loved in there, but also because, as stated, she is Anaṅga Mañjarī, Rādhikā’s younger sister. This is significant in terms of Gopīnātha’s unique position—and hers. Jāhnavā and her alter ego Anaṅga Mañjarī are considered the very emblem of mādhurya-rasa, or the quintessence of romantic love on the spiritual platform. Rādhā-Gopīnātha are the deities best suited to receive that love. Jāhnavā had supervised the placement of her deity in this temple, specifying exactly where each form should be positioned on the altar: Gopīnātha stands with her (Anaṅga Mañjarī) to His left and Rādhikā to His right. The famous gopīs Lalitā and Viśākhā are there as well, flanking them as loving servants. An alternate version of this story explains that the Jāhnavā/Anaṅga Mañjarī deity arrived after Jāhnavā’s departure from this world. It is said that when visiting Vrindavan years earlier, she fell deeply in love with the deity of Gopīnātha. Sometime after her second visit, one of her followers, ostensibly at her behest, came to Vrindavan from Bengal carrying a Jāhnavā deity to be placed at Lord Gopīnātha’s side. That very night, Gopīnātha appeared to the temple pūjārī in a dream, revealing that Jāhnavā is nondifferent from Anaṅga Mañjarī, further saying that the Rādhā deity should be moved to the right of Gopīnātha and the Jāhnavā deity placed on the left. Still another version of the story involves the size of the deity who originally accompanied Lord Gopīnātha: “When Lord Nityananda’s wife, Jahnava Mata, visited Vrindavana on pilgrimage in the year 1582, she felt that the Deity of Radharani being worshipped in the temple was far too small, and when she returned to Bengal she asked one of her disciples to carve a new Deity of Radharani for the Gopinath temple. This new Deity was then sent to Vrindavana and immediately installed next to Sri Gopinath. When all the devotees in Vrindavana saw the new Deity of Radharani, they felt that it looked just like Jahnava Mata.”8 Tradition has it that, feeling the deepest love, she merged into this very deity of Gopīnātha, who today stands in Jaipur, having been moved there from Vrindavan in the seventeenth century. It is said that Gopīnātha pulled her onto the altar and placed her on His right, where she resumed her eternal Vraja-līlā form as Anaṅga Mañjarī. Some say she merged into her own deity, who stands by His side.9 *A Prayer to Jāhnavā Devī* “One of the positive results of the Caitanya movement was the elevation of the social and religious status of women in Bengal,” writes Ramakanta Chakravarti. “This remarkable development was first seen in the assumption of ecclesiastical leadership by Jāhnavā Devī, second daughter of Sūryadās Sarkhel and second wife of Nityānanda.”10 Great women Vaiṣṇavas have existed throughout the ages, and they have demonstrated that the qualities of leadership, scholarship, intelligence, wisdom, and devotion are affairs of the heart and mind, irrespective of gender. Jāhnavā Devī, no doubt, was among the best of such Vaiṣṇavīs, and we are honored to have her as part of our Gauḍīya tradition. Sidebar: A Prayer by Śrīla Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura I have fallen into the ocean of material existence and I am completely bewildered. I have no information about how to reach the shore. I have no strength of pious activities, spiritual knowledge, performance of sacrifices, mystic perfections, austerities or religiosity. In fact, I have no resources at all. I am extremely week and I do not know how to swim. So, who will deliver me from this dangerous condition? This ocean is full of fearful crocodiles, in the form of material sense objects. The waves of lusty desires always agitate me. O Śrī Jāhnavā Devī, please be merciful to this servant, out of your own accord, and deliver me from my painful condition of life. I have firmly decided to cross over this material existence by taking shelter of the boat which is in the form of your lotus feet. You are the consort of Lord Nityānanda Prabhu and you are an authority on distributing devotional service to Lord Kṛṣṇa. Therefore, please give this servant the shelter of your lotus feet, which are just like desire trees. You have already delivered many sinful persons. Today, this insignificant beggar has come to your lotus feet. —From Kalyāna Kalpataru: The Desire Tree of Auspiciousness. Translation by Bhūmipati Dāsa. Published by Rasabihari Lal & Sons, 2004. *NOTES* 1. Jāhnavā is a variant of Jāhnavī, which refers to the river Gaṅgā. Literally, the word means “from Jahnu’s clan” or “the daughter of Jahnu,” as per Ṛgveda 1.116.19. Jahnu was a king of the Vedic era who adopted the river Gaṅgā as his daughter. 2. Conversations with Srila Prabhupada (Los Angeles: Bhaktivedanta Book Trust, 1990), Volume 22 (Toronto, 6.18.76), 19–20. The issue of women acting as **guru*s* is an intriguing one. Those who hold that women should not serve as *guru* might object, averring that Jāhnavā was an exception because she was an eternal associate of the Lord, i.e., not an ordinary woman. Prabhupāda clearly disagrees with this perspective, saying that women in general can be **guru*s*, and he cites Jāhnavā as evidence. Indeed, the great souls of the early Gauḍīya period act as ācāryas. That is, they teach by example, and thus if it were inappropriate for a woman to adopt the position of *guru*, Jāhnavā would never have done so. When one couples that with the fact that she was not the only female *guru*—Sītā (Advaita's wife) and Hemalatā, among others, occupied this position—it becomes clear that this was already an established part of Vaiṣṇava culture. 3. The fact that Jāhnavā was an incarnation of Anaṅga Mañjarī is reaffirmed by Viśvanātha Cakravartī’s Gaura-gaṇa-svarūpa-tattva-candrikā, trans., Demian Martins (Vrindavan, U.P.: Jiva Institute, 2015), Text 51, p. 21. “Anaṅga Mañjarī, who was as dear as life to Rādhārānī, has now become Lord Nityānanda’s most beloved wife named Jāhnavī.” Also, in the Muralī-vilāsa (chapter nine), Rūpa Gosvāmī tells the devotee Rāmacandra that he had heard this truth from Śrīmatī Jāhnavā directly: she confided in him that she is none other than Anaṅga Mañjarī! This same Rāmacandra later wrote a work called Anaṅga-mañjarī-sampuṭikā in which he describes the nature of Anaṅga Mañjarī and identifies her with Śrīmatī Jāhnavā. Finally, in Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura’s Bhaktivinoda Vāṇī Vaibhava we read, “Who is Śrī Jāhnavā-devī? How did she benefit the Vaiṣṇava society? . . . The many wonderful activities performed by Śrī Jāhnavā-devī, who was the energy of Śrī Nityānanda Prabhu and who was nondifferent from Anaṅga-mañjarī, are almost unknown to the Vaiṣṇava society.” See Śrīpāda Sundarānanda Vidyāvinoda (Compiled under the direct order of His Divine Grace Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura Prabhupāda), Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura’s Bhaktivinoda Vāṇī Vaibhava (produced and published by Īśvara dāsa, translated by Bhūmipati dāsa, Kolkata: Touchstone Media, n.d.), 54. 4. According to the Prema-vilāsa: “When he saw the goddess with four arms, Vīra fell on the ground out of deep respect, asking her to initiate him. He would have no need to go to Śāntipura to look for a *guru*,” that is to say, to approach Advaita’s wife. See Nityānanda Dāsa, Prema-vilāsa (Kolkata: Jashodalal Talukdar, 1913), 252–253. Jāhnavā is not the only woman to have manifested such a four-armed form. The tradition tells a similar story about Hemalatā Ṭhākurāṇī, the daughter of the important third-generation Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇava leader Śrīnivāsa Ācārya. 5. Primary sources for Jāhnavā’s visits to Vrindavan are Muralī-vilāsa 15–17; Narottama-vilāsa 6–9; Prema-vilāsa 14–16; *Bhakti-ratnākara* 11 and 13; and Nityānanda-vaṁśa-vistāra, Madhya 1 and 2. 6. Ramakanta Chakravarti, Vaiṣṇavism in Bengal: 1486–1900 (Calcutta: Sanskrit Pustak Bhandar, 1985) 175. 7. See Joseph T. O’Connell, Caitanya Vaiṣṇavism in Bengal Social Impact and Historical Implications (New York: Routledge, 2019), 91. 8. See https://sthalapurana108.wordpress.com/2014/08/03/radha-gopinath-temple/. There is another deity of Jāhnavā, though far from Vrindavan, at Nityānanda Prabhu’s birthplace: Ekacakrā-grāma. Within the main temple there is a deity of Kṛṣṇa said to be established by Nityānanda Prabhu Himself. The name of the deity is Baṅkima Rāya or Bāṅkā Rāya. Prabhupāda writes: “On Baṅkima Rāya’s right side is a deity of Jāhnavā, and on His left side is Śrīmatī Rādhārāṇī. The priests of the temple describe that Lord Nityānanda Prabhu entered within the body of Baṅkima Rāya and that the deity of Jāhnavā-mātā was therefore later placed on the right side of Baṅkima Rāya. . . . Afterwards, many other Deities were installed within the temple. On another throne within the temple are Deities of Muralīdhara and Rādhā-Mādhava. On another throne are Deities of Manomohana, Vṛndāvana-candra and Gaura-Nitāi. But Baṅkima Rāya is the Deity originally installed by Nityānanda Prabhu.” 9. Both Muralī-vilāsa and Vaṁśī-śikṣā describe Jāhnavā’s amalgamation into the Gopīnātha deity; some traditions teach that she merged with Gopīnātha while the divine image was in Kāmyavana, en route to Jaipur, and others while He was in Vrindavan proper. Various Vaiṣṇava groups question the accuracy of these texts, though overall it is agreed that they convey the basic narrative of her generation of devotees. For the disappearance story in particular, see Premdāsa Miśra, Vaṁśī-śikṣā (Nabadwip: Nimāicāñda Gosvāmī, n.d., reprint), 187. The text says, “After five years in Kāmyavana, there was a ‘coming together’ [or ‘union’] (milana) of the goddess (devīra) and Gopīnātha.” Some consider this a colloquial way of saying that she passed from this world at this time; others say it means that she merged with the deity; still other opine that she merged into her own deity who stands on that same altar. See also Rāja-vallabha Gosvāmī, Muralī-vilāsa, Chapter 16 (Mathura: Śrī Kṛṣṇa Janmasthāna Sevā Sa?sthāna, 1987, reprint), 136: “Then, when the time came for her to come out of the temple, Gopīnātha instead grabbed on to the hem of her garment and pulled her in.” Also, in Manohara Dāsa’s 1696 work the Anurāga-vallī, we read that Jāhnavā “made her residence/stayed” (kaila vāsa) with Gopīnātha (tāhā laiyā gopīnāthe āsi kaila vāsa). Indeed, gopīnāthe āsi could be read either as she “came to the Gopīnātha temple” or “came/entered Gopīnātha himself.” 10. See Ramakanta Chakravarti, op. cit., 174. Pondering High Ideals *Before becoming Prime Minister of the UK, Mr. Keir Starmer visited Bhaktivedanta Manor and heard about the qualities of great leaders.* By Viśākhā Devī Dāsī *Speaking truth to power.* Last autumn, Mr. Keir Starmer, the leader of the Labour Party in the United Kingdom and widely predicted to be the next Prime Minister, visited Bhaktivedanta Manor near London. A devotee greeted him and introduced him to Manor leaders, and a few of us gave him a tour of the Manor gardens and temple. Mr. Starmer garlanded the deity of Śrīla Prabhupāda in the temple room and, since it was the month of Kārttika, offered a candle to Śrī Śrī Yaśoda-Dāmodara and Śrī Śrī Rādhā-Gokulānanda. Then, just before we all took dinner prasāda, some devotees had a chance to address Mr. Starmer and his team. I was one of those scheduled to speak to this potentially powerful group, and I wanted to talk about Lord Rāmacandra, the avatar of God who exemplifies excellent leadership. Yet I wondered how Śrī Rāma’s exalted example would be received by our guests; after all, what the scriptures describe about Śrī Rāmacandra and His reign was diametrically opposed to what we were experiencing with current leadership—not just in the UK but internationally as well. In Śrīla Prabhupāda’s words, “In this Age of Kali, the executive head of a state somehow or other gets votes and is elected to an exalted post, but the condition of the citizens continues to be full of anxiety, distress, unhappiness and dissatisfaction.” (Kṛṣṇa, chapter 89) When I told some devotee colleagues my doubts about discussing the exalted ideal of Rāmacandra, they assured me that people want a high standard of behavior in their leaders. And, they said, people want to hear about the high ideals and exalted personalities who prevailed in former times. All of us innately yearn for such knowledge and are drawn to those descriptions because within ourselves we know we’re capable of doing better. We’re not living up to our potential but weakly succumbing to pettiness, selfishness, and self-aggrandizement. So the topics of Lord Rāmacandra and the kingdom He ruled were good ones, yet they raised a critical question: How to bridge the chasm between what we are and what we want to be and can be? Therein lies the great challenge of our lives. *The Brief Presentation* When my turn to speak came, I read a few paraphrased verses from the tenth chapter of the Ninth Canto of *Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam* describing Lord Rāmacandra’s kingdom: During the reign of Lord Rāmacandra the forests, the rivers, the hills and mountains, the states, the seven islands and the seven seas were all favorable in supplying the necessities of life for all living beings. At that time bodily and mental suffering, disease, lamentation, distress, and fear were absent. Lord Rāmacandra was a saintly king, and everything in His character was untinged by qualities like envy, anger, lust, and greed. By His personal activities He set an exemplary standard for the general public. Dressed like an ordinary person, Lord Rāmacandra would sometimes wander within the capital to understand the mood and needs of the citizens. When the citizens saw the Lord’s excellent behavior and qualities and how he personally supervised state affairs, they appreciated it very much and freely gave Him their loyalty and their love. Thus Lord Rāmacandra, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, the chief of the best learned scholars, along with His wife, Sītā Devī, and all the citizens of the kingdom, enjoyed peace and prosperity. I explained to the small group that the Vedic scriptures set a high standard, so high in fact that we could almost get discouraged if we compared that standard to our current one. But the scriptures never intend to discourage us. Rather, they’re meant to inspire us to strive for those high ideals, step by small step. After all, we can’t expect the scriptures or the Supreme Person to set mediocre examples. Who benefits from or is inspired by mediocrity? While we need to be realistic about our present situation and shortcomings, at the same time we also need to try to improve, to rise to a higher standard of behavior and a more noble mindset. Śrīla Prabhupāda writes, In this material world, we need a leader for a monarchy or good government. Lord Śrī Rāmacandra, by His practical example, showed how to live for the benefit of all human society. He fought with demons like Rāvaṇa, He carried out the orders of His father, and He remained the faithful husband of mother Sītā. Thus there is no comparison to Lord Rāmacandra’s acting as an ideal king. Indeed, people still hanker for rāma-rājya, a government conducted like that of Lord Rāmacandra. . . . The coherent purpose of Lord Rāmacandra, Lord Kṛṣṇa and Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu is to teach human society how to be happy by following the instructions of the Supreme Lord. *(Bhāgavatam* 8.1.16, Purport) Lord Rāmacandra governed with integrity, humility, and compassion, and He respected all people, regardless of their position in society or their economic standing. Aware of the needs and moods of the citizens, with focus and determination He united rather than divided. He was decisive and clear in His leadership and, without ulterior motives, used the power of the government to help people. He honored the earth, the creatures of the earth, and every human being; He was just and equal to all. He had the courage to make difficult choices, and in His kingdom crime was punished in proportion to the offense regardless of who the criminal was. Also, during the reign of Lord Rāmacandra there was only clean energy; no one used pollutants of any sort. *How to Bridge the Chasm Between Then and Now?* Bridging the chasm starts with an understanding of that chasm, along with a powerful desire to shrink it. In other words, the process starts with knowledge. Śrīla Prabhupāda writes, By thinking of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, one becomes free from the contamination of the faulty association of the material world, and thus one becomes peaceful. The world is in a disturbed condition because of a scarcity of such peaceful devotees in human society. Unless one is a devotee, one cannot be equal to all living entities. A devotee is equally disposed toward the animals, the human beings and all living entities because he sees every living entity as a part and parcel of the Supreme Lord. In the *Īśopaniṣad* it is clearly stated that one who has come to the stage of seeing all living beings equally does not hate anyone or favor anyone. (Krsna, chapter 89) Thus, hearing of the qualities and activities of an ideal personality like Lord Rāmacandra is necessary; otherwise, how will we have a high standard to look up to, along with a person who exemplifies that standard? *Bhagavad-gītā* (3.21) declares, > yad yad ācarati śreṣṭhas > tat tad evetaro janaḥ > sa yat pramāṇaṁ kurute > lokas tad anuvartate “Whatever action a great person performs, common people follow. And whatever standards that person sets by exemplary acts, all the world pursues.” Exalted teachings are essential, yet they’re of limited value if they’re simply parroted and don’t lead to improved behavior. People want leaders who are intelligent and knowledgeable and who also teach by their practical qualities and behavior. If leaders lack integrity, it’s not surprising if people in general also lack integrity. We learn from and emulate our leaders, whether we intend to or not. Leaders, therefore, are not meant to manufacture a standard of behavior from their own imagination or whimsical preferences. They are meant to follow the principles given in the scriptures, for the scriptures are the standard to be followed by human society. People in general have high expectations of their leaders, and all leaders, whether big or small, have a great responsibility toward those they lead. If leaders follow scriptural principles as they are practiced by exalted predecessors, they will surely progress spiritually and develop qualities that will endear them to their constituents. Whoever sincerely follows scriptural directives and those who exemplify such directives will experience a revolutionary change of heart inspired by this newfound knowledge and the empowerment that results from pleasing Kṛṣṇa and His devotees. Such an internal shift evokes the willpower needed to put ideals into practice. Our powerful resolve and effort to rid ourselves of bad habits and to inculcate good ones, like regularly chanting the holy names of God, will evoke the mercy of Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Personality of Godhead. We pray that He gives us the fortitude and resolve to resist those who would influence us otherwise. The result of such an attempt is that within ourselves, in our own mind and heart, we’ll be peaceful and happy. Plus, we’ll win the ongoing loyalty and encouragement of those we serve. *Mr. Starmer’s Response* My talk was short and a bit grave, although I managed to evoke a laugh when I mentioned that due to political intrigue, Lord Rāmacandra had been banished for fourteen years and that I’d understood that the Labour Party had been out of power for twelve years. Afterward I wondered how it had been received. When I returned to my seat next to Mr. Starmer, he kindly leaned toward me and said, “Very nice words.” *Visakha Devi Dasi has been writing for BTG since 1973. The author of six books, she is the temple president at Bhaktivedanta Manor in the UK. She and her husband, Yadubara Dāsa, produce and direct films, most recently the biopic on the life of Śrīla Prabhupāda Hare Kṛṣṇa! The Mantra, the Movement, and the Swami Who Started It All. Visit her website at OurSpiritualJourney.com.* Freedom from the Crocodile’s Jaws *From the pages of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, the story of an elephant’s devotional plea provides an example for us all.* By Vraja Vihārī Dāsa “One day everything will be well; that’s our hope. Everything’s fine today; that’s our illusion.”—Voltaire The crocodile’s invincible jaws have got me. But the bigger tragedy is that I am unaware of its vicious grip even though its terrible gaping maw inflicts continuous pain, with brief moments of relief that I take as pleasure. In times of mental clarity, I realize I can’t get out of this deadly trap unless I call out to the Lord in utter surrender. Thousands of years ago in a higher world an elephant king named Gajendra was captured by a crocodile in a lake. The elephant was sporting with his many wives when unexpectedly a crocodile grabbed his legs in its jaws. Gajendra tried to escape, but water is home for aquatic predators, and for Gajendra it was a foreign environment. He struggled, and even his wives and children tried pulling him away. But the crocodile just wouldn’t let go. Exasperated, Gajendra’s family left him to navigate the crisis alone. This incident is narrated in *Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam*, a scripture that describes life, the world, and relationships from a dimension different from the reality we commonly perceive with our limited senses. The explanations of the cosmos by modern science and *Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam* vary because they view the universe from a different scale of perception. For example, I may see a gray powder, but you may view it under a microscope and discover that it’s white and black granules. What exactly is it? Although the two views differ, each is correct according to the perspective. *Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam* describes the universe from a scale of observation different from that of modern science, and in its stated purpose and scheme of things there are special planets with extraordinary creatures and animals. For example, the animals talk and pray, and they experience life differently than animals do here on earth. Yet even in the twenty-first century the principles that emerge from their stories, including Gajendra’s struggle, which lasted for centuries, have a universal appeal and deliver lessons to a spiritual aspirant. In his pain and suffering Gajendra realized he needed to take his existence to the next level—to that of surrender. He called out to God helplessly and promised he’d offer his entire existence only to serve and please the Lord. He realized that no one could help him in this moment of crisis and that he was all alone in this dangerous world of suffering. The moment his appeal was sincere and heartfelt, the Lord descended on Garuḍa, His giant eagle carrier, and hurled His Sudarśana disc to cut off the head of the unrelenting crocodile. Gajendra was thus saved and awarded the highest position—service to God. *Three Stages of Life* We can view this narration as an example of three phases of our existence in the material world. First, like the king of the elephants, we seek to enjoy pleasures. This stage is called SENSE GRATIFICATION. We discover that sense pleasures bring misery, but we hope to find relief with more pleasure pursuits. The result is an endless, complicated mesh of suffering. This next stage is called STRUGGLE or SUFFERING. We pull and push our way through in this world, paying a heavy price for all the sense gratification we engaged in. We suffer as we struggle, and with no respite in sight we delude ourselves into believing it’s all part of the game called life. But our hearts hanker for unending happiness and relief from all suffering. After many lifetimes of sense gratification and struggle, finally a battered and bruised living entity, if fortunate, surrenders to God. This is the SURRENDER stage, where in a state of utter helplessness the soul finds shelter in God’s loving embrace. Before taking to spiritual life, we live a material life centered on our own pleasures—sense gratification—where our mind drags us in different directions. Gajendra led a merry life of enjoyment; we too are oblivious to the harsh realities of this world. Somehow a few of us come to a spiritual path and understand the seriousness of strict practices. Yet the mind, like the crocodile, drags us again into the lake of the material world. We want to get out of the grind of material life, but on our own we are helpless. During this second stage—struggle—we try to control our minds. Previously the mind hauled us around wherever it wanted to go, but now we seek to master it. As Gajendra struggled for centuries, we may endeavor for decades to gain mastery over our mind. But it is obstinate, and we suffer perpetually. Until, of course, we decide to enter the third stage—surrender –where we allow God to control our minds. Stage 1: Sense gratification—the mind controls us. Stage 2: Struggle—we try to control the mind. Stage 3: Surrender—God takes charge of our mind. When Gajendra realized he couldn’t get out of suffering by his own methods, he gave up the struggle. This is also what Draupadī did. When she realized that cruel Duḥśāsana, goaded by his treacherous brother Duryodhana and their wily uncle Śakuni, were determined to disrobe her; when her own husbands were incapable of helping her; when she couldn’t do anything on her own—she gave up the struggle and surrendered completely to Kṛṣṇa. *Spiritual Progress and the Need for Grace* We aspiring devotees on the path of Kṛṣṇa consciousness must reach the stage where the realization dawns that we can’t achieve success on our own. To go back to God’s kingdom, we need to access His grace, a power beyond our own. The advanced spiritual levels are not achieved by our endeavors; rather they are rewarded to us. And to receive grace, we need to surrender. Imagine a man riding in a chariot where the five horses drag him, the miserable passenger, in all directions against his will. A soul trapped in this world of enjoyment and suffering is riding the chariot of his life, dragged by his mind and senses. That’s the first stage. In the second stage, he decides to hold the reins of the horses and maneuver the chariot as he wills. After some time he realizes that the horses are wild and his attempts to control the chariot are feeble. He then choses the third phase—spiritual life—where he allows God take charge of the chariot. He lets go of the reins. The difference between the first and third phase is that in the first stage, when he let go it was his mind that dragged the chariot of his life, but now when he releases control, it’s God who has taken charge. The difference in these two approaches is the inner aspiration: his desire has changed from wanting to be an enjoyer in this world to wanting to be a servant of God and His devotees. Until the soul makes this conscious choice to be a servant, he is relentlessly pummeled by the indefatigable material energy. We all surrender—either to the mind or to God. In between we show our sincerity by struggling to control the mind. As we realize the formidable challenge ahead of us, we humbly call out to God, in deep realization of our puny existence and His magnificent omnipotence. It is this realization that made Gajendra a hero in the pages of *Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam*. The main lesson from the story of Gajendra and the crocodile is that we have to move from sense gratification to struggle to finally surrender to God. One may wonder: if surrender is the final objective, why not surrender now? And what stops us from calling out to Kṛṣṇa as Gajendra did? *Why Can’t We Surrender Now?* We lack the ability to call out to Kṛṣṇa helplessly like Gajendra for at least three reasons. First, we are not aware that we are in the jaws of the crocodile called māyā—the material energy or our own wicked mind. A snake swallows a frog slowly, but surely. Even as the snake is gulping down the frog, the frog stretches out its tongue to catch a flying insect. Similarly, even as we are reduced to insignificance by all-powerful time, we stay oblivious of our situation, busily catching insects daily in the form of our petty materialistic goals. Second, even if we realize we are suffering in this world, we imagine that the crocodile of Māyā will tire and eventually let us go. “She can’t keep biting me forever,” we delude ourselves. “She has to let go sometime.” Sorry. She never lets go. She is never tired. The crocodile of Māyā never sleeps. We foolishly hope that things will get better in this world. A German saying that translates as “Hope dies last” has been around for a long time. Yet despite our undying hope, in the material world things never really improve. The crocodile of Māyā will never relax. The only way to get relief is to surrender to Kṛṣṇa completely. A third reason why we don’t surrender is that we falsely assure ourselves that we have in fact surrendered to God because we practice many rituals. But although we may learn scriptural verses or visit holy places, none of this can match the quality of the surrender of Gajendra, who cried out to Kṛṣṇa for help. Until we take complete shelter of God, the crocodile will continue to bite us. The only hope for the living entity suffering in the material world of repeated birth and death is to take complete shelter of Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇa in the form of His holy names can give us complete relief from suffering. When Kṛṣṇa reciprocates with our sincere effort in chanting, we’ll see the crocodile of Māyā as a blessing. Until then, we’ll see and experience only suffering in this world. *Why Does Māyā Give Suffering?* Māyā is Kṛṣṇa’s agent, and she performs the thankless task of testing all spiritual aspirants to help them become stronger in their resolve to serve God. In the third chapter of his book Teachings of Queen Kuntī, Śrīla Prabhupāda writes that Māyā tests us to see how firmly fixed we are in Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Since she is an agent of Kṛṣṇa, she won’t allow anyone to have the freedom to disturb Him. Her plan is to see if we are actually serious or if we are simply a nuisance. Śrīla Prabhupāda declared emphatically in his talks that this is Māyā’s real business. A thief is looking to steal from a wealthy man’s house. A friend assures him that he knows all the secrets of the rich man and helps the thief enter the house at night. Meanwhile, unbeknown to the thief, this friend, now turned traitor, quietly informs the prosperous merchant that a thief will come at a particular time on a certain day to steal his wealth. What do you think the wealthy man will do? He’ll be prepared to receive the thief and foil his plans. Likewise Kṛṣṇa assures us that we can cross over the hurdles offered by Māyā. Through scriptures, He gives us the method: the regulative principles, the shelter of a bona fide *guru*, and many devotional practices. Yet He also empowers Māyā to test our resolve. In a sense Māyā and Kṛṣṇa are hand in glove in this operation. Nevertheless, Kṛṣṇa has a simple solution for us: just surrender to Him. “When the going gets tough, the tough simply surrender,” wrote biblical scholar Samuel Davidson (1807–1898). Kṛṣṇa has assured us in the *Bhagavad-gītā* (7.14) that even though His māyā is difficult to overcome, if we surrender to Him we can easily cross over the insurmountable ocean of material existence. *How Do We Surrender to Kṛṣṇa?* In the devotional guidebook *Hari-bhakti-vilāsa*, Śrīla Sanātana Gosvāmī has given us a simple method: “Accept what is favorable for developing love of Kṛṣṇa, and reject what is unfavorable.’ As we lead our daily lives, in every provoking situation we can simply ask this question: will this help me come closer to Kṛṣṇa, or will it take me away from Him? The answer helps us surrender to Kṛṣṇa. Of course, the mind won’t agree to the proposal to surrender. Every spiritual practitioner is well aware of the mind’s belligerence and insubordination; still the solution is simple: performing the right actions. As we change our activities, or even begin to make small steps in the right direction, the mind may initially disobey, but soon it goes along with our new habits, as if nothing has changed. Our intervention is the key, and if we aren’t as strong as we wish to be, let’s make a small beginning. When Gajendra cried and used all his effort to offer a beautiful lotus to the Lord, Kṛṣṇa ended his suffering of a thousand years in just a few moments. As we surrender to Kṛṣṇa, He can, if He so desires, quickly bring auspiciousness to our lives. He can change our lives in just one day. After being saved, if Gajendra had decided he’d go back to enjoying with his family, Kṛṣṇa would have sent another crocodile into his life. But Gajendra chose exclusive shelter of Kṛṣṇa. We too need to have no desire other than to offer ourselves completely to the Lord. But if we hope for succor in materialistic life, Kṛṣṇa will surely send the crocodiles of suffering. And He may send them especially when we least expect them. Nevertheless Kṛṣṇa consciousness is a hopeful practice because as the Lord has assured us in the *Bhagavad-gītā* (5.29), He is the best friend of all living entities; to the extent we connect to this reality, we’ll find relief from the pangs of material miseries. In our darkest times, when we are all alone, He is always there in our heart, waiting for us to offer a sincere appeal. No teardrop shed in love and longing for Kṛṣṇa ever goes in vain. He’ll take us out of all our suffering if only we turn to Him. His reciprocation is all based on our desire. And let’s rest assured: He is always there for us. An ancient Indian saying sums it up beautifully: “Before we can see properly, we must first shed tears to clear the way.” *Vraja Vihārī Dāsa, a disciple of His Holiness Rādhānāth Swami, has served full time at ISKCON Chowpatty since 1999. He has an honors degree in economics and a master’s in international finance. He teaches Kṛṣṇa consciousness to youth and the congregation and has written four books. You can read his daily reflections at www.yogaformodernage.com.* COVER: In the Eleventh Chapter of the *Bhagavad-gītā*, on Arjuna’s request Lord Kṛṣṇa dramatically reveals His Godhood by displaying His infinitely powerful universal form. From the Editor *The Aims of Life* I’ve noticed when listening to classes by Śrīla Prabhupāda’s disciples that many routinely quote cherished phrases they picked up from recordings of his classes in their early years as devotees. I do that too. One recurring sentence of Prabhupāda’s that left a lasting impression on me is “They do not know what is the aim of life.” By “they” he meant people in general, and he would emphasize the word aim. People no doubt know many things about their lives and the world around them, but Prabhupāda insisted that most people live without understanding what human life is meant to accomplish. Many people, of course, don’t think life has a goal other than trying to make the best of it and achieve whatever happiness they can. Śrīla Prabhupāda, in describing the aim of life with both common sense and scriptural citations, included the quest for happiness as a suitable goal. Yes, he would say, we seek happiness above all else, but our attempts to achieve it through material pursuits must ultimately fail. True and lasting happiness can be found only though self-realization. Our aim in life, therefore, should be self-realization, which becomes complete only when it includes God realization, or realization of the Absolute Truth. Because real happiness must include freedom from unhappiness, Śrīla Prabhupāda often stressed that the aim of life is liberation from the various kinds of suffering we all endure as captives of the material energy. He would often point out that the desire to find the solution to our suffering in the material world is the defining quality of human life. Without that desire, human beings are no better than animals. Still, one doesn’t have to listen to Śrīla Prabhupāda for long to learn that he directed our aim to things higher than just liberation. Freedom from suffering entails only the convalescent stage of the soul. The soul is active by nature, and its natural, eternal desire is to act in a loving relationship with God. So Prabhupāda often framed the aim of life as reviving our relationship with God, or Kṛṣṇa. The name of his society—the International Society for Kṛṣṇa Consciousness—indicates that aim. He wanted to teach the world that life is meant to be aimed at knowing, loving, and serving Kṛṣṇa. There’s nothing as valuable as pure devotional service to the Lord. We must set our sights on that. When we do, Kṛṣṇa becomes satisfied, and when He’s satisfied, He responds by fully satisfying us. While Prabhupāda spoke of liberation as an inferior goal, he nonetheless strongly encouraged us to aim at going “back home, back to Godhead,” the highest form of liberation. By using the word home for the spiritual world, he implied that it’s natural for us to want to go there, to that place where Kṛṣṇa lovingly and eagerly awaits us. Because the most highly advanced devotees are always fully aware of Kṛṣṇa’s company, they may be indifferent to their location. Still, the Lord’s pure devotees generally leave this world at death and attain the spiritual world, which is fully saturated with devotion for the Lord. Our aim in life should be to follow their example and achieve both pure love for Kṛṣṇa and eternal residence in His love-filled abode. Hare Kṛṣṇa. —*Nāgarāja Dāsa, Editor* *Bhakti* Wisdom 57/3 If we practice Kṛṣṇa consciousness in this present body while in a healthy condition and in good mind, simply by chanting the holy *mahā-mantra*, Hare Kṛṣṇa, we will have every possibility of fixing the mind upon Kṛṣṇa at the time of death. If we do this, then our lives become successful without any doubt. But if we keep our minds always absorbed in fruitive activities for material enjoyment, then naturally at the time of death we shall think of such activities and again be forced to enter material, conditioned bodies to suffer the threefold miseries of material existence. His Divine Grace A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupāda *Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Chapter 46* The scripture is revealed transcendental sound that has been visualized in the form of writing. We can hear the transcendental sound vibrations through writings, vibrations that were made by sādhus thousands of years ago. Therefore the śāstra, the work of saintly persons, is the deity form of transcendental sound vibration. Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura *Amṛta Vāṇī, “Deity,” No. 5* The body of Śrī Kṛṣṇa is eternal, full of knowledge and bliss. There is no difference between His body and His soul, unlike ordinary embodied beings. On the platform of *advaya-jñāna*, or nondual knowledge, the body is the self and the self is the body. Although the form of Kṛṣṇa is situated in one place, it is all-pervading. Śrīla Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura *Commentary on Śrī Manaḥ-śikṣā* The original nature of every living entity is to consider himself the eternal servant of Kṛṣṇa. But under the influence of māyā he thinks himself to be the body, and thus his original consciousness is covered. Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu *Śrī Caitanya-caritāmṛta, Madhya-līla* 24.201 It is the duty of every conditioned soul to engage his polluted consciousness, which is now attached to material enjoyment, in very serious devotional service with detachment. Thus his mind and consciousness will be under full control. Lord Kapila Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam 3.27.5 My dear daughter of Garga, His greatness encompasses everything above us in heaven, everything below the surface of the earth, everything in between heaven and earth, and everything that has ever existed, exists now, or will ever exist. *Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad* 3.8.4 Therefore Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme Godhead. One should meditate on Him, relish the taste of reciprocating loving exchanges with Him, worship Him and offer sacrifice to Him. *Gopāla-tāpanī Upaniṣad, Pūrva* 50 BTG57-04, 2023