# Cc. Antya 16.29 ## Text > āmi—nīca-jāti, āmāra nāhi kṛṣṇa-bhakti > anya aiche haya, āmāya nāhi aiche śakti" ## Synonyms *āmi*—I; *nīca*-*jāti*—belonging to a lower caste; *āmāra*—my; *nāhi*—there is not; *kṛṣṇa*-*bhakti*—devotion to Kṛṣṇa; *anya*—others; *aiche* *haya*—may be such; *āmāya*—unto me; *nāhi*—there is not; *aiche* *śakti*—such power. ## Translation **"Such a position may befit others, but I do not possess such spiritual power. I belong to a lower class and have not even a pinch of devotion to Kṛṣṇa."** ## Purport In his statement, Jhaḍu Ṭhākura presents himself as being born in a low-caste family and not having the qualifications of a bona fide devotee of Lord Kṛṣṇa. He accepts the statements declaring a lowborn person highly exalted if he is a Vaiṣṇava. However, he feels that these descriptions from *Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam* appropriately describe others, but not himself. Jhaḍu Ṭhākura's attitude is quite befitting a real Vaiṣṇava, for a Vaiṣṇava never considers himself exalted, even if he factually is. He is always meek and humble and never thinks that he is an advanced devotee. He assigns himself to a lower position, but that does not mean that he is indeed low. Sanātana Gosvāmī once said that he belonged to a low-caste family, for although he was born in a *brāhmaṇa* family, he had associated with *mlecchas* and *yavanas* in his service as a government minister. Similarly, Jhaḍu Ṭhākura presented himself as someone who belonged to a low caste, but he was actually elevated above many persons born in *brāhmaṇa* families. Not only is there evidence for this in *Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam,* as quoted by Kālidāsa in verses 26 and 27; there is also considerable evidence for this conclusion in other śāstras. For example, in the *Mahābhārata, Vana-parva,* Chapter 180, it is stated: > śūdre tu yad bhavel lakṣma > dvije tac ca na vidyate > na vai śūdro bhavec chūdro > brāhmaṇo na ca brāhmaṇaḥ "If the characteristics of a *brāhmaṇa* are found in a *śūdra* and not in a *brāhmaṇa,* that *śūdra* should not be known as a *śūdra,* and that *brāhmaṇa* should not be known as a *brāhmaṇa.*" Similarly, in the *Vana-parva,* Chapter 211, it is said: > śūdra-yonau hi jātasya > sad-guṇānupatiṣṭhataḥ > ārjave vartamānasya > brāhmaṇyam abhijāyate "If a person born in a *śūdra* family has developed the qualities of a *brāhmaṇa,* such as *satya* [truthfulness], *śama* [peacefulness], *dama* [self-control] and *ārjava* [simplicity], he attains the exalted position of a *brāhmaṇa.*" In the *Anuśāsana-parva,* Chapter 163, it is said: > sthito brāhmaṇa-dharmeṇa > brāhmaṇyam upajīvati > kṣatriyo vātha vaiśyo vā > brahma-bhūyaḥ sa gacchati > > ebhis tu karmabhir devi > śubhair ācaritais tathā > śūdro brāhmaṇatāṁ yāti > vaiśyaḥ kṣatriyatāṁ vrajet > > na yonir nāpi saṁskāro > na śrutaṁ na ca santatiḥ > kāraṇāni dvijatvasya > vṛttam eva tu kāraṇam "If one is factually situated in the occupation of a *brāhmaṇa,* he must be considered a *brāhmaṇa,* even if born of a *kṣatriya* or *vaiśya* family. "O Devī, if even a *śūdra* is actually engaged in the occupation and pure behavior of a *brāhmaṇa,* he becomes a *brāhmaṇa.* Moreover, a *vaiśya* can become a *kṣatriya.* "Therefore, neither the source of one's birth, nor his reformation, nor his education is the criterion of a *brāhmaṇa.* The *vṛtta,* or occupation, is the real standard by which one is known as a *brāhmaṇa.*" We have seen that a person who is not the son of a doctor and has not attended a medical college is sometimes able to practice medicine. By practical knowledge of how to perform a surgical operation, how to mix medicine and how to give certain medicines for certain diseases, a person can receive a certificate and be registered as a medical practitioner in the practical field. He can do a medical man's work and be known as a doctor. Although qualified medical men may consider him a quack, the government will recognize his work. Especially in India, there are many such doctors who perform their medical services perfectly. They are accepted even by the government. Similarly, if one is engaged in brahminical service or occupational duties, he must be considered a *brāhmaṇa* despite the family in which he is born. That is the verdict of all the *śāstras.* In the *Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam* [[sb/7/11/35|(7.11.35)]], it is said: > yasya yal lakṣaṇaṁ proktaṁ > puṁso varṇābhivyañjakam > yad anyatrāpi dṛśyeta > tat tenaiva vinirdiśet This is a statement by Nārada Muni to Mahārāja Yudhiṣṭhira, wherein Nārada says that the symptoms of a *brāhmaṇa, kṣatriya* and *vaiśya* are all described in *śāstra.* Therefore, if one is found exhibiting the symptoms and qualities of a *brāhmaṇa* and serving in a *brahminical* occupation, even if he is not born a *brāhmaṇa* or *kṣatriya,* he should be considered according to his qualifications and occupation. Similarly, in the *Padma purāṇa* it is said: > na śūdrā bhagavad-bhaktās > te tu bhāgavatā matāḥ > sarva-varṇeṣu te śūdrā > ye na bhaktā janārdane "A devotee should never be considered a *śūdra.* All the devotees of the Supreme Personality of Godhead should be recognized as *bhāgavatas.* If one is not a devotee of Lord Kṛṣṇa, however, even if born of a *brāhmaṇa, kṣatriya* or *vaiśya* family, he should be considered a *śūdra.*" In the *Padma Purāṇa* it is also said: > śva-pākam iva nekṣeta > loke vipram avaiṣṇavam > vaiṣṇavo varṇo-bāhyo 'pi > punāti bhuvana-trayam "If a person born in a *brāhmaṇa* family is an *avaiṣṇava,* a nondevotee, one should not see his face, exactly as one should not look upon the face of a *caṇḍāla,* or dog-eater. However, a *vaiṣṇava* found in *varṇas* other than *brāhmaṇa* can purify all the three worlds." The *Padma Purāṇa* further says: > śūdraṁ vā bhagavad-bhaktaṁ > niṣādaṁ śva-pacaṁ tathā > vīkṣate jāti-sāmānyāt > sa yāti narakaṁ dhruvam "One who considers a devotee of the Supreme Personality of Godhead who was born in a family of *śūdras, niṣādas* or *caṇḍālas* to belong to that particular caste certainly goes to hell." A *brāhmaṇa* must be a Vaiṣṇava and a learned scholar. Therefore in India it is customary to address a *brāhmaṇa* as *paṇḍita.* Without knowledge of *Brahman,* one cannot understand the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Therefore a Vaiṣṇava is already a *brāhmaṇa,* whereas a *brāhmaṇa* may become a Vaiṣṇava. In the *Garuḍa Purāṇa* it is said: > bhaktir aṣṭa-vidhā hy eṣā > yasmin mlecche 'pi vartate > sa viprendro muni-śreṣṭhaḥ > sa jñānī sa ca paṇḍitaḥ "If even a *mleccha* becomes a devotee, he is to be considered the best of the *brāhmaṇas* and a learned *paṇḍita.*" Similarly, *Tattva-sāgara* says: > yathā kāñcanatāṁ yāti > kāṁsyaṁ rasa-vidhānataḥ > tathā dīkṣā-vidhānena > dvijatvaṁ jāyate nṛṇām "As bell metal is turned to gold when mixed with mercury in an alchemical process, so one who is properly trained and initiated by a bona fide spiritual master becomes a *brāhmaṇa* immediately." All this evidence found in the revealed scriptures proves that according to the Vedic version, a Vaiṣṇava is never to be considered an *abrāhmaṇa,* or *non-brāhmaṇa.* A Vaiṣṇava should not be thought to belong to a lower caste even if born in a *mleccha* or *yavana* family. Because he has become a devotee of Lord Kṛṣṇa, he has become purified and has attained the stage of *brāhmaṇa (dvijatvaṁ jāyate nṛṇām).*