Translated from the Hindi book titled ‘Govinda Kathamrta Vrsti’ which is a compilation of Srila Gurudeva’s Hari-katha spoken at the Sri Radha Govinda Mandir in Jaipur (from 6.9.2001 to 12.9.2001) Śrī Govindajī is the root of all avataras-keśava dhṛta mīna śarīrā, keśava dhṛta rāma śarīra etc. He is not alone but presides with Śrī Rādhājī. One time Śrī Rādhājī was removed from here because the Vaiṣṇavas of the Rāmānuja school of thought (Sampradāya) propounding Svakīyavāda raised the objection that, Śrīmatī Rādhārānī is not a consort of Kṛṣṇa wedded according to Vedic principles. Nowhere in the Śrīmad Bhāgavatam or the Viṣṇu Purāṇa is there any mention of the name of Rādhājī. Secondly, the Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇava’s are not Vaiṣṇava’s belonging to a Sampradāya because they don’t have there own commentary on Brahma-sūtra and therefore they cannot be accepted as a Sampradāya coming from a discpilic succession (paramparā). At that time Maharājā Jayasiṁha the Second called the prominent Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇava ācarya’s, knowing them to be followers of Śrīla Rūpa Gosv āmī, to debate with the Rāmānuja Vaiṣṇava’s. That time Śrīla Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura was present but he had become very old, so he sent his own disciple and student Śrīpāda Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa to Jaipur to debate. Using incontrovertible logic and very strong and firm scriptural evidence (pramāṇa) he established that the Gauḍīya Sampradāya is a pure Vaiṣṇava Sampradāya in the line of Madhva and that the Śrīmad Bhāgavatam is indeed the natural and genuine commentary of this Sampradāya. In many different Purānas a mention of Śrī Rādhājī’s name is given. She is the embodiment of bliss (hlādini svarūpa), the eternal beloved of Śrī Kṛṣṇa. Indeed, in many places of the Śrīmad Bhāgavatam, especially in the tenth canto where vraja-līlā is described, everywhere, in a hidden way, Śrīmatī Rādhikā can be found mentioned. Sitting in front of Śrī Govindajī, Śrīpāda Baladeva Vidyābhūá �£aṇa in one night composed the Govinda-bhāṣya commentary, and seeing this all the learned and knowledgeable people became astonished. Kṛṣṇa was indeed certainly married to Rukmiṇī and Satyabhāmā but only to the gopīs, especially Śrīmatī Rādhikā He accepted his indebtedness by admitting His own defeat. na pāraye ’haṁ niravadya-saṁyujāṁ sva-sādhu-kṛtyaṁ vibudhāyuṣāpi vaḥ yā mābhajan durjara-geha-śṛṅkhalāḥ saṁvṛścya tad vaḥ pratiyātu sādhunā (Srimad Bhagavatam 10.32.22) I am not able to repay My debt for your spotless service, even within a lifetime of Brahmā. Your connection with Me is beyond reproach. You have worshiped Me, cutting off all domestic ties, which are difficult to break. Therefore please let your own glorious deeds be your compensation. Śrī Kṛṣṇa is saying – My dear beloved gopīs! For my sake you have broken the bonds of household life, which even great yogīs and renuncient are unable to break. You meeting with Me is in all respects spotless and free from faults. Even if I wanted to fully recompensate your loving service and sacrifice (tyāga) by an immortal life and body, till the end of time, still I would not be able to do so. I am birth after birth indebted to you. By your own mild nature and love you could make me free from this debt, nonetheless I would still remain indebted to you. Kṛṣṇa may tell the gopīs, ‘ask for something in return for your service’, however the gopīs only ask for Kṛṣṇa’s service and in this way Kṛṣṇa becomes even more indebted to them. Such is the one pointed love of the gopīs for Kṛṣṇa. Their love is not divided for their own husbands, family and other relations. Their love (rati) is competent (samarthā) for it has the ability to control Kṛṣṇa. In this love (rati) only the desire for Kṛṣṇa’s happiness predominates. Other than the gopīs who are not separate from Kṛṣṇa, none are Kṛṣṇa’s potency (śakti) rather, are but a part of a plenary expansion (kalā) of Kṛṣṇa. The queens (mahiṣis) are married to Kṛṣṇa, but their love apart for Kṛṣṇa is divided amongst their sons, family members and respected seniors (gurujana). Sometimes they will go to their own father’s house. Their love (rati) is proper (samañjasā) and in this love along with Kṛṣṇa’s happiness is also some mood for their own happiness. Their love is not solely fixed on Kṛṣṇa, it is distributed amongst others also. The Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam manifested only to exclusively glorify the love of the gopīs; however, this is done in an indirect way. For example if I were to say, ‘A one year old boy, who wears a peacock feather, goes from house to house stealing butter. He wanders after cows and plays a flute.’ and then ask ‘Who is he? Is he Rāma or Vāmana? Or is he Nrsṁhadeva?’ One would be compelled to say that this is a description of Kṛṣṇa Kanhaiyā. This is how something is glorified in an indirect form. All of Kṛṣṇa’s pastimes in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam have been glorified in an indirect way. On inspection of this Mahāpurāṇa on might suppose that Kṛṣṇa is not Brahma. The question arises does Brahma perform activities of stealing? The gopīs often express words like ‘deceitful’ and ‘rogue’ etc. to Him. Rāsa only happened in Vṛndāvana and until now it has not been performed by any other incarnation of Bhagavān or in any othe r abode (dhāma), not even in Dvārakā or Mathurā. Kṛṣṇa wipes the sweat from the faces of the gopīs with His own shoulder garment (pītāmbar) resulting from the fatigue of dancing. If an ankle bell is separated and falls off then Kṛṣṇa puts it back on. In the Vedas and Purāṇas the name of Śrī Rādhā is seen mentioned everywhere. In the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, descriptions of the names of Rukmiṇī, Satyabhāmā etc. and the other queens are seen. Out of the gopīs only the name of mother Yaśoda is found. Śrī Rādhā and the other names of the gopīs have not been clearly mentioned. But the pure devotee knows the essential truth that Śrī Rādhājī’s name is in every verse of the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, in a secret form. Why didn’t Śrīla Śukadeva Gosvāmī clearly mention Śrī Rādhā’s name? The reason is that in his previous birth he was Śrī Rādhā’s dear parrot and only saying the name of Śrī Rād hā and the other residents of Vraja would awaken a remembrance of them in his mind and render him unconscious. If he were to clearly utter the name of Śrī Rādhājī then it would be impossible for him to describe the glories of Śrī Kṛṣṇa’s pastimes in the seven days Parīksit Mahārāja had before his death. Therefore in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam we find him giving descriptions like, ‘one gopī’, ‘one resident of Vraja’ etc. Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam didn’t appear for manifesting the glories of Kṛṣṇa rather only for manifesting the love of the gopīs. This has all been glorified in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam in a very beautiful way and for this reason it has been called the Amala Purāṇa, Mahā Purāṇa, Śabda Purāṇa etc. We are starting our discourses from this very Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. The pastimes of Kṛṣṇa were performed in Vṛndāvana, Mathurā, and Dvārakā. After this the Mahābhārata war took place and then due to the curse of the sages (ṛṣis) an iron pestle came from the stomach of Sāmba, which became the cause of the destruction of the Yadu dynasty. By the advice of king Ugrasena the iron pestle was ground into powder and washed away in the sea. Left over, was a triangular iron piece that was also thrown into the sea. It was then swallowed by a fish that a hunter caught and the pointed iron piece was taken from its stomach and attached to the tip of his arrow. That same arrow struck Kṛṣṇa, who quickly returned to His own abode Goloka. From the iron powder reed-stalks emerged and the entire Yadu dynasty destroyed themselves by fighting amongst each other with these iron stalks. However, we should understand this pastime in this way that, if Kṛṣṇa desires so, then in a blink of an eye He can create and destroy unlimited universes. He never perishes but just becomes un-manifest. He cannot be seen by the vision of ordinary people. This is explained by Śrīla Viśvanātha Cakravarti Ṭhākura using an analogy: Once in the court of a king a conjurer performed an unprecedented magic trick. The king became very pleased and the queen gave him her own precious necklace as a token of appreciation. Seeing this, the two sons of the conjurer began to fight over the necklace and killed each other. The conjurer began to lament and both the conjurer and his wife killed themselves using a sword in distress over the loss of their sons. Their bodies were then removed from the assembly. The next day the king held another assembly and the conjurer along with his wife and two sons appeared there. Everyone became astonished, for yesterday they had all died. The conjurer spoke to the king, ‘This was also a part of our magic trick. Nobody actually died. Now please compliment us with another gift.’ Here Śrīla Viśvanātha Cakravarti Ṭhākurapāda is saying that, if an ordinary magician can do such a trick then what cannot be performed by Śrī Kṛṣṇa, the magician of magicians do? Therefore, Kṛṣṇa un-manifesting in this way was only His pastime. The deliberations of the academics are empty and the men who write history are atheistic. According to their view, with our eyes we only see the earth and the sun etc. however they are unaware of the unlimited universes that are situated in the skin pores of Bhagavān. The constellations of the earth, sun, moon and so forth cannot be seen only by the eyes, in reality there are millions and millions of them situated in many different universes. Moreover, unlimited living entities reside in those universes. This has all been lucidly described in our Vedic scriptures. To say nothing of this, such academics and historians etc. don’t even have knowledge of themselves, or the truth regarding the soul (ātma-tattva). Are they able to stop old-age and death even momentarily? No! What is the soul? They don’t even know that Govindajī, the root of all incarnations, is the Supersoul of all the souls. He is indestructible; He is never destroyed and therefore He is only manifesting and un-manifesting His pastimes.
Posted on: Thu, 25 Jul 2013 15:21:13 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015