QA-2

(Some of my friends, who are atheists, have asked these questions on sweet devotion and related topics. I have sent those questions to H.H. Shri Datta Swami, who has answered these questions. - Ms. Thrylokya)

2. Since we cannot distinguish between real and unreal forms of God, how can we believe this theory of illusory Krishnas?

[Ms. Thrylokya asked:- Swami, I have forwarded Your reply to the learned person. He shared the below text “Every political leader before elections, tries to bring an emotional angle while canvassing for votes. The answer about real Krishna and Gopikas as Father and daughters based on the Gita verse appears like that coverup only. God definitely did not realize the fact of being their Father just before the raasa-dance with Gopikas. He is omnipotent and omniscient from the beginning. If God has full knowledge that He is the father of all souls and has the fatherly feeling only towards all souls, why would God encourage the sweet devotion in the first place? Just like God discouraged the homosexual feelings of male devotees towards Him, God could have discouraged the sexual feelings of devoted souls towards Him in the beginning itself (when sages in Dandakaranya proposed to hug God Rama) by saying that He cannot have such romantic feelings towards His children. But, no! He decided to encourage them and settle them permanently in that line and asked the sages to be born as real females! God's encouragement itself proves that He is equally interested in the line of sweet devotion. Since no father will encourage their issues to have sexual feelings towards him, God didn't really have that fatherly feeling. Moreover, the original unimaginable God is beyond all the feelings of mind. In fact, a verse in Veda says all the souls are not only females, but also wives of God! According to the Veda, God becomes husband (Striyaḥ satīḥ puṃsaḥ) although God becomes father according to the Gita (Ahaṃ bīja pradaḥ pitā). Swami only said that Veda is more reliable than any other scripture. God promised that one can reach Him in anyway. But, He discouraged homosexuality breaking His own promise. But, He stuck to the same promise to encourage heterosexuality. If God has only fatherly feelings towards His children, He should break His promise in both cases of homosexuality and heterosexuality towards Him. Isn't it? But, seeing God's interest in encouragement of sweet devotion, I am not convinced that God involved with them without any romantic interest from His side. Gopikas being sages from millions of births, don’t they know that God has only fatherly feeling for them? If Gopikas are correct in directing lust towards God, we must conclude that God also responded in true sense in real form. If God is truly having fatherly feelings towards Gopikas, then either His encouragement in sweet devotion must be false or God being omnipotent must possess both husband and father feelings simultaneously towards Gopikas. Since we cannot distinguish between real and unreal forms of God based on proof, how can we believe this theory of illusory Krishnas?” Swami, please reply to this.]

Swami replied:- If you carefully and patiently study the answers that are already given by Me, your new questions will not arise because your new questions are just new forms of the old questions only. God Krishna is the purest form of God and for this reason only, God Brahma said that He alone is the real celibate (Askhalita Brahmacārī). God Krishna did not react or even acted in the form of reaction towards the devotees of sweet devotion. The illusory Krishnas created by Him have their own individual bodies and individual minds. Their bodies contained individual hormones that react to the hormonal expressions of Gopikas in action, word and feeling. Only the form of Krishna is common because there is no other way to satisfy Gopikas. Form is completely illusory just like the shape of the pot can never exist by itself independently without its causal material that is mud.

Regarding worldly bonds, they are temporary and hence, unreal as said by Shankara (Yadanityaṃ tat kṛtakaṃ hi loke…). Sage Ashtaavakra also says that mother in this birth becomes wife in the next birth. Hence, all the worldly bonds are unreal in the sense of highest spiritual level. But, when these worldly bonds exist between God and soul, the bonds become real because one end of the bond is God, who is the absolute reality. The love present in each bond is the essence of that bond. Once Gopikas told in their prayer “O Krishna, You are the Father, Mother, teacher, friend, husband and the ultimate way”. Their sense is that only love is present in every bond. All the love gathered from all the bonds is made as one heap and this entire heap is channelised into the bond of God and devotee, which bond alone exists in the eyes of God. All the other worldly bonds are just like the water tubes without water in them and these unreal bonds are superimposed on the real bond, which is God-devotee. The entire water-love is running only in one tube, which is the bond with God. In such case, you can call such single bond with God in the name of any worldly bond or in the names of all worldly bonds. Among all these worldly bonds, physical sex or romantic feelings and words exist only in husband-wife bond. Since God created all the souls, as per justice, He cannot have husband-wife bond with anybody except with the personified form of His own power, which is in fact Himself only without any internal dualism.

Love is common in all worldly bonds, which is in the form of service and sacrifice. The real love is based on these two points only. All Gopikas failed in this test of real love by complaining to Mother Yashoda about the stealing of butter by Krishna except those twelve Gopikas, who reached Goloka. Hence, the real test is based on the joint bond of children and wealth. The test about the bond with spouse is only formal because unless this test is conducted, the total pass of all the tests about all the 100 worldly bonds can’t be declared. This test is very easy for any soul and due to this fact, all Gopikas passed in this test. I don’t understand why you are digging and digging about this easiest test like King Parikshit! This bond is justified only when the justice in the husband-wife bond is not disturbed and this point is clearly emphasized by God Krishna in the Gita (Dharmaviruddho bhūteṣu kāmo'smi…). At the same time, God has to be involved in this test because this test is about the vote of the devotee to God only (and not of any other human being) when God competes with her bond with spouse. If God is not involved, the basic meaning of this test is lost. If God is involved, justice is damaged. Hence, it is a very critical position for God. In the place of God, if some other person is standing, such person cannot conduct this test without spoiling the justice (because even if God stands in that place, He becomes the spoiler of justice). Since God is omnipotent, God conducted this test based on the same background and at the same time, without involving Himself in anyway (theoretical or practical sex). Only the form is same between original and duplicate Krishna. This point cannot bring sin to the original Krishna.

In the world, sometimes, you find two people having exact physical features. If one of the two did a sin, you cannot punish both. In the case of God, even one did not commit the sin because each illusory Krishna is following the one-wife policy by uniting with one Gopika only and the real Krishna is always a celibate uniting with His own power. Even the Gopika meeting an illusory Krishna (with full confidence that he is real Krishna due to the same form of Krishna) is not a sinner because she is leaving the spouse-bond for the sake of God in Nivrutti. Hence, there is no trace of sin in any angle of this test. Moreover, conducting such test is possible only for the omnipotent God having the power of Maayaa. Since such power is absent in the case of any ordinary human being, a human being cannot imitate this action standing in the place of God. Sage Shuka answered King Parikshit in this way only saying that ordinary people should not imitate divine human incarnations of God having unimaginable powers. The ethical scripture also says the same that inefficient people shall not imitate God (Avara daurbalyāt – Gautama Dharma Suutra). God is the possessor of this mysterious power called Maayaa (Māyinaṃ tu Maheśvaram - Gita). God is called as Maayii or the possessor of this omnipotent power. Since the possessor of power and the power are one and the same, there is no dualism between Maayaa (Power) and Maayii (possessor of Power). Hence, there is no dualism between God and His power. Hence, God is not having even one wife in real sense and therefore, God is called as absolute celibate (Askhalita Brahmacārī) or the one absolute reality in spiritual sense. This world is the product of Maayaa, which is inherently unreal. Hence, God has no dualism with reference to either the world, which is inherently unreal or with reference to His real inherent power, which is Himself. God Himself is called as the infinite ocean of bliss (Sa eko Brahmaṇa ānandaḥ - Veda). Since God is bliss and God is also spiritual knowledge, spiritual knowledge is bliss.

For every statement, there can be possibility of that side or this side like both sides of a coin. Hence, a conclusion by itself cannot be treated as the perfect truth. Only very deep and very sharp analysis can decide whether a concluding statement is right or wrong. For example, you said that God covers His side by some intellectual talent like a politician. But, is there any politician, who is really supporting himself with real analysis? Hence, a conclusion by itself cannot be the authority. It should be confirmed by deep logic only. Mere perception is not the truth. For example, in the morning of winter, fog appears like smoke. Will you conclude that the fog is smoke and it must be coming from the fire existing somewhere? Hence, inference (anumaana pramaanam, like deciding the existence of fire on the top of the hill seeing the smoke coming down) also becomes false at some places. Similarly, perception can also go wrong. A fellow having defect in the eye can see two moons in the sky. Hence, systematic logic and analysis is the only way for correct decision and this will be agreed even by an atheist. There are miracles of God, which are seen in this world (You can see a miracle even today at Hindupuram, Satya Sai District, Andhra Pradesh. From the foot of a very small marble statue of Shri Shirdi Sai Baba, a lot of water is flowing continuously from many months!). But, you can’t understand them. Hence, perception itself does not mean clear understanding. You are seeing magic and you understand that it is true because it is perceived by you. If you understand its background, you will realise that what you perceived is not true. In the case of God’s miracle seen in this world, you are perceiving it and at the same time, not understanding it. Hence, perception by itself is not understanding the truth. You have seen the miracle and at the same time, you agree that you have not understood it. If you understand that the unimaginable miracle is done by unimaginable God, then only you can understand that you have not understood the mechanism of miracle because the unimaginable God is doing that unimaginable miracle.

Unfortunately, there is no perfect simile for God because every item in the world is knowable whereas God alone is unknowable. God has omnipotent power and everything is possible for Him, be it even impossible in the sense of worldly logic. When you do logical analysis, the conclusion may be either this is done or this is not done. Since God can do everything, the worldly logic becomes unnecessary in His case since you can never arrive at the conclusion that God has not done this since it is impossible to do like this. There is only one way to conclude that God has not done this and the only reason for it is that it is improper to do like this. Even though God can do everything, God will not do anything, which is improper and unjust. You can conclude that God has not done this because it is improper and unjust. We can never conclude that God has not done this because this is impossible to be done by anybody. With these facts only, you should start analysing anything done by God. Once God has not done like this, it must mean that this is not justified and hence, God did not do like this. Hence, if God did something, that must be justified about which we are missing the perfect analysis. God is the ultimate authority of truth and justice. Whatever is done by God is true justice and we are mistaking Him since we missed the perfect path of analysis. Therefore, God is not following justice. But, the justice itself is following God like the cow following God Datta. God is beyond logic and sometimes, even logic may go wrong, but not God.

The entire basic logic is that you must recognize and distinguish the unreal Krishna from the real Krishna. There are two personalities here, which are different from each other in all aspects expect the common physical appearance, which cannot transfer sin from one person to the other person. In fact, here, there is no sin at all because whatever is done by the illusory Krishna is also justified since such illusory Krishna did not break the rules of husband-wife relationship anywhere. If you keep the real Krishna alone as one personality and assume that the unreal Krishna is totally absent, the confusion and conflict between father and husband comes up in the case of such single real Krishna. Whenever you speak something about Krishna, you must be cautious whether such Krishna is real or unreal. Ex:- Whenever you see Krishna romancing with Rukminii or Radhaa, such two Krishnas are real because the form of real Krishna multiplied itself into two. Whenever you see Krishna romancing with any Gopika, such Krishna is the illusory form of Krishna created by the real Krishna. In all the rest of the occasions, where romance is not involved, such Krishna is real, be it with any Gopika. Unreal does not mean totally absent because the inherently unreal world got the absolute reality from God as gifted reality and became absolutely real. The world has unreal nature as its inherent nature and has real nature also side by side due to the gifted reality from God. Hence, the world is neither totally non-existent (asat) nor totally existent (sat). As per the context, the world becomes real or unreal. When God performs a miracle, any item of the world can become non-existent. When God is enjoying the world with the help of His superimposed ignorance, the world becomes existent. World is neither existent nor non-existent and hence, Shankara told that the world is neither real nor unreal and is called as mithyaa (Sadasat vilakṣaṇā mithyā).

If a married female devotee retains all the worldly bonds intact and wants to enjoy some other extremely beautiful person, it is horrible sin, be such person is the most beautiful Lord Krishna. She wants to break only the bond with spouse and not the other worldly bonds. Such devotee is not a true devotee to God and is only a sinful devotee. All the Gopikas except the 12 Gopikas, broke only spouse bond and not any other worldly bond. Hence, they became angry when Krishna stole their butter (wealth) that was preserved for their children. This means that no Gopika is ready to break her bond with child and with wealth (butter). Hence, almost all Gopikas failed in the two tests (test for the bond with child and test for the bond with wealth resulting as a joint test for wealth and children). Hence, breaking only spouse bond is not the complete test at all because such breaking of spouse bond alone makes her as a prostitute only. If you take only the bond with spouse and discuss about Gopikas and Krishna, it becomes meaningless since it is only a part of the total picture. A blind fellow catching the tail of an elephant says that elephant is like a rope! Therefore, we must discuss about this spouse bond in the last stage only after testing all other worldly bonds. Only in the last stage, you shall go to this spouse bond just like you must touch the elephant all over the face and body and in the last stage only, you must touch the last part, which is the tail. If you touch all parts of the elephant in the beginning, you will say that the elephant is having a rope-like tail. If you touch only tail in the beginning, you will conclude that elephant is like a rope. Similarly, if you break all the worldly bonds in the beginning and finally break the spouse bond for the sake of God, you will say that sweet devotion is the final formal test in the path of devotion. If you enter into sweet devotion without breaking any other worldly bond, you will say that the path of devotion means only sweet devotion. This is the reason why God Krishna first conducted the test of stealing butter, which is the test for joint-bond with children and wealth. For this joint-test, He spent ten years (5^th to 15^th year of His age) in the first phase itself. Then, just for two years (16^th to 18^th year of His age), He conducted the test for spouse bond by dancing in Brundaavanam. Since every Gopika passed in this test, He stopped conducting this test after one year only.

You may ask that why He conducted this formal test for all Gopikas when He could have conducted this test only for those twelve Gopikas, who passed in the main joint test. He conducted this test for all Gopikas to give full clarification of the spiritual knowledge. You must distinguish between two types of Gopikas:- i) Those, who passed in the tests of all the worldly bonds and also passed the final spouse-bond test and ii) Those, who failed in the tests of all worldly bonds and then, passed the test for spouse-bond as the last test. God Krishna showed both these types of devotees clearly through perception to clarify the concept perfectly. You can insist the sacredness of spouse bond in the case of a devotee maintaining all the other worldly bonds simultaneously. But, if a devotee has crossed all the worldly bonds, you cannot insist on this last spouse bond only since the spouse is very sacred. In fact, God is the most sacred and hence, more sacred than the spouse also. Moreover, spouse-bond is very weak having the facility of divorce and such facility does not exist in any other worldly bond. In this bond only, the ethical scriptures propose remarriages for both females and males in certain situations, which is not for any other bond. The ethical scripture says that a married female can remarry in five situations (Pañcasvāpatsu nārīṇām, patiranyo vidhīyate). Hence, the ethical scripture is not partial to say that a male can marry any number of times, whereas a female shall marry only once. If you take God as male husband and the devotee as female wife (since the Veda says that all souls are females and wives of God), the topic will no more be Pravrutti, but becomes the most sacred Nivrutti. The true devotion of a real devotee is tested by God in several ways. In Pravrutti, the principle between two souls is “I love you provided you also love me” and this is basic human level of love. But, in Nivrutti, the principle of the devotee towards God is “I love you even if you don’t love me or even if you torture me!”. At first, God Datta remains silent towards the devotion of the devotee (Brahma Pariikshaa). Later on, God Datta causes loss to the devotee instead of giving benefit (Vishnu Pariikshaa). Finally, God Datta causes unbearable torture to the devotee (Rudra Pariikshaa). The principle of Nivrutti shall never be applied to Pravrutti because Pravrutti is at the basic human level, whereas Nivrutti is at the highest divine level as said “Pravṛtti reṣā bhūtānām, Nivṛttistu mahā phalā”.

Though the soul is very much fascinated to the spouse, the Veda encourages the soul to have the highest fascination for parents, which shall be more than spouse. The Veda says that parents are God (Mātṛ devo bhava, Pitṛ devo bhava). Even such highest bonds are also worldly bonds and the devotee aspiring for God shall break these two parental bonds also. Prahlaada rejected his father for the sake of God, Shankara rejected His mother for the sake of God and Buddha rejected the three strongest worldly bonds, which are wife, son and wealth for the sake of God. Parents are far better bonds than the spouse bond and even such highest bonds in Pravrutti, are defeated for the sake of the bond with God. For learned souls, bond with parents is far far higher than the spouse bond. In the context of breaking all the worldly bonds, when even the bonds with parents are thrown away, what to speak about the spouse bond? The Veda says that every worldly bond is forming for the sake of soul’s own pleasure and not for the pleasure of the other side (Ātmanaḥ kāmāya sarvaṃ priyaṃ bhavati). In this context, the Veda says that the wife loves her husband for her pleasure and the husband loves his wife for his pleasure. Similarly, children. The Veda doesn’t give the bonds of parents as an example in this context because parents love their children without any aspiration in return. When such most sacred bond with parents is thrown away for the sake of God, what to speak about the spouse bond in this context? In the case of children, the child loves parents for its comfort. But, the parents love their child not for their comfort, but, for the comfort of the child only. Even if the son behaves like a servant to his wife due to blind fascination to the wife and neglects his parents completely, no doubt, the parents will scold their son, but, they will not change their property-will written in the name of their son! Therefore, devotion to God must be like the parental love towards their children. Hence, the name ‘Datta’ is taken by God, which means that He is the adopted child to the devotee-parents. Since people don’t like this, they reversed this bond so that God Datta becomes their adopted Father and He gives His property to them (children) even if they are bad!

Coming to the topic of encouraging heterosexual sweet devotion while objecting the homosexual line by God, I repeat one millionth time that God neither invented nor encouraged this heterosexual sweet devotion. He only conducted the test for the spouse bond. In fact, the spouse bond is discovered as one of the three strongest worldly bonds (Eshanaatrayam) by the highest order of souls called sages. The sages made it a compulsory test because the fascination for spouse is very famous in the worldly life (Pravrutti). Due to this compulsion of spouse bond test, God has to conduct this like a male doctor doing the delivery of a pregnant lady touching her private parts due to the inevitable procedure of delivery (I am referring this case of olden days when male doctors alone were present.). But, God did not like to do this test by Himself since it is against the justice of assumed-father and assumed-daughter relationship between God and created souls. Hence, He created His illusory forms to conduct this test. This homosexual relationship is also invented by souls only due to their blind lust resembling animals. Do you (the questioner) have even a trace of common sense that can prevent you from blaming God blindly? God neither invented nor supported the sweet devotion even in dream!

Real Krishna is sinless because He never touched any Gopika since He created unreal Krishnas for their sake. The unreal Krishnas were felt as real Krishnas by Gopikas due to commonality in the form of body and face and hence, Gopikas were not deceived. We are calling them as unreal Krishnas from the point of absolutely real God. Actually, the unreal Krishnas have gifted absolute reality like Gopikas and hence, from the point of a Gopika, the unreal Krishna is real only. Since each unreal Krishna was confined to each Gopika following the one-wife policy, the unreal Krishna is also sinless. But, if you see the case of Gopika, she left her spouse and involved in the enjoyment of God. As per ethics, leaving spouse and going with somebody else is a sin. How can the Gopika cross that sin? First point is that this is not leaving the spouse for the sake of another beautiful person, which is definitely a sin. The ultimate aim of any soul is to reach God and be in His association forever. The most wonderful point is that even the husband of the Gopika wants to reach God for his permanent association with God even by sacrificing his spouse bond also!! The soul has to break all the worldly bonds for the sake of the bond with God. Actually, the soul is neither female nor male and hence, both Gopika and her husband have the same aim. When it is said that all the worldly bonds have to be broken, bond with spouse cannot be an exception. The holiness of God is at such height about which we cannot even imagine. God is beyond justice also. It means that with reference to His Holiness, the worldly justice is nothing. You must remember that this is a peculiar case, where all the worldly bonds are completely broken for the sake of God. In this situation, you cannot attribute any speciality to the spouse bond. In fact, even more holy bonds like bonds with parents are also broken in this situation. Even the spouse of a Gopika has to follow this line only and get salvation from all the worldly bonds to get union with God (Saayujyam). This is the ultimate goal of life.

Moreover, if you realise all this and try to develop such unique bond with God, all this procedure is applied. If you are not willing, you can continue in the world maintaining the worldly bonds forever. Nobody is forcing you because God gets rid of one headache! God has given you free will and the decision is purely yours. Even if you take such decision to reach God, God will obstruct your trials by His tests. If you stand like an unshaken hill by any test, then only God will help you. Krishna threatened Gopikas to go back to their homes telling about the horrible punishment for this sin. But, the Gopikas stood very firm because they were sages for millions of births doing penance for the sake of God. Any sage is the peak of entire knowledge of both Pravrutti (worldly life) and Nivrutti (Spiritual life). Each sage is the author of scriptures and is an infinite ocean of spiritual knowledge. Each sage knows the truth far far better than any human devotee. Hence, you (the learned scholar, who asked this question) need not sympathise them as exploited innocent and ignorant souls. Your so-called intelligence about which you are egoistic cannot be equal to one dust particle of the feet of the sage. A sage is considered as universal preacher. Sages are preachers even for angels. Sage Bruhaspati is the preacher (Guru) even for Indra, the Lord of Angels. Sages are the writers of all ethical scriptures, which are the authorities to decide what is sin and what is merit in this world. You, petty lilliput! You are trying to show God as a sinner framing His interest in sweet devotion, for whom even the highest sages did the most horrible penance for millions of births!!