22 Aug 2025
| Q & A | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4-8 |
| 9-12 | 13-20 | 21-26 | 27-31 |
| 32-36 | 37-39 | 40-47 | 48-53 |
| 54-62 | 63-68 | 69-71 | 72-77 |
| 78-86 | 87-98 | 87-98 | |
QA:78-86
(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)
78. Why is God interested in Nivrutti and encouraging sweet devotion?
[Ms. Thrylokya asked:- Swami, please explain in points why God is interested in Nivrutti and encouraging sweet devotion. Also, I still feel that Radha is totally fruitless since she is neither a progressing Gopika nor a complete Sadguru. Please enlighten me.]
Swami replied:-
1) Radha/Anaghā does not require salvation (Moksha) from worldly bonds to unite (Yoga) with God because she is already relieved from all the worldly bonds and is unimaginable God Himself exactly like the real Krishna.
2) The illusory media (roles) of Radha/Rukmini/real Krishna are created by unimaginable God and also the unimaginable God merged with those media, which got destroyed as in the case of all other human beings and the innermost eternal single Parabrahman (unimaginable God) is leftover as Himself (actor) alone. This means that the basic actor is one eternal Parabrahman only and the above three are different roles.
3) The three roles are different with some similarities. We can say that Radha or Rukmini belongs to one type of roles of ideal devotees covered by full ignorance by which both are unable to recognize themselves as Parabrahman. This is very essential for the role of a devotee. Rukmini was the leader for all married wives and Radha was the leader for all the Gopikas. Krishna was also covered with ignorance sometimes, so that through this role, Parabrahman can have the real entertainment. But, Krishna is in the role of God because He (Parabrahman) came to earth to preach about God as Līlā Mānuṣāvatāra. Krishna was having the facility in His role to realise Himself as Parabrahman. Rama was also fully covered with ignorance like Radha/Rukmini not only for the sake of real entertainment, but also for the sake of standing as an ideal example for human beings called as Ādarśa Mānushāvatāra.
4) Parabrahman has general love on all the created souls with the basic all-pervading bond called God-devotee or Master-servant relationship and He tries to help all the souls as far as possible unless the hard bad deed-bad fruit cycle governed by the deity of justice does not stand rigidly on the way as obstacle. God loves justice to the climax state because the ethical scriptures were written by sages and sages were God’s most dearest souls. Sages always do penance (which is the agony for God) in every birth.
5) Some devotees developed sweet love for God and the liking of a soul for a particular path is based on the individual inherent taste of the soul. God did not create any taste for any soul because the liking for a specific taste is based on the accumulated strong thoughts (samskaaras) that got solidified as qualities (gunas). The strength of the taste depends upon the strength of the individual qualities. Hence, neither God is the creator nor the developer of such qualities provoking strong taste. If such taste is sinful, God will send such soul to the hell for punishment by which at least the quality of the taste gets weakened. Since this sweet love is not sin if it is diverted to the legal husband, there is no need of any discussion on this topic since it is justified Pravrutti (worldly life). If this sweet love is illegally diverted to another human being other than husband, it becomes sin since it is unjust worldly life called Dushpravrutti and the result is horrible hell.
6) If this sweet love is diverted to God other than husband, it becomes Nivrutti (spiritual life). The various points of Nivrutti are:-
i) Nivrutti is for every soul irrespective of external factors like caste, gender, religion, region etc. ii) Due to extreme devotion to God, all the worldly bonds shall be spontaneously dropped without any specific effort to destroy the worldly bonds. iii) God has equal general love on all the souls to help them in worldly life as well as in the spiritual life. Since the fruit of spiritual life is eternal and very high, God gives more importance to help the souls in Nivrutti because God wishes that the soul shall get the best fruit. iv) The general love is split into several paths or worldly bonds and each path has its own special greatness. The greatness of sweet love is that union is complete since all the Trikaranams (body, word and mind) get united resulting in climax inspiration. This path is not punished in Pravrutti but seriously punished in Dushpravrutti. v) The strengths of all worldly bonds are tested in comparision with the bond with God. Here, full salvation is obtained only when all the worldly bonds without a single exception are tested in competition with God-bond. vi) The spouse-bond test should not be misunderstood as confined to females only. This test is concerned with one of several worldly bonds and neither any soul based on gender nor any worldly bond based on inconvenience can be exempted if salvation from all the 100 worldly bonds is to be achieved. vii) Relief from all the worldly bonds is a pre-requisite for the union of the soul with God. You cannot give the joining report in a new institution without obtaining the relieving order from the old institution. viii) God is in no way responsible for the sweet love generated in the hearts of some souls based on their inherent individual liking depending on the strength of qualities acquired from several previous births. The inherent liking to a specific concept cannot be changed even by God. Even though God Krishna made hectic efforts to His best capacity to change Kauravas, they did not change even a centimetre because of their inherent demonic qualities, which were accumulated from several births. ix) The most important point in this topic of Nivrutti is that no separate efforts must be made by the soul to destroy the existing worldly bonds. Such effort is condemned. The worldly bonds shall drop by themselves before the power of attraction towards God. Hence, the wife need not put efforts to dislike her husband and the husband need not put efforts to dislike his wife. When the divine nectar (God’s devotion) is tasted, the taste to drink any worldly drink is naturally destroyed without any trace of effort. Devotees coming in such path are only allowed into Nivrutti. Devotees breaking the worldly bonds by force for the sake of God are not allowed into Nivrutti. Dropping the worldly drinks is a spontaneous process that happens after tasting the divine nectar and it is not a pre-requisite to attain the divine nectar. x) The three strongest worldly bonds are with wealth, spouse and child, by defeating which for the sake of God, one can enter into Nivrutti. God Krishna stole butter from the houses of Gopikas, which was the joint test of wealth and child since butter was the wealth preserved for their children. Out of 1000 Gopikas, only twelve Gopikas have passed this test by not complaining to Mother Yashoda about Krishna’s theft of butter. The dance in Brundāvanam was the test of spouse-bond in which all the 1000 Gopikas have passed proving that the spouse-bond is the weakest of all the three strongest worldly bonds. Krishna as God and sages as Gopikas have enacted this play to demonstrate that one has to pass all the tests of God to reach God permanently.
79. Can ‘God created His duplicate forms’ be treated as an Arthavāda for the sake of satisfying the general public?
[Swami, God Krishna has blessed the same romantic sexual union for Radha, Rukmini, 12 successful Gopikas, 16,107 married wives and 1000 failed Gopikas as well. Same romantic pleasure was also blessed to Kubja, who wanted to enjoy God. Therefore, God is giving the equal fruit for everyone. Seeing this, it can be inferred that God is interested in sex with devoted females. The reason is definitely not lust, but, to reward the souls breaking their spouse-bond and honour the souls breaking all the worldly bonds for His sake. Still, God can be called as celibate for different reason. In Your own book ‘Shri Dattaguru Bhagavat Gita’, in 53rd Point of Chapter-6, You said “Brahmachaarii doesn’t mean the person, who is unmarried. It means a person, who is always absorbed in God. Sage Vashishta, who got 100 issues through his wife Arundhati claimed himself as Sadaa Brahmacharii (always bachelor), which was accepted by Ganga river! When Narada asked God Brahma about the real Brahmachaarii in the entire creation, Brahma showed His finger towards Krishna, who married 16,000 girls! When Narada asked about a chaste lady, His finger pointed Gopika.”. Therefore, Your theory of God creating His duplicate forms can be treated as an Arthavāda for sake of satisfying general public. Please comment on this.]
Swami replied:- My explanation about the word ‘Brahmacārī’ is a scholastic explanation for the sake of intellectual scholars only. It cannot satisfy the intelligence of an ordinary human being. Sage Vashishta was treated as Brahmacārī because his mind was always on God and not on his spouse. Hence, even though he produced 100 children, he was treated as celibate by scholars. Treating a person as a celibate is different from a person, who is the actual celibate. The general public, who are illiterate cannot understand the explanation given for the word ‘treated as Brahmacārī’. When God Brahma referred to God Krishna, He told that God Krishna is the actual perfect celibate. Hence, we have to explain the celibacy of God Krishna from the viewpoint of general public and not from the viewpoint of intellectual scholars. Creating the duplicate Krishnas having the form of real Krishna alone establishes real Krishna as the ‘perfect celibate’, who is not a ‘treated celibate’. If you make the creation of duplicate Krishnas as arthavāda, in such case, the real Krishna becomes a treated celibate and not the perfect celibate as told by God Brahma. Hence, creation of duplicate Krishnas by real Krishna is not a lie and hence, is not arthavāda. A treated celibate is not mentally attached to the spouse even though He is attached to the spouse by words and actions. A real celibate is not attached to any female by mind, words and actions. A perfect celibate derives pleasure and satisfaction from Himself being the infinite ocean of bliss.
Gopika left her spouse for the sake of God and selected God as her spouse. This is Nivrutti in which even justice shall be sacrificed for the sake of God since God is greater than justice. Justice is greater than injustice, but not greater than God. Even though God created His duplicate forms in order to save His celibacy, Gopika is believing that the duplicate forms of God are real forms of God only. Hence, as far as Gopika is considered, this point is not coming to her view at all. This point is revealed by God Datta very recently only and hence, the public alone knows the fact and not those Gopikas. Hence, your objection is overruled. Gopika is chaste because she did not leave the justified spouse-bond for the sake of Dushpravrutti. She left the spouse-bond for the sake of Nivrutti along with all other worldly bonds. Gopika became more chaste in Nivrutti than the previous Pravrutti.
80. What do You say if I say the following?
[Swami, if I say that Anaghā is exploited as a show-piece and made an ignorant devotee for the sake of devotees of sweet devotion. What do You say?]
Swami replied:- No devotee sits in equal position with God. If Anaghā is really an ignorant devotee, Anaghā will not sit by the side of God Datta in equal height and position. Sarasvati will not sit by the side of God Brahma. Lakshmi will not sit by the side of God Vishnu. Parvati will not sit by the side of God Shiva. Sita will not sit by the side of Rama. Radha/Rukmini will not sit by the side of God Krishna. This shows that both are the same actor called Parabrahman. Half-side of Parabrahman cannot sit at higher position and another half-side of Parabrahman cannot sit at lower position. Hence, you should not say that Anaghā is in the lower position acting in a lower role as ignorant devotee. This difference is in the roles, but not in the actor. If you take two human beings, both are roles only and there is no actor in them. Actor and role exist in incarnation of God only. Hence, before you come to your above mentioned point, stand at the level of the same actor standing in both roles. If we assume that the two roles contain two different actors, then also there is possibility of saying one actor/role is greater than another actor/role. When the difference between two roles is based on the single actor acting in two roles, how can you say that real difference (in the angle of actor) exists? Roles have to be different as per the scheme of the play. This difference will neither insult this role nor that role when the basic actor is one and the same.
You will touch the feet of your parents and the feet of guru. In North-India, even if any elder is seen, his/her feet are touched. Do you say that in all these similar actions, the angle and quantity of reverence is one and the same since the action is same? Lord Narasimha made Prahlaada to sit on His lap on which Goddess Lakshmi used to sit. Do you say that the devotee Prahlaada is equal to Goddess Mahā Lakshmi? The external visible action is not connected to the internal invisible feeling since the external action is one and the same. Such difference is found even in human beings. You support this in human beings and not in the case of God! You need not take sexual life as the greatest of all angles. When Goddess Lakshmi came near Lord Narasimha, He roared with anger and Goddess Lakshmi ran away. When Prahlaada came near, Lord Narasimha became pleasant and made him to sit on His lap. Hence, respect several angles, which are far far greater than the sweet devotion. Even if you examine the three strongest worldly bonds, the strongest among the three is the bond with child and not the spouse-bond.
81. Is ‘God’s exclusive romantic love on His real form’ just a theory to satisfy the souls following justice?
[Swami, You just said that no devotee sits in equal position with God. But practically, we see both Lakshmi and Padmavati on either side of God Venkateshwara being worshipped equally as His wives. In fact, both attain the same practical fruits since neither of them can identify either the presence or absence of God-component in real form and illusory form of God. Hence, Lakshmi appears to be exploited by God as a show-piece to help devoted souls like Padmavati to become an equal wife to God proving that God’s exclusive romantic love on His real form is just a theory to satisfy the devoted souls following justice. If Lakshmi is absent, God Venkateshwara cannot do devotional justice to sweet devotees since He cannot show the benchmark of practical fruit for sweet devotion. Please comment on this.]
Swami replied:- Deep background analysis stands behind the curtain. The play before the curtain shows only the roles. Lord Venkateshwara established as God Krishna (His mother Yashoda was born as Vakulamālikā, the adopted mother of Lord Venkateshwara) has two wives:- i) Shri Devi or Goddess Mahā Lakshmi or Rukmini, ii) Bhuudevi or Padmaavati or Satyabhama. The play before the curtain is that the Lord married both and hence, both sit in equal positions on both sides of the Lord. The servant will always sit near the feet of the Lord. Both these wives can sit by the sides of the husband and this is our ancient tradition of Hindu religion. Even though wife serves the husband like a servant, she has higher position than the servant. Therefore, there is no objection for both the wives sitting along with their husband.
Goddess Maha Lakshmi is the incarnation of the original power of Parabrahman (unimaginable God). She is the incarnation of Parabrahman as Vishnu is the incarnation of Parabrahman. Hence, the marriage and union of God Venkateshwara with Goddess Mahā Lakshmi is perfect monism without internal dualism. Padmavati is the incarnation of the presiding deity (angel) of earth. Earth is one of the five elements and the deity of earth is also a created energetic being, which is a soul. In the marriage of Lord Venkateshwara with Padmavati, the created divine form (having the same form of Lord Venkateshwara) of Lord Venkateshwara without Parabrahman married Padmavati and the union was also between both of them only. Parabrahman is the actor that acted in the two roles of Lord Venkateshwara and Goddess Mahā Lakshmi. The role is unreal with reference to the actor and the actor is real. The actor gave full consent to act in both these roles, which are God and devotee. If Goddess Mahā Lakshmi is a show-piece, Lord Venkateshwara will also be a show-piece. The roles are always different in their natures giving encouragement to devotees (the deity of earth is also a devoted soul) to make them happy that they are in association with the original God. Goddess Mahā Lakshmi and her husband are essentially one and the same actor. I have seen a cinema in which two actors play the roles of husband and wife. Both are advocates. In a case, the wife wins over the husband in the court. The husband comes back and starts feeling pained due to his defeat. The wife advises him and changes him to make him happy. In this cinema, there are three components:- i) basic actors, ii) the roles played by both the actors as husband and wife, and the husband and wife as roles of basic actors become real actors to play the two roles as advocates in the secondary level and iii) the roles of advocates, which are unreal in the secondary level while the husband and wife are unreal roles in the primary level. Both pain and happiness enjoyed in the primary and secondary levels are not at all enjoyed by the two basic actors after coming to their homes from the cinema shooting. Hence, this is meaningless worry of yourself. Since your first name is ‘Lakshmi’ (your full name is Lakshmi Thrylokya), you are unnecessarily worrying yourself for the sake of Goddess Mahā Lakshmi!!!
82. Why should God marry someone and crave for sex with someone else?
[Swami, I am a feminist and the ideology of feminism makes me worried about all the female personalities. I felt pity on Satyabhama (previous incarnation of Padmaavati Devi) also while listening to Your Gopi Giitalu. In those songs, Krishna says that He is craving for the sexual union (aikyam) with Gopika under the tree at the bank of Yamuna River. Krishna even begs the Gopika to show some mercy on Him by coming to Him secretly. He says that both the husband of the Gopika and His wife Satyabhama are the two enemies to their romantic love. At many places, He compares and declares that the love of Gopika exceeds the love of Radha. In fact, Krishna married Radha secretly. If Krishna has so much romantic love on Gopikas, why didn’t He say that to His wives Satyabhama and Radha before marriage? Why should God marry someone and crave for sex with someone else?]
Swami replied:- When God Krishna sang songs on Gopikas, He kept Radha as the representing Gopika for all Gopikas. Radha is a ‘pratīka’ or representative model of all Gopikas. A national flag represents the country. Salutation to the flag can be assumed as the salutation to the whole nation, which is not in the real sense because the person has not travelled all the country and saluted. God Krishna sang all those songs keeping only Radha-Gopika in His eyes. This is known to Radha also very well. He wanted to transfer all this box of romantic love to the other Gopikas by rubbing off the name of ‘Radha’ and by writing the names of Gopikas. For this, Radha has no objection because she knows every idea of God Krishna since she alone exists in the heart of God Krishna. God Krishna Himself told even to Goddess Rukmini that Radha stays in His heart. In such case, all this arthavāda is known to Radha very well. Radha as a leader and guide of Gopikas also wishes to encourage Gopikas in the spiritual path. Even Satyabhama knows this arthavāda because God Krishna clearly explained to Satyabhama in person. Satyabhama is the incarnation of Goddess Earth, who is famous for her tolerance and patience. When both have understood God Krishna (including Rukmini), why are you burning your mouth for them?
Arthavāda means utter lie. When God Krishna told in His songs that a Gopi is more dear than even Radha, it is only arthavāda to please all the Gopikas. Such lie is allowed, which is not a sin because it is only for the encouragement of devotees. God Krishna told to Arjuna that Arjuna is Krishna. Immediately, the same Krishna tells that Arjuna does not know anything (Na tvaṃ vettha paraṃtapa…- Gita). Both lie and truth are simultaneously told to explain the nature of Arthavāda. All the craving expressed in these songs on the Gopikas was only the unimaginable force of love possessed by God Krishna towards Radha only, who is described as the Goddess present in the temple of His heart. All the songs are really applicable to Radha only, but, these songs are transferred to the names of other devotees as Arthavādas to encourage them in the spiritual path. Arthavāda is always maintained as topmost secret because if the devotee comes to know that it is a lie told for his/her encouragement only, the devotee will collapse with depression.
83. Is it justified for God to make promises as part of arthavāda?
[In the same Gopi Giitalu, Krishna says “I am Parabrahman and I promise on Myself about the truth in My romantic love towards Gopikas”. Is it justified for God to make promises as part of arthavāda?]
Swami replied:- The word 'I' can represent the body. The word 'I' can also represent the awareness. In the case of God Krishna, 'I' can also represent Parabrahman. These three meanings can be taken as per the context. I already told that when the words of romance are uttered to a soul, it is illusory Krishna and not real Krishna. If illusory Krishnas promise on Parabrahman and express their romantic love to Gopikas, nothing is to be worried because illusory Krishnas are sincerely responding to the love of the Gopikas. Illusory Krishnas are totally different from real Krishna. Same form of both Krishnas means similarity between two different forms. If the form of original Krishna is transferred to the illusory Krishna totally or partially, the real Krishna should be either totally or partially formless. If two objects have the same form, it means only the similarity between two independent forms. While God Krishna was singing these songs, He kept Radha in His mind as the goal of these songs because Radha is also a Gopika. This box of true love to Radha is transferred to Gopikas just by changing the name so that it becomes very strong arthavāda to give full boost for the encouragement of devoted Gopikas. Arthavāda does not mean simply telling the lie. Arthavāda means telling the lie stressing it as truth so that the devotee will progress in the spiritual path. It is a sinless meritorious beneficial lie and stressing it as truth must be done in order to help the devotee.
84. Can we say that God's general love on any sweet devotee is equal to God's romantic love on Anaghā?
[Swami, God Datta (Krishna) is satisfying Anaghā (Radha) with His real form because of His romantic love on her and God Datta is satisfying the sweet devotees with His illusory forms because of His general love on them and devotional justice. But, actions speak louder than words. When practice is the proof for true love and we see that Anaghā is also getting the same romantic pleasures equal to any sweet devotee, can we say that God's general love on any sweet devotee is equal to God's romantic love on Anaghā? When God created Goloka above His own abode to give permanent romantic pleasure to souls, can we say that God's general love on successful sweet devotees has exceeded His romantic love on Anaghā?]
Swami replied:- i) You must know that in romance, love is greater than lust. Love is theoretical and lust is practical. The practical lust ends in few minutes and once lust is pacified, there is no concern of one partner about the other partner. If you take a prostitute, she involves in practical lust only for the sake of earning money. Hence, the practical side in the case of romance is far far inferior than the theoretical mental pure love that stays permanently. In the case of worship of God, the practical aspect of devotion, which is service and sacrifice of fruit of work is far far higher than the theoretical Jnaana Yoga and Bhakti Yoga. Therefore, you should not compare both these fields of romance and true devotion based on the same formula.
ii) You are telling that Radha (Anaghā) is getting the same fruit of romance as the Gopikas are getting. Here, you must remember that Radha came as an ideal devotee to guide Gopikas in the path of their selected path of devotion. Rama came to act as ideal human being. Therefore, Rama became equal to all the human beings in having the same qualitative and quantitative ignorance. Radha is on the staff side and not on the side of the students. The teacher shall mix with the students behaving as equal to them in the level of a friend. The teacher is called as friend, philosopher and guide. This is the best method of teaching so that a student is not excited due to the potential difference between teacher and student. God is also coming as a human being for this purpose only. Even if penance is done, God is not appearing as energetic incarnation to preach the spiritual knowledge to the devotees. Rama never did a miracle, which establishes a potential difference between Him and the humanity. By becoming equal to the students, the teacher is not degraded. The very meaning of Avatāra or incarnation is that God descends from the higher level of divinity to the lower level of humanity for the sake of giving spiritual guidance to the human devotees. The diamond can be on 90th step or on 10th step. Since the diamond came down to the 10th step, its value is not decreased.
iii) You cannot blame that Radha is used as demo-piece and that she is exploited. This is the climax of nonsense because Radha and Krishna are one and the same Parabrahman, the actor signing to play both roles of teacher (Krishna) and student (Arjuna) in teaching the Bhagavad Gita. The same actor has taken two different roles, which are differing in their potential status, which does not mean that one role is higher than the other role. From the angle of roles, you can say that one is higher and the other is lower. From the point of the basic actor, the Parabrahman, such difference is completely unreal and is the result of the climax of foolish ignorance. Krishna is in the role of God and Radha is in the role of devotee so that complete guidance of ideal devotion can be given to the devotees. The program is important and not the unreal false lower status of the role of Radha. Two roles are unreal like the serpent and the chain seen on superimposition over the rope. The basic actor, the real rope is one and the same. The difference between Krishna and Radha (or serpent and chain) is totally unreal and the unity of Krishna and Radha (the unity of serpent and chain as rope) is real. In reality, if Radha is exploited or insulted or cheated, simultaneously Krishna is also exploited, insulted and cheated. This means that finally, in reality, the one basic actor of the two roles called as Parabrahman is exploited, insulted and cheated.
iiv) The enjoyment created between Radha and real Krishna is also the enjoyment generated by the interaction between two illusory media only. For both Radha and real Krishna also, the external media are illusory only. The media of illusory Krishnas and Gopikas are also illusory. The media of any human soul in the world is also illusory. Therefore, the joy of Radha and Krishna in their union is equal to the joy between illusory Krishna and Gopika, which is equal to the joy between any human couple in the world because from the point of media, real Krishna = real Radha = illusory Krishna = Gopika = any male human being = any female human being.
v) Radha, previously Madhumati became Mahiṣī (she-buffalo) by the curse of Sage Dattatreya, the then human incarnation. Radha is always Anaghā, who is always Sarasvati, Lakshmi and Parvati and finally represents the power of Parabrahman called Mahā Māyā. Similarly, Krishna is always God Datta, who is always God Brahma, God Vishnu and God Shiva and finally represents the possessor of power called Parabrahman. Madhumati embracing Sage Dattatreya and Sage Dattatreya cursing her to become Mahiṣī was a drama played by God and the Goddess for the sake of human beings. One should not take the status of the role and impose that status on the status of the actor. The status of the actor is always untouched by the status of the role. In a similar divine drama, God Shiva became a pillar of radiation. God Vishnu taking the incarnation of Varāha started digging the earth to find the beginning of the pillar and God Brahma became a Swan and flew up to find out the end of the pillar. Here, God Brahma and God Vishnu played the roles of devotees and God Shiva played the role of Parabrahman/God. If you analyse all this in terms of the actors of the roles, there are no three actors because there is only one actor called God Datta appearing in three roles (Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva). All these divine plays described in secondary scriptures called the Purāṇams written by Sage Vyāsa are just meant for teaching the lessons of Pravrutti and Nivrutti to the created souls. In the play, God Brahma tells a lie through His 5th face and God Shiva becoming angry plucked His upper 5th face. Similarly, you have to understand that even Goddess Madhumati became Mahiṣī, which is the representation of total ignorance. The lesson here is that even the highest soul can be covered by the deepest and darkest ignorance and therefore, the soul shall be very careful in its spiritual effort all the time and everywhere.
85. Please comment on the following argument.
[Swami, You told that God Brahma played the role of a liar. Perhaps, during the same play, Sage Narada would have asked God Brahma that who is the real celibate in this creation and God Brahma would have replied that God Krishna is the real celibate. Therefore, even the words of God Brahma cannot become an authority for Your concept of God Krishna creating His duplicate forms for the sake of protecting His celibacy. Please comment.]
Swami replied:- When Sage Narada was asking God Brahma about the perfect celibate in the creation, you say that God Brahma was playing the role of a liar! To say this statement, you should have been present along with God Brahma and Sage Narada. Please show Me the audio-video proof of that situation. You may ask Me that whether I have the video of God Brahma while speaking a lie with God Shiva. Even though I don’t have such video proof, I have the proof of this story present in the secondary scripture (Purāṇam) written by Sage Vyāsa. To stand on the same level of proof equal to Me, you must show the same secondary scripture in which Sage Vyāsa should have written that one soul called Ms. Laxmi Thrylokya existed while Sage Narada was asking this question to God Brahma! Leave that. At least, you must show the proof from the secondary scripture that Sage Narada asked God Brahma this question while Brahma was telling a lie to God Shiva. Even this second proof is also absent on your side. Therefore, your allegation is as blind as a statement spoken by a born-blind person saying that he enjoys seeing the sun every day! I finally conclude that you are possessed by the ghost of an atheist. I advise you to chant the name of ‘Shri Āñjaneya’ every day.
86. Please comment on the following argument.
[In the entire arrangement of God regarding sweet devotion, it appears that Goddess Anaghā is being created by God not out of love, but only for two selfish reasons:-
i) To bring justice to sweet devotees, who are wanting to enjoy God as husband or darling, God has brought her down to make her equal to a devotee by imposing permanent ignorance on her. Without her existence, God cannot prove to sweet devotees that they are getting the equal fruit of enjoying Him as wives or darlings.
ii) To bring completeness to His personality, God needs a romantic partner. To prove Himself as the king of romance, God has created her to romance with her in His real form.]
Swami replied:- Radha is both darling and wife of Krishna. Even before she married Ayanaghosha, she became the darling of Krishna. Since she married Krishna secretly (through Gāndharva vivāha), she also became the wife of Krishna. In this way, she stood as an ideal devotee for all the devotees. The daring Radha stood as an ideal example for the 1000 Gopikas, who are also daring in sweet devotion while the submissive Rukmini stood as an ideal example for the 16,107 submissive wives of Krishna. Here, the Parabrahman has taken two female incarnations as Radha and Rukmini and the same Parabrahman has taken one male incarnation as Krishna. The job of Rukmini was very soft and easy whereas the job of Radha was very much adventurous. Hence, the courage and daringness of God Shiva is also added in Radha. Krishna and Rukmini are also covered by ignorance for the sake of enjoying the entertainment from the world. But, both Krishna and Rukmini have their full self-awareness. Hence, Rukmini was always silent knowing the entire divine program.
The essence of your question is that Krishna controlled His romantic desire (in actions, words and feelings) towards Gopikas due to the influence of some other factors like respect towards the ethical rules written by sages and not due to His unparallel love to Radha. The essence of My answer is that your statement is 1000% wrong because Krishna did not desire Gopikas based on His unimaginable love towards Radha, who is Himself. The love on self is said to be the highest especially for God because higher than God, nothing exists and also nothing has the absolute reality of God.
In the case of Gopikas, God definitely has general love but not even a shadow of trace of romantic love. Due to the general love, He used His Māyā to solve the problem of Gopikas, which is to help the devotees to reach the goal in their chosen path of sweet devotion. The goal of any devotee is to reach God and be in close association with God. In this aspect, there is no romantic love. But, in the case of the devotees liking romantic love with God treating Him as darling, God made the same arrangement as done in Brundāvanam even in the highest world called Goloka. This point is based on the concept that Videha Mukti is the continuation of Jīvan Mukti (Videha Mukti means the salvation after leaving this body and Jīvan Mukti means the salvation while living in this body). This is a general point applying to all types of love. Whatever the soul attains here will continue in the upper worlds also.
Adi Shankara did not marry because He gets infinite bliss from Himself since He is the Parabrahman or God Datta. But, Anaghā or Radha is Himself and therefore, He gets the same bliss from Anaghā or Radha also since there is no internal dualism with Anaghā or Radha. Adi Shankara means God Krishna. God Krishna never aspired any soul for the petty illusory worldly happiness because just like Adi Shankara, God Krishna is also getting the self-bliss from Radha. The question here is that why Radha is not getting the self-bliss, but only getting a trace of illusory happiness? The answer for this is that Radha is covered with full ignorance to play the role of an ideal devotee like Rama, who also covered Himself with full ignorance to stand as an ideal human being.
There are only two types of sweet devotion:-
i) Sweet devotion is between God and Goddess, which are the two roles of the same God. In this context, the word 'creation' is not used. Only the word related to Iccha or theoretical love is used without referring to practical lower lust (Sa dvitīyamaicchat… - Veda).
ii) Sweet devotion is between two souls, which is Pravrutti or justified love and lust for the extension of human generation (Sa idaṃ sarva masṛjata… - Veda).
There is no third type of sweet devotion between God and soul. Hence, the illusory Krishnas created by real Krishna are only participating in romance with sweet devotees. Since the form is same, you cannot argue that real Krishna is involved in the romance with the soul. If that is correct, it is said that seven people across the world have the same form and if one person does a sin, all other six persons must also be punished applying your blame on real Krishna for the action done by the same form of Krishna. Divine love alone is Nivrutti. Justified love is Pravrutti. When it is only beastly lust without divine love, it is the lowest Dushpravrutti (It is like a demon having the name Madhu or sweet.). These three states indicate angel, human being and demon respectively.
Certainly, there is equality between Radha and Gopika in the sweet devotion which is based on the main point that illusory Krishna has the same form of real Krishna. It is the devotional justice that the devotee shall feel that she is with real Krishna. Then only, spiritual progress is possible. This will lead Gopika to the goal. The devotional justice is completed here. The actual main point here is that real and illusory Krishnas have the same form and have the same types of substance in their body and soul. But, the amount of actual substance in real Krishna is not the same in illusory Krishna. Suppose illusory Krishna is made of 1 Kg of matter and 1 Kg of energy. The real Krishna is also made of 1 Kg of matter and 1 Kg of energy. The actual point to be noted here is that the matter and energy of illusory Krishna are similar to the matter and energy of real Krishna. But, the quality of matter and energy are different. You must understand that both Krishnas are not made of the same 1 Kg matter and the same 1 Kg energy. Both are made of 2 Kgs of matter and 2 Kgs of energy. Therefore, real Krishna is completely different from the illusory Krishna in actions, words and feelings. If you say that actions, words and feelings of two Krishnas are similar (not the same), the actions, words and feelings of the entire humanity in this aspect of romance are also similar. Does it mean that if one human being is doing sinful sex, all the humanity is touched by that sin?
When the form of God from the body of God came to another body, it does not mean that the same form of God is transferred to the other body. A form, which is similar to the form of God is created here. These two forms are two in number and not one form. If you say that the same form is transferred from the divine body, the divine body should not have that form again. If X item is transferred to Y item, X item should not exist in the original place. This means Y item is created separately resembling the X item. Similarly, the divine body is not transferred to the illusory Krishna. The body of real Krishna is constructed by the similar five elements present in the divine body. Therefore, neither the divine body nor the divine form are transformed from real Krishna. The body and form of illusory Krishna are completely different possessing only the similarity.
There is similarity between love of real Krishna and Radha and the love of Gopika and illusory Krishna. Madhva says (Bhinnā jīvagaṇāh…) that souls are different among themselves with different qualities in nature and different quantity of each quality. Hence, all Gopikas are not enjoying the same love with all illusory Krishnas respectively. In this world, we are experiencing the difference in souls having different qualities and different quantity of the same qualities. Even the Gopikas and illusory Krishnas are created souls only. Therefore, all the Gopikas are not getting the same quality of the fruit or the same quantity of the fruit having same quality. When Gopikas themselves are differing in their fruits, how can you say that the souls are equal to God Krishna and Goddess Radha? The fruit differs based on the quality and quantity of the nature of the soul. Hence, the enjoyment of God Krishna and Goddess Radha is far far higher than the fruits enjoyed by Gopikas. I can give an example of atomic structure here. In an atom, the principal quantum levels of energy of electron are different. Within the same energy level, the sub-energy levels are again different. Similarly, one quality is higher than another quality (principal quantum number) and within the same quality, the quantitative levels are again different. God Datta and Goddess Anagha belong to the level of Parabrahman. In the Veda, different levels of enjoyment are mentioned (Taittirīya Upanishad - Ānanda Vallī). Among all the levels of joy, the topmost level is that of Parabrahman (Sa eko Brahmaṇa ānandaḥ...).
Hence, God's enjoyment is the highest in quality as well as in quantity (Quantity is always within the level of the medium of the incarnation. It means that the highest level of happiness of human level is only taken as the climax level because beyond that, the medium cannot withstand. But, the lust of God Krishna and Goddess Radha has the highest qualitative level because it is always based on true and permanent divine love). The twelve Gopikas or sages are also human beings only. Gopikas belong to the human level, which is far far below the level of Radha (assuming equal reality) in terms of love, qualities, deservingness etc. You may say that there are 100 unmarried Gopikas, who married God Krishna only just like Radha. Of course, these 100 Gopikas are as chaste as Radha. But, these 100 Gopikas cannot be equal to Radha from the point of divinity. Both Satya Harishchandra and Rama followed dharma (justice) strictly. Rama is God, but, Harishchandra is not God. Divinity is the nature of God, who is the creator and protector of justice. A staunch follower of justice cannot be equal to the creator and protector of justice. Therefore, even if the 100 Gopikas were chaste, they cannot be equal to Radha, who is the incarnation of God Shiva. These 100 married Gopikas will not come under the other 1000 married Gopikas and can be counted under 16,107 married wives as per their spiritual status, which is not based on the caste like the dynasty of cowherd and king.
To be continued...
★ ★ ★ ★ ★