[The beginner female devotee, who is in Dushpravrutti can divert her bad quality of most attractive lust towards God in male form as per Your advice. At least, she can sing romantic songs before the statue of God (Like Mīrā). But, how can a beginner male devotee, existing in same Dushpravrutti, divert his lust towards God in female form so that the equity of gender is maintained?]

 

[This question can be asked by lustful male devotees in the coming Kali age to save themselves from hell due to uncontrollable lust by some arrangement as done for the lustful female devotees by God. In such case, what is Your reply? Who can give the perfect answer to this question except Yourself, the unimaginable God, who is called Parabrahman?]

 

Śrī Kṛṣṇa Bhagavān uvāca:-
[God Shri Krishna spoke:-]

[O God! O God! Again, the same question from your mouth! O daughter of Vrushabhānu! will these devotees quarrel with each other like small kids with excess jealousy? (Small kids quarrel before parents complaining to the parents that they have given a chocolate to one kid and not to the other kids.)]

 

[After doing the Vedic sacrifice, the male devotee is said to attain beautiful heavenly dancer after death. But, his wife, who participated equally in the sacrifice, will not get a heavenly call boy. Due to this, did the female devotees quarrel for equality of justice?]

 

[You can also create illusory Radhas as I created the illusory Krishnas for the sake of encouraging the devotees. In such action, you are also untouched and pure in body, word and mind like Me. If I am the celibate, you are also equally celibate like Me because yourself and Myself are one only.]

 

[When God Krishna told like this, Goddess Radha became unconscious for some time and wept for some more time. Then, Radha told God Krishna like this “O Darling! O Husband! I prefer to die than doing like this. I can’t do like this even in My dream”.]

 

[Again, Goddess Radha told God Krishna “How can my son enjoy My form thinking Me as his darling? I have killed such demons having such evil thought of marrying Me”.]

 

Śrī Kṛṣṇa Bhagavān uvāca -

[God Shri Krishna spoke:-]

 

[In this Rāsa-dance, which is as internal drama in this world-drama, there is no trace of lust because all these are dancing with brother-sister feeling in their minds. How can I be called as lust monger? Did I provoke lust anywhere? In such case, why all these non-sense words?]

 

[In this world-drama, which is more real than this internal drama, I have tested all these Gopikas, who are sages and all utterly failed in the joint test of wealth and children. It is proved that this joint bond with wealth (butter) and children is the strongest (when I stole their butter preserved for their children, they complained to My mother against Me even though they know that I am God.)]

 

[By their miraculous power due to penance, they could recognize Me as God. Such power attained by them became effective due to the permission from My will. Same powerful sages could not identify that My stealing of their butter as their test because My will didn’t permit them to identify My action as the test for the joint bond with children-wealth. Any miraculous power works only when I permit it.]

 

[In this world also, the bond with mother is stronger and greater than the bond with father. Even though there is equality between father and mother since both have equally contributed sperm and ovum for the generation of the baby, the mother contributed fully to the body of the baby. The body of the baby is modification of the body of the mother.]

 

[Therefore, in the Veda, the mother is told as Goddess in the first place. After mother only, the father is told to be God in the second place. The body of born baby is made up of the blood and flesh of the mother only and not the father.]

 

[If we take the case of both of us, we both are Divine Father and Divine Mother of these souls. Our union is without the combination of sperm and ovum. Even then, there is modification of yourself into inert items and non-inert souls. In My case, there is no modification of Myself to create the creation because I am not subjected to any change like modification (Mayā'dhyakṣeṇa prakṛtis, sūyate sa carācaram — Gita).]

 

[In the upper energetic world, Anaghā and Datta are the energetic incarnations of God and they are imaginable but invisible to human beings on earth. On this earth, yourself, Radha and Myself, Krishna, are the human incarnations of God and we both are imaginable and visible. These two cases are imaginable.]

 

[Mahāmāyā, the unimaginable power and Parabrahman, the unimaginable God are unimaginable and invisible couple anywhere. This is the third case, which is unimaginable and invisible. This couple is beyond the imagination and logic of intellectuality of human beings and even divine angels. The Veda also says the same (Indro māyābhiḥ…– Veda, Mahāmāyā viśvaṃ bhramayasi Parabrahma mahiṣī! - Shankara).]

 

[The first two cases, which are energetic and human incarnations, are always to be selected for the sake of logical analysis since both are at least imaginable. The third case called unimaginable God and unimaginable power are merged in the first two cases because the first two cases (energetic and human incarnations) are exhibiting unimaginable events called miracles. We can infer unimaginable God and unimaginable power through unimaginable miracles. Therefore, the first two cases are also Mahāmāyā and Parabrahman merged by the third case.]

 

[Two unimaginable items are always impossible in separation and can always be treated only as one single item. The Veda also says in singular tense that one item only merged with the first two cases (Tadevā'nu prāviśat— Veda). This is the Vedic conclusion.]

 

[Even in imaginable items, it is perfectly accepted that the power and possessor of power are inseparable and must be treated as one item only. This concept is supported by logical analysis itself. When such concept is supported by logic even in imaginable items, what to speak of its application in the case of two unimaginable items, which are power and possessor of power?]

 

[Whether we say that the male lion is capable of hunting while united with its female lion or we say that the male lion itself is capable of hunting, there is no difference between dualism and monism. The dualism itself becomes monism because even in dualism, the male lion and female lion are always one only.]