Presentation of the Division of the Vedas
Nava-jiyada Nṛsiṁha-kṣetra, 14.05.1989
As you can see, on the board I’ve put a diagram – a simple, graphic outline of the division of the Vedas. It’s not an absolute and final presentation, but it will help us look at this division. I think the general meaning of “Vedas” has already been discussed, so we’ll go straight into how the Vedas are divided, without dwelling too much on their overall significance.
As many of you already know, originally there was only one Veda. The word Veda means “knowledge”. “Knowledge” includes all branches of material and spiritual knowledge. The Vedas speak about all types of knowledge. Whatever we do not find in the Vedas cannot be called real knowledge. It’s very simple: what is not in the Vedas is not knowledge.
Now, someone may ask:
“Do the Vedas really cover all material fields of life? If today we have technical books about, say, chemistry, and all their detailed content is not explicitly in the Vedas, does that mean this is not Vedic – not knowledge?”
Here we can mention an important point: the Vedic literature available to us today is not the complete body of Vedic knowledge. We are living on a very tiny planet, known by different names in different languages; in Sanskrit it is the earthly planet within Bhu-maṇḍala. In one sense it’s an insignificant lump of earth in this whole universe. There are planets much greater than this one, with much longer lifespans and much better memory among the inhabitants. Correspondingly, the Vedic literature available there is far more extensive and detailed.
It is said, for example, that on Brahmaloka the Purāṇas alone comprise about one billion verses. Whereas here on earth we have only about 400,000 verses. That’s roughly 0.4% of the Purāṇas – and that’s just the Purāṇas. That’s only a fraction of the Vedas.
A very good analogy is that the Vedas are like an instruction manual for this universe. When you buy a new washing machine you get an instruction manual. You buy a TV – you get an instruction manual:
- Unpack
- Plug it in
…etc.
For every device we buy, there’s a manual. The Vedas provide the instruction manual for the universe: how we should deal with it so that ultimately we can become free from this material universe. The real purpose of spiritual – and also material – knowledge is to become free from material existence.
Why material knowledge? Material knowledge is there so that we can move through material existence as smoothly as possible: we must eat, we must sleep, we must defend ourselves; and we don’t necessarily have to have sexual life, but that also occurs. These things have to be done – but how should they be done? In such a way that we become as little entangled as possible. At the same time we must maintain good health. Therefore there is Āyur-veda, Dhanur-veda, and so on.
Now someone looking at this diagram might ask:
“Where is Āyur-veda, where is Dhanur-veda? I don’t see them – where are they?”
It’s not that there is one single book titled “Āyur-veda” in the modern sense. In fact, Āyur-veda is found scattered in other parts of the Veda. Material and spiritual knowledge are both within the Vedas. Ultimately everything is meant to bring us to Kṛṣṇa consciousness. The whole body of Vedic knowledge is certainly meant for knowing Kṛṣṇa.
With that aim – to help people – Kṛṣṇa provides Vedic literature for humanity. This knowledge was first given to Brahmā. Brahmā also compiled the Brahma-saṁhitā. First the knowledge was revealed in the heart of Lord Brahmā. In the Second Canto of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam it is described how Brahmā performed tapasya after hearing how he should proceed. He heard two syllables: “ta–pa” – that was the instruction he received. “I am sitting in darkness, what am I to do?” – “Tapa – you should perform austerity.” So he practiced tapasya for a long time until Kṛṣṇa revealed Himself to him.
How did Kṛṣṇa manifest to Brahmā? Within his heart. After hearing the gāyatrī mantra, Brahmā was initiated by Lord Kṛṣṇa, began to chant the Brahma-saṁhitā and described what he saw. And what did he see? He saw the spiritual world. Immediately afterwards he became inspired and received the knowledge needed for visarga, the secondary creation. At that time he also received from Kṛṣṇa the knowledge known in the Second Canto as the catuḥ-ślokī – the four essential verses of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam.
We have four Vedas: Ṛg-veda, Sāma-veda, Yajur-veda and Atharva-veda. Before talking about Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam I’ll briefly talk about these four Vedas, because it is said that Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is the ripened fruit of the tree of Vedic literature. So let’s first look at that tree.
Originally there was one Veda, and it was divided into four. By whom? By Vyāsa. Who is Vyāsa? The word vyāsa means “one who divides”. He is also called Veda-vyāsa – the one who divided the Vedas. “To divide” here also means to compile. Because before Vyāsa compiled them, the Vedas were transmitted only orally. Writing already existed, but no one cared much for it, because if one heard something once from his guru in the gurukula as a brahmacārī, he could immediately remember it for life.
But with the beginning of Kali-yuga, that ability disappeared. We know very well how “strong” our memory is today. You think you’ve learned a verse by heart one day, then the next day you try to recall it: “How was it? sarva… dharma… oh! parityajya… mām ekaṁ…” – it’s very difficult for us.
In the original Vedic system one first heard, and then repeated. Actually it worked like this: you heard once, and then you repeated – śravaṇa–kīrtana, hearing and chanting. Someone would hear something once and then repeat it twice. That was the process. In this way one also learns now in our gurukula in Māyāpur. The teacher chants one verse using a melody; the melody corresponds to the grammar. All the students repeat, and then the teacher continues. In this way they learn. But that ability has almost completely disappeared.
The last person I heard of who possessed such a memory was our param-guru, Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura. Practically everything he read or heard, he remembered immediately.
So Śrīla Vyāsadeva divided the Veda into four parts to entrust each part to a specific “professor” of that Veda. This is also described in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. The basic division was into Ṛg-veda, Sāma-veda, Yajur-veda and Atharva-veda:
- Ṛg-veda contains hymns and verses meant to be chanted aloud.
- Yajur-veda contains prose and verses to be recited in a low voice for performing sacrifices (yajña).
- Sāma-veda contains verses to be sung. The melodies of Sāma-veda are incredibly difficult – very complex but also very beautiful. That’s why Kṛṣṇa says in the Bhagavad-gītā that among songs, He is the song of the Sāma-veda.
You often hear about trivedīs, the knowers of the three Vedas. Frequently only three Vedas are mentioned. So what about the fourth Veda?
These three Vedas together help one perform sacrifices (yajñas). Yajña, as I said at the beginning, is about how we should deal with the universe. It’s the “instruction manual”: what should we do? And what is to be done? We should perform yajñas. That is what people do in a Vedic society – they perform sacrifices. The three Vedas together support the performance of yajñas.
Atharva-veda is basically everything that doesn’t fit neatly into those three. Here we find, for example, knowledge about defense – like Dhanur-veda. Āyur-veda can also broadly be assigned to Atharva-veda. Many practical instructions also fit into Atharva-veda.
For each of the four Vedas there is a further subdivision – I’ve sketched it very roughly. It is said that, especially with Yajur-veda, there is a split into two:
- Kṛṣṇa-Yajur-veda (“Black” Yajur-veda)
- Śukla-Yajur-veda (“White” Yajur-veda)
What does this mean? Kṛṣṇa-Yajur-veda contains hymns and Brāhmaṇas. The Brāhmaṇas are explanations to the hymns, and the two are mixed together. In Śukla-Yajur-veda, however, hymns and Brāhmaṇas are clearly separated. To Śukla-Yajur-veda belongs also the Taittirīya Upaniṣad, one of the more important among the 108 Upaniṣads.
Within the Vedas there is another double division into Brāhmaṇas and Āraṇyakas. Here we’re not talking about the social class brāhmaṇa, but about texts.
- The Brāhmaṇas are works used by priests; they explain the practical performance of sacrifices – how to do this and that in order to please Lord Viṣṇu.
- The Āraṇyakas are so called because they were composed in the forest (araṇya). They are intended mainly for vānaprasthas – those who have finished their duties as householders (gṛhasthas), go to the forest, read the Āraṇyakas, eat dry leaves, and live a very austere life.
Part of the Āraṇyakas are the Upaniṣads. There are 108 Upaniṣads. The word Upaniṣad means “that which brings one closer to the truth”. Incidentally, it’s interesting that Śrī Īśopaniṣad is placed at the end of the Yajur-veda. In other words, the Upaniṣads (except Īśopaniṣad) are part of the Āraṇyakas. Śrī Īśopaniṣad stands at the end of the Yajur-veda generally speaking, or more precisely at the end of the Saṁhitās.
This may be a bit confusing: there are Saṁhitās, Brāhmaṇas and Āraṇyakas. Saṁhitās are also philosophical compilations, like Brahma-saṁhitā – the one we know. But there are also other Saṁhitās belonging to the Pañcarātra, which we’ll discuss too.
To the “Brāhmaṇa section” belong the śrauta-sūtras. What are those? Among the sūtras we have, for example, Dharma-sūtras – codes like those coming from Manu: thousands of rules for human society. There are also gṛhya-sūtras about life in the gṛhastha-āśrama, etc. Sometimes in the Bhagavad-gītā purports Śrīla Prabhupāda says, “It is said in the śruti-mantras…” – we may understand that these quotes probably come from the śrauta-sūtras, and more broadly from one of the four Vedas.
So, we’ve spoken of the four Vedas. Now let’s look at the left side of the diagram. On the lower left we have Pañcarātra, which leads to vaidhi-bhakti.
What is Pañcarātra? You’ve certainly heard of the Nārada-pañcarātra. That text itself is quite short. There are many scriptures called collectively āgama-śāstras. Gama means “to go” or “to receive”, and the prefix ā means “from”. So āgama means knowledge “coming from” – from guru to disciple. Of course, that is true of all Vedic knowledge, but the āgama-śāstras especially deal with tantras.
What are tantras? Tan means “to expand” or “that”, and tra means “to deliver”. So tantra is “that which delivers one from ignorance”.
Now back to Saṁhitās. Saṁhitās are hymns to the Absolute Truth, like the Brahma-saṁhitā, chanted to the Supersoul. This can be confusing, because when we read the Vedic literature we find prayers to Indra, Sūrya, Agni – prayers to all kinds of demigods. And so Indologists speculate that Viṣṇu is just one of the demigods, and that originally he wasn’t very important – that only later Viṣṇu became more popular, but at first people mainly worshiped Indra or Agni.
But the real fact, especially for true Vedic authorities – those actually authorized to read, study and pass on the Vedas – is different. The Vedas were never meant for śūdras. Most Indologists today are śūdras. It is specifically stated that śūdras must not study the Vedas, because they will misinterpret them. The results of that are what we see today: total confusion in this field, completely distorted understandings of the Vedas. One such misunderstanding is that the Vedas simply recommend demigod worship, and that Hindus are pantheists who worship anything and everything.
No. The reality is that these hymns were always meant for the Supersoul – sometimes the Supersoul within Indra, sometimes within Agni, sometimes within the sun-god, or within the mind, or another deity. Kṛṣṇa says in the Bhagavad-gītā that all gifts apparently coming from demigods actually come from Him.
Back to the word tantra: it is that which lifts one out of ignorance, especially by describing procedures, methods and recitations. We know very well that sound vibration is extremely important in spiritual life. Through transcendental sound the mind becomes freed from material existence. In fact, the whole material world rests on sound. Everything is based on it. The Vedas give great prominence to sound, but in a subtle, not crude, sense. Tantra is the methodology of performing sacrifice with the use of mantras, sacred sounds.
Pañcarātra is that part of the Vedas which helps us perform vaidhi-bhakti. It is said there are two forms of bhakti: vaidhi-bhakti and rāga- or rāgānugā-bhakti. Vaidhi-bhakti is what we practice – regulated devotional service, sādhana-bhakti. In fact rāgānugā-bhakti is also within the broader category of sādhana-bhakti. But by sādhana-bhakti – regulated, practical devotional service – we can apply knowledge in practice, as you’ve heard.
A central part of Pañcarātra is the worship of the Lord in His Deity form. As we said, the Vedas are intended for knowing Kṛṣṇa and serving Him. Pañcarātra gives specific instructions on how we should serve Kṛṣṇa in His Deity form. Kṛṣṇa appears in various forms: His original svarūpa, which we cannot see; His catur-vyūha expansions, which we cannot see; His twenty-four forms – we cannot see them; His antaryāmī form in the heart – we cannot see that either. But the arca-mūrti we can see. Not only see – we can serve Him.
Kṛṣṇa appears as arca-vigraha so that we can practically apply the knowledge we receive. That is the meaning of Pañcarātra. Pañcarātra also includes all the behavioral rules for devotees – Vaiṣṇava etiquette: how to deal with each other, with others in general, how to deal with Kṛṣṇa in His Deity form, how to deal with various atheists, how to properly fill the entire day with devotional service so that we don’t want to leave devotional service even for a single minute. All that is Pañcarātra.
We practice vaidhi-bhakti – that is, we take information from Pañcarātra, and in a sense we also find Pañcarātra principles in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, as we shall see, contains everything.
Now we move to the other side of the diagram and see what role Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam plays. To do that we must recall a little of the history of how Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam came about.
As mentioned earlier, Kṛṣṇa gave Vedic knowledge to Lord Brahmā, and Brahmā passed it on. Interestingly, Brahmā distributed this Vedic knowledge to many ṛṣis. Among his creations, Brahmā had seven great ṛṣis, and he later created other ṛṣis as well. All of them wanted to receive Vedic knowledge from him. Brahmā passed this knowledge on to his sons, one of whom is Nārada Muni.
He had many sons. These ṛṣis were among them. Each of them understood the same Vedic knowledge differently, depending on their mixture of material modes of nature. Each emphasized something different. Thus we hear about six systems of philosophy, the ṣaḍ-darśanas. There are six kinds of Vedic philosophy, each presenting a different angle on the Vedas.
Sometimes it is said that these six darśanas do not present the final conclusion. In fact, they drift away from the main conclusion of the Vedas and can become atheistic. Originally, however, these six systems were meant as assistants for understanding the Absolute Truth. Later, at the beginning of Kali-yuga, the representatives of these six philosophies began to quarrel among themselves. Each one proclaimed:
“Our path is the only path.”
“No, our way is the only way.”
You can compare it to a university with different departments: mathematics, physics, chemistry, art history… more recently ecology, and other, increasingly “demonic” disciplines – law, medicine, etc.
Imagine the dean of the medical faculty going to the university president and saying:
“In my opinion all the other departments could simply be closed. Everything is already contained in medicine. All areas of knowledge are already in medicine. We would save a lot of money if we folded everything into this department.”
And he presents it so convincingly that the president is impressed. But as soon as he leaves, the dean of physics comes in and says:
“Mr. President, there is one thing you must understand: in this world there is really only one kind of knowledge, and it is called ‘physics’. We have now developed a single formula by which everything can be understood. Everything else can be discarded; it is worthless. Poetry, literature, German studies – all of that belongs to a less developed stage of humanity. Now we’re more advanced and we need only physics.”
He is fully convinced. And then the dean of biology comes in:
“Everything can be understood only through biology!”
And so on – one by one. No one respects anyone else; each says “Truth is only with us.” What should the president conclude from all this? He shuts down the entire university. Too much chaos; no one knows what’s happening.
Similarly, Brahmā distributed Vedic knowledge to various ṛṣis. One of them was Nārada Muni. As we know from Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, Nārada Muni is a śakti-āveśa-avatāra, endowed with special power – bhakti-śakti.
Nārada Muni then instructed Vyāsadeva after Vyāsa became dissatisfied. Vyāsa felt:
“I have compiled all the Vedas, divided them, done everything according to the plan, just as I was meant to. I am an incarnation of the Supreme Lord and I have fulfilled my task. I also composed the Mahābhārata. Yet something is unfinished. I am dissatisfied. Why?”
Śrīla Vyāsadeva had a sense of why he was dissatisfied. We should really read those verses – they are very beautiful. They appear in the Fourth Chapter of the First Canto:
“By following the discipline of strict vows, I faithfully worshiped the Vedas, my spiritual masters and the sacrificial fire. I have also shown respect to the traditional Vedic structure by explaining the Mahābhārata, which enables women, śūdras and others (friends of the twice-born) to understand the path of religion. But despite all this, I feel some deficiency within myself, although I appear to have achieved everything that the Vedas require.”
Then Vyāsa voices his suspicion:
“Perhaps this is because I have not sufficiently highlighted the great importance of devotional service, which is so dear to both perfected beings and the Supreme Lord Himself.” (SB 1.5.8–10, paraphrased)
Śrī Nārada replied:
“In fact, you have not described the sublime and spotless glories of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. That philosophy which does not satisfy the transcendental senses of the Lord is considered useless.”
He continues:
“O great sage, although you have elaborately described the four principles of religiosity beginning with fruitive work, you have not described the glories of Vāsudeva.”
Nārada says:
“Words that do not describe the glories of the Lord — those very words which can sanctify the entire universe — are regarded by saintly persons as a place of pilgrimage for crows. Since perfect, saintly persons are inhabitants of the transcendental world, they find no pleasure there.”
At this point Nārada does not spare Vyāsa. He speaks very directly. Vyāsadeva approaches Nārada like a disciple to a spiritual master and wants to know:
“What is wrong with me? Why am I unhappy? How can I become satisfied?”
And Nārada, as a dutiful spiritual master, tells him plainly:
“What you’ve done so far is like a pile of garbage, interesting only to crows.”
He continues:
“On the other hand, that literature which fully describes the transcendental glories of the name, fame, forms, pastimes, etc. of the unlimited Supreme Lord is a completely different world – a world of transcendental words that can spark a revolution in the misguided lives of this godless civilization. Such transcendental literature, even though imperfectly composed, is heard, sung and accepted by honest people who are thoroughly virtuous.” (SB 1.5.10–11, paraphrased)
Then Nārada instructs Vyāsa to compose Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam – and Vyāsa does so.
Now in Chapter Seven (1.7) there is a crucial verse describing how Vyāsa experienced everything in meditation. We also get, in earlier chapters, the story of how Nārada Muni became Nārada Muni – essentially his “How I came to Kṛṣṇa consciousness” story. Sometimes in our magazines we print “How I came to Kṛṣṇa consciousness” testimonies. Nārada’s story is a very wonderful example. And why does he reveal it? To encourage Vyāsa and all who follow these teachings – to show that anyone can become a devotee.
Nārada Muni had a very humble background as the son of a śūdrā woman. But some visiting sages – Prabhupāda calls them bhakti-vedāntas (knowers of the ultimate Vedic conclusion, i.e. devotees) – came to his village and stayed there during the rainy season. His mother cooked for them daily. Young Nārada was very inspired by their association and felt strongly attracted to them. His heart was moved to follow in their footsteps. Then Kṛṣṇa arranged things in such a way that Nārada could quickly make spiritual progress – He arranged the death of Nārada’s mother. Suddenly Nārada was alone. What to do now?
First he wandered throughout the land, then he sat and began to meditate. He was so determined in his meditation that Kṛṣṇa appeared before him. But then Kṛṣṇa vanished, saying:
“You are not yet fully qualified to always see Me. I have given you a glimpse, but you must further purify yourself.”
Nārada’s heart was shattered: seeing Kṛṣṇa was so beautiful, and then suddenly He disappeared. So already at the beginning of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam we see the mood of separation from Kṛṣṇa – vipralambha.
Later Nārada felt grateful that Kṛṣṇa dealt with him this way, inspiring him. Something similar happens to us. Not that we have Kṛṣṇa’s direct darśana, but we do see the Deities, and sometimes we may feel inspiration, happiness, some spiritual realization. Then it disappears, and we become frustrated:
“Where did my spiritual realization go?”
But then we begin to understand that this spiritual encouragement itself is Kṛṣṇa’s mercy – a drop of nectar:
“Here, take this!”
We receive a drop of nectar so that we are attracted to continue along the entire path back home, back to Godhead.
So Nārada’s story is told. In his next life he appears as Nārada Muni, son of Brahmā. He then instructs Vyāsadeva to compile Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. After Nārada leaves, Vyāsa sits down and, as described in 1.7.4:
“He fixed his mind, perfectly engaging it in unalloyed devotional service (bhakti-yoga). Thus he saw the Supreme Personality of Godhead, along with His external energy, which was under His full control.”
He saw Kṛṣṇa with His spiritual energy, and at the same time, His material energy – māyā. He saw them both. In this way he saw everything and could understand everything. It is said he saw Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam in a single moment.
Sometimes great artists experience something similar: in one moment a whole symphony appears in their mind; then they write it down. In the same way, Vyāsa, inspired beyond measure, experienced everything at once. Then, as the text explains, just as an artist hurriedly writes notes before he forgets, Vyāsa wrote down a condensed form – these notes are called Vedānta-sūtra.
Vedānta-sūtra is a summary of the Upaniṣads. The Upaniṣads (which we mentioned as belonging to the Āraṇyakas) explain the meanings of all the sacrifices described earlier. But by simply studying the Upaniṣads one does not reach a final conclusion; you can study and study and still not know the conclusion. Vyāsa therefore gave the Vedānta-sūtra as the conclusion of the Upaniṣads.
However, the Vedānta-sūtra is so concise, so cryptic, that it too is very difficult to understand. You really need deep knowledge of the Upaniṣads before studying the Vedānta-sūtra. Vedānta-sūtra, as a commentary on the Upaniṣads, does not even consist of complete sentences, but aphoristic statements like:
“Therefore this should be understood as such and such.”
It starts:
athāto brahma jijñāsā – “Therefore, now one should inquire into Brahman.”
Therefore – what “therefore”? Someone buys the book and the first line says “Therefore…”
“Therefore what? I don’t understand; where is the first sentence?”
It means:
“Therefore, now that one has gone through so much study of the Vedas and has attained a human form – rather than an animal body – one should inquire into the Absolute Truth.”
Very short phrases.
Then Vyāsadeva wanted to explain the Vedānta-sūtra, and that explanation is precisely Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, which he had first seen in his meditation.
Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam leads to rāga-bhakti – that is, spontaneous love of God. By cultivating rāga-bhakti, one can attain the highest planet in the spiritual sky (para-vyoma), namely Goloka Vṛndāvana. By vaidhi-bhakti alone, one does not necessarily attain Goloka Vṛndāvana.
We’re now in the Seventh Chapter of the First Canto. Ideally we would systematically go through these chapters. I’m sure you’ve all already read the First Canto, but maybe it will help to review the flow of events, because the entire First Canto leads to the meeting of Mahārāja Parīkṣit and Śukadeva Gosvāmī.
Actually Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam was spoken three times:
- First by Vyāsadeva to his son Śukadeva Gosvāmī.
- Then by Śukadeva Gosvāmī to Mahārāja Parīkṣit.
- Then again by Sūta Gosvāmī, who heard it there, to the sages of Naimiṣāraṇya – there were 60,000 of them.
But this meeting between Śukadeva and Mahārāja Parīkṣit is so important that nearly the entire First Canto serves as an introduction to it. And to fully understand who Parīkṣit is, we must go back to the Mahābhārata.
That begins in the Seventh Chapter, where we get something like a mini-Mahābhārata – or an appendix to it. The Mahābhārata tells of the war between two dynasties. Everything is arranged by Kṛṣṇa so that Yudhiṣṭhira becomes emperor, since he is a devotee of Kṛṣṇa. The burden of the earth – all the demonic kings – must be removed, and they are all destroyed on the battlefield at Kurukṣetra. All this was arranged by Kṛṣṇa. He explains this in the Bhagavad-gītā.
The Bhagavad-gītā itself is a small interlude, a tiny episode – but extremely important. It is said that the whole battle was arranged by Kṛṣṇa just so that He could speak the Gītā. The conclusion of the Gītā is sarva-dharmān parityajya – abandon all varieties of religion and surrender unto Me alone. Kṛṣṇa also says there, “Time I am… I have come to destroy these men.”
So Kṛṣṇa arranged all this, and it has all happened. In Chapter Seven of the First Canto, while reading, we suddenly encounter this episode with Aśvatthāmā, who killed the sleeping sons of the Pāṇḍavas in order to please his father Droṇācārya – or rather, he killed the grandsons of the Pāṇḍavas at night. It was a most cruel murder.
Then there is a confrontation between Aśvatthāmā, son of Droṇa, and Arjuna. Both release brahmāstras, nuclear-like weapons. Aśvatthāmā releases his weapon without real understanding. Kṛṣṇa instructs Arjuna to release his own brahmāstra to counteract that of Aśvatthāmā. Arjuna does so and then captures Aśvatthāmā.
What follows is a very interesting discussion. Arjuna now holds this murderer of children – this scoundrel – and wants to kill him on the spot. But Draupadī intervenes and says:
“I have myself experienced what it means to be bereft of one’s children. I do not want his mother to suffer the same fate.”
Here we see the noble heart and nature of Draupadī. “Please do not kill him.”
On the other hand, Kṛṣṇa stands there and says:
“You should kill him.”
But at the same time Draupadī says, “You must not kill him.” What is Arjuna to do now? Damned if he does, damned if he doesn’t. Then, after reflection – Kṛṣṇa does not say exactly what to do; rather He tells Arjuna: “You must decide” – Arjuna concludes that he can fulfill both instructions by socially killing Aśvatthāmā, i.e. shaving his head, taking away his position and banishing him. In this way he is killed socially, removed from society but physically allowed to live.
This episode answers one of the questions the sages at Naimiṣāraṇya asked at the beginning of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam:
“How can we recognize the principles of religion in this age? There are so many scriptures, so many instructions – please give us a concise conclusion.”
From that story we see that dharma means to please Kṛṣṇa. But pleasing Kṛṣṇa is not a simple matter. From Arjuna’s example we see that the devotee uses his own intelligence in Kṛṣṇa’s service.
In our Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement too, we see that intelligence is very much desired. Everyone should engage his or her abilities in Kṛṣṇa’s service. It is not that Kṛṣṇa consciousness destroys individuality – as some people accuse us – nor that we are blindly forced to do things. Rather, we are encouraged to engage everything in Kṛṣṇa’s service.
To continue: after this event Kṛṣṇa wants to leave. The battle is over, Yudhiṣṭhira is on the throne. Everything looks very auspicious. “Now I can go to Dvārakā – that is My home.”
But just before Kṛṣṇa departs, Aśvatthāmā again appears and attempts to attack Uttarā, who is pregnant. He tries to strike her womb because he knows that within is the successor to Yudhiṣṭhira – if this child lives, the dynasty continues; if he dies, everything ends. Then Uttara calls out to Kṛṣṇa to protect her.
Here we encounter Mahārāja Parīkṣit for the first time. Within the womb he meets Kṛṣṇa face to face. That’s very significant considering that later Parīkṣit will hear Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam from Śukadeva Gosvāmī. Already in the womb he saw Kṛṣṇa. Therefore his name is Parīkṣit – “the examiner, the searcher” – because all his life, after this vision, he seeks Kṛṣṇa. He constantly examines each person: “Where is Kṛṣṇa in you?” He is always searching for Kṛṣṇa.
After this incident, Uttara and Parīkṣit are saved. Again Kṛṣṇa wants to depart, but now we hear the prayers of Queen Kuntī – a very important section full of very refined devotional feelings. In the end she prays:
“Please cut the ties of my affection for my family and let my attraction be exclusively drawn to You, like the Ganges flowing without cessation to the sea.”
But still Kṛṣṇa cannot leave, because yet another problem remains: Mahārāja Yudhiṣṭhira is deeply troubled. He feels responsible for the Kurukṣetra war, in which millions have died just so he could become king. He sits on the throne in depression:
“Millions of men have died and now I sit on the throne. Their wives mourn because they have no husbands. It is all my fault.”
To calm Yudhiṣṭhira, Kṛṣṇa brings him to Bhīṣma. Bhīṣma still lies on the battlefield of Kurukṣetra on his bed of arrows. I’ve heard he lay there for sixty days. There were so many arrows that some pierced his body completely and he lay suspended on them. The pain was immense, but Kṛṣṇa blessed him so that the pain would be taken away and he could speak.
Bhīṣma was a great sage, versed in the entire application of Vedic knowledge in the form of varṇāśrama. He gave a long discourse on varṇāśrama-dharma to Yudhiṣṭhira right there on the bed of arrows. This is described in great detail in the Mahābhārata. In the Bhāgavatam it is summarized (1.9).
Kṛṣṇa requested Bhīṣma to pacify Yudhiṣṭhira so that he would no longer feel guilty for the war. The verses I read (1.9.15–18) say:
“O how wonderful is the influence of inevitable time! How else could there be reverses in the presence of King Yudhiṣṭhira, the son of the controller of religion; Bhīma, the great warrior with the club; Arjuna, the great archer with his famous bow Gāṇḍīva; and above all, the Lord Himself, the well-wisher of the Pāṇḍavas?
No one can understand the plan of the Lord. Even great philosophers who are engaged in exhaustive inquiries remain bewildered. Therefore, O King, everything that happens is part of His plan. Accept this unmanifest plan of the Lord. You have been appointed as the ruler and must now protect the citizens who are without shelter.
This Śrī Kṛṣṇa is no one else but the inconceivable Supreme Personality of Godhead, the first Nārāyaṇa, the supreme enjoyer. Yet He is moving among the descendants of King Vṛṣṇi just like one of us, and thus He bewilders us by His own internal potency.”
Here we see a wonderful union of philosophy and history. We learn about the Absolute Truth through the mouths of the bhāgavatas – those who have realized Kṛṣṇa.
A verse states that the Absolute Truth cannot be realized simply by argument, debate or by the philosophies of various munis – whose very qualification is to each have their own opinion. The Truth is very mysterious and can only be understood by following the mahājanas, the great authorities. Such a person is truly a bhāgavata, connected with Bhagavān. By following them we can understand the Supreme Truth.
Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is nothing other than the beautiful story of the Supreme Personality of Godhead and His direct devotees. We hear from His devotees what Kṛṣṇa consciousness is, through their experiences, and thus we receive the philosophy of Kṛṣṇa consciousness. That philosophy is the final conclusion of the Vedas.
The Vedas are meant for knowing Kṛṣṇa. They are like kalpa-taru, a desire tree. By properly approaching the Vedas one can fulfill all desires. The Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is the fully ripened fruit of that tree. When you have a fruit tree, you’re primarily interested in the fruit, not so much in the trunk, the leaves or branches. If you have a cherry tree, you rejoice when it bears cherries. The tree of Vedic literature has produced a fruit – Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam.
Nigama means Vedic scriptures, phalam means fruit. The nectar of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is thus described as perfect nectar in every respect. Another example is given: śuka means parrot. A parrot pecks a mango, and it is said that the mango becomes sweeter when touched by the beak of a parrot. Śukadeva Gosvāmī is also called Śuka – parrot. Not because he merely repeats mechanically what he heard from Vyāsa, but because through him the sweetness of Bhāgavatam increases.
We’re still with Bhīṣma here, but I wanted to reach at least the point where Mahārāja Parīkṣit meets Śukadeva Gosvāmī. I fear we won’t get that far today; perhaps we can continue tomorrow. I think we can stop here, unless someone has any questions.
Question: [about the karma-kāṇḍa process shown on the diagram]
Kṛṣṇa Kṣetra Swami: It is explained like this: it is the process of Pañcarātra where one becomes completely surrendered to Lord Viṣṇu in every respect. That is what distinguishes it from the classical Vedic system. Karma-kāṇḍa, jñāna-kāṇḍa, upāsanā-kāṇḍa tend to neglect conscious dependence on Kṛṣṇa – to put it mildly.
Question: Who is responsible for all this (Pañcarātra etc.)?
Kṛṣṇa Kṣetra Swami: Nārada Muni is responsible for Pañcarātra. In fact it is said: Nārada-Pañcarātra. Strictly speaking, the Nārada-Pañcarātra itself is small, but when we say “Pañcarātra” we generally mean a wide body of āgama-śāstras. Nārada Muni is the one who passed Pañcarātra down.
Question: About access to these scriptures.
Kṛṣṇa Kṣetra Swami: You mean Pañcarātra? Access is through guru-paramparā. Guru-paramparā connects us to the entire body of Vedic knowledge. In earlier ages there were specializations: whole families and traditions faithfully preserved particular Vedas – Ṛg-veda brāhmaṇas, Yajur-veda brāhmaṇas, Sāma-veda brāhmaṇas… But in Kali-yuga Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam and Pañcarātra have special importance.
If you are asking about access to Bhāgavatam and Pañcarātra – or something else?
Question: …
Kṛṣṇa Kṣetra Swami: The various parts of the Vedas are brought together by Lord Caitanya. Regarding Pañcarātra: Sanātana Gosvāmī received the order from Lord Caitanya to focus on that aspect and to write Hari-bhakti-vilāsa with the help of Gopāla Bhaṭṭa Gosvāmī. In a way similar to Vyāsa having different specialists for parts of the Vedas, Lord Caitanya appointed Rūpa Gosvāmī to develop rāgānugā-bhakti. The first part of Nectar of Devotion – which is actually a summary of the first part of Rūpa Gosvāmī’s Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu – gives a short summary of vaidhi-bhakti. It is a very philosophical presentation of its meaning, importance, etc. Then it transitions into rāgānugā-bhakti, and later goes on to describe all the rasas (spiritual tastes) in the second part of Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu. Beyond that it enters deeply into mādhurya-līlā, the conjugal pastimes, and their subtleties.
Sanātana Gosvāmī deals with Pañcarātra. Jīva Gosvāmī deals with Vedānta, giving the philosophical presentation. Later ācāryas also took up particular tasks, for example Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa wrote his commentary Govinda-bhāṣya on Vedānta.
Śrīla Prabhupāda gives wonderful purports in these sections of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam and explains – we could read it directly – that Prahlāda Mahārāja is our spiritual master. It is said in many places: we should learn from such great personalities. The entire Bhāgavatam consists of instructions from spiritual masters. When we come to Kṛṣṇa consciousness we are included in this whole family of spiritual masters and ācāryas.
Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is not a static work. It is not that there are 12 Cantos and that’s it. Once Śrīla Prabhupāda was asked:
“What about Joan of Arc? Is she also a saint?”
Prabhupāda didn’t really know who Joan of Arc was, but he said something to the effect:
“If she truly was a saint, then her story also belongs to Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam.”
Of course this is meant in a broader sense. Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura strongly emphasized that the philosophy of Kṛṣṇa consciousness is in no way sectarian. It embraces the entirety of genuine spiritual knowledge, wherever it appears. Sometimes the same truths are expressed in different languages and forms. But the essence of those teachings is found in the philosophy of Bhāgavatam.
If one reads and studies properly, one can recognize the philosophy of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam and then go on to teach it. That is the special nature of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam.
Let us stop here.