Transformation of Desire into Love
ŚB 2.6.23
yadāsya nābhyān nalinād
aham āsaṁ mahātmanaḥ
nāvidaṁ yajña-sambhārān
puruṣāvayavān ṛte
Synonyms
yadā — at the time of; asya — His; nābhyāt — from the abdomen; nalināt — from the lotus flower; aham — myself; āsam — took my birth; mahā-ātmanaḥ — of the great person; na avidam — did not know; yajña — sacrificial; sambhārān — ingredients; puruṣa — of the Lord; avayavān — personal bodily limbs; ṛte — except.
Translation
When I was born from the abdominal lotus flower of the Lord [Mahā-Viṣṇu], the great person, I had no ingredients for sacrificial performances except the bodily limbs of the great Personality of Godhead.
Purport
Lord Brahmā, the creator of the cosmic manifestation, is known as Svayambhū, or one who is born without father and mother. The general process is that a living creature is born out of the sex combination of the male father and the female mother. But Brahmā, the firstborn living being, is born out of the abdominal lotus flower of the Mahā-Viṣṇu plenary expansion of Lord Kṛṣṇa. The abdominal lotus flower is part of the Lord’s bodily limbs, and Brahmā is born out of the lotus flower. Therefore Lord Brahmā is also a part of the Lord’s body. Brahmā, after his appearance in the gigantic hollow of the universe, saw darkness and nothing else. He felt perplexity, and from his heart he was inspired by the Lord to undergo austerity, thereby acquiring the ingredients for sacrificial performances. But there was nothing besides the two of them, namely the Personality of Mahā-Viṣṇu and Brahmā himself, born of the bodily part of the Lord. For sacrificial performances many ingredients were in need, especially animals. The animal sacrifice is never meant for killing the animal, but for achieving the successful result of the sacrifice. The animal offered in the sacrificial fire is, so to speak, destroyed, but the next moment it is given a new life by dint of the Vedic hymns chanted by the expert priest. When such an expert priest is not available, the animal sacrifice in the fire of the sacrificial altar is forbidden. Thus Brahmā created even the sacrificial ingredients out of the bodily limbs of the Garbhodakaśāyī Viṣṇu, which means that the cosmic order was created by Brahmā himself. Also, nothing is created out of nothing, but everything is created from the person of the Lord. The Lord says in the Bhagavad-gītā (10.8), ahaṁ sarvasya prabhavo mattaḥ sarvaṁ pravartate: “Everything is made from My bodily limbs, and I am therefore the original source of all creations.”
The impersonalists argue that there is no use in worshiping the Lord when everything is nothing but the Lord Himself. The personalist, however, worships the Lord out of a great sense of gratitude, utilizing the ingredients born out of the bodily limbs of the Lord. The fruits and flowers are available from the body of the earth, and yet mother earth is worshiped by the sensible devotee with ingredients born from the earth. Similarly, mother Ganges is worshiped by the water of the Ganges, and yet the worshiper enjoys the result of such worship. Worship of the Lord is also performed by the ingredients born from the bodily limbs of the Lord, and yet the worshiper, who is himself a part of the Lord, achieves the result of devotional service to the Lord. While the impersonalist wrongly concludes that he is the Lord himself, the personalist, out of a great gratitude, worships the Lord in devotional service, knowing perfectly well that nothing is different from the Lord. The devotee therefore endeavors to apply everything in the service of the Lord because he knows that everything is the property of the Lord and that no one can claim anything as one’s own. This perfect conception of oneness helps the worshiper in being engaged in His loving service, whereas the impersonalist, being falsely puffed up, remains a nondevotee forever, without being recognized by the Lord.
Kṛṣṇa Kṣetra Prabhu:
This is quite a remarkable description of Lord Brahmā. Generally, people cannot describe the time of their birth, because we do not remember anything from our birth. Of course, the birth of Lord Brahmā is extraordinary in many ways, and besides that, he is not born in accordance with the ordinary process of reproduction.
The ordinary process of reproduction is itself quite fantastic, quite astonishing, it is mystical – how a living being comes to take shelter in the mother’s womb. It is so mysterious that we cannot understand how it actually happens. So how much more astonishing is the birth of Lord Brahmā. He does not even require this so-called ordinary process of reproduction. It is said here that he was born from Mahā-Viṣṇu.
We may wonder why Śrīla Prabhupāda wrote “Mahā-Viṣṇu”. Normally we understand that Garbhodakaśāyī Viṣṇu is the father of Brahmā. And Śrīla Prabhupāda mentions this further on in the same purport. In the verse the word mahā-ātmanaḥ is used – “the great person”. And of course, that great person is the Supreme Personality of Godhead, so in a general way one can address Him as Mahā-Viṣṇu. And this is one explanation: that Śrīla Prabhupāda uses this word in a broader sense, referring to this Sanskrit term mahā-ātmanaḥ.
Because Viṣṇu is the great person, mahā-ātmā, we expect that His son will also be great. Even in this world, if someone is a great person, then when they have a child, we expect that the child will also be great to some degree. And it is a great shame for a great aristocratic family when they have a son who becomes some sort of low-class bum.
Lord Brahmā is so great that although he was bewildered at the moment of his birth, he did not give in to that; rather, he accepted inspiration from the Lord to perform his tapasya. And as a result of his tapasya, because he performed it properly, according to the instructions he received, he obtained the result of his tapasya. What was that result? He obtained the ingredients for sacrifice.
He knew that the purpose of this world is sacrifice, and therefore he immediately went to arrange everything that was needed, and Kṛṣṇa reciprocated with him by making Himself available as the ingredients of the sacrifice. This will be explained in the next two or three verses.
The Puruṣa-sūkta explains how the various parts of the Lord’s body are used, and it further describes how, as a result of these sacrifices, so many things appear. For example, it is described how the different classes of human beings are manifested: from the Lord’s head the brāhmaṇas appear, from His arms the kṣatriyas, and so on. Animals too, and all other living beings, are created as a result of sacrifice.
In the Bhagavad-gītā Kṛṣṇa explains how all desirable things come from sacrifice. In the third chapter of the Bhagavad-gītā Kṛṣṇa explains how to perform these sacrifices and, as a result of them, obtain everything we need, or everything we desire.
However, as Śrīla Prabhupāda mentions in the purport, in order to perform sacrifices, qualified priests are required. A priest in this context means a person who knows how to perform everything properly, so that the animal offered in sacrifice receives a new body. Śrīla Prabhupāda explains that this is the measure, the test, that everything has been done correctly.
Throughout history there have been so many misunderstandings regarding the meaning of these animal sacrifices. And now, of course, it has become so degraded that it has no connection with a religious act; it is simply the slaughter of animals. But the interesting, pitiable phenomenon is that even today people are trying to justify this in some religious way.
Some scholar of the Vedic scriptures has, from various texts, dug out certain passages that supposedly justify eating meat, especially beef. And someone else has seen a book refuting all his arguments. So many different arguments were presented, but the point is that everything was based on a misunderstanding and on incorrect explanations of certain words.
This man, for example, said that the injunction is that when, in receiving a guest, one offers him manu-parka, one should add to it some ingredient derived from the cow. So he speculated that before offering this manu-parka one should slaughter a cow, which is complete madness.
Even nowadays the eating of meat is justified on the basis of certain spiritual authorities. So often we hear that it is all right to eat meat because Jesus Christ ate fish.
Śrīla Prabhupāda presented an interesting point of view in this connection: that He may indeed have eaten fish, but He is a great personality and should not be imitated. In the particular circumstances that existed at that time, He may have eaten fish. So He may do that, but that does not mean that everyone can simply follow His example.
And in any case, what kind of precedent is that for opening slaughterhouses in which billions of animals are killed, just because He might have eaten one or two fish?
An example from Vedic literature is Lord Śiva, who swallowed a certain poison. And what was the result of that? His throat turned blue.
If we were to eat some poison, we would die; we would be fatally poisoned. Yet this is exactly what people do when they say that since Lord Śiva acted in this way, they will do the same.
Therefore religious principles are a very subtle matter, and understanding them requires proper guidance from proper authorities such as Lord Brahmā.
Another thing we can learn from this verse is that the cosmic order comes from Lord Brahmā. And what is the modern idea? That it comes from nothing. And what is our experience of nothingness? That from nothing comes… nothing. More nothing. A lot of nothing.
Yet they create very sophisticated ideas about “nothing”. Now they have the theory of chaos: that we impose some idea of order onto chaos. Their idea is described in Vedic literature by the term dunakszaranjaya.
There is the example of a certain worm that eats its way through a book. As it chews through the book it carves out some patterns. We may see such a pattern and think, “Oh, that is the letter ‘a’! What an intelligent worm!”
In this way they explain that everything is a completely chaotic situation, and we somehow impose some causes, some reasons, on it. All right, but where does our idea of order come from, such that we can impose it on anything? There is no answer.
Śrīla Prabhupāda quotes Kṛṣṇa’s statement from the Bhagavad-gītā: “Everything comes from the limbs of My body. I am therefore the original source of all creation.” Thus, by understanding that everything comes from the limbs of the Lord’s body, we can understand our relationship with Kṛṣṇa.
And what does Kṛṣṇa say further on? Does anyone know? Who has read the 10th chapter of the Bhagavad-gītā? Good. So, the first of the four verses of the catur-śloki, the most important verses of the Bhagavad-gītā:
ahaṁ sarvasya prabhavo
mattaḥ sarvaṁ pravartate
iti matvā bhajante māṁ
budhā bhāva-samanvitāḥ
What does this mean? “I am the great source of all the universes, and the sages know this perfectly, engaging in undivided devotional service unto Me.” So – devotional service. One who understands this, what does he do? He engages in devotional service. A very simple point, and yet such an important one.
It implies that there has to be some understanding of Kṛṣṇa before someone can engage in service to Kṛṣṇa with full enthusiasm. Śrīla Prabhupāda presents a contrast between the attitude of the impersonalist and that of the personalist.
The impersonalists conclude: “Kṛṣṇa is everything, so what is the use of serving? If there is nothing different from Kṛṣṇa, then what is the question of service?” But this is an impractical philosophy. More practical is the philosophy of the bhaktas, in which the devotees can express their gratitude.
And Śrīla Prabhupāda explains here that the devotees are grateful to Kṛṣṇa: “Oh, Kṛṣṇa is so merciful.” Śrīla Prabhupāda explains that a bhakta realizes all of Kṛṣṇa’s qualities. And what is Kṛṣṇa’s most wonderful quality? That He is so merciful.
The devotee thinks in this way, and Śrīla Prabhupāda cites the feelings of such a devotee: “Oh, Kṛṣṇa is so merciful, therefore I will serve Him. And not only that, He is so humble that what does He say? ‘One flower, one leaf, one cup of water, and what else? One fruit. Such an offering, however small, I will accept if you offer it with devotion.’”
Thus, feeling such gratitude, the devotee says, “I will offer everything to Kṛṣṇa.” And his attitude is like this: Kṛṣṇa says to offer Him one leaf, one fruit, but the devotee says, “No, let us offer Him all the fruits, all the flowers, and not only that – let us offer Him everything else, because everything belongs to Kṛṣṇa.”
And Śrīla Prabhupāda explains that this is the proper understanding of oneness. He says that this perfect conception of unity helps the servant engage in his loving service.
We engage in devotional service when we want to obtain all the help we can get. And this is Śrīla Prabhupāda’s indication: the perfect conception of oneness.
Does this mean that we become Māyāvādīs and walk around saying, “It’s all one, prabhu, everything is one, therefore serve Kṛṣṇa”? If we were to chant this “mantra”, then we might just as well go to sleep; if everything is one, we could simply go to sleep.
No, it is not “all one” in that sense. Everything is one in the sense that everything must be engaged in the service of Kṛṣṇa. […]
Kṛṣṇa says in the Bhagavad-gītā that if even one of the senses is not properly engaged, it will carry us away like the stars. In order to properly engage the senses we also need all the help that we can get. And we all know why we have been in this material world for so long: because we are accustomed to allowing our senses to indulge. Therefore we accept spiritual authorities.
Śrīla Prabhupāda writes in the third chapter of the Bhagavad-gītā that this discipline in devotional service is compared to military discipline. In military discipline there is no room for “I would like to” or “I would not like to”. […]
Trivikrama Mahārāja confided to me yesterday that sometimes we chastise the devotees like this, but in response they just smile. Because sometimes they become so undisciplined. Mahārāja tries to stop this and says, “Go, go out the door, go on saṅkīrtana, distribute books, and so on, and so on.” Then we hear how everyone smiles, “Oh, that was the mercy of Mahārāja, he is giving so much mercy, he is so angry with us, oh, what mercy!”
We should not take it in this way, taking the instructions of senior devotees merely as orders. We should understand that they are for our own good and that they help us restrain the senses, which want to drag us away from devotional service.
And this leads to that question which was asked yesterday, regarding the transformation of lust into love. Yes, this is a great challenge, it is the greatest challenge; it is not an easy thing, and this is something we have to acknowledge right from the beginning if we want to be successful in this battle.
In the Bhagavad-gītā it is explained that this enemy known as lust has taken up various strategic positions within our body. When an enemy enters someone’s territory, it becomes very difficult to drive him out. Generally one wants to keep the enemy outside the fortress and fight on open ground. If the enemy has already occupied one’s territory, it is very difficult to deal with him.
So it is very difficult. Nevertheless, it is not impossible. And this is our basis for fighting here: it is difficult, but it is not impossible.
Devotional service means facing great difficulties. But the secret of our success is to recognize one essential point: we are not the supreme controller; Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme Controller and enjoyer. And we have heard all this before, just as we are hearing it again now. Yes, that is a fact. I apologize for that. I probably have nothing additional to say, because everything has already been said by Śrīla Prabhupāda.
One English gentleman said that education simply means reminding us. So our whole concern as devotees is to acknowledge that Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme Enjoyer, and in contemporary terminology this would be called a paradigm.
A paradigm is a way of seeing the world. In the material world everyone sees that this world exists for their pleasure, but the devotees see exactly the opposite – that it is meant solely for Kṛṣṇa’s pleasure.
If someone already has a formed paradigm, it is very difficult for him to change it. One example of how difficult it is to change a paradigm comes from the watch industry. Until 1962 Switzerland dominated the world watch industry. In that year a certain Swiss man invented the quartz watch and demonstrated it at a Swiss watchmakers’ conference. At that conference, the other watch manufacturers decided that it was just some sort of speculation.
Meanwhile, the Japanese took note of this idea, began to produce it and flooded the world with quartz watches. And as a result, the Swiss lost about 80% of their business.
In any case, we want to change this paradigm to the recognition that Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme Source of Pleasure, and in order to do that we have to constantly engage the intelligence given to us by God.
One of the characteristics of intelligence is to express doubt and ask questions: “Is this really how things are? Is it really as he said?” There is this verse which Śrīla Prabhupāda often quotes, “kāmādīnāṁ…,” which says, “For so long I have served my senses, but then I attained intelligence. And what did that intelligence reveal about these bad masters, the senses? Na karuṇā… – that these masters have no mercy, no shame, and they never give me peace.”
So intelligence asks: “Has this sense gratification given me mercy? Has it given me good sense? Have I attained peace through gratifying my senses?” Intelligence raises these questions.
Thus the devotee says, “Now I have intelligence, therefore I have rejected these masters. Now I take shelter of Kṛṣṇa, and therefore I am free from fear.”
This question was also asked: “What is the relationship between lust and fear?” If someone conquers the master known as lust, then he becomes freed from fear. At the end of this prayer the devotee says, “Therefore, my Lord, please engage me in Your service.” This indicates that we cannot become free from lust by ourselves; we need Kṛṣṇa’s mercy.
However, we do not make the mistake that some Christians make, who claim that God’s grace is everything and therefore we do not need to do anything. They think you can simply sit, give up searching, and wait until God pours His grace upon you.
No – we must make an effort. And what is effort in the material world? It is karma. And how is karma properly applied in this material world? As yajña, sacrifice. And which yajña do we perform in the age of Kali? Saṅkīrtana-yajña ki jaya!
This is the solution: “harer nāma harer nāma harer nāmaiva kevalam kalau nāsty eva nāsty eva nāsty …” We can accept that there is no other way to transform lust into love.
But it is not exactly that the transformation of lust produces love, because lust is a distorted form of love. Sometimes it is said that one can “engage lust in Kṛṣṇa’s service”; however, we must be very careful with this statement. Generally, when someone is lusty, it will end with that person having even more lust.
A good example of the proper attitude is Yāmunācārya. It is not that he became lusty; rather, he remembered his former lusty activities so that he spat at the mere thought of lust. Or Haridāsa Ṭhākura: when the prostitute came to him, there is no evidence that he was attracted to her at all. He simply thought, “Since she has already come to me, this is an opportunity to engage her in devotional service.” Nor did he become angry; he simply saw this person as an ordinary soul, and in any case he just went on chanting Hare Kṛṣṇa.
In Spanish they say mañana. Do you know what that means? Specifically it means “tomorrow”, but in fact it means “never”. So a better line of action is the line of the devotee who has decided to fast on Ekādaśī. When you decide to fast, you have no anxiety about eating on that day. You are not worried about it. There may be some desire, but it is not a problem – you are simply not going to eat, that’s all.
So this is the safest line of action. Any other line of action is not as safe. There is also the possibility of another course within Kṛṣṇa consciousness – there is the gṛhastha-āśrama – but it is not completely safe. In any case, this material world is a dangerous place for us, because the enemy has already entered our territory. Therefore we need all the help we can get. Saṅkīrtana-yajña.
From whom especially do we get help? Who is the yajña-puruṣa? Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu ki jaya!
There is this wonderful verse by Kṛṣṇadāsa Kavirāja:
kaṭañcana smṛte yasmin duṣkaraṁ sukaraṁ bhavet
vismṛte viparītaṁ syāt śrī-caitanyaṁ namāmi tam
It says that things which are very difficult and hard to attain become very easy when one remembers Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, and that things which are very easy to attain become very difficult for one who does not remember Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu.
So what is the conclusion? Always remember Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu.
Thus, when we sing before prasādam, or when we will chant now because today is Ekādaśī, at the end we say: “preme ḍāko Caitanya Nitāi.”
Preme means “with love”, with a sense of being accepted, fulfilled; ḍāko – “call out”, “cry out”; Caitanya Nitāi. This is the conclusion of that prasādam prayer.
And in the prayer it is pointed out that the senses are very difficult to control, but Kṛṣṇa is very merciful. How can we obtain His mercy? By calling out for the mercy of Caitanya–Nitāi.
We find out, as intelligence tells us, how we have served those cruel masters, the senses – and from this we see that our intelligence is not very deep. So what should a person do who does not have such intelligence? Does it mean that such a person is not qualified?
Intelligence is something we receive from Kṛṣṇa and from the spiritual master, so we have to cultivate intelligence by hearing. Kṛṣṇa said in the Bhagavad-gītā:
yadā te moha-kalilaṁ
buddhir vyatitariṣyati
tadā gantāsi nirvedaṁ
śrotavyasya śrutasya ca
In the Bhagavad-gītā Kṛṣṇa says that when your intelligence comes out of the forest of illusion, then you will become indifferent to what has been said and what will be said, and to everything that someone tries to impose upon you.
All right, but what if your intelligence is still in the forest of illusion? Therefore Lord Kapila says that we must hear for a very long time. We do have intelligence, because otherwise we would not be able to hear at all. However, it has to be awakened — buddhi. The word buddhi comes from bodha, which means “awakening”. It is spiritual intelligence, which means that it is connected with Kṛṣṇa, coming from Kṛṣṇa.
The danger, or the problem, is when we think that we have our “own” intelligence, that somehow we know better than Kṛṣṇa, we know better than the spiritual master.
I also wanted to comment on lust: when Śrīla Prabhupāda said that if you engage in very hard work for Kṛṣṇa, then that same lust becomes the force that pushes you, but it is directed differently and naturally brings a different result.
Another way of using that desire is to dance very enthusiastically in kīrtana. Śrīla Prabhupāda also writes that one way to conquer the lord of lust is to engage in Deity worship.
Sometimes we hear a philosophical explanation from many people, and then it happens that some particular person says the very same thing, but at a certain moment it suddenly becomes clear to us why it is so.
Just as Śrīla Bilvamaṅgala Ṭhākura did not ask the prostitute why she was so entangled. Nor did he deliberate over why he felt inspired upon hearing her words. He immediately accepted it in his heart and went to Vṛndāvana.