Q. I heard that verse 9.32 of Bhagavad-Gita can be translated in two ways, either as Srila Prabhupada did: “O son of Prtha, those who can take shelter in Me, though they be of lower birth—women, vaisyas, sudras—can attain the supreme destination.” or “…though they be sinful women, vaisyas or sudras…” Which is true?
A. I don’t think the Sanskrit supports the translation in which papayonayah (sinful birth) is used as an adjective to qualify striyah (women). However, Prabhupada himself did interpret this verse differently in one of his purports to Srimad Bhagavatam (SB 1.11.19) where he translated striyah as “prostitutes.” Alternately, here is the translation and commentary I use in my upcoming book Bhagavad-gita: Its Feeling and Philosophy.
“It is certain, O Partha, that those who take refuge in me, even the lowborn, women, merchants, as well as the working class, attain the highest goal.” (Bg. 9.32)
Commentary: “In this verse Krishna says that even the lowborn, who due to impiety in their previous life have taken such births, regardless of the seeds of their past and present harvest, can overcome their impiety if they take shelter of him in devotion. The sacred literature cites numerous examples of animal killers and animals themselves being so delivered by the direct and indirect influence of bhakti.
“Women are mentioned in this verse because of the social impediment to their study of the Vedas in times gone by, as well as the fact that a woman’s birth can subject one to the kind of repression they have suffered from over the centuries.
“Merchants are notorious for being untruthful, and the laborers for their lack of interest in and qualification for scriptural study. Regardless of the socioreligious position of all of the above, Krishna does not withhold himself from them should they try to love him. Indeed, they will surpass others of greater material qualification who take paths other than bhakti and attain the highest destination.”
The spiritual position is that everyone—men and women—should be submissive to Krishna. If, for example, in a married relationship, the wife is more submissive to Krishna, her husband should follow her. When Caitanya Mahaprabhu found that Muknunda’s son, Raghunandana, was more Krnsa conscious than his father, he considered Raghunandana the father and Mukunda the son.
Q. You said in a previous Sanga that the Bhagavatam’s glorification of Lord Siva is progaganda. I cannot accept this. How can this be?
A. I am simply explaining the truth about the statement in the Bhagavatam, vaisnavanam yatah sambhu. Siva is not the greatest Vaisnava. Thus, this statement is propaganda, and this was the stated opinion of Om Visnupada B. R. Sridhara Deva Gowami Maharaja as well. In the Bhagavatam Siva represents jnana misra bhakti, as revealed by Sanatana Goswami in Brihat Bhagavatamrita. The fact that some Gaudiyas see him in other ways is another subject. He was posted at the gate of the rasa stahli. He was not allowed the priviledge of serving Radha in manjari svarupa. Those who do this, they are the greatest Vaisnavas. This is the message of Srimad Bhagavatam.
If you do not accept this line of reasoning, how will you explain the verse that follows this one (vaisnavanam yatah sambhu), wherein it is stated that Kasi is the highest of holy places (ksetranam caiva sarvesam yatah kasi hy anuttamam)? This too is propaganda! Bhagavatam teaches that Vrindavana is the holiest place, not Kasi. These statements come in the section in which the Bhagavatam is being glorified.
The Bhagavatam is saying that as the Ganga is the greatest of rivers, Acyuta the greatest God, Siva the greatest Vaisnava, Bhagavatam is the greatest Purana. Here Siva is distinguished from Visnu and described as his devotee, as no other Purana points out so clearly. Siva is a Vaisnava! Indeed, he is the greatest Vaisnava, and his place, Kasi, the holiest tirtha. This is propaganda. Let the Saivaites become Vaisnavas, and let discussion of the Bhagavata take place in Kasi, where practically everyone is a mayavadi and no on is interested in the Bhagavatam! This is what the Bhagavatam is saying in the verse under discussion.
Q. What about a Guru who doesn’t follow institutional authorities, such as asking disciples not to follow the instructions of the local temple president, or when coming to town not visiting the temple but remaining in the home of disciples? What does the sastra say about this? Is one obligated to follow the instructions of his Guru knowing they are wrong?
A. What if the temple authority is wrong and that’s why the Guru is instructing his disciples to stay away? The sastra doesn’t say anything about institutional policies. It concerns itself with siddhanta and standards of personal spiritual behavior, Vaisnava acar. Perhaps the disciple should hear from his Guru why he is avoiding a particular temple. The disciple should try to see first if there is a temple in his Guru’s heart. He may be wrong, he may not be wrong. Without knowing the particulars, I cannot say. If you think your Guru is wrong, however, he should be approached about it respectfully after consultation with advanced devotees.
Q. You once said Caitanya-caritamrita is based on Sat-sandarbha, and this is brought out in Tattva-sandarbha. Could you explain?
A. The vastu nirdesa sloka of Cc (1.1.3), which states the essence of the entire book, is based on the vastu nirdesa slokas of Sat-sandarbha (Tattva-sandarbha anucchedas 1 and 8).There it is explained that Mahaprabhu is Brahman, Paramatma, and Bhagavan. He is the advaya jnana tattva that Srimad Bhagavatam is all about. To find out more information, please refer to my book Tattva-sandarbha: Sacred India’s Philosophy of Ecstasy.
Q. What is the philosophical basis for “introductory” initiations that are so popular these days among Gaudiya Gurus?
A. Different acaryas have different standards. Many give Hari Nama initiation very freely and place more emphasis on mantra diksa. In the scripture it is mentioned that Hari Nama Prabhu is independent of diksa—na diksam na ca sat-kriyam na ca purascaryam (Padayavli 29). So some may draw their policy from this. Prabhupada differed in this regard, and I think his approach was insightful. It is also mentioned (I believe in Advaita prakasa) that Advaita Acarya initiated Sacimata into the chanting of the Hare Krishna maha mantra. He did so when Sri Gaurasundara refused to take the breast milk from someone who was not initiated.
Q. Some say Srila Prabhupada emphasized chanting more than service while Sridhara Maharaja stressed the opposite. Similarly, I’ve heard that Prabhupada emphasized chanting 16 rounds while Sridhara Maharaja put more stress on quality over quantity. How do we understand these apparent differences?
A. Sridhara Maharaja is saying that a service attitude is at the heart of real chanting. Chanting without a proper service attitude does not have much value. Prabhupada would not disagree with this. Indeed, he engaged his disciples in service all day, and sometimes into the night as well, after they chanted 16 rounds of japa.
Q. Can a devotee who has received Hari nama initiation skip chanting on some days?
A. The idea is not to skip, but to chant under vows. This will bring steadiness (nistha).
Q. What is the difference between Brahma Gayatri and regular gayatri?
A. Om bhur bhuvah, no difference. However, in our sampradaya we sometimes equate gayatri with the diksa mantras because Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura gave them together. Thus we sometimes call it gayatri initiation.
Q. The BBT published two editions of Srila Prabhupada’s Bhagavad-gita: As It Is. Which edition is more faithful to the original?
A. There is no essential difference between the two editions.
Q. What is the meaning of akashat patitam toyam, keshavam prati gachati?
A. “As water falls from the sky, we should go to Krishna, naturally and spontaneously.” Pray that you can flow in this direction.
Q. Is it true that nitya-siddhas can never be put into material illusion? In one of your CD discourses you described that when the associates of Caitanya Mahaprabhu recognized him as Krishna, they then realized they were his eternal associates. Why didn’t they know this all along?
A. They were under the influence of Yogamaya, the internal sakti of Krishna, who in accordance with his desire makes them forget themselves, as she does his associates for the sake of Gaura lila.
Q. Is vaibhava a wider concept than sandhini, hladhini, and samvit? Is there any difference between this and yogamaya?
A. The term vaibhava refers to manifestations of Godhead, whereas sandhini, hladhini, and samvit are constituents of his svarupa sakti. Yogamaya is a function of the svarupa sakti.
Q. Do Gaudiya Vaisnavas attain two siddha-dehas; one for Vraja and one for Nabadwipa lila?
A. Some devotees prefer gaura lila, others prefer Krishna lila, and some prefer both equally. Dasya bhakti in Gaura lila brings one to Krishna lila. If we follow Nimai Pandit in his Nadiya lila, when he himself enters Krishna lila in trance, we will go there with him.
