Critical Krishna Options

[Kalisurfer]

It's fun to go through these stories for old time's sake as Zanardi mentioned. It can only make me think: How did we ever believe this stuff?

As Ek and I found ourselves meditating on the story of Devaki's eight baby last night, we came to wonder: If Kamsa wanted to avoid being killed by Devaki's eight child, why did he not consider imprisoning her alone, without Vasudeva? (And no access to the guards...)

He wouldn't have to kill any babies. Everything would be fine and dandy.

But then comes in the possibility of Immaculate Conception, I mean if it worked for Mary, why not Devaki ... but then we would of had to be dealing with something called Krsnaianity, Hhmmm...both have evil Kings wanting to kill babies, Herod and Kamsa ... mixing up those two narratives may be too much for my mind to handle right now, though Kirtanananda would of felt right at home with that one.

[Gerard]

Deeper meanings in general were viewed with suspicion by Prabhu Foot. They smacked of mental speculation, were declared maya and rejected. Only one single chapter in BhP was officially allowed to have a deeper meaning. Ha ha, any one knows?

That would be SB 4.25, the story of King Puranjana. I'll have that cigar, Ek. But your referring to this story implies perhaps that you think that the deeper meaning of a story can only be of an allegorical nature? I believe that the stories describe real events that are not visible to normal human eyes, perhaps in meditation.

Dhyana said "some of the stories spoke to something in me", that is a hunch, a feeling. And I am sure Ek still has strong feelings in relation to Hindu mythology, why else hang on to a 700 volume Sanskrit library, it can't be for the money you can make with it

We all, at some time, thought the Bhagavatam a beautiful book, perhaps if we can get past Prabhupad's literalistic interpretation (it was just one of many possible interpretations and not a very good one at that) we can again experience the beauty of that scripture because it saddens me to see that now it all has just been such a sour waste of your time, obvious talents and religious feelings

[Brainiac]

For me, it isn't a question of dealing with these things literally or figuratively within ISKCON. I have had to live with these things since birth due to my religion.

'Symbolic' interpretations abound aplenty in Advaita and other impersonalistic sects (the dreaded Mayavada!), and in my view they make even less sense than the literal versions.

[Brainiac]

As Ek and I found ourselves meditating on the story of Devaki's eight baby last night, we came to wonder: If Kamsa wanted to avoid being killed by Devaki's eight child, why did he not consider imprisoning her alone, without Vasudeva? (And no access to the guards...) 

You know what these demons are like. They're less intelligent, uncouth, inexplicably and pathologically malicious, and well, demonic! They make their plans to live forever and somehow always end up signing their own death warrants.

By the way, if you think this is funny, you should see the demons as depicted in various Indian TV soap serials. They really are ridiculous. All they ever seem to do is laugh a lot (maliciously of course), twirl their moustaches villainously and end up getting killed.

[zanardi]

I think its kinda sweet that ek and dhyana still discuss Krishna lila together!

Yes they do, and they also drink warm milk while doing so.

[zanardi]

There are so many touching stories and so many touching books to read. I do not know if I was ever really that much "touched" by the scriptures, but I do not think that my time was wasted. It was one hell of a ride!

[Brainiac]

Because the devotees wanted to see it.

The devotees sure get a lot of fringe benefits, don't they? The Vedanta-sutra immortalises the dictum that God has an impartial attitude to all of his creations, but funnily enough he has a "very special relationship" with his devotees. Is this a mutual contradiction? One might say that one treats and respects all human beings equally while having a "special relationship" with one's family, blood relations and so on. Does this logic apply to God, who is supposed to be the creator of all (and thus a direct family member of all) and the "seed-giving Father"?

Krishna loves his devotees so much that he specifically says he descends on earth for their benefit. BG 4.8: paritrāṇāya sādhūnāḿ vināśāya ca duṣkṛtām, that's a fine example of equal opportunities right there. One would think that if Krishna/God is the creator of all, he created the demons too. But here he says he wants to save one faction and destroy the other. How nice.

Check out this line in the purport:

As far as the atheistic are concerned, it is not necessary for the Supreme Lord to appear as He is to destroy them, as He did with the demons Rāvaṇa and Kaḿsa. The Lord has many agents who are quite competent to vanquish demons. But the Lord especially descends to appease His unalloyed devotees, who are always harassed by the demoniac.

The trouble is that whenever the Lord descends to engage in beautiful pastimes with his loving and unalloyed devotees, he nearly always leaves a trail of destruction in his wake. Krishna, especially, killed many demons from birth. In BG 16 (a chapter that deals with the divine and demoniac natures) it seems that Krishna doesn't seem to offer any chances for the demons to reform themselves except with just a hint in verse 24 that following the scriptures will lead to improvement. Has anyone heard of demons listening to scriptures and krsna-katha ? It doesn't seem like the sort of thing they'd do. Perhaps there may be a few instances where Krishna offered the chance to surrender (are there any?), but non-compliance with this suggestion often results in death in the most gruesome way. Is it really necessary to chop off people's heads with a chakra, dismember them with swords and such? Is it really necessary for Narasimhadev to rip apart Hiranyakashipu's stomach with his large lionlike nails and kill him in front of his own child Prahlad? This could be taken as child abuse of the emotional sort; some war atrocities often take place where soldiers kill parents in front of their own children where the child is left weeping, desolate, and destitute. That is, if the child isn't killed too. Prahlad seems pretty happy about his father's death however: "My Lord Nṛsiḿhadeva, please, therefore, cease Your anger now that my father, the great demon Hiraṇyakaśipu, has been killed. Since even saintly persons take pleasure in the killing of a scorpion or a snake, all the worlds have achieved great satisfaction because of the death of this demon. Now they are confident of their happiness, and they will always remember Your auspicious incarnation in order to be free from fear." (SB 7.9.14)

Only in the scriptures, eh?

[0Aran0]

I think its kinda sweet that ek and dhyana still discuss Krishna lila together!

Yes they do, and they also drink warm milk while doing so.

But perhaps they lace it with rum these days.

[Dhyana]

Krishna loves his devotees so much that he specifically says he descends on earth for their benefit. BG 4.8: paritrāṇāya sādhūnāḿ vināśāya ca duṣkṛtām, that's a fine example of equal opportunities right there.

Brainiac, your style just cracks me up.

The trouble is that whenever the Lord descends to engage in beautiful pastimes with his loving and unalloyed devotees, he nearly always leaves a trail of destruction in his wake.

Or at least broken hearts. (I have tried to paste in nine broken hearts here, for Radha and the eight principal gopis, but ther board doesn't allow so many in one post.)

Has anyone heard of demons listening to scriptures and krsna-katha ? It doesn't seem like the sort of thing they'd do.

I have, but don't remember the names right now... Bali Maharaja, for one. But there were more. Vritrasura once offered one of the sweetest prayers I have seen. (I may dig it up once I have served my husband the evening tea...)

Is it really necessary for Narasimhadev to rip apart Hiranyakashipu's stomach with his large lionlike nails and kill him in front of his own child Prahlad? This could be taken as child abuse of the emotional sort; some war atrocities often take place where soldiers kill parents in front of their own children where the child is left weeping, desolate, and destitute. That is, if the child isn't killed too. Prahlad seems pretty happy about his father's death however: "My Lord Nṛsiḿhadeva, please, therefore, cease Your anger now that my father, the great demon Hiraṇyakaśipu, has been killed. Since even saintly persons take pleasure in the killing of a scorpion or a snake, all the worlds have achieved great satisfaction because of the death of this demon. Now they are confident of their happiness, and they will always remember Your auspicious incarnation in order to be free from fear." (SB 7.9.14)

Only in the scriptures, eh? 

Not only. Identification with the aggressor is often seen in children. (If we were to ignore the fact that Nrsimhadeva appeared in order to save Prahlad from his own father who tried to kill him.)

[Brainiac]

I have, but don't remember the names right now... Bali Maharaja, for one. But there were more. Vritrasura once offered one of the sweetest prayers I have seen. (I may dig it up once I have served my husband the evening tea...)

Hehe you are such an inspiration. Bali Maharaja, what a conflicted guy. An individual who can't seem to decide if he wants to be devotional or demonic. And what a delicious irony that he was Prahlad's grandson too. Perhaps being demonic is in the genes! Hiranyakashipu was a demon and Prahlad recognises his own demonic status in various SB verses, and then we have his grandson Bali being uppity and trying to do something really vulgar and detestable like rule the three worlds. You can't say he didn't lack ambition though; what else is he supposed to do, work in McDonald's?

You also just reminded me that I never got around to reading about Vritrasura, so I should do that.

This all represents a great confusion for Krishna, whose incarnation policy now looks a little too narrow in distinguishing who exactly is a sadhu or an asura when he descends. Perhaps we should all form a posse and go protest loudly outside his house. Assuming he doesn't massacre our uppity lot and actually listens to some constructive criticism, we can give him the "shades of grey" lecture and tell him to stop being so bloody black-and-white every time he writes a scripture!

Not only. Identification with the aggressor is often seen in children. (If we were to ignore the fact that Nrsimhadeva appeared in order to save Prahlad from his own father who tried to kill him.)

I guess you're right. Prahlad probably did hate him a lot after suffering all those myriad persecutions, and enjoyed revenge by proxy. Understandable. Poor little lad.

[Dhyana]

You also just reminded me that I never got around to reading about Vritrasura, so I should do that.

SB 6.11.26
ajAta-pakSAH iva mAtaraM khagAH
stanyaM yatha vatsatarAH kSudh-ArtAH
priyaM priyeva vyuSitaM viSannA
mano 'ravindAkSa didRkSate tvam

Translation: (Prabhupada's is intolerably wordy and not always close to the Sanskrit, here goes my attempt):

O lotus-eyed Lord, as baby birds that have not developed their wings yet look for their mother to return; as small calves tied with ropes await anxiously the time of milking by their mothers; and as a morose lover whose beloved is far away longs for him; so I yearn to see you.

A lovely meter he chose too, this Vritrasura.

[ePiTau]

You also just reminded me that I never got around to reading about Vritrasura, so I should do that.

SB 6.11.26
ajAta-pakSAH iva mAtaraM khagAH
stanyaM yatha vatsatarAH kSudh-ArtAH
priyaM priyeva vyuSitaM viSannA
mano 'ravindAkSa didRkSate tvam

Translation: (Prabhupada's is intolerably wordy and not always close to the Sanskrit, here goes my attempt):

O lotus-eyed Lord, as baby birds that have not developed their wings yet look for their mother to return; as small calves tied with ropes await anxiously the time of milking by their mothers; and as a morose lover whose beloved is far away longs for him; so I yearn to see you.

A lovely meter he chose too, this Vritrasura.

Such a demon, this Vritrasura!
Do you think he was gay?
A gay demon in Vedic times?
There he goes, saying "I feel like a woman longing for her lover."
McCain, save us!

[ePiTau]

Softbrain and Aran,

I don't think I was a literalist fundamentalist while in iskcon. Not sure what I was, though. I remember the very first Bhagavatam class I gave. I was really looking forward to it. Some time (days, hours, I can't remember) after the class I was called to the temple president's office. The Mensch looked grave and told me some of my brahmacari godbrothers had complained about my lecture. The TP agreed with their points, namely that I had committed the offense of speculation, and on top of that jumping over the acaryas and senior devotees, by offering explanations not found in the purports or known commentaries. Oooops, thought I, what did I do? I had said in the class that the fact Balaram killed Romaharshana Suta by touching him with a blade of grass, shows that Balaram/Krishna wanted Suta Gosvami, and not Romaharsana, to speak the Bhagavatam. I thought that was pretty obvious. The question was only, how could I be so sure?

I decided the guys were just envious because I enjoyed giving class. I did not change my style or attitude.

Over the years I found myself more and more comfortable with taking the persons, especially the interlocutors in the Bhagavatam, to be real people. I took it that they really, literally, had said what they said, once upon a time. A large part of my classes was spent describing the context. Why did this person say these words to that person? What was the situation? Who else was around listening. Who else had said something similar, when, where, why, to whom? I was looking at the emotions of the interlocutors and speakers, even if such things were rarely explained in the purports or commentaries. What were the actors trying to get each other to do?

There was room for more meaning. I did not think in terms of "deeper" meaning. I liked to explore multiple, equally valid, perfectly supported parallel meanings. And if such meanings contradicted one another, even better! I developed my own tools and rules for this. I liked to present a well-supported train of arguments until I had the whole audience with me. Then I showed how this interpretation was probably wrong, or if taken as correct, had incredibly outrageous consequences! Some other explanation was needed. I liked the Bhagavatam for having plenty of material for these kinds of adventures. In those days I still believed that some perfect being(s) had compiled the text and that simply by getting absorbed in it, while enjoying the discovery of endless layers of meanings (without a single ONE ultimate meaning) would somehow spiritually benefit me.

That's more or less how it was. I had a great time with the Bhagavatam during my days in iskcon. There were a few more occasions when I was accused of not showing enough respect or reverence towards the persons of the book. No doubt that was so because I described them as beings with real emotions and motives.

Later, after studying Sanskrit and reading many more Puranas in the original language, I changed my attitude and found these texts to be quite a porridge. Not that I hate porridge, but enough is enough.

[0Aran0]

Thank you ePiTau for answering so openly.

ISKCON was certainly not (I imagine still isn't) the place for reflection; I mentioned to you before how Prithu cast us out into the street because I had dared to quote from 'Jaiva Dharma' and 'Brihad Bhagavatamrita' during Bhagavatam class, and, perhaps worse still, had begun to sing all funny, 'like a sahajiya'.

Maybe your stay in GV would have been more appreciated somewhere in SCSMath - at least there was room in the penumbrae for your proclivities (the things I got away with!); though, Lord knows, we had to suffer our fair share of rather domineering ex-ISKCON-sanyasis who, much to the embarrassment of the rest of us, took pleasure in, alternately, treating us to both Prabhupad and Sridhar Maharaj impersonations (as dictated by mood and circumstance).

[Gerard]

I am sure I would have enjoyed your Bhagavatam classes, EpiTau, sorry to hear that all the fun was sucked out of it by those senior devotees who were what we call in Dutch "droogkloten", - "the ones with dry testicles".

[Brainiac]

Such a demon, this Vritrasura!
Do you think he was gay?
A gay demon in Vedic times?

Forget Vedic times, your very mention of a gay demon made me LMAO!

That's more or less how it was. I had a great time with the Bhagavatam during my days in iskcon. There were a few more occasions when I was accused of not showing enough respect or reverence towards the persons of the book. No doubt that was so because I described them as beings with real emotions and motives.

I appreciated your story and I found myself empathising a lot with this paragraph especially because I have sometimes felt that way too, having had to live with these stories since birth. I have felt some of the greatest emotions while reading these stories and often wondered why such fantastic events never happened any more 'in these days'. I was often fobbed off with explanations such as "then was the Age of Miracles and this is the Age of Mercy" and similar platitudes. How convenient, I thought.

The 'symbolic' explanations never satisfied me much either because the meanings offered seemed somehow to fall short of taking full account of the complexities described in each story. It seemed much easier to believe that these were real events happening in an Age of Miracles where gods and their devis would often zip and zap all over the cosmos in their celestial airplanes and these were normal occurrences. Perhaps demons really were lurking around in benign animal forms waiting for their intended victims. Perhaps it really was possible for Savitri to travel to Samyaminipuri to ask the return of her beloved husband's soul (one of the most charming husband-wife love stories in the canon, I think).

During the period of my leaving faith, I developed an interest for the 'underdogs' or other lesser known characters in the main stories who made important contributions in their own way. I wrote an article on Abhimanyu and empathised very much with his struggle (I still admire Abhimanyu's ideal), and I planned to write more articles on Draupadi, Shatrughna, Uttara and other less wellknown characters. In fact last week I saw an episode of Kahaani Humaarey Mahabharat Ki and I felt, really felt, for the character of Madri, who you'll remember as Pandu's second wife and Kunti's co-wife. What a tragic life that must have been; a younger wife who loved her husband so much that she never had her romantic and sexual longings fulfilled satisfactorily, and to top it all off she immolated herself on his funeral pyre. She contributed two of the five Pandavas and yet history doesn't remember her very much. Even some of the 'major' characters, such as Karna, could be a fitting subject to wonder about agonies and ecstasies.

I guess somewhere, deep in the deepest core of my heart, I want these stories to be true. It seems such a waste of human sadness, tragedy and unfulfilled yearnings if it was all a complete work of fiction. I expect some people would love to think that a real-life romance provided the inspiration for Romeo and Juliet, or that a dastardly murder formed the basis of Macbeth. But unfortunately, reason doesn't brook such thinking. It doesn't stop me wondering about the emotions of the characters when I read about them though, perhaps that is the whole point of fiction after all; to generate inspiration, excitement, courage, desires and yearnings in us.

[zanardi]

Dhyana, you just revealed why so many in our former institution are so hell bent on "preaching", "going out", "distributing books" etc.  Being the sole distributors of the absolute truth we just had to go out and use our "fantastic selling lines" in order to convert as many as possible to join our ranks. 

How did the trick work? Let us calculate.  After having sold alltogether about 700 000 books here in Finland, there is now a bit more than 70 registered members in the movement.  Today, less than 20 fulltimers.  That is after 25 years of hard work. 

Of course there is a bunch of people who practice their brand of vaisnavism, outside of Iskcon,  and I do not see the invisible.  Still, do the math.

Well, that just shows that Finland is a very demoniac place. Only 25? So what? We are selling diamonds, not many can buy. (paraphrase of something SP once said)

Or maybe it is exactly the opposite. This is such a pious country that people bought the books just for "our" sake. In their own life they were already so godly that there was no need for the institution.

[zanardi]

I am sure I would have enjoyed your Bhagavatam classes, EpiTau, sorry to hear that all the fun was sucked out of it by those senior devotees who were what we call in Dutch "droogkloten", - "the ones with dry testicles".

Some of us did attend EpiTaus classes. The only downside was that as a listener you had to be wide awake, otherwise he fooled you with his "well-supported train of arguments" and had you believing something outrageous . It could be a bit embarassing if also refreshing .

Sometimes there was too much sanskrit .

[Dhyana]

During the period of my leaving faith, I developed an interest for the 'underdogs' or other lesser known characters in the main stories who made important contributions in their own way.

This strikes a chord. I have done something similar. Amba and Vidura come to mind.

Somehow many of the Bhagavatam passages that have evoked the strongest response are those about "minor tragedies," with understated emotion, often only hinted at by the choice of a detail in the description, or the choice of metaphor.

Like Devahuti after both her husband and her son left her, she is old and alone, and performs austerities in her home with the beautiful garden and its pond to which celestial damsels come to play with their lovers, and the birds are singing sweetly. There she is, her skin wrinkled and gray from fast and excessive purification baths. (The scene is described with so much sensuousness, and there goes SP ranting about sexual restraint / submission to husband crap in the purport. I think he had some powerful repressions in place, apart from sometimes being too crude with the Sanskrit. I somehow can't imagine SP appreciating poetry.)

Or like Parvati, when she decides to attend her father Daksa's sacrifice, although her husband Siva has tried to dissuade her with both loving words and arguments. When she goes, he gives her his bull to ride on, an umbrella and her favorite parrot. A parrot! You can just see this little girl on the huge bull, a child missing her family. Siva instructs his trusted servants -- Pisacas and other ghastly figures -- to surround her and guard her. There she rides, straight into disaster.

Or Narada in the 1st Canto, describing his meeting with the bhaktivedantas, how he served them and how they left. His love and longing are so palpable. This one was actually something Ek made me aware of through some classes.

In fact last week I saw an episode of Kahaani Humaarey Mahabharat Ki and I felt, really felt, for the character of Madri, who you'll remember as Pandu's second wife and Kunti's co-wife. What a tragic life that must have been; a younger wife who loved her husband so much that she never had her romantic and sexual longings fulfilled satisfactorily, and to top it all off she immolated herself on his funeral pyre.

She had to beg Kunti to allow her to immolate herself. only one of the wives could do it since they had the Pandavas to take care of, and Kunti as the senior wife had the final say. Madri pleaded with her that since their husband died through his intense passion for her, a passion that remained unfulfilled, she needed to follow him to release him from it.

I guess somewhere, deep in the deepest core of my heart, I want these stories to be true. It seems such a waste of human sadness, tragedy and unfulfilled yearnings if it was all a complete work of fiction.

One wise person's definition of myth: what never was but always is. These stories are true, just not in the literal sense. If there was no truth in them, they wouldn't have been passed on for so long.

[Dhyana]

Some of us did attend EpiTaus classes.  The only downside was that as a listener you had to be wide awake, otherwise he fooled you with his "well-supported train of arguments" and had you believing something outrageous .  It could be a bit embarassing   if also refreshing .

He always paid attention to the dialogue nature of the narrative. Every verse in the Bhagavatam is spoken by someone in response to someone (the whole thing often being quoted by a third person in response to a question by a fourth one, etc.). He would always check to whose question, and what question, today's verse is the answer. Sometimes you had to go back several chapters for that. There was a risk he would ask the audience.

This stood in contrast to the usual approach -- taking the verse out of context and treating it as an instruction or a teaching in and of itself, completely literally. Missing that it was perhaps spoken tongue in cheek, or intended to evoke a response. He visualized the scene. Sometimes it led to hilarious discoveries.

Remember that verse in the 3rd Canto which describes Devahuti and how famous she was for her beauty. How she was once playing ball on the roof of her palace, and some powerful demigod "nyapatat svad vimanat" [fell off his airplane ] upon seeing her, so attractive she was. The purport is about how the Vedic kings must have had skyscrapers if planes could fly so closely overhead, and above all about chastity (princely girls didn't go out and mix with the crowd in the street).

This verse is spoken by Kardama Muni, after he is approached in his yogic ashrama by Devahuti's father Svayambhuva, and offered her hand in marriage. Kardama reciprocates with the king by praising the girl, of whose beauty he had heard. But wait, how could he have heard anything about her? He was the staunchest celibate ever, sitting in solitude by the Ganga performing fierce austerities. Did them sages engage in sending brahmacari gossip from one hermit dwelling to the next on akasha waves? One of them saw that unfortunate Gandharva dropping down from the sky, and sent the word along so that they all could have a laugh and dream of the breasty girl running after her ball?

Sometimes there was too much sanskrit

Sometimes?? But he knew how to chant and could also explain how this particular meter is used in poetics, what mood it conveys and how it adds to the message of the verse.

Sweet old times.