Brahma-bandhu

Expressions researched:
"brahma-bandhu" |"brahma-bandhus"

SB Canto 1

The most intelligent man is called a brāhmaṇa, and it is not a hereditary title. Aśvatthāmā was also formerly called the brahma-bandhu, or the friend of a brāhmaṇa.

SB 1.7.19, Translation and Purport:

When the son of the brāhmaṇa (Aśvatthāmā) saw that his horses were tired, he considered that there was no alternative for protection outside of his using the ultimate weapon, the brahmāstra (nuclear weapon).

In the ultimate issue only, when there is no alternative, the nuclear weapon called the brahmāstra is applied. The word dvijātmajaḥ is significant here because Aśvatthāmā, although the son of Droṇācārya, was not exactly a qualified brāhmaṇa. The most intelligent man is called a brāhmaṇa, and it is not a hereditary title. Aśvatthāmā was also formerly called the brahma-bandhu, or the friend of a brāhmaṇa. Being a friend of a brāhmaṇa does not mean that one is a brāhmaṇa by qualification. A friend or son of a brāhmaṇa, when fully qualified, can be called a brāhmaṇa and not otherwise. Since Aśvatthāmā's decision is immature, he is purposely called herein the son of a brāhmaṇa.

The word brahma-bandhu is significant. A person who happens to take birth in the family of a brāhmaṇa but is not qualified to be called a brāhmaṇa is addressed as the relative of a brāhmaṇa, and not as a brāhmaṇa.

SB 1.7.35, Translation and Purport:

Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa said: O Arjuna, you should not show mercy by releasing this relative of a brāhmaṇa (brahma-bandhu), for he has killed innocent boys in their sleep.

The word brahma-bandhu is significant. A person who happens to take birth in the family of a brāhmaṇa but is not qualified to be called a brāhmaṇa is addressed as the relative of a brāhmaṇa, and not as a brāhmaṇa. The son of a high-court judge is not virtually a high-court judge, but there is no harm in addressing a high-court judge's son as a relative of the Honorable Justice. Therefore, as by birth only one does not become a high-court judge, so also one does not become a brāhmaṇa simply by birthright but by acquiring the necessary qualifications of a brāhmaṇa. As the high-court judgeship is a post for the qualified man, so also the post of a brāhmaṇa is attainable by qualification only. The śāstra enjoins that even if good qualifications are seen in a person born in a family other than that of a brāhmaṇa, the qualified man has to be accepted as a brāhmaṇa, and similarly if a person born in the family of a brāhmaṇa is void of brahminical qualification, then he must be treated as a non-brāhmaṇa or, in better terms, a relative of a brāhmaṇa. Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa, the supreme authority of all religious principles, the Vedas, has personally pointed out these differences, and He is about to explain the reason for this in the following ślokas.

Even to date, in a Hindu family a woman shows proper respect to the brāhmaṇa caste, however fallen and heinous a brahma-bandhu may be. But the men have begun to protest against brahma-bandhus who are born in families of good brāhmaṇas but by action are less than śūdras.

SB 1.7.42, Translation and Purport:

Śrī Sūta Gosvāmī said: Draupadī then saw Aśvatthāmā, who was bound with ropes like an animal and silent for having enacted the most inglorious murder. Due to her female nature, and due to her being naturally good and well-behaved, she showed him due respects as a brāhmaṇa.

Aśvatthāmā was condemned by the Lord Himself, and he was treated by Arjuna just like a culprit, not like the son of a brāhmaṇa or teacher. But when he was brought before Śrīmatī Draupadī, she, although begrieved for the murder of her sons, and although the murderer was present before her, could not withdraw the due respect generally offered to a brāhmaṇa or to the son of a brāhmaṇa. This is due to her mild nature as a woman. Women as a class are no better than boys, and therefore they have no discriminatory power like that of a man. Aśvatthāmā proved himself to be an unworthy son of Droṇācārya or of a brāhmaṇa, and for this reason he was condemned by the greatest authority, Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa, and yet a mild woman could not withdraw her natural courtesy for a brāhmaṇa.

Even to date, in a Hindu family a woman shows proper respect to the brāhmaṇa caste, however fallen and heinous a brahma-bandhu may be. But the men have begun to protest against brahma-bandhus who are born in families of good brāhmaṇas but by action are less than śūdras.

The specific words used in this śloka are vāma-svabhāvā, "mild and gentle by nature." A good man or woman accepts anything very easily, but a man of average intelligence does not do so. But, anyway, we should not give up our reason and discriminatory power just to be gentle. One must have good discriminatory power to judge a thing on its merit. We should not follow the mild nature of a woman and thereby accept that which is not genuine. Aśvatthāmā may be respected by a good-natured woman, but that does not mean that he is as good as a genuine brāhmaṇa.

As a brahma-bandhu, or a worthless son of a brāhmaṇa, Aśvatthāmā was not to be killed, but he was at the same time an aggressor also.

SB 1.7.53-54, Purport:

Arjuna was perplexed because Aśvatthāmā was to be killed as well as spared according to different scriptures cited by different persons. As a brahma-bandhu, or a worthless son of a brāhmaṇa, Aśvatthāmā was not to be killed, but he was at the same time an aggressor also. And according to the rulings of Manu, an aggressor, even though he be a brāhmaṇa (and what to speak of an unworthy son of a brāhmaṇa), is to be killed.

The once-born scions of brāhmaṇa families are equal with the once-born śūdras, and such brahma-bandhus, or unqualified once-born scions, must be rejected for any purpose of religious or Vedic function.

SB 1.12.35, Purport:

Simply taking birth in the family of a brāhmaṇa does not make one qualified to perform yajñas. One must be twice-born by proper training and initiation from the bona fide ācārya. The once-born scions of brāhmaṇa families are equal with the once-born śūdras, and such brahma-bandhus, or unqualified once-born scions, must be rejected for any purpose of religious or Vedic function. Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa was entrusted to look after this arrangement, and perfect as He is, He caused the yajñas to be performed by the bona fide twice-born brāhmaṇas for successful execution.

The unworthy sons of the royal orders are called kṣatra-bandhavas, as the unworthy sons of the brāhmaṇas are called dvija-bandhus or brahma-bandhus.

SB 1.19.32, Purport:

For a devotee who desires to go back to Godhead, two things are strictly prohibited: worldly enjoyers and women. Therefore, devotees of the standard of Śukadeva Gosvāmī are never interested in seeing kings. Mahārāja Parīkṣit was, of course, a different case. He was a great devotee, although a king, and therefore Śukadeva Gosvāmī came to see him in his last stage of life. Mahārāja Parīkṣit, out of his devotional humility, felt himself an unworthy descendant of his great kṣatriya forefathers, although he was as great as his predecessors. The unworthy sons of the royal orders are called kṣatra-bandhavas, as the unworthy sons of the brāhmaṇas are called dvija-bandhus or brahma-bandhus. Mahārāja Parīkṣit was greatly encouraged by the presence of Śukadeva Gosvāmī. He felt himself sanctified by the presence of the great saint whose presence turns any place into a place of pilgrimage.

SB Canto 3

When the brāhmaṇa class or caste gradually became easygoing, being fed by the society although they had no brahminical qualifications, they degraded themselves into brahma-bandhus, or disqualified brāhmaṇas, and thus other members of society also gradually fell down from the social standard of progressive life.

SB 3.3.27, Purport:

The kṣatriya kings and rich mercantile men would provide them with all that they needed, and in exchange the brāhmaṇas were completely devoted to the elevation of society. That was the way of social cooperation between the different castes. When the brāhmaṇa class or caste gradually became easygoing, being fed by the society although they had no brahminical qualifications, they degraded themselves into brahma-bandhus, or disqualified brāhmaṇas, and thus other members of society also gradually fell down from the social standard of progressive life. As described in Bhagavad-gītā, the caste system is the creation of the Lord and is arranged according to the quality of work rendered to society and not in terms of birthright, as falsely claimed in the present degraded society.

SB Canto 4

Brahma-bandhu means persons who are born in the families of brāhmaṇas but do not follow the rules and regulations carefully.

SB 4.1.3, Purport:

There are many qualities which indicate a brahminical personality, and it is understood that Ruci followed all the brahminical principles rigidly. Therefore he is specifically mentioned as brahma-varcasvī. One who is born of a brāhmaṇa father but does not act as a brāhmaṇa is called, in Vedic language, a brahma-bandhu, and is calculated to be on the level of śūdras and women. Thus in the Bhāgavatam we find that Mahābhārata was specifically compiled by Vyāsadeva for strī-śūdra-brahma-bandhu (SB 1.4.25). Strī means women, śūdra means the lower class of civilized human society, and brahma-bandhu means persons who are born in the families of brāhmaṇas but do not follow the rules and regulations carefully. All of these three classes are called less intelligent; they have no access to the study of the Vedas, which are specifically meant for persons who have acquired the brahminical qualifications.

A person who is born in a brāhmaṇa family but has no brahminical qualifications is called a brahma-bandhu.

SB 4.4.30, Purport:

Dakṣa is described here as most hardhearted and therefore unqualified to be a brāhmaṇa. Brahma-dhruk is described by some commentators to mean brahma-bandhu, or friend of the brāhmaṇas. A person who is born in a brāhmaṇa family but has no brahminical qualifications is called a brahma-bandhu. Brāhmaṇas are generally very softhearted and forbearing because they have the power to control the senses and the mind. Dakṣa, however, was not forbearing. For the simple reason that his son-in-law, Lord Śiva, did not stand up to show him the formality of respect, he became so angry and hardhearted that he tolerated even the death of his dearest daughter.

The word brahma-bandhuṣu used here is significant. Brahma-bandhu means a person who is born of a brāhmaṇa father but whose activities are not up to the standard of the brāhmaṇas.

SB 4.7.13, Purport:

The word brahma-bandhuṣu used here is significant. Brahma-bandhu means a person who is born of a brāhmaṇa father but whose activities are not up to the standard of the brāhmaṇas. Such a person is not a brāhmaṇa but a brahma-bandhu. Dakṣa proved himself to be a brahma-bandhu. He was born of a great brāhmaṇa father, Lord Brahmā, but his treatment of Lord Śiva was not exactly brahminical; therefore he admitted that he was not a perfect brāhmaṇa. Lord Śiva and Lord Viṣṇu, however, are affectionate even to an imperfect brāhmaṇa. Lord Śiva punished Dakṣa not as one does his enemy; rather, he punished Dakṣa just to bring him to his senses, so that he would know that he had done wrong. Dakṣa could understand this, and he acknowledged the great mercy of Lord Kṛṣṇa and Lord Śiva towards the fallen brāhmaṇas, including even himself. Although he was fallen, his vow was to execute the sacrifice, as is the duty of brāhmaṇas, and thus he began his prayers to Lord Śiva.

SB Canto 5

Understanding that Jaḍa Bharata was born in a brāhmaṇa family, people would call him a brahma-bandhu and other names. Being thus insulted and neglected by materialistic people, he wandered here and there.

SB 5.9.9-10, Translation:

Degraded men are actually no better than animals. The only difference is that animals have four legs and such men have only two. These two-legged, animalistic men used to call Jaḍa Bharata mad, dull, deaf and dumb. They mistreated him, and Jaḍa Bharata behaved for them like a madman who was deaf, blind or dull. He did not protest or try to convince them that he was not so. If others wanted him to do something, he acted according to their desires. Whatever food he could acquire by begging or by wages, and whatever came of its own accord—be it a small quantity, palatable, stale or tasteless—he would accept and eat. He never ate anything for sense gratification because he was already liberated from the bodily conception, which induces one to accept palatable or unpalatable food. He was full in the transcendental consciousness of devotional service, and therefore he was unaffected by the dualities arising from the bodily conception. Actually his body was as strong as a bull's, and his limbs were very muscular. He didn't care for winter or summer, wind or rain, and he never covered his body at any time. He lay on the ground, and never smeared oil on his body or took a bath. Because his body was dirty, his spiritual effulgence and knowledge were covered, just as the splendor of a valuable gem is covered by dirt. He only wore a dirty loincloth and his sacred thread, which was blackish. Understanding that he was born in a brāhmaṇa family, people would call him a brahma-bandhu and other names. Being thus insulted and neglected by materialistic people, he wandered here and there.

SB Canto 7

If one was born in a brāhmaṇa family and has acquired the brahminical qualifications, he is to be accepted as a brāhmaṇa; otherwise, he should be considered a brahma-bandhu.

SB 7.11.35, Purport:

As stated in Bhagavad-gītā (4.13), cātur-varṇyaṁ mayā sṛṣṭaṁ guṇa-karma-vibhāgaśaḥ. Thus the four divisions of society—brāhmaṇa, kṣatriya, vaiśya and śūdra—are to be ascertained according to qualities and activities. If one was born in a brāhmaṇa family and has acquired the brahminical qualifications, he is to be accepted as a brāhmaṇa; otherwise, he should be considered a brahma-bandhu. Similarly, if a śūdra acquires the qualities of a brāhmaṇa, although he was born in a śūdra family, he is not a śūdra; because he has developed the qualities of a brāhmaṇa, he should be accepted as a brāhmaṇa. The Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement is meant to develop these brahminical qualities. Regardless of the community in which one was born, if one develops the qualities of a brāhmaṇa he should be accepted as a brāhmaṇa, and he then may be offered the order of sannyāsa. Unless one is qualified in terms of the brahminical symptoms, one cannot take sannyāsa.

CC Adi-lila

CC Adi 17.78, Translation:

""Since I am but a poor, sinful brahma-bandhu, not brahminically qualified although born in a brāhmaṇa family, and You, Lord Kṛṣṇa, are the shelter of the goddess of fortune, it is simply wonderful, my dear Lord Kṛṣṇa, that You have embraced me with Your arms.""

Because of His great respect for brāhmaṇas, however, Kṛṣṇa embraced Sudāmā Vipra, although he was not a regular brāhmaṇa but a brahma-bandhu, or friend of a brāhmaṇa family.

CC Adi 17.78, Purport:

This is a verse from Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (10.81.16) spoken by Sudāmā Vipra in the presence of Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa. This and the previous verse quoted from Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam clearly indicate that although Kṛṣṇa is so great that it is not possible for anyone to satisfy Him, He exhibits His greatness by being personally satisfied even with one who is unqualified from so many angles of vision. Sudāmā Vipra was born in a family of brāhmaṇas, and he was a learned scholar and a class friend of Kṛṣṇa's, yet he considered himself unfit to be strictly called a brāhmaṇa. He called himself a brahma-bandhu, meaning "one born in a brāhmaṇa family but not brahminically qualified." Because of His great respect for brāhmaṇas, however, Kṛṣṇa embraced Sudāmā Vipra, although he was not a regular brāhmaṇa but a brahma-bandhu, or friend of a brāhmaṇa family. Murāri Gupta could not be called even a brahma-bandhu because he was born of a vaidya family and according to the social structure was therefore considered a śūdra. But Kṛṣṇa bestowed special mercy upon Murāri Gupta because he was a beloved devotee of the Lord, as stated by Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu.

The members of the International Society for Krishna Consciousness cannot even call themselves brahma-bandhus.

CC Adi 17.78, Purport:

The members of the International Society for Krishna Consciousness cannot even call themselves brahma-bandhus. Therefore our only means for satisfying Kṛṣṇa is to pursue the injunctions of Lord Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, who says:

yāre dekha, tāre kaha "kṛṣṇa"-upadeśa

āmāra ājñāya guru hañā tāra' ei deśa

"Whomever you meet, instruct him on the teachings of Kṛṣṇa. In this way, on My order, become a spiritual master and deliver the people of this country." (CC Madhya 7.128) Simply trying to follow the orders of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, we speak to the people of the world about Bhagavad-gītā As It Is. This will make us qualified to satisfy the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Kṛṣṇa.

CC Madhya-lila

As far as killing the body of a brāhmaṇa is concerned, Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (1.7.53) gives the following injunction concerning a brahma-bandhu, a person born of a brāhmaṇa father but devoid of brahminical qualities.

CC Madhya 15.264, Purport:

For the same reason, it would have been undesirable for the Bhaṭṭācārya to commit suicide because he also was a brāhmaṇa. Since neither course could be accepted, the Bhaṭṭācārya decided to give up his relationship with Amogha and never see his face.

As far as killing the body of a brāhmaṇa is concerned, Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (1.7.53) gives the following injunction concerning a brahma-bandhu, a person born of a brāhmaṇa father but devoid of brahminical qualities:

śrī-bhagavān uvāca

brahma-bandhur na hantavya

ātatāyī vadhār-haṇaḥ

"The Personality of Godhead Śrī Kṛṣṇa said, "A brahma-bandhu is not to be killed, but if he is an aggressor, he must be killed.""

Cutting the hair from his head, depriving him of his wealth and driving him from his residence are the prescribed punishments for a brahma-bandhu. There is no injunction for killing the body.

CC Madhya 15.264, Purport:

It is also stated in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (1.7.57):

vapanaṁ draviṇādānaṁ sthānān niryāpaṇaṁ tathā

eṣa hi brahma-bandhūnāṁ vadho nānyo ’sti daihikaḥ

"Cutting the hair from his head, depriving him of his wealth and driving him from his residence are the prescribed punishments for a brahma-bandhu. There is no injunction for killing the body."

As far as Ṣāṭhī, the daughter of Sārvabhauma Bhaṭṭācārya, was concerned, she was advised to give up her relationship with her husband. Concerning this, Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (5.5.18) states, na patiś ca sa syān na mocayed yaḥ samupeta-mṛtyum: "One cannot be a husband if he cannot liberate his dependents from inevitable death."

Krsna, The Supreme Personality of Godhead

If a person is born of a brāhmaṇa father but has no brahminical qualification, he is called brahma-bandhu or dvija-bandhu.

Krsna Book 89:

If a person with no qualifications represents himself as a kṣatriya of the royal order, he is not called a kṣatriya but a kṣatra-bandhu. Similarly, if a person is born of a brāhmaṇa father but has no brahminical qualification, he is called brahma-bandhu or dvija-bandhu. This means that a brāhmaṇa or a kṣatriya is not accepted simply by birth. One has to qualify himself for the particular position; only then is he accepted as a brāhmaṇa or a kṣatriya.

Bhagavad-gita As It Is Lectures

Nowadays they are descendants, they have deviated, deviated from the brahminical culture, they are not to be considered as devatās. That is also mentioned in the śāstras. They are called brahma-bandhus. According to śāstra, they are called brahma-bandhus. Brahma-bandhus means son of a brāhmaṇa but not the brāhmaṇa.

Lecture on BG 2.13 -- New York, March 11, 1966:

In India nowadays there is a great movement for removing the caste system because the higher caste, brāhmaṇas, they are claiming, due to their birthright, higher position, and the others, they are in inconvenience: "Now, nowadays the brāhmaṇas are doing the same thing, what we are doing, a śūdra. Why he should claim?" So there is quarrel. You see? So devatā and asura, the division is that, of course, the... Of course, according to our śāstra, the brāhmaṇa family means devatā family. But because nowadays they are descendants, they have deviated, deviated from the brahminical culture, they are not to be considered as devatās. That is also mentioned in the śāstras. They are called brahma-bandhus. According to śāstra, they are called brahma-bandhus. Brahma-bandhus means son of a brāhmaṇa but not the brāhmaṇa. Just like a son of high-court justice. He can claim that "I am the son of a high-court justice." That's all... But because he's the son of a high-court justice, he cannot claim that "I am also the justice of the high-court." So that consideration is there.

They are called brahma-bandhu. And if we have acquired the qualification of a śūdra, then, even though one is born in the brāhmaṇa family, he should be accepted as śūdra.

Lecture on BG 7.1 -- Fiji, May 24, 1975:

That is the verdict of the śāstra. Not by birth. Birth is a facility. If you have the opportunity to take birth in a brāhmaṇa family, then you have got the best opportunity to acquire the brahminical qualification. Just like a person born as the son of a medical man, from the childhood he is learning all the medical terms and how his father is treating patient. So before entering medical college he is half medical man. That is the facility. But if we don't take the facility, we go astray... They are called brahma-bandhu. And if we have acquired the qualification of a śūdra, then, even though one is born in the brāhmaṇa family, he should be accepted as śūdra. Similarly, if a person is born in a śūdra family, but he has acquired these qualities, śamo damaḥ satyaṁ śaucam, he should be designated as brāhmaṇa. That is the injunction of the śāstras in many places. So if by force I want to assume myself as a brāhmaṇa or kṣatriya without qualification, that is the cause of India's cultural ruination. Such a high Vedic culture of India is now ruined because we have misused the terms. That is the cause.

In the śāstras, a person born of a brāhmaṇa family or a person born of a kṣatriya family but his qualities are not brāhmaṇa, kṣatriya, he is called brahma-bandhu, kṣatri-bandhu, not brāhmaṇa.

Lecture on BG 7.1 -- Bhuvanesvara, January 22, 1977:

Just like if you are qualified as a medical man and if you are practicing as a medical man, then you are medical man. Simply by posing yourself that "I am the son of a medical man; therefore I am medical man," this is useless. In the śāstras, a person born of a brāhmaṇa family or a person born of a kṣatriya family but his qualities are not brāhmaṇa, kṣatriya, he is called brahma-bandhu, kṣatri-bandhu, not brāhmaṇa.

Woman, śūdra and brahma-bandhu or dvija-bandhu, they cannot understand Vedic knowledge.

Lecture on BG 7.1 -- Bhuvanesvara, January 22, 1977:

So in the Bhāgavata it is stated strī-śūdra-dvijabandhūnāṁ trayī na śruti-gocarā (SB 1.4.25). Strī, woman, and śūdra and dvija-bandhu. Dvija means brāhmaṇa, kṣatriya, vaiśya. Especially brāhmaṇa. So dvija-bandhu, who is not qualified as a brāhmaṇa but born in the brāhmaṇa family, they are called dvija-bandhus. So śāstra says strī-śūdra-dvijabandhūnāṁ trayī na śruti-gocarā. Woman, śūdra and brahma-bandhu or dvija-bandhu, they cannot understand Vedic knowledge. Unfortunately we are creating, trying to create real brāhmaṇa, kṣatriya, vaiśya, and śūdra means everyone. One who cannot become a brāhmaṇa or a kṣatriya or vaiśya, simply they are satisfied by serving a suitable master, vaiśya-karma svabhāva-jam. Paricaryātmakaṁ kāryaṁ śūdra-karma svabhāva-jam (BG 18.44).

Srimad-Bhagavatam Lectures

They are called, according to śāstra, brahma-bandhu, dvija-bandhu. Dvija-bandhu.

Lecture on SB 1.2.13 -- Vrndavana, October 24, 1972:

Because varṇāśrama means the institution or a set-up of society where gradually one can understand Viṣṇu and worship Viṣṇu. Viṣṇur ārādhyate. That is the system. Not that so-called brāhmaṇa and so-called kṣatriya, they have no information of Viṣṇu, and they are declaring, "I am brāhmaṇa," "I am kṣatriya." They are called, according to śāstra, brahma-bandhu, dvija-bandhu. Dvija-bandhu. One who is born of a brāhmaṇa family or a kṣatriya family or vaiśya family, but do not act as brāhmaṇa, kṣatriya, and vaiśyas, they are called dvija-bandhu. They are not accepted as dvija.

He must have the qualities of brāhmaṇa and must act as a brāhmaṇa. Then he'll be accepted as brāhmaṇa. Otherwise he'll be called brahma-bandhu, dvija-bandhu.

Lecture on SB 1.2.27 -- Vrndavana, November 7, 1972:

He must have the qualities of brāhmaṇa and must act as a brāhmaṇa. Then he'll be accepted as brāhmaṇa. Otherwise he'll be called brahma-bandhu, dvija-bandhu. Strī-śūdra-dvija-bandhu. Strī, woman, śūdra and dvija-bandhu. Dvija-bandhu means born of a brāhmaṇa father but his actions are like something else. He's called dvija-bandhu. Or born of a kṣatriya father. Dvija means brāhmaṇa, kṣatriya, and vaiśya also—those who are born for the second time by initiation. First birth is by the father and the mother, and the second birth is by the spiritual master and Vedic knowledge. Vedic knowledge is the mother, and spiritual master is the father. So when one approaches a bona fide spiritual master, his second birth is there by advancement of spiritual knowledge, and that sacred thread is offered to him. Upanayana. Upa means "near," and nayana means "bringing."

Brahma-bandhu, or kṣatra-bandhu, a person born in the family of a brāhmaṇa but has no brāhmaṇa qualifications, he is called brahma-bandhu, "friend of a brāhmaṇa."

Lecture on SB 1.7.16 -- Vrndavana, September 14, 1976:

So yad brahma-bandhoḥ. Brahma-bandhu, or kṣatra-bandhu, a person born in the family of a brāhmaṇa but has no brāhmaṇa qualifications, he is called brahma-bandhu, "friend of a brāhmaṇa." Bandhu means friend. A person, a man, his father is high-court judge. So there is no harm that he belongs to the family of such and such high-court judge—but that does not mean he is high-court judge. This should be noted. That is the difference, brāhmaṇa and brahma-bandhu. Brāhmaṇa means guṇa-karma-vibhāgaśaḥ (BG 4.13). He must have the quality, śamo damaḥ śaucaṁ titikṣā ārjavam, jñānaṁ vijñānam āstikyaṁ brahma-karma svabhāva-jam (BG 18.42). He must be self-controlled, controlling the mind and the senses. Then very clean, śaucam. Satyaṁ śaucam. Then titikṣā, tolerant; ārjavam, very simple. No duplicity. Simple. Ārjavam. Jñānam, full knowledge; vijñānam, knowledge applied in practical life. This is vijñānam. Just like we call science.

So here, Aśvatthāmā, he's born of a brāhmaṇa father, but his work has been proved just like a butcher. Therefore he is called brahma-bandhu. He's called not a brāhmaṇa: brahma-bandhu.

Lecture on SB 1.7.16 -- Vrndavana, September 14, 1976:

So here, Aśvatthāmā, he's born of a brāhmaṇa father, but his work has been proved just like a butcher. Therefore he is called brahma-bandhu. He's called not a brāhmaṇa: brahma-bandhu. Brahma-bandhoḥ śira ātatāyinaḥ. Ātatāyinaḥ, aggressor. A brāhmaṇa does not require to kill a person with weapon. No. That is kṣatriya's business. If one is actually a brāhmaṇa—of course, in the Kali-yuga such brāhmaṇa is not to be found—his simply curse is sufficient to kill a man. If a brāhmaṇa curses somebody... Just like Mahārāja Parīkṣit, he was cursed by a brāhmaṇa's son. Means not fully brāhmaṇa, not grown-up. A child, a boy twelve years old, he cursed Parīkṣit Mahārāja that "Within seven days you'll be bitten by a serpent," and it came to be true. So brāhmaṇa does not require any sword or any arrow to kill a man. His very word is sufficient. Therefore when somebody was to be killed, the brāhmaṇa would bring him to the kṣatriya—not killing himself by weapon. Just like Viśvāmitra, he wanted to kill one rākṣasī, so he came to Mahārāja Daśaratha, kṣatriya, to do the business of killing. There are so many... That is shastric evidences.

So here, a brahma-bandhu... Aśvatthāmā was born of a brāhmaṇa, Droṇācārya. But he killed the five sons of Draupadī most abominably, when they were sleeping. So what to speak of brāhmaṇa, he's less than a kṣatriya even. Because a kṣatriya also do not kill anybody while one is sleeping.

Considering all these points, Aśvatthāmā is accepted here as brahma-bandhu. And at the same time he's aggressor. Brahma-bandhoḥ ātatāyinaḥ.

Lecture on SB 1.7.16 -- Vrndavana, September 14, 1976:

And if there is excess, then vāṇijya, trade. Otherwise there is no question of trade. And vaiśya... And śūdra, paricaryātmakam (BG 18.44)—to work for some payment. That is this blacksmith, goldsmith, weaver. You take some work from him and pay him something, maintain him. That is śūdra. So in the śāstra it is said, kalau śūdra-sambhavaḥ. In the Kali-yuga almost everyone is a śūdra. You'll find they're interested in accepting some service. Even one is born of a brāhmaṇa family, he is looking after some good job. That is śūdra mentality. That is not brāhmaṇa's business. Brāhmaṇa will not accept anyone's service, neither the kṣatriyas, neither the vaiśyas. Only śūdras.

So considering all these points, Aśvatthāmā is accepted here as brahma-bandhu. And at the same time he's aggressor. Brahma-bandhoḥ ātatāyinaḥ. Therefore Arjuna promised, "I shall kill him." Arjuna did not promise to kill a brāhmaṇa. No. That was not his business. Because he's proved to be brahma-bandhu and ātatāyinaḥ, he deserved to be killed. Therefore it is sanctioned (?). So, next verse you can read. This verse is finished.

Necessity has no law. This brahma-bandhu, he knew how to create this brahmāstra. He learned it. But he knew it also that this weapon is not to be used generally.

Lecture on SB 1.7.20-21 -- Vrndavana, September 17, 1976:

So necessity has no law. This brahma-bandhu, he knew how to create this brahmāstra. He learned it. But he knew it also that this weapon is not to be used generally. In very, very rare cases this should be used. As I explained, that atomic bomb, the nuclear weapon, is not used when there is fight between two dogs. It is not so insignificant. When the fight is very severe, just like your country used this nuclear bomb. When the Japanese people dared to attack your Pearl Harbor, at that time, your President was Mr. Truman. So it was not to be used, but he took little more precaution. Anyway, such weapon, deadly weapon, should not be used ordinarily. Therefore here it is said that prāṇa-kṛcchra upasthite. He knew that Arjuna was after him, and there is no escape. He would be killed. So whatever last resort he knew, he used that knowledge to throw brahmāstra so that the other party may be killed altogether. But ajānann api saṁhāram. He was not willing, but he did not know how to withdraw that. Formerly they used to know it. They could throw one brahmāstra, and if he likes he can withdraw. Or the other party he, can nullify it. This is warfare. But he did not know that. How to counteract it, he did not know that.

He asked him not to excuse this rascal. Not to excuse. It is next verse, it is said, mainaṁ pārthārhasi trātuṁ brahma-bandhum imaṁ jahi. He's brahma-bandhu. He's not a brāhmaṇa. He's brahma-bandhu. Everyone can say, "I am the son of a brāhmaṇa." That is brahma-bandhu.

Lecture on SB 1.7.34-35 -- Vrndavana, September 28, 1976:

Pradyumna: "After binding Aśvatthāmā, Arjuna wanted to take him to the military camp. The Personality of Godhead Śrī Kṛṣṇa, looking on with His lotus eyes, spoke to angry Arjuna. Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa said: O Arjuna, you should not show mercy by releasing this relative of a brāhmaṇa (brahma-bandhu), for he has killed innocent boys in their sleep."

Prabhupāda:

śibirāya ninīṣantaṁ

rajjvā baddhvā ripuṁ balāt

prāhārjunaṁ prakupito

bhagavān ambujekṣaṇaḥ

(SB 1.7.34)

mainaṁ pārthārhasi trātuṁ

brahma-bandhum imaṁ jahi

yo 'sāv anāgasaḥ suptān

avadhīn niśi bālakān

(SB 1.7.35)

So bhagavān ambujekṣaṇaḥ. Ambuja means lotus flower. Bhagavān is described in many places as ambujekṣa-lotus-eyed, lotus feet, lotus navel, in so many ways, lotus palms. So ambujekṣaṇa, very beautiful eyes like the petals of a padma, lotus flower. But at the same time, prakupita, He's angry. He's angry. Still, ambujekṣaṇa. Not that as the Māyāvādīs think, that "God is kind. Why He should be angry?" But here it is said, prakupita. Pra means "specifically." Prakṛṣṭa-rūpeṇa kupitaḥ, "very angry." Prakupita. And He was, rather, glad that this Aśvatthāmā, who happens to be the son of a brāhmaṇa... Still, He was angry. He asked him not to excuse this rascal. Not to excuse. It is next verse, it is said, mainaṁ pārthārhasi trātuṁ brahma-bandhum imaṁ jahi. He's brahma-bandhu. He's not a brāhmaṇa. He's brahma-bandhu. Everyone can say, "I am the son of a brāhmaṇa." That is brahma-bandhu. Or a friend of a brāhmaṇa. That does not mean he is a brāhmaṇa. This is the idea. Brāhmaṇa is not the body.

Can you advise anything adversely to your friend? To your son? No. I must give very good advice. So Kṛṣṇa is advising Arjuna, "Don't excuse this rascal brahma-bandhu. Don't excuse." This is Kṛṣṇa's advice.

Lecture on SB 1.7.34-35 -- Vrndavana, September 28, 1976:

So in considering all angles of vision, this Aśvatthāmā was not a brāhmaṇa. Therefore Kṛṣṇa personally advised him, mā enaṁ pārtha arhasi trātum: "Don't excuse him. Kill him, this brahma-bandhu. He has done wrong, now he deserves to be killed." It is clearly said. So does it mean that Kṛṣṇa is advising brahma-hatyā? No. Kṛṣṇa cannot do that. He is the teacher, world teacher. How He can advise somebody, especially His friend Arjuna? Bhakto 'si priyo 'si me (BG 4.3). Can you advise anything adversely to your friend? To your son? No. I must give very good advice. So Kṛṣṇa is advising Arjuna, "Don't excuse this rascal brahma-bandhu. Don't excuse." This is Kṛṣṇa's advice. But it does not mean that we can do anything and everything under the pretext of Kṛṣṇa's advice. You must be first of all a confidential friend or servant of Kṛṣṇa. You must receive direct order from Kṛṣṇa. Then you can do it. Otherwise not. Otherwise not. Under the pretext that "Kṛṣṇa said," "My spiritual master has said," "Prabhupāda has said," we manufacture something. Don't do that. Unless you are directly ordered, you cannot do at least such things as to chastise a brahma-bandhu. This should not be done. Here is direct order.

Brāhmaṇa's position is very, very exalted. Now, since after the battle of Kurukṣetra, they have become brahma-bandhus. The example is here, brahma-bandhu.

Lecture on SB 1.7.34-35 -- Vrndavana, September 28, 1976:

They were so rich that when Viśvāmitra approached Mahārāja Daśaratha, immediately he vacated his seat and welcomed, "Sir, sit down here." So respectful. This is Vedic culture. The brāhmaṇas would not accept any comfort, but the kṣatriyas would be very, very glad to give all comforts to the brāhmaṇas. In our śāstra, brāhmaṇa-bhojana, it is recommended that brāhmaṇas should be invited to take prasāda. Now they have manufactured daridra-bhojana or daridra-nārāyaṇa-bhojana. They have made daridra-nārāyaṇa. But that is not Vedic culture. Vedic culture is to find out qualified brāhmaṇa, sages, sannyāsīs. They would refuse, but still they'll fall down, "Please come, take some prasāda." This is Vedic culture. Brāhmaṇa's position is very, very exalted. Now, since after the battle of Kurukṣetra, they have become brahma-bandhus. The example is here, brahma-bandhu.

So we should not become brahma-bandhu. We should become actually brāhmaṇa. And brahma jānāti iti brāhmaṇaḥ. One who knows Brahman, he is brāhmaṇa. And one who knows Parabrahman, he is Vaiṣṇava. Brahman and Parabrahman. So Kṛṣṇa is Parabrahman. In the Bhagavad-gītā it is said, paraṁ brahma paraṁ dhāma pavitraṁ paramaṁ bhavān puruṣaṁ śāśvataṁ divyam (BG 10.12).

This is Vedic culture, that they know how to offer respect to the proper persons. But Arjuna, he also decided that although Kṛṣṇa ordered him to kill Aśvatthāmā, he's guru's son, although he's not brāhmaṇa; he's brahma-bandhu.

Lecture on SB 1.7.43 -- Vrndavana, October 3, 1976:

So this is Vedic culture, that they know how to offer respect to the proper persons. But Arjuna, he also decided that although Kṛṣṇa ordered him to kill Aśvatthāmā, he's guru's son, although he's not brāhmaṇa; he's brahma-bandhu. He has been described as brahma-bandhu, not brāhmaṇa. But Draupadī, being woman, vāma-svabhāvā, very soft-hearted, she did not consider whether he's actually a brāhmaṇa. The son of a brāhmaṇa, that much she knew. This is the difference, how to calculate whether one is brāhmaṇa or not brāhmaṇa. Brāhmaṇa and brahma-bandhu, these two words are there. Just like if you are the son of a high-court judge, you can be called, you have got the right, that "son of a high-court judge." That is all right. But you cannot claim to become the high-court judge. That is not possible.

She did not consider about Aśvatthāmā's position. But so far Kṛṣṇa is concerned, Arjuna is concerned, they considered that he is not a brāhmaṇa, but he is a brahma-bandhu. Brahma-bandhu means son of a brāhmaṇa, but behavior is something else. He's called brahma-bandhu.

Lecture on SB 1.7.43 -- Vrndavana, October 3, 1976:

One has to become brahma-bhūta (SB 4.30.20). That is brāhmaṇa. The sign is na śocati na kāṅkṣati. He does not care for anything material. He's always satisfied. Ahaṁ brahmāsmi. That is brāhmaṇa. But, in spite of this quality, if he does not enter into the bhakti, then he's not a Vaiṣṇava. He may be a brāhmaṇa... This is clearly defined in the Bhagavad-gītā. Brahma-bhūtaḥ prasannātmā na śocati na kāṅkṣati (BG 18.54). He's pacified. Samaḥ sarveṣu bhūteṣu. He's equal to everyone. Then he's qualified to become a devotee, Vaiṣṇava. So unless he comes to that stage he cannot become guru. Evaṁ paramparā-prāptam imaṁ rājarṣayo viduḥ (BG 4.2).

So here, the Pāṇḍava family, they are very enlightened family, and still, vāma-svabhāvā, the woman is soft-hearted. He did not... She did not consider about Aśvatthāmā's position. But so far Kṛṣṇa is concerned, Arjuna is concerned, they considered that he is not a brāhmaṇa, but he is a brahma-bandhu. Brahma-bandhu means son of a brāhmaṇa, but behavior is something else. He's called brahma-bandhu.

1975 Conversations and Morning Walks

But without education, without qualification, he wants to become a brāhmaṇa. They are called brahma-bandhu or dvija-bandhu.

Morning Walk -- November 7, 1975, Bombay:

Prabhupāda: Stri-śūdra-dvija-bandhūnām (SB 1.4.25). It is meant for less intelligent class of men: stri, woman; śūdra; and dvija-bandhu. Dvija-bandhu means persons who are born in high family but they have no education. Just like a man born in brāhmaṇa family...

Dr. Patel: Brahma-bandhu.

Prabhupāda: ...but without education, without qualification, he wants to become a brāhmaṇa. They are called brahma-bandhu or dvija-bandhu. So Mahābhārata is meant for the, these persons: stri-śūdra-dvija-bandhunam. They cannot understand directly the Vedic injunctions; therefore it is simplified in a history. Mahābhārata is the history. History and stories, ordinary people, they can read with interest. But those who are advanced, they want higher philosophical thoughts. That is Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. Dharmaḥ projjhita-kaitavo atra paramo nirmatsarāṇāṁ vāstava-vastu vedyam atra (SB 1.1.2). Nigama-kalpa-taror galitaṁ phalam idam (SB 1.1.3). It is meant for higher class. So there are different literatures for different persons. Why there are eighteen Purāṇas, sattvic, rajasic, tamasic? Those who are tamasic, for them it is advised...