Daksa (SB)

Expressions researched:
"Daksa" |"Daksa" |"Daksa's" |"Pracetasa"

SB Canto 1

SB 1.3.5, Purport:

From Brahmā the other demigods like Dakṣa, Marīci, Manu and many others become incarnated to generate living entities within the universe.

SB 1.9.8, Purport:

Kaśyapa: One of the prajāpatis, the son of Marīci and one of the sons-in-law of Prajāpati Dakṣa. He is the father of the gigantic bird Garuḍa, who was given elephants and tortoises as eatables. He married thirteen daughters of Prajāpati Dakṣa, and their names are Aditi, Diti, Danu, Kāṣṭhā, Ariṣṭā, Surasā, Ilā, Muni, Krodhavaśā, Tāmrā, Surabhi, Saramā and Timi.

SB 1.16.12, Purport:

Kimpuruṣa-varṣa: It is stated to be situated north of the great Himalaya Mountain, which is eighty thousand miles in length and height and which covers sixteen thousand miles in width. These parts of the world were also conquered by Arjuna (Sabhā 28.1-2). The Kimpuruṣas are descendants of a daughter of Dakṣa.

SB Canto 2

SB 2.5.30, Translation:

From the mode of goodness the mind is generated and becomes manifest, as also the ten demigods controlling the bodily movements. Such demigods are known as the controller of directions, the controller of air, the sun-god, the father of Dakṣa Prajāpati, the Aśvinī-kumāras, the fire-god, the King of heaven, the worshipable deity in heaven, the chief of the Ādityas, and Brahmājī, the Prajāpati. All come into existence.

SB 2.6.43-45, Translation:

I myself (Brahmā), Lord Śiva, Lord Viṣṇu, great generators of living beings like Dakṣa and Prajāpati, yourselves (Nārada and the Kumāras), heavenly demigods like Indra and Candra, the leaders of the Bhūrloka planets, the leaders of the earthly planets, the leaders of the lower planets, the leaders of the Gandharva planets, the leaders of the Vidyādhara planets, the leaders of the Cāraṇaloka planets, the leaders of the Yakṣas, Rakṣas and Uragas, the great sages, the great demons, the great atheists and the great spacemen, as well as the dead bodies, evil spirits, satans, jinn, kūṣmāṇḍas, great aquatics, great beasts and great birds, etc.—in other words, anything and everything which is exceptionally possessed of power, opulence, mental and perceptual dexterity, strength, forgiveness, beauty, modesty, opulence, and breeding, whether in form or formless—may appear to be the specific truth and the form of the Lord, but actually they are not so. They are only a fragment of the transcendental potency of the Lord.

SB 2.7.6, Translation:

To exhibit His personal way of austerity and penance, He appeared in twin forms as Nārāyaṇa and Nara in the womb of Mūrti, the wife of Dharma and the daughter of Dakṣa. Celestial beauties, the companions of Cupid, went to try to break His vows, but they were unsuccessful, for they saw that many beauties like them were emanating from Him, the Personality of Godhead.

SB 2.9.42, Purport:

Lord Brahmā, being the creator of all living beings in the universe, is originally the father of several well-known sons, like Dakṣa, the catuḥ-sanas, and Nārada. In three departments of human knowledge disseminated by the Vedas, namely fruitive work (karma-kāṇḍa), transcendental knowledge (jñāna-kāṇḍa), and devotional service (upāsanā-kāṇḍa), Devarṣi Nārada inherited from his father Brahmā devotional service, whereas Dakṣa inherited from his father fruitive work, and Sanaka, Sanātana, etc., inherited from their father information about jñāna-kāṇḍa, or transcendental knowledge.

SB 2.10.37-40, Translation:

O King, know from me that all living entities are created by the Supreme Lord according to their past deeds. This includes Brahmā and his sons like Dakṣa, the periodical heads like Vaivasvata Manu, the demigods like Indra, Candra and Varuṇa, the great sages like Bhṛgu, Vyāsa and Vasiṣṭha, the inhabitants of Pitṛloka and Siddhaloka, the Cāraṇas, Gandharvas, Vidyādharas, Asuras, Yakṣas, Kinnaras and angels, the serpentines, the monkey-shaped Kimpuruṣas, the human beings, the inhabitants of Mātṛloka, the demons, Piśācas, ghosts, spirits, lunatics and evil spirits, the good and evil stars, the goblins, the animals in the forest, the birds, the household animals, the reptiles, the mountains, the moving and standing living entities, the living entities born from embryos, from eggs, from perspiration and from seeds, and all others, whether they be in the water, land or sky, in happiness, in distress or in mixed happiness and distress. All of them, according to their past deeds, are created by the Supreme Lord.

SB Canto 3

SB 3.12.22, Translation:

Marīci, Atri, Aṅgirā, Pulastya, Pulaha, Kratu, Bhṛgu, Vasiṣṭha, Dakṣa, and the tenth son, Nārada, were thus born.

SB 3.12.23, Translation:

Nārada was born from the deliberation of Brahmā, which is the best part of the body. Vasiṣṭha was born from his breathing, Dakṣa from a thumb, Bhṛgu from his touch, and Kratu from his hand.

SB 3.12.57, Translation:

The father, Manu, handed over his first daughter, Ākūti, to the sage Ruci, the middle daughter, Devahūti, to the sage Kardama, and the youngest, Prasūti, to Dakṣa. From them, all the world filled with population.

SB 3.14.8, Translation:

Diti, daughter of Dakṣa, being afflicted with sex desire, begged her husband, Kaśyapa, the son of Marīci, to have intercourse with her in the evening in order to beget a child.

SB 3.14.13, Translation:

In days long ago, our father, the most opulent Dakṣa, who was affectionate to his daughters, asked each of us separately whom we would prefer to select as our husband.

SB 3.14.14, Translation and Purport:

Our well-wishing father, Dakṣa, after knowing our intentions, handed over thirteen of his daughters unto you, and since then we have all been faithful.

Generally the daughters were too shy to express their opinions before their father, but the father would accept the daughters' intentions through someone else, such as a grandmother to whom the grandchildren had free access. King Dakṣa collected the opinions of his daughters and thus handed over thirteen to Kaśyapa. Every one of Diti's sisters was a mother of children. Therefore, since she was equally faithful to the same husband, why should she remain without children?

SB 3.14.51, Purport:

Diti was very aggrieved to learn that because of her untimely pregnancy her sons would be demons and would fight with the Lord. But when she heard that her grandson would be a great devotee and that her two sons would be killed by the Lord, she was very satisfied. As the wife of a great sage and the daughter of a great Prajāpati, Dakṣa, she knew that being killed by the Personality of Godhead is a great fortune. Since the Lord is absolute, His acts of violence and nonviolence are both on the absolute platform. There is no difference in such acts of the Lord. Mundane violence and nonviolence have nothing to do with the Lord's acts. A demon killed by Him attains the same result as one who attains liberation after many, many births of penance and austerity. The word bhṛśam is significant herein because it indicates that Diti was pleased beyond her expectations.

SB 3.21.5, Translation and Purport:

O holy sage, tell me how the worshipful Ruci and Dakṣa, the son of Brahmā, generated children after securing as their wives the other two daughters of Svāyambhuva Manu.

All the great personalities who increased the population in the beginning of the creation are called Prajāpatis. Brahmā is also known as Prajāpati, as were some of his later sons. Svāyambhuva Manu is also known as Prajāpati, as is Dakṣa, another son of Brahmā. Svāyambhuva had two daughters, Ākūti and Prasūti. The Prajāpati Ruci married Ākūti, and Dakṣa married Prasūti. These couples and their children produced immense numbers of children to populate the entire universe. Vidura's inquiry was, "How did they beget the population in the beginning?"

SB Canto 4

SB 4.1.1, Purport:

In this Fourth Canto of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam there are thirty-one chapters, and all these chapters describe the secondary creation by Brahmā and the Manus. The Supreme Lord Himself does the real creation by agitating His material energy, and then, by His order, Brahma, the first living creature in the universe, attempts to create the different planetary systems and their inhabitants, expanding the population through his progeny, like Manu and other progenitors of living entities, who work perpetually under the order of the Supreme Lord. In the First Chapter of this Fourth Canto there are descriptions of the three daughters of Svāyambhuva Manu and their descendants. The next six chapters describe the sacrifice performed by King Dakṣa and how it was spoiled. Thereafter the activities of Mahārāja Dhruva are described in five chapters. Then, in eleven chapters, the activities of King Pṛthu are described, and the next eight chapters are devoted to the activities of the Pracetā kings.

SB 4.1.11, Translation:

Svāyambhuva Manu handed over his daughter Prasūti to the son of Brahmā named Dakṣa, who was also one of the progenitors of the living entities. The descendants of Dakṣa are spread throughout the three worlds.

SB 4.1.46-47, Translation:

My dear Vidura, the population of the universe was thus increased by the descendants of these sages and the daughters of Kardama. Anyone who hears the descriptions of this dynasty with faith will be relieved from all sinful reactions. Another of Manu's daughters, known as Prasūti, married the son of Brahmā named Dakṣa.

SB 4.1.48, Translation:

Dakṣa begot sixteen very beautiful daughters with lotuslike eyes in his wife Prasūti. Of these sixteen daughters, thirteen were given in marriage to Dharma, and one daughter was given to Agni.

SB 4.1.49-52, Translation:

One of the remaining two daughters was given in charity to the Pitṛloka, where she resides very amicably, and the other was given to Lord Śiva, who is the deliverer of sinful persons from material entanglement. The names of the thirteen daughters of Dakṣa who were given to Dharma are Śraddhā, Maitrī, Dayā, Sānti, Tuṣṭi, Puṣṭi, Kriyā, Unnati, Buddhi, Medhā, Titikṣā, Hrī and Mūrti. These thirteen daughters produced the following sons: Śraddhā gave birth to Śubha, Maitrī produced Prasāda, Dayā gave birth to Abhaya, Sānti gave birth to Sukha, Tuṣṭi gave birth to Muda, Puṣṭi gave birth to Smaya, Kriyā gave birth to Yoga, Unnati gave birth to Darpa, Buddhi gave birth to Artha, Medhā gave birth to Smṛti, Titikṣā gave birth to Kṣema, and Hrī gave birth to Praśraya. Mūrti, a reservoir of all respectable qualities, gave birth to Śrī Nara-Nārāyaṇa, the Supreme Personality of Godhead.

SB 4.1.60, Translation and Purport:

The predominating deity of fire begot in his wife, Svāhā, three children, named Pāvaka, Pavamāna and Śuci, who exist by eating the oblations offered to the fire of sacrifice.

After describing the descendants of the thirteen wives of Dharma, who were all daughters of Dakṣa, Maitreya now describes the fourteenth daughter of Dakṣa, Svāhā, and her three sons. Oblations offered in the sacrificial fire are meant for the demigods, and on behalf of the demigods the three sons of Agni and Svāhā, namely Pāvaka, Pavamāna and Śuci, accept the oblations.

SB 4.1.63, Translation:

The Agniṣvāttas, the Barhiṣadas, the Saumyas and the Ājyapas are the Pitās. They are either sāgnika or niragnika. The wife of all these Pitās is Svadhā, who is the daughter of King Dakṣa.

SB 4.1.66, Translation and Purport:

The reason is that Satī's father, Dakṣa, used to rebuke Lord Śiva in spite of Śiva's faultlessness. Consequently, before attaining a mature age, Satī gave up her body by dint of yogic mystic power.

Lord Śiva, being the head of all mystic yogīs, never even constructed a home for his residence. Sati was the daughter of a great king, Dakṣa, and because his youngest daughter, Sati, selected as her husband Lord Śiva, King Dakṣa was not very much satisfied with her. Therefore whenever she met her father, he unnecessarily criticized her husband, although Lord Śiva was faultless. Because of this, before attaining a mature age Sati gave up the body given by her father, Dakṣa, and therefore she could not produce a child.

SB 4.2.1, Translation and Purport:

Vidura inquired: Why was Dakṣa, who was so affectionate towards his daughter, envious of Lord Śiva, who is the best among the gentle? Why did he neglect his daughter Satī?

In the Second Chapter of the Fourth Canto, the cause of the dissension between Lord Śiva and Dakṣa, which was due to a great sacrifice arranged by Dakṣa for the pacification of the entire universe, is explained. Lord Śiva is described here as the best of the gentle because he is not envious of anyone, he is equal to all living entities, and all other good qualities are present in his personality. The word śiva means "all auspicious." No one can be an enemy of Lord Śiva's, for he is so peaceful and renounced that he does not even construct a house for his residence, but lives underneath a tree, always detached from all worldly things. The personality of Lord Śiva symbolizes the best of gentleness. Why, then, was Dakṣa, who offered his beloved daughter to such a gentle personality, inimical towards Lord Śiva so intensely that Satī, the daughter of Dakṣa and wife of Lord Śiva, gave up her body?

SB 4.2.2, Translation and Purport:

Lord Śiva, the spiritual master of the entire world, is free from enmity, is a peaceful personality, and is always satisfied in himself. He is the greatest among the demigods. How is it possible that Dakṣa could be inimical towards such an auspicious personality?

Lord Śiva is described here as carācara-guru, the spiritual master of all animate and inanimate objects. He is sometimes known as Bhūtanātha, which means "the worshipable deity of the dull-headed." Bhūta is also sometimes taken to indicate the ghosts. Lord Śiva takes charge of reforming persons who are ghosts and demons, not to speak of others, who are godly; therefore he is the spiritual master of everyone, both the dull and demoniac and the highly learned Vaiṣṇavas. It is also stated, vaiṣṇavānāṁ yathā śambhuḥ: Śambhu, Lord Śiva, is the greatest of all Vaiṣṇavas. On one hand he is the worshipable object of the dull demons, and on the other he is the best of all Vaiṣṇavas, or devotees, and he has a sampradāya called the Rudra-sampradāya. Even if he is an enemy or is sometimes angry, such a personality cannot be the object of envy, so Vidura, in astonishment, asked why he was taken as such, especially by Dakṣa. Dakṣa is also not an ordinary person. He is a Prajāpati, in charge of fathering population, and all his daughters are highly elevated, especially Sati. The word satī means "the most chaste." Whenever there is consideration of chastity, Sati, this wife of Lord Śiva and daughter of Dakṣa, is considered first. Vidura, therefore, was astonished. "Dakṣa is such a great man," he thought, "and is the father of Sati. And Lord Śiva is the spiritual master of everyone. How then could there possibly be so much enmity between them that Sati, the most chaste goddess, could give up her body because of their quarrel?"

SB 4.2.4, Translation and Purport:

The sage Maitreya said: In a former time, the leaders of the universal creation performed a great sacrifice in which all the great sages, philosophers, demigods and fire-gods assembled with their followers.

Upon being asked by Vidura, the sage Maitreya began to explain the cause of the misunderstanding between Lord Śiva and Dakṣa, because of which the goddess Satī gave up her body. Thus begins the history of a great sacrifice performed by the leaders of the universal creation, namely Marīci, Dakṣa and Vasiṣṭha. These great personalities arranged for a great sacrifice, for which demigods like Indra and the fire-gods assembled with their followers. Lord Brahmā and Lord Śiva were also present.

SB 4.2.5, Translation:

When Dakṣa, the leader of the Prajāpatis, entered that assembly, his personal bodily luster as bright as the effulgence of the sun, the entire assembly was illuminated, and all the assembled personalities became insignificant in his presence.

SB 4.2.6, Translation:

Influenced by his personal bodily luster, all the fire-gods and other participants in that great assembly, with the exceptions of Lord Brahmā and Lord Śiva, gave up their own sitting places and stood in respect for Dakṣa.

SB 4.2.7, Translation:

Dakṣa was adequately welcomed by the president of the great assembly, Lord Brahmā. After offering Lord Brahmā respect, Dakṣa, by the order of Brahmā, properly took his seat.

SB 4.2.8, Translation and Purport:

Before taking his seat, however, Dakṣa was very much offended to see Lord Śiva sitting and not showing him any respect. At that time, Dakṣa became greatly angry, and, his eyes glowing, he began to speak very strongly against Lord Śiva.

Lord Śiva, being the son-in-law of Dakṣa, was expected to show his father-in-law respect by standing with the others, but because Lord Brahmā and Lord Śiva are the principal demigods, their positions are greater than Dakṣa's. Dakṣa, however, could not tolerate this, and he took it as an insult by his son-in-law. Previously, also, he was not very much satisfied with Lord Śiva, for Śiva looked very poor and was niggardly in dress.

SB 4.2.9, Translation and Purport:

All sages, brāhmaṇas and fire-gods present, please hear me with attention, for I speak about the manners of gentle persons. I do not speak out of ignorance or envy.

In speaking against Lord Śiva, Dakṣa tried to pacify the assembly by presenting in a very tactful way that he was going to speak about the manners of gentle persons, although naturally this might affect some unmannerly upstarts and the assembly might be unhappy because they did not want even unmannerly persons to be offended.

SB 4.2.10, Translation and Purport:

Śiva has spoiled the name and fame of the governors of the universe and has polluted the path of gentle manners. Because he is shameless, he does not know how to act.

Dakṣa wanted to impress upon the minds of all the great sages assembled in that meeting that Śiva, being one of the demigods, had ruined the good reputations of all the demigods by his unmannerly behavior. The words used against Lord Śiva by Dakṣa can also be understood in a different way, in a good sense. For example, he stated that Śiva is yaśo-ghna, which means "one who spoils name and fame." So this can also be interpreted to mean that he was so famous that his fame killed all other fame. Again, Dakṣa used the word nirapatrapa, which also can be used in two senses. One sense is "one who is stunted," and another sense is "one who is the maintainer of persons who have no other shelter." Generally Lord Śiva is known as the lord of the bhūtas, or lower grade of living creatures. They take shelter of Lord Śiva because he is very kind to everyone and is very quickly satisfied. Therefore he is called Āśutoṣa. To such men, who cannot approach other demigods or Viṣṇu, Lord Śiva gives shelter. Therefore the word nirapatrapa can be used in that sense.

SB 4.2.11, Translation and Purport:

He has already accepted himself as my subordinate by marrying my daughter in the presence of fire and brāhmaṇas. He has married my daughter, who is equal to Gāyatrī, and has pretended to be just like an honest person.

Dakṣa's statement that Lord Śiva pretended to be an honest person means that Śiva was dishonest because in spite of accepting the position of Dakṣa's son-in-law, he was not respectful to Dakṣa.

SB 4.2.13, Translation and Purport:

I had no desire to give my daughter to this person, who has broken all rules of civility. Because of not observing the required rules and regulations, he is impure, but I was obliged to hand over my daughter to him just as one teaches the messages of the Vedas to a śūdra.

A śūdra is forbidden to take lessons from the Vedas because a śūdra, due to his unclean habits, is not worthy to hear such instructions. This restriction, that unless one has acquired the brahminical qualifications one should not read the Vedic literatures, is like the restriction that a law student should not enter a law college unless he has been graduated from all lower grades. According to the estimation of Dakṣa, Śiva was unclean in habits and not worthy to have the hand of his daughter, Sati, who was so enlightened, beautiful and chaste. The word used in this connection is bhinna-setave, which refers to one who has broken all the regulations for good behavior by not following the Vedic principles. In other words, according to Dakṣa the entire transaction of the marriage of his daughter with Śiva was not in order.

SB 4.2.16, Translation and Purport:

On the request of Lord Brahmā I handed over my chaste daughter to him, although he is devoid of all cleanliness and his heart is filled with nasty things.

It is the duty of parents to hand over their daughters to suitable persons just befitting their family tradition in cleanliness, gentle behavior, wealth, social position, etc. Dakṣa was repentant that on the request of Brahmā, who was his father, he had handed over his daughter to a person who, according to his calculation, was nasty. He was so angry that he did not acknowledge that the request was from his father. Instead, he referred to Brahmā as parameṣṭhī, the supreme teacher in the universe; because of his temperament of gross anger, he was not even prepared to accept Brahmā as his father. In other words, he accused even Brahmā of being less intelligent because he had advised Dakṣa to hand over his beautiful daughter to such a nasty fellow. In anger one forgets everything, and thus Dakṣa, in anger, not only accused the great Lord Śiva, but criticized his own father, Lord Brahmā, for his not very astute advice that Dakṣa hand over his daughter to Lord Śiva.

SB 4.2.17, Translation:

The sage Maitreya continued: Thus Dakṣa, seeing Lord Śiva sitting as if against him, washed his hands and mouth and cursed him in the following words.

SB 4.2.18, Translation and Purport:

The demigods are eligible to share in the oblations of sacrifice, but Lord Śiva, who is the lowest of all the demigods, should not have a share.

Because of this curse, Śiva was deprived of his share in the oblations of Vedic sacrifices. It was due to the curse of Dakṣa, Śrī Viśvanātha Cakravartī comments in this connection, that Lord Śiva was saved from the calamity of taking part with other demigods, who were all materialistic. Lord Śiva is the greatest devotee of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and it is not fitting for him to eat or sit with materialistic persons like the demigods. Thus the curse of Dakṣa was indirectly a blessing, for Śiva would not have to eat or sit with other demigods, who were too materialistic.

SB 4.2.19, Translation and Purport:

Maitreya continued: My dear Vidura, in spite of the requests of all the members of the sacrificial assembly, Dakṣa, in great anger, cursed Lord Śiva and then left the assembly and went back to his home.

Anger is so detrimental that even a great personality like Dakṣa, out of anger, left the arena where Brahmā was presiding and all the great sages and pious and saintly persons were assembled. All of them requested him not to leave, but, infuriated, he left, thinking that the auspicious place was not fit for him. Puffed up by his exalted position, he thought that no one was greater than he in argument. It appears that all the members of the assembly, including Lord Brahmā, requested him not to be angry and leave their company, but in spite of all these requests, he left. That is the effect of cruel anger. In Bhagavad-gītā, therefore, it is advised that one who desires to make tangible advancement in spiritual consciousness must avoid three things—lust, anger and the mode of passion. Actually we can see that lust, anger and passion make a man crazy, even though he be as great as Dakṣa. The very name Dakṣa suggests that he was expert in all material activities, but still, because of his aversion towards such a saintly personality as Śiva, he was attacked by these three enemies—anger, lust and passion. Lord Caitanya, therefore, advised that one be very careful not to offend Vaiṣṇavas. He compared offenses toward a Vaiṣṇava to a mad elephant. As a mad elephant can do anything horrible, so when a person offends a Vaiṣṇava he can perform any abominable action.

SB 4.2.20, Translation and Purport:

Upon understanding that Lord Śiva had been cursed, Nandīśvara, one of Lord Śiva's principal associates, became greatly angry. His eyes became red, and he prepared to curse Dakṣa and all the brāhmaṇas present there who had tolerated Dakṣa's cursing Śiva in harsh words.

There is a long-standing dissension among some of the neophyte Vaiṣṇavas and Śaivites; they are always at loggerheads. When Dakṣa cursed Lord Śiva in harsh words, some of the brāhmaṇas present might have enjoyed it because some brāhmaṇas do not very much admire Lord Śiva. This is due to their ignorance of Lord Śiva's position. Nandīśvara was affected by the cursing, but he did not follow the example of Lord Śiva, who was also present there. Although Lord Śiva could also have cursed Dakṣa in a similar way, he was silent and tolerant; but Nandīśvara, his follower, was not tolerant. Of course, as a follower it was right for him not to tolerate an insult to his master, but he should not have cursed the brāhmaṇas who were present. The entire issue was so complicated that those who were not strong enough forgot their positions, and thus cursing and countercursing went on in that great assembly. In other words, the material field is so unsteady that even personalities like Nandīśvara, Dakṣa and many of the brāhmaṇas present were infected by the atmosphere of anger.

SB 4.2.21, Translation and Purport:

Anyone who has accepted Dakṣa as the most important personality and neglected Lord Śiva because of envy is less intelligent and, because of visualizing in duality, will be bereft of transcendental knowledge.

The first curse by Nandīśvara was that anyone supporting Dakṣa was foolishly identifying himself with the body, and therefore, because Dakṣa had no transcendental knowledge, supporting him would deprive one of transcendental knowledge. Dakṣa, Nandīśvara said, identified himself with the body like other materialistic persons and was trying to derive all kinds of facilities in relationship with the body. He had excessive attachment for the body and, in relation to the body, with wife, children, home and other such things, which are different from the soul. Therefore Nandīśvara's curse was that anyone who supported Dakṣa would be bereft of transcendental knowledge of the soul and thus also be deprived of knowledge of the Supreme Personality of Godhead.

SB 4.2.23, Translation:

Dakṣa has accepted the body as all in all. Therefore, since he has forgotten the viṣṇu-pāda, or viṣṇu-gati, and is attached to sex life only, within a short time he will have the face of a goat.

SB 4.2.24, Translation and Purport:

Those who have become as dull as matter by cultivating materialistic education and intelligence are nesciently involved in fruitive activities. Such men have purposely insulted Lord Śiva. May they continue in the cycle of repeated birth and death.

The three curses mentioned above are sufficient to make one as dull as stone, void of spiritual knowledge and preoccupied with materialistic education, which is nescience. After uttering these curses, Nandīśvara then cursed the brāhmaṇas to continue in the cycle of birth and death because of their supporting Dakṣa in blaspheming Lord Śiva.

SB 4.2.26, Translation and Purport:

These brāhmaṇas take to education, austerity and vows only for the purpose of maintaining the body. They shall be devoid of discrimination between what to eat and what not to eat. They will acquire money, begging from door to door, simply for the satisfaction of the body.

The third curse inflicted by Nandīśvara on the brāhmaṇas who supported Dakṣa is completely functioning in the age of Kali. The so-called brāhmaṇas are no longer interested in understanding the nature of the Supreme Brahman, although a brāhmaṇa means one who has attained knowledge about Brahman.

SB 4.2.33, Translation and Purport:

The sage Maitreya said: When such cursing and countercursing was going on between Lord Śiva's followers and the parties of Dakṣa and Bhṛgu, Lord Śiva became very morose. Not saying anything, he left the arena of the sacrifice, followed by his disciples.

Here Lord Śiva's excellent character is described. In spite of the cursing and countercursing between the parties of Dakṣa and Śiva, because he is the greatest Vaiṣṇava he was so sober that he did not say anything. A Vaiṣṇava is always tolerant, and Lord Śiva is considered the topmost Vaiṣṇava, so his character, as shown in this scene, is excellent. He became morose because he knew that these people, both his men and Dakṣa's, were unnecessarily cursing and countercursing one another, without any interest in spiritual life.

SB 4.2.35, Translation and Purport:

My dear Vidura, carrier of bows and arrows, all the demigods who were performing the sacrifice took their bath at the confluence of the Ganges and the Yamunā after completing the yajña performance. Such a bath is called avabhṛtha-snāna. After thus becoming purified in heart, they departed for their respective abodes.

After Lord Śiva and, previously, Dakṣa, left the arena of sacrifice, the sacrifice was not stopped; the sages went on for many years in order to satisfy the Supreme Lord. The sacrifice was not destroyed for want of Śiva and Dakṣa, and the sages went on with their activities.

SB 4.3.1, Translation and Purport:

Maitreya continued: In this manner the tension between the father-in-law and son-in-law, Dakṣa and Lord Śiva, continued for a considerably long period.

The previous chapter has already explained that Vidura questioned the sage Maitreya as to the cause of the misunderstanding between Lord Śiva and Dakṣa. Another question is why the strife between Dakṣa and his son-in-law caused Sati to destroy her body. The chief reason for Satī's giving up her body was that her father, Dakṣa, began another sacrificial performance, to which Lord Śiva was not invited at all. Generally, when any sacrifice is performed, although each and every sacrifice is intended to pacify the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Viṣṇu, all the demigods, especially Lord Brahmā and Lord Śiva and the other principal demigods, such as Indra and Candra, are invited, and they take part. It is said that unless all the demigods are present, no sacrifice is complete. But in the tension between the father-in-law and son-in-law, Dakṣa began another yajña performance, to which Lord Śiva was not invited. Dakṣa was the chief progenitor employed by Lord Brahmā, and he was a son of Brahmā, so he had a high position and was also very proud.

SB 4.3.2, Translation and Purport:

When Lord Brahmā appointed Dakṣa the chief of all the Prajāpatis, the progenitors of population, Dakṣa became very much puffed up.

Although he was envious and was inimical towards Lord Śiva, Dakṣa was appointed the chief of all Prajāpatis. That was the cause of his excessive pride. When a man becomes too proud of his material possessions, he can perform any disastrous act, and therefore Dakṣa acted out of false prestige. That is described in this chapter.

SB 4.3.3, Translation and Purport:

Dakṣa began a sacrifice named vājapeya, and he became excessively confident of his support by Lord Brahmā, He then performed another great sacrifice, named bṛhaspati-sava.

In the Vedas it is prescribed that before performing a bṛhaspati-sava sacrifice, one should perform the sacrifice named vājapeya. While performing these sacrifices, however, Dakṣa neglected great devotees like Lord Śiva. According to Vedic scriptures, the demigods are eligible to participate in yajñas and share the oblations, but Dakṣa wanted to avoid them. All sacrifices are intended to pacify Lord Viṣṇu, but Lord Viṣṇu includes all His devotees. Brahmā, Lord Śiva and the other demigods are all obedient servants of Lord Viṣṇu; therefore Lord Viṣṇu is never satisfied without them. But Dakṣa, being puffed up with his power, wanted to deprive Lord Brahmā and Lord Śiva of participation in the sacrifice, understanding that if one satisfies Viṣṇu, it is not necessary to satisfy His followers. But that is not the process. Viṣṇu wants His followers to be satisfied first. Lord Kṛṣṇa says, mad-bhakta-pūjābhyadhikā: (SB 11.19.21) "The worship of My devotees is better than worship of Me." Similarly, in the Padma Purāṇa, it is stated that the best mode of worship is to offer oblations to Viṣṇu, but better than that is to worship the devotees of Kṛṣṇa. Thus Dakṣa's determination to neglect Lord Śiva in the sacrifices was not fitting.

SB 4.3.5-7, Translation and Purport:

The chaste lady Satī, the daughter of Dakṣa, heard the heavenly denizens flying in the sky conversing about the great sacrifice being performed by her father. When she saw that from all directions the beautiful wives of the heavenly denizens, their eyes very beautifully glittering, were near her residence and were going to the sacrifice dressed in fine clothing and ornamented with earrings and necklaces with lockets, she approached her husband, the master of the bhūtas, in great anxiety, and spoke as follows.

It appears that the residence of Lord Śiva was not on this planet but somewhere in outer space, otherwise how could Sati have seen the airplanes coming from different directions towards this planet and heard the passengers talking about the great sacrifice being performed by Dakṣa? Satī is described here as Dākṣāyaṇī because she was the daughter of Dakṣa.

SB 4.3.15, Translation and Purport:

The great sage Maitreya said: Lord Śiva, the deliverer of the hill Kailāsa, having thus been addressed by his dear wife, replied smilingly, although at the same time he remembered the malicious, heart-piercing speeches delivered by Dakṣa before the guardians of the universal affairs.

When Lord Śiva heard from his wife about Dakṣa, the psychological effect was that he immediately remembered the strong words spoken against him in the assembly of the guardians of the universe, and, remembering those words, he was sorry at heart, although to please his wife he smiled. In Bhagavad-gītā it is said that a liberated person is always in mental equilibrium in both the distress and the happiness of this material world. Therefore the question may now be raised why a liberated personality like Lord Śiva was so unhappy because of the words of Dakṣa.

SB 4.3.16, Translation and Purport:

The great lord replied: My dear beautiful wife, you have said that one may go to a friend's house without being invited, and this is true, provided such a friend does not find fault with the guest because of bodily identification and thereby become angry towards him.

Lord Śiva could foresee that as soon as Sati reached her father's house, her father, Dakṣa, being too puffed up because of bodily identification, would be angry at her presence, and although she was innocent and faultless, he would be mercilessly angry towards her. Lord Śiva warned that since her father was too puffed up by his material possessions, he would be angry, and this would be intolerable for her. Therefore it was better that she not go. This fact was already experienced by Lord Śiva because although Lord Śiva was faultless, Dakṣa had cursed him in so many harsh words.

SB 4.3.17, Purport:

It may be argued that since Dakṣa was very learned, wealthy and austere and had descended from a very exalted heritage, how could he be unnecessarily angry towards another? The answer is that when the qualities of good education, good parentage, beauty and sufficient wealth are misplaced in a person who is puffed up by all these possessions, they produce a very bad result. Milk is a very nice food, but when milk is touched by an envious serpent it becomes poisonous. Similarly, material assets such as education, wealth, beauty and good parentage are undoubtedly nice, but when they decorate persons of a malicious nature, then they act adversely. Another example, given by Cāṇakya Paṇḍita, is that a serpent that has a jewel on its head is still fearful because it is a serpent. A serpent, by nature, is envious of other living entities, even though they be faultless. When a serpent bites another creature, it is not necessarily because the other creature is at fault; it is the habit of the serpent to bite innocent creatures. Similarly, although Dakṣa was qualified by many material assets, because he was proud of his possessions and because he was envious, all those qualities were polluted.

SB 4.3.18, Translation and Purport:

One should not go to anyone's house, even on the consideration of his being a relative or a friend, when the man is disturbed in his mind and looks upon the guest with raised eyebrows and angry eyes.

However low a person may be, he is never unkind to his children, wife and nearest kin; even a tiger is kind to its cubs, for within the animal kingdom the cubs are treated very nicely. Since Sati was the daughter of Dakṣa, however cruel and contaminated he might be, naturally it was expected that he would receive her very nicely. But here it is indicated by the word anavasthita that such a person cannot be trusted. Tigers are very kind to their cubs, but it is also known that sometimes they eat them. Malicious persons should not be trusted, because they are always unsteady. Thus Satī was advised not to go to her father's house because to accept such a father as a relative and to go to his house without being properly invited was not suitable.

SB 4.3.21, Purport:

The real reason for the enmity between Lord Śiva and Dakṣa is explained here. Dakṣa was envious of Lord Śiva because of Śiva's high position as an incarnation of a quality of the Supreme Personality of Godhead and because Śiva was directly in contact with the Supersoul and was therefore honored and given a better sitting place than he. There were many other reasons also. Dakṣa, being materially puffed up, could not tolerate the high position of Lord Śiva, so his anger at Lord Śiva's not standing up in his presence was only the final manifestation of his envy. Lord Śiva is always in meditation and always perceives the Supersoul, as expressed here by the words pūruṣa-buddhi-sākṣiṇām. The position of one whose intelligence is always absorbed in meditation upon the Supreme Personality of Godhead is very great and cannot be imitated by anyone, especially an ordinary person. When Dakṣa entered the arena of yajña, Lord Śiva was in meditation and might not have seen Dakṣa enter, but Dakṣa took the opportunity to curse him because Dakṣa had maintained an envious attitude towards Lord Śiva for a long time. Those who are actually self-realized see every individual body as a temple of the Supreme Personality of Godhead because the Supreme Personality of Godhead, in His Paramātmā feature, is residing in everyone's body.

SB 4.3.21, Purport:

When one offers respect to the body, it is not to the material body but to the presence of the Supreme Lord. Thus one who is always in meditation upon the Supreme Lord is always offering Him obeisances. But since Dakṣa was not very elevated, he thought that obeisances were offered to the material body, and because Lord Śiva did not offer respect to his material body, Dakṣa became envious.

SB 4.3.22, Translation and Purport:

My dear young wife, certainly friends and relatives offer mutual greetings by standing up, welcoming one another and offering obeisances. But those who are elevated to the transcendental platform, being intelligent, offer such respects to the Supersoul, who is sitting within the body, not to the person who identifies with the body.

It may be argued that since Dakṣa was the father-in-law of Lord Śiva, it was certainly the duty of Lord Śiva to offer him respect. In answer to that argument it is explained here that when a learned person stands up or offers obeisances in welcome, he offers respect to the Supersoul, who is sitting within everyone's heart. It is seen, therefore, among Vaiṣṇavas, that even when a disciple offers obeisances to his spiritual master, the spiritual master immediately returns the obeisances because they are mutually offered not to the body but to the Supersoul. Therefore the spiritual master also offers respect to the Supersoul situated in the body of the disciple. The Lord says in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam that offering respect to His devotee is more valuable than offering respect to Him. Devotees do not identify with the body, so offering respect to a Vaiṣṇava means offering respect to Viṣṇu. It is stated also that as a matter of etiquette as soon as one sees a Vaiṣṇava one must immediately offer him respect, indicating the Supersoul sitting within. A Vaiṣṇava sees the body as a temple of Viṣṇu. Since Lord Śiva had already offered respect to the Supersoul in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, offering respect to Dakṣa, who identified with his body, was already performed. There was no need to offer respect to his body, for that is not directed by any Vedic injunction.

SB 4.4.7, Translation and Purport:

When Satī, with her followers, reached the arena, because all the people assembled were afraid of Dakṣa, none of them received her well. No one welcomed her but her mother and sisters, who, with tears in their eyes and with glad faces, welcomed her and talked with her very pleasingly.

The mother and sisters of Satī could not follow the others, who did not receive Satī very well. Due to natural affection, they immediately embraced her with tears in their eyes and with loving feelings. This shows that women as a class are very softhearted; their natural affection and love cannot be checked by artificial means. Although the men present were very learned brāhmaṇas and demigods, they were afraid of their superior, Dakṣa, and because they knew that their welcoming Satī would displease him, although in their minds they wanted to receive her, they could not do so. Women are naturally softhearted, but men are sometimes very hardhearted.

SB 4.4.8, Translation and Purport:

Although she was received by her sisters and mother, she did not reply to their words of reception, and although she was offered a seat and presents, she did not accept anything, for her father neither talked with her nor welcomed her by asking about her welfare.

Satī did not accept the greetings offered by her sisters and mother, for she was not at all satisfied by her father's silence. Satī was the youngest child of Dakṣa, and she knew that she was his pet. But now, because of her association with Lord Śiva, Dakṣa forgot all his affection for his daughter, and this very much aggrieved her. The material bodily conception is so polluted that even upon slight provocation all our relationships of love and affection are nullified. Bodily relationships are so transient that even though one is affectionate towards someone in a bodily relationship, a slight provocation terminates this intimacy.

SB 4.4.9, Translation and Purport:

Present in the arena of sacrifice, Satī saw that there were no oblations for her husband, Lord Śiva. Next she realized that not only had her father failed to invite Lord Śiva, but when he saw Lord Śiva's exalted wife, Dakṣa did not receive her either. Thus she became greatly angry, so much so that she looked at her father as if she were going to burn him with her eyes.

By offering oblations in the fire while chanting the Vedic mantra svāhā, one offers respect to all the demigods, great sages and Pitās, including Lord Brahmā, Lord Śiva and Lord Viṣṇu. It is customary that Śiva is one of those who are offered respects, but Satī, while personally present in the arena, saw that the brāhmaṇas did not utter the mantra offering oblations to Lord Śiva, namaḥ śivāya svāhā. She was not sorry for herself, for she was ready to come to her father's house without being invited, but she wanted to see whether or not her husband was being respected. To see her relatives, her sisters and mother, was not so important; even when she was received by her mother and sisters she did not care, for she was most concerned that her husband was being insulted in the sacrifice. When she marked the insult, she became greatly angry, and she looked at her father so angrily that Dakṣa appeared to burn in her vision.

SB 4.4.10, Translation and Purport:

The followers of Lord Śiva, the ghosts, were ready to injure or kill Dakṣa, but Satī stopped them by her order. She was very angry and sorrowful, and in that mood she began to condemn the process of sacrificial fruitive activities and persons who are very proud of such unnecessary and troublesome sacrifices. She especially condemned her father, speaking against him in the presence of all.

The process of offering sacrifices is especially meant to satisfy Viṣṇu, who is called Yajñeśa because He is the enjoyer of the fruits of all sacrifice. Bhagavad-gītā (5.29) also confirms this fact. The Lord says, bhoktāraṁ yajña-tapasām. He is the actual beneficiary of all sacrifices. Not knowing this fact, less intelligent men offer sacrifices for some material benefit. To derive personal material benefits for sense gratification is the reason persons like Dakṣa and his followers perform sacrifices.

SB 4.4.11, Translation and Purport:

The blessed goddess said: Lord Śiva is the most beloved of all living entities. He has no rival. No one is very dear to him, and no one is his enemy. No one but you could be envious of such a universal being, who is free from all enmity.

In Bhagavad-gītā (9.29) the Lord says, samo'haṁ sarva-bhūteṣu: "I am equal to all living entities." Similarly, Lord Śiva is a qualitative incarnation of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, so he has almost the same qualities as the Supreme Lord. Therefore he is equal to everyone; no one is his enemy, and no one is his friend, but one who is envious by nature can become the enemy of Lord Śiva. Therefore Satī accused her father, "No one but you could be envious of Lord Śiva or be his enemy." Other sages and learned brāhmaṇas were present, but they were not envious of Lord Śiva, although they were all dependent on Dakṣa. Therefore no one but Dakṣa could be envious of Lord Śiva. That was the accusation of Satī.

SB 4.4.12, Translation and Purport:

Twice-born Dakṣa, a man like you can simply find fault in the qualities of others. Lord Śiva, however, not only finds no faults with others' qualities, but if someone has a little good quality, he magnifies it greatly. Unfortunately, you have found fault with such a great soul.

King Dakṣa is addressed here by his daughter Satī as dvija, twice-born. Twice-born refers to the higher classes of men, namely the brāhmaṇas, kṣatriyas and vaiśyas. In other words, a dvija is not an ordinary man but one who has studied the Vedic literature from a spiritual master and can discriminate between good and bad. Therefore it is supposed that he understands logic and philosophy. Satī, Dakṣa's daughter, put before him sound arguments.

SB 4.4.13, Purport:

Offenses are generally committed by persons who falsely identify with the impermanent body. King Dakṣa was deeply engrossed in a misconception because he identified the body with the soul. He offended the lotus feet of Lord Śiva because he thought that his body, being the father of the body of Satī, was superior to Lord Śiva's.

SB 4.4.15, Purport:

People generally practice religion for economic development, to get some money, for by getting money they can satisfy their senses. But when they are frustrated they want spiritual brahmānanda, or merging into the Supreme. These four principles of material life—religion, economic development, sense gratification and liberation—exist, and Lord Śiva is the friend of both the ordinary man and the man who is elevated in spiritual knowledge. Thus it was not good for Dakṣa to create enmity towards him. Even Vaiṣṇavas, who are above both the ordinary and the elevated men in this world, also worship Lord Śiva as the greatest Vaiṣṇava. Thus he is the friend of everyone—the common men, the elevated men and the devotees of the Lord—so no one should disrespect or create enmity towards Lord Śiva.

SB 4.4.16, Purport:

The position of Lord Śiva is accepted by Lord Brahmā, so Dakṣa, Satī's father, should also recognize him. That was the point of Satī's statement. She did not actually come to her father's house to participate in the function, although before coming she pleaded with her husband that she wanted to see her sisters and her mother. That was a plea only, for actually at heart she maintained the idea that she would convince her father, Dakṣa, that it was useless to continue being envious of Lord Śiva. That was her main purpose. When she was unable to convince her father, she gave up the body he had given her, as will be seen in the following verses.

SB 4.4.17, Purport:

The argument offered by Satī is that a person who vilifies a great personality is the lowest of all creatures. But, by the same argument, Dakṣa could also defend himself by saying that since he was a Prajāpati, the master of many living creatures and one of the great officers of the great universal affairs, his position was so exalted that Satī should accept his good qualities instead of vilifying him. The answer to that argument is that Satī was not vilifying but defending. If possible she should have cut out Dakṣa's tongue because he blasphemed Lord Śiva. In other words, since Lord Śiva is the protector of religion, a person who vilifies him should be killed at once, and after killing such a person, one should give up one's life. That is the process, but because Dakṣa happened to be the father of Satī, she decided not to kill him but to give up her own life in order to compensate for the great sin she had committed by hearing blasphemy of Lord Śiva.

SB 4.4.18, Purport:

Since Satī was the representation of the external potency of the Lord, it was in her power to vanquish many universes, including many Dakṣas, but in order to save her husband from the charge that he employed his wife, Satī, to kill Dakṣa because he could not do so due to his inferior position, she decided to give up her body.

SB 4.4.19, Purport:

A common man must observe all the rules and regulations of the Vedas which a person who is in the transcendental position does not need to observe. Dakṣa found fault with Lord Śiva for not observing all the strict rules and regulations of the Vedas, but Satī asserted that he had no need to observe such rules.

SB 4.4.21, Purport:

Satī's father was under the impression that he was exalted in both prestige and opulence and that he had offered his daughter to a person who was not only poor but devoid of all culture. Her father might have been thinking that although she was a chaste woman, greatly adherent to her husband, her husband was in a deplorable condition. To counteract such thoughts, Satī said that the opulence possessed by her husband could not be understood by materialistic persons like Dakṣa and his followers, who were flatterers and were engaged in fruitive activities.

SB 4.4.21, Purport:

Whether or not King Dakṣa and his flatterers could understand the position of Lord Śiva, Satī wanted to impress upon her father that he should not think her husband to be without opulence. Satī, being the devoted wife of Lord Śiva, offers all kinds of material opulences to the worshipers of Lord Śiva.

SB 4.4.22, Purport:

Vasudeva is that state from which Kṛṣṇa, Vāsudeva, is born, so Lord Śiva is the greatest devotee of Lord Kṛṣṇa, and Satī's behavior is exemplary because no one should tolerate blasphemy against Lord Viṣṇu or His devotee. Satī is aggrieved not for her personal association with Lord Śiva but because her body is related with that of Dakṣa, who is an offender at Lord Śiva's lotus feet. She feels herself to be condemned because of the body given by her father, Dakṣa.

SB 4.4.23, Translation and Purport:

Because of our family relationship, when Lord Śiva addresses me as Dākṣāyaṇī I at once become morose, and my jolliness and my smile at once disappear. I feel very much sorry that my body, which is just like a bag, has been produced by you. I shall therefore give it up.

The word dākṣāyaṇī means "the daughter of King Dakṣa." Sometimes, when there was relaxed conversation between husband and wife, Lord Śiva used to call Satī "the daughter of King Dakṣa," and because this very word reminded her about her family relationship with King Dakṣa, she at once became ashamed because Dakṣa was an incarnation of all offenses. Dakṣa was the embodiment of envy, for he unnecessarily blasphemed a great personality, Lord Śiva. Simply upon hearing the word dākṣāyaṇī, she felt afflicted because of reference to the context because her body was the symbol of all the offensiveness with which Dakṣa was endowed. Since her body was constantly a source of unhappiness, she decided to give it up.

SB 4.4.24, Translation and Purport:

Maitreya the sage told Vidura: O annihilator of enemies, while thus speaking to her father in the arena of sacrifice, Satī sat down on the ground and faced north. Dressed in saffron garments, she sanctified herself with water and closed her eyes to absorb herself in the process of mystic yoga.

It is said that when a man desires to quit his body he dresses in saffron garments. Therefore it appears that Satī changed her dress, indicating that she was going to quit the body given her by Dakṣa. Dakṣa was Satī's father, so instead of killing Dakṣa she decided that it would be better to destroy the part of his body which was hers. Thus she decided to give up the body of Dakṣa by the yogic process. Satī was the wife of Lord Śiva, who is known as Yogeśvara, the best among all yogīs, because he knows all the mystic processes of yoga, so it appeared that Satī also knew them. Either she learned yoga from her husband or she was enlightened because she was the daughter of such a great king as Dakṣa.

SB 4.4.26, Translation and Purport:

Thus, in order to give up her body, which had been so respectfully and affectionately seated on the lap of Lord Śiva, who is worshiped by great sages and saints, Satī, due to anger towards her father, began to meditate on the fiery air within the body.

Lord Śiva is described herein as the best of all great souls. Although Satī's body was born of Dakṣa, Lord Śiva used to adore her by sitting her on his lap. This is considered a great token of respect. Thus Satī's body was not ordinary, but still she decided to give it up because it was the source of unhappiness because of its connection with Dakṣa.

SB 4.4.26, Purport:

Satīdevī decided to quit the body she had obtained from Dakṣa's body, and she wanted to transfer herself to another body so that she might have completely uncontaminated association with Lord Śiva.

SB 4.4.27, Purport:

Satī at once thought of the lotus feet of her husband, Lord Śiva, who is one of the three great personalities of Godhead in charge of the management of the material world, and simply by meditating on his lotus feet she derived such great pleasure that she forgot everything in relationship with her body. This pleasure was certainly material because she gave up her body for another body that was also material, but by this example we can appreciate the devotee's pleasure in concentrating his mind and attention on the lotus feet of the Supreme Lord, Viṣṇu, or Kṛṣṇa. There is such transcendental bliss in simply meditating on the lotus feet of the Lord that one can forget everything but the Lord's transcendental form. This is the perfection of yogic samādhi, or ecstasy. In this verse it is stated that by such meditation she became free from all contamination. What was that contamination? The contamination was her concept of the body derived from Dakṣa, but she forgot that bodily relationship in trance.

SB 4.4.27, Purport:

If one keeps his bodily relationships within this material world and poses himself as a great yogī, he is not a bona fide yogī. In Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (2.4.15) it is stated, yat-kīrtanaṁ yat-smaraṇaṁ. Simply by chanting the holy name of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, simply by remembering the lotus feet of Kṛṣṇa, simply by offering prayers to the Supreme Personality of Godhead, one is immediately freed from material contamination, the material bodily concept, by the blazing fire of ecstasy. This effect takes place immediately, without a second's delay.

According to Śrī Jīva Gosvāmī, that Satī quit her body means that she gave up within her heart her relationship with Dakṣa. Śrī Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura also comments that since Satī is the superintendent deity of the external potency, when she quit her body she did not get a spiritual body but simply transferred from the body she had received from Dakṣa. Other commentators also say that she immediately transferred herself into the womb of Menakā, her future mother. She gave up the body she had received from Dakṣa and immediately transferred herself to another, better body, but this does not mean that she got a spiritual body.

SB 4.4.28, Translation and Purport:

When Satī annihilated her body in anger, there was a tumultuous roar all over the universe. Why had Satī, the wife of the most respectable demigod, Lord Śiva, quit her body in such a manner?

There was a tumultuous roaring all over the universe in the societies of the demigods of different planets because Satī was the daughter of Dakṣa, the greatest of all kings, and the wife of Lord Śiva, the greatest of all demigods.

SB 4.4.29, Translation and Purport:

It was astonishing that Dakṣa, who was Prajāpati, the maintainer of all living entities, was so disrespectful to his own daughter, Satī, who was not only chaste but was also a great soul, that she gave up her body because of his neglect.

The word anātmya is significant. Ātmya means "the life of the soul," so this word indicates that although Dakṣa appeared to be living, actually he was a dead body, otherwise how could he neglect Satī, who was his own daughter? It was the duty of Dakṣa to look after the maintenance and comforts of all living entities because he was situated as Prajāpati, the governor of all living entities. Therefore how is it that he neglected his own daughter, who was the most exalted and chaste woman, a great soul, and who therefore deserved the most respectful treatment from her father? The death of Satī because of her being neglected by Dakṣa, her father, was most astonishing to all the great demigods of the universe.

SB 4.4.30, Translation and Purport:

Dakṣa, who is so hardhearted that he is unworthy to be a brāhmaṇa, will gain extensive ill fame because of his offenses to his daughter, because of not having prevented her death, and because of his great envy of the Supreme Personality of Godhead.

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. Satī tried her best to mitigate the misunderstanding between the son-in-law and the father-in-law by coming to her father's house, even without an invitation, and at that time Dakṣa should have received her, forgetting all past misunderstandings. But he was so hardhearted that he was unworthy to be called an Āryan or brāhmaṇa. Thus his ill fame still continues. Dakṣa means "expert," and he was given this name because of his ability to beget many hundreds and thousands of children. Persons who are too sexually inclined and materialistic become so hardhearted because of a slight loss of prestige that they can tolerate even the death of their children.

SB 4.4.31, Translation and Purport:

While people were talking among themselves about the wonderful voluntary death of Satī, the attendants who had come with her readied themselves to kill Dakṣa with their weapons.

The attendants who came with Satī were meant to protect her from calamities, but since they were unable to protect their master's wife, they decided to die for her, and before dying they wanted to kill Dakṣa. It is the duty of attendants to give protection to their master, and in case of failure it is their duty to die.

SB 4.5.1, Translation and Purport:

Maitreya said: When Lord Śiva heard from Nārada that Satī, his wife, was now dead because of Prajāpati Dakṣa's insult to her and that his soldiers had been driven away by the Ṛbhu demigods, he became greatly angry.

Lord Śiva understood that Satī, being the youngest daughter of Dakṣa, could present the case of Lord Śiva's purity of purpose and would thus be able to mitigate the misunderstanding between Dakṣa and himself. But such a compromise was not attained, and Satī was deliberately insulted by her father by not being received properly when she visited his house without being invited. Satī herself could have killed her father, Dakṣa, because she is the personified material energy and has immense power to kill and create within this material universe. In the Brahma-saṁhitā her strength is described: she is capable of creating and dissolving many universes. But although she is so powerful, she acts under the direction of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Kṛṣṇa, as His shadow. It would not have been difficult for Satī to punish her father, but she thought that since she was his daughter, it was not proper for her to kill him. Thus she decided to give up her own body, which she had obtained from his, and Dakṣa did not even check her.

When Satī passed away, giving up her body, the news was conveyed by Nārada to Lord Śiva. Nārada always carries the news of such events because he knows their import. When Lord Śiva heard that his chaste wife, Satī, was dead, he naturally became exceedingly angry. He also understood that Bhṛgu Muni had created the Ṛbhudeva demigods by uttering the mantras of the Yajur Veda and that these demigods had driven away all of his soldiers who were present in the arena of sacrifice. Therefore, he wanted to reply to this insult, and thus he decided to kill Dakṣa because he was the cause of the death of Satī.

SB 4.5.1, Translation:

Maitreya said: When Lord Śiva heard from Nārada that Satī, his wife, was now dead because of Prajāpati Dakṣa's insult to her and that his soldiers had been driven away by the Ṛbhu demigods, he became greatly angry.

SB 4.5.4, Translation and Purport:

When that gigantic demon asked with folded hands, "What shall I do, my lord?" Lord Śiva, who is known as Bhūtanātha, directly ordered, "Because you are born from my body, you are the chief of all my associates. Therefore, kill Dakṣa and his soldiers at the sacrifice."

Here is the beginning of competition between brahma-tejas and śiva-tejas. By brahma-tejas, brahminical strength, Bhṛgu Muni had created the Ṛbhu demigods, who had driven away the soldiers of Lord Śiva stationed in the arena. When Lord Śiva heard that his soldiers had been driven away, he created the tall black demon Vīrabhadra to retaliate. There is sometimes a competition between the mode of goodness and the mode of ignorance. That is the way of material existence. Even when one is situated in the mode of goodness, there is every possibility that his position will be mixed with or attacked by the mode of passion or ignorance. That is the law of material nature. Although pure goodness, or śuddha-sattva, is the basic principle in the spiritual world, pure manifestation of goodness is not possible in this material world. Thus, the struggle for existence between different material qualities is always present. This quarrel between Lord Śiva and Bhṛgu Muni, centering around Prajāpati Dakṣa, is the practical example of such competition between the different qualitative modes of material nature.

SB 4.5.9, Translation and Purport:

Prasūti, the wife of Dakṣa, along with the other women assembled, became very anxious and said: This danger has been created by Dakṣa because of the death of Satī, who, even though completely innocent, quit her body as her sisters looked on.

Prasūti, being a softhearted woman, could immediately understand that the imminent danger approaching was due to the impious activity of hardhearted Prajāpati Dakṣa. He was so cruel that he would not save her youngest daughter, Satī, from the act of committing suicide in the presence of her sisters. Satī's mother could understand how much Satī had been pained by the insult of her father. Satī had been present along with the other daughters, and Dakṣa had purposely received all of them but her because she happened to be the wife of Lord Śiva. This consideration convinced the wife of Dakṣa of the danger which was now ahead, and thus she knew that Dakṣa must be prepared to die for his heinous act.

SB 4.5.10, Translation and Purport:

At the time of dissolution, Lord Śiva's hair is scattered, and he pierces the rulers of the different directions with his trident. He laughs and dances proudly, scattering their hands like flags, as thunder scatters the clouds all over the world.

Prasūti, who appreciated the power and strength of her son-in-law, Lord Śiva, is describing what he does at the time of dissolution. This description indicates that the strength of Lord Śiva is so great that Dakṣa's power could not be set in comparison to it. At the time of dissolution, Lord Śiva, with his trident in hand, dances over the rulers of the different planets, and his hair is scattered, just as the clouds are scattered over all directions in order to plunge the different planets into incessant torrents of rain. In the last phase of dissolution, all the planets become inundated with water, and that inundation is caused by the dancing of Lord Śiva. This dance is called the pralaya dance, or dance of dissolution. Prasūti could understand that the dangers ahead resulted not only from Dakṣa's having neglected her daughter, but also because of his neglecting the prestige and honor of Lord Śiva.

SB 4.5.11, Translation:

The gigantic black man bared his fearful teeth. By the movements of his brows he scattered the luminaries all over the sky, and he covered them with his strong, piercing effulgence. Because of the misbehavior of Dakṣa, even Lord Brahmā, Dakṣa's father, could not have been saved from the great exhibition of anger.

SB 4.5.12, Translation and Purport:

While all the people talked amongst themselves, Dakṣa saw dangerous omens from all sides, from the earth and from the sky.

In this verse Dakṣa has been described as mahātmā. The word mahātmā has been commented upon by different commentators in various manners. Vīrarāghava Ācārya has indicated that this word mahātmā means "steady in heart." That is to say that Dakṣa was so stronghearted that even when his beloved daughter was prepared to lay down her life, he was steady and unshaken. But in spite of his being so stronghearted, he was perturbed when he saw the various disturbances created by the gigantic black demon. Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura remarks in this connection that even if one is called mahātmā, a great soul, unless he exhibits the symptoms of a mahātmā, he should be considered a durātmā, or a degraded soul. In Bhagavad-gītā (9.13) the word mahātmā describes the pure devotee of the Lord: mahātmānas tu māṁ pārtha daivīṁ prakṛtim āśritāḥ. A mahātmā is always under the guidance of the internal energy of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and thus how could such a misbehaved person as Dakṣa be a mahātmā? A mahātmā is supposed to have all the good qualities of the demigods, and thus Dakṣa, lacking those qualities, could not be called a mahātmā; he should instead be called durātmā, a degraded soul. The word mahātmā to describe the qualifications of Dakṣa is used sarcastically.

SB 4.5.17, Translation:

Maṇimān, one of the followers of Lord Śiva, arrested Bhṛgu Muni, and Vīrabhadra, the black demon, arrested Prajāpati Dakṣa. Another follower, who was named Caṇḍeśa, arrested Pūṣā. Nandīśvara arrested the demigod Bhaga.

SB 4.5.21, Translation and Purport:

Just as Baladeva knocked out the teeth of Dantavakra, the King of Kaliṅga, during the gambling match at the marriage ceremony of Aniruddha, Vīrabhadra knocked out the teeth of both Dakṣa, who had shown them while cursing Lord Śiva, and Pūṣā, who by smiling sympathetically had also shown his teeth.

Here a reference is made to the marriage of Aniruddha, a grandson of Lord Kṛṣṇa's. He kidnapped the daughter of Dantavakra, and thereafter he was arrested. Just as he was to be punished for the kidnapping, the soldiers from Dvārakā arrived, headed by Balarāma, and a fight ensued amongst the kṣatriyas. This sort of fight was very common, especially during marriage ceremonies, when everyone was in a challenging spirit. In that challenging spirit, a fight was sure to occur, and in such fights there was commonly killing and misfortune. After finishing such fighting, the parties would come to a compromise, and everything would be settled. This Dakṣa yajña was similar to such events. Now all of them—Dakṣa and the demigods Bhaga and Pūṣā and Bhṛgu Muni—were punished by the soldiers of Lord Śiva, but later everything would come to a peaceful end. So this spirit of fighting between one another was not exactly inimical. Because everyone was so powerful and wanted to show his strength by Vedic mantra or mystic power, all these fighting skills were very elaborately exhibited by the different parties at the Dakṣa yajña.

SB 4.5.22, Translation:

Then Vīrabhadra, the giantlike personality, sat on the chest of Dakṣa and tried to separate his head from his body with sharp weapons, but was unsuccessful.

SB 4.5.23, Translation:

He tried to cut the head of Dakṣa with hymns as well as weapons, but still it was hard to cut even the surface of the skin of Dakṣa's head. Thus Vīrabhadra was exceedingly bewildered.

SB 4.5.24, Translation and Purport:

Then Vīrabhadra saw the wooden device in the sacrificial arena by which the animals were to have been killed. He took the opportunity of this facility to behead Dakṣa.

In this connection it is to be noted that the device used for killing animals in the sacrifice was not designed to facilitate eating their flesh. The killing was specifically intended to give a new life to the sacrificed animal by the power of Vedic mantra. The animals were sacrificed to test the strength of Vedic mantras; yajñas were performed as a test of the mantra. Even in the modern age, tests are executed on animal bodies in the physiology laboratory. Similarly, whether or not the brāhmaṇas were uttering the Vedic hymns correctly was tested by sacrifice in the arena. On the whole, the animals thus sacrificed were not at all the losers. Some old animals would be sacrificed, but in exchange for their old bodies they received other, new bodies. That was the test of Vedic mantras. Vīrabhadra, instead of sacrificing animals with the wooden device, immediately beheaded Dakṣa, to the astonishment of everyone.

SB 4.5.25, Translation:

Upon seeing the action of Vīrabhadra, the party of Lord Śiva was pleased and cried out joyfully, and all the bhūtas, ghosts and demons that had come made a tumultuous sound. On the other hand, the brāhmaṇas in charge of the sacrifice cried out in grief at the death of Dakṣa.

SB 4.6.3, Translation and Purport:

Both Lord Brahmā and Viṣṇu had already known that such events would occur in the sacrificial arena of Dakṣa, and knowing beforehand, they did not go to the sacrifice.

As stated in Bhagavad-gītā (7.26), vedāhaṁ samatītāni vartamānāni cārjuna. The Lord says, "I know everything that has happened in the past and is going to happen in the future." Lord Viṣṇu is omniscient, and He therefore knew what would happen at Dakṣa's sacrificial arena. For this reason neither Nārāyaṇa nor Lord Brahmā attended the great sacrifice performed by Dakṣa.

SB 4.6.4, Translation and Purport:

When Lord Brahmā heard everything from the demigods and the members who had attended the sacrifice, he replied: You cannot be happy in executing a sacrifice if you blaspheme a great personality and thereby offend his lotus feet. You cannot have happiness in that way.

Lord Brahmā explained to the demigods that although Dakṣa wanted to enjoy the results of fruitive sacrificial activities, it is not possible to enjoy when one offends a great personality like Lord Śiva. It was good for Dakṣa to have died in the fight because if he had lived he would have committed such offenses at the lotus feet of great personalities again and again. According to Manu's law, when a person commits murder, punishment is beneficial for him because if he is not killed he might commit more and more murders and therefore be entangled in his future lives for having killed so many persons. Therefore the king's punishment of a murderer is appropriate. lf those who are extremely offensive are killed by the grace of the Lord, that is good for them. In other words, Lord Brahmā explained to the demigods that it was good for Dakṣa to have been killed.

SB 4.6.6, Translation:

Lord Brahmā also advised them that Lord Śiva is so powerful that by his anger all the planets and their chief controllers can be destroyed immediately. Also, he said that Lord Śiva was especially sorry because he had recently lost his dear wife and was also very much afflicted by the unkind words of Dakṣa. Under the circumstances, Lord Brahmā suggested, it would behoove them to go at once and beg his pardon.

SB 4.6.41, Translation and Purport:

All the sages who were sitting with Lord Śiva, such as Nārada and others, also offered their respectful obeisances to Lord Brahmā. After being so worshiped, Lord Brahmā, smiling, began to speak to Lord Śiva.

Lord Brahmā was smiling because he knew that Lord Śiva is not only easily satisfied but easily irritated as well. He was afraid that Lord Śiva might be in an angry mood because he had lost his wife and had been insulted by Dakṣa. In order to conceal this fear, he smiled and addressed Lord Śiva as follows.

SB 4.6.44, Translation:

My dear lord, Your Lordship has introduced the system of sacrifices through the agency of Dakṣa, and thus one may derive the benefits of religious activities and economic development. Under your regulative principles, the institution of the four varṇas and āśramas is respected. The brāhmaṇas therefore vow to follow this system strictly.

SB 4.6.45, Purport:

The Supreme Personality of Godhead is called the supreme will. It is by the supreme will that everything is happening. It is said, therefore, that not a blade of grass moves without the supreme will. Generally it is prescribed that performers of pious activities are promoted to the higher planetary systems, devotees are promoted to the Vaikuṇṭhas, or spiritual worlds, and impersonal speculators are promoted to the impersonal Brahman effulgence; but it sometimes so happens that a miscreant like Ajāmila is immediately promoted to the Vaikuṇṭhaloka simply by chanting the name of Nārāyaṇa. Although when Ajāmila uttered this vibration he intended to call his son Nārāyaṇa, Lord Nārāyaṇa took it seriously and immediately gave him promotion to Vaikuṇṭhaloka, despite his background, which was full of sinful activities. Similarly King Dakṣa was always engaged in the pious activities of performing sacrifices, yet simply because of creating a little misunderstanding with Lord Śiva, he was severely taken to task. The conclusion is, therefore, that the supreme will is the ultimate judgment; no one can argue upon this.

SB 4.6.47, Translation and Purport:

Persons who observe everything with differentiation, who are simply attached to fruitive activities, who are mean minded, who are always pained to see the flourishing condition of others and who thus give distress to them by uttering harsh and piercing words have already been killed by providence. Thus there is no need for them to be killed again by an exalted personality like you.

Persons who are materialistic and always engaged in fruitive activities for material profit cannot endure seeing the flourishing life of others. Except for a few persons in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, the entire world is full of such envious persons, who are perpetually full of anxieties because they are attached to the material body and are without self-realization. Since their hearts are always filled with anxiety, it is understood that they have already been killed by providence. Thus Lord Śiva, as a self-realized Vaiṣṇava, was advised not to kill Dakṣa.

SB 4.6.51, Translation:

My dear lord, by your mercy the performer of the sacrifice (King Dakṣa) may get back his life, Bhaga may get back his eyes, Bhṛgu his mustache, and Pūṣā his teeth.

SB 4.6.53, Purport:

After the yajña was performed by Dakṣa, all the demigods expected prasāda, the remnants of foodstuffs offered to Viṣṇu. Lord Śiva is one of the demigods, so naturally he also expected his share of the prasāda from the yajña. But Dakṣa, out of his envy of Lord Śiva, neither invited Śiva to participate in the yajña nor gave him his share after the offering. But after the destruction of the yajña arena by the followers of Lord Śiva, Lord Brahmā pacified him and assured him that he would get his share of prasāda. Thus he was requested to rectify whatever destruction was caused by his followers.

In Bhagavad-gītā (3.11) it is said that all the demigods are satisfied when one performs yajña. Because the demigods expect prasāda from yajñas, yajña must be performed. Those who engage in sense gratificatory, materialistic activities must perform yajña, otherwise they will be implicated. Thus Dakṣa, being the father of mankind, was performing yajña, and Lord Śiva expected his share. But since Śiva was not invited, there was trouble. By the mediation of Lord Brahmā, however, everything was settled satisfactorily.

SB 4.6.53, Purport:

Everything is controlled by the demigods. Under the circumstances, in this age, in order to keep the balance of social peace and prosperity, all intelligent men should execute the performance of saṅkīrtana-yajña by chanting the holy names Hare Kṛṣṇa, Hare Kṛṣṇa, Kṛṣṇa Kṛṣṇa, Hare Hare/ Hare Rāma, Hare Rāma, Rāma Rāma, Hare Hare. One should invite people, chant Hare Kṛṣṇa, and then distribute prasāda. This yajña will satisfy all the demigods, and thus there will be peace and prosperity in the world. Another difficulty in performing the Vedic rituals is that if one fails to satisfy even one demigod out of the many hundreds of thousands of demigods, just as Dakṣa failed to satisfy Lord Śiva, there will be disaster. But in this age the performance of sacrifice has been simplified. One can chant Hare Kṛṣṇa, and by pleasing Kṛṣṇa one can satisfy all the demigods automatically.

SB 4.7.3, Translation:

Lord Śiva continued: Since the head of Dakṣa has already been burned to ashes, he will have the head of a goat. The demigod known as Bhaga will be able to see his share of sacrifice through the eyes of Mitra.

SB 4.7.5, Translation and Purport:

Those who have had their arms cut off will have to work with the arms of Aśvinī-kumāra, and those whose hands were cut off will have to do their work with the hands of Pūṣā. The priests will also have to act in that manner. As for Bhṛgu, he will have the beard from the goat's head.

Bhṛgu Muni, a great supporter of Dakṣa, was awarded the beard of the goat's head which was substituted for the head of Dakṣa. It appears from the exchange of Dakṣa's head that the modern scientific theory that the brain substance is the cause of all intelligent work is not valid. The brain substance of Dakṣa and that of a goat are different, but Dakṣa still acted like himself, even though his head was replaced by that of a goat. The conclusion is that it is the particular consciousness of an individual soul which acts. The brain substance is only an instrument which has nothing to do with real intelligence. The real intelligence, mind and consciousness are part of the particular individual soul. It will be found in the verses ahead that after Dakṣa's head was replaced by the goat's head, he was as intelligent as he had previously been.

SB 4.7.7, Translation and Purport:

Thereafter, Bhṛgu, the chief of the great sages, invited Lord Śiva to come to the sacrificial arena. Thus the demigods, accompanied by the sages, Lord Śiva, and Lord Brahmā, all went to the place where the great sacrifice was being performed.

The whole sacrifice arranged by King Dakṣa had been disturbed by Lord Śiva. Therefore all the demigods present there, along with Lord Brahmā and the great sages, specifically requested Lord Śiva to come and revive the sacrificial fire. There is a common phrase, śiva-hīna-yajña: "Any sacrifice without the presence of Lord Śiva is baffled." Lord Viṣṇu is Yajñeśvara, the Supreme Personality in the matter of sacrifice, yet in each yajña it is necessary for all the demigods, headed by Lord Brahmā and Lord Śiva, to be present.

SB 4.7.8, Translation and Purport:

After everything was executed exactly as directed by Lord Śiva, Dakṣa's body was joined to the head of the animal meant to be killed in the sacrifice.

This time, all the demigods and great sages were very careful not to irritate Lord Śiva. Therefore whatever he asked was done. It is specifically said here that Dakṣa's body was joined to the head of an animal (a goat).

SB 4.7.9, Translation and Purport:

When the animal's head was fixed on the body of King Dakṣa, Dakṣa was immediately brought to consciousness, and as he awakened from sleep, the King saw Lord Śiva standing before him.

The example given here is that Dakṣa got up as if he were awakened from deep sleep. In Sanskrit this is called supta ivottasthau. The meaning is that after a man awakens from sleep, he immediately remembers all the duties which he must execute. Dakṣa was killed, and his head was taken away and burned to ashes. His body was lying dead, but by the grace of Lord Śiva, as soon as the head of a goat was joined to the body, Dakṣa came back to consciousness again. This indicates that consciousness is also individual. Dakṣa actually took another body when he took on the head of a goat, but because consciousness is individual, his consciousness remained the same although his bodily condition changed.

SB 4.7.10, Translation and Purport:

At that time, when Dakṣa saw Lord Śiva, who rides upon a bull, his heart, which was polluted by envy of Lord Śiva, was immediately cleansed, just as the water in a lake is cleansed by autumn rains.

Here is an example of why Lord Śiva is called auspicious. lf anyone sees Lord Śiva with devotion and reverence, his heart is immediately cleansed. King Dakṣa was polluted by envy of Lord Śiva, and yet by seeing him with a little love and devotion, his heart immediately became cleansed. In the rainy season, the reservoirs of water become dirty and muddy, but as soon as the autumn rain comes, all the water immediately becomes clear and transparent. Similarly, although Dakṣa's heart was impure because of his having slandered Lord Śiva, for which he was severely punished, Dakṣa now came to consciousness, and just by seeing Lord Śiva with veneration and respect, he became immediately purified.

SB 4.7.11, Translation:

King Dakṣa wanted to offer prayers to Lord Śiva, but as he remembered the ill-fated death of his daughter Satī, his eyes filled with tears, and in bereavement his voice choked up, and he could not say anything.

SB 4.7.12, Translation:

At this time, King Dakṣa, afflicted by love and affection, was very much awakened to his real senses. With great endeavor, he pacified his mind, checked his feelings, and with pure consciousness began to offer prayers to Lord Śiva.

SB 4.7.13, Translation and Purport:

King Dakṣa said: My dear Lord Śiva, I committed a great offense against you, but you are so kind that instead of withdrawing your mercy, you have done me a great favor by punishing me. You and Lord Viṣṇu never neglect even useless, unqualified brāhmaṇas. Why, then, should you neglect me, who am engaged in performing sacrifices?

Although Dakṣa felt defeated, he knew that his punishment was simply the great mercy of Lord Śiva. He remembered that Lord Śiva and Lord Viṣṇu are never neglectful of the brāhmaṇas, even though the brāhmaṇas are sometimes unqualified. According to Vedic civilization, a descendant of a brāhmaṇa family should never be heavily punished. This was exemplified in Arjuna's treatment of Aśvatthāmā. Aśvatthāmā was the son of a great brāhmaṇa, Droṇācārya, and in spite of his having committed the great offense of killing all the sleeping sons of the Pāṇḍavas, for which he was condemned even by Lord Kṛṣṇa, Arjuna excused him by not killing him because he happened to be the son of a brāhmaṇa. 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 4.7.14, Purport:

Another feature of this word is that persons who are simply attached to the ritualistic portion of the Vedas and do not understand the situation of the Supreme Personality of Godhead are not any more advanced than animals. In the beginning of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam it is confirmed that even though one performs the rituals of the Vedas, if he does not develop a sense of Kṛṣṇa consciousness, then all his labor in performing Vedic rituals is considered to be simply a waste of time. Lord Śiva's aim in destroying the Dakṣa yajña was to punish Dakṣa because by neglecting him (Lord Śiva), Dakṣa was committing a great offense. Lord Śiva's punishment was just like that of a cowherd boy, who keeps a stick to frighten his animals. It is commonly said that to give protection to animals, a stick is needed because animals cannot reason and argue. Their reasoning and argument is argumentum ad baculum; unless there is a rod, they do not obey. Force is required for the animalistic class of men, whereas those who are advanced are convinced by reasons, arguments and scriptural authority. Persons who are simply attached to Vedic rituals, without further advancement of devotional service, or Kṛṣṇa consciousness, are almost like animals, and Lord Śiva is in charge of giving them protection and sometimes punishing them, as he punished Dakṣa.

SB 4.7.15, Purport:

As usual, a devotee in an adverse condition of life accepts such a condition to be the mercy of the Lord. Factually, the insulting words used by Dakṣa against Lord Śiva were enough to have him thrown perpetually into a hellish life. But Lord Śiva, being kind toward him, awarded him punishment to neutralize the offense. King Dakṣa realized this and, feeling obliged for Lord Śiva's magnanimous behavior, wanted to show his gratitude. Sometimes a father punishes his child, and when the child is grown up and comes to his senses, he understands that the father's punishment was not actually punishment but mercy. Similarly, Dakṣa appreciated that the punishment offered to him by Lord Śiva was a manifestation of Lord Śiva's mercy.

SB 4.7.16, Translation:

The great sage Maitreya said: Thus being pardoned by Lord Śiva, King Dakṣa, with the permission of Lord Brahmā, again began the performance of the yajña, along with the great learned sages, the priests and others.

SB 4.7.18, Translation:

The great sage Maitreya said to Vidura: My dear Vidura, as soon as King Dakṣa offered the clarified butter with Yajur Veda mantras in sanctified meditation, Lord Viṣṇu appeared there in His original form as Nārāyaṇa.

SB 4.7.21, Purport:

The smiling face of Lord Viṣṇu is pleasing to the whole world. Not only devotees but even nondevotees are attracted by such a smile. This verse nicely describes how the sun, moon, eight-petalled lotus flower and humming black bees were represented by the fans of hair, the overhead canopy, the moving earrings on both sides of His face, and His blackish hair. All together, accompanied by the conchshell, wheel, club, lotus flower, bow, arrows, shield and sword in His hands, these presented a grand and beautiful audience for Lord Viṣṇu which captivated all the demigods there, including Dakṣa and Lord Brahmā.

SB 4.7.25, Translation:

When Lord Viṣṇu accepted the oblations offered in the sacrifice, Dakṣa, the Prajāpati, began with great pleasure to offer respectful prayers unto Him. The Supreme Personality of Godhead is actually the master of all sacrifices and preceptor of all the Prajāpatis, and He is served even by such personalities as Nanda and Sunanda.

SB 4.7.26, Translation:

Dakṣa addressed the Supreme Personality of Godhead: My dear Lord, You are transcendental to all speculative positions. You are completely spiritual, devoid of all fear, and You are always in control of the material energy. Even though You appear in the material energy, You are situated transcendentally. You are always free from material contamination because You are completely self-sufficient.

SB 4.7.29, Purport:

Lord Śiva expresses herein his regret at having been angry and having disturbed the sacrificial activities of Dakṣa. King Dakṣa had insulted him in many ways, and thus he had become angry and had frustrated the entire sacrificial ceremony.

SB 4.7.30, Purport:

Bhṛgu Muni was conscious of the scandalous behavior exhibited by each and every one of them, including Brahmā and Lord Śiva, in the sacrificial ceremony of Dakṣa.

SB 4.7.33, Translation and Purport:

The wives of the performers of the sacrifice said: My dear Lord, this sacrifice was arranged under the instruction of Brahmā, but unfortunately Lord Śiva, being angry at Dakṣa, devastated the entire scene, and because of his anger the animals meant for sacrifice are lying dead. Therefore the preparations of the yajña have been lost. Now, by the glance of Your lotus eyes, the sanctity of this sacrificial arena may be again invoked.

Animals were offered in sacrifice in order to give them renewed life; that was the purpose of having animals there. Offering an animal in sacrifice and giving him renewed life was the evidence of the strength of chanting mantras. Unfortunately, when Dakṣa's sacrifice was devastated by Lord Śiva, some of the animals were killed. (One was killed just to replace the head of Dakṣa.) Their bodies were lying about, and the sacrificial arena was turned into a crematorium. Thus the real purpose of yajña was lost.

SB 4.7.33, Purport:

Lord Viṣṇu, being the ultimate objective of such sacrificial ceremonies, was requested by the wives of the priests to glance over the yajña arena with His causeless mercy so that the routine work of the yajña might be continued. The purport here is that animals should not be unnecessarily killed. They were used to prove the strength of the mantras and were to have been rejuvenated by the use of the mantras. They should not have been killed, as they were by Lord Śiva to replace the head of Dakṣa with an animal's head. It was pleasing to see an animal sacrificed and rejuvenated, and that pleasing atmosphere had been lost. The wives of the priests requested that the animals be brought back to life by the glance of Lord Viṣṇu to make a pleasing yajña.

SB 4.7.36, Translation and Purport:

The wife of Dakṣa prayed as follows: My dear Lord, it is very fortunate that You have appeared in this arena of sacrifice. I offer my respectful obeisances unto You, and I request that You be pleased on this occasion. The sacrificial arena is not beautiful without You, just as a body is not beautiful without the head.

Another name of Lord Viṣṇu is Yajñeśvara. In Bhagavad-gītā it is said that all activities should be performed as Viṣṇu-yajña, for the pleasure of Lord Viṣṇu. Unless we please Him, whatever we do is the cause of our bondage in the material world. This is confirmed herein by the wife of Dakṣa: "Without Your presence, the grandeur of this sacrificial ceremony is useless, just as a body without the head, however decorated it may be, is useless."

SB 4.7.36, Purport:

The name of the wife of Dakṣa was Prasūti, and she was the daughter of Svāyambhuva Manu. Her sister, Devahūti, was married to Kardama Muni, and Kapiladeva, the Personality of Godhead, became her son. Prasūti, then, was the aunt of Lord Viṣṇu. She was asking the favor of Lord Viṣṇu in an affectionate mode; since she was His aunt, she sought some special favor. Also significant in this verse is that the Lord is praised with the goddess of fortune. Wherever Lord Viṣṇu is worshiped, naturally there is the favor of the goddess of fortune. Lord Viṣṇu is addressed as amṛta, transcendental. The demigods, including Brahmā and Lord Śiva, were produced after the creation, but Lord Viṣṇu existed before the creation. He is addressed, therefore, as amṛta. Lord Viṣṇu is worshiped with His internal energy by the Vaiṣṇavas. Prasūti, the wife of Dakṣa, implored the Lord to turn the priests into Vaiṣṇavas instead of simply fruitive workers performing sacrifices for some material benefits.

SB 4.7.41, Purport:

In the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam it is clearly stated that in this age of Kali the only successful performance of yajña, or sacrifice, is yajñaiḥ saṅkīrtana-prāyaiḥ: the best type of sacrifice is simply to chant Hare Kṛṣṇa, Hare Kṛṣṇa, Kṛṣṇa Kṛṣṇa, Hare Hare/ Hare Rāma, Hare Rāma, Rāma Rāma, Hare Hare. This yajña is offered before the form of Lord Caitanya, as other yajñas are offered before the form of Lord Viṣṇu. These recommendations are found in the Eleventh Canto of the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. Moreover, this yajña performance confirms that Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu is Viṣṇu Himself. As Lord Viṣṇu appeared at the Dakṣa yajña long, long ago, Lord Caitanya has appeared in this age to accept our saṅkīrtana-yajña.

SB 4.7.47, Purport:

The brāhmaṇa priests were very hopeful that their sacrifice would be carried out without obstacles now that Lord Viṣṇu was present. It is significant in this verse that the brāhmaṇas say, "Simply by chanting Your holy name we can surpass the obstacles, but now You are personally present." The performance of yajña by Dakṣa was obstructed by the disciples and followers of Lord Śiva.

SB 4.7.48, Translation:

Śrī Maitreya said: After Lord Viṣṇu was glorified by all present, Dakṣa, his consciousness purified, arranged to begin again the yajña which had been devastated by the followers of Lord Śiva.

SB 4.7.49, Translation and Purport:

Maitreya continued: My dear sinless Vidura, Lord Viṣṇu is actually the enjoyer of the results of all sacrifices. Yet because of His being the Supersoul of all living entities, He was satisfied simply with His share of the sacrificial offerings. He therefore addressed Dakṣa in a pleasing attitude.

In Bhagavad-gītā (5.29) it is said, bhoktāraṁ yajña-tapasām: Lord Viṣṇu, or Kṛṣṇa, is the supreme enjoyer of all the results of sacrifices, austerities and penances; in whatever one may engage, the ultimate goal is Viṣṇu. If a person does not know that, he is misled. As the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Viṣṇu has nothing to demand from anyone. He is self-satisfied, self-sufficient, but He accepts the offerings of yajña because of His friendly attitude toward all living entities. When His share of the sacrificial results was offered to Him, He appeared very pleased. It is said in Bhagavad-gītā (9.26), patraṁ puṣpaṁ phalaṁ toyaṁ yo me bhaktyā prayacchati: if any devotee offers Him even a small leaf, or a flower or water, if it is offered with love and affection, the Lord accepts it and is pleased. Although He is self-sufficient and does not need anything from anyone, He accepts such offerings because, as Supersoul, He has such a friendly attitude toward all living entities. Another point here is that He does not encroach upon another's share. In the yajña there is a share for the demigods, Lord Śiva, and Lord Brahmā, and a share for Lord Viṣṇu. He is satisfied with His own share and does not encroach upon others'. Indirectly, He indicated that He was not satisfied with Dakṣa's trying to deny Lord Śiva his share. Maitreya addressed Vidura as sinless because Vidura was a pure Vaiṣṇava and never committed any offense to any demigod.

SB 4.7.51, Translation:

The Lord continued: My dear Dakṣa Dvija, I am the original Personality of Godhead, but in order to create, maintain and annihilate this cosmic manifestation, I act through My material energy, and according to the different grades of activity, My representations are differently named.

SB 4.7.55, Translation:

The sage Maitreya said: Thus Dakṣa, the head of all Prajāpatis, having been nicely instructed by the Supreme Personality of Godhead, worshiped Lord Viṣṇu. After worshiping Him by performing the prescribed sacrificial ceremonies, Dakṣa separately worshiped Lord Brahmā and Lord Śiva.

SB 4.7.56, Translation:

With all respect, Dakṣa worshiped Lord Śiva with his share of the remnants of the yajña. After finishing the ritualistic sacrificial activities, he satisfied all the other demigods and the other people assembled there. Then, after finishing all these duties with the priests, he took a bath and was fully satisfied.

SB 4.7.57, Translation and Purport:

Thus worshiping the Supreme Lord Viṣṇu by the ritualistic performance of sacrifice, Dakṣa was completely situated on the religious path. Moreover, all the demigods who had assembled at the sacrifice blessed him that he might increase his piety, and then they left.

Although Dakṣa was considerably advanced in religious principles, he awaited the blessings of the demigods. Thus the great sacrifice conducted by Dakṣa ended in harmony and peace.

SB 4.7.58, Translation:

Maitreya said: I have heard that after giving up the body she had received from Dakṣa, Dākṣāyaṇī (his daughter) took her birth in the kingdom of the Himalayas. She was born as the daughter of Menā. I heard this from authoritative sources.

SB 4.7.60, Translation:

Maitreya said: My dear Vidura, I heard this story of the Dakṣa yajña, which was devastated by Lord Śiva, from Uddhava, a great devotee and a disciple of Bṛhaspati.

SB 4.7.61, Translation:

The great sage Maitreya concluded: If one hears and again narrates, with faith and devotion, this story of the Dakṣa yajña as it was conducted by the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Viṣṇu, then certainly one is cleared of all contamination of material existence, O son of Kuru.

SB 4.8.1, Purport:

Semen is meant to be discharged when one has a home, a wife and the intention to beget children, otherwise there is no injunction for discharging semen. These principles were followed from the beginning of creation, and such brahmacārīs never created progeny. This narration has dealt with the descendants of Lord Brahmā from Manu's daughter Prasūti. prasūti's daughter was Dākṣāyaṇī, or Satī, in relation to whom the story of the Dakṣa yajña was narrated. Maitreya is now explaining about the progeny of the sons of Brahmā. Out of the many sons of Brahmā, the brahmacārī sons headed by Sanaka and Nārada did not marry at all, and therefore there is no question of narrating the history of their descendants.

SB 4.24.9, Translation and Purport:

The great sage Maitreya continued: My dear Vidura, Havirdhāna's very powerful son named Barhiṣat was very expert in performing various kinds of fruitive sacrifices, and he was also expert in the practice of mystic yoga. By his great qualifications, he became known as Prajāpati.

In the beginning of the creation there were not many living entities, and consequently the very powerful living entities or demigods were appointed as Prajāpatis in order to beget children and increase the population. There are many Prajāpatis—Brahmā, Dakṣa and Manu are sometimes known as Prajāpatis—and Barhiṣat, the son of Havirdhāna, became one of them.

SB 4.29.42-44, Translation:

The most powerful Lord Brahmā, the father of all progenitors; Lord Śiva; Manu, Dakṣa and the other rulers of humankind; the four saintly first-class brahmacārīs headed by Sanaka and Sanātana; the great sages Marīci, Atri, Aṅgirā, Pulastya, Pulaha, Kratu, Bhṛgu and Vasiṣṭha; and my humble self (Nārada) are all stalwart brāhmaṇas who can speak authoritatively on Vedic literature. We are very powerful because of austerities, meditation and education. Nonetheless, even after inquiring about the Supreme Personality of Godhead, whom we always see, we do not know perfectly about Him.

SB 4.30.39-40, Translation and Purport:

After being born, Dakṣa, by the superexcellence of his bodily luster, covered all others' bodily opulence. Because he was very expert in performing fruitive activity, he was called by the name Dakṣa, meaning "the very expert." Lord Brahmā therefore engaged Dakṣa in the work of generating living entities and maintaining them. In due course of time, Dakṣa also engaged other Prajāpatis (progenitors) in the process of generation and maintenance.

Dakṣa became almost as powerful as Lord Brahmā. Consequently, Lord Brahmā engaged him in generating population. Dakṣa was very influential and opulent. In his own turn, Dakṣa engaged other Prajāpatis, headed by Marīci. In this way the population of the universe increased.

SB 4.30.48, Translation and Purport:

Following the order of Lord Brahmā, all the Pracetās accepted the girl as their wife. From the womb of this girl, the son of Lord Brahmā named Dakṣa took birth. Dakṣa had to take birth from the womb of Māriṣā due to his disobeying and disrespecting Lord Mahādeva (Śiva). Consequently he had to give up his body twice.

In this connection the word mahad-avajñānāt is significant. King Dakṣa was the son of Lord Brahmā; therefore in a previous birth he was a brāhmaṇa, but because of his behaving like a non-brāhmaṇa (abrāhmaṇa) by insulting or disrespecting Lord Mahādeva, he had to take birth within the semen of a kṣatriya. That is to say, he became the son of the Pracetās. Not only that, but because of his disrespecting Lord Śiva, he had to undergo the tribulation of taking birth from within the womb of a woman. In the Dakṣa-yajña arena, he was once killed by Lord Śiva's servant, Vīrabhadra. Because that was not sufficient, he again took birth, from the womb of Māriṣā. At the end of the Dakṣa-yajña and the disastrous incidents there, Dakṣa offered his prayer to Lord Śiva. Although he had to give up his body and take birth from the womb of a woman impregnated by the semen of a kṣatriya, he received all opulence by the grace of Lord Śiva.

SB 4.30.49, Translation:

His previous body had been destroyed, but he, the same Dakṣa, inspired by the supreme will, created all the desired living entities in the Cākṣuṣa manvantara.

SB 4.30.49, Purport:

The word jagad-aṇḍa-nātha means Lord Brahmā. There are innumerable jagad-aṇḍa-nātha Brahmās, and thus we can calculate the many Manus. The present age is under the control of Vaivasvata Manu. Each Manu lives 4,320,000 years multiplied by 71. The present Manu has already lived for 4,320,000 years multiplied by 28. All these long life-spans are ultimately ended by the laws of material nature. The controversy of the Dakṣa-yajña took place in the Svāyambhuva manvantara period. As a result, Dakṣa was punished by Lord Śiva, but by virtue of his prayers to Lord Śiva he became eligible to regain his former opulence. According to Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura, Dakṣa underwent severe penances up to the fifth manvantara. Thus at the beginning of the sixth manvantara, known as the Cākṣuṣa manvantara, Dakṣa regained his former opulence by the blessings of Lord Śiva.

SB 4.31.1, Purport:

After the Pracetās had finished their penances, they were blessed by the Supreme Personality of Godhead. The Lord blessed them by telling them that after finishing their family life they would return home, back to Godhead, in due course of time. After finishing their family life, which lasted thousands of years according to the calculations of the demigods, the Pracetās decided to leave home, putting their wife in the charge of a son named Dakṣa.

SB Canto 5

SB 5.5.21-22, Translation:

Of the two energies manifest (spirit and dull matter), beings possessing living force (vegetables, grass, trees and plants) are superior to dull matter (stone, earth, etc.). Superior to nonmoving plants and vegetables are worms and snakes, which can move. Superior to worms and snakes are animals that have developed intelligence. Superior to animals are human beings, and superior to human beings are ghosts because they have no material bodies. Superior to ghosts are the Gandharvas, and superior to them are the Siddhas. Superior to the Siddhas are the Kinnaras, and superior to them are the asuras. Superior to the asuras are the demigods, and of the demigods, Indra, the King of heaven, is supreme. Superior to Indra are the direct sons of Lord Brahmā, sons like King Dakṣa, and supreme among Brahmā's sons is Lord Śiva. Since Lord Śiva is the son of Lord Brahmā, Brahmā is considered superior, but Brahmā is also subordinate to Me, the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Because I am inclined to the brāhmaṇas, the brāhmaṇas are best of all.

SB 5.15.10, Translation and Purport:

All the chaste and honest daughters of Mahārāja Dakṣa, such as Śraddhā, Maitrī and Dayā, whose blessings were always effective, bathed Mahārāja Gaya with sanctified water. Indeed, they were very satisfied with Mahārāja Gaya. The planet earth personified came as a cow, and, as though she saw her calf, she delivered milk profusely when she saw all the good qualities of Mahārāja Gaya. In other words, Mahārāja Gaya was able to derive all benefits from the earth and thus satisfy the desires of his citizens. However, he personally had no desire.

The earth over which Mahārāja Gaya ruled is compared to a cow. The good qualities whereby he maintained and ruled the citizens are compared to the calf. A cow delivers milk in the presence of her calf; similarly the cow, or earth, fulfilled the desires of Mahārāja Gaya, who was able to utilize all the resources of the earth to benefit his citizens. This was possible because he was bathed in sanctified water by the honest daughters of Dakṣa. Unless a king or ruler is blessed by authorities, he cannot rule the citizens very satisfactorily. Through the good qualities of the ruler, the citizens become very happy and well qualified.

SB Canto 6

SB 6.4 Summary:

When the ten Pracetās came out of the sea and saw the entire world full of trees, they were very angry with the trees and decided to destroy them all to rectify the situation. Thus the Pracetās created wind and fire to burn the trees to ashes. Soma, however, the king of the moon and the king of all vegetation, forbade the Pracetās to destroy the trees, since the trees are the source of fruit and flowers for all living beings. Just to satisfy the Pracetās, Soma gave them a beautiful girl born of Pramlocā Apsarā. By the semen of all the Pracetās, Dakṣa was born of that girl.

In the beginning, Dakṣa created all the demigods, demons and human beings, but when he found the population not increasing properly, he took sannyāsa and went to Vindhya Mountain, where be underwent severe austerities and offered Lord Viṣṇu a particular prayer known as Haṁsa-guhya, by which Lord Viṣṇu became very pleased with him.

SB 6.4 Summary:

Being very satisfied by the prayers of Dakṣa, Lord Viṣṇu appeared before Dakṣa with eight arms. The Lord was dressed in yellow garments and had a blackish complexion. Understanding that Dakṣa was very eager to follow the path of enjoyment, the Lord awarded him the potency to enjoy the illusory energy. The Lord offered him the daughter of Pañcajana named Asiknī, who was suitable for Mahārāja Dakṣa to enjoy in sex. Indeed, Dakṣa received his name because he was very expert in sex life. After awarding this benediction, Lord Viṣṇu disappeared.

SB 6.4.17, Translation and Purport:

In the womb of that girl the Pracetās all begot a son named Dakṣa, who filled the three worlds with living entities.

Dakṣa was first born during the reign of Svāyambhuva Manu, but because of offending Lord Śiva he was punished by having the head of a goat substituted for his own head. Thus insulted, he had to give up that body, and in the sixth manvantara, called the Cākṣuṣa manvantara, he was born of the womb of Māriṣā as Dakṣa. In this connection Śrīla Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura quotes this verse:

cākṣuṣe tv antare prāpte

prāk-sarge kāla-vidrute

yaḥ sasarja prajā iṣṭāḥ

sa dakṣo daiva-coditaḥ

"His previous body had been destroyed, but he, the same Dakṣa, inspired by the supreme will, created all the desired living entities in the Cākṣuṣa manvantara." (SB 4.30.49) Thus Dakṣa regained his previous opulence and again begot thousands and millions of children to fill the three worlds.

SB 6.4.18, Translation and Purport:

Śukadeva Gosvāmī continued: Please hear from me with great attention how Prajāpati Dakṣa, who was very affectionate to his daughters, created different types of living entities through his semen and through his mind.

The word duhitṛ-vatsalaḥ indicates that all the prajās were born from Dakṣa's daughters. Śrīla Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura says that apparently Dakṣa had no son.

SB 6.4.19, Translation:

With his mind, Prajāpati Dakṣa first created all kinds of demigods, demons, human beings, birds, beasts, aquatics and so on.

SB 6.4.20, Translation:

But when Prajāpati Dakṣa saw that he was not properly generating all kinds of living entities, he approached a mountain near the Vindhya mountain range, and there he executed very difficult austerities.

SB 6.4.21, Translation:

Near that mountain was a very holy place named Aghamarṣaṇa. There Prajāpati Dakṣa executed ritualistic ceremonies and satisfied the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Hari, by engaging in great austerities to please Him.

SB 6.4.22, Translation and Purport:

My dear King, I shall fully explain to you the Haṁsa-guhya prayers, which were offered to the Supreme Personality of Godhead by Dakṣa, and I shall explain how the Lord was pleased with him for those prayers.

It is to be understood that the Haṁsa-guhya prayers were not composed by Dakṣa, but were existing in the Vedic literature.

SB 6.4.23, Translation:

Prajāpati Dakṣa said: The Supreme Personality of Godhead is transcendental to the illusory energy and the physical categories it produces. He possesses the potency for unfailing knowledge and supreme willpower, and He is the controller of the living entities and the illusory energy. The conditioned souls who have accepted this material manifestation as everything cannot see Him, for He is above the evidence of experimental knowledge. Self-evident and self-sufficient, He is not caused by any superior cause. Let me offer my respectful obeisances unto Him.

SB 6.4.24, Translation and Purport:

As the sense objects (form, taste, touch, smell and sound) cannot understand how the senses perceive them, so the conditioned soul, although residing in his body along with the Supersoul, cannot understand how the supreme spiritual person, the master of the material creation, directs his senses. Let me offer my respectful obeisances unto that Supreme Person, who is the supreme controller.

The individual soul and the Supreme Soul live together within the body. This is confirmed in the Upaniṣads by the analogy that two friendly birds live in one tree—one bird eating the fruit of the tree and the other simply witnessing and directing. Although the individual living being, who is compared to the bird that is eating, is sitting with his friend the Supreme Soul, the individual living being cannot see Him. Actually the Supersoul is directing the workings of his senses in the enjoyment of sense objects, but as these sense objects cannot see the senses, the conditioned soul cannot see the directing soul. The conditioned soul has desires, and the Supreme Soul fulfills them, but the conditioned soul is unable to see the Supreme Soul. Thus Prajāpati Dakṣa offers his obeisances to the Supreme Soul, the Supersoul, even though unable to see Him.

SB 6.4.26, Purport:

Ataḥ śrī-kṛṣṇa-nāmādi na bhaved grāhyam indriyaiḥ: (CC Madhya 17.136) as long as one is situated in duality, on the sensual platform, gross or subtle, realization of the original Personality of Godhead is impossible. Sevonmukhe hi jihvādau svayam eva sphuraty adaḥ: but when one engages his senses in the service of the Lord—specifically, when one engages the tongue in chanting the Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra and tasting only Kṛṣṇa prasāda with a spirit of service—the Supreme Personality of Godhead is revealed. This is indicated in this verse by the word śuci-sadmane. Śuci means purified. By the spirit of rendering service with one's senses, one's entire existence becomes śuci-sadma, the platform of uncontaminated purity. Dakṣa therefore offers his respectful obeisances unto the Supreme Personality of Godhead, who is revealed on the platform of śuci-sadma.

SB 6.4.29, Purport:

Prācetasa, Dakṣa, herein offers prayers unto the Transcendence, not to anyone within the material creation. Only fools and rascals think God a material creation. This is confirmed by the Lord Himself in Bhagavad-gītā (9.11):

avajānanti māṁ mūḍhā

mānuṣīṁ tanum āśritam

paraṁ bhāvam ajānanto

mama bhūta-maheśvaram

"Fools deride Me when I descend in the human form. They do not know My transcendental nature and My supreme dominion over all that be." Therefore, one must receive knowledge from a person to whom the Lord has revealed Himself; there is no value in creating an imaginary name or form for the Lord. Śrīpāda Śaṅkarācārya was an impersonalist, but nevertheless he said, nārāyaṇaḥ paro 'vyaktāt: Nārāyaṇa, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, is not a person of the material world. We cannot assign Nārāyaṇa a material designation, as the foolish attempt to do when they speak of daridra-nārāyaṇa (poor Nārāyaṇa). Nārāyaṇa is always transcendental, beyond this material creation. How can He become daridra-nārāyaṇa? Poverty is found within this material world, but in the spiritual world, there is no such thing as poverty. Therefore the idea of daridra-nārāyaṇa is merely a concoction.

Dakṣa very carefully points out that material designations cannot be names of the worshipable Lord: yad yan niruktaṁ vacasā nirūpitam. Nirukta refers to the Vedic dictionary. One cannot properly understand the Supreme Personality of Godhead merely by picking up expressions from a dictionary. In praying to the Lord, Dakṣa does not wish material names and forms to be the objects of his worship; rather, he wants to worship the Lord, who existed before the creation of material dictionaries and names.

SB 6.4.34, Purport:

The impersonalists imagine the various demigods to be forms of the Lord. For example, the Māyāvādīs worship five demigods (pañcopāsanā). They do not actually believe in the form of the Lord, but for the sake of worship they imagine some form to be God. Generally they imagine a form of Viṣṇu, a form of Śiva, and forms of Gaṇeśa, the sun-god and Durgā. This is called pañcopāsanā. Dakṣa, however, wanted to worship not an imaginary form, but the supreme form of Lord Kṛṣṇa.

SB 6.4.34, Purport:

Unintelligent persons want to imagine or concoct a form of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, but devotees want to worship the actual Personality of Godhead. Therefore Dakṣa prays, "One may think of You as personal, impersonal or imaginary, but I wish to pray to Your Lordship that You fulfill my desires to see You as You actually are."

SB 6.4.35-39, Translation:

Śrī Śukadeva Gosvāmī said: The Supreme Personality of Godhead, Hari, who is extremely affectionate to His devotees, was very pleased by the prayers offered by Dakṣa, and thus He appeared at that holy place known as Aghamarṣaṇa. O Mahārāja Parīkṣit, best of the Kuru dynasty, the Lord's lotus feet rested on the shoulders of His carrier, Garuḍa, and He appeared with eight long, mighty, very beautiful arms. In His hands He held a disc, conchshell, sword, shield, arrow, bow, rope and club—in each hand a different weapon, all brilliantly shining. His garments were yellow and His bodily hue deep bluish. His eyes and face were very cheerful, and from His neck to His feet hung a long garland of flowers. His chest was decorated with the Kaustubha jewel and the mark of Śrīvatsa. On His head was a gorgeous round helmet, and His ears were decorated with earrings resembling sharks. All these ornaments were uncommonly beautiful. The Lord wore a golden belt on His waist, bracelets on His arms, rings on His fingers, and ankle bells on His feet. Thus decorated by various ornaments, Lord Hari, who is attractive to all the living entities of the three worlds, is known as Puruṣottama, the best personality. He was accompanied by great devotees like Nārada, Nanda and all the principal demigods, led by the heavenly king, Indra, and the residents of various upper planetary systems such as Siddhaloka, Gandharvaloka and Cāraṇaloka. Situated on both sides of the Lord and behind Him as well, these devotees offered Him prayers continuously.

SB 6.4.40, Translation:

Seeing that wonderful and effulgent form of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Prajāpati Dakṣa was first somewhat afraid, but then he was very pleased to see the Lord, and he fell to the ground like a stick (daṇḍavat) to offer his respects to the Lord.

SB 6.4.41, Translation and Purport:

As rivers are filled by water flowing from a mountain, all of Dakṣa's senses were filled with pleasure. Because of his highly elevated happiness, Dakṣa could not say anything, but simply remained flat on the ground.

When one actually realizes or sees the Supreme Personality of Godhead, he is filled with complete happiness. For example, when Dhruva Mahārāja saw the Lord in his presence, he said, svāmin kṛtārtho'smi varaṁ na yāce: (CC Madhya 22.42) "My dear Lord, I have nothing to ask from You. Now I am completely satisfied." Similarly, when Prajāpati Dakṣa saw the Supreme Lord in his presence, he simply fell flat, unable to speak or ask Him for anything.

SB 6.4.42, Translation:

Although Prajāpati Dakṣa could not say anything, when the Lord, who knows everyone's heart, saw His devotee prostrate in that manner and desiring to increase the population, He addressed him as follows.

SB 6.4.43, Translation:

The Supreme Personality of Godhead said: O most fortunate Prācetasa, because of your great faith in Me, you have attained the supreme devotional ecstasy. Indeed, because of your austerities, combined with exalted devotion, your life is now successful. You have achieved complete perfection.

SB 6.4.44, Translation and Purport:

My dear Prajāpati Dakṣa, you have performed extreme austerities for the welfare and growth of the world. My desire also is that everyone within this world be happy. I am therefore very pleased with you because you are endeavoring to fulfill My desire for the welfare of the entire world.

After every dissolution of the material cosmos, all the living entities take shelter in the body of Kāraṇodakaśāyī Viṣṇu, and when creation takes place again, they come forth from His body in their various species to resume their activities. Why does the creation take place in such a way that the living entities are put into conditioned life to suffer the threefold miseries imposed upon them by the material nature? Here the Lord says to Dakṣa, "You desire to benefit all living entities, and that is also My desire."

SB 6.4.44, Purport:

Prajāpati Dakṣa is trying to benefit the conditioned souls by begetting them to give them a life with a chance for liberation. Liberation means surrender to Kṛṣṇa. If one begets children with the purpose of training them to surrender to Kṛṣṇa, fatherhood is very good.

SB 6.4.45, Purport:

There are various types of incarnations or expansions of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. The expansions of His personal self, or viṣṇu-tattva, are called svāṁśa expansions, whereas the living entities, who are not viṣṇu-tattva but jīva-tattva, are called vibhinnāṁśa, separated expansions. Although Prajāpati Dakṣa is not on the same level as Lord Brahmā and Lord Śiva, he is compared to them because he engages in the service of the Lord. In the service of the Personality of Godhead, it is not that Lord Brahmā is considered very great while an ordinary human being trying to preach the glories of the Lord is considered very low.

SB 6.4.47, Purport:

The ultimate cause, the supreme cause of creation, is the Supreme Personality of Godhead, who can be understood only by bhakti-yoga. He cannot be understood by speculative philosophical research or by meditation, since all such processes came into existence after the material creation. The impersonal and localized conceptions of the Supreme Lord are more or less materially contaminated. The real spiritual process, therefore, is bhakti-yoga. As the Lord says, bhaktyā mām abhijānāti: (BG 18.55) "Only by devotional service can I be understood." Before the creation, the Lord existed as a person, as indicated here by the word aham. When Prajāpati Dakṣa saw Him as a person, who was beautifully dressed and ornamented, he actually experienced the meaning of this word aham through devotional service.

SB 6.4.51, Translation:

O My dear son Dakṣa, Prajāpati Pañcajana has a daughter named Asiknī, whom I offer to you so that you may accept her as your wife.

SB 6.4.52, Purport:

One may follow the natural tendency for sex life only to beget children. Therefore the Lord told Dakṣa in this verse, "This girl is offered to you only for sex life to beget children, not for any other purpose. She is very fertile, and therefore you will be able to have as many children as you can beget."

Śrīla Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura remarks in this connection that Dakṣa was given the facility for unlimited sexual intercourse. In Dakṣa's previous life he was also known as Dakṣa, but in the course of performing sacrifices he offended Lord Śiva, and thus his head was replaced with that of a goat. Then Dakṣa gave up his life because of his degraded condition, but because he maintained the same unlimited sexual desires, he underwent austerities by which he satisfied the Supreme Lord, who then gave him unlimited potency for sexual intercourse.

SB 6.4.52, Purport:

One should not think that Dakṣa received the favor of the Lord by receiving the facilities for unlimited sex. Later verses will reveal that Dakṣa again committed an offense, this time at the lotus feet of Nārada. Therefore although sex life is the topmost enjoyment in the material world and although one may have an opportunity for sexual enjoyment by the grace of God, this entails a risk of committing offenses. Dakṣa was open to such offenses, and therefore, strictly speaking, he was not actually favored by the Supreme Lord. One should not seek the favor of the Lord for unlimited potency in sex life.

SB 6.4.54, Translation:

Śukadeva Gosvāmī continued: After the creator of the entire universe, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Hari, had spoken in this way in the presence of Prajāpati Dakṣa, He immediately disappeared as if He were an object experienced in a dream.

SB 6.5 Summary:

This chapter relates how all the sons of Dakṣa were delivered from the clutches of the material energy by following the advice of Nārada, who was therefore cursed by Dakṣa.

Influenced by the external energy of Lord Viṣṇu, Prajāpati Dakṣa begot ten thousand sons in the womb of his wife, Pāñcajanī. These sons, who were all of the same character and mentality, were known as the Haryaśvas. Ordered by their father to create more and more population, the Haryaśvas went west to the place where the River Sindhu (now the Indus) meets the Arabian Sea. In those days this was the site of a holy lake named Nārāyaṇa-saras, where there were many saintly persons. The Haryaśvas began practicing austerities, penances and meditation, which are the engagements of the highly exalted renounced order of life. However, when Śrīla Nārada Muni saw these boys engaged in such commendable austerities simply for material creation, he thought it better to release them from this tendency. Nārada Muni described to the boys their ultimate goal of life and advised them not to become ordinary karmīs to beget children. Thus all the sons of Dakṣa became enlightened and left, never to return.

SB 6.5 Summary:

Prajāpati Dakṣa, who was very sad at the loss of his sons, begot one thousand more sons in the womb of his wife, Pāñcajanī, and ordered them to increase progeny. These sons, who were named the Savalāśvas, also engaged in worshiping Lord Viṣṇu to beget children, but Nārada Muni convinced them to become mendicants and not beget children. Foiled twice in his attempts to increase population, Prajāpati Dakṣa became most angry at Nārada Muni and cursed him, saying that in the future he would not be able to stay anywhere. Since Nārada Muni, being fully qualified, was fixed in tolerance, he accepted Dakṣa's curse.

SB 6.5.1, Translation:

Śrīla Śukadeva Gosvāmī continued: Impelled by the illusory energy of Lord Viṣṇu, Prajāpati Dakṣa begot ten thousand sons in the womb of Pāñcajanī (Asiknī). My dear King, these sons were called the Haryaśvas.

SB 6.5.2, Translation:

My dear King, all the sons of Prajāpati Dakṣa were alike in being very gentle and obedient to the orders of their father. When their father ordered them to beget children, they all went in the western direction.

SB 6.5.6-8, Purport:

Nārada Muni saw that the boys known as the Haryaśvas were already purified because of living in that holy place and were practically ready for liberation. Why then should they be encouraged to become entangled in family life, which is so dark that once having entered it one cannot leave it? Through this analogy, Nārada Muni asked them to consider why they should follow their father's order to be entangled in family life. Indirectly, he asked them to find within the cores of their hearts the situation of the Supersoul, Lord Viṣṇu, for then they would truly be experienced. In other words, one who is too involved in his material environment and does not look within the core of his heart is increasingly entangled in the illusory energy. Nārada Muni's purpose was to get the sons of Prajāpati Dakṣa to divert their attention toward spiritual realization instead of involving themselves in the ordinary but complicated affairs of propagation.

SB 6.5.11, Purport:

Nārada Muni spoke to the Haryaśvas, the sons of Prajāpati Dakṣa, about ten allegorical subjects—the king, the kingdom, the river, the house, the physical elements and so forth. After considering these by themselves, the Haryaśvas could understand that the living entity encaged in his body seeks happiness, but takes no interest in how to become free from his encagement. This is a very important verse, since all the living entities in the material world are very active, having obtained their particular types of bodies. A man works all day and night for sense gratification, and animals like hogs and dogs also work for sense gratification all day and night. Birds, beasts and all other conditioned living entities engage in various activities without knowledge of the soul encaged within the body. Especially in the human form of body, one's duty is to act in such a way that he can release himself from his encagement, but without the instructions of Nārada or his representative in the disciplic succession, people blindly engage in bodily activities to enjoy māyā-sukha—flickering, temporary happiness. They do not know how to become free from their material encagement. Ṛṣabhadeva therefore said that such activity is not at all good, since it encages the soul again and again in a body subjected to the threefold miseries of the material condition.

The Haryaśvas, the sons of Prajāpati Dakṣa, could immediately understand the purport of Nārada's instructions.

SB 6.5.13, Purport:

"After attaining Me, the great souls, who are yogīs in devotion, never return to this temporary world, which is full of miseries, because they have attained the highest perfection." One's real concern should be to free himself from the repetition of birth and death and attain the topmost perfection of life by living with the Supreme King in the spiritual world. In these verses the sons of Dakṣa repeatedly say, kim asat-karmabhir bhavet: "What is the use of impermanent fruitive activities?"

SB 6.5.20, Purport:

If the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement spreads, the so-called businessmen will have to close their slaughterhouses, breweries and cigarette factories. Therefore they are also very much afraid. However, we have no alternative than to teach our disciples to free themselves from materialistic life. We must instruct them in the opposite of material life to save them from the repetition of birth and death.

Nārada Muni, therefore, advised the Haryaśvas, the sons of Prajāpati Dakṣa, that instead of begetting progeny, it would be better to leave and achieve the perfection of spiritual understanding according to the instructions of the śāstras.

SB 6.5.21, Translation and Purport:

Śukadeva Gosvāmī continued: My dear King, after hearing the instructions of Nārada, the Haryaśvas, the sons of Prajāpati Dakṣa, were firmly convinced. They all believed in his instructions and reached the same conclusion. Having accepted him as their spiritual master, they circumambulated that great sage and followed the path by which one never returns to this world.

From this verse we can understand the meaning of initiation and the duties of a disciple and spiritual master. The spiritual master never instructs his disciple, "Take a mantra from me, pay me some money, and by practicing this yoga system you will become very expert in materialistic life." This is not the duty of a spiritual master. Rather, the spiritual master teaches the disciple how to give up materialistic life, and the disciple's duty is to assimilate his instructions and ultimately follow the path back home, back to Godhead, from whence no one returns to this material world.

After hearing the instructions of Nārada Muni, the Haryaśvas, the sons of Prajāpati Dakṣa, decided not to be entangled in materialistic life by begetting hundreds of children and having to take care of them.

SB 6.5.23, Translation and Purport:

The Haryaśvas, the sons of Prajāpati Dakṣa, were very well behaved, cultured sons, but unfortunately, because of the instructions of Nārada Muni, they deviated from the order of their father. When Dakṣa heard this news, which was brought to him by Nārada Muni, he began to lament. Although he was the father of such good sons, he had lost them all. Certainly this was lamentable.

The Haryaśvas, the sons of Prajāpati Dakṣa, were certainly well behaved, learned and advanced, and in accordance with the order of their father they went to perform austerities to beget good sons for their family. But Nārada Muni took advantage of their good behavior and culture to properly direct them not to be involved with this material world, but to use their culture and knowledge to end their material affairs. The Haryaśvas abided by the order of Nārada Muni, but when news of this was brought to Prajāpati Dakṣa, the prajāpati, instead of being happy with the actions of Nārada Muni, was extremely sorrowful. Similarly, we are trying to bring as many young men as possible to the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement for their ultimate benefit, but the parents of the young men joining this movement, being very sorry, are lamenting and making counterpropaganda. Of course, Prajāpati Dakṣa did not make propaganda against Nārada Muni, but later, as we shall see, Dakṣa cursed Nārada Muni for his benevolent activities.

SB 6.5.24, Translation and Purport:

When Prajāpati Dakṣa was lamenting for his lost children, Lord Brahmā pacified him with instructions, and thereafter Dakṣa begot one thousand more children in the womb of his wife, Pāñcajanī. This time his sons were known as the Savalāśvas.

Prajāpati Dakṣa was so named because he was very expert in begetting children. (The word dakṣa means "expert.") First he begot ten thousand children in the womb of his wife, and when the children were lost—when they returned home, back to Godhead—he begot another set of children, known as the Savalāśvas. Prajāpati Dakṣa is very expert in begetting children, and Nārada Muni is very expert in delivering all the conditioned souls back home, back to Godhead. Therefore the materialistic experts do not agree with the spiritual expert Nārada Muni. but this does not mean that Nārada Muni will give up his engagement of chanting the Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra.

SB 6.5.25, Purport:

Prajāpati Dakṣa sent his second group of sons to the same place where his previous sons had attained perfection. He did not hesitate to send his second group of sons to the same place, although they too might become victims of Nārada's instructions. According to the Vedic culture, one should be trained in spiritual understanding as a brahmacārī before entering household life to beget children. This is the Vedic system. Thus Prajāpati Dakṣa sent his second group of sons for cultural improvement, despite the risk that because of the instructions of Nārada they might become as intelligent as their older brothers.

SB 6.5.27-28, Translation:

For a few months the sons of Prajāpati Dakṣa drank only water and ate only air. Thus undergoing great austerities, they recited this mantra: "Let us offer our respectful obeisances unto Nārāyaṇa, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, who is always situated in His transcendental abode. Since He is the Supreme Person (paramahaṁsa), let us offer our respectful obeisances unto Him."

SB 6.5.29, Translation:

O King Parīkṣit, Nārada Muni approached these sons of Prajāpati Dakṣa, who were engaged in tapasya to beget children, and spoke enigmatic words to them just as he had spoken to their elder brothers.

SB 6.5.30, Translation and Purport:

O sons of Dakṣa, please hear my words of instruction attentively. You are all very affectionate to your elder brothers, the Haryaśvas. Therefore you should follow their path.

Nārada Muni encouraged Prajāpati Dakṣa's second group of sons by awakening their natural affinity for their brothers.

SB 6.5.31, Translation and Purport:

A brother aware of the principles of religion follows in the footsteps of his elder brothers. Because of being highly elevated, such a pious brother gets the opportunity to associate and enjoy with demigods like the Maruts, who are all affectionate to their brothers.

According to their belief in various material relationships, people are promoted to various planets. Here it is said that one who is very faithful to his brothers should follow a path similar to theirs and get the opportunity for promotion to Marudloka. Nārada Muni advised Prajāpati Dakṣa's second group of sons to follow their elder brothers and be promoted to the spiritual world.

SB 6.5.32, Translation:

Śukadeva Gosvāmī continued: O best of the advanced Āryans, after saying this much to the sons of Prajāpati Dakṣa, Nārada Muni, whose merciful glance never goes in vain, left as he had planned. The sons of Dakṣa followed their elder brothers. Not attempting to produce children, they engaged themselves in Kṛṣṇa consciousness.

SB 6.5.34, Translation:

At this time, Prajāpati Dakṣa observed many inauspicious signs, and he heard from various sources that his second group of sons, the Savalāśvas, had followed the path of their elder brothers in accordance with the instructions of Nārada.

SB 6.5.35, Translation and Purport:

When he heard that the Savalāśvas had also left this world to engage in devotional service, Dakṣa was angry at Nārada, and he almost fainted due to lamentation. When Dakṣa met Nārada, Dakṣa's lips began trembling in anger, and he spoke as follows.

Śrīla Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura comments that Nārada Muni had delivered the entire family of Svāyambhuva Manu, beginning with Priyavrata and Uttānapāda. He had delivered Uttānapāda's son Dhruva and had even delivered Prācīnabarhi, who was engaged in fruitive activities. Nevertheless, he could not deliver Prajāpati Dakṣa. Prajāpati Dakṣa saw Nārada before him because Nārada had personally come to deliver him. Nārada Muni took the opportunity to approach Prajāpati Dakṣa in his bereavement because the time of bereavement is a suitable time for appreciating bhakti-yoga. As stated in Bhagavad-gītā (7.16), four kinds of men—ārta (one who is distressed), arthārthī (one in need of money), jijñāsu (one who is inquisitive) and jñānī (a person in knowledge)—try to understand devotional service. Prajāpati Dakṣa was in great distress because of the loss of his sons, and therefore Nārada took the opportunity to instruct him regarding liberation from material bondage.

SB 6.5.36, Translation and Purport:

Prajāpati Dakṣa said: Alas, Nārada Muni, you wear the dress of a saintly person, but you are not actually a saint. Indeed, although I am now in gṛhastha life, I am a saintly person. By showing my sons the path of renunciation, you have done me an abominable injustice.

Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu said, sannyāsīra alpa chidra sarva-loke gāya (CC Madhya 12.51). In society one will find many sannyāsīs, vānaprasthas, gṛhasthas and brahmacārīs, but if all of them properly live in accordance with their duties, they are understood to be sādhus. Prajāpati Dakṣa was certainly a sādhu because he had executed such great austerities that the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Lord Viṣṇu, had appeared before him. Nevertheless, he had a fault-finding mentality. He improperly thought Nārada Muni to be asādhu, or nonsaintly, because Nārada had foiled his intentions. Desiring to train his sons to become gṛhasthas fully equipped with knowledge, Dakṣa had sent them to execute austerities by Nārāyaṇa-saras. Nārada Muni, however, taking advantage of their highly elevated position in austerity, instructed them to become Vaiṣṇavas in the renounced order. This is the duty of Nārada Muni and his followers. They must show everyone the path of renouncing this material world and returning home, back to Godhead. Prajāpati Dakṣa, however, could not see the exaltedness of the duties Nārada Muni performed in relation to his sons. Unable to appreciate Nārada Muni's behavior, Dakṣa accused Nārada of being asādhu.

SB 6.5.36, Purport:

Prajāpati Dakṣa condemned Nārada Muni because Nārada, a brahmacārī who could beg from door to door, had made sannyāsīs of Dakṣa's sons, who were being trained to be gṛhasthas. Dakṣa was extremely angry at Nārada because he thought that Nārada had done him a great injustice. According to Dakṣa's opinion, Nārada Muni had misled Dakṣa's inexperienced sons (asādhv akāry arbhakāṇām). Dakṣa regarded his sons as innocent boys who had been misled when Nārada showed them the renounced order of life. Because of all these considerations, Prajāpati Dakṣa charged that Nārada Muni was asādhu and should not have adopted the dress of a sādhu.

SB 6.5.37, Translation and Purport:

Prajāpati Dakṣa said: My sons were not at all freed from their three debts. Indeed, they did not properly consider their obligations. O Nārada Muni, O personality of sinful action, you have obstructed their progress toward good fortune in this world and the next because they are still indebted to the saintly persons, the demigods and their father.

As soon as a brāhmaṇa takes birth, he assumes three kinds of debts—debts to great saints, debts to the demigods and debts to his father. The son of a brāhmaṇa must undergo celibacy (brahmacarya) to clear his debts to the saintly persons, he must perform ritualistic ceremonies to clear his debts to the demigods, and he must beget children to become free from his debts to his father. Prajāpati Dakṣa argued that although the renounced order is recommended for liberation, one cannot attain liberation unless one fulfills his obligations to the demigods, the saints and his father. Since Dakṣa's sons had not liberated themselves from these three debts, how could Nārada Muni have led them to the renounced order of life? Apparently, Prajāpati Dakṣa did not know the final decision of the śāstras.

SB 6.5.37, Purport:

Even if one does not repay his debts, he is freed from all debts if he renounces the material world for the sake of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, whose lotus feet are the shelter of everyone. This is the verdict of the śāstra. Therefore Nārada Muni was completely right in instructing the sons of Prajāpati Dakṣa to renounce this material world immediately and take shelter of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Unfortunately, Prajāpati Dakṣa, the father of the Haryaśvas and Savalāśvas, did not understand the great service rendered by Nārada Muni. Dakṣa therefore addressed him as pāpa (the personality of sinful activities) and asādhu (a nonsaintly person). Since Nārada Muni was a great saint and Vaiṣṇava, he tolerated all such accusations from Prajāpati Dakṣa. He merely performed his duty as a Vaiṣṇava by delivering all the sons of Prajāpati Dakṣa, enabling them to return home, back to Godhead.

SB 6.5.38, Translation and Purport:

Prajāpati Dakṣa continued: Thus committing violence against other living entities and yet claiming to be an associate of Lord Viṣṇu, you are defaming the Supreme Personality of Godhead. You needlessly created a mentality of renunciation in innocent boys, and therefore you are shameless and devoid of compassion. How could you travel with the personal associates of the Supreme Lord?

This mentality of Prajāpati Dakṣa still continues even today. When young boys join the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement, their fathers and so-called guardians are very angry at the propounder of the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement because they think that their sons have been unnecessarily induced to deprive themselves of the material enjoyments of eating, drinking and merrymaking. Karmīs, fruitive workers, think that one should fully enjoy his present life in this material world and also perform some pious activities to be promoted to higher planetary systems for further enjoyment in the next life. A yogī, however, especially a bhakti-yogī, is callous to the opinions of this material world. He is not interested in traveling to the higher planetary systems of the demigods to enjoy a long life in an advanced materialistic civilization. As stated by Prabodhānanda Sarasvatī, kaivalyaṁ narakāyate tridaśa-pūr ākāśa-puṣpāyate: for a devotee, merging into the Brahman existence is hellish, and life in the higher planetary systems of the demigods is a will-o'-the-wisp, a phantasmagoria with no real existence at all. A pure devotee is not interested in yogic perfection, travel to higher planetary systems, or oneness with Brahman. He is interested only in rendering service to the Personality of Godhead. Since Prajāpati Dakṣa was a karmī, he could not appreciate the great service Nārada Muni had rendered his eleven thousand sons. Instead, he accused Nārada Muni of being sinful and charged that because Nārada Muni was associated with the Supreme Personality of Godhead, the Lord would also be defamed. Thus Dakṣa criticized that Nārada Muni was an offender to the Lord although he was known as an associate of the Lord.

SB 6.5.40, Translation and Purport:

Prajāpati Dakṣa continued: If you think that simply awakening the sense of renunciation will detach one from the material world, I must say that unless full knowledge is awakened, simply changing dresses as you have done cannot possibly bring detachment.

Prajāpati Dakṣa was correct in stating that changing one's dress cannot detach one from this material world. The sannyāsīs of Kali-yuga who change their robes from white to saffron and then think they can do whatever they like are more abominable than materialistic gṛhasthas. This is not recommended anywhere. Prajāpati Dakṣa was right in pointing out this defect, but he did not know that Nārada Muni had aroused the spirit of renunciation in the Haryaśvas and Savalāśvas through full knowledge.

SB 6.5.40, Purport:

All the sons of Prajāpati Dakṣa had first been raised to the platform of jñāna and had then automatically renounced this world. In summary, unless one's knowledge is awakened, renunciation cannot take place, for without elevated knowledge one cannot give up attachment for material enjoyment.

SB 6.5.41, Purport:

It is said that unless a woman becomes pregnant, she cannot understand the trouble of giving birth to a child. Bandhyā ki bujhibe prasava-vedanā. The word bandhyā means a sterile woman. Such a woman cannot give birth to a child. How, then, can she perceive the pain of delivery? According to the philosophy of Prajāpati Dakṣa, a woman should first become pregnant and then experience the pain of childbirth. Then, if she is intelligent, she will not want to be pregnant again. Actually. however. this is not a fact. Sex enjoyment is so strong that a woman becomes pregnant and suffers at the time of childbirth. but she becomes pregnant again, despite her experience. According to Dakṣa's philosophy. one should become implicated in material enjoyment so that after experiencing the distress of such enjoyment. one will automatically renounce. Material nature, however. is so strong that although a man suffers at every step, he will not cease his attempts to enjoy (tṛpyanti neha kṛpaṇa-bahu-duḥkha-bhājaḥ (SB 7.9.45)).

SB 6.5.42, Purport:

Prajāpati Dakṣa wanted to prove that he had been most tolerant in not having said anything when Nārada Muni, for no reason, induced his ten thousand innocent sons to adopt the path of renunciation. Sometimes householders are accused of being gṛhamedhīs, for gṛhamedhīs are satisfied with family life without spiritual advancement. Gṛhasthas, however, are different because although gṛhasthas live in householder life with their wives and children, they are eager for spiritual advancement. Wanting to prove that he had been magnanimous to Nārada Muni, Prajāpati Dakṣa stressed that when Nārada had misled his first sons, Dakṣa had taken no action; he had been kind and tolerant. He was aggrieved, however, because Nārada Muni had misled his sons for a second time. Therefore he wanted to prove that Nārada Muni, although dressed like a sādhu, was not actually a sādhu; he himself, although a householder, was a greater sādhu than Nārada Muni.

SB 6.5.43, Purport:

Because Prajāpati Dakṣa was a gṛhamedhī who wanted to remain in household life, he thought that if Nārada Muni could not remain in one place, but had to travel all over the world, that would be a great punishment for him. Actually, however, such a punishment is a boon for a preacher. A preacher is known as parivrājakācārya—an ācārya, or teacher, who always travels for the benefit of human society. Prajāpati Dakṣa cursed Nārada Muni by saying that although he had the facility to travel all over the universe, he would never be able to stay in one place.

SB 6.5.44, Translation and Purport:

Śrī Śukadeva Gosvāmī continued: My dear King, since Nārada Muni is an approved saintly person, when cursed by Prajāpati Dakṣa he replied, "tad bāḍham: Yes, what you have said is good. I accept this curse." He could have cursed Prajāpati Dakṣa in return, but because he is a tolerant and merciful sādhu, he took no action.

As stated in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (3.25.21):

titikṣavaḥ kāruṇikāḥ

suhṛdaḥ sarva-dehinām

ajāta-śatravaḥ śāntāḥ

sādhavaḥ sādhu-bhūṣaṇāḥ

"The symptoms of a sādhu are that he is tolerant, merciful and friendly to all living entities. He has no enemies, he is peaceful, he abides by the scriptures, and all his characteristics are sublime." Because Nārada Muni is the most elevated of sādhus, devotees, to deliver Prajāpati Dakṣa he silently tolerated the curse.

SB 6.5.44, Purport:

Now, it may be asked why Nārada Muni stayed in the presence of Prajāpati Dakṣa and tolerated all his accusations and curses. Was that for Dakṣa's deliverance? The answer is yes. Śrīla Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura says that after being insulted by Prajāpati Dakṣa, Nārada Muni should have left immediately, but he purposely stayed to hear all Dakṣa's strong words so that Dakṣa might be relieved of his anger. Prajāpati Dakṣa was not an ordinary man; he had accumulated the results of many pious activities. Therefore Nārada Muni expected that after delivering his curse, Dakṣa, satisfied and freed from anger, would repent his misbehavior and thus get a chance to become a Vaiṣṇava and be delivered.

SB 6.6 Summary:

As described in this chapter, Prajāpati Dakṣa begot sixty daughters in the womb of his wife Asiknī. These daughters were given in charity to various persons to increase the population. Since these offspring of Dakṣa were women, Nārada Muni did not try to lead them toward the renounced order of life.

SB 6.6.1, Translation and Purport:

Śrī Śukadeva Gosvāmī said: My dear King, thereafter, at the request of Lord Brahmā, Prajāpati Dakṣa, who is known as Prācetasa, begot sixty daughters in the womb of his wife Asiknī. All the daughters were very affectionate toward their father.

After the incidents concerning the loss of his many sons, Dakṣa repented his misunderstanding with Nārada Muni. Lord Brahmā then saw Dakṣa and instructed him to beget children again. This time Dakṣa was very cautious to beget female children instead of male children so that Nārada Muni would not disturb them by urging them to accept the renounced order.

SB 6.6.23, Translation:

O Mahārāja Parīkṣit, best of the Bhāratas, the constellations named Kṛttikā were all wives of the moon-god. However, because Prajāpati Dakṣa had cursed him to suffer from a disease causing gradual destruction, the moon-god could not beget children in any of his wives.

SB 6.6.24-26, Translation:

Thereafter the King of the moon pacified Prajāpati Dakṣa with courteous words and thus regained the portions of light he had lost during his disease. Nevertheless he could not beget children. The moon loses his shining power during the dark fortnight, and in the bright fortnight it is manifest again. O King Parīkṣit, now please hear from me the names of Kaśyapa's wives, from whose wombs the population of the entire universe has come. They are the mothers of almost all the population of the entire universe, and their names are very auspicious to hear. They are Aditi, Diti, Danu, Kāṣṭhā, Ariṣṭā, Surasā, Ilā, Muni, Krodhavaśā, Tāmrā, Surabhi, Saramā and Timi. From the womb of Timi all the aquatics took birth, and from the womb of Saramā the ferocious animals like the tigers and lions took birth.

SB 6.6.43, Translation:

Pūṣā had no sons. When Lord Śiva was angry at Dakṣa, Pūṣā had laughed at Lord Śiva and shown his teeth. Therefore he lost his teeth and had to live by eating only ground flour.

SB 6.17.7, Purport:

Śrīla Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura remarks that although Citraketu criticized Lord Śiva, he did not offend Lord Śiva like Dakṣa. Dakṣa considered Lord Śiva insignificant, but Citraketu expressed his wonder at Lord Śiva's being situated in that way.

SB Canto 7

SB 7.3 Summary:

Upon hearing about the purpose of Hiraṇyakaśipu's austere meditation, Lord Brahmā, accompanied by the great sage Bhṛgu and great personalities like Dakṣa, went to see Hiraṇyakaśipu. He then sprinkled water from his kamaṇḍalu, a type of waterpot, upon Hiraṇyakaśipu's head.

SB 7.3.14, Translation:

O King, being thus informed by the demigods, the most powerful Lord Brahmā, accompanied by Bhṛgu, Dakṣa and other great sages, immediately started for the place where Hiraṇyakaśipu was performing his penances and austerities.

SB 7.5.23-24, Purport:

It is recommended that even if one commits offenses, one should continue chanting the holy name. In other words, the chanting of the holy name makes one offenseless. In the book Nāma-kaumudī it is recommended that if one is an offender at the lotus feet of a Vaiṣṇava, he should submit to that Vaiṣṇava and be excused; similarly, if one is an offender in chanting the holy name, he should submit to the holy name and thus be freed from his offenses. In this connection there is the following statement, spoken by Dakṣa to Lord Śiva: "I did not know the glories of your personality, and therefore I committed an offense at your lotus feet in the open assembly. You are so kind, however, that you did not accept my offense. Instead, when I was falling down because of accusing you, you saved me by your merciful glance. You are most great. Kindly excuse me and be satisfied with your own exalted qualities."

SB 7.11.6, Purport:

Lord Nārāyaṇa, along with His partial manifestation Nara, appeared in this world through the daughter of Dakṣa Mahārāja known as Mūrti. He was begotten by Dharma Mahārāja for the benefit of all living entities. Even now, He is still engaged in executing great austerities near the place known as Badarikāśrama.

SB 7.15 Summary:

One may actually become successful in spiritual consciousness by the mercy of devotees, or one may fall from spiritual consciousness by being disrespectful to devotees. In this regard, Nārada Muni narrated the history of how he had fallen from the Gandharva kingdom, how he was born in a śūdra family, and how by serving exalted brāhmaṇas he become the son of Lord Brahmā and was reinstated in his transcendental position. After narrating all these stories, Nārada Muni praised the mercy received from the Lord by the Pāṇḍavas. Mahārāja Yudhiṣṭhira, after hearing from Nārada, become ecstatic in love of Kṛṣṇa, and then Nārada Muni left that place and returned to his own place. Thus Śukadeva Gosvāmī, having described various descendants of the daughters of Dakṣa, ends the Seventh Canto of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam.

SB 7.15.80, Translation:

On all the planets within this universe, the varieties of living entities, moving and nonmoving, including the demigods, demons and human beings, were all generated from the daughters of Mahārāja Dakṣa. I have now described them and their different dynasties.

SB Canto 8

SB 8.1.19, Purport:

There are many incarnations of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Manu, the manu-putrāḥ (the sons of Manu), the king of the heavenly planets, and the seven great sages are all partial incarnations of the Supreme Lord. Manu himself, his sons Priyavrata and Uttānapāda, the demigods created by Dakṣa, and the ṛṣis like Marīci were all partial incarnations of the Lord during the reign of Svāyambhuva Manu.

SB 8.4.17-24, Translation:

The Supreme Personality of Godhead said: Freed from all sinful reactions are those who rise from bed at the end of night, early in the morning, and fully concentrate their minds with great attention upon My form; your form; this lake; this mountain; the caves; the gardens; the cane plants; the bamboo plants; the celestial trees; the residential quarters of Me, Lord Brahmā and Lord Śiva; the three peaks of Trikūṭa Mountain, made of gold, silver and iron; My very pleasing abode (the ocean of milk); the white island, Śvetadvīpa, which is always brilliant with spiritual rays; My mark of Śrīvatsa; the Kaustubha gem; My Vaijayantī garland; My club, Kaumodakī; My Sudarśana disc and Pāñcajanya conchshell; My bearer, Garuḍa, the king of the birds; My bed, Śeṣa Nāga; My expansion of energy the goddess of fortune; Lord Brahmā; Nārada Muni; Lord Śiva; Prahlāda; My incarnations like Matsya, Kūrma and Varāha; My unlimited all-auspicious activities, which yield piety to he who hears them; the sun; the moon; fire; the mantra oṁkāra; the Absolute Truth; the total material energy; the cows and brāhmaṇas; devotional service; the wives of Soma and Kaśyapa, who are all daughters of King Dakṣa; the Rivers Ganges, Sarasvatī, Nandā and Yamunā (Kālindī); the elephant Airāvata; Dhruva Mahārāja; the seven ṛṣis; and the pious human beings.

SB 8.6.15, Translation:

I (Lord Brahmā), Lord Śiva and all the demigods, accompanied by the prajāpatis like Dakṣa, are nothing but sparks illuminated by You, who are the original fire. Since we are particles of You, what can we understand about our welfare? O Supreme Lord, please give us the means of deliverance that is suitable for the brāhmaṇas and demigods.

SB 8.6.15, Purport:

We cannot invent any means to be delivered from the dangers of material existence. Here, even the demigods, such as Lord Brahmā and Lord Śiva, and the prajāpatis, such as Dakṣa, are said to be like illuminating sparks in the presence of the Supreme Lord, who is compared to a great fire.

SB 8.7.32, Translation:

When annihilation is performed by the flames and sparks emanating from your eyes, the entire creation is burned to ashes. Nonetheless, you do not know how this happens. What then is to be said of your destroying the Dakṣa-yajña, Tripurāsura and the kālakūṭa poison? Such activities cannot be subject matters for prayers offered to you.

SB 8.7.45, Translation:

Upon hearing of this act, everyone, including Bhavānī (the daughter of Mahārāja Dakṣa), Lord Brahmā, Lord Viṣṇu, and the people in general, very highly praised this deed performed by Lord Śiva, who is worshiped by the demigods and who bestows benedictions upon the people.

SB 8.23.20-21, Translation:

Lord Brahmā (the master of King Dakṣa and all other Prajāpatis), accompanied by all the demigods, the great saintly persons, the inhabitants of Pitṛloka, the Manus, the munis, and such leaders as Dakṣa, Bhṛgu and Aṅgirā, as well as Kārttikeya and Lord Śiva, accepted Lord Vāmanadeva as the protector of everyone. He did this for the pleasure of Kaśyapa Muni and his wife Aditi and for the welfare of all the inhabitants of the universe, including their various leaders.

SB Canto 9

SB 9.1.10, Translation:

From the mind of Lord Brahmā, Marīci took birth, and from the semen of Marīci, Kaśyapa appeared from the womb of the daughter of Dakṣa Mahārāja. From Kaśyapa, by the womb of Aditi, Vivasvān took birth.

SB 9.4.8, Translation:

The father of Nābhāga said: Whatever the great sages sacrificed in the arena of the Dakṣa-yajña, they offered to Lord Śiva as his share. Therefore, everything in the sacrificial arena certainly belongs to Lord Śiva.

SB 9.4.53-54, Translation:

Lord Brahmā said: At the end of the dvi-parārdha, when the pastimes of the Lord come to an end, Lord Viṣṇu, by a flick of His eyebrows, vanquishes the entire universe, including our places of residence. Such personalities as me and Lord Śiva, as well as Dakṣa, Bhṛgu and similar great saints of which they are the head, and also the rulers of the living entities, the rulers of human society and the rulers of the demigods—all of us surrender to that Supreme Personality of Godhead, Lord Viṣṇu, bowing our heads, to carry out His orders for the benefit of all living entities.

SB 9.10.10, Translation:

O King Parīkṣit, when Rāvaṇa, who had ten heads on his shoulders, heard about the beautiful and attractive features of Sītā, his mind was agitated by lusty desires, and he went to kidnap her. To distract Lord Rāmacandra from His āśrama, Rāvaṇa sent Mārīca in the form of a golden deer, and when Lord Rāmacandra saw that wonderful deer, He left His residence and followed it and finally killed it with a sharp arrow, just as Lord Śiva killed Dakṣa.

SB 9.23 Summary:

The sons of Yayāti's fourth son, Anu, were Sabhānara, Cakṣu and Pareṣṇu. Of these three, the sons and grandsons of Sabhānara were, in succession, Kālanara, Sṛñjaya, Janamejaya, Mahāśāla and Mahāmanā. The sons of Mahāmanā were Uśīnara and Titikṣu. Uśīnara had four sons, namely Śibi, Vara, Kṛmi and Dakṣa. Śibi also had four sons-Vṛṣādarbha, Sudhīra, Madra and Kekaya. The son of Titikṣu was Ruṣadratha, who begot a son named Homa. From Homa came Sutapā and from Sutapā, Bali. In this way the dynasty continued. Begotten by Dīrghatamā in the womb of the wife of Bali were Aṅga, Vaṅga, Kaliṅga, Suhma, Puṇḍra and Oḍra, all of whom became kings.

SB 9.23.3-4, Translation:

The four sons of Uśīnara were Śibi, Vara, Kṛmi and Dakṣa, and from Śibi again came four sons, named Vṛṣādarbha, Sudhīra, Madra and Kekaya. The son of Titikṣu was Ruṣadratha. From Ruṣadratha came Homa; from Homa, Sutapā; and from Sutapā, Bali.

SB Cantos 10.14 to 12 (Translations Only)

SB 10.88.32, Translation:

The Supreme Lord said: If this is the case, We cannot believe what Śiva says. Śiva is the same lord of the Pretas and Piśācas whom Dakṣa cursed to become like a carnivorous hobgoblin.

SB 11.4.6, Translation:

Nara-Nārāyaṇa Ṛṣi, who is perfectly peaceful and is the best of sages, was born as the son of Dharma and his wife Mūrti, the daughter of Dakṣa. Nara-Nārāyaṇa Ṛṣi taught the devotional service of the Lord, by which material work ceases, and He Himself perfectly practiced this knowledge. He is living even today, His lotus feet served by the greatest of saintly persons.

SB 11.6.36, Translation:

Once, the moon was afflicted with consumption because of the curse of Dakṣa, but just by taking bath at Prabhāsa-kṣetra, the moon was immediately freed from his sinful reaction and again resumed the waxing of his phases.

SB 11.16.15, Translation:

I am Lord Kapila among perfected beings and Garuḍa among birds. I am Dakṣa among the progenitors of mankind, and I am Aryamā among the forefathers.

SB 12.8.12, Translation:

Lord Brahmā, Bhṛgu Muni, Lord Śiva, Prajāpati Dakṣa, the great sons of Brahmā, and many others among the human beings, demigods, forefathers and ghostly spirits—all were astonished by the achievement of Mārkaṇḍeya Ṛṣi.

SB 12.12.14-15, Translation:

Also described are the progeny of the nine great brāhmaṇas, the destruction of Dakṣa's sacrifice, and the history of Dhruva Mahārāja, followed by the histories of King Pṛthu and King Prācīnabarhi, the discussion between Prācīnabarhi and Nārada, and the life of Mahārāja Priyavrata. Then, O brāhmaṇas, the Bhāgavatam tells of the character and activities of King Nābhi, Lord Ṛṣabha and King Bharata.

SB 12.12.17, Translation:

The rebirth of Prajāpati Dakṣa as the son of the Pracetās, and the progeny of Dakṣa's daughters, who initiated the races of demigods, demons, human beings, animals, serpents, birds and so on—all this is described.