Superficially appear

Expressions researched:
"Superficially both classes may appear" |"Superficially it appeared" |"Superficially it appears" |"Superficially it may appear" |"Superficially it will appear" |"Superficially material nature appears" |"Superficially, it appeared" |"Superficially, it appears" |"Superficially, they appear" |"appear superficially" |"appear that superficially" |"appears superficially" |"superficially appear" |"superficially appears" |"superficially one process appears" |"superficially they appeared" |"superficially, outside, it appears"

BG Chapters 1 - 6

Factually, both processes are the same, although superficially one process appears to involve detachment and the other process appears to involve attachment.

BG 5.5, Purport:

The real purpose of philosophical research is to find the ultimate goal of life. Since the ultimate goal of life is self-realization, there is no difference between the conclusions reached by the two processes. By Sāṅkhya philosophical research one comes to the conclusion that a living entity is not a part and parcel of the material world but of the supreme spirit whole. Consequently, the spirit soul has nothing to do with the material world; his actions must be in some relation with the Supreme. When he acts in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, he is actually in his constitutional position. In the first process, Sāṅkhya, one has to become detached from matter, and in the devotional yoga process one has to attach himself to the work of Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Factually, both processes are the same, although superficially one process appears to involve detachment and the other process appears to involve attachment. Detachment from matter and attachment to Kṛṣṇa are one and the same. One who can see this sees things as they are.

SB Canto 1

The great six Gosvāmīs of Vṛndāvana all came from greatly rich and aristocratic families, but when they adopted the life of mendicants at Vṛndāvana, superficially they appeared to be in wretched conditions of life, but factually they were the richest of all in spiritual values.

SB 1.11.38, Purport:

In the Vedas and Vedic literatures (Śruti and Smṛti) it is affirmed that in the Divinity there is nothing material. He is transcendental (nirguṇa) only, the supreme cognizant. Hari, or the Personality of Godhead, is the supreme transcendental person situated beyond the range of material affection. These statements are also confirmed even by Ācārya Śaṅkara. One may argue that His relation with the goddesses of fortune may be transcendental, but what about His relation with the Yadu dynasty, being born in that family, or His killing the nonbelievers like Jarāsandha and other asuras directly in contact with the modes of material nature. The answer is that the divinity of the Personality of Godhead is never in contact with the qualities of material nature in any circumstances. Actually He is in contact with such qualities because He is the ultimate source of everything, yet He is above the actions of such qualities. He is known, therefore, as Yogeśvara, or the master of mystic power, or in other words the all-powerful. Even His learned devotees are not affected by the influence of the material modes. The great six Gosvāmīs of Vṛndāvana all came from greatly rich and aristocratic families, but when they adopted the life of mendicants at Vṛndāvana, superficially they appeared to be in wretched conditions of life, but factually they were the richest of all in spiritual values. Such mahā-bhāgavatas, or first-grade devotees, although moving amongst men, are not contaminated by honor or insult, hunger or satisfaction, sleep or wakefulness, which are all resultant actions of the three modes of material nature. Similarly, some of them are engaged in worldly dealings, yet are unaffected. Unless these neutralities of life are there, one cannot be considered situated in transcendence.

SB Canto 2

Superficially material nature appears to be the cause of creation, maintenance and destruction, but material nature is set into motion for creation by the supreme conscious being, the Personality of Godhead.

SB 2.10.45, Purport:

Inert matter is undoubtedly energy with potential to interact, but it has no initiative of its own. Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam therefore comments on the aphorism janmādy asya by saying abhijñaḥ and svarāṭ, i.e., the Supreme Brahman is not inert matter, but He is supreme consciousness and is independent. Therefore inert matter cannot be the ultimate cause of the creation, maintenance and destruction of the material world. Superficially material nature appears to be the cause of creation, maintenance and destruction, but material nature is set into motion for creation by the supreme conscious being, the Personality of Godhead. He is the background of all creation, maintenance and destruction, and this is confirmed in the Bhagavad-gītā (9.10):

mayādhyakṣeṇa prakṛtiḥ

sūyate sa-carācaram

hetunānena kaunteya

jagad viparivartate

The material nature is one of the energies of the Lord, and she can work under the direction of the Lord (adhyakṣeṇa). When the Lord throws His transcendental glance over the material nature, then only can the material nature act, as a father contacts the mother, who is then able to conceive a child. Although it appears to the layman that the mother gives birth to the child, the experienced man knows that the father gives birth to the child. The material nature therefore produces the moving and standing manifestations of the material world after being contacted by the supreme father, and not independently.

SB Canto 3

A devotee in full Kṛṣṇa consciousness appears superficially to be a great karmī, always working, but the inner significance of the devotee's activities is that they are meant for the satisfaction of the Supreme Lord.

SB 3.27.23, Purport:

The karmīs try to utilize the resources of material nature and thus become its lord and enjoy sense gratification, and the jñānīs, the salvationists, who have become frustrated in enjoying the material resources, want to become one with the Supreme Personality of Godhead or merge into the impersonal effulgence. These two diseases are due to material contamination. Material contamination can be consumed by devotional service because in devotional service these two diseases, namely the desire to lord it over material nature and the desire to become one with the Supreme Lord, are absent. Therefore the cause of material existence is at once consumed by the careful discharge of devotional service in Kṛṣṇa consciousness.

A devotee in full Kṛṣṇa consciousness appears superficially to be a great karmī, always working, but the inner significance of the devotee's activities is that they are meant for the satisfaction of the Supreme Lord. This is called bhakti, or devotional service. Arjuna was apparently a fighter but when by his fighting he satisfied the senses of Lord Kṛṣṇa, he became a devotee. Since a devotee also engages in philosophical research to understand the Supreme Person as He is, his activities may thus appear to be like those of a mental speculator, but actually he is trying to understand the spiritual nature and transcendental activities. Thus although the tendency for philosophical speculation exists, the material effects of fruitive activities and empiric speculation do not, because this activity is meant for the Supreme Personality of Godhead.

Many ācāryas, such as Rūpa Gosvāmī and Sanātana Gosvāmī, used to live beneath trees every night. Superficially it appeared that they were poverty-stricken, but from their writings we can understand that in spiritual life they were the richest personalities.

SB 3.29.17, Purport:

It is recommended herewith that all the ācāryas be given the highest respect. It is stated, guruṣu nara-matiḥ. Guruṣu means "unto the ācāryas," and nara-matiḥ means "thinking like a common man." To think of the Vaiṣṇavas, the devotees, as belonging to a particular caste or community, to think of the ācāryas as ordinary men or to think of the Deity in the temple as being made of stone, wood or metal, is condemned. Niyamena: one should offer the greatest respect to the ācāryas according to the standard regulations. A devotee should also be compassionate to the poor. This does not refer to those who are poverty-stricken materially. According to devotional vision, a man is poor if he is not in Kṛṣṇa consciousness. A man may be very rich materially, but if he is not Kṛṣṇa conscious, he is considered poor. On the other hand, many ācāryas, such as Rūpa Gosvāmī and Sanātana Gosvāmī, used to live beneath trees every night. Superficially it appeared that they were poverty-stricken, but from their writings we can understand that in spiritual life they were the richest personalities.

SB Canto 4

Superficially it appears that the woman is the enjoyed and the man is the enjoyer, but internally everyone is an enjoyer. Consequently everything in this material world is called māyā.

SB 4.25.29, Purport:

In this verse Purañjana states that the girl appears to be an ordinary woman. However, since he is attracted by her, he requests that she become as happy as the goddess of fortune by associating with him. Thus he introduces himself as a great king with great influence so that she might accept him as her husband and be as happy as the goddess of fortune. To desire to enjoy this material world as a subordinate of the Supreme Personality of Godhead is godly. The demons, however, want to enjoy this material world without considering the Supreme Personality of Godhead. This is the difference between a demon and a demigod.

The word bhuvi-spṛk mentioned in this verse is very significant. When the demigods sometimes come to this planet, they do not touch the ground. Purañjana could understand that this girl did not belong to the transcendental world or the higher planetary system because her feet were touching the ground. Since every woman in this world wants her husband to be very influential, rich and powerful, Purañjana, to seduce the girl, introduced himself as such a personality. In the material world, whether one be a man or a woman, one wants to enjoy. A man wants to enjoy a beautiful woman, and a woman wants to enjoy a powerful, opulent man. Every living entity who possesses such material desires is called puruṣa, an enjoyer. Superficially it appears that the woman is the enjoyed and the man is the enjoyer, but internally everyone is an enjoyer. Consequently everything in this material world is called māyā.

SB Canto 6

Although prakṛti and puruṣa superficially appear to be the causes of the material manifestation, both are emanations of different energies of the Supreme Lord.

SB 6.9.26-27, Purport:

As stated herein, paraṁ pradhānaṁ puruṣaṁ viśvam anyam: "He is the supreme cause, represented as the male and female creative energies. Although different from this universe, He exists in His universal form (virāṭ rūpa)." The word prakṛti, which is used to indicate the source of generation, refers to the material energy of the Supreme Lord, and the word puruṣa refers to the living entities, who are the superior energy of the Lord. Both the prakṛti and puruṣa ultimately enter the Supreme Lord, as stated in Bhagavad-gītā (prakṛtiṁ yānti māmikām).

Although prakṛti and puruṣa superficially appear to be the causes of the material manifestation, both are emanations of different energies of the Supreme Lord. Therefore the Supreme Lord is the cause of prakṛti and puruṣa. He is the original cause (sarva-kāraṇa-kāraṇam (Bs. 5.1)). The Nāradīya Purāṇa says:

avikāro 'pi paramaḥ

prakṛtis tu vikāriṇī

anupraviśya govindaḥ

prakṛtiś cābhidhīyate

Both the prakṛti and puruṣa, which are inferior and superior energies, are emanations from the Supreme Personality of Godhead. As explained in Bhagavad-gītā (gām āviśya (BG 15.13)), the Lord enters the prakṛti, and then the prakṛti creates different manifestations. The prakṛti is not independent or beyond His energies. Vāsudeva, Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa, is the original cause of everything.

SB Canto 8

Such a devotee, because of full knowledge of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, is immediately transcendental, although he may superficially appear to be engaged in materialistic activities.

SB 8.9.29, Purport:

The word asat means bad or temporary, and sat means permanent and good. Activities performed for the satisfaction of Kṛṣṇa are permanent and good, but asat activity, although sometimes celebrated as philanthropy, altruism, nationalism, this "ism" or that "ism," will never produce any permanent result and is therefore all bad. Even a little work done in Kṛṣṇa consciousness is a permanent asset and is all-good because it is done for Kṛṣṇa, the all-good Supreme Personality of Godhead, who is everyone's friend (suhṛdaṁ sarva-bhūtānām). The Supreme Personality of Godhead is the only enjoyer and proprietor of everything (bhoktāraṁ yajña-tapasāṁ sarva-loka-maheśvaram (BG 5.29)). Therefore any activity performed for the Supreme Lord is permanent. As a result of such activities, the performer is immediately recognized. Na ca tasmān manuṣyeṣu kaścin me priya-kṛttamaḥ (BG 18.69). Such a devotee, because of full knowledge of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, is immediately transcendental, although he may superficially appear to be engaged in materialistic activities. The only distinction between materialistic activity and spiritual activity is that material activity is performed only to satisfy one's own senses whereas spiritual activity is meant to satisfy the transcendental senses of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. By spiritual activity everyone factually benefits, whereas by materialistic activity no one benefits and instead one becomes entangled in the laws of karma.

If one connects himself with Hari, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, the Lord takes away all his miseries, and in the beginning the Lord also superficially appears to take away all his material possessions, reputation, education and beauty.

SB 8.19.32, Purport:

Śrīla Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura explains in this regard that the very word hariḥ means "one who takes away." If one connects himself with Hari, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, the Lord takes away all his miseries, and in the beginning the Lord also superficially appears to take away all his material possessions, reputation, education and beauty. As stated in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (10.88.8), yasyāham anugṛhṇāmi hariṣye tad-dhanaṁ śanaiḥ. The Lord said to Mahārāja Yudhiṣṭhira, "The first installment of My mercy toward a devotee is that I take away all his possessions, especially his material opulence, his money." This is the special favor of the Lord toward a sincere devotee. If a sincere devotee wants Kṛṣṇa above everything but at the same time is attached to material possessions, which hinder his advancement in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, by tactics the Lord takes away all his possessions. Here Śukrācārya says that this dwarf brahmacārī would take away everything. Thus he indicates that the Lord will take away all one's material possessions and also one's mind. If one delivers his mind to the lotus feet of Kṛṣṇa (sa vai manaḥ kṛṣṇa-padāravindayoḥ (SB 9.4.18)), one can naturally sacrifice everything to satisfy Him. Although Bali Mahārāja was a devotee, he was attached to material possessions, and therefore the Lord, being very kind to him, showed him special favor by appearing as Lord Vāmana to take away all his material possessions, and his mind as well.

SB Canto 9

In a spiritual body the devotee becomes a direct associate of the Lord, but even though a devotee may superficially appear to be in a material body, he is always liberated and is engaged in the same duties of service to the Lord as a devotee in Vaikuṇṭhaloka.

SB 9.13.9, Purport:

If one has a strong desire to serve the Lord, even if he accepts a material body, there is no cause of anxiety, since a devotee, even in a material body, is a liberated soul. This is confirmed by Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī:

īhā yasya harer dāsye

karmaṇā manasā girā

nikhilāsv apy avasthāsu

jīvan-muktaḥ sa ucyate

"A person acting in Kṛṣṇa consciousness (or, in other words, in the service of Kṛṣṇa) with his body, mind, intelligence and words is a liberated person even within the material world, although he may be engaged in many so-called material activities." The desire to serve the Lord establishes one as liberated in any condition of life, whether in a spiritual body or a material body. In a spiritual body the devotee becomes a direct associate of the Lord, but even though a devotee may superficially appear to be in a material body, he is always liberated and is engaged in the same duties of service to the Lord as a devotee in Vaikuṇṭhaloka. There is no distinction. It is said, sādhur jīvo vā maro vā. Whether a devotee is alive or dead, his only concern is to serve the Lord. Tyaktvā dehaṁ punar janma naiti mām eti (BG 4.9). When he gives up his body, he goes directly to become an associate of the Lord and serve Him, although he does the same thing even in a material body in the material world.

CC Adi-lila

Superficially both classes may appear to work in the same way, but their purposes are completely opposite because of a difference in consciousness. Asuras work for personal sense gratification, whereas devotees work for the satisfaction of the Supreme Lord.

CC Adi 3.91, Purport:

This is a verse from the Padma Purāṇa. Viṣṇu-bhaktas, or devotees in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, are known as devas (demigods). Atheists, who do not believe in God or who declare themselves God, are asuras (demons). Asuras always engage in atheistic material activities, exploring ways to utilize the resources of matter to enjoy sense gratification. The viṣṇu-bhaktas, Kṛṣṇa conscious devotees, are also active, but their objective is to satisfy the Supreme Personality of Godhead by devotional service. Superficially both classes may appear to work in the same way, but their purposes are completely opposite because of a difference in consciousness. Asuras work for personal sense gratification, whereas devotees work for the satisfaction of the Supreme Lord. Both work conscientiously, but their motives are different.

The Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement is meant for devas, or devotees. Demons cannot take part in Kṛṣṇa conscious activities, nor can devotees in Kṛṣṇa consciousness take part in demoniac activities or work like cats and dogs simply for sense gratification. Such activity does not appeal to those in Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Devotees accept only the bare necessities of life to keep themselves fit to act in Kṛṣṇa consciousness. The balance of their energy is used for developing Kṛṣṇa consciousness, through which one can be transferred to the abode of Kṛṣṇa by always thinking of Him, even at the point of death.

Krsna, The Supreme Personality of Godhead

Superficially it appears that a child is born due to the combination of the father and mother, but the ultimate cause of both the father and the mother is Kṛṣṇa.

Krsna Book 87:

The atheistic Sāṅkhyaite philosophers will of course offer their arguments that the material cosmic manifestation is due to prakṛti and puruṣa—material nature and the living entity, or the material cause and the effective cause. But Kṛṣṇa is the cause of all causes. He is the cause of both the material and the effective causes. Prakṛti and puruṣa are not the ultimate cause. Superficially it appears that a child is born due to the combination of the father and mother, but the ultimate cause of both the father and the mother is Kṛṣṇa. He is therefore the original cause, or the cause of all causes, as confirmed in the Brahma-saṁhitā.

Both the Supreme Lord and the living entities enter into the material nature. The Supreme Lord, Kṛṣṇa, by one of His plenary expansions, manifests as Kāraṇodakaśāyī, Mahā-Viṣṇu, the gigantic Viṣṇu form lying in the Causal Ocean. Then from that gigantic form of Mahā-Viṣṇu, Garbhodakaśāyī Viṣṇu expands and enters into every universe. From Him, Brahmā, Viṣṇu and Śiva expand. Viṣṇu as Kṣīrodakaśāyī enters into the hearts of all living entities, as well as into all material elements, including the atom. The Brahma-saṁhitā says, aṇḍāntara-stha-paramāṇu-cayāntara-stham: (Bs. 5.35) "The Lord is within this universe and also within every atom."

Bhagavad-gita As It Is Lectures

Although superficially it appears that Kṛṣṇa is engaging Arjuna to fight in the sinful activities, no, that is not sinful.

Lecture on BG 1.44 -- London, July 31, 1973:

So here Arjuna is a fighter, he is engaged in fighting. Now he is thinking that is proper. He is Vaiṣṇava. He is devotee. He is properly thinking that "For my sense gratification I am going to kill my kinsmen? Oh, what a great sinful activity I am going to do." But actually, Kṛṣṇa is not engaging His devotee to act sinfully. No. That is not Kṛṣṇa's business. Although superficially it appears that Kṛṣṇa is engaging Arjuna to fight in the sinful activities, no, that is not sinful. Whatever Kṛṣṇa does, it is not sinful; it is transcendental, the most pure activity. The rascals who do not understand Kṛṣṇa, they say that Kṛṣṇa is immoral. They do not know what is Kṛṣṇa and what is Kṛṣṇa's action. They do not know. They think, "Now, Kṛṣṇa is engaging Arjuna to fight. Oh, it is immoral. Why Kṛṣṇa should engage Arjuna in the fighting business?" So therefore... Or "Why Kṛṣṇa is engaged in dancing with the gopīs? They are wives and sister of other men. It is sinful." If we enjoy with others' wife or others' daughter or others' sister, who is not bona fide my wife, if I want to enjoy life, that illicit sex... Kṛṣṇa is not doing that. But artificially, those who have nonsense, they see that "Kṛṣṇa is dancing at dead of night with others' daughters and girls. Therefore He is immoral." But that means he does not know what is Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇa can do anything. Tejīyasaṁ na doṣāya.

Sometimes we may do something which is approved by the general public, but it may not be approved by the supreme authority. Superficially it may appear very appealing to the sentiment of the public, but factually such thing may not be correct, may not be correct.

Lecture on BG 2.7-11 -- New York, March 2, 1966:

Now, here is a good proposal from the worldly point of view that Arjuna does not want to fight, and Kṛṣṇa is not encouraging him. Now, what is the point? Somebody may say that "Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, why He is encouraging in the matter of fighting?" People, at the present moment, when there is a question of war, people want to stop that war. At the present moment, the movement is going on between all nations that they do not want war. But here we see that Kṛṣṇa is not discouraging war. We have to mark this point. He is not discouraging war, but He is, rather, advocating, inducing Arjuna that "No, no, no, this is not befitting your position. You must fight, must fight."

So here is a point, that sometimes we may do something which is approved by the general public, but it may not be approved by the supreme authority. Superficially it may appear very appealing to the sentiment of the public, but factually such thing may not be correct, may not be correct. If we accept Kṛṣṇa as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and "Why He was inducing Arjuna to fight?" It does not mean that He was inducing Arjuna to do something wrong. But from worldly point of view, Arjuna was a very pious man and he was declining to fight, not to kill his kinsmen, not to kill his friends. This... This is a very important point. So he argued, "No, no, if I fight, my people will die, and their wives will become widow, and they will be adulterated, and then, by adulteration, unwanted population will increase, and who will offer śrāddha?" Śrāddha... There is a ceremony of śrāddha according to Hindu scripture. I do not know whether you have in your Christian religion, but according to Hindu, a dead body is offered some respect every year.

Just like a merchant, a mercantile man, he is doing some business and working very hard day and night to accumulate some money, similarly, a devotee of the Lord also can earn money in the same spirit, working day and night. Superficially it will appear just like this man and that man. There is no difference.

Lecture on BG 3.21-25 -- New York, May 30, 1966:

How it is possible? Just like a merchant, a mercantile man, he is doing some business and working very hard day and night to accumulate some money, similarly, a devotee of the Lord also can earn money in the same spirit, working day and night. Superficially it will appear just like this man and that man. There is no difference. They are working the same day and night for earning some money. But the devotee or the man who is established in relationship with God, his expenditure will be different. His expenditure will be not for sense gratification. For advancement of God consciousness. That is the ideal man. There is no harm. If you work, very, very much attached to your business or anyone, that doesn't matter.

The same thing just we have explained before, that the results should be given to God. Just like Rūpa Gosvāmī. Rūpa Gosvāmī... The other day I cited the example. When they retired, they brought home two boats full of gold coins, millions of rupees. But before retirement they spent 50 percent of the accumulation of wealth for God's cost. And 25 percent he distributed to the relatives. They also expect some money. And 25 percent they kept in the bank for personal needs in some extraordinary times. So here Kṛṣṇa also said that saktāḥ karmaṇy avidvāṁsaḥ. Just like fool, those who are after sense gratification, as they are working with full attachment, that "I must have this money. I must accumulate this bank balance and so on, so on," so similarly, yathā kurvanti bhārata, as they devote, similarly, vidvāṁs... Vidvān means learned also may work in that way, but he would spend the money in such a way that is example.

Lusty people, they are working on account of sense gratification, and lover of Kṛṣṇa is working for Kṛṣṇa's satisfaction. The activity may appear superficially the same.

Lecture on BG 3.31-43 -- Los Angeles, January 1, 1969:

Just like Arjuna. Arjuna is loving Kṛṣṇa as friend. So he is so great lover that in the beginning he hesitated to fight, "How shall I kill my kinsmen?" But when he understood, "Kṛṣṇa, my friend, desires. Oh, never mind." So there was no lust. Simply love of Kṛṣṇa. So lust and love, that means the same thing is there. Simply one has to change the account. That's all. Lusty people, they are working on account of sense gratification, and lover of Kṛṣṇa is working for Kṛṣṇa's satisfaction. The activity may appear superficially the same.

Just like these boys in Kṛṣṇa consciousness. People may say, "What they are doing? They are also eating, they are also cooking, and offering Kṛṣṇa, and they say it is Kṛṣṇa conscious. What is the difference between this foodstuff with the hotel foodstuff?" In this way they may think. "Oh, they are also typewriting, they are also using dictaphone and this tape recorder and all this material." But they do not know that everything is being used for Kṛṣṇa. Therefore there is far different. There is no lust. So you can utilize everything if it is in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, not for satisfaction of your lust. Then your life is sublime.

We do not reject anything, but we accept anything. The only difference is that we do not accept anything for our sense gratification. We do not accept this tape recorder for sense gratification, singing or dancing. We accept this tape recorder to record Kṛṣṇa's glories, to record Kṛṣṇa's topics. So this is the difference only. Nirbandhaḥ kṛṣṇa-sambandhe yuktaṁ vairāgyam ucyate. Dovetail everything in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, and it is perfect.

Srimad-Bhagavatam Lectures

Someone is thinking that "By executing bhakti-yoga, I shall become merged into the body of the Supreme." There are many. Superficially, they appear to be bhakti-yogīs, but at heart, they are nirbheda-brahmānusandhana.

Lecture on SB 1.2.7 -- Vrndavana, October 18, 1972:

Vyabhicārī and avyabhicārī. There are different types of... According to the person. Avyabhicāriṇī. Avyabhicāriṇī means just to the point, as it is described by the authorities. Just like Rūpa Gosvāmī. He describes the bhakti-yoga:

anyābhilāṣitā-śūnyaṁ

jñāna-karmādy-anāvṛtam

ānukūlyena kṛṣṇānu-

śīlanaṁ bhaktir uttamā

(Brs. 1.1.11)

So this is avyabhicāriṇī-bhakti, without any adulteration. There are so-called bhakti-yogas. They are not bhakti-yoga. Someone is thinking that "By executing bhakti-yoga, I shall become merged into the body of the Supreme." There are many. Superficially, they appear to be bhakti-yogīs, but at heart, they are nirbheda-brahmānusandhana. They clearly say also, śaṅkarera mata caitanyera patha(?). "When you adopt the process of Caitanya Mahāprabhu, that means chanting Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra, but ultimately we accept the opinion of Śaṅkarācārya." Śaṅkarācārya means nirbheda-brahmānusandhana, to become one with the Absolute Truth. This is Śaṅkara's philosophy. "When we are liberated, there is no more distinction between the Absolute and myself. I'll be, both of us, we become one, merge." This is the Māyāvāda philosophy. But Caitanya philosophy's different.

Anywhere Kṛṣṇa is acting, that is transcendental—the Battlefield of Kurukṣetra, historical references, description, so superficially it appears that what a devotee has got to do with this battlefield? But battlefield or no battlefield, wherever there is Kṛṣṇa, that is transcendental.

Lecture on SB 1.7.12 -- Vrndavana, September 11, 1976:

This Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is another Purāṇa, history. We have already explained. So sometimes a class of devotees known as sahajiyā, they say that "What we have got to do with the narration of Kurukṣetra battle?" They immediately jump to the kṛṣṇa-līlā, directly with the gopīs. And Kṛṣṇa's activities in other field, they think it is useless. But that is not the fact. Anywhere Kṛṣṇa is acting, that is transcendental—the Battlefield of Kurukṣetra, historical references, description, so superficially it appears that what a devotee has got to do with this battlefield? But battlefield or no battlefield, wherever there is Kṛṣṇa, that is transcendental. This has to be understood. Otherwise, Śukadeva Gosvāmī, why he should indulge in describing how Uttarā's pregnancy was saved by Kṛṣṇa, how the brahmāstra was thrown by Aśvatthāmā? So Śukadeva Gosvāmī is liberated person. Why he should indulge in these material things? No. Those who are advanced, they know that Kṛṣṇa's dancing with the gopīs, that līlā and Kṛṣṇa's playing as the leader of the battlefield of Kurukṣetra is the same. It is all transcendental. One should not make any distinction between the two. Saṁsthāṁ ca pāṇḍu-putrāṇāṁ vakṣye kṛṣṇa-kathodayam. Pāṇḍu-putrāṇām, the pāṇḍu-putras, or the Pāṇḍavas, son of Pāṇḍu, they're all devotees. Even their political affairs, because there is connection with Kṛṣṇa, it is kṛṣṇa-kathā.

Superficially it appeared that Kṛṣṇa killed the Pūtanā, but Pūtanā, Kṛṣṇa took her as His mother. Although she came to kill Kṛṣṇa with poison on her breast, but Kṛṣṇa thought that "This woman has come to kill Me, but because I have sucked her breast, she is My mother."

Lecture on SB 1.8.29 -- Mayapura, October 9, 1974:

Those who are mūḍhas, they cannot understand Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇa is playing, although like that, ordinary human being. The mūḍhas cannot understand. Just like Kṛṣṇa killed Pūtanā, but she got elevation to the position of His mother. Superficially it appeared that Kṛṣṇa killed the Pūtanā, but Pūtanā, Kṛṣṇa took her as her (His) mother. Although she came to kill Kṛṣṇa with poison on her breast, but Kṛṣṇa thought that "This woman has come to kill Me, but because I have sucked her breast, she is My mother." So any way, the service side, Kṛṣṇa always accepts, a little service. Therefore in the Bhagavad-gītā it is said, svalpam apy asya dharmasya trāyate mahato bhayāt. Svalpam asya. A little service to Kṛṣṇa is feasible, is helpful to save a man from the greatest danger.

So further she explains, na yasya kaścid dayitaḥ. Dayita means favorable. Na yasya kaścid dayitaḥ asti karhicid dveṣyaś ca yasmin. And nobody is envious. The Bhagavad-gītā also confirms, samo 'haṁ sarva bhūteṣu na me dveṣyo 'sti na priyaḥ (BG 9.29). Kṛṣṇa is, as we discussed the other day... Just like the sun is equal to everyone, but we are not able to take the sunshine equally. Somewhere the sun is covered with cloud. Someone is sitting within the dark room. In this way, we are unable to take the sunshine equally. But sun is distributing equally.

Superficially, it appeared that Prahlāda Mahārāja did wrong because his father was killed before him. Suppose if your father is killed before you and if you stand only, if you don't speak any protest to protect the father, who will agree with your endeavor? Nobody.

Lecture on SB 3.25.44 -- Bombay, December 12, 1974:

There are many instances. Just like Prahlāda Mahārāja was giving service to the Lord, and his father was very angry, and there was very much misunderstanding between the father and mother, er, the father and the son. Ultimately, the father was killed by Nṛsiṁhadeva. And Prahlāda Mahārāja saw it. But does it mean...? Superficially, it appeared that Prahlāda Mahārāja did wrong because his father was killed before him. Suppose if your father is killed before you and if you stand only, if you don't speak any protest to protect the father, who will agree with your endeavor? Nobody. Everyone will say, "You are such a coward that your father was killed before you. You did not protest. You did not try to give any protection?" This is superficial. But actually, the son, Prahlāda Mahārāja, was giving the best service to his father, best service. Because in the śāstra it is said that if a person, if a demon, is killed by God, he immediately is liberated. Even though he was not liberated, thinking that he was very, very sinful... Of course, he was liberated. But Prahlāda Mahārāja was thinking that "My father was so sinful, so much against God consciousness. He might not be liberated."

Although superficially, outside, it appears that everything is burned, but the root remains there. The root remains there, and as soon as there will be facility or there will be rainy season, the same grasses and twigs and other things will come out again, new growth.

Lecture on SB 6.1.15 -- Los Angeles, June 27, 1975:

A series of practice. Then the brain will be clear. So this process also—not very safe. The example has been given that kṣipanty aghaṁ mahad api veṇu-gulmam ivānalaḥ. It is something like burning, setting fire into the dry grass. And superficially it appears that all the grasses are now burned into ashes; there is no possibility of coming out. No. Therefore this very word is there, iva analaḥ. Although superficially, outside, it appears that everything is burned, but the root remains there. The root remains there, and as soon as there will be facility or there will be rainy season, the same grasses and twigs and other things will come out again, new growth. That is... Even after so much tapasya... There are many instances. Just like Viśvāmitra Muni. Viśvāmitra Muni was a king. He wanted to become a brāhmaṇa, and he practiced mystic yoga for many years. Still, he became a victim of a woman, Menakā. He was meditating, closing eyes, and Indra sent this woman, Menakā. And simply by hearing the sound of the bangles, ching, ching, ching, "Oh, there is woman. Yes, very nice," (laughter) all mystic yoga finished. Then he begot one daughter. That..., her name is Śakuntalā, the famous beautiful daughter. So that history is there.

Superficially it appears that animal is put and he is killed, but when the animal comes out of the yajña, that is the test of yajñic brāhmaṇa chanting the Vedic hymns correctly. That was the system.

Lecture on SB 6.2.24-25 -- Gorakhpur, February 13, 1971:

The fire was not ignited by matches—by mantra. And the animal... Just like in medical science, in physiology sometimes experiment is made by plying the knife on some animal, similarly, how the yajña was being performed, that was tested by animal sacrifice. Animal sacrifice was not meant for killing one animal and eating. No. That the animal, an old animal, should be put into the yajña fire and he'll come out a young, with a young body, that was the test how Vedic mantras were being chanted powerfully. That was the... Not that animal was to be killed there. No. Superficially it appears that animal is put and he is killed, but when the animal comes out of the yajña, that is the test of yajñic brāhmaṇa chanting the Vedic hymns correctly. That was the system. And because there is no such powerful yajñic brāhmaṇa at the present moment, therefore all kinds of yajñas are forbidden at the present moment. Kalau tad hari-kīrtanāt. Kṛte yad dhyāyato viṣṇuṁ tretāyāṁ yajato makhaiḥ (SB 12.3.52). This is the injunction of the śāstra, that in the Satya-yuga, meditation on Viṣṇu... Now they have manufactured meditation in so many ways, but actually meditation means dhyāyato viṣṇu. Viṣṇu-mūrti, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, meditation, focusing the mind on the form of four-handed Viṣṇu, that is yoga.

Sanātana Gosvāmī did not lose, but superficially it appeared because he was mixing with the Muhammadans, eating with them, sitting with them, talking with them.

Lecture on SB 7.9.8 -- Mayapur, February 28, 1977:

Vaiṣṇava is always humble, meek and humble. That is Vaiṣṇava. Vaiṣṇava is powerful, but still he is very meek and humble. So here is the sign. Prahlāda Mahārāja is so qualified that immediately Lord Nṛsiṁhadeva put His hand on the head: "My dear child, you have suffered so much. Now be pacified." This is Prahlāda Mahārāja's position—immediately accepted by the Lord. But he's thinking, "I am so lowborn in the family of passionate family." Ugra-jāteḥ. He's not proud that "Now Nṛsiṁhadeva has touched my head. Ah. Who is like me? I am the greatest personality." This is not Vaiṣṇava. Sanātana Gosvāmī when he approached Caitanya Mahāprabhu, he presented himself, nīca jāti nīca karma nīca saṅgī: "I am born of very low grade family, and my duties are also very low grade, and my association are also very low grade." So Sanātana Gosvāmī was born in a very respectable brāhmaṇa family, but because he accepted the service of Muhammadan king, actually he lost his all brahminical culture. He did not lose, but superficially it appeared because he was mixing with the Muhammadans, eating with them, sitting with them, talking with them. But he gave up. Tyaktvā tūrṇam aśeṣa-maṇḍala-pati-śreṇīṁ sadā tuccha. He understood, "What I am doing? I am committing suicide." Jāniyā śuniyā viṣa khāinu. Narottama dāsa Ṭhākura says that "I am taking poison knowingly." Unknowingly one may take poison, but if knowingly one takes poison, that is very regrettable.

Nectar of Devotion Lectures

The point is that superficially it may appear sometimes against the social and religious rules and regulations, but if it is done for Kṛṣṇa, ānukūlyena... Kṛṣṇa should be satisfied.

The Nectar of Devotion -- Bombay, December 26, 1972:

To reject spiritual master is a great sin. So these are, from social point of view, from religious point of view, these are irreligious, sinful activities, to reject one's spiritual master; to see one's father being killed in one's presence; one woman is going to another boy, dead of night. Superficially they are sinful activities. But Caitanya Mahāprabhu recommends, ramyā kācid upāsanā vrajavadhū-vargeṇa yā kalpitā. There is no upāsanā, method of worship, as it was conceived by the gopīs. First class.

So the point is that superficially it may appear sometimes against the social and religious rules and regulations, but if it is done for Kṛṣṇa, ānukūlyena... Bhakti means ānukūlyena kṛṣṇānu-śīlanam (CC Madhya 19.167). Kṛṣṇa should be satisfied. That is... It doesn't matter. Kṛṣṇa should be satisfied. Just like Kṛṣṇa pretended that He was sick, and many physicians came. He said, "No physician cured Me. If some devotee gives Me the dust of his feet on My head, then I can be cured." So all devotees were asked, and nobody... "Oh! How can I give? My dust on the head of Kṛṣṇa? How it is possible?" Nobody prepared.

General Lectures

The chanting Hare Kṛṣṇa, you have already heard. Superficially it may appear the repetition of the same word, but every mantra with effect is chanted like that. It requires little practice.

Lecture at Auckland University -- Auckland, April 17, 1972:

The chanting Hare Kṛṣṇa, you have already heard. Superficially it may appear the repetition of the same word, but every mantra with effect is chanted like that. It requires little practice. So the effect of this mantra is stated by Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu: ceto-darpaṇa-mārjanam (CC Antya 20.12). It will cleanse your heart. If you go on chanting this Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra, then gradually the dirty things which are accumulated within our hearts, that will be cleansed. This is the process.

The dirtiest thing now within our heart is the bodily concept of life. Actually, this is the misconception of whole situation of the modern world. If anyone is in bodily concept of life that "I am this body," then the basic principle of our life becomes on the false platform, because I am not this body. This is the dirtiest thing within our heart. If you chant Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra, then gradually, by this bhakti-yoga process, we shall understand that "I am not this body, but I am a spirit soul," ahaṁ brahmāsmi. There is a Vedic mantra which is called aham: "I, I am Brahman, or the spirit soul." And if we come to that position to understand that "I am not this body; I am spirit soul," then other things will follow, which is stated in this Bhagavad-gītā, brahma-bhūtaḥ prasannātmā na śocati na kāṅkṣati (BG 18.54). When one becomes Brahman-realized, that "I am spirit soul," then the first benefit will be that such persons will be free from all kinds of lamentation and hankering. In this material world two things are going on: lamentation and hankering.

Philosophy Discussions

Fire, the same example: fire you touch in any way, it will act. So in that way, Kṛṣṇa does not become polluted. Even superficially it appears to be wrong, the gopīs were others' wives, but because He is Kṛṣṇa, He cannot be polluted.

Philosophy Discussion on Bertrand Russell:

Prabhupāda: But Kṛṣṇa, He is the supreme. Their lusty desires become purified and they became the first-class devotees. Therefore Lord Caitanya was so strict as a sannyāsī to allow women to come to near to His (indistinct), He says, ramyā kācid upāsanā vraja-vadhū-vargeṇa yā kalpitā. So there is no superior mode of worship than it was conceived by the damsels of Vraja, because they loved Kṛṣṇa blindly, without any reservation, without any return. Mad after Kṛṣṇa. So Caitanya Mahāprabhu says this is the first-class love. They might have gone with some purpose, that doesn't matter, but because they approached Kṛṣṇa somehow or other, (indistinct) kāma, it doesn't matter. Fire, the same example: fire you touch in any way, it will act. So in that way, Kṛṣṇa does not become polluted. Even superficially it appears to be wrong, the gopīs were others' wives, but because He is Kṛṣṇa, He cannot be polluted. The example is given, just like the sun. The sun absorbs water from urinal, so that place where you pass urine, that becomes sterilized, purified, but sun does not become impure. Similarly, you may go with Kṛṣṇa, even with lust, it doesn't matter, but because you come to Kṛṣṇa, you become purified. And Kṛṣṇa remains pure always. So those who do not know this science, they think, "Oh, Kṛṣṇa is being (indistinct)." Kṛṣṇa is not being (indistinct), Kṛṣṇa is giving chance to everyone, "You come to Me, anyway, I give you protection." This is all.

1969 Correspondence

Superficially, it appears that in the USA there is sufficient provision of eating, sleeping, mating and defending, but actually nobody is safe even in his good apartment.

Letter to Rupanuga -- Hawaii 14 March, 1969:

Your seventh question, "How is it that there is so much material "advancement" in the USA even though there is no formal demigod worship? Is a man after economic development automatically worshiping Lord Siva whether he is making Yajna or not?" Actually there is no material advancement in the USA. Material advancement means there is amply opportunity for eating, sleeping, mating, and defending. Superficially, it appears that in the USA there is sufficient provision of eating, sleeping, mating and defending, but actually nobody is safe even in his good apartment. I have got practical experience in New York. Several times my typewriter and tape recorders were stolen and the police could not take any action. There are many persons in the Bowery street, they have no shelter to live. So if a certain fraction of the people are supposed to be very materially happy at the cost of others, that is not material advancement. Had it been so, then why there are so many persons confused and frustrated? So actually there is no material advancement here. Here, I am seeing practically that Gaurasundara, such a nice intelligent and qualified boy, he has to work hard 12 hours simply for his subsistence.

1975 Correspondence

Now you well know you have to approach the men and women of your country, and it may appear that superficially that you have to disturb them. They are doing their business peacefully, and you come and disturb them, "Please take this Krishna book."

Letter to Jagaddhatri, Pasupati, Sailogata, Pamela -- Dallas 30 July, 1975:

Please accept my blessings. I am in due receipt of your letter dated July 29, 1975 and have noted the contents. Regarding the problem of how to be aggressive on Sankirtana and submissive in the temple, my request to you is that you should go on being aggressive on Sankirtana. I myself was aggressive in coming to your country. No one invited me. Even you boys and girls did not invite me. But, I came and I preached aggressively, and therefore you are now my disciples. So now you well know you have to approach the men and women of your country, and it may appear that superficially that you have to disturb them. They are doing their business peacefully, and you come and disturb them, "Please take this Krishna book."

Of course it is good that you are concerned about being chaste, shy, and submissive amongst your godbrothers. Canakya Pandit said that every man should see all other women as mother, and similarly a woman should see all men as son. So what is your difficulty? If you are completely aggressive on Sankirtana, there should be no material aggressiveness and pride remaining. You have to distinguish between devotees and non-devotees.