So although we have made our friendship with Kṛṣṇa and He will always protect us, but at the same time this devotional line is risky also, that we create so many enemies. There are many examples in the history of this devotional service that unnecessarily people become enemy to these innocent devotees. Even a innocent boy like Prahlāda Mahārāja, five years old.
But a devotee cannot give up his profession. You see? He was being chastised so many times by his atheistic father, but what Prahlāda Mahārāja was doing? Oh, because he was king, he ordered the teachers that, "This boy is coming home and chanting Hare Kṛṣṇa. What is this nonsense?" teachers were asked. Teachers said: "My dear sir, we do not teach Hare Kṛṣṇa. According to your regulation, we are secular. (laughter) There is no possibility of teaching God or God's name. This boy, I do not know wherefrom he has got this Hare Kṛṣṇa." (laughter)
Oh, he became very angry, "Where you have got your Hare Kṛṣṇa?" "Father, from where you have got your anger, I have got that Hare Kṛṣṇa. (laughter) He is the supplier. You want to be angry; He supplies the anger. And I want to chant." Oh, he becomes more angry. So, but that boy, what he was doing? That teacher was forbidden, secular, and the father was enemy. Still, he was taking some opportunity as soon as the teacher is out, "O my dear friends, come on. I shall speak to you Hare Kṛṣṇa and the science."
So this should be our, your policy. Whenever there is some chance, just preach this. Whenever there is chance. But you should always know that you will find enemies, but you don't be afraid. Go on with your work.
So Prahlāda Mahārāja, he was such a nice devotee. And to protect him when he was just going to be killed by his father . . . and his father was very polit . . . good politician. He took benediction from Brahmā that he will not be killed by anyone. By policy he took benediction from Brahmā that, "I shall not be killed by man." "Oh, yes." "I shall not be killed by demigods." "That's all right." "I shall not be killed by any animal." "That's all right." "I shall not be killed in day." "That's all right." "You shall . . . I shall not be killed at night." "That's all right." "I shall not be killed by any weapon." "That's all right."
And he said: "Now it is finished. Everything is now secure. I cannot be killed in day. I cannot be killed at night. No man can kill him (me). No demigod can kill me. No animal can kill me. Then where is the killing? Everything finished." But God is so, cunning that He assumed neither man nor animal, and no weapons. He killed him with the nails. He never expected that "I will be killed by the nails." This is the definition by negation, defective definition. There the . . . in argument, if you define negatively, "This is not this. This is not this. This is not this," then something will come that will, I mean to say, nullify all your arguments. You see? So he protected himself in all negative ways, "This will not. This will not. This will not. This will not." Something came which was not in his power. So this Nṛsiṁhāvatāra.