Here is a question, please try to understand the question properly before answering it.

Hare Krsna dear devotees

I was going through chapter 18 of 9th Canto of Srimad-Bhagavatam and I found it very very intriguing.

As it is natural for me to form a question to help enable a nice discussion from which everyone can benefit, please try to understand the question itself, nevermind whether you are unable to answer it or for being lazy not to consult the chapter, " King Yayaati Regains His Youth ".

HERE IS THE QUESTION:

Why was Yadu's act of refusing his father Yayaati to exchange his youth (so that Yayaati could enjoy sex life for a little longer as he was not yet satisfied, after having been cursed by Sukracarya to become invalid and old) not against religion, whereas the refusal of his brothers to exchange their youth or accept premature old age certainly irreligious?

I hope nobody gets offended by the style of the presentation of my question. It was too long to be posted as a question for a discussion anyway!

Hari bol

Hare Kṛṣṇa, the key point here lies in the difference of vision of dharma between Mahārāja Yadu and his brothers.I am remembering a shloka which states: yadoś ca dharma-śīlasya.

Mahārāja Yadu was strictly attached to the principles of religion. Therefore, although he was requested by his father to exchange his youth for old age, he did not do so. Turvasu, Druhyu and Anu, however, unaware of religious principles, accepted the request of their father.

Yadu was dharmic (dharma-śīlaḥ). He understood that to artificially exchange one’s youth for another’s old age was against the natural order established by the Lord. Dharma never asks a son to give up his own swadharma simply to satisfy his father’s material desires. He respected his father, but at the same time he did not compromise the higher principle of dharma. Thus, his refusal was not disobedience—it was fidelity to truth.

His brothers, on the other hand, refused simply out of selfishness, without understanding or appealing to dharma. They rejected their father’s request but without offering a higher principle as their basis. Therefore the Bhāgavatam calls them adharma-jñāḥ - ignorant of dharma. In short, they acted out of caprice, while Yadu acted out of principle.

turvasuś coditaḥ pitrā druhyuś cānuś ca bhārata
pratyācakhyur adharmajñā hy anitye nitya-buddhayaḥ

This is why the great dynasty of the Yādavas came from Yadu, as he carried the qualities of righteousness and clear discrimination.

So, the lesson for us is that real dharma is not blind obedience, but conscious alignment with the Lord’s order. Even when serving elders, the highest service is to protect dharma itself. Hari Hari.

Replies

Govind Sharan August 22, 2025 at 6:57pm

Hare Kṛṣṇa, the key point here lies in the difference of vision of dharma between Mahārāja Yadu and his brothers.I am remembering a shloka which states: yadoś ca dharma-śīlasya.

Mahārāja Yadu was strictly attached to the principles of religion. Therefore, although he was requested by his father to exchange his youth for old age, he did not do so. Turvasu, Druhyu and Anu, however, unaware of religious principles, accepted the request of their father.

Yadu was dharmic (dharma-śīlaḥ). He understood that to artificially exchange one’s youth for another’s old age was against the natural order established by the Lord. Dharma never asks a son to give up his own swadharma simply to satisfy his father’s material desires. He respected his father, but at the same time he did not compromise the higher principle of dharma. Thus, his refusal was not disobedience—it was fidelity to truth.

His brothers, on the other hand, refused simply out of selfishness, without understanding or appealing to dharma. They rejected their father’s request but without offering a higher principle as their basis. Therefore the Bhāgavatam calls them adharma-jñāḥ - ignorant of dharma. In short, they acted out of caprice, while Yadu acted out of principle.

turvasuś coditaḥ pitrā druhyuś cānuś ca bhārata
pratyācakhyur adharmajñā hy anitye nitya-buddhayaḥ

This is why the great dynasty of the Yādavas came from Yadu, as he carried the qualities of righteousness and clear discrimination.

So, the lesson for us is that real dharma is not blind obedience, but conscious alignment with the Lord’s order. Even when serving elders, the highest service is to protect dharma itself. Hari Hari.
- Madhava das > Govind Sharan August 22, 2025 at 9:53pm
  
  Hare Krsna
  
  That is good. There is one more confidential reason. Since Lord Sri Krsna was to appear in the dynasty of Yadu. That was one reason not to delay.
  
  Hari bol
  - Govind Sharan > Madhava das August 24, 2025 at 9:26am
    
    Yeah. Hari Hari.

This reply was deleted.