Çréla Prabhupäda Speaks OutOn Lust and Love, Myth and RealityThe following conversation between His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupäda and David Lawrence, a British schoolteacher, took place in August 1973 during an early-morning walk in London.David Lawrence: In the Çrémad-Bhägavatam there seems to be a great deal of . . . demonology, if you like. Now, I confess this raises problems for me. Are the references to, say, the demoness Pütanä taking Kåñëa on her lap and Kåñëa sucking her breast and killing her—is this to be taken literally or allegorically?Çréla Prabhupäda: Literally.Mr. Lawrence: Literally, as a physical fact?Çréla Prabhupäda: Yes. Of course, in the Bhägavatam there are some figurative stories, similar to Aesop's Fables. These are for instruction.Mr. Lawrence: What about the reference to Kåñëa and the unmarried gopés [cowherd girls]? You say in your books that "He treated them like dolls, yet they were well pleased with Him." What is the main point of that passage?Çréla Prabhupäda: When the Bhägavatam says Kåñëa treated the gopés like dolls, that means the gopés danced just according to His desire.Mr. Lawrence: Is that to be taken literally, or is there some symbolic meaning?Çréla Prabhupäda: No, literally. The gopés are so devoted to Kåñëa that whatever Kåñëa desires, they do.Mr. Lawrence: I must confess, these activities of Kåñëa's are quite beyond my comprehension.Çréla Prabhupäda: Yes, they are very difficult for ordinary people to understand. That is why this portion of Kåñëas life is depicted in the Tenth Canto of Çrémad-Bhägavatam. Nine cantos are devoted to understanding Kåñëa's supreme position. Then Kåñëa's intimate lélä [pastimes] are described in the Tenth Canto. But if one tries to read the life and pastimes of Kåñëa without understanding that He is the Supreme Personality of Godhead, one will be misled. Therefore the Bhägavatam begins by explaining the Supreme Lord as the original source of the creation (janmädy asya yataù). The Bhägavatam doesn't abruptly introduce Kåñëa's pastimes with the gopés.In the spiritual world Kåñëa has unlimited varieties of activities. The activities in this material world are only a perverted reflection of those in the spiritual world.But out of foolishness we take Kåñëa's activities to be like ours. Kåñëa loved the gopés. The gopés were young girls, and Kåñëa was a young boy, and He loved them. But here the so-called love between a young boy and girl is lust. Therefore it is condemned. But in the love between Kåñëa and the gopés there is not a trace of lustHere lust is going on in the name of love. And because it is not love, it doesn't continue very long—it breaks. But in the history of the spiritual world, you don't find that the love between the gopés and Kåñëa broke at any time. That is the difference between lust and love.Mr. Lawrence: In the West, one in three marriages is destined to break up. That's what they say now—one in three.Çréla Prabhupäda: Just see! And they are trying to drag their lusty ideas into Kåñëa's pastimes. Generally, rascals claim that Kåñëa's pastimes with the gopés support their own lusty activities: "Kåñëa acts lustily, so I can also." This is a gross misunderstanding. People who think like this do not take into account that here in the material world so-called love is lust—and it breaks. But in the love between Kåñëa and the gopés, there is no breaking—only increase. So how can they compare their lusty affairs to Kåñëa's loving affairs with the gopés?Mr. Lawrence: I must admit that I've read far enough in your books to see that they really can't.Çréla Prabhupäda: When you give an analogy, there must be many points of similarity. So where are the points of similarity between Kåñëa's pastimes and the lusty affairs of this material world? These rascals are so dullheaded that they don't even have a logical argument. They are comparing the lusty affairs of this material world to the affairs of Kåñëa and the gopés. But where is the similarity?Mr. Lawrence; There's never any mention at all of lust or animal desire, is there?Çréla Prabhupäda: No. For example the Bhägavatam describes everything about Kåñëa's dancing with the gopés—their kissing, their embracing, and so on. But there is no mention of contraceptives. And the gopés never became pregnant. So how can we compare Kåñëa's loving affairs with the gopés to the lusty affairs of this material world?Mr. Lawrence: It can't be done. Another question: I was reading a book (one not put out by the Kåñëa consciousness movement) about Lord Caitanya, and it said that the manifestations of Kåñëa consciousness He showed during kértana [chanting] and so on were manifestations of madness. Can you comment on that?Çréla Prabhupäda: When a man is himself mad, he'll find others mad. [Laughter.]Mr. Lawrence: He'll see a reflection of himself.Çréla Prabhupäda: Yes. This misunderstanding is condemned in Bhagavad-gétä, where Kåñëa says avajänanti mäà müòhä: "Because when I come to this world I come in a human form, rascals take Me for an ordinary human being." (The word müòhä means "rascals" or "asses.") So, Lord Caitanya is Kåñëa Himself, but the fools and rascals take him for an ordinary human being.Mr. Lawrence; They're just talking from within their own experience. They can't imagine what happens when God presents Himself as a man.Çréla Prabhupäda: When they hear that Kåñëa lifted Govardhana Hill, they think, "This is mythology." But if Kåñëa is actually God, is it very difficult for Him to lift a mountain? He's floating so many heavy planets in the sky. So if Kåñëa can make so many planets weightless, is it very difficult for Him to make Govardhana Hill weightless?These things are very easy for devotees to understand, but nondevotees cannot understand them. Therefore in the Bhagavad-gétä Kåñëa clearly says, bhaktyä mäm abhijänäti: "Only through devotional service can one understand Me." So if you want to understand Kåñëa and Kåñëa's pastimes in truth, you must take to the process of devotional service.* * * * * *
Comments