“Observation on the Kali Yuga” (SB 1.17.43-44)

TRANSCRIPT:  Srimad-Bhagavatam, Canto 1, Chapter 17, Text 43-44. “Observation on the Kali Yuga.” San Diego – July 21, 1988 / (064)

[Text 43]: 

The most fortunate Emperor Mahārāja Parīkṣit, who was entrusted with the kingdom of Hastināpura by Mahārāja Yudhiṣṭhira when he desired to retire to the forest, is now ruling the world with great success due to his being glorified by the deeds of the kings of the Kuru dynasty.

Purport:

The prolonged sacrificial ceremonies undertaken by the sages of Naimiṣāraṇya were begun shortly after the demise of Mahārāja Parīkṣit. The sacrifice was to continue for one thousand years, and it is understood that in the beginning some of the contemporaries of Baladeva, the elder brother of Lord Kṛṣṇa, also visited the sacrificial place. According to some authorities, the present tense is also used to indicate the nearest margin of time from the past. In that sense, the present tense is applied to the reign of Mahārāja Parīkṣit here. For a continuous fact, also, present tense can be used. The principles of Mahārāja Parīkṣit can be still continued, and human society can still be improved if there is determination by the authorities. We can still purge out from the state all the activities of immorality introduced by the personality of Kali if we are determined to take action like Mahārāja Parīkṣit. He allotted some place for Kali, but in fact Kali could not find such places in the world at all because Mahārāja Parīkṣit was strictly vigilant to see that there were no places for gambling, drinking, prostitution and animal slaughter. Modern administrators want to banish corruption from the state, but fools as they are, they do not know how to do it. They want to issue licenses for gambling houses, wine and other intoxicating drug houses, brothels, hotel prostitution and cinema houses, and falsity in every dealing, even in their own, and they want at the same time to drive out corruption from the state. They want the kingdom of God without God consciousness. How can it be possible to adjust two contradictory matters? If we want to drive out corruption from the state, we must first of all organize society to accept the principles of religion, namely austerity, cleanliness, mercy and truthfulness, and to make the condition favorable we must close all places of gambling, drinking, prostitution and falsity. These are some of the practical lessons from the pages of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam.

om ajnana-timirandhasya

 jnananjana-salakaya

caksur unmilitam yena

 tasmai sri-gurave namah

sri-caitanya-mano-'bhistam sthapitum yena bhtu-tale

svayam rupah kada mahyam dadati sva-padantikam

 

Translation:

The most fortunate Emperor Mahārāja Parīkṣit, who was entrusted with the kingdom of Hastināpura by Mahārāja Yudhiṣṭhira when he desired to retire to the forest, is now ruling the world with great success due to his being glorified by the deeds of the kings of the Kuru dynasty.

So the first topic which Śrīla Prabhupāda deals with in the purport is the matter of the present tense being used in this verse. The verse of course says that Mahārāja Parīkṣit is now ruling the world with great success. But yet the Bhāgavatam was spoken by Śukadeva Gosvāmī to Mahārāja Parīkṣit at the time when Mahārāja Parīkṣit had seven days to live, so he died at the end of that period. And then later on the Bhāgavatam was spoken by Sūta Goswāmī in the forest of Naimiṣāraṇya. So it would seem that Mahārāja Parīkṣit was not ruling the planet at that time and yet the verse says he is now ruling. So Śrīla Prabhupāda was explaining some details concerning the use of the present tense. So in the course of thinking about that I happened to look up some information concerning the history of the Bhāgavatam which I thought was interesting. So I thought I would read some of that. This has to do with the question of just when the Bhāgavatam was written, so it provides some idea of the chronology which is involved here. So the first point, these points are mainly taken from the First Canto Part 1 which we were just reading through. So nonetheless it’s interesting to put them together. So the first point Śrīla Prabhupāda makes is the following: 

Amongst mundane scholars there is some diversity of opinion as to date of compilation of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. It is, however, certain from the text of the Bhāgavatam that it was compiled before the disappearance of King Parīkṣit and after the departure of Lord Kṛṣṇa. When Mahārāja Parīkṣit was ruling the world as the King of Bhārata-varṣa, he chastised the personality of Kali. According to revealed scriptures and astrological calculation, the Age of Kali is in its five thousandth year. Therefore, Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam was compiled not less than five thousand years ago.

[5:20]. 

And Śrīla Prabhupāda points out: 

Mahābhārata was compiled before Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, and the Purāṇas were compiled before Mahābhārata. That is an estimation of the date of compilation of the different Vedic literatures. The synopsis of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam was given before the detailed description under instruction of Nārada. 

So this means then that after Lord Kṛṣṇa left the planet and before the death of Mahārāja Parīkṣit, Vyāsadeva compiled the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam under instruction from Narada Muni. But he gave a synopsis of that previously when Kṛṣṇa was still on the planet. So that relates to the story of Vyāsadeva speaking the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam to Śukadeva Gosvāmī when he was still in the womb. So let’s see, the story there is related in the Ninth Canto of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. There it’s stated, by the way, that Śukadeva Gosvāmī... let’s see... after he came out of the womb of his mother, he generated a simulated Śukadeva Gosvāmī by his mystic powers who stayed in the home of Vyāsadeva and  who later had a daughter. But the real Śukadeva Gosvāmī left home as a wandering mendicant. In any case, here it’s stated that the:

The child Śukadeva Gosvāmī remained in the womb of his mother for twelve years, and when the father asked the son to come out, the son replied that he would not come out unless he were completely liberated from the influence of māyā. Vyāsadeva then assured the child that he would not be influenced by maya, but the child did not believe his father, for the father was still attached to his wife and children. Vyāsadeva then went to Dvārakā and informed the Personality of Godhead about his problem, and the Personality of Godhead, at Vyāsadeva's request, went to Vyāsadeva’s cottage, where He assured the child in the womb that he would not be influenced by māyā. Thus assured, the child came out, but he immediately went away as a parivrājakācārya. When the father, very much aggrieved, began to follow his saintly boy, Śukadeva Gosvāmī, the boy created a duplicate Śukadeva, who later entered family life. 

So here it’s described that, well this is a description of the birth of Śukadeva Gosvāmī. So Śukadeva Gosvāmī was born when Kṛṣṇa was present on the planet, because in fact it was Kṛṣṇa who convinced Śukadeva Gosvāmī to come out of the womb, after being in the womb for 12 years. Of course Śukadeva Gosvāmī was a great mystic yogi as is shown by the fact that he even created a duplicate of himself immediately after coming out of the womb. But it's described also that Vyāsadeva spoke a synopsis of the Bhāgavatam to Śukadeva Gosvāmī when he was in the womb and in this way Śukadeva Gosvāmī because a pure devotee of Kṛṣṇa, whereas previously he would have been situated in Brahman realisation. So this synopsis was spoken then before the time of Lord Kṛṣṇa’s departure but the Bhāgavatam was actually compiled by Vyāsadeva after the time of Lord Kṛṣṇa’s departure. So that corresponds to the statement that Śrīla Prabhupāda has here. 

Then let’s see... oh yes, this statement also relates to that: 

Śrīla Vyāsadeva knew that the child, after his birth, would not stay at home. Therefore he (Vyāsadeva) impressed upon him the synopsis of the Bhāgavatam so that the child could be made attached to the transcendental activities of the Lord. After his birth, the child was still more educated in the subject of the Bhāgavatam by recitation of the actual poems. 

[10:02]

So it would appear that after Śukadeva Gosvāmī was born later on, Śrīla Vyāsadeva recited the actual poems of the Bhāgavatam to him, but before his birth he just recited a synopsis. So, that is described in another aspect given here which is related to questions that are sometimes raised about the Bhāgavatam. This has to do with the meaning of suka as applied to this personality:

In Sanskrit the parrot is also known as śuka. When a ripened fruit is cut by the red beaks of such birds, its sweet flavour is enhanced. The Vedic fruit which is mature and ripe in knowledge is spoken through the lips of Śrīla Śukadeva Gosvāmī, who is compared to the parrot not for his ability to recite the Bhāgavatam exactly as he heard it from his learned father, but for his ability to present the work in a manner that would appeal to all classes of men.

So the indication is that Śukadeva Gosvāmī was not literally parroting the Bhāgavatam but he was presenting it in a very poetic fashion. So, also there is another reference here, indicating that the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is also known as the Śuka​-saṁhitā or the Vedic hymns spoken by Sri Śukadeva Gosvāmī, the great liberated sage. 

So those were some observations on the history of the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. So let’s see, in the course of different considerations I came across some other interesting points. In the Eleventh Canto of the Bhāgavatam there are some other references to these basic regulative principles which are being discussed in these verses with regards to Mahārāja Parīkṣit and the age of Kali. Specifically there is an explanation of the three regulative principles of avoiding meat eating, intoxication, and illicit sex according to the Vedic standard. So in one verse here it is stated:  

In this material world the conditioned soul is always inclined to sex, meat-eating and intoxication. Therefore religious scriptures never actually encourage such activities. Although the scriptural injunctions provide for sex through sacred marriage, for meat-eating through sacrificial offerings and for intoxication through the acceptance of ritual cups of wine, such ceremonies are meant for the ultimate purpose of renunciation.

So then it’s explained in what sense those different things are allowed. It says: 

According to the Vedic injunctions, when wine is offered in sacrificial ceremonies it is later to be consumed by smelling, and not by drinking. Similarly, the sacrificial offering of animals is permitted, but there is no provision for wide-scale animal slaughter. Religious sex life is also permitted, but only in marriage for begetting children, and not for sensuous exploitation of the body. Unfortunately, however, the less intelligent materialists cannot understand that their duties in life should be performed purely on the spiritual platform.

So this is an explicit statement in the Bhāgavatam about the, for the example, the point that sex in permitted in marriage only for begetting children and not for sense gratification. Also it’s interesting that wine apparently could be offered in some ceremonies involving the worshipping of demigods – of course not for the worship of Lord Viṣṇu – but one could only drink that by smelling. One wasn’t allowed to actually consume it. And then concerning killing: In the text the word for sacrificial killing of animals, ālabhanaṁ, it says here is prescribed killing, but what comes next is na hiṁsa, not with violence. So it’s explained that the animals were killed according to the sacrificial system involving the recitation of different Vedic mantras and the result was that the animals would immediately be elevated to the heavenly planets. So this is certainly different for the situation of slaughtering animals in slaughterhouses and so forth. So that was an observation concerning the regulative principles of the Bhāgavatam. 

[15:32]

So another interesting observation, this is just a sort of list of different things I happened to run across – this concerns the prediction of Lord Caitanya in the Bhāgavatam. Of course we all know of this verse, kṛṣṇa-varṇaṁ tviṣākṛṣṇaṁ. It’s interesting, though, to see the context in which this appears in the Bhāgavatam because it makes it pretty clear that this is the prediction of Lord Caitanya. 

Of course from an empirical point of view you could never hope to make an argument along those lines. This is due to the nature of empirical arguments. A sceptic can never be convinced. Practically that’s the basic role of a sceptic. But in any case it’s interesting to see how this first fits into its context, so I thought I would read for you the basic context of that verse. This involves the instructions by a number of great sages to a certain Vedic king, King Nimi. So: 

King Nimi inquired: In what colours and forms does the Supreme Personality of Godhead appear in each of the different ages, and with what names and by what types of regulative principles is the Lord worshiped in human society? 

So this is a general question about the yuga-avatāras which is being raised by this King Nimi. So: 

Śrī Karabhājana replied: In each of the four yugas, or ages – Kṛta, Tretā, Dvāpara and Kali – Lord Keśava appears with various complexions, names, and forms and is thus worshiped by various processes. In Satya-yuga the Lord is white and four-armed, has matted locks and wears a garment of tree bark. He carries a black deerskin, a sacred thread, prayer beads and the rod and water pot of a brahmacārī.

So that’s a description of the incarnation or yuga-avatāra for the Satya-yuga.

People in Satya-yuga are peaceful, non-envious, friendly to every creature and steady in all situations. They worship the Supreme Personality by austere meditation and by internal and external sense control. 

And then it’s stated:

In Satya-yuga the Lord is glorified by the names Haṁsa, Suparṇa, Vaikuṇṭha, Dharma, Yogeśvara, Amala, Īśvara, Puruṣa, Avyakta and Paramātmā. 

So this is all the description of the situation in Satya-yuga. It would appear here that the persons in Satya-yuga were typically engaged in the process of medication and they were highly qualified for carrying out that process. There’s also, by the way, an interesting comment in the purport which is coming from Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī. Apparently all these different names of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, which are listed here, refer to qualities of the Supreme Personality of Godhead which are lacking in conditioned souls. 

For example, he is known as Dharma, or religion personified, due to the fact that the condition souls are said to be irreligious. Therefore in contrast to the conditioned soul, the Supreme Personality of Godhead is Dharma. He’s a perfect follower of religious principles. Likewise this term Yogeśvara, meaning that he is perfectly self-controlled – Yogeśvara means “master of yoga” – and it’s pointed out that this term is used by those whose minds are uncontrolled and disturbed by the modes of material nature. Similarly, Amala means uncontaminated, so those who are contaminated by passion and ignorance refer to the Supreme Lord as Amala, uncontaminated. Then Īśvara refers to the Supreme Lord, so persons who are lacking in potency, in other words are not the lord in any sense, refer to the Supreme Personality of Godhead as Īśvara; and so forth. So it’s an interesting explanation of these names. Another one is Avyakta, which means unmanifest. So the Lord is called unmanifest by those who are in this manifest world. So that shows the Supreme Personality of Godhead is transcendental to this world. 

[20:47]  

So in any case going to the Tretā-yuga: 

In Tretā-Yuga the Lord appears with a red complexion. He has four arms, golden hair, and wears a triple belt representing initiation into each of the three Vedas. Embodying the knowledge of worship by sacrificial performance, which is contained in the Ṛg, Sāma and Yajur Vedas, His symbols are the ladle, spoon and other implements of sacrifice. In Tretā-yuga, those members of human society who are fixed in religiosity and are sincerely interested in achieving the Absolute Truth worship Lord Hari, who contains within Himself all the demigods. The Lord is worshiped by the rituals of sacrifice taught in the three Vedas. [So] In Tretā-yuga the Lord is glorified by the names Viṣṇu, Yajña, Pṛśnigarbha, Sarvadeva, Urukrama, Vṛṣākapi, Jayanta and Urugāya.

So that’s Tretā-yuga where the Lord appears with a red colour and he is teaching the process of worship through sacrifice, different types of Vedic sacrifices, and that was the process followed during that age. So then:

In Dvāpara-yuga the Supreme Personality of Godhead appears with a dark blue complexion, wearing yellow garments. The Lord’s transcendental body is marked in this incarnation with Śrīvatsa and other distinctive ornaments, and He manifests His personal weapons. My dear King, in Dvāpara-yuga men who desire to know the Supreme Personality of Godhead, who is the supreme enjoyer, worship Him in the mood of honouring a great king, following the prescriptions of both the Vedas and the tantras. Obeisances to You, O Supreme Lord Vāsudeva, and to your forms of Saṅkarṣaṇa, Pradyumna and Aniruddha. O Supreme Personality of Godhead, all obeisances unto you. O Lord Nārāyaṇa Ṛṣi, O creator of the universe, best of personalities, master of this cosmos and original form of the universe, O Supersoul of all created entities, all homage unto You.   

So this is the mode of worship in the Dvāpara-yuga. 

O King, in this way people in Dvāpara-yuga glorified the Lord of the universe. 

So it was pointed out here also that the different sages were worshipping the Lord in this way from the very beginning of the Dvāpara-yuga, even though Lord Kṛṣṇa actually appeared at the end of the Dvāpara-yuga, but nonetheless this was the mode of worship in that period. So then the next thing is:

In Kali-yuga also people worship the Supreme Personality of Godhead by following various regulations of the revealed scriptures. Now kindly hear of this from me. 

It’s pointed out here that it’s said in Kali-yuga people also worship the Supreme; in other words this might seem surprising considering the nature of Kali-yuga. So the next verse is this kṛṣṇa-varṇaṁ:

In the Age of Kali, intelligent persons perform congregational chanting to worship the incarnation of Godhead who constantly sings the names of Kṛṣṇa. Although His complexion is not blackish, He is Kṛṣṇa Himself. He is accompanied by His associates, servants, weapons and confidential companions. 

So from the appearance of this verse in the sequence it would have to refer to the avatāra of the Kali-yuga. So that, plus the fact it's referring to congregational chanting and the description of Kṛṣṇa by someone who is not blackish and so forth although, they say a sceptic would never want to accept, it seems like a fair statement that this must refer to Lord Caitanya. Then there are two further verses that come directly after this which go as follows... these follow the pattern we’ve seen previously, because in the previous sections describing the different yugas, there would be a description of the Personality of Godhead, who incarnated during that yuga, and then a description of how He was worshipped, so in these next two verses it is said:

[25:42]

My dear Lord, You are the Mahā-puruṣa, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and I worship your lotus feet, which are the only eternal object of meditation. Those feet destroy the embarrassing conditions of material life and freely award the greatest desire of the soul, the attainment of pure love of Godhead. My dear Lord, Your lotus feet are the shelter of all holy places and of all saintly authorities in the line of devotional service and are honoured by powerful demigods like Lord Śiva and Lord Brahmā. My Lord, You are so kind that you willingly protect all those who simply bow down to you with respect, and thus you mercifully relieve all the distress of your servants. In conclusion, my Lord, Your lotus feet are actually the suitable boat for crossing over the ocean of birth and death, and therefore even Lord Brahmā and Lord Śiva seek shelter at your lotus feet.

Then:

O Mahā-puruṣa, I worship Your lotus feet. You gave up the association of the goddess of fortune and all her opulence, which is most difficult to renounce and is hankered after by even the great demigods. Being the most faithful follower of the path of religion, You thus left for the forest in obedience to a brāhmaṇa’s curse. Out of sheer mercifulness You chased after the fallen conditioned souls, who are always in pursuit of the false enjoyment of illusion, and at the same time engaged in searching out Your own desired object, Lord Śyāmasundara.

It's described here that this verse is taken by Vaisnava ācāryas to refer to both Caitanya Mahāprabhu and Lord Rāmacandra. The way that is can be seen as referring to Lord Rāmacandra is that, of course, Lord Rāmacandra went to the forest and he was also searching for his desired object which was Sītā who had been kidnaped by Rāvaṇa. That’s the interpretation there. But it can apply to Lord Caitanya because Lord Caitanya also was married to the goddess of fortune and he gave that up and took sannyāsa. This leaving for the forest is a term that refers to taking sannyasa in general. It is said that one has left for the forest. I guess that one doesn’t literally have to go to a forest to do that. And then the point of doing this in obedience of a brāhmaṇa’s curse, I don’t know what brāhmaṇa’s curse was involved in the case of Lord Rāmacandra, maybe someone would know.

But in the case of Lord Caitanya it in fact happened that a brāhmaṇa cursed Lord Caitanya that he would be bereft of all material opulence, This happened when Lord Caitanya was holding saṅkīrtana confidentially in the house of Śrīvāsa Ṭhākura. On that occasion various persons became envious of this. So one time a brāhmaṇa approached Lord Caitanya and snapped his brāhmaṇa’s thread and cursed Lord Caitanya that you shall never have any material happiness. And it’s said that Lord Caitanya was very glad to hear that. So that’s the way that this is interpreted in reference to Lord Caitanya and also of course the point of chasing after the fallen conditioned souls who are also in pursuit of false enjoyment and illusion and so forth. And of course then there’s the fact that this verse appears in this particular position after the description of the yuga-avatāra for the Kali-yuga. 

So I thought that was interesting to see all of these different verses together in their actual position. Because of course it’s described that in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam different avatāras and so on are predicted and in fact no one can be accepted as an avatāra of the Supreme Personality of Godhead unless he is properly predicted in the revealed scriptures such as Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. So, also there are various references to saṅkīrtana yajña in this same part; for example, a couple of verse later it says:

[30:26] 

Those who are actually advanced in knowledge are able to appreciate the essential value of this Age of Kali. Such enlightened persons worship Kali-yuga because in this fallen age all perfection of life can easily be achieved by the performance of saṅkīrtana.

So specifically using that word also in that verse, saṅkīrtanena. So those are some observations. Let's see, it's about 6 o'clock. Are there any questions? Yeah?

Question:  [unclear]

Answer:  Well, He’s not a yuga-avatāra. This was specifically referring to the class of incarnations called yuga-avatāras; it doesn’t cover all the incarnations. 

Q:  [unclear]

A:  The question is whether it’s just this planet or the universe, but as far as I can understand the yuga-avatāra appears for the universe as a whole. Although, these different avatāras... well, apparently the favourite place for appearance is in Bhārata-varṣa. That’s where Kṛṣṇa wants to appear. It’s the Pṛśnigarbha. Well, just a second… yeah?

Q:  [unclear]

A:  So that was, for those in the kitchen, just a description of how Lord Rāmacandra went to the forest due to the curse of a brāhmaṇa, namely his father Daśaratha accidently shot the son of a brāhmaṇa with an arrow when hunting and so the brāhmaṇa cursed him: “As you caused me to lose my son, you’ll lose yours also.” Yeah?

Q:  [unclear]

A:  Yes that’s true too, although they are fully capable of doing that. There’s great resourcefulness in the area of scepticism 

Q:  [unclear]

A:  Well of course, that even would be hard to understand even in ordinary mundane terms if Vyāsadeva had some plan for what was going to be written, because you don’t have to be tri-kāla-jñā to know what you’re going to do in the future, what to speak of someone else. So that might answer the sceptic in that case.

All glories to Śrīla Prabhupāda!