SB 10.33.37

The cowherd men, bewildered by Kṛṣṇa’s yogamāyā, thought their wives had remained home at their sides. They did not harbor any jealous feelings against him at any time. “One may argue that because he is Paramātmā or because he enjoys with women who are his eternal consorts, the gopīs are not others’ wives. By inference one may establish that there is no fault if he is Paramātmā. If one argues that the gopīs are his eternal consorts, why is it heard that they are others’ wives? They must have married someone else. In every birth when there are pastimes, they would be someone else’s wives by marriage. If the Lord performs these pastimes for giving mercy to his devotees, how does he give mercy to the husbands who are the highest devotees, since they live in Vraja, while they hate him for taking their wives? How did his eternal consorts end up in such misfortune? How will other devotees become absorbed in these pastimes if they hear the descriptions of these highest devotees?” This verse answers these doubts. The syntactical order takes precedence over the order found in the verse. The conclusion will be reached by this method. The syntactical order is this: definitely (khalu) the people of Vraja did not find fault Kṛṣṇa at any time. (And bewildered by māyā, they thought their wives were by their sides.) Thus Brahmā said to Kṛṣṇa: yad-dhāmārtha-suhṛt-priyātma-tanaya-prāṇāśayās tvat-kṛte What can you give to the people of Vraja whose houses, possessions, friends, dear ones, bodies, sons, life airs and hearts are dedicated only to you, since there is nothing superior to you or Vraja? SB 10.14.35 Śukadeva said to Parīkṣit: kṛṣṇe ’rpitātma-suhṛd-artha-kalatra-kāmā The members of the cowherd community had accepted Kṛṣṇa as their dearmost friend and offered him themselves, their friends, their wealth, their families and goals of life. SB 10.16.10 “It is not proper that, knowing or not knowing the facts, they should be put into stress since they were recipients of the Lord’s mercy.” If the men were married to them and those gopīs were their wives, Kṛṣṇa would be the cause of disturbance. If they only thought they were married to the gopīs by some illusion and they were actually Kṛṣṇa’s wives, they would not be aware that he had attracted them. Then what fault is there? Thus it is said “They were bewildered by his māyā and thought that their wives were by their sides.” But it has been said in the scriptures that the gopīs were his eternal consorts (and not their wives). In order that the statement of scripture is not contradicted, the syntax of the present verse must be understood by repetition of the verb manyamānāḥ, as in the case of daśā pavitrena gṛhaṁ sammārṣtī: the ten women purified themselves with water and cleansed the house. The meaning is this: bewildered by his yoga-māyā which produces variety in prema and produces exhilaration in various pastimes, they thought that his wives were theirs, and thought that those gopīs were by their sides. Thus two different types of syntax have been presented. The first version is “They were bewildered by his māyā and thought that their wives were by their sides.” The intention is this. The gopīs that the men married were produced by yogamāyā. They were not the eternal consorts of the Lord. The gopīs, concealed by māyā and bewildered, did not know about māyā’s actions. Though they may have heard, they were not interested in it. The men thought those gopīs were their wives, though actually they were not. And the real gopīs rejected those men as their husbands in their minds. They did not have relationships in marriage with those men. Thus the verse says that the men did not find fault (na āsūyan) in Kṛṣṇa’s qualities. The word īrśā (hate) is not used (since no one in Vraja hated Kṛṣṇa). The second version is “Bewildered by his yoga-māyā which produces variety in prema and produces exhilaration in various pastimes, they thought that his wives were theirs, and thought that those gopīs were by their sides.” The intention of the second version is as follows. When Kṛṣṇa attracted the gopīs to the rāsa dance and other pastimes, the men thought the forms created by yogamāyā, which were replicas, like shadows, to be their wives by their sides. Here also there is no fault. “If at any time the men by force had relations with those gopīs who were the Lord’s eternal consorts, it would be great fault.” The answer to this is found in the second syntax: the men thought that the gopīs were by their sides, but as with the marriage, they were cheated by māyā. Kṛṣṇa said to the gopīs niravadya-samyujām: your association with me was faultless since you had pure prema. (SB 10.32.22) This can also be understood from Garga’s statement with kaimutya: ya etasmin mahā-bhāge prītiṁ kurvanti mānavāḥ nārayo ’bhibhavanty etān viṣṇu-pakṣān ivāsurāḥ Enemies cannot harm the devotees who show affection for this greatly fortunate child, just as the demons cannot harm the devatās. SB 10.8.18 (Anyone who shows affection for Kṛṣṇa cannot be attacked or criticized. What then to say about the gopīs being assaulted by other men?) Brahmā confirms that the gopīs with apparent husbands were illusory by saying śriyaḥ kāntāḥ kāntaḥ parama-puruṣaḥ: in Goloka there are unlimited gopīs and their beloved Kṛṣṇa, the supreme form of God. (Brahma-saṁhitā 5.56) The following statement should be also considered: tā vāryamāṇāḥ patibhiḥ pitṛbhir bhrātṛ-bandhubhiḥ: their husbands, fathers, brothers and other relatives tried to stop them. (SB 10.29.8) It is said that the gopīs were prevented from meeting Kṛṣṇa by their husbands and others. Did the husbands and others know that Kṛṣṇa was attracting them or not? If they did not know, they would not find fault with Kṛṣṇa. Then no arguments could be raised about his bad conduct and their preventing the gopīs leaving would be meaningless. If they knew about the attraction, they would also not find fault with the gopīs because they thought the gopīs were by their sides and they had protected them. But they would find fault with Kṛṣṇa, who was trying to attract them. In this case, accusations could be raised against Kṛṣṇa. But one should not conclude that the real gopīs stayed by the side of their husbands. It should be said however that he attracted those gopīs intentionally, but without the husbands knowing it was intentional. By his special craft he made the sound of the flute enter their ears without entering others’ ears. If the sound could be heard by everyone, the mothers and fathers would think, “Why did Kṛṣṇa leave his bedroom while sleeping and go far off in the forest at night?” They would become full of anxiety. Since they all knew that Kṛṣṇa naturally attracted everyone at all times by his sweetness, they inferred that the gopīs were going to see him. (In that sense they knew.) But because it was the wrong time, they prevented them. If the men knew that the gopīs were in the forest all night, the men would develop only an abhāsa or semblance of fault finding-- since fault finding was actually impossible for them because they were residents of Vraja. “He is the source of our life. For the whole night he remains with others’ wives and enjoys. It seems he has transgressed the rules of dharma and custom.” Astonished, thinking of Kṛṣṇa’s welfare, they developed some sort of anger. This is what is meant by a “semblance of fault finding.” By that, they also found fault with their wives and the unmarried gopīs, but seeing the wives by their side, they did not react strongly. How could they ever develop a fault finding attitude? Supporting this conclusion, the Lord had given a benediction to the cowherds who would produce the gopīs later in another yuga. yadā nanda-prabhṛtayaḥ avatāraṁ dharātale kariṣyanti tadā cāhaṁ vasiṣye teṣu madhyataḥ yuṣmākaṁ kanyakāḥ sarvā ramiṣyante mayā saha tatra doṣo na bhavitā na roṣo na ca matsaraḥ When Nanda and others appear on earth I will live amongst them. All of your young daughters will enjoy with me. You will not find fault with this. You will not become angry or envious. Padma Purāṇa Since real anger could not arise, it is meaningless to accept even a semblance of anger. The people of Vraja never found fault with Kṛṣṇa. Saying that because they were bewildered by māyā they did not find fault is thus a contradiction. They would be bewildered if they found fault with him. Thus “bewildered” should be taken in conjunction with the word manyamānāḥ: because they were bewildered, they thought that their wives were by their sides. The purpose of the verse is to repudiate the ideas that Kṛṣṇa was at fault and that the men appeared to find fault with Kṛṣṇa, thinking of his benefit. In the phrase mohitās tasya māyayā if māyayā indicates the instrumental (by māyā) then instead of tasya, the word tena should be used with it. If māyayā expresses a cause of the inhabitants not finding fault with Kṛṣṇa, then the word mohitāḥ is not needed: because of māyā, they did not find fault in Kṛṣṇa. Māyā is thus the agent of mohitāḥ. (Bewildered by māyā, they thought their wives were by their sides.) Without needing the order of the Lord who is absorbed in his pastimes with his dear devotees, this māyā, like a remedy for the whole world, produces excellent taste in the pastimes by arranging his pastimes in sequence. This is illustrated in the words yoga-māyām upāśritaḥ: he took shelter of yogamāyā. (SB 10.29.1) Since māyā is his dear assistant by her work, the word tasya (his) is unnecessary there, and in order that scripture should not be contradicted, it should properly be connected with the phrase “they thought their wives were by their sides.” Thus the meaning is as follows. “Bewildered by yogamāyā, they thought that his (tasya) wives were theirs (sva-sva) and that they were by their sides.” This meaning eliminates the idea that Kṛṣṇa committed illicit acts with married women, that the gopīs slept with other men and that the people of Vraja found a semblance of fault in Kṛṣṇa. Taking the meaning as “Bewildered by his (tasya) yogamāyā, they thought that their wives were by their sides” it must still be explained that the husbands thought the māyā forms were their wives, because the husbands were bewildered by yogamāyā. The real consorts of the Lord should not be in that place at that time. Chaste women should not be assaulted by others, what to speak of devotees, and what to speak of the gopīs. ya etasmin mahā-bhāge prītiṁ kurvanti mānavāḥ nārayo ’bhibhavanty etān viṣṇu-pakṣān ivāsurāḥ Enemies cannot harm the devotees who show affection for this greatly fortunate child, just as the demons cannot harm the devatās. SB 10.8.18 In the Thirty-second Chapter of Kūrma Purāṇa it is said: pati-vratā dharma-parā rudrāṇy eva na saṁśayaḥ nāsyāḥ parābhavaṁ kartuṁ śaknotīha jaṇaḥ kvacit yathā rāmasya subhagā sītā trailokya-viśrutā / patnī dāśarather devī vijigye rākṣaseśvaram // rāmasya bhāryāṁ vimalāṁ rāvaṇo rākṣaseśvaraḥ / sītāṁ viśālanayanāṁ cakame kāla-coditaḥ // gṛhītvā māyayā veśaṁ carantīṁ vijane vane / samāhartuṁ matiṁ cakre tāpasaḥ kila kāminīm // vijñāya sā ca tadbhāvaṁ smṛtvā dāśarathiṁ patim / jagāma śaraṇaṁ vahnim āvasathyaṁ śuci-smitā // upatasthe mahāyogaṁ sarva-doṣa-vināśanam / kṛtāñjalī rāmapatnī śākṣāt patim ivācyutam // namasyāmi mahāyogaṁ kṛtāntaṁ gahanaṁ param / dāhakaṁ sarva-bhūtānām-īśānaṁ kāla-rūpiṇam // iti vahnyaṣṭakaṁ japtvā rāmapatnī yaśasvinī / dhyāyantī manasā tasthau rāmam unmīlitekṣaṇā // athāvasathyād bhagavān havyavāho maheśvaraḥ / āvirāsīt sudīptātmā tejasā pradahanniva // sṛṣṭvā māyā-mayīṁ sītāṁ sa rāvaṇa-vadhepsayā / sītām ādāya dharmiṣṭhāṁ pāvako 'ntaradhīyata // tāṁ dṛṣṭvā tādṛśīṁ sītāṁ rāvaṇo rākṣaseśvaraḥ / samādāya yayau laṅkāṁ sāgarāntara-saṁsthitām // kṛtvātha rāvaṇa-vadhaṁ rāmo lakṣmaṇa-saṁyutaḥ / samādāyābhavat sītāṁ śaṅkākulita-mānasaḥ // sā pratyayāya bhūtānāṁ sītā māyāmayī punaḥ / viveśa pāvakaṁ dīptaṁ dadāha jvalano 'pi tām // dagdhvā māyāmayīṁ sītāṁ bhagavān ugradīdhitiḥ / rāmāyādarśayat sītāṁ pāvako 'bhūt sura-priyaḥ // pragṛhya bhartuś caraṇau karābhyāṁ sā sumadhyamā / cakāra praṇatiṁ bhūmau rāmāya janakātmajā // dṛṣṭvā hṛṣṭa-manā rāmo vismayākulalocanaḥ / nanāma vahniṁ sirasā toṣayāmāsa rāghavaḥ // uvāca vahner bhagavān kim eṣā vara-varṇinī / dagdhā bhagavatā pūrvaṁ dṛṣṭā mat-pārśvam āgatā // tam āha devo lokānāṁ dāhako havyavāhanaḥ / yathāvṛttaṁ dāśarathiṁ bhūtānām eva sannidhau // bhartuḥ śuśrūṣaṇopetā suśīleyaṁ pati-vratā / bhavānī-pārśva-mānītā mayā rāvaṇa-kāmitā // yā nītā rākṣaseśena sītā bhagavatāhṛtā / mayā māyāmayī sṛṣṭā rāvaṇasya vadhāya sā // tad arthaṁ bhavatā duṣṭo rāvaṇo rākṣaseśvaraḥ / mayopasaṁhṛtā caiva hato loka-vināśanaḥ // gṛhāṇa vimalāmenāṁ jānakīṁ vacanān mama / paśyan nārāyaṇaṁ devaṁ svātmānaṁ prabhavāvyayam // ity uktvā bhagavāṁś caṇḍo viścārcir viśvatomukhaḥ / mānito rāghaveṇāgnir bhūtaiś cāntaradhīyata // There is no doubt that Parvatī is chaste and dedicated to dharma and no one can defeat her. Similarly the chaste wife of Rāma, famous in the three worlds, defeated Rāvaṇa. Rāvaṇa by the influence of time desired spotless Sītā, the wife of Rāma. Disguising himself as an ascetic by illusion, he decided to kidnap her as she wandered alone in the forest. Understanding his mind, remembering her husband, smiling brightly, she took shelter of the household fire. She began worshipping Agni, destroyer of all faults with folded hands, as if he were her infallible husband. “I offer respects you, the great yogī, death, the inexplicable, the burner, the lord of all beings, the form of time.” Having uttered eight verses to Agni, the famous Sītā with wide eyes stood there and meditated on Rāma in her mind. The great lord Agni, receiver of oblations, appeared from this abode, shining brightly as if he would burn everything. Desiring to kill Rāvaṇa, he made a false form of Sītā and taking her with him, disappeared. Seeing that form, the lord of the Rākṣasas Rāvaṇa took that form and went to Laṅkā situated over the ocean. Rāma along with Lakṣmaṇa then killed Rāvaṇa. He accepted Sītā with an anxious mind. To give faith to all beings, the false Sītā entered the blazing fire again. Agni burned up that form. Blazing Agni, dear to the devatās, then shows the real Sītā to Rāma. Holding Rāma’s feet with her hands, she offered respects to him on the ground. Seeing her Rāma was overjoyed. His eyes opened wide with astonishment. Rāma offered respects to Agni and satisfied him. He asked Agni, “Who is this beautiful woman? I saw that she was burned up by you but now she has come back to me.” Agni, carrier of oblations, lord of the worlds, then explained what happened to Rāma in the presence of all beings. “Sītā is devoted to her husband and has the best conduct. She is respected by Parvatī, but was desired by Rāvaṇa. Thus I took her away. Rāvaṇa took away a false Sītā that I made in order that Rāvaṇa could be killed. Because of her, you killed evil Rāvaṇa, lord of the Rākṣasas, destroyer of the worlds. Then I destroyed that form. Please accept pure Sītā on my word.” While looking at his Lord, Nārāyaṇa, endowed with indestructible power, after being worshipped by Rāma, Agni disappeared along with his associates. Thus yogamāyā, taking shelter of the pastimes, should assist Kṛṣṇa just as Agni assisted Rāma. In this way the subject should be ascertained.