How to offer everything to your Guru?

Goswāmī Mahārāj: Hare Kṛṣṇa. Any question from anyone?

Devotee: Yes Mahārāj, I've got questions from our viewers.

Goswāmī Mahārāj: Yes

Question: And it's about how to offer everything you've got to your Guru. Because, sometimes on the path, we might feel that we got something very valuable, like new understandings and new feelings. And also, we are told, all glories are going to the Gurus. So, how should we behave properly to avoid keeping those things to ourselves, to get too much proud, but to offer it to the Gurus. Obstacles on the path of devotion

Goswāmī Mahārāj: Hmm, hmm. Well, there's this saying in the song of Śrīla Bhakti Siddhānta Saraswatī Ṭhākur, kanaka-kāminī, pratiṣṭhā-bāghinī (Vaiṣṇava Ke: 11.1) He's talking about some things that are obstructions on the path of devotion for the aspiring servitor. In general, these three: kanak, kāminī, and pratiṣṭhā. Kanak means wealth; kāminī means women; and pratiṣṭhā — name and fame. So, we're told, in succinctly, that wealth, by extension — Lakṣmī — is meant for Nārāyaṇ, a kāminī, lady — Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇa's rasa-rāj, His specialty that distinguishes Him from Vishnu or any other, is this rāsa-vilās, and pratiṣṭhā, name and fame — for Guru. Wealth — it’s is mentioned in the Bhāgavatam:

kāmasya nendriya-prītir
lābho jīveta yāvatā
jīvasya tattva-jijñāsā
nārtho yaś ceha karmabhiḥ
(Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam: 1.2.10)
dharmaḥ svanuṣṭhitaḥ puṁsāṁ
viṣvaksena-kathāsu yaḥ
notpādayed yadi ratiṁ
śrama eva hi kevalam
(Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam: 1.2.8)

I mean, in this part of the Bhāgavatam, seeing really in terms of wealth, we only need the minimum. Rūpa Goswāmī is saying, atyāhāraḥ prayāsaś ca, prajalpo niyamāgrahaḥ (Upadesamrta: 2.1-2), if we collect more than necessary, if we endeavor to the extreme for wealth, mundane facility that it will spoil our attempts at devotion: it's a distraction.
Simple living and high thinking

Śrīla Prabhupād liked to invoke the saying, “Simple living and high thinking”, which is one of the hallmarks of Vedic culture. Sometimes people wonder: why if it was such advance civilization, why it appears materially less advance then now. One simple explanation is: on account of being inner-directed and engaged in internal spiritual culture they did not use their intelligence in outer-directedness toward developing technology and spending their time trying to make a better, you know, sanitation system. They’re so inner-directed that they’re giving the least amount of energy toward the external.

And we find this in the literature they’ve produced, that we are unable to produce anything comparable. Today it's Vedic literature or Purāṇic literature, the Upaniṣads, etc. are not the product of some primitive undeveloped people. But rather the great sages, the ṛṣis or the research scholars of the subjective realm. So, they’re more interested in that which is subjective than the objective world. So, we'll find, in some instances, less development on the objective side. The same thing in principle in spiritual culture: to not spend the bulk of one's energy to accumulate mundane facilities. Prahlāda Mahārāj, in the prahlād-carita, there’s some analysis of how much time one has in life. How much time he spent eating, sleeping, taking care of the body, etc. Even by this type of analysis we see: there is a very small percentage comparatively… remainder left for... that can be used in spiritual culture. So, it's a question of prioritizing things. Athāto brahma-jijñāsā (Vedānta-sūtra 1.1.1) is also priority − prioritizing, saying: “Now that you've achieved the human form of life, how should you spend your energy?” Implying that, before that you have āhāra-nidrā-bhaya-maithunaṁ ca (Mahābhārata). Eating, sleeping, reproduction, defense — all of these things are possible in species other than human life. So what distinguishes human life, human civilization, human culture, from animal civilization, or animal life — dharmeṇa hīnāḥ paśubhiḥ samānāḥ (Mahābhārata), what distinguishes human life is the ability to engage in internal culture. Really, that's what spiritual... it's synonymous with spiritual culture. That what is subjective. And, even in its secular representations like literature, art, things like that — it's all really subjective, internal. Guru Mahārāj likes to quote one poet who says, “If we think of the heart (which is the core of our consciousness) as a field to cultivate.”— Just as, we have so many fields here, they’re planting some seeds, growing some kind of vegetables, rice, whatever it might be. He said, “What sort of substance can the heart, if cultivated properly, what can the heart yield?” Tene brahma hṛdā, it comes back to that. The heart-to-heart transaction, bhakti-latā-bīja. We're being bombarded with varieties of conceptions, mainly through humanistic sloganeering that permeates advertising in the modern world. As the playwright, one of the most famous playwrights of the 20th century, observed, he said, “Previously people looked to playwrights and artists as arbiters of reality, those who could give some guidance to people: what to cultivate, what to understand in life, what's the purpose of life.
Self-realization through consumption

He said, almost casually acknowledging how far modern culture has moved away from that, he said, “Most people get their concepts from advertising in the modern world.” Not from great works of literature; from these great writers and thinkers. He said, “They get most of their concepts from advertising.” [laughing] I mean, it's humorous, if not sad or pathetic, but true. So, and what is advertising about? — Consumption as a means of fulfillment. What is the promise of the internet? — Total access to all things at all times. That's what it promises. What is mobile computing? — Total access to all things at all times. With the underlying understanding that that will give you fulfillment or happiness. You’ll become realized. Self-realization, self-fulfillment, self-actualization will be achieved through consumption, as a consumer — which is antithetical to the culture of devotion. So whenever a devotee or neophyte devotee, an aspiring servitor, mistakenly takes the route of envisioning spiritual achievement as some sort of object to be attained by them, then a disastrous reversal is taking place. So, if rather on the subject of pratiṣṭhā: as we said the money, Lakṣmī — for Nārāyaṇ; ladies — for Kṛṣṇā; pratiṣṭhā, name and fame — for Guru. If they think that they, by accumulation of spiritual knowledge or understanding that they'll get the name and fame of being a Kṛṣṇa das or a devotee —that will be disastrous for their spiritual development.
Devotion attracts the all-attractive Krishna

Even Mahāprabhu expresses this in the famous reiteration of what comes from Śrīmatī Rādhārāṇī, Na prema-gandho ’sti darāpi me harau, krandāmi saubhāgya-bharaṁ prakāśitum (Śrī Caitanya-caritāmṛta: Madhya-līlā, 2.45.1-2) He says, “I don't have a scent of the fragrance of kṛṣṇa-prem, what to speak of a drop.” And then he says, “But, if someone says, Well we see though — you’re crying torrents of tears as if the Gaṅgā is streaming out of your eyes.” He says, “Oh that, I am... I show that so that people will think I'm a devotee, it's all a show.” Why is he saying that? — “And then people will think I'm a devotee of Kṛṣṇa.” It's mentioned in the Ramananda Samvad that there's no greater theme than having the reputation of being a devotee of Kṛṣṇa. What do we see in the case of Mādhavendra Purī? — Rather than being subjected to the adoration of the public, that he's a great devotee of Kṛṣṇa, he fled in the middle of the night after Kṣīra-corā Gopīnātha. The deity stole the kṣīra and he realized: “Oh, everyone, they'll be thinking, as the pujari said, “Who is that fortunate devotee named Mādhavendra Purī”? The word will spread that he has devotion to Kṛṣṇa. It says, su-durlabhā...

kleśa-ghnī śubha-dā mokṣa- 
laghutā-kṛt su-durlabhā
sāndrānanda-viśeṣātmā 
śrī-kṛṣṇākarṣiṇī ca sā
(Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu: 1.1.17)

Such a rare achievement, because devotion proper is capable of attracting Kṛṣṇa Himself. Kṛṣṇa who is all attractive, He's irresistibly inconceivably attractive — He is attracted to devotion. It's mentioned in the Bhāgavatam commentary of Vishvanatha Chakravartī Ṭhākur, just in passing, why the Vraja-gopīs are superior to the yogis and the jñānīs. He saying, “Well, through yoga practice some are able to meditate, think of Kṛṣṇa. Some jñānīs — also. But what's the difference? Gopīs admittedly, āhuś ca te nalina-nābha padāravindaṁ, yogeśvarair hṛdi vicintyam agādha-bodhaiḥ (Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam: 10.82.48.1-2) Saying, We're not yogis, we're not jñānīs, we're just simple, fallen householders. — Why are they highlighted or mentioned by Chakravartī Ṭhākur in this saying? — Because the difference is: yes, yogis and jñānīs may be able to think of Kṛṣṇa, but Kṛṣṇa is thinking of the Vraja-gopīs. — That's the difference. He's meditating on them. [laughing] He saying, “These... they do these fantastic things and they have a glimpse of Kṛṣṇa.” Yeah. That is a wonderful extraordinary thing. It's mentioned in the Brahma-saṁhitā. What does it say? — Vāyor athāpi manaso muni-puṅgavānām...

panthās tu koṭi-śata-vatsara-sampragamyo
vāyor athāpi manaso muni-puṅgavānām
so 'py asti yat-prapada-sīmny avicintya-tattve
govindam ādi-puruṣaṁ tam ahaṁ bhajāmi
(Brahma-saṁhitā: 5.34)

But Kṛṣṇa — He's thinking of the Vraja-gopīs. When Mahāprabhu met Raghupati Upādhyāya… We're told that Mahāprabhu wanted to understand from him what he thought was the best thing in the world, the most spiritual thing, the highest concept of God, the highest form of Divinity, the highest pastimes of Divinity — everything he wanted to know: the best, best, best, highest. — What is that? And what's the best path in approaching Him? — Everything: he's cutting to the chase, He wants to know: “Tell me, without a lot of explanation, the answer to these questions.” So, it means in a summary form, what's been expressed in one place in 100,000 ślokas, how do you express that in one śloka? As Guru Mahārāj points out: Mahābhārata, Brahma-gāyatrī, a lakh, 100,000 ślokas in one place, and then — one śloka. Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam: 18,000 ślokas. Gāyatrī-bhāṣya-rūpo ’sau, vedārtha-paribṛṁhitaḥ (Śrī Caitanya-caritāmṛta: Madhya-līlā, 25.143.3-4), everything concentrated in one. So, Raghupati Upādhyāya — he's actually quoting himself. [laughing] He's saying I've written some ślokas in this regard. And the first one being, what is it? —

śrutim apare smṛtim itare
bhāratam anye bhajantu bhava-bhītāḥ
aham iha nandaṁ vande
yasyālinde paraṁ brahma
(Padyāvalī: 126)

Very beautifully he can summarize everything and condense it to a very fine point. As Śrīla Gurudev once said, “Why Bhaktivinod Ṭhākur can do this? — When he says all the Vedas proclaim that Kṛṣṇa's the property of Rādhārāṇī and Her girlfriends. — How can he make such an audacious statement?” He said, “Because he has a view of the whole. Because he can see the entire thing. He can express it so succinctly. So, very beautifully, Raghupati Upādhyāya saying, “Well, the śrutis, they describe one thing: the Śruti or “the best of what is to be heard”. What does Rūpa Goswāmi say? Śruti-mauli-ratna-māla — about the Holy Name — the supreme sound. He said, “The śrutis, they must say that through sound culture, you'll get everything, otherwise they'd be committing suicide. Why? Because they’re sound personified. So they're saying, “Yes, actually sound is the ultimate thing.” But of all sounds, nikhila-śruti-mauli-ratna-māla (Nāmāṣṭaka: 1.1), the crown jewel of all spiritual sounds is Sri Kṛṣṇa, nām-saṅkīrtan, the Holy Name of Kṛṣṇa.

So he's saying, “Śrutis, they've given some advice, śrutibhir vimṛgyām, they’re pointing us in a particular direction. That is their seva: to indicate which direction to go to, to proceed in one's search for Sri Kṛṣṇa. But as Uddhava says, ārya-pathaṁ ca hitvā, bhejur mukunda-padavīṁ śrutibhir vimṛgyām ( Śrī Caitanya-caritāmṛta: Antya-līlā, 7.47). But the Vraja-gopīs... what the Vedas are pointing in a particular direction, they live in that zone. That's their zone, their domain. The inhabitants of that highest domain that the Vedas are pointing to. So the śruti, the smṛti; and their giving so much advice. What is the main concern of people? Is dealing with mortality; death. Every day, every media, newspaper, internet home-page, what ever it is, you can look now, look tomorrow, look the following... look every day and you will see what's prominently placed there; is death... and a new iphone. [laughing] To give you some hope. [laughing] Yes, we're all going to die, but did you see the new iphone? [laughing] So, you can pick up you're new iphone and say, Oh, did you hear what happened to me... yeah... it's terrible, isn't it?... yeah. It's going to happen to all of us... can you hear me?... [laughing] It's death,

ahany ahani bhūtāni
gacchantīha yamālayam
śeṣāḥ sthāvaram icchanti
kim āścaryam ataḥ paraṁ
(Mahābhārata: Vana-parva 313.116)

Nothing more wonderful then this. We live in the world of mortality. All around us there's evidence of death. It's in the news everyday, being blasted at us. Still, somehow we're thinking; not I. It won't happen to me, at least not yet. We go, no... I mean... I know it will happen eventually, but not yet. I won't be in that plane that's blown out of the sky, or get that disease... this mosquito could be bringing that to me right now. Oh no, that mosquito... he won't have the fatal disease. In so many ways we're avoiding dealing with this. It's says, bhava-bhītāḥ, that's what it means. The bhava-sāgar means the, in this sense, not the world of divine ecstasy, but the world of death. So he saying, So that's why people... I mean to be truthful... he saying, really, their getting scriptural advice and otherwise, how to try and escape death. Weather we do it through religion, or science, or technology, or whatever it is, we're trying to avoid this inevitability.

So, he says, but what I want to know. So people think like, oh, you mean so if I worship Kṛṣṇa, then I'll become deathless? These are mundane motives for spiritual culture pursuit. So, but what I want to know, aham iha nandaṁ vande yasyālinde paraṁ brahma (Śrī Caitanya-caritāmṛta: Madhya-līlā, 19.96.2) People, their approaching the Param-brahma to get this, that, and the other thing, according to what they perceive as self interest; śreya; preya; what they think is in their self interest. So, but what I want to know is, “What did Nanda Mahārāj do get the Param-brahma, that everyone's seeking, to crawl in his courtyard as a child”. That fascinates me. That I find compelling.

nandaḥ kim akarod brahman
śreya evaṁ mahodayam
yaśodā ca mahā-bhāgā
papau yasyāḥ stanaṁ hariḥ
(Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam:10.8.46)

When it's mentioned in the Bhāgavatam; only Acharyas they can make these type comparative analysis. Just... but... what we can say, for the sake reminding us, that the spiritual world is dynamic, growing, full of gradation. Yaśodā ca mahā-bhāgā (Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam:10.8.46.3), Yaśodā, by extension, is even more fortunate, papau yasyāḥ stanaṁ hariḥ (Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam:10.8.46.4) that the supreme Lord is sitting on her lap sucking her breast. So, Raghupati Upādhyāya in one śloka, he's gone from the śrutis to rāga-bhakti; prema-bhakti... in one śloka. Śruti, smṛti... rāga-bhakti. Why... how can he do that? He has a vision, a comprehensive vision of the whole. So, Mahāprabhu liked hearing this very much. Then He said, “Anymore, do you have anymore of this quality of substance?” And he saying, “Yeah, there's more, but I don't know if there is anyone qualified to hear it. And if I can find someone qualified will they believe it?” It's unbelievable, it's inconceivable. I mentioned in China, in Shenzhen, we saw that movie 'The Life of Pi.' And in that, without getting in all the details, the person says at a critical point for understanding the whole. He says, “I'm going to tell you a story that will make you believe in God.” Then so many other things are shown that people may forget. He said, “I'm going to tell you a story that will make you believe in God.” Then after he tells this very fantastic story, in particularly he's telling that to some insurance company agents, because he needs to file a claim. And their saying, “This story you just told us, is unbelievable. We...I can almost guarantee you're not going to get any money, no one is going to believe it, you won't get... be able to file a claim and get some renumeration. Then he said, “Then I can tell you another story.” So he tell a similar story to that. But, they go, “Well, this is believable. This story we can submit and you'll probably get something, you know, you'll be nicely rewarded; compensated.” He said, “Alright, but I just wanted to ask you a question, though. Of the two stories I told you, which one do you prefer?” They said, “We prefer the unbelievable one. That was really something. Yeah, we prefer that.” So, that's what he's saying, that I will tell you a story that will make you believe in God. I mean, the story of God is acintya, it is inconceivable or unbelievable in the sense that the word is a modifier that means, astonishingly wonderful. That's what we mean in English when we say unbelievable. It no longer means 'I can't believe that.' That maybe what it meant originally, now it's an intensifier to express astonishment. If you give me something where I go “Wow, this is unbelievable.” It doesn't mean I don't believe just gave me that. It's not what it means... means astonishingly wonderful. That is the story of God, in general, and Kṛṣṇa conception specifically. So, Raghupati Upādhyāya;

kaṁ prati kathayitum īśe
samprati ko vā pratītim āyātu
go-pati-tanayā-kuñje
gopa-vadhūṭī-viṭaṁ brahma
(Śrī Caitanya-caritāmṛta: Madhya-līlā, 19.98)

Who will believe me if I tell them. Where I told you before that param-brahma crawling in the courtyard of Nanda Mahārāj. Well, in His most enchanting, charming, sweet, and irresistibly attractive past times, He's the param-brahma, He's go-pati-tanayā-kuñje, gopa-vadhūṭī-viṭaṁ brahma (Śrī Caitanya-caritāmṛta: Madhya-līlā, 19.98.3-4). He's hunting the Vraja-gopīs in the kuñja in Vṛndāvan; the forest flowers of Vṛndāvan. Who could I tell this to? And if I can find someone to tell them, will they believe me? So, Śrīla Guru Mahārāj, he wrote an article, in the Gaudiya Math time, in which he alluded, directly mentioned this past time, Mahāprabhu enquiring from Raghupati Upādhyāya in this śloka coming. And he said, “What it points to, indirectly, is that, or by inference that, with the advent of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, then everyone will hear about it and be given the opportunity to believe that. What was previously unattainable, anarpita-carīṁ cirāt karuṇayāvatīrṇaḥ kalau, samarpayitum unnatojjvala-rasāṁ sva-bhakti-śriyam (Śrī Caitanya-caritāmṛta: Adi-līlā, 1.4.1-2), Mahāprabhu will come and distribute this to everyone. Namo mahā-vadānyāya kṛṣṇa-prema-pradāya te, kṛṣṇāya kṛṣṇa-caitanya-nāmne gaura-tviṣe namaḥ (Prayer to Lord Caitanya), so Mahāprabhu is very happy to hear that. Then what do you say is the supreme abode, the supreme form of the Lord, the supreme age of the Lord, and the highest rasa. Then he says,

śyāmam eva paraṁ rūpaṁ
purī madhu-purī varā
vayaḥ kaiśorakaṁ dhyeyam
ādya eva paro rasaḥ
(Śrī Caitanya-caritāmṛta: Madhya-līlā, 19.106)

That the supreme form of the Lord; Śyāma-sundar Kṛṣṇa, śyāmam eva paraṁ rūpaṁ: the supreme abode, Mathurā Vṛṇdavan: the supreme age, kiśor... we're told that's when Kṛṣṇa is at His most beautiful and manifest His past times with Śrīmatī Rādhārāṇī and the Vraja-gopīs. And... what did he say?... ādi-rasa, madhura-rasa is the supreme rasa.

That Mahāprabhu He's saying, “Any display from a devotee to try and impress others with devotional achievement is a type of show, or cheating.” So, what is the proper response, if some spiritual wealth comes to the disciple... there's a famous śloka, one that says, “As rare as it is to find the Sat-Guru, in this world, it's equally rare, if not rarer, to find a proper disciple.” The proper recipient of that wealth. And what is that wealth mentioned that, it is said, “All the wealth in the world cannot repay the debt incurred by the disciple to get one word from Sri Guru.” What do we say, guru-mukha-padma-vākya, cittete kariyā aikya, āra nā kariha mane āśā (Śri Guru-vaiṣṇava Māhātmya-gita: by Śrīla Narottam dās Ṭhākur, 2.1-2). Śrīla Gurudev; Śrīla Govinda Mahārāj said “One word from the lotus lips of Śrīla Guru Mahārāj is sufficient to make us his slaves forever.” So, we're unable to pay, repay the debt. So, only by service... and it's through that service some recognition comes to us, we pass that on to Guru understanding that really, truly it's a gift. My Guru Mahārāj says in his Premadhāma Stotram, kṛṣṇa-nāma-sīdhu-dhāma-dhanya-dāna-sāgaraṁ... dān-sāgar (Śrī Śrī Premadhāma-deva-stotram: 1.3) The ultimate gift. So, it's being gifted or extended to us by the grace of Sri Guru, by the guru-varga. If by proper reproduction and faithfulness and adherence to the representation of Kṛṣṇa conception and extension to others, some recognition or praise comes our way. Then to save us from the ego that 'I'm a devotee', or an advance devote, we offer that acclaim, name and fame, recognition to the lotus feet of Sri Guru.

And we say that in the case of Śrīla Prabhupād, or Bhaktivedanta Swami Mahārāj. He spread Kṛṣṇa consciousness all over the world but, whenever praise came to him, in that regard, he offered that to the lotus feet Guru and Vaiṣṇav. Always presenting himself as a humble servitor of Śrīla Bhakti Siddhanta Saraswati Ṭhākur. Kṛṣṇadāsa Kavirāja Goswāmī is the medium for expression of Śrī Caitanya-caritāmṛtam, and he's saying, “That some higher power is making me write these things, Madan-Mohan is using me to express these things.” Jagāi mādhāi haite muñi se pāpiṣṭha, purīṣera kīṭa haite muñi se laghiṣṭha (Śrī Caitanya-caritāmṛta: Ādi-līlā, 5.205) “I'm more sinful than Jagāi and Mādhāi, etc... But, by the mercy of Nityānanda Prabhu I'm being used as an instrument to express the past times of Mahāprabhu, at the behest of Śrī Śrī Rādhā Madan Mohan.” So... name and fame are particularly, according to Guru Mahārāj, difficult to detect. And their the greatest enemy of the devotee. That is, what is at the base of sahajiya: imitationism. To imitate the ecstatic transformation of higher devotees to give people the impression that one has devotion to Kṛṣṇa. Where's in Mahāprabhu śloka again, reiterating what Rādhārāṇī herself has express, na prema-gandho ’sti darāpi me harau (Śrī Caitanya-caritāmṛta: Madhya-līlā, 2.45.1) “I don't have the scent of the fragrance of kṛṣṇa-prem, what to speak of a drop.” It's not a thing of this world. If one has kṛṣṇa-prem, love for Kṛṣṇā, then what did She say, and echoed in Mahāprabu's sentiments? Separation will be impossible. The substance is so high, so wonderful. In Guru Mahārāj's words, “So heart swallowing.” That separation is not a possibility. If one were to become separated from it, they would die. So, what's the proof you don't have it, you're alive. That the devotional way of viewing these things. [drinking] So... it's what we're trying for is not something of this world. So then Guru Mahārāj would say, “Then we're mad men.” As Mahāprabhu says to Rāmānanda, āmi — eka bātula, tumi — dvitīya bātula (Śrī Caitanya-caritāmṛta: Madhya-līlā, 8.291.1), I'm the first mad man, and you're the second one, because you appreciate all of these things. So, in this world, the pursuit of Kṛṣṇa consciousness is like madness. But, when this world vanishes then we can perceive the value; the true wealth value, of Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Any other question?

Devotee: Sometimes that we might offense a Vaiṣṇavas in our thinking, like in our mind. So, this is offense from the mind. How can they affect the soul? How is it connected to the soul? Because...

Goswāmī Mahārāj: Well, because we're interested in the sevā world. So, aparādh, offenses to Vaiṣṇava, is an obstruction for the servitor. That's what the soul is interested in, is serving. So, Rūpa Goswāmī, in the 'Upadeśāmṛta,' which incidentally Guru Mahārāj says, “Really is Mahāprabhu expressing his conceptions through Rūpa Goswāmī”. Says there that, he gives a comparison that just as in the body there might be some defect. Someone might be physically challenged, in some particular way. As we do not see that as a disqualification, also, to observe particular mentalities we won't think that as being the root identity of a devotee. But, rather to see them as a servitor. We know Guru Mahārāj gave the example, at the time of Saraswati Ṭhākur, that there were two devotees who did not appreciate one another, for what ever reason. And we're told, that in a public setting, Śrīla Saraswati Ṭhākur asked each one to praise the other one; to say something in their favor. So, Guru Mahārāj said, “The only way they could do this, was by looking to the svarūp. To their servitor identity.” Then they could express some praise. So, we want to view our godbothers and godsisters as aspiring servitors, as recognized servitors of Guru and Vaiṣṇav. And to see how their serving, and if anything, if there's something we can learn from them to improve our own service aspirations. That will be a healthy mentality. But, if we look for their faults, then some blame... the same sort of blame will come and appear within us. In one place, Guru Mahārāj compares it to, “Spitting in the wind.” You spit in the wind, it's going to come back on you. So, if we become absorbed in finding fault with Vaiṣṇavas, then those faults will appear within us as a reaction. No less then Śrīla Saraswati Thākur said, “It is only that I am honeycombed with defects, that I take the task of finding fault with others. That I could have spent my time serving the lotus feet of Guru and Vaiṣṇav. Instead, I spent that time finding fault with them. Some Vaiṣṇav aparādh is the obstruction on the path of devotion. We want to avoid that at all costs. Sometimes Śrīla Gurudev, Śrīla Govinda Mahārāj would say, “One of my faults is I believe everyone.” He means to say, I believe in everyone. He'd rather be a believer than a disbeliever. He'd rather believe that whom he observes is a sincere aspiring servitor of the lotus feet of Guru and Gaurāṅga then be suspicious of them, or doubt the sincerity of their intentions. In concluding with saying that my religion is finding fault with myself. So, the critical eye, it's natural, human, to be critical. But, when we become aware that this is what we're doing, then it will be better to turn the critical eye inward, ātma-samīkṣā, in self examination and see what are our faults, our flaws, how we can improve. Any other question?

Devotee: Goswāmī Mahārāj, I don't know if I can ask this question but I was listening to the lecture; one of the previous lectures, and you told that when gopīs saw Mahāprabhu from a distance and they were concealed, they were proud of seeing him. And what was the occasion when he (they) saw Mahāprabhu?

Goswāmī Mahārāj: No, what I said was, I was quoting the Caitanyāṣṭakam of Rūpa Goswāmī. So we know that the... from works like the Gaura-gannodesh-dipika of Karni... Kavi Karnapura and else where, who are the principle devotees of Mahāprabhu. What is there position in Vṛndāvan. So, in this context, their seen... remember they occupy that position in Vṛndāvan, Rūpe, Sanatan, etc... Now their seen in gaura-līlā that Kṛṣṇa has now... who is he... rādhā-bhāva-dyuti-suvalita. He now enveloped in the heart and halo of Rādhārāṇī. So, that's giving some pride in their hearts that the wealth of their mistress, who means Śrīmatī Rādhārāṇi, that position has been embraced by Kṛṣṇa. Quoting,

suresanam durgam gatir atisayenopanisadam
muninam sarvasvam pranata-patalinam madhurima
viniryasah premno nikhila-pasu-palambhuja-drsam
sa caitanyah kim me punar api drsor yasyati padam
(Prathama Caitanyastaka: 2)

It's the second śloka of the Caitanyāṣṭakam of Rūpa Goswāmī. And showing some gradation in, what is very, rarely glimpsed by the demi-gods, indicated in the Upaniṣads, etc... The Vraja-gopīs know very well what this divine substance is, and who the original personification and embodiment of that divine wealth is. It's their mistress Śrīmatī Rādhārāṇi and their very happy and overwhelm with joy to see that Kṛṣṇa has embraced that position as the supreme triumph of devotion. Where we say, infinite comes in control of the finite, and here, Kṛṣṇa Himself has embraced the position of a devotee, sva-bhaktebhyaḥ śuddhāṁ nija-bhajana-mudrām upadiśan (Śrī Caitanya-caritāmṛta: Ādi-līlā, 3.66.3). Hare Kṛṣṇa. [laughing at sounds in the background] Their howling in agreement. [laughing] Hare Kṛṣṇa.

Devotee: Where can we find them?

Goswāmī Mahārāj: It's in the Caitanyāṣṭakam of Rūpa Goswāmī. He's written three of them. So, this is perhaps number one. Three eight śloka... like there's Śikṣāṣṭakam, he wrote Caitanyāṣṭakam. Eight ślokas, but he did it three times.

Devotee: Three times?

Goswāmī Mahārāj: Yes, so that's 24, but this particular verse also found in the Ādi-līlā, Chapter Four of the Caitanya-caritāmṛtam. Which is a very significant chapter in understanding who is Mahāprabhu and what is His reason... internal reason for appearing in the world. We understand the external is given, nām-saṅkīrtan, but why did... what is His internal reason for descending. External; nām-saṅkīrtan the yuga-dharma. But, the internal reason. So, that's a very important chapter. And there Kṛṣṇadāsa Kavirāja Goswāmī is quoting from various Caitanyāṣṭakams of Rūpa Goswāmī to... how do you say... to corroborate the position that he's