SB 10.33.28

SB 10.33.28

Devanagari

आप्तकामो यदुपति: कृतवान्वै जुगुप्सितम् । किमभिप्राय एतन्न: शंशयं छिन्धि सुव्रत ॥ २८ ॥

Verse text

āpta-kāmo yadu-patiḥ kṛtavān vai jugupsitam kim-abhiprāya etan naḥ śaṁśayaṁ chindhi su-vrata

Synonyms

āpta kāmaḥ — self-satisfied ; yadu patiḥ — the master of the Yadu dynasty ; kṛtavān has performed ; vai certainly ; jugupsitam that which is contemptible ; kim abhiprāyaḥ — with what intent ; etat this ; naḥ our ; śaṁśayam doubt ; chindhi please cut ; su vrata — O faithful upholder of vows .

Translation

O faithful upholder of vows, please destroy our doubt by explaining to us what purpose the self-satisfied Lord of the Yadus had in mind when He behaved so contemptibly.

Translation (Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura)

O faithful upholder of vows, please destroy our doubt by explaining to us what purpose the self-satisfied Lord of the Yadus had in mind when He behaved so contemptibly. KB 10.33.28 In his statement, Mahārāja Parīkṣit has used several important words which require clarification. The first word, jugupsitam, means “abominable.” The first doubt of Mahārāja Parīkṣit was as follows: Lord Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme Personality of Godhead, who had advented Himself to establish religious principles. Why then did He mix with others’ wives in the dead of night and enjoy dancing, embracing and kissing? According to the Vedic injunctions, this is not allowed. Also, when the gopīs first came to Him, He gave instructions to them to return to their homes. To call the wives of other persons or young girls and enjoy dancing with them is certainly abominable according to the Vedas. Why should Kṛṣṇa have done this? Another word used here is āpta-kāma. Some may take it for granted that Kṛṣṇa was very lusty among young girls, but Parīkṣit Mahārāja said that this was not possible. He could not be lusty. First of all, from the material calculation He was only eight years old. At that age a boy cannot be lusty. Āpta-kāma means that the Supreme Personality of Godhead is self-satisfied. Even if He were lusty, He doesn’t need to take help from others to satisfy His lusty desires. The next point is that, although not lusty Himself, He might have been seduced by the lusty desires of the gopīs. But Mahārāja Parīkṣit then used another word, yadu-pati, which indicates that Kṛṣṇa is the most exalted personality in the dynasty of the Yadus. The kings in the dynasty of Yadu were considered to be the most pious, and their descendants were also like that. Having taken birth in that family, how could Kṛṣṇa have been seduced, even by the gopīs? It is concluded, therefore, that it was not possible for Kṛṣṇa to do anything abominable. But Mahārāja Parīkṣit was in doubt as to why Kṛṣṇa acted in that way. What was the real purpose? Another word Mahārāja Parīkṣit used when he addressed Śukadeva Gosvāmī is suvrata, which means to take a vow to enact pious activities. Śukadeva Gosvāmī was an educated brahmacārī, and under the circumstances it was not possible for him to indulge in sex. This is strictly prohibited for brahmacārīs, and what to speak of a brahmacārī like Śukadeva Gosvāmī. But because the circumstances of the rāsa dance were very suspect, Mahārāja Parīkṣit inquired for clarification from Śukadeva Gosvāmī.

Purport

It is clear to the enlightened that these doubts will arise in the minds and hearts of persons unfamiliar with the transcendental pastimes of the Lord. Therefore since time immemorial great sages and enlightened kings like Parīkṣit Mahārāja have openly raised these questions to provide the authoritative answer for all posterity.

Purport (Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura)

"If you argue that for the Supreme Lord there is no adharma, what would be his purpose in performing such abominable acts? One cannot answer that he does so to fulfill his desires, because his desires are already fulfilled (aptakamah)." "But in this avatara he must do these condemned activities." "Then how could he be the head of the Yadus who follow the highest dharma? This is not only my doubt but the doubt of many people. It is our (nah) doubt. That the lord, though he is apta kama and atma rama, enjoyed enthusiastically with the gopis, who were the very form prema and bliss, is a very deep concept. Not understanding, doubts will arise among people. Though you are deeply committed to proper conduct (suvrata), you have become extremely involved with the lilas involving such condemned conduct. From this also doubt arises."

Purport (Jiva Goswami)

If he acts in this way, how can he be the leader of the Yadus who are the greatest followers of dharma? There is no other doubt. Parīkṣit says “we” to indicate many people in the assembly. The heart becomes disturbed by the fact that Kṛṣṇa was the crown jewel of good conduct and also the corrupter of scripture. O Śukadeva, fixed in brahmacārya (suvrata)! He acted contrary to your conduct. This conduct is condemned. Or, you are fixed in good conduct (suvrata) but if you cannot explain this, then good conduct that you and others follow will be destroyed. There is another opposite meaning. He is the leader of the devotees (yadu-patiḥ). To give mercy to devotees, he sometimes transgresses dharma. Did he do condemned acts (jugupsitam)? Never. He has done what is approved by the devotees. Why? He desired to spread his prema through the rāsa pastimes (āpta-kāmaḥ). By spreading prema, the highest result, he did not perform censured acts, but rather by the rāsa dance he satisfied all the devotees. There can be no doubt about this. Moving his folded hands, Parīkṣit asked Śukadeva to destroy the doubts of those assembled, including himself out of humility. He says destroy “generally (prāya)” since some present, the devotees who know the conclusions of scripture and were inundated with rasa had no doubts about the rāsa pastimes filled with prema. I ask for the benefit of the inattentive members of the assembly. This is not my doubt. Therefore cut the chains of their doubts so they no longer have fear (abhi), O Śukadeva, fixed in bhakti (suvrata)!