 | In the histories given above, we’ve seen some examples of contradictory teachings, each serving its purpose. Similarly, Srila Prabhupada’s statements, personal example, and mood related to women vary and may sometimes appear contradictory. These apparent contradictions may lead to our misunderstand his teachings.
|
| | What do we do with contradictions? One thing is, we should be careful to avoid something called attentional bias, which is the tendency to pay attention to some things while ignoring others. Unlike impartially analyzing all the information to discern important points, attentional bias is often unconscious, considers only some of the available information, and is a result of our situation in the modes of material nature. The pastime of Parvati and Chitraketu can exemplify our attentional bias.
|
| | Here are texts from Srimad-Bhagavatam along with Srila Prabhupada’s purports to them that explain the situation:
|
| | (a) “One day while traveling, Chitraketu came upon Lord Siva embracing Parvati, surrounded by an assembly of Siddhas, Charanas and great sages. Seeing Lord Siva in that situation, Chitraketu laughed very loudly, but Parvati became very angry at him and cursed him.” (SB 6.17 Summary)
|
| | (b) “The Supreme Personality of Godhead wanted to bring Chitraketu to Vaikunthaloka as soon as possible. The Lord’s plan was that Chitraketu be cursed by Parvati to become Vrtrasura so that in his next life he could quickly return home, back to Godhead.” (SB 6.17.4–5, purport)
|
| | (c) “For Parvati to be embraced by Lord Siva was natural in a relationship between husband and wife; this was nothing extraordinary for Chitraketu to see. Nonetheless, Chitraketu laughed loudly to see Lord Siva in that situation, even though he should not have done so.” (SB 6.17.4–5, purport)
|
| | (d) “Not knowing the prowess of Lord Siva and Parvati, Chitraketu strongly criticized them. His statements were not at all pleasing, and therefore the goddess Parvati, being very angry, spoke as follows to Chitraketu, who thought himself better than Lord Siva in controlling the senses.” (SB 6.17.10)
|
| | (e) “The difficulty was that Chitraketu, having become a great devotee of Lord Vishnu, Sankarshana, was somewhat proud at having achieved Lord Sankarshana’s favor and therefore thought that he could now criticize anyone, even Lord Siva. This kind of pride in a devotee is never tolerated. A Vaishnava should always remain very humble and meek and offer respect to others.” (SB 6.17.10, purport)
|
| | (f) “Chitraketu thought himself a better controller of the senses than Lord Siva, although actually he was not. Because of all these considerations, mother Parvati was somewhat angry at Chitraketu.” (SB 6.17.10, purport)
|
| | (g) “Mother Parvati was justified in punishing Chitraketu, for Chitraketu impudently criticized the supreme father, Mahadeva, who is the father of the living entities conditioned within this material world.” (SB 6.17.15, purport)
|
| | (h) “Mother Parvati spoke to Chitraketu exactly like a mother who says to her naughty child, ‘My dear child, I am punishing you so that you won’t do anything like this again.’” (SB 6.17.15, purport)
|
| | (i) “It is the duty of a mother to chastise her beloved son, even in the case of the Supreme Lord. It is to be understood that mother Durga [Parvati] was justified in punishing Chitraketu.” (SB 6.17.15, purport)
|
| | (j) “Srila Visvanatha Chakravarti Thakur comments that Maharaja Chitraketu’s being cursed by Parvati should be considered the mercy of the Lord. The Lord wanted Chitraketu to return to Godhead as soon as possible, and therefore he terminated all the reactions of his past deeds. Acting through the heart of Parvati, the Lord, who is situated in everyone’s heart, cursed Chitraketu in order to end all his material reactions.” ( 6.17.17 purport)
|
| | From the above, it’s abundantly clear that Chitraketu should not have criticized Lord Siva, that Chitraketu was proud, and that Krishna Himself, acting from within Parvati’s heart, orchestrated Chitraketu’s being cursed. At this point, however, the pastime becomes more nuanced, for Lord Siva does not approve of Parvati cursing Chitraketu.
|
| | (a) “Lord Siva tried to convince his wife, Parvati, that her cursing of Chitraketu was not very sensible.” (SB 6.17.34–35, purport)
|
| | b) “These were all friendly jokes; there was nothing serious for which Chitraketu should have been cursed by Parvati. Upon hearing the instructions of Lord Siva, Parvati must have been very much ashamed for cursing Chitraketu to become a demon. Mother Parvati could not appreciate Chitraketu’s position, and therefore she cursed him, but when she understood the instructions of Lord Siva she was ashamed ... Upon being informed by Lord Siva, mother Parvati could understand that she was wrong in cursing Chitraketu.” (SB 6.17.34–35, purport)
|
| | How could Parvati be wrong in cursing Chitraketu if Krishna inspired her from within the heart to do so? And do we pay attention to the many impressive justifications for Parvati’s action or the criticism leveled at her for that same action? Somehow, Parvati should have and should not have cursed Chitraketu.
|
| | “But which is it?” we ask. Even in the material world difficult situations may arise where we have to choose between two options which are right from one perspective and wrong from another. As it’s said, “damned if you do and damned if you don’t.”
|
| | Spiritually, we know that the Lord’s and His devotees’ pastimes must be approached with care, caution, and loving devotion. Since the Lord is simultaneously and inconceivably the same as and different from His energies, therefore “The materialistic demeanor cannot possibly stretch to the transcendental autocrat...” (Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati, Sri Brahma Samhita Foreword). Our mundane minds, bound to the confines of this world, cannot grasp how such apparent opposites as cursing and not cursing are both simultaneously correct.
|
| | Such inconceivability may be beyond our grasp because, “One who is in the mode of goodness is... somewhat elevated, for he can gradually understand what is God. In the modes of passion and ignorance, no one can understand God.” (Teachings of Lord Kapila verse 14, purport) In other words if, due to our situation within the modes of material nature, we take the lesson from one side of this pastime and not the other, it may be because we are under the influence of the modes of material nature. And that influence can lead to attentional bias: we pay attention to one aspect of the pastime while simultaneously ignoring the other. In fact, the Bhagavatam validates and offers us valuable lessons from both aspects.
|
| | Like the Srimad-Bhagavatam, Srila Prabhupada’s statements, example, and mood related to women may appear to us to vary widely and even be contradictory, but perhaps it’s our black-and-white thinking that prevents us from seeing the unity behind his statements, example, and mood.
|
English
Español
Pусский
Português