KEY TAKEAWAYS FROM HH HARIVILAS MAHARAJ’S MORNING BHAGAVATAM CLASS ON SB 2.7.23 & 24:
- The Lord appears when there are discrepancies in the discharge of factual religion. Lord Rāmacandra also appeared under the same circumstances, accompanied by His brothers, who are expansions of the Lord’s internal potency, and by Lakṣmījī Sītādevī.
- Originally Lord Rāmacandra is the incarnation of Vāsudeva, Lakṣmaṇa is the incarnation of Saṅkarṣaṇa, Bharata is the incarnation of Pradyumna, and Śatrughna is the incarnation of Aniruddha, expansions of the Personality of Godhead.
- Lakṣmījī Sītā is the internal potency of the Lord and is neither an ordinary woman nor the external potency incarnation of Durgā. Durgā is the external potency of the Lord, and she is associated with Lord Śiva.
- Sītā is Lakṣmījī, or the goddess of fortune, but she is never to be enjoyed by any living being. She is meant for being worshiped by the living being along with her husband, Śrī Rāmacandra.
- Rāvaṇa was very advanced materially, so much so that he turned his kingdom, Laṅkā, into pure gold, or full material wealth. But because he did not recognize the supremacy of Lord Rāmacandra and defied Him by stealing His wife, Sītā, Rāvaṇa was killed, and all his opulence and power were destroyed.
- The Personality of Godhead has every sentiment of a sentient being, like all other living beings, because He is the chief and original living entity, the supreme source of all other living beings.
- Not only was mother Sītā powerful, but any woman who follows in the footsteps of mother Sītā can also become similarly powerful.
- As a man must follow great personalities like Brahmā and Nārada, a woman must follow the path of such ideal women as Sītā, Mandodarī and Draupadī. By staying chaste and faithful to her husband, a woman enriches herself with supernatural power.
- Rāvaṇa was condemned not only by Lord Rāmacandra but even by his own wife, Mandodarī. Because she was a chaste woman, she knew the power of another chaste woman, especially such a wife as mother Sītādevī.
- One who follows the path of Rāvaṇa is condemned in two ways: his body is fit to be eaten by dogs and vultures, and the soul goes to hell.
- Mandodarī, the wife of Rāvaṇa, could understand all this because she was a chaste woman. Although lamenting for the death of her husband, she knew what would happen to his body and soul, for although one cannot see directly with one’s material eyes, one can see with eyes of knowledge (paśyanti jñāna-cakṣuṣaḥ).
SB 2.7.23 & 24 TRANSLATION:
Due to His causeless mercy upon all living entities within the universe, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, along with His plenary extensions, appeared in the family of Mahārāja Ikṣvāku as the Lord of His internal potency, Sītā. Under the order of His father, Mahārāja Daśaratha, He entered the forest and lived there for considerable years with His wife and younger brother. Rāvaṇa, who was very materially powerful, with ten heads on his shoulders, committed a great offense against Him and was thus ultimately vanquished.
Lord Rāma is the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and His brothers, namely Bharata, Lakṣmaṇa and Śatrughna, are His plenary expansions. All four brothers are viṣṇu-tattva and were never ordinary human beings. There are many unscrupulous and ignorant commentators on Rāmāyaṇa who present the younger brothers of Lord Rāmacandra as ordinary living entities. But here in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, the most authentic scripture on the science of Godhead, it is clearly stated that His brothers were His plenary expansions. Originally Lord Rāmacandra is the incarnation of Vāsudeva, Lakṣmaṇa is the incarnation of Saṅkarṣaṇa, Bharata is the incarnation of Pradyumna, and Śatrughna is the incarnation of Aniruddha, expansions of the Personality of Godhead. Lakṣmījī Sītā is the internal potency of the Lord and is neither an ordinary woman nor the external potency incarnation of Durgā. Durgā is the external potency of the Lord, and she is associated with Lord Śiva.
As stated in the Bhagavad-gītā (4.7), the Lord appears when there are discrepancies in the discharge of factual religion. Lord Rāmacandra also appeared under the same circumstances, accompanied by His brothers, who are expansions of the Lord’s internal potency, and by Lakṣmījī Sītādevī.
Lord Rāmacandra was ordered by His father, Mahārāja Daśaratha, to leave home for the forest under awkward circumstances, and the Lord, as the ideal son of His father, carried out the order, even on the occasion of His being declared the King of Ayodhyā. One of His younger brothers, Lakṣmaṇajī, desired to go with Him, and so also His eternal wife, Sītājī, desired to go with Him. The Lord agreed to both of them, and all together they entered the Daṇḍakāraṇya Forest, to live there for fourteen years. During their stay in the forest, there was some quarrel between Rāmacandra and Rāvaṇa, and the latter kidnapped the Lord’s wife, Sītā. The quarrel ended in the vanquishing of the greatly powerful Rāvaṇa, along with all his kingdom and family.
Sītā is Lakṣmījī, or the goddess of fortune, but she is never to be enjoyed by any living being. She is meant for being worshiped by the living being along with her husband, Śrī Rāmacandra. A materialistic man like Rāvaṇa does not understand this great truth, but on the contrary he wants to snatch Sītādevī from the custody of Rāma and thus incurs great miseries.. Rāvaṇa was very advanced materially, so much so that he turned his kingdom, Laṅkā, into pure gold, or full material wealth. But because he did not recognize the supremacy of Lord Rāmacandra and defied Him by stealing His wife, Sītā, Rāvaṇa was killed, and all his opulence and power were destroyed.
The materialists, who are after opulence and material prosperity, may take lessons from the Rāmāyaṇa that the policy of exploiting the nature of the Lord without acknowledging the supremacy of the Supreme Lord is the policy of Rāvaṇa
Lord Rāmacandra is a full incarnation with six opulences in full, and He is therefore mentioned in this verse as kaleśaḥ, or master of all opulence.
SB 2.7.24
The Personality of Godhead Rāmacandra, being aggrieved for His distant intimate friend [Sītā], glanced over the city of the enemy Rāvaṇa with red-hot eyes like those of Hara [who wanted to burn the kingdom of heaven]. The great ocean, trembling in fear, gave Him His way because its family members, the aquatics like the sharks, snakes and crocodiles, were being burnt by the heat of the angry red-hot eyes of the Lord.
The Personality of Godhead has every sentiment of a sentient being, like all other living beings, because He is the chief and original living entity, the supreme source of all other living beings. He is the nitya, or the chief eternal amongst all other eternals. He is the chief one, and all others are the dependent many. The many eternals are supported by the one eternal, and thus both the eternals are qualitatively one. Due to such oneness, both the eternals constitutionally have a complete range of sentiments, but the difference is that the sentiments of the chief eternal are different in quantity from the sentiments of the dependent eternals. When Rāmacandra was angry and showed His red-hot eyes, the whole ocean became heated with that energy, so much so that the aquatics within the great ocean felt the heat, and the personified ocean trembled in fear and offered the Lord an easy path for reaching the enemy’s city. The impersonalists will see havoc in this red-hot sentiment of the Lord because they want to see negation in perfection. Because the Lord is absolute, the impersonalists imagine that in the Absolute the sentiment of anger, which resembles mundane sentiments, must be conspicuous by absence. Due to a poor fund of knowledge, they do not realize that the sentiment of the Absolute Person is transcendental to all mundane concepts of quality and quantity. Had Lord Rāmacandra’s sentiment been of mundane origin, how could it disturb the whole ocean and its inhabitants? Can any mundane red-hot eye generate heat in the great ocean? These are factors to be distinguished in terms of the personal and impersonal conceptions of the Absolute Truth. As it is said in the beginning of the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, the Absolute Truth is the source of everything, so the Absolute Person cannot be devoid of the sentiments that are reflected in the temporary mundane world. Rather, the different sentiments found in the Absolute, either in anger or in mercy, have the same qualitative influence, or, in other words, there is no mundane difference of value because these sentiments are all on the absolute plane. Such sentiments are definitely not absent in the Absolute, as the impersonalists think, making their mundane estimation of the transcendental world.
One interesting point is that –
Often times Hindus say – Radharani and Sita Rani is expanded from Durga. Radha, Sita and Durga are the same. Here SP is clearly making the point. Impersonalists they do not understand the internal energy, external energy.. They want to make everything, in this way they think that they are making unity.. But they are separatists philosophy.. This leads to atheism.. Hindus/ Mayavadis they want to separate Brothers of Rama and say they are ordinary human beings and only Rama is God. So many misunderstandings.. It is part of strategy of all is one.. Separate Rama’s brother from Him. This has created havoc in Hindusim, because those are false assumptions.
Why would Ravana attempt Sita? Because He is nonsense he thinks that the strength of a man comes from having a beautiful wife. But beauty is skin deep. Caitanya Maha Prabhu Says Na dhanam na janam.. Demoniac nature they think that they will be happy by exploiting body of a woman. They are always looking for young women to exploit. This creates disturbance.. This has been there since the beginning of time. How should one see things and understand them.. We must understand from Shastra and not from material eyes. Devotee does not understand the absolute necessary of following the paramapara. What is the point of initiation to connect to Krsn through parampara. NOt speculation not with the eye of sense gratification.. One must only see through our parampara..
For example the whole concept of woman is misunderstood today..
SB 9.10.27
O greatly fortunate one, you came under the influence of lusty desires, and therefore you could not understand the influence of mother Sītā. Now, because of her curse, you have been reduced to this state, having been killed by Lord Rāmacandra.
Not only was mother Sītā powerful, but any woman who follows in the footsteps of mother Sītā can also become similarly powerful.
This defeats all women’s liberation that is being taught and advocated these days.. Does not make women happy it makes them even more vulnerable.. It was all started by the man who wanted to exploit women. They came up with this idea.. Even women do not understand this.. Do women know this? Are they being taught this?
There are many instances of this in the history of Vedic literature. Whenever we find a description of ideal chaste women, mother Sītā is among them. Mandodarī, the wife of Rāvaṇa, was also very chaste. Similarly, Draupadī was one of five exalted chaste women. As a man must follow great personalities like Brahmā and Nārada, a woman must follow the path of such ideal women as Sītā, Mandodarī and Draupadī. By staying chaste and faithful to her husband, a woman enriches herself with supernatural power. It is a moral principle that one should not be influenced by lusty desires for another’s wife. Mātṛvat para-dāreṣu: an intelligent person must look upon another’s wife as being like his mother. This is a moral injunction from Cāṇakya-śloka (10).
“One who considers another’s wife as his mother, another’s possessions as a lump of dirt and treats all other living beings as he would himself, is considered to be learned.” Thus Rāvaṇa was condemned not only by Lord Rāmacandra but even by his own wife, Mandodarī. Because she was a chaste woman, she knew the power of another chaste woman, especially such a wife as mother Sītādevī.
SB 9.10.28
O pleasure of the Rākṣasa dynasty, because of you the state of Laṅkā and also we ourselves now have no protector. By your deeds you have made your body fit to be eaten by vultures and your soul fit to go to hell.
One who follows the path of Rāvaṇa is condemned in two ways: his body is fit to be eaten by dogs and vultures, and the soul goes to hell. As stated by the Lord Himself in Bhagavad-gītā (16.19):
“Those who are envious and mischievous, who are the lowest among men, are cast by Me into the ocean of material existence, into various demoniac species of life.” Thus the destination of godless atheists such as Rāvaṇa, Hiraṇyakaśipu, Kaṁsa and Dantavakra is a hellish condition of life. Mandodarī, the wife of Rāvaṇa, could understand all this because she was a chaste woman. Although lamenting for the death of her husband, she knew what would happen to his body and soul, for although one cannot see directly with one’s material eyes, one can see with eyes of knowledge (paśyanti jñāna-cakṣuṣaḥ). In Vedic history there are many instances of how one becomes godless and is condemned by the laws of nature.
Chastity has been taught since time immemorial, but today it seems to be something wrong. You have such idiots like Froyd and others who recommend lusty behavior. Vedic culture is diametrically opposed to the modern concepts. Main thing is chastity.
BG 1.40 – Chastity and faithfulness
When irreligion is prominent in the family, O Kṛṣṇa, the women of the family become polluted, and from the degradation of womanhood, O descendant of Vṛṣṇi, comes unwanted progeny.
Good population in human society is the basic principle for peace, prosperity and spiritual progress in life. The varṇāśrama religion’s principles were so designed that the good population would prevail in society for the general spiritual progress of state and community. Such population depends on the chastity and faithfulness of its womanhood. As children are very prone to be misled, women are similarly very prone to degradation. Therefore, both children and women require protection by the elder members of the family. By being engaged in various religious practices, women will not be misled into adultery. According to Cāṇakya Paṇḍita, women are generally not very intelligent and therefore not trustworthy. So the different family traditions of religious activities should always engage them, and thus their chastity and devotion will give birth to a good population eligible for participating in the varṇāśrama system. On the failure of such varṇāśrama-dharma, naturally the women become free to act and mix with men, and thus adultery is indulged in at the risk of unwanted population. Irresponsible men also provoke adultery in society, and thus unwanted children flood the human race at the risk of war and pestilence.
SB 9.3.20 – Chastity & Divorce
O unchaste girl, what is this that you have desired to do? You have cheated the most respectable husband, who is honored by everyone, for I see that because he was old, diseased and therefore unattractive, you have left his company to accept as your husband this young man, who appears to be a beggar from the street.
This shows the values of Vedic culture. According to the circumstances, Sukanyā had been given a husband who was too old to be compatible with her. Because Cyavana Muni was diseased and very old, he was certainly unfit for the beautiful daughter of King Śaryāti. Nonetheless, her father expected her to be faithful to her husband. When he suddenly saw that his daughter had accepted someone else, even though the man was young and handsome, he immediately chastised her as asatī, unchaste, because he assumed that she had accepted another man in the presence of her husband. According to Vedic culture, even if a young woman is given an old husband, she must respectfully serve him. This is chastity. It is not that because she dislikes her husband she may give him up and accept another. This is against Vedic culture. According to Vedic culture, a woman must accept the husband given to her by her parents and remain chaste and faithful to him. Therefore King Śaryāti was surprised to see a young man by the side of Sukanyā.
SB 9.3.22
Sukanyā, however, being very proud of her chastity, smiled upon hearing the rebukes of her father. She smilingly told him, “My dear father, this young man by my side is your actual son-in-law, the great sage Cyavana, who was born in the family of Bhṛgu.”
Although the father chastised the daughter, assuming that she had accepted another husband, the daughter knew that she was completely honest and chaste, and therefore she was smiling. When she explained that her husband, Cyavana Muni, had now been transformed into a young man, she was very proud of her chastity, and thus she smiled as she talked with her father.
When you know that whatever rumor is going around is false, there is no reason to be afraid or no reason to be intimidated.
All big men.. Ex President, Epstein, Weinstein, Bill Gates.. So many other people have been revealed as low class scoundrels.. Who exploited young women with their power, name and fame, because they are engaging in this lusty behavior.. Women get revenge. It is very disturbing.. People like Presidents.. Are like this..
Devotees have to follow the rules and regulations, then they can preach.. When Maharaj preached in Paris KC there is no illicit sex even in marriage.. One muslim man challenged him asking if he is not having sex with wife…too only when procreating.. To be a successful preacher we have to follow the rules and regulations.. Both men and women.. SP never minces his words.. SP says women are like children they can be easily exploited..