Narayana Krishna

“In accordance with her feelings, each Gopika was offering a different form of worship to the Lord. Admiring this assembly of the Gopikas, within which the Lord was illumining divinely, the Devatas were ecstatic. They said to one another, ‘Although we are inhabitants of heaven, such fortune of witnessing these Gopikas, who in reality are supreme saints, eludes us. Today we are truly fortunate to behold the Lord seated amidst them all’.

One Gopika placed the lotus feet of the Lord on her chest while another placed His hand on her chest. Using this opportunity wherein they were blessed to touch Him, the Gopikas extolled Him greatly. Then, feeling a bit enraged, the Gopikas said to Him,

‘O Srikrishna! Some reciprocate the love shown by showering love upon those who love them while others behave in exactly the opposite manner i.e. they shower love upon the person who does not reciprocate their love. Some do not even entertain feelings of love towards those who love them. Please explain which among them is the best’.”

The Goipkas sought to know which love is the best. Could that love wherein the person reciprocates the love be considered supreme? Or could that love wherein the person continues to love being fully aware that his/her love is not being reciprocated? For some reason, the Gopikas harboured this doubt. Perhaps they were intrigued by Radha.

Although there are claims that Radha is a fictional creation, many Puranas extol her devotion and her story. Even in main Bhagavatam, there is reference to her, albeit indirectly. Did we not listen to the incident wherein the Lord carried Radha, fetched flowers for her and then dropped her when she became conceited? It could perhaps be that they were seeking clarification to the type of devotion shown by her or perhaps they were seeking clarification regarding the love reciprocated by Krishna. Perhaps Krishna did not shower love in proportion to the love they showered upon Him.

“The Supreme Lord replied, ‘Isn’t it true that those who love others only when others shower love upon them are definitely doing so expecting some profit? Isn’t it true that such love is selfish in nature? True love and adherence to dharma are found lacking in such love. Their love is aimed solely at their personal gain. Apart from this, there is no other purpose that is served through such love.

Bhajanty abhajato ye vai karuṇāḥ pitarau yathā

Dharmo nirapavādo ‘tra sauhṛdaḿ ca su-madhyamāḥ

O beautiful ones! Akin to the love showered by parents, the ever-compassionate persons continue to shower love even upon those who do not love them’.”

Aha! How wonderful is this explanation! Similar to parents, compassionate persons continue to love others even when they are unloved by them. Many children do not love their parents. They behave tautly with them and abuse the parents for having given birth to them. Pretending to be busily engaged in other activities, they refuse to even engage in small talk with their parents. Neither do they smile nor do they even greet them. Nevertheless, parents continue to love these children. They remain unconcerned at being neglected. They continue to worry about the well-being of that child. ‘Did my son sleep well last night? Did he eat properly?’- they worry. ‘O poor boy, he stepped out in the rain. Hope he is safe’. Or ‘My poor son is at work. He is unable to enjoy this hot, delicious meal. Wonder whether he had his food on time or not’. They shower such love even when their son refuses to even acknowledge their existence.

“In this love showered, nobleness, righteousness, and gentleness are filled. At the same time, there are some who do not love those who love them. This being the case, how can such persons ever shower love upon those who do not love them?”

The word love should not be confused for lusty love. Parents love their child isn’t it? This is pure love filled with affection as against lusty love.

Blessing the person who offers obeisance is a customary practice. But is it necessary to bless a person who refuses to offer obeisance? There are some who do not seek such blessings. There are some who bless even those who have not offered obeisance to them while there are some who refuse to bless the person who offered obeisance to them. Aren’t these strange paradoxes?

“This is applicable to supremely accomplished great sages, to householders that rotate in this cycle of worldly bondages, to the ungrateful who have forgotten the help received as well as to the tricksters who seek to exploit the teachers who have granted them knowledge’.”

It is wrong to comment that accomplished sages have been treated at par with the tricksters. It is Self-knowledge that hinders Self-realized saints who are freed from every form of desire from reciprocating the love that has been showered upon them by others. There is no reason barring this.

Krishna Narayana