On Haridas’ Samadhi.

A Poem by Thakur Bhaktivinode


  1. O! Born of Moslem parents, Haridas!*1
    And trained in youth in Moslem creed,
    Thy noble heart to Vaishnava truth did pass!
    Thy holy acts the candour plead!
  2. Is there a soul that cannot learn from thee
    That man must give up sect for God?
    That thought of race and sect can ne'er agree
    With what they call Religion broad?
  3. Thy love of God and brother soul alone
    Bereft thyself of early friends,
    Thy softer feelings oft to kindness prone
    Led on thyself for higher ends!!
  4. I weep to read that Kazees and their men
    Oft persecuted thee, alas!
    But thou didst nobly pray for th' wicked then!
    For thou wert Vaishnava Haridas!!
  5. And God is boundless grace to thee, O man!
    United thee to one who came
    To save the fallen souls from Evil's plan
    Of taking human souls to shame.2
  6. And he it was who led you all that came
    For life eternal,-- holy,--pure!
    And gave you rest in Heaven's endearing name
    And sacred blessings ever sure!
  7. The body rests upon the sacred sands
    Of Swargadwar3 near the sea,
    Oh! Hundreds come to thee from distant lands
    T' enjoy a holy thrilling glee!
  8. The water roars and storming winds assail
    Thy ears in vain, Ah! Vaishnava soul!
    The charms of Brindaban thy heart regale,
    Unknown the wheel of time doth roll!!
  9. He reasons ill who tells that Vaishnavas die
    When thou art living still in sound?
    The Vaishnavas die to live and living try
    To spread a holy life around!
  10. Now let the candid man that seeks to live
    Follow thy way on shores of time,
    Then posterity sure to him will give
    Like one song in simple rhyme!

1 *Haridas was the son of a Kazee who lived within a few miles of Jessore. While yet a boy, the religious sentiment received a very great development in him and he could not understand that pure spiritual love was the only absolute religion of man. He was very much averse to cruelty to animals and turned a Vaishnava in preference to the faith of his community. The Kazees and others met together and ordered him to be beaten very hard in the bazaars of Kalna. We read it in the "Chaitanya Bhagabat" that when he was being cruelly beaten, he was praying God that his persecutors might be pardoned.

2 It is said that Haridas after leaving Jessore came to Nadia and lived for sometime in Santipur, on the banks of the Ganges. The great "Chaitanya Mahapravoo" of Nadia was born after Haridas had come to Santipur. But When "Chaitanya" came of age and began to preach the highest truth of Vaishnavism, Haridas very gladly enlisted himself as a follower of "Mahapravoo". In a short time Haridas met him at Puri of Jagannath and there lived till the time of his passing. His body was interred by "Chaitanya Deba" on the sea shore.

3 large portion of the beach at Puri goes by the name of Swargadwar in which the Samaja or tomb of Haridas is found. Popularly the place is considered sacred.

Para-Brahma & Maya.

By Bishweswar Das, B.A., Head Master, Sutragarh H.E. School, Shantipur

The right conception of Brahma, involves the following self-evident postulates:-

  1. The transcendental cannot be judged by the human standard.
  2. Brahma is the source of everything.
  3. Brahma is beyond the thought and conception of man equipped with sentient knowledge of insentients and what little can be conceived of Brahma by the grace of the transcendental preceptor has to be expressed in words that do not submit to the test of sensuous organs.
  4. Brahma ceases to be such, as soon as he is grasped by any of individual souls as a product of nature.
  5. For the proper conception of Brahma we should rely on Aptabakyas (authoritative testimonies of self-realised souls enabling us to understand the indisputable truth) i.e., the Vedas and the upanishads etc, and not upon independent sensuous reasons.
  6. Brahma is not simply a passive Being devoid of all attributes, but an omnipotent, ever-active Existence, revealing Himself out of His free will to His devotees.
  7. Brahma though unmanifest to sensuous understanding, eternally manifests Himself in multifarious spiritual forms and deludes mundane observers by suitable energy.
  8. Brahma is an Absolute and Unconditioned Being. It is foolish to try to see only one aspect of the indivisible Truth if the partial manifestation proves to be mundane.
  9. Self-realised souls can impart their knowledge of Brahma to ignorant but sincere enquirers i.e., those who are really inclined to accept the Truth as an act of grace.

It must be stated at the outset that in accepting these postulates as self-evident one is not called upon to surrender one's reasoning faculty nor to suspend it, nor to reduce one's self to the position of a passive recipient of ideas or assertion called dogmas. The empiricist may gain the charge of the commission of the common logical fallacy of "Petitio Principii" or as it is commonly termed "begging the question" by trying to prove the unavoidable necessity of ignorance. But considering the deep and abstruse nature of the problem I am trying to tackle, I may be pardoned for following a better line of reasoning than his.

Assuming, therefore, that the postulates set forth above are accepted as underlying the universally accepted idea of the Truth let me now proceed to a specific consideration of the nature of Brahma and with it that of Maya, basing my views not on my individual opinion but on the text of the scriptures, which are the only source of the knowledge of the Absolute.

In this connection, let it be observed that in Sanskrit, Brahma is a neuter word which is represented in English by the pronoun 'it'. But for the sake of avoiding evident misunderstanding I have used 'He' and its variations with reference to Brahma and in the following note, I shall use them frequently. Properly speaking Brahma is not neuter but common in the non-sensuous philosophical sense.

So much for the preamble. Let me now come to the matter in hand.

I have already intimated that it is utterly impossible for a man with his limited knowledge to conceive Brahma. Divine nature is simply inconceivable. The text from Brihadaranyakopanishad which is to the point means thus:-

"Well Gargi! Standing on the mundane platform nobody has ever seen this imperishable Brahma, but He sees all; nobody has ever made Him the object of His hearing, but He hears everything; nobody has ever conceive Him, but He conceives all; nobody has ever known Him, but He knows all. There is no other observer than He, no other hearer than He, no other conceiver than He, no other knower than He. Well Gargi! The infinite space is fully surcharged with the presence of this indestructible Brahma."

Again in the Talobakaropanishad we find:-

"Sticking to speculation he who knows for certain that Brahma is incomprehensible knows something of Him; he on the other hand who fully believes that he has known Brahma has not known Him. Sages declare that Brahma is unknowable through limited sense-perception. It is only fools who think that He is so knowable."

The text from Kathopanishad and Taittireeyopanishad respectively which may be translated thus are also to the point:-

"He is not attainable by any world hardened through word, mind or eye. How can He be realised by anyone except by those only who are on the same plane?
"Falling to attain Whom our limited words and thoughts recoil back on themselves."

Again Divine Nature is a complex thing. It is verily a paradox to the worldly judgment as all irreconcilables find their reconciliation in Brahma. All contraries and contradictions merge in Him into a harmonious whole. Thus we find respectively in Kathopanishad, Swetaswataropanishad and Ishopanishad of which here are the English renderings:-

"Brahma is the most minute of all minute things. Yet He is the most gigantic of all gigantic things. He lives in the hearts of all beings. He who is free from all sorrows and desires can see that super-sensuous Brahma through the grace of Brahma alone."
"He has no hands of flesh and blood, yet He holds. He has no feet like anything of this world, yet He walks far. He has no mundane eyes, yet He sees. He has no fleshy ears, yet He hears. He knows all things, yet nobody with limited intelligence knows Him. The sages have all called Him the First and Greatest Being."
"He moveth, yet moveth not. He is both far and near. He is in the inner consciousness of all, yet He envelopes all."

The great poet Kalidas has some slokas in imitation of the above on this point in his Raghuvamsam canto X, which may be translated in these words:-

"Thou art ever present in our hearts, yet Thou art at a distance. Thou art free from desires, yet Thou practis'st severe austerities. Thou art full of mercy, yet Thou art unaffected by sorrow. Thou art the oldest Being, yet Thou art free from the infirmities of age."
"Thou art self-existent, yet Thou art born. Thou art free from passions, yet Thou destroy'st enemies. Who then does know Thy true nature."
"Thyself immeasurable, Thou measur'st the world. Thyself desireless, Thou fulfillest the desires of all (Thy devotees). Thyself unconquered, Thou art ever victorious. Thyself unmanifested (to worldly people), Thou art the root cause of this phenomenal universe."
"Thou art an omniscient Being, but none (who are worldly-minded) can know Thee. Thou art the primal cause of all, but Thou Thyself art without a cause. Thou art the ruler of all, but thou has no ruler. Thou art One, yet Thou exist'st in infinite (transcendental) forms."

True it is that Brahma is an Absolute and unconditioned Being. True it is that He is the only source of all real and unreal existence. Nevertheless, it is true that Brahma is not an abstract existence nor an attributeless Being; on the other hand He is the Fountain head of all conceivable and inconceivable attributes. He is all existence, all knowledge and all bliss

Thus says Shankaracharyya himself in his Atmabodha:-

"He who fills all spaces, above, below and around as Existence, Knowledge and Bliss and Who is Infinite and without a second is Brahma, the Ever Existing Unique Being."

Again in the Sruti we read:-

"Brahma shines as an Ever Existing, All Knowing, All Blissful, Infinite Being."

Accepting the above interpretations of the nature of Brahma as true, it is easily seen that Brahma is both immanent and transcendental. Thus in the Rigveda Samhita we find:-

"Brahma has infinite heads (but not of flesh and bone), infinite eyes and infinite feet. He pervades the whole (material) universe, yet remains outside it by ten inches (i.e, He is both immanent and transcendental)."

Again in the Bhagabat Gita says Krishna:-

"O, Arjuna ! What is the use of knowing more? Know this for certain that I hold the whole phenomenal universe only by one portion of Myself (i.e., I am both immanent and transcendental).”

Thus we see that Brahma pervades the phenomenal universe, co-exists with it, remains outside it and exists after the phenomenal universe is destroyed. In other words, He exists before creation, with creation, outside creation and after the destruction of all created things. It is not all consistent or incompatible with Divine Nature to create this illusory, phenomenal universe with all its multifarious manifestations, although Brahma is not at all affected by this Maya or illusion. Maya is the power of illusion. Maya is the power of illusion belonging to Brahma which operates by His will to bring about this phenomenal universe with its manifold forms, varieties and appearances. This Maya becomes effective and spreads its charms as soon as Brahma is inclined to create. Kapila, the founder of the Sankhya system of philosophy has identified Maya with Prakriti and has mistakenly supposed that it is not a power of Brahma but something else coeval with Him. In point of fact, Maya exists in Brahma not as touch exists in air and heat in fire, or as whiteness in milk and sweetness in sugar but as shadow haunts the substance. Maya is the cause of illusory or material creation, the phenomenon as opposed to the substantive and eternal Reality. Thus although Maya is but the power of illusion of nescience, yet by reason of its Divine potency it is capable of working apparent impossibilities. Indeed, such is the potent influence of Maya that it is impossible for any individual soul to escape from the sphere of its influence except by Divine grace .It can be overcome only by those who are privileged to know Brahma. Thus in the Bhagabat Gita the Supreme Lord says:-

"This is my Divine Maya which is made up of the qualities of Satwa, Raja and Tama, is simply insuperable. Those only who throw themselves entirely upon My mercy or come to know Me may succeed in overcoming it."

If we have already conceived how all contraries and contradictions find their margin or solution in Divine Nature, it becomes easy for us to conceive how Brahma being the sole reality can yet give rise to this nescience or Maya, without altering even a jot or little of His own nature and imposing upon Himself anything like limitation.

In fact Brahma has infinite aspects and from whatever standpoint the emancipated see Him they behold the many-sided Truth. Brahma creates the material world through Maya at His own sweet will and takes it away whenever He likes. Brahma is not however to be looked upon as a fickle and capricious Being. He is not like a wayward child now fondling His dolls and pets and now destroying them all, at pleasure. In point of fact, all matters even of this phenomenal universe are governed by His Supremely beneficent purpose and not by dead cosmic laws which modern scientists and philosophers are mainly endeavouring to postulate. If we obtain a sight of Brahma from the standpoint of Absolute Truth we can learn to reconcile all apparent contradictions and differences, and succeed in having a true idea of Divine Nature which is otherwise most inscrutable.

Such being the case it is but in the fitness of things that Brahma should be the Master and proprietor of Maya without being Himself in the least affected by it or being in any way under its influence . Hence Brahma is very appropriately called the Lord of Maya which is absolutely powerless before Him. It may be added here that there are sages free from the influence of Maya. If such is the case with tiny individual souls how natural and inevitable it is for Brahma to be always above His Maya to use it for His beneficent purposes. All liberated beings and all avatars of God who appear in this world at different periods of history, as Teachers of mankind, are above the influence of Maya. They have all shown by their lives and examples that Maya is, as it were, the handmaid or maid-servant and that it is called into requisition as needs arise, only to serve the beneficent purpose of the Supreme Lord. Indeed, as darkness disappears before light, so the artifices of Maya or illusion also is dispelled with the advent of true or right knowledge.

Thus we see that to know the Absolute Truth is to know Brahma Who is identical with Truth and to know Brahma is to attain such intimacy with the working of the Divine or spiritual power as to be able easily to participate in the manipulation of Maya by the will of God.

I beg leave to add here that I have hitherto spoken of Maya as nescience; the Divine power is really One and Maya is the reflected aspect of the real substantive Power, which lies at the root of a man's redemption or salvation. In its real aspect the Divine power dominates everything under the different names of yogmaya and so forth.

Without trying to enlarge more on this point I may conclude my short note with the observation that if we succeed in getting even the least glimpse of Truth or even a grain of what is called living faith in God we invariably find ourselves in a position to conceive the nature of Brahma and of Maya and can also realise how they are co-related. The Vedas and Upanishadas do, indeed, help us, if properly understood, in attaining the true Knowledge of Brahma and of Maya. But the sine-qua-non of spiritual advancement is the grace of Brahma Himself which is associated with that of His chosen servants or His veritable representatives going by the names of transcendental Acharyas, Messiahs, Masters. For it is clearly stated in Kathopanishad--

"Brahma cannot be attained by many fine words or intellect or the hearing of many scriptural texts. He only attains Brahma, who prays or longs for Him. Brahma reveals Himself unto such earnest souls only."

In point of fact, Brahma cannot be seen or realised except through the grace of Brahma Himself, just in the same way as the great luminary, the Sun, cannot be seen except by the Sun's own light.

Thus we see that the be-all and end-all of human existence, the Summum-bonum of human life is to be able to know and love Brahma. For says Mundokopanishad:-

When one is blessed with the sight of that Supreme Being, one's worldly passions are torn asunder, doubts are removed and mundane deeds are exhausted."

Again in Brihadaranyakopanishad:-

"The Supreme Being is the nearest and dearest of all. He is dearer than son, dearer than wealth and dearer than all dear things."

Sanctified is the family, blessed is the mother and glorified is the country, of man whose mind is absorbed in the service of the Supreme Being-- the blissful ocean of infinite Knowledge.

De Lai De Ram.

[By SJ. Kishori Mohan Pal, B.L. July 1929]

THOSE who live in towns are not unfamiliar with cries like 'De lai de Ram' (Oh Ram, Give me something). They know that there are some Sannyasi mendicants of the West who instead of begging from individual persons, are in the habit of begging in the above fashion. They often make cries like (Oh Ram! Give me a seer of flour or a quarter seer of clarified butter). Their object is that they will not beg of any individual person, because they have faith in God Who maintains the universe and they have taken refuge in Him after complete surrender. They think that if they beg of any person, it will show their lack of confidence in God. Mendicancy is the religion of a Sannyasin and that is the symptom of his surrender to God. Complete surrender is then attained when a man practices Haribhajan in the accompaniment of Kirtan by living upon the daily collection of alms to the extent he is in need of for that day only but that he should not save anything for the future. But those who adopt the practice of unsolicitude become so much absorbed in their mental service to the Godhead, that no scope is left there for the perception of their physical body and hence they forget to beg altogether. They do not wilfully entertain such a silly idea that Bhagaban with food in hand will call at their doors that He will serve them. But what are those who are crying about de lai de Ram in order to gratify their own material senses? What do they mean by this? They mean that they are not beggars but they have accept the practice of unsolicitude, that they are asking Ram (God) to give them this and that or, in plain words, they are calling upon the Lord to serve them. Instead of serving Sri Ramachandra, their idea is to have services done to them by Him. This is like the conduct of those professional idol-worshippers or priests and the hired Bhagabat lectures of these days who are in the habit of getting services done to them by Him who is the object of their service. Because Sri Bigraha and Sri Bhagabat are the personification of Godhead and to earn money by Them and then to gratify their material senses therewith are no other than getting services done to them by Him who is the object of their service. What more heinous offences can there be than this?

While walking on the road one day, such a man began to cry aloud, 'Oh Ram! Give me a horse'. But a horse is not available anywhere and everywhere. However, sometime after, the man came across an unclaimed mare standing there. As soon as he found her, he hastily tore off a creeper, put the same into her mouth as reins and was about to get on her back, when to his surprise, he found that she had given birth to a child. Now the man has felt some attachment for the mare and hence could not let her go. Then, when the mare become a little well off, she felt reluctant to step forward, leaving behind her little one; and why should she go without her child? Then the man, finding no other alternative, took the young one upon his own shoulders, when the mare began to advance. Now talking the young one upon his shoulders, he began to cry 'Oh Ram! What have you given me? I asked for a horse to ride on, but instead, the horse has got on my shoulder. There are many who have to repent like this man. Like an ass, doing hard labour day and night in quest of pleasures, we come across miseries in place of happiness. Then with hearts full of sorrow, we begin to think 'Oh, what has come to pass!'

"With happiness in view, we built this house, but it has been burnt down." We find such things everywhere, with a motive to have services done to us by wives and children we take recourse to them, but as fate would have it, we end our lives in serving them on the contrary. Such things happen to the lot of almost all persons. With what high hopes do we enter into the threshhold of this worldly life only to find in the end that neither can we keep it nor give it up--like the snake catching hold of a male. It is for that reason that intelligent people are not prepared to meddle in it. They are not prepared to be annihilated in the whirlpools of weal and woe and hence they, keeping aloof from these whirlpools, engage their lives in the eternal service of Sri Hari and do not fall into the fifth of this material life. If, on the footsteps of these ideal persons, we try to build our characters and engage ourselves in the service of Sri Hari with the accompaniment of Sri Nam Kirtan after surrendering ourselves to the holy feet of a Sadhu Guru. Then we shall not have to suffer like the man who, with a desire to ride on a horse had to carry the horse on his back. All the material desires of the mind are like the cries 'Oh Ram! Give me a horse'. Hence we request all to beware of falling into such a miserable condition.

The Author of Sri Chaitanya-Charitamrita.


His Ashram.

A WORSHIPPER of the family Deity Sri Madan Gopal, Krishnadas Kaviraj Goswami had an innate devotion to Vishnu as revealed in his dealings with his brother with whom he severed all connections. It cannot be known for certain whether he lived the life of a house-holder while at Jhamatpur. His brother showed want of faith in Lord Nityananda the all- pervading and all-permeating Oversoul and the Prime Cause of all existence, thereby courting self annihilation or, in other words, turned an infidel atheist.

By the order of Lord Nityananda he went Holy Brindaban, and was freed from the evils of worldly affinity; this clearly shows that he entered into a new phase of life (ashram). There are different opinions regarding his mode of life even before that. Some say that it is easy for one to renounce the world and go to Holy Brindaban while still a Brahmachari (a bachelor student); otherwise we would have heard from him much of how difficult it is to tear asunder the knotty ties of the world. Others hold that he did not mention it, as it is not at all proper for one who has cut off his connection with family life to recount them; so he did not give even a hint on his past life. Whatever sort of life might he have lived before he left for Brindaban, it is sure that after he had gone there he spent the whole time in the service of Krishna and was utterly indifferent to worldly matters. This is last stage of life which should be solely devoted to the service of the Supreme Lord. It was when he attained the status of a Paramahamsa (the highest spiritual plane) after passing all the stages of life that he composed Sri Chaitanya Charitamrita a masterpiece of world literature.

In pious circles he is commonly known by the name of Kabiraj Goswami. Thakur Narottam styled him the cynosure of the devotees who had gone to Brindaban. At the end of each chapter of Sri Chaitanya Charitamrita he calls himself the humblest follower of Sri Rupa Goswami and Sri Raghunath Das Goswami-- the two pioneers of the religious renaissance of the age. In his time he was known as one of the most prominent followers of Sri Rupa Goswami and looked upon as the esoteric teacher of the Lord's own who flourished in later ages. He speaks of the six Goswamis of Braja as his own spiritual guides. Sri Nityananda the saviour of the world conferred on Krishnadas the service of the Divine Couple Sri Radha Gobinda the Transcendental Lord and His Transcendental counterwhole. It was by His Grace alone that he won the favour of Sri Rupa Goswami, Sri Sanatana Goswami, Sri Raghunath Das Goswami and Sri Jiva Goswami. He was, as it were, the very life of those devotees who resided at Brindaban and was cordially attached to Sri Raghunath Das Goswami who was the very heart, as it were, of Sri Damodar Swarup the second embodiment of the Supreme Lord Sri Chaitanya.

So far as his relations with the members of his family are concerned we know only this that he severed his connection with his brother who was disloyal to his spiritual guide Lord Nityananda. As regards other family matters he is quite silent. None but those who were assiduously devoted to the supreme Lord Sri Chaitanya Chandra were regarded by him as his own people.

His Character

As an intimate servant of the Supreme Lord he belonged to the highest order of devotees. Sri Raghunath Das Goswami's as well as Krishna Das's own writing bear testimony to his attachment and loving devotion to Sri Raghunath. Though a towering personality of sterling worth, an erudite scholar and a literary genius, he was still the very embodiment of humility--humbler than a blade of grass.

Even a most cursory reader of Sri Chaitanya Charitamrita, however much might be his conceit and vanity, cannot fail to be impressed with the spirit of humility infused into every letter of the sacred book. "I am," says the author, "a worse sinner than Jagai and Madhai, and more insignificant than the worm on the dung-hill. Whosoever hears my name is bound to find his pious inclinations on the wane, commits sin."

The author was assiduously attached and devoted to the Supreme Lord and is held in the highest esteem in the Vaishnava world. All pious accomplishments are ever found in full perfection in a Vaishnava and Kabiraj Goswami was avowedly a Vaishnava of the highest order. These accomplishments are twenty-six in number. Kabiraj Goswami enumerates them in Sri Chaitanya Charitamrita, Middle part, Ch XXII 75-77. They are clemency, harmlessness, integrity, equanimity, immaculate character, magnanimity, mildness, purity, selflessness, benevolence, self-control, absolute surrender to Krishna only disinterestedness, want to selfish activities, calmness, control over the six appetites, temperance, sobriety, modesty, humility, gravity, compassion, friendliness, wisdom, dexterity, and reticence.

Every line of his writing is suffused with his transcendental spirit and reveals his ethics and devotion.

He was also an adept in the art of the administration of culinary condiments and cherished a pious craving for offering the best foods to his Divine Master--not to enjoy them-- but to conduce to the enjoyment of Him who is the Sole enjoyer of all things in the universe. This is the only way to get rid of the degenerating tendency to satisfy the palate; but, unfortunately for us, we are not inclined to listen to the words of the saint--that physician who possesses knowledge enough to prescribe the regimen for us who are diseased morally and mentally.

The vast learning of this great author, his keen insight into the transcendental reality, his masterly way of argumentation, his wonderful tact and capacity for making abstruse matters clear to the common run of humanity and his study of Poetry, Rhetoric, Epics and Mathematics not only places him high in the estimation of the literary world, but has enabled him to embellish his works with a combination of materials, rarely available elsewhere and fill it with a crowd--a host of perpetual and perennial novelties--so much so that linguists hold that the elite of the whole world will one day strive to learn this neglected language if only to have an acquaintance with this monumental piece of literature.

Do Good to Others.


OF all the maxims the above is the most well-known one. Everybody pretends to know it and follow it. But in fact none knows it and follows it. The maxim signifies more than what is generally understood by it. An honest attempt will be made here to discuss the significance of it in the light of the teachings of Sriman Mahaprabhu.

The maxims involves five problems which, for solution, demand our careful attention and close examination. They are:-

  1. What good should be done to others.
  2. Who are the others to whom good should be done.
  3. Who should go to do good to others.
  4. How to do good to others.
  5. Who should teach how to do good to others.

These five problems are closely related to one another, such that the solution of one is hinged on the solution of another. We propose to take up the first two at first.

In this world it is found that different people have got quite different ideas of 'good' and 'other'. There comes a man who is extremely self-centred. He knows none but his own self and he knows how to live for his own self only. Eat drink and be merry is the be-all and end-all of his life. Should such a life be considered as an ideal life? Certainly not. It is an irrational and irresponsible life which is a constant menace to others lives around it. In going to gratify his own senses he has neglected the gratification of the senses of other people. Again while he pretends to do good to his body and the mind he has left the soul that inhabits them to take care of itself. His idea of 'good' and 'others' is extremely narrow and hence it is no use living up to it.

There comes another man who is fondly devoted to his horse. His 'other' is the horse whom he feeds well, clothes well and does everything to keep him stout and strong. Is his one of ideal life? Certainly it is not. Firstly because while he takes care of a particular horse he has left other members of its race uncared for; secondly, because what he does is not as much for the sake of the horse as for his own sake. Thirdly because the treatment accorded to the animal being not approved by it is more likely to do harm than good. Fourthly because while he has proposed to do good to the body of the horse he has left his soul unbenefited and fifthly, because by his attachment to the animal he has done in calculable harm to his own self in as much as he, if the scriptures, are to be believed, stands thereby in danger of rebirth like Raja Jadabharat in the form of the animal he feels attachment for.

Next you come across a couple of men much agitated over the question of cow killing; one says he has right to kill the animal because his religion sanctions it. The other objects to it saying that his religion condemns it. Each of them commands a large following to cheer them up in their controversy. Is their life an ideal life that we should desire to live? Ah! No. This ideal should also be condemned. Religion cannot be a party to a crime. Any religion that encourages the slaughter of animals is not commendable. Again one may take delight in killing a cow but the latter certainly does not take delight in being killed by him under any circumstances. The ideal of the other party that goes to oppose cow-killing under the injunction of religion and usefulness does not also hold good. If he kills other classes of animals for his food or religion, he has no right to oppose the other party who professes to kill cow on the same grounds. The question of usefulness equally involves the element of partiality and selfishness The idea that the life of one should be preserved when it is of use to a party and destroyed when it is not so is not at all a liberal one. Everything that breathes has got a right to live on its own account, none can claim the right to disturb it with impunity.

You meet another man who is a patriot. He has fought much, suffered much and sacrificed much for the sake of his own country. His unselfish devotion to the cause of his country has held him dear to millions of his fellow countrymen. Now should we crave to live such a life as an ideal one? No. His seemingly unselfish actions have a background of selfishness. There is always a party to oppose his actions under the same pretence. One that holds the country of another for the good of his own country is as much a patriot as the other who tries to set her free from his clutches. None can expect to serve to such contending parties, of diametrically opposite interests. This service of one certainly involves neglect of the other including his own self. Hence the highest good is not likely to accrue from such a narrow service.

There comes another man who is a great scientist. He has done yeoman service to the cause of civilization by some of his most ingenius inventions. His 'other' is the whole world whom he is serving. Has he really done the highest good to mankind? A little examination will show that he has not. For has not the invention of chemical indigo compelled a class of indigo-planters to roll up their business with a heavy loss? Has not the invention of cotton mills hard hit the class of poor weavers who had to use their shuttle and cock as fuel to cook their scanty meal? Has not the introduction of steamer service in carrying cargo paralysed the activity of the country boatsmen who used to subsist on this trade before? Examples can thus be multiplied to show that for each such invention there is invariably a class of men who have to suffer. The class of people that seem to be benefited by these inventions form a microscopic minority, and the world, without any harm to it can bid good bye to them any moment. These inventions have steadily helped the rich to grow richer and the poor poorer. For this unequal distribution of wealth, theft, burglary, and crimes of still worse nature are being now-a -days committed without restraint. This is indeed a very sad picture of the present civilization that is being constantly helped forward, by scientific inventions. Ah! How hourly are the teeming millions tired of the present embarrassing civilization wishing the good old days of sufficiency come back to them. They want food and not civilization and are always ready to exchange present civilization for a hearty meal.

Hitherto we have discussed the merit of good that the Karmin section of the world, the elevationist school of thought propose to do to the world. We would now propose to discuss the merit of 'good' as conceived by the Jnanin section of the world or the salvationist school of thought.

The Salvationist, like the elevationist, thinks himself the master of the world. He can make the unmake things as manifested therein. Both dislike woe and desire weal--the elevationist by fighting woe and the other by denying its existence. According to the salvationist the world and his own self as its enjoyer have got no subjective existence. They exist because one thinks so. It is all illusion--it is all Maya. If this Maya is overcome there will exist neither the world nor its seer according to him then there is in reality no others and consequently there can be no good that needs be done to them. Is this then an ideal life? No. Things after all may not be such as to appear with our acknowledgement and disappear with our denial. They may have a subjective existence in which case it is dangerous to go by a mere supposition that they do not exist. Hence the life of a salvationist is most uncertain and is not at all an ideal life worth coveting.

Let us now discuss the merit of the concept of the highest good that Sriman Prabhu proposed to do to the world. His idea of the highest good can be culled from the following two well-known copulates.

This briefly means that a man can render mankind the highest good if he only takes care to become worthy at first. The highest good accrues from chanting and preaching the Name of Krishna. The word preaching connotes much more than what is generally understood by it. It roughly means—

  1. Hearing the Name of Krishna from the real source.
  2. Chanting the Name of Krishna.
  3. Offering prayers to Krishna without mundane reference of elevation and salvation.
  4. Preaching His gospel to the worthies.
  5. Doing everything that facilitates such preaching.
  6. Serving His devotees who are the real sources of spiritual strength.
  7. Utilising the multifarious services of others for the purpose.
  8. Helping others to do all the above.

Lord Krishna is the greatest of the great and in His Karsna form, the smallest of the small. He is in all and all are in him. Serve Him and all are served; leave Him and none are served Just as by watering at the root of a tree you water its twigs and leaves as well so by serving Him, you serve all-- friend or foe, animate or inanimate. The service of Him is then the highest form of service whereby one can except to do the highest good to all around.

An illustration of this form of service is found in the great epic Mahabharat. King Duryodhan bore a grudge against the Pandavas. Desiring their destruction from the curse of Durbasa, a Brahman of irritable temper, he requested him to become guest at the cottage of the Pandavas with his disciples. Draupadi, the wife of the Pandavas had the supernatural power of feeding with a small quantity of food, as many people as might come to their cottage, as long as she did not eat herself. But after she had her meal she could not do so. Durbasa along with his sixty thousand disciples came to the house of the Pandavas long after Draupadi had her meal. Draupadi apprehended the curse, and prayed to Krishna to come to their help. Durbasa along with his disciples went to a river to perform ablution. In the meantime Krishna to protect his devotees appeared before Draupadi and demanded a particle of her cooked food. Unfortunately Draupadi could offer Him nothing but a small particle of vegetables found still sticking to the pan in which it was cooked. Krishna ate it and was gratified which led to the gratification of Durbasa and his followers who considering their inability to eat more and apprehending the shame which they would be put avoided visiting the cottage of the Pandavas altogether.

In Ramayana, another great epic, a similar illustration is found. Ramachandra, the incarnation of Vishnu desired to go over to Ceylon by a bridge. At once all things animate or inanimate felt the desire and came out for the construction. The sea, over which the bridge was to be constructed, remained still, the stone refused to sink, the squirrel brought straws as building materials. Thus is no time was the bridge constructed.

These illustrations clearly indicates that one Supreme Being pervades through all, great or small, animate or inanimate. In his satisfaction lies the satisfaction of all. If He is served all are served, and if He desires their service, they all feel the call.

Sriman Mahprabhu teaches that Jiva is in reality the servant of Krishna. The fundamental function of every soul, whether in the garb of a man or of a tree or of a stone, is to serve Krishna, their Lord. In service of him only lies the salvation of the Jiva. He will have to regain through service the plane of consciousness which he has lost through his non-serving attitude. Hence good done to the body is not the highest good, neither is good done to the mind so; good done to the soul is what is the real good, the highest good. It is the Supreme duty of every one to serve Him and help others to do the same. There should be no flickering, no wavering and no running away. If we fall in it, we commit a double crime--we commit suicide and, at the same time, help other do the same directly or indirectly. We commit a double crime when we kill any life for our food, we commit a double crime when we cut trees for fuel to cook our food, we commit a double crime when we cut stones for the construction of our house, we commit a double crime when we draw water for our drink. In every such action if it is not done as a sacrifice unto Krishna and for His satisfaction, we commit there two-fold crimes. Let the cook prepare vegetables for Him, the drawer draw water for him, the hewer fell trees for him, the mason make construction for Him, the plough-man open his furrows for Him, the scientist make inventions for Him and so on. Let the whole universe be one temple in which are engaged His several servants in serving Him in their different capacities. The nature of works make no difference in the quality of devotion. All these are services to Lord Krishna, and all doing these for Him are His servants. Remember Lord Krishna is the Absolute Master of the whole universe: He is the sole Lord of sacrifice He admits no partner in this business. Whatever we think, whatever we do, whatever we consume must be first dedicated unto Him, lest we become usurpers. In the matter of ascertaining the nature of the offerings, that is, what should be offered to Him and what not, we shall have to refer to our scriptures. We should not do anything, think anything and consume anything if it is not warranted by the scriptures. The scriptures embody the will of Krishna and one, who transgresses the scriptures, transgresses His will, and consequently, His offerings will not be acceptable to Him. A servant must always do the will of his Lord or he is not a servant.

Let the patriot always remember that the freedom for which he is fighting at present is another bondage. The world is a prison house; and whatever we do here for the re-adjustment of our position as a mundane entity, we only manage thereby to strengthen its walls against us. So long as we are in this prison-house, our talk of freedom with reference to our existence here is merely the talk of changing cells. The things that we fight to possess, possess us in turn. Our attempt to become their lord leads us to become their servants. Thus we run from one subjection to another. This is a punishment and Krishna wills it. There will be no flying away from this long chain of subjections. Let us not then confine our attention to such seeming gains which, in reality, entail on us a heavy loss. Let us rise above all fetish and superstition and view things from quite a different angle of vision, view them with spiritual eyes, when they will appear in their true perspective colours. Let us embrace the whole world with a loving heart and thereby prove ourselves worthy of the descent from that All loving Father on high. Evil strengthens evil and hatred strengthens hatred. If we desire to free this world of its evils, then let us return evil with good, hatred with love and anger with smile. We should turn our right cheek to them who smite us on the left. Knowledge cannot be gained by superstition and love not by hatred. Gain love by loving and service by serving. Approach all with a loving and serving attitude, and we will find all doing the same to us in return. So long as we bear ill-will to the tiger, the latter we have the same feeling towards us. But as soon as we become God-loving, the tiger will forget its ferocity and love us. For did not the mad elephant, which was intended to kill Prahlad, take him on his back and dance in ecstasy? Did not the venomous serpent intended to bite him, wear a loving look and begin to play on this lap? None did him any harm. Such is the influence one God-loving exercises even on this wild mischievous animals whose nature it is to do wrong. Let us then, even when hurt by our enemies, say with Christ "Father, forgive them, for they know not what they are doing." Let us reciprocate their ill-well with love for them.

Sriman Mahaprabhu came with this message of love and invited all to preach it in every part of the world. Against it there can be no party. All are equally interested. Questions of caste, creed or colour do not arise. Sriman Mahaprabhu did not recognise superiority of any on mere consideration of high birth, age, rank, learning etc. According to Him he who serves Krishna is the greatest of all. He says:--

"Great is he who serves, others are low,
No distinction of caste His service doth make."

The next problem is, who should go to do good to others. The preachers above all must be honest and sincere. Insincere hearts are dangerous and do incalculable harm both to themselves, and to those that hear them. Sincerity qualifies a man for initiation. The Guru initiates a sincere heart, for the regulation of his hitherto unregulated life, into the holy order of Divine servants, when he as service unto Krishna and Guru, does the work of preaching. Before initiation none are qualified for the work, no matter whatever his natural endowments might be. In the matter of preaching we cannot take the initiative. It must come from high through the medium of the Guru. As like begets like so sincerity begets sincerity. Insincere preachers not only engender insincerity but endanger sincerity and turn men sceptic and aetheistic. A story may be told here to illustrate this point.

A man was once found addressing a huge gathering on the subject of “Brinjal as the human diet." He spoke with great eloquence for hours and concluded his speech saying that Brinjal as human diet was most injurious, and that the man who consumed it would have to reside in hell for as many years as there were seeds in it. Unhappily his wife was among the audience. She knew that her husband did not relish a dish without brinjal. In order to teach him a lesson she came home and cooked only rice and nothing else. When her husband sat for supper she served him with a dish of rice without any vegetable. The husband grew angry and called for an explanation. The wife told him that as she had gone to attend his lecture, and as it was too late for the market she could get nothing to cook. At this her husband restored that she could have easily plucked some brinjals from their kitchen garden and prepared them. The wife forthwith told him that she after having heard so much against it, promised not to touch the hellish thing again in future. The husband laughed heartily and said that she was a most foolish woman. Hell was for those who heard him and not for him who spoke.

The influence of his speech on one of the audience is thus made clear, and that on the rest it is not difficult to guess. Such preaching makes man incredulous and impervious to further education. Our scriptures have condemned their preaching by the insincere.

They say:-

Hear not of Hari if by non-Vaishnava be preached:
It harms, though holy, like milk as orts of snake.

Preaching must be done as a service unto Krishna; and only a Guru can direct such service otherwise it will lose its divine character and will be turned into a mere mundane exercise. Guru is a Divine representative on earth. He having no other occupation, is the only Being who can direct such service unto him. "Knock and the door of heaven will be opened unto you." But where to knock and how to knock? It is Guru who teaches how and where to knock and it is He again who opens the door and admits the disciple into the kingdom of heaven. Hence humble yourself and heaven will be yours. For has not Christ remarked to his disciples saying, "whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, the same is the greatest in the Kingdom of heaven.” Only the humble can submit to the will of Guru and Krishna submits to him who thus submits the guru. Hence Christ said, "whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in Heaven."

Sriman Mahaprabhu states humbleness as the necessary qualification of him who desires to be favoured by Krishna, He says --

God to the humble is very kind;
The noble, the learned, the rich are proud.

The above three classes of people are too proud to submit to the will of Guru, and hence the door of heaven remains shut against them forever. "No man can serve two masters, You cannot serve God and Mammon." Mammon-worship means non God-worship. Seeking of and attachment to learning, riches and rank for their own sake is classed as Mammon-worship. These things however are themselves not hellish. The purpose for which they are employed determines their quality if they are utilised for the service of God they are divine, and if not, they are hellish. Let therefore the rich employ their riches, the learned their learning, the noble their rank, the famous their fame, the great their name, and all whatever they possess, in the service of Lord Krishna.

Mammon-worship is as bad as the company of its votaries. Hence a sincere devotee of Lord Krishna must not only not worship Mammon but should always shun the company of its votaries as well, in as much as not only does not help him in his mission but is very likely to cause his deflection from it. Instances are not rare to show that the people engaged in God-worship have been found to depart from His temple to that of Mammon. Hence Sriman Mahaprabhu calling upon Vasudev, a leper, whom he had healed, to preach His doctrine from door to door, promised him protection against the evil influences of these two things. He says--

At my command you be saviour, and save the world,
Never shall the waves of wordliness hinder you.

Such is the influence Guru exerts upon those who have the fortune to submit to Him. They do none harm, and, protected as they are by the Divine Shield called Sudarsana, none can do them harm. Without such divine protection their frequent association with these people engaged in non-God-worship would not have at all been safe.

The fourth problem is how to do good to others. To educate others is a very difficult and psychologically a very knotty problem. But we do not intend to enter into the psychological discussion of it. It is enough here to say that education must begin more by examples than by percept. A theory belied by practice is no good. On the contrary it does incalculable harm as has been illustrated before. "An ounce of practice is better than a pound of theory." The teacher should be the living source of inspiration to their disciples. Their life should be such as to inspire others to imitate it. A preacher should always remember that learning, he can make others learn, and being faithful he can make others faithful. We cannot expect service if we do not serve. We cannot expect others to do a thing if we do not do it ourselves. Hence Sriman Mahaprabhu says-

Teach others rites by doing yourself them:
None can you teach if yourself do not them.

The fifth and last problem is who should teach us how to do good to others. Of course he must be a Divine Guide. None but a Divine Guide can aspire to play the role of religious teacher.

We know nothing about Lord Krishna, and nothing about the realm, Baikuntha where He resides. Necessarily we must expect some of this realm to come down here to inform us of His existence and beauty. Without such information it is not at all possible for us to crave Him and start to work for Him. There are two sources where from it is possible for us to get the information- one the scripture and the other the Divine guide or guru. Scriptural texts are capable of different interpretations. Hence it is always safe to receive the information from the living source Guru.

Again there is another difficulty. How can it be possible for us to select a particular man as guru capable of guiding us in the light of divine wisdom which can be thrown only by the true interpretation of the scriptural texts? We do not know the scripture or at least we do not know what the true interpretation of their texts is. How can we avoid the danger of selecting a wrong man as Guru? Whom can we trust as reliable to make this selection for us? Sriman Mahaprabhu says that none but Krishna Himself can appoint Guru for us. He is not an inert thing. He sees and feels He makes Guru manifest himself to him when He notices his sincerity. He and His Guru are one. The Master knows the Servant and the Servant the Master. The Servant always executes the will of his Master as has been said before. Hence he can communicate the will of his Master to others who are fortunate enough to unconditionally surrender themselves to him. If anybody wants to serve God by doing His will he must follow and carry out the will of Guru. Without such following the service of Godhead is impossible; and the people, who are for direct worship, only chalk out a wrong path for their destination by their so called religious activities. The importance of Guru has been stated in Srimat Bhagabat thus--

Know Guru as myself, think not Him low;
Grudge Him not as mortal, godly is He all.

Selection of Guru on mere consideration of his pedigree as is the custom prevalent among some sects is pernicious. Mahaprabhu warning all against such custom has, for us, left a clear statement with regard to the quality of guru. He says--

Brahman, Sannyasi or Sudra designated as he may be,
On knowledge all about Krishna welcomed as Guru will be he.

In the selection of a Guru importance must not be attached to the worldly designations as Brahman, Sannyasi or Sudra. He should be judged on the merit of His transcendental wisdom. Guru is Guru: Guruship can not be attributed to any if he is found lacking in essentials.

Sree Raghunath Das Goswami. Part II


RAGHUNATH passed one year in this fashion. Next year he made up his mind to abscond. Getting up at night he set out to flee but was caught and brought back from a distance by his father. He fled repeatedly in this manner but was intercepted and brought back as often. Therefore his mother proposed to his father that their son had evidently gone mad and should be put under restraint by being bound hand and foot. To this the father sorrowfully replied that temptations like opulence equal to that of the king of the gods, a wife rivalling the celestial nymphs in beauty and accomplishments have failed to bind his mind. How can such a person be bound by ropes made up hemp? The parent who is the author of seminal birth cannot cancel the course of one's previous and future deeds. The mercy of Chaitanya Chandra has touched him. Who can keep back one who is mad after Lord Chaitanya?

Raghunath now bethought himself of a plan to free himself and made his way to Nityananda Goswami at the first opportunity. He obtained the sight of the Lord at Panihati. Nityananda was accompanied by chanters of Kirtan, His servants. At the foot of a tree on the bank of the Ganges, the Lord was seated causing the splendour of a glorious sunrise. He was encompassed on the terrace and below by a vast throng of devotees. Raghunath was astonished on beholding the display of the power of the personality of the Lord. He fell prostrate in obeisance at some distance in front of the Lord. The attendants of the Lord announced, "It is Raghunath who is making his prostrated obeisance." On hearing this, the Lord replied, "The thief has delivered himself up at last. Come on, I will surely punish you today." The Lord commanded, but he did not move till at last the Lord snatched him to Himself and placed His feet on his head.

The playful Nityananda full of spontaneous mercy in a fit of delight said to Raghunath, 'Thief, you always take to your heels from afar and never come near. I have captured you today and will punish you. Feed my companions with curd and chinrah (flattened rice)." On hearing these words Raghunath's mind was filled with gladness. He at once despatched his people to the neighbouring villages who procured eatables which were conveyed to the spot by the villagers. Chinrah, milk, curd, sweetmeats, sugar, and plantain were brought in this manner and placed on all sides of the Lord. Worthy Brahmans and innumerable people began to collect on receiving the tidings of the great festivity. Articles of food were secured from the villages as well as hundreds of earthen pots. Half a dozen vessels of great size were procured in which one of the Brahmins soaked the chinrah for the Lord. The chinrah was put into hot milk in some of them. Half of it was treated with curd, sugar and plantain. The other half was treated with champa plantain, thickened milk, sugar, ghee and camphor.

As the Lord now putting the loin cloth took His seat on the terrace, the Brahman who had prepared the food placed before Him seven earthen vessels having filled them with these delicacies. On the dais sat the personal companions of the Lord, all those great personage forming themselves into a circle. Ramdas, Sundarananda Das, Gadadhar, Murari, Kamalakara, Sadashiva, Purandar Dhananjaya, Jagadish, Parameswara das, Mahesh, Gouridas, Hode-Krishnadas, Uddharan and all the other innumerable personal followers took their seats on the raised platform. The Lord respectfully made the Pandits, Bhattacharyyas and all the Brahmans who arrived there on hearing the news of the festivity take their seats on the dais. Two earthen pots were placed before every one. In one of them chinrah with milk and in the other chinrah with curd were served. The rest of the people sat below the dais. They were also served in the same fashion. A number of Brahmans finding no room on the dais prepared their chinrah on the bank of the Ganges, while others with their portions of chinrah got into the water finding no unoccupied space on dry land.

At this stage Raghab Pandit arrived with a variety of prasads other than cooked rice and having first offered the same to the Lord distributed them among the devotees. He said that he had been expecting the Lord in his house when he had made ready offerings of food for Him that prasad still remained untouched in his house while the Lord was engaged in festivities there. The Lord replied that He would dine on those things which had been brought to Him during the day and at night accept the prasad that was in readiness in his house, remarking that as He was of the community of milkmen he felt delight in the pastime of feasting out in the open in the company of a large number of cowherds. Then the Lord made Raghaba take his seat supplying him with the two varieties of the preparation of chinrah.

Then after the pots of the people had been filled with chinrah the Lord in meditation invoked the Supreme Lord to be present there. As the Supreme Lord appeared Nitai got up from his seat on catching sight of Him and in His company inspected severally the chinrah that was in the pots of all the persons. With many remarks Nitai put into the mouth of the Supreme Lord a handful of chinrah from every pot. The Supreme Lord laughingly took another handful and made Nitai eat the same. All the Vaishnavas stood up and watched the pastime as Nitai moved about amidst all the groups. No one is aware why Nitai was going round in that manner. Very few persons had the good fortune to obtain a sight of the Supreme Lord. Thereafter Nityananda laughingly resumed his seat and placing four vessels of sun-dried chinrah to his right and preparing a seat made the Supreme Lord to be seated there. Then the two brothers began to eat the chinrah. The sight filled Lord Nityananda with joy and he manifested many signs of his mood of overpowering love. He commanded all the people to eat and chant the name of Hari. There arose a universal chant of the Holy Name that reminded the vaishnavas of feasting out in Brindaban. Nityananda and the Supreme Lord are merciful and magnanimous. They accepted all this to ensure the good fortune of Raghunath.

Be Kind and Serve Vaishnavas.


THE teachings of Lord Chaitanya make the following the sine qua non of spiritual life, viz., to have an inclination for the Holy Name, to be kind to Jivas, to serve the Vaishnavas.

In this iron age, Krishna chooses to appear in this world in the form of the Holy Name. To recite the Holy Name without offence is the only permitted way of serving the Supreme Lord in this sinful Age. To attain this is the ultimate object of human life.

In order to qualify for and continue in the state of grace in which the chanting of the Name without offence is possible it is necessary to be both kind to all animate beings and to serve the devotees of the lord. Sri Chaitanya insists that the shastras enjoin us to serve no one who does not serve the Lord. The shastras recognise no community of unbelievers. The word 'service' is therein deliberately reserved to denote the relationship with the devotees alone. It is necessary and obligatory on all animate beings to serve the Vaishnavas and them only.

The idea of service that prevails in non-vaishnava communities is rendered to the material cases of body and mind in which the jiva is incarcerated in the state of sin. As a matter of fact the mind and body can be served only by mind and body and not by the soul. The mind and body are, however, without the power of initiative. It is the soul that serves the body and mind under the mistaken notion that they are identical with himself. It is, however, impossible for the soul to serve the material cases even while under such self-delusion. What he really does in such a case is to require the cases of others to serve his own cases. The soul only confounds himself with the material cases when he is really averse to serve at all as he can he serve only the soul. As soon as he desires to receive the service of other souls then the delusion of being master in his own right overpowers his judgment and makes him lose the function of service and have that of enjoyment in its stead. In the realm of the spirit there is no enjoyment for the individual souls there being only the Enjoyer, viz., the Supreme Lord Himself to Whom all services are rendered. In the spiritual realm no individual soul misappropriates any service for his own personal enjoyment. This is the only and natural constitution of the real spiritual community. The soul has nothing to do in the matter of service with a community of sinful jivas which is based on the principle of selfish material enjoyment sometimes passing under the name of service. The Vaishnavas can only feel sorrow for the plight of fallen souls and try to reclaim them from the self elected state of sinfulness. They cannot serve a fallen soul as the latter wants only enjoyment and not service, the relationship, whatever it is, being mutual.

The spiritual function taught by Sri Chaitanya on the authority of the scriptures should not be confounded with duties in the current ethical senses. If we are inclined to enjoy objects which are on the plane of the material cases in which we may happen to be incarcerated we run the risk of prolonging the painful delusion that our souls are identical with the body and mind. This is a suicidal folly. The dereliction of so called ethical duties is punished by physical and mental inconveniences that obstruct our freedom of material enjoyments and serves a useful purpose if it makes us understand the justice and beneficent purpose of what appears to be a retributive principle which should be impossible in all-merciful Providence. But such reaction is rare and would hardly be recognised as ethical. The sinner ordinarily tries to avoid the inconveniences by being more careful in the choice of enjoyment for the future. This leaves him substantially in the same position as before. The dereliction of spiritual duty is punished by an increase of worldliness or attachment to the material cases which are mistaken for the soul. This deadens the spiritual instinct still further. This is not perfectly intelligible as long as one remains subject to the worldly or apparent self. The worldling indeed, finds nothing to object to, and much to praise, in the conduct of the worldling. Nay, the confirmed worldling is also necessarily a confirmed opponent of spiritual life. The so called dutiful worldling is only under a double delusion. The word duty which belongs to the technical vocabulary of empiric ethics does not, therefore, really apply to those spiritual functions the necessity of which is emphasised by Sri Chaitanyadeva.

The worldling, indeed, finds an infinite number of duties to be performed in this world. These duties are sometimes comprehensively and euphemistically styled "service of humanity." To minister to the wants of the body and mind is, according to ethical science, the paramount and only duty that we owe to ourselves and other fellow beings. That conduct which does not serve, or actually obstructs this purpose is branded as bad. The decision lies with the mind. Of course the mind has its thousand and one considerations by which it pretends to seek to establish the real necessity and wisdom of following a particular course. But these considerations themselves are always subordinate to the above purpose. In its attempt to formulate a basis for its conduct that will stand the test of reason the mind is reduced to the necessity of declaring that no definite basis exists merely in order to avoid a straightforward confession of its thraldom to the body. This means the abandonment of impartial and all-round consideration in favour of a foregone conclusion which is the product of an irrational instinct, viz., the desire for sensuous gratification.

But the insincere and irrational science of empiric ethics although it is compelled, in however roundabout a way, to confess its failure to find a basis in reason for its conclusions, still continues shamelessly to proclaim itself as the only rational regulator of human conduct. As a matter of fact, under the colour of regulating it only tries to persuade us to follow the natural bent of the mind to pander to the body by adopting the ideal of seeking to adjust the mind and body their surroundings under pressure that admits of no action. There is really no 'ought' in the matter at all. It is taken for granted as self-evident that the body and mind have a right to live and function at their own sweet will as long as and comfortably as possible. But the body is sure to grow old and decrepit and die, The mind is subject to decay and is liable to perish with the body so far as this is ascertainable by itself. According to empiric science the mind cannot actively exist, or in other words, be alive, except in the living body.

Thus our so-called duties, according to the principle of empiric ethics, reduce themselves to no more than this, viz., to follow the natural inclinations of the body in such way that the body may thereby be enabled to enjoy the most vigorous and all-round existence for the longest space of time; and also to help others to do the same. But the latter is not really compatible with the former, in spite of all the ingenuity that has been displayed to explain away the incongruity and gild the pill.

The attempt to live for the biological purpose of accumulating worldly facilities for the body is sure to lead to social and moral disaster. The biological interests of one individual are not identical with those of another individual. The struggle for existence is really a fight of each individual against every other individual in order to live well at the expense of others. But the attempt carries its own punishment. The individual cannot continue to thrive unless other individuals are also prosperous. This is the insoluble vicious circle. This is only as it should be. The defects of a conclusion that is not proven nor provable can never be avoided in the long run.

The result has been that even the cleverest of ethical persons finds it convenient only to profess a lip homage to the vague principles of biological ethics as their contrived vagueness frees him from submitting to any principle except the dictates of the interest of the physical body. Charity, says the biological proverb, begins at home. It should have been added that it also ends there. Charity to one's own body is elastic enough to monopolise easily the whole of one's conduct. It has always the first as well as the last claim on its votaries. The occasion to consider the claims of the second and third persons does indeed always arise but always as auxiliaries of the first person singular number. Empiric altruism is sheer hypocrisy from beginning to end.

So everybody who professes to follow the principles of empiric ethics, either biological or casuistical, only lives into the body and mind, which are really one, which he or she is pleased to call the soul this predominance of the pseudo-self is inevitable and natural in this world and does not require to be taught. The body and mind have their natural but unappeasable wants. The wants themselves are of a hopelessly conflicting nature. It is impossible to harmonise the demands of the body and mind except by always refusing to gratify them either wholly or partially. Nay even this imperfect satisfaction of these wants becomes increasingly impossible by the very effort to follow the recommendations of empiric ethics.

The philanthropists and all those who advocate the cult of the 'service' of humanity are being converted by the stern logic of facts to the creed of the economists which favours the uncompromising biological ideal. Today in all civilized countries all weighty issues are practically decided almost solely by the economic test. This is as it should be if we really want to follow the natural dictates of the body to their logical conclusion.

Charity in all its forms is condemned on principle by the economic science on biological grounds. The economists oppose all unproductive expenditure. Their ideal strictly limits the individual to the fruits of his or her own personal industry. Even charity to the disabled is regarded as a necessary evil and drain on the resources of industry. The so-called relief that is provided for the unemployed is so arranged as to be made to pay itself as much as possible. The self-supporting and self-sufficient principle of the unit is advocated in every sphere of human relationship as the ideal of perfect living.

This biological brand of the 'service' of humanity favoured by modern charity is a by-product of the 'Service' of one’s own body. The incompatibility of communal and individual interests is avoided by making the latter supreme. Selfishness is ever incompatible with charity.

I don't deny the validity of the conclusions of economic and biological sciences. They are certainly true in the limited sense. They moreover serve the useful purpose of exposing clearly the hypocrisy of the claims of the whole race of sentimental humanitarians who pose as agencies for correcting the errors of a merciless providence by their own superior clemency. But these sciences fall into the opposite error when they deny the necessity of the very principle of charity through correct apprehension of its inevitable abuse in the hands of sinful humanity. Those exact sciences are disposed to regard, not without very cogent reasons, the results of the abuse of the principle of charity with even greater alarm than those of undiluted selfishness which they themselves advocate for this reason.

If an unproductive, or merely consuming person, says the economic science, is encouraged to lead a life of ease and comfort which is the proper and safe reward of the productive individual, both parties to such a policy, viz., the helper as well as the helped, are bound to come to grief in the long run. Only the potentially productive person may be helped, to a strictly limited and tentative extent, without producing far-reaching bad economic consequences which are bound to undermine the basis of material well-being. The humanitarian of the sensuous sentimental school replies with equally limited and equally misleading argument that the consequence of total abstinence from helping, or segregating, those who are economically mischievous members of society, are not likely to be less fatal to general material well-being.

Those apparently well meaning people, who after hearing both sides and realising the validity of their respective contention, try to medicate between the hostile schools by devising the path of the 'golden mean', find themselves reduced to the unenviable position of Hobson, as this third alternative only creates a fresh source of evil without diminishing the prospect of mischief threatened by the other two already existing.