“’You said that He is indeed everywhere, so why can He not be seen in this pillar? If I do see that Vishnu right now in the middle of the pillar, then I will not kill you. Otherwise, you will be divided into two.’ Having seen (his father) in that way, Prahlada began to meditate on that Supreme Lord.” (Narasimha Purana, 44.10-11)

Download as podcast episode (right click and save)

त्वयोक्तं स हि सर्वत्र कस्मात् स्तम्भे न दृश्यते
यदि पश्यामि तं विष्णुम् अधुना स्तम्भमध्यगम्

तर्हि त्वां न वधिष्यामि भविष्यसि द्विधान्यथा
प्रह्लादो ऽपि तथा दृष्ट्वा दध्यौ तं परमेश्वरम्

tvayoktaṃ sa hi sarvatra kasmāt stambhe na dṛśyate
yadi paśyāmi taṃ viṣṇum adhunā stambhamadhyagam

tarhi tvāṃ na vadhiṣyāmi bhaviṣyasi dvidhānyathā
prahlādo ‘pi tathā dṛṣṭvā dadhyau taṃ parameśvaram

“Do you not think that the teachers within the bhakti-yoga tradition go overboard in the labels they apply to modern institutions of higher learning? We can take the specific example of His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada comparing educational establishments to slaughterhouses. In case there was any remaining ambiguity, a slaughterhouse is where an animal goes to meet its untimely end. Of course, to the people desperate to consume the resulting flesh, the death occurs exactly according to schedule, but the animal would much rather live, to continue on in peace.

“If you castigate the modern education system, then you should at least provide an alternative. If someone avoids college, for example, then how are they going to earn a living? What is wrong in being trained in the sciences, in modern medicine, in technology, in the humanities, and the like? Why is that a bad thing? Okay, I get it that we should strive for self-realization, that we should turn to spiritual life, but that should not come at the expense of common sense.

“Just look at what happened to all those people who renounced everything and went to join various institutions of spiritual learning. The corrupt later captured those institutions and then unceremoniously tossed aside anyone who was honest, had common sense, or carried integrity. Those people were then left to fend for themselves, in a world otherwise trained in modern ways. In other words, the decision to take spiritual life so seriously ended up hurting them, at least in terms of economics and staying afloat. Do you see what I am saying? Where is the balance?”

In truth, the criticism is not new. It is not exclusive to the modern day. We find similar sentiments expressed by a young prince, who happened to be only five years of age. He figured out the problem right at the beginning, when he first entered school. This wasn’t a case of a child full of energy refusing to be confined to a classroom for eight hours a day. This wasn’t a case of a child only interested in playing, in running around, in enjoying the outside world.

Rather, Prahlada understood what was going to be taught. He knew what the end-goal was. He need look no further than his own home. His father was the ruler of the kingdom. That kingdom had control over practically the entire universe. The goal of the standardized education, run by the brahmana class of the community, was for the children to reach the same position in adulthood. Especially for Prahlada, the goal was to follow in the footsteps of the father.

Prahlada heard the proposal and politely declined. He had no interest in the four principal means of diplomacy, which are sama, dana, bheda, and danda. He had no interest in being like his father, since that meant living up to the Daitya name in characteristics and in conduct. Prahlada knew something better. He was already educated in this matter, while his own teachers were ignorant.

ऋषिः कारुणिकस् तस्याः
प्रादाद् उभयम् ईश्वरः
धर्मस्य तत्त्वं ज्ञानं च
माम् अप्य् उद्दिश्य निर्मलम्

ṛṣiḥ kāruṇikas tasyāḥ
prādād ubhayam īśvaraḥ
dharmasya tattvaṁ jñānaṁ ca
mām apy uddiśya nirmalam

“Narada Muni delivered his instructions both to me, who was within the womb, and to my mother, who was engaged in rendering him service. Because he is naturally extremely kind to the fallen souls, being in a transcendental position, he gave instructions on religion and transcendental knowledge. These instructions were free from all material contamination.” (Shrimad Bhagavatam, 7.7.15)

You see, Prahlada understood that there is a God. He understood that this Supreme Being is sarvatra, which means “all-pervading.” God is everywhere. It must be the case. The tree standing tall across the street grew on its own. The seed is the cause, but that seed had no ability to ask for assistance. It did not sit in a classroom to learn how to extract heat, light, and water in order to develop within the ground. The seed did not sit in a laboratory and test out various hypotheses. The seed already had intelligence, and someone had to put that intelligence there. Moreover, someone had to oversee the progression from the seed into a mature tree.

उपद्रष्टानुमन्ता च भर्ता भोक्ता महेश्वर:
परमात्मेति चाप्युक्तो देहेऽस्मिन्पुरुष: पर:

upadraṣṭānumantā ca
bhartā bhoktā maheśvaraḥ
paramātmeti cāpy ukto
dehe ’smin puruṣaḥ paraḥ

“Yet in this body there is another, a transcendental enjoyer who is the Lord, the supreme proprietor, who exists as the overseer and permitter, and who is known as the Supersoul.” (Lord Krishna, Bhagavad-gita, 13.23)

That same person oversees every instance of beginning-to-end, of cause-and-effect. Prahlada knew this. He wanted his own father to at least acknowledge the reality. Prahlada also understood that this all-pervading force is a person. It is not a bright light or an eternal void. It is a singular force, for sure. That is how the sarvatra property manifests, in singularity. Still, there is duality in terms of the instances. Prahlada was different from his father. The tree in my yard is different from the tree in your yard. The teacher is different from the student.

The problem in this case was that the father refused to acknowledge the reality. If he did not understand that God, as Vishnu, is all-pervading, then what did he really know? How could he call himself educated? Hiranyakashipu thought that he was God, that through his own efforts in austerity and supplication of higher powers he had managed to game the system. He outsmarted everyone else, you see. There is no God. There is no Vishnu. If Vishnu did exist, He certainly is not sarvatra, as Prahlada claims.

Alas, Hiranyakashipu tempted fate by making a public declaration of a scientific test. He would strike a nearby pillar with a powerful sword. If Vishnu did not prove His presence in that pillar, then Prahlada would be embarrassed, exposed to everyone as a liar. The child was not educated, after all. He did not pass through the school system. What could he possibly have known?

न मां दुष्कृतिनो मूढाः
प्रपद्यन्ते नराधमाः
माययापहृत-ज्ञाना
आसुरं भावम् आश्रिताः

na māṁ duṣkṛtino mūḍhāḥ
prapadyante narādhamāḥ
māyayāpahṛta-jñānā
āsuraṁ bhāvam āśritāḥ

“Those miscreants who are grossly foolish, lowest among mankind, whose knowledge is stolen by illusion, and who partake of the atheistic nature of demons, do not surrender unto Me.” (Lord Krishna, Bhagavad-gita, 7.15)

Prahlada was telling the truth. The teachers within the bhakti-yoga tradition ask others to rise to the highest standard. Only the lowest among men consider themselves to be God. Only the worst of the worst tell others that there is no God, in hoping to suppress their natural inclination towards Divinity. Prahlada wanted his father to be the most educated, and ironically the greatest lesson of all would be taught by Vishnu Himself, in the amazing appearance of Narasimha.

In Closing:

The lowest of the low as God taking,
But saints for highest man making.

Appearance as Narasimha to call,
Teaching greatest lesson of all.

That valid the child’s appeal,
Sarvatra claim true and real.

Otherwise like in slaughterhouse to teach,
In school not proper understanding to reach.

Categories: chandrahasa, questions

Tags: dailyprompt, god, hare krishna, narasimha, poem, poems, poetry, religion