Srimad Bhagavatam 10.87.2 | HH Bhanu Swami Maharaj | ISKCON Japan | 1 May 2026
jaya rādhā-mādhava kuñja-vihārī
gopījana-vallabha giri-vara-dhārī
yaśodā-nandana vraja-jana-rañjana
yamunā-tīra-vana-cārī
Hare Kṛṣṇa Hare Kṛṣṇa Kṛṣṇa Kṛṣṇa Hare Hare
Hare Rāma Hare Rāma Rāma Rāma Hare Hare
Jaya Prabhupāda Jaya Prabhupāda
Prabhupāda Jaya Prabhupāda
Oṁ namo bhagavate vāsudevāya
Oṁ namo bhagavate vāsudevāya
Oṁ namo bhagavate vāsudevāya
nama oṁ viṣṇu-pādāya kṛṣṇa-preṣṭhāya bhū-tale
śrīmate bhaktivedānta-svāmin iti nāmine
namas te sārasvate deve gaura-vāṇī-pracāriṇe
nirviśeṣa-śūnyavādi-pāścātya-deśa-tāriṇe
jaya śrī-kṛṣṇa-caitanya prabhu-nityānanda
śrī-advaita gadādhara śrīvāsādi-gaura-bhakta-vṛnda
Hare Kṛṣṇa Hare Kṛṣṇa Kṛṣṇa Kṛṣṇa Hare Hare
Hare Rāma Hare Rāma Rāma Rāma Hare Hare
Reading from Srimad Bhagavatam Canto 10 Chapter 87 Verse 2.
ŚB 10.87.2
śrī-śuka uvāca
buddhīndriya-manaḥ-prāṇān
janānām asṛjat prabhuḥ
mātrārthaṁ ca bhavārthaṁ ca
ātmane ’kalpanāya ca
Synonyms
śrī-śukaḥ uvāca — Śukadeva Gosvāmī said; buddhi — material intelligence; indriya — senses; manaḥ — mind; prāṇān — and vital air; janāṇām — of the living entities; asṛjat — sent forth; prabhuḥ — the Supreme Lord; mātra — of sense gratification; artham — for the sake; ca — and; bhava — of birth (and the activities that follow it); artham — for the sake; ca — and; ātmane — for the soul (and his attainment of happiness in his next life); akalpanāya — for his ultimate abandonment of material motives; ca — and.
Translation
Śukadeva Gosvamī said: The Supreme Lord manifested the material intelligence, senses, mind and vital air of the living entities so that they could indulge their desires for sense gratification, take repeated births to engage in fruitive activities, become elevated in future lives and ultimately attain liberation.
Purport
At the dawn of creation, when the conditioned living entities lay dormant within the transcendental body of Lord Viṣṇu, He initiated the process of creation by sending forth the coverings of intelligence, mind and so on for the living entities’ benefit. As stated here, Viṣṇu is the independent Lord (prabhu), and the living entities are His jana, dependents. Thus we should understand that the Lord creates the cosmos entirely for the living entities’ sake; compassion is His sole motive.
By providing the living entities with gross and subtle bodies, the Supreme Lord enables them to pursue sense gratification and, in the human form, religiosity, economic development and liberation. In each body the conditioned soul utilizes his senses for enjoyment, and when he comes to the human form he must also discharge various duties assigned to him at the different stages of his life. If he faithfully discharges his duties, he earns more refined and extensive enjoyment in the future; if not, he is degraded. And when the soul eventually hankers to be freed from material life, the path of liberation is always available. Śrīla Viśvanātha Cakravartī comments that in this verse the repeated use of the word ca (“and”) indicates the importance of all of what the Lord provides — not only the path of liberation, but also the paths of gradual elevation through religious life and appropriate sense enjoyment.
In all their endeavors the living entities depend on the Lord’s mercy for success. Without intelligence, senses, mind and vital air, the living entities cannot achieve anything — neither elevation to heaven, purification through knowledge, perfection of the eightfold meditational yoga, nor pure devotion through following the process of bhakti-yoga, beginning with hearing and chanting the names of God.
How, then, if the Supreme arranges all these facilities for the conditioned souls’ welfare, can He be impersonal? Far from presenting the Absolute Truth as ultimately impersonal, the Upaniṣads speak at great length about His personal qualities. The Absolute described by the Upaniṣads is free from all inferior, material qualities, and yet He is omniscient, omnipotent, the master and controller of all, the universally worshipable Lord, He who awards the results of everyone’s work, and the reservoir of all eternity, knowledge and bliss. The Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad (1.1.9) states, yaḥ sarva-jñaḥ sa sarva-vid yasya jñāna-mayaṁ tapaḥ: “He who is all-knowing, from whom the potency of all knowledge comes — He is the wisest of all.” In the words of the Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad (4.4.22, 3.7.3, and 1.2.4), sarvasya vāśī sarvasyeśānaḥ: “He is the Lord and controller of everyone”; yaḥ pṛthivyāṁ tiṣṭhan pṛthivyā āntaraḥ: “He who resides within the earth and pervades it”; and so ’kāmayata bahu syām: “He desired, ‘I will become many.’” Similarly, the Aitareya Upaniṣad (3.11) states, sa aikṣata tat tejo ’sṛjata: “He glanced at His potency, who then manifested the creation,” while the Taittirīya Upaniṣad (2.1.1) declares, satyaṁ jñānam anantaṁ brahma: “The Supreme is unlimited truth and knowledge.”
The phrase tat tvam asi, “You are that” (Chāndogya Upaniṣad 6.8.7), is often cited by impersonalists as a confirmation of the absolute identity of the finite jīva soul with his creator. Śaṅkarācārya and his followers elevate these words to the status of one of the few mahā-vākyas, key phrases they say express the essential purport of Vedānta. The leading thinkers of the standard Vaiṣṇava schools of Vedānta, however, vociferously disagree with this interpretation. Ācāryas Rāmānuja, Madhva, Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa and others have offered numerous alternative explanations according to a systematic study of the Upaniṣads and other śrutis.
The question Mahārāja Parīkṣit has submitted here — namely, “How can the Vedas directly refer to the Absolute Truth?” — has been answered as follows by Śukadeva Gosvāmī: “The Lord created intelligence and other elements for the sake of the conditioned living beings.” A skeptic may object that this answer is irrelevant. But Śukadeva Gosvāmī’s answer is not actually irrelevant, as Śrīla Viśvanātha Cakravartī explains. Answers to subtle questions must often be phrased indirectly. As Lord Kṛṣṇa Himself states in His instructions to Uddhava (Bhāg. 11.21.35), parokṣa-vādā ṛṣayaḥ parokṣaṁ mama ca priyam: “The Vedic seers and mantras deal in esoteric terms, and I also am pleased by such confidential descriptions.” In the present context, the impersonalists, on whose behalf Parīkṣit Mahārāja asked his question, cannot appreciate the direct answer, so instead Śrīla Śukadeva gives an indirect reply: “You say that Brahman is indescribable by words. But if the Supreme Lord had not created the intelligence, mind and senses, then sound and the other objects of perception would all be just as indescribable as your Brahman. You would have been blind and deaf since birth, and would know nothing about physical forms and sounds, what to speak of the Absolute. So, just as the merciful Lord has given us all faculties of perception for experiencing and describing to others the sensations of sight, sound and so forth, in the same way He may give someone the receptive capacity to realize Brahman. He may, if He chooses, create some extraordinary way for words to function — apart from their ordinary references to material substances, qualities, categories and actions — that will enable them to express the Supreme Truth. He is, after all, the almighty Lord (prabhu), and He can easily make the indescribable describable.”
Lord Matsya assures King Satyavrata that the Absolute Truth can be known from the words of the Vedas:
madīyaṁ mahimānaṁ ca
paraṁ brahmeti śabditam
vetsyasy anugrahītaṁ me
sampraśnair vivṛtaṁ hṛdi
“You will be thoroughly advised and favored by Me, and because of your inquiries, everything about My glories, which are known as paraṁ brahma, will be manifest within your heart. Thus you will know everything about Me.” (Bhāg. 8.24.38)
The fortunate soul who has been graced by the Supreme Lord with divine inquisitiveness will ask questions about the nature of the Absolute, and by hearing the answers given by great sages, which are recorded in the Vedic literatures, he will come to understand the Lord as He is. Thus only by the special mercy of the Supreme Person does Brahman become śabditam, “literally denoted by words.” Otherwise, without the Lord’s exceptional grace, the words of the Vedas cannot reveal the Absolute Truth.
Śrīla Viśvanātha Cakravartī suggests that the word buddhi in this verse spoken by Śukadeva Gosvāmī can indicate the mahat-tattva, from which evolve the various expansions of ether (such as sound), which are designated here as indriya. Mātrārtham, then, means “for the sake of using transcendental sound to describe Brahman,” since for that precise purpose the Supreme Lord inspired prakṛti to evolve ether and sound.
A further understanding of the purpose of creation is spoken by the words bhavārtham and ātmane kalpanāya (if the reading kalpanāya instead of akalpanāya is taken). Bhavārtham means “for the good of the living entities.” Worship (kalpanam) of the Supreme Self (ātmane) is the means by which the living entities can fulfill the divine purpose for which they exist. Intelligence, mind and senses are meant to be used for worshiping the Supreme Lord, whether or not the living entity has yet brought them to the stage of transcendental purification.
How both purified and unpurified devotees use their intelligence, mind and senses in worshiping the Lord is described in reference to the following quote from the Gopāla-tāpanī Upaniṣad (Pūrva 12):
sat-puṇḍarīka-nayanaṁ
meghābhaṁ vaidyutāmbaram
dvi-bhujaṁ mauna-mudrāḍhyaṁ
vana-mālinam īśvaram
“The Supreme Lord, appearing in His two-armed form, had divine lotus eyes, a complexion the color of a cloud, and garments that resembled lightning. He wore a garland of forest flowers, and His beauty was enhanced by His pose of meditative silence.” The transcendental intelligence and senses of the Lord’s perfect devotees correctly perceive His purely spiritual beauty, and their realizations are echoed in the Gopāla-tāpanī-śruti’s comparison of Lord Kṛṣṇa’s eyes, body and clothing to a lotus, a cloud and lightning. On the other hand, devotees on the level of sādhana, who are in the process of becoming purified, have only barely realized the Supreme Lord’s boundless spiritual beauty. Nonetheless, by hearing scriptural passages such as this one from the Gopāla-tāpanī Upaniṣad, they engage in contemplating Him to the best of their fledgling ability. Although the neophyte devotees have not yet learned how to fully realize the Lord or meditate steadily on even the effulgence surrounding His body, still they take pleasure in presuming, “We are meditating on our Lord.” And the Supreme Lord, moved by the waves of His boundless mercy, Himself thinks, “These devotees are meditating on Me.” When their devotion matures, He draws them to His feet to engage in His intimate service. Thus it is concluded that the Vedas have access to the personal identity of the Supreme only by His mercy.
HH Bhanu Swami Maharaj:
So Parikshit asked the question how can the Vedas describe the Lord when the Lord has no qualities. And Sukadeva answers the Lord created the senses and the intelligence and the pranas and the jivas so that they can enjoy the material world and get liberation. So this answer does not even mention the Vedas, nor does it mention that supreme entity without any qualities [Laughs]. So then it looks like he’s not answering the question at all [Laughs]. So therefore, we have this long purport to explain why that is so [Laughs].
So in this purport then, there is a quote from the 11th canto. In which Krishna instructs Uddhava. And there He says that the sages speak indirectly, and I also am pleased to speak it that way. So this is called paroksha-vada, indirect expression. So the direct meaning of the words are different from the actual meaning [Laughs]. In other words, the Supreme Lord and the sages and the scriptures sometimes speak mysteriously [Laughs]. And they often seem to speak in contradiction. For instance, Isopanishad said, the Lord is far, but He is near. He walks, but He does not walk [Laughs].
So of course, yesterday we talked about direct meaning, abhidha, and indirect meaning, lakshana. So sometimes we have to take this lakshana [Laughs]. Sometimes this whole indirect expression may be for many, many verses even [Laughs]. For instance, Krishna writes a letter to the Gopis and sends it through Uddhava. And if we take the direct meaning of those words, then Krishna is saying, you should not be very disturbed, you should be like yogis, control your senses and understand that I am everywhere. And certainly such a letter or such a message will be very comforting to the yogis and impersonalists. And then they will say, ultimately the conclusion of everything is impersonal Brahman [Laughs].
Later on, when Krishna met the Gopis in Kurukshetra, He gave a similar message. So therefore, this gives support to the yogis and impersonalists. However, if we see the whole Bhagavatam and we see the whole tenth canto or whatever, then we also understand that it’s all meant to glorify the personal form of Krishna.
So the Gopis have no interest in meditating that Krishna is spread everywhere, He is all the material elements, etc. They are interested in serving Krishna directly and admiring His beautiful form [Laughs]. And thus, our Acharyas like Vishwanath and Jiva Goswami say, that’s not the real meaning of the message, the direct words, the abhidha. That’s not the real meaning because it contradicts the whole Bhagavatam [Laughs].
So then the Acharyas take each word of the message and they give a different meaning [Laughs]. And so that meaning, the real deep meaning is that, you should meditate on me by understanding that my relationship with you and our pastimes are eternal. So when you feel separation, then you meditate on the eternal pastimes where we are united [Laughs]. So we see that these are an extended use of indirect expression. And the Acharyas do this because the whole section, if we take it literally, contradicts the meaning of Bhagavatam.
Again, at the end of the Bhagavatam, Sukadeva Goswami, in the 12th canto, after concluding everything, says, Now you’ve heard everything. So now you can meditate on impersonal Brahman. So taking these words, very serious impersonalists say that this shows that higher than the personal form of God is that impersonal Brahman. So after listening to all the wonderful pastimes of Krishna in Vrindavan and Mathura and Dwaraka, you forget all that and you merge in Brahman [Laughs]. So that’s the direct meaning of the words [Laughs]. But it is contradicted by so many statements in Bhagavatam that says the devotees reject impersonal liberation as being insignificant [Laughs].
So our Acharyas explain that this statement of Sukadeva should not be taken seriously. So why did he say it at all? He does it as a test. And also as a joke [Laughs]. So he wants to see if Pariksit is going to say, Oh, very nice or he’ll protest and say, This is useless [Laughs]. This conclusion is nonsense [Laughs]. So then we see in the next verses Pariksit responds, and he completely contradicts what is said in that [Laughs] by Sukadeva Goswami [Laughs]. So sometimes we cannot take the direct meaning of words. We have to see the total context. In this case, it is indirect expression, but it’s not we have to interpret the words differently. But we have to take the statement and understand the intention of Sukadeva in answering like this.
So in the verse, Sukadeva Goswami says, the Lord creates the senses and the intelligence and the pranas of the living entities. I think he uses the word Prabhu here. So he is describing the Lord as Prabhu. Which means master. And the question of Pariksit is that this Supreme entity, whatever it is, anirdesya, He cannot be named or described at all [Laughs]. But here he gives a name to Him [Laughs]. And Pariksit says, that Supreme entity has no qualities. So therefore, if He has no qualities, how we can describe Him [Laughs]? But in this statement of Sukadeva, he says, the Lord is there. He has a name. He is the master. And what does He do? He creates senses and pranas for the living entities. So He has qualities, He is a controller, and He creates things.
So of course, the Mayavadis say that Brahman has no qualities and no activities and no form. And therefore, doesn’t create anything. That’s an activity [Laughs]. Yeah, that Brahman does not create a material world, does not create senses for living entities, does not create bodies for living entities, doesn’t do anything. There is nothing except Brahman. So this statement directly contradicts the idea that Brahman has, cannot be named or described. He has no qualities, no activities, etc. So in other words, by this statement that the Lord creates all these things, He is directly contradicting that other statement.
So the Lord creates, and what is His intention? So by saying intention, we know that the Lord thinks and He has certain goals, etc. So the Lord creates all these things so living entities can enjoy in the material world and ultimately they can get liberated from the material world. So the Lord is not impersonal, He has form, qualities, activities, and He has intentions, goals.
So of course, we may ask, well Sukadeva is making this statement, but what’s the proof [Laughs]? So of course, the Mayavadis will quote Upanishads, tattvamasi [Laughs]. But for every statement that the impersonalists can quote, the Vaishnavas can also quote the opposite from the same Upanishads [Laughs]. So therefore, I heard in the purport, there’s a quote from Mundaka Upanishad, the Lord knows everything [Laughs]. He’s filled with knowledge. So in other words, it’s not that He’s completely inactive, He knows something [Laughs]. And then he quotes from Brhad-aranyaka Upanishad, the Lord controls everybody, those activities. Knows everything, and He controls everything. And there’s a famous quote from Aitareya Upanishad, the Lord glanced and He created [Laughs]. And from Taittiriya Upanishad, says the Lord is truth, knowledge, and bliss.
So Brahman is being described here as truth, knowledge, and bliss. He’s designated. He’s not Anirdesya. He has [Laughs] qualities and whatever. So then, what Sukadeva Goswami is saying is that, no, that Supreme Brahman does have qualities, He can be described. And this is also stated in all the Upanishads. Of course, the same Upanishads can be quoted, so that this Brahman has no qualities, no form, no activities, also there in the same Upanishads [Laughs]. So there we see contradiction in the Upanishads [Laughs].
Upanishads say Brahman has qualities, Brahman has no qualities. So a lot of the commentaries of the different Acharyas like Ramanuja and Madhva are to resolve this contradiction in favor of Brahman with qualities [Laughs]. To do that, often they may take the impersonal statements and interpret them. So if the Upanishads say Brahman has no qualities, He is nirguna, it actually means the Lord has no material qualities, that’s all [Laughs]. So that can be done to resolve the contradiction, but of course, there can be a protest against that also [Laughs].
And the Mayavadis say, no, we have to take direct meaning [Laughs].But then the Mayavadis will do the same thing. They have to say, why, why it says that the Lord creates? How can that be? He glances, He creates [Laughs]. So then the Mayavadis will use lakshana and say these statements mean, they’re metaphorical, symbolic, they’re not absolute statements.
So how do you resolve this? One is accusing the other of doing lakshna, the other is saying you’re using lakshna [Laughs]. So one way of seeing who is actually correct is to take the whole work and see the context of those statements. Just as we take the whole Bhagavatam and we understand God has qualities, it’s not that God has no qualities [Laughs].
Caitanya Mahaprabhu takes a different approach. He says we should not interpret any statement, no lakshana. God impersonal and He’s also personal. He’s nirguna and He’s saguna, He’s both. But then the counter argument is, well, you’re just not resolving the contradiction at all [Laughs]. Because in normal experience, if something is black, it cannot be white. If it’s white, it cannot be black. So if you say it’s black and white, it doesn’t mean anything [Laughs].
So Lord Caitanya’s answer is, there can be contradictions in the Lord because He has achintya-shakti. So the Lord is simultaneously impersonal Brahman and personal Bhagavan. So in that way, some statements are describing Brahman in the Upanishads, nirguna, etc., and other statements are describing Bhagavan who has form, qualities, and activities. So this is a method of giving meaning to the Upanishads with the minimum of interpretation or lakshana. This, of course, is supported by Bhagavatam Himself, because in the first canto, it says that the Lord is Bhagavan, Paramatma, and Brahman. They’re all one [Laughs].
So in any case, though the scriptures talk about Brahman with no qualities, etc., it also speaks of Supreme Lord with qualities, with activities, with form. Because He is Bhagavan and Paramatma, He can express mercy. If it’s Brahman, there’s no mercy, because that’s the quality. He can’t have qualities. Brahman cannot have qualities [Laughs]. Out of His mercy, He creates a material world. He lets the jiva enjoy, because that’s what they want. He also makes arrangements so they can get liberated from material world. That’s His mercy [Laughs]. And to help them, then He gives them scriptures.
So in the Vedas, He gives methods by which you can enjoy in the material world, karma yoga. He gives methods by which you can get out of the material world. That is jnana yoga, astanga yoga, and bhakti yoga. So the Vedas are also the mercy of the Lord. And though they are sound, this sound is mercy of the Lord. So therefore, this sound can’t describe the Lord [Laughs]. Okay.
Hare Krishna!
Q & A :
1.) So the question is, like we mentioned here in the class that, Supreme Lord created the material world so that the jiva can enjoy. But if the Supreme Lord does like this so that we can enjoy, then why will jiva think of coming out of it?
So Supreme Lord is like a tolerant parent. And of course, a small child doesn’t really understand goals and whatever in life, he just likes to play around. And he doesn’t like to force the child. So of course, the children may resist if the parents say, you have to go to school, you have to learn this. They say, no, no, we don’t want to learn this and you force them, force them, then they hate it more. They don’t want to do it [Laughs]. So the Lord waits and waits until the Jjivas are mature enough that they will say, okay, I’ve had enough of this play. Now I got to be a little serious [Laughs].
2.) Maharaj the jiva in material world is anadi bahirmukha then how can we understand that Krishna created?
HH Bhanu Swami Maharaj: If He created the material world?
Devotee: The jiva is anadi bahirmukha right?
HH Bhanu Swami Maharaj: Okay.
Devotee: So how can we say that Lord created this for us because it’s always there.
HH Bhanu Swami Maharaj: Do you understand the question?
Devotee: No, sorry.
HH Bhanu Swami Maharaj: If the Lord has no beginning in the material world, how we can say the Lord creates the material world [Laughs]? So jiva is eternal and prakriti is eternal. And karma has no beginning but it can have an end. So it’s not eternal in the same sense. So the jivas and prakriti are nitya, but karma is anadi, no beginning. So when we say the Lord creates the material world, the material world is made out of prakriti, which is eternal, but He takes that eternal and starts transforming it into elements and then into universes. And Lord does not create jivas when He creates the material world. They’re already there. He sticks them into the material world. So the universes and the bodies of the living entities are not eternal, but prakriti is eternal. In the same way that pots are non-eternal, they get broken, but earth is eternal. Well, relatively eternal [Laughs]. So, but at a certain point, then the Lord destroys the material world and merges back into prakriti. That’s how prakriti remains. The jivas also, their bodies are destroyed, but the jivas are not destroyed. So though the bodies of the jivas are destroyed, their karmas are not destroyed. And then, after some time, the Lord recreates the material worlds, puts the jivas back in. But He does not put the jivas in randomly and just assign new bodies to them. He does it according to their previous karmas. So jivas are eternal, material worlds are created and destroyed. Bodies are created and destroyed. And even though the worlds are created and destroyed, the karmas continue. However, if you perform bhakti, you destroy all the karma. When you perform bhakti, you perform bhakti, you destroy the karma. Or by jnana or yoga, you can also destroy the karma. But if you don’t do those three processes, karma will continue. Once it’s destroyed completely, that’s finished. So the karma has no beginning, but can have an end.
3.) I have one question like you mentioned like the Vedas and the sages, they don’t talk directly, it‘s indirect and Krishna also like that. So if the spiritual world or these Vedas, they have this tendency to talk indirectly, that also comes in us. We say the communication should be straight and simple but if it is made like this, then we cannot have very clear communications between the jivas also.
So when Krishna is saying this to Uddhava, He is referring to His speech and sages’ speech, which is about spiritual things, not material things [Laughs]. And of course, it doesn’t mean that it’s always indirect [Laughs], sometimes. So therefore, one has to carefully decide what parts are indirect and which are direct. So main method is if it contradicts the main context. So what is the purpose of hiding the meaning? And the answer is that, some things are for the devotees and not for others. So to do that, then we have indirect meaning [Laughs]. Krishna says that this knowledge is the greatest secret, rahasya [Laughs]. So devotees can understand, others cannot understand. And even in devotional service, a lot of it is direct. There are some things, higher things are a little bit indirect. And thus, in Bhagavatam, Radha is not mentioned directly, but if we look closely, then we have the inference there also, indirect. So this is a principle for mainly scriptural things. And if we were to speak every day in indirect language, nobody is going to understand anything [Laughs]. However, even in the material world, we don’t always say things directly. So of course, some of this is custom. And people, rather than speak directly, they’ll do it a little bit indirectly [Laughs]. And that may be different in different countries. Some countries, they speak more directly. In other words, other countries speak indirectly [Laughs]. So it depends on the country how much direct [Laughs] and how much indirect you’re going to use [Laughs].
Devotee: Maharaj but can we say that this also creates rasa, for example, when Radha and Krishna speaks in front of the Gopis or in front of the parents, only Radha and Krishna can understand. And in the material world, we can see this is also used in drama and in performance, in films. So this creates the feeling of, I have special understanding with this person. Like if you have some very close relationship with some friend, you can call him any name, he will not be offended.
HH Bhanu Swami Maharaj: So material rasa and spiritual rasa both depend a lot on indirect expression. So, for instance, we’ll have Shakespeare, he has dramas like Romeo Juliet. So simply you can say, I love you or I hate you. That’s it [Laughs]. But they don’t say that directly, they express it through some poetic language [Laughs]. Or in terms of Radha and Krishna’s spiritual rasa, then Krishna will start describing a lotus and a moon or something like that. He doesn’t talk about Himself, He doesn’t know the lotus is blossoming [Laughs] or the moon is getting full. So they speak indirectly in metaphors and whatever. So the whole section in Ujjwala Nilamani, Rupa Goswami where he shows how words are used in rasa. This is also one reason why he says that animals and plants cannot have rasa with Krishna, because they cannot communicate the subtleties using language.
Okay. Hare Krishna!
Devotees: Grantharaj Srimad Bhagavatam ki jai!!! HH Bhanu Swami Maharaja ki jai!!! Srila Prabhupada ki jai!!! Nitai Gaura Premanande Hari Haribol!!!