Long, long ago, there was an assembly of great sages on the bank of the river Sarasvaté who performed a great sacrifice of the name Satra. In such assemblies, the great sages present usually discuss Vedic subject matters and philosophical topics, and in this particular meeting the following question was raised: The three predominating deities of this material world, namely, Lord Brahmä, Lord Visnu and Lord Çiva, are directing all the affairs of this cosmos, but who among them is the Supreme? After much discussion on this question, the great sage named Bhågu, the son of Lord Brahmä, was deputed to test all three predominating deities and report to the assembly as to who is the greatest.

Being thus deputed, the great sage Bhågu Muni first of all went to his father’s residence in Brahmaloka. The three deities are the controllers of the three material qualities, namely the qualities of goodness, passion and ignorance. The plan decided upon by the sages was for Bhågu to test which of the predominating deities possesses the quality of goodness in full. Therefore, when Bhågu Muni reached his father, Lord Brahmä, because he wanted to test whether he had the quality of goodness, he purposely did not offer his respects to his father, either by offering obeisances or by offering prayers. It is the duty of a son or a disciple to offer respects and recite suitable prayers when he approaches his father or spiritual master. But Bhågu Muni purposely failed to offer respects, just to see Lord Brahmä’s reaction to this negligence. Lord Brahmä was very angry at his son’s impudence, and he showed signs which definitely proved this to be so. He was even prepared to condemn Bhågu by cursing him, but because Bhågu was his son, Lord Brahmä controlled his anger with his great intelligence. This means that although the quality of passion was prominent in Lord Brahmä, he had the power to control it. Lord Brahmä’s anger and his controlling his anger are likened to fire and water. Water is produced from fire, but fire can be extinguished with water. Similarly, although Lord Brahmä was very angry due to his quality of passion, he could still control his passion because Bhågu Muni was his son.

As a great devotee of Krishna, King Paréksit was already liberated, but for clarification he was asking various questions of Çukadeva Gosvämé. In the previous chapter, King Paréksit’s question was, “What is the ultimate goal of the Vedas?” And Çukadeva Gosvämé explained the matter, giving authoritative descriptions from the disciplic succession, from Sanandana down to Näräyana Åsi, Närada, Vyäsadeva and then Çukadeva himself. The conclusion was that devotional service, or bhakti, is the ultimate goal of the Vedas. A neophyte devotee may question, “If the ultimate goal of life, or the conclusion of the Vedas, is to elevate oneself to the platform of devotional service, then why is it observed that a devotee of Lord Visnu is generally not very prosperous materially, whereas a devotee of Lord Çiva is found to be very opulent?” In order to clarify this matter, Paréksit Mahäräja asked Çukadeva Gosvämé, “My dear Çukadeva Gosvämé, it is generally found that those who engage in the worship of Lord Çiva, whether in human, demoniac or demigod society, become materially very opulent, although Lord Çiva himself lives just like a poverty-stricken person. On the other hand, the devotees of Lord Visnu, who is the controller of the goddess of fortune, do not appear very prosperous, and sometimes they are even found living without any material opulence at all. Lord Çiva lives underneath a tree or in the snow of the Himalayan Mountains. He does not even construct a house for himself, but still the worshipers of Lord Çiva are very rich. Krishna, or Lord Visnu, however, lives very opulently, whether in Vaikunöha or in the material world, but His devotees appear poverty-stricken. Why is this so?”

Mahäräja Paréksit’s question is very intelligent. The two classes of devotees, namely the devotees of Lord Çiva and the devotees of Lord Visnu, are always in disagreement. Even today in India these two classes of devotees still criticize each other, and especially in South India the followers of Rämänujäcärya and the followers of Çaìkaräcärya hold occasional meetings for understanding the Vedic conclusion. Generally, the followers of Rämänujäcärya come out victorious in such meetings. So Paréksit Mahäräja wanted to clarify the situation by asking this question of Çukadeva Gosvämé. That Lord Çiva lives as a poor man although his devotees appear very opulent, whereas Lord Krishna, or Lord Visnu, is always opulent and yet His devotees appear poverty-stricken, is a situation which appears contradictory and puzzling to a discriminating person.

King Paréksit inquired from Çukadeva Gosvämé about a very important topic in understanding transcendental subject matter. His question was, “Since Vedic knowledge generally deals with the subject matter of the three qualities of the material world, how then can it approach the subject matter of transcendence, which is beyond the approach of the three material modes? Since the mind is material and the vibration of words is a material sound, how can the Vedic knowledge, expressing by material sound the thoughts of the material mind, approach transcendence? Description of a subject matter necessitates describing its source of emanation, its qualities and its activities. Such description can be possible only by thinking with the material mind and by vibrating material words. Brahman, or the Absolute Truth, has no material qualities, but our power of speaking does not go beyond the material qualities. How then can Brahman, the Absolute Truth, be described by your words? I do not see how it is possible to understand transcendence from such expressions of material sound.”

The purpose of King Paréksit’s inquiring was to ascertain from Çukadeva Gosvämé whether the Vedas ultimately describe the Absolute Truth as impersonal or as personal. Understanding of the Absolute Truth progresses in three features—impersonal Brahman, Paramätmä localized in everyone’s heart, and, at last, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Krishna.

After hearing of the incidents described in the last chapter, King Paréksit became more inquisitive to hear about Krishna and His pastimes, and thus he inquired from Çukadeva Gosvämé how his grandmother Subhadrä was kidnapped by his grandfather Arjuna at the instigation of Lord Krishna. King Paréksit was very eager to learn about his grandfather’s kidnapping and marriage of his grandmother.

Thus Çukadeva Gosvämé began to narrate the story as follows: Once upon a time, King Paréksit’s grandfather Arjuna, the great hero, was visiting several holy places of pilgrimage, and while thus traveling all over he happened to come to Prabhäsa-ksetra. In Prabhäsa-ksetra he heard the news that Lord Balaräma was negotiating the marriage of Subhadrä, the daughter of Arjuna’s maternal uncle, Vasudeva. Although her father, Vasudeva, and her brother Krishna were not in agreement with Him, Balaräma was in favor of marrying Subhadrä to Duryodhana. Arjuna, however, desired to gain Subhadrä’s hand. As he thought of Subhadrä and her beauty, Arjuna became more and more captivated with the idea of marrying her, and with a plan in mind he dressed himself like a Vaisnava sannyäsé, carrying a tridanòa in his hand.

The Mäyävädé sannyäsés take one danòa, or one rod, whereas the Vaisnava sannyäsés take three danòas, or three rods. The three rods, or tridanòa, indicate that a Vaisnava sannyäsé vows to render service to the Supreme Personality of Godhead by his body, mind and words. The system of tridanòa-sannyäsa has been in existence for a long time, and the Vaisnava sannyäsés are called tridanòés, or sometimes tridanòi-svämés or tridanòi-gosvämés.