In the House of Commons in England, Minister Lloyd George has indicated that the rights granted to Indians are not permanent but merely temporary. This statement seems to have brought great satisfaction to the English civil servants, disheartened the moderates, and encouraged the non-cooperators. Many Englishmen themselves are criticizing the minister for his lack of discretion. Leaving aside mundane affairs, even in the realm of transcendence, we understand that, due to differing perspectives, the same non-dual reality is perceived in various ways. Hearing of these events, we are reminded of the Śrīmad Bhāgavatam's account of the vision of Kṛṣṇa (10.43.17):
mallānām aśanir nṛṇāṁ naravaraḥ strīṇāṁ smaro mūrtimān
gopānāṁ svajano 'satāṁ kṣitibhujāṁ śāstā svapitror śiśuḥ ।
mṛtyur bhojapater virāḍ aviduṣāṁ tattvaṁ paraṁ yogināṁ
vṛṣṇīnāṁ paradevateti vidito raṅgaṁ gataḥ sāgrajaḥ ॥
When Śrī Rāma (Balarāma) and Kṛṣṇa, accompanied by the Gopas, entered Kaṁsa’s wrestling arena after killing the elephant Kuvalayāpīḍa and holding its tusk in hand, different individuals perceived Kṛṣṇa differently based on their own dispositions. To the wrestlers, He appeared like a thunderbolt; to ordinary men, as the best among men; to women, as Cupid incarnate; to the Gopas, as their own family member; to the wicked kings, as a chastising ruler; to Devakī and Vasudeva, as their son; to Kaṁsa, as death and punishment incarnate; to the learned, as the universal form; to the yogīs, as the ultimate truth; and to the Vṛṣṇis, as the supreme deity. Based on the differences in their hearts and minds, each person saw Him differently.
This diversity of perception is not confined to Kaṁsa’s assembly; at all times, different people perceive the advaya-jñāna (non-dual knowledge) Śrī Kṛṣṇa in various ways. Devotees see Him as the eternal, blissful, and conscious form of the Supreme Lord (saccidānanda-vigraha), as the origin of all, and as the ultimate controller. Atheists know Him as a mundane, perverted person of that era. Some consider Him a statesman skilled in political affairs, while modern-day priestly Brāhmaṇas, paid chanters and speakers regard Him as merely an instrument for their livelihood. Hypocritical individuals engaged in immoral behavior, who wish to be identified as great devotees, portray Him as a supporter of their deeds.
Thus, the same ultimate reality (tattva) is perceived differently by different people according to their own qualifications and dispositions. Whatever arises from human understanding is never universally accepted, but within the non-dual reality of the Supreme Lord, everything is imbued with the purpose of divine love.
