Once, Lord Balarāma was visiting the sages at the forest of Naimiṣāraṇya. He was offered respect by everyone except Romaharṣaṇa Sūta who was sitting on the vyāsāsana, not getting up. Lord Balarāma became angry. His mission was to annihilate hypocrites. Romaharṣaṇa was not humble, not self-controlled, and just pretending to be a great sage and therefore needed to be terminated. Lord Balarāma killed him with a single blade of kuśa grass. This incident shows the fate of all bogus gurus, false spiritual leaders.
Because of the misbehaviour of Romaharṣaṇa, being disrespectful, Lord Balarām killed him with a blade of kuśa grass at Naimiṣāraṇya and appointed his son Ugraśravā, Sūta Gosvāmī, the speaker of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, to continue the discourses on the Purāṇas.
The Curious Story of Romaharshana Suta
By: Narasimha das
[Note: I wrote a version of this article by hand (minus the parts in brackets) and gave it to Tamal Krishna Gosvami in late 1979 when we were staying at our ISKCON farm project in Oklahoma. The next day when I brought him his lunch, I noticed he had “Krishna Book” opened to Chapter 77. He said, “Let’s discuss your article.” He got an urgent call right after lunch, and we never had that discussion. But he gave me permission to leave his “zone”, and shortly thereafter he spoke his famous Topanga Canyon confessions, wherein he frankly admitted Srila Prabhupada had never appointed any gurus.]
In Srila Prabhupada’s KRISHNA BOOK, Chapter 77, we find the story of Romaharshana Suta. This man was a learned transcendentalist and direct disciple of Srila Vyasadeva. But he was not a pure devotee. Srila Prabhupada explains: “his transcendental realization was not perfect.”
Just prior to the advent of the age of Kali, many great sages and saintly persons gathered at the holy place of Naimisharanya to perform a great sacrifice via the recitation of the pastimes of the Supreme Lord and His pure devotees. Such narrations are found in the Puranas, such as Srimad-Bhagavatam and Mahabharata, and in other authorized scriptures. In Vedic culture, advanced devotees well-versed in these scriptures would often lead long discourses and discussions of these important topics. Unlike the modern-day bhagavat-saptas performed by professional speakers to impress laymen for sake of their own financial gain, these meetings were attended almost exclusively by ascetics and yogis, or serious transcendentalists eager to develop full Krishna consciousness.
Romaharshana Suta had studied all the Vedas and Puranas under the personal guidance of Srila Vyasadeva, the literary incarnation of God. Therefore he had been elected to sit on the vyasasana at the great assembly of transcendentalists, even though he had not been born in a lineage of pure brahmins. We find many examples mentioned in Srila Prabhupada books wherein a person not born in a family of brahmins had achieved the position of a brahmin or acharya by virtue of training, staunch sadhana and realization in Krishna consciousness. Srila Haridas Thakura, for instance, who was born in a family of Mohammedans, was recognized as the best devotee and given the title of nama-acharya by Lord Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu Himself. Srila Haridas Thakura, however, was the emblem of humility and never considered himself a great devotee or teacher of Vaishnavas.
Romaharshana Suta was not a devotee on the level of Haridas Thakura. In spite of his learning and exalted status, he had failed to perfectly realize his constitutional position as a tiny part and parcel of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Rather he imagined himself to be the greatest sadhu. He dared to sit on the vyasasana--even in the presence of many learned devotees who hailed from dynasties of pure and exalted brahmins or brahma-rishis. Moreover, when everyone else stood up and offered obeisance to welcome Lord Balarama, Romaharshana Suta remained seated. Srila Prabhupada mentions that he should have followed the example of all the other learned sages present by standing to receive Lord Balarama.
[Note: Srila Prabhupada’s “Nectar of Devotion” states that everyone should stand up to greet the Deities. No one should remain seated.]
Srila Prabhupada writes: “When Lord Balarama saw that Romaharshana Suta did not understand the highest principle of religiousness in spite of having studied all the Vedas, He certainly could not support his position. Romaharshana had been given the chance to become a perfect brahmana, but because of his ill behavior in his relationship with the Supreme Personality of Godhead, his low birth was immediately remembered… “
What is the highest principle of religiousness? If a brahmin does not know the answer to this question and has not realized the import of all the Vedas, then he should not think of himself as guru or exalted leader among Vaishnavas and saintly persons. If he does so, he may make the mistake of Romaharshana and think himself as exalted as Lord Balarama or His empowered representative. Srila Prabhupada mentions elsewhere in this connection: “One should not imitate the behavior of an advanced devotee or maha-bhagavata without being self-realized, for by such behavior one will eventually become degraded.”
Both Lord Krishna and Lord Balarama killed many obnoxiously sinful persons in the course of Their transcendental pastimes. All of these persons were guilty of killing, abusing and/or raping many innocent people, including brahmins, cows, women and children. None of these sinfully violent and disruptive demons were brahmins or sadhus or disciples of great devotees like Srila Vyasadeva. Yet Lord Balarama considered Romaharshana Suta, a direct disciple of Vyasadeva, to be equally dangerous and destructive, like the other grossly sinful demons He had killed.
We may wonder why the Personality of Godhead, Lord Balarama, would severely punish a sadhu seated as guru, even a voted-in, low-born “guru” like Romaharshana Suta, when, in fact, He had spared and even befriended men like Duryodhana. Krishna had even spared the Kaliya serpent, who had poisoned the waters of the Yamuna and caused death in Vrindaban among Krishna’s intimate devotees. So why did Lord Balarama kill Romaharshana Suta, who was seated as guru and blessed by the great sages at Naimisharanya with long life? Srila Prabhupada explains: “Because Romaharshana’s transcendental realization was not perfect, Lord Balarama remembered his pratiloma (mixed caste) heritage. The idea is that any man can be given the chance become a brahmana, but if he improperly uses the position of a brahmana without actual realization, then his elevation to the brahminical position is not valid.”
These statements above (and others below) suggest low-born persons without full realization in Krishna consciousness should carefully avoid coveting the post of guru. Unless one is a fully self-realized soul ordered by guru and Krishna to act as acharya, he should avoid thinking of himself as diksha-guru, or an exalted Vaishnava capable of delivering transcendental knowledge to new students of Krishna consciousness. "One should not try to be an artificially advanced devotee, thinking, 'I am a first-class devotee.' Such thinking should be avoided. It is best not to accept any disciples.” Citing Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati, Srila Prabhupada has specifically warned, “Our men, some of them, are becoming sahajiyas. My guru-maharaja has said, ‘When our men will become sahajiyas, oh, they will be more dangerous!’ ”
In other words, low-born, voted-in “gurus” who exploit the sentiments of persons attracted to the path of Krishna consciousness may be as dangerous as those who kill or cause physical harm to others, or those who deliberately disrupt Vedic culture, such as evil kings like Kamsa. We find no mention in this story that Romaharshana Suta was preaching false siddhanta (like mayavad or sunyavad) or was ignorant of Vedic instructions or had grossly deviated from the correct path of sadhana. So, then, what was his terrible mistake for which he received the death penalty? Lord Balarama killed him because he was posing as guru without being fully self-realized. Although he was elected to the acharya post by the assembly of learned sages, his acceptance of this post was false due to the fact that his “transcendental realization was not perfect.”
Srila Prabhupada writes: “After seeing the deficiency of realization in Romaharshana Suta, Lord Balarama decided to chastise him for being puffed up. Lord Balarama therefore said, ‘This man is liable to be awarded the death punishment because, although he has the good qualification of being a disciple of Lord Vyasadeva and although he has studied all the Vedic literatures from this exalted personality, he was not submissive in the presence of the Supreme Personality of Godhead.’ “
Srila Prabhupada continues: “From this we can understand that when one is puffed up by material acquisition, he cannot acquire the gentle behavior befitting a brahmana. The learning of such a person is as good as a valuable jewel on the head of a serpent. Despite the valuable jewel on the hood, a serpent is still a serpent and is as fearful as an ordinary serpent. If a person does not become meek and humble, all his study of the Vedas and Puranas and his vast knowledge in the shastras become simply outward dress, like the costume of a theatrical artist dancing on stage. Lord Balarama began to consider thus, ‘I have appeared in order to chastise false persons who are internally impure but externally pose themselves to be very learned and religious. My killing of such persons is proper to check them from further sinful activity.’ “
Srila Prabhupada concludes, “Considering these points, He killed Romaharshana Suta simply by striking him with kusa straw, which is nothing but a blade of grass.”
All the brahmins and sages present there were much aggrieved by this act of the Lord. They all humbly requested the Lord to atone for this action as an example for ordinary human beings. They said, “He was seated on the vyasasana by our election, and when one is seated on the vysasana, it is improper for him to stand up to receive a person. Moreover, we awarded Romaharshana Suta an undisturbed duration of life…” Lord Balarama agreed, saying, “Yes, I must atone for this action, which may have been proper for Me, but is improper for others; therefore, I think it is My duty to execute a suitable act of atonement enjoined in the authorized scriptures…”
Lord Balarama offered to restore the life of Romaharshana, but the learned sages decided they should not nullify the action of Lord Balarama. Following Lord Baladeva’s suggestion, they agreed that their blessings of long life and other benedictions could be transferred to Urgrasava Suta, the son of Romaharshana Suta, who became forever famous as the most illustrious Sri Suta Gosvami. In this way, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Lord Baladeva, removed a false guru and established a genuinely realized soul as leader of the assembly. Thus the stage was set for the continuous performance of pure sravana, kirtana, smarana at this monumental transcendental sacrifice for the benefit of the whole world.
In His purports to Sri Isopanisad, Srila Prabhupada repeatedly stresses that one must hear from and accept only an “undisturbed acharya” to get relief from the bondage of the powerful illusory energy of the Lord. “Unless one hears from the bona fide acharya, who is never disturbed by the changes of the material world, one cannot have the real key to transcendental knowledge.” And throughout His books He emphatically stresses: “One who is disturbed by the whirlpool movements of the material energy is not qualified to become an acharya.” (Sri Isopanisad, Mantra Thirteen, Purport.)
[Final note: Only the Supreme Lord or His deputed agents like Lord Yama can properly chastise false gurus and other miscreants. This is not the duty of ordinary devotees and preachers. It is the duty of some preachers, however, to expose the false ideas promoted by ignorant or envious persons, especially those posing as brahmins and gurus.
A few years ago, I heard that Tamal Krishna Gosvami had been killed in the holy land near Krishna Nagar, apparently without a mark or blood on his body. A senior devotee, who went to identify his body right afterwards, told us his face appeared frozen in fright but there were no major injuries visible on his body. Hearing this, I remembered the picture in Krishna Book of Romaharshana Suta’s frightened face when Balarama killed him, without the usual blood and gore, simply with a blade of grass. I was not happy to hear this news of the demise of Tamal Krishna Gosvami but was amazed to contemplate the causeless mercy of Srila Prabhupada and Lord Balarama. “And as soon as he [the upstart] learns that Guru Maharaja is dead, ‘Now I am so advanced that I can kill my guru and I become guru.’ Then he’s finished.” (Conversation, Aug. 16, 1976, Bombay)]
Additional References:
“As soon as a foolish disciple tries to overtake his spiritual master and becomes ambitious to occupy his post, he immediately falls down.” (Srimad-Bhagavatam 5.12.14, Purport.)
"A guru can become guru when he is ordered by his guru. Otherwise nobody can become guru." (Conversation, October 28, 1975, Nairobi)
"When one has attained the topmost position of maha-bhagavata, he is to be accepted as guru and worshiped exactly like Hari, the Personality of Godhead. Only such a person is eligible to occupy the post of guru." (Chaitanya-caritamrta Madhya, 24.330, Purport, citing Padma Purana)
"One should not try to be an artificially advanced devotee, thinking, 'I am a first-class devotee.' Such thinking should be avoided. It is best not to accept any disciples." (Chaitanya-caritamrta Madhya 7.130, Purport.)
"If everyone just initiates, there will only be a contradictory result. As long as it goes on, there will only be failure." (From the Palguna Krishna Panchami, a poem by Srila Prabhupada, 1961.)
“One should consider the Acharya to be as good as the Supreme Personality of Godhead. In spite of these instructions, if one considers the spiritual master an ordinary human being, one is doomed. His study of the Vedas and his austerities and penances for enlightenment are useless, like the bathing of an elephant.”
“However, one should not imitate the behavior of an advanced devotee or maha-bhagavata without being self-realized, for by such imitation one will eventually become degraded.” (Nectar of Instruction, Verse Five, Purport)
“They did even consider with common sense—that if Guru Maharaja wanted to appoint somebody as acharya, why he did not say? He said so many things, and this point he missed? The real point? And they insisted upon it. The declared some unfit person to become acharya. And then another—‘Acharya!’ Another—‘Acharya!’ So better to remain a foolish [simple] person perpetually to be directed by Guru Maharaja. That is perfection. And as soon as he [the upstart] learns that Guru Maharaja is dead, ‘Now I am so advanced that I can kill my guru and I become guru.’ Then he’s finished.” (Conversation, Aug. 16, 1976, Bombay)
-------------------------------
Krishna-Book (1970 Edition)
77. The Killing of Romaharṣaṇa
Once upon a time, Lord Balarāma heard that there was an arrangement being made for a fight between the two rival parties in the Kuru dynasty, one headed by Duryodhana and the other by the Pāṇḍavas. He did not like the idea that He was to be only a mediator to stop the fighting. Finding it unbearable not to take an active part on behalf of either of the parties, He left Dvārakā on the plea of visiting various holy places of pilgrimage. He first of all visited the place of pilgrimage known as Prabhāsakṣetra. He took His bath there, and He pacified the local brāhmaṇas and offered oblations to the demigods, pitās, great sages and people in general, in accordance with Vedic ritualistic ceremonies. That is the Vedic method of visiting holy places. After this, accompanied by some respectable brāhmaṇas, He decided to visit different places on the bank of the river Sarasvatī. He gradually visited such places as Pṛthūdaka, Bindusara, Tritakūpa, Sudarśanatīrtha, Viśālatīrtha, Brahmatīrtha and Cakratīrtha. Besides these, He also visited all the holy places on the bank of Sarasvatī River running toward the east. After this He visited all the principal holy places on the bank of the Yamunā and on the bank of the Ganges. Thus He gradually came to the holy place known as Naimiṣāraṇya.
This holy place, Naimiṣāraṇya, is still existing in India, and in ancient times it was especially used for the meetings of great sages and saintly persons with the aim of understanding spiritual life and self-realization. When Lord Balarāma visited that place there was a great sacrifice being performed by a great assembly of transcendentalists. Such meetings were planned to last thousands of years. When Lord Balarāma arrived, all the participants of the meeting--great sages, ascetics, brāhmaṇas and learned scholars--immediately arose from their seats and welcomed Him with great honor and respect. Some offered Him respectful obeisances, and those who were elderly great sages and brāhmaṇas offered Him blessings by standing up. After this formality, Lord Balarāma was offered a suitable seat, and everyone present worshiped Him. Everyone in the assembly stood up in the presence of Balarāma because they knew Him to be the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Education or learning means to understand the Supreme Personality of Godhead; therefore, although Lord Balarāma appeared on the earth as a kṣatriya, all the brāhmaṇas and sages stood up because they knew who Lord Balarāma was.
Unfortunately, after being worshiped and seated at His place, Lord Balarāma saw Romaharṣaṇa, the disciple of Vyāsadeva (the literary incarnation of Godhead), still sitting on the Vyāsāsana. He had neither gotten up from his seat nor offered Him respects. Because he was seated on the Vyāsāsana, he foolishly thought himself greater than the Lord; therefore he did not get down from his seat or bow down before the Lord. Lord Balarāma then considered the history of Romaharṣaṇa: he was born in a sūta family or a mixed family, born of a brāhmaṇa woman and kṣatriya man. Therefore although Romaharṣaṇa considered Balarāma a kṣatriya, he should not have remained sitting on a higher seat. Lord Balarāma considered that Romaharṣaṇa, according to his position by birth, should not have accepted the higher sitting position, because there were many learned brāhmaṇas and sages present. He also observed that Romaharṣaṇa not only did not come down from his exalted seat, but he did not even stand up and offer his respects when Balarāmajī entered the assembly. Lord Balarāma did not like the audacity of Romaharṣaṇa, and He became very angry with him.
When a person is seated on the Vyāsāsana, he does not generally have to stand up to receive a particular person entering the assembly, but in this case the situation was different because Lord Baladeva is not an ordinary human being. Therefore, although Romaharṣaṇa Sūta was voted to the Vyāsāsana by all the brāhmaṇas, he should have followed the behavior of other learned sages and brāhmaṇas who were present and should have known that Lord Balarāma is the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Respects are always due Him, even though such respects can be avoided in the case of an ordinary man. The appearances of Kṛṣṇa and Balarāma are especially meant for reestablishment of the religious principles. As stated in the Bhagavad-gītā, the highest religious principle is to surrender unto the Supreme Personality of Godhead. It is also confirmed in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam that the topmost perfection of religiousness is to be engaged in the devotional service of the Lord.
When Lord Balarāma saw that Romaharṣaṇa Sūta did not understand the highest principle of religiousness in spite of having studied all the Vedas, He certainly could not support his position. Romaharṣaṇa Sūta had been given a chance to become a perfect brāhmaṇa, but because of his ill behavior in his relationship with the Supreme Personality of Godhead, his low birth was immediately remembered. Romaharṣaṇa Sūta had been given the position of a brāhmaṇa, but he had not been born in the family of a brāhmaṇa; he had been born in a pratiloma family. According to the Vedic concept, there are two kinds of mixed family heritage. They are called anuloma and pratiloma. When a male is united with a female of a lower caste, the offspring is called anuloma; but when a male unites with a woman of a higher caste, the offspring is called pratiloma. Romaharṣaṇa Sūta belonged to the pratiloma family because his father was a kṣatriya and his mother a brāhmaṇa. Because Romaharṣaṇa's transcendental realization was not perfect, Lord Balarāma remembered his pratiloma heritage. The idea is that any man can be given the chance to become a brāhmaṇa, but if he improperly uses the position of a brāhmaṇa without actual realization, then his elevation to the brahminical position is not valid.
After seeing the deficiency of realization in Romaharṣaṇa Sūta, Lord Balarāma decided to chastise him for being puffed up. Lord Balarāma therefore said, "This man is liable to be awarded the death punishment because, although he has the good qualification of being a disciple of Lord Vyāsadeva and although he has studied all the Vedic literature from this exalted personality, he was not submissive in the presence of the Supreme Personality of Godhead." As stated in the Bhagavad-gītā, a person who is actually a brāhmaṇa and is very learned must automatically become very gentle also. In the case of Romaharṣaṇa Sūta, although he was very learned and had been given the chance to become a brāhmaṇa, he had not become gentle. From this we can understand that when one is puffed up by material acquisition, he cannot acquire the gentle behavior befitting a brāhmaṇa. The learning of such a person is as good as a valuable jewel decorating the hood of a serpent. Despite the valuable jewel on the hood, a serpent is still a serpent and is as fearful as an ordinary serpent. If a person does not become meek and humble, all his studies of the Vedas and Purāṇas and his vast knowledge in the śāstras become simply outward dress, like the costume of a theatrical artist dancing on the stage. Lord Balarāma began to consider thus: "I have appeared in order to chastise false persons who are internally impure but externally pose themselves to be very learned and religious. My killing of such persons is proper to check them from further sinful activity."
Lord Balarāma had avoided taking part in the Battle of Kurukṣetra, and yet because of His position, the reestablishment of religious principles was His prime duty. Considering these points, He killed Romaharṣaṇa Sūta simply by striking him with a kuśa straw, which was nothing but a blade of grass. If someone questions how Lord Balarāma could kill Romaharṣaṇa Sūta simply by striking him with a blade of kuśa grass, the answer is given in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam by the use of the word prabhu (master). The Lord's position is always transcendental, and because He is omnipotent He can act as He likes without being obliged to the material laws and principles. Thus it was possible for Him to kill Romaharṣaṇa Sūta simply by striking him with a blade of kuśa grass.
At the death of Romaharṣaṇa Sūta, everyone present became much aggrieved, and there was roaring and crying. Although all the brāhmaṇas and sages present there knew Lord Balarāma to be the Supreme Personality of Godhead, they did not hesitate to protest the Lord's action, and they humbly submitted, "Our dear Lord, we think that Your action is not in line with the religious principles. Dear Lord Yadunandana, we may inform You that we brāhmaṇas posted Romaharṣaṇa Sūta on that exalted position for the duration of this great sacrifice. He was seated on the Vyāsāsana by our election, and when one is seated on the Vyāsāsana, it is improper for him to stand up to receive a person. Moreover, we awarded Romaharṣaṇa Sūta an undisturbed duration of life. Under the circumstances, since Your Lordship has killed him without knowing all these facts, we think that Your action has been equal to that of killing a brāhmaṇa. Dear Lord, deliverer of all fallen souls, we know certainly that You are the knower of all Vedic principles. You are the master of all mystic powers; therefore ordinarly the Vedic injunctions cannot be applied to Your personality. But we request that You show Your causeless mercy upon others by kindly atoning for this killing of Romaharṣaṇa Sūta. We do not, however, suggest what kind of act You should perform to atone for killing him; we simply suggest that some method of atonement be adopted by You so that others may follow Your action. What is done by a great personality is followed by the ordinary man."
The Lord replied, "Yes, I must atone for this action, which may have been proper for Me, but is improper for others; therefore, I think it is My duty to execute a suitable act of atonement enjoined in the authorized scriptures. Simultaneously I can also give this Romaharṣaṇa Sūta life again, with a span of long duration, sufficient strength, and full power of the senses. Not only this, if you desire I shall be glad to award him anything else which you may ask. I shall be very glad to grant all these boons in order to fulfill your desires."
This statement of Lord Balarāma definitely confirms that the Supreme Personality of Godhead is free to act in any way. Although it may be considered that His killing of Romaharṣaṇa Sūta was improper, He could immediately counteract the action with greater profit to all. Therefore, one should not imitate the actions of the Supreme Personality of Godhead; one should simply follow the instructions of the Lord. All the great learned sages present realized that although they considered the action of Lord Balarāma to be improper, the Lord was able to immediately compensate with greater profits. Not wanting to detract from the mission of the Lord in killing Romaharṣaṇa Sūta, all of them prayed, "Our dear Lord, the uncommon use of Your kuśa weapon to kill Romaharṣaṇa Sūta may remain as it is; because of Your desire to kill him, he should not be brought to life again. At the same time Your Lordship may remember that we sages and brāhmaṇas voluntarily gave him long life; therefore, such a benediction should not be nullified." Thus the request of all the learned brāhmaṇas in the assembly was ambiguous because they wanted to keep intact the benediction given by them that Romaharṣaṇa Sūta would continue to live until the end of the great sacrifice, but at the same time they did not want to nullify Balarāma's killing him.
The Supreme Personality of Godhead therefore solved the problem in a manner befitting His exalted position, and said, "Because the son is produced from the body of the father, it is the injunction of the Vedas that the son is the father's representative. Therefore I say that Ugraśravā Sūta, the son of Romaharṣaṇa Sūta, should henceforth take his father's position and continue the discourses on the Purāṇas, and because you wanted Romaharṣaṇa to have a long duration of life, this benediction will be transferred to his son. The son, Ugraśravā, will therefore have all the facilities you offered--long duration of life in a good and healthy body, without any disturbances and full strength of all the senses."
Lord Balarāma then implored all the sages and brāhmaṇas that aside from the benediction offered to the son of Romaharṣaṇa, they should ask from Him any other benediction, and He would be prepared to fulfill it immediately. The Lord thus placed Himself in the position of an ordinary kṣatriya and informed the sages that He did not know in what way He could atone for His killing of Romaharṣaṇa, but whatever they would suggest He would be glad to accept.
The brāhmaṇas could understand the purpose of the Lord, and thus, they suggested that He atone for His action in a manner which would be beneficial for them. They said, "Our dear Lord, there is a demon of the name Balvala. He is the son of Ilvala, but he is a very powerful demon, and he visits this sacred place of sacrifice every fortnight on the full moon and moonless days and creates a great disturbance to the discharge of our duties in the sacrifice. O descendant of the Daśārha family, we all request You to kill this demon. We think that if You kindly kill him, that will be Your atonement on our behalf. The demon occasionally comes here and profusely throws upon us contaminated, impure things like puss, blood, stool, urine and wine, and he pollutes this sacred place by showering such filth upon us. After killing Balvala, You may continue touring all these sacred places of pilgrimage for twelve months, and in that way You will be completely freed from all contamination. That is our prescription."
Thus ends the Bhaktivedanta purport of the Second Volume, Twenty-third Chapter, of Kṛṣṇa, "The Killing of Dantavakra, Vidūratha and Romaharṣaṇa."